8. MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINEasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether it is customary in the Navy to embark additional field guns for hypothetical bad weather; and why, in particular, bad weather was anticipated at Lamlash after the 20th of March this year, as per telegram of 20th March from the Vice-Admiral of the Third Battle Squadron?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI have nothing to add to the reply given on Monday last to the hon. Member for Sheffield Central.
MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINECan the right hon. Gentleman tell us the exact spot at Lamlash where you could exercise field guns, and also can he furnish us with the reports which made it unnecessary to put the guns on the ships?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLNo, I am not prepared to give any more information.
§ 9 and 65. Sir WILLIAM BULLasked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether His Majesty's ship "New Zealand" was among the warships recently ordered to proceed to Lamlash Bay in connection with the anticipated contingency of active operations in Ulster; if so, whether the Government of the Dominion of New Zealand was consulted before the ship was ordered to participate in this particular service; and (2) whether in the event of civil disturbances in the United Kingdom ships contributed to the Imperial Navy by the dominions or dependencies of his Majesty overseas are considered liable for service in such conflicts; if the Governments of any dominions or dependencies have been consulted on this subject; if not, whether it is proposed in future to consult them before such ships are so used; and if any British Government overseas has been consulted on this point, what the result of the consultation has been?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLNo, Sir. The "New Zealand" was not among the ships ordered to proceed to Lamlash.
§ Mr. SWIFT MacNEILLIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that every self-governing Colony of the Empire has declared in favour of Home Rule?
§ 11. Mr. JAMES HOPEasked at what time on 20th March the communication from the vice-admiral of the 3rd Battle Squadron, with regard to the embarkation of field guns, was despatched?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI have nothing to add to the information already given to the House.
§ Mr. J. HOPEDoes the right hon. Gentleman decline to give the information, and if so on what grounds?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI think quite sufficient information has been given about all these subjects, and I am not going to give any more.
12. MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINEasked what was the occasion on 11th October, 1912, upon which the Admiralty approved of the embarkation of extra field guns on battleships?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe occasion was (as indicated in the telegram to which it is a reply) the impending departure of the Third Battle Squadron for the Mediterranean.
MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINEWas it in connection with possible active service in the neighbourhood of Scutari or thereabouts?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLNo, Sir.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLWe knew nothing about "Scutari or thereabouts" at the time the Third Battle Squadron started for the Mediterranean. Profound peace reigned in that sea at that time so far as any operations that we could conceive were concerned. Therefore it had nothing to do with military operations at all.
§ Mr. JAMES HOPEAre we to take it that His Majesty's Government knew nothing of the probable outbreak of the Balkan war?
§ 46. Mr. G. LOCKER-LAMPSONasked the Prime Minister on what date the reports began to be received by the Government that raids were apprehended on Government stores in the North of Ireland?
§ The PRIME MINISTERAs I have already stated, reports were received from the police on this subject on various dates principally from December last.
§ 47 and 48. Mr. SANDYSasked the Prime Minister (1) whether Major-General Friend 1688 is still a resident magistrate of the counties of Antrim and Down; whether this officer is to be permanently employed in this capacity; and (2) why Major-General Friend was appointed resident magistrate in the counties of Antrim and Down; and why it was thought necessary that this officer should obtain authority over the police?
§ The PRIME MINISTERAs I have already stated, Major-General Friend was not appointed resident magistrate for the counties of Antrim and Down. The reasons for his intended appointment are given in the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Colchester on Monday last.
§ 49. Mr. SANDYSasked the Prime Minister why General Sir Arthur Paget telegraphed on 22nd March to say that the cause of the attitude adopted by the 3rd Cavalry Brigade was a determination to take no part in active operations against Ulster; and if it was a fact that such operations were not contemplated?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe misunderstanding, and the reasons for it, have been explained in the House and in Sir A. Paget's statement published in the White Paper. The last part of the question has been fully dealt with in Debate.
§ 50. Lord CHARLES BERESFORDasked the Prime Minister why it was necessary for the Cabinet to decide the ordinary routine connected with the disposition of a battle squadron on 11th March; and whether such dispositions have always been arranged by the First Sea Lord on the part of the Admiralty?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI have nothing to add to the statements already made on this subject.
§ 51. Lord C. BERESFORDasked the Prime Minister whether the Cabinet Committee handed full instructions to Sir John French, Sir J. S. Ewart, and the other heads of Departments at the War Office; whether these heads of Departments warned the late Secretary of State for War that such orders would create a strong feeling in the Army; whether some of the heads of Departments threatened 1689 resignation; and, if the original instructions were in writing, whether he will submit them to the House?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the other branches the matter is one of the internal administration and discipline of the War Office, and I am not prepared to answer questions on the subject.
