§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (for Mr. MAYNE)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to a statement in the "Munster Express" of April 14th, to the effect that John Kirwan, under agent to the Marquess of Water-ford, accompanied the policeman who distributed the voting papers at the late Poor Law elections to the tenants of his Lordship, and insisted upon them signing their voting papers in his presence, in favour of the candidate approved by his Lordship, under threat of having the hanging gale on their holdings demanded should they not comply; and, whether this conduct constitutes an offence under the Crimes Act; and, if so, whether he will take steps to punish such conduct, and have the election voided at which it was practised?
§ MR. PLUNKETsaid, that before the right hon. Gentleman answered the Question, he (Mr. Plunket) wished to ask him a Question of which he had given him private Notice. It was, Whether it is a fact that in the Poor Law Union of Portlaw, in the county Water-ford, previous to the late election for Poor Law Guardians, the parish priest directed the voters not to sign their voting papers until he was present in person; and whether, afterwards, the same rev. gentleman went round with the Land League candidate, and, in one instance, so intimidated a voter as to cause him to destroy his voting paper, because he had voted against the Land League candidate; also, whether the curate of the adjoining parish of Clonea visited the voters before the papers were distributed and directed them to come down to the chapel-yard and sign them there?
§ MR. O'DONNELLsaid, he wished to ask, Whether the presence of the Catholic clergymen in these cases was not necessary to prevent the agents of the landlords from tampering with the voters?
§ MR. TREVELYAN,in reply, said, he had made careful inquiries into the ease of Mr. Kirwan, and he was informed that the allegations in the Question were wholly without foundation. The circumstance which gave rise to the allegations was that Mr. Kirwan wont with the police to two houses at which 575 voting papers had been left according to law. The voting papers belonged to Lord Waterford, and he went for them. With that exception, he did not call upon any voters in the manner described. With regard to the Question of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Dublin University (Mr. Plunket), he had received a report from the Special Resident Magistrate which practically bore out the suggestions made in the Question with respect to the conduct of the priests named. With regard to the practical part of the Question, he might say, what he had often said before—that the Government did not, on either side, intend to put the Prevention of Crime Act in force with reference to any matters that occurred at the recent Poor Law elections.