Is it right or proper to proceed with this Bill in the absence of the Minister for Justice?
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS. - PUBLIC SAFETY (EMERGENCY POWERS) BILL, 1926—SECOND STAGE.
Deputies will have to make allowance for that. In the course of a brief statement which I made yesterday when asking for permission to introduce the Public Safety (Emergency Powers) Bill, I promised that I would bring to the notice of the Dáil a chain of circumstances showing that a conspiracy to subvert the authority of the State has been in active existence for some time past. Regarded as isolated incidents, these events might perhaps attract little attention but, when taken together and analysed, they leave no room for doubt that there exists in the country a small body of men who will not hesitate at crime in their desire to override the will of the people by force of arms.
For the past two years, a steady stream of information has been received by the Gárda Síochána, which has enabled them to trace and remove numerous hidden dumps of arms, ammunition and military equipment, which had obviously been secreted for illegal purposes, and evidence was available that these discoveries were causing considerable uneasiness among a certain small section of the community. On the 16th July last a letter was received by a military officer in Cork City to the effect that a dump of this nature was to be found at Frankfield, Douglas, County Cork. Information was conveyed to the local Superintendent of Police, and, on the following day, accompanied by four detective officers, he proceeded to the place and searched the out-offices of the destroyed residence of Colonel Gibbons. In the course of the search, the Superintendent observed a small door upstairs fastened by a nail fixed over the latch. On forcing the nail to one side, and raising the latch, there was immediately a loud explosion which blew the roof off the room, and burst out the door and side walls. The Superintendent was hurled back; several bones in his hands were fractured and his left leg was torn in three places by shrapnel. An examination of the scene revealed that a trap-mine had been laid in the room and so arranged that the lifting of the latch would cause it to explode. It is clear that this fiendish trap was laid with a view to causing the deaths of members of the military or of the police instructed to search the place in the execution of their duty, and that it was hoped, by means of this outrage, to deter officers of the State from continuing those activities which had resulted in the capture of so many illegal dumps.
Some time previous to this, an armed raid was made on Mountjoy Prison. Dublin, and several prisoners, who were charged with various offences of violence against the State or individuals, were rescued. One of these was subsequently traced to London and arrested there. On his arrest he was found in possession of a large number of .45 revolvers which he had obviously intended to smuggle into Ireland. Shortly after the mine incident, to which I have referred, there was a series of armed raids on moneylenders in Dublin and elsewhere, which were obviously organised from a single centre. The persons responsible for the Dublin raids were discovered and duly convicted. In the course of the police investigation which resulted in the discovery of the property stolen by the raiders, there was found, in addition to a revolver and ammunition, a despatch in the possession of a youthful courier, directed to a person addressed as the "O/C of the Dublin Brigade." The despatch made reference to a box which had been forwarded by rail to the manager of a creamery in County Cork. The police traced the box and found that it contained half a hundredweight of a home-made explosive, known as "War Flour."
About a fortnight ago, the attention of the police was attracted to unusual activities in the Midlands on the part of a certain individual who claims to be the "Chief of Staff" of this armed organisation and placed him under arrest. He is at present awaiting trial on a charge under the Treasonable Offences Act. Though resident in Dublin, he is a native of Cork and this fact is believed to be not altogether unconnected with the events of Sunday night.
On the 10th of this month the police held up a motor car in Middleton, which had previously disobeyed a signal to stop. There were four men in the car. A fully loaded Webley revolver was found under the front seat and nine rounds of revolver ammunition underneath the back seat. Documents in their possession showed that these four men were members of the so-called "Staff" of the 4th Battalion of the Cork Number 1 Irregular Brigade, acting on instructions from a person in Dublin calling himself "Adjutant General," and that the organisation of which they were members had decided that the only effective means by which its objects could be achieved were by force of arms. I have a copy of the document which was found. It reads:—
OGLAIGH NA h-EIREANN.
(Irish Bepublican Army).
Ref. No. —Dept. A/G.
General Order No. 28.
General Headquarters, Dublin.
4th Battalion Cork No. 1 Brigade.
21st October, 1926.
To:
Commanders of Independent Units.
VOLUNTEERS AS PARLIAMENTARY CANDIDATES.
1. The Army Council has directed that the following statement and Order be circulated.
"Oglaigh na h-Eireann was created and is being maintained primarily for the following object:
"To establish and uphold a lawful Government in sole and absolute control of the Republic."
"The primary, and it is believed by the Army Council, the only `effecting ' means by which this object can be achieved, are as stated in the Constitution:
1. Force of arms.
2. Organisation, training and equipping the manhood as an effective military force.
"The Army Council is decidedly of opinion that these means can best be promoted when a Volunteer is free to concentrate on them and is not distracted by holding the responsible position of T.D., and endeavouring to fulfil the duties attaching to it. Further, and especially bearing in mind late experiences, there is the danger of military discipline being impaired. The Army Council hereby order:
"That a member of Oglaigh na h-Eireann shall not permit himself to be put forward or accept nomination as a candidate in any constituency for which Teachtai are being elected, and that this Order shall be transmitted to all ranks."
2. You are hereby ordered to have the above transmitted to all ranks in your area. Acknowledge receipt by return.
A/General.
On Sunday night we had the criminal outbreak which is so fresh in our minds to-day, and which resulted in the wounding of a private soldier and in the untimely deaths of two gallant members of our unarmed police force, whose only crime was that they had fearlessly and impartially carried out the duties entrusted to them—namely, the protection of the rights of the people. We have paid a last tribute to these two young men who were laid to rest to-day; but we have a duty to the living as well, and we are bound to provide some protection for their comrades, who, though themselves unarmed, have to do their duty unflinchingly, in the face of armed attacks from an organised body, whose members stop at nothing—not even murder—in their attempts to achieve their objects.
