§ MR. O'DONNELLasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been drawn to the complaint of Mr. Henry Egan, in a letter in the "Freeman's Journal" of Monday, that for saying "release the suspects" in the course of the Eight honourable Gentleman's speech at Tullamore, he was threatened with arrest by a sub-inspector and policeman in attendance, and was put under the supervision of a policeman during the remainder of the speech; and, whether the alleged conduct of the police on the occasion is approved by the Government?
§ MR. SEXTONBefore the right hon. Gentleman answers the Question, I wish to ask him whether Sub-Inspector Allen, who threatened Mr. Henry Egan, is the same Sub-Inspector who, whilst in command of a party of police, meeting two young men on the road, said to the police, "Punch them on before you," the consequence being that one of the young men has been in bed ever since?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERI think the hon. Member who has just spoken will see that in common fairness he ought to have given me Notice of this Question. I do not know whether the Sub-Inspector is the Sub-Inspector Allen to whom he refers, neither do I know if the statement of the hon. Member is correct. With regard to the Question of the hon. Member for Dungarvan, I may say that I saw the letter in The Freeman's Journal, and directly communicated with the Sub-Inspector of Constabulary at Tullamore. I have received from him a Report, stating, as I fully expected—for it would have been contrary to my orders if it had not been so—that it is not true that, on the occasion of my speech at Tullamore, both the military and the police were present in large numbers. What I believe is true is that a Sub-Inspector and a couple of men were on duty in the town; but I cannot learn that even those three men were at the meeting. I have 998 reason to believe, however, that one man came, not by my orders, but out of curiosity to hear what I might have to say. The military were not employed in any way, nor were there any soldiers present, except a Dragoon and two Infantry officers, who happened to come up at the time, and who remained to listen. There were no policemen in plain clothes—no detectives—present, except that the Sub-Inspector who was present was not in uniform. I think he rather wished to hear what I had to say. [Ironical Home Rule cheers and laughter.] I suppose a good many people did. The Sub-Inspector informs me that Mr. Egan came down from his shop in a very excited state, and several times shouted in an angry manner, and in a loud voice, "Release the 'Suspects!'" evidently, in the opinion of the Sub-Inspector, with the view of exciting the people, who were attentively listening. Some words passed between the Sub-Inspector and Mr. Egan. The Sub-Inspector did not give him in charge; but his brother, Mr. Patrick Egan, then came out and took him away, saying, "This is no place for you." I am also informed by Mr. Blake, the Resident Magistrate, that what really happened was this—that the people wished to hear me, and that Mr. Egan wished that they should not do so. The Sub-Inspector goes on to say that there was no further interruption, that I was heard to the end in good humour, and that I walked about the town afterwards—I am sorry to be obliged to say so much about myself—unattended by a single policeman. That is a simple account of what, according to the observations of the Sub-Inspector, occurred. I have also had a letter from Mr. Blake, from which I will read the following quotation:—
The military were not communicated with, either directly or indirectly; and I am in a position to state that it was your express wish on the subject that no precautions of any kind were to be taken, and no change to be made in the everyday police arrangements. That was carried out to the letter—not a single policeman was brought into Tullamore, only two policemen being, as usual, on duty.One at either end of the town, I suppose. Perhaps I may be allowed to answer another Question put on Friday night by the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton), and about which he gave Notice of Motion on going into Committee of Supply, as to the report of my speech.
§ MR. CALLANI rise to Order. I wish to ask if the right hon. Gentleman is in Order in referring to a Notice of Motion which is to come on this evening?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERPerhaps I may ask if it will be in Order if I answer the Question as a personal explanation?
§ MR. SPEAKERThe right hon. Gentleman will be perfectly in Order in completing his answer to the Question.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERA statement has been made that I hired, at the expense of the Government, an official reporter to give a report of my speech. What I want to say is, that no official reporter was employed to take my speech at Tullamore. I have made inquiries, and I find that there were three reporters present, one representing The Irish Times, and two others the local papers, being also local correspondents of the Dublin papers. One of these reporters, the correspondent for The Freeman's Journal and The Dublin Express, was in the room. He stood behind my chair, and the others stood under the window. Neither the English nor the Irish papers were furnished with reports of my speech at the expense of the Government. I may say that I saw the gentleman representing The Irish Times, although I did not know his name. I had no opportunity of correcting my speech; but, having read the report, I should say that it is very accurate.
§ MR. O'DONNELLI wish to ask whether the Government will grant an independent inquiry into the conduct of the Sub-Inspectors, magistrates, policemen, and officers of the Army, who happened to be on the spot at the time?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERThere is no charge against the officers. They simply came there, happening to be in the town, because they wanted to hear what a man speaking out of a window had to say. If the hon. Member wishes for an independent inquiry into the conduct of the police, let him move to that effect.
§ MR. O'DONNELLThe right hon. Gentleman has forgotten that there is a charge made against them. One of the listeners was threatened with arrest because he shouted "Release the 'Suspects!'" That could be proved by an independent inquiry,
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERWhat I said was, that there was no charge made 1000 against the officers in the Army or against the soldiers into which inquiry could be made. As to the police, I consider that there is no case for inquiry against them. If the hon. Member thinks that there is ground for any charge against them, let him bring it forward in the usual way, and let the House decide between us.
§ MR. SEXTONasked the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary if the reporter of The Irish Times, Mr. Murray, was not a Government reporter; and whether he was not employed by the Government to report, among other things, the State Trials in Dublin; and why information as to the right hon. Gentleman's visit was not supplied to other papers. [Cries of "Oh!" and "Do not answer!"]
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERI would rather answer.
§ MR. SPEAKERThe right hon. Gentleman appears to have given a full answer to the Question; but if he desires to make a further explanation he can. do so.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERI do not wish that a false impression should go abroad as to this matter. As regards the reporter, I did not know his name until to-day. Mr. Murray is not a Government reporter. I am informed that he, like many others, was employed to report the State Trials for The Irish Times. The fact is that, thinking it possible that I might say something at Tullamore, I sent to The Irish Times to say that perhaps they might think it worth while to send a reporter there, and they did so. The hon. Member asks me why I did not inform other newspapers. As a matter of fact, I believe other newspapers were informed, and that, having sent word to The Irish Times, I had done as much as I wished to do. I may, however, add that I did not let it be generally known that I was going to speak; because, if I had, I have no doubt the advice given afterwards—that I should not be allowed to be heard—would have been given then.