§ MR. LALOR (Queen's Co., Leix)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord 195 Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the following circumstances: That Vesey Fitzgerald, esquire, R.M., on the 16th February last, at Maryborough Petty Sessions, made an order for £10, highest penalty, against George Vanston, Poor Rate collector and contractor, on the ground that his workmen interred the corpse of a convict in a private grave without the consent of a relative, and that Vanston lodged an appeal and entered into a recognizance to have his case reheard before the Court of Quarter Sessions: that, subsequently, on the 2nd March, and pending the appeal, said Vesey Fitzgerald, without notice to and in the absence of George Vanston, and another of the convicting justices, altered the order book by inserting that the conviction was under the 41st and 42nd Vic. cap 52, which obliges different statutable requirements to be given with a view to an appeal; whether, on the hearing of the appeal at Quarter Sessions on 16th April, 1886, before Mr. De Moleyns, County Court judge, the said Vesey Fitzgerald during the hearing of the appeal, and contrary to the Act of Parliament, occupied a seat on the Bench, and presided at the hearing, and took part in it; and, is it his intention to recommend a return (under the foregoing circumstances) of the abated penalty of £4 imposed by the County Court judge on the said George Vanston?
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne), in reply, said, that the facts were as stated in the first paragraph of the Question. It was found that the wrong statute had been quoted, and it was necessary, so far, to amend the conviction, which the magistrates had power to do. The certificate given to the defendant showed clearly that the conviction had been so amended. The point was raised on the appeal, and was not maintained. Mr. Fitzgerald informed the Government that he was present when the appeal was heard, but that he took no part in the hearing of it. There did not appear to be any good reason for interference in the matter.