HC Deb 16 June 1893 vol 13 cc1182-4
MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the case of "Burns v. The Belfast Evening Telegraph," tried before Mr. Justice Gibson and a special jury, in Dublin, on the 2nd and 4th instants, and reported in The Belfast News Letter of the 3rd and 5th; whether he is aware that at this trial it was proved that on the occasion of the West Belfast election, in July last, a person named Kearney, who was then acting as secretary of the Belfast branch of the National Federation, marked on the list of voters the names of dead, absent, and sick men, and handed the list to three men named M'Ginley, Carberry, and O'Neill, with instructions to have them personated; whether a large number of personators were arrested on the polling day; and if he can say how many pleaded guilty when brought to trial; whether it has been brought to his notice that Mr. Justice Gibson in his Charge to the jury declared that there had, if the jury believed the evidence, been arrangements for wholesale personation under the direction of the National Federation through their secretary; whether it is true that Kearney has, since the election, been appointed to any public office; and if he can say by whom he was recommended to the Government for the appointment; and if the Government intend to take any action in regard to the parties involved in the evidence given at the trial in question?

MR. J. MORLEY

I understand that evidence to the effect stated in the second paragraph of this question was given by a man named Bloomer. Bloomer virtually described himself as an accomplice in the offence which he charged against the persons named. His evidence was not corroborated; and as the parties charged by him were neither parties to, nor witnesses in, the action, they had no opportunities of refuting what was alleged against them. Bloomer at the time of the trial was in the employment of the defendants in the action. A large number of personators, 15 in all, were arrested on the polling day, of whom 11 pleaded guilty at the Assizes and four were discharged. The observations of Mr. Justice Gibson, in his Charge to the jury, are understood to have been made on the evidence of Bloomer; but, as already pointed out, Bloomer admitted himself an accomplice, and his evidence as an accomplice, being uncorroborated, could not be acted upon in a criminal prosecution. Kearney, I believe, is now acting as collector of Income Tax. The Attorney General for Ireland is of opinion that there is no adequate evidence to warrant a prosecution of the persons named by Bloomer, the truth of whose evidence is denied by the persons implicated.

MR. T. W. RUSSELL

I desire to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the jury, in giving a nominal verdict for the plaintiff, with a farthing damages, instead of the £6,000 he claimed, did not at all events show that they—

MR. SEXTON (Kerry, N.)

I rise to Order. I submit that this is not the kind of inference which ought to be put in the form of a question. As this question raises grave charges against a gentleman residing in my late constituency, I will ask first, with regard to Mr. Bloomer, is it true that he was taken into the service of the defendant newspaper whilst the defence was in preparation; secondly, did Mr. Kearney have no opportunity whatever of giving evidence; thirdly, is it true that the three men, Kearney, Carberry, and O'Neill, having been subpœnaed by the defendants, and being present in Court, were not called by the defendants, and had consequently no opportunity of giving evidence; fourthly, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these men were prepared to prove their innocence on oath; fifthly, does he know that two of them could neither read nor write; and, sixthly, was not the list of voters prepared in the ordinary way, and, as at every election, with the object of preventing personation by either side? Finally, I am requested by Kearney, as the charge is made against him in a place where he cannot defend himself, to invite the hon. Member for South Tyrone to repeat his statement in a place where, as he is in this House, he will not be sheltered by privilege.

MR. J. MORLEY

Naturally, I cannot answer all the questions of detail which my hon. Friend has addressed to me, but I have received from Kearney a communication which bears out some of the statements which the hon. Gentleman has made. I will, however, make further inquiry.