§ COLONEL SAUNDERSON (Armagh, N.)I rise for the purpose of making a personal explanation. Unfortunately I was absent from the House yesterday, when the hon. Member for East Galway spoke. He said—
The hon. and gallant Member also accused him of having stolen a deer. He never stole a deer, he never pleaded guilty to stealing a deer, and he was never fined for stealing a deer, and he challenged the hon. and gallant Member to produce any record showing such a conviction.The hon. Member pointed out also that I made a mistake in asserting that two days after a speech he had made a 405 murder was committed. I made that statement upon what I believed to be sufficient authority, but I find I was mistaken. The date of the murder was five mouths after he made the speech. With regard to stealing the deer, I hold in my hand an authority which I deemed conclusive, and that was a certified copy of the order and finding on that case. Perhaps the House will allow me to read it. The case set out—That you the defendant (John Roche) did, on the 4th of October 1876, at Derrycraigh, being a forest chase or purlieu of the complainant, carry away therefrom a deer, and further that you hail in your possession on the day aforesaid a deer, contrary to the statute in such case made and provided. The defendant pleaded guilty of having the deer in his possession on the 4th of October, 1876, and expressed regret for the same, and consented to pay all cost.Sir, that is the authority on which I stated John Roche stole a deer. Furthermore, the hon. Member accuses me of personal discourtesy to him in having made this statement in regard to him without having given him previous information. I should be sorry to show discourtesy to any Member of the House; but permit me to observe that I was not bound to associate John Roche, who took away the deer and had it in his possession, with the hon. Member for East Galway, although I am bound to admit that between the names of the two persons there is some similarity.
§ MR. JOHN ROCHE (Galway, E.)Mr. Speaker, I must firstly say that I received no notice from the hon. Member for North Armagh of his intention to introduce this question here to-day, no more than of his attack on me yesterday. He produces a copy of a summons; but as he told you, he stated in his speech yesterday that I stole this deer, that I pleaded guilty, and that I was fined. Now he has got a copy of a summons close on 20 years old, but why has he not got the conviction, if there was any such thing as a conviction? If I was fined where is the record of the fine? He says I apologised. But I apologised for nothing, because there was nothing to apologise for. I was summoned, no doubt, for shooting a deer upon my own land—upon a farm which I hold in the townland of Derrycrag, for which I pay rent. There is not within 10 miles of the farm a single enclosed deer park or forest. No doubt there is a large number 406 of wild deer in the district owned by several men, and I say here, that if tomorrow I were on the lands and found a deer straying there I would shoot him. The landlord's agent, Mr. George Morris, who is now a member of the Local Government Board, Dublin, and a brother of Lord Morris, appeared at the Petty Sessions, and stated he would withdraw the summons, and that no fine or penalty need be inflicted. [Cries of "Withdraw Saunderson!" and "Apologise!"]