Source: Hansard House of Commons Debates

CHARGES AGAINST IRISH OFFICIALS— CASE OF JAMES ELLIS FRENCH— COLONEL BRUCE.HC Deb 13 April 1885 vol 296 cc1454-6 1454

CALLAN: asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, in view of the statement made by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, when Chief Secretary, in this House on the 17th of June 1884, on the Motion for a— ‘Select Committee to inquire into the conduct of the Government with regard to the criminal charges against James Ellis French, County Inspector and Detective Director, and others,’ to the effect— ‘I think something may be said of the duty of those who are aware of these horrible crimes, or who think they are aware that these horrible crimes have been committed. These crimes are criminal matters deserving of criminal punishment, and when any person has evidence that such crimes have been committed, he should proceed against the persons who have committed them in the way the Law enjoins, that is, to lay information before a magistrate, whether the offenders he Government officials or not,’ Whether it is a fact that Colonel Bruce, the Inspector General of the Royal Irish Constabulary, held an inquiry in the Castle, Dublin, into certain of the charges against his colleague, James Ellis French, with the result that the said James Ellis French was officially informed by Colonel Bruce that he should “not return to his office till called upon to do so,” in other words, that he was suspended from duty; whether the evidence taken at that inquiry was laid before the Law Officers of the Crown for advice and direction, or its nature and effect, and suspension of J. E. French, communicated to His Ex- 1455 cellency the Lord Lieutenant or the Chief Secretary; whether Mr. John Mallon, the Chief Superintendent of the Detective Department of the Metropolitan Police, was instructed to prosecute further inquiry into the said charges; whether it is a fact that, at the inquiry so held by Colonel Bruce, District Inspector Maguire, of Limerick, was examined as to French’s conduct towards his brother; whether District Inspector Bell, Athenry, in the course of his evidence at said inquiry made a statement with reference to charges made by his clerk against James E. Trench of solicitation to commit a felony; and, if so, whether Colonel Bruce took any and what steps to secure the evidence of the said police clerk; and, whether Colonel Bruce, instead of directing the prosecution of further inquiry into the matters disclosed at said inquiry, arising from which J. E. French was suspended from duty, on the contrary warned the District Inspectors so examined to suppress all mention of the matter, and not to divulge the fact that such an inquiry had been held?

CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: There are no grounds for any of the insinuations against the conduct of Colonel Bruce implied in this Question. I can only repeat that from first to last Colonel Bruce laid before the Government the result of the inquiries which he made, that the steps which he took were taken with the cognizance and approval of the Government, and that the Government assume the entire responsibility for the conduct of the case.

CALLAN: Will the Chief Secretary answer this Question—Whether Mr. John Mallon, the Chief Superintendent of the Detective Department of the Metropolitan Police, was instructed to prosecute further into the said charges? Yes or no?

CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: If the hon. Member will repeat his Question on some future day I will reply to it.

CALLAN: I have given 10 days’ Notice of it, and I have once postponed it on the request conveyed to me by the right hon. Gentleman’s Private Secretary.

CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I certainly am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for putting it off. This is a very particular point in a very long 1456 Question, and I have not in my possession accurate information upon it—

CALLAN: Why have you not?

SPEAKER: Order, order!

CAMPBELL – BANNERMAN: I have given general information in order to save the time of the House.

 

LAW AND POLICE (IRELAND)—MR. JAMES ELLIS FRENCH.HC Deb 16 April 1885 vol 296 cc1855-6 1855

CALLAN: asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is a fact that Colonel Bruce, the Inspector General of the Royal Irish Constabulary, held an inquiry in the Castle, Dublin, into certain charges preferred against his colleague, James Ellis French; whether the minutes of the evidence taken at that inquiry, which resulted in the said James Ellis French being officially informed by Colonel Bruce that he should “not return to his office till called upon to do so,” in other words, that he was suspended from duty, were laid before the Officers of the Crown for advice and direction; whether it is a fact that District Inspector Bell, Athenry, in the course of his evidence at said inquiry made a statement with reference to charges made by his clerk against James E. French of solicitation to commit a felony; and, if so, whether Colonel Bruce took any and, if so, what steps to secure the evidence of the said police clerk; whether it is a fact that Mr. John Mallon, the Chief Superintendent of the Detective Department of the Metropolitan Police, received no instructions to prosecute any further inquiries into the said charges, and, if so, whether any further inquiries whatever into the said charges were made; and, if so, by whom ordered, and by whom made; and, whether it is a fact that Colonel Bruce, instead of directing the prosecution of further inquiry into the matters disclosed at said inquiry, arising from which J. E. French was suspended from duty, on the contrary warned the District Inspectors so examined to suppress all mention of the matter, and not to divulge the fact that such an inquiry had been held?

CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: The answer to the first two paragraphs of this Question is in the affirmative. District Inspector Bell made a statement with reference to conduct of French towards a clerk which he regarded as suspicious; but there was no allegation whatever of solicitation to commit a felony. Colonel Bruce took immediate steps to procure the statement of the 1856 clerk, and it and the statements made by the officer at the inquiry were at once submitted by him in full to the Government. No instructions were immediately given to Mr. Mallon for a further inquiry, because, in the opinion of the Law Officers, the facts which had been then elicited did not constitute ground for an accusation of felonious conduct; but on the termination of the trial of Cornwall v. O’Brien, Mr. Mallon, as well as the other members of the Dublin Police Force, received instructions to make the most exhaustive inquiries, and prosecute all persons against whom evidence could be found. The inquiry held by Colonel Bruce was necessarily confidential, and those examined were so informed, as a matter of course; but, as I have previously stated, Colonel Bruce put the Government in immediate possession of all the information he acquired.

 

POLICE DOCTORS.HC Deb 16 June 1890 vol 345 cc1017-8 1017

ROCHE (Galway, E.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland “whether the office of doctor to the police at Kilconnell, New Inn, and Woodlawn Police Stations (County Galway), held until his death by the dispensary doctor (Dr. Deely), has now been divided, Dr. Rutherford being appointed to Kilconnell, Dr. O’Farrel to New Inn, and Dr. Leonard to Woodlawn; why Dr. M’Merney, who succeeded Dr. Daly as dispensary doctor, and who applied to be appointed police doctor, got neither of the three stations, though he lives within two miles of each of the three, whereas Dr. Rutherford lives at Ballinasloe, eight miles from Kilconnell, Dr. O’Farrell at Loughrea, 10 miles from New Inn, and Dr. Leonard at Athenry, 18 miles from Woodlawn; whether there is any question as to Dr. M’Merney’s qualifications and capacity to discharge the duties of police doctor; whether he is aware that frequent com plaints have been made recently as to the irregularity of the visits of Dr. Rutherford, who holds the appointment of visiting physician to Ballinasloe Lunatic Asylum, that Dr. O’Farrell is the son of a local Crown prosecutor, and has never previously held any public appointment, and that Dr. Leonard is over 70 years of age; and why the ordinary practice of appointing the dispensary-doctor police doctor, till recently a rule of the force, has been departed from in this case?

A. J. BALFOUR: The Constabulary Authorities report that the facts are as stated in the first three paragraphs, except that Dr. Leonard resides at a distance of only 12 miles by train from the place mentioned. The public service will not be served by discussing the qualifications of individual candidates. No complaints have been received as to the appointment of Dr. Leonard, who is not over 70, but only 61 years of age. Dr. O’Farrell, for the last two and a half years, has been a Constabulary Medical Attendant. The rules referred to in the last paragraph were abolished in 1883, and no such rule is now in existence.

