§ MR. CALLANasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether the statement is correct which has appeared in the Dublin newspapers to the effect that Serjeant Armstrong has been appointed to go as Judge of Assize?
§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACHSir, I am informed that it is the invariable practice in Ireland for the three Queen's Serjeants to be named in the Commission of Assize together with the Common Law Judges. Two of the three Serjeants are the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Clare County (Sir Colman O'Loghlen), and my hon. and learned Friend the Member for King's County (Serjeant Sherlock). The Serjeants would, I imagine, in case of necessity, go the circuit in place of the Judges if their other engagements permitted. It is obvious, however, that the two hon. and learned Gentlemen I have named have other engagements. Serjeant Arm- 1141 strong has been, and still is, engaged in the ordinary business of a barrister on one of the circuits during the present Assizes. Therefore I cannot say whether he will act as a Judge or not. I am at present in communication with the Lord Chancellor of Ireland on the subject.
§ MR. CALLANI beg to give Notice that on Monday I will ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether the insertion of the names of the Serjeants-at-law in the Commission of Assize is not such a matter of ordinary routine as not to confer any right, in case of the existence of a vacancy amongst the Judges, to be selected to go as Judge of Assize; whether the statement which has appeared in the Dublin newspapers, to the effect that Serjeant Armstrong has been appointed to go as Judge of Assize, is correct; if so, whether at the time of the appointment of Serjeant Armstrong to go as Judge of Assize the Irish Executive were aware that the Serjeant Armstrong referred to is the same individual as the "Richard Armstrong" whose name was returned by the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the existence of corrupt practices at elections for the borough of Sligo, under Schedule D, as "Guilty of bribery;" whether the said Commissioners further reported that Serjeant Armstrong had expended £1,480 in bribery; that the number of voters so bribed amounted to 97, and of these the names of 65 have been ascertained, among whom the sum of £1,200 was distributed; whether, in consequence of the said Report, the borough of Sligo was disfranchised; and whether, in view of the foregoing circumstances and the precedent in the Stonor case, Her Majesty's Government are still prepared to appoint, or, if appointed, to cancel the appointment of an individual reported and scheduled as guilty of bribery to the important judicial office of going as Judge of Assize?