I beg to move:—
In page 4, Section 7 (a), to delete lines 51 to 54, inclusive.
I do not know whether the Minister will save me some trouble by saying that he proposes to accept this amendment. Perhaps not, because on the last day we were discussing this section we had a definite challenge from the Minister to table an amendment or a resolution which would raise the whole question of the existence of secret societies in the Saorstát. He said:—
I make the suggestion that whoever the expert is in the Dáil on secret societies, whoever has the biggest dossier, whoever knows most about these things, should put down a resolution to the effect that the prohibition which applies to members of the Army and members of the police forces, should be extended to embrace all State employees if you like, members of the Civil Service and members of the judiciary, or, better still, to embrace all citizens of Saorstát Eireann, and there can be full discussion and all the dreadful facts can be hauled out into the daylight...
At another moment in the same discussion the Minister said that he was quite prepared to leave this matter to an open vote of the Dáil. I am not an expert on secret societies. I do not know any of the horrible things that have been said about secret societies and their active influence upon the State or upon the administration of justice.
I do know that secret societies have existed, and have been instrumental in bringing about, sometimes very disastrous, and sometimes in other minds, very beneficial changes in the law and government of the country. The Minister himself has been a most eloquent and persuasive opponent and critic of secret societies. He has attempted in several Bills to bring secret societies into disrepute. Undoubtedly a very great majority of the public is opposed to the existence in the State of secret societies. I suppose if it were possible, assuming that this amendment is not acceptable to the majority of the Dáil or the Seanad, to refer the Bill as it passes the Dáil to the country for a plebiscite or referendum, or if it were possible to refer this particular proposal to make secret societies illegal, then I think we should have an overwhelming vote in favour of that prohibition.
I do not want to discuss the merits of any particular class of secret society. There may be some societies or bodies which have been popularly called secret, believed to be secret, which the Minister suggested on the last occasion were not in fact secret, or may not in fact be secret, but we have had presented to us by the Minister himself a definition, and it may be that some of these organisations popularly called secret, would not come within this definition and therefore will not be affected by the section if it is amended as I desire it to be. The prohibition then will be against the existence of societies coming under this definition. That is to say:
The expression "secret society" means an association, society, or other body the members of which are required by the regulations thereof to take or enter into, or do in fact take or enter into, an oath, affirmation or declaration not to disclose the proceedings or some part of the proceedings of the association, society or body.
Of course the definition was amended during the Committee Stage. It is much more definite now and the words "entering into an undertaking" have been deleted and it is quite clear now that before a society or an association would be called a secret society the members are required to take an oath of affirmation or declaration. I think it is quite unanswerable to say that quite nine-tenths of the people of the country would favour prohibition, shall I say, the illegalising of secret societies. I am not going to pretend that it will prove that no longer secret societies shall exist. The kind of secret society that has been active in political affairs has been of a kind in which the members quite clearly and deliberately went into illegal activities knowing when they were taking upon themselves these activities they were doing illegal things and were prepared to take the risks. Although this amendment may be carried, and although we may make secret societies illegal, it will not prevent the existence of secret societies, provided there are sufficient people who believe that a certain cause must be carried through and that it can only be carried through by the aid of secrecy. If there are such, and if they are prepared to take the consequences no enactment of this kind will prevent them. We would, however, be making it known that in the view of the lawmakers secret societies ought not to exist in the country, and that they are in fact illegal bodies.
I do not think it is necessary—I doubt whether it is desirable, and certainly it would not go any distance towards attaining my end, which is quite a serious one—if we were to try to bring to the notice of the Dáil proofs of the malignant activities of secret societies. On the last occasion the Minister rather suggested that it was necessary to prove that secret societies had in fact been committing acts which were to the disadvantage and which were detrimental to the best interests of the country before you could legislate against their existence. There is a good deal to be said for that, but there ought to be some general understanding that men are free to act provided they are not committing acts that are detrimental. Without endeavouring to bring definite proofs in regard to any particular society, or any particular class of society, we have it on the testimony of the Minister that secret societies have been organised to do acts which were detrimental to the stability of the State. I would say that it should be accepted more or less as a proof that the purposes and intentions of the body were dark and evil if they thought it necessary to make affirmations, take oaths or make declarations binding members not to disclose the proceedings.
I do not think it is stretching the powers of the legislature or going beyond what the canons of liberty would lay down to say that a secret society ought not to be allowed to exist, because it is a fair assumption that the fact of secrecy implies dark deeds. Whether that is actually the fact or not, we are now faced with this general belief. As I argued on a previous occasion, the existence of a very widespread belief that secret societies exist, and that the oaths and affirmations which the members of these societies take are held in greater veneration and reverence than the oath of loyalty to the State service or their obligations as citizens is sufficient to damage very considerably the stability of the State, because of the fact that confidence in public administration is shaken. I think there is no Deputy who will not agree that there is a cynical kind of attitude amongst men very generally, that so-and-so is all right; he is a member of such-and-such an organisation. His friends are going to look after him, they are bound to look after him. The existence of that state of mind, very widespread, is detrimental, and I believe there is no Deputy in the House, or at least very few, who will assent to the proposition that an oath taken secretly—the terms of which may not be known, and the persons who take it are also not known—is liable to be held in much higher regard perhaps out of fear than from the ordinary sense of obligation that every citizen is entitled to hold towards the State. The effect of the amendment, if it were carried, would mean that the section would read as follows:—
Every person who shall—
(a) form, organise, promote or maintain any secret society, or
(b) attempt to form, organise, promote or maintain any such secret society, or
(c) take part, assist, or be concerned in any way in the formation, organisation, promotion, management, or maintenance of any such society,
and so on
shall be guilty of a misdemeanour.
The secret society is then defined in the terms which the Minister himself has set before us. On the last occasion when this matter was under discussion the form of the amendment was challenged by the Minister on the grounds that it attempted to make it penal for judges and civil servants to enter a secret society, because judges and civil servants had not, up to date, been prohibited from being members of a secret society. The Minister's view on that matter prevailed. As I have said, he then challenged Deputies that the matter should be brought forward in such a form as would embrace every citizen; not merely judges and civil servants, but that we should take the sense of the House on the question whether secret societies should be allowed to exist, and whether any citizen, judge or otherwise, civil servant or non-civil servant, should be allowed to be a member of a secret society. The amendment that I am moving takes up that challenge. I want to remind the Minister and the Dáil that this is to be an open question, and that every Deputy is free, according to the Minister's promise, to vote on this issue as his personal judgment would dictate. I, therefore, move my amendment, and ask that it shall be taken by the country as a definite decision of the Dáil that, so far as we are concerned at any rate, we desire to make secret societies illegal bodies in the Saorstát.