§ MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN (Tyrone, S.)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether of the eleven magistrates who adjudicated upon the Orange moonlighting charge at Dungannon, ten were Orange magistrates, several of whom have themselves taken a prominent part in Orange demonstrations; whether the witnesses were described by the Grown Solicitor as "witnesses hostile to the Crown;" whether their evidence was given with extreme reluctance and prevarication, and was at variance with their original statements to the police; whether, notwithstanding, it was proved that ten farmers' houses had been visited by night; whether William Doran, Rachel Ramsay, Isabella Somerville, Mrs. Mawhening, James Cuddy, John Armstrong, James Burrows, and Jane Doran all admitted it was the defendant who visited their houses and questioned them as to whether they were Orange or Nationalist; whether James Cuddy admitted that the defendant was disguised with a false whisker, and several other witnesses admitted that it was with difficulty they recognized the defendant, although he was well known to them as a neighbour; whether the magistrates refused to admit the evidence of the police as to the circumstances under which the defendant was arrested; whether steps will be taken to prevent Orange magistrates from adjudicating in party cases in Ulster; and, whether the Lord Chancellor has taken any notice of the conduct of Colonel Burgess, the Orange magistrate, who, on his own responsibility, directed the prisoner to be discharged without a prosecution?
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)This is a long story and not a new one. It has been thought advisable to obtain a Report on the subject from the Resident Magistrate who assisted in the adjudication of the case. He states that of the 11 magistrates—exclusive of himself—who adjudicated not more than three belonged to the Orange Society, and of the remaining eight he does not know of any who have taken part in Orange demonstrations. The witnesses were merely reported by the police as being 1284 supposed to be able to prove so-and-so. They were described by the Crown Solicitor as being hostile, as they would not prosecute; but they never said they would, and they did not prevaricate in any way. One witness proved that the defendant asked who lived in a certain house and what his politics were, and the grandfather, James Cuddy, swore that he came into his house partly disguised, but that he knew him and talked with him, and regarded it as a practical joke. Beyond this there was no evidence of importance. The Resident Magistrate states that he paid particular attention to this prosecution, and that upon the evidence it would have been impossible for any Bench to return informations. There is nothing in the case to lead one to suppose that it was not rightly dismissed, although it was a proper case for investigation. The defendant had not been arrested at the time when the matter was brought under the notice of Colonel Burgess, whose action was confined to an expression of opinion which was no bar to further action. As a matter of fact, the case was reported to the Resident Magistrate; and if his advice had been taken, and the matter reported to head-quarters, it is probable that no question would have arisen. The officer of police has been informed that he ought to have acted on that advice.
§ MR. WILLIAM O'BRIENWhat action will be taken regarding Orange magistrates who sit on Party cases, as they constantly do in the North?
§ MR. JOHN MORLEYI should have to consider what steps could be taken to prevent magistrates of any particular complexion from acting in a judicial capacity, and as at present advised we cannot, I think, take cognizance of the matter.