HL Deb 17 March 1893 vol 10 cc341-53
LORD ASHBOURNE,

in moving for Copies of the Letters Patent or Commissions of the Viceroys of Ireland at the dates following: 1st January, 1780, 1st January, 1790, 1st January, 1802, 1st January, 1893; and to draw attention to the position of the Lord Lieutenant in reference to the military forces of the Crown in Ireland, said: My Lords, in moving for a copy of the Letters Patent to the Viceroys of Ireland at certain dates, I would like to state to your Lordships why I have selected those dates. I have done so because I think it would be interesting and important, both practically and historically, to know what were the powers conferred upon the face of the Letters Patent by the Crown on the Viceroy before the change which was made in the constitution of Ireland in 1782, to know what they were under the form of constitution established after 1782, to know what they were immediately after the Union in 1800, and to contrast them with what they are at the present time. I should like to have this information because I believe that it would be of importance at the present time, considering what, if any, were the changes proposed to be made that might affect the position of the Lord Lieutenant in reference to the Military Forces of the Crown in Ireland. This matter came before your Lordships in consequence of an answer made by the noble Lord the First Lord of the Admiralty in a Debate in this House on March 3, on the condition of County Clare. On that occasion he used words which struck me as being very interesting and very important, particularly as falling from a former Viceroy of his ability and experience, and who took so great, so active and energetic, a part in the Government of Ireland during each of the periods during which he filled that very important and responsible office. In that Debate on the condition of County Clare the noble Earl used these words— I am aware that the Military Authorities always object to breaking up regiments into small divisions, but it is, of course, necessary that the Government should do something when the peace of a district is threatened. I maintain, therefore, that the objections of the Military Authorities ought to have been at once overruled. I have frequently done this myself, and any Government ought to do so, if in their opinion the state of the country requires the military to support the police. I was not myself present on the occasion when the noble Earl, in the course of his speech, made that statement, but I read it with interest and attention, and in consequence of it I ventured to ask a question of the noble Earl on the 13th March, as to the power, authority, and jurisdiction he was exercising when he acted in the way he has described so very clearly, fairly, and fully, in the passage I have just read, and the noble Earl was good enough to give me a detailed reply. I am not in the slightest degree questioning the fairness and reasonableness of the reply the noble Earl made mo, but am only regarding the fact of what took place on that occasion. I quite understand that the word "over- ruled" was only used as an expression, not intending to convey that he actually asserted his powers of Viceroy, but that, in conversation or otherwise, he had indicated his views to the Military Authorities, and that those views had been accepted after a very strong expression of opinion from him; and that so the matter was. But I did not think that, having regard to the great practical importance of the present position of the Viceroy with reference to the Military Forces in Ireland, it was desirable to leave the matter so, and I intimated that, having regard to the great importance of the power of the Viceroy over the Military Forces of the Crown, it would be necessary for me to bring this matter before your Lordships at a later date. The noble Earl then stated, in a further observation that he made on the 13th March of extreme interest, that he had received an opinion. He said— An opinion had been given as to the powers of the Lord Lieutenant. That opinion stated that under his Patent he was entitled to give such orders to the Commander of the Forces in Ireland as he, as the highest civil authority, might deem to be necessary. In the exercise of his authority as the direct representative of the Queen, he had all the powers and prerogatives of the Crown in Ireland. That statement of the noble Earl and of the opinion given to the noble Earl, I am sure, was given as representing the result of very deliberate thought on the part of those who gave it—I assume it must have been the Law Officers of the Crown, either in England or Ireland. In the absence of the Patent itself, I, of course, accept that statement. I only reserve to myself the right of saying, after perusing the Patent, whether I would like to qualify any of the terms of that opinion; but I speak of it with no possible disrespect, and I, of course, accept it as the opinion of the responsible advisers of the Crown with reference to the position of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in relation to the Military Forces of the Crown. But the matter does not rest there, because the noble Earl, although he is one of the most trusted members of the Government, is not himself the member of the Government who is directly responsible for the Army, and I find that Mr. Campbell-Bannerman, in the other House of Parliament, last month, he being Secretary of State for War, when he was asked by Colonel Warning, one of the Members for the County