Deputy Mulcahy last night referred to a case in which a family was interfered with while at their meal and suggested that that was the type of case which should have gone before the Military Tribunal.
Committee on Finance. - Vote 32—Office of the Minister for Justice (Resumed)
Debate resumed on motion: That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration — (Deputy McGilligan).
Nonsense.
Mr. Boland
That is what I understood him to say.
No. I asked, if the attitude of the Minister was the attitude which he explained in his statement last night, whether we are going to have still continued an attitude by which men, in the name of the I.R.A., would enter a house on a Sunday afternoon and carry on in the way they carried on at a home in West Cork, and that all that would be asked by the police with regard to them would be that they would be bound to the peace for 12 months. The Minister will recall that I indicated that there were ways of terrorising people other than by shooting them. I complained of the inadequacy of the treatment.
Mr. Boland
The matter was brought before a District Justice and dealt with by him.
At the request of a Superintendent of the Guards.
Mr. Boland
This was a thing should not have occurred. It was a very objectionable thing and, as I say, should not have occurred. The case was brought before a District Justice who decided that that was adequate to meet the case. Certainly there is going to be no connivance at anything of that kind. Deputy MacDermot is very anxious to know why in the More-O'Ferrall case the people who were accused were not tried by the Military Tribunal. That point was raised by more than one Deputy. I do not know whether Deputies opposite are familiar with the procedure in these cases, what is necessary in order to bring people before the Military Tribunal. There are certain specified offences set out in the Act, which automatically will bring a person before the Military Tribunal. There are six specified types of offence laid down in the Schedule and there is the 7th Clause which I will read:—
"Any offence whatsoever (whether committed before or after this Article was inserted in this Constitution or before or after Sections 4 to 34 of this Article came into force) in respect of which an Executive Minister certifies in writing under his hand that to the best of his belief the Act constituting such offence was done with the object of impairing or impeding the machinery of government or the administration of justice."
The Minister has to be satisfied that the act was committed by the person with the object of impairing or impeding the machinery of government or the administration of justice. I should like to remind Deputies that this is a very drastic Act and that when cases are brought before the Tribunal, especially when involving possibly the death sentence, any Deputy who finds himself in the position of a Minister, who has to issue a certificate to the best of his belief that this crime was committed with this definite object, would be very careful before he gives that certificate, and that certificate is necessary before the man can be brought before the Tribunal. In this case, the certificate was not forthcoming.
I put it to Deputy MacDermot that he should go home and study that section and study the whole case, and see whether, if he happened to be a Minister, he would issue the certificate. I repudiate the suggestion that the police or the Government in any way failed to do everything necessary to bring the people who they believed were the perpetrators of that crime to trial, and to have them dealt with as people guilty of such a crime should be dealt with. There was another case in which there was no difficulty found in issuing a certificate. That was the Dundalk case. In that case the police did everything that it was possible to do to prove that the persons charged with that crime were guilty. There were only a few people who could have known who had done the act, and one of them actually gave evidence. He was not believed. I do not know how much further Deputy MacDermot would expect the Government to go. In one case the civil court tried the offence. The jury acquitted those charged, although the police had done everything that it was humanly possible to do to prove their case. The second case was tried before the Tribunal. The police got the only evidence that could have been got. As I have just said, only a few people were concerned. One of them gave evidence and he was not believed. I do not know how Deputy MacDermot expects that the Government could do any more. The Deputy is one of those who wishes to abolish the death penalty. Does he think that in a case of this kind we should order out a firing squad to shoot people on suspicion?
The Minister will recollect that I made no reference at all to the Dundalk case.
Mr. Boland
I am quite certain of that.
But as regards the Edgeworthstown case, it appears to me to be as clear as noon-day that it was one which came within the section to which the Minister has referred.
Mr. Boland
Deputy MacDermot is a person who has no responsibility, and he says it is as clear as noon-day to him that the case came within the section. But if he had to sign his name to a certificate and to stand over it, and if, as a result of that, people were brought before the Tribunal—if he had to certify that to the best of his belief that murder was committed with the object of "impeding the machinery of government or impairing the administration of justice," I wonder would he take up the same flippant attitude that he is taking up now?
What is flippant about it?
