Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1944 > Committee of Public Accounts > Interim and Final Report - Appropriation Accounts 1942 - 1943

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Dé Céadaoin, 4ú Deireadh Fómhair, 1944.

Wednesday, 4th October, 1944.

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

DEPUTY DILLON in the chair.

Mr. J. Maher (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), Mr. C. S. Almond, Mr. L. O Broin and Mr. L. M. Fitzgerald (An Roinn Airgeadais), called and examined.

Chairman.—It may be well, seeing that we have some new members on the Committee, briefly to recapitulate our functions. Our functions are concerned with the Appropriation Accounts which are before us. With the assistance of the Comptroller and Auditor General, who is kind enough to come and help us in our work, it is our duty to inquire from Accounting Officers how they spent the money which Dáil Eireann appropriated for their several Departments. The pitfall for the unwary is the addressing of questions to the Accounting Officers which should, more appropriately, be addressed to Ministers of Dáil Eireann. Accounting officers are not responsible for policy. The duty of an Accounting Officer here is to re-assure the Committee that the money which Dáil Eireann voted was spent in accordance with the regulations laid down by Dáil Eireann. Therefore, it is irrelevant to address any question to an Accounting Officer as to whether he thinks this method of spending the money was wise or unwise. His duty is to carry out the orders of Dáil Eireann, whatever his personal opinion of those orders may be. That having been said in regard to relevance, I think it right to say a word with regard to the rights of individual members of the Committee. Each member of the Committee is entitled to address to the Accounting Officer before us any question he deems necessary. Occasions may arise on which an Accounting Officer has brought all the information which he foresaw would be required and, yet, a Deputy may raise a point upon which the Accounting Officer is not in a position to give full information there and then. If the matter is, in the opinion of the Deputy, one of substance, he is quite entitled to ask that a note or memorandum be furnished to him and to the Committee as soon as the Accounting Officer is in a position to accumulate the required information. It is not customary to ask for that unless the matter is one of substance, because Accounting Officers are very busy men. Nevertheless, I think it right to remind the Committee that the question as to whether a matter is of substance or not is for the individual Deputy himself to decide and any Deputy on this Committee has the right to ask for such a memorandum if he feels he requires it for his own information. Each Deputy is entitled to put as many questions as he thinks necessary. The Chair is, naturally, the ultimate judge of relevancy. I shall try to impose a proper patience upon myself and I should ask my colleagues on the Committee to exercise a proper patience with one another. Even if questions by one Deputy do not seem very important to another Deputy let the other Deputy remember that when his turn comes to put questions he will expect to be listened to with patience.

The first Vote for our consideration today is that for the Office of Public Works. To that vote there is a note by the Comptroller and Auditor General. For the information of new members, I may say that our practice in respect of each Vote is to turn, in the first place, to the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General, which appears at the beginning of the volume of the Appropriation Accounts and to dispose of any note in that report referring to the account under consideration. Having disposed of that note, we turn to the Vote itself. I shall call out each subhead by its number and any Deputy is free to ask the Accounting Officer any question he wishes relating to that subhead. If I happen to go rather faster than you anticipated, please do not hesitate to ask me to go back to a sub-head in respect of which you wished to raise a question but omitted to do so because you had not noticed that I had called it.

VOTE 9—OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKS.

Mr. J. Connolly called and examined.

“Insurance of Workmen.

“13. As stated in a note to the account, sums amounting to £15,380 4s. 10d. expended in prior years on compensation, etc., in respect of claims arising out of accident risks which had been covered by policies of insurance with the Irish Employers’ Mutual Association, Limited, now in liquidation, remain charged to suspense. In addition, a sum of £6,017 4s. 0d., being portion of the premium paid for the year 193839, also remains charged to a suspense account pending settlement of the Commissioners’ claim against the Liquidator. Sums amounting to £1,908 18s. 0d. which would otherwise have been payable to the Association under the policies have been retained by the Commissioners as a set-off against their claim. I have been informed that, since the date of my last report, no additional expenditure has been incurred by the Commissioners and also that no payment has yet been received in respect of the claims which have been rendered to the Liquidator.”

1. Is there anything which the Comptroller and Auditor General would wish to add to that?

Mr. Maher.—That was the position last February when the report was written. Whether anything has happened since, I am not aware. Probably Mr. Connolly will be able to assist.

Mr. Connolly.—The only thing I can add is that the Court Examiner has now signed the list of names of those from whom claims of £5 each are to be collected and we may soon expect a notice in the paper calling upon them to pay. That is a step in expediting matters by the Liquidator.

