HC Deb 26 March 1886 vol 304 cc21-2
MR. SEXTON (Sligo, S.)

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, With reference to statements in the press to the effect that a force of constabulary has been engaged in aiding the sheriff to carry out evictions on the estate of the Catholic Archbishop of Tuam, whether the only ground for the statement is that the sheriff of Galway, last month, executed a writ of habere upon a holding of which the Archbishop is trustee on behalf of a charitable institution; whether the holding formed an undivided moiety of a certain parcel of land, the tenant being the owner in fee of the other moiety; whether, before the execution of the writ, the Archbishop's solicitor and agent informed the sheriff that there was no occasion for the employment of the constabulary, that it would involve entirely unnecessary expense, and that the ejectment of the tenant was not required, the object of the writ being, as was known to the sheriff and all the parties concerned, to procure a legal partition of the moieties of the land; whether, notwithstanding, the sheriff brought a large force of constabulary to the spot; whether he and his bailiff insisted on putting out the tenant, against the expressed desire of the agent; how the cost of the force of constabulary will be defrayed; and, what course the Government will take in regard to the conduct of the sheriff?

THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)

, in reply, said, that there was only one eviction in this case, and it was simply of a formal nature to enable possession to be assumed of an undivided moiety, the tenant being the owner in fee of the other undivided moiety. It was carried out without the slightest difficulty or inconvenience to the tenant. The Archbishop did intimate, through his solicitor, to the sheriff that no difficulty whatever was expected, and that the police might be dispensed with. The sheriff, however, from considerations of a general character, and without reference to the particular circumstances of the case, concluded that he would not be justified in going into the locality without protection, and he was accompanied by eight men. The cost only amounted to one guinea, which would be paid out of the Constabulary Vote.

MR. SEXTON

I shall move to take that guinea out of the Constabulary Vote.