§ MR. MACNEILL (Donegal, S.)asked the President of the Board of Trade what inquiries were made as to the antecedents of Mr. Segrave, and his competence to fill a judicial office, on his appointment as a Resident Magistrate in October 1886; were the Irish Government aware that Mr. Segrave had three times failed to obtain by examination a Commission in the Army, and that on two of these three occasions he had failed to pass a qualifying examination; and, were the Government aware that in September 1885 Mr. Segrave's services in the Cape Forces had been dispensed with, as appears by the Cape Gazette, he having been previously placed under arrest for the embezzlement of money belonging to soldiers under his command?
§ *SIR M. HICKS-BEACHI am obliged to the hon. Member for asking me this question, as it gives me an 371 opportunity of stating that any responsibility rests with me, and not at all with the present Chief Secretary for Ireland. I can only speak as to the circumstances of that appointment from my recollection of a matter which took place two and a half years ago, but I am quite sure that I gave very great personal attention to the inquiry into the testimonials which must have been produced by Captain Segrave, both by letter and oral, and I referred the testimonials to the Lord Chancellor for his consideration with regard to the judicial qualifications of Captain Segrave. Of course the points referred to in the second and third paragraphs of the hon. Member's question were not in any way brought under my notice. On the contrary, Captain Segrave was recommended to me as a Roman Catholic gentleman, whose claims to such an appointment had been favourably looked upon by Lord Aberdeen, and whose record of service at the Cape was a good one. If the statements in the second and third paragraphs are true, it is obvious that I was deceived.
§ *SIR M. HICKS-BEACHYes, Sir, they were perfectly genuine.
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order!
§ MR. SEXTONasked whether the papers, including the testimonials and correspondence, connected with this appointment would be laid on the Table?
§ *SIR M. HICKS-BEACHI have already stated that I only speak from recollection. My difficulty is that testimonials are never, as I believe considered as official documents. They remain with the Chief Secretary, to whom they may be addressed, and I have been unable, after careful search, to lay my hand on those documents.
§ MR. JOHN ELLIS (Nottinghamshire, Rushcliffe)asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies on what date a communication was first sent by the Colonial Office to the Government of Cape Colony respecting the charges made in this House on 19th December, 1888, against Captain Segrave, R.M., and the date on which any reply was received from the Government of Cape Colony?
§ BARON HENRY DE WORMSThe first communication made by the Colonial 372 Office to the Cape Government was sent by the mail on the 4th of January, that being the first mail which left after the 29th of December, on which day the Secretary of State was requested by the Irish Office to make inquiry into the allegations made against Captain Segrave. Not receiving a reply from the Cape Government, the Secretary of State, at the request of the Irish Office, telegraphed on the 16th, and again on the 19th, and yesterday the following reply was received—
Cape Town, March 19th.—Referring to your telegram of the 16th of March, Ministers inform me that Lieutenant Segrave was in July, 1885, dismissed from the Cape Infantry for gross neglect and breach of trust.
§ An hon. MEMBER: "Remember Mitchelstown!"
§ SIR W. HARCOURT (Derby)In the absence of the Chief Secretary, I will ask the First Lord of the Treasury the question which I asked the other night, whether in this Vote on Account is included the salary of Mr. Segrave, who, I believe, was the magistrate at Mitchelstown.
§ *THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH,) StrandMy right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary will be in his place in a few minutes, and will be able to answer the question of the right hon. Gentleman.