M. HEALY: Will not the right hon. Gentleman interfere, and see that a doctor living on the spot is appointed?

A. J. BALFOUR: I do not see why I should interfere with the Constabulary Authorities in the exercise of their discretion.

M. HEALY: Was not Dr. M’Merney passed over because he is a Nationalist?

 

CHARGE AGAINST AN ATHENRY CONSTABLE.HC Deb 07 July 1893 vol 14 cc1062-3 1062

SHEEHY (Galway, S.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the case of a police constable stationed at Athenry, who was charged last April with being drunk while under medical treatment, and against whom the charge has been again renewed, the doctor who attended the constable having since died; is he aware that it transpired at the inquiry that a statement made by the accused to the Inspector General was suppressed; can he state by whom this statement was suppressed; is he also aware that it was shown that the Head Constable induced certain shopkeepers to at once send their accounts to the accused, it being represented to them that the accused was about to be reduced and removed; and whether he will cause inquiries to be made into the case?

J. MORLEY: The question appears to relate to a constable named Lally, who was recently tried by a Constabulary Court of Inquiry on several charges, including one of drunkenness, in respect of all of which he was found guilty. I am informed that the entire circumstances of the case were fully in- 1063 quired into, and that all the papers, including the statement alleged to have been suppressed, were before the Court, by whom it was submitted to the Inspector General. The alleged misconduct of the Head Constable was also inquired into, and the Court were of opinion that he had only done his duty. The Inspector General considers that the constable has been dealt with leniently, and there appears to be no sufficient grounds for re-opening his case.

 

Athenry Police Case.HC Deb 10 March 1904 vol 131 cc759-60 759

DUFFY (Galway, S.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the proceedings at the last petty sessions held at Athenry, when a bailiff named J. Hansberry was prosecuted and fined for discharging firearms on the public road between nine and ten o’clock at night; whether he is ‘† See (4) Debates,, cxxix., 192.’ ‘† See (4) Debates,, cxxix., 595.’ 760 aware that Hansberry lives about 100 yards from the public road in the neighbourhood of which several malicious injuries have taken place, and that at the last quarter session at Gort, Hansberry claimed compensation under the Malicious Injuries Act, and, if so, will he say what was the nature of his claim; can he state the number of times these outrages were reported to the police; whether they were recorded as agrarian outrages in the Return supplied to Parliament; and what action the authorities intend to take in the matter, and whether they will consider the propriety of depriving Hansberry of the licence to carry arms.

MR. WYNDHAM: I stated yesterday† that Hansberry was prosecuted and fined, on the charge of discharging firearms on the public road. He was awarded £5 compensation at quarter sessions in January for malicious injury to a pony trap at Athenry several miles distant. This case was not recorded as agrarian. There were two other cases of malicious injury in the neighbourhood for which compensation was granted; both of these, were recorded as agrarian offences. Hansberry is reported by the police to be a man of good character and there are no sufficient grounds for depriving him of his arms licence.

ROCHE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the police sergeant swore that frequent complaints had been made about shots being fired at night?

SPEAKER: Notice must be given of any further Question.

 

Loughrea and Athenry Police Force HC Deb 17 April 1905 vol 145 c311 311

CHARLES CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how many extra police have been drafted into the districts of Loughrea and Athenry; where have they been brought from: and will he consider the advisability of charging the districts named, instead of the county at large, with their cost.

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALTER LONG,) Bristol, S.: Between March 30th and April 8th, a force of sixty-five extra police was stationed in Loughrea,Athenry, and other districts in the East Riding of Galway. The extra force was reduced by ten men on the latter date. The police have been drawn from a number of counties, and the question of the area of charge is at present under consideration.

 

Loughrea, Kilchreest, and Athenry Police Force. HC Deb 17 April 1905 vol 145 c294 294

DUFFY (Galway, S.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of policemen at present stationed in Loughrea, Kilchreest, and Athenry; and how many extra policemen have been drafted into these districts within the coarse of the past month.

(Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The number of police at present stationed in Loughrea is twentv-four; in Kilchreest, fourteen; and in Athenry, thirty-two. The number of extra police drafted into these stations within the past month are: Loughrea, six; Kilchreest, nine; and Athenry, sixteen.

 

Domiciliary Visits by Irish Police at Athenry.HC Deb 15 May 1905 vol 146 cc295-6 295

DUFFY (Galway, S.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in the neighbourhood of Athenry the police have been in the habit of visiting the houses of the people at night, forcing the people to get out of bed to be inspected and interrogated; and will he say by what authority such domiciliary visits are carried out.

WALTER LONG: The police have visited certain houses in the district of Athenry for the purpose of obtaining information in respect to the prevention and detection of crime. This i a fundamental duty of the police 296 which, as peace officers, they are bound to discharge. There is not the smallest foundation for the suggestion that they have forced people to get out of bed to be inspected and interrogated. The visits of the police were not made at times when the inmates of houses were in bed, and they have always been careful not to cause inconvenience in any way to the persons visited.

DILLON: My information is that the people were compelled to get out of bed.

WALTER LONG: I have no information as to the precise hours, but I am informed that the visits were not made at times at which the people ought to be in bed.

DILLON: What was the hour? By what right do the police insist upon entering people’s houses without warrant?

WALTER LONG: I will endeavour to ascertain whether there is any further information as to the hour at which these proceedings were taken.

 

Domiciliary Police Visits at Athenry.HC Deb 17 May 1905 vol 146 cc627-8 627

DILLON (Mayo, E.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland at what hour the police have entered the houses of the people in the neighbourhood of Athenry; whether they entered houses without the consent of the proprietors; and, if so, by what authority this was done; what was the object of the police in making these domiciliary visits.

WALTER LONG: I am informed that police have entered houses in the neighbourhood of Athenry in the day time and at night no later than 10 p.m., in two or three cases up to 10.30 p.m., when inmates were not in bed, and with their consent. The object of the police in entering such houses was to make general police inquiry with a view to the prevention and detection of cr

DILLON: I beg to ask by what right the police enter the houses in the country, and is it lawful for the police to lay down a rule that the occupants shall not go to bed before 10 p.m.

Member that the police entered these houses with the consent of the inhabitants.

DILLON: Has the right hon. Gentleman not stated already on the authority of the police that they never entered houses at an hour when the people ought to be in bed. We are informed that they entered between 10 and 10.30.

WALTER LONG: said that he had already given two or three Answers on this subject. The information he had received was that the police did not enter the houses at a time when the people were expected to be in bed, and further information showed that they entered with the consent of the occupiers. In no case did the police force their entrance into the houses. They had a right to obtain any information they could, provided that they entered without the use of forcible means.

CAPTAIN DONELAN: Have the people a right to prevent the police from entering the houses?

WALTER LONG: I am not called upon to explain the general law of the land. As far as I know no force was used by the police in entering the houses.

DILLON: How much force would be required to enter a cottage in an Irish country district?

WALTER LONG: By using the word force I did not intend to suggest that it was necessary violently to attack the people, but I meant to convey the fact that the entry of the police was made with the consent of the people occupying the houses.

BLAKE (Longford, S.): asked whether the consent of the occupants was asked before the police entered, or whether, when they found a door which was not barred, it was opened by the police without any intimation to the occupant or a request made for consent.

WALTER LONG: That is a legal question.

BLAKE: No, it is a question of fact.

DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The hon. Member ought to give notice of that Question.

PATRICK O’BRIEN (Kilkenny): asked whether if a meeting is called at Athenry for the purpose of explaining to the people their legal right to resist the forcible entry of their homes at any hour of the day or night by police without legal warrant, he will undertake that such meeting will not be suppressed by force?

