§ MR. GEDGE (Stockport)Sir, I have the following Notice on the Paper:—
To call attention to the present mode of framing the jury panel and selecting jurors in Ireland, and the reasons given for the same, and, in connection therewith, to the alleged jury packing in past and pending cases; and to move, That the present system of framing the jury panel and selecting jurors in Ireland is complicated, and has often failed to secure a jury which could he relied upon to return a verdict according to the evidence, and therefore needs amendment, yet that the charges of jury packing in recent cases have not been substantiated.I stated at an earlier period this evening that if I were able I should certainly bring the matter forward tonight. As at this time it is too late to have a discussion, I will state what I propose to do. When I gave Notice of this Motion the matter was of considerable importance, so much so that the hon. Gentleman the Member for West Belfast (Mr. Sexton) had a Notice on the Paper dealing with the Question from his point of view. But since this Notice of mine was put on the Paper the Government Bill for the Prevention of Crime in Ireland has been presented to us, and has been printed and circulated, and, on looking at that Bill, I see that—
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)I rise to Order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is the hon. and learned Member entitled to refer to a Bill at present before the House?
§ MR. GEDGEThe subject-matter of my Notice, or Resolution, will be much more conveniently discussed on the second reading or in Committee of the Government Bill, which touches the same subject—therefore I do not propose to proceed with my Motion.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYHas the hon. and learned Member moved the discharge of his Motion?
§ MR. T. M. HEALYI wish to say—
§ MR. T. M. HEALYThen I move that this House do now adjourn, and I do it on this ground. We have been night after night led astray by the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Stockport. He has put down this Motion relating to the Irish jury system, and has kept us here until late at night to watch it, preventing us in that way from doing other work. I think that, under the circumstances, a Motion for the adjournment of the House is the proper course to take—therefore I move it.
§ MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)I beg to second that Motion, and I do it because I desire to say that the conduct of the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Stockport (Mr. Gedge) is in the highest degree objectionable; and before I sit down I shall ask you, Sir, to say whether his proceedings, in view of the recent ruling of Mr. Speaker, are not an abuse of the Rules of this House? The hon. and learned Member, at an earlier period of the evening's Sitting, informed me—I dare say, Sir, you were in the House and heard it—that if he got an opportunity, he would bring his Motion on to-night.
§ MR. DILLONI leave it to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and to the House to say what was the impression conveyed to the House by what the hon. Gentleman said. I do not for a moment propose to contradict the account the hon. and learned Gentleman has given of the statement he made; but, whatever the words he used may be, the impression conveyed to me, and to every sensible Member of this House without exception, was that if he got an opportunity to-night, he would bring forward his Motion. Now, what has been the course adopted by the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Stockport? Why, he has put his Motion on the Paper for the deliberate purpose of preventing us from bringing the subject forward—of preventing us from discussing or even alluding to the subject 469 with which his Motion deals. He put his Motion on the Paper when another Motion had been withdrawn, and I am entitled, I think, to declare, looking at his line of conduct in this matter, that beyond all question, in the eyes of every frank and honest man, that was the object he had in view in putting his Motion on the Paper. Hitherto I have abstained from attributing that motive to him. [Interruption.] I do not know what hon. Gentlemen opposite may think as to the propriety of that motive; but I maintain that the hon. and learned Member's statement this evening fully entitles me to say—whether or not he himself considers it an improper one or not—that it was with that motive that he placed his Motion on the Paper. Now that he has an opportunity of bringing on the Motion he deliberately withdraws it. I would ask him, on the question of adjournment, whether he proposes to put this Motion on the Paper again, or whether any hon. Gentleman in collusion with him will put a similar Motion on the Paper? After what has occurred, I shall take another opportunity—perhaps one more favourable than the present—of appealing to you, Sir, or to whoever occupies the Chair, to rule whether such a course of proceeding as that which has been pursued by the hon. Member is not an abuse of the Rules of this House, in view of the ruling given by the Speaker on a previous occasion? I myself and other Members of our Party are personally and most vitally interested in this subject of Irish jury panels, and yet the hon. Member has gone out of his way to prevent us from alluding to the matter in the House. I consider the conduct of the hon. and learned Gentleman has been extremely unfair, and I trust that the course he has adopted will not be followed by other hon. Members. We have abstained on this side of the House from pursuing that course; but if this sort of conduct is to be repeated by supporters of the Government I think we have shown on previous occasions that two can play at such games. We can put down a series of Notices at some future time which may have the result of preventing hon. Gentlemen opposite from bringing on discussions which may be of great moment to them; and in this way, through the conduct of the supporters of the Government, a state 470 of things will be brought about which was characterized in one of the public newspapers the other day as proceedings more worthy of sharpers on a race-course than hon. Members of this House.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn.— (Mr. T. M. Healy.)
