THE SITUATION IN IRELAND.

HL Deb 12 March 1918 vol 29 cc367-414

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY rose to move to resolve— That as the present situation in Ireland has become a danger to the Empire and a menace to the successful prosecution of the war and to the security of life and property, it is incumbent on His Majesty's Government to enforce the law in that country. The noble Marquess said: My Lords, in rising to call your Lordships' attention to the condition of Ireland, I do not think I shall be considered to be going beyond my duty in reminding you of the heavy cloud which rests at this moment over Irish political life in the death of Mr. Redmond. I have never belonged to the number of Mr. Redmond's political friends, but should like to be allowed to do justice not only to his courtesy and eloquence but to the public spirit and the real patriotism which I believe characterised him. Our duty, however, is not with the dead but with the living, and we have to consider the condition of Ireland as it presents itself to-day.

Several of my friends have impressed upon me that the moment which I have selected to bring this matter to the notice of your Lordships is inopportune. They say that it is at once too soon and too late—too soon because the Irish Convention is still, I believe, in being; and too late because the Government have already awakened to the condition of lawlessness in Ireland and are at last beginning to enforce the law. I do not think that any stimulus which your Lordships' House may give to the Government in the matter of the enforcement of the law in Ireland will be out of place. Looking at the past record of the Government in Ireland, I am sure they require a little of that stimulus. The second criticism is really an answer to the first. One of the reasons why I may with propriety bring this subject under your Lordships' notice notwithstanding the fact that the Convention is still sitting is that the whole idea of keeping law and order out of sight during the sittings of the Convention has now by the force of circumstances been abandoned by the Government. I can do no harm, therefore, to the Convention by pointing out what is the condition of law and order in Ireland.

I have had a great mass of material, as your Lordships may well believe, sent to me in connection with this debate; and in order to enter upon the subject I will read one short extract from a private letter which has reached me from an eminent lawyer in Dublin which sums up the situation as an Irishman sees it— All law is set at defiance, and if anything was required to prove the danger of establishing any form of self-government in Ireland it is to be found in the treason which has been and is prevalent in Ireland in connection with the war and in the anarchy which has now reached a point which is intolerable in any civilised country. He finishes with this sentence— It is much worse than the public is permitted to know. I do not intend to detain your Lordships very long; but I hope before I sit down to make good to some extent that deficiency, and to let your Lordships know, and the public know if my words go further than this House, what is the real state of things in Ireland.

This is not, I am sorry to say, the first time that this subject has been debated in your Lordships' House, nor the first time that I have ventured to take part in a debate upon it here. As recently as November 15 last there was a debate in this House, and we then had the advantage of two speeches from the Treasury Bench—one from my noble friend who now sits gore as Leader of the House, and one from the noble Lord the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. The noble Earl said, speaking of Mr. de Valera's speeches— They are not dangerous to public order, and the extreme Sinn Fein Party is in a minority that becomes smaller instead of larger from day to day. He added— There is no general prevalence of crime in Ireland. There is no policy of violence in the proceedings of the Sinn Fein party. I wonder whether my noble friend reflects with satisfaction upon those assurances which he gave your Lordships in November of last year.

EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON

Yes, I absolutely adhere to them—at that date.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

No one has disputed my noble friend's courage. He adheres to them. I turn to the speech of the Lord Lieutenant. He said quite frankly, "Ireland is orderly." I remember speaking of a particular occasion when there was danger, or said to be danger, of a rising again in Ireland. The Lord Lieutenant said, "Not a dog barked." "We cannot and will not tolerate drilling," added the noble Lord. I shall try to show to your Lordships that, whatever was true then, none of those things said either by my noble friend opposite or by the Lord Lieutenant are true to-day. I dare say my noble friend will say that things have changed for the worse. If so, the responsibility lies upon him and his colleagues for allowing them to go worse.

But let us see what the state of things really is. There is now crime of every kind—and crime which is gradually getting worse, or was until within the last fortnight, worse in extent, worse in type: disorder of all sorts, and drilling; raiding for arms, cattle driving, illegal entry upon other people's land to plough it, seizure of property in broad daylight in the streets of Dublin; firing into dwellings, throwing bombs into dwellings, murder. Those are the crimes against private rights and private property. And then there are the crimes against the country; insults to the National Anthem; the victimisation of soldiers, because they are soldiers of the King; the preparation of maps and drawings against a new rising, for the purpose, of destroying bridges; defiance of magistrates in Open Court, and demonstrations in favour of an Irish Republic.

Your Lordships may say, It is all very well for you to say these things, but what evidence have you of them? Let me read one short extract to show the sort of things which an ordinary observer in Ireland has been seeing lately. This is a. letter from an Englishman who is now resident in Ireland for the time being, and it will show the general attitude of mind— Some three weeks ago I was going down to a certain place for the week-end. The train was full of Sinn Feiners coming from South Armagh and returning to Clare—all fine young men, many in volunteer uniform, awl many with rebel flags. They fired revolvers out of the windows as we left Dublin and waved their flags, and at every station they shouted 'Up the rebels.' Uniforms, flags, and revolvers are all forbidden, but the police did not interfere. That is the sort of thing which is to be seen. I do not know how far I ought to trouble your Lordships with instances of the kind of crime. There is an immense sameness about them. There are quantities of them in all parts of Ireland—no, not in all parts; I should not have said that—but in a great many parts of Ireland. I will read one or two instances. Here is an example— George Sheehan, aged seventy, living near Nenagh, on refusing to give up his soldier son's rifle, was held by one of an armed raiding party, while another fired three shots at him, inflicting fatal injuries. That, I think, was in the county of Tipperary. Again— A score of armed men with blackened faces raided the house of Mr. O'Connell Ffrench at Rockwood, near Galway. Mr. Ffrench was covered with a revolver while the house was searched for arms. A similar raid was made the same night on Rocklawn House, the residence of Mr. E. S. French, who was told by the raiders that they wanted arms for the next rising. I could multiply these cases to any extent—raids for arms and invasion of private rights in all directions.

So bitter is the feeling against England that it is extended to England's Allies. I want to call special attention to this, because I think that a good deal of the policy of His Majesty's Government, or want of policy, is really to be attributed to a regard—for which I wish to give every kind of consideration—for public opinion in America. This is how the Sinn Feiners treat America— About fifteen men of the United States Fleet were returning to their ship when a gang of youths bearing Sinn Fein flags, began to hoot and jeer them, giving cheers for the Germans, the Turks, and the Bulgars. No notice was taken by the sailors until showers of stones were hurled at them. Then, a number having been struck, they about-turned and charged their assailants, who outnumbered them by at least four to one. So that positively the hospitality of His Majesty's Dominions is violated by these gentlemen in order to insult and throw stones at our American Allies. In the same way in Galway the Stars and Stripes flag was seized and torn to shreds as a demonstration by these men against America.

These are very serious matters—serious matters condemned, I am certain, by all right-feeling men, not only in England but in Ireland as well, and condemned notably by Prelates of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Galway, the Bishop of Kildare, and the Bishop of Elphin. All of them have quite recently stated that these crimes are not only crimes against the law of man but crimes against the law of God. And most of all has the state of Ireland been revealed and condemned by impartial authorities which I can with confidence quote to your Lordships or to any audience—namely, by the judicial authorities themselves in Ireland. Before I state them, I should like to give to the House some idea of the extent of these disorders. Some may think that there is a plague-spot—namely, Clare—and that as martial law has been proclaimed in Clare, that is all that need be done. Oh, no; the Government have neglected things so long that matters have spread far beyond Clare.

I will give a list of the counties in Ireland in which crimes of more or less severity in connection with this agitation have taken place. They are Clare, Limerick, Tipperary, Cork, Kerry, Galway, Mayo, Sligo, Ross-common, Leitrim, County of Dublin, Kildare, Wexford, Westmeath, Tyrone, Donegal. It is very widespread. I admit that in many of these counties there is as yet but a slight outbreak of this disorder. The worst counties, according to my information, are Limerick, Tipperary, Kerry, Galway, and Clare. But the thing is general; and unless the Government show the stiffest of backs it will become even more general. They have allowed things to go so far that it may be difficult to restore order without a great deal of trouble.

Let us see what the Judges have to say about it. The Lord Chief Justice, at Wicklow Assizes, spoke of the lawlessness at present existing in many parts of Ireland; and the Grand Jury said— We, the Grand Jury of Wicklow, feel it, to be our imperative duty to call public attention to, the condition of lawlessness and anarchy at present prevailing in many parts of Ireland. That is pretty severe; and this is the country which the Lord Lieutenant said three months ago was orderly.

