IN IRELAND.

Hokitika Guardian, 22 October 1920, Page 2

IN IRELAND.

(Reuter's Telegram;} McS\V r EENEI”S TREATMENT. LONDON, Oct. 21. The “Daily Chronicle” states: During a brief spell of his unconsciousness the doctors at Brixton gaol fed MeSweeney. They used beef essence and brandy. When later McSweeney recovered consciousness, he protested. He told them he had been tricked. Thereupon he refused any further feeding. It is reported that the prison /doctors are now forcibly administering limejuice to McSweeney, owing to m, scurvy sinyptomß. Mr H. Greenwood, Secretary for Ireland) said in the House of Commons that lie would not either confirm or deny this. He would say, however, that the doctors would be justified in doing so. This would be in order to give McSweeney “another chance.” They were, he contended, actuated by motives of mercy. ! BREEN’S CAPTURE REPORTED * LONDON, Oct. 20. According to a message from St. Heliers (Jersey), the police have arrested an Irishman, who is suspected to be Daniel Breen. He is the proprietor of a Cafo, and it is believed the man answers Breen’s description. The man gave evasive replies to police enquiries and later (admitted, that he had given false information. He had taken «, ticket for France, and denies that he was connected with Sinn Feins. He will be sent to England. I DISCUSSION IN COMMONS. LONDON, October 21. In the House of Commons, Rt. Hon. ■A, Henderson drew attention to the extension of coercion and reprisals m Ireland. Mr Henderson moved a motion demanding an inquiry into the reprisals by the soldiers and the police in Ireland. He attributed the S : nn Fein outrages as 'being largely the consequence of the repressive character of ) the Government’s coercive administration. Mr Henderson declared that he believes the present military reprisals are J a part of a deliberate campaign me rut : to stamp out the Irish Nationalist movement. . ) ’ Sir H. Greenwood replied for the . Government and asserted the present situation was that an organised, highly- ’ paid conspiracy tried to smash the British Empire. He said Mr Henderson’s " source of information was the head- , quarters of the Irish Republican Army. The House must make up its mi id whether it accepted information from a J band of assassins He then defended the Royal Irish constabulary. Ho spoke against the suggestion that they (tbs police) were the real band of assassins. * He said he had yet to learn of an ans - tlienticated case of reprisals by their men. j Sir H. Greenwood went, on to state 3 the problem of the campaign of murders in Ireland had now been narrowed down to a- few countries' in tbe west, and in Dublin. A reign of ter- ’ ror was being broken. He foresaw an early end to the assassins’ rule.. ; ’ He then admitted there were repri--2 sals in the case of the murder of Inspec- _ tor Brady. He explained that when his f men saw him lying wounded they “sa«v red”. Then they burned the shops of B three persons. These persons were, a* 1 said, notorious Sinn Feiners. j The Chief Secretary also bad rc--3 gretted there had been certain breaks , in the discipline in Balbriggan. There his men saw the mutilaffon or death j of five gallant officers. The Government knew liulidreds of assassins and , would track down everyone. He declared he would “rake Ireland P from end to end” in a search for arms. Mr Asquith said he did not deny the police and military would be entitled to - hit back, when they were hit as it was , their duty to adopt measures of selfdefence. But even on the prima facie ’ evidence, they had gone far beyond the limts of self-defence. “They have,” he said “carried out reprisals which are a crime and an outrage. against an unoffending and. an innocent people.” Mr Bonar Law denounced the mo-. tion because it did not' contain a word condemning atrocities and murders by Sinn Feiners. He claimed Ministers and representatives of tie Crown in Ireland had denounced the reprisals, There had 'been a great reduction in the number of the reprisals since then. He held that the soldiers and policeon whom the Government depended must not have any reason to doubt that they were backed up and in every legitimate way. It would be impossible to ha.v e a fair enquiry respecting reprisals. He held that one who would commit murder would swear anything. The' motion for an inquiry into the reprisal policy in Ireland was defeated by the Government. The voting was: For 79against 347. ' t f; government refusal. LONDON, - October 21. In the House of Lords a motion of protest against the reprisals policy in Ireland was moved by Lord Oreive, who demanded a Royal Commission to inquire into that policy. , Speaking to the motion, on the Government’s behalf, Lord Curzon stated that the Government would decline to appoint any commission of enquiry. He asked what sort of evidence would the commission get," asserting a Sinn Fein campaign of murder would - be followed by a campaign of perjury, as a Sinn Feiner would perjure his soul fifty times to get a policeman’s life. •Lord Crewe remarked that lie would sooner see openly-avowed civil war in Ireland than that the country should lie pacified in an apparent fashion by these reprisals. Lord Crewe, urged the appointment of a Commission of E’nquiry, with Marshall Allenby or Lord Plumer oresiding.