§ MR. SHEEHAN (Cork County, Mid.)To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the prosecution of Mr. Richard Murphy, Coachford, for having an unlicensed dog in his possession; is he aware that Mr. Murphy applied for a licence in the Irish language, and that it was refused; will he state the grounds for this refusal; is he aware that Mr. Murphy was served with a summons on Good Friday, and will he explain why this was subsequently taken back and another issued in its stead; will he state the locus standi of an ex-clerk of the petty sessions, named Carey, who intervened during the hearing of the case, pointing out to the Bench the penalty incurred by the defendant; and, seeing that the policeman, Constable Huggins, who prosecuted in this case, is causing annoyance to Mr. Murphy by constantly sauntering in front of his residence, will he say what steps he proposes to take.
(Answered by Mr. Bryce.) I am informed that Mr. Murphy's application for a dog licence was written in the Irish language, and that the clerk of petty sessions informed Mr. Murphy that he was unable to read it, whereupon Mr. Murphy at once left. He was subsequently summoned by the police for having an unlicensed dog, and was fined half-a-crown and costs and ordered to take out a licence forthwith. Mr. Murphy was first served with a summons on Good Friday, but doubts having arisen as to the legality of service on that day a fresh summons was served. Mr. Carey, the late clerk of petty sessions, attends the court, with the approval of the magistrates, for the purpose of assisting his son, who has been appointed clerk. I am informed that there is no foundation for the suggestion that Constable Huggins is causing annoyance to Mr. Murphy, beyond the fact that the constable has several times visited Mr. Murphy's house in connection with his omission to take out a licence.