HC Deb 09 August 1889 vol 339 cc898-9
MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)

I beg to ask Mr. Solicitor General for Ireland whether he will lay upon the Table Copies of the Correspondence betwen the Lord Chancellor and Mr. James Byrne, of Wallstown Castle, resulting in the dismissal of the latter from the Commission of the Peace for acting as Justice on a charge against the police in an adjoining Petty Sessions District within his own County (Cork); whether the Lord Chancellor, when dismissing Mr. Byrne, had under his notice the decision of the Court of Crown Cases Reserved in England (Queen v. Beckley, 20 Q. B. D. 187), holding that it was distinctly legal for a Magistrate to act within his county outside his Petty Sessions District; whether Lord Coleridge in that case said, In dealing with an offence committed in the county the Magistrates for the county have jurisdiction throughout the county, and Baron Pollock held that The law is very jealous to preserve the jurisdiction of Magistrates, and their authority is not to he cut down without an express provision to that effect; whether if this exposition of the law in England was not reported when Mr. Byrne was dismissed, the Lord Chancellor will now reinstate him; whether as all Resident Magistrates in Ireland are allowed to sit everywhere throughout their counties and some of them in several counties, and all English Magistrates can exercise jurisdiction through all their counties, a different practice is to be established for Irish Justices or their Commissions forfeited if they act on the English Law; and whether, in consequence of Mr. Byrne's dismissal, no Catholic Magistrate and no Magistrate who is not a landlord or an agent now sits for his Petty Sessions District?

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

I stated, in reply to a ques- tion put by the hon. and learned Gentleman on March 13th, that the correspondence between the Lord Chancellor and Mr. Byrne, of Wallstown, had been published by Mr. Byrne, and circulated in the Press. The decision in the case quoted in the question does not appear to me to affect Mr. Byrne's case, or the reasons which induced the Lord Chancellor to act as he did. There is no analogy in the present case with the appointment of a Resident Magistrate, whose duty it is to attend, if possible, every Petty Sessions in his jurisdiction. The Lord Chancellor sees no reason whatever for reinstating Mr. Byrne. I am informed that it is not the case that no Roman Catholic who is not a landlord or an agent now sits for the district in consequence of Mr. Byrne's dismissal.

MR. T. M. HEALY

Are we to understand that the law of England is not to prevail as the law in Ireland in this matter? Can English Magistrates sit where they like; and are Irish Magistrates not being Resident Magistrates to be dismissed if they sit out of their own district?

* MR. MADDEN

The reason for which the Lord Chancellor acted in this matter was not that Mr. Byrne had violated the law by acting without jurisdiction, which was the case in the instance which the hon. and learned Gentleman has quoted. It was that he had been guilty of a reprehensible practice in sitting outside his customary district for the purpose of adjudicating on a special class of cases.

MR. T. M. HEALY

I will call attention to this matter on the Estimates.

MR. COX

Will the Lord Chancellor take notice of all Magistrates who sit outside their own district?

* MR. MADDEN

A similar practice on the part of any other Magistrate coming to the notice of the Lord Chancellor will, I have no doubt, be dealt with in a similar manner.