§ MR. MACARTNEYI beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware 1460 that, at the Petty Sessions held at Clogher, County Tyrone, on Tuesday, the 12th of June, a vote was taken upon the appointment of a clerk to the Sessions, with the result that there was a tie between two candidates; is he aware that three of the Magistrates voting for one of the candidates had only been sworn in on the 9th of June, and that one of them was the father of one of the candidates; were these three Magistrates appointed with the consent or approval of the Lord Lieutenant of the county; and what public necessity existed for the appointment of these Magistrates at this particular moment?
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)Before the right hon. Gentleman answers, I would like, as this affects my constituency, to ask two questions of which I have given him private notice—first, whether one of the Magistrates appointed described himself in the paper sent to him by the Lord Chancellor as a retail publican; secondly, whether he did not, on the very day on which he took his seat, transfer his licence to his barman or pot-boy, and whether he thinks a colourable transaction of that kind at all creditable?
MR. J. MORLEYIn answer to the hon. Gentleman the Member for South Tyrone, I may say that the moment the allegations to which he refers were brought under my notice—which was yesterday—I communicated with the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, who replies that he is not aware of the truth of the statements, but will direct careful inquiry to be made into them.
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELLAs to the first question, did this gentleman describe himself as a retail publican or suppress the fact?
MR. J. MORLEYMy information is that he had ceased to be a publican for some time. I will make further inquiries. With regard to the question on the Paper, the facts in the first paragraph are correctly stated. The 12 Magistrates who voted on the occasion were qualified to vote, and three of them were recently appointed to the Commission of the Peace. They were not recommended by the Lieutenant of the county but the Lord Chancellor was satisfied from independent inquiry of their entire fitness for the Magistracy. Neither the Lord Chancellor nor the Registrar of 1461 Petty Sessions Clerks is aware whether one of the candidates is or is not a relative of one of the voting Magistrates. I may add that the Lord Chancellor informs me that these three Magistrates were, with others, selected for appointment before this vacancy for Petty Sessions Clerk occurred or could have been contemplated.
§ MR. MACARTNEYWhat are the independent sources of inquiry which did not disclose the fact—well-known to everyone acquainted with the district— that one of these gentlemen was a publican?
§ MR. MACARTNEYI will put the question down later.
§ MR. SEXTON (Kerry, N.)Does the fact of a man being a publican disqualify him from being a Magistrate, and is there anything in the practice of the Irish Magisterial Bench as we know it to forbid a Magistrate to vote for the appointment of his son?
MR. J. MORLEYThere is, of course, as I have had occasion frequently to state during the last two years, no law against a publican being a Magistrate. In fact, the late Government made more than one publican a Magistrate.
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELLWhat about colourable transfers?
MR. J. MORLEYThe lion. Member has brought before the House at different times certain colourable transactions. In all those cases the Lord Chancellor has made inquiries, and where he has found it necessary to recall the appointment he has done so.
§ MR. SEXTONIs it quite an unheard-of tiling for a Magistrate to vote for his son—has it not taken place before now?
MR. J. MORLEYI am not particularly well acquainted with the practice of Irish Benches, but I think it is very different from that of the English or Scotch Boards.
§ MR. MACARTNEYIs it usual in England or Scotland to make Magistrates for the express purpose of voting for their relatives?