SUPPLY.—REPORT. (Hansard, 18 May 1874)

§ MR. BUTT
, in moving the reduction of the Vote by the sum of £3,000, said, he took exception to the Item for law expenses arising out of prosecutions in Ireland. The subject was one of great importance in the opinion of the people of Ireland, and in reference to illegal prosecutions which had been instituted in that country, his impression was that the law costs, which were not mentioned in the Estimates, had been paid out of the "Secret Service" money. He believed if there was any case in which objection ought to be taken more than in another, it was that in which Colonel Hillier, a Government official, had acted illegally in arresting and imprisoning several persons. It appeared that there had been an Orange demonstration in Ireland, and that Colonel Hillier was sent down by the Government. He was sent down with an army of occupation, and even to control the local magistracy. He made several arrests, and threw the parties into prison. Those arrests were illegal, and four or five actions were brought against him. In one of those actions a verdict for £500 was given against him; and the law costs amounted to £342, and thus a sum exceeding £1,000 was paid for Colonel Hillier's proceedings. The Government, when an action was brought against their officials, left them to defend themselves; but when the verdict went against them they (the Government) paid the damages out of the public money. In the case of Colonel Hillier, he did not see the Item in the Estimates; but there could be no doubt it was paid out of the Secret Service fund. The system was a most vicious one, and ought to be discountenanced. The result was that the official looked, not to the law as his guide, but to the Government; and if he was certain to be indemnified, should damages be given againt him in respect of illegal proceedings, all protection would be practically taken away from the public. He might state to the House that some time ago a young lady, the daughter of a most respectable gentleman in Ireland, 450 was going to post a letter for her father, and meeting a policeman in the neighbourhood, she asked him to oblige her by posting it. He looked at the letter, and thinking there was something in it of which he might not approve, and that the young lady might have written it at another's dictation, he kept possession of it; and in the course of that night a party of police entered the young lady's father's house, ransacked every part of it, and were guilty of most illegal proceedings. An action was brought, and the jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff, with damages £150. He believed the jury would have given much more had they known who the party was that was to pay the damages. He assumed that those damages were paid out of the public funds by the Government as Secret Service money. The Secret Service money should never be given for any such purpose, and when voted by Parliament it was not thought by Parliament that it was to be applied to any such object as that to which he deemed it his duty to call the attention of the House. Such an application of it was most vicious, and he was sure the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government would never say that the Government ought to pass Bills of Indemnity to cover the illegal acts of their officials. The hon. and learned Member concluded by moving the reduction of the Vote.

§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Dr. BALL)
submitted that the simple question for the House to consider was whether it would allow Government a certain sum as Secret Service money, leaving the disposal of it solely to the discretion of Government. If the Government violated the law or acted wrongly, the House could censure them; but he must set his face firmly against indirect attacks upon previous Governments in Ireland, who had done their best with the means given them by Parliament to cope with unparalleled difficulties; those attacks being made under colour of questions and appeals addressed to the present Government 451 which were never brought forward when the late Government were in office. The honesty of such proceedings might at least be doubted, seeing that some of those who now adopted them were Members of the last Parliament.

§ MR. BUTT
, after what had fallen from the right hon. and learned Gentleman, in hardly Parliamentary language, doubting the honesty of Members of that House, wished to state that he made that Motion last year, when the late Government was in office.

§ MR. LAW
believed that in 1872, some damages or costs were paid in the case of the gentleman whose name was mentioned by the hon. Member for Limerick, and who, being, as stated by that hon. Member, uninstructed in the law, had innocently committed some irregularity. If the Government employed an official, and if, the conduct of that official having been examined in a public Court of Justice, it was found there was nothing objectionable in the course he had pursued, further than that he had been betrayed into an irregularity through ignorance of the law, he would ask whether it was not the duty of the Government to support that officer and pay the damages and costs? It was so in the case referred to, and the Government of the day having inquired into the matter, he had no doubt the House would think they acted rightly in the course they had taken. No other case but this had been specifically brought forward by the hon. and learned Member for Limerick, and therefore it was impossible to answer him as to any other. He was, however, disposed to agree with the hon. and learned Gentleman that where the Government on its own responsibility came to the conclusion that an official deserved to be supported, the money necessary to indemnify him should be, as it latterly had been, put upon the Estimates. But that was no reason for reducing the present Vote.

§ MR. COLLINS
begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland, when he proposed to give effect to the Motion carried a few nights ago with respect to the Irish Fisheries? That was no party question, for during the debate, hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House endeavoured to impress on the Government the necessity of doing something to encourage fisheries in Ireland. He himself suggested the construction of piers to protect the boats, and the propriety of advancing small sums of money as loans to the fishermen to procure nets, and clothing for themselves; and the right hon. Gentleman expressed a wish, that a fund called the Reproductive Loan Fund should be made available.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, his right hon. Friend (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) had devoted his attention to the subject, and expressed his desire to meet the views of Irishmen on that subject. The difficulty was as to what source the money was to come from, and how it was to be administered? He then made an offer, which was not accepted. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was surprised at that. In the name of the Government, he was prepared to renew the offer which was made by the Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant, to place the Irish Reproductive Loan Fund at the disposal of a Fishery Board, properly constituted, through whom the object sought might be attained. If that offer were not accepted, there would be considerable difficulty in ascertaining in what other manner the money could be obtained, and the matter would stand over for further consideration.

§ MR. BUTT
said, he was glad to hear that an Irish Board of Fisheries was to be established, and would in that view support the Bill which would be necessary to give effect to the offer of the Government. He, however, did not represent in any way, the opinions of any counties interested in the Fund in question.