§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland will he inquire of the South Meath Revising Barrister whether the four persons in the Summerhill polling district—Brennan, Kiernan, Darley, and Weir—were struck off the voters' list by him; were the two latter officially objected to, Weir's correct number being 746 on the 1893 list and 669 on that for 1894; has the Revising Barrister been consulted, and has he any record as to the 10 names in Trim, alleged to be wrongfully in the 1894 list, having been objected to and struck off in 1893; were the three following persons struck off the 1893 supplemental list for the Clonard polling district of South Meath—namely, Peter Conlon, Baltinoran, Michael M'Namara, Castlejordan, James Berrigan, Toor—and do they appear on the 1894 list; what materials exist in the Clerk of the Peace's office to enable these allegations to be investigated; did an employé named Love, in the said office, who was engaged in procuring evidence for the petitioner in the South Meath Election Petition, 1892, have anything to do with preparing or arranging the voters' lists; were the following seven persons struck off the list for the Dunshaughlin polling district of South Meath in 1893, and do they appear on the present register, namely, No. 27, Frank Behan, grounds of objection, non-residence; No. 133, Brien Carney, non-tenancy; No. 39, Pat Gallagher, non-tenancy; No. 46, John Hughes, Kilbrew, person unknown; No. 56, William Mansin, short occupation; No. 57, Pat Martin, non-tenancy; No. 91, John Whearty, non-tenancy and short occupation; and, viewing the fact that these allegations relate to three separate polling districts, and that they rest on the evidence of different agents, acting in separate Courts, will a strict inquiry be ordered?
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. J. MORLEY,) Newcastle-upon-TyneThe Revising Barrister has been communicated with as to the first three paragraphs, but up to the present I have not heard with what result. The Clerk of the Crown and Peace has reported to me as follows regarding the fourth and following paragraphs: (4.) The Revising Barrister revised the Lists of Voters in 1893, by drawing his pen through each name which he decided to remove, and writing the word "out" and placing his initials thereto. In the cases of Peter Conlon and Michael M'Namara a line is drawn through their names, but as neither the word "out" nor the initials of the Revising Barrister are entered opposite the names they were included in the Register for 1894, where they now appear. James Barrigan was officially objected to. A line was drawn through his name, but the name was re-inserted in the margin by the Revising Barrister and initialled by him. His name also appears on the Register for 1894. (5.) The Clerk of the Peace has in his custody the original lists for 1893, as revised and signed by the Barrister, and also the objection notices served on him for revision. (6.) A person named Love is employed in the manner stated in the office of the Clerk of the Peace, but I am informed he took no part whatever in getting up evidence or otherwise for the Election Petition referred to. (7.) There were no persons of the names severally mentioned in this paragraph on the lists for 1893, and they do not appear on the Register for 1894.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYIn view of the extraordinary discrepancies disclosed by this answer, I beg to give notice I will go further into this matter.