Page images
PDF
EPUB

and here is the most important part of his testimony, for he is the first witness in the street while the firing was actually going on

-"in the street near the barrack there were few, if any, people at the time, and the whole street appeared to be almost empty. I tried to get into the Court-house; but they would not let us in at the front door, so I had to go round a long way."

This is the only independent witness who was in the street when the firing was going on, and his testimony is that there were few, if any, people at all in the neighbourhood of the barrack. I will finish with a quotation from an independent witness, who is the only witness dealing with the nature of the stone-throwing. It is taken from an account published by an eye-witness in this day's Irish Times, also an unfriendly source. He says—

locked, so I moved down the square, and when | The correspondent goes on to say that I got within a few yards of the corner, I heard the best proof of "the trifling nature of shots fired, and I walked across the road tothe attack, if indeed it can be so dewards the Court-house. I thought the police were firing blank cartridge to frighten the scribed, is the condition of the barracks people. I got down. I saw about a dozen itself." Well, I ask, have I not made rifles through the upper windows of the police out a strong prima facie case against the barrack blazing away. In the street". alleged attack on the barrack? Now, from whom did the Government get their report? Seagrave was not on the scene. Nobody could find him. Somebody said he had gone to find the Riot Act, which he had forgotten. Other persons said he was up in Mr. Eaton's. He was not on the spot. Therefore, he could not give an account of what took place. Was it from the County Inspector the Government had their story? I had him by the arm for a considerable time, and I can state, from my own knowledge, that he could not have seen-nor was he in the state of mind to judge of anything that was going on. I wish to ask on what witness the Government rely; and I say that the people of this country, as well as this House, will expect some independent and credible confirmation of this alleged attack on the barrack before they will be able to wash their hands of responsibility for the death of these men at Mitchelstown. When I left the barrack, I went through the square in company with some priests, and engaged in clearing the town, and in persuading all the people to go home, and to abandon all further attempt at holding a meeting. An incident then took place which I shall leave to speak for itself. Whilst we were engaged in clearing the square, a body of about 50 police, with rifles, appeared on the scene, and drew up in the middle of the square. They consisted chiefly, I believe, of a reinforcement who had charged into the square, batoning the people, after the first body had fled to their barracks. They had been attacked with stones, and had fled into the priests' house, and elsewhere, for refuge, and they were not followed into the houses. They emerged, and were joined by another body of police, and these 50 or 60 men drew up in the middle of the square. Recollect that some of these men were cut and bleeding; some of them had been struck with stones. The

"What I do know is this-that when I arrived, there were some men [he crossed after the police had fired]-there were some men out in the street throwing stones at the barrack,

which was too distant for them to reach.

Large stones were thrown in the direction of the barrack; but they also fell short of the door. It was when these stones were being thrown that the police fired the shots to which

I have referred."

Therefore, the account of this witness is that stones were fired in the direction of the barracks, which fell short of the mark. I would like to point out, I have quoted the testimony of a number of witnesses besides what I saw with my own eyes, which I think would be in itself sufficient to prove that all the talk about the attack on the barracks was absolutely without foundation. Every single witness unites in the statement that no such thing occurred, and that there was no justification for the firing at all. Here is a quotation which has just been supplied to me from the special report in another hostile paper, The Sunday Observer. The correspondent of that paper says—

"Having witnessed the attack myself, I can bear testimony to the fact that whatever stones were thrown at the building from the corner of the square were thrown by a few small boys, who exposed themselves in the most foolhardy manner to the fusillade,”

square was full with people. Many of our men were cut also. A drunken man, or a thoughtless child, could have flooded the square with blood in five minutes; because both this large body of police,

[ocr errors]

"Very likely," said he. There had been no disturbance in the town for the last quarter of an hour, and there was no man who had spared himself to get the people away. The only answer I got from him was-"Very likely." "For goodness sake don't do that, we are doing our best to get all the people out of the town." He turned away and used some oath. I could not exactly say what it was; but so far as I could make out it was- "I am not here to answer the questions of every damned Jackanapes that chooses to address me." I walked away. We worked away for two or three hours endeavouring to get the town clear; but all the danger of a disturbance appeared over, and the best proof of the correctness of my judg ment was that this young officer agreed with me that the best thing to do was to get the police to the barrack. I hope I have not injured his chance of promotion by mentioning his name. I do believe that it was largely owing to his action that we were spared the loss of any more lives in Mitchelstown. That is all I have got to say about the case. I do not wish to use strong language about it. I think the case speaks for itself. We in Ireland have felt bitterly the cruel taunts which have been levelled at our heads by The Times newspaper. When we disperse quietly we are called cowards. We were told, when we did not lead an unarmed multitude to storm the hill of Ballycores against the armed forces of the Crown, that we were cowards; we were told, because we did not lead the people up to storm the barrack at Mitchelstown, that