2. Chairman.—I think I am right in saying that this is a matter we have had under careful review for the past year or two years?

Mr. Maher.—It was raised first in 193839 and the Committee reported on it at length, setting out the position. It has been before the Committee for the past five or six years.

3. Deputy MacEoin.—And will be for five or six years more?

Mr. Maher.—That is a matter for the Liquidator:

4. Chairman.—The best thing we can do is to let the matter stand until a further stage in the process of liquidation is reached?

Mr. Connolly.—I think that that is the only course. We are in continuous contact with the Liquidator and we are pressing to get the matter cleared off as quickly as possible.

5. Deputy Dockrell.—What chance is there of being paid in full?—I should not care to express an opinion on that. The prospects are, probably, better now than they would have been two or three years ago owing to the improved position of many of those who are liable.

Deputy MacEoin.—To collect the money will mean a little civil war because everybody is going to wait until the sheriff arrives.

Mr. Maher.—For the information of members of the Committee, I may say that they will find in the Public Accounts Committee Report for 1939-40 the history of the case.

Chairman.—We shall now turn to the account proper. May I again remind Deputies that it is sometimes not easy to associate questions they have in mind with the proper sub-head. Therefore they may ask questions which, strictly speaking, are irrelevant. I urge upon every Deputy to do that. The best way to discover the rules of this Committee is to break them. In that way, the rules will be rapidly learned.

No question.

VOTE 10—PUBLIC WORKS AND BUILDINGS.

Mr. J. Connolly, further examined.

“Subhead B.—New Works, Alterations and Additions.

“14. With the approval of the Department of Finance the form of the Statement of Expenditure on New Works, etc., appended to the account, has been altered in order to facilitate comparison of figures and to secure economy in printing.

Included in the amount charged to New Works, No. 74, National Schools, Grants for Building, etc., is a sum of £92 10s. 8d. being a supplementary grant towards the cost of the adaptation of a site. I observed that when the site was originally surveyed the gradient was reported as 1 foot in 20 feet, whereas the actual gradient was 1 foot in 5 feet, and the unsuitability of the site was not discovered until some progress had been made with the erection of the school and it was then too late to abandon the site. As the cost of site development is normally the responsibility of the manager of the school, I have asked that the covering sanction of the Department of Finance be sought for the payment of the supplementary grant referred to.”

6. Chairman.—Have you anything you care to add to that, Mr. Maher?

Mr. Maher.—As regards the first paragraph, the information contained there is, for all practical purposes, the same as in previous statements. The only change is that it gives the total estimate for the work and the total payments in tabular form, along with voted items for the year. The object of the paragraph is to bring the change to the notice of the Committee.

7. Chairman.—The Schedule referred to by the Comptroller and Auditor General, the form of which is being altered, is on page 31. Can you add anything to the second paragraph, Mr. Maher?—As regards the second paragraph, the Department of Finance has sanctioned this payment since the report was made.

8. Can you give us any information, Mr. Connolly, as to how an officer of your Department could make a mistake in a gradient of 1 foot in 20 feet, when the actual gradient was 1 foot in 5 feet, or was it an officer of your Department?

Mr. Connolly.—Yes. The Assistant Architect accepted the report of the Clerk of Works, which was furnished on the basis of an inspection, but not on a proper survey of the site.

9. And the Assistant Architect was a member of your staff?—Yes, both were members of our staff.

10. Was it his duty to check up on that matter?—Yes, it was his duty to check and confirm that the gradient was properly reported.

11. So that his failure to do so has resulted in a loss of £92 10s. 8d.?—That is so.

12. Have you deemed it necessary to take any action in that regard?—Yes, we have taken action and, after consultation with the Department of Finance, a severe reprimand was given to the official concerned, and he was also fined.

13. Deputy MacEoin.—Of course, since the school has been built, it is not actually a loss.

Mr. Connolly.—Strictly speaking, I think that Deputy MacEoin is right, but the difference is that the cost falls on the Exchequer instead of on the manager of the school, whose responsibility it normally would be.

14. Chairman.—May I take it, Mr. Connolly, that if your Department was aware that the gradient was 1 foot in 5 feet, instead of 1 foot in 20 feet, they would not build there?—Well, that might have been possible, although, on the other hand, it might not. It was a site within a site, so to speak.

15. But you take the view that there was a serious dereliction on the part of the officer concerned?—Well, there was a failure on his part to check the report of the Clerk of Works.