§ 52. Mr. MALLABY-DEELEYasked the Prime Minister whether he was present at a meeting of the Committee of the Cabinet on Thursday, 19th March, when Sir Arthur Paget received his further instructions previous to returning to Ireland?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, Sir.
§ 53. Mr. STEWARTasked the Prime Minister the date upon which, and the reasons why, the Cabinet formed their recent Special Committee to attend to the present condition of Ireland; had the Lord Lieutenant and the Chief Secretary declared themselves unable to carry out their ordinary duty of preserving order and of protecting property; whether the Lord Lieutenant attended, or was invited to attend, any meetings of the Inner Cabinet Council; and whether there is any precedent for such an important change, whereby the usual authorities were practically superseded, without previous and special announcement in this House?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe Cabinet formed this Committee, as they do other Committees, for reasons of policy which seemed to them sufficient. There was no question of superseding the usual authorities.
§ Mr. JAMES HOPEWill the right hon. Gentleman say whether the general situation referred to was wholly connected with the movement of troops?
§ The PRIME MINISTERPrimarily.
§ 54. Mr. DENISON-PENDERasked the Prime Minister what were the arrangements for the general situation which General Sir Arthur Paget stated had been made in telegram No. 16 of the 20th March?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe general situation connected with the movements of troops as explained in the White Paper.
§ 55. Mr. DENISON-PENDERasked the Prime Minister what were the legal questions to which it was anticipated the action of the Great Northern Railway might give rise?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe hon. Member can draw his own conclusions.
§ 56. Mr. DENISON-PENDERasked the Prime Minister what was the difficulty about sending the battalion by train to Dundalk referred to in the telegram from General Sir Arthur Paget to Major-General Friend on the 19th March?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe difficulty is explained in the telegram No. 9 in the White Paper.
§ 57. Colonel CHALONERasked the Prime Minister if he will communicate to the House the text of any documents issued to Major-General Sir N. Macready defining his powers and duties as General Officer Commanding the Belfast district and a Divisional Magistrate respectively?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo documents were issued to Sir N. Macready when he went to Belfast last month.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYWhen were the documents issued?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNone were issued.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYDoes the right hon. Gentleman mean to say this officer was given these new powers entirely on verbal instructions?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, Sir.
§ Colonel CHALONERArising out of that answer, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any written instruction has been sent since?
§ The PRIME MINISTEROh, yes.
§ Colonel CHALONERWill it be produced?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI do not think so.
§ 53. Mr. ASTORasked the Prime Minister the number of arms and also the quantity and nature of stores at Armagh, Omagh, Dundalk, and Carrickfergus on or about 17th March?
§ The PRIME MINISTERAt all the places named there were considerable stores of arms and ammunition. I am not prepared to give precise details.
§ 59. Mr. ASTORasked the Prime Minister whether General Sir Arthur Paget has submitted to the Secretary of State for War a written statement containing the orders which he gave and also an account of what took place at the second conference on the 19th March; and, if not, whether he will ask him to prepare such a statement?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI really do not know to what conference the hon. Member is referring. If he is referring to the conference on 20th March I have got an answer in reply to a subsequent question; but I am not prepared to ask Sir A. Paget to prepare any further statements.
§ 60. Mr. ASTORasked the Prime Minister whether by the King's Regulations, paragraph 666, a court of inquiry may be assembled by the Army Council or by an officer in command to assist in arriving at a correct conclusion on any subject on which it may be expedient for them to be informed; and, if so, whether he will appoint such a Court to ascertain exactly what was said, what orders were given, and what occurred at the two conferences held by General Sir Arthur Paget at Dublin on 19th March?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe answer to the first part is in the affirmative; to the second, in the negative.
§ Mr. PRINGLEIs my right hon. Friend aware that these questions are prepared by a bureau headed by Mr. Rosenbaum?
61. Captain FABERasked the Prime Minister on what date Sir Arthur Paget was informed that battleships and de stroyers were to be sent to Lamlash in order to be ready to support him in case of serious disorders occurring; and how the information was conveyed to him?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, Sir; I do not propose to go into any further details on this subject.
