§ MR. HEALYasked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, If his attention has been drawn to the failure of a prosecution for alleged intimidation instituted by the Police against the treasurer 1374 and secretary of the Bantry Land League, and tried before the Bantry magistrates on the 7th inst.; whether the woman alleged to have been intimidated swore that she was never intimidated by either of the gentlemen accused; whether the latter were put to much expense by having to bring down counsel from Dublin to defend them; whether the Government will make some compensation to the parties prosecuted for the expenses they were obliged to incur; and, whether the Government approve of such prosecutions; and, if not, whether they will caution the police against such proceedings in future?
§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON)My attention was drawn to the prosecution referred to in the Question of the hon. Member and to its result. Two persons, one of whom was the Treasurer and the other the Secretary of the Bantry Land League, were summoned under the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875, for intimidating a publican who refused to serve a bailiff on the Kenmare estate with refreshment. The case was dismissed on the evidence of the publican himself that he was not intimidated. I do not know whether the defendants were put to any expense; but I have reason to believe that the Dublin Central Land League, at their own expense, sent down counsel from Dublin to defend the case. [Mr. HEALY: No, no!] In reply to the last paragraph of the Question, I have to say that legitimate prosecutions under the Act I have mentioned have the approval of the Government; and the information which the Constabulary had in this case quite justified, in my opinion, the institution of this prosecution.