Mr. CHARLES MacVEIGHasked the Attorney-General for Ireland, whether the police in charge of the case of the King r John L. Tease, by reason of the Attorney-General not deciding until the last moment whether the trial was to proceed or not, received short notice of only about ten days that the trial was to proceed a third time; and whether he can say what were the grounds upon which it was decided to put the prisoner on his trial for the third time at the last Donegal Summer Assizes?
§ Mr. CHERRYThere is no foundation, whatsoever, for the statement contained in the question that I did not decide until the last moment to proceed with the trial referred to in the Question. The usual instructions were given to the police in sufficient time beforehand. It would be contrary to the interests of justice that I should publicly state the grounds upon which I acted in this or in any other pending prosecution.
455W
Mr. CHARLES MacVEIGHasked the Attorney-General for Ireland whether at the trial in the case of the King v. John L. Tease, at the last Donegal Summer Assizes, the Crown ordered 47 jurors out of a panel of less than 100 jurors answering to stand by; whether there was anything of a political or religious nature in the case; and whether, in view of the repeated assurances of the Law Officers of the Crown of the present Government in this House that the practice of jury packing in Ireland would be disapproved of by them and discontinued, and that instructions had been given to Crown solicitors not to object to jurors on political or religious grounds, he can explain the action of the Crown solicitor at the trial of this case?
§ Mr. CHERRYThe Crown solicitor received no special instructions as to the empanelling of the jury in this case. He acted in accordance with the general instructions he has received, and his action has my entire approval. There was nothing, that I am aware of, either of a political or religious nature in the case.
Mr. CHARLES MacVEIGHasked the Attorney-General for Ireland whether he can state if at the trial of the case of the King v. John L. Tease, at the last Belfast Winter Assizes, only four jurors were ordered by the Crown to stand by; whether there were nine of the jury sworn in favour of an acquittal of the prisoner; whether at the trial of the prisoner at the Donegal Summer Assizes there were only 16 jurors ordered by the Crown to stand by, and there were nine of the jury sworn in favour of an acquittal; and whether, notwithstanding the fact of 47 jurors being ordered to stand by at the last trial of the prisoner at Donegal Summer Assizes and despite the attempt of the Crown solicitor to pack the jury, there was a substantial number of the jury in favour of acquittal?
§ Mr. CHERRYI know nothing as to the views of individual jurymen in any of the trials referred to in the question. It would be contrary to the interests of justice that I should make any statement upon the subject, even if I had the information.
§ Mr. HUGH LAWasked the Attorney-General for Ireland whether he can state if the principal witness for the Crown in the case of the King v. John L. Tease, at the trial of the prisoner at the last Belfast Winter Assizes made a vital change in her evidence two days preceding the 456W trial, and only a few hours' notice of this change was given by the Crown to the prisoner's advisers; whether by reason of such a change in the evidence the counsel for the Crown were for some time disposed to abandon the prosecution of the prisoner; and whether nine of the jury were in favour of his acquittal?
§ Mr. CHERRYIt would be contrary to the interests of justice that I should make any statement as to the proceedings at previous trials of this prisoner, who is again to be tried in a few days at the ensuing Winter Assizes at Belfast.