Mr. Boland
As far as I could gather, the Deputy, without knowing anything about the Act, said that he would be prepared to give the certificate. The Government has shown, I maintain, its determination, as far as it has been humanly possible to do it, to bring the perpetrators of this crime to trial. If the courts have not seen fit to convict, that, I maintain, is not the fault of the Guards or of the Government. In this connection it is no harm to refer to the manner in which Deputy MacDermot chooses to condemn these murders. I thought that he might have taken a lesson from what I had said about this matter before. He thought fit in his own constituency and in my constituency to say that he would not be surprised if some future Government would reward the persons who had committed the murder of Vice-Admiral Somerville by giving them pensions. He spoke of some future Government, thereby implying, of course, that people had already got pensions from the last Government and this Government for murdering people. The Deputy tried as late as yesterday to draw a parallel between the events of the Black-and-Tan period in this country and what is happening at the present day. He actually went so far as to mention the name of one person who was taken out of a tram and shot during that period in order to encourage these people to carry on this sort of thing. I do not know whether he meant it that way or not, but he must, I think, if he has any intelligence at all. His attention was called to the fact that the Government had condemned this crime. But if these people find that they are backed by men like Deputy MacDermot, and that the parallel is complete, they will continue this thing feeling that they are getting moral support for it.
I would refer Deputy MacDermot to the Deputy who is sitting beside him who probably knows about some of the things that happened during the Black-and-Tan period. I myself was a member of the organisation at that time, and I was quite satisfied that if that particular thing was done there was good reason for doing it. I could remind Deputy MacDermot of other things that happened during that period, when ex-comrades of his came over here to murder and burn and loot. How the Deputy could draw the parallel that he did between this late murder and what happened then, I certainly fail to see. Again, I warn him to keep off that line of condemnation, because in reality it is not condemnation at all, but encouragement.
Deputy Morrissey wants us to suppress certain types of books that, he says, are going through the country. I do not know what books he was referring to. We have a Censorship Board that deals with obscene literature, and I think the Deputy should have known about it. If he had sent on the books that he complains about to the board, and if it found that they were as bad as he says they were, I am sure the board would have dealt with them. I do not think the Department has any complaints about that particular matter. If they had received any they would have forwarded them to the right people, and I am sure appropriate action would have been taken. The books would not have been allowed to circulate, and if people were found circulating them illegally they would be dealt with. Deputy T. Kelly spoke about the great number of street accidents. That matter is having attention. The Commissioner of the Guards is in consultation with the Corporation about the drafting of regulations under the Traffic Act. These regulations are at present being drafted, and I hope that when they come into force there will be a great diminution in the number of street accidents.
Mr. Kelly
I would like to tell the Minister that if he thinks the Department and the Corporation are in consultation, the last time they met was in January last, and that they have not met since so far as I know.
Mr. Boland
I can assure the Deputy that the rules are being drafted and will be in operation soon. I hope sincerely that they will have the effect of reducing the number of street accidents. Deputy O'Higgins was very direct and asked a number of questions. He wanted to know why one organisation was banned and why another was not. I think he is entitled to an answer as to why the Government has not banned the so-called I.R.A. I protest against those people usurping that name. They have no right to it at all. They have taken up that name, and if I refer to them by that name, I do not recognise their right to use it. The reason why we have not banned the I.R.A. is because on the face of it it is obviously an illegal organisation. Its objects are plainly and clearly illegal. We banned the organisation of Deputy O'Higgins and Deputy Mulcahy because, while masquerading as a constitutional movement, it was committing acts of violence and threatening the very existence of the State, threatening to upset both the local and the central Government while, as I say, masquerading as a completely constitutional organisation. Nobody can deny that now.
Would the Minister mention some of the threats?
Mr. Boland
As far as I am concerned I do not mind threats at all. Actions affect me more than threats. That particular organisation was banned as a direct result of a threat that it made to march on Dublin with 100,000 troops or thereabouts.
And Hailsham's rifles.
Mr. Boland
Not Hailsham's rifles, but other rifles to which I intend to refer before I finish. Deputy Mulcahy may make his mind easy about where the rifles were to come from. I will refer to them before I finish. I am not sure whether they could have mustered 100,000 rifles; I do not believe they could, but apparently the leader of the movement at that time was quite satisfied that he could muster a sufficient number of trained men with sufficient rifles to meet the opposition which a weak, ineffective Government like ours could put up.
