Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1937 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1935 - 1936

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Dé Céadaoin 12adh Bealtaine, 1937.

Wednesday, 12th May, 1937.

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

DEPUTY DILLON in the Chair.

Seóirse Mag Craith (Ard-Sgrúdóir); Mr. T. S. C. Dagg and Mr. C. S. Almond (An Roinn Airgid) called and examined.

VOTE 41.—LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH

Mr. J. Hurson called and examined.

292. Chairman.—There is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General on sub-head F (2)—Expenses in connection with the Local Government (Dublin) Tribunal G 3—which reads as follows:

“The expenditure under this subhead includes fees to the Chairman, fees for verbatim reporting, and hire of hall for public sittings of the Tribunal appointed under Section 101 of the Local Government (Dublin) Act, 1930. This section provides that the costs and expenses of a Tribunal shall to such amount as may be sanctioned by the Minister for Local Government and Public Health be paid to the Minister by the local authorities concerned. With the authority of the Department of Finance, authorised expenditure is, in the first instance, charged to this Vote, and the sums recovered from the local bodies will be credited to Exchequer extra receipts.

“There were no receipts from the local authorities during the year, as the Tribunal had not completed its sittings.”

Mr. McGrath.—That paragraph is for the information of the Dáil.

293. Chairman.—As there are no questions arising on that note, we will pass to the next note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General under sub-head S— Grants under the Housing (Financial and Miscellaneous Provisions) Acts, 1932 and 1934.

“A test examination was applied to the files and vouchers dealing with the payments. As regards the grants to private persons and public utility societies the results were satisfactory.

“In connection with the contributions to annual loan charges it was observed that in one instance the contribution was based on a loan, the amount of which appeared to be in excess of that authorised by the regulations made under the 1932 Act, and I am in communication with the Accounting Officer on the matter.”

Mr. McGrath.—A reply was received from the Accounting Officer which satisfied the Audit Office. The actual loan was in excess of the amount subsidisable, and owing to that there was an over-remittance to the local authority. The Department has agreed with the Audit Office now as to the proper basis of the calculation in future.

Mr. Hurson.—That is so. The over-payment has been adjusted.

Mr. McGrath.—The actual loan was £102,223; that is in the case of the Cork County Borough. The amount subsidisable was £100,867 16s. In two years the overpayment amounted to £67 7s. 10d.

294. Chairman.—Part of the original sum of £102,223 was not eligible for subsidy at all?

Mr. Hurson.—That is so. The subsidy was calculated on the actual cost, which was above the amount eligible for subsidy.

295. That is to say, the Cork Borough Council actually spent more on each individual house than the regulations of the Minister permitted them to spend?—No— than the regulations authorised for subsidy. For instance, the maximum on which subsidy may be payable is £400. In that case the expenditure was £405 or £410. Subsidy should be paid only on the £400, and I believe it was calculated on the actual cost of the House.

296. It appears from the account here that there were 240 houses at £400 each. Do you happen to have those figures before you, Mr. Hurson?—I have not the figures at the moment.

297. There were 240 houses at £400, coming to £96,000, and they were eligible for 66⅔ per cent. grant. Then there were 12 houses which cost £405 13s. each, and it appears from this account that they were eligible only for 33⅓ per cent. grant? —That is so.

298. So that the extra expenditure of £5 13s. per house deprived the Cork Borough Council of 33⅓ per cent. of the grant?—Oh, no. The houses to which the 33⅓ per cent. subsidy applied were let to persons other than those removed from slum areas. They were let at higher rents. That applies all through the 1932 Act. The 66⅔ per cent. subsidy applies only to slum clearance houses, and for those who could pay the higher rents the subsidy of 33⅓ per cent. applies.

299. The 66⅔ per cent. grant also applies to labourers’ cottages schemes?— No. It is 60 per cent. in those cases.

300. Deputy Goulding.—So the Cork Borough Council owes you £60 odd?— It has been adjusted.

301. Deputy Keyes.—Was it an excess over the original estimate that brought the people into conflict with the Department in regard to the amount over £400? Were they part and parcel of the scheme which, if held within £400, would entitle them to the grant, and was it because of an excess over the original estimate that they got themselves disqualified?— No. Under the regulations the 66⅔ per cent. applies only to the £400 limit.

302. Chairman.—Lest there be any misapprehension, am I right in saying that the real test is the purpose for which the houses are being built? If you build houses to take persons out of condemned tenements you are entitled to a grant of 66⅔ per cent. in respect of those houses. But if you build houses to provide new housing accommodation for persons who could pay economic rents, then the Government grant is only 33⅓ per cent.?—That is so.

Deputy Keyes.—Then if you go in excess of £400 in either event you will not be paid any subsidy in respect of the excess.

303. Chairman.—In regard to the Motor Tax Account, there is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General as follows:

“A test examination has been applied to the Motor Tax Account with generally satisfactory results. The certificates and reports of the Local Government auditors who examine the Motor Tax transactions of the local authorities were scrutinised in so far as they were available, but in some cases this audit had not been completed at the date of the test examination.

“The gross proceeds of the Motor Vehicle, etc., duties in 1935-36, including £9,480 13s. 1d., attributable to fines, amounted to £1,015,924 16s. 11d. A statement of the gross and net receipts of the Motor Tax Account, and of the payments thereout to the Exchequer, appears on page 15 of the Finance Accounts, 1935-36.

“With the approval of the Department of Finance, an extra-statutory refund of Motor Licence duty, amounting to £8, was made to a former Trade Commissioner.

“The authority of the Department of Finance has been obtained for the write-off of the unrecovered balance, amounting to £118 16s. 0d., of the deficiencies referred to in paragraph 23 of my last report.

“During the year under review, arrangements were made by the Department, with Department of Finance approval, for inspection and examination of the work in Motor Tax Offices throughout the country. It appears that the examinations carried out resulted in the reassessment of vehicles by which a considerable annual gain accrues to the Road Fund.”

So far as I am aware, that note is more for the information of this Committee than to form the subject matter of inquiries to Mr. Hurson, who, strictly speaking, I think is not the Accounting Officer for that particular Road Tax Account.

Mr. McGrath.—He appears as Accounting Officer here for the Department of Local Government Vote. The Motor Tax Account is rendered to the Dáil, and that account has not been rendered to this Committee. I merely use this occasion for the purpose of giving the Dáil the information that is in the paragraph. Of course, if any Deputy desires to ask for information on this paragraph, he can do so

304. Deputy Goulding.—What are the fines, by the way?

Mr. Hurson.—Various fines under the Road Traffic Act.

Mr. McGrath.—In the third sub-paragraph reference is made that “With the approval of the Department of Finance, an extra-statutory refund of motor licence duty, amounting to £8, was made to a former Trade Commissioner.” As Deputies know, there are no refunds made in the case of road tax, but on this occasion the Department of Finance approved of a refund being made to a former Trade Commissioner. I think it is desirable that a thing like that should be brought out. In future, the amount will be shown in the Contingency Fund Account, and in that way it will be brought before the Dáil.

305. Deputy Keyes.—What is the specific instance that is referred to in the following paragraph?

Mr. McGrath.—That was discussed at last year’s Committee. It was the case of a County Wexford burglary, and the Department did not know until lately whether they could succeed in getting the fees or not. They have made up their minds now that they cannot, and they have got to write the amount off. The last part of the paragraph is in connection with extra work in the assessing of duty, and I state here that, as a result of employing two extra officers, a yearly income of £7,396 extra has been made. It was also found that arrears, to the extent of £17,060, had been lost. Now, in connection with that, I should say that these two officers have to visit fairs and markets and look at lorries and afterwards go into the local office and demand that these lorries be brought in for reweighing. In that way they have made reassessments of an annual value to the State of £7,396. The work of these extra officers has turned out well for the State.

306. Chairman.—I would like to know from you, Mr. Hurson, if you have any of your traffic experts with you to-day? —No.

307. Because this question arises on Administration. In making the reassessments referred to in the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s report, I wonder, in re-weighing these lorries, what is regarded as a fixture for the purpose of ascertaining the statutory weight, and what is not so regarded. The case I have in mind is this: that some people attach to the lorries sides which convert the lorry into a creel, and on occasion these are found to raise the lorry above the statutory weight in respect of which duty has been paid. Other people, however, simply take the four sides which would convert the lorry into a creel, rope them together, and put them on the lorry like a box, not fixing them at all to the body of the lorry. Do they escape the assessment on the weight of those parts?—I would not think so.

Deputy Keyes.—If the sides are left on the lorry when it is being weighed, it does not matter whether they are fixed or roped.

308.* Chairman.—Some people have lorries so constructed that you can fit sides on to them. Then they become an integral part of the lorry. Other people bind them together with ropes and plant them on the lorry like a large box. They put whatever merchandise they intend to carry inside that box. It achieves exactly the same purpose as the other method. I cannot see how the licensing authority can differentiate between the box and the four creel sides tied together in that way?—I have not much experience of that, but I can inquire into it and submit further information to the Committee.

309. If, in your opinion on reflection, it is a matter on which you can give the Committee further information it would be of personal interest to myself in any case. I do not know how other Deputies feel, but if you would let the Committee have the information I would be glad?— Certainly.

310. Mr. McGrath.—As regards those reassessments, there were cases in which in the original weighing for the original assessment it was found that persons who brought the lorries left certain parts behind them. There is no doubt about that. It is not a case of smartness on the part of the Central Government in making an extra assessment. It was where, on the original assessment, a person who got a lorry weighed conveniently forgot parts to include in the weight?— I believe that is so. In some cases mudguards have been taken off.

Chairman.—I have no doubt that some members of the Committee may have had some experience of these transactions.

Deputy Keyes.—I think all those lorries are made to a standard weight. You have 30-cwt. lorries and 35-cwt. lorries.