I turn now from Wicklow to Tipperary. Your Lordships will remember that the Lord Lieutenant said, "We will not tolerate drilling." That was not, as my noble friend suggested just now, a reference merely to the moment when he was speaking; it was an announcement of the policy of the Irish Government. This is what Mr. Matheson, the Assize Commissioner, says of Tipperary— These young men stay at home imitating His Majesty's Army, drilling openly in large numbers— I wish the Lord Lieutenant were hare— and at any hour they think fit. A bugle call is sounded in various places, and a few minutes afterwards a body of fifty, one hundred, or more men gather together. Their principal employment at present is searching for arms and taking them either by force or by terror. They also organise and carry on cattle drives, and have become so audacious that they actually advertise these raids, trusting to the fact probably that there will not be enough police in the district to prevent them. … I am informed that the thing has become so widespread, and is done so openly, that everybody is practically afraid of them. This is not a politician or an agitator speaking; this is a Judge speaking from the Bench in the execution of his office, and warning the public and the country what is the real state of things. The learned Judge went on to say— They terrorise their own parents. They terrorise shopkeepers, and they try to intimidate and in many cases successfully, the police—where there is only a handful of police against a. large body. Lastly we come to the county of Clare. This is what the Judge said at the recent Spring Assizes— He had to point out that the state of Clare was as serious as ever it had been in the history of that old county. When one thinks of the history of Ireland, and of the days, which many of us remember, of the Land League, and of the No Rent Manifesto, and of the fact that here we have a Judge saying that he never remembers it being so bad in Clare, it can be seen what the present state of affairs is in that county. The learned Judge proceeded to say— He who ran might read. The authorities had thought it right to put Clare under military government, and that in all civilised countries was the last resort. Last year the specially reported cases in the county amounted to fourteen, and that year they amounted to sixty-five. These had mostly occurred in the last month or six weeks. They included offences of all kinds—cattle driving, raids for arms, ploughing up poor people's land, firing into houses, and intimidation of all kinds. Even these statistics, serious as they are, do not really represent what is going on around you. At the present time there is a wide-spread lawlessness and intimidation in county Clare, and open disregard for all law, contempt for all authority, fear on the part of quiet, well-conditioned people, and a cynical activity on the part of wrongdoers. Now, gentlemen, that is a challenge not merely to the laws under which we live, to the condition of government under which we live, but a challenge to all government; and whether it is this Government which still exists, or whether a Government of another sort comes into existence in the near future, what is going on in this country is equally a challenge as it is to the present rulers of this country. Your Lordships will note the significance of that speech. The learned Judge says, and with truth, that it is not a question of disorder and of disaffection against the present Government; it is the complete disintegration of society which is inimical to all government—and that is what His Majesty's Government have brought upon Ireland. The Grand Jury were a little more outspoken even than the Judge. They said— We feel compelled to record our indignation et the state of lawlessness, intimidation, and outrage which has been allowed to grow up in this county in practically the short period which has elapsed since the Summer Assizes. We recall with pride the widespread order which prevailed in the earlier stages of the present war. We believe that this feeling still exists among our community generally, and that the disgraceful state of our county at present is entirely due to the notorious neglect of the most elementary obligations of government by the present Irish Administration. That is what the Grand Jury of the county of Clare felt it incumbent upon them to assert in the exercise of their duty.

I have tried not to detain your Lordships over that part of my subject, and I think I have said enough to convince every impartial man that when my friend who wrote to me said that the state of things was much worse than the public were permitted to know, he was speaking well within the mark. I will say that there is no Englishman outside official circles who, until the facts were forced before him during this last fortnight, had any notion of the state of complete anarchy which exists in so many parts of Ireland. What is the reason for it? The Grand jury of Clare say that the reason is the misgovernment of time present Irish Administration. It is due to one circumstance, and to one circumstance only. It is due to administrative feebleness. You cannot have a better example than the history of hunger-striking in Ireland. Your Lordships will remember that one unfortunate man who was imprisoned in connection with the Rebellion hunger-struck; and, although he was released, his death was attributed to what he had undergone. Thenceforward His Majesty's Government in Ireland seemed to have entirely lost their nerve in this respect, and they allowed man after man not only to hunger strike, but to hunger-strike successfully. The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, speaking here on November 15 of the death of the poor man Ashe, to whom I have referred, said "Hunger striking is attended with risks to the strongest constitution." That may be so in some parts of the world, but not in Ireland. No risk at all attaches to it now, or until recently, and notwithstanding these brave words of the Lord Lieutenant, it was after this statement in your Lordships' House that he and the Chief Secretary allowed men on hunger-strike to be released. Could anything be more hopelessly inept than such conduct?

Finally, Mr. Duke gathered a little courage, and wrote to the Lord Mayor of Cork a letter in which he announced that all this sort of thing had got to come to an end on February 23—"that the Government have determined that in the circumstances now existing physical disability due to wilful and systematic refusal of food ought not to be regarded as a ground for such discharge." He was speaking with reference to three men then in prison in Cork Gaol named Hickey, Cronan, and Macarthy.

Will it be believed that after that brave letter—within two or three days—the men were released because of hunger-strike? Can your Lordships be surprised at the state of Ireland when it is under such, administration as I have described? I need not say that I do not blame my noble friend the Leader of the House directly. I do not venture to do such a thing. I know that he is not immediately responsible for the Government of Ireland, except as a member of the Cabinet; but I think he must have a feeling—may I call it of mortification?—that he should be put into such a position of having told you three months ago that the extreme Sinn Fein Party was in a minority and becoming smaller instead of larger every day and that there was no violence in the policy of the Sinn Fein Party, and then to be presented with the picture which I have ventured to draw for your Lordships. Then my noble friend said that in what is going on in Ireland your Lordships will find that recourse is always had, where it can be had, to police remedies, to the arrest of the leaders, their prosecution, their trial, and their imprisonment. That is what he stated was going on in Ireland. I ask him now, across the floor of your Lordships' House, What leader has he brought to justice? What leader has he tried? What leader has he imprisoned?

My Lords, it is notorious that the Government have been afraid to touch any of the leaders; and so the announcement of policy of the Lord Lieutenant that they would not tolerate drilling, and the announcement of policy of the Leader of the House that they would try and imprison the leaders, have ended in a state of things which has been so graphically described by the Judges in their charges and by the Grand Jury of the County of Clare, who attribute the whole thing to the maladministration and weakness of the Irish Government. My Lords, I hope that the Government have wakened to a better mind. Why is it that they made this mistake? It was in order to produce what they thought was a suitable atmosphere for the deliberations of the Convention. That was the reason. It was announced by the Lord Lieutenant. The attitude of the Executive was determined by the existence of the Convention, and they really thought that it was a better atmossphere in which the Convention should sit—the kind of atmosphere I have described—than a condition of order and good government. I believe there could have been no greater enemy of the Convention than the statesman who advised such a policy. It does not matter what Government you have in Ireland, whether the present Government, or a Home Rule Government—or indeed separation. Order must be maintained, and anybody who advises the contrary is really an enemy of all forms of government. The Government have turned over a new leaf. They have proclaimed what is practically martial law in the County of Clare, and no doubt in the course of this evening the Government will tell us what their intentions are. I hope they will be able to satisfy your Lordships. Certainly I shall not be hard myself to satisfy, and if they should be able to tell us that all is being done which can reasonably be expected to restore order in Ireland, I should not ask your Lordships to divide against them.

My Lords, I want the Government to realise that the condition of things which they have allowed to grow up in Ireland is not only a disgrace and very serious from the point of view of the inhabitants of Ireland, but is really inconsistent with a proper appreciation of what is due in carrying on the great war in which we are engaged. It is not merely the large number of troops which have to be retained in Ireland, but it is the reputation which our country and our Government ought to have among the Allies and in the eyes of the world. What a picture it is that the protagonists in this great war cannot even keep decent order in Ireland. What a source of weakness it is that they should allow what was originally undoubtedly a minority, and a small minority probably, in Ireland, to so dominate the country, or these large parts of the country, that seditious cries in favour of our enemies and against our own country are allowed to go unchecked, and that, it may be, even worse attempts are being permitted to seduce our people from their allegiance. The thing is altogether inconsistent with the due administration of the country during the war. The Irish character many of us know and admire, but it is very impressionable, and very impressionable to success; and when Irishmen see the success of these extreme gentlemen, is it surprising that they are willing to receive all the seduction of German intrigue in that country, and that so before our very eyes we should watch not only disorder but the gradual winning of our fellow-countrymen in Ireland from their allegiance?

I wish I could impress upon the Government the gross impoliey of favouring—I will not say favouring, because they do not favour, but of permitting disorder. Sometimes one has been tempted to think that all these prophecies of evil which are made from time to time in Parliament are exaggerated, and that you can allow feebleness of administration to go on and nothing very much happens. But no one who has seen what has happened in Russia can think this any longer. I do not mean to say that the fate of Russia is possible in Ireland, but the same causes, the same Bolshevism, which have destroyed Russia will in a measure destroy Ireland. You have no right to defy the lessons of history and experience, and to allow such things to take place. I do not know what the Government think of this dreadful fiasco, or what bearing it has upon their plans—if they have any plans—for the future government of Ireland; but I know this, that the future government of Ireland, whatever it is, must be founded upon the supremacy of the law, must be founded upon the supremacy of Imperial security, must be founded upon the supremacy of the good faith of this country towards the law-abiding subjects of His Majesty in Ireland. On no other foundation would any future Government of Ireland, whatever its description, be safe. I urge the Government to exercise that strength which is entrusted to them—that strength to see that law and order are maintained. It has been said that force is no remedy, and, no doubt, force is no remedy against injustice and against maladministration; but force is a remedy against disorder. Indeed, the essential foundation of all government is strength. I beg to move.

Moved to resolve, That as the present situation in Ireland has become a danger to the Empire and a menace to the successful prosecution of the war and to the security of life and property, it is incumbent on His Majesty's Government to enforce the law in that country.—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)

THE EARL OF MEATH

My Lords, as an Irishman who loves his country deeply it is a matter of humiliation and of sadness me to have listened to the important speech which has been made by my noble friend—of sadness, because I must agree with almost every word he has spoken with regard to the condition of Ireland. The Irish question has been with us for many, many years, and there is no one who feels more humiliated than I do to think that with all the efforts and all the desire that have been lavished on Ireland for at all events the last fifty years the country should still be in such a condition of disorder as it is at this moment. I should like to make one little excuse for the county to which I belong, and which was mentioned by my noble friend the county of Wicklow. If I understand aright, the Grand Jury were not speaking so much of the county of Wicklow—

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

Hear, hear.

THE EARL OF MEATH

As of the condition of Ireland, and I am thankful to say that the county of Wicklow, during all the agitations which have existed, has been the county in which the most fair judgments were recognised as being given in trials for sedition or for crimes of outrage. So much so that it has been the custom for many years for the authorities to send cases for trial at Wicklow, when they were not certain that either in the north or the south justice would be done. But, my Lords, is it not a terribly sad thing to think that we have practically made no progress during the last fifty years in acquiring the love and affection of the Irish people? I myself am old enough to remember two risings when armed men marched down. During my father's lifetime a thousand men marched down in one of the risings, and we have had fighting all round my own place even in peaceable Wicklow.

When I have travelled all over the Empire, as I have, it has always been a sorrow to me to recognise that there were elements of disloyalty to the Empire in Canada, in America, in Australia. I have met my own countrymen out there who have been bitter against the old land. We have had long conversations, and I have had to recognise and acknowledge that there was a good deal of justice sometimes in what they said. That has not made me feel the less sad. Is there no hope for Ireland? Can nothing be done? I am perfectly at one with my noble friend in urging the Government, as I always have done, to insist upon the law being kept, but I am sorry to say that my experience has been like that of many others. I have always received the most friendly reception whenever I have seen an Irish Secretary or Lord Lieutenant, but it has always ended in the same thing—the law has not been enforced.

