HC Deb 24 April 1893 vol 11 cc1106-16

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn." — (Mr. Marjoribanks.)

MR. SEXTON (Kerry, N.)

In the absence of the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant, I have to inquire of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, before the House adjourns, whether his attention has been drawn to the results of the recent incitements to riots in public speeches by eminent politicians upon the state of peace and order in Belfast? I think the House in a few minutes will be disposed to admit that the case requires prompt attention. It was only on Wednesday last that Lord Salisbury said in a public speech that the Ulster people would be very poor people if they could not beat down the local police, and some of our Ulster friends appear to be now engaged in showing that they are not such a poor people, and they appear to be engaged in that endeavour sooner than Lord Salisbury himself expected. I would draw the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to three incidents which have boon reported. The first appears to have occurred on Friday night or Saturday morning after the result of the Division on the Second Reading of the Home Rule Bill, when a crowd of Orangemen belonging to Ballymacarrett, a suburb of Belfast, smashed the windows in one of the Catholic quarters on both sides of the street for a considerable distance. On Saturday morning a crowd of Queen's Island workmen, numbering about 800 or 900, marched in a body from the works, and, passing up North Street, attacked a Catholic crowd. I need scarcely remind the right hon. Gentleman that the Report of the Commissioners who inquired into the Belfast riots of 1886 stated that the deplorable incident which led to the loss of 30 or 40 lives, to the wrecking of many houses, to the destruction of £90,000 worth of property, to the placing of the city in a state of siege, and which preceded riots which lasted three months, was that a body of Queen's Island workmen left their work and attacked a small body of Catholic workmen, driving them into the river, the result being that one man was drowned. According to the Belfast correspondent of The Times, several windows were broken on Saturday, but no person was seriously injured. Yet the police found it necessary to make two or three baton charges, and after one of the charges the police barracks was assailed with stones. At midnight on Saturday a crowd of Orangemen assembled on the Shankhill Road and amused themselves by groaning for the Home Rule Bill, the Prime Minister, and the Pope. They then attacked several Catholic houses, and completely looted one public-house belonging to a Catholic named Connolly, who escaped by a back door from their violence. I wonder if that is the way Lord Salisbury expected that they would show they are not such poor people. I found in The Daily Express to-day a statement that the Protestant workmen at the Queen's Island works held a meeting on Saturday at which they decided not to resume work this morning unless the Catholic minority were locked out. There appeared in that to be evidence of deliberation and design, and it has been necessary to send a large force of military and policy to the works. I am, too, informed that some Catholic mill girls, on going to their usual place this morning, were turned back by force. I have had a number of messages from Belfast which, in my judgment, confirm the account given, and which go to show that there is, as the House may expect, very deep uneasiness and great excitement in Belfast and some dissatisfaction with the control of the police, because in the case of the attack on the public-house, which lasted for a considerable period, it does not appear that any attempt was made by the police to cope with the disturbance. The Report of the 1886 Riots Commissioners stated that they regretted to find that in one of the large works, which was the Queen's Island works, the workmen freely carried away large numbers of iron bolts and nuts, and that no effort was made to check such misconduct. The workmen appeared to have also used iron nuts in their attack to-day, and I am informed that several of the military and police have been seriously injured. I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman, in the first place, whether he can afford the House any official statement of the facts; secondly, whether, if it is consistent with the public interest, he can state what measures are being adopted to secure the restoration or maintenance of order; and, further, whether the speeches in which religious rancour has been excited with a view to the instigation of violence in order that such may be used as an instrument of attack upon the will of this Legislature, will be considered by the Law Advisers of the Crown?

