HC Deb 24 February 1914 vol 58 cc1591-2
71. Mr. FREDERICK HALL (Dulwich)

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland on whose advice the prosecution of Mr. Larkin for sedition, incitement to riot, and conspiracy was abandoned; whether he was aware of the grounds for these charges before the prosecution was commenced; and if his attention has been called to the remarks of Mr. Justice Kenny, in opening the Dublin Assizes in December last, as to the action taken in the matter?

The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell)

Mr. Larkin made two speeches of a criminal character—one on the 26th and the other on the 29th August, 1913. In connection with the first speech, proceedings were taken against him in the Dublin Police Court, and he was charged with four other persons, who, on that occasion, made speeches of a similar but milder and less criminal character. They were returned for trial on the charges of sedition and inciting to riot, and gave undertakings not to repeat the offence and to be of good behaviour; and all of them kept their word except Mr. Larkin, who, on the 29th August, made another speech of a still more criminal character. It was in respect of this latter speech that he was made amenable and tried in October, 1913. He was convicted on the first count of the indictment for speaking with a seditious intention, but the jury acquitted him on the other counts of having spoken with the intention of inciting to riot, and with the intention of inciting to pillage and rob the shops. In all the circumstances of the case, it was considered undesirable to continue the proceedings in the case of the first speech, which was of a less criminal character, and a nolle prosequi was accordingly entered on behalf of the Crown. The answer to the second and third paragraphs are in the affirmative.

Mr. CASSEL

Did the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the result of the Reading election?

Mr. BIRRELL

No, Sir.

Captain CRAIG

Is it a fact that the Chief Secretary and Attorney-General for Ireland both threatened to resign if he were let out?

Mr. BIRRELL

No such rash statement was made by either of them.

Mr. WILLIAM THORNE

How is it that the right hon. Gentleman (Sir E. Carson) has not been prosecuted for inciting to riot?