HC Deb 14 July 1884 vol 290 cc914-6
LORD GEORGE HAMILTON

asked Mr. Attorney General, If his attention has been directed to the following words in The Pall Mall Gazette of July 9th 1884, describing the object of the agitation set on foot by the Birmingham Caucus and kindred Liberal Associations:— Our immediate duty is to organise the intimidation of the House of Lords. That is the fact in all its naked brutality, and we hope it will be taken to heart by every Liberal in the three Kingdoms; and, whether such an organised attempt at intimidation is in accordance with Law; and, if not, what steps he proposes to take to deal with this huge avowed conspiracy against one branch of the Legislature?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES)

In consequence of the Question placed on the Paper by the noble Lord, I have referred to The Pall Mall Gazette of Wednesday last; and although, of course, the words put by the noble Lord in turned commas are correctly quoted, I do not find them so immediately connected with the agitation said to be set on foot by any Association as the position they occupy in the Question would cause most persons to think. Apart from the construction put on the words by the noble Lord, it is not for me to express any opinion whether the writer has chosen the most happy words he could in order to express his meaning. Certainly it is due to the writer to say that the words ought to be read with the context, and not separated and isolated as they appeared in the Question. If I am to express my opinion—and I suppose the noble Lord wishes me to do so—whether there has been any offence against the law committed by writing those words in connection with the context, it does not appear to me that a prosecution of the writer could lead to any practical or satisfactory result. If the noble Lord will refer to the same journal of this evening he will see an explanation of the words, which, I am sure, will be so satisfactory to him that he will be anxious to relieve me from the further consideration of this question.

LORD GEORGE HAMILTON

The hon. and learned Gentleman has not answered my Question. I wish to know whether an agitation, the object of which is to organize an intimidation in order to prevent certain persons from performing duties legally intrusted to them, is not an illegal combination?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES)

It is only an act of courtesy to answer the noble Lord. But this Question is, in one sense, a hypothetical Question; it depends entirely upon the sense in which the word "intimidation" is used—whether it is used in the sense of physical violence to overawe either House of Parliament. Such might be alleged to be an offence. But if it should happen to be used in reply to a challenge from a distinguished person, that no action shall be taken in legislation until "great and violent public pressure" is placed upon Parliament, then it may be an answer to such an invitation, and would not cause the person who accepted it to be guilty of any criminal offence.

LORD GEORGE HAMILTON

I wish to give Notice that on Thursday next I will ask the Prime Minister, if we are to understand from the answer of the Attorney General that his Government, which put Irish Members of Parliament in prison for using language which was supposed to be of an intimidatory character, are disposed to aid and abet the use of similar language in England when it is likely to promote their own ends?