It is clear that the events of Sunday night were a definite challenge to the authority of the State and a desperate effort to intimidate the police from carrying out their duty to the State. We hope to be successful in collecting evidence against the actual perpetrators, and I trust we will be able to bring the murderers to justice. But it is clearly difficult to deal with a conspiracy of this kind by the ordinary criminal processes. The elaborate safeguards which these contain for the prevention of miscarriage of justice, though absolutely necessary in normal circumstances, render these processes inapplicable to an emergency such as that which was created for a few hours on Sunday night. It may be possible to trace the misguided individuals who actually took part in the raids, but the chief instigators—the real criminals—though they are well known to the police, are very careful to avoid, as far as possible, leaving evidence which would secure their conviction in a court of law. It is essential, therefore, that the Executive Council should have special powers which will enable them to deal promptly with an emergency of this nature and for this purpose we are asking the Dáil to give a speedy passage to this Bill.
The Act is intended to be a permanent one, but it will only be brought into operation in time of emergency, and following the issue of a formal proclamation by the Executive Council which will be laid forthwith before both Houses of the Oireachtas. I accordingly move the Second Reading.
I intend to oppose the Second Reading of this Bill on the same grounds as I opposed the First Reading yesterday. To my mind the measure is unnecessary. No Deputy has more respect for the members of the Gárda Síochána or the military in the Saorstát than I have. I am quite sure there is not a loyal citizen in the State who would protect the lives of these men sooner than I would and I do regret very much the loss the State and the relatives of these men who were shot in Sunday night's raids, have suffered.
In this measure the President is asking for powers that the Executive Council already possess in the Treason Act. Section 3 of the Treason Act gives power to the Executive Council to arrest any person who commits or attempts to commit any offence against the State, and that person shall be liable to a fine of £500 or two years' imprisonment with or without hard labour, or both. Section 6 of the Act gives power to the Gárda and the military to imprison for a term not exceeding five years any person found guilty of forming or attempting to form an unauthorised military or police force. Section 8 of the Treason Act gives power to any authorised officer to arrest and put into prison for a term of two years, or otherwise fine £100, any person who is in a secret society or in an unauthorised army or police force. I put it to the President that under that measure he has plenty of power to deal with the people he has in mind, and whom he mentions the Gárda know well—the people who committed the crimes connected with the raids on Sunday night.
Under this proposed measure the Executive Council seek power to arrest any person. It makes no matter whether a man or woman has committed a crime. If a man or a woman has an enemy living in the neighbourhood, and if that enemy sends a letter to the Gárda saying that such a man or such a woman is out drilling or doing something wrong, he or she can be arrested irrespective of whether they are loyal citizens to the State. The Government want power to arrest such a person and keep that person in prison for a week or until such time as an appeal can be made to the Appeal Council; then, if the Council recommends the release of that person, it rests with the Minister or the Executive Council as a whole, to order the release within one month after the recommendation for release is made.
In the Schedule of this measure it is set out that punishment will be inflicted for
Unlawfully injuring or destroying or attempting to injure or destroy any house, factory, barn, haggard, workshop, or other building, or any agricultural property, food supplies for man or beast, or any other property of any nature or kind, movable or immovable, public or private, including standing trees and crops.
I am glad to note that they place man in the same category as beast there. At the present time there is a great scarcity of fuel and, apparently, if a man went out to cut a tree on his own or his neighbour's land and a Gárda saw him doing so, he could arrest that man and imprison him, notwithstanding the fact that the Government has made no provision for people in the way of a fuel supply.
Not alone are the Government asking us to assist in putting down armed raids, but they even want permission to arrest a man for cutting down a tree on his own land for the purpose of providing himself with fuel. I know well that the intention is to deal with a man cutting down a tree in order to put it across a road, but the Bill does not state that. I do not see why the Dáil should pass such a measure as this.
Since I had the honour of being elected a member of this House, I have opposed the different Public Safety Acts, including the well-known unpopular measure, the Flogging Act. Between 1922 and 1924 a large number of Deputies opposed such measures. I sincerely hope the same Deputies have not been influenced by the Government to such an extent that they will support this latest measure of crucifixion, to be known as the Public Safety (Emergency Powers) Act. If we allow the Executive Council to obtain such powers as they seek under this measure, we will be placing in their hands every citizen of the State.
There is nothing to prevent the Government from sending their agents down the country making wholesale arrests and making a general sweep of the country. These agents can drive in, like a lot of cattle, every person they find on the streets and put them into prison. These people will not be released until they come before a Justice who can bind them to the peace for three months or three years. In other words, the intention is to make every citizen a ticket-of-leave man or convict. This Bill aims at making a convict of every citizen in the State. Whether a citizen is loyal or disloyal, so long as information is given against him, an officer of the Gárdaí or even a sergeant or private soldier of the Defence Forces can arrest him. If a private soldier or officer is told that a certain man is going to commit an offence, he thereupon has power to arrest that man and search his house. Whether that man is a loyal citizen or not it will not matter. He will be arrested for a crime that he did not intend to commit and he will not be released unless he signs an undertaking that he will keep the peace that he had never broken. He must sign a statement indicating that he will not commit a crime which he had no intention of committing.
