HC Deb 13 March 1890 vol 342 cc699-700
MR. GILL (Louth, S.)

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. M'Dermott, a recently evicted tenant on the Clanricarde Estate, now in Gal way Gaol, who has been kept in prison eight weeks on the ground of declining to give evidence before a secret inquiry, and who has been brought once a week during these eight weeks under a heavy escort from Gal way to Ballinasloe, a distance of 40 miles, and on each occasion remanded, has on each occasion expressed his willingness to answer any question put him in open Court; and what, under these circumstances, is the explanation of his continued imprisonment?

* MR. MADDEN

I am informed that it is the case that M'Dermott, having refused to give evidence at an inquiry held at Mountshannon and Ballinasloe, has been re-committed to the county prison, as stated in the question, for continuing that refusal. The inquiry is being held under Section 6 of the Explosives Substances Act, 1883, in connection with an alleged attempt to blow up the police and other persons present at evictions on the Clanricarde Estate. His imprisonment has been due to his refusal to comply with the requirements of the Statute.

MR. T. M. HEALY

Was there any reason why the inquiry should be carried on under the Secret Clause of the Crimes Act; and, if so, is it legal to inflict more than a mouth's inprisonment?

* MR. MADDEN

I cannot answer that question off-hand without referring to the section.

MR. SHAWLEFEVRE (Bradford, Central)

Is there anything in the Act which justifies a secret inquiry in a case of this kind?

* MR. MADDEN

If the right hon. Gentleman will refer to the Act, which is one applying to the entire of the United Kingdom, he will find the section under which the inquiry was held.

MR. SHAW LEFEVRE

Are not the provisions of the Crimes Act more stringent than those of the General Criminal Law?

* MR. MADDEN

The provisions of the two Acts are in this respect very similar.

MR. GILL

Is it true that Mr. M'Dermott has offered to answer any question that may be put to him in open Court?

* MR. MADDEN

Whether that is true or not I do not know; but it is highly irrelevant, the object of the inquiry being to ascertain if there was sufficient evidence to justify a prosecution in open Court.

MR. GILL

I beg to give notice that on the earliest opportunity I will call attention to this matter.