LORD DUNSANYrose to ask Her Majesty's Ministers, Whether they have received any Information of the Circumstances under which a Man named Cryan or Bryan was, on the 7th Instant, at Sligo Petty Sessions, sentenced to Two Months Imprisonment for the serious Offence of endeavouring to seduce Two Soldiers from their Allegiance and engage them in the Fenian Conspiracy? Having regard to the present state of Ireland, and to the frequent attempts that had been made to corrupt the soldiery, he thought their Lordships would not think the inquiry he put to Her Majesty's Government wholly unnecessary. He did not mean to say that the Irish executive Government was responsible for the sentences that had been passed upon the class of offenders to whom he referred, but he hoped to elicit 1670 from Her Majesty's Government, who were probably well informed of all the circumstances relating to the subject, some information which would have the effect of relieving the apprehension that was at present entertained with regard to the attempts which had been made to seduce the soldiery from their allegiance. Their Lordships were aware that the distinguishing feature of the Fenian conspiracy in Ireland was the attempt to corrupt the soldiery by means of agents. It might be supposed that those agents were miserable, ignorant creatures; but the fact was otherwise, for in many cases they claimed high military rank in the American army—in one case the agent styled himself a colonel in the American army. However hopeless such attempts might appear, probably there were no barracks or military stations in the country which had not been visited by these persons and had exercised their calling with more or less success; and this was the most serious feature in the Fenian conspiracy. From the efficient manner in which the Law Officers of the Crown had conducted the recent prosecutions, there could be no doubt that had sufficient evidence been procurable, those agents would have been brought to justice; but as a matter of fact they had hitherto escaped, and it was, therefore, of the more importance that where a conviction could be obtained adequate punishment should follow. He did not wish to impugn the conduct of the magistrates in the case of the man Cryan, but it was somewhat strange that they should have dealt with it summarily, for the Act 37 Geo. III. declared the offence of attempting to seduce solders or sailors from their allegiance to be a felony, involving sentence of death, and there was a proviso that the parties guilty of it might be indicted for high treason. That Act was contemporaneous with the mutiny at the Nore in 1797, and it was probable that some persons suffered the capital penalty under it. A statute of the same date rendered the administration of an oath, such as that of the Fenians, a felony likewise. It was true that a later Act abolished the punishment of death for felonies of this character, but high treason still remained a capital offence. It was, therefore, rather surprising that the magistrates should have adjudicated in so serious a matter. By subsequent legislation the penalty had been mitigated, and these offenders were liable to the penalties at- 1671 tached to what was now called treason felony. Nevertheless, in the particular case to which he had directed their Lordships' attention, the magistrates had summarily convicted the offender for the offence of attempting to seduce soldiers from their allegiance, awarding the slight punishment of two months' imprisonment, without even, so far as he knew, the addition of hard labour. It was stated by the first Minister of the Crown, on the occasion of the Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, that a considerable number of the soldiery had been tampered with, and the failure of such attempts was surely no reason for a lenient sentence, for soldiers, like many other people, were very apt to be carried away by a sudden impulse. Had any number of them been seduced from their allegiance in some of the country stations, it was difficult to conceive how far the mischief might not have extended, and after throwing off all the restraints of discipline any imaginable atrocities might have been committed in the neighbourhood. These agents were still continuing their attempts to create disaffection, and though one of the Ministers of the Crown had expressed a wish in another place that they would take themselves out of the country, it would to his mind be far more satisfactory if they could be brought to condign punishment. At all events, if this could not be done, the reason should be generally known; for the punishment of their miserable dupes contrasted unsatisfactorily with the escape of the principals. He hoped the Government would offer an explanation of the apparently inadequate sentence passed upon Cryan, and of the impunity hitherto enjoyed by these men.
LORD DUFFERINsaid, the facts of the case as stated by the noble Lord were substantially correct. The evidence of the guilt of the man was complete, and he quite agreed that on the face of the evidence a far more severe punishment than was inflicted was deserved. The Government, however, must not be held responsible for whatever course magistrates in Petty Sessions might, in their district, think proper to adopt. In this case they resolved to adjudicate summarily, and though there was a difference of opinion on the bench as to the penalty to be awarded, the majority determined to inflict the lesser punishment to which the noble Lord had referred. He might state, however, that directly the Report of the Inspector of 1672 Constabulary was received at Dublin the legal advisers of the Crown signified their opinion that it would be desirable to have the case sent for trial at the assizes; but unfortunately, it had been already disposed of summarily by the magistrates, and the Government had, therefore, no opportunity of interfering. As to the noble Lord's question, why more of these Fenian agents had not been convicted, he was unable to give a specific reply, but he could assure him that no effort had been spared by the Irish Government to bring those offenders to justice.
THE MARQUESS OF WESTMEATHsaid, he was surprised that the Inspector of Constabulary, who lived on the spot, and whose duty it was to inspect the register of proceedings in Petty Sessions, did not immediately inform the Government that such a case was awaiting investigation, so as to afford them an opportunity of giving directions in the matter. If the Government had known the fact no doubt they would not have allowed the case to be dealt with as it had been. As it was the case had been treated in a very absurd manner, and the Government should hold the constabulary officer responsible for his remissness.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEobserved, that the case had not been dealt with by the constabulary at all. A military officer had brought it before the magistrates, and for the lightness of the sentence the magistrates, not the constabulary, were responsible. He quite agreed that the punishment was inadequate.