§ MR. SMALLasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, in the cases under the Prevention of Crime Act, against Peter Kehoe and James Kennedy, brought on at Newtownbarry, county Wexford, on the 23rd February last, the summonses were issued at the instance of the head constable without his having received any authority from his superior officers; whether the head constable afterwards went to the defendants and asked them to give back the copies of the summonses, informing them that the cases would not be heard; whether, notwithstanding this, the cases were called, and the district inspector then asked them to be adjourned so that he might prosecute; and, whether the Constabulary at Newtownbarry are in the habit of issuing summonses under the Prevention of Crime Act without authority, and whether any steps will be taken to prevent them doing so?
§ MR. TREVELYANI am informed that although the head constable had not actually been ordered to serve the summonses in these cases, he had been instructed to have them ready for hearing at the Prevention of Crime Act Court on the 23rd of February. It was expected that the authority would be received previous to the holding of the Court; but when it was found that it could not be issued until after that date, the defendants were informed that their cases would not be proceeded with on the 23rd. This was done by direction of the District Inspector, and in order to save the defendants from being put to the inconvenience of attending the Court. They attended nevertheless, and the cases were called formally, merely for the purpose of adjourning them—the Constabulary paying costs. The cases were prosecuted on a later date. It is not the case that the Constabulary at Newtownbarry are in the habit of issuing summonses without authority.