HC Deb 24 July 1890 vol 347 c731
MR. KNOX

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that, at the Belfast Petty Sessions, on Monday the 16th instant, before Mr. Eaton, R.M., a man named Wallace was charged with committing an assault occasioning actual bodily harm, that it was proved that a serious wound had been inflicted with a reaping hook, and that Mr. Eaton, saying the case was proved, ordered Wallace to pay 40s. and costs; under what Statute Mr. Eaton was empowered to deal summarily with an offender who had committed an assault occasioning actual bodily harm; and whether Mr. Eaton is the gentleman who formerly acted as Resident Magistrate at Mitchelstown?

MR. MADDEN

The charge in the case in question was one of "assault and wounding." The investigation in Court proved that the occurrence arose in a drunken quarrel in which the defendant had received a great deal of provocation from the complainant and others in his company, and was defending himself from attack when he struck the blow. The cut, though severe, was not a serious one. The presiding Magistrate was of opinion that the case was not one requiring to be sent forward for trial at Assizes. With the consent of the solicitor prosecuting, the charge was entered in the Order Book as for a common assault. The man was fined 40s. and 20s. costs, or, in default, one month's imprisonment with hard labour, one-third of the fine and 20s. costs being awarded to the complainant. The man, being unable to pay the penalty, is now undergoing the term of imprisonment. The conviction was made under 24 and 25 Vic, c. 100, s. 42, and 25 and 26 Vic, c. 50, s. 2. The reply to the last paragraph is in the affirmative.