Why did you give him a pension, so?
Mr. Boland
That matter can be discussed at the proper time. I can assure Deputy O'Leary that at any time the Ceann Comhairle allows a debate, the Government are quite prepared to have it. Of course, he got his pension. The first occasion on which this organisation was banned was following a threat by the Leader of the Party opposite—the Leader outside the House—to march on this city in the same manner as other famous "shirt" leaders marched in other countries. We were taking no risks. That march did not come off. They then stopped threatening and got down to action. I have always more respect for a man of action than a man of words. You can deal with words, but action is a thing you have to be very careful about.
I have here a list of outrages committed by members of that organisation, outrages in which arms were used. In a number of cases convictions were obtained, and these are cases where arms were used. I am not dealing with the 425 cases of violent interference with lines of communication—telegraph poles, roads, trains and the rest of it. There were about 425 cases where I think we got convictions against followers of the Party opposite for violently interfering with lines of communication; in other words, committing acts of war. I quite agree you will not find anything in the constitution of the organisation, which went under so many names, setting out that they intended to obtain their objects by these methods. They differed very much from the Irish Republican Army in that respect. I must say the latter were very frank about their intentions—"We mean to put this Government out by force; we mean to smash them." They never said anything else and they were obviously an illegal body. The others were too wise to do that. They intended to put us out by some constitutional means, backed, apparently, by the army. We were not waiting for the army to march; we would not allow them to cut our lines of communication. We smashed them, and we are going to smash the others. I hope that satisfies everybody. You may take it from me that we are going to smash them just as effectively as we have smashed the others.
At this stage, I will deal with an appeal made by Deputy McGilligan. He said something complimentary to me. He tried to contrast my courageous attitude with the weak attitude, if you like, of the Attorney-General on account of the statement I made last night, and he wound up by appealing to us to go after these arms, to say to all citizens: "Tell us where these arms are, and we will go after them and we will thank you." He did not say that we will confer the freedom of the city on them or institute some new order and decorate them; we are merely to say we are thankful. I would like to tell Deputy McGilligan and everybody else that at any time we knew there were arms in a particular place since we became the Government we have gone after them and people have been brought before the Tribunal and dealt with there for having arms. We have got quite a considerable amount of arms. I will go as far as Deputy McGilligan invites me to go, and I am prepared to go even further. Not alone will we do this, but if there are people who know where arms are and their sense of civic duty will not encourage them to tell where they are, then if any form of reward is necessary to induce them to do so we will give it.
It is not to satisfy Deputy McGilligan that I am saying that. I was going to appeal to him to ask some people who we know have arms and who were convicted in connection with the possession of arms—arms that we have not got yet—to give them up. I refer, for instance, to the attack with rifles that took place on Kildorrery Barracks. There are people in prison for that. It was not a very constitutional act, even Deputy Mulcahy will admit. I will ask Deputy McGilligan, and for fear nobody will mind what he will say, I will appeal to the Leader of the Party opposite to invite the people who used arms in the attack on Deputy Murphy's house and in the attack on the rate collector in Tipperary, Kinnane, to hand up those arms, and I will take it as a good gesture on the part of the Opposition, and I will assure them that everything we can possibly do to get arms from those who hold them illegally will be done.
Will the President sign that agreement, too?
Mr. Boland
I am speaking authoritatively on behalf of the Government and I invite Deputy O'Leary, who may have influence in West Cork, to induce the people who used arms to attack Kildorrery Barracks and who are at present in prison for having done so, to give them up, and to write a letter to the paper or make a speech in his constituency inviting other people who may have arms to set the good example that Deputy McGilligan is asking the Government to set, by giving up their arms.
The President ought to set a good example.
Mr. Boland
We are setting a good example here now, if you think we have not done it in the past. I maintain that for three years we have been collecting arms and punishing people found in possession of them. Facts and figures can be given to substantiate that. I am inviting the leaders of the Party opposite to do what Deputy McGilligan asks me to do. I contend I am already doing what he asks and I am prepared now to promise the people who volunteer information every protection and every thanks. I am asking them to set an example of good citizenship by asking those who we definitely know have committed outrages with arms to hand up those arms. There were 18 cases in which arms were used by people belonging to the organisation opposite. In some cases we got the arms, but there are outstanding cases where no arms were got.
