The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle. — 1884-11-08 (Stourbridge, West Midlands, England)

THE ADDRESS.  The adjourned debate on the Address was resumed by Mr. Sexton, who moved a fourth amendment, calling for a more impartial administration of the criminal law in Ireland, especially with i egard to the composition of juries. In support of it Mr. 6exton inveighed energetical\,_ against jury packing, which, he maintained, had reduced trial by jury in Ireland to a farce, and enabled the Government to punish the innocent when they could not get at the guilty, or even when they could. He referred to the circumstances of the Maamtra.sna murders and to the recent trials in Dublin, in regard to both of which he contended that the Government had contrived to pervert the course of jnstice. Mr. O'Brien seconded the amendment, asserting that the Government had murdered innocent men and had screened the guilty. Mr. Trevelyan replied briefly to those criticisms, which he contended were utterly unjustifiable, and afforded no ground for censure. To accept the amendment would make the repression of crime in Ireland impossible. Mr. Power, having remarked that in Ireland there was one law for the rich and one for the poor, protested against the Irish judgeships being given to Government partisans. Mr. Biggar charged the Government with packing juries for the purpose of convicting persons whether guilty or innocent. Mr. Leamy contended that the present lawless state of Ireland was due to the policy of repression and coercion which had been inaugurated by the Liberal party; and Mr. Barry supported the amendment.  Mr. Marum entered upon a 1-mg historical review of the persecution of Catholics in Ireland, and, being twice called to order by the Speaker, traced the history of the practice of challenging juries, and argued that the Executive Government, who put persons on their -trial, ought not to retain the power of ordering jurors to stand by. Mr. A. Moore expressed the dissatisfaction largely felt by Roman Catholics at their frequent exclusion from juries. Mr. W. Redmond animadverted on Mr. Bolton's restoration, which he attributed to Ministerial fears, and expected that Mr. French would shortly be set at liberty with a large sum of money in his pocket to leave the country. Mr. Plunket vindicated the conduct of the Irish Juries, and though he attributed much of the deplorable condition of Ireland to the action of the present Government, he did not think they were liable to the censure now proposed. Mr. Kenny, Colonel O'Beirne, and Mr. Deasy having supported the amendment, The Solicitor-General for Ireland replied categorically to the charges brought against the Government. He denied that the right of free speech had been interfered with in Ireland, and protested against the insinuation that the merchants of Dublin who had served as special jurymen had not honestly fulfilled their duties. He contended that Roman Catholics had not been improperly excluded from juries. Where they were excluded such exclusion was effected by their co-religionists, because every officer of the Government concerned in the administration of justice in Dublin, with the exception of himself, was a Catholic. Referring to the suggestion that the Government had endeavoured to screen Mr. Cornwall, he pointed out that the Government bad prosecuted him upon every charge which the law allowed them to prefer against him. At this point Mr. J. H. M‘Carthy moved the adjournment of the debate, to which Mr. Gladstone emphatically objected, pointing out that the Address was not the occasion for raising a debate on any subject simply because it happened to be important, and declaring that if any further extension were given to the recent practice a new revolution would be introduced intc Parliamentary life. After debate and divisicn, the debate was adjourned, and the House adiovrned at 2.40.