and the large crowd of people standing there, were smarting from their wounds. I asked where was the commanding officer? They did not know. I asked another man. There was no commanding officer. I said "Where is Captain Seagrave ?" The man said-"I don't know." "Can anybody find him?" "I don't know anything about him." "Who is your commanding officer ?" "The only commanding officer we have is the Head Constable.' I asked the Head Constable, << Are you in command?" He said, "I believe I am." I asked the Head Constable to take his men back to the barrack. He replied"I cannot stir the men; I have no authority.' "Where is the officer to be got?" "I do not know, Sir." Now, is not that a nice state of things? For five or ten minutes these men were drawn up on the square without an officer, some of them wounded; and all I could do was to get five or six priests, and as many people of influence as I could, to stand around them as near as possible, because the square was like a powder magazine, and one stone would have caused the police to fire. Fortunately a young officer arrived, and strayed across the square, and took command at once. I said to him-"Would it not be well to take these men to the barrack? I will give you my word that we will clear the town." "I think so," said he, and ordered them to barrack at once. That was the next stage of the proceedings, and then we proceeded with the work of clearing the town; and then the great hero of the day arrived upon the scene, with a cigar in his mouth, and with him arrived 60 military. The" the chivalry of Tipperary was not military at that moment marched across the square. I followed them down, and they drew up in line, facing down the town, away from the barrack. For the last 10 minutes we had been driving the people down in that direction away from the barrack, and the street was thronged with people. We had massed the people down there, and the priests were engaged in shoving them gradually out of the town. At that moment Seagrave appeared with a cigar in his mouth, and with his hands in his pockets. He came marching along. I walked up to him and said- Surely you will not bring the troops down that part of the town, where we have got all the people removing out of the town?"

rallied." That is the way in which The Times newspaper seeks to preserve the peace. I have never altered in the advice which I have given to the people in this regard, nor shall I alter it on the provocation of base and cowardly sneers like these. The people of Tipperary, when armed and disciplined, and well ied, have shown on many a hard fought field that they are slow to turn their backs on any foe. But now, if they show a peaceable disposition, and disperse when called upon to do so by the armed forces of the Crown, they are told that they are cowards because they do not assail armed men without arms themselves. As I have said, notwithstanding this provocation of threats and

insults, I shall not alter the advice I have always given to the people of Ireland; and while we in Ireland shall continue to hold our meetings in spite of Proclamations, my advice will always be to the people, when required by the forces of the Crown, to disperse without violent resistance, putting the Government to the shame of violating the law, and allow the cruel wrong of using force to disperse these meetings, not opposing force by force, but leaving the Government in the face of the democracy of England to break the law and break up these peaceable meetings-convinced as I am that by pursuing this policy we shall raise in this country such a storm of popular indignation that the hour will soon come when we in Ireland shall have the same right of public meeting which you have struggled for and persisted in maintaining in England.

