§ DR. KENEALYasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he has, in pursuance of the promise given on the 25th of June last, caused inquiry to be made as to whether Mina Jury, who has been twice convicted of felonies in this country, is the same person as Mercivina Caulfield, who was sentenced in 1847 to seven years transportation for a felony committed in Dublin; whether the police authorities in Scotland Yard were aware of that fact at the time the said Mina Jury appeared as a witness for the Crown in the Tichborne prosecution; whether it is true, as she stated at Knutsford Sessions in July 1875, that the Treasury owed her £1,189; and, if not, whether the Treasury owes her any sum, and if so, what sum; and, whether he will state by whom the said Mina Jury was first discovered as a witness in Hobart Town, by whom she was there first examined, and who first gave information about her to the prosecution or to the Treasury?
MR. ASSHETON CROSShad to say, in reply to the hon. Member for Stoke-upon-Trent, that, as he promised, he did make inquiries into the case of Mina Jury. A person was sent over to Dublin, and on searching the criminal records it was found that on the 27th of June, 1847, a woman named Mercivina Caulfield, aged 19, was tried before Baron Lefroy for felony and sentenced to seven years' transportation, and that she sailed on the 24th January, 1848, in the John Calvin, Captain John Davidson, to Hobart Town. That was the only official record in Ireland, and there were no documents to show what became of the woman after her arrival in the colony, and no person could be found to identify Mrs. Mina Jury as the same woman. Mrs. Jury herself had been seen in Knutsford Gaol, and she entirely denied that she was the same person. "With respect to the second part of the Question, the police authorities in Scotland Yard were not aware of the fact the hon. Member alluded to at the time Mina Jury was examined as a witness in the Tichborne case. As to the sum of £1,189, the only answer the Treasury gave was that they owe her nothing whatever, and do not even know who she is. As to the last part of the Question, about her being examined 446 in Hobart Town, he could only state that when examined before the Commission sent out in the case of "Tichborne v. Lushington and others," the Treasury received their information by reading the evidence given on that occasion.
§ DR. KENEALYgave Notice that as the Answer, especially to the last paragraph, was not satisfactory, he should bring the subject again before the House.