HC Deb 06 July 1888 vol 328 c560
MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)

asked Mr. Solicitor General for Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the case of "The Queen v. James Quinn," heard at the Dungannon Petty Sessions, and reported in The Tyrone Constitution of June 1, in which, after having decided that there was a primâ facie case against Quinn, the magistrates entered "No rule" as their finding; whether it is true that the Justices were equally divided, and if two of those who voted for the finding—namely, Messrs. M. and P. Shields, were acting outside their own Petty Sessions district; and, whether the decision of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland in Mr. Byrne's case is applicable to the circumstances; and, if so, will he direct the attention of the Lord Chancellor to the action of the two Justice referred to?


My attention has been called to this case by the Question of the hon. Member. It is the fact that at the hearing the magistrates were equally divided. Three of the magistrates being of opinion that there was no primâ facie case, and that the defendent should be sent for trial, and three of a contrary opinion, "No rule" was entered. I am informed that the Messrs. Shields have been in the habit of attending at the Dungannon Petty Sessions; and the circumstances of the case are, therefore, not similar to that of Mr. Byrne mentioned in the Question.