§ MR. R. POWERasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been called to the following statement made by the Chairman of Quarter Sessions at Waterford on Thursday the 23rd of June:— 1829
He was happy to be able to tell the grand jury that their duties would be very light, as there was only one case to go before them, which was a charge against three young lads of stealing some potatoes in one of the small streets of the city. The calendar was very creditable to the state of the city, and he was glad to be able to congratulate them on it;and, if he still considers it necessary to declare the City of Waterford a prescribed district?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTER,in reply, said, he had not seen the statement to which the hon. Member referred, but did not doubt that it had been correctly quoted. He was obliged, to answer that he still thought it necessary to prescribe the county of the city of Waterford.
§ MR. LEAMYasked whether the right hon. Gentleman would state the grounds on which he had formed that opinion?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he must really refer the hon. Member to what happened a few days ago, when he stated that he was unable to give any precise information on the subject. The adjournment of the House was then moved, and a large majority supported-by voting against that Motion the course he had taken.
§ MR. LEAMYasked whether the right hon. Gentleman would state any of his reasons, and what had been officially set forth as to the condition of Waterford?
§ MR. T. D. SULLIVANasked whether the Prime Minister had not promised that all actions taken under the Coercion Act might be challenged on the floor of the House? But what was the use of challenging the proceedings if they got no answer?
MR. J. COWENasked whether it was the case that the city of Waterford, containing 30,000 inhabitants, had been prescribed in order to facilitate the arrest of the secretary of the local branch of the Land League?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he really could not give any more definite answer. The House had approved of their not giving the special grounds of the proclamation issued; but the hon. Member for Newcastle (Mr. J. Cowen) must not suppose, if he did not give him a definite answer, that the supposition suggested in his Question was necessarily correct.
§ MR. MACDONALDasked, whether, when promoting the passage of the Coercion Bill through this House, the Prime Minister made this statement, 1830
That on the floor of the House"—["Order!"]
§ MR. SPEAKERIt is quite irregular for the hon. Member to refer to past debates of the present Sesssion.
§ MR. T. D. SULLIVANwished to know if they were at liberty to challenge these proceedings on the floor of the House of Commons? If they were, what was the use of doing so when they could get no information?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he could repeat what he had stated before, that if any Motion was brought forward censuring the Government they were perfectly ready to meet it.
§ MR. JUSTIN M'CARTHYasked whether the right hon. Gentleman knew the grounds on which Waterford had been prescribed, or had he merely relied on the statement of some subordinate official?
§ MR. R. POWERinquired if the Government would give any opportunity for bringing forward a Vote of Censure?
§ [No reply was given.]