Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1940 > Committee of Public Accounts > Interim and Final Report - Appropriation Accounts 1939 - 1940

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 11adh Abrán, 1940.

Thursday, 11th April, 1940.

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

DEPUTY DILLON in the Chair.

Seóirse Mag Craith (Ard-Reachtaire Cunntas agus Ciste) and Mr. C. S. Almond (Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

VOTE 51—NATIONAL GALLERY.

Dr. George J. Furlong called and examined.

155. Chairman.—The Comptroller and Auditor-General has the following note to this Vote:—

Subhead D.—Incidental Expenses.

“31. Premiums amounting to £38 1s. 0d., for insurance of pictures while undergoing repairs, which would appear to have come in course of payment in the year 1937-38, were not paid until April, 1938. I am informed that payment was not made until 1938-39 as the provision in the subhead for 1937-38 was insufficient owing to the number of important pictures which urgently required repairs; that the insurance brokers concerned agreed to the postponement, and that the delay would not have prejudiced any claim for damage arising prior to the date the premiums were paid. Had the payment been made in the previous year, an excess on the Vote for that year would have resulted.”

Have you anything to add to that, Mr. McGrath?

Mr. McGrath.—I am drawing attention to the fact of a fully matured liability being postponed. To permit fully matured liabilities to be postponed in that manner, would defeat the end that the Dáil has in view when it votes money for certain purposes. It is understood that all fully matured liabilities are to be paid within the period: that is within the year in which the liability takes place. If this rule were not carried out it would tend to the presentation of accounts that would have no bearing on the periods which they covered.

156. Chairman.—Had you averted to that aspect of the question, Dr. Furlong?

Dr. Furlong.—I had better explain to the Committee how this occurred. In this particular case it was absolutely unavoidable. What happened was that, heretofore the Grant-in-Aid used to be £1,000 for buying pictures and £325 for cleaning, repairing, carriage and insurance. The grant of £325 was surrenderable. Consequently, it frequently happened that a picture was sent to be cleaned in the later part of the financial year, to pay for which there was ample money in the subhead D. But if the cleaning of the picture—as often happened—was not completed by April the money reserved for cleaning it was surrendered and the bill had to be paid out of the following year’s grant, instead of as estimated. As it is impossible to calculate in advance how long the cleaning of certain pictures is going to take the position as regards cleaning, etc. (included in subhead D) was very unsatisfactory. I pointed out the difficulty to the Department of Finance, and when the Minister decided to increase the Grant-in-Aid for the purchase of pictures from £1,000 to £2,000 the ambit of the grant was widened so as to include the cleaning and repair of pictures, now taken out of subhead D. Subhead D, at the same time, was reduced from £325 to £200. It remained surrenderable, and out of it with other incidental expenses the costs of carriage and insurance of pictures had to be paid. Now, since a picture has to be insured during the whole period of its absence from the Gallery for cleaning, this decrease in subhead D defeated the object of the change just made, which was to afford greater facilities for the cleaning and repair, as well as the purchase of pictures. There were more occasions when insurance was necessary and less money with which to pay for it. In a particular year although we might still have ample money in sub-head B for cleaning and repairs, perhaps urgently required, it would be necessary to postpone the work because at that stage there would not be enough money in sub-head D to cover the insurance that would be entailed if it were undertaken. The new difficulty can, I feel, be successfully overcome by taking the provision for insurance out of subhead D and including it in subhead B with the general provision for purchase and repair of pictures. The difficulty in this particular case arose as follows: This was a Reubens picture which I found in the Gallery and which had not been in the catalogue since about 1898. I thought that it was a Reubens, and I sent it to the London National Gallery. They examined it. They have got x-rays and other equipment which we have not got, and they do work of that kind for us for nothing. Having examined the picture they came to the conclusion that it was an early Reubens. The picture was sent to an expert cleaner, but it was found that his price was too high. It was then sent to another man. All that took a long time. When I sent the picture to London I could not foretell—nobody could foretell —how long it was going to remain there. The result was that we were let in for a lot of expense on the insurance of this picture which we could not possibly have foreseen. The picture did not come back in time. If we had tried to pay for it out of that year we would not have had enough money, and would have had a deficit.

157. Chairman.—Can you, Mr. Almond, make any suggestion to the Committee as to the inappropriateness of this procedure and as to how a similar dilemma may be avoided in the future?

Mr. Almond.—I do not think that what Dr. Furlong has said affects the principle to which the Comptroller and Auditor-General has referred. The National Gallery must have been aware before the end of the financial year that a certain commitment had accrued. The proper procedure then would have been to go for a Supplementary Estimate, or, if it was very close to the end of the financial year, to take an excess Vote in due course.

158. Chairman.—I wonder would the principle be correctly stated in this way: that Dr Furlong’s procedure was the normal same procedure, but that in matters relating to public moneys the situation is that you cannot do that. Where difficulties arise towards the end of the financial year, I think Dr. Furlong would be wise to consult the Department of Finance as to what is the correct procedure, and to fall in with their view.

Mr. Almond.—This is the first notification which we have had on our side that this difficulty had arisen. This is the concern of the Dáil as much as of the Department of Finance. It concerns the authority of the Dáil in voting a certain amount of money for a particular year. The postponement of a matured payment to the next year is in effect the incurring of expenditure in excess of what was actually voted by the Dáil for the year. That is the principle at issue.

159. Chairman.—I think you may take it, Dr. Furlong, that the Committee will take a very sympathetic view but would be glad to be assured that in future circumstances of this kind you will avail of the advice of the Department of Finance to get the accounts presented in the acceptable form.

Dr. Furlong.—I can quite see the principle involved, but I still do not see how we can prevent it arising from time to time.

