§ MR. P. O'BRIEN (Monaghan, N.)I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that, in the case of the policeman charged and proved to have been drunk when on duty in Millstreet on 22nd July, there was division of opinion on the Bench of Magistrates trying the case on the 5th inst.; whether Surgeon Major Leader, who dissented, is correctly reported to have stated that "a case was brought before them of false imprisonment by a policeman" at the prosecution of his District Inspector, "and that he thought they should go into it no matter what happened subsequently," and to have stated that, on the evidence of the head constable, the arrests were illegal; whether a conviction for illegal arrest can be given under the Act of Will. 3, c. 13, s. 19; and whether the attention of the Lord Chancellor will be directed to the action of Mr. Butler, R. M., in obtaining the dismissal, without prejudice, of the case against the policeman in question?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. MADDEN, Dublin University)I understand it is the fact that at the hearing of the case two members of the Bench were in favour of a dismissal and the third member was in favour of proceeding with the case. Surgeon Major Leader was the dissenting Magistrate; but I am not aware of the exact terms in which he expressed his dissent. The majority of the Bench, in dismissing the case, acted without prejudice and in the exercise of their judicial discretion.