As this motion by Senator Johnson dealing with the Volunteer Reserve will raise very contentious matters, I would like to move——
The Volunteer Reserve.
Cathaoirleach
Would you not allow Senator Johnson to move his motion formally?
Not formally.
I was going to move that the motion be adjourned until after the Recess.
I ask the House to give some consideration to the motion in my name, because it really deals with a very important subject. I suppose that in the history of Parliaments it may be said that control of the defence forces——
I want guidance in this matter. Are we to understand that this discussion is being formally initiated now?
Cathaoirleach
No. But Senator Johnson is quite entitled to move it formally and continue the debate later if he wishes.
On a point of order. A number of us have to catch trains this evening, and if we wait for this motion——
Cathaoirleach
I am afraid that that is not a point of order.
—we will be too late and we will be kept in the city for another night, when the prospects are that the discussion will be adjourned.
Cathaoirleach
I have nothing to do with that. If Senator Johnson wishes to move his motion he can do so.
Is Senator Johnson going to move this formally, or is he going to make a speech in regard to it?
Cathaoirleach
I understand that he is going to make a speech now.
I think there is a desire amongst a great many Senators that this matter should not be taken at this particular time—at the fag end of the session—and that it is their desire to adjourn the discussion of the whole matter until after the Recess. I think that before we are committed to a discussion by Senator Johnson's formal motion we ought to have the opinion of the House.
Cathaoirleach
I will define the position as it appears to me. If you had, before I mentioned the Town Planning Bill, suggested an adjournment I would have let you do that, but now it is optional for Senator Johnson to go on with his motion if he likes.
I might point out that Senator Counihan was about to raise the matter when you mentioned that Bill.
Cathaoirleach
But he did not raise it.
I do not wish to express my view as to the meaning of this attempt to baulk discussion on this very important subject.
There is no attempt to baulk discussion.
The motion which I propose is:—
"That the Seanad disapproves of the procedure adopted by the Minister for Defence in the formation of a Volunteer Reserve as being an abuse of the power of the Minister and an encroachment upon the authority of the Oireachtas."
I was about to say that the practice has been everywhere for Parliaments to keep a very strict watch upon and control over the use that is made of armed forces. I do not want to express any views at all as to the advisability or the wisdom of establishing a Volunteer Reserve, but I want to bring to the attention of the Seanad what I consider to be a serious departure from what is right and proper touching the establishment of a military force. In the Defence Forces (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1923, it was provided that the Executive Council night raise and maintain a Reserve Force, that Reserve Force to consist of officers and men. "The reserve of men shall consist of non-commissioned officers and men who, having served in the Forces, have been transferred to the Reserve in pursuance of Part II, Chapter V. of this Act." Part II, Chapter V. of the Act provides that:
The original enlistment of a person under this Act shall be as follows—
(1) for the whole of the term of his original enlistment in Army service; or
(2) for such portion of the term of his original enlistment as may be, from time to time, fixed by the Minister and specified in the attestation paper in Army service, and for the residue of the said term in the Reserve.
The Minister may from time to time, by general or special regulation, vary the conditions of service so as to permit a soldier of the Forces in any service, with the assent of the Minister, either—
(a) to enter the Reserve at once for the residue unexpired of the term of his original enlistment; or
(b) to extend his Army service for all or any part of the residue unexpired of such term.
Acting under the powers of Section 146, presumably, the Minister has thought fit to establish a Volunteer Reserve by enlisting men in the Army and immediately, without any interval for training or for any other purpose whatsoever, for them to apply for transfer to the Reserve. It is probably quite true that the Minister has power, by twisting and stretching the provisions of that section——
Is it in order for a member of the House to go around and try to induce Senators to leave the House so that there shall not be a quorum?
Cathaoirleach
I am afraid that I have nothing to direct me.
Will the Senator name the Senator who is doing so?
Cathaoirleach
I have nothing to direct me about it.
He is one of the front benchers——
I think it would be perfectly legitimate for anyone to do that.
Cathaoirleach
I cannot allow a discussion on that point.
You stopped Senator Counihan when he was going to move the adjournment.
Cathaoirleach
That has been disposed of.
Will you accept a motion from me that the House do now adjourn?
Cathaoirleach
I cannot do so now.
