§ MR. HAVELOCK WILSON (Middlesbrough), rising at the close of Questions, said: Mr. Speaker, I desire to make a statement to the House, not alone in my interests, but in the interests of the dignity arid honour of the House of Commons. ["Hear, hear!" and laughter.]
§ * MR. SPEAKERDo I understand the hon. Member is rising for the purpose of making a personal explanation?
§ MR. HAVELOCK WILSONYes, Sir; and to call attention to a breach of privilege.
§ * MR. SPEAKERIf the hon. Member is raising any question of privilege he is entitled to do so, or he is entitled to make a personal explanation, but he must do either the one or the other.
§ MR. HAVELOCK WILSONDo I understand that if I make a personal explanation I cannot afterwards raise the question of privilege?
§ * MR. SPEAKERIf the hon. Member has a question of privilege to raise, he should first call attention to the fact on which he proposes to raise it, so that it may be before the House. It may be there is no question of privilege.?
§ MR. HAVELOCK WILSONThe question of privilege I desire to raise, Sir, is in connection with an article which appeared in the St. James's Gazette of last evening. [Cries of "Read."]
§ * MR. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is complaining of an article in a newspaper as a breach of privilege. If he has a copy of the paper it will be read by the Clerk at the Table, or those parts of it of which the hon. Member complains of.
§ MR. HAVELOCK WILSONbrought to the Table a copy of the St. James's Gazette newspaper, of the 16th March 1896, and the passage complained of was read by the Clerk (Sir REGINALD PALGRAVE) as followeth:—
The story has been scandalous up to now, and, unless proper measures are taken, will continue to be so. Here is a man in a public position posing as the champion of a class which is peculiarly liable to be cheated and unable to defend himself. He is accused of theft and swindling; and what follows? The worst that can befall him, as the result of this action, is to be called upon to pay the costs of Mr. Collison; which, in any case, will probably not come out of his pocket. If the charges brought against Wilson cannot be disproved—and he has not tried to disprove them,—then he is a public offender, who has defrauded hundreds of poor men as foully as ever did the secretary of a building society who decamped with the funds. Yet it seems to be nobody's business to bring Mr. Wilson to book. The task is left to be discharged by a private person, who runs a considerable risk of being heavily mulcted for his pains. And this shy defender of his honour, this friend of the sailor and fireman—who, after mouthing for months about vindicating his character, after delaying to bring his action for a year and a half, at last refuses to face cross-examination, and stands by his own choice in the position of a confessed impostor—is a Member of Parliament who votes our taxes and brings in Bills. Is he to continue to hold this position? Is the House content to include him among its Members? Is the end of it to be that Wilson's dogged indifference to honour and decency is to gain its purpose? We hope not most sincerely. The Commons have now no excuse for not taking measures to vindicate their character; and the time has come when it ought to be thought impossible to postpone inquiry into the question whether the House can endure the presence of this man Wilson any longer.
§ * MR. SPEAKERThe hon. Member was good enough to send me a copy of the newspaper last night, therefore I have considered it, and although there can be no doubt that the newspaper article, or the part of it which has just been read, does make a serious attack on the private character of the hon. Member, I cannot say that it constitutes a case of privilege. In order to constitute a case of privilege there must be some attack on an hon. Member in respect of his conduct as a Member of the House. In the present instance there is a violent attack, no doubt, made on the character of the hon. Member in respect of transactions outside this House altogether, and, therefore, I do not think it constitutes a case of privilege, nor do I think the fact that the writer 1178 of the article draws or states an inference that if these charges are true then, the hon. Member against whom they are directed would not be fit to sit in the House—I do not think that that inference merely at the end of an attack which is entirely an attack upon the hon. Member in respect of matters outside the House would make that a breach of privilege which would not otherwise be so. I therefore think the hon. Member cannot treat this as a breach of privilege.
§ MR. HAVELOCK WILSONDo I understand that I will not be allowed to discuss this question?
§ * MR. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is entitled to make a personal explanation to the House. Perhaps I may say beforehand that the hon. Member has written to me a letter, which, I understand, he has also communicated to the Press, on the subject of what he is about to say. He will understand that a personal explanation in this House will not entitle him to go into details answering the matters which he had an opportunity of going into at the recent trial to which he refers. That is a matter of detail that could not properly be gone into here. It will be impossible for me to say to what extent he may go in the way of a personal explanation until I hear what he does wish to say.
