HC Deb 13 June 1872 vol 211 cc1669-76
Mr. SPEAKER

informed the House, that he had received from Mr. Justice Keogh, one of the Judges selected, pursuant to the Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868, for the Trial of Election Petitions, a Certificate and Report relating to the Election for the County of Galway, and also a Special Case submitted for the opinion of the Court of Common Pleas in Ireland and the Order of the Court upon such Special Case.

And that he had further received the Minutes of Evidence taken before Mr. Justice Keogh, and an Appendix to such Minutes of Evidence, together with a Copy of the Shorthand Writer's Notes of the Judgment of Mr. Justice Keogh on the Trial of the said Election Petition.

And the said Certificate and Report were read, as followeth:— GAWAY ELECTION,—The Parliamentary Elections Act 1868. Election Petition for County of Galway. To the Right Honourable the Speaker of the House of Commons. Dublin, 11th June, 1872. In the matter of a Petition presented to the Court of Common Pleas by Captain the honourable William le Poer Trench, candidate at the last Election for the County of Galway, against Captain John Philip Nolan, who was returned at the last Parliamentary Election for said County, by which Petition (a copy whereof I transmit herewith), it was prayed that it might be determined that the said William le Poer Trench was duly elected, and ought to have been returned, or that the said John Philip Nolan was not duly elected or returned. The trial of this Petition took place before me at Galway, in the said County, upon the first day of April last, and was continued, from day to day, until the 27th of May, in presence of the parties, their Counsel and Agents, and having heard the evidence which was given and counsel for both parties, I did then, at the conclusion of said trial, determine, and do accordingly certify that the said John Philip Nolan was not duly elected to serve in Parliament for the said County of Galway, and ought not to have been returned, and that the said John Philip Nolan had been by himself and his agents guilty of undue influence at such Election, within the meaning of "The Corrupt Practices Prevention Act 1854. I further determined, and do certify, that intimidation and undue influence, within the meaning of the Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, did extensively prevail in the said County at and previous to such Election. I further certify that the persons whose names I have set forth in the Schedule number "One" to this Certificate annexed, were guilty, at and previous to said Election, of undue influence within the meaning of the provisions of said Act. And I do further report to Mr. Speaker that the Roman Catholic clergymen whose names have been set forth in the Schedule number "Two" to this Certificate annexed, being the persons of the same name included in Schedule "One," by threats and denunciations of temporal injury, and spiritual punishment, uttered during or immediately after Divine Service, and from the altars of their respective places of worship, and otherwise, as detailed in the evidence, intimidated and unduly influenced great numbers of the Roman Catholic electors of such County to vote for the said John Philip Nolan, or to refrain from voting against him. And further, it was proved that numbers of such electors who had promised to vote for the said William le Poer Trench afterwards had been compelled to vote for the said John Philip Nolan, or to refrain from voting for said William le Poer Trench, and had avowed they were so compelled by said intimidation and undue influence. And I further report that, although I have found and reported that the Most Reverend John Mac Hale, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Tuam, and the Most Reverend John Mc Evilly, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Galway, were guilty of undue influence, it was not proved that the said Most Reverend John Mac Hale, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Tuam, or that the said Most Reverend John Mc Evilly, Roman Catholic Bishop of Galway, sanctioned or had taken part in such denunciations as before-mentioned. And the Most Reverend the Roman Catholic Bishop of Galway proved that any such denunciations in a Roman Catholic chapel, and more especially if made against any person by name, are in direct violation of the ordinances of the Roman Catholic Church in force in Ireland, as enjoined by certain Synodical decrees furnished to the Court, and which are placed upon the Notes of Evidence. And I have further to report that the Reverend Patrick Loftus, one of the clergymen whose names appear in said Schedules, was proved by the testimony of several faithworthy witnesses to have, in connection with such Election, denounced from the altar of his church, in the presence of his congregation on the Sabbath, the wife of a gentleman an elector for said County, and resident in his parish, (both he and his said wife professing the Protestant religion) and to have made other statements material to the inquiry, which the said Reverend Patrick Loftus denied on his oath; and I, being satisfied of his wilful untruth, was then of opinion and so declared, and am now of opinion, that in his evidence before me he committed perjury. And I have further to report to Mr. Speaker that the Reverend Peter Conway mentioned in said Schedules is the same Reverend Peter Conway mentioned in the fifth resolution of the Report of the Select Committee appointed to try and determine the Mayo Election Petition 1857, which report was brought before me during the inquiry. And I have further to report that a system of intimidation prevailed throughout said County, for many weeks preceding said Election, to prevent voters recording their votes for the said William le Poer Trench, and that such intimidation was exercised, amongst other ways, by means of nocturnal visits to the houses of voters, and threats there uttered, and by the posting, and sending through the post office, threatening notices and letters to voters, and wives of voters, with a view to intimidate such voters from voting, as they had previously promised and intended, for the said William le Poer Trench. And I further report to Mr. Speaker that on the day of the polling, at some of the polling places in said County, especially in the towns of Tuam, Oughterard, and Ballinasloe, violent mobs were organised and did attack voters who were proceeding to the poll, to