§ MR. J. E. ELLIS (Nottingham, Rushcliffe)I rise to support the protest made by the hon. Gentleman the Member for East Mayo (Mr. Dillon). I venture to think that the hon. and learned Member for Stockport (Mr. Gedge) has given no adequate reason for the course he has just pursued. Surely it is not a proper thing for an hon. Member to put on the Paper such a Notice as that of the hon. and learned Member for Stockport, and then to decline to move it as he has now done. We all know the object with which it was put down. I ventured to ask the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury (Mr. W. H. Smith) what course the Government would pursue in the event of the Resolution of the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Stockport being brought forward; and the right hon. Gentleman, in this House, informed me that as soon as the Resolution was moved the Government would state fully their views on the matter. I would point out that we are now precluded from hearing the views of Her Majesty's Government on this very important subject. I venture to say that not only the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Stockport, but also the Government, by not using their influence with their supporter—and we all know the influence they possess—have not been treating the House with proper respect in this matter.
§ MR. GEDGEI rise to support the Motion for Adjournment. I consider that at a quarter past 2 o'clock in the morning I might very well have excused myself from going on with this Motion without assigning any other reason. But I thought it better to give an honest, bonâ fide reason. At the time I put my Motion on the Paper, the hon. Gentleman the Member for West Belfast (Mr. Sexton) had not, I believe, withdrawn his Notice of Motion which stood on it. If he had done so I was not aware of it. My Notice was put on the Paper with the intention of discussing the matter as 471 soon as an opportunity arrived for so doing. No opportunity has presented itself up to the present time, and meanwhile the Government Bill for the Amendment of the Criminal Law of Ireland has, in my opinion, rendered the discussion of my Resolution unnecessary. It would have been out of Order for me to give this explanation in reply to the Question put to me a few hours ago. That was the reason of my conduct, and I submit that I have acted in a perfectly straightforward manner, and in accordance with the Rules of the House.
§ MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)The right hon. Gentleman the Postmaster General (Mr. Raikes) accuses me of running away from my guns. I wonder what he would have said about his supporter, the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Stockport, if he had known about this transaction? I rise to support the protest of hon. Gentlemen behind me, and in order to express the opinion—which I think will be shared by many on this side of the House —that it would only have been candid on the part of the hon. and learned Member for Stockport if, when he was challenged earlier in the evening as to what he intended to do, he had given the same reply as he has now given. It is obvious that the reply he made at an earlier period of the evening could have only one construction placed on it— namely, that he did intend to bring this matter forward for debate. If he had had the frankness to state the bonâ fide reason he has given now at half-past 2 o'clock in the morning, it would have saved hon. Gentlemen on this side a great deal of trouble. It would have saved many of them from the trouble of sitting here all the evening expecting his Motion to come on. If the hon. and learned Member would learn to treat hon. Gentlemen on this side with a little more frankness, it would contribute more to the harmony of our proceedings.
§ MR. M. J. KENNY (Tyrone, Mid)I hope the House will not adjourn until we have received some assurance that hon. Gentlemen opposite, who have of late indulged in the practice of putting Notices of Motion down for the purpose of really preventing discussion upon the subject of the Motions, will desist from doing so. The hon. and learned Mem- 472 ber for Stockport (Mr. Gedge) referred to his Motion in the most flippant manner; but we are entitled to know whether it is not an abuse of the Forms of the House for an hon. Member to put down a Notice of Motion upon a subject in which he takes no interest whatever, simply for the purpose of preventing discussion? The practice is certainly one which ought to be stopped. If the right hon. Gentleman the Speaker could have foreseen the consequence of his recent ruling, I question whether he would ever have given it.
§ MR. M. J. KENNYI will not pursue it.
§ MR. M. J. KENNYCertainly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will withdraw it, though I am not quite conscious of the statement I have to withdraw. With all respect to the right hon. Gentleman the Speaker, I only wish to point out that his ruling was quite different to the ruling of Mr. Speaker Brand.
