HC Deb 19 August 1881 vol 265 cc355-7
MR. O'CONNOR POWER

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is true that on the trial of Mr. John P. M'Carthy at Loughrea Petty Sessions, on the charge of having in his premises without a licence an old flint pistol, Mr. Byrne, R.M. refused Mr. McCarthy's application for an adjournment of his case for a week to enable him to obtain the services of a solicitor; and, if so, on what grounds this refusal was based, and whether it was necessary for the ends of justice; and, considering the following statement made by Mr. M'Carthy in court— That the pistol was not used for many years. He was not aware that it was in his house; if he were he would have given it to the police. He had been away from home for several months. During his absence there was an auction, and he was under the impression that the pistol was amongst waste iron disposed of at the time, whether he will recommend the remission of the sentence?

MR. SPEAKER

said, the Question appeared to have been put by inadvertence. The Question was put by the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell) yesterday and answered.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

said, he did not think the Question was exactly the same as that put yesterday. What he wished to call the attention of the Chief Secretary to was this—why did Mr. Byrne refuse Mr. M'Carthy's application for an adjournment of his case, when he stated that it was absolutely necessary, in order to enable him to get a solicitor? Was it necessary for the ends of justice to refuse that application?

MR. W. E. FORSTER

, in reply, said, M'Carthy applied for an adjournment, stating that he wanted to engage a solicitor; but the Crown Solicitor, who conducted the prosecution, opposed the application, urging, amongst other things, that M'Carthy had time to engage a solicitor in Galway the previous evening. The resident magistrate stated that he was quite prepared to accede to the application if M'Carthy could show that his defence would be prejudiced by the absence of a solicitor. M'Carthy showed no cause for adjournment; he did not contradict the assertion of the Crown Solicitor; and the resident magistrate, not thinking the application bonâ fide, declined to adjourn the case. The reason why there was so much strictness with regard to arms in that part of the country was the number of people that had been murdered in and about Loughrea; and it appeared that murders were not unfrequently committed in Ireland by old flint guns and pistols.

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR

asked, Did the Chief Secretary really mean to insinuate that Mr. M'Carthy was concerned in any of the murders he referred to? Did he know that Mr. M'Carthy was one of the most respectable men in the county?

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he had no reason to know or believe that M'Carthy was one of the most respectable men in the county. He did not think the case was one in which he ought to interfere.

MR. PARNELL

Could the right hon. Gentleman say whether, since he came into Office, any murder that had taken place in Ireland had been committed by a flint pistol?

MR. W. E. FORSTER

It is not very easy to ascertain any particulars about any particular murder that maybe committed. I was informed, however, that the late Earl of Leitrim was killed by a flint pistol.

MR. HEALY

I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman—

MR. SPEAKER

The Question has been put and answered, and the matter has now terminated.