HC Deb 19 August 1889 vol 339 c1666
MR. MAURICE HEALY

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the report of the prosecution against Mr. Thomas Barry, at Mallow Petty Sessions, in the Cork Examiner, of the 14th instant, from which it appears that Mr. Rice, the Crown Solicitor, in stating the case, said that there was no charge against Mr. Barry of any offence, but that he had been "associating with persons who were strongly suspected" of boycotting; and that, on this charge, Mr. Barry was sent to gaol for three months, in default of giving bail to be of good behaviour; and, whether he can state what the effect of giving such bail by Mr. Barry would be, and what course of proceeding on Mr. Barry's part would afterwards entitle the Crown to have the recognisance estreated?

MR. FLYNN

May I also ask whether this prosecution was sanctioned by the Irish Government; and, if so, is it their intention to persevere with prosecutions under this very old Statute?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I am not aware of the precise language used by the Sessional Crown Solicitor who conducted the prosecution of Mr. T. Barry at Mallow Petty Sessions. He was called upon to show cause why he should not be compelled to give sureties for good behaviour, under a branch of the law, no doubt ancient in its origin, but recognised and enforced by the most distinguished Judges of modern times. The Government did sanction this prosecution, and will, when necessary, enforce the branch of the law on which the prosecution was founded. The case is still pending, the Magistrates having decided to state a case for one of the Superior Courts.

MR. M. HEALY

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered the second paragraph of my question.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I do not think the hon. Gentleman can expect me to express an opinion on a point of law.