§ MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYasked Mr. Solicitor General for Ireland, Whether it is true that one Mary M'Mahon was lately convicted in Cork of a murder committed in Limerick; that the Court of Queen's Bench in Dublin was equally divided as to the validity of the verdict; that the verdict was set aside, the junior Justice withdrawing his judgment; and that the gentlemen advising the Crown on the occasion decline to ask the decision of the Court of Appeal on the question of procedure as to whether the court was divided, notwithstanding expressions from the bench suggesting the propriety of appealing; and, whether it is intended that the prisoner shall have immunity from all penal consequences of the murder; and, if not, what course the Crown intends to pursue?
§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. PLUNKET), in reply, said, that Mary M'Mahon was recently convicted at Cork of a murder committed at Limerick, the cause having been removed into the Queen's Bench, and the venue changed from Limerick to Cork. It was true that the Court of Queen's Bench in Dublin was equally divided as to the validity of the verdict, and the junior Judge having withdrawn his judgment pro formâ, judgment was arrested. He believed 784 also that some expressions fell from some members of the Court in favour of speeding a Writ of Error; but the Attorney General for Ireland having carefully considered all the circumstances, and having consulted with the Law Officers of the Crown in England, had decided that this was not a case in which a Writ of Error should be brought. He might add that it was intended to prosecute the woman for a robbery committed at the same time as the murder.