To my mind it is most extraordinary that we have not had long before this far greater risings, far greater discontent, in Ireland than we have had. Why? Because there has always been weakness, as long as I can remember. I remember as long ago as the days of Mr. Forster, when a squire in the south of Ireland came up to him at the commencement of the Land League and said, "Mr. Forster, if you will give me permission, I will prevent this agitation from increasing. It has begun in my own neighbourhood." Mr. Forster said, "What would you do?" The squire replied, "I would do what my grandfather did." On being asked what his grandfather did, he said, "What my grandfather did in former days was to organise a body of police out of his own tenantry, and to issue a proclamation that no man was to be out of his house after eight o'clock in the evening or he would be interned in the cellars of his country house. It put down the whole thing." Mr. Forster said, "You will be in the cellars of the gaol in Dublin if you do anything of the sort." The squire replied, "Very well, Mr. Forster, the Land League will have to go on." It did go on. That was an extreme case.

But this is not an extreme case that my noble friend is speaking about. We are in the middle of the most gigantic terror and peril the Empire has ever been. The word "terror" I will withdraw, but we are in the midst of the most gigantic peril the Empire has ever been in. We are at war with the Central Powers of Europe, and it is imperative that we should not have, close to our own centre of Government, a population which is in active hostility against all our Allies and ourselves. The sad part of the present position, so far as I can see it, is that whereas formerly there was never any idea of complete separation, there is now. Up to the present it has been a constitutional agitation from O'Connell upwards. Now it is quite different. The agitation is for absolute independence. You may ask how this has occurred?; why have the Irish suddenly developed this notion of independence, guaranteed by European Powers, which is what they want?

I hold in my hand a pamphlet which has been distributed throughout the whole of Ireland. I got it only on loan for an hour to read. The pamphlet is a collection of papers, written at different periods between 1911 and 1915, and from internal evidence it is absolutely certain that the papers have been written by a German in connection, no doubt, with Irish rebels. In order to make one believe that it conies from America it is marked "5 cents," but it really is written by a German and probably printed in some back slum in Dublin. It is Germany who has put into the heads of the Irish that their policy was not to try and get constitutional reform in the shape of Home Rule, but to go to The Tribunal at The Hague and get a European guarantee. In these pamphlets Germany writes to the Irish and says, in effect—If you will assist us Germany will assist you; we want to get hold of Bearhaven, and if we get hold Bearhaven we will give you every assistance and we will assist you to go before the Tribunal at The Hague and get Separation acknowledged by Europe. That is to my mind the dangerous part of the present agitation. It appears to me to be an impossibility; there is no settlement of the difficulty at all. Unless the British Empire is prepared to give up its position altogether and grant these things, we cannot permit Ireland to become a separate Republic or even a kingdom. There is no doubt whatever that if they were separated the first thing they would do, if Germany was not already there, would be to invite her, or anybody else who was hostile to England. You know well that when we were fighting the Madhi it was the Madhi who was the great man. His pictures were everywhere. Therefore I say they are asking for an impossibility. That is the serious part of this trouble. We cannot grant it, and it puts on one side, to my mind, all idea of Home Rule as conceived by Mr. Gladstone and others since those days.

I will not argue the question as to whether or not the majority are Sinn Feiners, but you must acknowledge that it is a moot question as to which is in the majority. There are quite sufficient Sinn Feiners at all events to claim that they have half the votes. How possibly can you have any Home Rule which has against it half the votes of Ireland? Therefore we are in a terrible dilemma, as it appears to me. I think it is of great importance that we should realise what the Sinn Feiners are endeavouring to do, and what their programme is. This a matter which is closely connected with the preservation of order, because we must know what their ideas and their feelings are. As far as my information goes, there are three things which they desire. One is the complete independence of Ireland, under a European guarantee. Mr. de Valera has stated that he himself favours a Republic, but that if, on the other hand, Ireland desired a Monarchy, he would not object. He has also definitely stated that if Ulster does not fall in with his views she will have to be coerced by the rest of Ireland. That is the second point. The third point is that if some arrangement is come to over their heads, by which Home Rule or any other arrangement is made, they will refuse British taxation. He says, "You have refused the rents of the landlords and you will find it just as easy to refuse to pay taxes." It is a most serious position if you are going to have half Ireland definitely refusing to pay taxes if the British Empire has the least financial hold over Ireland. That, we may say, is the programme of the Sinn Feiners as represented by Mr. de Valera.

It may be of interest to your Lordships for me to give you the dates, and a few short quotations, to show that this programme was drawn out, not yesterday, but as long ago as 1911. In these pamphlets which I hold, the German writer in 1911 said— Ireland can only be restored to the current of European life, from which she has so long been purposely withheld, by the act of Europe. I wish the Government to realise that. As long ago as 1911 the Germans were teaching the Irish that it was only through the act of Europe that they really could get independence. "Ireland," says the writer, "is necessary to Europe, is essential to Europe." In 1912, still before the war, the writer said— The German gateway is a free Atlantic. It can only be kept open by a free Ireland. The key to the freedom of European navigation lies at Bearhaven and not at Dover. From other information that I have, I know that is what the Germans are aiming at. It is to get hold of Bearhaven, and no doubt they would like to get other ports also. They say that if they could get hold of Bearhaven—and the noble and gallant Lord behind me (Lord Beresford) will be able to correct me if I am wrong—they would be able to close the Channel and prevent all shipping from coming in except, round by Scotland. In 1912, again, this German writer said— One of the conditions of peace— peace, if you please, he writes as if they were at war with England; and he intended it to be so— and for this reason the most important condition of peace that victorious Germany must impose upon her defeated antagonist— Victorious Germany! And there was no idea of war at that time!— is is that Ireland shall be separated and promoted into an independent European State under international guarantee. In 1913, in a different pamphlet, he said— The task of freeing Ireland, and of restoring that exiled laud to the current of European life again is One worthy of the greatness and strength of the German Kaiser and his people— Could anything be more plain than that?— The day the first German comrade— that is to catch the Republican— lands in Ireland, the day the first German warship— We were at peace, remember!— is seen proudly breasting the waves of the Irish Sea with the flag of Ireland at the fore, that day many Irishmen must die, but they shall die in the sure peace of God that Ireland may live. The same year, 1913, he said— The Irishman's place is to prepare for the coming of the German. The German writer recognises that perhaps they might find the Irish question a difficult one, and he goes on to say— The Irishman's place is to see that, when a victorious Germany severs Ireland from her hereditary exploiter, the difficulties of settlement shall be resolutely faced by a people determined to justify the freedom conferred on them. The Germans are afraid apparently that Ireland might turn even upon them. I am not going to weary your Lordships with further quotations. I think that I have quoted quite sufficient to show where the idea came from, and that it has taken root.

What is the present political situation of Ireland? That, after all, is what we are at this moment discussing. We are debating the question of maintaining the law properly. Here I am in a great difficulty because we do not know—at all events I do not know—what has happened to the Convention. Has the Convention failed or has it not? I hear rumours to the effect that the Convention has failed.

That may not be so; I should like to know. I do not suppose that I shall he told, but a great deal depends upon it, because, as my noble friend stated and as everybody knows quite well, the real reason why His Majesty's Government have allowed this disorder to gain the strength which it at present has is because they were so anxious to find a proper atmosphere for this Convention to work out its problems. I have the greatest possible sympathy with His Majesty's Government. I think that they were placed in a most difficult position, but the difficulty was because they were so anxious about the Convention. I hope that the Convention has either succeeded or is going to die, for it is the Convention which prevents order being kept in Ireland. Heaven knows, nobody in this House would desire more than I do that the Convention should succeed. Personally I avoided as much as possible going near to it, or having anything to say to it, because I felt perfectly certain that it would fail. But if it succeeds I shall thank God for it, and for anything that would bring peace to my unhappy country and unite it to the Empire.

Let us realise what is the actual position of Ireland at present. May I assume that the Convention has practically failed? Ulster then refuses to be coerced into joining the rest of Ireland. I for one cannot blame Ulster when we see what is happening in the rest of Ireland, and when we know what is the state of Ireland at this moment. On the other hand, we have Sinn Fein refusing any settlement short of absolute independence. After the quotations which I have given to your Lordships that will not be denied, unless Mr. de Valera has changed his programme within a very few days. Sinn Fein, therefore, if it obtains the power will endeavour to coerce Ulster. Any scheme of Home Rule passed by Parliament cannot, therefore, in my view, possibly bring peace to Ireland. Under any circumstances it must bring a sword, for if Sinn Fein obtains the power and endeavours to coerce Ulster a new Irish difficulty will arise. The only difference will be that Sinn Fein will have taken the place of Britain, and the Protestant and Unionist population will have become the rebels to the Irish Parliament. There will be continual intrigue, rebellion and disorder.

If Sinn Fein does not get independence what will be the result? It will constitute a continual danger to any Home Rule or British Government which may be formed. It does not matter which it is, if Sinn Fein does not obtain independence it will constitute a danger, and a permanent danger, to Great Britain and the British Empire. How are you to get out of that difficulty? German political penetration will keep alive racial hatred, and efforts will be made by Germany to obtain control of Bearhaven Harbour, and perhaps other places as naval bases for the control of the Channel and the Atlantic. The British Empire in my opinion could never, except under complete naval and military defeat, run these and other vital risks, and therefore the demands of Sinn Fein are inadmissible.

Let us look matters quite calmly in the face and not be afraid of speaking out. There are not many I believe—I say this although I have always been a Unionist—who consider that under present circumstances it is possible to continue to govern Ireland permanently under the Act of Union of 1801. If it had been possible, as the father of my noble friend once said, to govern Ireland for thirty years firmly it might have been practicable to continue under the Act of Union, but our democratic Governments, our complete and constant changes—and we are going to have in the future far more democratic governments than we have had in the past—made it impossible to do so, and therefore there can be no idea of going on with the old programme of Union with England in the old sense. If Ireland can no longer be governed as in the past, since 1801, if Home Rule cannot be obtained for the whole of Ireland, or if the terms of the Sinn Feiners cannot be realised—all of which things I think I have given you good reasons to believe cannot be—is there then no hope for the political future of my unhappy country? I think there is yet hope, but it is not upon the lines of the past.