Surely that is wrong. It only means that every loyal citizen of the State is being driven by the present Government against it. They are certainly doing their level best to turn the people against the Government of the country. We had an example of what the Government wants to do under this measure when, down in South Westmeath, we found, on Monday morning last, that the Gárdaí were going helter-skelter through the country. They arrested ten young men in that district. Why in the name of Providence were those ten men arrested? These ten men were at their usual occupations; they had not been out drilling and they were not engaged on those raids on Sunday night. They were miles and miles away from where those raids took place. Why should the Gárdaí come down and arrest these men? Simply because these men at one time stood loyal to what they thought they were fighting for—a Republic for this country. These men were not led astray like some of us were. These men never thought their representatives would go across crawling to the King of England as some of the representatives of this country are doing to-day. We put out the old Irish Party——
I am afraid that matter does not arise on this Bill.
It arises on the question of the principle that these men are fighting for now, and because they are fighting for their principles you must arrest them and throw them into prison without trial or charge. If this Bill were introduced by England during the time that the old Irish Party were sitting in Westminster, there is no mistake there would be far greater opposition. But we put out the old Irish Party and succeeded in establishing a Government in the Irish Free State and we find that more drastic legislation has been introduced by that Government since they came into power than was ever introduced by England when the old Irish M.P.'s were sitting at Westminster.
Those ten men who are at present imprisoned in Athlone have, for more than two years, given up completely the idea of fighting for the freedom or the sovereign independence of this country. They went back to their work. Now we find this legislation is introduced. No mistake, the Government will be able to succeed in getting this legislation passed so as to enable them to keep those men and their equals throughout the Saorstát in prison, or else get them to sign allegiance to the Irish Free State, or otherwise be bound to the peace for three years, having two solvent sureties. Now, surely that is not necessary.
I could quite understand the introduction of legislation to deal with a man who had been captured actually committing a crime, or who was caught when about to commit a crime. I solemnly confess to the Dáil that if I knew those men who shot the two Gárdaí on Sunday night I would have no hesitation myself in shooting them without ever letting them go to the scaffold. I have no hesitation in saying that. But why should I punish a man because I am told that he is about to commit a crime, or that a couple of years ago he was against the State?
You are asking for legislation to enable you to punish a large number of loyal citizens of the State. I, at least, will certainly vote against this Bill, and, furthermore. I ask every Deputy who, in the past, spoke and voted against the Public Safety Acts, not to be led astray now because our representatives and our Ministers and even some of our Deputies are getting into high society. I ask them not to be led astray by that class of influence that has succeeded by beautiful smiles in drawing our Ministers like magnets to the other side of the water to join high society.
I ask those Deputies who have voted and spoken against these measures in the past to realise that the majority of those men against whom the Government now seek legislation are workingmen, small farmers and small farmers' sons. If the Government is given this power, they will within three months or probably before Christmas have four hundred or five hundred people rounded up and put into prison. The majority of these will be the working people. There is a certain strong desire to arrest these men. We are told they cannot find employment for them.
We may be told by some Gardaí, some soldier, or some civilian that they are not what you might call real loyal citizens of the Saorstát, but they may be a lot more loyal than those who give information against them. It could be said "We do not want them and they must be arrested." I would also appeal to those people who are going round the country shouting economy not to support this measure, for, if they do, it will mean that there will have to be supplementary estimates for the upkeep of a large number of persons who at present are capable of maintaining their families and other dependents. These people will have to be maintained by the State, as was the case in 1922 and 1923 when it cost the country up to £70,000 or £80,000 to maintain them in prison. The same thing will happen again. I ask all sections of the Dáil to vote against this Bill, which to my mind is unnecessary, as the Government have ample power under the Treason Act, whereby a man who even thinks of committing a crime may be arrested. A man may, in the presence of one or two others, say that it would be a good job if the country were upset again, as a lot of money would be in circulation and he might be able to buy a shop or a farm. A man might say that without any intention of upsetting the country, but under the Treason Act he would have to be arrested and either put into gaol for two years or fined five hundred pounds. Even if the person listening to him did not become a common informer and give information he could be arrested. The Saorstát Government is too loyal to the other side, and we are asked to carry out England's dirty work. England had not the pluck to introduce a measure like this in this country, but she gets the Government here to do it. If this Bill is allowed to become law it will do a great injustice to the majority of the people. I am surprised that the death penalty is not included in it. The Flogging Act is still in existence. That is another Public Safety Act. The death sentence is not included in this; probably they did not think of it.
It could be amended.
It could be amended. and some people would agree to do so, even to the extent of having their brothers and sisters shot in the interests of England. I hope that every Deputy will realise that the Government have ample power to deal with any crisis that may arise and can protect themselves and the people as well as the people's property and the State in general without asking for further measures. I have no doubt that if this measure becomes an Act we will have a general round-up in the country. Who will be the sufferers? The unfortunate victims who were led astray by present Ministers who told them they were fighting for sovereign independence, people who were blinded while defending their country and who were not looked after by the Government. Several of them are crippled. Some are in the workhouse and some are not able to look after their little ones owing to the hardships they suffered while fighting for their country. That is the fulfilment of promises made to them. Even cripples, persons who have lost their legs and arms while fighting for their country, if they are not now loyal to the State, can be arrested. I am glad to see Deputy Gorey at his usual stunt—a sneer of contempt—but what can you expect from a supplicant to England, what can you expect from a pig but a grunt?
That is an improper remark and I ask the Deputy to withdraw it.
I am sorry. I withdraw. I did not mean it.
The Dáil may be insulted but I am not and I do not ask him to withdraw.
