EVICTIONS (IRELAND)—CASE OF THE WIDOW, ANNE SHAW, CO. MONA- GHAN.

§ MR. T. M. HEALY,

in rising to call attention to the eviction of the widow, Anne Shaw, from her freehold in county Monaghan, by Mr. Jesse Lloyd, J.P., Clerk of the Peace of that county, and to the judgment of the Court of Appeal thereon in December last; and to move— 718 That the falsification of the records of the Monaghan County Court by the Clerk of the Peace, observed on by the Court of Appeal, calls for the immediate removal of the officials implicated, said, he thought some apology was due to the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland (Mr. John Morley) for the way in which the Motion had necessarily been brought on while the right hon. Gentleman was new to his Office, and therefore could not be supposed to be directly acquainted with the facts of the case. Dublin Castle, at any rate, had sufficient notice of the matter; and he thought it was most unfortunate that nothing would be done by that institution for the chastisement of officials in Ireland, except direct attention was called thereto by a Motion in that House. Mr. Jesse Lloyd was a J.P., and was Clerk of the Peace for the County Monaghan and Chairman of the Monaghan Board of Guardians. He was also a local landlord, and the person who did his evictions for him was his deputy as Clerk of the Peace—Mr. J. W. Johnson. Some two years ago a plot of ground, formerly belonging to the Presbyterian Widows' Fund, and held as a freehold by a Presbyterian widow named Anne Shaw, was, by some mischance, included by the Landed Estates Court in a conveyance of certain lands to Colonel Lloyd. Colonel Lloyd thereupon got a decree for possession against this poor woman, and on her appealing to the Judge of Assizes the Judge affirmed the decree for possession, but made an order staying the execution of the decree until she got a lease of the premises for her life at a nominal rent. In the course of a few months, however, Colonel Lloyd, with his deputy Johnson, turned the poor woman out of her holding, and levelled the house to the ground without giving her a farthing compensation. Mrs. Shaw then, by the aid of a public subscription—for she was a helpless poor woman of 80 years of age—brought an action against Colonel Lloyd for the specific performance of the order for a lease made by the Judge of Assizes. When this matter came before the Court it was found that either Colonel Lloyd or his deputy had falsified the record of the judgment given by the Judge of Assize in their own Court in a manner unfavourable to Mrs. Shaw; and this conduct on their part was sharply com- 719 mented upon by Lord Justice Fitzgibbon and Lord Justice Barry. After the judgment given by those two learned Judges he (Mr. Healy) thought Colonel Lloyd should not be allowed to remain one moment longer in the office of Clerk of the Peace. The case might appear a paltry one; but it was in miniature a picture of the violence of the oppression of the poor in Ireland. Landlordism ran through every pore of private and public life in Ireland, and poisoned and debilitated public justice at its very core. When those landlords committed crimes for which they ought to be whipped at the cart-tail, and even when their deeds had been branded as crimes by a Judge like Mr. Justice Fitzgibbon, they were allowed to retain their positions. They all heard a great deal about injuries inflicted in Ireland upon people who were very well able to take care of themselves; they could write to the newspapers and make the House and the country ring with their injuries, while this poor woman had been deprived of her rights by oppressors who were receiving public money. If this man's conduct was allowed to pass unchallenged, he would say that no matter how the figure-heads in public positions changed with different Governments, the men at the wheel were the same old hands, and Dublin Castle remained the same as regarded the protection of the oppressor. In conclusion, he begged to move the Resolution of which he had given Notice.

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOE IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY)

I do not suppose that any Member of the House will think that the hon. and learned Member (Mr. T. M. Healy) has done anything but his duty in bringing before the attention of the House what, for my own part, I must admit is a very serious and disagreeable-looking affair. The 720 hon. and learned Member was good enough to say that he could not expect me, who have been so short a time in my present Office, to have mastered all the details of the case; and that is perfectly true, and I have a right to some allowance in the matter. But, in fact, the details of the case between Colonel Lloyd and Anne Shaw are not particularly important in forming a judgment on the issue raised by the hon. and learned Member. As I am informed, Colonel Lloyd, who was Clerk of the Peace for the county of Monaghan, brought an action of ejectment against Anne Shaw. It was brought in the Civil Bill Court of Monaghan, and a decree got. Anne Shaw appealed; and, by consent, the decree was affirmed, Anne Shaw to get a lease of the place. After a considerable time, the lease not having been taken out, through Shaw's own default, according to Lloyd, he executed the decree, and, according to what I have long looked upon as a very barbarous usage, pulled down the house. Anne Shaw then brought an action compelling the granting of a lease, and for damage. Lloyd moved to remit the action from the Superior Courts to the County Court; the Court of Exchequer refused to grant the order to remit, and, on appeal by Lloyd, the Court of Appeal confirmed the order of refusal. Then comes the offence. At the hearing of the appeal two documents purporting to be copies of the Judge's order at the Assizes, and both signed by the Deputy Clerk of the Peace, were produced, one of which was less favourable to Anne Shaw than the other; and there appears to be no doubt that Lord Justice Fitzgibbon did make the very definite condemnation of this duplicate copy of the decree referred to by the hon. and learned Member. The difference between the two copies was relied upon by the Court as one of the grounds for not sending the case to be tried before a Court of which Lloyd was an official. No falsification was attributed by the Court, and no materials existed for forming an opinion on the question. As this and other matters relating to the case form the subject of an inquiry before a Judge and jury, I am advised that it would be contrary to usage, and it appears to me it would be contrary to common justice, to interfere in the matter of the falsifying, if I may use the word, of these documents until 721 the case itself is decided. I can only promise the hon. and learned Gentleman that if I am still in Office when the case is decided, I will not lose sight of it, and every effort will be made to impress upon those whom it concerns my own very strong opinion of what is much wanted in Ireland—not more by one section of the people than another—a strict, and scrupulous, and literal adherence to the spirit of legality; and in this of itself not very important case it may be our duty to affirm a very grave principle, and possibly to read an important lesson.

EVICTIONS (IRELAND)—CASE OF THE WIDOW, ANNE SHAW, CO. MONA- GHAN.—RESOLUTION.