§ MR. W. A. MACDONALD (Queen's Co., Ossory)asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it is true, as stated in Thursday's Daily News, that Mr. Hosack, the Magistrate at the Clerken-well Police Court, on Monday refused to attest the voting paper of Dr. J. B. Daly, an elector of Dublin University, on the ground that he was not personally known to him; that several policemen about the court knew Dr. Daly, and were willing to testify to the fact that he had property close to one of their stations; and, that Mr. Hosack refused to interrogate the said policemen, and ordered Dr. Daly to stand down, and that, as a consequence, Dr. Daly was deprived of the opportunity of recording his vote at the election?
Mr. MAC NEILL (Donegal, S.)had a similar Question on the Paper which was not asked.
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. MATTHEWS) (Birmingham, E.), in reply, said, he had obtained a Report from Mr. Hosack, the magistrate, who informed him that on the 11th instant, Dr. Daly applied to him to certify that he was a voter for Dublin University. It was the invariable rule in such cases that the applicant should be introduced by a person who could certify that the applicant was personally known to him. The applicant in this case was not so introduced; and therefore the magistrate declined to attest the voting paper. The magistrate denied that he had refused to hear any evidence as to Dr. Daly's identity. The latter stated that he was well known to the police of the district, and an Inspector of Police in Court, when asked by the applicant, said he did not know him. It was not a fact that Dr. Daly was obliged to wait for the arrival of the magistrate in a narrow, crowded Court, with the people about to be charged before the magistrate. He was in another part of the building along with other persons, who, like himself, were applicants. Mr. Hosack was absent from town at present; but on his return he (Mr. Matthews) would request 1338 him to make further inquiry into the statements of Dr. Daly.