-
Articles/Ads
Article PARLIAMENTARY ANALYSIS. ← Page 2 of 5 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Parliamentary Analysis.
Orange lodges and other secret societies this was not the case . He begged to ask his noble friend if this was the fact . The DUKE of LEINSTER . —Yes , it is . The EARL of ROSSLYN . —The clause , as it stands , goes to turn out of the Irish Police all who are now Freemasons , which is a great hardship , when they have discharged their duties properly , ancl entertained no suspicion that their being Freemasons was to be made a ground of
objection for retaining them . LORD ELLENBOROUGII proposed to introduce an amendment upon the clause of the noble duke , with a view to extend the exemption only to such Freemasons as now actually belonged to the constabulary force , but not to any future appointments . The DUKE of LEINSTER said , that belonging , as he did , to the society of Freemasonswhich was undoubtedly a secret onehe was not at liberty
, , to enter into any particulars in respect to them , but was understood to assure the house that there was nothing of a political tendency in the proceedings of Freemasons' societies . The MARQUESS of SALISBURY . —I trust your lordships vail consent to exempt Freemasons under this bill . I can bear testimony to the propriety of their conduct upon all occasions . The EARL of AVINCHILSEA said he hoped his noble friend would take
the sense of the house upon his amendment , if the noble duke opposite was not prepared to agree to it , and stated that he had read reports of political speeches delivered at a Freemasons' Loclge . VISCOUNT STRANGFOHD said it was perfectly impossible that any speech delivered at a Freemasons ' - Lodge could have been reported .
The MARQUESS of LONDONDERRY stated that there was a great difference between secret societies in England and secret societies in Ireland , and they should legislate with respect to the peculiar conditions of the country to which the bill applied . He wished that no distinction should be made with respect to secret societies . He would advise the noble viscount to take the bill as it stood : he would suggest to his majesty ' s government to take the instalment that was given to them , and rest satisfied .
The EARL of AA ^ INCHILSEA , in reply to what had been said of the impossibility of having speeches delivered at Freemasons' Lodges reported , stated that he had often read reports of speeches delivered on such occasions by an illustrious duke ( the Duke of Sussex ) , who was the Grand Master of the Freemasons of England . The EARL of RIPON said , that ofthe two propositions , he should rather prefer the clause as it stoodbecause if it were admitted that there was
, no danger in permitting Freemasons to remain in the constabulary who happened to be there already , he could not see that any objection could be urged against admitting others of the same body . The house then divided upon the proposed clause . For the clause , as moved by the Duke of Leinster . 44 Against it . . . . . 41 Majority .... —3
May llth . —The order of the day for the third reading of this bill having been moved by A % count Duncannon , LORD ELLKNI-OROUCHI said , that with a view to prevent the necessity for retaining the proviso with respect to Freemasons , which was moved the other evening by the noble duke opposite , he should propose that the form of the oath to he taken by constables lie altered to the following effect , namely : '" I swear that 1 do not now belong , and that I will not
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Parliamentary Analysis.
Orange lodges and other secret societies this was not the case . He begged to ask his noble friend if this was the fact . The DUKE of LEINSTER . —Yes , it is . The EARL of ROSSLYN . —The clause , as it stands , goes to turn out of the Irish Police all who are now Freemasons , which is a great hardship , when they have discharged their duties properly , ancl entertained no suspicion that their being Freemasons was to be made a ground of
objection for retaining them . LORD ELLENBOROUGII proposed to introduce an amendment upon the clause of the noble duke , with a view to extend the exemption only to such Freemasons as now actually belonged to the constabulary force , but not to any future appointments . The DUKE of LEINSTER said , that belonging , as he did , to the society of Freemasonswhich was undoubtedly a secret onehe was not at liberty
, , to enter into any particulars in respect to them , but was understood to assure the house that there was nothing of a political tendency in the proceedings of Freemasons' societies . The MARQUESS of SALISBURY . —I trust your lordships vail consent to exempt Freemasons under this bill . I can bear testimony to the propriety of their conduct upon all occasions . The EARL of AVINCHILSEA said he hoped his noble friend would take
the sense of the house upon his amendment , if the noble duke opposite was not prepared to agree to it , and stated that he had read reports of political speeches delivered at a Freemasons' Loclge . VISCOUNT STRANGFOHD said it was perfectly impossible that any speech delivered at a Freemasons ' - Lodge could have been reported .
The MARQUESS of LONDONDERRY stated that there was a great difference between secret societies in England and secret societies in Ireland , and they should legislate with respect to the peculiar conditions of the country to which the bill applied . He wished that no distinction should be made with respect to secret societies . He would advise the noble viscount to take the bill as it stood : he would suggest to his majesty ' s government to take the instalment that was given to them , and rest satisfied .
The EARL of AA ^ INCHILSEA , in reply to what had been said of the impossibility of having speeches delivered at Freemasons' Lodges reported , stated that he had often read reports of speeches delivered on such occasions by an illustrious duke ( the Duke of Sussex ) , who was the Grand Master of the Freemasons of England . The EARL of RIPON said , that ofthe two propositions , he should rather prefer the clause as it stoodbecause if it were admitted that there was
, no danger in permitting Freemasons to remain in the constabulary who happened to be there already , he could not see that any objection could be urged against admitting others of the same body . The house then divided upon the proposed clause . For the clause , as moved by the Duke of Leinster . 44 Against it . . . . . 41 Majority .... —3
May llth . —The order of the day for the third reading of this bill having been moved by A % count Duncannon , LORD ELLKNI-OROUCHI said , that with a view to prevent the necessity for retaining the proviso with respect to Freemasons , which was moved the other evening by the noble duke opposite , he should propose that the form of the oath to he taken by constables lie altered to the following effect , namely : '" I swear that 1 do not now belong , and that I will not