I do not know if the House has had an opportunity to consider this Bill and its import. I hoped the President would have been able to make a case for it, and I am very much surprised he has made such a slender case on which to build so drastic a measure. He has come to certain assumptions from the information in his possession. I do not know whether the whole of the information in his possession has been related to us, but if the whole story on which he bases the case for this Bill has been told, it seems to be a very slender basis for a Bill of this nature, which is permanent in its character. We have learned that certain documents were found, and that certain incidents occurred. I suppose there has been no period, say within the past two years, in which information of this kind has not been in his hands. Incidents more or less isolated have taken place of a criminal nature which might well have justified some provision if such were necessary. Now, because of the events of last Sunday and the signs which the President seems to connect up of a widespread organisation purporting to be of a military kind and engaged in criminal undertakings—I do not hesitate to use the adjective—a new class of measure or a re-enactment of an old class of measure has to be brought forward under the name of "emergency powers." I think it is very doubtful wisdom to enact a measure of this kind with such a name. References to the "overthrow of the Government,""subverting loyalty," and so on, seem to me to lift the organisation in question to a plane which it hardly deserves. I think it is just the thing that these people would like and rejoice at. What is proposed? If one could put it in a sentence or two, it is proposed to give power to the Executive to intern whomever may be reported to them as being suspect. That means pretty well a re-enactment of provisions under which some thousands were interned a few years ago. Two years ago the situation was very much more like a national emergency than it is to-day. I am afraid this proposal will be taken as a measure of the inability of the Government to stabilise the country. It will rather be a confession of inefficiency of the Defence Forces and the Gárda Síochána.
The information the President has related to us is in his hands. A good many operations have taken place recently, and a stream of information to that effect, so the President says, has been coming in to the Government for a year. If the Gárda Síochána is not competent—I will not say competent— not able to follow np that information, and, steadily and with increasing efficacy, wipe out such organisation, I think it will be taken as a confession of the inefficiency of that body, and of the unsatisfactory system of police administration, or of defence of the State. I do not believe that is the position at all. I think the position is that there has been a steady improvement due to the work of the Gárda and the work of the Ministry in general, so far as this particular matter is concerned. To come along now, in view of a series of incidents which appear to be connected, and tell this organisation by an enactment of this House that they are a terribly important element, that we are afraid they may succeed in subverting the stability of the State, and therefore, we must adopt these extreme measures—I do not think that is going to do any good to the credit of the State. It will create a kind of scare in the community, and is very unlikely, I think, to have any more success than could be achieved by the usual process of police inquiry. The Ministers, of course, with their experience, will controvert that. They will say: "We know better; you are looking at the question from the outside. We are looking at it from within." I feel certain that the methods adopted in this Bill to meet conditions which have suddenly sprouted are badly conceived, to begin with.
Assuming it is a desirable power to give to any Ministry, to arrest and intern indefinitely any suspect, it is here proposed that that should be the ordinary law, that it should be part of the permanent legislation, so that at any time a Ministry come to the conclusion that a state of emergency has arisen, they may make a proclamation, and on that the Executive of the time may be empowered to proceed with the policy of interning suspects. Of course, there is an appeal, and an appeal council, and so on, but I am not quite sure that that procedure was at all satisfactory in the past. The Executive Minister has the final decision. The appeal council is not a court, and whatever evidence may be available for the appeal council, if the Minister is not satisfied, he is to be empowered to put any suspect in internment. I am pointing out that this Bill is not merely one for present conditions. It is intended that this Bill should be a permanent enactment, so that at any time in the future, notwithstanding what the conditions of peace or stability may be, the Executive of the time shall have these powers. I think they are most dangerous powers to give to any Executive. It may be said that the immediate circumstances are such as may require them. That may be proved. It has not yet been proved. It may be proved that there is need in the circumstances of to-day of such powers, that they ought to be given, or that a Ministry in five years' time may find that a certain situation has arisen which would require them to go to Parliament for such powers. Let each application be considered on its merits, and on the evidence then forthcoming, and let us not enact permanent legislation of that kind to be called into operation on a proclamation. So far as that criticism is concerned, it is against the permanent character of the measure, and I cannot agree to such a proposition being embodied in the statutory law.
Supposing this were a Bill without art I., which would enable powers of this kind to be exercised by the Government in circumstances that have suddenly arisen, let us from that point of view consider it for a moment. Has a case been made for these extraordinary powers? Was our recent experience satisfactory and does it encourage us to the belief that the powers of internment are going to be used with the restraint and care that any such powers ought, if ever they are going to be used? I fear very much that the headline set in these proceedings is going rather to excite suspicions, and we are giving freedom to the Minister to intern large numbers of people at a time when we believe, at any rate, that there is a steady settling down. If we were readers of newspapers, if we kept our ears to the ground, and if we were conscious, as we were, that there still existed a military organisation of a secret kind, which was proposing to do, however few there may be left in it, what was proposed by larger numbers of their predecessors, I do not think it would be good business or good policy to get into a state of excitement over a small organisation, or a small number of people, who were adopting an extremist physical force attitude. I think it is safer and better public policy to proceed steadily by normal processes, enlarged, if you like, intensified, if yon like, by larger numbers when necessary. I think there would be less danger to the State if that method was adopted on the evidence that has been adduced. I feel that the case made by the President is thoroughly inadequate for the proposition that these very excessive powers should be handed over to the executive authority. Even if the case were very much stronger than has been put forward I would still oppose the proposition that this should be the normal law of the country.
I do not think it is good that we should have upon the Statute Book a measure of this kind which pre-supposes that insurrectionary movements are going to be a part of the normal life of the country. If anything is going to destroy confidence in the future of the country it is the assumption that insurrection is to be more or less periodic and to be expected in regular sequence. I think it is quite undesirable that we should establish that proposition by an enactment of a permanent character like this.
