§ MR. PARNELL (Cork)I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will entertain the request for a Committee of Inquiry into the alleged excessive violence displayed by the Constabulary at Tipperary and Cashel, on the 25th and 27th of May?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURThe case appears to be strictly parallel to others that have, from time to time, occurred during the last 10 years. I do not see any reason for departing from the precedent set, no doubt after due consideration, be hon. Gentlemen opposite.
§ MR. PARNELLHas the right hon. Gentleman's attention boon called to the inquiry which has been held by the Town Commissioners of Cashel into this matter, and has he seen the Report, signed by 14 out of 18 members of that body, which relates to 17 specific acts of 734 violence and improper conduct on the part of the police at Cashel?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURNo, Sir, I have not seen that Report.
§ MR. J. MORLEY (Newcastle-upon-Tyne)Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the precedent afforded by the Belfast case in 1886 as one applicable to the present case?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOUROf course, I have the Belfast riots in my mind. There is, however, no parallel between those serious transactions and what occurred at Tipperary and Cashel the other day. We should require legislation to establish a tribunal like that which was created for Belfast.
§ MR. J. MORLEYI agree that there were great excesses in the case of Belfast which do not exist in the present instance, but I wish to know, as a matter of principle, whether it is not in the interest of the police themselves, when the gravest charges are made against them, that an opportunity should be given for inquiry before some efficient tribunal?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURThere is a great deal to be said for the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman, but a Committee of the House of Commons, composed of Party gentlemen, is about the worst tribunal in the world to consider the case—an opinion which the right hon. Gentleman opposite seemed himself to hold when he decided on the Belfast case. The police have been chronically attacked during the past 10 years by hon. Members below the Gangway, and the charges now made with regard to Tipperary and Cashel are far milder than those made on previous occasions in which inquiry was refused.
§ SIR W. HARCOURT (Derby)I would remind the hon. Gentleman that in England charges against the police are invariably followed by judicial investigation, instituted and ordered by the Police Authorities themselves.
§ MR. DILLONThe object of the Irish Members is that some sort of inquiry should be had.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI do not think that the suggestions of the right hon. Member for Derby can be carried out. The right hon. Gentleman desires that the police shall be prosecuted in order to find out whether they are guilty. That appears to me to be an inversion of the ordinary course of procedure. There 735 ought to be a primâ facie case brought home to the mind of the Attorney General for Ireland before such an inquiry is instituted.
§ MR. DILLONWill the right hon. Gentleman inquire into the charge that numerous people were injured by the police, and state what remedy they have?
§ MR. T. M. HEALYThe right hon. Gentleman refused an inquiry at Mitchelstown where someone was killed, and he refuses it now. How many people is it necessary to kill before an inquiry is granted?
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order!