§ MR. FLYNNTo ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the attention of the constabulary authorities has been called to the action of a police inspector named Cruise, at the recent county and city assizes in Cork, in arbitrarily excluding from the court-house respectable members of the public, including jurors, Press-men, witnesses, and other parties having legitimate business to transact; is he aware that the conduct of this inspector was censured by the Lord Chief Justice when the facts were brought to his notice; are the authorities aware of the numerous complaints against this inspector by the people of Charleville, in respect to frequent vexatious prosecutions which have generally been dismissed; will he say how many prosecutions against licensed traders have been instituted by this inspector within the past twelve months, and how many of them have been dismissed; is he aware that he recently brought a prosecution against a man named Coleman for alleged she beening, and that the bench, consisting of a resident magistrate and three local justices, summarily dismissed the charge; and will he say whether the constabulary authorities will communicate with Inspector Cruise regarding the discharge of his ordinary police duty.
(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) On the occasion in question the court-house was inconveniently crowded, and the Lord Chief Justice remarked that a witness could not be heard owing to the confusion 678 in Court. District Inspector Cruise, who was in charge of the police arrangements, thereupon directed the police to refuse admittance to persons other than those who had business in Court. Two persons are stated to have felt aggrieved at being questioned by the police. One, a reporter, was at once admitted on stating his business. The other, a juror, turned away without stating his business. He was, however, recognised by another policeman, and invited to enter, but refused to do so. On the following day the Lord Chief Justice expressed in Court his approval of the district inspector's action. No complaints have been received in respect of prosecutions instituted by the district inspector. During the past year he has taken forty-six prosecutions under the Licensing Laws. There were eighteen dismissals and twenty-eight convictions. A recent prosecution for she beening was dismissed, but in that case an appeal by the district inspector is pending. The Inspector-General is satisfied with the district inspector's performance of his duty, and sees no reason for communicating with him in the matter.