HC Deb 15 August 1887 vol 319 cc482-3
MR. MACARTNEY (Antrim, S.)

had the following Question on the Paper, but did not ask it:—To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the following paragraph, in The Sheffield Daily Telegraph of 11th August: — Our Dublin correspondent says;—I am in a position to inform you that the attack on a Protestant excursion party at Westport, which has been reported in your columns, has been followed by a state of things in the immediate district which is creating serious alarm among the Protestant residents. …. A few days ago a Protestant Police Inspector stayed at a Boycotted hotel in the district, and, on leaving, was the victim of a murderous assault for thus offending against the unwritten laws of the Nationalists. The Inspector bravely tackled his assailant, and held on to him in the midst of a hostile crowd till police assistance arrived; and, whether the Government will take steps to protect the law-abiding inhabitants of the district of Westport from the dangers which may be apprehended from the state of things alluded to?

MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)

Mr. Speaker, I wish to draw your attention to a Question which appears on the Paper of a very offensive character to the county which I have the honour to represent. It is Question No. 19. The hon. Member for South Antrim placed it on the Paper; but he left his place in the House before the Question was called. I understand that on a previous occasion you ruled that any Question reflecting seriously upon a constituency, or a section of the people, when placed upon the Paper ought to be asked, if the hon. Member is in the House. The hon. Member deliberately left his place before the Question was called.


If the hon. Gentleman likes to ask the Question himself, it is perfectly competent for him to do so.


I beg to ask the Question of the Chief Secretary.


I have not seen the newspaper paragraph alluded to in the Question; but I find that it has reference to the case of a man who refused to leave the hotel premises until supplied with drink, he at the time being intoxicated. He was removed from the premises, and subsequently arrested for being drunk and disorderly. The case has no connection with the religious ill-feeling which unhappily exists in the district,