Deputy MacEoin.—Since the official has been reprimanded and fined, I think that is hard enough.

“Rents Receivable.

“15. Arrears of rents due to the Commissioners at the end of the year amounted to £4,760 12s. 5d. compared with £6,214 9s. 3d. on 31st March, 1942, a decrease of £1,453 16s. 10d. From statements furnished to me with the appropriation account it appears that of these arrears sums amounting to £2,791 have been recovered subsequent to 31st March, 1943, and that of the balance £68 was considered bad or doubtful.”

16. Chairman.—Do you care to add anything to that, Mr. Maher?

Mr. Maher.—No. That paragraph is for information only, but you will observe that the position in regard to arrears has considerably improved.

Mr. Connolly.—Yes. The actual position at the 31st March, 1944, was that the arrears of £4,760 had been reduced to £738.

17. Chairman.—Which, I think, is a very satisfactory position?—Yes, it is very satisfactory.

“Stores.

“16. I observed that redundant and unserviceable furniture has been allowed to accumulate for a number of years. Under the existing store accounting system articles classified as redundant or unserviceable are, pending their sale or destruction, recorded in a disposal ledger, but arrangements do not appear to exist for the periodical verification of these stocks. In reply to an inquiry, I was informed that unserviceable stores generally consist of a miscellaneous collection of articles, many of which are dilapidated, that they are housed in such a way that it has not been the practice to subject them to a periodical stocktaking, that the task of sorting and endeavouring to identify them would be unduly difficult and involve outlay which it is considered would not be warranted, and that the articles being kept in locked stores the possibility of unauthorised removal after deposit in the stores is very remote.”

18. Chairman.—Do you care to add anything to that, Mr. Maher?

Mr. Maher.—Yes. The present position in regard to these stores, as indicated in the Report, is not quite satisfactory. Owing to the Emergency, I understand that periodical auctions of rejected or redundant stores were deferred, but that arrangements are in progress to auction such of the stores as are not likely to be required. When a clearance has been effected it may be possible to put the accounting arrangements, for the control of these stocks, on a more satisfactory basis.

19. Have you anything to say with regard to that matter, Mr. Connolly?

Mr. Connolly.—Yes; I should like to point out what has been the policy since the Emergency arose. Normally, we would dispose of all redundant stores, but on the advice of the Furniture Clerk we directed that these auctions be deferred.

20. May I interrupt, Mr. Connolly, for a moment? Could you give the Committee a general idea as to what these stores consist of?—Yes. The stores to which the Comptroller and Auditor General refers are, I think, what one might call the rubbish, or stuff that we would not hold in store at all in normal times: such as old sheets, loose covers that were worn out, old carpets that we would not like to use in the offices in normal times, or old damaged chairs and so on. In view of the difficulty, however, of getting supplies of every kind, we decided to hold on to anything that could possibly be used. The result was that goods of the kind that otherwise would have gone to auction were held and subsequently used, although they were not up to our standards. That accounts for the deferring of the auctions and the holding of these residual stores which would normally be treated as redundant. We used them down to the point where we felt that there was no residue worth holding. In other words, we pruned through them, and the ultimate residue was sold during the last three months and realised, to my surprise, almost £500. Of course, the present state of the market is responsible for that, but I wish to make it clear that it was a deliberate policy on our part to hold these residual stores, and I think we were justified in our reckoning that we could use a considerable portion of them.

21. Deputy Cosgrave.—Have all the redundant stores been disposed of?—No, only the worst of them. Anything that we feel can be used at all, even though not up to our standard, we are still holding, but anything that we feel is not worth keeping, we have let go by auction.

22. Chairman.—In regard to that part of the paragraph which speaks of periodical stocktaking, are you quite satisfied in your mind that these redundant stores can safely be retained over a protracted period without periodical stocktaking?— Well, periodical stocktaking goes on, and any such redundant stores as we have are locked away in old stores and stables, attached to Dublin Castle, and we are satisfied that, so far as is humanly possible, they are adequately protected.

23. You are satisfied that no possibility would arise of their being removed without authority?—Well, I think that in these days one could not say what is safe, but so far as it is humanly possible to protect these stores, we have done so.

24. Do you feel, Mr. Maher, that periodical stocktaking is essential for ensuring the proper custody of these stocks?

Mr. Maher.—We would regard it as essential in normal times, but in view of what Mr. Connolly says, that he has already disposed of considerable stocks, it may not be essential now. However, we can look into that matter when the next Report is due.

