HC Deb 24 June 1915 vol 72 cc1314-5
5. Mr. GINNELL

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he will say by whose direction, in the case of John Kinsella, tried under the Defence of the Realm Act at Cahirciveen, Police Officer Hicks, prosecuting on behalf of the Crown, asked in succession three male witnesses for the defence how much German money he received to go there to give evidence for the accused, and on their denying that they had got any ordered them down with further insult, and also insulted the lady witness who had called the police in the same case; if this conduct was not ordered by Dublin Castle and is disapproved there, in what form the disapproval has been communicated to Mr. Hicks; whether the defendant was, nevertheless, sentenced to imprisonment with hard labour; whether this is one of cases of such sentences on uncorroborated evidence of armed servants of the Crown; whether it is by his direction that the Dublin daily Press is closed against reports of such cases; how many policemen are under the control of Mr. Hicks; what remedy, if any, a policeman has when reported or punished for disobedience by an officer of Mr. Hicks's rank; and what action has the Lord Chancellor of Ireland taken with reference to the magistrates who allowed such conduct in their Court?

Mr. BIRRELL

No instructions were issued to the district inspector as to the line to be followed in his cross-examination of the witnesses for the defence in this case, and in framing the questions put to them he was guided by information in his possession. I understand that the district inspector told one of the witnesses to stand down, but I am not aware that he insulted them. The prisoner was sentenced to fourteen days' hard labour by the unanimous decision of the magistrates after hearing the evidence of three men in the Royal Navy. No directions were issued to the Dublin Press against reporting the case. The number of police in charge of the district inspector is thirty-six. He has no power to punish the men under his command, and any instance of misconduct would be reported and investigated under the orders of the Inspector-General. The Lord Chancellor has taken no action in the matter.

Mr. GINNELL

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will produce the evidence upon which Mr. Hicks asked those questions?

Mr. BIRRELL

No, Sir; the district inspector asked such questions as occurred to him in cross-examination. He received no instructions.

Mr. GINNELL

Did they occur to him as pure inventions, and, if so, on what grounds did he base them?

Mr. BIRRELL

The hon. Member must consider the practice of an advocate. He asked such questions in cross-examination as he thought best in the interests of justice.