§ MR. FLYNNI beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, in reference to the proceedings at last Winter Assizes in Cork, in the case of Brigid Nealon, alias Cremer, charged with infanticide, whether he is aware that, out of the 64 jurors ordered by the Crown Counsel to stand by, the judge ordered eight of the said jurors to be sworn on the second calling of the list, and that the jury so empanelled returned a verdict of guilty; 691 and, can he state what is the explanation for ordering such a number of jurors to stand by.
§ MR. ATKINSONFrom the report I have received, it would appear that the hon. Member is under a misapprehension. Jurors who had been ordered to stand aside were not sworn on the jury in this case. I presume he refers to two cases of manslaughter tried at the Cork Winter Assizes, namely, Rex v. James Healy, and Rex v. John Gough, in both of which jurors who had been ordered to stand aside were in pursuance of the Statute sworn so that the trial might proceed, and in both the accused were acquitted. In the first by the direction of the Judge owing to the deposition of a deceased witness being held inadmissible, and the second on the facts. I have already replied to the last question. In that trial, the Crown Solicitor set aside these jurors because he reasonably believed that if sentened they would not give a verdict according to the evidence.
§ MR. FLYNNBut is it not the fact that jurors who had previously been ordered to stand aside were sworn on the jury by direction of the judge?
§ MR. ATKINSONYes, Sir, under a Statute about 600 years old.