§ MR. SEXTONasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. Whether, at the last Winter Quarter Sessions, at Phillipstown, King's County, in a case of ejectment on the title by Sir E. Grogan, landlord, against Bernard Ennis, tenant, a decree against the tenant was granted on the sole evidence of Zoe Collins, estate bailiff to Sir E. Grogan, that he had seen Mr. Ennis sign a deed of attornment; whether Mr. Ennis, who was not present at the hearing of the case, wrote next day to the County Court judge, accusing the witness Collins of perjury, and declaring that he never had signed any document in the presence of Collins; whether Mr. Ennis repeated the accusation in a letter to the Lord Lieutenant and offered, if called upon, to prove it, but no official steps have yet been taken; whether, as Mr. Collins is clerk of the Phillipstown Petty Sessions, the Executive deem it requisite to take measures to ascertain the grounds of the charge against him; whether, in virtue of the decree obtained on the oath of Collins, Mr. Ennis was, on the 3rd ultimo, evicted from the holding, also Patrick Warren, caretaker, and Warren's wife and four children; whether notice of the intention to evict was given either to the tenant, the caretaker, the local board of guardians, or the relieving officer, and whether, consequently, the relieving officer was not present at the eviction, to afford relief, if requisite, to the caretaker and his family, who obtained shelter from a neighbour for the night; whether the sub sheriff, at the eviction, was assisted by the estate bailiff, Zoe Collins, upon whose evidence the decree had been obtained; whether, on the day of eviction, a horse, the tenant's property, was sold under the decree for 105 days' rent; and, what steps will be taken to recover the penalties incurred by violation of the Law, in not serving the notice of intention to evict, and what means will be afforded to examine the charge against the witness Zoe Collins?
§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALKER)It is the fact that an ejectment decree was obtained on the evidence stated, and that Mr. Ennis wrote to the County Court 1176 Judge and Lord Lieutenant alleging he had not signed the deed of attornment which Mr. Collins swore he had. Ennis was in Court when the evidence was given. He did not appeal from the decree, as he might, and has done nothing beyond writing the letters mentioned; and the Executive would not consider itself justified in assuming, under those circumstances, that any grounds existed for imputing perjury to Collins. An eviction took place under the decree, and Mr. Collins was present in discharge of his duty as sub-agent. Notice of that eviction was given to the relieving officer, which was a compliance with the law, and notice was also given to the Guardians. It is not necessary, in point of law, that the relieving officer should be present at the eviction. A horse was sold, as stated in the Question. If there was any violation of the law by reason of an omission to serve notice the Guardians are the proper persons to enforce the penalties provided by the Act of 1847.