25. And you, Mr. Connolly, will take up with the Comptroller and Auditor General the matter of the advisability and desirability of having an inventory of these redundant stores?

Mr. Connolly.—Yes. We shall always be glad to have his advice and co-operation.

26. Chairman.—I think it is relevant to see that, apart from the intrinsic value of stores of this character, there should be a sufficient incentive for carrying out an inventory.

Mr. Connolly.—I take it you are referring to what I call the rubbish stock?

27. Chairman.—Well, I think that “rubbish” is scarcely an appropriate term for what yields £500.

Mr. Connolly.—Of course, there was a small percentage of surplus stocks in that, but undoubtedly the prices secured for what I look upon as rubbish were extremely good.

28. Chairman.—Yes, and realising that all of us, sitting around this table, are poor men, the sum of £500 excites our avarice. We now come to the Vote itself. Has any Deputy any question to ask on the subheads?

29. Deputy Cosgrave.—With reference to Subhead EE.1, has any compensation at all been paid in respect of premises commandeered by the Army and damaged during the emergency?—This particular subhead refers to outstanding claims in respect of operations during 1922 and subsequent years.

30. Chairman.—Are we to understand that the Board of Works is not charged with the payment of compensation for premises commandered during the present emergency?—No. The Army deal with such matters themselves.

31. Subhead EE.2 refers to the commandeering of the County Club, Waterford. Was that incident during the 1922 period, which is now closed?—No. That property was taken over under an Emergency Powers Order of 1939 for the accommodation of the Gárda whose barrack had been acquired by the military, and we had to pay £101 2s. 6d., made up as follows: £60 11s. 8d. recoupment to the club in respect of head rent and rates, and £40 10s. 10d. to the Waterford Corporation as first moiety of rates for 1942-43.

32. Does the Club get any compensation for the loss of the use of their premises? —I understand that was settled in previous years.

33. A lump sum was paid to them rather than an annual payment?—Yes.

34. If there was any payment as rent to the County Club itself in compensation for the loss of the use of its premises, would that appear on your Vote?—The Club held the property on a lease expiring on the 24th March, 1942, at a rent of £40 per annum, plus rates and maintenance. The Commissioners paid them £250 in 1940-41 as full and final compensation for any disturbance and inconvenience occasioned to the Club and agreed to recoup them their outlay on rent, rates and insurance. As from the 25th March, 1942, the Commissioners hold the property from the head landlord. That is the position.

VOTE 11—HAULBOWLINE DOCKYARD.

Mr. J. Connolly, called.

No question.

VOTE 32—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE.

Mr. S. A. Roche, called and examined.

Chairman.—There is no note on this Vote by the Comptroller and Auditor General.

35. Deputy Cosgrave.—May I ask on Subhead A. 3—Censorship of Publications —if there is a censorship of plays in operation?

Mr. Roche.—No. Theatres must have letters patent. If they commit a breach of the patent by showing anything indecent they are liable to lose the letters patent. That is the control we have over them. There is no active censorship.

36. So that the Department would only act on the receipt of a complaint?—That is so.

37. Chairman.—Would you give us details of Subhead E.—Expenses of the late Dáil Eireann Courts?—That is a very belated affair as you will see from the note. It was a sum of £25 which was paid by a litigant into the Dáil Eireann Arbitration Court at Tipperary, in September, 1920. He paid in the money but did not get any value for it. After this lapse of years he made application for its return and got it back.

VOTE 33.—GÁRDA SÍOCHÁNA.

Mr. S. A. Roche, further examined.

Subhead O.—Local Security Force: Expenses.

“32. Of the £61,268 provided for this subhead in the estimate a sum of £44,646 9s. 5d. remained unexpended, as only portion of the clothing and equipment required could be obtained. As noted in the account, a quantity of denim uniform clothing surplus to military requirements was taken over from the Army, and I understand that the greater portion of this clothing has been adapted to the requirements of the Local Security Force and issued to members of that body.”

38. Chairman.—Is there anything, Mr. Maher, that you would care to add to that note?

Mr. Maher.—The purpose of the paragraph is to explain the difference between the estimate and the expenditure.

39. Chairman.—In regard to the equipment taken over from the Army, does that appear as a charge on the Gárda Síochána Vote and a credit on the Army Vote, or has there been any bookkeeping entry made?

Mr. Maher.—Not so far as I am aware.

Mr. Roche.—There is no charge.

40. Chairman.—Does that procedure meet with your approval?

Mr. Maher.—Yes. It is quite usual to sanction the transfer of supplies or stores from one Department to another, provided a satisfactory note is made in the Appropriation Accounts.

