HC Deb 31 March 1913 vol 51 cc38-40
76. Major M'CALMONT

asked whether, on the 26th November last, the Reverend R. Barron, Presbyterian minister at Whitehouse, gave the police at White- house, at their request, a list of the names and addresses of men, women, and children of his congregation who had been injured at Castledawson, on the previous 29th June, by members of the Ancient Order of Hibernians, who were subsequently tried and convicted of riot; and whether the Crown Solicitor for County Londonderry had this or any similar list before the trial?

Mr. RUSSELL

A list was given on 28th November, 1912, by the Rev. Robert Barron to the police and forwarded to the Crown Solicitor, who submitted it to the counsel appearing for the Crown. The list contained the names of three children, but no women. The indictment on which the accused were tried was for riot, and the evidence given at Petty Sessions was, in the opinion of Crown Counsel, sufficient to sustain the indictment without further evidence, and all the prisoners referred to in the question returned for trial were convicted.

Captain CRAIG

Why was not the evidence bearing on the wounding of these women and children not brought before the Crown Prosecutor in Court?

Mr. RUSSELL

Counsel for the Crown saw that the evidence given before the Petty Sessions Court was sufficient to convict them, and they were convicted on the evidence.

Captain CRAIG

Is it not the fact that they were released after undergoing a very short term of imprisonment simply because the Crown Prosecutor did not bring forward the evidence that they had acted as cruelly as they did?

Mr. RUSSELL

No, these prisoners were released by order of the Lord Lieutenant when they had served almost the full three months—I think within a fortnight—and they were released by the exercise of the prerogative of the Crown.

Mr. RONALD M'NEILL

May I ask whether it is customary to suppress evidence when it is considered by the Crown solicitor that a conviction might be obtained without it?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

The hon. Gentleman's supplementary question should be confined to a matter of fact arising out of the answer.

Mr. MITCHELL-THOMSON

May I ask whether it was at the request of the police that that evidence was not brought forward?

Mr. RUSSELL

I am not aware of that.