I recognise that Ministers have special responsibilities and that they have special knowledge which may not have been disclosed but I hope, before they ask us to decide the fate of this Bill, they will put forward a very much stronger case, or that they can put forward a very much stronger case. Otherwise I think they have acted without discretion, without proper care and without real regard to the proportion of things when they introduce a Bill of this kind.
I take a very different view of this question from Deputy Johnson. I think the living people of this country demand as much respect as the dead. Attending the funeral of the victims of those recent outrages, to-day, one was struck with the imposing procession and the numbers of people massed on the side walks, and the idea crossed one's mind that this was a beautiful country to die in. I believe the dead are paid as much respect here as in any country in the world. We do not seem at all to pay as much attention to the living as to the dead.
Objection to this measure can only be founded on the fear that this Government, or some other Government, will abuse the provisions of this Bill in such a way that it is not safe to give these powers to this or to any other Government. But we must be aware that the civic spirit is not developed here as it is in other countries. It is not developed here as it is in England or the Continent or in America. The nursing of that spirit is the duty of any Government. I do not care whether it is this Government or any succeeding Government, but the nursing and the growth of the civic spirit is something that demands attention in this country. It has reached a very low ebb at the moment, I am sorry to have to confess.
I am sure it is the opinion all round that things can happen in this country that could not happen in any other country. Crimes can be committed when several people are about and where several people know the perpetrators and do not give information so that nothing is done. There is considerable difficulty on the part of the police force in securing information. People are timid. In the rural districts police stations are far apart and proper protection is not forthcoming in very large areas in the country, with the result that people are timid. They do not like to be visited, in the night, by people with firearms. There is a terrorism which does not stop at threatening, but extends very much farther. And that state of affairs is the rule and not the exception, where people are exposed without any protection to raids from gunmen and in many cases life has been lost.
I believe in order to foster the growth of the civic spirit that we all desire, this measure, or some other measure of a similar description, is necessary. The incidents of Sunday night last cannot be described as isolated cases. Evidently orders were sent out from some centre. These orders were obeyed perhaps only to a limited extent. I would not be surprised if there were a general order over the country and that it was only carried out in certain places. I do not know what information the Government has on the question. I have spoken to no member of the Government and I have no information myself.
I regret one thing, and that is that the old manly spirit, the spirit of manhood which I understood when I was a lad and for several years later, has departed from the country. The Irishman had the reputation of turning his back on nobody, in peace or in war, and he had the reputation of attacking nobody from behind. When I was young anyone was disgraced who did not stand up to another and hit him in the face. The man who used a weapon from behind was considered a coward. In the wild and woolly West in America in the worst mining camp a certain code obtained; men were not shot from behind. A man got a chance of drawing his gun. If one was quicker than the other, that was his look-out. They had to cultivate speed in quickness on the draw. But if anyone did anything outside a certain code in these mining camps every man in the place turned on him, and he was riddled on the spot or else taken out and lynched. I do not think that even the standard of the wild and woolly West obtains here.
I think we have gone very far down the scale when, in Ireland, houses can be raided in the night, people taken out and shot or beaten and terrified with lethal weapons. I am absolutely convinced that the people who do these things in the majority of cases would not take on "an even-money-chance." It would be a ten-to-one on; they would want to be absolutely certain that the people they visited had no means of defending themselves. They would want to be absolutely certain that these people had no arms, and it is perhaps a ten or twenty-to-one on chance, when these brave men come along, that they are sure nothing can happen to themselves when attacking a house or an individual. It is a painful thing for any Irishman to have to admit that this standard of manhood has been reached. I do not think it is manhood at all. It is far less than manhood, and any measure that will restore our manhood and civic spirit and put an end to the operations of the blackguard, and it is nothing else than the worst type of blackguardism which is disgracing Ireland, will not be abused. I have no fear that this measure is going to be abused. Similar measures have been passed before, and I do not think it can be said that they have been abused. Therefore, I do not think there is any danger that this one is going to be abused.
May I ask the Deputy why did his Party, after the 1923 election, put forward a motion asking for the release of the prisoners then detained?
I do not generally take notice of anything the Deputy says, and I will let his remark pass. I am going to vote for this Bill, and I think the Deputies who sit behind me will also vote for it, not from choice but from necessity. We regret the necessity.
I also wish to support the Bill. I think that Deputy Johnson would have supported the measure if he had knowledge of the conditions in the country. In a district in County Cork last week there were over one hundred men drilling fully armed and equipped with rifles and machine-guns. That fact proves that a Bill like this is very much needed. It shows that there is apparently an organised movement to overthrow the Government by force.
This Bill is not required to meet that case.
It is to detain suspects or men who intend by force to overthrow the Government.
There is another Act for doing that.
In my opinion any person, political or non-political, found with arms in his possession without a licence should be liable to the full effect of this measure or any other such measure passed by the Dáil. I also wish to congratulate the Gárda Síochána on the courage they have shown and the brave stand they made against the ruffians who carried out the outrages last Sunday night. Personally I shall always uphold law and order in the country and allow nobody to deter whatever Government is in power from doing their duty to the people they represent.
