§ SIR F. MAPPIN (York, W.R.,) HallamshireI beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department I whether he will inquire into the action of the County Justices at Barnsley, in refusing to bind over to appear at the 1151 late Assizes at Leeds witnesses who deposed to alibis in favour of some of the colliers and pit lads charged with riot; whether he will communicate with the learned Judge who tried the cases in order to ascertain whether there was any reason why the costs of those witnesses should not have been paid out of the County Fund if they had been bound over; and whether he is aware that some of such witnesses, who proved alibis for prisoners who were discharged at the Assizes, were, from their expenses not being paid, in great distress and difficulty at Leeds?
§ MR. ASQUITHAll the seven men whose witnesses to prove an alibi the Magistrates refused to bind over were acquitted. The Judge expresses au opinion that it is the usual and most convenient course to bind over the witnesses for the defence, as the Judge has always a discretion to disallow the expenses, and that in the present cases he knows of no reason why the costs of the witnesses for the defence should not have been paid out of the County Fund if they had been bound over.
§ MR. DODD (Essex, Maldon)Is there any power of ordering payments of the expenses now?
§ MR. ASQUITHI am afraid not. I very much regret that that is the state of the law.
§ SIR F. MAPPINI beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that 19 men and boys were taken from their beds in the middle of the night and imprisoned, on the charge of participating in the Rockingham and Elsecar Colliery Riots on the 15th and 16th September last; whether of these persons who were committed to take their trial at the Leeds Assizes (some of whom had been in prison over three months) on the 13th and 14th December, 10 were found not guilty, and nine guilty only of misdemeanour (Justice Williams stating that any man present at the riot, whether he took part in it or not, was guilty of misdemeanour), eight of them being ordered to come up for judgment when called upon; whether he is aware that the law costs for the defence of these men and boys amount to over £100, irrespective of the costs of the witnesses for the defence, which will have to be borne in consequence of the refusal of 1152 the Barnsley Bench to bind them over; and whether he will make careful inquiry into the matter, in order to ascertain upon whom the responsibility ought to rest for causing needless suffering and expense to innocent persons?
§ MR. ASQUITHYes; the police considered it probable, in view of the disturbed state of the district at the time, that an organised attempt at rescue would be made if the defendants were apprehended in the day time, consequently the warrants were executed in the night or early morning. Ten were acquitted, nine found guilty. Bail had been allowed in every case by the Magistrates, and only six of the defendants appear to have been committed to prison from inability to find it. Of these six, only one was acquitted at the trial, and none were in prison for so long a period as three months. The Judge has informed me that in his opinion the riot was of a serious character, and that in imposing the lenient sentences that he did he was influenced partly by the youth of the defendants and partly by the strong wish of the prosecuting colliery proprietors, who were still willing to employ the defendants, that they might be leniently dealt with. I have no information as to the amount of the law costs for the defence, particulars of which could only be had from their solicitors. I am informed by the Judge that in his opinion the Magistrates would have failed in their duty if on the evidence before them they had not committed all the defendants for trial, and that there is no ground for supposing that this prosecution caused needless suffering and expense to innocent persons.