Mr. O'CONNORI beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, 45 namely, the statements and charges against the Irish Administration appearing over General Crozier's name in this morning's Press.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI cannot possibly accept that Motion. An allegation appears in this morning's Press, and the Minister in question has asked for time to look into the allegation. We should have Adjournments every day if allegations by persons which appeared in the morning's Press were to come under Standing Order No. 10. I wish the hon. Member had consulted me beforehand. I would then have pointed that out to him.
Mr. O'CONNORI would have done so, but I did not contemplate the possibility of having to do this, because I understood the answer of the Government would be to ask for time to make an investigation. May I call your attention to the fact that that is not the answer of the Government? The answer of the Government is a direct and emphatic denial of the truth of every one of these allegations. Therefore, I take it, that so far as the Government is concerned, they mean to refuse the request I made, which I think is demanded by the public opinion of the country, that a public and independent inquiry be made into charges which really are so terrible that the Government ought either to take the first opportunity of rebutting them or of investigating them under conditions which will be satisfactory to the public conscience. On that ground, therefore, Mr. Speaker, I must again make a strong appeal to you to allow me to have this Adjournment for the purpose of getting this information.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI must point out to the hon. Member that a request for a public inquiry into various allegations has been made quite half-a-dozen times during the current Session, and on certain occasions an Adjournment has been granted, where a primâ facie case has been laid before the House. Here we have only the statement of an officer recently in the employment of the Crown. I myself have not seen the statement, and do not know where it appeared. I think some much more specific and primâ facie case must be brought against the Government before a Motion for Adjournment under Standing Order No. 10 can be allowed.
Mr. O'CONNOROf course, I bow to your ruling at once, and I hope you will not imagine that I am endeavouring to argue a ruling with you, but may I interpret your ruling as meaning that when adequate evidence which appears to demand an inquiry and immediate action is published, as it will be in a few days, I shall be in a position to renew my request for the Adjournment so as to secure immediate discussion?
§ Mr. SPEAKERCertainly, if the hon. Member can show a primâ facie case and negligence on the part of the Government to meet that case.
Mr. O'CONNORMay I say that the primâ facie case which I thought was established was that a gentleman recently holding the position of a general officer had published what is described in the newspaper as a dossier with affidavits which professed to confirm all his charges of murder, arson and looting against the Government and their connivance in hiding these crimes.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat would appear to be in the period in which he was a servant of the Crown. That point must be cleared up first.
§ Lord R. CECILI have not seen the allegation, but may I submit that it is of the utmost possible importance that charges of this very great gravity, if there is anything in them, should be investigated somehow or another, either by the High Court of Parliament or in some other way, without unnecessary delay.
§ Lieut.-Colonel ARCHER-SHEEMay I ask your opinion, Mr. Speaker, upon this matter? Is it not a fact that this officer resigned months ago, and if this matter was so definite and urgent, should not these charges have been made then instead of now?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe House will understand that that is exactly where my trouble exists. We cannot spend our Parliamentary time in discussing what is in the morning's newspapers.