Down, what would be the position of the troops in Ireland under the Home Rule Bill, gave this answer— The hon. and gallant Member asks what will be the position of the troops under the Home Rule Bill. Was it ever expected that it would be altered from that which they now occupy? Both the troops and the Militia will remain just as at present, under the supreme control of the Commander-in-Chief under the Queen. In other words, the noble Earl having stated the opinion he had obtained as to the power of the Lord Lieutenant in Ireland over the troops, Mr. Campbell-Bannerman stated that at present the troops were under the supreme control of the Commander-in-Chief under the Queen, and that they would still remain under that control. My Lords, I am only dealing at present with the power of the Lord Lieutenant, and I venture to submit that the answer of the Secretary of State for War does not, at all events at first sight, appear to convey the same meaning as the answer of the noble Lord as to the present power of the Lord Lieutenant in Ireland, and in order to prevent all possibility of misconception on this most important point, and to leave myself open to correction, if correction should be needed, I think it desirable to refer shortly, in order that I may get explanations, if possible, to what I conceive to be the powers of the Lord Lieutenant at the present time, having regard to the answer I have received from the noble Earl, and accepting as conclusive upon me for the purpose of my present observations the answer given by the noble Earl as to the powers of the Lord Lieutenant, at present, under his Patent in reference to the Military Forces of the Crown. I take it to be this: that it is competent for the Lord Lieutenant, as being clothed during his appointment with the powers and prerogatives of Her Majesty, and representing the Supreme Civil Authority in Ireland, to give such orders as he thinks right in reference to the troops in Ireland; or, in other words, that it is competent for the Lord Lieutenant now to direct the movements of troops from one part of Ireland to the other as he may think right and necessary in the exercise of his Constitutional discretion, and that he may for that pur- pose send either a large force or a small force, and that he can make the larger forces subdivide into smaller forces, and break up regiments, if need be, for the purpose of achieving his object. But the matter does not rest there, for the noble Earl was only dealing with the powers of the Lord Lieutenant under the Patent which clothed him with the powers and prerogatives of Her Majesty in reference to this mutter. It is not uncovered by statutable authority. In the Army Act of 1881 there is an express reference to the Lord Lieutenant us an important factor in reference to military organisation in Ireland. In Section 115 of that Act it is stated that the Lord Lieutenant may authorize the requisition of carriages by the Military in cases of emergency. But more than that, in that Act we find another Section, 122, which more in detail presents one of the statutable aspects in which the Lord Lieutenant may be regarded in reference to the Army— 'Qualified officer,' for the purposes of this Act, in so far as it relates to convening or confirming the findings and sentences of General Courts Martial, means the Commander-in-Chief, and any officer not below the rank of Held officer in command. It also includes the Lord Lien-tenant of Ireland, the Governor General of India, and a Governor of any Colony on whom the command of any body of Regular Forces may be conferred by Her Majesty. So that it would appear under the Code Military in the two sections which I have read, as well as under his Patent, the Lord Lieutenant has a distinct and active power of interference in the business of the Army at present; he is brought by Section 122 into distinct privity with the action of Courts Martial, and that is a circumstance of considerable importance in considering what is the power of the Lord Lieutenant at the present moment in reference to the Military Forces of the Crown. I want to be absolutely assured, and I hope I make my meaning plain, that there is really no intentional difference of opinion between the Military Authorities at the War Office as represented by the Secretary of State for War in the other House of Parliament, and the noble Earl as representing the authorities in this House, upon the question of the power of the Lord Lieutenant to control the troops of the Crown in Ire- land. The whole Code as to billeting our soldiers — regulating their transit en route, finding them houses where they are to live, and punishing the offences which may be committed by officers and soldiers called "billeting offences"— every bit of that in Ireland is vested at the present moment in the Civil power. It is an officer of the constabulary, who is the most active officer in those matters, and the summary jurisdiction wielded by the local Magistrates is on every occasion invoked to work out the punishment for those offences. The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland is at present, of course, the head of his own civil establishment. He represents, as the chief and supreme Civil Authority in Ireland, the various Departments and Boards which are found in that country. The prisons in Ireland have to be used by the military authorities for the punishment of all military offenders, penal and under sentence to imprisonment; and, more than that, the whole prerogative of mercy in