§ Mr. MOOREI ask the permission of the House to make a personal explanation relating to a criticism which was passed on my conduct yesterday during my inevitable absence, and without any notice whatsoever to myself. The hon. and learned Member for South Donegal (Mr. Swift MacNeill) is very friendly with me in the Lobby, but when he proceeded to attack my conduct in this House I think at least I should have had elementary notice from him, in which case I would certainly have been in my place. It was suggested yesterday by the hon. and learned Member that I had put a question down for the purpose of attacking some friend of his, and that, when the question came on to be asked, I had had it postponed, and, having had it postponed, I had then strangled it before its birth, and never put it down again. The hon. and learned Member said that it was a grossly unfair thing—I am not 1555 quoting his exact words—that anyone in this House should use his position as a Member of Parliament for making an attack of this sort, and then running away from it. He complained that I had got this question postponed, and had not put it down again for an answer subsequently. I may say I cordially concur, and if these had been the facts I would have deserved the censure which, upon that hypothetical statement, you, Mr. Speaker, passed in saying it was unfair that a man should so abuse his position. I therefore wish to make a personal explanation of what really happened, and I am perfectly satisfied that when the House hears the whole facts of the matter, hon. Members, on whichever side they may sit, will see that I am the person with a grievance, and not the other man mentioned in the question or the hon. Member for South Donegal. I put this question down after having made full inquiry, and believing absolutely the statements which were in it, as I still do. I put it to the Chief Secretary, and I do not conceal from the House that I intended to put some supplementary questions arising put of it, as I felt quite sure the Chief Secretary would profess sublime ignorance of the whole situation, which, as subsequent events proved, he did do. I had intended to ask him would he make inquiry of the Chief Commissioner of Police in Belfast, who could give him the information in two hours.
The question was put down for a Thursday, which, as hon. Members know, is the only day when one can be sure of getting an Irish question reached. It was early in the list, but, to my disappointment, the Chief Secretary was not in his place, but was represented by a subordinate Minister. The subordinate Minister was useless for my purpose. I say it without offence, but he is in charge of a Department which begins with the turnip fly and ends with the foot-and-mouth disease. Therefore, I asked to have the question postponed until the Chief Secretary was in his place. The same evening I was obliged to go to the country, and I am sure the House will accept my assurance when I say I had every intention to put the question down on the following Monday to be answered on the succeeding Thursday. But on Friday morning, to my intense disgust, I found that the Irish Office, although I had postponed the question, had circulated the answer with the Votes. I thought that was a very unfair way of doing me out of 1556 my supplementary questions, but, whether it was fair or unfair, the question was answered by the Irish Office, saying, "We know nothing about the alleged Privy Councillor." The result would have been, if I had put the question down again, that either Mr. Speaker would have told me that the Irish Government had already stated they knew nothing of the matter or the Chief Secretary would have said, "I can only refer the hon. Member to my previous answer." The fact remains that the answer was circulated with the Votes, and that will be found in the "Official Debates." On Monday the hon. Member for Warrington (Mr. Harold Smith) asked me if I intended to put the question down again, and I told him I should not, as the Government had already answered it. Then, without a single word to me, the hon. and learned Member for South Donegal comes down here on Thursday, not having read his "Official Debates" and not having communicated with me, and charges me with a breach of the etiquette of this House and with abusing my position, because, having postponed a question, I had not put it down again. I think that was a very unfair misrepresentation of what happened, and on this occasion the hon. Member has discovered not a mare's nest but a blind nut. I have always, if I put a question affecting an hon. Member, given, him some intimation of my intention to do so, and if the hon. and learned Member had only notified me I would certainly have been here to give my explanation. I venture to say any other hon. Member of this House would have taken the same course as I did.
§ Mr. SWIFT MacNEILL rose—
§ Mr. SPEAKERI think we had better pass to the next business.
§ Mr. SWIFT MacNEILLI am sorry. I should have liked to reply.
§ Mr. SPEAKERIt is not necessary.