160. Chairman.—It is quite easy to prevent it. If the Department of Finance is consulted, I think they will suggest a course of action which will make it quite easy to avoid, because it would have been perfectly easy to arrange for a Supplementary Estimate to be introduced to cover this sum had appropriate action been taken in time. I can assure you that the Committee will not take a very grave view of that matter, but would be gratified, I think, to be assured that you will take the precaution of consulting the Department of Finance in future and making quite certain that payments of this kind are not postponed from one financial year to another?— Certainly. I might say that they have reduced this year the purchase money from £2,000 to £1,000. Presumably, they imagined when doing that that they were putting us back where we were before. That means that we are cut down now not merely £1,000 but £1,125, because we will still be short on the incidental expenses. They have made the case much worse this year. I pointed out that difficulty at the time. This thing will always arise because subhead D— Incidental Expenses, is far too small for the number of things to be done out of it. There is no use in having money to clean a picture under one subhead if you have not the money to pay for the insurance under another subhead.

161. Unfortunately we have no discretion as to the amount of money appropriated to the Gallery. Doubtless, if we had, more generous provision would be made. We are solely concerned to see how the money is spent. I think Dr. Furlong will take the necessary precautions. As to subhead E, when you were last before the Committee we asked you if there was any scheme in mind to give some kind of public lectures on the exhibits in the Gallery. Have any steps been taken in that direction?—No. I discussed it with the Minister for Education, but he did not see his way to do it. I think he has a scheme at the back of his mind that at some time a lecturer will be appointed to give lectures in the Museum and the Gallery, but I do not think any practical steps have been taken towards implementing that. Besides that, he was interested in the fact that the Gallery should be open at night and, as you know, a scheme was drawn up under which electric light was to be introduced into the Gallery. It was to start on the 15th September but, unfortunately, at the beginning of the war the whole thing was dropped.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 45—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION.

Mr. Seosamh O Neill called and examined.

162. Chairman.—As to subhead C— Preparation of Irish vocabularies, is that work proceeding according to plan, Mr. O’Neill?—Yes. We have issued pamphlets containing vocabularies for history, geography, science, commerce, athletics and so on, and we are proceeding with the scheme. It is quite necessary for the teaching in the schools, because many of the terms would not be known by the teachers and with the vocabularies the teaching is made a good deal easier.

163. It makes teaching through the medium of Irish less difficult than it would be otherwise?—Yes.

164. Are teachers required to commit the contents of these pamphlets to memory, or, when they are at a loss for a word in addressing the pupils, will they consult the pamphlets?—They may consult them. We do not require anything except that whenever a term comes into an examination paper we naturally will follow the official pamphlets for the term so that there will be uniformity through the country. That is a great help.

165. Deputy McMenamin.—We have Ulster and Munster Irish, and if in this pamphlet the Munster term is used, will you penalise an Ulster student who does not know it?—We do not use Munster, or Ulster. In practice all these terms are terms of standard Irish. We have to go back to early classical modern Irish and, for some, to middle Irish. A number of terms which were in use in the Irish schools formerly, were dropped in the intervening time. Consequently, these terms do not come from any modern dialect but from Irish as a whole.

166. Chairman.—Are school broadcasters on the radio instructed to adhere to these vocabularies?—We do not employ them. We have nothing to do with broadcasting.

167. Is there any co-ordination, inasmuch as you require teachers to adhere strictly to these?—We hope the broadcasters will use our terms. The vocabularies are there for the broadcasters. I have asked Dr. Kiernan to see that they use them as far as possible, but he cannot very well control them, because an individual broadcaster has individual terms. Unfortunately, in Irish, the professors in the university colleges and other experts do not always adhere to our terms. That is the trouble—that we have not got things standardised in the country as a whole.

168. Deputy McMenamin.—Is it not rather difficult to impose a rigid rule as to terms on a student in an examination? —What else can you do as regards the questions? We do not mind what terms they use in writing their answers provided they are intelligible. But, for our examination papers, if we had a varying set of terms in physics or chemistry or anything else the candidate would not know exactly what we mant.

169. Chairman.—You are always satisfied when you use the standard terms that he knows what you mean?—Yes. We have gone to a great deal of trouble to settle these terms. We invited university professors and our own inspectors to form a committee to select terms which would become standard terms and these are there for the candidates to learn.

170. Chairman.—I am glad that you are satisfied that the candidates understand them, because I am not.

VOTE 46—PRIMARY EDUCATION.

Mr. Seosamh O Neill further examined.

171. Chairman.—Under “Subhead A. 3. —Preparatory College, etc.”, paragraph 24 states:—

“The average boarding cost per head for the school year 1938-39 ranged from 7s. 6d. to 9s. 5½d. per week, showing an increase in each college as compared with the previous year.

Accounts have been furnished showing the receipts and expenditure in connection with the farms and gardens during the school year 1938-39, small excesses of expenditure over receipts being disclosed in four of the accounts, and small surpluses of receipts in the other two cases.

The average fee paid by the students for the same school year was £7. 12s. 1d.”

Mr. McGrath.—I do not know whether the Committee would like to discuss any details in connection with the first paragraph of the note.

172. Deputy McMenamin.—What is included in the 7s. 6d. and 9s 5½d.? Is that the net cost of the fuel and food?— Food only.

173. It does not include attendance or wear and tear of beds or fuel?—No, the cost of the food only.

174. Therefore it is not a true figure?— When you say boarding, you mean food. Otherwise you usually say “board and lodging”. Board alone usually means food.

175. Chairman.—Is there any particular reason why the actual cost of board in each of the boys’ colleges should be substantially in excess of the board cost in each of the girls’ colleges?—The boys generally eat more.

176. Chairman.—Under “Subhead C 1 —National Schools, etc”, there is the following (paragraph 25):—

“Although recognition and salary had been withdrawn from an assistant teacher as from 1st October, 1934, owing to a decline in the average attendance of pupils, the teacher continued to serve in the school until 4th September, 1936, when he obtained an appointment as principal of another school. Following court proceedings instituted by the teacher which resulted in a judicial declaration that his salary had not been lawfully withdrawn and had been discontinued without lawful authority, the Department of Finance authorised payment of salary for the period, amounting to £584 11s. 10d., which has been charged to this subhead.

