§ MR. WEIRI beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the case of John Hanreharty, haymaker, a native of County Louth, Ireland, who was sentenced by H. E. C. Stapylton, Colonel Trotter, and C. H. Cock, at Barnet Petty Sessions, on 23rd July, to three weeks' imprisonment with hard labour without the option of a fine, and of several of his fellow-workmen, also natives of Ireland, who were fined by 262 the same Justices; whether he is aware that the Justices who tried these men stated that the landlord of the "Red Lion," where the disturbance took place, should have been present to give evidence, and that they did not adjourn the case to enable him to attend; whether he is aware that the sergeant of police in his evidence stated that "These Irishmen coming into the district are a nuisance, and more of them arrive every year," and that the police constable on arresting them said, "You Irish——! We have you now, and we'll punish you"; whether he is aware that these haymakers have been brought specially from Ireland for a number of successive years by the same farmer who attended at the trial and testified to the steadiness, diligence, sobriety, and trustworthiness of Hanreharty and his fellow-workmen; whether he is aware that it was proved that these Irish haymakers were going quietly home when they were attacked by a number of loafers outside the "Red Lion"; whether he is aware that Patrick Shields, one of the men who were fined, was taken from his bed at 2 o'clock on Sunday morning to the police station, in spite of the fact that, having been ill during the day, he had retired for the night and before the disturbance took place; whether ho will state why none of the Englishmen who were the aggressors were fined or imprisoned; and whether, having regard to the circumstances of the case, he will recommend the liberation of Hanreharty, and cause inquiry to be made into the case, and especially into the evidence of the police sergeant and the statement of the police constable?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. ASQUITH,) Fife, E.I am informed that, after hearing the evidence at Bar-net Petty Sessions on July 23, the Chairman asked at what public-house the prisoners had obtained their drink, when Mr. Reid replied that he had heard that they had been at the Lion, Potter's Bar, when the disturbance commenced. The chairman then said—
The landlord should have been present, as the disturbance is said to have originated in his house.But neither of the prisoners corroborated the statement made by Mr. Reid, nor was any suggestion made for an adjourn- 263 ment of the case in order that the landlord should attend. The disturbance did not take place at the public-house. The sergeant of police did not give evidence, but, in answer to a question by the Chairman, said—They are Irishmen, and belong to a class of men employed as haymakers by the farmers in the neighbourhood. Several disturbances have occurred at Potter's Bar lately; they are a great annoyance, and there seem to be more of them come every year.The police constables who arrested the men emphatically deny having used the words:—You Irish——! We have you now, and we'll punish you.What they did say to the other men when they arrested Hanreharty and Thomas M'Court was, "We will come back after you." I understand that the farmer employing these men gave them a good character. No evidence was taken as to the origin of the disturbance. Patrick Shields was not taken from his bed; he was found with others at 1 a.m. lying on some hay in a shed in a field on Mr. Reid's farm, and he was identified as one of the men who stoned the police. Shields did not say he had been ill during the day, and had retired before the disturbance took place. When the first disturbance took place the police dispersed them, and the two parties left in different directions; no arrest would have been made had not Hanreharty and his companions renewed the disturbance by quarrelling amongst themselves and assaulting and stoning the police; Hanreharty having also threatened the police with a knife. I regret that I do not see any sufficient ground for my interference. I have made full and careful inquiry into the case, with the result that the statement which I have made to the House appears to me accurately to represent the facts.
MR. T. M. HEALYasked how the right hon. Gentleman explained the fact that the police only arrested the Irishmen who had been assaulted by the English party, and why were not the English party arrested?
§ MR. ASQUITHsaid, that did not tally with the account he had received. They appeared to be quarrelling amongst themselves, and the police said to the remainder of the crowd, "We will come back for you." The crowd had 264 dispersed before the police had any opportunity of making further arrests. He did not think there was any evidence, so far as he could make out, that the police acted with anything like partiality. If they had discriminated between Englishmen and Irishmen in the matter they would have left themselves open to very grave censure.
MR. T. M. HEALYIs it not a fact that these Irishmen had for years been employed by a farmer in the district, and that they bear an excellent character?
§ MR. ASQUITHIt is quite true the farmer gave the men a good character. However, I find that Hanreharty was sent to prison for threatening to assault the police with a knife.
§ MR. WEIRIs it not a fact that the man referred to was cutting a cake of tobacco when the police interfered; and would the right hon. Gentleman make further inquiries into the case, as I believe that the information now given to the House is undoubtedly incorrect? Will he inquire, for instance, whether it is a fact that Patrick Shields was laying on a bed of hay—not on a bed of linen, no doubt—and why he was taken from the place where he was sleeping?
§ MR. ASQUITHI think my hon. Friend and myself are at one on the facts as to Patrick Shields. He was found laying on some hay in a shed on Monday morning and he was arrested, having been identified as one of the party who assaulted the police.
§ MR. WEIRDid not the shed in which he was found contain the beds prepared for him and his brother Irishmen to sleep in at night time? Will care be taken that Irishmen shall have some measure of justice meted out to them, and not to be treated in this brutal fashion by the police?
MR. T. M. HEALYWhy did not the police summon the man instead of taking him at 1 o'clock in the morning out of what was his bed?
§ MR. ASQUITHWhether they did rightly or wrongly—and the Magistrates found they did rightly—it is quite in accordance with the practice.
§ MR. SEXTON (Kerry, N.)As it is stated in the question that the Irishmen were going quietly home when they were 265 attacked, and as the right hon. Gentleman in his reply admits that there is no information in his possession as to the origin of the disturbance, which appears to be a very material point, I would ask him to inquire as to how the disturbance began, in order to determine whether the Irishmen, who alone have been punished, were solely or primarily at fault.
§ MR. ASQUITHI will make further inquiries; the result might be to show that other persons are guilty.
§ MR. SEXTONIf it be found that other persons were the aggressors, should that not qualify the amount of the punishment?
§ MR. ASQUITHI have no evidence to point to that state of things.
MR. T. M. HEALYHas the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been called to the fact that a party of Irish haymakers were set fire to in Lancashire last month by an English mob?
§ MR. WEIRIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that this farmer, who is an Englishman, has engaged these men year after year for 16 years, and spoke of them in the highest terms of their general character? Will the right hon. Gentleman make further inquiries?
§ MR. ASQUITHI have answered that question already. I have not heard of the alleged case in Lancashire, but I will inquire as to that. I can only repeat what I have said before—namely, that I will see that impartial justice is meted out as between Englishmen and Irishmen.