HC Deb 23 March 1920 vol 127 cc306-32

Resolution [23rd February] reported, That a sum, not exceeding £75,000,000, be granted to His Majesty, on Account, for or towards defraying the Charges for Army Services, for the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1921.

Resolution read a Second time.

Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."

Mr. CHURCHILL

Perhaps I may be in order now in continuing?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

It would not be in order to proceed again to discuss the Estimates. We are dealing now with a Vote on Account of £75,000,000, which is due for specific items appearing on the Paper. We are not discussing the Estimates.

Lord H. CECIL

Surely the Secretary of State for War may proceed until he comes to a topic which is not included in the Vote on Account, and then it will be for the Chair to draw attention to it?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

The only thing I questioned was the suggestion that the right hon. Gentleman now thought there was an opportunity to revert to the Estimates.

Mr. CHURCHILL

I beg your pardon. Now is an opportunity for me to revert to the subject of medals, which forms an important item in the Estimates. This question of battle clasps has engaged for a long time the attention of a Committee under Lord Cavan, and they have recently presented me with their report. The subject is of very great complication. I am very strongly of opinion that there ought to be named battle clasps to commemorate the great outstanding actions of the War in every theatre. On the other hand, so numerous have been those actions that the Committee produced something like thirty battle clasps for France alone, and that reaches dimensions which, both in regard to the capacity of the medal ribbon to carry the clasps and the capacity of the Exchequer to pay for these very costly items, far exceeded the limits which I think are practicable. I have, therefore, remitted the matter again to the Committee with suggestions which will enable them to review the War from a point of view, not of the perspective of war-time, but to some extent in retrospect. One can begin to see now the great outstanding events. I should have thought that about ten named battle clasps ought to cover the War in France and two or three for each of the other theatres. At any rate, that is the kind of objective to which I hope the Committee may now be inclined to work.

Another difficulty is raised by the question, who are to have the clasps, because a clasp is, par excellence, the reward of the fighting soldier. You want so to draw your line and limits as to include those whose duty actually took them under the fire of the enemy and not to include the vast administrative services which, although they are extremely honourable and contributed greatly to the success of the operations, are not services of the kind that people particularly mark when they look with great respect on a row of battle clasps. On the other hand, you have to consider the responsibility of persons concerned in the actions. In my view, risk and responsibility should be the test of the battle clasp—risk in being in the zone of the enemy's field artillery and responsibility in having taken a definite share of responsibility for the planning or execution of a particular military operation. On those lines also a careful investigation is proceeding. It will take a very long time to deal with the clasps. When we have to deal with 6,000,000 or 7,000,000 medals with four or five clasps apiece the figures run to 25,000,000 or 30,000,000. These vary in their permutations and combinations according to the records of service of all these individuals.

Even reduced, as I contemplate, it will be a long, elaborate and costly business. The War medals, with their clasps and other tokens of honour, are the escutcheon of the private soldier, and in every home in the country they will be regarded with the greatest attention by the relatives of those who have fought and enabled us to secure the victory. Therefore, I think that the trouble and the expense, if kept within reasonable limits, will be well repaid by a well-thought-out system of distribution. I cannot undertake that the medals will be kept back until the clasps are completed. It is much better that the medals should go out as soon as they are minted. That alone will take three or four years. The clasps can subsequently be sent to the recipients. Facilities can be arranged for fitting the top clasp on to the bar of the medal. At any rate, it is an operation of the simplest character for which a very small sum of money will suffice, and possibly we might arrange to meet that in some way.

6.0 P.M.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY

I am rather surprised that the right hon. Gentleman made his extremely interesting remarks before he had heard whether any other questions were to be raised on the Vote which we are now discussing. I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman again about a matter to which I received no reply last night. It is the question of the conduct of certain troops who are carrying out very difficult, very unpleasant, and arduous duties in Ireland. I mentioned last night that I bring this matter forward with a good deal of pain. Throughout the War our Army maintained its excellent reputation in its dealings with the civil population wherever it was stationed. We are now continually receiving complaints from Ireland that in the conduct of their military duties, particularly in the raids on private houses, the soldiers do not always behave with that consideration which the people have a right to expect. I repeat that I am most loath to believe anything of this sort against British officers and soldiers. I raise the question in order that the right hon. Gentleman may have an opportunity of denying the charges, or, at any rate, of giving an assurance that the complaints made will be inquired into. Raids are taking place in Ireland at the rate of 500 or 600 a week, or possibly sometimes up to 900 or 1,000. Those raids are made usually in the middle of the night in order that the people who are being searched for may be caught. Sometimes they are made to arrest suspected persons and with the object of finding incriminating documents or arms or that sort of thing. In the very nature of these raids, a great many perfectly innocent people who have no connection with any party in Ireland are subjected to these visits, because the net is spread very wide. Very often the whole raid ends in a blank, and nothing is found. Complaints are occurring frequently that in the carrying out of this extremely unpleasant, difficult and trying duty the troops in certain cases have not behaved in that seemly way which we would expect of the British soldier. Complaints are made of ornaments, pictures and so on being deliberately smashed, and also furniture. I mentioned an instance last night of the raid on the Sinn Fein bank, and I mention it again because I wish to give the right hon. Gentleman an opportunity of making a statement about it. The bank, which is not a political but an industrial bank, was raided. The raids are not complained of, because there is a state of war in Ireland. The floors of the bank were of course pulled up in order to search for documents, and locked doors and cupboards were broken. It is stated categorically that the furniture was deliberately broken and pictures smashed, and that chairs were broken against the walls and ink-pots thrown about. That may seem a little thing, but it is the sort of thing which irritates people beyond measure. It will be remembered when we heard of the outrages by the Germans in Belgium it was the little petty useless acts of sabotage which caused so much annoyance. That sort of charge is being made as to raids in Ireland. I do not accept it, but I mention the matter so that the War Office, through the Financial Secretary, may deal with it in his reply.