311. Chairman.—When you buy a lorry from a manufacturer he constructs it up to within about 7 lb. of the top limit of the statutory weight. If you add to that the makings of a creel, or something like that, you get five or six 1b. over the class for that limit and find yourself in a completely new taxation class. That finishes the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s note on the Vote. We can now turn to the sub-heads. On sub-head G (1)—Vaccine Lymph Supply— could you tell us, Mr. Hurson, where this is kept?—There is a Vaccine Institute at Sandymount for the supply of vaccine lymph.

312. Have any representations been made to you that, in regard to certain vaccine lymphs it would be desirable to have supplies in the county hospitals, so that in case of emergency they will be more readily available to dispensary doctors?—I am not aware that there is any delay in meeting the requirements of dispensary doctors. I believe that their supplies are furnished within a couple of days of their requisition being sent in.

313. Are these vaccines exclusively for vaccination against smallpox, or do they cover anti-diphtheric toxins?—Vaccination against smallpox only.

314. Under the Vote is there no provision made for anti-toxins?—Under sub-head G (2) you have therapeutic substances.

315. What does the Therapeutic Substances Act deal with?—It is “An Act to regulate the manufacture, import and sale of Therapeutic (including prophylactic and diagnostic) Substances.”

316. You are aware that dispensary doctors have the right to get, in necessitous cases, anti-diphtheric toxins and a variety of other prophylactic substances of that character, some of which are required at very short notice. An hour or two may make all the difference between using them successfully and getting them too late. I have heard complaints that they are not available easily enough, and that it would be a very much better system if there were deposits of these therapeutic substances left either with the county medical officer of health or at the county hospital, so that in cases of grave urgency the dispensary doctor could drive to the county town and get his supply of prophylactic substances, come back and give them to the patient?—There are immunisation schemes in operation throughout the country. They are controlled by the county medical officer of health, and the dispensary doctor would not, as far as I am aware, be called upon to deal with cases of that kind unless under the supervision of the county medical officer of health.

317. * I am not talking of immunisation schemes. Take the case of a doctor who finds a child suffering from diphtheria and wants to apply, as a therapeutic measure, diphtheric anti-toxins. A delay of two days waiting for the substance to come from Dublin would involve the death of the child, whereas if the doctor could drive into the county town and come back in two hours’ time with an anti-toxin and give it to the child he might save the child’s life?—I am not aware as to the particular manner in which such toxins can be obtained, but I can inquire and supply the information to the Committee.

318. I would be very grateful if you would look into the question of the supply of therapeutic substances, as opposed to prophylactic substances?—You mean for individual treatment, apart from public schemes of immunisation?

319. Yes. What is sub-head I?—The amount is applied in part payment of annuities payable in respect of the loans under the Labourers Acts.

320. In fact, it clears the cottage plots of outstanding land annuities?—The labourers’ cottages were provided under an annuity system on the same terms as land purchase terms. The amount provided in the Vote meets a proportion of the annual charge.

321. Why was not the entire amount spent under J (2)?—It is difficult to get the expenditure up to the full amount. The local authorities, of course, get recoupment of full expenditure. Naturally there is a tendency, coming to the end of the year, to confine the expenditure within the amount that they have been allocated.

322. I should have thought that if there was any discrepancy in that Vote it would have been by virement with a view to spending more money than was granted rather than a refund to the Exchequer showing that less was spent than was granted?—If they over-expend they do not get recoupment.

323. Do the same remarks apply to the falling short of expenditure under K?— No. I think the note on page 107 explains why there was a saving. In some cases there were vacancies in the post of county medical officer of health, and the schemes did not develop as quickly as was estimated.

324. These vacancies have now been filled?—Yes.

325. As to L (2), can anything be done to induce the local authorities in these Gaeltacht areas to take better advantage of the school meals scheme?—I think so. At present I think the expenditure is well up to the full amount of the grant.

326. Your note contains the suggestion of a rebuke to the local authorities?—There are very few eligible schools at present in which meals are not provided.

327. You refer to undue limitation in some areas of the amount provided from the local rates?—I am not aware that that exists at present.

328. Deputy Goulding.—It is difficult in some cases to get local people to be interested in and co-operate in this scheme?—In some cases difficulties have arisen in regard to the manner of providing the meals.

329. That would probably account for less expenditure?—I do not think that in that year there were any exceptional difficulties.

330. Chairman.—There are many matters arising about which we might be tempted to ask questions, but we must remember that this amount refers not to last year, but the year before. As to Q —your note says that only one candidate was accepted for training in the financial year. Surely there must be some explanation of that?—Great difficulty has been experienced since the scheme was started in finding girls in the Gaeltacht who possess a good general education that would enable them to go through a course of training in nursing. The hospitals that train nurses look for a fairly high standard in general education. Most of the girls sent forward were rejected. Only one, I think, passed through. At the present time there are four.

331. Has any attempt been made to get these girls trained, say, in Galway or in some centre where Irish would be the vernacular?—That is under consideration at present. I have seen the syllabus for entrants into Galway Hospital and there also there is a very high standard of general education required.

Deputy Beegan.—In a few cases where they did actually pass the examination, when they were called up after passing the examination they did not come in, strange to say.

332. Chairman.—What is the grant in respect of each candidate?—They receive practically the full cost of training, namely, the hospital expenses, and they receive a small personal allowance during training. I cannot just give the amount offhand.

333. Then we may expect further developments under this scheme in future? —It is receiving very close attention at present.

Deputy Beegan.—The fee for probationers I think is £30 in Galway. Perhaps that would account to some extent for their failing to come in after passing the examination.

334. Chairman.—Mr. Hurson says the Department is prepared to pay the greater part of their training expenses and, further, to give a small personal allowance. Is not that so?—I think so.

335. Deputy Keyes.—During a previous discussion on this matter the view was expressed that a better type of candidate might be induced to come forward if the financial provisions were sufficiently attractive. I think the general tone of the discussion last year was that it was not sufficiently attractive to bring in candidates with the necessary educational qualification.

336. Chairman.—Could there be any substance in that suggestion?—I do not see how there could, if each candidate receives a personal allowance during training.

Deputy McMenamin.—Girls have to pay a very high premium in the city hospitals. The lowest fee, I think, is £50.

337. Chairman.—In regard to S—does that £40,000 which was not expended revert to the Exchequer at the end of the year?—Yes.

338. Item 3 of the Appropriations-in-Aid refers to licences to private mental hospitals. How many of these are in the Saorstát?—About five or six.

339. Are they subject to inspection by the Department?—Yes, by the Department’s medical inspector. The fee is 10/- per patient.

340. That would suggest that there are about 540 patients in these private mental hospitals?—About that.

341. Are they, in fact, regularly inspected?—Once a year at least.

342. Deputy McMenamin.—They are also inspected by the Chief Justice’s Department?—I do not think so.

Chairman.—Only patients who have property which becomes vested in the Chief Justice are visited by his Registrar.

Deputy McMenamin.—Would that apply also to people in the private mental hospitals if they had property? Would they not be inspected by the Chief Justice’s Department?

343. Chairman.—If they have property, yes. If these patients have property, they are visited by the Chief Justice’s Registrar as trustee of their property?— I presume so. I am not fully aware of the arrangement.

344. The general equipment is inspected at least once a year by an officer of your Department?—Yes.

345. Are they more frequently inspected than once a year?—Yes.

346. Is there any visiting committee similar to that which visits Grangegorman?—No.

347. Deputy Goulding.—The local bodies have no control over these—no rights of inspection?—No.

VOTE 42—GENERAL REGISTER OFFICE

348. Chairman.—Mr. Hurson, on the general Vote, could you tell us if the records are now fairly complete, in your judgment? The information I want is this: As you are aware great difficulty has been found by old age pension claimants in getting their age certificates. During the first years of the registration, from 1851 onwards, there were very considerables laches in registration. Have we now reached a stage in which, in your judgment, the records are fairly complete?—I think so.

349. There is less difficulty in finding the pensioner’s age now than there used to be?—There is no difficulty now that I am aware of, but I will make further inquiries. I looked into your representations on this year’s Vote and I have taken a note of it. Might I correct one piece of evidence I have given?

350. Certainly?—It is as regards the number of private asylums. The number appears to be eight instead of five.

Chairman.—If there is no further matter for any Deputy to inquire into, we need not trouble you at any further length. We are very much obliged to you, Mr. Hurson, for your assistance.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 45.—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION

351. Chairman.—I have a letter to read to the Committee from Mr. O’Neill, who is the Accounting Officer for the Department of Education as a whole. Deputies will remember that this Department is peculiar inasmuch as we have primary and secondary education to deal with. The letter reads:

“The Chairman,

“Public Accounts Committee,

“Leinster House, Dublin.

“Dear Sir,

“In connection with the examination by the Committee on Public Accounts of the report of the Auditor-General for the year ended 31st March, 1936, I should be grateful if you would permit me, as Accounting Officer for the Department of Education, to be represented before you and the Committee by Mr. Morrissey, Assistant Secretary for Primary Education, for the detailed examination of the expenditure of the Primary Education Branch and the Office of the Minister for Education, and by Mr. O’Duffy, Assistant Secretary for Post-Primary Education, for the examination of the expenditure Accounts of the remaining branches of this Department.

“Is is to be understood, of course, that, if you are so good as to permit of this arrangement, it will not in any way relieve me of my liability as Accounting Officer and that I shall be available for attendance before the Committee if you should think it desirable to summon me at any moment.

“Yours very truly,

“(signed) Seosamh O’Neill.”

That arrangement, I take it, is quite acceptable to the Committee?

Deputy Smith.—Yes.

Mr. T. Morrissey called and examined.

