HC Deb 09 August 1905 vol 151 cc817-20
MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN (Kilkenny)

Mr. Speaker, I desire to call attention to a grossly improper interference with the rights of Members of this House, and an abuse of privileges given to certain servants who are in attendance on this House. About half-past twelve last night I received by a district messenger boy a certain communication. I went out into the Central Hall, and found the boy sitting there waiting for a reply. I took out my card, wrote on it, and handed it to him. The boy then left. Before he had crossed the Central Hall he was stopped by a man, who followed him and asked whether the message was for a Member of Parliament, and, if so, what was his name, and where was he taking it to. The boy said, "I believe he is a Member of Parliament, but I do not know any more about him." The person, whose name I will give, took my card out of the boy's hand, read the message, and then gave it back, and let the boy go his way. The person of whom I complain is named Ridgway. After some difficulty I got his name from him, and he told me that he was a servant of the Government Whips. As a matter of fact, the message was to a Member of this House, so that it was a message between one Member and another; but, whether between one Member and another or not, I claim that every message ought to be regarded as secret in this House, and I am sure that I can readily appeal to you, Mr. Speaker, to protect the secrecy of such messages. I asked the man what business he had interfering in that way. He said he did not interfere, but I have the evidence of a gentleman, whose name I can give, and I have the name of the boy and his number. On my way home with a colleague I called at the district messenger offices and asked to see the boy, in order that we might hear both sides. The boy, a very intelligent boy, was asked by my colleague, "Did anyone interfere with you in the Central Hall of the House of Commons?" He said, "Yes." My colleague asked, "What did he say to you? The boy replied, "He said, 'Is that a message to a Member of Parliament, and if so what is his name and where does he live?' I answered that I thought the gentleman was a Member of Parliament, but I did not know any more about him. He said, 'Show me that,' and he took the card out of my hand and read what was on both sides of it, and saw the name on the back of it." That is the complaint as far as I am concerned. The boy's name was William White and his number is 1,180. I ask you, Mr. Speaker, cannot you do something to protect Members of Parliament from this sort of conduct? I feel bound to say what I had occasion to complain of to your predecessor in that Chair, that a number of messengers employed by the Government Whips are in the habit of invading the private rooms of this House — at all events, rooms regarded as for Members only, into which I should not be allowed to take the most distinguished stranger who might come here. I refer to the dining-room, smoking-room, library, and even the private dining-room. I have myself seen these people taking their stand at the door and ticking off every Member of Parliament who went in.

SIR A. ACLAND-HOOD

The hon. Member for Kilkenny reported this incident to me last night. I at once inquired into it, and have made further inquiries this morning. The story of the messenger is that the boy showed him the hon. Member's card. ["Oh, oh! "] I acknowledge that the action which was taken by the messenger ought not to have been taken, but may I point out that these messengers are not the servants of one Party. They are as much the servants of the Opposition when they cross the floor of the House. The same men would serve hon. Members opposite, and naturally it is their object to do the best for the Party they serve. I do not attempt to defend the conduct of the man, and I certainly deprecate any unusual Parliamentary tactics. What I like is a straight Parliamentary fight to a finish.

MR. JOHN REDMOND (Waterford)

said that nothing was further from the thoughts of his hon. friend than to make any imputation on the right hon. Gentleman. The Irish Members had always found him to be a perfectly straight-forward and honourable opponent. But these messengers were not in the service of the third Party in the House. The necessity for a messenger of this kind for each Party in the House, even for the smaller of the three Parties, was very great, and when on one occasion he made an urgent request that a messenger having access to the lobby should be allowed to the Irish Party he failed to obtain the necessary permission. He suggested that the Speaker should take the subject into his consideration, because it was not fair that two Parties only should have messengers all over the House, while the Irish Party had not the services even of one messenger. Personally he had not been allowed to bring a gentleman into the lobby to assist him with his correspondence, and he had in consequence to dispense with that gentleman's services because he was not allowed to take him into his private room. There was nothing more to be said about the incident referred to by his hon. friend after the condemnation of the action of the messenger made by the right hon. Gentleman. But he hoped that it would make those persons more cautious, because it would be intolerable if the private letters and messages of Members belonging to any Party in the House were intercepted by anyone and read. These messages must be protected, and he was sure that the Speaker would take precautions in that direction.

*MR. SPEAKER

The conduct of the messenger was most reprehensible, and could not be defended even by the man himself on cool reflection. It must be remembered that these men are admitted to the lobby on sufferance, and that they are permitted to be there for the convenience of the two chief Parties in the State. The hon. Member for Waterford will not expect me at the present moment to say what should be done in respect of a messenger for the Irish Party, but I will take the subject into consideration before the House meets again.