HC Deb 25 February 1890 vol 341 cc1165-6
MR. O'KEEFFE (Limerick)

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether his attention has been called to the sentence of one month's imprisonment passed yesterday on Mr. John M'Enery, editor of the Limerick Leader, by Messrs. Hoddes and Robertson, in default of giving bail to be of good behaviour for 12 months, for publishing without comment proceedings of a meeting of a branch of the Local National League on the 3rd of February; whether the magistrates are correctly reported to have refused to state a case for superior Courts on this conviction; and if, having regard to sentences in similar cases being under review by superior Courts, he will take steps not to permit said sentence to take effect?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. MADDEN,) University of Dublin

The magistrates did refuse to state a case for a superior Court of Law in the matter referred to in the Question. They so refused on the ground that the question of law submitted to them had been already decided by the Exchequer Division in the case of another prosecution. I have no power to take the steps suggested in the third paragraph of the Question, but I may point out that, whenever magistrates act erroneously in refusing to state a case, their error can be corrected on an application to the Court of Queen's Bench, under the provisions of 20 and 21 Vic, c. 43.

MR. FLYNN

Has this prosecution been brought under the Criminal Law Procedure Act, or under the Statute of Edward III.?

MR. MADDEN

The sentence appears to have been given under the Statute of Edward III. I believe the charge was under the Criminal Law Procedure Act.

MR. O'KEEFFE

The charge was that the defendant had published without comment the report of a meeting of a branch of a Local National League. Does not the decision of the magistrates amount to a breach of the decision of the County Court Judge at Waterford?

MR. MADDEN

The question of the correctness of the decision of the County Court Judge at Waterford is now sub judice, and pending the ultimate decision of the superior Court I can give no opinion on the subject.

In reply to Mr. CLANCY (Dublin County, N.),

MR. MADDEN

said: The Court of Queen's Bench has jurisdiction in the matter, and beyond that I can say nothing.

MR, CLANCY

Upon a former occasion when the Court of Queen's Bench was appealed to, the appeal was not opposed. Will the Government agree not to oppose an appeal in this case?

[No answer was given.]