Chairman.—That is a rather unusual procedure.

Mr. McGrath.—Yes. I bring this case under notice on account of the fact that the Department of Education had held the view that the salary and recognition had been properly withdrawn according to the rules in force at that period. That is the important point—at that period.

177. Chairman.—What were the circumstances surrounding this case, Mr. O’Neill?

Mr. O’Neill.—It was a case where the average attendance fell off but the circumstances were rather peculiar. For one thing, there was a difference of opinion as to whether this particular teacher was the teacher who should have been affected by the fall in the average. We have what we call first assistants and second assistants. This teacher argued that he was a first assistant. The judge, however, did not actually go into that particular question at all. He went on the general principle that where you are withdrawing recognition from a teacher, it is only right that the teacher should have a chance of making his case, even though it is a question of falling averages. Suppose we are withdrawing recognition on grounds of inefficiency or grounds of misconduct, we always give the teacher a full opportunity of making his case but, in the past, in the case of falling averages the withdrawal of recognition has always been automatic and the teacher never got an opportunity of making his case. The case was supposed to be quite obvious. If the average was falling, the teacher knew that it was falling and that when it reached a certain point he must go automatically. The judge, however, in this case held that it was much too serious a decision for us to take without giving the teacher notice of what we were doing.

178. Chairman.—Surely, at some stage somebody said to the teacher: “You need not come in to-morrow morning, Mr. So-and-So?”—The manager is the employer of the teacher and the manager is supposed to give him the notice.

179. In this case was that advice given to the teacher?—We notified the manager and the manager presumably notified the teacher but the real trouble, from the judge’s point of view, was that the teacher had no opportunity before this was done of making his case.

180. Did the teacher on being discharged by the manager simply continue to attend at the school?—Yes.

181. And did the manager take no action?—Yes, he appealed to us against the decision. There were two factors that must have influenced the manager. To begin with, he was not at all sure that the teacher was the one that should be affected. There was a mix-up as between the first and the second assistant. The manager should have made a distinction between them but he did not make that distinction.

182. Deputy Hughes.—What notice did he get?—We did not give him any notice and the manager seemingly did not give him notice. Usually in the past the teacher got no notice except from the manager.

183. They go automatically the moment the average drops?—Yes. The old Board never gave any notice. Of late years we have tended to warn the manager that the average is falling. The rule was that the teachers got a respite of two quarters. At the end of the first quarter, we usually sent a warning to the manager that the average was still falling and if it was down at the end of the second quarter the teacher must go. In this case we did not do that.

184. Chairman.—Are you aware that the teacher was not informed by the manager and never heard of his suspension until six weeks after the suspension had taken place when he was casually informed by an inspector?—Yes, the teacher made that statement. The inspector assumed, of course, that he had been informed previously. When the manager was informed of the teacher’s suspension, the manager sent a protest to us and we decided to hold an inquiry and sent an inspector down. We assumed that the manager had informed the teacher of the position, but he declared that he had not been informed. Our rule, however, was automatic. Having informed the manager, we had to carry out the rule automatically.

185. Deputy McMenamin.—Were you to take action of that kind under the law, are you not obliged to convey to the person concerned notice that the law is going to be enforced against him in that way?—We have always held that it is the manager who should do that, that we are not the employer of the teacher.

186. You are acting through an agent, and you assume that the agent is going to discharge his duty efficiently?—That is exactly the position. That is where the judge gave a decision against us.

187. Deputy Cole.—How often does the inspector visit the school?—He might visit the school two or three times in the year and he might visit it only once.

188. In this case would he not be there during the six weeks that the teacher was supposed to be under notice?—Not necessarily. We would not give notice through the inspector.

189. Chairman.—Would the inspector get any notice of the decline in the number of pupils attending the school?— No. The inspector only attends to the education side. This question of averages arises on the office administration side and does not some under inspection. The inspector would not be concerned with it unless he were going down on an inquiry into the matter.

190. Deputy McMenamin.—Would it not be a simple thing when you are sending out a notice to the manager in reference to falling averages to send it out in duplicate, one going to the teacher as well as to the manager?—We have decided to do that.

191. Chairman.—Can the situation arise in a national school, where there are two assistants, and where there is a rule operating that in the event of a decline in the average one of the assistants must automatically cease to be employed, that nobody knows which assistant is to go?—Not any longer. We have brought in a new rule clarifying the thing completely. This was a hangover from the old rule.

192. Deputy Hughes.—Might I ask why the Comptroller and Auditor-General stated that the rule which obtained was important at that period?

Mr. McGrath.—What I meant to convey was that if this teacher could have held out for another quarter, he would have the benefit of new regulations which then came into effect. One of them was in connection with redundancy. A new regulation was made in the year 1935 by the Department that where a teacher had ten or 20 years’ service, he would be allowed to have two or three more quarters, even though the average was falling, before he could be advised that his salary was withdrawn. Further than that, the panel system came into being at a later period. Therefore, this particular teacher was very unlucky in what happened. I drew attention to the fact that the regulations as they then existed were very severe in their operation on this particular teacher. If the matter had arisen a few months later he would have been protected by the new rule.

193. Deputy McMenamin.—That did not affect the machinery for giving notice to the teacher that his services were being dispensed with?

Mr. McGrath.—I want to draw attention to the fact that the rules were then more severe than now.

194. Chairman.—Are you satisfied, Mr. Almond, that the rules are now drafted in such a form as to protect the Exchequer against any further loss of this kind?

Mr. Almond.—Such a case as the one under review could not arise at present, in view of the new panel arrangements which allow a teacher although he is redundant under the rules as to average, to remain on in the school until a vacancy can be found for him in another school. He remains teaching and draws his salary, but he goes on to the panel. The panel is arranged according to dioceses.

