§ MR. BIGGARasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is a fact that the clerk of Cootehill Union made the following statement in his letter to the Local Government Board, No. 14,583–84, in answer to the allegations made against him by Mr. Owen M'Cabe, candidate, and Rev. P. M'Kenna, P.P. his nominator, paragraph 11:— 809
This property" (Carmeen) "is held in trust by the persons named" (Most Rev. Dr. Donnelly, &c.) "who lodged separate statements of claim on a valuation of £119, on which I allowed four votes, &c.;if it is a fact that the clerk confirmed the above statement, with 25 others, by solemn oath at the subsequent inquiry, July 8th, 1884, before Mr. Armstrong, Local Government Board inspector; if it is a fact that the clerk did not allow any property votes on the said property of Carmeen, for which the Lev, P. M'Kcrma, P.P. Latton, was proxy, and at whose residence the voting paper was left, inasmuch as the clerk alleged, at the counting of votes, that the property voting papers of the town land of Latton were missing, and could not be produced; that the clerk swore at the inquiry, 8th July, he could not find the property voting papers of the townland of Latton at the counting of votes, and of course did not allow them; that the fact that the clerk did not allow any property votes for Carmeen is notorious, hiving occurred in the board room in the presence of all interested, and sworn to at a public inquiry, and is in the knowledge of the Local Government Board; and, if it is a fact that Mr. Owen M'Cabe and Rev. F. M'Kenna, P.P., have again and again directed in a special manner the attention of the Local Government Board to the contradictory swearing of the clerk in this matter?
§ MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANPerhaps the hon. Member will kindly postpone this Question till Thursday next. It has been necessary to communicate with the clerk, and his explanation has not yet reached me.