§ MR.JOHN O'CONNOR (Tipperary, S.)I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the refusal of certain prisoners in gaols in Ireland to take exercise with certain other prisoners is allowable by and in accordance with Rules issued by the Irish Prisons Boards last year; whether such prisoners so refusing constitute a class in themselves; and whether, in prisons where there are more than one of such prisoners, they will be given their exercise at the same hours and in the same place, as in the case of other distinct classes of prisoners?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURThe General Prisons Board report that the new Rule issued last year in regard to the exercising of convicted prisoners does not allow any such prisoner to refuse to take exercise with other prisoners. It requires that the exercise shall be taken at such times and places and subject to such conditions as the Governor or surgeon may direct. The fact of a prisoner being convicted under a particular Statute, or refusing to exercise with other prisoners, does not constitute a recognised classification for purposes, of exercise under the Prison Rules.
§ MR. J. O'CONNORMay I ask whether under the Rules issued last year, with the consent of the right hon. Gentleman and no doubt by his desire, prisoners were not to be allowed to take exercise in their own clothes or not as they please? Are those Rules consistent with his statement now, that prisoners are not allowed to wear their own clothes? In fact, are they not in direct contradiction with his statement?
§ * MR. A. J. BALFOURI see nothing about prisoners wearing their own clothes in the question on the Paper. I have described the existing Rule to the hon. Member, and there is no connection between the wearing of clothes and the exercise of prisoners.
§ MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)Did not the new Rule, following, as it did, upon a debate in this House as to the indignity inflicted upon prisoners convicted under the Act of 1887, in not being allowed to wear their own clothes at exercise, allow prisoners convicted under the summary clauses of that Act to exercise separately from others?
§ * MR. A. J. BALFOURNo, Sir; I have distinctly stated over and over again, in answer to questions and in debate across the floor of this House, that no distinction is drawn between the conviction of prisoners under the Statute of 1887 and under any other Statute whatever.
§ MR. SEXTONThen, what was the intention of the new Rules unless it was to allow separate exercise in some cases?
§ * MR. A. J. BALFOURIt was not intended to be a privilege confined exclusively to persons convicted under the Act of 1887, although no doubt the possibility of taking separate exercise is contemplated by the Rule.
§ MR. J. O'CONNORIs it intended to disqualify a certain class of prisoners from the enjoyment of the privilege, to reduce their status, and to compel them to bear their imprisonment under what is known as the solitary system?
§ * MR. A. J. BALFOURI do not know that I fully understand the question of the hon. Member. He had better give notice of it. There is no intention of degrading any one.
§ MR. J. O'CONNORI will repeat the question by and bye.