§ 62. Sir ARTHUR GRIFFITH-BOSCAWENasked the Prime Minister whether certain ex-sergeants in the Army received an official letter from the War Office on 20th March last asking them if they would rejoin the Army if called upon; if so, will he say what was the object of the War Office in making this request; and in view of what eventualities did the Government take this step?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI understand that one sergeant, about whose discharge there had been some informality, was asked if he would like to rejoin the Army.
§ 63. Mr. ASTORasked the Prime Minister if he will state either exactly or approximately on what day the memorandum of the interview which took place on 16th December last between the Secretary of State for War and the General Officers Commanding-in-Chief was actually drawn up and initialled by the late Secretary of State for War?
§ 83. Mr. RONALD M'NEILLasked the Prime Minister whether the undated memorandum, numbered 1 in Part I. of the Command Paper 7329, was written on the same day that the interview took place which it records or composed from memory of that interview at a later date; and whether he will say on what date the memorandum was written?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe terms of the statement which the Secretary of State for War made to the General Officers Commanding-in-Chief was decided on before the interview took place. The actual published document contains the substance of this statement and was prepared by Colonel Seely from a confidential memorandum dated 9th December in response to the request for the publication of Papers so that the House should have full information of material events.
§ 64. Mr. ASTORasked the Prime Minister whether any telegrams, despatches, or letters were sent by himself or by the late Secretary of State for War to, or whether 1693 any such communications were received from, General Sir Arthur Paget between the 22nd March and the 2nd April; and, if so, whether he will publish them?
§ The PRIME MINISTERYes, Sir, there were communications, but I am not prepared to publish them or to add anything to what has been stated in the House.
§ 66. Sir R. POLE-CAREWasked the Prime Minister whether General Sir Arthur Paget has at any time expressed a desire to resign, or to be relieved of, the chief command in Ireland?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI have nothing to add to the answer I gave on 27th April.
§ 67. Sir R. POLE-CAREWasked the Prime Minister whether it was in consequence of instructions given by General Sir Arthur Paget, and with his sanction and approval, that General Sir Charles Fergusson addressed the officers and men of his brigade at the Curragh on the 21st March last; and if he will say what was the purport of General Sir Charles Fergusson's statements?
§ The PRIME MINISTERSir A. Paget states in his published memorandum that any such questions were put under a misapprehension. As regards the latter part of the question I would refer to the last two paragraphs but one of Sir A. Paget's memorandum.
§ Mr. R. M'NEILLMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will consider the propriety of issuing a Paper giving a complete list of the misapprehensions?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI do not propose to issue any more Papers or after this week to answer any more questions upon this subject.
MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINEMay I ask the right hon Gentleman if he can inform us what steps the Government and War Office took to allay the misapprehension?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThat has already been amply stated.
Mr. F. HALL (Dulwich)May I ask whether this is a reply we should receive 1694 from the head of a so-called democratic Government?
§ Mr. OUTHWAITEArising out of the statement that no more Papers will be issued, will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the issue of summons?
§ 68. Mr. G. LOCKER-LAMPSONasked the Prime Minister if he is now in a position to lay upon the Table any report from General Sir A. Paget of his speech to the officers of the 3rd Cavalry Brigade on the morning of Saturday, 21st March?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, Sir.
§ Mr. BUTCHERCan the right hon. Gentleman say when that report was received?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI have answered the question in the negative.
§ 69. Mr. SANDYSasked the Prime Minister whether he will lay upon the Table a copy of the first dispatch for warded on 22nd March by General Sir A. Paget with reference to the conference which took place on the morning of 20th March?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, Sir. I have informed the House of the only substantive revision made by Sir A. Paget.
§ 70. Mr. SANDYSasked the Prime Minister what was the nature of the misunderstanding between General Sir A. Paget and the late Secretary of State for War as to the intentions of the Government with regard to military operations in Ireland?
§ The PRIME MINISTERAs far as I know, there was no misunderstanding.
§ 71. Mr. SANDYSasked the Prime Minister whether the officers by whose instructions orders were posted on the 20th March, or following days, at the head quarters of each unit of the 5th division in Ireland, as to the movements at short notice of all regiments and units with medical and surgical appliances and stores, as to the requisitioning of mobilisation stores, packing of kit, and the stoppage of leave, acted on their own responsibility?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI am informed that this is the case.
§ 72. Mr. JAMES HOPEasked the Prime Minister whether General Gough was present at the afternoon conference between General Sir A. Paget and his officers on 20th March?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, Sir.
§ 73. Mr. JAMES HOPEasked the Prime Minister whether he will lay upon the Table a report of the conference between General Sir Arthur Paget and officers under his command held at 2 p.m. on Friday, 20th March?
