THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN, in rising to call attention to the circumstances in connection with the committal to prison of Father Keller, and to ask, Whether the prison rules ordinarily applied to persons committed for contempt of Court are to be applied in Father Keller's case; and, if not, for what reason any relaxation was to be permitted? said, that the case had excited considerable attention both in Ireland and on this side of the Channel, and reports had appeared in various newspapers as to the treatment of Father Keller by the Government, and for this reason he thought it desirable to ask the Government their intentions in regard to this matter. He wished, in a very few words, to recall to their Lordships' attention the events which had led to the arrest of Father Keller. In the latter part of last year the tenants on the Ponsonby estate, at Youghal, had adopted the Plan of Campaign, and paid their rents to a certain person. Amongst other persons having a knowledge of the circumstances was Father Keller, who was also parish priest of Youghal. In the Court the ordinary course of proceedings were taken against the tenants, and one named Patrick O'Brien was made a bankrupt. Father Keller was called upon to give evidence in the Bankruptcy Court in Dublin last week, but he refused to attend. A summons was served upon him in the ordinary way, and when he failed to appear a warrant was issued for his apprehension. He was apprehended by a messenger of the Court, and on Saturday last he attended the Bankruptcy Court in Dublin. When he was called he refused to answer the questions put to him, and he did so on the ground that they related to matters which had been communicated to him secretly and in confidence in his capacity of priest. Of course, he (the Earl of Camperdown) did not need to argue before their Lordships that that was a state of things which could not for a moment be allowed, and perhaps the best answer that could be given to the contention was given by the learned Judge. Judge Boyd thereupon told him that if witnesses were allowed to refuse to answer questions put to them upon 1134 such a ground the whole object of the Bankruptcy Law might be defeated by the simple expedient of getting a priest to occupy a position of trust with respect to the property of the bankrupt. Notwithstanding this remark of the learned Judge, however, Father Keller refused to answer the questions put to him, and accordingly he was committed to prison for contempt of Court. He (the Earl of Camperdown) thought that, in the first place, this contention of Father Keller could not be allowed. He quite admitted that if a Home Rule Government were to be established in Dublin, judging from the way in which the Nationalists had behaved at every town along the railway from Cork to Dublin, it was very likely such a privilege as that claimed by Father Keller might be allowed; but as long as these countries remained the United Kingdom of Great Britain such a claim would never be submitted to by Parliament or by the country. He now came to the point of his Question, which was, whether the present rules ordinarily applied to persons committed for contempt of Court were to be applied in Father Keller's case; and, if not, for what reason any relaxation of them was to be permitted? He put that Question in consequence of what he had read in the newspapers. He put it to their Lordships that if ever there was a case in which the ordinary prison discipline and rules ought to be enforced it was the present one. In the first place Father Keller had committed a contempt of Court in the ordinary manner; and he had boon committed to prison in the ordinary manner; and therefore, so far as he knew, there was nothing peculiar in the circumstances of his case that called for any relaxation of the ordinary prison discipline. In the next place, Father Keller might purge himself of his contempt at any moment, and might come forth from prison at any time he chose. There were, however, under the circumstances of the case, special reasons that made it, in his opinion, peculiarly undesirable that any extraordinary leniency should be exhibited towards Father Keller. In the first place, all the circumstances connected with Father Keller's imprisonment had been used as means for promoting so many National League demonstrations throughout Ireland. When Father 1135 Keller was arrested he was conveyed to Dublin by a glow train. It might, perhaps, be open to question whether it was wise to allow Father Keller to travel, not by the proper train, but by a later and a slower one, so as to give time for demonstrations and meetings to be organized all along the route between Cork and Dublin. Their Lordships would remember that such demonstrations took place everywhere. At one place Father Keller was greeted by the Archbishop of Cashel, and at Dublin he was met by the Lord Mayor and several Members of Parliament, and on this occasion language of a very turgid character was used for the purpose of bringing the law, and the persons appointed to administer the law, into contempt. For his part he thought, if they wore to carry on the Government, they could not allow the law and the Judges to be brought into contempt. He