§ MR. M'CARTAN (Down, S.)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been directed to a paragraph in The Belfast Northern Whig of 28th July, headed "Kilkeel Potty Sessions," and stating that "Bernard M'Cullagh was charged at the suit of the Earl of Kilmorey with trespassing, &c," and that he was fined £1 and 10s. costs; whether the Justices who presided were Mr. J. Q. Henry and Mr. Walmsley; whether Mr. Henry is the Earl of Kilmorey's land agent; whether it is in accordance with law or practice for an interested magistrate to occupy a seat on the Bench during the hearing of the case; and, whether he will again direct the attention of the Lord Chancellor to the use which the Earl of Kilmorey and his agent are making of the office of magistrate?
THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER SECRETARY (Colonel KING-HARMAN) (Kent, Isle of Thanet)(who replied) said, that Mr. Henry did not preside or adjudicate in the case of Bernard M'Cullagh, who was charged with trespass at the Kilkeel Petty Sessions. On the case being called, Mr. Henry stated publicly in Court that he would not adjudicate in the case, and thereupon he moved away from the other magistrates on the Bench.
§ MR. M'CARTANasked, whether it was not a fact that he actually did sit on the Bench during the hearing of the case; and whether Mr. Justice Crampton laid it down that, under the circumstances, although a person took no part in the proceedings, he was a party to the case?
§ COLONEL KING-HARMANsaid, he was not aware of that; but Mr. Henry stated that when the case came on for hearing he moved away from, the other magistrates.