MR. SULLIVANasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, If his attention has been called to the reports in the Dublin papers of the 6th of August to the case of a gentleman, named Taylor, who, for remonstrating with the police against their excessive violence towards a prisoner, was instantly seized by them, and carried off to the station on a charge of drunkenness; whether it is the fact that the magistrate dismissed the charge against Mr. Taylor, it being proved that he was perfectly sober at the time and had been a total abstainer from intoxicating drink for several years; and, whether any and what steps have been taken as to the three policemen who swore to this false charge against Mr. Taylor because of his remonstrances against their violence?
§ MR. J. LOWTHER, in reply, said, it appeared from the report to which the hon. and learned Member alluded that a charge was brought against Mr. Taylor for having been drunk and disorderly. The charge was heard before one of the Divisional Justices in Dublin and dismissed. Evidence was adduced by the prosecution in order to show that Mr. Taylor was in a state of intoxication, and counter evidence was brought forward which certainly went to show that Mr. Taylor was not in a state of intoxication at the time. Among other statements that were made was this—that this gentleman was a total abstainer, and also that he was in the habit of lecturing occasionally in support of total abstinence principles. The only way in which he (Mr. J. Lowther) could account charitably for the mistake made by the police was that persons who were accustomed to lecturing sometimes acquired habits of vociferation and gesticulation which might give rise to a perfectly legitimate mistake on the part of the police. Under all the circumstances, as it was a case of personal violence, the Chief Commissioner of Police had come to the conclusion that it was a matter for further inquiry, and such an inquiry would at once be made.