§ The PRIME MINISTERSir A. Paget reports that at the second conference he repeated much of what he said at the first for the benefit of officers who had not been present in the morning. He then indicated the military dispositions which he would make in the event of the precautionary moves being resisted by armed force or a hostile attitude being adopted by the Ulster Volunteers under their responsible leaders.
§ Mr. JAMES HOPEWill the right hon. Gentleman lay Sir Arthur Paget's own report?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, Sir; certainly not.
§ Viscount HELMSLEYDid it contain any allusion to the possibility of having to send troops to some parts of the South of Ireland?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI cannot answer any question of the kind. It is a purely confidential document; the Statement to the officers was also confidential. I cannot understand how they have been disclosed.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEDoes the right hon. Gentleman desire to hush up the whole affair?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI am not going to disclose for public information the military plans and preparations which Sir Arthur Paget had in view.
§ 74. Mr. JAMES HOPEasked the Prime Minister why General Sir A. Paget was 1696 unable to inform General Gough at the morning conference on 20th March that no duty as ordered or contemplated involved the initiation of active military operations against Ulster?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI have nothing to add to the information I have already given.
75. Mr. HAMILTON BENNasked whether the trains which were detained at Newbridge and Kildare stations during 20th and 21st March were intended for the conveyance of troops and military stores; and, if so, what was their destination?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI am informed that the only train ordered for the conveyance of troops at Newbridge or Kildare was that which conveyed the battalion of the Duke of Cornwall's Light Infantry on 20th March from the Curragh to Dundalk and Newry.
76. Mr. HAMILTON BENNasked the Prime Minister if he will give the times at which the various telegrams contained in Part I. of the new White Paper were dispatched; and whether the times of receipt of certain of these telegrams printed in the first White Paper may be regarded as accurate?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI am not prepared to add anything to the full information already published. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.
§ 78. Mr. CAMPIONasked what information the Prime Minister has with regard to the numbers, arms, and organisation of the Irish Nationalist Volunteers; and whether it is with the sanction and approval of the Government that this force is being armed and drilled?
§ The PRIME MINISTERAs regards the first part of the question, the Irish Government are fully informed with regard to the numbers and proceedings of the organisation referred to by the hon. Member. As regards the second part, the Government have not interfered with the arming and drilling of this force or with that of the Ulster Volunteers.
§ 79. Mr. CAMPIONasked what orders were issued to the officers commanding troops at Lichfield and Aldershot with reference to immediate or contemplated service in Ireland?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo such orders were issued.
§ 81. Mr. RONALD M'NEILLasked whether the written statement of Sir Arthur Paget, forming Part III. of Command Paper No. 7329, was in response to any written request; and, if so, why such request is not included in the White Paper?
§ The PRIME MINISTERSir Arthur Paget prepared and handed mo this statement entirely on his own initiative.
§ 82. Mr. RONALD M'NEILLasked what reason Sir Arthur Paget had for supposing, when in consultation with the War Office on 19th March, that any officers were likely to feel deeply on the subject of protecting depots from attack by evilly-disposed persons; and what concessions Sir Arthur Paget endeavoured but failed to obtain for such officers, other than the exemption of those domiciled in Ulster?
§ The PRIME MINISTERAs regards the first part of the question I would refer the hon. Member to paragraph 11 of Sir Arthur Paget's statement. As regards the latter part I am not aware of any other concessions.
84. Mr. F. HALL (Dulwich)asked if any evidence exists to show that the contents of any documents connected with the recent movements of troops in Ireland issued from the War Office, and marked confidential, have been made known by officers to Members of the Opposition; and, if so, what steps have been, or are prepared to be, taken in the matter?
§ The PRIME MINISTERAs I have already stated, I should be loth to believe that any officer in the Army would divulge confidential instructions.
Mr. F. HALLHas the right hon. Gentleman observed the statement made by the hon. Member for Leicester in the speech he delivered at Newcastle last week?
85. Mr. F. HALL (Dulwich)asked the Prime Minister if the statement made by the Secretary for Foreign Affairs that in the event of the Government of Ireland Bill becoming law it would not come into effect until another General Election had taken place was made with the authority of the Government; and, if so, what is the earliest date when it is expected that the Bill can come into force in the event of the country endorsing the policy of the Bill?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the latter part, I would refer the hon. Member to the provisions of Clause 49 of the Bill.
