§ *MR. W. J. CORBET (Wicklow, E.)
I wish to return to the incident of the 992 police violence at Arklow. The statement of the hon. and learned Gentleman that Father Farrelly had barricaded his house is altogether inconsistent with the fact that he had intimated his willingness to place himself at the disposal of the Police Inspector. There is also the inconsistency that seeing that the warrant was held in suspense for several weeks the rev. gentleman would have had to keep up his barricade night and day the whole time. It is quite evident he knew nothing about the intention of the police in regard to his arrest on this particular occasion. I have myself walked through the town with the rev. gentleman more than once since the issue of the warrant, and we passed the police several times, May I ask whether, under the warrant, the police had any right whatever to break into the rev. gentleman's house?
§ MR. W. REDMOND (Fermanagh, N.)
Will the hon. and learned Gentleman tell us to whom he is about to apply for information? We already have the statement of Father Farrelly; is the hon. and learned Gentleman going to apply to the police who so misconducted themselves, or to any other source? If he is going to postpone consideration for this purpose, the whole thing is little better than a farce. I am well acquainted with Father Farrelly, and I am sure he had no intention in any way to evade the service of the warrant. It is the opinion of the people in the district—an opinion which I share—that the police deliberately adopted this form of arrest in order, if possible, to inflict a public insult on the rev. gentleman. In a similar manner Father Clarke was arrested; he could have been taken quietly at any time, but the police deliberately adopted a time and method that was sure to lead to a great deal of public excitement.
§ It being Six of the clock, Mr. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put.