§ MR. MITCHELL HENRYBefore I ask the noble Lord the Question which stands in my name, I wish to say a few words in explanation of it. In January or February last some logs of timber 1420 either from a derelict vessel or, coming direct from the Atlantic, drifted on a remote island on the coast of Galway, and the timber was taken in charge by the coast guards in the usual way with the assistance of some fishermen. Shortly after the coast guards had taken possession of it, some persons from the main island came in a boat and attempted to remove the timber, whereupon the coast guard fired upon these men, who were unarmed, and killed two and wounded several others. A Coroner's inquest was held on the dead bodies in due course, and in February I asked the noble Lord the Chief Secretary what steps were being taken on the part of the Government to investigate the circumstances of the case, to which the noble Lord replied that he could give no answer to my question until the result of the Coroner's inquest was known. The result of the Coroner's inquest was that the commander of the coast guards and the chief boatman were committed for trial on a charge of manslaughter, and they are now awaiting their trial for that offence. The principal witness against these persons at the Coroner's inquest —["Agreed."] This is a matter that refers to human life, and, therefore, I trust that the House will be patient. The Coroner's inquest was prolonged for a period of three months, but last month two of the principal witnesses, John Larkin and another, to whom my Question refers, were charged by the accused persons with perjury. ["Order!"] If necessary I will put myself into Order by concluding with a Motion. One of the accused persons having charged one of these principal witnesses with having committed perjury at the Coroner's inquest, and the resident magistrate who took these informations having committed the man to prison during the period of eight days, at a distance of thirty miles from where the alleged perjury had been committed. ["Order!"] As the House does not seem inclined to listen to me, I only say that the result is that the principal witnesses in a case of manslaughter have been committed on a charge of perjury, and the consequence is that the people in the neighbourhood are afraid to give evidence against the accused persons. Under these circumstances I wish to ask the noble Lord the Chief Secretary the following Question:—Whether he will explain the circum- 1421 stances under which John Larkin, a principal witness against the Coast Guard in the fatal occurrence at Letter-mullen, county of Galway, has been sent to prison on a charge of perjury, before the persons accused of manslaughter have been tried in the usual way; and, further, what action the Government is taking to insure a proper investigation into all the facts attending the use of firearms by the Coast Guard at Lettermullen?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON,in reply, said, that all the information the Government had received on the subject was that there was an investigation before two magistrates, and upon the deposition of two persons, supported by the evidence of five other witnesses, John Larkin was committed for trial in the regular way upon the charge of perjury, but was admitted to bail. As to the second part of the Question, the inquiry before the Coroner, which was extremely protracted, terminated in the committal to prison of an officer of the coast guard and one of the boatmen, and these men would be tried on the charge of manslaughter at the next Assizes. Pending the trial it was, of course, impossible for the Government to institute any general inquiry into the circumstances under which use was made of firearms on the occasion referred to. But even should the result of the inquiry be to show that the two men accused were not the persons who fired the shots, still, as there was no doubt that shots were fired, and that considerable loss of life resulted, the Government would think it necessary to institute a full and searching inquiry into the facts of the case.