§ MR. CARSON (Dublin University)I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the speeches made at Kells by hon. Members of this House on the 4th of February last, at a meeting held for the purpose of denouncing a gentleman resident in the district; whether the said meeting, having regard to its avowed object and the language used, was a legal assembly; whether any proceedings have been taken against any persons in respect of this meeting: whether he is aware that the gentleman referred to and denounced at the said meeting has been and is severely boycotted; and whether any steps have been taken to put an end to such boycotting?
MR. J. MORLEYMy attention was drawn at the time to a report of the speeches delivered at this meeting. The notice convening the meeting, which I have examined, did not, as stated in the question, disclose or advocate any illegal object, the professed and avowed object being perfectly legal. It is true that in the course of the speeches made at the meeting references were made to the retaking of evicted farms in the locality, and there can be very little doubt, I suppose, that the promoters of the meeting had specially in view the action of 1110 the person referred to in the question in taking and holding this farm. As regards the effect, of the speeches, however, they appear to be innocuous, and the police moreover were informed by the person who held, and still holds, the farm referred to that he did not care whether the meeting was held or not The Government were advised by their legal advisers that there were not sufficient grounds for interfering with the meeting, and it was afterwards considered that proceedings with respect to the speeches made at the meeting would not be expedient. As the hon. and learned Member is aware, prosecutions, though sometimes justifiable, do more harm than good, and the present is just one of those cases. With regard to the effect of these speeches, I am informed that it is not correct to say that the man in question has been severely boycotted. It is true that several of his customers have withdrawn from his milling business; otherwise he has not suffered serious inconvenience, He buys and sells cattle at fairs without being in any way obstructed. The police are using, by my directions, the greatest possible vigilance to prevent any acts of intimidation, and so far they have been successful in their efforts.
§ MR. CARSONIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that within the last month two additional meetings have been held for the purpose of adopting methods to secure a more effectual boycotting of this gentleman, and has the right hon. Gentleman taken any steps to deal with them?
MR. J. MORLEYI was aware that these meetings had been held. I have watched this case carefully, and my information has been all the way through that this man—of course, for obvious reasons, I will not mention his name—has not suffered any harm, and, indeed, apprehends none. The police hold a similar view. Of course, they will not relax their vigilance in the slightest degree.
§ MR. CARSONWill the right hon. Gentleman allow these meetings to go on until this man's trade is ruined? We have already seen that his milling business has suffered.
MR. J. MORLEYAs soon as I find the effect of any meetings of this kind to be injurious to the man in his business or otherwise, I shall take such steps 1111 as may be deemed necessary by the law advisers.
§ MR. W. KENNY (Dublin, St. Stephen's Green)Is the right hon. Gentleman advised by the Irish Law Officers that the facts are sufficient to warrant a prosecution for criminal conspiracy?
MR. J. MORLEYNo, Sir; I have not been advised to that effect. Some phrases have been used which might, no doubt, point to what is technically a conspiracy; but, taking the speeches as a whole, I have been advised that they are not such as to warrant a prosecution.