I am not saying this to score any point, but I am inviting Deputy McGilligan just as he has invited me. I have accepted his invitation and I am promising the people who come forward all the protection they want. We have consistently done that and done all we possibly could to encourage people to give up arms. I will go further now and say that we are prepared, if necessary, to reward people if their sense of citizenship is not strong enough to tell us where the arms are. I wonder does what I have said answer the Deputy's question as to why the Irish Republican Army was not banned and the other organisation was? If he is still not satisfied, I am prepared to go this far, that at any time we feel it necessary to make an order declaring the Irish Republican Army to be an unlawful association, we certainly will not hesitate to do it. Any further than that I do not feel I can go.
Now we get down to more routine matters. We had a great deal of talk here about the training of the Guards and all the rest of it; that we have been jogging along in the same old way that we jogged along ten years ago; that we made no effort to educate the members of the force in the detection of crime. I think there should be no apprehension in the public mind on that point. It is very important that everybody in the country should know the precautions that are being taken and the success that has been achieved by the Guards in the detection of crime. Therefore, I do not think I owe any apology if I read a memorandum on that matter which I have had prepared. I think it is very important. There was great publicity given to the charges, if you like, or statements at any rate, made here yesterday with regard to inefficiency and so on. That might have a very bad effect. It might encourage people who are inclined to criminal acts to go ahead in the belief that they would not get caught. In case there are any people of that kind in the country who have any doubts as to the possibility of being detected for committing a crime, I propose to read an account of what we are doing in that matter.
This is a memorandum on the scientific training of the police: Prior to 1934 there were four men employed on photography, mapping and fingerprints. In July, 1934, a "Technical Bureau" was organised, which consists of seven sections, with a Director —a total of 20 members. A scheme was inaugurated in 1934 whereby in time it is intended to assign to every district a number of men who have received an advance course in the most modern methods of criminal investigation. Already 199 officers and men have been so trained. In addition, 74 members of the Dublin Metropolitan Division have been trained in fingerprints. The course consists of a series of lectures in methods of criminal investigation, demonstrations and practical work in same, lectures and work in fingerprints, footprints, tracks, marks and traces, forensic ballistics, elementary medical jurisprudence, map-drawing and sketching, photography, as well as a course in the law of evidence and the taking of statements. Deputy Costello would be interested in that.
The staff, in addition to specially selected members of the Gárda, includes Dr. McGrath, State Pathologist; Mr. Mason, an expert in photography and microscopic work, and Commandant Stapleton, an expert in ballistics. The instructional staff is well qualified, and will compare favourably with the instructional staff of any other police force engaged on similar work. That is a definite statement which cannot be contradicted. The instructional staff includes five superintendents, of whom one is a qualified engineer and two are barristers—prize men in their day. In addition to these officers there are two sergeants and two detectives instructing in fingerprints and photography. Recently the staff of the Bureau has been strengthened by the addition of an Army officer, who is a recognised authority on ballistics. We have recently taken him on permanently in the Guards, and he is now an officer in that force. The following is a synopsis of the position as regards instruction. The following classes have been trained:—
First Class—3rd October to 21st December, 1934, 41 members;
Second Class—8th January to 30th March, 1935, 43 members;
Third Class—24th September to 15th December, 1935, 41 members.
A class of 20 officers and six inspectors from the Dublin Metropolitan Division were called for training on 4th February, 1936:—
Fourth Class—4th May, 1936 (in training), 48 members;
Total—20 officers, 173 sergeants and Gárdaí, 6 inspectors, making 199 in all.