Chairman.—There is no note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General on this Vote. Items A (1) to A (5) seem to be all right.

Deputy Keyes.—How did the miracle happen that for salaries and allowances over £2,000 less was expended than was voted?

352. Chairman.—You will find in page 118 an explanation of that. “Saving due to ... overestimate of Cost-of-living figure.” It was expected that the Cost-of-living figure would rise even faster than it, in fact, has. With regard to Item C— Inspection Organisation, etc.—what are these Irish Vocabularies?—These are vocabularies of terms on the technical side —history, geography and music, etc. This Committee has been set up to draw up suitable lists of terms for the development of the Irish language on the educational side.

353. These vocabularies are designed to facilitate teaching through the medium of Irish?—Yes, technical terms.

354. Deputy McMenamin.—Will these be published in the form of a dictionary? —They are published in pamphlet form.

355. Chairman.—Are they furnished to all primary teachers in the service?—They are on sale and they are available to everybody. I should say they are more on the secondary education side.

356. Has the Department considered the desirability of placing these vocabularies in the hands of teachers who, under the regulations, are required to teach through the medium of Irish?—Oh, yes, that has always been the view.

357. Deputy McMenamin.—What progress have you made about the translation of the Gospel?—I do not know. I think that is a matter that has been taken up recently.

Chairman.—Did Deputy McMenamin ask about the translation of the Gospel?

Deputy McMenamin.—Yes.

Chairman.—That would scarcely come under item C.

VOTE 46—PRIMARY EDUCATION.

Mr. T. Morrissey further examined.

358. Chairman.—There is a note on page 10, Roman numerals, from the Comptroller and Auditor-General, in connection with sub-head A 1—Training Colleges under Private Management. The note reads:—

“I stated in paragraph 24 of my last report that I had asked for particulars of the cases which fell to be dealt with under the agreed arrangements for the recovery of the cost of training where liability to repay had arisen. I have not yet been furnished with this information in respect of training college ex-students as the procedure to be followed in certain cases is still under discussion with the Department of Finance.”

Has Mr. McGrath anything to tell the Committee in connection with that?

Mr. McGrath.—That paragraph is in connection with students who have gone through the training colleges and have failed to take up the vocation of teaching. It has been agreed between the Departments that those who did not follow the vocation of teaching became liable for the cost of their training. In certain cases such as with regard to students who afterwards become civil servants there is no question as to refunding the cost of their training. They do as a matter of fact refund. There are other classes who become secondary teachers. The Department of Education has not agreed with the Department of Finance as to how these should be dealt with. There are several other classes, but they are all being dealt with by the Department of Finance and the Department of Education. So far as the second paragraph is concerned, we have not been informed as to the present position. We believe that the position is being looked after, but we do not know how the matter stands.

Mr. Morrissey.—The matter has been under discussion between the two Departments but we have not arrived at a final settlement so far. We have not completed arrangements in connection with the procedure.

359. Chairman.—What is the attitude of the two Departments?—The attitude is the same; only matters of detail remain to be settled. The broad distinction is that when it is not the fault of the student the claim is not pressed. In other cases we press the claim.

360. Does this refer particularly to the Gaeltacht?—Oh, no, these are students of the training colleges.

361. Deputy Keyes.—We may take it from the remark made by the Comptroller and Auditor-General that in the case of all boys who go to the college and become trained as teachers, the cost of their training will be deducted from them if they afterwards become civil servants. But what happens to a boy who spends a week or two in college and then goes into the Civil Service? Are the fees deducted from him in toto in the same way as if he had gone through the whole course? I have one case in my mind.

Mr. McGrath.—Did the boy only spend a week there?

Deputy Keyes.—That was all.

Mr. McGrath.—Has the fee been refunded by him?——

Deputy Keyes.—I. do not know. I know that he was pursued by the De La Salle people. His father told me about the difficulty he had.

Mr. McGrath.—I would be greatly surprised if the Department of Education would sue in that particular case. I think it is almost impossible.

362. Deputy Keyes.—Then there is discretion vested in a case of that kind?

Mr. Morrissey.—As far as the Department is concerned only the pro rata cost would be required from the student.

363. Chairman.—Is the situation this, that if a boy or girl goes into a training college to be trained as a primary teacher, that part of the fees are paid by the Department of Education?—Yes; there is a grant to the college in respect of each student.

364. At the conclusion of his training, if he elects to pursue some other avocation, does the Department recover from the student so much of his fees as the Department had paid?—Yes.

365. Deputy Smith.—Except in a case where the student received a Civil Service appointment, is it customary to recover this amount? Are there any cases in which this amount has been recovered except where a student has been appointed to a Government post?— There would be cases outside Civil Service cases.

366. How would the Department know of such appointments?—Of course the Department watches the career of students after they have finished their training and they look out for that.

367. Supposing a boy has been in a training college for years and that three or four years afterwards he secures an appointment from a local authority, how would the Department know of that case or know whether he had secured the appointment?—They always inquire as to what he is doing.

368. How long do you keep up those inquiries?—Until there is no use in pursuing them further.

369. Chairman.—Perhaps it might clarify the matter if I read a paragraph from the new agreement which candidates for appointment to the training college have to sign. The agreement reads as follows:—

“I, .................................... hereby agree and declare in consideration of my being admitted into the ............... Training College, that I will use my best endeavours to qualify myself thoroughly for the calling or occupation of teacher, and that so soon as I shall be duly declared so qualified I will forthwith adopt and follow during a period of at least five years, that calling or occupation in a national school under the jurisdiction of the Minister for Education for Saorstát Eireann.

“I also hereby agree that in the event (1) of my leaving the said College or absenting myself therefrom before the completion of my course without the express permission of the Minister for Education, or (2) of my being dismissed from the said College for breach of its rules and regulations or for other misconduct, or (3) of my failure to pass the Training College Examination or Examinations, provided that, in the opinion of the Minister for Education, such failure is due to causes within my own control, or (4) of my failure, within a reasonable period after the completion of my course of training, to serve to the satisfaction of the Minister for Education, who shall be the sole and absolute judge of the reasonableness of such period, for five years as teacher under the conditions prescribed in the first paragraph of this Agreement, that I will, upon demand by the Minister for Education for Saorstát Eireann, pay and refund to the Minister for Education the amounts paid, or payable, by him to the said College in consideration of my maintenance and tuition whilst resident therein.

“I further hereby agree, in the event of my failing to fulfil the undertaking given by me in the first paragraph of this agreement, that I will, upon demand by the Minister for Education for Saorstát Eireann, pay to him any amount which may be then due by me in respect of College fees by way of outstanding repayments by me to the Minister for Education in consideration of fees advanced by him on my behalf to the said College.”

370. Deputy Smith.—There is one condition there which is very loose and it would I am sure be difficult to interpret it. I refer to the one dealing with the failure of the student.

371. Chairman.—The wording of (3) is “of my failure to pass the Training College Examination provided that in the opinion of the Minister for Education, such failure is due to causes within my own control.” That simply means that the Minister would make up his mind whether the young fellow had been wasting his time and did not bother about doing his examination properly.

Deputy Smith.—In some cases it would be hard to interpret that properly.

Chairman.—Yes, of course, but in the final paragraph he is only required to refund if called upon by the Minister for Education to do so. If the Minister thought there were extenuating circumstances he might not demand a full refund.

372. Deputy Smith.—I had the feeling that if a man secures a Government post of some kind or other this money might not be recovered at all?—That is not so. An effort to recover is usually made.

373. You would like to recover, but the money may not be recovered—is that it?—Quite so.

374. Mr. McGrath.—Perhaps I should explain the reason why the Department of Finance think there ought to be a refund. An ordinary boy who goes in for the Civil Service examination has to pay perhaps college and grinding fees. In the case of a boy who goes through a training college the State actually pays £75 a year for him and he pays himself about £22 10s. 0d. a year. It is hardly fair to put those two boys on the same level.

375. Deputy Smith.—I had the feeling that it was only in very exceptional cases that a recovery was made; that while it would be just to recover in that case, it was only in very exceptional cases that a recovery was made.

Mr. McGrath.—I think you are right in saying that it is only in very exceptional cases that recovery has been made. But we want to come to a certain definite decision and have rules. We can assure you the Department of Education are not too severe on any body in this matter. The Department of Finance is the Department which is in charge of the expenditure of the State and its duty is to see that the State gets a fair deal. That is all that is being asked in this case.

376. Chairman.—Has the position of the Department been made clear?

Mr. McGrath.—The matter is in a state of development, but I can assure you the students are not being harshly treated in any event.

377. Chairman.—The Committee would like clear guidance to be given in this matter as early as possible to the Audit Department.

Mr. Almond.—The proposals of the Department of Education are with the Department of Finance. We are ready to agree to all their proposals with the exception of one small point on which I think we shall reach agreement very shortly. The difficulty in recovering up to the present from ex-students of training colleges has been that the agreements have been faulty, and we have been advised that it is impossible to go so far as taking legal proceedings. The agreement has been revised, and it is now an agreement which will enable us to take every possible step in future to recover the cost of training. This arrangement which we have under consideration will apply to students of preparatory colleges and also to pupil teachers. I may mention that, in the case of pupil teachers, no new appointments are now being made. That matter is referred to in a later paragraph in the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report. The proceedings to which I have referred would be civil proceedings under a civil bill.

378. Chairman.—The Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General further proceeds:

“Following upon reductions in the numbers admitted to training colleges for men, I have asked that the sanction of the Department of Finance be obtained for the basis of payment of fixed grants.”

Mr. McGrath.—We have received the sanction of the Department of Finance since.

379. Chairman.—Does that call for any comment, Mr. Morrissey?—We have got the necessary sanction as asked for by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. We got it from the Department of Finance.

