HC Deb 24 February 1888 vol 322 cc1370-3
MR. DEASY (Mayo, W.)

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the Lord Chancellor has inquired into the charges against Mr. Stoney, who he stated in September last was guilty of gross dereliction of duty, or something more, in connection with the money entrusted to him in carrying out the Government emigration scheme; whether Mr. Stoney is still on the Commission of the Peace; and, what steps the Government are taking in the matter?

THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER SECRETARY (Colonel KING-HARMAN) (Kent, Isle of Thanet)

(who replied) said, the charges against Mr. Stoney were fully inquired into by a Local Government Board Inspector, who found that the irregularities were attributable to a want of administrative foresight on the part of the committee. In one case, however, he attributed personal misconduct to Mr. Stoney for having permitted a girl to emigrate with a family to which she did not belong, contrary to a Rule of the Local Government Board. The Lord Chancellor then inquired fully into the case and all its circumstances, and has censured Mr. Stoney for having yielded to the girl's entreaties, thereby transgressing the Rules laid down by the Local Government Board, and also for not having taken sufficient steps to prevent the irregularities which had occurred. The Lord Chancellor saw no reason for removing Mr. Stoney from the Commission of the Peace; and the Government did not contemplate taking any further action in the matter.

MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)

said, he would like, as he now saw the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary in his place, to refer him to the extraordinary language he used last year in reference to Mr. Stoney in the debate on the Estimates; and when his hon. Friend the Member for West Mayo was dealing with the question the right hon. Gentleman had said, interrupting his hon. Friend (Mr. Deasy)— Perhaps it may shorten the hon. Gentleman's case if I say that the evidence he has quoted is admitted, and that it is not my intention to make any defence. And he continued— I cannot pledge myself to go as far as the hon. Gentleman —who wished to institute a criminal prosecution— but I am quite ready to admit that Mr. Stoney has been guilty of grave dereliction of duty, and possibly, in some cases, of something more."—(3 Hansard, [320] 794.) He wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he, when that gentleman had been guilty of gross dereliction of duty, and something more in some cases —namely, peculation of hundreds of pounds—transmitted to the Lord Chancellor, with the Report of the Inspector of the Local Government Board—

THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR) (Manchester, E.)

It is not my function to convey anything whatever to the Lord Chancellor.

MR. T. M. HEALY

You promised to do it.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The hon. and learned Gentleman, in the last part of his Question, appears to have misquoted me—[Mr. T. M. HEALY: I quoted from Hansard.]—because in the last part of the Question he said that I had expressed a distinct opinion that the gentleman in question was guilty of peculation. I beg to say that I never accused him of peculation. I do not understand the quotations which he has read from Hansard, and which I have not had an opportunity of looking at.

MR. T. M. HEALY

said, that perhaps, as the matter was one of great importance to the persons concerned, the House would permit him to repeat the quotation for the right hon. Gentleman. [The hon. and learned Gentleman again read the quotations, pointing out that the right hon. Gentleman had twice interrupted the hon. Member for West Mayo in order to make the statement which he had read.] He asked the Chief Secretary, whether he expressed to the Lord Chancellor, as the Chief Law Administrator in Ireland, an opinion that Mr. Stoney was "guilty of grave dereliction of duty and something more;" and, whether he would state what "the something more" was?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I again say that it is not my duty to give my views as to Mr. Stoney to the Lord Chancellor. The Lord Chancellor is perfectly capable of drawing his own deductions from the Report; and I maintain that the hon. and learned Gentleman will now see that it is so—that I never went the length of accusing the gentleman in the House of peculation. It has been already stated that the only charge sustained against Mr. Stoney was that he allowed a young woman to be emigrated as a member of a family to which she did not belong.

MR. DEASY

wished to put a Question to the right hon. Gentleman, whether one of the charges which he admitted was brought against Mr. Stoney was that he used the public funds for the purpose of evicting his own tenants, and in order to get possession of their farms; and whether, under the circumstances, he considers Mr. Stoney a fit and proper person to hold the Commission of the Peace?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Give Notice of the Question.

MR. DEASY

I beg to give Notice that I shall move a Resolution on the subject of Mr. Stoney upon the House going into Committee on the Supplementary Estimates.