§ MR. BRADLAUGH (Northampton)(for Mr. LABOUCHERE) (Northampton) asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether in view of the fact that two old men and a youth were killed by shots fired by the Irish Constabulary from their barracks at Mitchelstown; that a Coroner's Inquest found a verdict of murder against certain of the constables who fired from the barracks; that this verdict and the proceedings at the Coroner's Inquest were quashed upon technical grounds in regard to the proceedings; it is intended to direct that a second inquest be held upon the bodies of the three persons who were killed; or to prosecute the constables who killed them; or to hold any sort of public inquiry, at which the evidence of the constables and of those present at these deaths may be forthcoming, in order that a primâ facie decision may be arrived at in respect to the legality of the action of the constables concerned in this matter; and, whether, in the event of such inquiry taking place, it will be entrusted to persons who have not expressed an opinion upon the matter under investigation, and who were neither directly nor indirectly responsible for what occurred?
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR) (Manchester, E.)Having regard to the fact that the Coroner's Jury, while inculpating some members of the Constabulary for firing in the Mitchelstown affray, wholly exonerated the District Inspector, who ordered the firing, and to the fact that the inquisition as regards those members of the Constabulary who were inculpated was quashed by the unanimous decision of the Court of Queen's Bench, not alone 170 for technical errors, but for matters of substance—namely, the misconduct of the Coroner—and to all the circumstances of the case, it is not intended to hold another inquest, or to prosecute the constables, or direct any other inquiries than the Departmental one already held.
§ MR. CONYBEARE (Cornwall, Camborne)May I ask the right hon. Gentleman what was the misconduct of the Coroner?
§ [No reply.]