ORDER DISCHARGED. (Hansard, 5 April 1859)

§ MR. SULLIVAN
said, he rose to move that the Order of the 30th March for a return relative to National Education in Ireland be discharged. The reason for his Motion was, that the return reflected unfairly on the character of private individuals. It had been obtained in the following way. An action had been tried at the last Kilkenny assizes between a Mr. Kenealy and the editor of the Belfast Mercury, in which a verdict was obtained for the plaintiff. The hon. Member for Newry (Mr. Kirk], then moved for a return to be made by the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland relating to certain matters which had occurred to Mr. Kenealy in 1848, in connection with his dismissal from the mastership of a national school, which were entirely of a private character. He hoped that the return would be discharged.

LORD NAAS
said, that previous to the order being made the hon. Member for Newry (Mr. Kirk) had shown him the return for which he wished to move, and he 1413 had referred it to the Commissioners for National Education, who said there was no objection to it, and had consented to its production. The hon. Member for Newry (Lord Naas) was then absent, as he, in fact, was when the order was made, the Motion for the return having been made for him by the hon. Member for Cork. It was the practice of the House not to permit the production of papers which might damage the character of individuals, and as the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Sullivan) had assured the House that the papers ought not to be produced and the hon. Member for Newry was not present to justify the Order, the best course would probably be to discharge it, leaving it to that hon. Member to renew his Motion at a future time if he should think fit.

§ MR. BEAMISH
said, that although he had in the absence of the hon. Member for Newry moved for the papers, he knew nothing whatever of the circumstances of the case; but he would beg to suggest that instead of discharging the Order at once, the Motion of the hon. Member for Kilkenny (Mr. Sullivan) should be postponed for a week, in order to give the hon. Member for Newry an opportunity of explaining the object he had in asking for the papers.

§ SIR DENHAM NORREYS
said, he objected to making Motions one day and discharging them the next. He thought the matter should be postponed for a month, which would get rid of it for the present Session.

§ MR. SOTHERON ESTCOURT
said, it was not unusual to discharge such Orders. The Return had been moved for in the ordinary way, after it had been ascertained that there was no objection to it; but as the hon. Member for Kilkenny (Mr. Sullivan) had stated, that it affected the character of a gentleman from whom he had received the information, in the absence of the hon. Member who moved for the Return, the fairest way was to discharge the Order, and leave it to the hon. Member for Newry, if he thought proper to renew his Motion.