his district.
In 42 firearms were used, 27 were malicious injuries, 32 were
threatening notices, 1 case of bomb explosion outside a house,
1 robbery of arms, and 1 attempted robbery. A sum of L268 had
been awarded as compensation for malicious injury and there
were claims for L75 pending for malicious injuries committed
during the week ended 11th inst. There were two persons under
constant police protection, and 16 receiving protection by
patrol. Head Constable Mulligan said that Mrs. Fitzpatrick was
under police protection. Since February 11th, 1912, there had
been 12 outrages in the district, Mrs. Fitzpatrick was under
almost constant police protection. Acting Sergeant Beegan
deposed that there had been 12 outrages on the Fitzpatrick
family during the last four years; these included driving
cattle off the lands, threatening notices, firing shots at the
house, knocking down walls, spiking meadows; the new roof of
a hay barn was perforated with bullets, and at Kiltonaghty
Chapel there were notices threatening death to anyone who
would work for Mrs. Fitzpatrick. Timothy Fitzpatrick gave
similar evidence as to the outrages, and said that his father
had taken the farm twenty-one years ago, and had paid the son
of the former tenant L40 for his goodwill.
(I may add that Arkins was committed for trial, convicted at the
Assizes and sentenced to seven years penal servitude; and was released
by Mr. Birrell a few weeks afterwards.)
In another Clare case, in February of the present year, the resident
Magistrate said as follows:--
"It is a mistake to say that these outrages are arising out
of disputes between landlord and tenant; nine out of ten arise
out of petty disputes about land. What is the use of having
new land laws? A case occurred not long ago in this county of
a man who had bought some land twenty years ago, and paid down
hard cash to the outgoing tenant. The man died, and left a
widow and children on the land for fourteen years. But in 1908
a man who had some ulterior object got the man who had sold
the farm to send in a claim under the Evicted Tenant's Act,
which was rejected. That was what the advisers of the man
wanted--they only wanted a pretext for moonlighting and other
disgraceful outrages, and the woman was kept in a hell for
four years. A man was caught at last and con
|