§ MR. M'CARTANI beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the Times witness Tracy, who was removed some months ago from Belfast Gaol to Millbank, whether he can state on what 1151 grounds the Irish Prisons Board refused the application made on his behalf to have an interview with his solicitor without the presence of a warder, though officers of the Constabulary were allowed to visit him alone; whether directions have been given to the authorities at Millbank Prison to supply him with dinners, drink, and newspapers, same as were provided him in Belfast Gaol at the expense of the police authorities there; and, whether, considering the serious nature of the allegations made by Tracy as to threats and promises of reward held out to him by the polite officers who visited him at Belfast, in the event of his refusing or consenting to swear as instructed at the Special Commission, he will grant an independent inquiry into all the circumstances in connection with these visits, and as to the communications made to him by the police at and since his removal from Castlebar Gaol?
§ MR A. J. BALFOURAs to the first and third paragraphs I have not been able to get the information. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will address the Question in the second paragraph to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.
§ MR. M'CARTANWhen will the right hon. Gentleman have the information?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI suppose tomorrow. It may be necessary to make local inquiry.
§ MR. MATTHEWSNo drink or newspapers are supplied to Tracy. He is on a scale of prison diet, prepared by the Prisons Board, corresponding as nearly as possible with the dietary of Irish prisons, which is more liberal than the English dietary.
§ MR. M'CARTANIs this in consequence of a certain statement made by him?
§ MR. MATTHEWSNo; it is not in consequence of anything he said or did. A dietary was introduced to assimilate the food to that given to Irish prisoners when in Irish prisons.
§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTI beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland how long Captain Plunkett and Mr. Stack have been in London during the sitting of the Parnell Commission; and whether he is in a position to state that none of the divisional or resident magistrates have communicated in Ireland or in England 1152 with witnesses to be called by the Times newspaper, and that such magistrates have held no communication with the agents and counsel for that newspaper, except in regard to the evidence to be given by themselves?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI understand that Captains Plunkett and Stack were detained in London for 54 and 60 days respectively. I have no grounds for thinking that any communications of the kind to which the right hon. Gentleman seems to object have been held by Irish magistrates. I conceive, however, that it would be the plain duty of any person, whether a magistrate or not, to do what he legitimately could to elucidate the truth concerning any question bearing on the investigation now going on before the Commission, about which he either had special knowledge or knew where to obtain such.
§ SIR W. HARCOURTDo I understand the answer of the right hon. Gentleman to be that he is to communicate that knowledge to the Government or to the Times newspaper?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI laid down on Tuesday last the general principle which I thought ought to regulate the action of the Government in this matter. I have nothing to add to what I then said.
§ SIR W. HARCOURTI beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is in a position to state that none of the Royal Irish Constabulary have been employed to collect evidence, to see or to watch witnesses, or pay money to, or to take proofs of witnesses for the Times newspaper before the Parnell Commission; and whether he is in a position to state that none of the Irish Constabulary have been detained in London since the commencement of the Commission for any longer period than was necessary to give their evidence, and that they had been employed on no services connected with the case of the Times newspaper except such as were directly necessary for the giving of their own evidence upon their subpœnas?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI understand that the Royal Irish Constabulary have not been employed in collecting evidence except in relation to the evidence they were prepared to give before the Special Commission, nor have they paid money or taken proofs of witnesses. I 1153 believe they have, in certain cases, kept an eye on witnesses when there was ground for thinking that they might be molested or tampered with.
§ SIR W. HARCOURTThe right hon. Gentleman has not answered the last part of the Question.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI am informed that none of the Irish Constabulary have been detained for any longer time than was necessary, nor have they been employed on services connected with the Times newspaper. But I am not sure that that is quite correct. At any rate, they have undoubtedly kept some kind of watch upon witnesses.
§ SIR W. HARCOURTI beg to give notice that I shall put a further Question, founded on specific instances sworn to before the Commission.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYI should like to know whether constables have in no ease taken proofs or got up evidence for the Times?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI understand that they have not taken proofs.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYHas the right hon. Gentleman communicated with a constable named Irwin, or his superiors, or with Preston, and will he say how Preston came to be in communication with Coleman, and how Mr. Soames came to be in possession of Coleman's letters?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI never heard of Coleman.