DUBLIN STEAMBOAT SERVICE. (Hansard, 1 April 1908)

§ MR. CLANCY (DublinCounty, N.)
I desire to put a question either to the Chief Secretary for Ireland or the Postmaster-General with reference to a very curious, if not a very serious, state of things which has arisen at Kingstown Harbour in connection with the mail service, and the permission given to the London and North Western Railway Company to use the Carlisle Pier at that place. Two telegrams have been handed to me in the course of the evening. The first says— When "Ulster" landing mails and passengers, Harbour Master's representative attempted by force to prevent the ship's rope being let go, and in doing so assaulted company's packet porter in charge of the rope. Attempt was un successful, and vessel swung and got into her usual berth. Will wire any further information. The second telegram read— Harbour Master has issued notice to Captain Birch to move ship to buoy. I presume away from the pier. He will not, of course, comply. If he did morning mail could not go out, and company would be liable to heavy penalties. Shall wire again if anything transpires. The question I have to put is whether either of the right hon. Gentlemen have any information on the subject, and whether they can confirm, deny, or explain these statements. If they cannot do so, will they take immediate steps to ascertain the exact state of things at Kingstown? It must be perfectly obvious to the Postmaster-General that if the mail steamers are not allowed to remain at their usual berths, they will not be able to comply with the contracts into which they have entered with His Majesty's Government, and, I suppose, in that case, the Postmaster-General will hardly put the company to the cost of an action to recover the heavy penalties for which they are liable by 630 any failure to deliver the mails in time. I cannot say anything more on the subject now, but it is quite obvious from what I have read that a serious state of things has arisen, and that possibly we are only at the commencement of a state of things still more serious. I must say that, for my own part, I have convinced myself that the action of the Government and the Treasury in coming to this arrangement with the London and North Western Company, which has led to the state of things mentioned in these telegrams, is a most important one for the Port of Dublin. It has robbed the Port of Dublin of £5,000 a year, and that is a thing which the Postmaster-General, the Chief Secretary, and the Secretary to the Treasury may take from me will be debated in this House on every possible opportunity.

§ MR. MOONEY (Newry)
Before any reply is given, I should like to say I also have received a telegram in connection with the same matter. It reads as follows— When "Ulster" was moving into her berth to start to-morrow morning a notice was received from the Harbour Master ordering her master not to move the vessel from her present moorings without authority. Captain Birch disregarded the order. Had he obeyed it the "Ulster" would have sustained serious damage at low water, and been unable to take out the the mails to-morrow morning, in all probability. When one of the packet porters was ordered to throw the rope off the bollard to move the ship, Superintendent Talbot ordered him to desist, and arrested him for not obeying the order. The superintendent informed the managing director, who was present, he would take bail, and accordingly Mr. Watson proceeded to the police station to give the required security.—Watson. The Postmaster-General ought to have that information before he makes any statement.

§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)
This is an attempt by the Treasury to hold the King's mails exactly comparable to the case in which a postboy in Galway is carrying the King's writs to put the people out of their cabins, and in which the people sometimes assemble, seize the postman, and destroy the writs. They do that to save their lives and their cabins. The Treasury, which is now supreme in all, are doing this in order to save a few ducats. What I want to know is this, Are we governed by the Treasury or by the King? Who is in command of the police? Why are the 631 King's officers lent in a dispute pending in London in the King's Court, where a Petition of Right is being tried on this question? Why should the Chief Secretary lend the armed forces to take one side in this dispute? Really the time has come when we shall have to take the Treasury thugs by the throat. They seem to be superior to the law. We will have to take some stand with reference to this Treasury action. I do not care who is right or who is wrong in the matter. There is at this moment pending in London a matter in which it must be declared, "Let right be done" That is signed by the King, and here are vessels getting a subsidy of £1,000,000 for twenty years, and the Treasury see the chance of saving a few hundreds with the London and North Western, which swindles Dublin out of £5,000 a year, and the Treasury, in order to promote this sordid arrangement, break in upon every tradition of the law, and actually get the Chief Secretary to lend the Dublin police, for which the city of Dublin is paying £40,000 a year, to swindle Dublin out of £5,000 a year. Is Ireland governed by a Treasury clerk or by a Cabinet Minister? The insolence of this body will have to be put down. We will have to have a separate Department to deal with Irish affairs. That is not "separatism." We will have to have a Select Committee to inquire into the Treasury conduct. We will not allow a single action of the Treasury to go forward without inquiry. As for the Post Office, they have always been the slaves of the Treasury, because they are dependent upon them; but Ireland is supposed to have an independent Minister, and here we have the fact of the Chief Secretary lending his police to take part in this dispute. He has, in my opinion, vindicated the action of the Galway peasants, who seize the postboy who is carrying writs.

§ THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. SYDNEY BUXTON,) Tower Hamlets, Poplar
The hon. Member told me that he would raise the question on the adjournment. The telegrams were not then in my possession, I had no such information myself. I have no doubt the information contained in them will be conveyed to the Treasury, and to me, in the morning, and meanwhile, I am sure the House would not expect me to give any expression of 632 opinion with reference to it now. I would remind the House that the whole question is sub judice—

§ MR. T. M. HEALY
Then why call the police?

§ MR. SYDNEY BUXTON
The question being sub judice, the point remains: upon which side action should be taken? The whole matter is a very difficult and delicate one to deal with, and of course, my interest in it, as Postmaster-General, is in the effective carrying of the mails. To-morrow, no doubt, I shall have full in formation upon the subject.

§ MR. JOHN REDMOND (Waterford)
I gather from the right hon. Gentleman that he will make inquiry by telegraph, so as to be in a position give us information at question time to-morrow.

§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (MR. BIRRELL,) Bristol, N.
I may say I have lent no police to any one. I have heard of this matter now for the first time, and it was only when the telegram was read I became acquainted with it. I will also make inquiries by telegram.

§ MR. MOONEY
If the right hon. Gentleman finds that what has been stated is correct will he order the immediate release of the porter?

§ MR. BIRRELL
I will do what I can.

§ MR. CLANCY
I will to-morrow put, Questions both to the Chief Secretary and the Attorney-General with regard to this question.

§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILL
May I ask the right hon. Gentleman why any official has dared to take any such action without consulting him?

§ THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. RUNCIMAN,) Dewsbury
I wish to say on behalf of myself and the Treasury, that the first I heard of this matter was at five minutes to eleven. As far as the Kingstown harbour is concerned we will never consent to its being under the control of any private company.

§ MR. T. M. HEALY
That is not the question