380. Mr. McGrath.—In certain colleges there are licensed numbers, and the actual number of attendances is calculated, and this affects the amounts received by the college. For instance, in one college, in 1934-35, the licensed number was 150 and the actual attendance was 126. The easy way to explain that is to say that in that year the college received 126 times £30, plus 126 times £40, plus 24 times £45. It may be difficult to follow that, but the greater the difference between the licensed number and the actual attendance, the bigger the advantage to the college. It is for that reason that I asked the Department to go to the Department, of Finance to get sanction, and they have done so.

381. Chairman.—£45 of the total annual grant of £75 is paid in respect of the licensed number of pupils?—That is correct. There is a difference as between men and women, £45 and £42 10s. 0d., in connection with the licensed number.

Mr. McGrath.—The Committee will understand that I am speaking of approximate amounts.

382. Chairman.—So that the smaller the number of pupils attending the college, the larger the number of payments of £42 10s. 0d. or £45 that the college receives for doing nothing except keeping the doors open?—Yes.

Mr. McGrath.—That £45 represents overhead charges. If you could imagine a case of a licence for 100 pupils and an attendance of ten, the college would be paid ten times £30 and 100 times £45. That would not suit. But the colleges must have a certain turnover to keep the doors open. I want to say that in fairness to the colleges.

383. Chairman.—Is there any limit to the discrepancy which the Department of Finance would tolerate as between the licensed number and the actual attendance?—The licensed number is under review periodically.

384. It is more or less on the quota system and if they do not fill the quota in one year you are liable to have the licensed number reduced next year?— There would be that possibility.

385. Chairman.—The Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General goes on to say:

“In my report last year I referred to the case of a student who was dismissed from training in 1930 and against whose guardian a claim for refund of £75 was made. The guardian having died legal advice was sought as to whether a claim could be sustained against the estate and I have been informed that the claim has become statute barred. I have asked that the sanction of the Department of Finance be obtained for the abandonment of the claim.

Mr. McGrath.—So far as I know the Department of Finance have not yet sanctioned that abandonment.

Mr. Almond.—In view of the legal advice, we are prepared to agree that the claim shall remain in abeyance. We do not agree to the abandonment of any of these claims. Circumstances may arise where it may be possible to revive the claim; for instance, if the student or his parents get a sudden acquisition of wealth, then we would ask that the claim be revived.

386. Deputy McMenamin.—How would you get it back if it is statute barred?

Mr. Almond.—I am not now talking about this particular case, but even if a case is statute barred I think we could apply. There is no objection to making an application, though we might not be able to pursue it.

387. Deputy Smith.—Is it only statute barred in so far as the guardian is concerned?

Mr. Almond.—The legal position in regard to State debts being statute barred is not very clear and I think it is possible we might be able to revive these claims.

388. Chairman.—I am sure the Deputy will remember that the statute runs in a dilatory way against the Crown. It is true if these persons became entitled to payments from the State a situation might arise in which the State could deduct this amount from the payments due?

Mr. Almond.—There is a possibility. I do not know whether legal opinion would be against us in this case.

Mr. McGrath.—I think the Department were a little bit slow in applying for this debt.

389. Chairman.—How did it come to be statute barred?

Mr. Morrissey.—I can assure you all possible steps were taken to pursue the claim, but for various reasons the matter did not come to a head in time.

390. Deputy McMenamin. — Is the student a party to the contract of payment as well as the guardian?—Yes.

391. Chairman.—I take it more than six years has been allowed to lapse since this payment became due?—There was correspondence and terms were suggested, but the people did not appear to be able to fulfil their engagements, and between one thing and another the time went on.

392. Deputy McMenamin.—When the student would become 21 years of age you could sue him. Why did you not issue a civil bill?—In the meantime the father died while the correspondence was proceeding; he died in May, 1934. Inquiries were made as to the position of his estate, but apparently we were advised there were no goods and there was no use in pursuing the claim.

393. Chairman.—I suggest we leave this matter in the vigilant hands of the Department of Finance and possibly the present officer’s grandson will collect this sum from the grandson of the pupil.

Mr. Almond. — The agreement was legally faulty and even if the case had not been statute barred we would not have been able to proceed for recovery in the courts.

394. Chairman.—You have a new agreement now and hereafter cases of this kind will not probably arise. The Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General proceeds:—

“27. Provision is made under this sub-head for advances, in necessitous cases, of the fees payable by students to the training colleges and these advances are repayable when the students have qualified and have obtained appointments. The Department of Finance has agreed that liability to repay the advances shall be treated on the same lines as liability to repay the cost of training proper, and the action to be taken in certain cases will be dependent accordingly on the decision arrived at following the discussion mentioned at paragraph 26.

“28. The boarding cost per head for the school year 1935-36 ranged from 7/1¾ per week to 8/4 per week, showing increases in all cases.

“Accounts have been furnished showing the receipts and expenditure in connection with the farms and gardens for the school year 1935-36, an excess of expenditure over receipts being disclosed in each case.

“The average fees paid by the students for the year 1935-36 was £8 14s. 4d.

“Three students were admitted to the special preliminary course for Fior-Ghaeltacht students conducted during the academic year 1935-36 and the expenditure on outfits, travelling expenses and school fees for these students in the financial years 1935-36 and 1936-37 was £232 10s. 0d. None of the students was successful in securing admission to a preparatory college or in obtaining a secondary scholarship. The special preliminary course has been discontinued as from the end of the school year 1935-36.

“Steps have now been taken towards the recovery of the cost of training of those students of preparatory colleges who failed to complete their courses in circumstances which render them liable to refund. Refunds of £36 13s. 4d. and £120, respectively, are being made by instalments in two cases and one case is still the subject of correspondence. I have been furnished with particulars of eight cases involving claims amounting to £645 9s. 4d., in which, owing to lack of means, the question of recovery is not at present being pursued.”

Mr. McGrath.—The last part of paragraph 28 is to give the Committee information as to how these claims against ex-preparatory college students are proceeding. The Audit Office is satisfied with the steps taken by the Department of Education and we let you know here how the matter stands.

395. Chairman.—I do not suppose that your functions, Mr. Morrissey, extend to a critical survey of the accounts of the farms and gardens which have been operated at a loss during this financial year?—We keep the matter under review, and, in cases in which the loss appears to be in any way substantial, we direct the attention of the heads of the colleges to the matter.

396. But here is a case in which most of your produce is sold to the college itself?—Yes. The main purpose of the farms and gardens is to supply the colleges with milk and vegetables.

397. But even though there was a surplus sold in respect of one college of £60, in respect of a second £103, a third, £81, and a fourth, £135, there was a deficit in every case?—I think that in most cases it was not very considerable.

Chairman.—It would not appear that agriculture was paying very well in those years.

Deputy Smith. — That is a slender point.

398. Chairman.—But profoundly significant, Deputy. The Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General further proceeds:

“I am in communication with the Accounting Officer with reference to certain pupil teachers who did not proceed to training on the completion of their courses.”

Mr. McGrath.—This is in connection with pupil teachers. We have under observation a dozen or two ex-pupils who have entered convents and we are satisfied, from the Department of Education’s reply to our query, that the matter is receiving their attention.

399. Chairman.—Is it proposed that these holy women should refund their education expenses?

Mr. Morrissey.—I think the idea is that they will proceed to training.

Mr. McGrath.—We shall be satisfied if they finish the course.

400. Chairman.—And become qualified teachers?

Mr. McGrath.—Yes.

401. Chairman.—Is it understood that these holy women will become teachers, or else refund the amount of their grants?

Mr. Morrissey.—It is almost certain that they will go to training.

Chairman.—We wish them luck.

402. Deputy Haslett.—May I ask is this avenue to the training profession still open?—No. This scheme has been brought to an end. I think the last pupil teacher was selected last autumn.

403. Chairman.—The Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General continues:

“Reference was made in previous reports to overpayments to teachers due to falsification of school records or to the production or maintenance of averages of attendance by irregular enrolment of pupils. Correspondence and discussions have taken place between the Departments of Finance and Education with a view to reaching agreement on the action to be taken in these cases, and the governing rules are being revised in order to make specific provision for the method of determining averages where these have been improperly inflated. Further cases of irregularities have since come to notice, but final action is being deferred pending agreement on the general question.”

Has any such agreement been arrived at?—Not yet. The matter is still under discussion between the Departments.

404. I take it that we may depend on the Department to notify the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Office at the earliest possible moment as to what the exact arrangements are?—Certainly.

Mr. McGrath.—Before you pass from that, I should say that there are a dozen or so cases which are looked upon as rather serious. These cases might involve dismissal, prosecution or temporary withholding of salary. It is now under discussion that the Department should issue a special circular to managers and teachers, pointing out the new regulations and referring to the types of cases of enrolments which have been occurring and reminding the teachers of the serious penalties to which they are liable in cases in which it is shown that the school records have been falsified or in which improper action has been taken with the object of securing payment of State grants.

405. Chairman.—This is a matter of very grave consequence?

Mr. Morrissey.—Yes.

406. And it is intended to draft rigid regulations and to enforce them rigorously?—That is so; regulations to meet varying circumstances. There are various gradations of irregularities, some, as the Comptroller and Auditor-General has pointed out, very serious, and others perhaps not of such a serious character.

407. You are contemplating sending out a circular something on the lines mentioned in the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s observations?—We are.

408. Deputy Goulding.—What would be a serious case?—Deliberate falsification of school rolls and putting down attendances that were not actually made at all.

409. Deputy McMenamin.—Would you not summarily dismiss a man in such a case?—It would go very hard with him but that would be the very extreme case.

