MR. KEIR HARDIE. (Hansard, 16 November 1914)

§ Mr. EDGAR JONES

I wish to call the attention of the House to certain writings and statements of my colleague, the Junior Member for Merthyr Tydvil (Mr. Keir Hardie), and to ask whether it cannot try to impress upon the hon. Member that his conduct during the last few weeks—as I think the House will feel—is not desirable either for his own cause, in objecting to the conduct of the War as he does, or any other cause whatsoever. I will deal first of all with two matters—an article written by the hon. Member in his local paper, one on 31st October, and certain remarks published on 11th November. Those remarks by the hon. Member were reported in his paper only, and certain remarks of the hon. Member for Leicester. In the first article the hon. Member was endeavouring to modify a little the statements about atrocities in Belgium, and he proceeded to say:— 'The ravaging of women has always been an accompaniment of war"— I may say that the hon. Member has received notice from me of my intention to call attention to these matters, and it is no fault of mine that he is not here at the present time— and even the 'Times' and other responsible dailies have shown considerable alarm at what is happening in our own camps at home. 306 I am sure the House will see the significance of that passage and the use of that phrase, and whatever may have been in the papers about indecency or immorality, I must ask the House whether it is not a slander on the troops to speak of "ravaging" women in the sense of the occurrences in Belgium or elsewhere. The hon. Member proceeds—and here I want to call the attention of the Government as to whether this is a matter we must lightly-pass by, and allow to continue week after week, and be put before working men—as follows:— Some of the letters which have come from the front and which I understand the Censor will not allow to appear, tell ghastly tales about the on-goings of our French Allies. I ask whether it is true to say that the Censor does not allow letters that tell ghastly tales relating to atrocities on women? He further proceeds in another letter:— We have not yet had in any fulness the Russian record, and may never yet it since she is our Ally, Her past, in this connection, shows only too clearly what her present, is sure to be. Further he goes on, as to French:— I have no doubt whatever that old men, women, and children were killed and mutilated by German troops during the invasion of Belgium. Does anyone pay the same kind of thing is not now happening in the towns and villages which are being recaptured by the Allies in France? That is to their own people, apparently. These are not opinions or comments. They are put before working men with the authority of a Member of Parliament, and, of course, the working men think he has sources of information that are not available to them. During the last few weeks we have experienced considerable difficulty in recruiting, which was going on handsomely in Merthyr before the hon. Member began those tactics. Here is another quotation:— Already the Russian papers are sneering at the English papers for saying we are going to have a big share in the settlement when the war is over. They are already saying that their share of the terms must have precedence, since the bulk of the sacrifice was being borne by the Russians. They said that they would demand that their terms should have preference. Does the prospect please you, my friends and comrades? I should like the Foreign Office to take note of that, and see whether some influence should not be brought to bear on the hon. Member in order to stop his making 307 statements of that kind. He turns again to the Belgians:— It is all very well to come out and appeal to you about the neutrality of Belgium, but if it had suited the Government to trample roughshod over the neutrality of Belgium, they would have done it as they have allowed Russia to do it in Persia. I take the next passage dealing with the Belgian Congo, and saying that, outside of the Belgian Congo, these atrocities have no existence, and that they were the product of foul-minded, war-making Press blackguards, intended for the consumption of the gullible. When the hon. Member wants to throw cold water upon the stories of atrocities in Belgium, why he should always drag in his sneers about the Belgian atrocities in the Congo I leave it for the House and country to judge; otherwise they would not know the influence the hon. Member was exerting. He then turns to the Australian Government and accuses the Australian Labour party, which is now in power, of Kaiserism, and says it is terrible that the Australian Labour party supports the War without inquiry. That, perhaps, is a legitimate comment, but I turn now to what he says as to the Indian troops. He sneers at the loyalty of the Indian troops and the patriotic gifts from the "princes and nabobs," and then says: Most of these are the outcome of hints covertly conveyed by those in authority, and the non-recognition of which might have consequences. I should like to ask the India Office to tell the country whether there is any shadow of foundation for that statement deliberately written and made in that fashion. The hon. Member turns again to South Africa. Knowing as he does, having visited that country, how susceptible the people are and how tender they are to things that are said here, he declares that General Delarey was murdered, and makes a vicious attack on General Botha as follows:— He is really at bottom a weak man whose word, as I can personally testify out of my own experience with him in a small matter, is not to be trusted. I submitted to my Constituents on last Thursday that passage, and they authorised me, in the most enthusiastic way, to do what little I could to explain it to General Botha, and to assure him how much we deprecated attacks of that kind, when he is doing his duty, as he is at the present time. In one passage further he sneers at us because the Germans are not fleeing to Berlin, and because the Allies 308 are not making headway. He goes on to say that:— At present, when the Press are unable to toll us about the Germans fleeing to Berlin, they have again opened wide the gate of the lie factory in which tales of German atrocities are made to order. That is always a sign that the Allies are not making headway. I would submit to the Government—without asking them to interfere with a man who is expressing opinions or commenting on the conduct of the War, and when they are exercising such a rigid censorship over all good things likely to stimulate us—whether they can really pass by statements of that kind, purporting to be facts, and written in that deliberate fashion by an hon. Member of this House? Finally, I want to tell the House that I submitted to thousands of my Constituents, at two of the largest meetings that have ever been held there, these statements of the hon. Member, and the meetings repudiated them, in particular this last comment of the hon. Member, who, when he was writing and endeavouring to praise the Germans said, as to the Kaiser: "I do know this much, that the Kaiser was taking his share of the risks at the front like a soldier." If he delights in saying things like that about the Kaiser, all very well, but why did he turn round at this juncture and sneer at our King as "our fireside-loving King." knowing the British Constitution as he does? I am sure that the House will support me, and will allow me to say that the House feels, as my Constituents feel, that it would be very much better that this Gentleman should maintain a dignified silence which we would respect, and which he did maintain in the earlier days of the War. The man who vilifies everybody, our Allies, our Dominions, and the King, who is the centre and symbol of all our unity at the present time, misuses his position in this House, and I can assure you does not represent the people of Merthyr.