HC Deb 01 May 1882 vol 268 cc1819-21
MR. CALLAN

asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the report which appeared in the "Freeman's Journal" of Monday last, of the proceedings in the Dunleer Petty Sessions Court on Tuesday, April 20th, when a number of the most respectable tenant farmers of the County Louth were, on the information of a person named Rue, charged with conspiracy to murder Sub-Inspector O'Callaghan of Drogheda; whether upwards of twenty individuals resident in the district were named in the sworn depositions of Rue with being parties to the conspiracy; and, if so, why is it that five only, out of the twenty so named, were charged before the magistrates; whether it is true, as admitted by the informer, on cross-examination by Mr. Rogers, the attorney for the parties, For four months I have been in the pay of the Government, getting information for the police. Gave in all the names of the parties present at the meeting to Mr. O'Callaghan, as well as the five defendants; they were nearly all Lord Bellew's principal tenants. Expects the Government reward if the defendants are convicted; and, whether, in view of the fact that Captain Keogh, R.M. after the investigation, which was held in private, having remanded the case until 2nd May, allowed the defendants to stand out on the "nominal bail of£25 each," he will direct that the proceedings on Tuesday next shall be in open Court, and have an official shorthand writer in attendance, in order to facilitate a prosecution for perjury in the case, if the magistrates so direct?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON),

in reply, said, in consequence of this Question he had looked into The Freeman's Journal; but having no other information on the subject, he might state, on the authority of that newspaper, that on the occasion referred to four persons were charged with conspiracy to murder before two magistrates in Dunleer. They decided to hear the cases in private, according to the statutable authority which magistrates possessed; and, therefore, there could be no report of the evidence taken before them. But, according to The Freeman's Journal, "from our own Correspondent," it appeared that the cases had been adjourned till the 2nd of May, which would be to-morrow. He had no power to direct that the inquiry should then be held in open Court; and if he ventured to so direct the magistrates would inquire under what authority he did so, to which he probably would not be able to give a satisfactory answer. The hon. Member knew very well he had no power to direct that an official shorthand writer be present. But there could be no miscarriage of justice, because the evidence of the witnesses must be reduced to the form of depositions, and be signed by the witnesses in presence of the accused. These depositions would come before himself for direction as to future proceedings, and if there were not sufficient grounds for proceeding he would not direct a prosecution.

MR. CALLAN

said, the right hon. and learned Gentleman had forgotten to answer the second paragraph, which alleged that 20 persons were named in Rue's depositions, but that only five were prosecuted.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON)

The second paragraph of the Question I know nothing whatever about. The number of persons charged, according to the report, was five.

MR. CALLAN

gave Notice that he would draw the attention of the House to this proceeding, and also to another proceeding last month, in which, not- withstanding the evidence of this information, no prosecution took place.