§ MR. SEXTONasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether Mr. Joyce, R.M., Mr. Horne, R.M., and District Inspector Concannon were engaged in Dublin Castle during August and September last, in taking the evidence of police witnesses for the Times; whether Head Constable Hussey, of Belfast, was engaged in making a note of the evidence so taken; whether district inspectors, head constables, sergeants, and constables, were ordered by the Inspector General to report themselves at his office for the purpose of the proceedings conducted by Mr. Joyce, R.M., Mr. Home, R.M., and District Inspector Concannon; whether the Inspector General issued communications to certain officers of the Constabulary Force to order the men of the Force under their command to be on the alert, in order to get up evidence for the Times; whether Head Constables Redington, of Castleisland, and Preston, of Westport, were engaged for a long time in the counties of Clare, Roscommon, Kerry, and Limerick, in looking for witnesses and arranging evidence on behalf of the Times; whether the Inspector General came to London, and 1015 conferred with the managers of the Times case as to the course of evidence; and whether County Inspector Lopdell, District Inspector Concannon, and Head Constable McCoy, of Kildare, have been in London, not as witnesses, but as agents of the Times, in charge of informers and other witnesses, and for what period each of these officers was in London on this business?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURThe officials referred to were not employed in the manner alleged in the question. Particulars as to how they were engaged have been already supplied in reply to various questions. The Inspector General did not order any officials to report themselves at his office for the purpose suggested in the question, nor were any orders issued to certain officers by the Inspector General to order them to be on the alert to get up evidence for the Times. Head Constables Redington and Preston were not engaged in the manner suggested. The Inspector General did mot come to London, and did not confer with the managers of the Times' case as to the course of evidence. County Inspector Lopdell, District Inspector J. Concannon, and Head Constable M'Coy attended on subpoena as witnesses and not as agents of the Times.
MR. J. MORLEYMay I ask if there was a circular issued from Colonel Turner's office to officers of the Constabulary force in Clare giving instructions to get up evidence for the Times?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURNo, I cannot believe that it was so, but I have no information upon the subject. If the right hon. Gentleman will put a question down I will make inquiry.
§ MR. SEXTONHow does the right hon. Gentleman account for the prolonged presence in London of Inspectors Lopdell and Concannon and Head Constable M'Coy, seeing that neither of those officers was examined? Has he founded the answers which he has given upon information received from the officers themselves; and will the right hon. Gentleman afford us any means of getting at the truth of the matter?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI shall be most happy to consider any statement the hon. Gentleman may make to me. As to the officers mentioned, I presume that they were kept in London by the Times on account of the evidence they 1016 were expected to give. Why they were not called I cannot say.
§ MR. J. F. X. O'BRIEN (Mayo, S.)asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the visit made by Thompson to James Mullett at Millbank Prison took place in the presence of an officer of the prison; if so, did that officer prepare a record of what passed at that interview between Thompson and Mullett; and, if so, would that record be placed at the disposal of the solicitor for the defendants before the Special Commission; upon whose application was the visit granted to Thompson, and on what authority; was Thompson a solicitor; and, had James Mullett any other visitor at Mill-bank Prison than his wife and Thompson?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. MATTHEWS,) Birmingham, E.The visit was in sight of an officer, but not in his hearing; consequently there is no record of what transpired at the interview. The application was made by Mr. Soames, and it was granted on the authority of the Prison Commissioners. I have no knowledge of Mr. Thompson's professional calling. He is described by Mr. Soames as his representative. The answer to the last paragraph is in the negative.
§ MR. J. F. X. O'BRIENThe right hon. Gentleman gave us to understand the other day that this permission was only given to solicitors. If Thompson was not a solicitor, how was it that he got leave?
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order!
§ MR. J. F. X. O'BRIENasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, at whose instigation did Sergeant Mullen, R.I.C., at Ballyhaunis, county Mayo, write to Patrick Lavan, late of Ballyhaunis, now living at Washington Territory, U.S.A., expressing anxiety to do him a good turn, and stating, "I guarantee your name will never be mentioned, and I further guarantee that it will be the means of putting you on your feet. I saw the chance, and as it could be done privately, I wish to give it to you, and I trust you won't be, as of old, foolish enough not to accept it when you can do so without a third party knowing it;" was it in the interest of the Times' case, now pending before the 1017 Special Commission Mullen sought evidence from Lavan; if not, for what other purpose; and was that the first and last time Mullen endeavoured to tempt Patrick Lavan to become an informer?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURA question on the same subject has already been answered. It was not in the interest of the Times Mullen communicated with Lavan, and it is not usual to disclose the particulars connected with obtaining information from informants, as to do so would paralyze the action of the police, and frustrate the ends of justice.
§ MR. J. F. X. O'BRIENWould the right hon. Gentleman note that he has not answered my question regarding the last paragraph?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURIt is not in the interests of the public justice, as I have already stated, to answer it.