With all humility I believe that, there is only one hope and only one solution, and that is Federal Home Rule. The only solution to my mind which would benefit Nationalist. Ireland and Ulster, and also place the British Isles on a proper, logical, and equal political plane with the rest of the Empire is a system of Federal Home. Rule for Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and England, like that existing in more or less similar forms in Canada, South Africa, and Australia. It would not be necessary to legislate at present for more than Ireland. Later on the needs of Scotland, Wales, and England could be considered. I need not enter into those. But at present local Home Rule Parliaments, subject to the Imperial British Parliament, should, in my opinion be established in the four Provinces of Ireland—Leinster, Munster, Connaught, and Ulster, the seats of local government being respectively in the cities of Dublin, Cork, Galway, and Belfast. Now, all those cities and provinces represent separate agricultural and economic interests, and have historic pasts since the days when there were provincial Kings. The most interesting period of Irish history, and the time of its greatest glories in art and literature and religion are intimately connected with provincial government. By getting these four provinces and giving them separate local Parliaments under the British Parliament, as at present established, you would get different interests represented. The interest, for instance, of Connaught is not the same as that of Leinster, the interest of Leinster is not the same as that of Munster, the interest of Munster is not the same as that of Ulster. You would get Ireland divided up, but always at the same time, it would be con-seated with the British Isles through the representation in Parliament, as it is now. And also, looked at from an Imperial point of view, we should get what we never got before—the whole political situation running on a logical, equal political plane. Now that is the future. For the present, if I were asked what I should do, I should say to His Majesty's Government, Preserve order. That is the first and one thing, during the time of war at all events. And, later on, let us see if something could not be done to establish some kind of Federal Home Rule.

LORD SYDENHAM

My Lords, excluding certain outbreaks in the East, there have only been two serious rebellions in the Empire since the beginning of the war—in South Africa in 1914, and in Ireland in 1916. Those two rebellions have many points in common, and both were largely due to German agency. But, as regards the after-results, they offer a very striking contrast. The strong action of General Botha crushed the conspiracy in the Transvaal and the Orange Free State, and ever since then order and law have prevailed in South Africa. On the other hand, the Inquiry which was held into the Irish rebellion showed that it was the result of great neglect and great apathy on the part of the Government. That Report was one of the most painful and humiliating documents, I believe, ever laid before Parliament. Ireland, from being a peaceful and a very prosperous country, was allowed to lapse into dangerous disorder, which culminated, as we all know, in the rising at Dublin. There could not be the slightest doubt as to the cause, or as to the responsibility for that rebellion. The lesson was one which everybody could learn, but, as we see, that lesson has been ignored. Mr. Duke succeeded Mr. Birrell, an Amurath to an Amurath, but everything went on just as before until very recently, when martial law has been proclaimed in the county of Clare.

The Motion of the noble Marquess declares that the present situation in Ireland has become a danger to the Empire, and there cannot be the slightest doubt that that statement is absolutely correct. It is on that point that I want to say a few words. Ever since the outbreak of war there has been a large section of the Irish people which has done all in its power to hamper our action, and to assist the actions of the enemy. Troops, as the noble Marquess said, have been locked up in Ireland when they were much wanted elsewhere, as the noble and gallant Field Marshal (Lord French) knows very well. The contribution of Ireland to the national armies has not been anywhere near its proper and due proportion. While men have been taken over here from very useful business, and many quite small businesses have been broken up, you have tens of thousands of young men in Ireland doing nothing whatever, though their own fellow-countrymen have served most gallantly in every theatre of the war.

Government after the rebellion in Ireland lost the great chance of applying compulsion, when I believe it would have been accepted, and since that time the Sinn Fein conspiracy has gained in strength because it is claimed to be a protection to the young men against conscription. German submarines have been regularly fed on the Irish Coast, and part of that coast has now to be regarded by our Navy as if it was practically enemy's territory. Ireland has suffered from no shortage of food, and yet we have Sinn Feiners endeavouring by force to prevent the supplies of food coming over to this country, just at our time of greatest need. Over parts of Ireland, as the noble Marquess has pointed out, and large parts, the law has ceased to run, and outrages seem to be becoming more and more frequent. Men have been permitted to arm themselves, to drill themselves, and to march about with flags of a revolutionary character, and in many cases carrying arms. Violent speeches have been made inciting young men to rebellion, and I do not think in any one case has the speaker been arrested.

It has been said that the state of affairs in Ireland and its lawless condition are viewed in America as a proof either of our incompetence or of our unwillingness to do justice to Ireland at a time when we profess to be waging war for the liberties of other peoples. Not long ago, in a long telegram from the Washington correspondent of one of the London newspapers, it was stated that if we did not relieve the situation in Ireland very quickly American enthusiasm and energy in the cause of this war would cool down. I do not believe that there is a word of truth in that statement. Americans now understand perfectly what the tremendous menace of Germany is to the liberties of Europe, and to their own future. They realise, as President Wilson has so clearly said, that everything that they most prize is at stake in this war. And more than that, some Americans are now beginning to learn for the first time the truth about Ireland, and to distrust all those lies, backed by German money, which have been disseminated broadcast through their country for political purposes. Many Americans still live who fought in the Civil War for the Union, and they know perfectly well that we can never grant more than State rights to Ireland, and that we must sternly refuse the demands of the Sinn Feiners. If a movement for independence were started in New Jersey State or in Oregon, it would very soon be put down, by force of arms, if necessary, and Americans will perfectly well understand our action if in the long run we have to take that course.

It is very difficult for us, and especially for Englishmen, to analyse the nature of the forces which have been in operation in Ireland, to the most serious detriment of our prosecution of this war. But some few things are certain. Ireland has now no grievance against this country. But every member of the Empire has a grievance against Ireland. We have done all that we could to meet the wishes of Ireland by the most liberal system of land laws that has ever been projected for the Empire, and we are now trying to do our best to get Irishmen to agree to some form of government which we can accept. We have gone so far as to allow Ireland to dominate and to demoralise our politics for many years, to our grave disadvantage. That cannot be denied. But in spite of this, in late years we have absolutely failed to uphold the law, and the natural result has been to encourage the disaffection of which we have heard this evening.

Weak government is always unpopular, and it always loses its natural allies. That is happening in India as well as in Ireland, and the two situations have very much in common. The loyal elements both in India and in Ireland are being alienated slowly, and they are being taught that a stronger power than government exists among them. Nobody likes being intimidated, and in Ireland, as in India, intimidation is the chief weapon of the disloyalists. I make a strong appeal to the Government to state plainly that the object of the Sinn Feiners—an independent Republic of Ireland—is one which can never be attained ; and that anybody who has those objects and proclaims them is in a legal conspiracy. Beyond that we want, as has been forcibly urged by the noble Marquess, that the law shall be rigidly and firmly enforced. I am sure that we all realise the immense difficulties with which government is faced in the South and in the West; but I am certain that if determination is shown the Government will find supporters, either open or secret, in many unexpected quarters. Whatever happens to the Convention, that is surely the only safe course; and the idea, which has been exploded to-night, that leniency to law breakers creates a favourable atmosphere to the settlement of the Convention is to my mind an utterly false and untenable theory. The present situation in Ireland, as I have said, is very largely due to German influence which is directed there, as it has been directed here, to establish a revolution of the Bolshevist type. It may be impossible wholly to eradicate that influence—I fear it is; but so long as the law is openly defied it will find ever increasing means of hampering our prosecution of the war, and thus it will add to the difficulties and dangers by which the Empire is now encompassed I trust, therefore, that the Government will view this question not only from the Irish or from our point of view, but from the point of view of the Empire.

LORD BERESFORD rose to speak—

THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON)

My Lords, I am very sorry to stand between the House and an Irishman who has so great a right to speak for his country as the noble and gallant Lord, but perhaps he will favour the House with his opinions—I dare say in criticism of mine—after I have spoken.

I should like, in beginning, to say a word in endorsement of the very appropriate remarks which fell from the noble Marquess who opened this debate with regard to the death of Mr. John Redmond. Mr. Redmond was a great public figure; he was a true and courageous patriot, an honourable opponent, and a loyal friend. His life was devoted with absolute singleness of purpose to the interests of his country, and his death is a great loss to her in the hour of her destiny.

The noble Earl who spoke second this evening, Lord Meath, will, I hope, excuse me if I do not follow him into the political and constitutional aspects of the Irish problem which he placed before us with so much clearness. It is a subject of great and commanding interest on which we are always glad to hear his views, but it did not seem to me that they were in all respects directly relevant to the subject under discussion this evening. I might almost make the same remark with regard to an observation that fell from Lord Sydenham. He asked me, on behalf of the Government—apparently unconscious that I have done it, before—to repeat our assurance that in no circumstances can this Government, or, I believe, any Government in this country, regard with any favour a political programme which contemplates the ultimate independence of Ireland. That goes without saying; and I only repeat it this evening in response to the definite question of the noble Lord, because had I not done SO he might have thought I had evaded the issue.

This debate is really one concerned with law and order. The administration of law and order by His Majesty's Government, in Ireland has been directly and powerfully challenged by the noble Marquess, and I am here to state the case for the Chief Secretary of Ireland and for the Government of which I am a member. I recall that on the last occasion when we had an Irish debate the noble Marquess, Lord Lansdowne (who is sitting on my right), said that he regarded it as an outrage that I should be called here, in the strain of a great war, to make long speeches about order in Ireland. I do not shelter myself behind that plea this evening; though I own that, in the midst of the many labours which are entailed upon one at this time, to plunge into the details and intricacies of Irish administration, and to endeavour to equip oneself at all points for the kind of discussion that may be raised in this House—very likely by noble Lords much better qualified to speak on Irish matters than I can be myself—does involve no small strain.