410. Deputy Goulding. — That is deliberate fraud, of course?—Yes. I give that as being at the extreme end of the scale.

411. Deputy Keyes.—What would be the action of the Department in the event of a school not being available for any reason to the children who normally attended it, and who were sent to another school? What would be the position of the manager in accepting them? Would he have to get previous sanction of the Department for admitting them and would he render himself liable to penalties?—I do not think so. It is a common thing that, when a school is closed for repairs, the children attend a school in the neighbourhood.

412. Deputy Keyes.—I have in mind a discussion we had last year where a torrent prevented children from getting to a particular school. A bridge was carried away by the flood and, owing to the negligence of the Board of Works, it was not replaced and the children had to go to another school, or the Civic Guards would prosecute them. I think that case came before the Committee. It would be very hard if a teacher were to be held guilty of any corrupt practice for accommodating those children.

Mr. McGrath.—He would not be held to be guilty of any irregularity in that case. If a change of school takes place at the beginning of a quarter, he can do that.

Mr. Morrissey.—That is so.

Mr. McGrath.—But if it takes place during the quarter, the Minister’s sanction must be got.

Mr. Morrissey.—That is so.

413. Chairman.—All we are concerned to ensure is that there is no breach of regulations, no fraudulent attempt to get grants from the Department to which they are not entitled and no fraudulent attempt to justify a larger personnel in a school than the regulations permit.

Mr. Morrissey.—That is so.

414. Chairman.—The Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General continues:—

Reid Bequest—Scheme “A.”

“Provision is made by this scheme for the distribution of the available income amongst selected schools in order to provide boys of limited means with books, clothes, etc. The distribution of the moneys is entrusted to the school managers who are required each year to submit and vouch accounts for audit by the Department’s Inspector. I have asked for further information in connection with the Inspector’s examination of these accounts.”

Mr. McGrath.—I have got that information since. There are certain terms in the bequest and we have to see that they are carried out.

415. Chairman.—Is the inspection satisfactory to your Department?

Mr. McGrath.—Yes. At the time of our examination we could not satisfy ourselves, but the Department has satisfied us since.

416. Chairman.—In connection with the audit of this fund, are you of opinion, Mr. Morrissey, that the examination of these accounts by inspectors of your Department is sufficient?—I think so. That is what is provided in the scheme.

417. So that it would not be open to the Department by administrative regulation to require these accounts to be submitted direct to the office of the Comptroller and Auditor-General?—No. The audit is in accordance with the scheme drawn up by the court.

418. Chairman.—The Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General continues:

Reid Bequest—Scheme “B.”

“Owing to revision of the arrangements for the examinations for entrance to training colleges, the scheme as formulated in 1919 had become inoperative. The scheme, as amended by an order of the High Court of Justice, dated 31st July, 1934, was applied to candidates admitted to training colleges in any year after the 1st July, 1931, and accordingly payment of prizes to students who entered training colleges in the years 1931 to 1935, inclusive, fell to be made in the year under review.”

Mr. McGrath.—The reason I wrote that is that I found payments rather heavy, and I give the reasons why they are heavy in that particular year.

419. Chairman.—With regard to sub-head C (3) of the Vote, Mr. Morrissey, you speak of land and boat services. Does that include buses to carry children to remote schools?—Yes; there is provision made for carrying children to schools where there is not a school within easy reach of the pupil.

420. Has that scheme proved satisfactory in operation?—Yes, I think so.

421. No difficulty has been experienced in collecting the children?—I do not think so.

422. It has been found quite practicable to gather the children to certain points, to pick them up by bus and to return them thither after the school is closed?—Yes.

423. Deputy Haslett.—You do that in the case of the closing of a school?—As a rule, there is always a school in the neighbourhood available, but if the necessity arose, we would consider a scheme for such children if they could not attend the school which they normally attend.

424. Chairman.—Have you found it to be extravagantly expensive?—I do not think so. We watch it very closely.

425. Deputy Haslett.—Have you any rule as to distance?—There is a certain rule depending on the ages of the children and certain considerations which we always keep in mind.

426. Chairman.—Have you any maximum distance beyond which you do not ask the primary school children to travel?—If application is made and if a sufficient number of children are concerned, we go into all the circumstances of the case, such as distance, ages of the children and so on, and then we determine whether a grant would be given in such a case.

427. Chairman.—If you find a family living in a remote place from which the children would have to travel three miles to the nearest available school, what do you do?—If the children are above the age of ten years, three miles would be considered about the limit they would be expected to go. If they are under ten years, two and a half miles or two miles would be regarded as the limit.

428. Do you exempt them from attendance at school in these circumstances?— An effort is generally made locally to see what can be done in order that such children should attend school.

429. What happens suppose no local effort is made?—I think that the school attendance authorities would bring the matter to our notice.

430. What would you do?—We would send an inspector to make an inquiry into the circumstances.

431. Deputy Goulding. — Are these vehicles covered by any special regulation?—There is a special licence in respect of vehicles conveying children to school. There is a special sub-section dealing with licences for such vehicles and everything required must be in order before such a licence is granted.

432. Chairman.—We have got to the point where the inspector was inquiring into the circumstances of a case in which a child under ten years was living more than three miles from the nearest school. What would you do in that case?—We are not obliged in such a case to go any further.

433. Would you just sit back, tell the school attendance officer to prosecute, and see what would happen?—The question of prosecution is in the discretion of the school attendance officer. In such circumstances, he probably would not proceed.

434. Would the child get no education? —A case of that type would rarely arise.

Chairman.—In parts of West Donegal it would arise.

Deputy Goulding.—Would not the child be able to attend at some pick-up point at which a service was available?

Deputy Smith.—Surely the Department would not be expected to put on a special van service for one child.

Chairman.—The law requires a child to attend school for a minimum number of days each year. The Department’s regulations do not require a child to travel more than three miles to a school.

Deputy Smith.—Would not that be a good defence in court in the event of a prosecution?

Chairman.—Eliminating the question of prosecution. I am thinking of the child’s education. An obligation is imposed by Dáil Eireann on the Department to provide free education for every child who is a national of Saorstát Eireann. We can conceive of a case where that education is not available because there is no school within three miles of the child.

Deputy Smith.—I do not think that many Deputies here could cite one case in which these circumstances exist.

Deputy Keyes.—I know several children who are in the unhappy position of not being able to get any education because the manager who is the owner of two schools in the parish declines to admit them to either of them. The school to which he directs them to go is unsuitable because they have to cross a railway line to get to it. The matter is really sub judice at the moment, because it is in the hands of the Department. There are nine children concerned and they have not been getting any education for the past 18 months.

Deputy Smith.—It is the manager and not the Department who is at fault in that case.

Deputy Keyes.—What is the power of the Department when the manager, who is owner of these schools, provides that only certain children can attend them?

Deputy Smith.—If the school attendance authorities were to bring these children to court, the court would determine whether the manager was justified in stipulating that they were to attend a certain school.

435. Chairman. — Perhaps Mr. Morrissey would say whether he has had a case brought to his attention in which a child has been, in fact, more than three miles from a school and no ’bus accommodation was available and whether he has any ruling to guide him in such circumstances?—No case has been brought to my notice of the type you mention, where it has been impossible to send a child to school. The Department’s attitude would be to do its best to see that facilities would be available to the child.

436. In regard to sub-head C (6) —Grants towards the cost of heating, etc., of schools and cleansing of out-offices—is the provision for cleansing of out-offices and heating of schools adequate to relieve the pupils of the necessity for taking part in either of those services?—That is the aim of the Department.

437. There was a system whereby children used to bring turf to the school?—We start from the point that the local people are supposed to provide for the heating and cleaning of schools. Then, we come along and give them a grant, subject to certain limitations, to enable them to do that. The primary duty is on the manager.

438. Are you satisfied that the grant is used for the cleaning and heating of the schools?—We are satisfied.

439. Deputy McMenamin.—Have you power to insist that a school be kept decently clean?—In our regulations, we deal with all those matters.

440. Deputy Smith.—Who gets that grant?—The manager.

441. Deputy McMenamin.—Some of these schools are not the last word in cleanliness?—So far as exhortation is concerned, the Department does all it can do.

442. Have you compulsory powers to ensure that school premises are kept clean?—That is a public health matter.

443. Chairman.—Are you satisfied that all this money is expended for the purpose for which it is paid?—Yes.

444. Do you require accounts to be rendered?—The accounts are submitted.

445. And inspected?—Yes, before payment of the grant.

446. Deputy Haslett.—You do not make any claim that the amount you give is sufficient to cover the whole of the work?—We merely give a grant.

447. Deputy Haslett.—In regard to sub-head C (8)—Teachers’ Residences—is that amount for repairs?

Mr. MacGrath.—It represents half the annuity payable on teachers’ residences.

448. Deputy McMenamin.—In regard to sub-head C (9)—Bonus to parents or guardians of certain pupils in the Gaeltacht and Breac-Ghaeltacht—I found that there was a considerable distinction this year compared with former years in the granting of the £2.

Chairman.—We cannot refer to anything that happened this year. We can only deal with what happened in the financial year 1935-36.

449. Deputy McMenamin.—These payments have been hanging over. You have probably a number of letters about this matter?—Probably.

450. You do not know anything about these cases?—Yes.

451. Apparently, a distinction is now being made in regard to the payment of this money?—Our only concern is to see that the rules laid down are carried out.

452. What are the rules?—That these children must belong to a home in which Irish is the ordinary language, that they must attend school in certain areas and that their progress during the year in question must have been satisfactory.

453. All these are combined?—Yes.

454. Chairman.—Sub-head D—Superannuation of Teachers—represents the liability for pensions for teachers taken over by the Government under the new pensions scheme?—Yes.

455. I note that Appropriations-in-Aid, under sub-head E, amount to £87,000. Does that include the interest on the sum which was lying in the Teachers’ Pension Fund at the time the Government took over the fund?—Yes, that includes the interest on the securities which represented the amount of the fund.