the people. I venture to say without hesitation that it will be difficult to find a precedent in our Parliamentary history for the conduct which ex-Ministers of the Crown have found it to be within their power to pursue. Sir, on questions of policy the largest latitude is allowed by our Parliamentary customs to the Opposition. I acquit hon. Members below the Gangway opposite from all blame for the action they have taken in this debate. I offer this remark rather to the Front Opposition Bench, and I doubt if you can find a precedent; and if you can find a precedent, I doubt whether it will be a precedent which will commend itself to the minds of the leaders of the Opposition, for ex-Ministers of the Crown to hurry up specially to town in a demonstrative manner, in a manner calculated to excite public attention, not to oppose the Government on a question of policy, LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL but rather to bring to bear all the forces (Paddington, S.) : Although, Mr. or their condemnation and all the weight Speaker, this Parliamentary Session of their influence on the Executive in its has been protracted beyond all pre-executive capacity. Never have I seen, cedent, and although the labours of during the 12 or 13 years that I have hoa. Members have been hard beyond been in this House, and I do not supall record which our Parliamentary pose I shall ever see it again, such annals tell of, still I do not myself curious conduct as I have seen to-night regret, and I do not think that any on the part of ex-Ministers of the Crown. Member who has been present this I have seen the Leader of the Opposition evening will regret, that this debate has (Mr. W. E. Gladstone), I have seen the taken place. In the first place, it occurs right hon. Gentleman the late Chief Seto me that when any great tragedy has cretary to the Lord Lieutenant (Mr. occurred which has moved people's John Morley), I have seen the right minds, it is well that Parliamentary de- hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby bate as to the facts of that occurrence (Sir William Harcourt), who was Home should be immediate and prompt; and, Secretary in a former Government—I in the second place, from a Party point of have seen them sitting there on that view, I can conceive nothing more satis- Bench, and although they could have no factory than that we should have had knowledge whatever of what has taken this debate, because I can imagine place at Mitchelstown they have ostennothing which is more likely to bring sibly identified themselves with every vividly before the country and to re-opinion, with regard to those occurrences, mind the country as to the nature of the which has fallen from hon. Gentlemen struggle in which the Government and below the Gangway opposite, and to the Unionist Party are engaged with such an extent has it been carried that regard to the government of Ireland-every statement of fact which has the nature of the struggle, the difficulties been made by hon. Gentlemen who have to which the Government and the Party spoken from below the Gangway has behind it had to contend with, and the received the enthusiastic applause of the unlimited resources of the opponents Leader of the Opposition. I believe with whom they have to fight. The conduct such as that to be unpreceElection which brought this Parliament dented. It may be right; but how coninto being took place upon that struggle duct such as this is to contribute to the

and

stances of one kind and another may I fail to understand. [Interruption upɑn have combined to remove the sharp- the Benches below the Opposition Gangway.] the

VOL. 000X XI. (THIRD SERIES.]

remarks which hon. Gentlemen opposite | Harcourt), and, of course, I thought it address to the House, and I claim from very full of legal lore and of learning, them the same amount of patience for some of which seemed to me to be musty, myself. I say that I fail to understand but all of which would have been inhow conduct such as this upon the part teresting if Parliament had not been of ex-Ministers of the Crown, and sitting for such a length of time. Under those who, perhaps, hope to be again the circumstances, I think we might Ministers of the Crown, is to contribute have been spared the lucubrations on to the stability of the Executive Govern- the 18th century in which he indulged; ment. It seems to me that conduct such but what has struck me about this whole as this throws a lurid light upon the business very much is, that not only has wild appeals which have been made by the conduct of the Opposition been. the Leader of the Opposition and his unusual, but that the Opposition have Colleagues to the Irish people to exer- made a great tactical blunder in putting cise patience in the coming crisis. We up the ex-Home Secretary to lead the have had most impressive, and, indeed, attack. If they had put up the right pathetic appeals to the Irish people from hon. Gentleman the Member for Newthat Bench opposite, not to allow the castle (Mr. John Morley), we should Government to provoke them into any certainly have listened to anything which act of resentment against the Executive fell from him with much more attention Government; but what have we to think, and respect than we listen to anything and what have the Irish people to think, which falls from the right hon. Gentleof the value of these appeals, when the man the Member for Derby. But there most ferocious, unmitigated, and un- is this to be said that it is not possible limited condemnation of the Irish police for the right hon. Gentleman the Memand of the Irish Government in this ber for Derby to make a speech about House receives the enthusiastic support law and order in Ireland which does not and the enthusiastic applause of the recall vividly to our minds speeches made Leader of the Opposition? Do hon. and by him, more forcible and more eloquent, right hon. Gentlemen opposite think in a sense diametrically opposed to that the Irish people are unacquainted that he delivered to-night, and that is with what happens in this House? On why I say the Opposition have made a the contrary, the Irish people throughout tactical blunder in putting him up to the length and breadth of Ireland are lead the attack. I remember there was better acquainted with what happens in once a gentleman who stood for a conthis House than any similar portion of stituency in the South of England as a people throughout the United Kingdom. strong Protestant Unionist, but he was What do they see? They see the whole defeated. He was anxious to get into serried ranks of ex-Ministers bustling Parliament, and a friend of his, an up to London in order to lend their Irishman, said to him-"I think I can sanction to every species of disgrace get you a seat in the South of Ireland." and abuse being poured upon the officers He said "Oh, yes; that will do very of the law and the officers of the Crown. well;" but he said-" On what platform The right hon. Gentleman the Member shall I have to stand?" And his for Mid Lothian and his Colleagues are friend said-"Oh, as a strong Catholic apparently under the impression that Home Ruler." The gentleman who such a course of conduct and such a had been defeated said-"But won't it course of policy is likely to conduce to be rather a sudden change? peace and to order in Ireland. That has Irish friend said—“Oh, dear, no; there struck me very much indeed. I do not will be no difficulty in the matter as know whether it has struck hon. Mem-long bers opposite, or hon. Members on this side of the House; but I do assert, without fear of contradiction, that conduct of this kind on the part of ex-Ministers of the Crown, whether it is right or wrong, is without precedent in the annals of the House of Commons. Now, I come to the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Derby (Sir William

