HC Deb 20 July 1896 vol 43 cc128-30
MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—(1) whether his attention has been called to the case tried by Mr. Justice Murphy, at the Kerry Assizes just concluded, in which a man named David Leahy was convicted and sentenced on a charge of perjury under aggravated circumstances; (2) whether he is aware that this man Leahy was the prosecutor against a man named David Keane, on a charge of firing into a dwelling house, tried at the Cork Winter Assizes of 1893, when Keane was convicted and sentenced to five years' penal servitude; that Leahy was the sole witness as to identification of the accused on that occasion; that, prior to the latter conviction, Leahy had been in litigation with Keane's family for years about a dwelling-house from which he was seeking to evict them; and that Leahy afterwards brought a similar charge against Keane's father and brother, but was disbelieved and the accused acquitted with the approval of the Judge; and, (3) whether, seeing that an influential memorial for Keane's release has lately been presented to the Lord Lieutenant, and in view of what has now transpired as to Leahy's character, it is intended to further detain Keane in prison?

MR. JAMES ROCHE (Kerry, E.)

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—(1) whether he is aware that a man named David Leahy, who was tried before Mr. Justice Murphy at the recent Kerry Assizes and sentenced on a charge of flagrant perjury, was granted a large sum of money by the Grand Jury of the county of Kerry as compensation on a presentment for the malicious burning of his own dwelling-house, although the police gave the strongest evidence against application damages being granted; (2) whether he will state what amount was awarded to him, if he has been paid it, and what independent witnesses gave evidence in support of the application; (3) whether he is aware that at the Cork Winter Assizes of 1893 a man named David Keane, whose identity was proved by the unsupported evidence of the aforesaid Leahy, was convicted and sentenced to five years' penal servitude; and that, in similar charges brought by Leahy against members of Keane's family, the jury disbelieved him and acquitted the Keanes; (4) whether, under the circumstances, and considering the general belief in the innocence of David Keane, who is still in prison, he will make inquiry into the matter with a view to the release of Keane?

MR. GERALD BALFOUR

The facts are substantially as stated in the first and second paragraphs of the Question of the hon. and learned Member for North Louth. It is to be observed, however, that although Leahy was the sole witness as to the identification of Keane in 1893, his evidence was largely corroborated by the independent testimony of the police. The case of Keane's conviction was carefully inquired into in July of last year, in connection with the memorial presented to the late Lord Lieutenant, and the conclusion arrived at upon the Report of Mr. Justice O'Brien, who tried the case, was that the law should take its course. The learned Judge considered the ease an audacious conspiracy to murder and certainly proved. Leahy was awarded £50 compensation for malicious burning at the last March Assizes. A policeman who was examined before the Grand Jury stated that he believed the burning was not malicious. No independent witness gave evidence in support of the application, though a sergeant of police testified to previous bad feeling towards Leahy and the annoyance to which he had been subjected. On the 18th instant, the Secretary to the Grand Jury forwarded to Leahy a cheque for the amount of compensation awarded. As regards the last paragraph of the Question of the hon. Member for East Kerry, I have already stated the conclusion arrived at both by the Judge who convicted Keane and by the Executive Government on the memorial submitted on his behalf. Any further memorial on behalf of the prisoner which may he forwarded to the Lord Lieutenant will be duly considered.

MR. T. M. HEALY

was understood to ask whether it would not be a graceful act to allow this man to be released.

MR. GERALD BALFOUR

The Chief Secretary has nothing whatever to do with the exercise of the prerogative of mercy, but if representation is made it will, I have no doubt, be duly considered.

MR. T. M. HEALY

I will raise that matter to-night on the Report of the right hon. Gentleman's Vote.