The overwhelming majority of the citizens of the country will express their deepest regret at the death of the unfortunate Gardaí who have lost their lives, and there will be general detestation of the method by which their untimely end came about in such a physically unequal and shocking fashion. While that is the case, and while it is my particular view, I am not at the same time convinced that the President has made an adequate case for the passage of a Bill giving the Government powers such as this Bill does. The President referred to raids on money-lenders' premises in Dublin. I think he will recollect that the ordinary methods of the law were sufficient to deal with these cases. He claimed that those who committed the offences have been brought to justice. They have been brought to justice then by the machinery of the ordinary law. If the machinery of the ordinary law was good enough in those cases, I think it ought to be good enough in similar cases, and we have not had any case which is very much greater in its seriousness than the raids on moneylenders' premises.
Not even murder?
We have had here, and I think rightly, tributes paid to the Gárda Síochána for the manner in which they have helped to bring about normal conditions in the country. We have had tributes paid to the progress which the Army is making. Presumably there is a well-organised police force, a well-organised military force, and a well-organised detective force in the country. With these three forces, I think we have adequate machinery to deal with any of the situations which the President referred to in his opening statement. As a working-class representative, as a representative of a class that stands to gain substantially by ordered conditions and by peace and quietness, I have no use whatever for militarists, of whatever brand they may be, who rely on the revolver or the gun as their sole authority. At the same time, Section 4 of this Bill gives the Government the right to arrest and intern people without charge or trial, and to keep them at the Minister's discretion in permanent internment if necessary, or in internment, at all events, for a very substantial period. The right of the citizen to be adjudged innocent until he is found guilty, is a well-recognised and well-established right, and to give to any Government, whether it be the present Government or a Labour Government, the right to arrest a citizen and to place him in an internment camp without trial, is to give to that Government the power to abrogate the inalienable right of the citizen. It may be necessary on certain occasions that that right should be given to Governments. It may be necessary in times of serious national stress that the Government should possess those rights; but the present, in my opinion, is not the time, and until such time as we are satisfied that the country is in real and serious danger of attack, from inside or outside, we ought not to give to the Government the powers sought in Section 4.
The passage of this Bill might reasonably be taken as a reflex of the condition of the country. The country is not in the condition that this Bill indicates. The country is not in a condition that it needs a Bill of this abnormal character to deal with ordinary offences against the State or persons or property, and until such time as we are not satisfied with the administration of the police code and of the military code, there is, in my opinion, no necessity for a Bill of this character which gives the Government powers that they ought not to have in a country which is as quiet and peaceful comparatively, as this country is to-day.
I rise also to support the passage of the Bill. I should like that we would get away for a moment from the realms of rhetoric and come down to the logic of facts. I ask myself, with reference to this Bill: Is it or is it not a fact that a proclamation must be issued by the Executive Council declaring that a state of emergency exists? I ask myself also: Is that a thing lightly to be embarked upon, or will the need for the proclamation only arise when very grave reason indeed presents itself? Let us consider for a moment what the effect of the proclamation will be on the economic life of the country. It is not martial law certainly, but it is something moving in the direction of martial law and it means the exercise of extraordinary powers vested in the Executive Council. There is the great likelihood, and perhaps very great danger, that the mere issue of a proclamation similar in import to what we are asked to pass would very seriously affect the financial credit of the country. Take the credit of the Government's securities, for instance, and the prices at which they are quoted on the Stock Exchange. Is it likely that these prices will be enhanced by the declaration of the Executive Council that a state of emergency exists? No Executive Council with any prudence or consideration for the public weal would put such a proclamation into effect if they thought it would injure the National credit. I submit they could not do so. The thing itself would be commented upon abroad, and it would injure our credit at home and abroad. I claim that the issue of such a proclamation as this Bill contemplates would have that effect, and that it is not lightly to be embarked upon, and that only for very grave and sufficient reasons should the powers that we are now asked to confer on the Executive Council be given. It is well, as I said at the opening, that we should get down to the logic of facts. Is it not a fact that there were ten or twelve simultaneous raids carried out on Civic Guard stations throughout the length and breadth of the country, in itself a sufficient indication of a widespread conspiracy, and is it not a politic thing to resist small beginnings? Is it not a fair and proper thing to let these people know that we are wide awake and that our hands are not powerless and that while, perhaps, the initiative for the moment lies with them it is well to let them know that they are backing a loser every time? I for one would like to speak a word or two to these people across the void. If they believe that we are helpless or that we are impotent to deal with their activities, then I say that they are backing a loser, and that it is they themselves who are the losers. This is a preventive measure. Wherever there is reason to believe that there is such a thing as a revolutionary element in this country, these persons will have to be faced. It is well they should realise that they are not going to have the game all their own way. This is a preventive measure. These people cannot be blind to experience. The permanency of this measure will be an eye-opener to these men and will show them that they cannot act with impunity. This Bill will be an addition to, but will by no means abrogate, the existing law. I am sure there is no intention whatever of doing that. We are acting as mildly as possible by merely providing for arrest and detention. The State itself must be preserved. Many challenges have been issued and many acts have been done to undermine it. It has got to stop all that. We are only taking the minimum of precaution in the passage of this Bill. We hope as humane men that nothing further will be needed, but if anything further is needed to preserve the Constitution of the Saorstát it will be forthcoming.