456. All the assets taken over from the Teachers’ Superannuation Fund are being maintained in a separate fund and will hereafter appear as an Appropriation-in-Aid on the Education Vote?— Yes.

457. That fund is being maintained intact?—Yes.

458. Deputy McMenamin.—That money in the teachers part of the fund cannot be taken in as revenue?—It is kept distinct and used as an Appropriation-in-Aid.

VOTE 47—SECONDARY EDUCATION.

Mr. F. O’Duffy called and examined.

459. Chairman.—What do Laboratory Grants, under A 2, cover?—The grants are paid to schools in which science or manual instruction or domestic economy is taught. They are intended to pay the cost of maintaining a laboratory or cookery room.

460. —Deputy McMenamin.—In those secondary schools where classics are principally taught, but which do some laboratory work in connection with physics and chemistry have you any fixed standard?— Yes.

461. Is it a reasonably high standard?— Yes. A programme is prescribed. In order to have the subjects recognised, the prescribed programme must be taught and the teaching must be up to a certain standard, to the satisfaction of the inspectors. A certain number of hours’ instruction must be given in the subject each week.

462. Deputy McMenamin.—And that is a reasonably high standard for a pass standard?—Yes, we are satisfied that it is.

463. Chairman.—With regard to sub head A (3), what is the exact nature of that grant?—That is a grant to defray the additional trouble and cost of giving instruction through Irish in the ordinary subjects of the secondary school. The schools are really divided into two classes, and one of them is sub-divided again. Class A would be a school in which Irish is the medium used ordinarily, and in the case of Class B schools Irish is partly used and English is partly used. The ordinary capitation grant payable is increased by a certain percentage in each of these classes of schools.

464. Deputy McMenamin.— That is distinct from a school that does not teach through Irish?—Yes.

465. Chairman.—I take it that there is continual surveillance to see that in Class A schools the education imparted is satisfactory?—Yes. The students sit for the same examination, and the same standard of instruction is required in the subjects taught, whether they are taught through Irish or English.

466. Is the same standard required in the examination?—Yes. The same paper is set.

467. I know that the same paper is set, but is the same standard required, or how is it arrived at?—The examiners who mark the papers would be the same for marking, whether through Irish or English. The only advantage in the case of Irish is that a small increased percentage may be awarded. It is comparatively small—not more than 10 per cent. of the marks actually deserved on the merits of the answering. Not more than 10 per cent. may be awarded in the case of subjects taught through the medium of Irish, such as history, and geography, and not more than 5 per cent. in the case of mathematics.

468. When the examiners are arriving at the standard which shall be fixed as the pass standard in a given examination, am I correct in saying that the objective is to fix such standard as will permit 70 per cent. of the candidates to pass and 30 per cent. to fail?—No. I do not think that could be done. At any rate, it is not attempted. When the examination has been set, before the papers are corrected, the examiner who sets the paper meets his correcting or marking examiners and instructs them as to what marks should be awarded for a certain kind of answer and what marks should be deducted for a certain kind of error. That was further expanded by the standardising committee. At present, I think science is being taken in that connection. The teachers appoint representatives who meet the examiner and discuss the paper and they decide that a certain marking should be awarded for answering a certain question, and so on. Once that is done, there could be no possible adjustment to ensure that 60 per cent. or 70 per cent. should pass.

469. The same papers are set in the case of students using Irish?—Yes.

470. They are translated and given to them?—Yes.

471. —Is there a separate standardising committee to deal with papers given through the medium of Irish?—No.

472. In the event of an undue proportion of pupils—let us say, 30 per cent.— failing, can there be any revision of the standard?—Well, it occurred only once in my experience, about ten or 12 years ago, when a certain standard was introduced, there seemed to be dissatisfaction about the standard of mathematics. It was felt that the standard was rather strange and difficult, and it was considered whether it would be possible then to go over all the marked answer books with a view to adjusting the marking, but there were so many thousands of these that it was found not to be possible. As things stand, now, however, if it is found that more than 30 per cent. fail in a certain subject, the marks must stand.

473. Deputy McMenamin.— Let us assume that two students answer a particular question absolutely correctly. One answers through Irish and the other answers through English. For instance, if I were in a class A school and you were in a class B school, and we both answered the question absolutely correctly, I may get 310 and you can get 300?—You may get, in fact, 330, and I can only get 300. That is true, but if you were an ordinary average student of a secondary school and were using the Irish language, and if you answered the question the same way as I did, I think the effort would be so much greater, and, if you answered the question in the Irish language, I think you would deserve the 30 marks extra, since I would be using the English language which is the ordinary medium to me.

474. Chairman.—When marking the paper, is regard had to the grammatical construction of the Irish used in answering the paper?—Yes. If the Irish is not correct, the additional marks cannot be awarded.

475. Deputy McMenamin.—With regard to sub-head D—Scholarships and Prizes for Irish—do you give special scholarships for Irish?—Well, there should really be a comma there after the word “scholarships” Only a very small part of that goes for prizes, and the remainder goes for scholarships and for the Fíor-Ghaeltacht students as well.

476. With regard to sub-head E— Grant towards publication of Irish Textbooks—perhaps this is the place to refer to the question of translations?—Well, the provision here in this Vote is for publication purely of textbooks in the Irish language for secondary schools. If you are referring to translation of ordinary works, that comes later on in Vote 49.

477. Chairman.—With regard to sub-head F — Appropriations-in-Aid — what sums are paid out of local taxation in customs and excise duties?—Well, many years ago, that was what was referred to as the “whiskey money.” When the Intermediate Board was abolished part of the income of the endowment of schools was derived from these sources and there was a regulation that part of it should be paid over towards the cost of education.

478. I notice that you realised more than you anticipated. You have realised 14/10 more than you estimated for. Is it a fixed sum?—As far as I am aware, yes. However, I am speaking subject to correction. It is not a matter that I have examined very closely because it is a matter of no consequence. It comes to us as a matter of course and is inserted in the Estimates.

479. It is a matter of importance if it is a fixed sum. If it is a fixed sum, it is a grant and should be on the Estimates accordingly; but if not, it is a fluctuating amount, the nature of which is subject to investigation?—Well, I know that the number of pounds has been fixed for the last dozen years.

I see. Well, then, the 14/10 remains unexplained.

VOTE NO. 48—TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION.

Mr. O’Duffy further examined.

480. Chairman.—There is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General to this Vote, which reads as follows:—

Sub-head A—Scholarships.

“Under the scheme of scholarships at secondary schools for pupils from the Fíor-Ghaeltacht, girls who have satisfactorily completed their secondary school course, and have passed the Leaving Certificate Examination, are eligible to compete for free places at the Department’s training schools of domestic economy, and the scholarships are renewed annually for the period of training. The provision at sub-head D of the Vote for Secondary Education covers the cost of these scholarships to the completion of the Secondary School course and the cost incidental to the period at the training schools is charged to sub-head A of the Technical Instruction Vote. Three of these scholarships were awarded in 1935 and the amount charged in the present year in respect of outfit grants, travelling expenses, etc., was £37 14s. 6d. It is a condition of the scheme that students will not be accepted for training as teachers of domestic economy unless they and their guardians sign undertakings in the form prescribed and as it appeared that the required undertakings were not obtained from the scholarship-holders referred to I have asked for an explanation.”

Mr. McGrath.—The Accounting Officer has replied saying that it has now been decided that in future the undertakings will be completed before these people are admitted to the school.

481. Chairman.—The next paragraph reads as follows:—

“With the sanction of the Department of Finance a special course for apprentices from the Carlow and Tuam factories of Cómhlucht Siúicre Eireann, Teo., was conducted by the City of Dublin Vocational Education Committee in the year 1935 and payments amounting to £395 2s. 7d. covering maintenance allowances to the apprentices and grants to the Vocational Education Committee were made in the financial years 1934-35 and 1935-36. Contributions amounting to £180 in respect of the cost of the course were payable by the Vocational Education Committees for the areas from which the apprentices came. A similar course for apprentices from Tuam was held in the year 1936 and I have asked that the covering sanction of the Department of Finance may be obtained for the second course.”

Mr. McGrath.—The covering sanction of the Department of Finance has been requested, but I do not know whether it has been actually received or not.

Mr. O’Duffy.—Yes, covering sanction has been obtained.

Mr. Almond.—It was given on the 21st April.

482. Chairman.—I take it, Mr. O’Duffy, that a note of that will be duly sent to the Auditor’s office?—Yes.

483. The next paragraph reads as follows:

Sub-head C—Miscellaneous Technical Instruction and Vocational Education Services.

“I am in communication with the Accounting Officer in connection with the purchase of certain materials for the course for teachers in metal work and motor car engineering.”

Mr. McGrath.—The Department purchased eight old engines, and the Audit Office thought that they should have gone to the Post Office who deal in those sort of things, and get their expert advice, instead of buying motor engines and paying from £5 to £7 10s. each. It is just a matter of whether they should have taken advantage of the advice of a Department which was dealing with matters of this sort.

484. Chairman.—What is your opinion, Mr. O’Duffy?—The instructors conducting these courses in motor car engineering wish to have particular types of engines, and they wish to inspect the engine and see the kind of engine they are purchasing. It is the desire of the instructor to be present at the purchase. The Government Contracts Committee agreed with us that purchase might be made direct.

485. Deputy McMenamin.—Are these new engines?—No. They are second-hand engines, costing, as the Comptroller and Auditor-General said, about £5 or £7 10s. The instructors want to get different types of engines for the purpose of instructing the students.

486. Are these engines for technical schools down the country?—No, merely for Ringsend, where a course was conducted for training in motor car engineering.

487. Chairman.—Would it not be possible for the instructors to indent to the Post Office for the various types of engines they wanted? Then they could get through the Post Office what they actually required. The Post Office could purchase them for them.

