§ Mr. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the Government question the legality of the purpose announced in the placard convening the Coolgreany meeting; whether he an cite any judicial decision establishing the right of the Lord Lieutenant, at common law, to prohibit the holding of such a meeting; and, if not, whether he can say upon what authority it is intended that the Lord Lieutenant possesses such a power; whether the attendance of Sir Thomas Esmonde at a public meeting on the day appointed for the Coolgreany meeting was the sole cause of his removal from the office of High Sheriff of Waterford; when the Lords Justices who superseded Sir Thomas Esmonde were sworn into office; when they inquired into the case of Sir Thomas Esmonde; when the order for his supercession was made and issued; when the order for the appointment of his successor was made and issued; when and where Colonel Hillier was sworn into office; and, whether any communication was made to Sir Thomas Esmonde inviting him to explain the circumstances which led to his supercession?
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Sir MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH) (Bristol, W.)717 The Coolgreany meeting was not pro claimed on account of any tiling in the placard convening the meeting, but on account of what the Government had good reason to believe was the object and would be the effect of it, and what took place in the attempt to hold it put that beyond doubt. Judges have repeatedly laid down that an unlawful assembly may be dispersed by the conservators of the public peace, and Proclamations have frequently been issued by successive Lord Lieutenants warning persons against attending such meetings and of the consequences of their doing so. The Lords Justices removed Sir Thomas Esmonde for the reasons stated in their letter, which referred to previous conduct as well as to his attendance at these meetings. They were sworn into office early in the morning of the 21st instant, and inquired fully into the case as it stood in connection with the events of the preceding day. The office of High Sheriff is held "during pleasure," and can be determined at any time. When a new High Sheriff is appointed there is never any separate order for the supercession of his predecessor. The order for the appointment of Colonel Hillier was made on the 21st instant, and he was sworn into office the next day in Dublin according to law. No communication was made to Sir Thomas Esmonde beyond that which was published.
§ MR. SEXTONasked if the right hon. Gentleman could give any precedent for the removal of a High Sheriff by Lords Justices and not by the Lord Lieutenant, and any precedent for the supercession of a High Sheriff without previous notice or invitation to him to explain his conduct?
§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACHIt is impossible for me to give an answer without Notice.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)asked whether the frequent proclamations of meetings to which the right hon. Gentleman had referred were not all issued under statute—that was to say, under the Crimes Act; and whether the proclamations which had been issued by the late Liberal Government had not been issued under the provisions of the statute?
§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACHNo, Sir. Proclamations have been issued when the Crimes Act was not in force.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYWhat were the dates?
§ [No reply.]