195. Chairman.—In the event of the panel system becoming unnecessary in future, as it probably will when unemployment amongst teachers becomes less acute, has any effective provision been made to prevent any loss falling on the Exchequer through the lâches of a manager in a case of this kind?

Mr. Almond.—We do not know what arrangements are contemplated if and when the panel system is brought to an end. Presumably there will be some method of notifying the teacher but I do not think the question is likely to arise for some time.

196. Chairman.—You are satisfied, Mr. O’Neill, that no loss of this kind can again accrue to the Exchequer?—The panel system is a permanent one. Such a loss cannot arise again.

197. Chairman.—The next paragraph (26) reads:—

“Subhead D—Superannuation, etc., of Teachers.

“The statutory age for retirement of women teachers is 60, but the practice had been to allow women who were giving efficient service to continue to the age of 65.

In view of the serious extent of unemployment amongst trained teachers, it was decided, with the approval of the Department of Finance, that women teachers should be required to retire on reaching 60 years of age or completing 35 years’ service, whichever was the later, unless in cases of special hardship. The new procedure took effect from 1st October, 1938, and to meet the increased charge to the superannuation subhead a sum of £7,000 was included in a Supplementary Estimate.

I have been informed that the number of women teachers who retired on pension otherwise than through disablement or inefficiency in the year ended 31st March, 1939, was 272, as compared with 55 in the previous year.”

Deputy Brady.—I should like to know from Mr. O’Neill whether that rule is waived, and whether an extension of services is granted, in special cases of hardship?

198. Chairman.—Have any cases arisen in which special extensions have been given to female teachers in cases of special hardship?—Yes. I cannot give you the actual figures, but there have been extensions.

199. Deputy Brady.—There have been extensions?—Yes, but not many.

200. Deputy Cole.—Have there been any special grounds on which you granted these extensions?—Yes, grounds of special hardship. Take the case of a woman whose family is completely dependent on her and who would be left in a bad way if she were compelled to resign, or a woman who had children at school and who could not afford to finish their education if she were retired, or again a woman who is supporting aged or infirm relatives and who could not continue to go on supporting them if she were retired. They are all cases of special hardship and we keep the exemptions confined to such, as far as we can. There would be about 20 or 30 cases altogether in which we have granted extensions.

Chairman.—We shall now turn to the details of the Vote.

201. Deputy McMenamin.—Arising out of subhead C (6)—grants towards the cost of Heating, etc., of Schools and Cleansing of Out-Offices—do you take any steps to see that the money you allocate for this purpose is expended?—We have got to get vouchers.

202. Chairman.—Arising out of subhead E—Appropriations-in-Aid—is the total income from the assets taken over in pursuit of the agreement whereunder the Government undertook to pay teachers’ pensions represented by the sum of £76,000?—That is so.

203. Does that mean that the Exchequer took on a very large additional annual burden when they undertook to pay pensions and took over the assets of the Pension Fund?—They did. The fund was insolvent at the time.

204. Because it does represent, apparently, an annual charge of about £300,000?—Yes. We have a remarkable proportion of teachers on pension. I was very much surprised to find that the actual number of teachers on pension is 25 per cent, of the actual existing number of pensionable teachers. They seem to have a very long life after being pensioned, as compared with civil servants.

VOTE 47—SECONDARY EDUCATION.

Mr. Seosamh O Neill further examined.

205. Chairman.—There is a note at paragraph 27 which states:—

“Subhead E—Grant towards Publication of Irish Textbooks.

“As noted in the account, a sum of £59 was paid in respect of the translation into Irish of portion of a work which was not published, as the owner of the copyright refused consent. In giving sanction for this payment the Department of Finance directed that in future no instructions to proceed are to be given to translators until all the preliminary arrangements have been satisfactorily completed.”

Leave was refused to publish the work in Irish?—Yes, publishers have always been willing to give us the rights; in this case also they agreed, but later they wrote to say that the executors did not agree to the translation of the work into Irish.

206. The executors would not let it be translated into Irish?—No.

207. Are negotiations proceeding to overcome the difficulty?—The difficulty has been overcome. The work is proceeding now.

208. Chairman.—Par. 28. Non-Voted Services are as follows:—

“Erasmus Smith Endowment.

“By direction of the Minister for Finance an account in respect of the funds transferred to the Minister for Education pursuant to the Erasmus Smith Schools Act, 1938, has been appended to the appropriation account for Secondary Education. In addition to the securities shown in the capital account the property described as the Tipperary Grammar School was also transferred in accordance with the Act. A scheme for the application of the property and funds has not yet been approved.

Have you any further information to give us about that, Mr. O’Neill? Has a scheme been approved yet?—No. I think the Minister feels that it would be safer if the court drew up a scheme. A scheme has been agreed on and is now being put into a form in which the Minister and the Department will be safeguarded.

209. Deputy McMenamin.—The authority of the court is being got for it?— Yes.

VOTE 48—TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION.

Mr. Seosamh O Neill further examined.

210. Chairman.—There is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General which reads as follows:—

“Subhead B—Annual Grants to Vocational Education Committees.

29. “An order made by the Minister for Education declared the area of the City of Cork Vocational Education Committee to be a district to which Part V of the Vocational Education Act, 1930, should apply as from 1st September, 1938. Under the provisions of paragraph 5 (1) of the Vocational Education (Additional Grants) Regulations, 1938, a sum of £2,730 2s. 9d. was paid to the committee as a supplemental grant based on the expenditure of the committee referable to the provision of compulsory courses, and the enforcement of Part V of the Act.”

Is that a purely informative paragraph?

Mr. McGrath.—I wish to inform the Committee that there is a special regulation under Part V of the Act by which the Minister undertook a liability of £2,730.

