§ 9. Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHYasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he will have inquiries made into the death of James Hayden, of Crannagh, Borris, County Carlow, on Sunday, 6th March; whether this man was fired upon without warning by a corporal in the presence of six people on his way home from Mass; whether the dead man's relatives were refused admission to the military inquiry; whether the military court, which concluded its sitting on 11th March, has given a verdict; and, if so, whether the verdict has been conveyed to the dead man's relatives?
§ The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Colonel Sir Hamar Greenwood)I am informed by the Commander-in-Chief that the court of inquiry in lieu of inquest in the case of James Hayden found that the deceased met his death on 6th March last through non-compliance with a military order in that he did not halt when called upon, and was shot by Crown forces in the execution of their duty. He was returning from Mass at the time. Four civilians, including a brother of the deceased, gave evidence, and the relatives were represented by a solicitor. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.
§ 22. Mr. KENYONasked the Chief Secretary whether any reprisals, such as the burning of property, have been officially ordered in any place outside the martial-law area?
§ Sir H. GREENWOODThe answer is in the negative.
§ Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHYWill any person responsible for an unofficial reprisal outside the martial-law area be proceeded against?
§ Sir H. GREENWOODAction is always taken against persons responsible for unauthorised reprisals.
Captain BENNDoes not the responsibility for un authorised reprisals rest with the Government, who incite them?
29. Mr. T. THOMSONasked the Prime Minister whether the closing of the creameries by military order is approved by the Cabinet?
§ Sir H. GREENWOODThe Commander-in-Chief in Ireland has the complete confidence of the Government in his difficult task, and their support in this and other measures which he has taken for the suppression and discouragement of crime and rebellion.
§ Mr. WATERSONIs the right hon. Baronet aware that when this Order has been applied they have shut down a creamery in one place and within 400 yards they have allowed another creamery to exist, and why have they been giving preferential treatment within the military area?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat does not arise.
Captain BENNWas a raid on papers made on Plunkett House, the centre of these creameries, and, if so, for what purpose?
§ Mr. SPEAKERNotice should be given of that question.
33. Captain BENNasked the Prime Minister what passage in the military code justifies the burning of houses except under circumstances of military necessity and as a reprisal?
§ Sir H. GREENWOODNo houses have been burned for reasons other than those stated by the hon. Member, and the question therefore does not appear to arise.
Captain BENNWill the right hon. Baronet answer the question, which is: Under what passage in the military code, as stated by the Prime Minister, these burnings took place? May I have an answer?
§ Lieut.-Colonel ARCHER-SHEEIs it not a fact that under The Hague Rule 23, Sub-paragraph (g), general devastation of territory is allowed if military necessities demand it?
§ Sir H. GREENWOODI can add nothing to the answer which has been prepared. No houses have been burnt for reasons other than those stated by the hon. and gallant Gentleman himself. The question does not therefore appear to arise.
Captain BENNWill the right hon. Baronet kindly answer the question on the Paper which is: Under what article of the military code the burnings took place?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. and gallant Gentleman's question is not what he now states it to be. It is denied that these burnings took place except under certain circumstances.
§ 58. Mr. NEWBOULDasked the Chief Secretary how many houses have been destroyed in the martial-law area by official order since 1st January, 1921?
§ Sir H. GREENWOODThe number is 185 for the nine counties in the martial law area.
§ 68. Mr. MOSLEYasked the Chief Secretary whether it is the policy of His Majesty's Government to burn the houses of persons in Ireland without proof of their complicity in outrages?
§ Sir H. GREENWOODNo, Sir. The destruction of houses in the martial-law area has been carried out (1) as a punishment for outrage where the military governor was satisfied that the building was used in rebel operations, or that the owner or occupier of the property had aided or sheltered the rebels. (2) In cases where outrages have been committed against loyal persons, action in the latter cases has been taken against persons of known rebel sympathies. The military governors have invariably taken steps to satisfy themselves personally of the guilt or implication of the owners of the property selected.
§ Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHYWas that done in the case of Mrs. Fitzgerald, a widow whose son served through the War in the British Army?
Lieut.-Colonel GUINNESSIn these cases where there is evidence against these men of aiding and abetting, is it not possible to take proceedings against them before a military Court?
§ Mr. MOSLEYDoes the right hon. Gentleman say that the houses of people are burned because they have rebel sympathies, though there is no accusation of participation in outrage against them?
§ Sir H. GREENWOODI have answered the question on the Paper, and as regards the supplementary question, I have, at any rate, tried to deal with it in debate.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYIs there no possibility of arranging in future to avoid burning the houses of 2034 soldiers who have served in the British Army?
§ Mr. MOSLEYHow does the right hon. Gentleman define "implication"? Is a Sinn Feiner in politics implicated, or does it mean people who take an active part in the campaign of murder?
§ Lord H. CAVENDISH-BENTINCKWhat is the object of continuing this policy of frightfulness?
§ Mr. MOSLEYWhy cannot you give a straight answer to anything?