§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland if he has examined (as promised) into the case of Mr. Walsh, of the Cashel Sentinel, now undergoing four months' imprisonment in Tullamore on a charge of conspiracy; whether, before being convicted in Tipperary on this charge, Mr. Walsh had been sentenced to three months' hard labour for publishing in his newspaper a speech of another person commenting on a declaration of the right hon. the Member for Mid Lothian; did the police hold over the first warrant until they ascertained that Mr. Walsh would not appeal against the second sentence, and have they since abstained from executing it, so that the prisoner, by the act of the Executive, is now enduring a punishment later in point of time than the one first inflicted on him; where is the authority for this procedure, and what is the name of the officer responsible; whether, inasmuch as Sec. 23 of the 1402 Petty Sessions Act prescribes when a warrant is issued, "for its execution forthwith," it is intended to enforce the first warrant four and a quarter months after sentence, when Mr. Walsh's second term has been completed; and how long may a policeman keep unexecuted in his possession a warrant which he has the power immediately to act on, and which the statute provides shall be executed "forthwith," and where is his discretion to suspend the Law derived from?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. MADDEN, Dublin University)I have examined into the case of Mr. Walsh, of the Cashel Sentinel. The warrant in the conspiracy case, under which the prisoner is now undergoing punishment, was the earlier in point of date. The warrant in the appeal case referred to in the question as the first warrant was not, in point of fact, issued until after the warrant in the conspiracy case, and therefore could not have been executed before it. It is not the fact that the police held over the first warrant, or that the prisoner, by the act of the Executive, is undergoing a punishment later in point of time than the one first inflicted on him. When the warrant in the appeal case was issued the prisoner was in custody under the warrant in the conspiracy case. Where there are two sentences which are not concurrent the ordinary course is to execute the second warrant on the expiration of the time of imprisonment under that which was earlier in date. This practice appears to be according to law, and there was nothing exceptional in the present case.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYFor the fourth time the right hon. Gentleman has carefully abstained from answering the question whether the police have not failed to follow the statute which prescribes that they shall execute a warrant forthwith.
§ MR. MADDENI have on this and on other occasions fully answered the hon. and learned Gentleman's questions. If the provisions of the Statute have been violated, the prisoner will have his remedy.