HC Deb 01 July 1881 vol 262 cc1832-3
MR. PARNELL

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether F. Doogan, of Meenanillen, Derrybeg, county Donegal, has been imprisoned in Lifford Gaol on a charge of assembling to prevent a bailiff from serving writs; and, whether he will consider whether a summons to attend before the petty sessions would have been sufficient? Whether Maurice Coll, of Meenanillen, Derrybeg, county Donegal, the sole support of a family of eight in number, the youngest of whom is only one year old, has been arrested and imprisoned in Lifford Gaol on a charge of assembling to prevent bailiffs serving writs; and, whether he will consider whether a summons to attend before the petty sessions would be sufficient in such cases? Whether James Carroll, Maheralask, Bunbeg, county Donegal, upon whom five children, the eldest of whom being fourteen and the youngest seven, and a wife, are depending for support, has been imprisoned in Lifford Gaol on a charge of assembling to prevent a bailiff from serving writs; and, whether he will consider whether in this case a summons to attend the petty sessions would be sufficient? Whether John Mulligan, Magheraclogher, Bunbeg, county Donegal, has been thrown into Lifford Gaol on a charge of assembling to prevent bailiffs from serving writs; and, whether he will consider whether a summons to attend before the petty sessions would have been sufficient? The hon. Member remarked that the Questions had been much altered since he had put them on the Paper; and he wished to know whether, when Questions were altered by the authorities of the House, it would not be fairer if the hon. Members giving Notice of these Questions should be communicated with?

MR. W. E. FORSTER

The magistrate had jurisdiction in each of the cases referred to either to issue a warrant or, if he thought proper, to cause summonses to be issued in the ordinary way. He could not review the decisions of the magistrates in such cases.

MR. PARNELL

asked the right hon. Gentleman, whether he would express an opinion on the action of the magistrate in this as he had done in other cases?

MR. W. E. FORSTER

said, he did not consider it his province to express an opinion.

MR. CALLAN

wished to ask the Attorney General for Ireland, whether it was not usual in such cases where the defendants were residents and not likely to run away to proceed by summons?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. LAW)

said, it depended altogether upon the circumstances of the case, and the magistrate was the person to decide.