HC Deb 05 March 1889 vol 333 cc966-8
MR. M'CARTAN

I wish to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the treatment of the bail prisoner Tracy, recently removed from Belfast to Mill-bank Prison, whether he can now say if the prison authorities supply dinners of joint, dessert, and beer or porter, to bail prisoners in Ireland; and, if not, whether such dinners were supplied at the expense of the proprietor of the Times to Tracy during his imprisonment at Belfast, or by whom these dinners were supplied to him there; whether he will state by whom the Freeman's Journal, containing reports of the proceedings at the Special Commission, was supplied to Tracy daily at Belfast Gaol; and, whether the Prisons Board, while allowing him to be visited by officers of the Royal Irish Constabulary to get up evidence for the Special Commission, without the presence of a warder, refused to grant such visits to the solicitors acting for him, and who at his request made application to be allowed similar visits?

* MR. A. J. BALFOUR

As this is the first Question asked me, and as there are several on the paper relating to this matter, I may explain the action the Government have taken, or are supposed to have taken, in connection with the Special Commission. The Government consider it their duty to aid the parties in this as they would in any other judicial investigation. They will afford that aid to either party, but hitherto only one party has been giving evidence, and the Government have afforded such information as has been asked for. With regard to the Question on the paper, I understand that the prison authorities do not provide bail prisoners with food and drink of the nature indicated in the Question. The dinners supplied to Tracy at Belfast were not at the expense of the proprietor of the Times, nor had they any connection whatever with the Special Commission trial, but were provided by the police authorities in connection with a totally different matter. A newspaper was also supplied to the man under precisely the same circumstances. I am informed that the man was not visited by officers of the Royal Irish Constabulary for the purpose alleged in the last paragraph. I am not aware whether it is the case, as alleged, that the solicitors acting for the prisoner were refused admittance, but have directed inquiry to be made.

MR. DILLON

As the right hon. Gentleman has stated that the Government feel themselves bound to aid either party in obtaining evidence, will he undertake to produce the informer Cullinane, whom he refused to produce on Friday?

* MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I do not consider that refusing to give up the name of an informer, whose life might thereby be endangered, is "refusing aid" to either party.

SIR W. HARCOURT

Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether Le Caron was an informer?

* MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I know nothing about Le Caron.

MR. SEXTON

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why it was that when Tracy's solicitors at Belfast applied to see the prisoner on a matter affecting his liberty the right was refused to them?

* MR. A. T. BALFOUR

I have not received any information on that point.

MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)

Is not Cullinane the man whom hon. Gentlemen have declared ought not to be believed on his oath?

MR. SPEAKER

Order, order!