41. Chairman.—In regard to Subhead K, is the place of detention in Summerhill now superseded?—Yes. Of course, as I am afraid I have said almost too often, it is a Department of Education institution but we have knowledge of it and we know it is closed.

42. Inasmuch as you happen to provide money to escort children thither or to some other suitable place of detention, could you tell us where the children are being escorted to now in view of such closing?—I am not certain of the exact location. It is somewhere in the Glasnevin district, about a mile from the Archbishop’s house in Drumcondra.

43. The Lord Mayor says it is 50 yards from his house. If the children are now half way between the Archbishop and the Lord Mayor, they are safe?—They are in very safe hands, Mr. Chairman.

44. On Subhead Q.—Appropriations in Aid—details of which may be found on page 107, in regard to the sales of cast uniforms—No. 4 in the Appropriations in Aid—we noted on the Army Vote last year, Mr. Roche, that theretofore abandoned Army material was destroyed and sold as rags. Was it the practice in the past, where Gárda uniforms were cast, to destroy them, or was it the practice to sell them?—To sell them.

Always?—Yes.

45. A difficulty arose in Army practice, sometimes, where blankets and the like had been stolen and were found on unauthorised premises, in establishing that they had been stolen, because certain Army blankets were sold after they had become unserviceable. Has that difficulty ever occurred in your Department? —No; I have never heard of it.

46. Deputy M. O’Sullivan.—I should like to ask a question in regard to No. 7 of the Appropriations in Aid. In what circumstances are these payments made from the Road Fund?

47. Chairman.—Under what circumstances are payments made from the Road Fund in respect of expenses of Gárda Síochána in the execution of the Roads Act, 1920, and the Road Traffic Act, 1933?—The Gárda are entitled, under the Road Traffic Act, 1933, or other statutes, to a contribution from the Road Fund towards their expenses in enforcing the Traffic Act generally. Instead of having a calculation each year of what these expenses were—which would have been very difficult—we made a bargain with the Department of Local Government and Public Health, with the concurrence of the Department of Finance, under which we get 2 per cent. of whatever the payments to the Road Fund in any particular year may be.

48. Deputy M. O’Sullivan.—To what pupose is the money put?

49. Chairman.—Deputy the Lord Mayor asks to what purpose is the money put. I take it towards the relief of the Estimate?—Exactly. It is not earmarked in any way. It is meant to compensate the Police Vote for duties which are not strictly police duties.

VOTE 34—PRISONS.

Mr. S. A. Roche further examined.

“33. The statement of the manufacturing and farm account appended to the appropriation account has been examined, and local test examinations of the conversion books and other records dealing with manufacturing operations have been carried out, with satisfactory results.”

50. Chairman.—I take it, Mr. Maher, that that is the usual annual informative paragraph?

Mr. Maher.—That is so, Sir.

51. Deputy Cosgrave.—May I ask Mr. Roche if there is any provision made for keeping hardened criminals or, shall we say, habitués of prisons, apart from first offenders or from people who are in for a short period on some small or technical offence?

Mr. Roche.—Yes. In the first place, of course, all the more serious crimes are punished by penal servitude and the prisoners go to Portlaoighise Prison, and they are automatically separated from minor offenders. Both in Portlaoighise, and in the other prisons, there is a system of classification. First offenders are kept separate; youthful offenders are kept separate.

52. Deputy Cosgrave.—Among women prisoners would there be a place for a girl convicted of a minor offence separate from that for a more hardened offender? —Not a separate building. It would be very difficult for anybody to understand how the classification works without his actually going down and seeing the place, but they are kept separate. They have to work sometimes in the same room, but as far as possible the classes are kept from talking to one another or meeting one another.

53. Deputy M. O’Sullivan.—Is there any form of technical training for the young boys in Mountjoy?—No. The trouble about technical training is that the prisoners are in for such a short time that it is almost impossible to do any— thing. I should say the average period in Mountjoy would not be more than three or four months and technical training would only begin when it would end. They are taught school subjects. They are usually very backward in that sort of thing. There is a school-room there and they learn reading and writing. Of course, the number of really young prisoners there is very small. Most young offenders, as you know, go to the industrial schools or to reformatories.