We are told that the conduct of the troops in certain of these eases is not what it should be, and that they act with a harshness which is not, perhaps, inexcusable when it is remembered that these men are risking their lives. I hope this charge of breaking furniture and pictures is not true, and that the reports are exaggerated. But if there is anything in it, and any deliberate attempt to annoy people in that way, or to teach them that it does not pay to belong to a particular organisation, then I consider it is simply scandalous and dishonouring to His Majesty's Army, to the whole country, and to this House, if no protest is made. I am sure every hon. Member will admit that. In the same way, there are cases of riots. I have only heard one side of them, I admit. My informants in two cases were Unionists. I refer to the riots at Fermoy and Thurles. Apparently, there were murders and regrettable and dastardly outrages on humble police officers in those two towns. I believe that, in the case of Fermoy, troops marching home from church were fired at. That is utterly deplorable, and no one regrets more than myself or could use stronger language against that conduct or hold stronger ideas about it. But then, apparently, there were reprisals. The troops, we are told—and I hope this statement is exaggerated—at Fermoy went into the town and proceeded to break windows and break into shops and do a great deal of damage to terrorise the people. Men, of course, who are sorry for the loss of their companions will feel extremely indignant, but it is bad policy, extraordinarily bad policy, if you do not check men for taking what they think to be rough and ready justice against the inhabitants of the town. We may feel as strongly as you like about the provocation given, and I certainly feel strongly about it, but I repeat that it is extraordinarily bad policy to allow this sort of thing, and I think there must have been some laxity in permitting the men to go into the town. The opponents of British rule there, and in Australia and America, say that it was deliberate, and that when they could not catch the murderers they took it out of the townspeople. I honestly cannot believe that, but that is what is being said abroad, and it is doing us a tremendous amount of harm and has far-reaching effects, about which one does not like to dwell.

In the case of Thurles there was the dastardly shooting of a police inspector in the market place, a horrible, cowardly crime. In Thurles there was a similar riot by soldiers with this difference, that the police were with them. The extremists declare that the riot was deliberately caused. I cannot again accept that, but there was apparently a spontaneous outburst of violence on the part of people whose comrades had been done to death. With things as they are between this country and Ireland and between the British people and the Irish people, I think every possible step should be taken to prevent rough and ready justice being done. It sounds all right in theory, but the innocent must suffer in these cases. It is no excuse to say that the innocent have to suffer with the guilty. None whatever. That was the German plea for the sinking of passengers at sea, but the world would not accept, and will not accept, that defence if any hon. or right hon. Member attempts to make it in this case. It is not moral justice, and will not be accepted as such. This is a matter on which I feel deeply, as if affects the honour of the British Army at home.

I cannot refrain from adding a new plea to my request for enlightenment. I refer to the recent events which were mentioned at question time to-day by the hon. Member for the Scotland division of Liverpool (Mr. O'Connor). I do not, of course, expect my right hon. Friend to have any more information than the Chief Secretary gave to the House. The other matters I have mentioned in order to get the usual courteous reply. From the contents of the telegram which the Chief Secretary read, apparently a very regrettable incident took place in Dublin last night, in which a soldier was shot and a man and woman, civilians, were killed. When that telegram was read out, certain hon. Members took it upon themselves to cheer at the firing of the troops. I do not think that that cheering is quite defensible.

Mr. HOHLER

On a point of Order. Does this question arise on this Vote?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

The hon. and gallant Member is in order so long as he confines his remarks to the administration of the War Office—beyond that he must not go.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY

I will not strain the point. I wish to dissociate myself from the cheers of Members of this House. The killing of civilians in the City of Dublin or anywhere else by military is too serious a matter to be treated lightly, or for Members to allow their passions to carry them away as was the case at the end of questions to-day. [A laugh.] A certain hon. Member is good enough to laugh now. He should remember we are discussing the deaths of people.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

The hon. Member should address the Chair, and not other hon. Members.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY

From the telegram apparently 150 soldiers went to a theatre on the anniversary of a victory of a regiment in France, and certain regrettable incidents occurred. I submit, and this is my point, we should be particularly careful at the present time that no unnecessary provocation is given in any Irish town by the troops that happen to be stationed there. I repeat that I consider the duties which have to be carried out by the British troops there are extremely difficult and extremely distasteful, and no doubt those soldiers have been tried to the uttermost. But Ireland to-day is a barrel of powder, and any display by the troops is bound to lead to indignation on the part of a very large and increasingly large section of the people. It is extraordinarily important that the attitude of the military in Ireland should be correct, and more than correct. There should be no sort of thing such as coming from a theatre and singing in any way to provoke people. We must realise that they are in a hostile country. It is appalling that it should be so, but there the fact is, and if collisions occur, innocent people on one side or the other are bound to suffer. In this case a soldier, a poor lad, a perfectly innocent and honest and decent man, was shot through the chest, and reprisals were taken, and a man and woman were killed. The woman was 25 years of age. I hope the representative of the War Office will assure us there is no policy of any sort of terrorism or reprisals, in the military sense of the word, being carried out in Ireland; secondly that in the performance of their duties the soldiers and the officers have the strictest orders to behave in the most correct manner and to behave towards the civilian population as they would wish a foreign Army of Occupation, for that is what it amounts to, towards their own womenfolk in their own country; and, thirdly, that in the Irish towns there should be no unnecessary parading or singing of songs which are to us patriotic, but, unfortunately, as things are in Ireland, are, I am afraid, in only too many cases a direct provocation to the Irish. I hope the War Office can assure us on these three points, and that that is the deliberate intention of the War Office, and that the military authorities in Ireland have not in any way come under the sway of that horrible, dastardly, cowardly system known as Castle rule in Ireland.

