§ 12. Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that during the last twenty-five years there has been in the Royal Irish Constabulary Force neither favourable record nor money reward given to any officer whose district was quiet and free from crime; and will he specify any rule of the force intended or calculated to counteract the dangerous temptation which knowledge of that fact constituted among a large force?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe hon. Member is quite under a misapprehension. Favourable records and sometimes Grants from the Fund are awarded for the meritorious performance of police duty in matters quite distinct from the detection of criminals.
§ Mr. GINNELLAre they extremely few compared with others?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI have not considered the exact proportions; I have no doubt they are fewer.
§ 13 and 15. Mr. G1NNELLasked the Chief Secretary (1) in view of the general refusal of the Crown to pay civilian witnesses who have not been examined in 2194 Court in cases in which if examined they should be paid, if he will state the number of cases in which the late District Inspector William Davis was given a good record and money out of the Irish Constabulary Force Fund, respectively, though not produced as a witness; the reason why he was not produced as a witness; the total amount so paid him; the rate of his promotion; the rule under which he was so favoured; and whether the services for which he was so paid and promoted were all connected with social agitation and not ordinary crime; and (2) in view of the general refusal of the Crown to pay civilian witnesses who have not been examined in Court in cases in which, if examined, they should be paid, if he will state the number of cases in which ex-District, Inspector William Henry Joyce has been given a good record and money out of the Irish Constabulary Force Fund, respectively, though not produced as a witness; the reason why he was not produced as a witness; the total amount so paid him; the rate of his promotion; the rule under which he was so favoured; and whether the services for which he was so paid and promoted were all connected with social agitation and not ordinary crime?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI will answer this question and No. 15 together. The hon. Member is under a misapprehension as regards civilian witnesses, who, when summoned by the Crown Solicitor, are paid their expenses whether they are examined or not. Both the officers referred to have long since left the force. I cannot undertake in reply to a question to enter into particulars as to the records of officers who were never under my control and for whose advancement I am in no way responsible.
§ 14 and 19. Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary (1) if he will say under what district inspector Sergeant Sheridan and Tramp Ryan served in county Clare; whether that officer is still in the service or in receipt of public money for his services; how he has accounted for the escape of Sheridan and Ryan after he had become-aware of their guilt; what was, or is, his answer to their subsequent public assertion that in all they did they had acted on the suggestions of their superior officers; in how many cases was this officer given a good record and money out of the Irish Constabulary Force Fund, respectively, though not produced as a witness; the reason why he was not produced as a witness; the total amount so paid him; the rate of his promotion; the rule under 2195 which he was so favoured; and whether the services for which he was so paid and promoted were all connected with social agitation and not ordinary crime; and (2) if he will state the number, pay, and expenses, at intervals of five years since 1878, of the section of the Royal Irish Constabulary called crime special men, to which Sheridan, Cullinan, and Tramp Ryan belonged; what the crime was that led to the exposure of the criminal activity of each of these; where, by whom, upon whom committed, by whom investigated, and with what result in each case; if he will state the rule, and the authority for it, under which the officers who employed, directed, and gave favourable records to those men were themselves all given favourable records, promotion, and grants out of the Constabulary Force Fund, while the officers whose investigation exposed those men were not rewarded in any of those ways; and if he will state the total amount of public money paid to those men and to the officers who treated their services as meritorious, respectively?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI will answer these two questions together. As regards Sheridan and Ryan, who was not a policeman, I must again refer the hon. Member to Mr. Wyndham's statement in the House of Commons on the 10th July, 1902. The case occurred in his time and I must decline to reopen it in any way. I do not know who the person referred to as Cullinan was.
§ Mr. GINNELLHas the right hon. Gentleman made inquiries of the police authorities?
§ Mr. BIRRELLYes, I have, and that is the information; otherwise I should have been even entitled to say that I had never heard of it.
§ Mr. GINNELLDo the police authorities deny that Cullinan was in their service and kept in their house for hired informers?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI do not know. Those transactions all occurred in 1902, long before my time, and I cannot undertake to say who is responsible.