HC Deb 31 July 1873 vol 217 cc1325-6
MR. BRUCE

I may, Sir, perhaps, be permitted to refer to a Question put to me on Wednesday, the 23rd instant by my noble Friend the Member for Calne (Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice) with reference to the disturbance of a public meeting at Leighton Buzzard. My noble Friend placed his Question on the Paper on Tuesday. The House sat to a very late hour, and I only saw the Question a few minutes before entering the House on Wednesday, at 12 o'clock. I then stated that I had received no information on the subject. On Monday last, in answer to the hon. and gallant Member for Bedfordshire (Colonel Gilpin), the noble Lord stated that I was mistaken, for that I had received and answered a communication on the subject, and that he held my letter in his hand. I have inquired into the matter, and find that, while it was quite true that no memorial or communication specially referring to the Leighton Buzzard disturbance was received at the Home Office, a letter was received from Mr. Joseph Arch complaining of the conduct of the police at two public meetings at which he had not himself been present, one of which meetings was at Leighton Buzzard. Mr. Arch's question was— Whether the police are justified in pandering to local farmers and others who, for a pint of beer, are made their dupes in order to put down free speech? He was answered by the Under Secretary, in my name, that— the Secretary of State has no control over county and borough police, and that any complaints respecting their conduct should, therefore, be addressed to the local authority. I made my answer in the firm conviction that no memorial emanating from persons actually aggrieved and stating facts within their knowledge would have been answered without being first submitted to me, and I am justified in that belief by the actual facts.