§ MR. WILLIAM JOHNSTON (Belfast, S.)I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the trial of the Rev. Edmond O'Leary, C.C., at the Limerick Petty Sessions, on Friday the 7th instant, on a charge of using threatening language to Dr. Long, in consequence of which a crowd gathered; whether he is aware that during the week Dr. Long was attacked when visiting a house in Thomondgate to attend a Protestant patient, and that, 722 after the Bench had adjudicated on the case against Rev. E. O'Leary, the Rev. Father Shanahan, P.P., said while Dr. Long continued in Limerick the same scenes would occur; and whether the Government will take adequate steps to protect Dr. Long in his rights as a British citizen.
§ MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY (Limerick, W.)Before the right hon. Gentleman answers, may I ask whether it is not a fact that the house at which the interview took place was the house of a Catholic?
§ *MR. SPEAKEROrder, order! That does not arise out of the question.
§ MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYI wished, Sir, to ask that, because the question on the Paper is inaccurate.
§ *MR. LECKY (Dublin University)May I ask whether the attention of the right hon. Gentleman has been called to the fact that the resident magistrate who adjudicated in the case is stated to have advised the people from the Bench to give no employment to Dr. Long—
§ *MR. SPEAKEROrder, order!
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,) DoverI will reply to the question on the Paper. Yes, Sir; the bench, consisting of five magistrates, decided unanimously to dismiss the charge, on the grounds, apparently, that the words complained of did not amount to a threat, and were no more than words of rudeness or incivility, and that the reverend gentleman was not responsible for the acts of the crowd. The reply to the second paragraph is in the affirmative. Dr. Long visited a Protestant who had for two months been a lodger in the house of a Roman Catholic. In consequence of the attack on Dr. Long two persons were summoned for assault on 7th June, and bound over in £5 for a month. (The prosecution of two other persons for riotous behaviour on 2nd June had been deferred for a month.) In reply to the third paragraph, the Government will continue the police protection which has been 723 given to Dr. Long since 14th January. (The police reported at that time that Dr. Long's action was often injudicious, and that he seemed disposed to court an exhibition of hostile feeling. I directed on 22nd January that, although Dr. Long's conduct was injudicious, protection must be continued.) I ought to add, in justice to the police, that Dr. Long occasionally evades protection, and that it is, so far as I know, only on such occasions that he has suffered from the hostility of the crowd.
§ MR. LUNDON (Limerick, E.)Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on cross-examination Dr. Long acknowledged that his life was not in danger?
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order! The hon. Member cannot be allowed to go into this.
§ MR. DELANY (Queen's County, Ossory)I wish to ask is it not a fact that Dr. Long is a professional proselytiser, and whether he uses his position as a medical doctor for that purpose?
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order!
§ MR. JOHN REDMOND (Waterford)I submit, Mr. Speaker, that the question which my hon. friend desires to put is in order. This case was tried, as the right hon. Gentleman said, by a bench of magistrates, and I respectfully submit that the question is in order. That question is, whether Dr. Long did not admit on cross-examination that he was engaged in proselytising in the City of Limerick.
§ MR. SPEAKERThat was not the question asked. It was whether he was not a professional proselytiser.
§ MR. JOHN REDMONDDo I understand you to rule it out of order?
§ MR. SPEAKERYes; I think it is out of order. It does not arise out of the question on the Paper, which has been fully answered. To comment in justification of the case for either the defence or the prosecution is out of order.
§ CAPTAIN DONELAN (Cork, E.)Will the right hon. Gentleman recommend Dr. 724 Long to confine his attentions in future to the bodily ailments of his patients, and to leave their souls alone?
§ MR. SPEAKEROrder, order!
§ MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYI beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the conduct of Dr. Long in distributing in the city of Limerick religious tracts; and whether, with a view to prevent offence to members of the Roman Catholic religion and the provocation to a breach of the peace of the poorer Roman Catholics, steps will be taken to prevent him from continuing to carry on these practices.
§ MR. WYNDHAMIt is to be regretted that Dr. Long, or rather that the society which employs him, should—conscientiously—think it right to afford gratuitous medical attendance, with the avowed object of making converts in the midst of a Roman Catholic population. But in this, as in other cases of sectarian or agrarian conflict in Ireland, the duty of the Government consists in preserving the peace and prosecuting those who break the law, and does not extend to the prevention of actions which, however injudicious, are not in themselves illegal.
§ MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN (Kilkenny)Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that Dr. Long in the course of the trial admitted he was a proselytiser?