HC Deb 26 November 1888 vol 331 cc156-7
MR. W. A. MACDONALD (Queen's Co., Ossory)

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether his attention has been called to the evidence given on Wednesday before the Special Commission by Sergeant Meehan, of the Royal Irish Constabulary, who stated on cross-examination that he had come to London without a subpoena, and in consequence of a telegram received from Mr. Rogers, his District Inspector; and, whether, in view of the declaration made by him, that the Government maintained a position of impartiality and neutrality as between the parties appearing before the Commission, this proceeding on the part of an officer of police, who is under the direct control of the Executive, has been sanctioned by the Government?

THE FIRST LORD (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)

I am informed that the police sergeant named was directed to proceed to London in consequence of a telegram announcing that a subpoena had been issued for his attendance before the Special Commission, and awaited his arrival. There was nothing in this proceeding which was inconsistent with the expressed views of the Government as to their attitude in the matter. Precisely the same course would be followed on a similar application on behalf of any of the other parties to the cause.

THE LORD MAYOR OF DUBLIN (Mr. SEXTON) (Belfast, W.)

I wish to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if this sergeant was directed by the telegram from his superior officer to report himself at the office of Mr. Soames; whether the office of Mr. Soames constituted a Department of the Irish Police in London; and, whether he will lay on the Table of the House a Return—in time for the Irish Estimates—of the names, rank, and pay of the public servants brought from Ireland and kept in London at the instance of The Times, showing the dates of their departure from Ireland and the periods of their detention?

MR. W. H. SMITH

I have no information beyond that which I have given to the House; therefore, I cannot reply to the Question of the hon. Member. It is obviously impossible for us to produce a Return of the officers who acted under subpoena under formal process issued by a capable authority.

MR. SEXTON

I wish to ask, as a matter of Constabulary Rule, if the absence of every policeman—of every grade—is not reported immediately to the Inspector General, who has, therefore, in his hands material to give the Returns?

MR. W. H. SMITH

The hon. Member must be aware that I have no personal knowledge of the Rules of the Constabulary in Ireland.

MR. W. A. MACDONALD

Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly state why the subpoena was not served on the police officer in Ireland?

MR. W. H. SMITH

The hon. Gentleman must be aware that I cannot tell anything of the kind.

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT (Derby)

I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it would not be regular and more fitting that the subpoena should be served by the solicitor in this ease, and not by officers of the Royal Irish Constabulary; and whether, as the Attorney General is counsel in this case, he would not see that such a course, which is the proper course, should be pursued?

MR. W. H. SMITH

The right hon. Gentleman must be aware that I have no personal knowledge on the matter. No doubt any suggestion coming from the right hon. Gentleman will he duly considered by the Attorney General.