§ MR. M'COANrose to put the following Question to the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland:—If his attention has been called to a series of extracts from recent articles in The United Ireland newspaper, which appeared in The Times of Wednesday last; whether Charles Stewart Parnell, Justin M'Carthy, and Joseph Gillis Biggar are the registered proprietors of The United Ireland, and William O'Brien its responsible editor; and, whether such writings are not incitements to disaffection and crime, and calculated to bring the Government of the Country and the administration of the Law into contempt amongst the masses of the Irish people; and, if so, whether it is the intention of the Irish Executive to permit the con- 611 tinued publication of such appeals to popular ignorance and passion, even although those who derive trade profits from them are Members of this House?
§ MR. SPEAKERBefore the hon. Member puts this Question, I must call his attention to the fact that the last two lines contravene the Rule of this House which applies to Questions, inasmuch as they contain a statement of fact which, I understand, is disputed, and also a matter of opinion as to the interpretation to be put upon the articles in question, which he states to be "appeals to popular ignorance and passion." Following the Rule which applies to Questions, I must ask the hon. Member to be good enough to omit that portion of the Question.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNORI rise, Sir, to Order. I wish to ask you, whether under the same Rule you will not request the hon. Member to omit the words in the Question "inoitements to disaffection and crime?"
§ MR. SPEAKERThat is not a statement of fact. The opinion which the hon. Member wishes to elicit is whether the Irish Executive think it necessary to interfere, in consequence of the publication of these articles.
§ MR. M'COANI, of course, Mr. Speaker, bow at once to your suggestion. I had hoped that the slight conveyance of opinion on the question was a perfectly legitimate one, and would have commended itself to your mind. Of course, I will leave out the words you mention, and substitute the words "such writings" instead of "appeals to popular ignorance and passion."
MR. O'BRIENBefore the right hon. Gentleman answers the Question, I will ask him also to say whether, so far from inciting to crime, one of these articles headed "A Warning," from which a garbled extract was given in The Times, was not a vehement denunciation of agrarian crime, and an exhortation to the people to hunt it down themselves, and whether these articles were not published with the object of obtaining a public investigation into grave and specific charges against certain public officials therein named of taking away innocent lives, screening infamous officials —[Cries of "Order!"] —corrupting the course of justice by packing juries, employing perjured witnesses, using the detective police for the purpose of or- 612 ganizing crime, and seducing convicts to give false evidence—[Cries of "Order!"]
§ MR. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is contravening the Rule which it was my duty just now to lay down. If the hon. Member desires to make anything like a personal explanation, he is at liberty to do so.
MR. O'BRIENI was simply explaining, Sir, what the writings which the hon. Member stigmatizes as "incitements to crime" really aimed at, and I was setting forth, as far as possible, the specific charges which these articles contain in reference to the administration of the law in Ireland. The only other thing I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman is whether, if the incriminated officials feel aggrieved, and are prepared to justify themselves before a jury, the Courts of Law are not open to them in the ordinary manner for that purpose?
§ MR. SEXTONI have also to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in consequence of incitement said to be of an incendiary and revolutionary character, a newspaper which the hon. Member who put the Question (Mr. M'Coan) edited in the Levant was not several times suppressed by the Government of the country?
§ MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANThe last Question put by the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton) is not, I presume, intended to be answered. The other Questions put by the hon. Member for Mallow (Mr. O'Brien) enter into matters of argument and opinion to which I can hardly be expected to reply. The attention of the Irish Government has been called not only to the extracts recently published in The Times, but to the original articles as they appeared from time to time in United Ireland. I have no precise information as to the actual proprietors of that newspaper, but I believe those who have been named by the hon. Member are or have been connected with it. I can assure my hon. Friend that, although the fact that some of those concerned are Members of Parliament may increase the importance attached to the paper in the eyes of some of its readers in Ireland, it will not influence the Government in deciding upon the course they may think proper to adopt in the matter. The character and tone of many passages in those articles are such that they must be regarded with 613 repugnance and condemned by all who value the maintenance of public order, and especially by those who appreciate most highly the existence of a free Press as a field for fair and reasonable political controversy. But the point we have always to consider is whether the harm which might unfortunately be done by the circulation of such articles might not be intensified, if any legal proceedings taken against a newspaper gave it a fictitious importance in the eyes of the more ignorant classes. This is, and always will be, a very difficult matter to decide. Its decision, as occasion arises, must be left to the Executive Government, which on the one hand is disposed to disregard these violent articles so far as they profess to be criticisms of their own conduct, but on the other hand they are fully alive to the effect which such publications may have on the general community.
MR. O'BRIENAs I am to some extent interested in this matter, I wish to say that neither the good nor the evil opinion of the right hon. Gentleman is anything to me.
§ MR. SPEAKERThat is not a statement compatible with the Rules of the House. The Question has been answered. I must call upon Mr. Justin M'Carthy (who had the next Question on the Paper).
§ MR. O'BRIEN, who rose amid cries of "Order!" said: Sir, an attack has been made upon me, and I hope I may be allowed to reply to it. ["Order!"]
§ MR. CALLANMove the adjournment.
§ MR. SPEAKERIf the hon. Member wishes to make a personal explanation, the House will grant its indulgence.
MR. O'BRIENI simply wish to say that whatever may be the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman—[Cries of "Order!"]
§ MR. SPEAKERThat is not in the nature of a personal explanation. I call upon the hon. Member who has the next Question on the Paper—Mr. Justin M'Carthy.