§ MR. O'DONNELLasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether it had come to his notice that, on the 3rd instant, before the Dungarvan magistrates, a poor woman, who had never before been accused of any crime (and with a destitute family, the youngest being an infant in arms), was sentenced to three months imprisonment, with hard labour, for the theft of a small quantity of milk of the estimated value of two pence; whether, on the same date, and before the same magistrates, another prisoner, convicted of the theft of some articles of clothing of the estimated value of one pound, was sentenced to only seven days' imprisonment; and, whether, if the facts be so, he will take steps to procure the remission of her punishment?
§ MR. J. LOWTHERMr. Speaker, as far as I have been able to ascertain 1005 the circumstances of the two cases alluded to, I am disposed to think that the magistrates were right in the course they adopted. The case first referred to was that of a woman named Mary Heffernan, who was employed in a situation of trust, having charge of a dairy, of which the keys were placed in her possession. It was proved by witnesses that she had been seen on more than one occasion making away with the property of her employer; and I consider that the Bench was fully justified in taking these circumstances into consideration in apportioning the sentence. With respect to the second case, which was that of a woman named Catherine Maloney, she pleaded guilty to the charge of stealing articles of clothing valued at 7s. 6d.; but urged as an excuse that there were arrears of wages due to her at the time amounting to £2 16s., and that she had pawned the stolen goods as a payment on account. The fact of the wages being due was admitted; and although, of course, it could afford no justification for the robbery, the magistrates were, I think, justified in taking into consideration all the circumstances of the case, as well as the mere question of the pecuniary value of the stolen articles, which, in the majority of instances, forms only a limited portion of the matters to be considered in apportioning sentences.
§ MR. O'DONNELLI would ask the right hon. Gentleman, if it is true that this was the first offence with which this woman was charged; and, being only a very small offence, whether the punishment was not excessive?
§ MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, he understood it was the first time she had been charged; although it was proved at the same hearing that she had been seen on more than one occasion committing the act referred to.