HC Deb 28 April 1904 vol 133 cc1448-9
MR. JOHN O'DONNELL (Mayo, S.)

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a convict, named Maurice Sheehan, was beaten by five warders in Maryborough Prison by order of Chief Warder Murray in December last; that the warders broke their batons on his head; that the Governor of the prison had him transferred to Dundrum Criminal Asylum with a view to preventing the prisoner from making a statement about the treatment he was subjected to; that the medical superintendent of the Dundrum Asylum certified the prisoner as not insane, and sent him back again to Maryborough; if so, what steps have been taken by the General Prisons Board in this matter; and whether a sworn inquiry will be held in connection with the case.

MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDHAM)

Sheehan was convicted in March. 1902, of the crime of breaking into two Roman Catholic Churches at Mitchels-town and Kanturk and of stealing a sum of money from the former. He was also convicted of the crime of malicious wounding. He was sentenced to penal servitude for a term of five years. He was transferred to the Dundrum Criminal Lunatic Asylum from Maryborough Prison in December, 1902. He escaped from the asylum in March, 1903, and remained at large for three months, when he was captured and recommitted to the asylum. Subsequently he was certified as sane and re-transferred to Maryborough Prison on the 24th June, 1903. In December he made a determined effort to commit suicide by setting fire to his cell. He made a murderous attack on the warders who succeeded in removing him, only after much difficulty, from the burning cell. He was examined by three local doctors and by the medical member of the Prisons Board who pronounced him to be a dangerous lunatic, of homicidal and suicidal tendencies, and he was sent back to Dundrum Asylum, where he remains. There is no foundation for the statement that Sheehan was assaulted, as suggested, in Maryborough Prisor. An allegation to this effect was made by the convict and, on investigation, was proved to be groundless. It is not proposed to hold a further inquiry.