§ MR. HAVELOCK WILSONI will endeavour, as far as I possibly can, to keep within your ruling, Sir. I do not complain of the trial in any way; but what I do say is this—that if a Member of this House is a liar and a thief, he has no right to sit and vote in this House—["Hear, hear!"]—and I ask that this House should appoint a Committee to inquire into these charges. If they are true, I am willing to retire from the House; if they are not true, then I consider that I am entitled to have the respect of this House. ["Hear, hear!"] I do not know whether the Rules of the House will permit that Committee of Inquiry to be appointed to inquire into the charges; but, if such a course cannot be adopted, I do think it within the province of the Members of this House to appoint a Committee of Honour of ten Members from either side; and if any one charge in that pamphlet can be proved to be true, I retire from this House at once. I trust the House will 1179 pardon my feelings on this matter. ["Hear, hear!"] I would like to explain why we adopted the course we did in connection with the recent libel. Since 1889 I have been continually subjected to libels by different men; and every time I have taken these men into Court, they have always thrown the onus of proving I was innocent of the charges on myself; and not one of these men in any of the actions, although making the charges, has ever had the courage to go into the witness-box and give me an opportunity of cross-examining him. I resolved in this case that, whatever the result might be, I would force them into the box to prove their charges on oath, and give me an opportunity of cross-examining them. They did not do it, because they had not the courage; therefore, I was compelled to suffer in consequence, and I now ask that this House will vindicate its own honour. Never mind me; if I am a thief, I have no right to be here; and I say it is not my honour which is now at stake, but the honour of the House of Commons. If the matter can be settled in a very short time, I am prepared to submit myself to any Committee of this House, to hand over to them the whole of the books and documents in connection with the union, and allow them the fullest opportunity of investigating every charge contained in this pamphlet. If they prove that any one of the charges is true, then, I say, I have no right to be asked to retire from this House; but, if I have the spirit of a man, I would retire immediately. ["Hear, hear!"] Members have a right in this House to know something of the character of the men with whom they associate, and I feel that on both sides of the House there are Gentlemen who can speak with authority as to the investigation of these accounts. I refer to the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Dublin University. He has investigated the accounts of the Union. He put me through a searching cross-examination at the trial at Guildford, and he himself in Court declared that not one charge of personal dishonesty could be brought against my character. Then there is the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for the Exchange Division of Liverpool, who has also appeared against me in a case in connection with these charges.
§ * MR. SPEAKERI must tell the hon. Gentleman that I think he is going a little beyond the usual indulgence permitted to hon. Members making a personal explanation in appealing to hon. Members present in respect to what they have done as counsel.
§ MR. HAVELOCK WILSONI am much obliged to you, Mr. Speaker, for your correction. I am no doubt a little bit excited and nervous, but I am sure hon. Members will overlook that. ["Hear, hear!"] However, the point I want to raise is this: Is it within the province of the Government to appoint a Committee to inquire into these charges? If it is, I ask the Government to do so. If they cannot, then I ask for the next best thing, and that is a voluntary Committee of Members from both sides to satisfy themselves whether there is any foundation for the charges.
§ * MR. SPEAKERthen called on the hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne, Mr. H.WHITELEY, who had a Motion on the Paper dealing with Bimetallism.
§ MR. WHITELEY rose to address the House, but there were loud cries of "Balfour, Balfour!"
§ * MR. SPEAKERThere can be no Debate on a personal explanation.
§ * MR. J. WILSON (Mid Durham)Will the First Lord of the Treasury state his views as to the appointment of a Committee? [Cries of "No."]
§ * THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYI do not know whether it will be my duty to answer the Question, or whether it would be proper. It is not easy to do that without going into argumentative matter which would not be in order. But I may say that as far as I am seised of the case—I do not pretend to know all its bearings—it appears to me that the House is not a fitting body to appoint a tribunal to rehear a case which has been brought before the ordinary tribunals by which justice is administered. ["Hear, hear!"]