way I will try to answer it. He then referred to proceedings taken against the hon. Gentleman the Member for East Mayo (Mr. Dillon.) I do not know whether he is aware that those proceedings have been abandoned by the Government, and that they do not intend to take any further steps in regard to them. That was announced in all the public newspapers, and therefore it is hardly conceivable that the Crown will revive those proceedings.

MR. CHANCE (Kilkenny, S.): Those proceedings were undoubtedly dropped in County Dublin; but I have seen nothing to prevent my hon. Friend being dragged up to County Antrim, and there tried by a jury of 12 landlords. There has certainly been a Parliamentary evasion of the question asked. We have asked whether it is intended, in respect to those transactions, to bring the hon. Member for East Mayo (Mr. Dillon) and his political Colleagues before a jury in the North of Ireland under Section 4 of this Bill? We believe that it is intended to revive those proceedings; we believe that this Amendment has been moved for the purpose of making it clear to the Courts that the Executive will be entitled to revive the proceedings; and we ask for a plain answer, Yes or No, upon the subject. I must remark that, having limited us to four and a-half days', or thereabouts, discussion, it is in the highest degree unreasonable and unfair for the Government to put down an Amendment of this character, which certainly raises very contentious matter, and re-opens questions which have been already argued and decided.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. HOLMES) (Dublin University): I think it will be a sufficient to the last charge brought against the Government when I say that you, Sir, have ruled that, as regards three of these special sections, the matter has been already decided by the Committee. Hon. Members below the Gangway opposite appear to understand the language of the Treasury Bench as always used in a different sense to that intended, and I do appeal to English Members to believe that when I state that proceedings have been abandoned I state what I mean-that proceedings have been really abandoned and will not be revived.

Mr. Holmes

MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.): It is all very fine for the Attorney General for Ireland (Mr. Holmes) to get into a frenzy over this question, and to say the Government mean what they say. I will not contradict his assertion, but I have practical experience of the way things are conducted in Ireland; they are conducted differently to the way they are described in the House of Commons. I have gone through this business. I was proceeded against last winter; first of all, in a police court in County Galway. The proceedings there were definitely dropped by the Crown, and notice was served on me at my house in Dublin that those proceedings were at an end. Then I was proceeded against in the City of Dublin in respect to the very same transactions. I was transferred to the County of Dublin, and then the trial proceeded, and the Crown was defeated. They intended to proceed again at a subsequent Assize, but they changed their mind, and gave notice that the proceedings were dropped. I have been twice proceeded against on the same transactions. Having received notice before the proceedings in the City of Dublin that the proceedings would be dropped, I have no confidence, even after the statement of the Attorney General for Ireland, that I shall not be proceeded against again on the same transactions. This may appear a trivial and absurd thing to some hon. Members; but, at the same time, I do want something more straightforward and plain from the Attorney General for Ireland before we allow this section to pass. He stated that the Crown had no intention of resuscitating these proceedings. Now, this is a retrospective clause, and may be used against the men who were tried in Dublin last winter, or against others who took part along with them. I am not thinking of ourselves alone, but of the hundreds and thousands of men who are engaged in similar work. If these clauses are passed in their present shape we and many others will be absolutely at the mercy of the Attorney General for Ireland, who is exceedingly polite in this House, but who is the very reverse when he is prosecuting in Green Street. When he gets us into Court he will hit below the belt. ["Oh, oh!"] I mean that he will hit below the belt in the sense of packing juries in a legal sense. He will

resort, as every Irish official before him has resorted, to every legal dodge to secure the conviction that the Castle has set its heart upon. Therefore, it is absurd to expect our opposition will be disarmed by the plausible statements of the Attorney General for Ireland, and by his appeals to English Members. We know perfectly well what we in Ireland have to expect from the Irish Government. Unless the Government will give us an assurance that this particular retrospective power will not be used in the way we fear it will, it is our bounden duty to resist this Amendment to the last.

framed, that you should give us the information we now ask. You have had plenty of time to obtain the information. We ask who are the individuals against whom this clause is intended to be put in operation? We have considerable reason to complain that this information is not forthcoming. We did, at least, expect that the Department of the Attorney General for Ireland would have obtained information as regards these prisoners. It is unreasonable to ask us to put down Questions on this subject. If we do put down Questions we shall be attacked for doing so; it will be said they are nothing but obstructive Questions. Will the Government give us this information on Report? That would be a fair compromise.

MR. T. M. HEALY: We are asked to believe what the Government say. But we are dealing with Gentlemen who, when they were elected, said they did not mean to propose coercion, yet they have brought in this Bill. It is absolutely necessary we should examine very closely the words used by the Government. Now, I asked the right hon. and learned Gentleman to whom this section is to apply-not an unreasonable question to ask. He says that if I will put a Question upon the Paper he will endeavour to answer it. Does he think we have nothing to do but to write out Questions to be asked in this House?

MR. HOLMES: The hon. and learned Gentleman asked me to what number of persons the section was intended to apply, and I asked that he should put a Question in the usual way upon the point.

MR. T. M. HEALY: When Sir George Trevelyan was in Office he found all his information in his box. When the Government knew this clause was coming on, is it reasonable they should think it sufficient to say that it is similar in effect to the provision discussed last Wednesday? Last Wednesday we asked for this information, and now, forsooth, we are to be put to the trouble of writing out a question to get at the information! What is the good of having a Parliamentary Under Secretary for Ireland if he cannot telegraph to Dublin to get information on such points as these? You do not spare expense, and I do think it is reasonable when you put a special Amendment on the Paper, evidently the result of second thoughts, and not at all arising out of the Bill as originally

DR. KENNY (Cork, S.): The right hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. Holmes) would shorten this discussion if he could bring himself to give a straightforward answer to a straightforward question. This is entirely a matter of definition. He says he has served notice on the defendants in the recent trials that he has discontinued these proceedings. What does he mean? Of course, we know the proceedings in Green Street are ipso facto discontinued. Will he say he does not intend, under this Bill, to bring further proceedings in reference to transactions out of which the recent trials arose? We should then be satisfied with what he said, because we would understand the meaning of his words. But at present we do not understand what he means. The Government talk about not coercing the Irish. That is another case of definition. We think they are coercing Ireland. By-and-bye in Court the Attorney General for Ireland may say that when he said he was going to discontinue these proceedings he meant the true bill given by the Grand Jury. What we want to know is whether any other prosecutions arising out of the recent transactions will be instituted? If he will make that clear we shall be satisfied.

MR. CHANCE: The right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland appealed to English Gentlemen, and asked them to believe what he said. I am sure they do believe what he said. We believe it. But I am a lawyer. I have defended my hon. Friends in political trials, and I know precisely the value of what he said. I [Sixth Night.]