This

as you allow a decent interval to elapse." The great weakness of the right hon. Gentleman's (Sir William Harcourt's) position is, that he has not allowed a decent interval to elapse between his preaching of the doctrines of Lord Sidmouth and Lord Castlereagh and his preaching of the principles of Mr. Fox and Mr. Burke. He now preaches the principles of Mr.

Fox and Mr. Burke; but it is only about | certain newspapers which are now cur

12 months ago he was preaching the rent, and to some extent popular, in the doctrines of Lord Sidmouth and Lord Metropolis, which convey their news to Castlereagh. That is a tactical blunder, the public in paragraphs. The stateand no amount of dialectical ingenuity ment of the hon. Gentleman did not will do away with it in the public mind. seem to me to be altogether connected. People cannot forget that the right hon. It was really a series of paragraphs which Gentleman the Member for Derby was succeeded each other without much conthe greatest exponent of the government nection as far as I could make out. of the bayonet, and therefore for him to I put aside the statement of the hon. act as he is now acting is either the Member for Northampton, because I depth of audacity or of burlesque. Well, have difficulty in regarding him as now, Sir, what I want to ask the Front altogether serious in this matter. I Opposition Bench is this. If they have take the statement of the hon. Member such serious accusations to bring against for East Mayo (Mr. Dillon), and the the Government as they have brought statement of the right hon. Gentleman to-night, if they identify themselves the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieuwith all the expressions which have tenant of Ireland (Mr. A. J. Balfour), fallen from hon. Gentlemen below the and I find that the evidence with regard Gangway, why have they raised no to these occurrences is terribly conflictdefinite issue in the House? Why have ing; and I say it is quite impossible for they confined themselves merely to the House by any means whatever to making vague and inconclusive speeches? arrive at any conclusion as to wheWhy have they not brought their opi- ther the Executive have been right nion to the test of the Division Lobby? or wrong in this matter-there must be Not only have they not set up any dis- a judicial inquiry. The hon. Member tinct issue, not only have they not ven- for Northampton stated that the matter tured to propose to the House any would not form the subject of a judicial definite Amendment, but I believe that inquiry, because the Government would the House has never been called upon take no notice of the affair. When the to discuss a more confused and indefinite Coroner's jury returns a manifestly issue. We have two questions before ridiculous verdict, that, no doubt, is no us. We have, in the first place, before sufficient ground for the Government us the question of the general conduct instituting criminal proceedings against of the Government in regard to public the persons incriminated by that verdict; meetings in Ireland, as exemplified in but the case is different where the verthe case of the Ennis meeting. And, dict is not manifestly absurd. But, bein the second place, we have the other sides this, I believe it is in the power of question with regard to the action of any individual to go before a Grand the Executive at Mitchelstown, and the Jury, and prefer an indictment against results which have flowed therefrom. any individual; and if the Grand Jury Now, in my opinion, the House is not believe that a prima facie case has been in a condition to decide upon the events made out, it will, in due course, go for at Mitchelstown. We have heard several trial. I believe I am right in saying statements upon the matter. We have that, therefore, there is no question heard the statement of the hon. Gentle-whatever that if hon. Members wish man the Member for East Mayo (Mr. that this matter should become the subDillon), a lucid and impressive state-ject of judicial inquiry it must so bement from his point of view, which I listened to with great attention; but we have also heard the statement of the Minister of the Crown, the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant (Mr. A. J. Balfour), also extremely lucid, most impressive, and spoken evidently under the sense of heavy and great Ministerial responsibility. And then, Sir, we had the statement of the hon. Member for Northampton (Mr. Labouchere), which seerns to me to resemble in its nature

come, and it is only a judicial inquiry which can determine the rights or the wrongs of the question which has been put before the House by the hon. Member for East Mayo and the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant; therefore I hope the hou. Member for East Mayo will not think me wanting in respect for him if I find myself quite unable to follow him controversially through the details of his very interesting statement. Rather

« PreviousContinue »