§ MR. HEALYasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the offence for which the Messrs. Flood (since released) were arrested was on suspicion of houghing cattle; whether it is true that the County Grand Jury have since assessed damages on three townlands for the injury to the cattle; whether it is the fact that, although the Messrs. Flood live in Robertstown, the adjacent townland to those on which the damages were levied, the Grand Jury, whose members were aware that the Floods were imprisoned on suspicion of having committed the outrage, and with all the information and evidence before them, did not levy any portion of the compensation paid for the cattle on Robertstown, the townland where the Floods reside; and, if so, whether he can explain this, and say whether any other cattle have been houghed in the district except those for which the Grand Jury gave the compensation above-mentioned; and, in that case, to whom they belonged?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTER, in reply, said, the men named had been arrested on suspicion of maiming cattle, and had been since discharged. With respect to the action of the Grand Jury, he could not enter into a discussion on a matter over which he had no power, and with which he had no concern. No cattle had been maimed except those in re- 124 spect of which compensation was assessed.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, the right hon. Gentleman had not answered his Question. It was whether the Grand Jury, knowing all the facts, did not levy the damages on the district in which the Floods resided, but in the adjoining townships?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he thought he had given an answer to the Question. It was true the Grand Jury had assessed the damages in the manner stated; but he could not say what the Grand Jury knew.