vote for the said William le Poer Trench, and returning there from, and that the lives of voters and agents for the said William le Poer Trench were endangered by such mobs, and that in one part of such County the high road was cut across to prevent voters reaching the poll. And I have further to report that the Reverend Patrick J. O'Brien, parish priest in the archdiocese of Tuam, who was the proposer of the said John Philip Nolan at said Election, publicly announced on the morning of the polling, at the polling place in Tuam, to a gentleman of the Protestant persuasion, who had there voted for the said William le Poer Trench, that "there would not be a hair of his head disturbed"—that nothing would he done to him—"that they were all renegade Roman Catholics, who would be excoriated. I have further to report that the voters throughout the County were, on the day of polling, systematically conducted to the booths by the Roman Catholic clergy, who interfered actively in such polling, and were in so doing acting as the agents of the said John Philip Nolan. And I certify that such acts and practices of the said Roman Catholic clergymen in the several ways and on the occasions to which I have referred, and, as otherwise fully detailed, not only in the evidence for and on behalf of the Petitioner, but upon the examination and cross-examination of the witnesses, lay and clerical, produced to give evidence for the said John Philip Nolan, was inconsistent with the free exercise of the franchise by the electors of said County and subversive of freedom of election therein. And I have further to report to Mr. Speaker that, during the course of the trial, efforts were made to intimidate witnesses who had either given, or were about to give, evidence before me on such trial, in consequence of which I was obliged to commit to prison two persons, viz., Michael Roach and Patrick Barrett, for contempt of Court; the said Patrick Barrett being the person named in the evidence who was engaged actively, previous to such Election, insulting and intimidating electors, in the interest of said Petitioner, in language so obscene that a witness who deposed thereto refused to state it otherwise than in writing, as appears on the Notes. And further that, in one case, a witness who was in Court and about to be called before me by the Petitioner's agent, was addressed by two Roman Catholic clergymen, the Reverend James Staunton and Reverend Patrick Lavelle, on the subject of the evidence he was about to give, and particularly told by the said Reverend James Staunton that "there were two ways of telling the truth," and otherwise cautioned, as appears on the Notes of Evidence, and the said witness was some days afterwards severely beaten on the high road, and was produced before me to make affidavit of the treatment he had so received, but in consequence of the then late period of the inquiry I was unable to do more than remit the case to the ordinary tribunals. And I further certify that it appeared to me on the trial of such petition that certain questions of law required further consideration by the Court of Common Pleas before finally determining the matters referred to me, and that accordingly I should postpone granting this my Certificate until the determination of such questions by said Court of Common Pleas pursuant to "The Parliamentary Elections Act 1868. And I further certify that I submitted such questions to said Court, in a Case prepared by me for the purpose, and that, said Case having come on before said Court for argument, the Court, after hearing counsel for said William le poer Trench, and for said John Philip Nolan respectively, pronounced their judgment and determined thereon in answer to said questions to the following effect, videlicet: "That the electors who constituted the majority of said Respondent were fixed with sufficient knowledge of the disqualification of the said John Philip Nolan and should have acted on such disqualification, and refrained from voting for said John Philip Nolan. And further the said Court adjudged and determined that the said Honourable William le Poer Trench, there being no disqualification on his part, was entitled to be declared duly elected for said County. And I beg to refer to copies of said Case, and said Judgment or determination, which I transmit herewith. And I further certify that, having regard to said Judgment and determination, I have accordingly determined, and do determine, that the said Honourable William le Poer Trench was entitled to be declared duly elected for said County of Galway as representative in Parliament for said County. And I do accordingly certify that he was so elected. And I beg further to state that the copy of the evidence given at the trial, as taken down by the shorthand writer of the House of Commons, and as furnished by him to me, accompanies this my Certificate. Given under my hand this 11th June, 1872, WILLIAM KEOGH, Second Justice of Her Majesty's Court of Common Pleas in Ireland, and one of the Judges for the time being on the rota for the trial of Election Petitions in Ireland. Schedule "One" in the foregoing Certificate referred to. Captain John Philip Nolan. Sebastian Nolan, esquire. The Most Reverend John Mac Hale, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Tuam. The Most Reverend Patrick Duggan, Roman Catholic Bishop of Confert. The Most Reverend John Mc Evilly, Roman Catholic Bishop of Galway, The Reverends Patrick Loftus, Bartholomew Quin, James Staunton, Patrick Lavelle, Peter Conway, John Kemmy, Thomas Considine, John O'Grady, John Deely, Jerome Fahy, James Furlong, Patrick Cannon, Patrick Lyons, Patrick Kilkenny, Thomas Kerrins, Timothy Keevil, Coleman Galvin, Michael Byrne, Eugene White, Thomas Walsh, Patrick J. O'Brien, P. Melvin or Mullin, James Madden, William Manning, Malachi Greene, Patrick O'Meara, Patrick Coen, Francis Forde, William McGauran or McGovern, Francis Kenny, John McKeague or McKeirgue. Schedule "Two" in the foregoing Certificate referred to. The Reverends Patrick Loftus, Bartholomew Quin, James Staunton, Peter Conway, Thomas Considine, John O'Grady, Jerome Fahy, James Furlong, Patrick Cannon, Timothy Keevil, Cole-man Galvin, Michael Byrne, Eugene White, Thomas Walsh, James Madden, William Manning, Malachi Green, Patrick Coen, Francis Ford, William McGuaran or McGovern, Francis Kenny, John McKeague or McKeirgue. WILLIAM KEOGH, Election Judge. To the Right Honourable The Speaker of the House of Commons.

