§ Mr. LONSDALEasked the Chief Secretary whether his attention has been directed to the address of the Lord Chief Justice to the grand jury at the Clare Spring Assizes, held at Ennis on 3rd March, 1908, in which he referred to the cases of five families who, although returned as examples of minor boycotting, were compelled to go considerable distances for the necessaries of life, in addition to suffering from other acts of exclusive dealing; whether he will state over what period these families were reported as having been affected by boycotting in this manner; whether they continue to-the present date to be so affected and to be entered on the Returns of minor boycotting; and whether he will give the explanation of the inspector?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThese cases first appeared in the boycotting Returns in the autumn of 1907 and continued to be recorded in those Returns up to November last. One case disappeared from the returns in that month, one in January last, and two in May, so that there is now only one case out of the five in which the boycotting continues. As regards the remainder of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to a question on the same subject asked by the hon. Member for Mid-Armagh on 26th October, 1908.
§ Mr. LONSDALECan the right hon. hon. Gentleman say how many persons in Ireland have now been returned as examples of minor boycotting who have to send a long distance for their supply of food?
§ Mr. BIRRELLWell, other conditions may enter into a definition of minor boycotting than that; but we have proceeded upon a well-known principle, which I have explained to the hon. Gentleman. I do not think there is any doubt as to what they are or that they are not properly enumerated when they occur.
§ Mr. LONSDALEWill the right hon. Gentleman have them correctly tabulated on the next occasion when he is asked for a Return?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI do not mind explaining what minor boycotting is when I next deal with the matter.
§ Mr. LONSDALEasked the Chief Secretary if he will ascertain from the police authorities in what respects the boycotting of Mr. Clarke, of Holycross, Thurles, was considerably relaxed in April, 1909, so as to warrant his case being classified as one of minor boycotting, which has been denned to consist of petty isolated acts of boycotting as distinguished from organised or sustained boycotting, or when an attempt is made to boycott though the effect is inappreciable; and whether the case has since continued to be returned on the list of minor boycotting?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI am informed by the constabulary authorities that about April, 1909, the boycotting of Mr. Clarke's workmen entirely ceased, and both he and they could obtain necessaries in Holycross. Mr. Clarke could also obtain goods in some shops in Thurles, a town where he had been previously completely boycotted. In these circumstances it was considered that the boycotting had so decreased as to render the case one for the minor category. Boycotting Returns are carefully revised each month, and cases are included, excluded, or moved from one category to another according to the circumstances. In June, 1909, it was found that Mr. Clarke was again considerably boycotted, and his case was then replaced in the category of serious boycotting, and has remained there since.
§ Mr. DILLONIs it not a fact that the boycotting of Mr. Clarke's farm had greatly decreased, and before the late trials in Dublin took place at all?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThey had decreased at one time, but not before the beginning of the trial. At the actual moment the trial began the case was still in the category of serious boycotting.
§ Mr. LONSDALEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that Mr. Clarke has now in the house sixteen policemen for the purpose of protecting him?
§ Mr. BIRRELLYes, Sir, he has that protection.