Major GLYN

I wish to allow no time to pass without trying to give some reply to the hon. and gallant Member who has just sat down. I think this House should realise that the military duty now carried out by our troops in Ireland is difficult enough without making it more difficult, and if I understand the hon. and gallant Member aright, he wishes the War Office to issue an order that British troops may no longer sing "God Save the King."

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY

I am sure the hon. and gallant Member docs not wish to misrepresent me. My words were that troops should be particularly careful in no way to provoke the civil population.

Major GLYN

The point that was raised by the hon. and gallant Member was that no provocation should be made to arouse the ire of the Irish inhabitants. When you have the men of a great and gallant British regiment celebrating their centenary, it will be a poor day when the men do not burst out with the National Anthem, and if it is to be believed—the hon. and gallant Member for Hull, as a member of the Senior Service, I am sure, is not putting it forward—that we have arrived at such a condition that it is wrong for British troops or sailors to do what is constantly done in celebrations of that nature, it is indeed a sad case that British troops are in in Ireland; but I would like to point out this. I happen to know the commanding officer of a battalion in Cork, and the provocation is on the other side. It may surprise the House to know that decent British soldiers can hardly walk out with a girl or anybody else without being insulted by the whole population of Cork. Those men have got to carry out duties which in normal times would be done by the police, and the duty performed by the military in aid of the civil power is always difficult, but under the present conditions in Ireland it is very nearly impossible, and, I think, instead of attacking the action of the British troops, this House ought to realise how great has been the work done by them during this difficult time in Ireland. There has been one perpetual strain on British troops. If you march to church, you go with side arms, and you are shot at from behind walls. If you go to a theatre, you are shot at with revolvers from upper windows of domiciles. When you send out a picket to bring in the men who are unarmed and who have been fired at, in bringing them back more fire is opened from people hiding behind windows, and yet the hon. and gallant Member for Hull is surprised when hon. Members in this House cheer because British soldiers rescued their comrades from the clutches of these people.

I fail altogether to understand the lines on which the Opposition are putting this thing forward. We all deplore the necessity for carrying out this military control or attempted control of Ireland, and, indeed, one must look forward with the greatest horror to the logical conclusion of the present system of military government. We are going along a path which in fairness to the troops and officers must have the support of the Government, by the enforcement of martial law. It is putting troops in an impossible position, and officers in a worse position. It is difficult for discipline, and it is very hard for those in high command to know where they stand, whether the Government are really going to back them up to the very limit in what they do, and I think no British officer could rest content with seeing his men shot at, or stoned, or having vitriol thrown over them without taking drastic and immediate action, and if he did not take such action he would be, indeed, at fault. It is said: Why was this attack made on the troops when they were going to church, or to the theatre, and why were the men not armed? The moment men went to church armed hon Members would be getting up and asking: Why provoke the Irishmen by marching to church with arms? If they do not go with arms, they are still in the wrong. What is the policy of hon. Gentlemen opposite? It seems to me the policy should be to back up and assist loyal and gallant soldiers for carrying out a task of enormous difficulty, which is not made the easier by provocative speeches in the House of Commons, and I would ask that at this particular time, when in Cork, in Thurles, at the Curragh, and elsewhere you have got British troops who may not walk out alone, who have to walk out in pairs or threes, or even larger parties, when you have got 50 per cent. of the police force in Ireland confined to barracks in order to defend those points, and when you have therefore got the police reduced by 50 per cent., I would ask that at a time when it is very hard to carry out the normal care of the country, the Government should not ask troops to do things which have brought them into idicule and which have done nothing but cause laughter to evil-disposed persons in Ireland.

I know of one case where some foolish boys, in September or October last year, put an Irish Republican flag, so called, in a tree in a village, and its shattered remains were flying from this tree until somebody realised that it was an Irish Republican flag. Some days afterwards, I think ten armoured ears rumbled along the road to this little village, and police and soldiers were ordered to go to the top of this tree and bring down the shattered remains of the flag. Obviously, such a performance is bad for the prestige of the British Army, and perhaps a little more care as to what is a possible thing for troops to be asked to do, and what is not, would make the lot of the troops a little bit easier in Ireland. The lot of commanding officers in Ireland, of Generals in high command, and indeed of naval officers in naval ports in Ireland, does, I think, deserve the considerate desire to help of every Member of this House. There is at present a real danger of something almost worse than we have yet had to encounter beginning in Ireland. If that goes on much further, and if it is encouraged by thoughtless speeches in this House to go any further—

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY

Thoughtless cheers.

Major GLYN

Be they cheers or be they speeches, I think nothing should be done which could possibly be misunderstood, but I want to point out that the speech of the hon. and gallant Member for Hull conveyed, possibly wrongly, to my mind the distinct impression that he was not bearing sufficiently in mind the difficulties of our sorely-tried troops and was thinking too much of the desires of those who wish to overthrow British rule in Ireland.

