HC Deb 18 February 1895 vol 30 cc960-1

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, on the occasion of a man named Reidy being brought into Cork Gaol to identify the prisoner John Twiss and make a deposition in his presence and hearing, any intimation was conveyed to Twiss' solicitor that such a deposition would be taken, inasmuch as it was subsequently shown at the trial that on this occasion Reidy swore that on a particular day he had been at a fair in Castleisland and heard the prisoner Twiss asking another man for a revolver in order to shoot Donovan; and, in view of the fact that the Crown subsequently discovered that Reidy was not at this fair, and was ill at the Tralee Infirmary at the time, it is intended to proceed against Reidy for perjury?


A man named Reidy was brought to the Cork Prison and his deposition taken there, in presence of the prisoner. The deposition so taken was immediately forwarded to the solicitor for Twiss. The solicitor was not present when the depositions were taken, which is regrettable, but Reidy was not examined at the trial of Twiss, nor was any evidence given or offered in respect to Reidy's allegation against Twiss, which the Attorney General rejected, not upon the ground that he had been in an infirmary during the time to which the evidence applied (of which he was unaware), but because of its being, in his opinion, unworthy of belief. There is no intention of prosecuting Reidy for perjury, nor do the law officers think such a prosecution could be successful. It was to be remembered that Reidy was not called as a witness at the trial.