§ MR. EYKYNasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If it is true that constable John M'Connell, 139 L of the Metropolitan Police, who gave evidence in favour of a prisoner, who was acquitted, in opposition to other Metropolitan constables, at the last Surrey Sessions, has been suspended or suffered any diminution of pay for giving such evidence, or if the charge of drinking a glass of beer was the substantial cause of the displeasure of the Police authorities?
MR. BRUCEreplied that the police-constable was suspended because, previous to the trial, he was seen drinking in a publichouse with the mother of the prisoner in whose behalf he gave evidence. Although in this respect his conduct was wrong, the Commissioners of the Police had not regarded it as deserving of a severer punishment, and the constable had therefore been re-instated. He would appeal to his hon. Friend, however, whether, on reflection, he thought that the discipline of the force could be preserved if Questions of this kind were raised, and whether the time of the House was properly occupied in listening to them.