Mr. JAMESON

I am afraid I offended the hon. and gallant Member for Hull by the ghost of a smile flitting across my face. The smile was not at the state of Ireland at the present day, which is not a matter for smiling at all, but I am sorry to say it was at the dramatic manner of the hon. and gallant Gentleman. I apologise for it. As for the matter of his speech, I wish to associate myself entirely with the hon. and gallant Gentleman who has spoken last. The sympathies of this country are not now directed towards the alleged grievances of Ireland, they are directed entirely towards the troops and the police, who have such a difficult task to perform, and whose lives are exposed to hourly and daily danger in that country. I am in very close touch with the people of my own country of Scotland, and I know that their sympathy with the alleged grievances of Ireland were very thin indeed during the War. People in Glasgow and Edinburgh, just as people in Birmingham and Manchester, were tightening their belts and living upon rations, and they saw Ireland having a pretty good time of it in comparison; they saw their sons and their brothers fighting in the trenches, and they were quite contented with that state of affairs, and would not have had it otherwise, but they contrasted very poignantly their own lot in these matters with the lot of Ireland. A very different state of mind accordingly has been aroused throughout the country, and I think Ireland should recognise this and beware of a change of feeling in this country generally towards Ireland. Generally speaking, I think it is the duty of everybody in this House, as it is the wish of everybody in the country, that the hands of the authorities should not be weakened, but that they should be strengthened, in Ireland. They do not think that the Government in Ireland errs upon the side of strength at all. If anything, it errs upon the side of weakness. They do not think the military and the police in Ireland are too much protected and too much egged on by the authorities, but they think, if anything, they are too little protected. They admire the forbearance of the police and the military in Ireland, they do not think they have any cause to be resentful at any alleged aggression upon the part of either the military or the police there. Accordingly, I would like to associate myself with the last speaker, and I would send across the message to Ireland that we think the military there have every call upon the sympathy of the British people, and that certainly there is no call for any protest against them.

Lieut.-Colonel MALONE

I think my hon. Friend who has just spoken, and referred to the bad feelings existing between Scotland and Ireland, must have been thinking about the alleged Sinn Fein-German plot, which has never been proved. I regret very much that he should have forgotten, what I am sure the Secretary of State for War remembers, and that is the gallant and heroic work performed by thousands of Irishmen in the trenches throughout France on every front on which the Allies faced the enemy, and I think it is very regrettable that any hon. Member should cast any disparaging remarks on the work performed by that nation in the gallant cause of the Allies. I am sure nobody on this side of the House or the other has any contempt or any bad feeling towards the troops in Ireland in these instances about which we have been talking. We all realise that they are simply carrying out the policy of the Government and the orders given them, and when we criticise the work which these troops perform, the murders, if I may use the term, which they are forced to commit, it is not in any way reflecting on the personal gallantry or heroism of those individual men. We realise that they are carrying out orders not less gallant than the orders which they carried out with the same loyalty in Franco and elsewhere. What we criticise in criticising the action they perform is the policy they are carrying out, and I associate myself entirely with my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) in deploring the cheer which greeted the statement at question time concerning the killing of civilians. It is most regrettable that such an expression of feeling from the Legislative body in this country should go out to our people in Ireland. We must remember the incidents which have incited the people to feel as they do towards the British troops.

Let me give one example. Last week a raid was carried out on the house of a very gallant officer, Major Erskine Childers, an officer who has served his country on the sea and in the air for the whole duration of the War. His name has been mentioned in despatches, and in every conceivable way his character was spotless and bore no stain at all. Last week, in order to examine his house, an armed tank arrived outside his address in Dublin in the middle of the night. Armed men emerged from that tank, entered his house, compelled his wife to leave her bed, entered the nursery, woke up the little children, pulled all the ties on the floor, and generally disturbed the household. If that were done in any other civilised country, surely we should be entitled to have it done in a manner in which the people should not be so grossly disturbed. Surely it would be possible for these incidents to be carried out in the daytime without the necessity of armed men entering people's drawing rooms and offering sacrilege to the premises of individuals; and I am sure if the House realised the effect these incidents are having on the British public they would not laugh when British soldiers murder and kill poor Irish civilians. [HON. MEMBERS: "Shame," and "Withdraw."] There might be in that crowd in Ireland men who have committed murder, but that is no reason for firing indiscriminately on a mass of Irish citizens who have been excited and inflamed by the policy for which the present Government is responsible, and I associate myself entirely with the hon. and gallant Member for Hull in deploring that such an expression of opinion should go forth to Ireland at the present day. I will not continue the question of Ireland to-night; we shall have a full opportunity next week on the Government of Ireland Bill.

