§ MR. DUFFY (Galway, S.)To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the recent law proceedings at Gort when Mr. F. Persse, J.P., was prosecuted for unlawfully discharging firearms on the public road; under what Act were the proceedings instituted; and will he explain why Mr. Brady, resident magistrate, contrary to the expressed opinion of his brother magistrate who assisted on the occasion, marked the case dismissed, instead of, as is usual in all such cases, adjourned to next petty sessions.
(Answered by Mr. Cherry.) The proceedings against Mr. F. Persse, J.P., were brought by the police under the Summary Jurisdiction (Ireland) Act, 1851. I 1191 am informed that one of the two magistrates was for a conviction and the other for an acquittal. In these circumstances it was open to the magistrates to make one or other of two orders, namely, to dismiss without prejudice to the complaint being renewed or to adjourn. The resident magistrate informs me that his fellow magistrates expressed no desire to adjourn the case, and the usual procedure in that court was therefore followed, that is to say, the case was dismissed without prejudice to the complaint being renewed if thought desirable.