HC Deb 17 July 1885 vol 299 cc1150-2

Bill considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)


said, he had given Notice of a new Clause—"In case of application for certiorari bail to be allowed;" but before moving it he would like to know what the intention of the Government was in the matter. He understood that in England, under the Summary Jurisdiction Act, of which they had not the advantage in Ireland, the right of appeal was given in all cases. There was no such right of appeal in Ireland, and therefore a man who was sentenced by a magistrate to a month's imprisonment might he the victim of great tyranny. He understood that the Government were desirous of meeting the case, to some extent, by the inclusion in the Bill of a clause in the direction of his Amendment. He would very much like to receive an assurance from the Government that if they were in Office next year they would apply to Ireland the Summary Jurisdiction Act, which dealt with many matters which might with benefit be included in the Irish law.


said, he thought it would be well for the hon. and learned Gentleman to move his Amendment, otherwise there would be no Motion before the Committee.


thereupon begged to move his new Clause.

New Clause:—

(In case of application for certiorari bail to be allowed.) Any person sentenced to imprisonment for an offence summarily punishable who gives notice of his intention to apply for a certiorari to test the legality of the conviction shall, on finding sufficient sureties, be admitted to bail pending the decision of the High Court: Provided always, That if the application for the certiorari he not proceeded with at the first available opportunity, the sentence shall at once take effect,"—(Mr. Healy,)brought up, and read the first time.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause be now read a second time."—{Mr. Healy.)


said, the hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. Healy) had stated a grievance which, no doubt, existed. The Government were conscious that something should be done in the matter; but the difficulty they saw was the impossibility of importing into this very small Bill, which was drawn for a special purpose, the large question which would be involved by redressing the grievance of which the hon. and learned Gentleman spoke. It appeared to him that it might be possible, by applying some of the provisions of the Summary Jurisdiction Act to Ireland, to do much in the direction desired. He hoped, however, the hon. and learned Member would now withdraw his Motion, and he (Mr. Stuart-Wortley) would put down an Amendment, on the Report stage, to the same effect. It was a fact that in England, whenever imprisonment was inflicted without the option of a fine, an appeal to Quarter Session was given. Although there was no Statute making it absolutely imperative to accept bail during the pendency of an appeal, it was laid down in all works of authority that it was improper to refuse bail.


asked leave to withdraw his Motion, but suggested that the hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. Stuart-Wortley) should put his clause into the Bill now, so that it would be competent to put down, on Report, any Amendments to it which might be necessary-Motion, by leave, withdrawn.


moved the new Clause— Amendment of Summary Jurisdiction (Ireland) Act, 1850. Discharge of defendant pending application for certiorari.

Motion made, and Question, "That the Clause be now read a second time," put, and agreed to.

Clause added to the Bill.

Bill reported; as amended, to be considered upon Tuesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 236.]

House adjourned at half after One o'clock till Monday next.