I wish to draw attention to a matter which was referred to yesterday, and to which no reply has yet been received from the Government. I refer to the question of military missions in foreign lands. It will be seen that 2,226 men are employed on military missions in different countries throughout Europe. Many of us here are of the opinion, and we have very good reason for thinking, that some of these missions, which are to be found in Esthonia, Lithuania, Latvia and Poland—in fact, in almost every country in Europe—are employed, not in advising the local Government in dealing purely with military events, but in supporting the most reactionary elements, the most conservative parties which are to be found in those countries. In the Debate last night, I ventured to quote certain examples concerning the work of these missions in Esthonia and Latvia, and said that the military mission in Latvia was originally responsible for the creation of that force which created the coup d'état in Germany last week. Since that time another incident has come before my notice. At question time to-day I asked the Secretary of State for War a question concerning General Holman, who is Chief of the Military Mission attached to General Denikin, and I ventured to call his attention to a manifesto which had been issued by General Holman to the Kuban Cossacks—a manifesto which purported to be a message from His Gracious Majesty the King. I am glad to say that the Secretary of State for War informed the House that this manifesto had been published without the authority and approval of His Majesty's Government. I would like an assurance that all these acts of military missions throughout Europe—acts which have been carried out with miracu- lous unanimity so far as supporting reactionary conservative elements is concerned—have all been carried out without the knowledge and cognisance of the British War Office. It is very difficult for many of us who watch the trend of politics in those countries to believe that is really the case; but I should like to be assured that these military missions are employed on purely military work, and are not used in any shape or form for political purposes or political propaganda. I hope my right hon. Friend will take an early opportunity of publicly conveying to the Kuban Republic that this declaration was carried out and presented without the approval of His Majesty's Government.

There is one small domestic matter which I wish again to bring before the Secretary of State for War, and I hope that he will see his way to reply to it. I refer to the question, which was not answered yesterday, concerning the Guards' uniform. It is a matter which is exercising the minds of numbers of young officers who joined the Guards during the War. It is a matter which exercises the minds of their parents to a very much greater extent. The expense of providing Guards' officers with the old pre-war uniform amounts to something like £300; and there has to be taken into consideration the very large annual expenditure required to keep up this very gaudy uniform. I hope my right hon. Friend will be able to give a decision on this matter at a very early date, and reassure those young officers and their parents that there is no intention on the part of the War Office to make them pay this enormous amount for a uniform which is not necessary, at all events, for years to come. If the khaki uniform was good enough for the War, it is quite good enough for the Peace, for some time to come.

Dr. MURRAY

I have come into contact with some Territorial officers, I find they are very sadly disappointed about the rate of recruiting for the Territorial Army. Of course it is too soon to assess the position of things, but there is one point on which they seem to be unanimous in regard to what is affecting recruiting, and that is the question of holidays. The men will be expected to spend a fortnight in camp, and most of these men will be deprived of holidays with their families, which, I think, many of these men have not enjoyed for years. If the War Office could arrange that the married men, especially, could be allowed an extra week in some way or other, it would, I believe, from the information of men well entitled to speak on behalf of the Territorial Force, facilitate matters very greatly, and make recruiting for the Territorial Army much more enthusiastic than it is at the present time. There is certainly no rush in the Territorial Army at present, except, to a certain extent, for the London Scottish, which one would expect. If this matter of holidays could be arranged, I think there would be a greater rush to the Territorial Army.

There is another point I wish to mention. There has been a rumour in the papers recently—I do not believe it myself—that it was the intention of the War Office to abolish the kilt. I know that is not the intention of the War Office, but it has somehow or other got into the London papers, and has percolated into the provincial papers and caused some searching of hearts. They do not make tartans or kilts in Dundee, but even there the Secretary of State for War would hoar of it, and my right hon. Friend the Member for Moray and Nairn (Sir A. Williamson), who knows something about the kilt, would not, I think, like to go back to his constituency if that report were to be true.

Colonel YATE

I should like to say a word regarding the question of the cost of uniform. I hope for the new uniform there will not be the enormous expense incurred by young officers that was incurred previously. The other day I heard of a young officer in the Royal Horse Artillery who went to a tailor and was told they could not make a jacket under £120. That sort of thing, I hope, is going to be put a stop to by the right hon. Gentleman. Whatever walking-out dress is given to the Army—and I quite agree the Army should have a walking-out dress—I ask that the dress should be made simpler, and that the officer's full dress should be without the gold lace which is so expensive at the present time, and that the expense of £120 should be abolished once and for ever. Then, there is the question of the new mess dress. Although the old red mess dress looked very nice on young officers, in all the countries of Europe that dress is looked upon with great dislike, and the further East you go the greater is the dislike to it. I would ask that the new mess dress should not be so expensive, but that there should be some simple and plain new dress provided without great expense to the officers. Consideration should be given to the cutting down of gold' lace, and, indeed, lace of all sorts. Some people very much disliked the old cavalry mess dress buttoning tight up to the throat. I do not think any of us like it now. I trust these points will be taken into consideration, so that great cost may not be incurred by young officers.

Mr. T. P. O'CONNOR

I did not intend to join in this Debate, and I was unaware until I entered the House that my hon. and gallant Friend on my right (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) had spoken on the conduct of the military in Ireland, or that it was to be one of the subjects of debate. I must say that I feel so seriously the tragic nature of the situation in Ireland, a tragedy, I am afraid, growing more tragic every day, that I hesitate to use any language at all, lest any words of mine should aggravate a situation already aggravated enough. But I may be allowed to make a few observations as to the complaint raised yesterday, and I will make my language as careful as I can in view of the situation in Ireland. St. Patrick's Day of this year was one of the saddest in the history of Ireland. Certainly it was the saddest I have seen during my life. I do not suppose that even the criticisms of the hon. and gallant Member, the Member for Hull, severe as they were, will cause any more misgivings and searching of heart than are likely to occur in respect of the situation. What happens? Almost every day we are saddened by a murder or crime as terrible and mysterious as that of the murder of the Lord Mayor of Cork. Even to-day we heard from the Chief Secretary for Ireland an account of another serious event in Dublin, in which, according to his statement, the soldiers were assaulted and fired at by the crowd. Although that telegram did not mention it, I am afraid that the matter was still more serious, a man and a woman, civilians, being killed. Does not this long tale of almost daily tragic events suggest serious reflections to hon. Members?

