The Sun. — 1870-03-15 (London, England)

CAPTAIN COOTE.  Viscount CRICHTON then rose and called the attention of the House to the circumstances connected with the dismissal of Captain Coote from the Shrievalty of the county of Monaghan and the appointment of his successor, and moved that in the opinion of this House the conduct of the Government in the dismissal of Captain Coote and the appointment of his successor has been unconstitutional and calculated to impede the due performance of public duty. His lordship at great length went into the law bearing on the subject, shewing the law and usage in England, and asking how far the same was applicable to Ireland. How the Government could justify its departure from the ordinary mode of proceeding, except by the exceptional legislation which characterised its dealings with Ireland, he was unable to discover. He characterised the way in which Government dealt with such matters 'as a solemn farce. ile believed that the appointment of Captain Cooto's suc3essor was unconstitutional, and he had brought the case forward because he thought a great injustice had been lone. Colonel LESLIZ seconded the motion.  Mr. C. FORTES= said he could not agree with many A the observations which had been made on this subject. rue steps that had been taken he was quite aware were aot in accordance with the law in Ireland, but they had oeen taken in accordance with a wholesome and beneficial practice, which had existed for some time. He admitted that except is special cases, or under good reasons for the public service, this practice should not be followed, but I scenes had taken place in Monaghan, which fully justified the course which it had oeen thought proper to adopt. Monaghan had been long the scene of painful conflicts and eontests between lumen Catholics and Protestants, and in ISG6, to go no further back, there was a general election, and such a state of riot that it resulted in a Roman Catholic being shot. A Protestant was charged with the crime and put on his trial, and acpitted, the jurymen being Protestants. He lid not mean to say that the acquittal was not right. In 1868 there were again the same scenes to Monaghan on the occasion of the Orange anniversaries, out on that occasion they were rather worse than usual, And he could call the state of affairs that then existed dttle less than civil war. On that occasion another riot took place, and life was lost, the unfortunate victim oeing again a Roman Catholic, and after that I A um para 4 Dalai was tried, and the result was  A'l ae:iCattai ; and here, again, he dui not mean to say that the termination of that trial was not right, but verdict of the jury was questioned. It thus happened 671 at the jury panel was inquired into when it was found that the sub-sheriff had made a most partial select 6ioli of Protestants in preference to Roman Catholics. The circumstance led to his having to communicate with Captain Coote, the High Sheriff. It was most important that the constitution of the jury panel should be above suspicion. A man, named M'Kenna, ivas afterwards indicted for the murder of a man named Clark, and, owing to some proceedings on the part of the sub-sheriff, the result was that he had to request that he (the High Sheriff) would appoint a new sub-sheriff XIS it was absolutely necessary that there should be no feeling that fairness was not extended to Roman Catnolics. This Captain Coole refused to do, and then it became necessary again to select a jury panel. Again, the partiality for Protestants over Roman Catholics was so apparent that the high sheriff had to be again communicated with, and as he still refused the Lord-Lieutenant thought it his duty to remove Captain Coote, and Mr. Langdale was appointed his successor. The Government felt they had acted throughout the matter in the way best calculated to promote the public good, and therefore he Locd the house would not agree to the resolution of the noble lord.  Mr. G. H. MooRE condemned the conduct of the Government in reference to the dismissal from the shrievalty of  Japtain Coote. Mr. C. BENTINCK supported the motion. Mr. G. HARDY thought that Captain Coote had acted in a perfectly straightforward way; and having appealed to the judge who tried Mackenna's case, he had been treated in a most unfair, unjust, illegal, and harsh manner. The