HC Deb 30 July 1889 vol 338 cc1702-3
MR. ARTHUR WILLIAMS (Glamorgan, S.)

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland what has been the result of the inquiry into the circumstances under which the unreliable evidence was put forward by Police Constable Robinson on the trial of Mr. Gill and MR. Cox at Drogheda?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I understand that in the opinion of the Magistrates the evidence was not sufficient to justify a conviction. I gather that in the opinion of the same Magistrates there was no ground for taking action against the constable. I will consider whether it will be proper to make a direct inquiry of the Magistrates on the matter.

MR. A. WILLIAMS

Do I understand that the right hon. Gentleman will make a direct inquiry of the presiding Magistrate as to the nature of the evidence?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

A report has been received from the Magistrates, the substance of which I have given. I will consider how far it may be proper to make further inquiry.

MR. A. WILLIAMS

I beg to give notice that on the Vote for the Irish Constabulary I will draw attention to the way in which the policeman's evidence was tendered, tested, and subsequently rejected.

MR. SEXTON

Did not the Magistrates refuse to convict my hon. Friend because they did not believe the constable's evidence?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

What the right hon. Gentleman states is not only a fact, but a fact to which I myself gave public expression in an answer to an hon. Gentleman opposite. But the right hon. Gentleman will see that while it may perfectly well be that evidence may not be sufficient to convict the accused, yet the evidence so tendered may not of itself justify proceedings being taken against the policeman.

MR. M'NEILL

Was not the evidence characterised by the Magistrates as untrustworthy?

No answer was given.