reference to soldiers convicted and imprisoned in Ireland is at present vested in the Lord Lieutenant. Those are matters which are of considerable importance, and it is not desirable to minimise, even in a general statement, what is the position of the Lord Lieutenant, at the present time, in reference to matters connected with the military forces of Her Majesty. Again, the Magistrates, who are part of the judicial machinery working under the Lord Lieutenant, have the power of applying for troops in support of the Civil Authority—the power of calling for the aid of the military forces of the Crown. That is a matter which rests both upon long usage and habitual practice, and I dare say upon what has been upon many occasions the necessities of the case. There are some Statutes, extending as far back as the reign of Charles II., passed for the purpose of enabling that aid to be given on special occasions; but I find it is laid down in a book of authority that a Privy Council Order issued in 1817, in the reign of George III., is regarded as the foundation of the exercise of this practice of enabling the Civil Power to call upon the Military Authorities for assistance. We are aware, of course, independent both of Statutes and Orders of the Privy Council, that soldiers, by being arrayed in uniform and being armed, do not cease thereby to be citizens or to be required to perform their duties as citizens. If a Magistrate is present on an occasion when the military have been called on for assistance, and he would always be present, I believe it is also regarded as necessary that the officer should act under the orders of the Magistrate who has invoked his assistance, even when the grave responsibility has to be taken of giving the order to fire upon citizens who are breaking the peace. That is a matter of great importance; and I believe that an officer who would refuse to obey that order would incur grave and serious responsibility, and possibly the risk of being called upon to give explanations by the Military Authorities, whom he might not find it easy to satisfy. There is another point—I will only mention, I will not go fully into it, but it is historically interesting—and that is, the power of proclaiming martial law. It has not been often exercised in Ireland, and I hope will not be exercised again, for that is a matter which no one can contemplate without the deepest pain. In 1798, in 1802, and in 1833 martial law was proclaimed in Ireland by the Lord Lieutenant for the time, acting through orders of the Privy Council. On all these occasions Statutes, I believe, were subsequently passed supporting what had been done, and giving bills of indemnity; but it has been laid down in a book of authority that some of those Acts of Parliament are looked upon as giving statutory recognition of the fact that the Lord Lieutenant is the person who is entitled, if the exigency arises, of proclaiming martial law. Now, my Lords, it is quite obvious that these are powers of great and high importance, and if they are exercised at the present time, if these are a portion of the powers capable of being exercised at the present time by the Lord Lieutenant, and under his directions, it is obvious that he has very grave and considerable powers, and that the Lord Lieutenant and the civil power under him have large, have enormous powers, both connected with the Army and over the Army, and I assume that when the Secretary of State for War in the House of Commons said that The Army was at present under the supreme control of the Commander-in-Chief under the Queen, he had all these facts present to his mind, and that he was not in the slightest degree desirous of ignoring the actual position of the Lord Lieutenant. I, therefore, assume that in saying the Army is under the supreme control of the Commander-in-Chief, he must be held to have added by implication Subject to any order given by the Lord Lieutenant to help the civil power in Ireland. I venture to think, however, that there are few people reading the tranquil and composed statement of Mr. Campbell Bannerman in the other House when he was asked about the powers which might be exercised by the Lord Lieutenant in the future, that the troops would remain, as at present, under the supreme control of the Commander-in-Chief under the Queen, never mentioning the Lord Lieutenant, never referring to his powers under the Patent or under Statute, or one particle of the jurisdiction in Ireland—there are very few people who would have supposed that such powers as I have glanced at were behind that concise statement given by the Secretary of State for War. It is obvious that it was given in entire good faith, but it is plain by the statement made by the noble Earl here that it minimised, if it did not entirely ignore, the power of the Lord Lieutenant in reference to this important matter. I think it right to state, as I have stated as plainly as I can, and I hope moderately, the points which strike me, and I hope this statement will enable the noble Earl on the part of the Government to explain that there is no real divergence of statement or of intention or opinion between what was stated here by the noble Earl and what was stated elsewhere by the Secretary of State for War; and if I have erred as to any of the suggestions made as to the jurisdiction exercised by the Lord Lieutenant and those acting under him in reference to the military resources of the Crown, I shall be quite prepared to receive the explanation, and to receive it with every respect.