was convinced that, in the peculiar state of things in Ireland, it was most unwise to allow the law to be brought into contempt. The Lord Mayor of Dublin was a member of the Prisons Visiting Committee, and as such he had already visited the prisoner. There was another reason why the prison regulations should not be relaxed in this case. A statement had been made in the newspapers—he did not know whether it was correct or not—to the effect that Father Keller had applied to be attended in prison by a physician not belonging to the gaol, but who was notoriously connected with the National League. The Lord Mayor of Dublin had taken the earliest opportunity he could find of identifying himself with Father Keller—he had met him at the station, and the next day Father Keller, accompanied by the Lord Mayor and by the Archbishop of Dublin, was driven in the Lord Mayor's carriage to the Court, and Father Keller entered the Court in company of the Archbishop of Dublin and the Lord Mayor; but after wards the Lord Mayor took a course which he (the Earl of Camperdown) had observed many Irish patriots take in similar circumstances. He had watched the papers to see whether, when Father Keller was removed to prison, he was accompanied by the Lord Mayor of Dublin; but the Lord Mayor had been much too wise to accompany Father Keller on that journey 1136 to prison. The Lord Mayor of Dublin was perfectly ready to encourage Father Keller to resist the law and bring it into contempt; but as soon as there was any danger to himself of incurring any in-convenience by opposing the law he very wisely desisted from doing anything further. The Lord Mayor of Dublin was one of the Prisons Visiting Committee, and is was quite plain what course he would take, and that he would do everything in his power to relax prison discipline, and to make the treatment of Father Keller as little disagreeable as possible. He (the Earl of Camperdown) hoped this would be prevented, as far as it was possible to do so. He was quite convinced that if the Government in this case displayed any want of firmness, or allowed any relaxation of the rules, their motives would be misinterpreted and misrepresented exactly in the same manner as the action of the law had been misrepresented throughout Ireland. It had been stated far and wide in Ireland that Father Keller had been put in prison because he would not betray his duty and trust as a Catholic priest. Of course, there was not a word of truth in that assertion. If there was any want of firmness in the treatment of Father Keller in prison, it would be said that it was from fear of the Nationalist Party. The noble Earl concluded by asking the Question of which he had given Notice.
§ THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (Earl CADOGAN), in reply, said, he thought the noble Earl (the Earl of Camper-down) had stated with accuracy the earlier circumstances connected with the case of Father Keller. But he could inform the noble Earl that the Executive Government and the Police Authorities had nothing whatever to do with the journey of Father Keller having been undertaken in a slow instead of a fast train. The arrangements for the journey were under the direction of the Court of Bankruptcy, whose messenger was sent to bring Father Keller to Dublin. With regard to the Question asked by the noble Earl, the rules which were applied to prisoners for contempt were to be applied in this case. These rules empowered the Visiting Justices to make certain relaxations in particular cases, and application was made, on behalf of Father Keller; by the Governor of the 1137 prison for some of those relaxations which it was in the power of the Committee to grant. It might interest the noble Earl if he read the requests. Father Keller requested that he might he allowed to say mass daily in his cell. That was granted, subject to the approval of the Board. He requested to be allowed to see more than two visitors for more than a quarter of an hour daily. He was allowed to see three persons for half-an-hour. Father Keller also asked to have Dr. Kenny as his medical attendant. The Committee had not power to grant that request. He asked to have four hours' exercise, and to be furnished with a fire and bed clothes. These requests were granted. He then requested that he might be supplied with two daily and two weekly papers, and with periodicals, the daily papers being The Freeman's Journal and The Pall Mall Gazette, and the weekly The Nation and United Ire-land. He was to be allowed one Dublin daily paper, one weekly paper, one London paper, one local paper, and periodicals. He asked to be allowed to provide himself with food from outside and to wear his own clothes. That was granted. Finally, he asked to be supplied with such stimulants as the doctor might think necessary, and to be allowed to use snuff. This was granted. The signatures appended to these orders were those of the Lord Mayor, Mr. Ion Hamilton, and two other Justices—Mr. Godley and Colonel Hartley. He could assure their Lordships that all these relaxations were such as, according to the prison rules, the Committee were entitled to grant, and that no exceptional facilities and no "extraordinary procedure" would be permitted in this case.