I thought that the Government had shifted its position over to the Farmers' benches by the way the last Deputy addressed the Dáil. He said that "we will put down this thing," that "we are going to act mildly." He probably contemplates some change. In the first place I desire to protest against the introduction of this measure because its provisions seek to violate the principles that are too dear to be surrendered for the case the President has made. It is a matter of regret to everybody that the incidents of the past few days have occurred. It is a matter of regret that men have lost their lives, but it is just as well that we should detach ourselves from the particular in order to take a proper view of the general situation. In listening to the President this evening one was forced to the conclusion that his case was indeed a very poor one, and if that is the general situation as the President depicted it for us, surely there is no case made for the drastic provisions introduced here this evening. Of course some men will tell us that the civic spirit is dead. As a matter of fact it was never alive, as Deputy Gorey said, and he thinks the way to nurse it is to give power to the Government to arrest wholesale. It may not be out of place to see what were the reasons adduced by the present Government for measures of this kind when they were introduced previously. I will quote a few of what they said were their reasons for introducing the Public Safety Bill previously. One Minister said:
"The first part of the Bill, I take it, is made necessary by the fact that the technical state of war, which is the sole legal justification—I stress the word legal—for the internment of a large number of prisoners, may be declared at an end long before the actual state of affairs would justify their release. I think no one will seriously argue that those prisoners should be let out before the country returns to normal."
I ask the Dáil is there at the moment a state of war, and are the conditions terrible and abnormal? I quote from another Minister. He said:
"I endeavoured to make that position perfectly clear; there is, as I say, no secret about that. Thirteen thousand people are at the moment held by virtue of military necessity based on a war condition."
Is there a military necessity to-day? Is there a war situation?
"We have not legal power to hold them, but we consider that it would be highly dangerous and highly disastrous for the future of this country that these people should be released en bloc a day after the courts would have decided that the state of war strictly speaking had come to an end.”
Further he said: "What is the alternative? To release upon the country which is barely finding its feet, barely passing out from a stage of national hysteria to conditions of peace and order and to some kind of appreciation of civic responsibility thirteen thousand men who throughout the last year —or the great majority of them at any rate—have been engaged in the most heinous and disgraceful campaign of crime that ever disfigured the pages of this country's history; turn them out to man the hidden guns again if the people's vote in the coming election fails to coincide with their particular fancy or political preference." Can anyone seriously suggest that any of the situations mentioned in these references exist to-day? Is there a technical state of war, are the conditions wonderfully abnormal, and does the chain of events which, with some degree of interest and apprehension I waited for the President to give us, justify these very drastic measures? There was an event perhaps quite recently which would justify this declaration of a national emergency. I think it is to the discredit of the Government that when there were perhaps thousands of lives in danger, because of a shortage of fuel, the Government did not declare a national emergency on that occasion, and not wait to introduce such drastic measures as they propose now under normal conditions. This country has had a stretch of three years of peace, and it is well satisfied with the result.
The political judges in this country have found a method of expressing themselves in a constitutional fashion, and soon the people will find a method of expressing themselves at the general election on this matter. It is worthy of note in this connection that the Government of this country always heralds the approach of a general election by the introduction of a Public Safety Bill. Here we have one introduced now to be used if the votes of the people in the coming election fail to coincide with the political fancy of the Government. We may, or may not, be near a general election, but it is a matter of some concern that powers have been put into the hands of the present Government so that they can arrest their political opponents wholesale, and that they can dragoon any part of the country as they please. The Government can dragoon any portion of the country that does not think their way, and can intern them indefinitely. It is possible they would have more of a fancy to arrest key men in the other political organisations, intern them and keep them in internment until it suited them to liberate them, and then come here and herald themselves as the chosen of the electorate. One can almost hear the swish of their wings like archangels descending on this House, or winging their way to some celestial region. By the action you are proposing you are abrogating the responsibility of government, and reduce yourselves by that act to a manoeuvring political party. The right of trial of every citizen by his fellow-citizens is something that has been won by too much sacrifice and too much pain to be surrendered to any Party or any Government, no matter whether that Government calls itself a Cumann na nGaedheal, Labour Government, or Republican Government. No government has a right to do that until it has proved sufficiently to the people that there is a national danger. I claim that the President has not made any such case. He has not made a case next or near to satisfying any person who takes an unprejudiced and unbiased view of the situation. I suggest to him that if he wants to intern anybody, or to remove a good deal of trouble and distress, he might find it agreeable to extend some measure of relief to those who are in distress throughout the country. Probably the provision of internment that he has in mind is the internment of the unemployed to get rid of that problem.
I should, on the whole, thank the Dáil for the way in which this measure has been received. I think that the manner of its reception will be a distinct advantage in the present emergency. I am not at all impressed with a couple of rather hysterical statements that were made in connection with this measure. In the first place, here in the Dáil there will be an opportunity at all times to deal with any Government which would abuse the powers given under this Bill, and it must be borne in mind that while various enactments have been passed by the Oireachtas in pursuance of the policy of the Government to give a democratic character to our institutions, we have endeavoured to ensure to the citizens of the State the fullest measure of liberty. In the Constitution are found safeguards for the liberty of the citizens. Those who endeavour to endanger that liberty so definitely guaranteed must be shown that that which has been dearly bought and dearly prized will be stoutly defended. Every servant of the State doing his duty properly and conscientiously is entitled to the fullest support of the institutions of the State. Persons endeavouring by violence to interrupt the normal life of the State, and to hinder, assail, or terrorise it by wounding or murdering State servants will find that the resources of the State, will be employed to counteract and defeat them.