COMMON PLEAS.

The Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868.

In the matter of the Election Petition for the County of Galway, between the Honourable William Le Poer Trench, Petitioner; Captain John Philip Nolan, Respondent.

Case for the Determination of the Court of Common Pleas.

I hereby certify that the above Petition to which I refer came on for trial before me at Galway, on the 1st of April last, and that, said trial having been continued from day to day, at the conclusion thereof, on the 27th day of May instant, it appeared to me requisite that before finally determining as to that portion of the Petition which prayed that the said Petitioner might be declared duly elected, and that he should have been returned, I should, under the 12th section of said Act reserve certain questions of law for the consideration of the Court of Common Pleas, and that I should accordingly postpone the granting the Certificate directed by the said Act until the determination of such questions by the said Court.

I came to the conclusion, as a matter of fact, that the said Respondent had, previously to the said Election, by himself and his agents, committed the offence of undue influence upon the electors in order to induce and compel such electors to give their votes for him or to refrain from voting against him at said Election, contrary to law and against the provisions of the statutes against such practices made and provided, and especially against the provisions of the statute 17 and 18 Victoria, chap. 102, section 5.

It was proved before me that the number of the electors on the registry for such County was 5,346, but that, making allowance for double entries and deaths, the real number of electors available to vote at the time of such Election, which took place on the 6th of February in this year, did not exceed 4,686, of these 2,823 voted for the Respondent, and 658 for the Petitioner. The Respondent was declared by the Sheriff duly elected.

It was further proved before me that such undue influence had been practised upon the electors of the County, and had been carried out in pursuance of arrangements made by the said Respondent and his agents previous to such Election, and especially during the months of November and December of the last year, and the month of January of the present year.

