HC Deb 15 August 1881 vol 264 cc1914-6
MR. BIGGAR

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it be true that the registration of births, deaths, and marriages, in the districts over which Dr. Martin and Dr. Torrens are appointed registrars in the electoral division of Belfast, has been, for the past five or six years, and at present continues to be, conducted by Robert Humphrey, publican, of 41, Grosvenor Street, Belfast, who is ineligible by Law from holding the office of deputy registrar, he being a person engaged in the retailing of wines, spirits, and beer; if it be true that this disqualification has been made known to Dr. Martin, Dr. Torrens, and Mr. Boyce, Superintendent of the Belfast Union Registrations, and that they, or neither of them, have taken any steps to discontinue these illegal registrations; if it be true that two-thirds of the registrations are recorded in the public-house, of which Humphrey is the owner, and in which he resides; if it be correct that the said public-house is outside either of the districts for which Humphrey is appointed deputy registrar, thereby forming not only a source of inconvenience but of absolute illegality, and in every respect at variance with the rules laid down for the guidance of registrars of births, deaths, and marriages; if it be true that, when Inspector Mitchell required the books for checking purposes, they were found to contain a large number of incomplete entries; if it be true that a report of this circumstance was made by Inspector Mitchell without any subsequent action being taken thereon; if it be true that the Registrar General has been made acquainted with Humphrey's legal disqualification to act as deputy registrar; if it be true that the Registrar General was personally interviewed by Humphrey on the subject, when he (the Registrar General) consented to give him three months to sell his public-house, or otherwise to forfeit the office of deputy registrar; if it be true that, although this alleged compact was entered into more than twelve months ago, the public-house not having been yet sold, Humphrey still remains in office; if, upon the whole of these serious charges, he is prepared, on behalf of the Executive Government, to institute a rigid inquiry into the conduct of the said several officials; is he able to say how far the registrations effected by Humphrey are legal; if he will not consider it necessary to have fresh legislation on the subject in order to legalise what has been illegally executed; is it a fact that the public-house of Robert Humphrey is carried on in the name of Rachel Kennedy, being the name of his wife before she was married to Humphrey; and, whether it is true that he requires a fee varying in amount in accordance with the condition of the parties on the occasion of the registration of marriages?

MR. W. E. FORSTER, in reply, said, he would answer the hon. Member's 14 Questions together. On inquiry, he found that Robert Humphrey held the office of Deputy Registrar of the two districts referred to in the Question. In 1875, he married a widow who held a spirit licence. That licence, even if held by him (Humphrey), would not constitute a legal disability in reference to the office of registrar; but it was contrary to the regulations. Up to May, 1880, the fact of his marriage was unknown to the proper officials; but, in consequence of a letter addressed to the Registrar General, inquiries were made, and the fact of his marriage ascertained. Directions were, therefore, given to remove Humphrey from office. However, after having had a personal interview with the Registrar General, he was allowed to continue in office on his under- taking to dispose of his wife's licence within a month. He obtained a transfer of the licence on the 28th June, which he exhibited to the Registrar General; but it now appeared that on the 22nd December last, the Recorder refused the transfer, which fact was not reported to the Registrar General. Having now ascertained this fact the Registrar General had given orders for the immediate removal of Humphrey from office. Courts for the purpose of registration were held within the bounds of the districts, and though, in 1878, incomplete entries were discovered on the part of Humphrey, their legality was not affected by the fact that his wife held a spirit licence.