§ MR. P. O'BRIEN (Monaghan, N.)asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he is aware that officers of the Army and Militia in the North of Ireland are members of Orange Lodges in the districts where they are stationed; whether an Address was carried in this House in 1836, praying His Majesty to take such measures as should be effectual for the suppression of Orange Societies; whether, in consequence of this Resolution of the House of Commons, orders were issued from the War Office prohibiting all persons in the Naval or Military Service from having any connection with Orangeism; whether Queen's Regulations were also issued by Her Majesty to the same effect; and, whether such Regulations are still in force; 267 and, if not, whether, in view of recent events in the North of Ireland, and particularly of the fact that it has been necessary to rely largely on the Military for the suppression of riots, in which Orangemen take a large part, it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to re-issue or enforce these Regulations?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. E. STANHOPE) (Lincolnshire, Horncastle)(who replied) said: In answer to the first Question, I would say that I have no knowledge of the political views of officers in the Army in their private capacities, and therefore I have no means of knowing whether they belong to Orange Lodges or not. As to the second and third Questions, such an Address was carried in Parliament on the 11th of August, 1835, and an Order was issued by the Adjutant General on the 31st of August, 1835, peremptorily forbidding the attendance of either officer or soldier at Orange Lodges, by whomsoever or wheresoever held. Fourthly, the King's Regulations of June 1, 1837, embodied the Order of 1835, and it was included in any edition of the Queen's Regulations up to the year 1868. Since then it has not been considered necessary to refer specifically in the Queen's Regulations to Orange Lodges; but the end is held to be sufficiently met by the Regulation still in force, which prohibits officers and soldiers from instituting or taking any part in any meeting, demonstration, or procession for party or political purposes, in barracks, quarters, or camp, or in their vicinity and anywhere, if in uniform. I would, at the same time, refer to the answer made by the noble Marquess the Member for Rossendale (the Marquess of Hartington) on February 21, 1884, in which he refused to regard a military man as being deprived of his civil rights, which he would be, if debarred entirely from attending political meetings. With that opinion I agree.