HC Deb 28 March 1892 vol 3 c47
MR. FLYNN (Cork, N.)

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether his attention has been called to the case against Michael Cronin, indicted at the Cork Assizes on the 21st instant on the charge of having stolen four head of cattle, the property of the Earl of Kenmare, in which the accused defended himself on the ground that it was an act of reprisal on the Earl of Kenmare for having made three distraints of his father's cattle; and was the case tried under the Criminal Law and Procedure Act, and what was the result of the trial; and, if so, why was it not tried under the ordinary law?

* THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. MADDEN,) Dublin University

I am informed that the suggestion contained in the first paragraph of the question was put forward on behalf of Cronin. The accused, however, pleaded guilty to the charge of larceny, and was sentenced to three months' imprisonment, and was bound over to be of good behaviour for three years. Two seizures were made in respect of four years' arrears of rent. The venue was changed to the City of Cork, but the case was investigated by the Magistrates, and subsequently dealt with at the Assizes under the ordinary law.