But though I do not complain on my own behalf, I do utter a note of complaint on behalf of the Minister, the Chief Secretary, for whom I am speaking this evening. We are frequently told that the first duty, and indeed almost the sole duty, of that Minister is to be at his post in Ireland. Mr. Duke has been at Dublin during the last fortnight in what I may truthfully say has been one of the most anxious periods of recent Irish history. He has lived laborious days and spent sleepless nights in combating an organised conspiracy against law and order in that country. The whole burden has fallen upon him; although I must state—and nobody would endorse my remark more readily than he—that he has had throughout the full and unqualified support of His Majesty's Government, and that no powers for which he has asked, or that could have been given to him, have at any stage of recent Irish history been denied to him in any degree whatsoever. But, my Lords, I was compelled to summon him here to give me the information which would qualify me to speak on his behalf, interrupting a task which he was most reluctant to leave. If, therefore, an injury has been inflicted upon anybody, it is not upon me but upon him. And although I do not question for a moment the right of the noble Marquess to challenge His Majesty's Government and to raise a debate on a matter so important as this, I think that noble Lords are sometimes a little forgetful of the strain that a question so easily, and perhaps so legitimately, put upon the Paper may impose either upon the officials who are discharging a heavy responsibility, or upon those who, in their absence, have to speak on their behalf.

The earlier parts of the speech of the noble Marquess were devoted to reminding your Lordships' House of what passed here in the discussion on Ireland on November 15 last—a discussion which was inaugurated by the noble Viscount, Lord Chaplin. That debate, as he told us, turned largely on the question of the speeches that were being made in Ireland by the Sinn Fein leaders, the meetings and processions, route marches and illegal wearing of uniform, the drilling of young men, and other manifestations of disorder. Those were anxious and disturbing symptoms, and they represented the disloyal and revolutionary propaganda of the extreme Sinn Fein Party in Ireland. The noble Marquess seemed to be much dissatisfied with the explanation given on that occasion by the Lord Lieutenant, who happened to be in London, and by myself. I do not think that we minimised the gravity of the situation. On the contrary, I think we endeavoured to expose to the House its real proportions—its real as against its imagined proportions—and for my own part, looking back at what I then said, I do not feel any of the mortification which the noble Marquess thought must be in my mind at the present moment.

I remember pointing out that while there is a dangerous and irreconcilable party in Ireland, I maintained, and I believe it to be true, that they are a minority of the Sinn Fein Party. I also said, which I still believe to be true, that the great majority of the Sinn Fein Party are a political Party agitating for a political object—namely (I admit it) separation from England—but not agitating, as the noble Marquess seemed to imply, for rebellion. Now, my Lords, as a political programme that is, and was, an immoral and reprehensible programme, and it was and remains our bounden duty to deal with it by every means in our power; but it was not at that time—and I still persist in the statement—associated with any active or definite crime. In those circumstances I pointed out that the policy of the Government was one of firmness without provocation. I said that the test of the action of the Executive ought to be at each stage whether the proceedings of the malcontents were likely to be injurious to the public safety; and I stated that our object in Ireland was to detach public opinion from the extremists and to rally it to the cause of law and order. I remember pointing out that there were certain omens of an encouraging character in that respect, and quoting the opinions and attitude both of the Roman Catholic clergy and of the farmers in Ireland. That, I think, is a fairly correct summary of what took place in that debate.

Now I will take the historical narrative of what has passed since then, because I think by telling your Lordships the unvarnished tale in chronological order of what has happened in Ireland you will be better able to form a correct idea of the situation than from any summary or rhetorical declamation. During the months of December and January—the debate took place in November—there was not much alteration in the situation in Ireland. On the one side you had the Sinn Feiners in their speeches going up to the line, sometimes just overstepping it, but as a rule stopping just short. There were assemblies and drilling, as a rule without arms, in defiance of the police, and usually taking place in carefully selected areas where the police had not the number sufficient to enable them to act. I am coming a little later to a further exposition of that point. From the military point of view these proceedings could be regarded with absolute contempt, but they were, I allow, an element in the atmosphere of lawlessness in Ireland which we could not ignore. Then there were the nocturnal raids for arms, to which the noble Marquess has alluded, very often perpetrated on innocent persons.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

So far as I know, always perpetrated on innocent persons.

EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON

I hope always. I think there is a tendency to exaggerate these instances. Sometimes they were carried out for the mere purpose of terrorism; at other times for the capture of weapons, although the amount of arms which passed in that way into the possession of the agitators was extremely small. It is true, as the noble Marquess reminded your Lordships, that on one occasion the proceedings were attended with loss of life. There was an old pensioner named Sheehan who lost his life while defending a rifle belonging to his son, a soldier home from the war.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

There were two murders, I think.

EARL CURZON or KEDLESTON

I may inform the House of what the noble Marquess did not mention—namely, that three men are awaiting trial for that crime. The usual inflammatory speeches were made. They were not quite of the original bouquet of the speeches of Mr. de Valera of six months ago, but I am willing to admit that they were of an effervescing and unwholesome vintage, if you like to use that expression. These speeches were not ostensibly directed to preaching rebellion or contempt of the law, but they were no doubt intended to produce that result.

Then there was the question of hunger strikes in prison, which under the practice that then prevailed could always be pursued to the point at which the prisoner waslet loose sooner than that his life should be endangered, and which no doubt the noble Marquess was justified in saying tended to reduce imprisonment to a farce. On the other hind, the Government, by arrests—there have been far more than the noble Marquess has any idea of—by prosecutions, by police action without the military (because at that stage the Government were anxious to keep the military out of it, for reasons that I will presently come to) exerted itself to the hest in the maintenance of law and order. Now I want your Lordships for one moment to realise, as I am sure you do, the difficulties that attend the successful treatment of the kind of sporadic, lawlessness in Ireland of which I have been speaking. It is all so different from what prevails in this country. Here in England we have the general sympathy of the community with law and order and with the attempts of the Executive to enforce it. In Ireland it is very different. There it is useless to prosecute before many of the local Benches or the Assize Courts, or the Quarter Sessions, because where the conviction depends upon the verdict of a jury you are likely to fail in your object. There are many cases of actual crime in which political feeling has been responsible for the rescue of the offender from conviction. Thus, my Lords, in Ireland the dice are always loaded against the Government instead of being on the side of the Government. Every possible attempt is made to hamper and defeat the conduct of the Executive at every turn, and, partly by instinct and partly by deliberation, large sections of the community are banded together to render the task of the Government, so relatively easy and simple in this country, one almost of impracticability across the water.

This state of things, with certain fluctuations, lasted through the winter months. All the while public opinion in Ireland was setting in favour of the Government and against this form of campaign. I think that on the last occasion I referred to the attitude of the Bishops. The Roman Catholic Bishops is Ireland, from the Cardinal downwards, with scarcely an exception, have assisted the Government to save Ireland, not merely from criminal acts, but from the horrors of civil war. They have been resolute on the side of law and order, and I cannot exaggerate the stress which I lay upon that point. The same, I think, may be said of all respectable elements in Irish society. The majority of the people in Ireland are keen and instinctive politicians. Nearly all of them, as we know, are orators, and every one of them, in some guise or another, is a politician, and no doubt the hearts of the people, or of a great majority of the people, are set in some form or another upon political changes—changes in the direction of self-government in Ireland. That is their object and their programme, for the people of Ireland no more than those of the other parts of the United Kingdom, broadly speaking, want violence; and when once you can show them that you as a Government are not dealing with political agitation but with crime, they will support the Executive, because it is the only defence of the society to which they themselves belong.

Now it would have been possible, had the Chief Secretary adopted in Ireland the kind of policy which was urged upon us by Lord Chaplin and others in the debate in November, by a combined police and military display, to stamp out this kind of disorder. My Lords, it is always easy to shoot. A rifle goes off very readily, and it is apt to take human life, and when in this kind of disorder human life is taken you are never quite certain what will follow, and you are never quite sure that the display of armed force—which it is easy to advocate, which only an order on paper is required to put into operation—may not inflame and accelerate, instead of stifling, the conflagration that is in view. Such was the condition of affairs in Ireland to the end of January.

Then we come to a marked change in the situation. The revolutionary party in Ireland at about that time discovered, sharpened, and employed a new weapon in their campaign against the Government. They conceived the idea of associating their general propaganda of disorder with an appeal to the ineradicable instinct of landhunger which still remains unsatisfied in the Irish bosom. They once again summoned the evil spirit of agrarian discontent in Ireland, which is always ready to come up from the vasty deep when it is called, and which half a century of agrarian legislation has not sufficed to exorcise. The agrarian situation in Ireland is one with which many of your Lordships are intimately familiar, and which is very easy, almost in a sentence, to explain to those who are not. In the greater part of Ireland the action of the successive Land Acts and of the Congested Districts Boards has converted the Irish peasantry to the cause of order and to a large extent has wiped out the old agrarian discontent. But there are two great exceptions. The first is the case of the undistributed, or, as they are sometimes called, the untenanted lands, where there are no occupying tenants but which are held on freehold tenure by their owners. Some of these are the best grazing lands in Ireland. Around them are other lands, often mountain tracts, where the small-holders who have been enfranchised by the different Land Acts look down with ill-concealed envy upon the richer pastures owned by others which can never be theirs. That is one case. Then there is the second category of cases—the lands where the distribution proceeding under the Land Acts was summarily arrested by the stoppage of expenditure due to conditions of war. You can readily see in these circumstances what a field there was for violent and seditious propaganda, what an appeal to the deep-seated cupidity in the nature of man.

My Lords, there was another phenomenon that at this moment showed itself upon the scene. The Government, impelled by national needs arising out of the war, were preaching in this country, and equally across St. George's Channel, the gospel of tillage, and they pointed out the economic and patriotic advantage and duty of cultivation over grazing. The Sinn Fein leaders were not slow to see and to seize the opportunity this presented to them. They invented the phantom of an impend- ing Irish famine to be caused by the export of produce from the Irish ports. They became sudden and interested converts to this gospel of tillage, and they made it an excuse for flaunting the banner of an Irish Republic. You will agree with me that this was both an insidious and an immoral plan. It was a flagrant violation of the elementary principles upon which civilised society exists, and it was a direct challenge to the Government which could not be ignored.