54. Chairman.—Are you satisfied in your own mind, Mr. Roche, that the segregation in Mountjoy of first offenders from recidivists is really effective?—I I think it is, Mr. Chairman, with this general observation, if I may make it— perhaps I am going too much outside the Vote—I have to run the prison system as it stands, because it cannot be changed in a night. It is very difficult indeed to make any substantial change because that involves building and building is just impossible at the moment. I know that the prisons are necessarily very far from what they could be in an ideal state but progress is slow. If anybody asks me is segregation carried out as I would like to carry it out, I say, “No; we would rather have a different place altogether, different conditions,” but we can only work with the material we have and we do the best we can with it.

55. And the matter is under constant review, I take it?—Yes, particularly from the point of view of building, but the prospects are very poor. We chose a site for a new Borstal near Dublin, and I had hopes that we would see a new Borstal actually functioning in perhaps a year. At the present rate of progress, building will not commence for about three years.

56. Deputy Cosgrave.—Could you say if any examination has been conducted as to the benefits derived from segregation? Have any statistics been compiled as to the effect that prisoners of one kind have on, say, less experienced prisoners or criminals of less experience?—No. Our theory is that they are segregated, so you could hardly compare them. There is no non-segregated class. Of course, there again, if I may say so, there is a vicious circle, perhaps not so much as regards children, but as regards other classes of criminals. For instance, in regard to people convicted of sexual crimes and that sort of thing, you are in a sort of vicious circle. If you lock each particular division of offenders up together, one might say that there is a tendency that they will get worse, that you are creating a narrow group of people all with the same kind of weakness. On the other hand, if you allow them to meet other prisoners, it might be good for them to contact different minds, but you will be told that they may harm the other prisoners.

57. Have you made any efforts to keep them, say, entirely apart—to keep each one of them separate?—Each group separate?

58. Each individual, even?—No. That is complete individual segregation. It was tried long ago and abandoned. It was found to be very bad for the men. They must talk to somebody.

59. Deputy M. O’Sullivan.—It is true to say that there is no contact as between the juvenile offenders and what may be described as the “old lags”?—That is so, Lord Mayor.

VOTE 35—DISTRICT COURT.

Mr. S. A. Roche further examined.

60. Chairman.—At the beginning of the Emergency, transport difficulties were assigned as a valid reason for cutting down the numbers of district courts held. Has the transport situation eased sufficiently to permit of a resumption of the full schedule of district courts?—I think the transport situation has eased so far as this matter is concerned, Mr. Chairman. There was a period when we just could not get petrol for our Justices’ cars. We are doing better in that connection now. I have not heard any complaints about the undue restriction of courts. I cannot remember anybody complaining to me or writing to me that courts had been abandoned which should have been held.

61. In some cases, I think, where there had been a monthly court there is now a court only every two months?—I do not know any such cases, Mr. Chairman. I think they would be rare. I have heard no complaints about it. Obviously, it is undesirable that cases should hang over for two months.

62. Chairman.—Perhaps, at your convenience, you would look into the general question of what courts were being held so as to ensure return to the normal schedule as soon as is practicable?—Certainly, Mr. Chairman.

63. Deputy M. O’Sullivan.—Who is responsible for the maintenance of the buildings of the District Courts?—The local authorities, and they are also responsible for the maintenance of all the courthouses except those in Dublin county borough.

64. What is the position in the Borough of County Dublin?—The local authority, that is, the Corporation, maintain Green Street. There was a sort of bargain which is enshrined in the Courthouses Act, 1935. The Corporation maintain Green Street; the State maintain everything else.

65. Are they responsible for the interior decoration, etc.?—Everything.

VOTE 36—SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE.

Mr. S. A. Roche further examined.

66. Chairman.—Deputy O’Sullivan would like some explanation of Subhead GG—Travelling Expenses of High Court Judges in connection with attendance at Central Criminal Court. How was it that there was no charge provided and yet £24 16s. 9d. was expended?—The note explains that a special subhead was opened by authority of the Department of Finance on 8th September, 1942. The High Court Judges never got any travelling expenses for attending the Courts in Dublin. A Judge has to attend at Green Street for two sessions each year. When the Judges were unable to use their private cars for this purpose during the emergency, the Judge going to Green Street had to take a taxi from his house to Green Street. It was hardly fair to expect that that should be paid out of his own pocket, and we arranged accordingly to repay him.

67. Deputy Cosgrave.—Is there a vacancy at present in the High Court?— Yes, there are only five Judges. The Act entitles us to have six.

VOTE 37—LAND REGISTRY AND REGISTRY OF DEEDS.

Mr. S. A. Roche further examined.

