HC Deb 29 March 1897 vol 47 cc1546-7
Mr. J. P. FARRELL (Cavan, W.)

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (1) whether he is aware that County Inspector Seymour, of County Down, is in the habit of requiring the policemen of Downpatrick to attend on his family and himself as if they were his private servants; and that these policemen when on duty have often been required to carry letters, parcels, and messages, although under the police regulations any constable carrying a message or parcel when on duty is liable to a fine of £3; (2) whether such conduct on the county inspector's part n contrary to these regulations; and, (3) will steps be taken to put an end to the practice complained of?


I am assured that there is no foundation for the allegations contained in the first paragraphs of this Question.

MR. JASPER TULLY (Leitrim, S.)

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Constable Lester, of the County Leitrim force, was recently charged with obtaining goods under false pretences from a cycle firm in Dublin; that he purloined letters addressed by this firm to his sergeant who had retired on pension; and that he wrote and posted letters in the name of this sergeant to this firm with intent to defraud: and that the constable was adjudged guilty, and transferred to another station; and whether, in view of the gravity of the offences, he will recommend that the sentence be revised and increased?


The constable was not charged with obtaining goods under false pretences. An allegation was made that he had intercepted a letter addressed to the sergeant of his station and that he had replied to that letter in a communication purporting to have been written and signed by the sergeant, with the object, apparently, of evading a small debt stated to have been due to the cycle firm. The firm, however, subsequently, expressed a desire not to proceed with the case, and the inspector General dealt with the constable's failure to explain the allegations against him as an offence against discipline, for which he, was severely admonished and sent to another county at his own expense. Of course, if the cycle firm desire to prefer a criminal charge against the constable every assistance will be afforded to them to have it investigated by the magistrates.