Deputy Keyes.—To my mind it would appear that the instructors who are responsible for the training of the boys should have discretion to get the various types of engines that they considered necessary. I feel that they should have the widest discretion in the purchase of these engines as the Post Office may not to able to supply the proper types.

Chairman.—The Post Office is the purchasing branch.

Deputy Keyes.—If these men had the requisite knowledge of teaching, they should have sufficient knowledge to be interested in the selection of the various types of engines at this nominal figure so as to be able to impart the widest possible instruction to those under their tuition.

Mr. McGrath.—The Audit Office agrees that the instructor should have the option of naming the engine. He could keep that in view while he would be in touch with the Post Office Stores Branch.

Deputy Keyes.—And in the event of their being unable to secure the necessary type of engine, he should have the option of going outside.

Mr. McGrath.—Our attitude is that the Post Office is more likely to get value for the money laid out on the purchase of engines than the instructor, but the instructor in every case should have the option of naming the particular engine he requires, whether it be a Hillman, a Standard or any other make. We wanted them to make these purchases through the Post Office Stores Branch and to have the advantage of the assistance of their experts.

488. Chairman.—I should like to ask the Comptroller and Auditor-General does any other Department buy motor cars without regard to the Post Office Stores Branch?

Mr. McGrath.—There is a Contracts Branch and all these purchases are subject to the Contracts Committee. The Contracts Committee is connected with the Post Office.

489. Chairman.—So that no other Department would make purchases of this kind without reference to the Post Office Stores Department?

Mr. McGrath.—I believe in all big purchases the Contracts Branch would give their advice. I think, however, it might be better to ask the representative of the Department of Finance who might be able to give the Committee more information.

Mr. Almond.—Our purchases of motorcars are effected through the Post Office Stores Department. The Army and the Gárdaí all obtain their supplies through the Post Office. Their requirements are estimated for the whole and they obtain a special discount in that way.

490. Chairman.—Does the Department of Finance regard this transaction as exceptional?

Mr. Almond.—Until I know more about it I could not say whether the Post Office would have been helpful in this matter. The Post Office would charge their overhead commission on the transaction. It is just possible from the nature of the transaction that there would be nothing to be gained by making these purchases through the Post Office Stores Department. The Department of Education approached the Government Contracts Committee and obtained their permission to make the purchases in this way.

491. Deputy Smith.—Was not this done by an ordinary vocational committee?— This was done under a scheme for the training of teachers.

492. In a school controlled in the ordinary way by a vocational committee? —Yes.

493. In which the practice previously had been to purchase the type of engine by the same method as has been done in this particular case?—That is so.

Deputy Smith.—This is the normal method of purchase followed by vocational committees.

494. Deputy Goulding.—This is secondhand stuff?—Yes. That is their point. It is stuff that offered the greatest variety of types of engines.

495. Deputy Goulding.—If you purchased new cars you would have to purchase them through the Post Office?— Yes, if we were purchasing in quantity. We got the permission from the Contracts Committee to do this.

496. Chairman.—If the instructors required these various types of engines for the purpose of these courses and if they had requisitioned the Post Office Stores Branch, it might very well have been that some of the engines would be already available as discarded engines from the Post Office Departments and that they would be ready to sell them as scrap. Instead of being sold to a scrap merchant, and being resold to these teachers by the scrap merchant for £5 10s. 0d. each, it could have been possible to obtain them direct from the Post Office in the first instance?—That did not occur to me and I do not think it is probable. We consulted the Contracts Committee and we assumed that they would know if such material was likely to be available in the Post Office Stores. They might have some engines available but it is very unlikely that these types of engines would display the various types of construction or the variety required for the purpose of these schools.

497. Deputy Keyes.—How are these secondhand engines utilised? — The engines were mounted on stands and the students were required to take out different parts of the engines, to repair them or to make new parts when required. They are held by the Department for the purpose of instruction in motor engineering.

498. Deputy Keyes.—Would the restrictions suggested by the Comptroller and Auditor-General limit in any way the operations of technical instructors in schools in the country?—No.

499. They would not be affected if they were required to purchase engines for their purposes through the Post Office Stores Department?—No.

Mr. Almond.—The Post Office Stores Department is represented on the Government Contracts Committee and when the matter was referred to the Government Contracts Committee, it seems to me that the Post Office representative must have assured the Committee that his Department could not have helped them. Otherwise, I take it, the decision to allow the Department of Education to purchase direct would not have been given by the Government Contracts Committee.

500. Chairman.—I think Mr. O’Duffy has given us all the information we can get on the matter. We can consider it when we are preparing our report. We now pass to the Appropriations-in-Aid. Paragraph 35 of the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report states:—

“Students in residence at the Irish Training School of Domestic Economy are required to pay a fee of £40 per annum but, in necessitous cases, a reduction may be allowed provided that a fee of not less than £20 is paid. I have asked the Accounting Officer for further information regarding certain cases in which reduced fees were paid.”

Mr. McGrath.—My officer in going through the receipts in this matter came across several payments of £20. It did not appear to him clear as to whether these payments of £20 were payments on account or payments for particular periods. We wrote this paragraph to clear the matter up. We have since received a reply from the Accounting Officer stating that these are payments for certain periods at reduced rates and that in one particular case the pupil will have to pay more in future. For the present, the Audit Office is satisfied that the matter is receiving proper attention.

501. Deputy Smith.—Who is the deciding authority as to when the fee may be reduced?—There is a certain procedure governing these cases. We have tightened up the procedure in this matter. If a girl’s parents claim a reduction in the fee, the parents are required to fill up a detailed form practically on the lines of the form for students in the preparatory schools. The form is a very detailed one and the inspectors are asked to make very full inquiries in regard to them. The inspector then sends the form forward to the higher officers in the Department and if the case seems to be one in which the parents cannot afford to pay the full fee, the Department give authority to reduce the fee to £20. A fee of £20 must be paid in all cases. That is the minimum fee.

VOTE 49—SCIENCE AND ART.

Mr. O’Duffy further examined.

502. Chairman.—Paragraph 36 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General states:—

“The Charge to this sub-head includes £33 16s. 6d. for travelling and subsistence expenses incurred by an officer of the National Museum during a period of training abroad. The total expenditure in this connection was £400 19s. 2d.”

Mr. McGrath.—That paragraph was written for the information of members of the Dáil to keep them in touch with certain matters.

503. Chairman.—I take it that it was deemed desirable to give this officer special training?-_Yes. The officer was being promoted to take charge of another section and it was considered desirable in order that he might obtain some experience to give him an opportunity of visiting museums in London, France and Germany. He spent over 12 months in studying organisation and arrangements generally.

504. Chairman.—Paragraph 37 of the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s Report reads:—

“Special sub-head—B 10—with the sanction of the Department of Finance this special sub-head was opened to bring to account a payment of £27 expended on the acquisition, for republication, of 200 unsold copies of an Irish translation, which had previously been published privately.”

Mr. McGrath.—This was a rather unusual transaction and I thought it well to bring the matter before the Dáil.

505. Chairman.—Perhaps Mr. O’Duffy would tell us the circumstances?—The reference there is really to an Irish translation of Mitchel’s Jail Journal. This was a pioneer work done almost 30 years ago. The project was financed by a wealthy Irish-American, a brother of Séamus MacManus. He financed the translation and paid for the publication of Mitchel’s Jail Journal. The second volume was published in 1910 and the first some years earlier. On the death of Patrick MacManus, who had financed the project, his brother was not satisfied at the rate at which the work was being sold. He got the impression that the publishers were not pushing it as well as they might. He eventually withdrew the work from the publishers. There were 700 sets unsold. He tried to get some other publisher and failed. The position was that these 1,400 books were left unsold and no use was made of them. The Department was then asked if they would take them over. As the Comptroller and Auditor-General states it was rather unusual for us to take over a work that was printed and ready for sale but we agreed, as an experiment, to take 200 sets of the work at a certain figure, to overprint the publishers’ name and to put them on sale. We paid £27 for these 200 volumes and £3 for overprinting, £30 in all. We have already sold 85 of the 200 sets and there is reason to expect that the remainder will be sold in due course.

506. Deputy McMenamin.—Was there any special point in the Department taking them over for sale?—The Department fixed the price; it paid a certain sum to the present owners and arranged that they were not to sell or republish the other sets at the same time.

507. Have you gone into the commercial side of it?—We enabled Miss MacManus who holds these 200 sets of volumes and could not dispose of them simply to dispose of them. In fact, she is receiving the same money as she would receive if some other publisher had undertaken the job for her.

508. She is turning you into a commercial agency?—To a certain extent, yes.

509. Chairman.—Surely we ought to congratulate ourselves on the fact that the Department of Education did not start translating John Mitchel’s Jail Journal. I think Mr. O’Duffy is to be congratulated on his departure from the red tape of departmentalism.

Deputy McMenamin.—So long as it does not go too far.

Chairman.—There is no danger of a Department of State going too far in entanglements of that sort.

510. Report of Comptroller and Auditor-General—Paragraph 38. It will be observed from the account of this Grant-in-Aid that the expenditure exceeded the amount available by £452 13s. 1d. The excess was due to the fact that payments falling to be made towards the end of the financial year were greater than had been anticipated. The amount charged against this account includes a sum of £54 10s. 0d. for the translation of an Irish County History, provision for the production of which is made at sub-head B (4).