I have to take this opportunity of saying this in regard to the tragic event in Cork. Yesterday I asked a question of the Chief Secretary in regard to the entrance of the military and the ran- sacking of the house of the late Lord Mayor of Cork shortly after the crime was committed. I suggested that this sudden incursion, when the widow and family must have been in a state of both mental and physical collapse, showed a certain lack of consideration. I addressed some words which reflected, though I did not give my reasons, what I thought was one of the most serious factors in the situation at Cork—the feeling of almost universal morbid suspicion which reigns in that city; for certainly it is a very serious fact that a man, not only a Sinn Feiner, but a leader of Sinn Feiners, who was elected to his position as Lord Mayor of Cork by the Sinn Fein majority in the Council, and who several times had been imprisoned because of his opinions, should be the victim of assassination. I ventured to urge what I considered merely a warning to the Chief Secretary that proceedings of this kind in the atmosphere of suspicion and excitement prevailing imposed upon the authorities the greatest care for themselves, for their own protection, and for the appeasement of the public mind against any possible misconstruction of motive or action. I am sorry to say the Chief Secretary misinterpreted my observations to mean a charge against the soldiers who went to the house. He said that the soldiers were only doing their duty in obeying the commands of their officers. I did not intend to make such a charge against the soldiers, and if my language was so interpreted it was misinterpreted or my words did not convey the idea I had in my mind. I am glad to inform the House that since I made that statement yesterday about the visit of the military to the house of the late Lord Mayor a letter of complaint has been sent by the Bishop of Cork simultaneously with a strong denunciation of the crime, and a letter in reply has appeared—an extract from which I find in the evening papers—from the Major-General commanding the soldiers in Cork. The Major-General says that the entrance into the house was carried out in pursuance of orders and that the officer in charge was facilitated in his search by the occupants of the house. That disposes of the suggestion which naturally occurred to me that this visit was resented. The Major-General goes The Major-General says that: The officer left expressing his regret to the residents at having to perform his duty at such a time and with the knowledge of the circumstances. The Major-General said that he regretted that the action of the military should have been construed as lacking in respect for the dead and the house of mourning. I think that explanation reflects great credit on the officer who wrote it, and I am sure I accept it. May I, however, ask this question: Is this the kind of duty that soldiers ought to be asked to perform? I do not know what the law is upon the matter. I think I know what the Secretary of State may say, that there is some difficulty in a policeman doing this duty, and that a policeman had been murdered on that very night. I think everybody regrets, and those who love the Army regret it most, that the soldiers should be employed in this work, which is really the work of the police and not of the soldiers. An hon. Member intervening in this Debate criticised rather severely my hon. and gallant Friend, but it seemed to me that he missed the whole point of this Debate. My hon. and gallant Friend gave several instances in which, under great provocation, the soldiers, and sometimes the police, more or less had run wild, lost their tempers and their heads. That happened at Fermoy, Limerick and Thurles. In one instance shots were fired into houses, and the lives of citizens endangered, also the lives of women and children. Not only were the lives endangered of persons sympathetic with or guilty of crimes, but the lives of people as innocent of either association or sympathy with these crimes as any Member of this House.

It is no answer to the charge to say that criticism such as my hon. and gallant Friend uttered goes beyond the necessities of the case, and to say that we must not weaken the arm of our soldiers; that if we utter any criticism of their actions, whether good or bad, we are weakening their arm and encouraging the forces of disorder in Ireland. Such an attitude, I say, is a fundamental misconception of the spirit of our institutions. It vitiates all the speech of the hon. Gentleman. Whatever provocation soldiers may have received, soldiers ought not to be allowed to break their bonds of discipline. The Chief Secretary, I think, will not take up the position of the hon. and gallant Member. I view with the greatest alarm the tendency, which is not absolutely absent from this House, to regard force, in view of possible very perilous conditions in England as well as Ireland, as its own justification. Without discussing its merits or conditions, when the tragedy at Amritsar was announced, when it was said that the soldiers had broken loose from discipline, and, answering perhaps a provocative and perilous attack, loosed themselves in a moment from the bonds of discipline, there was a, tendency, I say, in some quarters to acclaim that as the right thing.

7.0 P.M.

That is the gospel of force. That is the gospel of Prussianism. That is the devilish thing this War was fought to abolish. I pray God we shall never be allowed to introduce into this country, under any provocations, the spirit of militarism which justifies such things as happened at Zabern in Germany before the War, and led to one of the greatest catastrophies that ever happened. I would ask the House to take two things into consideration. I am sorry my hon. Friend opposite made the illusion he did to the attitude of the people of Glasgow towards the Irish. Let me say in reply that there was no city in the United Kingdom which had a more honourable record for sending volunteers—before conscription—to the War than the city of Glasgow. I have to add that foremost amongst those who enthusiastically went to the flag without compulsion were the men of my own race. I read one day a statement in a Scottish paper with regard to the losses in a well-known Scottish regiment, and the first name was William O'Brien, the second John Murphy, and the third Michael O'Connor. Those who know the composition of Scottish regiments know that this is true. What is the position of the Army in Ireland today? An Irishman waking up in Ireland is able to rise pretty early because he is not allowed to walk the streets of Dublin between the hours of 12 and 5. During those hours an Irishman finds the streets of the capital of his country filled with a large body of soldiers wearing helmets, and driving tanks with all the paraphernalia of war. Why are they there? They are there, in the eyes of patriotic Irishmen, as representatives of the armed forces of this strong country to keep down the national aspirations of the people of Ireland. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] I know it will be said that they are there to keep order, but the origin and foundation of all the disorder there is the denial to Ireland of her national aspirations.

