§ MR. DILLONI beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the judgments delivered in Dublin yesterday in reference to the sentences of imprisonment recently inflicted on two Members of this House and other citizens by two resident magistrates sitting at Gurteen and Ballinlough. Whether he is aware that the Lord Chief Baron held that the magistrates had no jurisdiction to hear the cases or to sentence the accused. And, whether, in view of the issues involved, he will lay copies of the judgments upon the Table of the House, and suspend the arrest and imprisonment of the accused until the House has had an opportunity of considering the action of the Executive Government in instituting these prosecutions before specially constituted Courts.
§ MR. WYNDHAMI have read newspaper summaries of the judgments delivered in the King's Bench Division. The decision of the magistrates was, it appears, upheld by three of their Lordships, the Chief Baron dissenting. I will lay copies of the revised and authorised reports of these judgments so soon as they can be procured. The Executive has no authority to arrest further legal proceedings consequent on a judicial decision of this character. The action of the Executive in instituting the prosecutions was discussed on the Address, and can be challenged on several Votes included in the Estimates.
§ MR. JOHN REDMOND (Waterford)Will the First Lord of the Treasury afford some early opportunity for the discussion of this matter? Certain Members of this House are about to enter upon sentences which will condemn them to prison as ordinary criminals. The Superior Court in Dublin has upheld the decision of the magistrates, but the Lord Chief Baron has held that these magistrates had no jurisdiction at all. The Chief Secretary has said that copies of these judgments will be laid upon the Table of the House, and I wish to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he would afford an early opportunity for discussing the matter.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (MR. A. J. BALFOUR,) Manchester, E.I understand that there are two questions raised, which it is important to keep apart, but which may very easily be mixed up. One is the action of the Executive, which it is perfectly proper to discuss in this House. The other is the decision of the Court, which was not absolutely unanimous, but in which there was one high legal authority against the majority. The judgment of the Court will be laid on the Table of the House; but the judgment is not, I think, a proper subject for discussion, and we will give no facilities for that purpose. The action of the Executive is, of course, always open to discussion, and the proper and convenient opportunity for the discussion would, I think, be on the Chief Secretary's Vote.
§ MR. JOHN REDMONDThat altogether depends upon when the Chief Secretary's Vote will come up for discussion. If the right hon. Gentleman will put down Supply at once and put the Chief Secretary's Vote down for consideration on the earliest possible day, that will meet my wish.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI do not gather that the matter is one of immediate hurry, because, as I understand it, whether the Executive were right or wrong in the action which they took, the sentence has been declared perfectly legal, and it cannot be interfered with.
§ MR. DILLONThe matter is an extremely urgent one, because two hon. Members of the House are going to be put in prison next week as common criminals under this judgment. Questions regarding the action of the Executive in issuing the summonses are to be raised, and illustrated by the judgment of the Chief Baron, who condemned the action of the Executive in the strongest possible language.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI understand that it is impossible to put the judgments in the hands of Members for a few days, and perhaps hon. Gentlemen will allow me to consider the matter.