THE GALWAY ELECTION PROSECUTIONS.

Waikato Times, Volume III, Issue 148, 19 April 1873, Page 3

THE GALWAY ELECTION PROSECUTIONS.

Api-rirmoN was made on the 28th January by Mr Butt to the Court of Queen's Bench for a trial at Bar m the cases of Bishop Duggan and Captain Nolan, defendants m the Q»lwaypiwecuUon. Coumel contendel that it would be /g>eat injustice and hardship to the Bibhop if the charges were not disposed of in a reasonable time, and that it was very unfair to keep a Bishop of the Chmtmn_ C imreh with an 'imputation of tins nature limiting orer linn, impairing his influence, and inteifermg with tho discharge ot his, funetioru. If tlic Attornn General Mould my th-it t! c Bishop's case would be tried first ho would not press tho motion. The Attorney -Uvneral declined, saying that the Bishop was one of the first fnc, but four who would probably be tried before him. Mr Butt asked if it was intended to try the Bishop at all. The Attorney-General said it win intended. Mr Butt said the l»-»t time a Bishop was tried it wa* by trial at .Bar, and dwelt on the importance of the issue, in the case of the 'Bishop, which was how far the exercise of spiritual influence constituted undue influence. Supposing the Bishop pressed on spiritual grounds a superstitious, ignorant, and illiterate man to \ote in a particular way he might be guilty of an olll'iic • But how far a clergyman or bishop, in the exercise ot his functions, before his congregation, and in addressing tho people on the subject of an election, was guilty of undue influence was a matter to be decided 111 these case3t The Attorney-General baid there was no question of great legal dithYulty m the case of a bishop. The law was nc unsettled He then quoted Mr Justice Fitzgerald's definition of it at Longford, in which he drew a clear definition between legitimate and illegitimate priestly inlluence There was great difficulty in fixing a day for the trial of the Bishop, because the provision of allow ing two Judges to sit at ym -Pn'us did not extend to criminal cases, and it was doubtful whether any Judge but the Lord Chief Justice could try the case. The Court refused the nobn in the case of* he Bishop, and risen vi the right to Captain Nolan to renew his motien if he was not tried in the meantime.