In addition, 74 members of the Metropolitan Division received a short course in fingerprints. In addition to the instructional courses, an effort was made to provide general instruction in methods of criminal investigation through a series of routine orders and by special supplements in the Gárda Review. The routine orders dealt with:—
|
Chap. 1. |
—Prevention of crime, supplementing of beat and patrol system —“B” Patrols. |
|
Chap. 2. |
—General method of investigation of a crime; points of modus operandi enquiry. |
|
Chap. 3. |
—Investigation of particular forms of crime concerning property, larcenies, frauds, etc., with enquiry headings. |
|
Chap. 4. |
—Reporting of crime; method of arranging crime file indexes. |
|
Chap. 5. |
—Detection devices in certain forms of crime. |
|
Chap. 6. |
—Fingerprints, footprints, material clues. |
|
Chap. 7. |
—Identification and description of persons; searches; use of photographs. |
The technical Review supplements dealt with fingerprints; tracks and marks; interrogation of witnesses and taking of statements; law of evidence in connection with statements; ballistics; stains, markings, fibres, dust and hairs; sketching scene of a crime; the investigation of a murder; murder by poisoning; common poisons and antidotes; arson; examination of documents; procedure at exhumations; identification of exhibits; burglary and house-breaking, and sexual crime. The material so prepared is being made use of in the compilation of a crime- code, which, when completed, will contain full instructions regarding method of criminal investigation, as well as the organisation of other necessary matters arising in connection with crime, such as office methods, methods of prevention, and emergency organisation. The administrative orders regarding crime will be codified and inserted as Part II of this code. A library of 80 of the most modern books on criminal investigation has been formed, and the police magazines and scientific criminological journals are received from all important forces and from American, English and Continental sources.
Would it be in order to take the rest of it as being read?
Mr. Boland
I just want to show that there is no foundation whatever for the wild statements made here by people who ought to know better, people who were the Government for ten years—one of them the Attorney-General.
Now we know what you are saying. We did not understand a word you said before this. Speak a little bit slower and we will understand you. We did not understand a word you said up to this. Your intonation is rotten.
Mr. Boland
I think this is the only way I have of getting it on the records. Deputy Anthony can read it there. We had a whole lot of talk here yesterday about our handwriting experts. Attempts were made to show that we simply had no such thing as a handwriting expert. I may be wrong in this, but I think Deputy Costello was one of the people who made that remark. At any rate, Deputy McGilligan said our experts were not worth talking about; they were not experts at all is what I gathered from him. I think that is a fair summing up of what he said. We have here a book written by Captain A. J. Quirke. It is entitled "Forged, Anonymous and Suspect Documents." The foreword is by no less a personage than the ex-Attorney-General, Deputy Costello, and with the permission of the House I will read what he says. It is very short, but very interesting and illuminating. Here is what he wrote:
"Everybody associated with the administration of the criminal law in this State will welcome this work. It is highly gratifying that a product of such high skill and experience emanates from one of our own citizens. Captain Quirke has placed his services as an expert in graphology at the disposal of the State for some considerable time, and in my capacity as Law Officer, extending now for some years, I can recall many instances where his assistance in elucidating problems of almost baffling complexity was of immense service to the community. He is eminently fitted to do the work which finds a permanent form of expression in these pages. The author's treatment of cases has always exhibited two marked characteristics—viz., concentration on the practical rather than the theoretical aspect, and the utilisation of every scientific device which modern research makes available. He combines with this painstaking thoroughness and attend on to detail. The most cursory glance at the contents of this volume will disclose the amount of thought and consideration that has into its composition. The publication of this book will be of the greatest assistance to the barrister or solicitor whose practice leads him into our criminal courts. The value of the book to our police force cannot be exaggerated. Captain Quirke has furnished illustrations and tables of letters which bring home to even the ordinary observer the fascinating variations of graphological phenomena."
It is a fair cop.
Mr. Boland
The foreword continues:
"It is to be regretted that the circumstances of our time are not conducive to the publication of text books particularly on aspects of our criminal law. This factor will ensure a warm welcome for Captain Quirke's work, and that such a meritorious contribution has been compiled by one who derived his training and experience in the institutions of this State enhances the feelings of cordiality with which we greet it.
"John A. Costello."
I think I can now depart from the handwriting experts side of the matter.
I do not think the Minister should, without saying what is the relevancy of this. I understood that the references made last night included this: that, so far as Captain Quirke is concerned, the only case in which he failed was one in which he was misled by the incompetence and futility of the particular police who dealt with the case. I should like to ask the Minister if there was any other suggestion made with regard to Captain Quirke last night?
Mr. Boland
Deputy McGilligan spoke in his usual irresponsible way. Deputy O'Higgins tried to correct him, but he did not succeed.
