§ Mr. O'DOWDasked Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether the application of the Crown for a change of venue in the cases of the Riverstown defendants to be tried at the Sligo Spring Assizes was grounded mainly on the affidavit of the county inspector of police; and whether such affidavit contained an inaccurate statement, namely, that one of the members of the bench before which these cases were tried at petty sessions was a leader of the Culfaddha branch of the United Irish League; and, if so, will he say what he proposes to do in the matter?
§ Mr. CHERRYThe affidavit of the county inspector upon which the application for a change of venue in the case referred to was grounded did contain an inaccurate statement; but the inaccuracy was not very material. The county inspector stated that one of the magistrates was the treasurer of the Culfaddha branch of the United Irish League, whereas, as a matter of fact, he was treasurer of the Keash branch. Both branches are in the same locality and in the same police sub-district, and the mistake did not in any way affect the case. I am satisfied that it was made in entire good faith by the county inspector, and that no blame attaches to him in the matter.
§ Mr. O'DOWDArising out of that answer, may I ask whether it is not a fact that the gentleman named by the county inspector has no connection whatever with Culfaddha, and that it was on his affidavit that the change of venue was obtained and these poor persons were sent for trial to the County of Dublin?
§ Mr. CHERRYYes, Sir; that is so. That is what I stated in my answer to the hon. Gentleman. He had no connection with Culfaddha, but with Keash.