68. Chairman.—Has your attention been directed to complaints regarding undue delay in the furnishing of materials from the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds?—Not in the Registry of Deeds. There were complaints, justifiable complaints, about a year ago about delays at the Land Registry. These delays were caused in latter years partly by the increased work there. Business has been extremely brisk during the emergency. It was also partly caused, not exactly by a lack of staff or in the number of the staff, but by defective organisation in the higher staffing. That has been put right, and I am told that the Land Registry is now entirely up-to-date, or very near it.

69. I had that assurance give me nine months ago in Dáil Éireann. On inquiring from legal friends recently I was informed that the assurance was somewhat optimistic. Perhaps you would have inquiries made regarding the position in the Land Registry?—I have no doubt that the Land Registry is doing its work now efficiently and promptly, but nine months ago that was not so.

70. You are satisfied that the position now is that it is up-to-date?—I would not say that they are actually in the position of having absolutely clear desks—of waiting for work to come in—but it will certainly be up-to-date in a short time. We still lack one higher post which has not been filled.

71. Recently it took me nearly two months to get a map in connection with the sale of a piece of land. I think the map was furnished approximately two months after being ordered?—When was that?

72. The map was delivered a week ago?— That sort of delay is hard to explain. The delay was generally more in title work. I have been in close touch with the Registrar of Titles. He tells me that the position is now satisfactory. There was a bad situation there but it is nearly all right now.

73. Chairman.—I should say in regard to my observation that is it always easy to be sure after the event. I had that experience within the last week. I cannot say with certainty that the fault was with the Land Registry but it induced me to mention the matter so that you could look into it again.

VOTE 38—CIRCUIT COURT.

Mr. S. A. Roche further examined.

74. Deputy Cosgrave.—Are you satisfied that there are sufficient Circuit Judges available for the work in Dublin? —The work in Dublin got into bad arrears, so much so that although we had an additional judge for the last twelve months, it is still in arrears. There would be no difficulty about getting additional judges but for the fact that accommodation is very hard to get. During the present term we will have two additional Circuit Judges in Dublin.

75. Deputy Cosgrave.—In addition to Judge Davitt and Judge Shannon?—Yes. I hope by Christmas that the criminal work will be up-to-date, as well as the civil work. There is no doubt but it got deplorably into arrears within the last year. In fact, frankly, we let it go too far.

76. I might mention the case of a prisoner who was tried originally in the District Court. Depositions were taken in June, 1943. He is still awaiting trial before the Circuit Criminal Court. Such delay causes considerable hardship to such person?—Great hardship. It should not happen.

77. Deputy M. E. Dockrell.—In connection with the jurors’ list, there is a feeling—I do not know whether it is justifiable or not—that the jurors’ list is drawn from a restricted representation, and that some people happen to be more or less always called as jurors?—The jurors’ list is made up by taking the ordinary electors’ list as a basis, and striking out anybody who is not a householder of a certain valuation. The valuation, I believe, in Dublin is £20, and as a result you have a restricted class to draw from. That results in the same people being there this year as were there ten years ago. The idea is to ensure that each man is called about once every three years. If you lower the qualification as regards Poor Law Valuation you will get amongst the jurors people who will say they cannot afford to spend their time on a jury.

78. Deputy M. O’Sullivan.—There is also the question of jurors’ expenses?

79. Chairman.—Deputies are free to ask Mr. Roche for particulars concerning the Vote, and, if he has not got them, the matter then leaves this Committee?—There has never been any Parliamentary Vote, as far as I know, for jurors’ expenses, but we have arranged with the Department of Finance to consider that question in hard cases, and cases where people have to stay in hotels for three or four nights. That is a recent arrangement. It has not yet borne fruit, but I think it will work.

80. Chairman.—If I might momentarily exercise the licence which I invited Deputies to exercise, as Deputy Cosgrave mentioned delays in connection with the Circuit Court, which Mr. Roche undertook to look into, I should like to know if any complaints reached him concerning the difficulty of getting depositions which are required for trials in the Circuit Court with sufficient expedition from the District Court. I have heard of cases where District Justices were obliged to postpone cases when the depositions were not in, and that sometimes men were in custody, while depositions were being taken, for periods extending over several weeks?—As far as the District Court is concerned, my conscience is absolutely clear. There are at present eight Justices working in Dublin compared with three normally.

81. And any delay that happened some time ago has now been eliminated?— Yes. So far as the Justices are concerned, but the Committee will understand that sometimes there is delay for other reasons. Cases occur where Justices are available but witnesses are away, and the next time perhaps the prisoner may be ill, and things drag on for months through nobody’s fault.