[No Answer was returned.]

 

HC Deb 18 May 1905 vol 146 cc765-6 765

LONSDALE (Armagh, Mid.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what are the circumstances under which an extra force of constabulary has been drafted into the district of Athenry, county Galway.

REDDY: Has the hon. Member got his information from Lord Ashtown?

WALTER LONG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a new wooden gate and 100 yards of new fencing were pulled down and destroyed on the farm of Patrick Costelloe, at Ballymacward, county Galway; and that on this farm 500 yards of stone wall were knocked down a few weeks ago, for which £50 was awarded as damages for malicious injury; and, if so, will he say what action he proposes to prevent the recurrence of similar damage.

WALTER LONG: Yes, Sir; the facts are substantially as stated, save that the amount of compensation awarded was £34, not £50. The later of these offences was committed on the 4th of last month, and since that date a force of twenty extra police has been sent to the district concerned, namely, Athenry. Every effort has been made by me, and will continue to be made, to prevent the occurrence of outrage and to protect the property of individuals.

 

Domiciliary Visits by Police at Athenry.HC Deb 23 May 1905 vol 146 cc1124-6 1124

DILLON: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the police, who have recently entered the houses of families in the neighbourhood of Athenry, have done so without first obtaining the permission of the owners; whether the police were furnished with special warrants or orders to enter the houses of certain individuals, or whether the police patrol exercises a discretion to enter the house of any person they think fit to enter; what instructions are given to police as to the action they are to take in the event of any resistance being offered to their entrance, and are they instructed to immediately leave the house if ordered by the owner to do so; and were there any criminal charges against the persons whose houses have been entered by the police.

WALTER LONG: The police have recently entered the houses of certain persons with their implied permission, as anybody else would enter. No express permission was asked for, and no objection was made to their entrance ‘† See (4) Debates, cxliv., 1275.’ 1125 or presence; had any such objection been made, they would have at once yielded to the objection, unless they had come to execute a warrant or had legal justification for remaining. No special warrants were issued nor special orders given on the occasions referred to. A patrol is sometimes instructed to make inquiries at a particular house and to enter it for that purpose, and sometimes it is left to their own discretion to enter for such purpose. The doors are often found open; they are never forced; and any objection, as I have said, to the police entering or remaining in the house would be at once yielded to. No criminal charges were made against any of the persons whose houses were entered.

CAPTAIN DONELAN (Cork, E.): Did the police visit any of the landlords’ houses on the occasion?

WALTER LONG: I cannot say, Sir; but the police in England have often visited my house.

DILLON: Is it proposed to continue to allow the police who patrol this district to exercise this discretion of entering the houses of any peasant during the night?

WALTER LONG: If I had reason to think that the police entered the houses of the people against their wishes I would give instructions that the practice should be discontinued; but no such information has reached me.

KILBRIDE (Kildare, S.): Did the police enter the right hon. Gentleman’s house after 10.30 at night without his permission?

WALTER LONG: My permission has never been asked, but the house has been visited late at night.

DILLON: Do you leave your door open?

BLAKE (Longford, S.): I wish to know how the permission he infers was “implied.” Was any effort made before opening the door and walking in to know if the occupants of the house were willing?

WALTER LONG: I am informed that the police constantly visit the houses of the residents in the district in which they are stationed, and that they are on the best possible terms with the population. No objection was raised to these visits on the part of the inhabitants. If, however, I had any reason to believe that the police exercised their powers in an improper way I would take care to see that regulations were issued to prevent it.

RUNCIMAN (Dewsbury): Will the right hon. Gentleman say, for the information of English Members, what object the police serve in invading the privacy of those homes with or without permission?

WALTER LONG: I assume that the police have a general duty in regard to the protection of life and property in their district.

CLANCY (Dublin County, N): What was the purpose for which the police visited the house of the right hon. Gentleman?

DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The hon. Member must give notice of that Question.

 

Irish Police and the Public.HC Deb 29 May 1905 vol 147 c94 94

ROCHE (Galway, E): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on Sunday, 2nd April, whilst Thomas Sheridan, together with two of his friends named Murray and Noone, was standing outside his own door, Constable Daly asked why they were shouting, which they denied; that Sergeant Dumphy, although Noone had gone into the house, ordered Constable Daly to draw his baton and attack Sheridan and Murray; and that the constable struck Murray twice, and dragged Sheridan out to the road and then released him; whether he is aware that they subsequently followed him into his own house, where Noone was, and arrested Noone in the house, handcuffed him, and took him to the police station, where he was kept until a late hour and then taken before Mr. Hazel, J.P., Athenry, at midnight, a distance of eight miles, and released, when summons was served upon him; and whether, seeing that Mr. Villiers, J.P., lives within a few hundred yards of the scene of arrest, and that when the charge was heard before a bench of six magistrates the chairman commented upon Sergeant Dumphy’s action adversely, and that the magistrates unanimously refused information, he will say what steps, if any, he intends to take in this case.

WALTER LONG: In this case a charge of assault has been preferred against the police, and it would obviously be undesirable to deal with the question while that case is sub judice.

 

Intimidation of Michael Fynn at Athenry.HC Deb 15 March 1906 vol 153 c1381 1381

LONSDALE (Armagh, Mid): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on Sunday March 4th threatening notices, couched in violent language, and bearing drawings of coffins and rifles, were found posted up opposite the Roman Catholic church at Athenry; and, seeing that these notices contained threats against Michael Fynn, a small farmer, who recently resumed the holding of a grazing farm at Rockmore, will he say what steps are being taken to afford this man protection from violence.

(Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The local police are aware that a rumour to the effect stated in the Question has been current at Athenry, but they have reason to believe that no such notice as is mentioned was found.

Galway Police Force.HC Deb 02 November 1906 vol 163 cc1447-9 1447

WALTER LONG (Dublin, S.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the nominal and actual strength of the free and extra forces of police in the East and West Ridings of Galway respectively on the following dates: 1st March, 1905; 1st December, 1905; 1st January, 1906; 1st February, 1906, and first of each succeeding month, including October instant.

1st March, 1905. 1st Dec, 1905. 1st January. 1906. 1st Feb., 1896.

Free. Extra. Free. Extra. Free. Extra. Free. Extra.

Galway, E. R. 284 — 303 33 304 14 300 12

Galway, W. R. 310 — 294 38 293 38 291 38

NOTE.—It should be observed that the actual strength of the free force in a county is always necessarily below the nominal strength, because this latter

(Answered by Mr. Bryce.): The nominal free force fixed for the county Galway for the three years prior to 21st May, 1906, was:—

Galway, E. R 311

Galway, W. R. 349

Since 21st May, 1906, the nominal free force has been:—

Galway, E. R. 313

Galway, W. R. 303

There is no difference between nominal and actual strength in the extra force. The actual strength of the free and extra forces on the dates mentioned in the Question was as follows:—

includes a percentage of recruits in training at the depot to supply waste due to retirements, death, etc.

WALTER LONG: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what additions were made, and on what dates, to the police establishments in the East and West Ridings, respectively, of Galway in the year 1905; what reductions, if any, have since been authorised in the extra force of each Riding; whether the establishment in either Riding has been recently augmented; and, if so, to what extent and under what circumstances.

(Answered by Mr. Bryce.): In the months of March and April, 1905, the police force serving in county Galway was temporarily increased by the addition of the following extra force:—

East Riding 111 men.

West Riding 50 men.

