§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL (Kirkcaldy)asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he proposes to make any further inquiry into the Edlingham burglary cage; whether the prosecutors in the late trial of the policemen were instructed to produce all the evidence which could throw any light on the case; and, if so, why some important witnesses were not examined, especially the Reverend Mr. Perry and Mr. Percy, the principal actors in the proceedings by which the case was re-opened, and who were present ready and willing to give evidence; whether the money to give compensation to Murphy and Brannagan has been voted, or when, or in what shape, Parliament will be asked to vote it; and, whether, in case there is to be no further inquiry, he will, before asking for the money, produce to the House a Copy of the proceedings on the inquiry by an agent of his own, or other evidence, by which he was satisfied of the innocence of the two men, and of their right to compensation?
§ * THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. MATTHEWS,) Birmingham, E.I have 1119 carefully considered this intricate and difficult case, and I am unable to see that any further inquiry can be made which will throw more light upon it, or elicit any new facts. The Director of Public Prosecutions was requested to produce at the late trial all the evidence that could be given. It was necessarily left to the counsel conducting the prosecution what particular witnesses should be called. Mr. Perry and Mr. Percy were not called, because the statements made to them by Edgell or Richardson were not evidence against the constables then on trial; but they were subpoenaed by the prosecution in order to insure their attendance in case the defendants wished to examine them. Mr. Perry was called as a witness before the magistrate in the case against Edgell and Richardson, and there was then an opportunity of cross-examining him. The compensation lodged with trustees for Braunagan and Murphy has been paid from the Civil Contingencies Fund, and Parliament will be asked to vote it in the Supplementary Estimate for the repayment of advances from that fund. I do not propose to produce to the House a copy of the proceedings and report of the Treasury Solicitor. That is a document containing a great deal of confidential matter; and it is impossible for the House to form a judicial opinion upon a mass of evidence of an intricate character. But I may say that I did not act on that report, and took no step for the pardon of Brannagan and Murphy, or for compensating them, until Edgell and Richardson had not only confessed their guilt after warning that they would be punished, but had been sentenced to five years' penal servitude,
§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLI want to know whether the counsel for the prosecution were instructed merely to produce such evidence as was likely to secure a conviction, or to produce all the evidence that would throw light on the case; and, if so, why the prosecution did not call Mr. Perry and Mr. Percy, and any evidence that might affect the credibility of Edgell and Richardson?
§ * MR. MATTHEWSI have already stated that the prosecution was instructed to lay the whole of the case, both for and against the policemen, before the Court.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLI beg to give notice that when the Vote for Compen- 1120 sation comes before the House, I will call attention to the unsatisfactory position of this matter, the extreme barbarity of the English law, and the great difficulty of eliciting the truth.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYIs it true that the prosecution was conducted by a new Conservative Member of this House?
§ * MR. MATTHEWSThe prosecution was entrusted to a gentleman who has a large practice before the tribunal by which it was tried. The choice was not in any way made by the Government, but by the Director of Public Prosecutions on his own responsibility.