211. Chairman.—On subhead I—Appropriations-in-Aid, Mr. O’Neill, has your attention ever been directed to the fact that certain technical instructors in technical schools under the control of local authorities, particularly those engaged in teaching rural science, found that there were certain pupils whose attendance they could not secure in the daytime and, out of their own good-will, they started evening classes to cater for those boys, whereupon they were approached by the Department of Agriculture and told that they must close down the evening classes as the provision of that type of instruction came within the ambit of the Department of Agriculture’s jurisdiction, and that they would not allow the Department of Education to infringe upon it, with the result that there were no classes at all?—There is a certain statutory bar. We can only expend money in accordance with the provisions of the Vocational Education Act and under that Act we cannot provide instruction in agriculture. We can only provide instruction in rural science, in other words, not in what would be—rather narrowly, possibly— called agricultural education. The Statutes divide the power between two local authorities—the Vocational Education Authorities and the Agricultural Authorities, and possibly it was under that that action was taken. I find it hard to believe, however, that the Department of Agriculture actually interfere with our committees: they would leave it to the Comptroller and Auditor-General to come along to us and say: “How dare you expend money without the necessary authority.”

212. A case has come to my notice in which a rural science teacher imparted to an evening class the same instruction as he was giving in the daytime in the technical schools, as the boys coming to the evening class were labouring youths unable to come in the daytime. They were boys of 16, 17 or 18, working for farmers, but the Department of Agriculture stopped this teaching?—That might be, but I find it difficult to understand how they could intervene in such a case. It is true that we have no authority to teach agriculture as a definite trade, but that is no affair of theirs.

213. Surely the fact that a country boy is earning a few shillings hay-making or helping farmers does not preclude him from getting technical education?—No. We have never interfered in a case of that sort.

214. Deputy Hughes.—It may be the case of a farmer’s son who could not attend in the day-time?

215. Chairman.—Would you look into that question, Mr. O’Neill, and see whether it is expedient to give instruction in the evening.

216. Deputy Keyes.—Is it not the Department of Agriculture which would be the culprit and not the Department of Education?—The teaching of agriculture is definitely barred to us. If we taught it as a trade, we should be the culprits.

217. Chairman.—In this case, the instruction is given under what might be called the rural science course?—We have full authority to give instruction in rural science.

218. The case arose within the Roscommon area. Perhaps you would examine the matter with the local vocational authorities?—Yes.

219. Deputy Hughes.—What does rural science treat of—botany, geology, fertility?

Chairman.—I think, in Mr. O’Neill’s presence it is better not to go too deeply into that, because the dividing line is a movable feast and as far as I am concerned the further it moves and the wider the scope of the education the better pleased I would be.

Deputy Hughes.—Your point is that rural science is very important in the rural districts and that it will not be possible to get a good attendance in the day-time.

220. Deputy Brady.—Would Mr. O’Neill give an explanation regarding subhead A?

221. Chairman.—Deputy Brady wishes to know why the scholarships were not all awarded?

Mr. O’Neill.—It was a case of supply and demand: the supply was too great for the demand. The Temple Hill people who train these and place them, when they train them, found, at the end of the year that they had people on their hands and that there was no use in training more until they had succeeded in placing these.

222. Deputy Brady.—There was no employment for them?—No.

223. Does that apply to domestic economy training also?—No, it is a scheme for the training of children’s nurses only. Domestic economy is a separate matter.

224. Chairman.—There is a reference by the Accounting Officer under the explanations in respect of subhead A, which reads as follows:—

“The trade scholarship courses were not started as early as arranged, as the technical schools concerned were required for other special courses. The arrangements for the Gaeltacht scholarship scheme for the training of children’s nurses fell through. A number of Gaeltacht scholarships for domestic economy training were not awarded.”

Has that difficulty passed, and are all the trade scholarship courses now in operation?—That difficulty has passed but, in fact, the trade scholarship courses are being cut off this year for economy purposes.

225. Deputy Brady.—Does that apply to Gaeltacht scholarships?—No, to people actually engaged in various trades throughout the country. In fact, these trade scholarships are nearly all confined to motor engineering and metal work generally. They are intended for all the trades—bakers, painters and others, but there are difficulties about the scholarships, as employers are not always willing to release apprentices for the necessary time. Generally, they are not willing; the employer will not release the apprentice or will not have him back at the end of the course if he does release him. Take, for instance, the case of baking: we have had only one of the apprentices from this trade in the whole time I have been secretary.

226. Chairman.—What would happen if a baker’s apprentice in rural Ireland got a scholarship? Would he have to come to Dublin?—Yes, we would pay his fare and his fees and allow him 30/- a week for maintenance.

227. How do they get these scholarships?—By application and examination. They apply, we examine the applications and see if we can provide a course for them. If there is a sufficient number for a class we arrange for it.

228. If a primary school student, in the eighth book, applies for an apprentice course, can he obtain it?—No, he must be an apprentice first for two years. There would be no use in taking a boy who had no experience of a trade. Unless he has been in employment he will not benefit. He must have questions to ask, and when he has been two years employed he will have these questions to ask about the processes. Then we will bring him to Bolton Street and give him thorough theoretical instruction and a certificate if he passes the examination.

229. And all the subsistence allowance he gets while living in Dublin is 30/ a week?—Yes.

230. And on that he is meant to board himself and dress himself and everything else?—Yes.

231. So in fact, of course, it is intended that his parents would make a contribution?—Yes.

232. And how long are these scholarship courses?—One year—about 40 weeks.

233. Deputy Walsh.—There is a note here that a number of Gaeltacht scholarships for domestic economy training were not awarded?

Chairman.—Mr. O’Neill has just explained that to Deputy Brady. He says that when they came to the end of the year they found that there were more trained nurses available than there were jobs to give them, so they suspended the scheme until the nurses already trained had been absorbed in employment.

Deputy Brady.—This is domestic economy training. I do not think Mr O’Neill answered that, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman.—I see.

Mr. O’Neill.—Domestic economy is a different propostion altogether.

234. Chairman.—Is your question relating to subhead F, Deputy Walsh?

Deputy Walsh.—Sub-head A.