The extra force in the East Riding was reduced by seventy-seven in April and May, 1905, that is, while the late Government were in office. The balance of thirty-four men was reduced from time to time from December, 1905, till 5th July, 1906, when the extra force was entirely dispensed with. In the West Riding the extra force was reduced by twelve men in May and June, 1905, and the balance of thirty-eight men was reduced in February, 1906, and finally dispensed with in June, 1906. The force of the East Riding was temporarily increased on 12th October, 1906, by twenty-five men of the reserve force, in consequence of disturbance in the Athenry district.

Galway Extra Police Tax.HC Deb 05 December 1906 vol 166 cc965-6 965

LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been called to the proceedings of the Galway County Council in reference to the extra police tax levied in that county; whether he will state the number of police in respect of which the tax has been levied, the districts in which the police have been located, and the reason for strengthening the number of the force in each case; and whether the extra police, or any portion of them, are still retained in the districts in question.

BRYCE: The County Council of Galway have raised certain objections to paying for the expenses of extra police drafted into the county, and have applied for particulars in connection with the accounts furnished for the purpose of checking their accuracy. As to the numbers of the extra police serving in county Galway at different times since 1st March, 1905. I beg to refer the hon. Member to my Answers to the Questions of the right hon. Member for South Dublin on 2nd November, to which give full particulars. The extra police for which charges have been made were located in the districts of Athenry, Ballinasloe, Dunmore, Galway, Gort, Loughrea, Portumna, and Tuam, and the main reason for the services of these police was the state of feeling arising out of the agitation against the grazing system. As the hon. Member is probably aware, these extra police were sent to the county while the late Government were in office. The only extra force at present serving in the county consists of twenty-five men of the ‘† See (4) Debates elxiii.,1447–9.’ 966 reserve force who were sent to the Athenry district on 12th October last.

Clause:—HC Deb 12 December 1906 vol 167 cc476-519

CAPTAIN CRAIG: said he was not going to detain the Committee long, and he would pass on. He would refer next to the case at Athenry. The right hon. Gentlemen said he was informed by the police that on the night in question such and such occurred. He also stated that twenty-five extra policemen were stationed there at the present time. A small town like Atherny needed twenty-five extra policemen to maintain law and order! The right hon. Gentleman also stated that in the East Riding of Galway 492 there were thirty-four cases of partial boycotting going on at the present moment. He was not going to weary the Committee a with all the cases of partial boycotting which came to his ears. In isolated cases of boycotting there was often, he admitted; a difficulty in making sure that the facts were as stated, but personally he had always done his utmost to make sure he was not asking a frivolous question. He thought, however, the cases he had put to the right hon. Gentleman showed that in various parts of the f South and West of Ireland there was an unsettled state of things, and that the police in different parts of the country required to be augmented by others—twenty-five in the case of the East Riding of Galway. He noticed also, and this was the last question he should refer to, the change of the constabulary after the Loughrea eviction. All these cases were being watched most cautiously and carefully, not only by those outside the disturbed areas, but by isolated men and women in parts of the country where police protection was required, and where boycotting and intimidation, and so on, were rife. He maintained that in the case he had mentioned there was sufficient justification for saying that Ireland at the present time was not ready to run the risk of taking away from the Lord-Lieutenant in Council the power given under the Act which it was proposed to drop. He could not conceive the Government’s motive in striking out with the pen this Act from the Bill, and pushing the Bill through at 1.30 a.m. at the fag end of the session, and after the House had been discussing another measure of great importance. His next point was that even if Ireland, south and west, and north and east, was settled and quiet, and in the same condition as Scotland and Wales at the present time, peaceful and law-abiding, it would be very difficult to persuade them what harm it would do to the country to continue this measure, which was introduced by the late Mr. Gladstone in the year 1881, and had gone on to this day, without, as far as he could ascertain, causing very much inconvenience or discomfort where people were law-abiding and peaceful. Possibly the argument was that the Act was a dead letter and was no longer required. 493 If they began to study too closely the details of such Acts as were no longer required they would find a mass of measures which it would be impossible for the House in a session of Parliament to examine and put out of the Statute Book. That argument, therefore, fell to the ground. Out of pure curiosity he turned up a measure, a statute of 1772, whereby any person who set fire to one of His Majesty’s dockyards was to suffer the penalty of death. He knew quite well that of these old Acts some were quite useless, but the onus would rest in this case of showing that the Act was no longer necessary. He would like to refer to one remark made by the hon. and learned Member for North Louth on the Second Reading of the Bill. He said that the measure was introduced in order to maintain law and order among the Orangemen in Ulster.

T. M. HEALY: The hon. Member has misunderstood me. I said it was renewed in 1886 for that purpose.

CAPTAIN CRAIG: said he accepted the correction at once, but if it was maintained in 1886 to preserve law and order among the Orangemen in the North of Ireland he would say on behalf of the whole order of Orangemen that they had no objection to its remaining on the Statute-book for another 100 years. He hoped, therefore, the hon. and learned Member would not press that point any further as the reason for the Act’s remaining on the Statute-book. He thought that the step which the Government had taken in this matter was one of the most important they had taken this session. He looked upon what they had done as practically the first shot in the Home Rule battle, which they would have to fight next year.

Amendment proposed— ‘In page 4, line 10, at the end, to insert the words:—’44 and 45 Vic, c. 5; The Peace Preservation (Ireland) Act, 1881; The whole Act; 49 and 50 Vic, c. 24; 50 and 51 Vic, c. 20.’

Question proposed, “That those words be there inserted.”

JOHN REDMOND (Waterford): said he was anxious to address a few words to the Committee, but he would promise that they would be brief, and they certainly would not lead to any excitement. His hon. friends and himself desired that this matter should be discussed without any excitement, or any trouble arising from a discussion. The first thing he wished to say was upon the remark of the hon. and gallant Member as to the pressure which he thought had been brought to bear on the Government. It was interesting to remember the fact that every year since 1890 they had moved the exception of this Act, and that on every occasion they had been supported by Gentlemen on the Front Bench opposite. The Government were, therefore, bound to take the first opportunity of giving effect to the pledges given every year. Let him remind the House what the Bill was. The hon. and gallant Gentleman was not quite candid, if he would allow him to say so, in his representation of it to the Committee. He represented it as a mere measure to regulate the sale of firearms. Yet under it any person carrying or having, or reasonably suspected of carrying or having, any firearm or ammunition might be arrested without warrant by any constable, and on the issue of a warrant any person suspected of having arms in his house might at any hour between sunrise and sunset have his house broken into for the purpose of search, for the Act specially provided that the person desiring to search the house might break into it. The penalties on anybody contravening the Act were three months hard labour, which might be imposed by a court consisting of two resident magistrates. The licence which the Act provided to exempt persons from its penalties was to be given by a resident magistrate. This was the small law for the purpose of regulating the sale and use of firearms. It was really the most audacious Coercion Act which was ever enacted for any country. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Dublin had said he regarded it as a mere police regulation, and that instead of exempting Ireland from it he desired to extend the Act to England. He never made that suggestion when he was a responsible Minister.

 

Constable O’Halloran, Royal Irish Constabulary.HC Deb 16 April 1907 vol 172 c774 774

BARRIE (Londonderry, N.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Constable O’Halloran, who was disabled for life by a gunshot wound received on the night of 9th October last while affording police protection to Colonel Lopdell, near Athenry, was in receipt of pay of £53 a year, and that the pension to which he is entitled now on retiring from the Royal Irish Constabulary is only £24 a year; and seeing, that this constable was on the list for early promotion to the rank of sergeant, whether any, and, if so, what, additional pension will be paid to him by reason of his having been maimed in the discharge of his duty.