Moved, That there be laid before the House, Copies of the Letters Patent or Commissions of the Viceroys of Ireland at the dates following: 1st January, 1780, 1st January. 1790, 1st January 1802, 1st January 1893."—(The Lord Ashborne.)

LORD CLARINA

claimed the indulgence usually accorded to a Member of the House who addressed their Lordships for the first time. When he held military command in Ireland, as he had done under no fewer than five Viceroys, he had ordered out troops in aid of the Civil Authorities as frequently as any man in Her Majesty's Service, and he would briefly state what he believed to be his duty as a military man. Under the rule of Earl Cowper he once ordered a battalion of Guards to move to Limerick in the middle of the night to reinforce the garrison there. Application was made by the Civil Authority in view of expected disturbance; and, as it was necessary that the troops should be on the scene at an early hour, they were conveyed by special train, and started three hours after the application was received. He need hardly tell many of their Lordships that Limerick was not within the district under his command, but he did not hesitate a moment with regard to the course he considered it his duty to adopt. Again, in Sir George Trevelyan's time, when the Dublin police struck, owing to some real or imaginary grievance, his troops, at the request of the Civil Authority, undertook police duties for several days, until the dispute with the police was settled. Another instance of how his troops were employed in aid of civil power occurred, when the Royal Irish Constabulary, perhaps Physically the finest armed force in Europe, which the Government now, with a light heart, contemplated disbanding, had their hands very full indeed in dealing with moonlighting outrages committed by brutal ruffians who dragged unfortunate women out of their beds, and tore the flesh off' their backs with cords and combs; pulled poor harmless old men out of their beds because they had in some way disobeyed the unwritten law of the Land League, and shot them in the legs, and mutilated dumb beasts—the refinement of barbarism. Of course, the only way to stop those outrages was by the vigilance of the police patrolling at night. At that time there was not much security for either life or property, and threatening letters were a matter of every-day occurrence. The consequence was that the Civil Authorities found it impossible to supply the requisite number of men for special protection duty, and they had to come again to the soldiers for assistance. Some years had elapsed since that time, but he believed he was correct in stating that at least 200 men under his command alone were scattered through the country in twos and threes, affording protection to persons whose lives were threatened. One gallant young soldier was shot dead at the same time that the gentleman-whom he was protecting was brutally murdered. Those instances showed how completely under the control of the civil-power the Military Authorities were. He might say with truth that he and the 15,000 officers and men whom he had the honour to command had assisted the-Civil Authorities by every means in their power to restore law and order. At that time a disgraceful condition of lawlessness existed, and the country was reduced to a state of semi-barbarism. A great many of the outrages at that time might, in his opinion, have been attributed to the dislike which the Government had to interfere in any way with the right of public speaking, which was often greatly abused. The country was overrun by a parcel of political agitators—most of them men of straw and a good many returned Americans—penniless individuals who had glib tongues, and who found ready listeners amongst the tenant-farmers who had already obtained large remissions of rent through the passing of the Land Act, which had ruined a vast number of the landlords in Ireland, and bad left most of them more or less incumbered. It therefore struck him, with his knowledge of the state of the country, as being somewhat strange that the noble Earl, who had gained the respect of everybody by the manly way in which he had performed his difficult duties in Ireland, should have so completely turned his back upon his former self, as to recommend the handing over of the government of that country to the men he had endeavoured to describe.

THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Earl SPENCER)

My Lords, I need not follow my noble and gallant Friend in the interesting remarks he has made, but I will very shortly reply to my noble and learned Friend's question. Her Majesty's Government have no difficulty in giving him the Return which he desires. I ought, perhaps, to say a few words with regard to the allusions to what I said the other night in the explanation given by me in answer to the noble and learned Lord on and before the 13th of March. I have merely to repeat what I said then that, as far as my experience in Ireland went, I never had the slightest difficulty in carrying out the wishes of the Civil power. The Military Authorities had always done exactly what was desired, as my noble and gallant Friend said they always wished to do, and I never had any difficulty in coming to an arrangement with them. With regard to what fell in another place from the Secretary of State for War, I know for certain that we have no difference of opinion whatever on this subject. My right hon. Friend alluded to the management of the Army being vested in the Commander-in-Chief, under the authority of Her Majesty. That no doubt is perfectly true, but it is perfectly consistent with the opinion I read out the other night, which gave a very large and wide power to the Lord Lieutenant in the exercise of his authority over the troops. The noble and learned Lord alluded to various matters in which the Lord Lieutenant has to come in contact with the military authorities in Ireland, but as far as I know there is no difference in the law between Ireland and England in respect to many of the matters to which he referred. The same arrangements are made in Ireland as in England when the police are being assisted by the military. He referred to billeting, the same arrangements are made as in England when troops are being billeted in the country. With regard to the Magistrates, exactly the same law, I believe, prevails; and as to courts martial, I remember most distinctly having a great many cases before me in my daily work, as Lord Lieutenant, in which military offenders were imprisoned in Irish prisons. They were submitted to me, but I invariably referred them to the Home Authorities.

LORD ASHBOURNE

To the Military Authorities.

EARL SPENCER

Yes; the War Office, as these military sentences were always dealt with by the Military Authorities.

LORD ASHBOURNE

But may I venture to ask the noble Earl whether the matter was not submitted to him as Viceroy in the ordinary way, in the exercise of the prerogative, to say whether the law should take its course— that it required the Minute of the Viceroy?

EARL SPENCER

The Viceroy has complete power over the doors of the prisons, he alone can release a prisoner, and in that way the sentences of courts martial, no doubt, come before him; but the Lord Lieutenant invariably takes the advice of the Commander-in-Chief or the War Office before he acts. Since the other day, I have had the opportunity of looking at the Patents, and I will read to your Lordships that part of the Patent bearing on this question, which I received during my first Viceroyalty, because I think it is better to be quite clear and distinct on the matter, though I should be surprised if the noble and learned Lord has not himself consulted a Patent to make himself aware of its terms.

LORD ASHBOURNE

I am not now in reach of a Patent.

EARL SPENCER

It is not very difficult, I think, to get at a Patent; they are not all in the hands of public officials. I think the noble and learned Lord has some friends who have Patents; I do not suppose they burn them. This is the Patent I received in 1868, and there has, I believe, been no alteration since. I have looked back to some of the earlier patents, and no doubt there has been some difference in the terms used. One, in the year 1801, has some difference in the powers specified; but they have remained, I think, the same from the earliest date to which the noble and learned Lord has referred, though, of course, the words have been altered according to the altered change of circumstances. But I will read the words in this Patent, which I had the honour to receive when I was first appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland— We give likewise to the said John Poyntz, Earl Spencer, our Lieutenant General and our Governor General, power and authority to give such orders and directions to the Commander of our Forces for the time being in that part of our said United Kingdom called Ireland, as he, our Lieutenant General and our Governor General, may judge necessary for the support of the Civil Authority, the collection of our Revenue, the protection of our loving subjects, and the defence and security of that part of our United Kingdom called Ireland, and for the suppression of tumults and insurrections, and of all traitorous and rebellious practices within the same. That seems to me so clear that, having read the Patent, I am content to leave the matter in that position, and I will only repeat that Her Majesty's Government have no objection to giving the Return for which he asks.

Motion agreed to.