235. Chairman.—I understand. Why were not the domestic economy scholarships awarded, Mr. O’Neill?

Mr. O’Neill.—Because a sufficient number of candidates did not qualify. There is no use in admitting girls to Kilmacud unless they are competent to deal with the course. There is a fairly stiff examination in practical subjects before we let them in. There is no use in having a girl trained specially in domestic economy unless she shows aptitude for cookery and housework generally.

236. Deputy Walsh.—Is the examination too stiff for girls from primary schools?

Deputy Brady.—Much too high.

Deputy McMenamin.—I should say it is.

Deputy Brady.—A number of girls who had gone to secondary schools for four years after finishing their primary education and who had spent, say, a year in a school of domestic economy, entered for Kilmacud and failed the examination. The standard is very high.

Deputy McMenamin.—I think it is too stiff.

237. Chairman.—Deputy Brady suggests that even those who have had four years in a secondary school and one year in a domestic economy school have then presented themselves for Kilmacud and failed. If that be true, how can we hope to get Gaeltacht girls from the primary schools ever to succeed in the examination?

Mr. O’Neill.—We do not hope for that. We do not believe that girls from the primary schools would be fit to be trained as domestic economy instructresses. We think that before a girl is trained to be a domestic economy instructress she should have a background of general education, and we have actually made arrangements for that purpose. We give scholarships to the Gaeltacht girls; send them to secondary schools and train them at the expense of the State in order to give them a background for Kilmacud.

238. Deputy Brady.—The committees of agriculture in the various counties give scholarships to girls in schools of domestic economy. The scholarship lasts for 12 months and those girls seem to be in a blind alley. They go home and go to service afterwards. Could the Department not arrange for an examination amongst girls of that type who have been granted scholarships and award, say, three or four scholarships each year to those girls in order to give them an opportunity, after having spent 12 months doing domestic economy training, of qualifying for Kilmacud or somewhere else?

239. Chairman.—Deputy Brady has in mind those girls who get a year’s scholarship from a local authority, doing domestic economy, and who, when they go home, find themselves in a blind alley. It is wondered if a further examination could be offered to them and if a certain number of them could be allowed to go on from that year’s training into Kilmacud or in the same line of education. That would spare them the necessity of being in a blind alley.

Mr. O’Neill.—Kilmacud is definitely for training domestic economy teachers for the country generally. We have got to keep the standard pretty high for that. The girls sent by the Department of Agriculture to these residential schools of domestic economy, as far as I know, are farmers’ daughters, and I think the intention of the Department is that they should go back and raise the standard of domestic economy throughout the country. I do not think it is intended that they should reach the standard of domestic economy teachers.

Deputy Hughes.—You could hardly say that the year they spent in the domestic economy school was lost.

Deputy Brady.—I did not say it was lost.

Deputy McMenamin.—It is meant to prepare them to be farmers’ wives.

240. Chairman.—In fact what I think is in our minds is that the vast majority of these Gaeltacht girls do not get secondary education, and unless some steps are taken to give some of them secondary education and to prepare them for Kilmacud none of them will ever get into Kilmacud.

Mr. O’Neill.—We do that. We have scholarships to the secondary schools for boys and girls from the Gaeltacht, of which the Gaeltacht girls get nine at least and these girls can all compete for Kilmacud. Places are actually assigned for them in Kilmacud. They have not to compete with the ordinary girls in the country. Free places are assigned for girls from the Gaeltacht who reach the qualifying standard.

241. Deputy Cole.—Would Irish be one of the compulsory subjects?—Yes.

242. Deputy Walsh.—Is Kilmacud the only school of this type in the country?— There is another one in Blackrock under the Dominican Sisters.

243. I thought there was one in Killarney?—No, that is for domestic servants, not for instructresses.

244. I happen to know a girl who was qualified in Killarney and she was a qualified instructress?—There was a special course held in Killarney for instructresses, but that was only a temporary measure.

245. Chairman.—Do you think there are enough of these domestic economy schools of the type of Kilmacud to deal with the number of applicants that seek admission to them?—As a matter of fact, we are extending them. The Corporation of Dublin is setting up a very big school of domestic economy here and we are making arrangements with them by which we will have the training school of domestic economy in their schools and so will be able to expand to a very considerable extent. There is hardly room in Kilmacud for training a sufficient number of domestic economy teachers.

246. That is my impression. The number of applicants is far in excess of the number of places available?—Yes, we need plenty of domestic economy instructresses.

VOTE 49—SCIENCE AND ART.

Mr. Seosamh O Neill further examined.

247. Chairman.—On this Vote, in regard to subhead B 1—Publications in Irish—there is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor-General, as follows:—

“30. Adverting to paragraph 34 of my last report I observed that the original agreement with the author has since been determined and a new agreement has been executed which provides, inter alia, for the completion of his part of the work by 31st March, 1942, and gives to the Minister for Education the right to print and publish, or not to do so, as the Minister may think fit.”

I think this refers to the roving commission of the gentleman who was dealing with the Dingle peninsula? I see a provision in the new agreement that the work is to be delivered in instalments at intervals of 30 days.

Mr. O’Neill.—There is also a provision that it is to be ended by 31st March, 1942.

248. Chairman.—I observe that the sum of £993 10s. 0d. which the author has already been paid is to be regarded as payment for the work already delivered?—Yes.

249. And is not to be assessed at the rate of 30/- per 1,000 words in accordance with the terms of the new agreement?—Under the new agreement it is 40/- per 1,000 words as before.

250. In regard to subhead A (5)— Purchase of Specimens—did you observe recently that in France, consequent on the drive for the collection of scrap metal, the museums of France were asked to supervise these collections and succeeded in getting from them any number of interesting objects which were being thrown out?—Yes.

251. Has it occurred to the museum authorities here to take similar steps?

Deputy Keyes.—They may have enough scrap already in stock.

252. Chairman.—I am serious about that. Could not the museum authorities co-operate with the scrap merchants in Dublin in some way to avoid destruction of old domestic articles that could easily be thrown out?