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. BIRRELL, Bristol, N.): Constable O’Halloran was seriously injured by a gunshot on the occasion mentioned, and has since been under medical treatment. The question whether he is permanently incapacitated for service has not yet been determined. The constable’s present pay is £67 per annum. His ordinary pension would amount to £24 a year, but if it should be certified that he is permanently incapacitated by reason of injuries received while on duty, there is power to award him a pension not exceeding his annual pay. Constable O’Halloran has lodged a claim against the county council for compensation in respect of the malicious injury inflicted upon him, and if he should be granted compensation the fact would be taken into account in fixing the amount of pension. The constable’s case will receive full consideration.

Police Protection of Grazing Farms.HC Deb 07 May 1907 vol 174 cc73-4 73

BR1DGEMAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state how many grazing farms in Ireland were under 74 police protection on 1st May, 1907; how many extra police were drafted into Athenry, Elphin, and Roscrea on 30th April and 1st May last; and what is the estimated cost of these precautionary measures.

CHERRY (for Mr. BIRRELL): I am informed by the police authorities that on 1st instant 245 grazing farms in Ireland were under police protection. On 30th April twenty additional policemen were brought into the Athenry district. On the same date thirty-seven additional men were brought into Elphin, and on 1st May twenty-three men. On 30th April eight men were brought into Roscrea. In none of these cases were extra police employed in the legal sense of the term, seeing that the men belonged to the established force of the county and not to other counties. The total cost of bringing in the men referred to was £32 15s. As regards the Athenry district, I may add that an extra force of twenty-five men belonging to the Reserve have been stationed in the district since 12th October, 1906, and an extra force of ten men belonging to another county have been there since 30th March last. The total cost of these extra forces has not yet been ascertained.

 

Athenry Outrage.HC Deb 29 May 1907 vol 174 cc1654-5 1654

COURTHOPE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on the night of the l5th instant, at about11 o’clock, the house of Thomas Duddy, situated in the centre of the town of Athenry, was fired into, and that the fact that Duddy drove some of the police on his car contrary to the orders of the United Irish League in that town is assigned as the cause of the outrage; and whether, in view of the fact that several similar cases of firing into houses in Athenry have occurred during the last two years, he will increase the police force there, and will supply them with fuller powers for detecting and preventing crime of this character.

BIRRELL: Thomas Duddy’s house was fired into on the date mentioned. 1655 It is the fact that Duddy drove the police on his car a month ago, but the police have no reason to believe that this fact furnished the motive for the firing, and so far as they are aware the United Irish League has in no way interferred in the matter. The police force at Athenry Station has been increased by twenty-five men, making the present number forty-one. The police possess full powers for the prevention arid detection of crime. The state of the district has been and is receiving the closest possible attention.

 

Additional Police in Ireland.HC Deb 30 May 1907 vol 175 c49 49

WALTER LONG (Dublin, S.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will indicate the districts in Ireland in which additional forces of constabulary are employed, stating the names of districts, counties in which situate, total number of additional police employed, and the circumstances under which, in the case of each such district, it was considered necessary to supplement the ordinary police establishment.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.): Additional forces of constabulary are employed as follows:—County Clare—Districts of Ennis, Corofin, Tulla, and Six mile bridge: one head constable and sixty-five men of the reserve force. County Cork, E. R.—Districts of Newmarket and Midleton: seven men of the reserve. Counties Leitrim and Cavan—Districts of Carrick-on-Shannon and Manorhamilton: twenty-two men of the Reserve. County Gal-way, E. R.—District of Athenry: thirty-five men of the Reserve. County Roscommon—Districts of Strokestown and Castlerea: one district inspector, two head constables, eighty-three men of the Reserve, and fifty men from other counties. King’s County—District of Parsonstown: one district inspector and twenty-five men of the Reserve. In all these cases the augmentation of the local police force was necessitated by the disturbed state of the district.

Rodney Estate, Galway.HC Deb 11 June 1907 vol 175 c1242 1242

Sir F. BANBURY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the tenants on the Rodney estate have refused to pay rent for their holdings until the estate has been handed over to the Estates Commissioners; that MR. Kirwan, the agent for the said estates, was under police protection when he visited Athenry on Monday the 27th ultimo to collect rents; and whether he will engage that the landlord shall receive legal payment for his lands either from the tenants or the Estates Commissioners.

BIRRELL: The Estates Com missioners inform me that no proceedings for the sale of this estate have been instituted before them, and they know nothing of the alleged withholding of rent. It is the fact that the agent received police protection when at Athenry on 27th May. Obviously I cannot give the undertaking suggested in the last part of the Question. If the facts are as stated, the usual legal remedies are open to the landlord.

 

Constable O’Halloran, Royal Irish ConstabularyHC Deb 03 July 1907 vol 177 cc709-10 709

LONSDALE: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the claim of Constable William O’Halloran, Royal Irish Constabulary, for compensation for being maimed by shot while protecting Colonel Lopdell, at Rockmore, county Galway, on 9th October; whether any person was brought to justice for shooting this officer; and whether, seeing that Judge Anderson, while refusing the application, expressed the hope that an appeal would be lodged, the officer will have facilities for appealing to a higher tribunal.

CHARLES CRAIG (Antrim, S.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a constable named O’Halloran was engaged in protecting the house of Colonel Lopdell, near Athenry, shot at on the 9th October last, grievously wounded, and maimed for life; is he aware that the Recorder of Galway has decided that O’Halloran is not entitled to compensation against the county; will he state what was O’Halloran’s annual pay and emoluments at the date of the outrage; was ho then qualified for promotion; what pension is he entitled to now, and will any, and what, addition be made to his normal pension by reason of his being maimed in the discharge of his duty; and has any person been made amenable to justice for shooting Constable O’Halloran.

BIRRELL: I will Answer these two Questions together. It is the fact that Constable O’Halloran received a gun-shot wound while on duty on 9th October last. The Recorder of Galway has decided that the constable is not entitled to compensation from the county for malicious injury. In so deciding the Recorder said that if his decision should be reversed on appeal no one would be better pleased than he, but he pointed out that his decision was based upon a judgment of the Court of Appeal in a similar case. If, however, the constable should desire to appeal the Inspector-General will permit him to do so at his own risk and expense. Three men were arrested for shooting the constable, but were discharged for want of evidence. The facts as to the constable’s pay and possible pension are fully stated in my reply to a Question put by the hon. Member for North Londonderry on 16th April. † If it should be determined that ho has been incapacitated for further service, his case will receive full consideration when his pension comes to be fixed.

 

Police Protection in Ireland.HC Deb 08 July 1907 vol 177 cc1170-1 1170

LONSDALE (Armagh, Mid.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what is the number of persons in Ireland to whom special protection is afforded by the constabulary, distinguishing constant protection and protection by patrols, and what is the total number of police detailed for such duty.

BIRRELL: The number of persons who are receiving constant police 1171 protection is fifty, and the number receiving protection by patrols is 166. The number of police engaged in affording constant protection is about 123. The number employed in affording protection by patrols cannot be stated with accuracy. Many of the policemen so employed are also engaged on other duties, and the number varies from day to day.

LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what is the number of additional police at present employed in disturbed districts in Ireland; and what are the names of such districts and the number of additional police employed in each.