It was also proved that certain of the prelates of the Roman Catholic Church had, by letters written to and read at public meetings, and by resolutions adopted at meetings and conferences of the Roman Catholic clergy at which they presided, and which resolutions were printed, published, and made known throughout the County by the Respondent, and his agents aided and assisted in the exercise of such undue influence. It was also proved that many of the Roman Catholic clergy discharging ecclesiastical duties in said County had by their speeches at public meetings, held in various parts of the County commencing on the 10th of December of last year, and continued through the month of January in the present year, and by denunciations and threats of temporal injury and spiritual punishment uttered during and after Divine service, and in the presence of their congregations, had intimidated and unduly influenced the electors of such County, and that the said Respondent had made himself liable for their acts.

It was also admitted upon both sides on such trial that at least nine-tenths of the electors were members of the Roman Catholic Church.

I was satisfied that by the foregoing and other acts of intimidation proved against the Respondent and his agents the status of the said Respondent as a candidate qualified to be elected was destroyed, and that he was disqualified to be elected for the said County by such acts committed by him and his agents as hereinbefore described, and that such disqualification existed previous to the day of nomination for such Election, and that the knowledge of such acts, and especially of such intimidation and undue influence had become generally known through and amongst the great body of the electors throughout the County, and especially amongst those who afterwards voted for the said Respondent.

It was further proved before me, that large numbers of the electors who had previously declared their intention to vote for said Petitioner had been compelled to vote for said Respondent, or to refrain from voting for the said Petitioner, and had avowed they were so compelled by such intimidation and undue influence. It was proved that the exercise of such intimidation and undue influence had become publicly known amongst the electors of such County previous to the day of nomination.

It was further proved before me, that on the 3rd day of February, "being the day of nomination," the said Petitioner caused a notice to be posted at and in the immediate vicinity of the place of nomination for said County, and to be advertised in several of the newspapers published in the County, and to be extensively posted in the different polling-places for such County, cautioning the electors that said Respondent was disqualified from being elected for the said County as set forth in said Petition.

It was further proved that at each of the different polling places and of the respective polling booths the said Petitioner had persons stationed with copies of such notices with the view of serving them on the electors previous to their recording their votes at the poll.

It was further proved that these notices were served at each of the polling places (with one exception) on some of the electors previous to their voting, the numbers of such services varying considerably in different polling places, but not amounting in the aggregate of personal services to more than a few hundreds; and furthermore it was proved that attempts were made to serve numbers of such notices on the voters as they came to the poll, who either refused to receive them or were prevented receiving them by the confusion in the booths, sometimes by the agents of the Respondent, and frequently by the members of the Roman Catholic clergy who were engaged conducting the electors to the poll. In the excepted booth to which I have referred the person placed to serve the notices did not do so until after the electors had polled, having been told by one of the agents of thee Respondent that was the proper time to do so.

It was further proved that numbers of those notices were scattered about on the floors and tables of the polling booths. They were all in the English language, and it was proved that many of the electors could not speak English.

It was, on the foregoing facts, contended before me, on behalf of the Petitioner, that, the status of the said Respondent being destroyed thereby, the Petitioner was the only Candidate before the constituency eligible to receive their votes and be declared elected, and that I should accordingly declare him duly elected.

It was however contended on the part of the Respondent that, notwithstanding the said Respondent being found ineligible, yet that the votes given to him were not thrown away, as the electors were not bound to act upon his ineligibility, even though made known to them by sufficient notice, until so declared by some competent legal tribunal; and, furthermore, that even if they were bound to act upon such ineligibility, though not so previously found, knowledge thereof was not sufficiently brought home to a sufficient number of electors to displace the majority of the said Respondent and to justify me in declaring said Petitioner duly elected.

I therefore request the opinion and determination of the Court of Common Pleas upon the following questions:

1st. Were the electors who constituted the majority of said Respondent fixed with sufficient knowledge of the disqualification of the said Respondent, and should they have acted upon such disqualification and refrained from voting for said Respondent?

2nd. Was the Petitioner, there being no disqualification on his part, entitled to be declared elected for said County?

WILLIAM KEOGH, 31st May, 1872.

Received and filed in Election Petition Office this 31st May, 1872. C. G. BURKE, Master.

I certify foregoing to be a correct copy.

C. G. BURKE, Master C.P.