I can quite understand the anxiety of some Senators not to have this matter made public. I do not know why there should be such anxiety to leave Dublin to-night when they might have legitimately been expected to remain over until to-morrow. As I was about to say, the Minister has illegitimately and unreasonably used the powers given to him under Section 146 of the Defence Forces Act to establish a new military arm, and I contend that in doing that he has over-stepped his own authority and has encroached upon the authority of the Oireachtas. It is provided that a person may be enlisted to serve as a soldier for twelve years or less, as fixed by the Minister. It is provided that:
The original enlistment shall be for the whole of the term of his original enlistment in Army service; or for such portion of the term of his original enlistment as may be, from time to time, fixed by the Minister and specified in the attestation paper in Army service, and for the residue of the said term in the Reserve.
I think I could quote section after section which would convince the House that the meaning of this Act is that persons shall have served for a period in the Army and then be transferred to the Reserve. It is provided that the Reserve shall consist of non-commissioned officers and men who, having served in the forces, have been transferred to the Reserve.
On the 6th November there was tabled the Defence Force Regulations, D.F.R. 76, 1929. It is required by the Act that these Regulations shall be tabled before the Oireachtas. It is not required that they shall be approved, and there is no provision that they may be nullified by the vote of the House. They explain the whole intention of the Volunteer Reserve, and how a man seeking to enter the Reserve makes his attestation oath. In the course of that form of oath I read:—
And I do further solemnly swear (or declare) that I will bear true faith and allegiance to and against all enemies whatsoever, defend Saorstát Eireann and its Constitution as by law established and I will render good true service and obedience to the Oireachtas and Government of Saorstát Eireann under the Constitution, and that I will submit myself to discipline and obey without question the orders of the officers appointed over me according to law and further that I will not while I am a soldier of Oglaigh na hEireann join or be a member of or subscribe to any political society or organisation whatsoever or any secret society.
Every member joining this Volunteer Reserve is required to sign this oath but at the moment of signing he is informed "That the provisions of the above oath cease to apply to a soldier when he has been transferred to the Reserve." A member of the Volunteer Reserve will therefore be entitled to engage in any lawful political activity except when in case of general national danger or great emergency the Reserve is called out on permanent service. We have heard a good deal from time to time of the phrase "an empty formula," but if ever it was applicable surely it is applicable to a regulation of this kind requiring that a man who shall take that oath and a moment afterwards be released from that oath as not being applicable because he has been transferred to the Reserve.
I do not want to elaborate too much upon this but I want to point out that there has never been any authority given by the Oireachtas for the establishment of this new military force, except the authority that I have referred to, and which, as I say, was clearly not contemplated and clearly in the mind of the Minister for Defence a few months ago was not considered lawful, because he informed the Dáil that he was doubtful whether he had power to establish that Volunteer Reserve. Later, presumably, he found that by this subterfuge or evasion he was able to establish such a Reserve, and without coming to the Oireachtas for powers, he proceeded to establish it. He made no provision in the Estimates submitted to the Dáil in January of this year for this Volunteer Reserve, and I submit that the whole method and the whole procedure has been entirely irregular and quite unfair to the Oireachtas, and that it is stretching the powers contained in the Defence Forces (Temporary Provisions) Act in a manner that ought not to have been done by any Minister of State. I submit that the House is entitled in view of these facts to express its disapproval of the procedure.
The question of the advisability of this is not before me and I do not want to express any views on it. If I were looking at the matter entirely irrespective of the procedure I would think that a Volunteer Reserve is probably the best form in which military training can be extended to any large section of the people, but the method of establishing this new force without regard to the formal permission of the Oireachtas, without bringing the matter formally before the Houses to get legislative sanction, was wrong and should be disapproved of.
The little comedy that took place when Senator Johnson moved this very important motion——
Cathaoirleach
Are you seconding the motion?
Yes. I will second it. The little comedy leads me to think that although we may have the sentiment and the desire for national liberty, there is not in the people of this country an educated opinion of what popular liberty is. Personal freedom and the safeguards of personal freedom are absolutely unknown. We are still children in that respect. This question of this embodiment of armies came up in every European country in the 17th century. The enrolment of a standing Army led to the downfall of liberty in every country except England. It did not lead to the destruction of liberty in England simply because the English people had fought for liberty in the two generations preceding, and because in their Mutiny Act they had guarded against the evils of a standing army. There is this preamble in their Mutiny Act:
Whereas the raising or keeping of a standing Army within the United Kingdom in time of peace, unless it be with the consent of Parliament, is against the law.
That was the preamble of the Mutiny Act of 1689. It has been repeated in every annual Army Act since then, and is contained in the Army Act of last year. I would also like to point out in regard to the National Militia, which corresponds in some way to the Volunteer Force which the Minister has without the consent of Parliament, embodied, that that militia could not be lawfully embodied except Parliament was in session. If Parliament was not in session the King was bound to issue a proclamation convening Parliament within ten days. That shows the jealous care with which Parliament sought to supervise the enrolment of bodies of armed men.