BIRRELL: The number of additional police at present employed on temporary service in disturbed districts in Ireland is one district inspector, three head-constables, and 310 men. The counties and districts in which they are employed are as follows: —County Clare: districts of Ennis, Corofin, Tulla, Sixmilebridge, one head-constable and fifty-six men. County Cork, E.R.: districts of Newmarket and Midleton, seven men. Counties Cavan and Leitrim: districts of Carrick-on-Shannon and Manorhamilton, twenty-two men. County Galway, E.R.: districts of Athenry and Loughrea, seventy men. County Roscommon: districts of Roscommon, Strokestown, Castlerea, and Ballaghadereen, one district inspector, two head constables, and 133 men. King’s County: district of Birr, twenty-two men.

KILBRIDE (Kildare, S.): How many police will be employed this week in disturbed districts in Belfast??

PATRICK O’BRIEN (Kilkenny): And how many were guarding the Crown jewels stolen at Dublin??

Charge against Constable Thomas M’Govern.HC Deb 31 July 1907 vol 179 c939 939

SLOAN:To ask the Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any, and if so, what steps have been taken against Constable Thomas M’Govern, of the Royal Irish Constabulary, now stationed at Athenry, county Galway, who on examination at Clonmel Assizes on 8th instant, in a case of alleged embezzlement against Sergeant Kearney, committed perjury in swearing that he knew and identified two women who were alleged to have paid Kearney certain sums of money, the amounts of fishery fines, while Constable M’Govern previously swore at Carrick-on-Suir Petty Sessions, on 28th March last, that he did not know and could not identify the two women, although he saw them in court and heard them giving evidence.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.): The Inspector-General informs me that there was a slight discrepancy between the evidence given by Constable M’Govern at petty sessions and that subsequently given by him at assizes, but there is no sufficient ground for suggesting that he was guilty of wilful and corrupt perjury. Upon cross-examination at assizes the constable fully explained the reasons for the variation in his evidence. It is not intended to take any action against the constable.

 Athenry Constable’s Pension.HC Deb 08 August 1907 vol 180 cc338-9 338

FETHERSTONHAUGH (Fermanagh, N.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what provision has been made, in addition to his ordinary pension as a constable, for Constable O’Halloran, Royal Irish Constabulary, who was, in October last, shot and severely wounded near 339 Athenry, county Galway, while protecting the house of Colonel Lopdell; was Constable O’Halloran near his promotion to the rank of acting-sergeant; and has the loss of promotion been considered in determining the provision to be made for him.

BIRRELL: The amount of the pension to be awarded to the constable has not yet been decided; the matter is at present under consideration.

 

Pension of Constable O’Halloran, R-I-C.HC Deb 10 February 1908 vol 183 cc1391-2 1391

FETHERSTONHAUGH: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any, and if so, what compensation by way of increased pension or otherwise has been awarded to Constable O’Halloran, Royal Irish Constabulary, who was shot at and severely wounded near Athenry, when on patrol duty.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.): Constable O’Halloran has been awarded a special 1392 pension of £52 per annum. The ordinary pension to which he would have been entitled if incapacitated through ill health would be £25 13s. 9d.

 

Newford Police Canteen.HC Deb 02 March 1908 vol 185 c325 325

DUFFY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the police authorities are erecting a canteen and supply store at Newford, near Athenry; whether the police could procure everything they wanted in Athenry; and will he explain the purpose of burdening the rates with this expense.

(Answered, by Mr. Birrell.) A canteen and general supply store for the constabulary will shortly be opened at this place. The police could doubtless procure supplies in Athenry, but in the Inspector General’s opinion it will be an advantage to the large extra force in the district to obtain their supplies at their own store. This arrangement will impose no burden upon local rates. The charge for the extra police is at a fixed rate.

 Police Huts at Athenry.HC Deb 02 March 1908 vol 185 cc324-5 324

DUFFY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how many police huts are erected on the agricultural farm near Athenry; how many police are quartered there; and can he state the probable cost of the extra police in the district.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.): One single and two double huts have been erected, or are in course of erection near Athenry. The huts will accommodate seventeen 325 men, of whom ten are already quartered in them. The extra police force in the Athenry district consists of one head constable and forty-seven sergeants and constables. The local charge for these men will fall on the county at large at a fixed rate, namely, £43 6s per annum for the head constable, and £34 9s 3d per annum for each sergeant and constable. The necessity for erecting the huts was due to the exorbitant rents asked for barrack accommodation in the locality and to other police reasons.

 

Extra Police in County Galway.HC Deb 30 November 1908 vol 197 cc1046-7 1046

HAZLETON (Galway, N.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state how the extra police at present stationed in County Galway are distributed; and the reasons in each case for the continued retention of these men in each district.

(Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The present distribution of the extra force in

Head Constables. Sergeants and Constables.

Athenry Constabulary District 1 57

Ballinasloe Constabulary District — 39

Loughrea Constabulary District — 60

Mountbellew Constabulary District — 39

Portumna Constabulary District — 8

Woodford Constabulary District — 17

Clifden Constabulary District — 3

Dumnore Constabulary District — 25

Galway Constabulary District — 20

Gort Constabulary District — 45

Oughterard Constabulary District — 3

Tuam Constabulary District — 29

Total 1 345

The extra force in each of the districts with the exception of Oughterard, is required to prevent cattle-driving and forms of disorder arising therefrom, to protect certain persons who require protection, and generally to preserve the peace. The three police in Oughterard district are required for emergencies elsewhere in the West Riding, but are lodged in that district because there is no room to house them in other districts.

 

Royal Irish Constabulary (Athenry District).HC Deb 29 July 1909 vol 8 cc1443-7W 1443W

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked the Chief Secretary what is the number of extra police stationed at present in the police sub-district of Athenry; the number of persons who were receiving police protection in the sub-district during the three last months of 1907 by patrol and by constant police protection, respectively; the number of specially reported cases during the first six months in 1907, and the same period in 1909, from this area; whether he is aware that there are several police huts on the lands held there by the Agricultural Department, Ireland, and that there is also a police canteen there; and will he state how many police there are stationed in such huts, how long they have been there, and when it is intended to remove them?

Mr. BIRRELL: There are now 26 extra police stationed in the Athenry sub-district. During the last three months of 1907 thirty-four persons were protected by patrols, while two were under constant police protection. There were nine specially reported cases during the first six months of 1907, and five during the first six months of 1909. There are two police

huts containing 17 men and a police canteen on the lands referred to. One of the huts has been there since January and the other since February, 1908. I cannot say when it may be found possible to remove them.

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked whether there is a regularly appointed constabulary canteen at Athenry; and, if so, what has been the turnover per month for the past six months at this canteen; and what 1445W has been the profit or loss on each month’s trading?

Mr. BIRRELL: I am informed by the police authorities that there is a regularly appointed constabulary canteen at Athenry. I do not know what the monthly turnover or the profit or loss thereon may be, and I do not think that any useful object would be attained by making inquiries into the matter. The loss, if any, does not fall on public funds.

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked whether a deputation from Athenry waited on the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, Ireland, and the Inspector-General, Royal Irish Constabulary, en 22nd January, 1908; who were the gentlemen who made up such deputation; what was the nature of its business; and what action, if any, has been taken by the Vice-President and the Inspector-General?

Mr. BIRRELL: My right hon. Friend the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture informs me that on 22nd January, 1908, some visitors from Athenry, whose names he does not now remember, called at his office in Merrion-street in order to impress upon him that the burning of the house belonging to the Department at New Ford was not malicious. He advised them to place their views before the judge. On the same day Captain Shawe Taylor and Messrs. Daly, Ruane, Clery, Nolan, Holland, Finerty, and Murphy called on the Inspector-General of the Royal Irish Constabulary at Dublin Castle and urged him to reduce the police force in the Athenry district. It has not yet been found possible to comply with that request.

