HC Deb 28 May 1894 vol 24 cc1395-7
MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if his attention has been called to the fact that a Major Bailey and John Henry Nunn, on behalf of the Phoenix Park Cricket Club, recently applied at the Dublin Police Court for summonses against other cricketers for trespass on the Phoenix Park, stating that the members of the club had been permitted by the Board of Works to erect a building upon it, and they had a resident caretaker; whether the Magistrate stated he would grant a summons for trespass in a different form to that applied for; are the Government prosecutors, and were they consulted by Major Bailey before summonses were applied for; have exceptional privileges and the right to erect buildings on Crown property been granted to cricket clubs in English parks; and if the general body of Dublin cricketers are to be excluded from certain parts of the Phoenix Park in the interest of a particular club, will he state the special claims of this club to Crown favour?

MR. DANE (Fermanagh, N.)

I beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman if it is not a fact that the two gentlemen named in the question are trustees of the ground and are obliged to act under a penalty to the Irish Board of Works. Has not the club enjoyed the use of the ground for the last 64 years; was not the summonses taken out at the Dublin Police Court for malicious injury and not for trespass; were not the persons summoned rowdies and not bonâ fide working men, and did they not give false names and addresses?

THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Sir J. T. HIBBERT,) Oldham

I think the answer I have to give to the question on the Paper will also afford a reply to the hon. Member for North Fermanagh. The trustees of the Phoenix Cricket Club took proceedings against certain persons for injuring the ground which has been set apart for the Phoenix Cricket Club since 1838. The Magistrate stated that there was not wilful injury, but a clear case of trespass, for which a fresh summons could be issued. The Government were not prosecutors, but were aware of the proceedings as the Board of Works, were subpoenaed to produce documents. I am informed that the ground in question was granted in the year 1838 to the Phoenix Club. Four other grounds have at various times been granted respectively to the Constabulary, the Garrison, the Civil Service, and the Working Men's Club, and it is believed that the general body of Dublin cricketers are members of one or other of these clubs. In addition, the Board of Works have recently prepared a ground, adjoining the Phoenix Cricket Club, for general use, on which at least four separate matches can be played at the same time by any of the public not members of clubs. The existence of the separate grounds, therefore, does not interfere with the use of the Park by cricketers not members of the clubs above mentioned. In the English Royal Parks no exceptional privileges are granted to cricket clubs using the Parks. But in Bushey Park certain local clubs have been permitted to erect pavilions on sufferance.

MR. T. M. HEALY

My only desire is if that these proceedings are sanctioned by the Government, the Government should institute them. If a separate piece of ground is being reserved for the general public I am satisfied.

SIR J. T. HIBBERT

These gentlemen hold the ground under agreement, and were, therefore, the proper persons to prosecute.

MR. T. M. HEALY

As to the allegation of the hon. Member that the persons prosecuted were rowdies, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that John Henry Nunn, one of the prosecutors, has himself been warned off other cricket grounds for rowdy conduct?

MR. DANE

I respectfully appeal to you, Mr. Speaker, if an attack of this nature should be made without notice of the question?

MR. SPEAKER

The hon. Member himself made an attack first.

MR. DANE

Not on any one named in the question.