There is in our Army Act, which is called the Defence Force (Temporary Provisions) Act, a reference made to the provisions in our Constitution. There is lip service paid to that. But I think the attitude which the Minister has adopted in this case shows that he has no regard whatever for the principles of liberty, which have been sanctioned by the usages of ages and for which men have bled. I suggest if these principles are not initiated in the Dáil and in the Seanad, if they are not paid regard to, I can assure the Minister that at some other time, perhaps other men will rise and do what men in England and in other places have already done.
Looking at the constitutional history of all European countries, we can see that armed and permanent military forces have led to the destruction of liberty, unless in cases where they were strictly supervised by Parliament. In England the Army Act, in addition to that preamble which is intended to preserve the liberties of the people, goes further, and strictly limits the number of armed men who are to be enrolled. Last year it provided that the whole number of such forces should consist of 153,500 men, including those employed at depots for the training of recruits. In our Irish Act there is no provision limiting the number of men that are to be enrolled. Our Act provides that "it shall be lawful for the Executive Council to raise and maintain an armed force to be called Oglaigh na hEireann (hereinafter referred to as the forces) consisting of such number of officers, non-commissioned officers and men as may from time to time be provided by the Oireachtas."
I do not know on what legal grounds the Minister considers that he can enrol this Volunteer Force without bringing his proposals be-force Parliament. Perhaps it is because there is some loophole in Chapter 1 of the Act. They are not limited as in England to the number of men that can be enrolled. They are only checked by the moneys to be placed at their disposal. Under that Act it would be quite possible to enrol 500,000 men if there were so many here for one month and pay them. I think that Senator Johnson's motion is a very important one, and that it ought to have been listened to by members of the Seanad. It raises a very serious question, one which the Minister has no doubt carefully considered, but which the Dáil and the Seanad are entitled to have fully explained.
I say nothing at all upon the merits of having a volunteer force. I think it is the best method of securing national defence, but in the present case, I think the Minister has not acted constitutionally, because he has not brought the proposals before Parliament, which is the only authority under which armies can be enrolled. If Parliament neglects its duties, abrogates its powers, or derogates its authority, if members run away from meetings where this question is discussed, then, whatever may be said about political liberty, personal liberty is in danger, and the soil is being cultivated and prepared for the dictatorship which is to come.
I am not going to comment on the indecent action—at any rate I consider it indecent action—of my colleagues. I am not going to comment on the insult that was offered to Senator Johnson and the party to which he belongs during part of the proceedings. I will content myself after consulting some of my friends by moving the adjournment of the debate until the next meeting of the Seanad.
In view of the very important matters raised by Senator Johnson's motion, and in view of the small attendance, I second the motion proposed by Senator O'Neill. I also suggest that Senator Johnson's motion be put down as the first item on the Order Paper when the Seanad next meets.
I want to support the motion for the adjournment as I think it would be well to defer this matter until after the Recess. In any case I take this opportunity of supporting the motion, and to state emphatically that the attempt which was made to get this discussion adjourned, was not with a desire to baulk any discussion of the subject.
I want to say, with all the emphasis that I can command, that my desire in this matter was that Senator Johnson in raising this would have a good House and a good hearing and that the matter would be fully considered. I was afraid that it would be very difficult indeed to have that this evening, and for that reason some of us considered that the purpose which Senator Johnson has in mind would be met much better if this matter were adjourned until after the Recess. I think some Senators who have spoken have tried to broadcast the idea that those who support the Government fear that some disclosures might be made if the discussion proceeded and wished to have the thing hushed up. There is no such intention. There is nothing to hush up and we have nothing to fear that may emerge from this discussion to the discredit of the Army or the Government.
I support the motion for the adjournment now that it has been moved, but I protest against the insult offered to the House by the contemptible action of Senator Milroy's colleagues in going around trying to induce Senators to leave their places so that there might be no quorum. I characterise that as contemptible. Senators should know better than to surrender themselves to that type of seduction in the discharge of their public duties.
Cathaoirleach
If Senator Johnson accepts the motion for the adjournment I agree to it but not otherwise.
I accept.
I had Senator Johnson's consent before I moved the motion. Otherwise I would not have dreamed of doing so.
Question put and agreed to.
Cathaoirleach
The House, I take it, will have no necessity to meet before the 12th February. In the meantime should it be necessary to call the House together the necessary notification will be given.
The Seanad adjourned at 6.35 p.m. sine die.