§ MR. CHARLES CRAIG (Antrim, S.)To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the language used by His Honour Judge Drummond at Manorhamilton, on 21st May, when he said that Michael Brady, a. person who is 816 rigorously boycotted and has been the object of intimidation, was a nuisance and a pest to the country; and whether, having regard to the disturbed condition of the country whore Brady lives, and to the effect which such a statement coming from a Judge on the Bench must have, he will endeavour to obtain an early day for the discussion of the Motion on the subject which stands in the name of the hon. Member for South Antrim, or, if not, what steps he proposes to take in the matter.
(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I have communicated with the learned Judge upon the subject. He informs me that the matter which came before him on 21st May was an application for a special order to substitute service of a process. He refused that application, not upon the ground of the character of the plaintiffs or their father, but simply upon the ground that certain legal requirements had not been satisfied. In the course of the discussion between the Judge and the barrister who made the application the Judge referred to certain criminal proceedings which had come before him on a previous occasion, in the course of which proceedings it was shown that Brady was not a man of good character. The Judge informs me that ho cannot recall the precise words which ho used on the occasion, but he does not deny that they may have been to the general effect stated in the Question. There appears to be no doubt as to the fact that Brady's character is not satisfactory, but the police will continue to afford him full protection in the exercise of his legal rights, as they have done for some years past. the Government do not see any sufficient reason for taking special stops in regard to the Notice of Motion which stands in the hon. Member's name.
§ MR. DOLAN (Leitrim, N.)To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a person named Brady, who lives near Dowra, in the county of Leitrim, where he enjoys the privilege of police protection, is the cause of disturbance in
† A Motion of the appointment of a Select Committee "to inquire into the conduct of His Honour Judge Drummond in respect of he use by him, at Manorhamilton Quarter Session on Tuesday, 21st May, of language unbecoming in a Judge on the Bench.817 that part of Leitrim; that Brady has been described by His Honour Judge Drummond, K.C., as a public nuisance, who is causing annoyance in a hitherto quiet and peaceful district; that, although he is frequently intoxicated, and has, in fact, been prosecuted for drunkenness by a policeman who is protecting him, yet he is allowed to carry firearms; that he has been recently convicted of driving his car while intoxicated over an old man, who was seriously injured; and whether steps will be taken by the Government to prevent Brady from continuing to disturb the peace in the county Leitrim.(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) It is the fact that Brady, who is a bailiff and the caretaker of evicted farms, receives police protection, and in the opinion of the police authorities this protection is necessary. I have just answered a Question relating to Judge Drummond's remarks about this man. It is the case that Brady has been convicted of drunkenness, and that the police who wore protecting him were the prosecutors. He was also convicted of driving his car over an old man, but this conviction was reversed on appeal. The fact that Brady's character is not satisfactory would not justify the police authorities in withholding from him any protection that may be necessary.
§ MR. DOLANTo ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the statement made by His Honour Judge Drummond, K.C, at Manorhamilton quarter sessions on 12th March, 1907, in which he described as wild exaggerations the accounts appearing in certain newspapers regarding the state of the county Leitrim, and said that, during the two years and a half that ho had been Judge at eleven quarter sessions in Leitrim, there had been altogether only five criminal cases, and (hose of the most trivial character, white gloves being presented to him at each of the four sessions in 1905, and in January and March, 1907, and that he was not aware of any other county in the United Kingdom that is so free from crime; and whether, in view of this statement of the learned Judge regarding the peace of the county Leitrim, he will have the extra police stationed in the county withdrawn.
§ (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) According to the local newspapers the learned Judge made the statement attributed to him in the Question, but prefaced it by saying that he confined his observations to North Leitrim. It is the fact that a considerable part of the county is in a satisfactory condition, but there are other parts of it to which that remark would hardly apply, and in the opinion of the police authorities who are responsible for the preservation of the peace, the presence of extra police is necessary in those parts.