The noble Marquess alluded to some of the principally affected areas. Those which have been given to me as the worst were Clare, Rosscommon, East Galway, North Tipperary, and parts of Sligo. In these parts of Ireland we read in the newspapers in the latter part of January and in February accounts of the cattle-drives organised under the plea of clearing the ground for tillage. We read of armed bands descending on the grazing farms in the name of the Irish Republic, marking them out for tillage, distributing the lands among their adherents, letting them out at a nominal rent, and in some cases making an actual pretence of tillage with ploughs. In some of these cases the owners were terrorised into acquiescence, in some cases there was a feeble show of resistance, but in the majority of cases the people were helpless. This was a new policy. We were no longer confronted with political agitation: we had to deal with a criminal conspiracy, attempting to subvert what I described as "the elementary conditions of civilised society."

I said just now that the Bishops had shown themselves on the side of law and order, and I should like to quote one very significant statement which was made by Bishop Foley, the Bishop of Kildare. He issued a strong warning to his clergy and people regarding this commandeering of land, appealing to them to keep clear of this kind of conduct; and—criticising a statement which appeared in a newspaper that "the commandeering of land was merely a forcible way of explaining that the people were willing to use the land if they were allowed"—he pointed out that "commandeering of land was also a very forcible way of proving that in order to make use of property which did not belong to them, some people were prepared grossly to violate the Seventh Commandment, while others had no hestitation about publicly defending their conduct as quite in harmony with the Law of God." He proceeded— It is enough to sicken any right-minded man to find that men in whom selfishness is ingrained am allowed to bamboozle the public by parading the poor as the justification of conduct which is beyond doubt a violation of the Seventh Commandment. The Bishop says he "appeals to all who had any responsibility in the Sinn Fein movement to make it plain to all those who are trying to foment disorder and rowdyism that they have no sympathy whatever with such conduct, and that they have nothing but condemnation for it."

I have spoken firstly of what was passing, and secondly of the attitude towards what was passing that was taken up by responsible and authoritative people in Ireland. I now come to the conduct of the Government and the policy of the Chief Secretary. I have already, I think, explained his motives. I have said that he might have intervened at an earlier stage, not merely by proclamation and processes of law, but by the association of the military with the police. I have said that at an earlier stage he would have failed had he undertaken that task, because he would have been thought in Ireland to have been striking at a political rather than at a criminal organisation. He held his hand until the case was so clear, until the offence was so gross, that he could, with the certainty of having public opinion behind him, use the whole forces of the Crown to suppress these criminal acts. I have here, but I think I need hardly read it, one of the Sinn Fein proclamations, which was posted in the neighbourhood called Ballaghaderreen, and which sufficiently indicates the nature of the outrage that was attempted on society. But your Lordships are already convinced of that, you do not want me to demonstrate it, and while I am willing to hand the document to any noble Lord who wishes to read it, I do not think I need it in order to establish my case as to the nature and character of the crime with which, at this stage, we were called upon to deal.

Let me again ask your Lordships' consideration for one moment while I point out to you some of the difficulties even of this new situation which the noble Marquess in his remarks appeared to me to ignore. This new policy was threatened in several areas: some disaffected, others the reverse. It was apt to break out in regions of vast extent, sparsely populated, with only small and scattered bodies of the Irish Constabulary—enough for the ordinary maintenance of law and order (and there has never been a time when there was less ordinary crime in Ireland) but insufficient to deal with this novel kind of emergency. The noble Marquess talked as if there was something ridiculous and ignominious in the situation which was frequently arising, where we read of an assembly, drilling, or something of that sort, taking place with which the Irish police were unable instanter to cope. I wonder whether he has any idea of the task which confronts the Royal Irish Constabulary in that country.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

I say that the police would have no difficulty in dealing with the situation if they were properly supported by the Government.

EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON

It is not a question of support; it is a question of numbers. Let me state my case. I have here a county with a population of 100,000 covering 1,000 square miles and the strength of the police force is 220. I have another area of 7,500 square miles, and the strength of the Irish Constabulary is 2,100. The total strength of the Royal Irish Constabulary for a country inhabited by 4,500,000 people is 9,000 men. See what happens. The noble Marquess says that it is a question of the Government supporting the police. It is nothing of the sort. Let us take an area where the police are scattered in isolated barracks or small posts, by no means lacking in support, and ready to do their duty. Stories are spread through the area of an intended cattle-drive or a ploughing raid. The police do not know—it is carefully concealed from them—where the blow is going to fall or where they ought to concentrate. Next day you read in the newspapers that 300 men with ploughs have entered upon certain lands in the name of the Irish Republic, have marked out the land, very likely have put a plough into the ground, and then, because these men were not stopped by the police, who may be miles away, or if they were on the spot were in numbers wholly insufficient to cope with such a case, we are at once told in certain organs of public opinion what an impotent Government, what a feeble Chief Secretary, what a miraculous way of preserving law and order in Ireland! You must face the concrete facts of the situa- tion; and while I do not shrink from any kind of suggestion, insinuation, or attack you make on the Government, at least be just to those representatives of law and order who are trying to the best of their ability—I am speaking of the police—

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

I never said a word against the police.

EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON

I know. The noble Marquess says, Why do not the Government stop these things?

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

Why do not the Government support the police?

EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON

Supporting the police does not convert ten men into twenty, or twenty men into 200; and I am trying, with all respect, to place before your Lordships certain aspects of the case which I think ought to he known to you before you arrive at a judgment in the matter. This was the state of affairs in the middle and latter part of February when the Chief Secretary came to the Cabinet and consulted us as to the way in which to deal with the situation. He pointed out that this was no longer a political agitation, that it was not merely a conspiracy to seize the land, but that it was a violent attempt to subvert order and to commit crime. I said at an earlier stage that there was no demand for powers which had at any time been refused to the Chief Secretary, who has had every power that he desired or that it was possible to give to him in that stage, and on this occasion he received our sanction to further steps which he proposed to take. He returned to Ireland, and there, in consultation with the General Officer in Command, he took immediate action.

I am dealing more particularly with the case of Clare. The noble Marquess had a general idea that Clare was in military hands, but he asked for more detailed information as to what has been proceeding there. On the return of the Chief Secretary to Dublin military reinforcements were despatched to the disturbed areas, with instructions when riots took place to disperse the assemblages, to arrest the ringleaders, and to strike at any form of organised revolt. Clare was placed under a military commander with instructions to exercise all the powers open to him under the Defence of the Realm Regulations. He was empowered to restrict all transit either of men or animals without permit, to prohibit assemblies and in some cases fairs—though this would only be done with reluctance, because of the inconvenience and loss caused to the farming section of the community—to close public houses, to occupy telegraph and telephone stations, to censor the post, to disperse law-breakers and effect arrests, to seize the ploughs and any other instruments of agrarian aggression. My Lords, I regard these acts from some points of view as a painful necessity, because undoubtedly they were a source of inconvenience and I dare say also of loss to some law-abiding elements of the population, but they had to be carried out. They were effectually carried out. The prisoners who were arrested were brought to trial. They received their sentences. They were sent to prison or held to bail.

In the course of the operations which I have been describing, the troops in County Clare behaved with most commendable restraint and self-control. The police acted not only with the courage which they always show, but also with great prudence. There was perfect co-operation between the military and the police force. The people generally adopted an attitude of strong friendly support to the line taken by the Executive, and the Catholic clergy at their altars and in their newspapers exerted their influence in every way to prevent collision and to impose restraint. I quoted just now a passage from an utterance from Bishop Foley, of Kildare, but I have here, if your Lordships will allow me to read it, a short statement which fell from another Bishop, Bishop Fogarty, of Killaloe, in Clare, who has been widely known for his sympathies with extreme Nationalism in Ireland. Bishop Fogarty stated in an interview with an Irish paper his opinion to the following effect— Sinn Fein has set its face— He is speaking of the better side of the Sinn Fein— against the abuse of cattle driving, and I join my voice with theirs and hope the people, no matter how provocative the elements surrounding them, will now steady themselves, and in all their actions keep like true Irishmen within the limits of what is just, fair, and equitable according to the law of God, for crimes and excesses of any kind are both non-Catholic and unpatriotic. I am glad to say the people have already done so, and done it because they feel it is the right and correct thing to do. There was one mad week in which the momentum of their rage carried them over the line of prudence and justice, but that is now all over, and though communities are never safe from individual criminals I think we can always trust the body of the people to do what is right and just in the end, though they may be led astray for the moment. Raids for arms are indeed an odious and most detestable form of crime, though not peculiar to Clare, but wherever it exists it is a hateful and heinous crime against which every one should set a stern face. There have been as far as I have learned four of these raids in Clare, and that is four too many. It is altogether an intolerable thing to go into any man's house and hold a revolver at his head while his house is being searched for arms or anything else. Raids for arms will soon be followed by raids for money. Both Sinn Fein and volunteers are deadly opposed to these suspicious raids, which they know well are deadly injurious to their patriotic movement.

LORD BERESFORD

Was that issued before or after martial law?

EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON

The date of this is in the early part of March. But martial law has not been proclaimed, I may say in passing, in County Clare. The county is under military control, but there is no martial law.

LORD BERESFORD

I meant that.

EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON

This paper is dated March 11, and the sentiments which I read just now from Bishop Foley emanated from him in the middle of February, a fortnight at least before the incidents to which I am referring took place. I hope that the noble Lord does not make the suggestion that the Bishop has, by the prompt exercise of authority on the part of the Government, been suddenly converted to law and order.

LORD BERESFORD

I made no suggestion.

EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON

That was rather the implication, though the noble Lord did not intend it. I have hero any number of statements, proclamations, and utterances made in Lenten addresses by the Bishops, proceeding continuously through the month of February, all in exactly the same sense. I am quoting them not in the least in justification of anything that the Government has done, but solely to support the point which I endeavoured to make three months ago in. your Lordships' House and which I have tried to make again to-night, that the Government have been steadily rallying to their side all the influences of strength and all opinion in Ireland of real value, and it is a considerable element in the hopes that we entertain of this policy that the Catholic Church and its most powerful speakers are now unanimously upon our side.

