HC Deb 30 November 1882 vol 275 cc371-4
SIR WILLIAM HART DYKE

In rising to put the following Question, I wish to say that, having given two or three days' Notice of this Question, I should wish to have a definite statement from the Chief Secretary as to the intentions of the Irish Government in reference to this subject. I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been called to a speech reported in the "Standard" newspaper of 27th November, as having been delivered by Michael Davitt at Navan on the previous day, to the following effect:— As to the calamity staring some of the people of the West in the face, he would not mince language as to the cause of these periodical famines; but neither he nor Mr. Parnell would ever again beg for a starving Ireland. They would compel landlordism to provide for the starving people during the coming winter. Unless just and wise legislation ere long prevented its necessity, the time would come when the starving people of Donegal, Connemara, Kerry, and Cork would have to be told to march down on the plains, and seize the land upon which to live as civilized beings in a Christian country. If the tenant farmers of the West would pay the rent that should go to feed their children, then let them die, and Ireland and humanity would be well rid of such a coward race. In case they should not succeed in getting the Government to do its necessary duty, he proposed that they should make Irish landlordism support the people. He proposed, in ease Mr. Gladstone did not apply the surplus of the Arrears Estimate to save the people, that no rent should be paid from this November until next May, and that out of this sum a portion should be placed in a National Relief Fund, by which to save the people from starvation; whether he has reason to believe that the above Report is substantially correct; and if the Government are taking note of the efforts now being made to stir up outrage in Ireland during the coming winter?

MR. REDMOND

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers, I would, by permission, ask him this Question—Whether his Predecessor in Office, and every person acquainted with the condition of Ireland, had not expressed the same opinion as that attributed to Mr. Davitt, that Ireland suffers from congestion of population in certain districts; whether it is not in those districts—Donegal, Connemara, Kerry, and Cork—that famine is apprehended in the coming winter; and, whether a re-distribution of the population over the rich grazing plains has not been advocated by several English statesmen; and, whether, in reference to that portion of the Question which charges Mr. Davitt with stirring up the people to outrage, it is not the fact that he has invariably warned the people of Ireland against the commission of crime?

MR. O'DONNELL

I would ask the Chief Secretary on the same subject, Whether his attention has been called to the fact that the principle advocated by Mr. M. Davitt—namely, a reduction of rent during seasons of extreme distress—has been recognized in the agrarian legislation of India?

MR. TREVELYAN

There is only one of these supplementary Questions that I need answer. I am quite aware that the seat of something like chronic distress in Ireland is in over-populated districts, which the Government hope to begin to relieve by emigration. It is possible that English statesmen may have recommended a transfer from these districts to the rich grazing lands of Ireland; but they did not recommend that that transfer should be made by illegal means. The Government had a shorthand writer present during Mr. Davitt's speech, and his report is substantially in accord with the report in The Freeman's Journal. In reference to the speech of the hon. Member for Wexford, the Government have directed their earnest attention, and have been directing their earnest attention since or probably before the day on which the first Question was asked on this subject. And I may say that questions relating to the treatment of speeches made on public platforms are absolutely the most difficult, and those which require the most consideration, both on grounds of policy and on grounds of law, of any questions which can be laid before the Government. I will, therefore, take this opportunity of saying that the Government have directed their earnest attention to the speeches of Mr. Davitt, of the hon. Member for Wexford, and of Mr. William Redmond, as to whom a Question was asked by an hon. and gallant Member opposite (Sir Henry Fletcher) a few days ago. Their conclusion is, that if such speeches continue to be made, there is no hope for peace and order in Ireland. It is impossible to keep crime in check by any system of punishment as long as speeches like these are made, which, from whatever their intention—and I say nothing about that—experience tells lead to crime and outrage. If the speeches made at public meetings of the National Land League are continued in the same strain as those made during the last week, I shall feel it my duty to recommend the Lord Lieutenant to exercise his power, under the Prevention of Crime (Ireland) Act, to prohibit these meetings. The Government have been advised that Mr. William Redmond's speech comes within the 7th section of the Prevention of Crime (Ireland) Act, and a prosecution will be forthwith instituted. With reference to Mr. Davitt's speech, and the first portion of the speech of the hon. Member for Wexford, which have been referred to in the Question of the right hon. Baronet, the Government are advised that they are not within the scope of the Prevention of Crime (Ireland) Act. Neither are they indictable. But I am advised that the latter part of the speech of the hon. Member for Wexford, referred to in the Question, is open to a prosecution for sedition; but I am recommended by the Attorney General for Ireland not to prosecute. It is quite out of the question, however, that such speeches should be allowed, and application will be made that these speakers shall be bound to be of good behaviour, or committed to prison in default.

SIR E. ASSHETON CROSS

Has the attention of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, who allowed Mr. Michael Davitt to go at large, been called to this speech?

MR. TREVELYAN

The attention of the Irish Government has been called to this Question, and their opinion is that Mr. Michael Davitt should be treated exactly as if he were any other person.

MR. REDMOND

Would the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to inform the House whether Her Majesty's Government is in possession of an official shorthand writer's note of the speech made by Mr. William Redmond at Cork?

MR. TREVELYAN

A Government reporter was present.

MR. SEXTON

I wish to ask the same Question in reference to the speech of the hon. Member for Wexford.

MR. TREVELYAN (after consultation with the Attorney General for Ireland)

I telegraphed to Ireland early to-day on that point, and it is the only point in connection with this matter on which I have not received an answer.

MR. REDMOND

I did not ask the right hon. Gentleman whether a shorthand writer was present when the speech of Mr. Redmond was made in Cork, but whether the Government was in possession of a full official report of the speech?

MR. TREVELYAN

That will be a matter which will come before a legal tribunal. I can only say that the Government reporter was present.

MR. HEALY

Perhaps it is desirable I should say that I was not aware, when coming here this evening, that this Question was to be asked; that, therefore, I am not here in consequence of it, and that I will be back again in Dublin to-morrow.

MR. SEXTON

I beg to give Notice that to-morrow I shall ask the Chief Secretary if the Irish Executive secured the services of an official shorthand writer at the public meeting held on Sunday last, at St. Mullins, County Carlow; if they are now in possession of a full official shorthand note of the speech delivered on that occasion by my hon. Friend the Member for Wexford; and as it appeared by the consultation which took place between the Chief Secretary and the Attorney General for Ireland that neither of them knows of the existence of such a note, and therefore could not have acted upon it, I beg to ask him upon what evidence he arrived at the decision, with respect to my hon. Friend, which he has communicated to the House?