Mr. McGrath.—If Deputies will look at the bottom of page 134, under the heading “Publications in Irish,” you will find that the total receipts were £9,419 16s. 8d., including balance from last year, and the expenditure during the year 1935-36 amounted to £9,872 9s. 9d., causing an over-expenditure of £452 13s. 1d. It is rather a serious thing for a Department to overspend on a sub-head but, rather strange to relate, the Department escaped from an awkward position by merely showing the over-expenditure on the Grant-in-Aid. I am quite satisfied that the Department have since found the seriousness of this matter and that it will not occur again. I do not want to say any more about it. I think the drawing of the attention of the Department to it has had the desired result. It will not be necessary for the Committee to have a Supplementary Estimate, or anything of that nature, but it is merely accidental that they had not to do so.

511. Chairman.—In fact, what was the authorisation for the expenditure on Irish publications?

Mr. McGrath.—The authorisation was the Appropriation Act supported by the Estimates.

512. So that, in fact, they would have been justified in spending £9,419 6s. 8d.? —Yes.

513. They did, in fact, spend more. Why should not we proceed to call for a Supplementary Estimate?—If they took credit in the Vote itself for the amount of the expenditure you would have to order an Excess Vote.

514. They transferred the Grants-in-Aid?—The Grants-in-Aid had been overdrawn.

515. Chairman.—Is there any statutory authority for this procedure. Perhaps the Ministry of Finance would have a word to say on it.

Mr. Almond.—The procedure adopted here was quite irregular. A Grant-in-Aid sub-head was exceeded without the authority of the Dáil, a state of affairs which, of course, as the Committee have already pointed out in their last report, should not in any circumstances be permitted. But there were some quite understandable features in this particular instance. There was some misunderstanding at the time as to whether the money could actually be found to meet a bill that was being presented by the Stationery Office. The printers had asked for an advance payment. Their output was greater than was expected. Some telephonic communications took place between the Stationery Office and the Department of Education, as a result of which the Stationery Office got the impression that there would be sufficient money to pay this account. After the account was paid by the Stationery Office it was discovered that there was a deficit in the Grant-in-Aid sub-head of £452 13s. 1d., but it was then too late to submit a Supplementary Estimate. In the ordinary course we would expect that a Supplementary Estimate should be taken in the financial year in which the deficit was likely to take place. We agree with the Comptroller and Auditor-General that owing to the misunderstanding that has arisen a warning would be sufficient, but we are very anxious to ensure that no similar cases should occur in the future.

516. Chairman.—I have no doubt that Mr. O’Duffy is in a position to give an assurance that no similar cases will occur.

Mr. O’Duffy.—I should like to explain some special features of this case. In the first place, this account was paid on our behalf by the Stationery Office. It was presented to us at the end of March. I think our Department had no option but to meet it and pay, whether it caused an excess or not. As far as I understand the procedure, it would be a greater irregularity to hold over payment of the account because there had not been money to meet it. We were between the devil and the deep sea. The demand for payment came along in the last week in March, I admit that we are to blame for one matter: that we did not notice at the time that over-expenditure was being created. But even if we did notice it. I do not think that we would have had time to go for a supplementary Estimate. The Dáil was meeting only for two weeks afterwards. I think we would have had to pay and face the music.

517. Deputy McMenamin.—Was it imperative to pay this account?—The position was that payment had been made on our behalf.

518. Chairman.—You have now brought it under the Estimates?—Yes.

519. In fact, it is sufficient now to meet it by virement if it occurs again? —Yes. In making our grant-in-aid we assume a certain saving from the previous year. Now we have dropped the grant-in-aid procedure entirely. We have an ordinary sub-head and if there is an excess we hope to have the permission of the Department of Finance to use virement.

Mr. Almond.—When I said we hoped that this matter would not occur again I was not referring only to this particular grant-in-aid. We wish the principle to be clearly understood that a Supplementary Estimate must be taken before the provision in any Grant-in-Aid sub-head can be increased.

520. Chairman.—I think the Committee will wish to reinforce that when they come to prepare their report. We now come to the sub-head. As regards A (5)—Purchase of Specimens (Grant-in-Aid)—what is meant by that grant?—It means that the provision made under this sub-head is met by way of grant-in-aid.

521. It is actually a grant. If they have a balance in this year they can hold it and spend it next year.

B (1)—Is that a grant to meet publications in Irish?—There is this grant-in-aid to the Department. It is merely a description of the sub-head.

522. The Department can carry the balance?—That is what we have been talking about. We have abolished that grant-in-aid. It becomes an ordinary sub-head in future.

523. B (4). What progress is being made in the production of county histories?—Three histories have been received. In fact, the first history is with the printers for second proof. It has been translated into Irish. The second history is also with the printers for printing and the third history was received a couple of months ago and it is at present being considered by a reader on behalf of the Department.

524. What is the total expense of this? —A certain amount of work has been done on two further histories. I do not think it would be quite fair to put all the expenditure since this scheme started against our first history. Certain preliminary work has been done. You can take it that the output at the moment is at the rate of one history for 11 months.

525. These histories are costing about £750 apiece in addition to whatever printing and publishing expenses there are?—Yes. That is true.

526. How much money has been spent on this scheme since it was initiated?— To the year 1935-36 the amount was £2,735.

527. What is it proposed to do with these histories?—I presume they will be sold and read.

528. They are published in English?— No.

529. They are written in Irish?—They are written in English and translated into Irish.

530. Does this sum of £750 include provision for the translation?—No, Sir, that is provided under the sub-head for publications in Irish. There has been expenditure mentioned in the Auditor-General’s Report of £54 10s. for translating the first history into Irish.

531. Deputy Goulding.—What size book would it be?—54,000 words is the size of the first. About 150 to 160 pages.

532. Chairman.— These are simply going to be offered to the buying public? —Yes, Sir.

533. As regards B (6)—Quaternary Research in Ireland—would you tell us what it is?—It is a scientific way of determining the age of the various strata of the earth. In this country it is being used for determining the age of various strata of bog. Provision was made to enable a Danish scientist, Professor Jesson of Copenhagen, to visit the country to have excavations carried out in certain centres and samples of bog of various types taken. Scientists contend that this is of great use both from the botanical and archaeological standpoints. In one of these excavations a wooden cauldron was discovered. By taking certain samples above and below where that had lain this expert in quaternary research was able to report on the age of the bog. His report on the bog where the cauldron was found practically coincided with the age archaeologically assigned to the article.

534. Deputy McMenamin.—They agreed that this cauldron was not buried there? —Yes, Sir.

535. Chairman.—B (8)—Production of Sound Film in Irish. I believe the film “Oidhche Sheanachais” was not a great success?—It was not what one could describe as a commercial success.

536. But as a record of the subject it was?—Yes.

537. B (9) Racial Survey of Ireland (Grant-in-Aid). I wish we had more time to go over this Vote. A lot of interesting things arise on it. As regards B (10), who bought the surplus files of old British newspapers?—A firm of booksellers in London paid us £200 for them. I do not know how many volumes there were, but they weighed some 40 tons.

538. Deputy McMenamin.—They were bound?—Yes.

539. “Sale of Strangford Lough hoard of forged gold ornaments.” What does that mean?—That is another interesting matter. The history of that is that in 1914 a hoard of gold ornaments was found in the neighbourhood of Strangford Lough. It was purchased through a London jeweller and presented to the National Museum. It included objects of a rather unusual type, and archælogists were somewhat puzzled. A scientific examination was made of the hoard and it was found they were a forgery. Gold was cheap at the time and someone got these articles manufactured so that the gold would fetch an enhanced price. Lord Iveagh who was a generous patron of the Museum bought the hoard for £200. It was definitely proved that the objects were really a fake. They were locked up in the Museum. They were of no value to anybody, and recently with the consent of the Department of Finance we had them melted down and sold for £68. Possibly the price of gold caused us to get rid of these things.

VOTE 50—REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.

Mr. O’Duffy fur ther examined.

540. Chairman.—As regards this establishment in Summerhill, I understand now that there are only one or two children incarcerated in this abomination?—Not more than two since the middle of March.

541. Would I be right in saying that the reason for this small number is that the magistrates have come to the conclusion that the place is such an abomination that they will not send any child to it?—I admit that that idea occurred to me but on making inquiries I could find nothing to support that contention. The idea did occur to me as a possibility. One cannot make direct inquiries from the magistrates. From inquiries made I understand it is not due to the case that the premises at Summerhill are unsuitable but that it is rather a waste of time to send boys there. Where the boys have reasonable homes the magistrates remand them on their parents undertaking to produce them in court. Where it is a clear case for industrial schools the children are sent to the schools right away. The result of the matter is that whereas during the year 1936 the lowest number in Summerhill was 12 and the average number 18 while the highest was 28, since the middle of March the number is two for one week, no boys at all for a week, one for the following week and none at all for the six days following. There were two in the month of May, and I think there is one at present.

542. Chairman.—Of course your attention has been directed to the report of those who examined the conditions of Summerhill?—That report was based on the assumption, I take it, that the premises were accommodating 16 or 20 boys of various ages. We do not deny that the premises were unsuitable but the conditions were abnormal about the year 1935-36. The average daily number in Summerhill for ten years was 2.8. There was a great increase in 1930 when the average was 4.2. In 1933 it was 6.8 and three years afterwards it was, as I say, almost three times that. There is a further fact that judges dealing with children’s cases had introduced the unusual practice of using Summerhill as a sort of short-time jail. They sent young people there for a couple of weeks in order to frighten them but not with any intention of getting them into an industrial school. Summerhill was never intended as a juvenile jail. In that sense it was quite unsuited for the purpose for which it was used.

543. Deputy Haslett.—Were the boys mainly from the city?—Yes. In other parts of the country industrial schools are used as a place of detention.

544. Chairman.—Why they do not do that in the case of boys from the city God only knows—The reason is that they decline to accept boys unless boys are specially committed to the school in question.

The Committee adjourned at 1.40 p.m. until Wednesday, 19th May.

* See Appendix X.

* See Appendix XI.