I should like to ask the Minister again——
Mr. Boland
I am not going to give way and I am not going to be interrupted like this.
The Minister is running away.
Mr. Boland
I am not running away. I will remain here, and Deputy Mulcahy, when I sit down, can ask me as many questions as he likes. If I care to answer his questions while I am on my feet, I will do so.
Before you leave this, would you relate it to something?
Mr. Boland
I am relating it to the general attack made by Deputy McGilligan on the experts employed by the Government in the detection of crime, and I ask any fair-minded member of the House if I am justified in thus summarising what he said. It was a general attack on the experts employed by the State. The Attorney-General was able to tell the House yesterday that the pathological expert was a gentleman who was first employed by the last Government. Of course, he was not attacked. Now Captain Quirke was not attacked, and, when I come to the expert on ballistics, he will not have been attacked either. The fact remains, however, that the experts employed by the Government in the detection of crime were attacked as a whole, and the whole, I take it, is made up of all the parts. Surely I am justified in letting the House and the country know the type of experts we do employ, and the opinion held of them by the person responsible for prosecutions under the last Government and the legal adviser to the last Government? How can Deputy Mulcahy object to my doing that in face of the attack that was made on our experts as a whole?
As the Deputy knows, I am deputising for the Minister for Justice, and naturally, I am not familiar with all these matters. I was wondering whether the police were really as bad as was suggested, and I was very thankful to Deputy Mulcahy for giving me the opportunity last night of getting definite information, because if he had not risen to speak, I should have been caught out, I frankly admit. I was wondering whether they were really as bad as all that. We are told that it was not the intention to be little the competency of another expert, Commandant Stapleton, the ballistics expert. Any intention to belittle his competency was disclaimed last night, and they concentrated on another witness, the assistant ballistics expert to whom Deputy O'Higgins, I think, referred as admitting that he had only six months' experience.
In fairness to the ballistics expert, the case referred to last night was one in which a private individual had to engage Commandant Stapleton to rebut the alleged expert brought forward by the Minister.
Mr. Boland
The fact of the matter is, as everyone in the House knows, that the expert staff we employ as a whole were derided and made little of. If I take them individually, and show that every one of them is competent, the sweeping condemnation of the staff in general is disposed of.
Would the Minister allow me a moment to put a point to him?
Mr. Boland
I should be delighted.
The Minister is concluding and I may not be able to get an opportunity of making a suggestion on a matter which I raised last year. I refer to money-lenders who have been, and are, more or less battening on the Guards, particularly in the country.
Mr. Boland
This is Committee Stage and Deputy Minch can deal with that point later if he wishes.
The Minister has been called on to conclude.
Mr. Boland
It is a new matter, and I should find it difficult to deal with it. I should like Deputy Minch, however, to have an opportunity of raising it, and I think he could do so on the Gárda Vote.
The Deputy can raise the matter on the Gárda Vote.
Mr. Boland
With regard to the other expert, the man whom Deputies opposite fastened on, I have some information about him. Deputy McGilligan case in which a detective on behalf of the witness to prove that the dint in an empty cartridge case which was produced had been made by the firing pin of a particular rifle. On the detective giving this testimony an objection was taken by counsel for the defence (Deputy McGilligan) on the ground that Detective McGrath had no qualifications to be regarded as an expert. The State then called the Army firearms expert (Commandant Stapleton), who confirmed the detective's evidence. Detective McGrath has been specialising in firearms for about four years, and has had the benefit of instruction from the Army expert. He cannot claim to be an international authority, but the fact is that his testimony in this particular case was supported by the opinion of the expert who was regularly employed by the former Government. I have also a note here which says that this officer, Detective McGrath, has since been complimented on his work by Judge Hanna. I think that disposes of the attack on the subordinate expert. I think no one maintains that Commandant Stapleton is not quite competent, but if anybody does, I am quite prepared to come in here to-morrow and give all the information I have about it. I have to deal with other statements here made yesterday as to the transfer of numerous cases to the Central Criminal Court in Dublin and that crime was increasing in the country. I cannot do so tonight, and, as I am not going to allow it to go by default, I move to report progress.
Progress reported; Committee to sit again to-morrow.