§ Mr. DEVLINI desire, with the indulgence of the House, to ask permission to make a personal explanation, and to call attention to a speech delivered by a Member of this House which seriously reflected on the reputation of myself and some of my colleagues. The hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for South Wolverhampton (Colonel Hickman) addressed a meeting in St. Martin's Schools, Bradley, on last Friday night, and, after referring to the fact that he went over to Ulster to study the Irish question, that he remained there from Friday until Monday, and that he had worked hard during all that period, the report proceeds to state:—
Colonel Hickman created some sensation by reading the oath which he said he is informed is the one taken by the members of the Nationalist organisation of the Ancient Order of Hibernians, the president of which he mentioned incidentally is Mr. Devlin, who, although the best orator in the Nationalist party, had not been allowed to speak during the Home Rule Debates, because he was too likely to blurt out the truth. In this oath he was informed the Ancient Order of Hibernians pledged themselves to wade knee-deep in Orange blood, and he heard that they considered it no crime to slaughter Protestants and destroy their churches. When the people of Ulster believed that that was in an oath taken by these Nationalists, was it not reasonable that they dreaded the consequences of a Parliament in which they would be outnumbered by the disparity of thirty-four members compared with 128?I have to state to the House that every imputation contained in that speech which I have read is absolutely untrue. This is not the first time I have publicly contradicted these allegations. This oath has 444 been, I understand, printed and circulated at every by-election in England. During the Crewe election in July last a leaflet was circulated among the electors giving this as the Ancient Order of Hibernians' oath.
§ Mr. DEVLINI then sent a telegram to the following effect:—
Please denounce handbill containing alleged oath by Ancient Order of Hibernians as an infamous falsehood. There is not a word of truth in it from beginning to end.Notwithstanding that and numerous other contradictions, the hon. Gentleman has repeated the allegation regarding the alleged oath. I have the honour to be president of that organisation. I have now once again to declare that the whole thing is an absolute concoction from beginning to end. No such oath is taken by the members of the Ancient Order of Hibernians. I am speaking as president of the organisation, and I never even heard of the oath. I go further, and I state to the House that no oath of any sort or kind is taken by the members. There is not a particle of truth in what the hon. and gallant Gentleman has stated in his speech, and which he said he was told, but which he should not, in my judgment, have circulated on his responsibility. I am sure that the House will now be delighted to hear what explanation the hon. and gallant Gentleman has to make.
§ Colonel HICKMANMr. Speaker, with your permission, and with the indulgence of the House, I should like to be allowed to say a few words in reply to the hon. Gentleman who has just spoken. In doing so, I should wish to assure him in the most earnest manner that anything I said on Thursday was meant in no sense to be discourteous to him personally, and in anything I did say on that occasion I said what I thought to be common knowledge on matters of public interest in this House and in the country and, also, that to the best of my belief I stated nothing that was not absolutely true. I was commenting on the difference between the tone of the speeches of the Nationalist Members made in America and in Ireland in the past and of those delivered in the House of Commons at the present time on the Home Rule Bill. I said that at the present time in the House of Commons 445 the speeches of Nationalist Members were marked by great efforts at conciliation, and, under that heading, I noticed that the hon. Gentleman, with his passionate and fiery eloquence, was much missed during those Debates, and that he has not been in the habit of speaking on the Bill. Therefore, I naturally argued that the Home Rule party thought that better. If that is not true, if that is an exaggeration, I am quite sure the hon. Gentleman will believe me when I say that I am sorry I have said so. At the same time, with regard to the oath of the Ancient Order of Hibernians, I can only say that this oath, as the hon. Member has said, was circulated all over the country. In common with nearly all other Members and candidates at the last General Election, I received a copy of this particular oath. [An HON. MEMBER: "Where did you get it?"] I cannot tell. It is nearly two years ago; I cannot remember where I got it. I should like to ask, if this is not the particular oath of the order for members joining, whether the hon. Gentleman can supply to the House the actual oath they do take.
§ Mr. DEVLINIf the hon. and gallant Gentleman had listened to my statement, he would have heard me say that no oath of any sort or kind is taken.
§ Colonel HICKMANI should have said declaration. May I ask the hon. Member if there is no declaration—[An HON. MEMBER: "Obligation."]—no obligation of any sort which the members are supposed to take?
§ Mr. DEVLINYes, Mr. Speaker; if the hon. and gallant Gentleman desires it, I will read it to the House to-morrow.
§ Colonel HICKMANWill the hon. Gentleman oblige the House by reading it now?
§ Mr. DEVLINI shall read it if I can find it in the House. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] What is the cause of this surprise? I gave the hon. Gentleman notice; he did not give me notice that he would ask for the declaration.
§ Mr. SPEAKERWe are now getting into a wrangle. This is not a personal explanation.
§ Mr. DEVLINThe hon. and gallant Gentleman, instead of doing what I expected he would do—
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member has made his statement, and the hon. and gallant Gentleman has made his, and there the matter must end.
§ Mr. DEVLINMr. Speaker, may I respectfully point out that in the course of his explanation he repeated another statement that is absolutely untrue.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is not a proper observation to make. We cannot argue this matter out now. I would point out to the hon. Member that no Question is before the House. The hon. Member wished to make a personal explanation; he was listened to, and his personal explanation no doubt was accepted.
§ Mr. DEVLINIt was not accepted.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. and gallant Gentleman rose to make his statement— [An HON. MEMBER: "He has not finished"]—in reply. The House has heard him, and, therefore, the matter is concluded, and the House can form its own judgment.
§ Mr. JOHN REDMONDMay I, Mr. Speaker, respectfully address a question: to you on this matter? Is it not usual in this House that when a Member, either by wrong information supplied to him or for any other reason, makes a statement about another hon. Member which that hon. Member repudiates and says is untrue—is it not usual for the hon. Member who made the original statement to accept the denial? In this case the hon. Member stated that this was the oath that the hon. Member for Belfast and his associates took. The Member for Belfast stated that it is not so, and that there is no such oath. Under those circumstances, is it not usual for Members of this House to accept a statement of that kind?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. and gallant Gentleman did accept the statement. [HON. MEMBERS: "NO, no."] Perhaps the House will kindly listen to what I say: He said, if there was no oath, was there any declaration or obligation of some kind? The hon. Member for Belfast said there was, and at the proper time he would produce it, as he had not got it with him now. There the matter rests, and I do not see how we can, without any Motion or any issue being raised, pursue the matter any further. The House must judge of what has occurred.