§ MR. MACALEESEI beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to a ease heard at the last petty sessions at Brooke-borough before Mr. Jones, H.M., Sir Victor Brooke and Mr. James Beatty, in which a. man named Kirkpatrick was prosecuted by the first cousin of Mr. James Beatty, J.P., for trespass in pursuit of game and was fined £3; if he is aware that Sir Victor Brooke and Mr. Jones, R.M., declined to adjudicate in the case, on the ground that it would be unseemly or illegal in them to take part in the hearing as they were members of the Hunt Club, thus leaving Mr. James 110 Beatty to decide the case in favour of his own near relative, and to inflict the pecuniary penalty of £3; and what action will the Lord Chancellor take in the case?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELANDI have obtained further reports in reference to this case, from which it would appear that the trespass for which a fine of £3; was inflicted on Kirkpatrick was committed on the lands of the Rev. Mr. Clinton and prosecuted by him, and that no fine was inflicted on Kirkpatrick in respect of the trespass alleged to have been, committed on the lands of Mr. Beatty, the cousin of one of the presiding Magistrates. Mr. Jones, R.M., adjudicated in the first case, and I believe Sir V. Brooke retired for the reasons stated. If Kirkpatrick is in a position to show that Mr. Beatty had such an interest in the matter as in law disqualifies a Magistrate from acting judicially, he can take proceedings to have the conviction quashed, it does not seem to be a case calling for action by the Lord Chancellor.