§ MR. T. W. RUSSELLI beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the observations of Mr. Justice O'Brien at the Leinster Assizes at Maryborough, in which he stated that he found it necessary, however, to observe that the usual means which are furnished to a Judge at Assizes in order to exhibit to him the state of the county, and upon which he has reason to depend, and which he has reason to expect to be accurate, required in this instance to be qualified by other means of information, because in the character of the Returns which are laid before the Judge by the Constabulary a grave departure from the established practice is exhibited in a contradiction between the information there furnished and the actual state of facts, for which I cannot account; and if he can state in what this great departure from established practice consisted?
MR. J. MORLEYI read a newspaper report of the observations of the learned Judge which are referred to in the question. The Judge stated that only one case of arson was included in the Constabulary Returns presented to him, whereas nine claims for compensation in respect of malicious burnings were before the Grand Jury. As a matter of fact, I am informed there were only five claims in respect of alleged malicious burnings before the Grand Jury; the remaining four claims were for alleged malicious injuries to property. With regard to the general question raised by 1463 the observations of the learned Judge as to the exclusion from the Returns of claims for compensation arising out of cases of alleged malicious burnings or alleged malicious injuries to property, I would point out that there has been no departure from the established practice, in the present instance, on the part of the County Inspector of the Queen's County. According to this practice, which has existed for years past, doubtful cases of incendiary fires and other malicious injuries are not included in the Returns as outrages pending the decision of the Grand Juries on the claims for compensation presented to them. The reason for this procedure is apparent, as claims are made in many fabricated cases of outrage, and it would be manifestly unfair to charge a county with outrages which, on further investigation, proved not to be genuine. On the other hand, in cases where no doubt exists in the minds of the police as to the genuineness of an outrage, the rule is to record it and include it in the Return. This was the course adopted on the occasion referred to in the question, and which, as I have pointed out, was in strict accordance with established practice; the Judge was entirely mistaken in asserting that there was any departure whatever, either grave or slight, from this practice. I may observe, in conclusion, that the statement of the Judge that there were nine claims for compensation before the Grand Jury in respect of alleged malicious burnings was made at the instance of the foreman of the Grand Jury, Colonel Cosby, who has since, of his own motion, written to the County Inspector explaining that he was responsible for the learned Judge's mistake, and that he had so informed the Judge.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)Is not this the fifth unfounded attack made on the police by Tory Judges in Ireland?
§ MR. MACARTNEYIs Justice O'Brien properly described in the House as a Tory Judge.
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELLMay I ask whether the only mistake of the Judge was not in putting the figure 9 for the figure 5?
MR. J. MORLEYNo. That was not the only mistake made by the Judge. Another mistake was that the Judge 1464 said there has been a grave departure from established practice.
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELLThen may I ask whether the Judge of Assize is not more competent to deal with this matter than the Chief Secretary there?
MR. J. MORLEYI observe that the Judges of Assize in Ireland think themselves competent, apparently, to express opinions upon matters which are more properly within the competence of the Executive Government.
§ MR. DARLING (Deptford)In what paper did the right hon. Gentleman see the observations of the Judge of Assize? Has he, in this case, an official Report of the Judge's words? He produced one in a case referred to a week ago.
MR. J. MORLEYI really do not remember in what paper I saw it. I have not had before me any official Report.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYAsk Russell.
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELLMay I call your attention, Sir, to the language used across the floor of the House, first by the hon. Member for South Donegal and then by the hon. Member for North Louth?
§ MR. T. M. HEALYI deny altogether having used any language with regard to the hon. Gentleman. I simply said to the hon. and learned Member for Deptford, above the Gangway, that he had better ask the hon. Member for South Tyrone for an answer to his question.
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order! I think ejaculations, from whatever quarter they come, ought to be abandoned in this House.
§ MR. BYLES (York, W.R., Shipley)I beg to ask whether the Chief Secretary can give the House any information to enable it to form an idea of the proportion of claims for compensation made on Grand Juries which are of a bogus character?
MR. J. MORLEYI am afraid I cannot do that. It would involve a great deal of trouble to get out such a Return.