Mr. O’Neill.—They could do that, but I am not clear as to what we could do in that particular way. We could, of course, send experts to examine the scraps, but I think it would be rather difficult.

253. Chairman.—I think it would be difficult. I found in my own scrap heap which was being thrown out an old candle-mould which was part of our domestic equipment 100 years ago. That is a common object, I imagine, in rural Ireland, but you might find a variety of other very interesting things of that sort in many country houses. I think that is a matter that would be worth examining.

Mr. O’Neill.—It would be worth examining.

254. Chairman.—In regard to subhead A (7)—Purchase of Books—I take it, Mr. O’Neill, that if any interesting library or manuscript comes upon the market the Minister views favourably applications for special grants to acquire it?—Yes, we have always got special grants.

255. In regard to subhead B (3)—Production of Irish County Histories—has any stipulation ever been made in regard to that subhead of a date upon which the work is to be finally completed?—No, it would be difficult to do so. He has already done six counties. There are Twenty-Six Counties still to be done, and as he is doing a county a year, the work may take 26 years.

Deputy Brady.—If they are giving him to 1942 for the Dingle peninsula, we can work out how long it is going to take for the Twenty-Six Counties.

Chairman.—I do not think the Deputy is far wrong. If he has until 1942 to do the Dingle peninsula, how long will it take to do Twenty-Six Counties?

256. Deputy Walsh.—Is not this just a reprint of the ordinary survey note?— No, it means an exhaustive county history.

Chairman.—Subhead B 3?

Deputy Walsh.—Yes.

Chairman.—You are treading on somewhat dangerous ground, Deputy. I advise you to allow us to pass on. I do not want to take you unawares, and if you were to go on I might have a lot of things to say which I abstain from saying out of deference to you.

257. Deputy Brady.—With reference to subhead B (5)—Scholarships to Gaeltacht Students—I notice that a sum of £354 less than what was granted for Gaeltacht scholarships was expended. What is the explanation of that?—The explanation is given on page 144. Three scholarships were not renewed and one scholarship was reduced in value.

258. Was there any reason why the scholarships were not renewed?—Yes, we keep a very close watch on these scholarships, because there is no use in sending boys to the universities unless they are doing their work and doing it thoroughly. In this case some of them were not doing it.

259. Subhead B (7) deals with the Irish Historical Society. What is the Irish Historical Society?—It is a new society consisting of experts who are interested in history, and they are producing a journal now. This money that we had here was for attendance at an international congress. The society is allied with similar historical societies in other countries in Europe. The members work on various detailed problems that would arise in the history of a country. The society deals with particularly interesting points of view in history, and we thought it worth while to give a little grant to help them.

260. Who is the president of the society?—I cannot say at the moment.

261. Deputy McMenamin.—Is it something like the National Geographical Society in England?—Yes.

262. What size is it?—It would consist amongst others of professors from the various colleges of Dublin, Belfast, Cork and Galway, but I cannot say what is the exact number of members.

263. Deputy Brady.—With regard to subhead C—Aids to Arts and Crafts Exhibitions—what are the qualifications for getting that?—That is for Cork alone. It is a hang-over from the old system.

264. Chairman.—I suppose, however, that if Donegal applied your heart might be touched, Mr. O’Neill?—Well, it might, but I am not so sure that the heart of the Department of Finance would be touched.

264a. Well, after all, water came from the rock when Moses struck it?

265. With regard to subhead D—Appropriations-in-Aid—I see that substantial additional fees were paid to the Professor of Painting the Assistant Professor of Painting, the Professor of Sculpture and the Assistant Professor of Sculpture, in respect of work done at the New York World’s Fair. I understand that all the work done there was done under the direction of an architect and contractors. Is not that so?—I do not know about that, because this is not in our Vote really. This is only noted by us because, whenever an officer gets payment from another Vote we have to put it into our Appropriation Account.

266. And so this would more properly be raised on the Vote which carries the charge for the New York World’s Fair?—Yes, it would be on the Vote for Industry and Commerce.

267. I see a note here about the sale of photostat prints and fees for the use of ultra-violet lamp. Can you give us any details about the sale of photostat prints and fees for use of the ultra-violet lamp?—We have this photostat machine in the National Library, and if anybody wants a print of manuscripts, etc., the National Library make these prints and sell them to him.

268. And can you bring in any document there and get it photostated?—You can.

269. Any document?—Yes; that is, if it is sufficiently important.

270. What is the ultra-violet lamp used for?—I think it is for use in the case of manuscripts which have become blurred.

271. And, I suppose, for detecting forgeries and so on?—Yes, possibly for things of that kind, but chiefly for the better examination of manuscripts.

272. Can any member of the public avail of the service?—Yes, for a fee.

273. It is a national service—Yes.

274. Deputy Walsh.—I see a note here to the effect that a duplicate of a hidecovered Irish coracle was permanently loaned to the Musée de L’Homme, Paris. That seems to be rather a contradiction. What is meant by the words “permanently loaned”?—I think that really means that, although we have given it to them, we want to preserve our claim in case any chance should arise of its being returned. The position is that we had enough of these ourselves and that we want to help other museums, while at the same time retaining our ownership of the objects.

275. I suppose it really means that if by any chance the Musée de L’Homme of Paris should cease to be a museum the property would come back to us?—Yes.

VOTE 50—REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.

Mr. Seosamh O Neill further examined.

276. Chairman.—Well, now we can turn to Vote 50, on page 147—Reformatory and Industrial Schools. With regard to subhead A—Reformatory Schools —can you tell us what plan is in mind for the transfer of Glencree School?—We intend to transfer it to Daingean, which has been completely renovated. The Oblates, when they got Daingean, reconstructed the whole place. They have been using it as a Novitiate for their own Order, and they spent thousands of pounds on the reconstruction.