MR. DUNBAR BARTON (Armagh, Mid)

said, that although they had only had a few minutes notice of the intention to bring this matter forward, he felt that one or two of the hon. Member's observations called for immediate answer and refutation. The hon. Member described what had occurred as due to incitement. It was not the result of incitement; it was the result of a monstrous and iniquitous Bill, and he would prove it. During the last six years had there been any riots in Belfast? The last time there were riots, and lamentable they were, equally regretted on both sides, they were provoked by the same cause. There was one thing, and one only, that would produce riots in Belfast, and that was the introduction of such a measure as that now before the House. The hon. Member had read from newspapers accounts of those proceedings, but he made omissions which were very remarkable. He had provided himself as well as he could in the short time he had had with newspaper extracts on the occurrences in Belfast, and he would supplement from The Daily News the account given by the hon. Member for North Kerry. The hon. Member had taken care to omit certain circumstances which, though he (Mr. Barton) did not attach much importance to them, were worth referring to. It was quite true that on the morning after the Division on the Home Rule Bill some Orangemen paraded the streets, cursing—he regretted to say —the Pope; and cursing—he less regretted to say—Mr. Gladstone. [Cries of "Order!" and "Shame!"] He regretted it, but he regretted it less for this reason —that his Holiness had nothing to say to these matters, but he regretted to say that the Prime Minister was the direct cause of this riot. For the looting of the public houses; for the injuries to the policemen; for all the circumstances that had occurred, there was one cause, and one cause only, and that was the Prime Minister and the Government. Before there was any riot what did he find in The Daily News? That the Resident Magistrate warned the people to keep within doors. He thought it was most unfortunate that that advice was not taken. Then what followed? Bonfires were lit in the heart of the Catholic quarters—he did not complain about that; but according to the Daily News some panes of glass were broken in one or two Protestant shops. That was not calculated, at any rate, to promote good feeling. After that the hon. Member for North Kerry passed on to what occurred later on. It appeared that there was a riot between midnight and in the morning, and some violence was used. The hon. Member stated that as soon as the soldiers appeared the rioters decamped. Merely to correct the insinuation which that statement contained, he would mention the regrettable circumstance that the rioters did not disperse until at least one of the soldiers had been injured. He would tell the Government that if they persisted in their policy there would be disorder in Belfast, much as the Ulster leaders regretted it, and though they had done their best to prevent it, and would continue to do their best. In every communication, public or private, the Ulster Members and leaders had urged that there should be no disorder so long as the Bill was not law. If the Bill did become law, then he and his hon. Friends would stand in the streets with these men. In none of the speeches to which reference had been made was there any suggestion that the people should do anything else but preserve order so long as the Bill was not law.

MR. PAUL (Edinburgh, E.)

Lord Salisbury said "Put down the local police."

MR. BARTON

said, he had not got the report of Lord Salisbury's speech with him, but he ventured to say that the passage quoted did not fairly bear the interpretation suggested by the hon. Member. Not one of the Ulster Members would defend any act of violence in Belfast or elsewhere. All their influence would be used to preserve order in this most unfortunate and exciting crisis. Later in the year they would easily be able to do so, even though the crisis were to continue; because they would then have an organisation equal to doing that and a great deal more. [Cries of "Oh!" and cheers.] It would then only be by means of that organisation that the Government could look for any order; and they would have to thank the Ulster leaders and nobody else for the preservation of law and order in Belfast. He had shown that the hon. Member for North Kerry had not stated the case fairly and fully, but had omitted important circumstances. It was most unfortunate and unsatisfactory that this Debate should have been raised on insufficient information. But there was sufficient evidence to show that the Catholics neglected the warning of the authorities to keep within their doors, and that before a single Catholic house was attacked Protestant houses in the Catholic quarter had been stoned. He ventured to think that there was not a fair-minded man in the House or in the country who was not convinced that the cause of the riots in Belfast was not to be found in the language of public men uttered in discharge of a public duty, that it was not to be found in any bitter feeling between Protestants and Catholics—for he could assure the House that at the great Ulster demonstration addressed by the Leader of the Opposition there was no sentiment more loudly cheered than the sentiment of good feeling towards the Roman Catholics—but as in 1886, so now these disturbances were caused by the Home Rule Bill, and if the Government persisted in that measure they could rely only on the Unionist leaders for the preservation of order in Ulster.

*THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. ASQUITH,) Fife, E.

I very much regret, though I am not altogether surprised at, the tone adopted by my hon. and learned Friend who has just sat down. The hon. Member very generously and magnanimously offered to the Government the assistance of himself and his friends at some remote and contingent date in the future, when they would be prepared to co-operate with the Government in the maintenance of law and order. I confess we should attach greater importance and value to the offer if it were accompanied by some assurance on the part of the hon. Member and his friends that they would make an attempt to allay the feeling which has been excited, and to dissuade the people of Belfast and elsewhere from violent and illegal conduct. The hon. Member said that the responsibility for the violence in Belfast was to be cast on "the monstrous and iniquitous Bill," the Second Reading of which the House sanctioned last week. There are ways known to the Constitution in which people can express their dissent from the proceedings of the House of Commons; and I think that this is the first time there has been an open avowal by a Member of a Party, which professes to be devoted to law and order, that riot and illegality are if not the appropriate, at any rate the natural expressions of persons who object to the action of this House. I will now content myself with placing the House in possession of the information which the Government have received in the course of the day as to what happened in Belfast since Friday night. The official Report of the police states— All was quiet in Belfast up to 11.30 on Friday night. Slight disturbances of no serious importance occurred between that hour and 2 a.m. on Saturday, and were suppressed without substantial difficulty by the police. The city remained quiet throughout Saturday till 10.30 p.m., when Nationalists lit two bonfires on Carrick Hill. A Protestant mob from the Shankhill Road attempted to break through the police, and, being prevented, stoned the police. This mob was pursued by the police as far as Bowers Hill, where they broke into the public-house of a Catholic named Connolly, setting fire to the place. The police succeeded in extinguishing the five and dispersed the mob. Stone-throwing having taken place, two companies of Infantry were brought out. but only kept out half-an-hour on Shankhill Road. A good deal of stone-throwing and glass-breaking took place in the vicinity of the Newtownards Road Catholic Chapel. At 3 a.m. on Sunday morning all was quiet, and so continued Sunday and Sunday night. This morning a small number of Roman Catholic workers went to work at the Queen's Island at 6 a.m. At breakfast-hour six of them were beaten by a crowd of idle men about the shipyard. Some Catholic girls were refused admittance by their fellow-workers in Bedford Street. They, however, intend to present themselves again at the dinner hour. Every possible precaution will be taken by the police for the protection of these work-people. I regret I have no information of a later date than that, and therefore I cannot verify or contradict what the hon. Member for North Kerry has said as to the later occurrences. The hon. Member asked two questions—one as to the responsibility for what has already occurred, the other as to the future steps the Government will take to prevent the recurrence of the disturbances. On the first question I will content myself simply with saying that, in the opinion of the Government, a grave responsibility rests upon those who, to whatever Party they may belong, address to a population, divided and excitable as the population of Belfast is, language that is calculated to incite either the one party or the other to acts of violence. As to the future, I can assure the hon. Member that every possible step is being taken by the police authorities to prevent a recurrence of these disgraceful scenes, and to protect every person, of whatever class or religion, in the free exercise of his rights as a citizen.

MR. JACKSON (Leeds, N.)

I think this is a subject which calls for remarks from some one on this Bench. The Home Secretary condemned the observations of my hon. and learned Friend (Mr. Barton), but I think that any one who has listened to the official account of the proceedings given by the Home Secretary will see that it differs very materially from the statements of the hon. Member for North Kerry. The statement of the Home Secretary went to show that the disturbance was begun, not by the Protestants, as was insinuated by the hon. Member, but by the lighting of bonfires by the Catholics. The Home Secretary did not indicate by his Report by whom those disturbances were initiated, but it is clear from that Report that the disturbances began by the lighting of bonfires by the Catholics.

*MR. ASQUITH

The disturbances did not begin by the lighting of the bonfires, but they followed the lighting of the bonfires.

