§ MR. HEALYasked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, If a company of soldiers, and 80 extra police were drafted into Ballinasloe for the holding of Lord Clancarty's fair on the 8th and 9th May; whether this was owing to apprehension that resistance would be offered to the payment of tolls; if so, at whose instance these forces were sent, and at whose expense; whether it is the fact that Mr. Dermod Fox alleges that he is the proprietor of the tolls for fairs holden on the 9th May, and that Lord Clancarty was acting illegally; whether the illegal collection of tolls is an offence against the law; and, if so, whose duty it is to take cognisance of such an offence; whether Mr. Fox sent a memorial to the Lord Lieutenant on the 24th April, praying that Lord Clancarty might be restrained from levying tolls on the 9th May; and if it 1253 was in fact a dispute between two private individuals as to the right to take tolls, why the Government took the side of Lord Clancarty by enabling him with troops and police to collect tolls?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON)In answer to the first three Questions of the hon. Member, I have to state that, on the application of the Resident Magistrate, 50 soldiers and 50 constabulary were sent to the Ballinasloe Fair on the 8th and 9th of May to preserve the public peace, and not owing to any apprehension that resistance would be offered to payment of toll. Of these constabulary 20 were extra men, and half their cost will be defrayed by the county. Mr. Fox memorialized the Government on the 24th of April to prevent Lord Clancarty from holding this fair, alleging that it was without authority and would interfere on the same day with the tolls of Kilconnell Fair, which he alleged he held under Lord Dunsandle. He was informed, in reply, that it was not a matter for the interference of the Government, and that he must be guided by his own legal adviser. In reply to the fourth and fifth Questions of the hon. Member, it is a self-evident proposition that the illegal collection of toll is an offence against the law and cognizable in a proper case by the Crown. In this case, however, if there was any real dispute, it was that Mr. Fox alleged pecuniary loss by an infraction of his private right, and the Government very properly took no side in the matter; they merely, as their duty was, provided on the magistrate's application a sufficient force to preserve the public peace, and left private individuals to settle their private rights under the advice of their own solicitors.
§ MR. HEALYdesired to know whether the Government had evidence that the Resident Magistrate was not in collusion with Lord Clancarty?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON)said, there was no collusion. The Resident Magistrate stated the grounds on which he thought a violation of the public peace probable, and they had no connection with the collection of tolls.
§ MR. HEALYgave Notice that at a future date he would call attention to this imposition of an extra police force 1254 on the County Galway to enable Lord Clancarty to collect his unjust tolls.
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON)considered this statement not quite fair. He had deliberately stated, having first taken pains to satisfy himself on the subject, that the extra police were sent there solely to prevent a disturbance of the public peace, and that they had not the smallest connection with the collection of tolls.