§ MR. FLYNN
I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether he has seen a Report of the Falcarragh Petty Sessions, held on Tuesday, 25th February, before Messrs. Burke and Bores-ford, resident magistrates, and at which Edward M'Ginleyr, an evicted tenant, was charged with intimidating one Charles Gallagher by interfering with the sale of the latter's pig at a fair; if it is true, as reported in the papers, that the only overt act of intimidation deposed to consisted in the defendant's "winking at the pig;" and the magistrates held there was no proof that the pig-buyers were intimidated, and dismissed the summons, but yet bound the defendant in sureties to keep the peace or in default to be imprisoned for three months; and was the prosecution brought under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act; and, if not, under what statute?
§ MR. MADDEN
It is not the case that the only overt act proved was that indicated in the question. It was clearly proved that the defendant had directed at least five buyers not to buy the pig. The magistrates held that the defendant had boycotted the sale of the pig, but they were not satisfied that the pig buyers had been intimidated. The prosecution was under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act. The magistrates ordered the defendant to give sureties for his future good behaviour. He appears to have complied with the order.