MR. JACKSON

Exactly. That is the point I am endeavouring to bring before the House. If the right hon. Gentleman prefers it in that way, I will say the lighting of the bonfires preceded the disturbances. I have no desire to add to the excitement which is apparently gathering round this question, but I will venture to say, and I think the hon. Member for North Kerry will boar me out. from his own experience, that newspaper accounts of these occurrences in Belfast, especially in connection with Queen's Island, are not always entirely reliable. The hon. Member will remember the case he brought forward some time ago of alleged attacks on Catholic workmen in the Queen's Island—I make no complaint of his bringing it forward; but it was absolutely without foundation. I, therefore, submit that we are not in a position to form a judgment, as the whole of the facts are not before us. If the question is to be raised seriously, let it be done with notice, and after the Government has obtained definite information. With regard to the few words which the hon. Member for North Kerry quoted from Lord Salisbury, I hold that nobody who reads the noble Lord's speech will come to the conclusion that the words bear the interpretation which the hon. Member put upon them. I hope, therefore, the House will not take it that any one on this side accepts the hon. Member's interpretation. On the contrary, we repudiate such an interpretation of the words. I have no wish to underrate the gravity of the situation in Belfast. I have no desire, by any single word, to add to the excitement there. But it must be obvious that the House is not fully informed on the matter, and that the discussion cannot usefully be continued on the imperfect facts before the House.

*MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER (Belfast, W.)

said he had no desire to prolong the Debate, but as the Representative of West Belfast—the district of the city chiefly concerned in these disturbances— he wished to make a few observations. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Leeds had adopted a wise course in deprecating an exhaustive discussion on this matter. He agreed that the matter could not be discussed until they had full information before them. He had made many endeavours during the day to obtain full particulars of the occurences, but he had been as unsuccessful as the hon. Member for North Kerry in obtaining an accurate account of what took place. He would, however, venture to add to the remarks of the hon. Member for Armagh by saying that the people of Belfast, and his constituents in particular, had a very clear and definite view of their duty. They felt and appreciated their responsibility. He had communicated with many men responsible for the peace and order of Belfast, and they had told him that they were aware of the very great danger that had been created in Belfast by the circumstances of the past few months. That the danger did exist was beyond question. They had recognised it, and, as responsible men, had taken every precaution to prevent disturbance. They intended to succeed in this matter, but not by riot. He had been at meeting after meeting at Belfast, at many gatherings large and small, and he had heard but one counsel given, and that was that every occasion should be avoided which might give rise to scones or to that resistance which no doubt in due time would be offered to the Bill if it became law. But the people of Belfast, and his own constituents in particular, had been subjected in the last few months to great provocation. They had been told that they were knaves or fools; that they did not know their own business, and dared not stand up for what they believed to be their own rights. The people of Belfast had been tried beyond endurance by those taunts; and it was no wonder that a few people gave way to passion and created those disturbances. But riots were not peculiar to Belfast. Disturbances had been excited by speeches made in Hull and other English towns, and it was no wonder that a small section of the poor and more ignorant of the population should have given way to the passions which animated them. But while there would be found in Belfast men ready and willing to seize every occasion to guide, to influence, and to instruct those ignorant men who had taken the law into their own hands under a mistaken conception of their duty, it should be remembered that there had been crime and violence in other parts of Ireland, and he knew only of one single instance in which a leading member of the Nationalist Party endeavoured to stand between the perpetrators of those crimes and outrages and their unfortunate victims. But with regard to Belfast, it was an unfortunate circumstance that the Lord Mayor and almost all the leading men had been withdrawn from Belfast owing to a great occasion in this part of the United Kingdom. However, the Lord Mayor and other responsible men had returned tonight, or would return almost immediately, and there was not a man of their Party who did not feel it to be his duty to go back and do everything he could to insure that the law should be observed. He had received, and was daily receiving, communications—not from Belfast nor from the Province of Ulster—showing a state of things which was calculated to rouse the passions of the men of Belfast.

It being One of the clock, Mr. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put.

House adjourned at One o'clock.