§ Mr. CHARLES CRAIGasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether 200 he is aware that the Irish Command Orders of 27th April, 1910, contained a notice to regimental commanding officers requesting them to forward the names of sergeants and sergeant-instructors who had served their time with the colours and who would be willing to compete for he position of sergeant-instructor at the Royal Hibernian Military School in Dublin; that Colour-Sergeant H. Moore applied for and was appointed to this post, being at the time a Roman Catholic; that there was no condition in the agreement which Colour-Sergeant Moore signed on 25th May, 1910, on entering upon his-duties, as to his religion; and that, on 1st November, 1911, Sergeant Moore, having in the meantime become a Protestant, received a notice terminating his appointment on the grounds that his position must be held by a Roman Catholic; and, seeing that Moore was refused a copy of the agreement signed by him on his appointment, will he state under what statute or regulation it is provided that a sergeant-instructor at the school in question must be a Roman Catholic, and, if such a rule exists, why was Sergeant Moore not informed of it, and why was it not mentioned' in his agreement; will he supply Sergeant Moore with a copy of the said agreement; and what compensation does he propose-to give Sergeant Moore for wrongful dismissal from his office?
§ Colonel SEELYThere are six company-commanders and instructors at this school, three of whom have invariably been Roman Catholics and three Protestants, the number of Catholic and Protestant boys being approximately equal, and the-instructors being chosen in like proportion. Colour-Sergeant Moore, who was a Roman Catholic, was selected to command a company hitherto commanded by a-Roman Catholic. He subsequently became a Protestant, and as the accustomed proportion of Roman Catholic instructors for the boys was thereby affected it became necessary to replace him by a Roman Catholic instructor. He had a right to only one month's notice, but under the circumstances he was granted six months' notice. He, however, obtained a new appointment before this period was completed. There was no wrongful dismissal, and no question of compensation arises. No conditions with regard to the religion of the applicant were contained in the agreement signed by Colour-Sergeant Moore; but it is obviously both expedient and just that the arrangement to which 201 I have referred, which has lasted uninterruptedly since the year 1865, under which an equal number of instructors of both persuasions should be appointed to a school containing an equal number of Protestants and Roman Catholics, should be adhered to as far as possible.
MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINECan the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether Colour-Sergeant Moore has got an equally good appointment under the Government?
§ Colonel SEELYI do not know what the appointment is, but I am glad to say he got an appointment before the six months was up.
§ Colonel SEELYI do not know. I will inquire.
§ Captain CRAIGMay I ask whether, in a special case of this sort, where religious instruction does not enter into the question, does the right hon. Gentleman consider it fair to discharge a man who otherwise is in every way fitted for the post.
§ Colonel SEELYI have said the arrangement has lasted since 1865, and I really think that in Ireland, or in any other country, an arrangement that has worked well for forty-seven years had better not be disturbed.
§ Captain CRAIGIn such a special and extraordinary case as this, where the man has done no wrong, will not the Government take some steps to see that, at all events, he does not suffer from his conscientious belief?
§ Colonel SEELYYes, Sir, certainly. Steps were at once taken by extending the period of notice from one month to six months, and it was the fact that this colour-sergeant obtained another appointment before the six months were up. I will inquire what that appointment is. I understand it is a good appointment, but I will find out. I repeat it is undesirable to alter a system which has worked well for forty-seven years.
§ Mr. C. CRAIGasked the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that Colour-Sergeant Moore, late sergeant-instructor at the Royal Hibernian Military School, in Dublin, and an Army pensioner, was taken to and detained in the Royal Military Infirmary, in Dublin, for a week 202 without a special order having been obtained from a Secretary of State; will he say who was responsible for this action; and what steps does he propose to take in the matter?
§ Colonel SEELYI am informed that Colour-Sergeant Moore was suffering from neurasthenia and insomnia, and in order that he might be properly nursed he was admitted to the Royal Infirmary. He was entitled as a civilian subordinate to such admission and no special order from a Secretary of State was necessary.
§ Captain CRAIGIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that he was compulsorily sent there for the purpose of testing whether there was anything wrong with his mind?
§ Colonel SEELYNo, Sir, that is not my information. I will make further inquiries.
§ Captain CRAIGCan the right hon. Gentleman say why, when a question, has been upon the Paper for some days, he has not got the information asked for?
§ Colonel SEELYI have already given the hon. and gallant Gentleman a very definite reply, which is the result of inquiries I have made personally of those who supplied it to me. If he does not care to accept my answer, the hon. Member can put down another question.
§ Mr. WATTCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether the insomnia was due to the threat of the North of Ireland Members?