§ MR. SEXTONasked Mr. Solicitor General for Ireland, If it has yet been ascertained that the young man Payne, committed for trial at the last Wicklow Assizes, on a charge of felony, had been in the employment of the Ex-Secretary to the General Post Office, Dublin; what explanation can be given of the fact that, although Payne had been committed to stand his trial for a felony, the principal witness, who had made an information, and had gone from Wales to give evidence at the trial, was informed by the police at Newtown Mount Kennedy, before the trial came on, that he would not be wanted; whether, in consequence of this intimation, the witness in question did not attend at the Assizes; whether, notwithstanding his absence, the Grand Jury found a true bill against Payne upon a minor charge; and, what became of this minor charge against Payne?
§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (MR. WALKER)The hon. Member has been misinformed as to the facts, and hence my former answer on this subject may have appeared obscure. The charge of felony was in reference to a man named Powell. The minor charge was in reference to a man named Greene. If with this explanation the hon. Member will refer to my former answer, he will see the Question has been answered. It has not been ascertained that Payne had been in the employment of the ex-Secretary to the General Post Office.
§ MR. SEXTONwished to know why, in the interval in between the committal to prison and the entry of the nolle 1371 prosequi, the police took it upon themselves to get rid of the witness by telling him that he was not wanted?
§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALKER), said there was no such thing as a nolle prosequi in that case. The Attorney General for Ireland reported that he did not think the evidence sufficient to sustain the charge, and it was not proceeded with.
§ MR. SEXTONBut how did the police know that before the Assizes came on?
§ [No reply.]