277. And now, when they want to get rid of it, they want to pass the baby on to us?—No, that is not the case. We were not satisfied with Glencree.

278. Surely to goodness, there was no need to go back to another reformatory, which was condemned in the past?—Well, we examined a lot of other places, and it appeared to us that this was the best place and could be acquired for the least money.

279. I understood that it had been condemned originally?—A part of it had been condemned, but the part that was condemned has gone and has been reconstructed. It is a different place altogether now.

280. Well, certainly, the place that was there in the past was a horrid scandal, was it not?—Yes, but it is not there now. It must be remembered that this place has been used actually by the Oblates as their college and they had to reconstruct it to the tune of about £8,000, I understand.

281. How much land is there around it? —That, again, was a consideration that influenced us. There is a very big farm around it—at any rate, quite enough for us. I think there are about 240 acres.

282. Deputy McMenamin.—It is arable land?—Yes, mostly arable land.

283. Chairman.—At any rate, Mr. O’Neill, you are satisfied that the premises are really good premises?—Yes, and we have got the authority not only of our own Department but that of the Board of Works for that. Otherwise, we would not have taken it at all. We have been considering a whole series of places, and this was considered to be the best of the lot.

284. How many students had the Oblates in Daingean while they were using it as a Novitiate?—I could not say that, but we will be able to accommodate about 200 students and we intend to give them every amenity that they could possibly expect.

285. Well, if I go down there to have a look over the place some time, Mr. O’Neill, will you let me in?—Oh, certainly.

286. With regard to subhead C—Places of Detention—is the luxurious accommodation which you have provided for children under detention in Summerhill still available?—Yes.

287. And it is intended to keep it available?—Yes, for the past two years we have had only two children there per day.

288. Has it ever occurred to you to ask why? Is it not because the place is such a howling scandal that no conscientious District Justice would send a child there? —Well, the number of children sent there is in proportion to the amount all over the country.

289. At any rate, when I visited the place two years ago there were 15 children there?—That would be exceptional.

290. That may be so, but I contend that the fact that there are only two children there now per day is because no sane District Justice would send a child there. Do you agree?—If that were so, it would apply to the country as a whole, but the proportion is the same as in other detention places all over the country.

291. But all the industrial school children in Ireland do not come from the City of Dublin?—No, but the actual proportion of two per day is the same as in other places throughout the country. Your argument, Mr. Chairman, would appear to be that the proportion should be very much higher here than in the country, but that is hardly the case for industrial schools.

292. The average of juvenile delinquency is not the same all over the country as it is in the City of Dublin, and if there is a very much higher incidence of juvenile delinquency here than there is in other parts of the country, and if there are only two children per day being sent to Summerhill, I hold that that means, God be praised, that the District Justices are in revolt against that place and will not use that abomination for the purpose of detaining children?—Juvenile delinquency plays only a small part in committal to industrial schools. In any case I understand that the District Justice says that he has examined the place and is satisfied with it.

293. Well, I am prepared to express my opinion of Summerhill, but I know that one District Justice, or at least his predecessor—requiescat in pace—had a very different view. I suppose he took the view that it was his duty to deal with the matter as best he could and that it was for the Department of Education to provide a better place. I do suggest, however, Mr. O’Neill, that if you were to appear at an international congress and were to be pointed out as the man responsible for keeping Summerhill as an educational establishment, your name would be damned for ever?—But it is not an educational institution. How could you give a boy education there when he is only there for two or three days? You could not educate a boy in a few days.

294. But at least you agree that they should be treated as human beings?—Yes.

295. Have you ever visited the place?— Yes.

296. What was your opinion of it?—I thought it was fair enough for the purpose for which it was intended.

297. Well, all I can say is that I would not put a yellow dog in it much less a child. However, I apologise to the Committee for, perhaps, going beyond the terms of reference in this case, and I suppose it should be more properly brought up in another place.

298. I should like to ask you, Mr. O’Neill, in connection with reformatory schools generally, whether there has been any provision made by the Department, as distinct from the religious order which is in charge of the school, for contact with the boys after they leave the school. Have you ever considered the desirability of having some kind of an officer who would stand in loco parentis to these boys and to whom the boys might turn if they found themselves in trouble or difficulty afterwards?—Well, in connection with this matter of parental moneys, we have been wondering if we could get a man who would act as a sort of probation officer as well as a collector of parental moneys, but it is rather difficult to get a man. If we had a whole-time man, he would have to be a man who would be able to go around to the homes and be accepted in those homes.

Deputy Keyes.—I think we are on dangerous ground here and that we should not discuss that aspect of the matter of having an officer to follow the boys when they have served their period and gone back to their homes. I think it is not our duty to discuss that.

Chairman.—We must discuss no matter because we would be wasting Mr. O’Neill’s time if we did. We are, however, entitled to ask him for information, and when we come to consider our report we can discuss the information which he gives.

Deputy Keyes.—I suggest that you are going further. You are asking him to introduce an innovation into the reformatory system by the appointment of a further probation officer, or some such officer, to supervise the boys after they have been discharged.

299. Chairman.—I am not asking him to do that. I am asking him if there is any provision made for maintaining contact with the boys hereafter. Mr. O’Neill’s answer is that there is no such provision at present, but that the matter is being generally considered.

Mr. O’Neill.—In actual fact, another Department, the Department of Justice, has a system of probation officers in Dublin and I think have one officer in Cork too, to deal with the question of looking after these cases. The probation system does not come under us. Of course, the system is very widely operated in England.

300. What was the excess in respect of which a payment of £500 was made to Glencree? In the explanation in respect of subhead A, you will see it stated that the excess was due to the payment of a special grant of £500 to Glencree?—It was due to the fact that the number of boys in the Reformatory is not sufficient to enable the school to pay its way.

301. Chairman.—The excess was due to the fact that the capitation grant on the small number of people there was not sufficient to maintain the institution. With regard to the £90, the note explains that grant without further question.

The Committee adjourned at 12.35 p.m.