§ 88. Mr. AMERYasked the Prime Minister whether he took part in any of the conferences between Ministers, military members of the Army Council, and Sir A. Paget on the 18th or 19th of March?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI have already stated that I was present at a conference on 18th March. I was not present at any conference on the 19th March.
§ 87. Mr. AMERYasked the Prime Minister at what precise hour on 20th March Sir A. Paget received the letter from General Gough asking for information as to whether the initiation of active operations against Ulster was the object in view in the questions addressed to officers (No. XX. in the White Paper)?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI cannot state the exact time, but I am informed it was about 8 p.m.
§ Mr. AMERYIs it not evident that General Paget had something like three hours in which to answer General Gough's queries before he telegraphed to the War Office, and in view of that fact was not the Prime Minister's answer to the hon. Member for Sheffield on the 23rd a misleading answer?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, Sir. All I am informed is it was 8 p.m.
§ Mr. AMERYDid not the Prime Minister inform my hon. Friend that the reason why General Paget could not deal with the letter he received at 8 p.m. was 1699 the War Office telegram which was dispatched from the War Office at 12 p.m.? Was not the implication that the Prime Minister's answer—
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is a matter for argument in Debate.
§ 88. Mr. AMERYasked the Prime Minister (1) whether he will publish the acutal written orders issued by General Fergusson on 20th March to officers of the Fifth Division stating the terms of the option offered to officers by the War Office; and (2) whether the written orders issued to officers of the Fifth Division by General Fergusson on 20th March, and purporting to be issued with the authority of the War Office, referred to the possibility of active operations in Ulster?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe purport of the orders addressed by General Fergusson to the majority of the officers under his command is given in General Paget's statement published in the White Paper. I am not prepared to publish further Papers.
§ Mr. AMERYIf the Prime Minister is not prepared to publish any further Papers, is he prepared to fulfil the promise he gave to the House on 24th March, that he would publish any memorandum, if it existed, of the instructions given to General Paget?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI have fulfilled all my undertakings in that respect.
§ Mr. WORTHINGTON EVANSDoes the Prime Minister say that the orders issued by General Fergusson were not in accordance with the instructions of General Paget or of the War Office?
§ The PRIME MINISTERGeneral Paget says so.
§ Mr. SANDYSIs this a misapprehension?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is a matter for discussion, and that is the object of having the Debate to-day.
§ 91. Mr. FELLasked what steps he proposes to take with reference to the incorrect statement telegraphed to the Secretary of State for War on the 22nd March that Major-General Friend had been appointed resident magistrate for Antrim and Down; and what explanation has been given of this disobedience of orders?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThere was no disobedience of orders. It was intended that Major-General Friend should be appointed a resident magistrate for Antrim and Down, but General Friend was recalled before the warrant was completed.
§ 93. Mr. HUNTasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the urgent necessity of preventing, as far as possible, an accidental and unpremeditated outbreak of civil war in Ireland, he can give an assurance that neither the Navy nor Army will be used for the coercion of Ulster until the people of the United Kingdom have been given an opportunity of ex pressing their approval or disapproval, either by a General Election or Referendum?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI can add nothing to what has been stated in the House on this subject.
§ Mr. HUNTAre we to understand that the Prime Minister would rather risk civil war than give the assurance asked for? Is he aware that the Foreign Secretary, speaking for the Government, said it was impossible to coerce Ulster until they had had an election?
§ 94. Mr. JAMES HOPEasked what was the text of the order instructing the Bedfordshire Regiment to proceed to Enniskillen, Omagh, and Armagh, referred to in No. VII. in the second White Paper?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI am not prepared to publish the text of orders of this kind.
§ 95. Mr. JAMES HOPEasked why orders for the mobilisation of the 6th division in Ireland were issued in the course of last month?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNothing is known at Irish Command Headquarters of any such orders.
§ Mr. JAMES HOPEIs anything known at the headquarters of the 6th division?
104. Mr. F. HALL (Dulwich)asked the Secretary of State for War if there was any authority for the intimation conveyed by Sir A. Paget to the officers in his command that active operations were contemplated in Ulster, or if anything transpired at the interview which he had previously had with the late Secretary of State for War which could be construed as conveying such an intention on the part of the Government?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI would refer the hon. Gentleman to the statement made by my right hon. Friend last night.
§ 105. Sir CHARLES HUNTERasked the Secretary of State for War if new mobilisation orders were issued to Reserve officers in England during March; and if warning was conveyed to them that they might be required to take up duties before mobilisation?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe only orders issued were those referred to in a reply given by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary to the hon. Member for the Tewkesbury Division on the 7th April.