HC Deb 01 August 1889 vol 339 cc61-3
MR. MATTHEW KENNY (Tyrone, Mid.)

I beg to ask the Solicitor General for Ireland if there is any precedent, since the passing of the Act 14 and 15 Vic. c. 93, for Magistrates at Petty Sessions in Ireland requiring a person adjudged by them guilty of a contempt of Court to find sureties for good behaviour?

* THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. MADDEN,) University of Dublin

Perhaps I may be allowed at the same time to reply to the question of the right hon. Gentleman the Lord Mayor of Dublin—namely:— Whether it was for 'contempt of Court' in language used by him in addressing the Court upon a charge against himself that Dr. Tanner, M.P., was ordered by two stipendiaries at Tipperary on Monday last to find bail or to undergo imprisonment for three months; and whether it was within the legal competency of the justices to deal with 'contempt of Court' otherwise than by a sentence of imprisonment for a period not exceeding one week. It appears that the hon. Member referred to in these questions was not adjudged by the Magistrates to be guilty of a contempt of Court. The conduct in respect of which the hon. Member was ordered to find bail to be of good behaviour took place in open Court, but the Magistrates acted under their jurisdiction in holding the Commission of the Peace, and not under the statutable authority referred to in the question of the hon. Member for South Cork. The hon. Member was not sentenced by the Court to any punishment for contempt of Court, nor need he undergo any punishment at all provided he gives the required securities to be of good behaviour.

MR. MACNEILL

Does not the Petty Sessions Act prescribe that the punishment for contempt of Court shall be seven days' imprisonment, and no more?

* MR. MADDEN

The Magistrates did not in this instance exercise the statutory jurisdiction at all.

MR. W. O'BRIEN (Cork County, N.E.)

May I ask whether the offence for which Dr. Tanner has been sentenced is not that of making a speech in his own defence, his counsel having been thrust out of Court by the Magistrates?

* MR. MADDEN

It was in the course of making a speech that the insult was offered to the Magistrates composing the Court.

MR. W. O'BRIEN

Are we to understand that in Ireland in future, if a Magistrate chooses to put an accused person's counsel out of Court, and the accused afterwards in any way offends the Magistrate's canons of manners, the presiding Magistrate is to send him to prison for three months?

MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)

Was or was not the offence contempt of Court, and, if it was, were the Magistrates justified in going outside the statute, which prescribes that a person committing contempt may be fined or imprisoned for a period of seven days only?

* MR. MADDEN

The right hon. Gentleman has brought the matter to a very narrow issue. The statute provides a certain punishment for contempt of Court. It is competent for the Magistrates to order a person guilty of certain conduct to find sureties for his good behaviour, and the question is whether this jurisdiction is ousted by the Statute in cases where the latter applies. The right hon. Gentleman raises the question whether the order in this case has been made legally or illegally—whether it was within or outside the jurisdiction of the Magistrates. As there are perfectly understood means by which such a question can be raised, it would not be proper for me to express an opinion on the legal point.

MR. H. H. FOWLER (Wolverhampton, E.)

Is there any precedent in the Superior Courts of England, Ireland, or Scotland where a Judge in a Superior Court, having been insulted in his Court, has dealt with such a case, not as one of contempt of Court, but has called on the offending person to find bail, and in default has sent him to prison?

* MR. MADDEN

There is the highest authority for saying that insulting or contemptuous language spoken of Judges or Magistrates is a proper matter for the exercise of the jurisdiction of the Magistrates under the Statute referred to; but whether, where there is statutable jurisdiction for dealing with contempt of Court, it is co-extensive with the general jurisdiction to which I have referred, I must decline to discuss, as that is a question which must be decided by proper legal authority.

MR. SEXTON

In consequence of a telegram just received from Dr. Tanner as to the violence from which he has suffered I feel myself under the necessity of giving notice that at the end of the questions I will move the adjournment of the House.