§ MR. M. J. KENNYOh! Is that the statement? Then I withdraw it. I will only say that we have a new state of facts before us, by means of which any Member of the House may, by adopting a certain line of conduct, stamp out all discussion upon a given question. The practice on the part of hon. Members opposite to which I have referred is, I submit, an abuse of the Forms of the House, contrary to the spirit of the ruling of the Chair, and one which we are entitled to protest against.
§ MR. EDWARD HARRINGTON (Kerry, W.)I think the matter which has been brought to the attention of the House deserves a word from the Ministerial Bench. Members of the Government are very ready and flippant with their reproaches towards hon. Members on this side of the House; but I think they would do well to set their own house on their own side of the House in order. If the course of the hon. and learned Member for Stockport (Mr. Gedge) is what he calls a candid and 473 straightforward course, I must have a very crooked eyesight indeed. The hon. Member thought it right to put down a Motion relating to one of the sorest grievances in Ireland. The question of jury-packing is one which we have sought times out of number to bring to the notice of the House. We have done so not for the purpose of delay or obstruction, but because the question is a sore and burning one in the opinion of our people. I shall not go into the merits of the question; but I do desire to mark as much as I can my emphatic protest against what hon. Members on the Tory Benches are pleased to call fair play and fair dealing. I make them a present of their idea of fair play. Hon. Members sitting near the hon. and learned Member for Stockport seem to be delighted with the great tact displayed by the hon. and learned Member; but it is false tact to put upon the Notice Paper a Notice of Motion like this, and flaunt it in our faces night after night. If the hon. and learned Member is satisfied with his arguments, why does he not give us an opportunity of debating the question? We are physically capable of debating it, and the hon. and learned Member himself seems sprightly enough. Why does he not move his Motion? If he is such a wonderful tactician, why does he not enter the arena of advocacy? I do not care to use the words which would best express the feelings I entertain of the tactics which hon. Members opposite have resorted to—no doubt, they are proud of their performances; but I think I am very near the truth when I say that their performances to-night will retaliate with vengeance on themselves. The Ministers of Her Majesty will some day have reason to regret that they have sat silently by while their supporters have made the proceedings of this House a means of insulting the Irish people.
§ MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)The hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Stockport (Mr. Gedge) has done me the honour of making a personal reference to me. Early in the Session I had a Motion on this subject on the Paper, and the hon. and learned Gentleman has said that when he placed his Motion on the Paper he was not aware that I had withdrawn mine. I can hardly reconcile that statement with the fact that, if my Motion was not withdrawn, 474 he must have known it was as good a one for raising the subject as his. My hon. Friend the Member for East Mayo (Mr. Dillon) endeavoured to raise the question of jury-packing in Ireland, and I withdrew my Motion on the next day, when it was well known the hon. Member for East Mayo would endeavour to return to the subject. The Motion of the hon. and learned Member for Stockport immediately appeared on the Paper, and applied the gag to the mouth of my hon. Friend. The House is aware that at that moment the liberty of my hon. Friend the Member for East Mayo and of three other hon. Members of the House was directly concerned in the subject of the Motion. I make the hon. and learned Member for Stockport a present of any self-congratulation he can feel as the result of the course he has pursued. I assure him he has taken a course which one hon. Member of this House rarely takes towards another hon. Member. He has taken a course which is not envied by any other hon. Member now present, for I assure him that, whatever may have been his purpose, the effect of his course has been very pitiable and contemptible obstruction.
§ MR. MAURICE HEALY (Cork)Mr. Deputy Speaker, I hold in my hand a copy of this year's Dod's Parliamentary Companion, and from under the heading "Sydney Gedge" I extract the following passage, which I presume was supplied by the hon. and learned Gentleman himself:—
A Conservative, but in favour of 'freedom of trade, freedom of contract, freedom of bequest, freedom of speech, and freedom from State and municipal interference with individual action and enterprize.'I will not comment on the amount of candour which the hon. and learned Member has exhibited in explaining the motive which has led him to put this Motion on the Paper of the House. I am afraid he will not find many hon. Members of the House so simple as to be prepared to accept in all its nakedness the statement he has made on this subject; but I take the liberty of saying that, in my judgment, the hon. and learned Gentleman might have selected some other method of displaying his desire for freedom of speech than by placing a Motion on the Paper of the House plainly designed for no other purpose than to smother deliberate ex- 475 pression of opinion on a topic of great public importance.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYIn asking leave to withdraw the Motion, I only desire to say that, as outside we apply the term "fishy" to transactions of a questionable character, in the House we had hotter apply to such transactions the term "Gedgey."
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
§ House adjourned at half after Two o'clock.