Where is all this going to end? I am afraid, and I say it with reluctance and misgivings and horror, we have not seen the end of this most tragic act. Can the Secretary of State for War say that the policy for which he has only corporate responsibility as a member of the Government has done anything to create order and not disorder, and can he say that the presence in Ireland of his army and equipment has made the country less crimeless? Is it not a fact that in Ireland the more the forces of the Crown have been imposed upon Ireland the more terrible has been the record of crime and disorder in that country? I make this most earnest appeal to the House. Next week we are about to enter upon a discussion of the measure which, its authors declare, is intended to bestow upon Ireland free institutions. I will not for the moment discuss their intentions, and I will discuss next week how their intentions are realised or falsified by their proposals. I put it to the House, what chance is there of any proposals of this kind succeeding in Ireland as long as you have disorder and crime there, accentuated by repression? What chance is there in such an atmosphere of anything like a fair consideration or acceptance of any proposals the Government may make under those conditions?

I make an appeal to the Government and to the House to bring this policy in Ireland to an end, and trust the Irish people. Leave to the Irish people the guardianship not only of their own liberties, but the security of the lives of their fellow citizens. Above all, I make this appeal to Englishmen rather than to Irishmen. The House sees how the world views the present conditions in Ireland. There is not a country in the world that has approved of the policy of the Government in Ireland. Grave and terrible disaster, in my opinion, has come upon England and upon France and upon the world by the unfortunate attitude which has been arrived at in the United States with regard to their responsibilities for the future of Europe and the League of Nations. I trace a good deal, though not all, of that disaster of England and America separating as the defenders of the democratic liberties of the world to our militarist ideals, and if England and America separate on that great issue as the guardians of the future liberties and peace of the world, then I say that the blood of our heroes has been shed in vain, and if the War has been won, peace has been lost. You must get into your minds the horrible catastrophe towards which Ireland and England are approaching, and the abyss into which you are sinking. For these reasons I beg you to view the Irish question a little more from the point of view of Irishmen, and you should do your share towards bringing about that peace between Englishmen and Irishmen which should be the ideal of every patriotic Englishman.

Colonel R. F. PEEL

After listening to the speech of the hon. Member who has just sat down. I thought for the moment we had reached the Third Reading of a Bill which we are to discuss next week. I do not propose to follow the hon. Member opposite into the question of the position and future of Ireland, but I wish to get back to the question of the Army. I will simply say that I think hon. and right hon. Gentlemen will do much better if they will use their endeavours to bring about good-will in Ireland, because we can do something with good-will if we pursue it. I want to ask the Secretary for War if he can tell me anything about the future of the special reserve which contributed something like 2,000,000 men to the Forces of the Crown during the War. They seem to have been treated with very scant references to their services by those who have spoken on behalf of the War Office. The authorities at the War Office know that if it had not been for the men sent out from the special reserve in the early part of 1915, before the New Army came into being, no one can say what the later stages of the War would have been. In 1916 the Secretary for War actually gave six lines to the special reserve on the Army Estimates, and that is the sort of recognition these men received from the War Office.

I want to know what it is proposed to do this year with regard to this force, I notice in the Army Estimates there is a reference to the special reserve, and I should be glad to know from my right hon. Friend whether it is proposed to keep all the battalions or do away with any of them. All these battalions have a long history of service, and there are also the extra reserve battalions. Remembering how necessary these men were in time of war, I hope the right hon. Gentleman has made up his mind to retain all the battalions of the special reserve. I received a letter from the Parliamentary Secretary some time ago in which he said it was not likely that they would do away with any of these regiments then in existence. I would like to know whether he has any thought of these battalions training as dêpot battalions, or whether he intends to go back to the old regimental system which existed before the War. If he will assure those who have taken such great interest in the formation of this force for many years on this point, I shall be very greatly obliged to him.

Mr. CHURCHILL

I exhausted my right to speak at the beginning of this discussion, not realising that it would be so long. Therefore, it is only by leave of the House that I can answer the questions that have been put to me With regard to what fell from my hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel R. F. Peel) about the Special Reserves, the new arrangement which we have made assigns a definite position to the Special Reserve battalions in the Army. There is approximately one to every link battalion of the regiment. For every two battalions of the Regulars, there is a Special Reserve battalion as a draft finding unit, which can be used in the course of war for expansion. We have decided to maintain about 74 or 75 of these battalions That implies that the extra Special Reserve battalions will be eliminated, but the Special Reserve battalions will be preserved. Of course, here and there there may be an extra Special Reserve battalion which for special reasons it may be desirable to keep in existence It is proposed to revive the old name of Militia which was so popular with them, and, although they did not fight to any large extent as units, nevertheless they rendered enormous service in training the drafts. These units will be preserved in their integrity, with their traditions and belongings, and regimental associations, and they will take a permanent part in the post-war Army. I think that will be satisfactory to that very large class of hon. Members who take an interest in the force and in the old Militia

I have observed that the Debate has shown several tendencies to drift away from a placid military atmosphere into the far more bellicose area of Irish administration. But I feel that no satisfactory Debate upon Irish administration can take place on the Army Estimates. It is my duty, it is the duty of those who hold my office to supply these troops to the various Governments, in India, Egypt, or Ireland, or wherever they may be, which are needed for the purpose of maintaining law and order, and the War Office has responsibility for the conduct of those troops. But so far as the Department is concerned they are not the executive authority charged with their direction on the spot, and if a Debate of that kind were to be originated it would, I think, be much more satisfactory to both sides in this controversy if it were conducted on the Vote for the Chief Secretary, for the Lord Lieutenant or on some general Motion which would permit of a discussion. I certainly do not wish to take up the point which has been put by the hon. Member for Leyton East (Lieut.-Colonel Malone), and by the hon. Member for Hull (Lieut.-Commander Ken-worthy) in a manner calculated to arouse and provoke discussion on these Estimates.