Now you will ask as to the results. The noble Marquess quoted with some gusto a letter from an anonymous correspondent in Dublin to the effect that all Ireland—I do not know what right he had to speak for all Ireland—was in a state of lawless disorder, the law was set at defiance, and so on. I happen to have been reading this morning the official reports which reached London only last night. They tell a very different, tale. This is what I read in them— The results of this effective action have so far been salutary and successful. Cattle-driving has ceased in the county of Clare. The seizure of land is being prevented. The police effect the necessary arrests without difficulty. Many of those arrested enter readily into bail for their good behaviour. Illegal dulling stilt continues in isolated districts— I am afraid it must, owing to the reasons I have before mentioned— but is being got in hand. I see seated there [the Cross Benches] the noble and gallant Field-Marshal Lord French. As Commander-in-Chief of the Home Forces he was recently engaged upon a tour of inspection in Ireland, where he went round the disturbed areas with the General Officer Commanding in Ireland, Sir Bryan Mahon. I have seen the reports of his tour, which were generally to the effect that the strong action that has been taken was having good consequences everywhere.

It is too much to expect that a period of commotion like that which I have described can be swiftly or suddenly succeeded by a period of content. The pot that has been simmering so long and has boiled over does not settle down at once. I dare say it may be true that many of the offenders were staggered by the suddenness of the blow, and that their attitude is one of surly acquiescence in the inevitable. That may be. But when the noble Marquess asks us, in the terms of his Motion, to say that "it is incumbent on His Majesty's Government to enforce the law in that country"—that is, Ireland—I think I have shown him that that is what we have been doing and are successfully doing at the present moment. How long it may be necessary to keep the military in these disturbed areas I cannot say. It is too early to ask me to give an opinion upon that point. But this I do say. They will be maintained so long as it is necessary to show that the Government are both determined and able to enforce the law in Ireland, as in other parts of the United Kingdom.

I must, before I conclude, allude in a few sentences to one other aspect of the question to which pointed attention was called by the noble Marquess, and in regard to which it is necessary to explain and defend the policy of the Government, and that is the question of prison treatment and hunger strikes. Here, again, I think it only fair that your Lordships should remember that there is a psychological difference between Ireland and this country. Here the country generally supports the Executive in the administration of the law and in respect of imprisonment for criminal offences, and forcible feeding in this country is acquiesced in as a necessary though detestable duty in certain cases of prison administration, although, as your Lordships know, if life is in danger there exists statutory power in this country, under an Act passed in 1913, for the relief of the prisoner whose life is in jeopardy. Now, in Ireland sentiment is entirely in the other direction. There has always been the strongest possible sentiment in Ireland against forcible feeding of political prisoners, and it was greatly aggravated, as the noble Lord rightly pointed out, by the unfortunate death of Thomas Ashe in Dublin. After that event forcible feeding was not proceeded with in the case of political prisoners, and then the hunger strikes began to take its place. The Government were left with the sole resource of imprisonment, followed by temporary release if the life of the prisoner was imperilled from the hunger strike. It is clear that if every prisoner had recourse to a hunger strike the prisons would presently either be converted into hospitals or would find themselves empty; and so far had the contagion of the hunger strike proceeded, that it was resorted to in the Irish prisons by persons convicted of such different offences as these:—burglary, failing to make their contributions under the National Insurance Act, perjury, in a case of abortion, cattle-driving, violent assaults, and even a number of cases of men charged with murder.

In these absolutely intolerable circumstances the Chief Secretary—and the Cabinet supported him—determined no longer to permit this calculated evasion of the law. It was decided that, while political prisoners should be treated, as they have been treated for long past, in a different category from ordinary criminal offenders, receiving the benefit of what are called the Churchill Rules, no release should be permitted in any circumstances for hunger-strikers. I have tried to get the facts of the case—at Cork, I believe—to which the noble Marquess referred. I think there must be some mistake, because in going through the list of the hunger-strikers who were released—which I have here—I could not find the names of any men who were released in those conditions from Cork. I am sorry not to be able to give a more complete answer to the noble Marquess at the present moment. Every person who is committed is now informed that while he will not be forcibly fed, he will not be released by hunger-striking. He must take the consequences of his own conduct, however serious they may be. And I have to report to your Lordships that on Saturday last, there being quite a number of these hunger-strikers in prison in different parts of Ireland, Sinn Fein issued orders that the hunger-strike should cease. They sought to cover their retreat by the pretence that there had been negotiations with the Government, or that a new set of Rules had been issued. There had been no negotiations with the Government, and there had been no new Rules. The Government had only been acting in accordance with the Regulations which have been in existence and have been known since the autumn of last year, and which provide for certain alleviations in the case of political prioners in respect of dress, diet, and society. These Rules are well known; they are posted in every cell. So long as a political prisoner conforms to the prison Regulations he gets the advantage of those Rules. If he resorts to the hunger strike he does so at the peril of his own life. We say to him, You shall not be forcibly fed; but we also say to him, You shall not be released.

I have stated honestly to the House what have been the measures that have been adopted by His Majesty's Government in this anxious time. I do not see in them any justification for the censure that the noble Marquess has passed either upon the Chief Secretary or upon the Government. The general gist of his argument was that there had been a weak and almost criminal abdication of power on the part of the Government. I think I have given, at any rate I have attempted to give, the answer. Just as President Wilson in the United States of America waited, though subject to great and what appeal ed to us reasonabl criticism, in declaring war until he could be assured of the general and convinced support of the American people, so the Chief Secretary in Ireland has waited and held his hand until he felt convinced that all the better elements of the community could be rallied to his side. Had pursued a coercive policy at an earlier stage while the agitation with which he was dealing could still be made to wear a political aspect, he would have arrayed the whole of Nationalist opinion in Ireland against him. some of which, at any rate, is apt to regard Sinn Fein as only an extreme form of the political feeling which they entertain themselves. But the moment that Sinn Fein in its manifestations was converted into a criminal conspiracy, we struck; and I think we struck with success. I do not say that the policy that has been adopted is one of heroism—I desire to make no such claim for it. But I do think that it has been a policy of sanity and of common sense.

I very much deprecate the character of the attacks that have been made upon the Chief Secretary. They are, I think, most unfair. The Chief Secretary is a man who has laboured not only with diligence but with unexampled patience, with extreme sincerity, and with a devot d love for the country which he is at present administering. His conduct and his policy do not, of course, satisfy everybody. If he acts with vigour he is charged, perhaps, in another place across the way—at any rate, he is charged here or there—with brutal severity. If he is slow to act, up jumps the noble Marquess and accuses him of "culpable inertia." or whatever was the phrase that he employed this evening. This I do say, that when the history of this time is written the record of Mr. Duke will be that of a true and faithful servant of Ireland. He has laboured unceasingly for her welfare; he has never lost heart in the darkest moments of despair; and to pass a Motion which is really one of censure and of condemnation upon him—I do not think the noble Marquess will push it to that point—would be in my judgment an act of the grossest injustice.

I have not said one word this evening, and I do not propose to do so, about the Convention. One noble Lord—I think it was Lord Meath—called my attention to the matter, and wanted to know whether in my opinion the Convention had failed or was going to fail. My Lords, I know no more than the noble Earl does about the matter; and, if I did, I would not say a word in this House. No word ought to be spoken at this moment that will run the slightest chance of wrecking the prospects—by no means beclouded or dim—that may still exist of finding salvation in the proceedings of that assembly. This only I will say, not about what is passing in the Convention but of the whole situation out of which the Convention has sprung, that His Majesty's Government are bent if they possibly can on Ending a real solution to this Irish problem. I agree with the noble Marquess in one thing—namely, that disorder and crime are the worst possible impediments to any such solution, and that the Convention was not likely to succeed if they were left to go unarrested. They have already to some extent been successfully stamped out; and I trust that all the anxieties, the labours, the troubles, of the past few months will not be sacrificed, that we may still hope for some fruitful result from this collaboration of so many minds all bent sincerely on doing something good for that unhappy country, and that it may still be possible for us, whatever our political prepossessions, to foresee the dawn of a. brighter day.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

My Lords, I fully expected that my noble friend would make a chivalrous defence of the Irish Administration, and he has done so. The consequence is that he leaves on record some very remarkable expressions of opinion as coming from him; and I hope he will not be surprised when I tell him that what he said does not carry conviction to our minds. It is not difficult to make the kind of speech which my noble friend has made if you ignore all through—as he has ignored—the history of Ireland during the last two years; and, I might say further, the history of Ireland during the whole period in which he and I have been in public life.

The noble Earl began with something not unlike a complaint that we should bring forward this question at this time. I say without hesitation that we on this Bench have exercised the greatest possible restraint in respect of our criticism of the Government of Ireland. In our judgment, as was said last November, the Government of Ireland has been incomprehensible and disastrous. From week to week we have held our tongues; and I offer no apology to my noble friend for this debate, even if it has brought the Chief Secretary over from Dublin or taken him for some hours from the work in connection with the war in which he is daily engaged. We would not have done our duty if we had held our tongues any longer in the face of the situation, as we see it, in Ireland to-day. What is the story? You cannot judge of the adequacy of my noble friend's defence unless you remember the story. Ireland was handed over to the Liberal Government in 1906 in complete tranquillity and prosperity. In 1916 a rebellion broke out in Dublin. That rebellion was proved, by a Commission appointed by a Government of which both my noble friend and I were members, to be entirely due to the incompetence—the astonishing incompetence—of the Irish Government. That took place two years ago. In what has Mr. Duke's government of Ireland differed from Mr. Birrell's?

VISCOUNT CHAPLIN

It is worse.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

The difference is that it has been a weaker and a less courageous Government than Mr. Birrell's. I could not have believed that, with the example of Mr. Birrell before him, if I had been told two years ago that the story of the two years which have since elapsed under Mr. Duke's administration would be what it is. I should have regarded that as the wildest flight of imagination.

EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON

Mr. Duke has been in office only fifteen months.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

The Irish Rebellion took place at Easter, 1916. Who was in office then?

EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON

I mean in this Administration.

