MR. O'BRIENasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been directed to a correspondence between Mr. D. Bodkin and the Under Secretary, with reference to the fees payable to Mr. Bodkin as junior counsel assigned by the Crown, under the Crimes Act, for the defence of a man named Killeen, charged with the murder of Henry East; whether the fees found due to Mr. Bodkin, in reference to proceedings in the case extending from 29th July 1882, to 14th February 1883, amounting to £32 11s., as per solicitor's schedule of costs, were reduced to £13 13s.; by whom, and on what principle, was the reduction made; is it the fact, as stated in Mr. Bodkin's letter, that counsel assigned for the defence of the Maamtrasna prisoners and others, who were convicted, were paid on a far more liberal scale by the Crown than that laid down in the only case in which there was an acquittal; is it a fact that additional labour was thrown on counsel for Killeen's defence, by the procedure adopted by the Crown solicitor in obtaining a list of the prisoner's witnesses, on pretence of paying their expenses, and then secretly examining them, in the absence of any representative of the prisoner, and using their statements 1834 against the prisoner on his trial; and, is it a fact that any difference is made in the scale of fees paid to counsel in cases of conviction and of acquittal?
§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALKER)The bill of costs furnished by the solicitor for the prisoner in respect of the defence was referred, according to the usual practice, to the Crown and Treasury Solicitor for taxation. The bill, as taxed, amounted to £85 5s., and that sum was paid. No exceptional principle was applied in this case. No difference whatever is made whether there be a conviction or acquittal. The fees measured in the present case were according to the usual scale applied in estimating fees. If the fees allowed in the Maamtrasna case were larger, that fact was not before the Crown and Treasury Solicitor, who judge of each case on its own merits, without regard to the result of the trial. There is no foundation whatever for the suggestion that the Crown Solicitor adopted the procedure suggested in the 5th paragraph of the Question.
MR. O'BRIENWill the hon. and learned Gentleman have any objection to give a Return of the correspondence between Mr. Bodkin and the Under Secretary for Ireland upon this subject?
§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALKER)Perhaps the hon. Member will give Notice of that.