HC Deb 14 June 1888 vol 327 cc99-100
MR. SHEEHAN (Kerry, E.)

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether at Killarney Petty Sessions, on the 5th instant, on the hearing of a charge of assault against Constable Kearney, the complainant, Timothy Cronin, and four witnesses, deposed to the constable having struck Cronin, and pushed him off the flag-way, for no apparent reason; whether the presiding Justices, Messrs. Herbert and Orpen, while avowing there was no obstruction of the foot-way by Cronin, still dismissed the case against the constable, without requiring his solicitor to make any defence, on the sole ground that they considered the assault trivial; and, if these allegations are true, would he cause the re-hearing of this case

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

The Inspector General reports that the complainant and three witnesses did not depose to the constable having struck Cronin; but they did swear to his having pushed him off the foot-path. Cronin, however, admitted that he did not feel the assault. The magistrates considered that there had been no real assault, and dismissed the case. The charge against Cronin was not heard before the magistrates at Petty Sessions, but before the Town Court.

MR. EDWARD HARRINGTON (Kerry, W.)

asked whether, when the case was before the Petty Sessions, a previous case had not been before the Town Court, and that, at the instance of the policeman, a summons was served for obstruction of the foot-path; and, whether the magistrates did not admit that the assault had been committed?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

said, the facts were as he had already stated.

MR. SHEEHAN (Kerry, E.)

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that the charge against the sergeant was not heard at Petty Sessions?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

said, he had stated the information he had received. If the hon. Gentleman would put a Question on the Paper he would inquire.

MR. SHEEHAN

said, he would repeat the Question on Friday.