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked the Chief Secretary whether it is the intention of the Government to reduce the police force in Athenry district to the regular number to which the place is entitled, seeing the peaceable condition of the district since the sale to the tenants of the several estates therein; and, if so, when will he take steps to do so?

Mr. BIRRELL: The condition of the Athenry district cannot be regarded as satisfactory. The time has not yet come for considering the question of reducing the police force in the district.

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that, on 1st January, 1908, a public meeting was held at Athenry in connection with the 1446W agrarian struggle then in the district, when a committee was appointed for the purpose of discussing matters in connection therewith for the purpose of arriving at a peaceable and satisfactory settlement and preventing a continuance of hostilities in that district pending the passing of the Land Bill, which it was expected would be introduced into law; whether he is aware that land disputes were discussed by this committee, and will he say what has been the result of its work since then; whether one of the cases discussed related to a man named Thomas Curran, Athenry, who signed an agreement leaving the settlement of his dispute to the arbitration of Sir Anthony (now Lord) M’Donnell, and that Lord M’Donnell refused to undertake the task; whether he is aware that this man has been since under constant police protection notwithstanding the fact that on several occasions he asked the protection to be removed; and what is the reason a force of police is kept guarding a man’s house against his will?

Mr. BIRRELL: I am informed by the Constabulary authorities that an indoor meeting was held in Athenry in January, 1908, in connection with the state of the district, and that a committee was appointed with a view to a peaceable settlement of the matters in dispute. The committee has since met several times, but apparently with no good result. The statements with regard to the case of Thomas Curran are, I understand, correct. He is now protected by patrols. The decision as to the nature of the protection required in any particular case must be left to the police, who endeavour to afford such protection as unobtrusively as possible.

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) how many police huts are on the lands now held by the Department at or near Athenry in addition to the Constabulary canteen; what was the cause for placing these huts on those lands; whether there has been any reason for such a display of force in connection with the working of this place; and, seeing that such display is likely to prevent the sons of farmers from availing themselves of the instruction paid for out of Treasury funds, whether he will, in the interests of peace as well as furthering the prospects of scientific agriculture in Galway county, recommend the removal of these huts from the lands worked by his Department at Athenry?

Mr. T. W. RUSSELL: The inquiries contained in the first portion of the question should be addressed to my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary. The Department do not agree with the view expressed in the concluding portion of this question, and do not propose to take the action suggested.

 

Irish Constabulary (Athenry Meeting).HC Deb 01 December 1909 vol 13 cc493-4 493

Mr. PATRICK O’BRIEN (for Mr. Duffy): asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the hon. Members for East and South Galway attended a meeting in Athenry on Sunday, 21st November, and that the object of the meeting was perfectly peaceable and lawful, it being to welcome home from prison two gentlemen who had been released that day; will he explain how many policemen were brought into the parish and lined along the street of the town on the occasion; and what was the cause of this display?

Mr. BIRRELL: The two men referred to in the question had just been released from prison after undergoing a sentence of 14 months’ hard labour for having formed part of a band of armed and disguised men who made a murderous attack on a police patrol. Twenty extra police were brought into Athenry on the occasion to preserve the peace and prevent intimidation. The attitude of the crowd towards persons who had incurred their displeasure afforded abundant evidence of the necessity for the presence of this force.

Mr. PATRICK O’BRIEN (for Mr. Duffy): asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state how many policemen are at present stationed in the village of Athenry and the police huts adjacent to the village; is he aware that the presence of so many policemen in the town where everything is at present quiet and law-abiding is a menace to the public peace and calculated to exasperate the people into acts of violence and disturbance; and whether, seeing that a general all-round settlement has taken place on practically all the estates surrounding the town, he will take steps to reduce the police stationed there to its normal level?

Mr. BIRRELL: There are at present 31 police in Athenry and 18 in the neighbouring police huts, and I am advised by the responsible police authorities that this force is absolutely necessary for the preservation of the peace and to prevent acts of violence and intimidation. I regret to say that the people of the town cannot all be described at present as quiet or law-abiding, and there are, unhappily, several estates in the neighbourhood on which no settlement has been reached.

Police at Craughwell and Athenry (County Galway).HC Deb 03 March 1910 vol 14 c964 964

Mr. CHARLES CRAIG: asked how many police are stationed at Craughwell, county Galway, at present, and how many at Athenry; and what were the numbers of police at these two places, respectively, in January, 1906?

Mr. BIRRELL: Thirty police are at present stationed at Craughwell and thirty-one at Athenry. In January, 1906, there were seven police at Craughwell and fifteen at Athenry.

Mr. C. CRAIG: What is the necessity for such an increase in the number of police?

Mr. BIRRELL: The condition of these two places is such as to require the presence of an additional number.

Mr. C. CRAIG: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether the condition of those two places is improving at the present time, or getting worse?

Mr. BIRRELL I should say it remains pretty much the same.

Athenry (County Galway) District Inspector (R.I.C.)HC Deb 03 March 1910 vol 14 cc963-4 963

Mr. CHARLES CRAIG: asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he was aware that a notice threatening the life of the district inspector, Royal Irish Constabulary, at Athenry, was posted on the district inspector’s door; and what precautions were being taken to protect this officer?

Mr. BIRRELL: No notice threatening the life of the district inspector stationed at Athenry was posted on his door or elsewhere so far as the police are aware. No special precautions are taken to protect this officer.

Extra Police, County Galway.HC Deb 18 April 1910 vol 16 cc1700-2 1700

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked the Chief Secretary whether he will state the number of police at present stationed in Gort, county Galway, the number of extra police stationed in the town, and the cost of such extra police to the ratepayers of the county; and whether, having regard to the fact that Gort is one of the most peaceable towns in Ireland, and that it is over-garrisoned against the will of the people, he will have the additional police force removed forthwith?

Mr. BIRRELL: The police in Gort consist of one district inspector, one head constable, and nineteen men. They are required not so much for the town itself as for patrolling the district around it. There are no extra police in the town.

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked how many grazing farms in the police district of Athenry are under police protection; what are the names of the landlords who have let these lands, the graziers who now hold them, the number of acres, and the valuation; whether any effort has yet been made by the Congested Districts Board to get possession of these farms; and, if not, will he say why this has not been done?

Mr. BIRRELL: I am informed by the police authorities that twenty-five grazing farms in the Athenry police district are under police protection. No useful purpose would be served by publishing the names of the owners and occupiers of these farms or their area. The Congested Districts Board have not purchased any grass lands or farms in the neighbourhood of Athenry, nor is it their intention to do so. It would be contrary to the established practice to state the reasons which actuated them in the exercise of their discretion.

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked whether the Chief Secretary would state the number of extra police now stationed at Craughwell, county Galway; the date or dates on which such extra police were drafted in there; the cost per month to the county; and whether, in view of the fact that all the lands in the parish of Craughwell have been sold to the tenants excepting a small estate owned by Lord Clanricarde, and that there is now no crime in that district, he would have the number of extra police there removed without delay?

Mr. BIRRELL: There are seven extra police now at Craughwell. They were sent there in February, 1909. The charge to the county is at the rate of £34 9s. 3d. a year per man. It is true that the lands in the parish of Craughwell have been sold to the tenants except 2,000 acres belonging to Lord Clanricarde. There is nothing in the state of Craughwell which would justify the reduction of the police force.

