§ 10. Mr. GINNELLasked the Under- Secretary for War when the competent military authority in Ireland decided to treat the use of the Irish language as an offence under the Defence of the Realm Act; why the decision is carried out in detail instead of by public proclamation; and whether he can arrange to have it announced in the speeches of recruiting officers and in posters on their vans and motor cars?
§ Mr. TENNANTNo such decision as is alleged in the first part of the hon. Member's question has been given, and accordingly the other parts of the question do not arise.
§ Mr. GINNELLWill the right hon. Gentleman explain how he reconciles that answer with the fact that the police in the county of Cork arrested Mr. Chavasse, an Englishman, subjected him to indignity, stripped him of his clothes, insulted him, called him a blackguard, a Sin Feiner, and a German spy, and told him that an Englishman had no right to speak the Irish language in Ireland?
§ Mr. TENNANTAnyone has a right to speak any language he chooses—even to speak the German language is not an offence against the law of the realm. But if the hon. Member will give me particulars of the case, I will certainly have it inquired into.
§ Mr. GINNELLI have given them. Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire?
§ Mr. TENNANTYes.
§ 11. Mr. GINNELLasked the Under-Secretary of State for War the dates, respectively, of the arrest and imprisonment of Mr. Terence MaeSwiney, of his being served with the text of the charge against him, and of the trial; what the charge was; how long he was imprisoned before trial; and the result of the trial?
§ Mr. TENNANTTerence MaeSwiney was by order of the competent military authority arrested and lodged in prison on the 13th January last. On the 15th February he was served with summonses charging him with making a seditious speech and having in his possession a cipher code. He was on the same day brought up at Cork Police Court and allowed out on bail to appear on the 21st February. He was in prison from the 13th January to the 15th February.
§ Mr. GINNELLCan the right hon. Gentleman explain how it is that Mr. MacSwiney has never been served with any charge whatever?
§ Mr. TENNANTThere is no requirement to serve a charge on a person arrested under the Defence of the Realm Act.
§ Mr. GINNELLCan a man in Ireland be imprisoned without any charge?
§ Mr. TENNANTA man can in this country and in any part of the United Kingdom.
§ Mr. GINNELLIt is very wrong!
§ 26. Mr. GINNELLasked, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether it is with the knowledge and approval of the Admiralty that the Englishman acting as coastguard on Lettermullen Island, in the midst of Irish speakers, though twenty years there, cannot speak Irish, and now threatens people with the Defence of the Realm Act unless they speak English, which many of them do not know; and whether, to avoid conflict with the people, this interference with their language will be stopped?
§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara)This matter has been inquired into and there would appear to be no foundation whatever for the allegations contained in the question.
§ Mr. GINNELLTo whom was the inquiry addressed; was it to the man accused?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAI cannot say offhand. I have read a long Report, and can say that the suggestion the question contains that this man could only speak English and insisted upon everybody else speaking English is, according to my information, quite without foundation.
§ 48. Mr. GINNELLasked if he will state how long Mr. MacCabe, of county Sligo, has been in prison on a charge of which he has been acquitted by a Dublin jury; whether he is still in prison; awaiting trial by what Court; and on what charge?
§ The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell)MacCabe was arrested on the 6th November last under the Defence of the Realm Regulation and detained in custody. On the 4th February 562 he was acquitted on one of the charges brought against him, and on the 18th February was discharged, the Crown having decided not to proceed with the remaining charges.
§ Mr. GINNELLWas not that decision due to the fact that they had no evidence against him?
§ Mr. BIRRELLNo, Sir.
§ Mr. GINNELLIf they had, why did not they go on?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThere was some reason for dissatisfaction in the former, case.
§ 49. Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland for what purpose members of the Crimes Special Branch of the Irish police are now in plain clothes in Sligo, Mayo, and Galway, having regard to the freedom of those counties from crime, as shown by the Assizes; will he inform the House by whom, known to the police, explosives have been placed on two recent occasions on the property of the Marquess of Sligo; why the order not to prosecute was issued from Dublin Castle; and whether it is by his direction men watching suspicious movements of the police are now being threatened with the Defence of the Realm Act?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThere are no members of the Crimes Special Branch of the Royal Irish Constabulary in the counties named in the hon. Member's question. No evidence has so far been obtained by the police in the matter referred to in the second part, and there is no foundation for the allegations in the third and fourth parts.
§ 50. Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether it is with his approval and under what law Claude Uasal Chavasse, B.A., of Christchurch, Oxford, has been arrested, imprisoned, and fined in Ireland for answering a policeman in the Irish language in the neighbourhood of an Irish college where Irish is generally used by all except the police; if this was the blunder of subordinates, whether he will prevent its recurrence; and, if any police are deemed necessary in such places, whether he will see that the men sent there understand Irish?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe person referred to, who is an Englishman, having failed to answer to the best of his ability questions 563 reasonably addressed to him under No. 53 of the Defence of the Realm Regulations, was arrested by the police but not imprisoned. By direction of the competent military authority he was prosecuted at Macroom Petty Sessions on the 9th instant when he was fined £4 and £l costs. It is understood that he has appealed. It is not considered that the incident requires any change in the present police arrangements of the locality.
§ Mr. GINNELLWill the right hon. Gentleman explain the conduct of the police towards this English gentleman in stripping him, abusing him and imprisoning him for a whole night in the black hole?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI do not think that that account of this Englishman's treatment is justified by the facts.
§ Major NEWMANMay I ask the name of the Irish college where Irish is always spoken?
§ Mr. GINNELLIs the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the general use of Irish in the neighbourhood of an Irish college is an asset to the district and to the college? [Laughter.] This is no laughing matter. It must be perfectly obvious, must it not, that the speaking of the Irish language in the neighbourhood of an Irish college is an asset to the district and the college, and a legitimate asset? That being so—
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is a matter of argument.