Committee Reports > List of Committees > Joint > 1925 > Committee on East Leinster Electricity Supply Bill, 1924, The Dublin Electricity Supply Bill, 1924, The Dublin and District Electricity Supply Bill, 1924 > Report - East Leinster Electricity Supply Bill, 1924, The Dublin Electricity Supply Bill, 1924, The Dublin and District Electricity Supply Bill, 1924

OIREACHTAS.

TUARASGABHAIL AN CHO-CHOISTE AR BHILLE SOLATHAR LEICTREACHAIS OIRTHEARLAIGHEAN, 1924, AR BHILLE SOLATHAR LEICTREACHAIS BHAILE ATHA CLIATH, 1924, AGUS AR BHILLE SOLATHAR LEICTREACHAIS CHATHAIR AGUS CHEANNTAIR BHAILE ATHA CLIATH, 1924.

REPORT OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE EAST LEINSTER ELECTRICITY SUPPLY BILL, 1924, THE DUBLIN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY BILL, 1924 AND THE DUBLIN AND DISTRICT ELECTRICITY SUPPLY BILL, 1924.

1. The Joint Committee was constituted as follows:—

Senator S. L. Brown, K. C., Chairman; Deputies Hennessy, Heffernan and P. Hogan (Clare); Senators Barrington, Irwin and Sir Nugent Everard.

2. The Joint Committee considered the above Bills at public sittings on the following days:—25th, 26th, 27th and 28th November, 1924, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 16th, 17th, and 18th December, 1924, 4th, 5th, 11th, 12th, 18th and 19th February, 1925, 30th April, 1925, 11th, 18th and 25th June, 19th and 25th November, 1st and 3rd December, 1925, and at private sittings on 25th February, 1925, 13th, 19th and 25th March, 1925, and 1st, 23rd and 29th April, 1925.

3. The Joint Committee report—

(1) that they examined the preambles of the respective Bills and that the allegations contained in the preamble of the East Leinster Electricity Supply Bill and in the preamble of the Dublin Electricity Supply Bill were not proved to their satisfaction and that the allegations contained in the preamble of the Dublin and District Electricity Supply Bill were proved to their satisfaction but that the parties promoting the Dublin and District Electricity Supply Bill having subsequently stated to the Joint Committee that it was not their intention to proceed with the said Bill, the Joint Committee have further examined the respective preambles of the East Leinster Electricity Supply Bill and of the Dublin Electricity Supply Bill and have found that the allegations contained in the preamble of the East Leinster Electricity Supply Bill were not proved to their satisfaction but that the allegations contained in the preamble of the Dublin Electricity Supply Bill were proved to their satisfaction;

(2) that they have gone through the Dublin Electricity Supply Bill and have made amendments thereunto;

(3) that in considering the respective Bills they had before them reports on the Bills from the Department of Industry and Commerce, the Department of Local Government and Public Health, and the Department of Fisheries. The manner in which the recommendations of the said Departments with respect to the Dublin Electricity Supply Bill have been dealt with is shown in Appendix (A), Appendix (B), and Appendix (C), respectively;

(4) that in considering the sections of the Bill relating to the impounding, abstracting, or otherwise interfering with the whole or any part of the water of any river or stream, the Joint Committee have inquired in pursuance of S.O. 89 of the Standing Orders relative to Private Business into the expediency of making provision for giving a flow of water in compensation for the water so impounded, abstracted, or interfered with, and are satisfied that no such provision is necessary;

(5) that with respect to Richard Claude Cane, a Petitioner against the East Leinster Electricity Supply Bill, the Dublin Electricity Supply Bill and the Dublin and District Electricity Supply Bill, they are unanimously of opinion that he has been unreasonably subjected to expense in defending his rights proposed to be interfered with by the East Leinster Electricity Supply Bill, the Dublin Electricity Supply Bill, and the Dublin and District Electricity Supply Bill respectively, and is entitled to recover from the promoters of the East Leinster Electricity Supply Bill, viz.: The Liffey Syndicate Limited, £40 per centum of his total costs necessarily and properly incurred in respect of his opposition to all three Bills up to and including 30th April, 1925, and from the promoters of the Dublin Electricity Supply Bill, viz., Sir John Purser Griffith and Messrs. Alfred Dover Delaph, Darrell Figgis, John William Griffith, and George Marshall Harriss, £10 per centum of his total costs necessarily and properly incurred in respect of his opposition to all three Bills up to and including 30th April, 1925, and from the promoters of the Dublin and District Electricity Supply Bill, viz., the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of Dublin (now the Commissioners of the County Borough of Dublin), £40 per centum of his total costs necessarily and properly incurred in respect of his opposition to all three Bills up to and including 30th April, 1925, and the whole of his costs of the 11th June, 1925, and of the 18th June, 1925.

S. L. BROWN,

Cathaoirleach an Chó-Choiste.

3adh Mí na Nodlag, 1925.