HC Deb 08 February 1884 vol 284 cc302-3

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware that James Kelly, of Londonderry, was seriously maimed by a pistol shot fired by one of an unlawful association from the City Hall in that City on the 1st of November last; whether the Lord Lieutenant has been asked to hold an inquiry; and, whether, under the provisions of the nineteenth section of "The Prevention of Crime (Ireland) Act, 1882," he has instituted such inquiry; and, if not, if he would explain the reason?


asked whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that the facts on which this Question was based were not proved and were not generally believed?


, in reply, said, he thought the hon. Baronet had gone a little too far. It was true that the facts could not be said to have been yet proved, because the facts deposed to at the inquiry were still under the consideration of the Government, and there was a young man awaiting trial for firing the shot. But as to the statement that the facts were not generally believed, he was unwilling to express an opinion. James Kelly applied to the Lord Lieutenant for compensation under Section 19 of the Prevention of Crime Act. His Excellency was advised that the case was not one coming within the operation of the section referred to. His Excellency, therefore, declined to comply with the application.


Will the right hon. Gentleman explain to the House why it does not come under that section, inasmuch as the section says— That anyone who receives an injury arising out of any agrarian offence, or from any illegal combinations, is entitled to compensation.


said, that he could not explain it as a lawyer; but if the case made was that the crime had been committed by an unlawful association, and if the section of the Prevention of Crime Act which described an "unlawful association" was referred to, he was not surprised at the decision which had been arrived at by the Law Advisers of the Government.


I beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman, did he hear the noble Lord the Member for Liverpool (Lord Claud Hamilton), who spoke last night, state that the demonstration in which this injury was sustained had been got up in opposition to the agrarian policy which I was supposed to represent; and whether, having sought the advice of the Solicitor General, he would not conceive it possible to treat it as an agrarian offence?

[No reply was given.]