§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieu- 1194 tenant of Ireland, If he will state what are the grounds on which Messrs. Murphy and Campion of Rathdowney, in the Queen's County, have been sent to Naas Gaol?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTER, in reply, said, the grounds on which the persons named in the Question were arrested were that they had incited other persons to intimidate tenants not to fulfil their lawful contracts by paying their rents.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked the right hon. Gentleman whether he was aware that both these men emphatically denied having directly or indirectly ever sanctioned, or otherwise assisted in, any proceedings of this nature?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, that he had not exactly that statement before him.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNORasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is true that Mrs. O'Halleron, wife of Mr. Martin O'Halleron, a "suspect" under the Coercion Act, of Ketullo, Athenry, county Gal-way, who has a large family to support, has received no relief since the arrest of her husband in March last, except ten shillings that was granted her about three weeks ago; and, whether the Loughrea Board of Guardians was prevented from receiving the grant by the refusal of the chairman to put a motion on the subject to the meeting?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTER, in reply, said, it was true that Mrs. O'Halleron had received 10s. and no more than 10s., out-door relief, which was granted on the 9th ultimo. On the 23rd ultimo the presiding Chairman refused to allow the question of further relief to the family to be put to a meeting of the Guardians. The case was, however, investigated, and it was decided at a subsequent meeting to refuse relief to Mrs. O'Halleron, on the ground that she possessed six acres well cropped, a cow, and a heifer. He would also refer the hon. Member to the 3rd section of the Relief of Distress Act, 1880, under which statute, as the hon. Member was doubtless aware, matters of this kind were left to the decision of the Guardians.
§ MR. HEALYasked whether the right hon. Gentleman would cause inquiry to be made into this matter, as to whether there was no prejudice against this woman on account of her husband's act; 1195 and if he would send down an order that relief should be granted?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he thought there was nothing to warrant any further inquiry. The Chairman of the Guardians had at first refused to authorize a discussion through a misapprehension of the law. At the next meeting a majority of the Guardians decided against giving the relief, and, for all he knew, it might have been a unanimous decision. There could have been no animus in the matter.