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked the Chief Secretary whether he will state how many extra police are now stationed in Athenry police district; what is the cost per month for the upkeep of such extra police; and whether, seeing that Athenry and the surrounding districts are absolutely free from crime of any sort, excepting some slight explosions of political temperament due to the behaviour of a small number of individuals whose grass-grabbing propensities are the cause of any 1702 existing troubles, he will ask the Congested Districts Board to take over these disputed lands for the welfare of the community and the general relief of the taxpayer?

Mr. BIRRELL: There are at present sixty-eight extra police stationed in the Athenry district. The charge on the county in respect of them is at the rate of £34 9s. 3d. a year per man. The district is by no means free from crime. As I have already informed the hon. Member, the Congested Districts Board do not propose to buy lands in the neighbourhood.

Police at Athenry.HC Deb 28 April 1910 vol 17 cc745-7W 745W

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked the Chief Secretary if he will state how many police huts are erected on the lands at Athenry now in the possession of the Agricultural and Technical Department; how 746W many police are stationed in each of those huts; how much per head has been charged for their pay, upkeep, and expenses to the ratepayers of Galway; and whether he will say how soon these huts will be removed from the lands held by what ought to be a popular public institution?

Mr. BIRRELL: There are two police huts on the farm attached to the agricultural station at Athenry, one containing five and the other fourteen police. These men, in addition to protecting the farm, perform ordinary police work in the district. The charge to the county is at the rate of £34 9s. 3d. a year for each man. The huts cannot be removed at present.

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked the Chief Secretary if he will state the date on which Head-Constable Manning was transferred to Athenry from the depot in Dublin; whether his salary and travelling expenses are chargeable to the rates in Galway during the time he has been in the Athenry district; if so, whether the amount allowed in the Estimates last year for his pay and upkeep will go back to the Treasury this year; and whether the same will apply to all the extra police now and for the past two years who were stationed in Galway?

Mr. BIRRELL: Head Constable Manning was transferred from the reserve to Athenry on 31st August, 1907. His salary and travelling expenses have not been claimed from the county, but a commuted charge for his services has been made as provided by Statute. The cost of the extra police specially appointed to counties under the Act 6 Wm. IV., cap 13, far exceeds the amount recoverable from the counties in respect of them.

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked the Chief Secretary whether there are at present sixty-eight extra police stationed in Athenry police district; whether he will state the counties from which these men have been brought; whether these men now doing duty at Athenry still belong to the free quota of their respective counties; if so, whether the Treasury has made, or will make, any allowance to the ratepayers of the counties from which these men have been drawn because of the reduction of the force, to which they are entitled by law; and, if not, whether the gain is to be handed to the Treasury at the expense of the ratepayers of Galway county?

Mr. BIRRELL: The sixty-eight extra police now stationed in the Athenry dis- 747W trict do not belong to the free quota of other counties, but were specially appointed under 6 Wm. IV., cap. 13, Section 13, as an addition to the free force of the county Galway. The amount recoverable from the county in respect of these men is not a gain to the State, as it is much less than their cost.

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked the Chief Secretary if he will state how many transport cars are now engaged at Athenry town and district; what is the cost to the county of each transport car, horse and men, including pay, upkeep, and cost of transfer, to the town of Athenry; how many mounted police there are at present stationed there; what is the nature of the duties discharged by them; and what is the average cost of each to the ratepayers of the county?

Mr. BIRRELL: The police authorities inform me that two transport cars and a transport van are employed in the town of Athenry, and one transport car at Woodlawn, in the Athenry district. No part of the cost of these cars or van or the men in charge of them is charged to the county. There are three mounted men in Athenry and one in Woodlawn. These mounted men and the transport horses and ears referred to are engaged in the conveyance of the police on duty or transfer and in carrying provisions and other stores.

 

Agricultural Farm, Athenry.HC Deb 28 April 1910 vol 17 c745W 745W

Mr. JOHN O’DONNELL: asked the Chief Secretary whether he will state how many police are employed in connection with the management of the police canteen on the farm held by the Department of Agriculture at Athenry; whether any charge will be made to the ratepayers of county Galway for the men so employed; and whether they are included in the establishment of extra police quartered on the people of a congested county?

Mr. BIRRELL: Two men are engaged in managing the constabulary canteen at Newford, in the Athenry district. No charge on the ratepayers arises in respect of them, as they are not included in the establishment of extra police.

 

Extra Police (Athenry Sub-District).HC Deb 04 March 1912 vol 35 cc166-7W 166W

Mr. DUFFY: asked the Chief Secretary if he can state the number of police stations in the Athenry sub-district and the number 167W of the free force and extra police force stationed in each barrack, and what is the cost of the same to the ratepayers of the county?

Mr. BIRRELL: There are six police stations in the sub-district of Athenry, the numbers of the free quota and extra force in the sub-district being respectively forty-eight and twenty-nine. The cost to the county of the extra force is at the rate of £34 9s. 3d. per man per annum.

Mr. DUFFY: asked the Chief Secretary whether he can state the number of agrarian or specially reported cases in the Athenry sub-district for the past twelve months; and whether, in view of the peacefulness of the district, he will consider the wisdom of reducing the number of police quartered in the district down to its normal level?

Mr. BIRRELL: The number of agrarian and non-agrarian, cases specially reported in the Athenry sub-district during the past twelve months was three and eight respectively. The responsible police authorities are not prepared to recommend any reduction of the police force in the district at present.

Discharging Firearms (County Galway).HC Deb 24 October 1912 vol 42 cc2349-50 2349

Captain CRAIG: asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that on the night of 9th September last a number of shots were fired outside the house of Martin Harte, near Athenry, county Galway; and whether anyone has been made amenable? 

Mr. BIRRELL: Martin Harte reported to the police on the 10th September that two gun shots had been fired outside his house on the previous night, but that no harm had been done. The police have visited and interrogated all suspected persons, but so far without result.

Police Protection (Ireland).

HC Deb 24 October 1912 vol 42 cc2383-5W 2383W

Captain CRAIG asked the Chief Secretary whether he will give a Return of the total number of persons now receiving police protection, either constant or by patrols, with names and districts in which such persons reside; and a Return of the number of persons now boycotted in any way, and the total number of extra police now employed in Irish counties, showing the number by counties in each case?

Mr. BIRRELL presented the following Return of persons receiving special police protection on the 30th September, 1912:—

County.	District.	Number Receiving Constant Protection.	Number Receiving Patrol Protection.	Total.
Cavan	…	Virginia	1	—	1
Cavan	…	Cavan	1	—	1
Cavan	…	Swanlinbar	—	1	1
Londonderry	…	Londonderry	—	1	1
Kilkenny	…	Thomastown	1	—	1
King’s	…	Birr	1	—	1
King’s	…	Banagher	—	2	2
King’s	…	Edenderry	—	1	1
Longford	…	Longford	1	—	1
Meath	…	Navan	1	—	1
Queen’s	…	Abbeyleix	1	1	2
Queen’s	…	Maryboro’	1	1	2
Westmeath	…	Castlepollard	—	1	1
Westmeath	…	Moate	—	3	3
Galway, E. R	…	Athenry	8	50	58
Galway, E. R	…	Loughrea	2	9	11

 Athenry Police Barracks.HC Deb 21 November 1912 vol 44 cc502-3W 502W

Mr. DUFFY: asked how many police barracks are to be found in the Athenry 503W district; is it proposed to build an additional police barrack at New Town, Ballinloughnave, Deer Park, Athenry; and, if so, out of what fund is the cost to be borne?

Mr. BIRRELL: In the Constabulary district of Athenry there are twelve police barracks, including huts and protection posts. It has been decided to build a new barrack in Athenry to replace the existing one, and the cost will be borne by the Vote for Public Works in Ireland.