THE EARL OF SELBORNE

But he was in office in the previous Administration. I am not dividing Mr. Duke's tenure of office into two periods; I am looking at it as it has existed ever since he succeeded Mr. Birrell. "By their fruits ye shall know them." That is more true of Governments than it is of any other human institution. Mr. Birrell set out to govern Ireland in accordance with the opinion of the Nationalists. He produced a rebellion. Mr. Duke set out to create an atmosphere in which conciliation should prevail in Ireland. The only atmosphere which he has created is one which benefits Germany. There is no other interest, Irish or British or European, that benefits by the atmosphere which Mr. Duke has created except Germany, who is our mortal foe. The atmosphere which Mr. Duke tried to create could only be fatal to the Convention. If the Convention survives, as I most sincerely trust it will, it will be in spite of Mr. Duke's endeavours to create an atmosphere and not because of the atmosphere which he has created.

The noble Earl said that we tended to exaggerate the real state of affairs in Ireland and he laid stress upon the difficulty of dealing with sporadic crime. He said that it was almost impracticable and had been almost impracticable, and again and again he told us that the policy of the Government had been to show moderate opinions in Ireland—moderate Nationalist opinion and especially the Roman Catholic hierarchy—that they were not attacking political opinion but crime. In the early part of his speech the noble Earl himself had shown how opinion and crime are in this conspiracy inseparably intermixed. You cannot attack crime without attacking opinion, and you cannot attack opinion without attacking crime, because, as he has shown us, the whole object of this organisation which produces the crime is the independence of Ireland—the separation of Ireland from the Empire, and of course he told us—Lord Sydenham was wrong—that not only has my noble friend and the Prime Minister never hesitated on this subject but they have said again and again that in no circumstances whatever can Ireland be allowed to claim or assert her independence, and that that was a conspiracy which their Government or any other Government was bound at all times to resist. To take these searches for arms, this agrarian outbreak is only a part of that conspiracy. They are only manifestations of the same nature; and therefore I do not admit that in this case my noble friend can separate the attitude of Sinn Fein into criminal and political aspects. The Irish are under no delusion about that. They know perfectly well that the Government are bound to oppose Sinn Fein in its separatist aspect, and they cannot possibly imagine that because the Government have only intervened now in the matter of agrarian outrages they are therefore neutral in regard to the ultimate aims of Sinn Fein.

My noble friend kept excusing the Irish Government, and indeed praising it, and I think that is where his words will seem a strange record in years to come. He not only excused but he praised the forbearance of Mr. Duke during this interim period while, as he put it, the true criminal character of Sinn Fein was becoming manifest to all the Irish people. Then, he said, the Government intervened and complete success followed their intervention. That is the whole of our case against the Government. Of course, complete success followed the intervention, and the same complete success would have followed, in our opinion, at any day or week or month when the Government took the same action. That has been the whole history of Ireland. Look back to the administrations of Lord Spencer, of Mr. Balfour and of Mr. Long. Every single time that the Government has confronted crime and disorder in Ireland crime and disorder have disappeared. The Irish are the worst people in the world to run away from, and the only reason why Sinn Fein is increasing is that Mr. Duke has been consistently engaged in running away from it. If he had confronted it six months ago, as we implored him to do, and as he has done this month, the whole of this terrible and humiliating history of the past six months would have been unwritten. I do not think the intervention has been too late. I think it has been just in time, so far as I can form a judgment.

The history of the hunger striking was told to us by my noble friend. I could scarcely believe my ears as I heard him tell the story. For months and months, under the threat of hunger strike, law and other has been paralysed in Ireland; but the very first moment that the Chief Secretary put his foot down Sinn Fein issued a proclamation saying the hunger strike was off. That is the very thing we have been complaining about Mr. Duke all these months, and while I sincerely admire the chivalry of my noble friend the Leader of the House in standing up for his colleague, I say it deliberately that the state of Ireland to-day is not due to German intrigue or to Sinn Fein but to the incompetence of Mr. Duke.

THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE

My Lords, I will detain the House for only a few moments, for I think that almost everything that requires to be stated has been said on one side or the other. I desire to express myself in entire agreement with what Lord Selborne said a few minutes ago as to the need for this debate. I think noble Lords who take an interest in Irish affairs have shown very great forbearance in allowing nearly four months to elapse without any reference to a subject about which we all of us feel most extreme anxiety.

With regard to the interesting and eloquent speech of the noble Earl who leads the House, I am bound to say that although at some points it did not seem to be entirely satisfactory, I welcomed it because I think it showed a much graver recognition of the seriousness of the Irish problem than the speeches which were delivered here in November by himself and by the Lord Lieutenant. To many of us those speeches, and particularly the speech of the Lord Lieutenant, seemed profoundly disappointing. I remember that the Lord Lieutenant bade us be of good hope for the future of the country, and. he told us distinctly, speaking as head of the Irish Executive, that he did not believe there was any menace to life and property at that time. Well, my Lords, since those words were spoken things have gone rapidly from bad to worse.

The noble Marquess who moved gave your Lordships a catalogue of some of the episodes which have been taking place in Ireland during the Last few weeks. I will not repeat the different items in the catalogue, but it included high-handed acts of interference with the cultivation of land, it included cattle-driving, it included at least one case in which there had been loss of life, and it drew a picture—confirmed by the words of the Lord Chief Justice—a profoundly alarming picture, of the condition not only of one or two dangerous spots but of a great part of the whole country. To my mind not the least disquieting circumstance was the manner in which these people who defied the law proclaimed their sympathy with our enemies, and even went to the length of insulting the friendly and nearly related lower which is now our ally in this great struggle. I remember that last autumn the Prime Minister gave a distinct assurance that His Majesty's Government would deal energetically with any steps which might be regarded as implying organisation for rebellion. My Lords, I say that the circumstances in Ireland during the last few weeks have been circumstances of rebellion—

SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS

Hear, hear.

THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE

Rebellion in its most insidious and dangerous shape—insidious because this has been a determined and elaborate attempt to bring the law of the country into disrepute, and what is most to be regretted is that it has been to a great extent a successful attempt to bring the law into disrepute. I have never been one of those who have taken too seriously what you might describe as exhibitions of bravado on the part of the disorderly elements in Ireland. They may be ascribed, if you like, to what I think the noble Earl called the "effervescence" of the Irish character, and I quite recognise that it would have been impossible for the Irish Executive to deal with every case of misconduct, no matter where it arose or when, in all parts of Ireland. The Constabulary are not sufficiently numerous for the purpose, and if it had once come to be known that by any little exhibition of disloyalty in some remote place the presence of a force of Constabulary on the spot would be secured there would have been no end to it, and there would have been a deliberate attempt to overtax the resources of that very long-suffering and valuable force.

But although I can well understand that there should have been hesitation to deal with every sporadic outbreak, no matter how insignificant, I have never been able to understand how the Irish Executive found it consistent with their duty not to deal with the leaders of this movement. The leaders were perfectly well known. Their language attempted no kind of concealment of their intention and policy, and it always seemed to me that it was rather at the leaders than at the humbler followers that the Irish Executive should have endeavoured to strike.

The noble Earl described to us at some length the further steps which His Majesty's Government are going to take. So far as one is able to follow his description, they seem to be vigorous and appropriate to the occasion. I think the House must have heard with special satisfaction that the question of hunger-strikes was going to be dealt with. I have never been able to understand why it was not dealt with long ago. Whatever remedy is available to-day was surely available weeks or months ago, and before this epidemic of hunger-striking had spread from these political criminals to other criminals of all sorts of descriptions. Therefore I am rather inclined to agree with my noble friend Lord Selborne when he said that he was not quite convinced by the chivalrous plea put forward by the noble Earl on behalf of the Chief Secretary—a plea in which it was suggested that the Chief Secretary had adopted a wise and prudent course in holding his hand during this long period of time, a period of time during which (to borrow an expression of the noble Earl) "the pot" was certainly allowed to "boil over."

I was glad to hear from the noble Earl that the Irish Government were now sanguine of rallying to their assistance what he called moderate opinion in Ireland, and that some progress had been achieved in that direction. There is a great amount of moderate opinion in Ireland which is ready to be railied, and which will rally, to the Government, but it will only do so if it is convinced that the Government are in earnest. Opinion of that kind in Ireland is of a very timid description, and you will find all over the country numbers of people who are heartily disgusted with the whole of this Sinn Fein business and would declare themselves against it if they had not at the back of their minds a feeling that they would be left in the lurch should they take a vigorous line against it.

I am also glad that we are no longer told that nothing more can be done because the Convention is still sitting. The argument that it was necessary to avoid any measures that might be regarded as provocative in order to obtain quiet weather for the Convention has always seemed to me a most unconvincing and futile argument. Unless we are very much misinformed, one of the great difficulties which the Convention has had to encounter has been the difficulty of convincing public opinion in the province of Ulster that it might safely accept radical changes in the system of Government. But, my Lords, the suspicion and alarm of the Ulster people are easily explained. They can see—they can anticipate from what has been happening—what would happen if a large measure of Home Rule were given to Ireland, and if the control of the country were at the same time to pass into the hands of these Sinn Fein organisers. The best way of bringing about a successful issue for the Convention surely was to maintain law and order while it was sitting.

I will say only one word more, and that is to support what has already been said by one or two of your Lordships to the effect that we should bear in mind that all these happenings in Ireland cannot be regarded as the protests of an Mused or oppressed people. There is no country, I venture to say no civilised country in the world, in which the population has had more done for it, or been treated with greater leniency and consideration. I hope, for the sake of the well-disposed people in Ireland, that His Majesty's Government will pursue energetically the measures which have been indicated to us by the noble Earl, and that they will see to it that this poisonous leaven is not allowed to infect a larger number of people than it has already reached. I venture to support, what the noble Earl has said in regard to this part of the case, and also to express my entire concurrence with a phrase which fell from Lord Sydenham, who told the House that in Ireland, as well as in other countries, "weak Government is always unpopular."

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY

My Lords, after the assurance which the noble Earl the Leader of the House has given to your Lordships and to the country of the Government's determination to enforce the law not only in Clare but I hope wherever the law is disturbed in Ireland, I shall not ask your Lordships to divide on the Motion. I would only like to add one word. In the remarks which I ventured to inflict on your Lordships' House this afternoon I was very careful not to deal with the question of the future government of Ireland, but I should not like it to be supposed that, for my part, I am disposed for a moment to abandon the proper claims of Ulster, or the necessity, in any future settlement of Ireland, to safeguard the security of the Empire as a whole. I ask leave to withdraw the Motion.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.