My hon. Friend the Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool (Mr. T. P. O'Connor) speaks from a whole life work in the cause of Irish government, and of improving, I can justly say, the relations of unity between Great Britain and her sister island. He spoke with remarkable moderation and restraint, although his feelings on this subject are known to be of a deep and passionate character. He said not a word calculated to inflame the feelings or offend the opinions of other hon. Members, and, in reply to him, I would gladly say that the War Office and the Government have no approbation whatever for violent and lawless measures, from whatever quarter they may come or under whatever Provocation they may be originated. At the same time, my hon. Friend must not overlook the extraordinary provocation to which the troops have been subjected in Ireland. The hon. Member for East Leyton spoke of the rising in Fermoy. Everyone knows what had happened the day before in Fermoy. Two soldiers who were returning from Church had been set upon and killed, and the coroner's jury had brought in a verdict which practically expressed no condemnation of that crime. In these circumstances, it is very regrettable, but not wonderful, that the anger of the troops was violently excited, and for a short period, in which I am glad to say no life was lost, they broke the bonds of military discipline and control and inflicted a great deal of damage on the town. It is not only a very wrong, but a very dangerous thing to shoot soldiers who fought in the War, who have come home from the War expecting to have a period of rest and peace, and who do not expect to be murdered from behind hedgerows in a civilised country by a population for whose defence they risked their lives during the War.

I think also my hon. Friend, in reading out the letter written by the Major-General in command at Cork to the Catholic Bishop, about the search at the residence of the late Lord Mayor of Cork, answered to a very large extent some of the charges eagerly preferred by the hon. Member for Leyton East, and the hon. Member for Hull, because that letter showed, as the hon. Member admitted, that the Major-General on the spot was animated by sentiments of the utmost consideration, and was endeavouring to discharge his duty in a manner which would commend itself to all right-feeling men, completely removed from any scene of excitement or passion. I notice my hon. Friend even commended this letter. I believe that the letter is very representative of the spirit in which the army in Ireland is being controlled by its military chiefs. Every endeavour is being made by them to discharge their duties with the least possible cause of complaint or irritation to the population among whom they are forced to dwell.

If I turn from the tone of the criticisms of my hon. Friend the Member for the Scotland Division to that which animated the speeches of the hon. Members for Central Hull and Leyton East, I think the House will see that in their two statements they have at any rate unfolded a perfectly clear, plain point of view. Their point of view, which they have abundant opportunities of displaying, is to attribute the worst vile motives and intentions to their fellow-countrymen in every quarter of the world. It is furthermore to express a servile and fulsome adulalation for the forces of treachery, rebellion, and Bolshevism in every quarter. The hon. Member for Leyton East has even gone so far as to traduce the memory of a brother officer (Captain Crombie) who was murdered by the Bolsheviks at Petrograd. A similar spirit animates him. With a consistency worthy of Lenin himself, with a supreme and devastating logic worthy of the highest manifestation of Bolshevism and intellectualism he has proceeded in every quarter of the world to apply similar treatment and a similar standard to educated British officers and men, where-ever they may be brought into contact with the very different events which, in this melancholy and turbulent period, fall so often to their experience. I think, in regard to these two hon. Members, all that is necessary is that they should have an opportunity of making their opinions perfectly clear and perfectly plain. I am certain no words and no arguments are needed from me, or from other hon. Members, to elicit in an effective manner the considered opinion of the House. I would venture to suggest to the House that as these military matters have now been under discussion for a long time, and as these more exciting topics are really extraneous to those with which we are dealing at the present time, the House will perhaps permit the Air Estimates to come on now in order that progress may be made with that other important branch of our defensive forces at an early stage of the evening.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE

Can the right hon. Gentleman say anything about the question of the Guards' uniform, which is agitating the minds of many hon. Members?

Mr. CHURCHILL

I propose to lay a full memorandum on this subject. I made a considered statement upon it when my hon. Friend was not in the House, and I indicated the broad general lines we intended to adopt. I stated that we accepted the principle of an outfit allowance for the officers.

Captain WEDGWOOD BENN

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any demands have been received from Ireland for an increase in the number of armed forces, and, if so, will it be granted?

Mr. CHURCHILL

From time to time demands are made by the Irish Executive for reinforcements of troops, but no large demand has been made during the last few months. If any demand is made, I am glad to say I am in a position to meet it most fully.

Dr. MURRAY

Can the right hon. Gentleman say if there is any truth in the rumour published in some papers that the kilt is to be abolished?

Mr. CHURCHILL

I am obliged to the hon. Member for giving me an opportunity to deal with that rumour. There is absolutely no intention whatever of abolishing the kilt. Certain Highland regiments may be converted into Engineers, but if they are called Highlanders the kilt will be retained. I have been in treaty with various representative bodies in Scotland, and I hope shortly to announce arrangements in regard to Scottish battalions, which will include several famous battalions of the 51st Division, which I hope will be deemed to be generally satisfactory.