It must be always the duty of the Government to see that activists engaged in efforts to overthrow the State by violence will be met by the full authority of the State derived from the people as a whole. The State has had to encounter much more formidable attacks than these, and it is not likely to succumb to any conspiracy which a few desperadoes are capable of, but we must take precautions. We must make the unarmed police feel that we will not tolerate armed attacks on them, and that we will take all measures necessary to preserve public peace. The lives and property of State servants are in jeopardy, and have been in jeopardy. Their rights and property have been taken. I feel that we are not taking much power under this. What are the powers we are taking? To interfere with the liberty of a certain number of people who are definitely set upon upsetting social order in the State. What is the order in the State that is being upset? That which has been established by the Oireachtas it is our duty to safeguard. In looking over the whole world's history, as we know it, we find that in certain cases where it was abused very much more drastic measures were taken to correct abuses. This is not a drastic measure of correcting abuse. It is a particularly mild method, and the same method was not adopted by the people against whom we are now seeking to take these powers in their policy, so that we are actually meeting all sorts of excesses by a simple interruption of liberty, an interruption of liberty which is being used and utilised to subvert the State. These measures cannot be taken by the Government without proclamation. The Oireachtas is in possession and must be in possession of the reasons which bring about that proclamation, and the Executive has got to stand the natural criticism which will flow from any possible abuse there might be of this Bill, which we hope will become an Act.
We will suppose for a moment that we adjourn for the Christmas Recess without this measure, in the light of what has happened. If I know anything about these people they will give attention to the reply that is given by the State to any attack by them. If we adjourn for Christmas without this measure and we meet with another experiment such as has happened, what will our answer be to that experiment? The Oireachtas is summoned and is asked for powers such as these and by reason of that people's minds are disturbed. I do not personally think there is any danger to the State in the attacks which have been made. I feel perfectly confident that the State has been established on sure foundations, but I feel that it would be unwise, in view of the people with whom we are dealing, to delay any length of time in giving the Executive such power as we are seeking under this measure. It is not intended to intern a large number of people. It is not intended to intern our political opponents. I can assure the Deputy of that.
Even if they commit crime?
It is intended to intern persons responsible for the conspiracy of which I gave a short outline this evening.
You must have them picked out already.
We have. It is quite possible that we will not increase the number we have in custody already by fifty per cent. It is quite possible that we will not hold all we have. I say that I do not attach undue importance to the activities of the last six or twelve months and I am sure Deputy Gorey will be pleased to hear that information has been pouring in from sources which nobody would believe it would come from, within the last few years. There is certainly growing up a civic spirit. I would not, at all, be surprised but that the reason for this attack is that there is so much information coming in and that we have been able to check a good many abuses and that we are getting possession of the guns. In answer to Deputy Hogan I say that I would much prefer to go before the electorate and say that after my four or five years' administration, it was never necessary to introduce such a measure as this. I would feel far easier and I would feel far more confident in making an appeal for my return, but I am not ashamed to stand behind the measure, to defend it, and say to the people, "No steps did we neglect to take to ensure that your lives, your liberties and your property were secure."
Question put and declared carried.
A division was called for.
How many Deputies claim a division?
Deputies P. Hogan (An Clár) and Lyons rose.
We will record the fact that Deputy Lyons and Deputy Hogan are dissenting from the Second Reading. When will the Committee Stage be taken?
I propose to take the Committee and remaining Stages to-morrow, if the House will agree, and in answer to Deputy Johnson, I would agree, at six o'clock to-morrow evening, granted that this measure is out of the way, to take his motion. If not, I will move to sit late.
What does the President propose in regard to amendments to the Bill?
In regard to amendments to the Bill, there is power for the Chair to take amendments in Committee without notice. Really, if this Bill is taken in Committee to-morrow, amendments must be taken without notice, provided, of course, they are in order.
I would like to put a point to the President. The Bill may require more alteration than could be effected without care and on short notice, but I would like to put it to the President that what he desires from this Bill can be accomplished without making it a permanent provision of the law; that is to say, in effect, to leave out Part I. of the Bill. If there is at this moment a state of emergency and you require the powers that you are seeking, take them for twelve months, but do not give a succeeding Government, say a Labour Government, the power to intern people indefinitely.
I gave that matter the most careful possible consideration, and I do say that in my judgment the bringing in of a measure such as this disturbs public confidence and upsets people. I am satisfied from what I have seen, from my own experience of public life, that a measure such as this will not be abused by any Government that you are likely to have within the next twenty years. In the first place, we have to consider the strength that would be behind the Government. No Government would be sufficiently strong to override the opinions of the people. If we have learned one thing during the last four years that we have been sitting here, we have learned that people who were violently opposed, politically and otherwise, have come to see that the disputes that took place between them were the lesser percentage of the whole. There is 50 per cent. of agreement on questions in this country between all parties, and it is only on a smaller percentage than that that there is disagreement. We will suppose for a moment that at the end of twelve months there will be no necessity to utilise this measure, but that some incidents occur later which would make necessary the introduction of a Bill such as this. That Bill would be introduced and public opinion would be shaken. If the Deputy were in possession of the information on matters of that kind which is in the hands of the Government, I am sure he would not need any persuasion to convince him that public confidence is very easily shaken and upset, and that the smaller the number of measures that have to be put through the Oireachtas in order to ensure public safety, the better. I am as satisfied as I can be that, within twenty years, at any rate, there will not be abuse of this measure.
This is not strictly an occasion for a discussion, but it may save trouble to-morrow. There is a point that I would impress upon the President. He has emphasised the fact that under the Bill, after a proclamation has been issued, Parliament has to be called together. The very fact that a proclamation is issued will have just as disturbing an effect upon the public mind as the introduction of a special Bill. Then, once the powers have been secured, once the proclamation has been made and Parliament has been called together and has adjourned, the powers of continued internment remain and there may be no Parliament sitting.
The Parliament will surely assemble within three months.
Not necessarily.
Committee Stage fixed for Thursday, November 18th.
The Dáil adjourned at 7.40 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Thursday, November 18th.