82. It is not due to want of a District Justice to hear a case?—No, not for the past 18 months.

Chairman.—That disposes of this Vote, but before closing I want to draw the attention of the Committee to the special subheads opened with the sanction of the Department of Finance. These are under special subheads which come before us today but which were not set out in the Estimate originally presented to Dáil Eireann. They have been opened during the current year, after the Estimates left Dáil Éireann, for special purposes, with the sanction of the Minister for Finance. Two refer to Law Charges and another for the expenses of the late Dáil Éireann Courts, as well as Subhead D. of the District Court Vote and Subhead G.G. of the Supreme Court Vote on which Mr. Roche has given information. If there is no other question to be asked of Mr. Roche, then we are very much obliged to him for his assistance.

VOTE 51—NATIONAL GALLERY.

Dr. G. J. Furlong called and examined.

83. Chairman.—Have there been any acquisitions by the Gallery during the course of the last year?—Oh, yes, quite a number. The grant-in-aid was £1,000 and you will note that we spent up to £1,600 because we were allowed to carry over savings. In the last year we got an early Italian picture, early 15th century, which was bought in this country; a Holy Family, by Bugiardini, a Florentine picture; a portrait of Thomas More, by Mulvany; a Holy Family, 16th century Italian, by Salvati; a miniature of Samuel Lover, by himself; O’Connell Street, by Michael Angelo Hayes; a picture called a Young Mother’s Pastime, by Rothwell; a little Italian reliquary with a miniature; and three Downman pastelles. These totalled £1,400, but we had some money saved.

84. Deputy Cosgrave.—Who decides what pictures are shown in the Gallery? Does it rest with yourself?—Normally, it rests with me, but in view of the emergency I was asked to select what pictures would go away and all the good pictures have gone away for safety. There was no public announcement made with regard to it, but in fact roughly 125 of the best pictures are away. We took the best pictures out of each school so that a nucleus, so to speak, of the whole Gallery would be preserved. You might argue now that there is a better Italian picture left than some Dutch picture taken away. The point is that the best pictures of each school were taken away, so that there are some pictures still in the Gallery which are better than some which have gone away, but out of another school. Most Italian pictures of the 15th century, even if they are only third-rate examples, would perhaps be more valuable in a representative sense than a first-rate 18th century picture, because, the further you go back, the more valuable on the average a picture in this sense is. But, for all practical purposes, it might be said that the cream of the Gallery is away, and if you were to hang all the part of the Gallery which has top light, that is, upstairs, all the main rooms, in other words, there is roughly enough again to hang it completely, spacing them properly.

85. Once a picture is in the Gallery in normal circumstances does it ever happen that it is taken down?—Yes, because not every picture is hung. The Gallery has been in existence since 1864 and at the beginnng the Gallery authorities both accepted and got a lot of pictures which they would not hang now because we have better pictures and we have not got the room. There must always be a certain pool of pictures downstairs, because if a picture is lent or has to be cleaned there must be something downstairs with which to replace it. There are always quite a large number of pictures downstairs, but, on the other hand, it is quite an error to think, as some people think, that we have wonderful treasures which are never shown. That is not true. There is never any first-rate picture downstairs in normal circumstances and most of the pictures downstairs which are any good are shown at certain times. At present it might be said that there is nothing downstairs because every single picture it is possible to use is upstairs. These are what might be called a second lot to replace the pictures which are away. In other words, since the emergency people have had an opportunity of seeing things which have not been hung for 80 years.

86. Chairman.—You may remember that on the last occasion I asked you if there was any prospect of arranging conducted tours or lectures in the Gallery. Had you an opportunity of considering the practicability of that as for the general public or as for chosen secondary school pupils? —Yes, that was discussed at several board meetings recently, and, as a matter of fact, at the Board meeting this morning, but all that is part of a larger scheme about which nothing can be done now. The Gallery has time after time considered the question of having public lectures and the Minister for Education has at different times discussed the project with me, but, as you know, the Board can do nothing about it until a grant is made by Finance. Until money is available, we have no subhead under which to do it. It is also bound up with a further scheme. As things are at present, as the Gallery is only open until 4 or 5 p.m., and as there is no light in it of any kind, it would be advisable if public lectures were to be given to have electric light in the Gallery, so that it could be opened on one or two nights a week and lectures given at a time when most people would be free to attend them. I do not say that nobody would go, but it could hardly be said to be proper to have lectures at 3 o’clock in the afternoon. There is only a limited number of people who could attend at that time. I think that a grant should be made and that there should be a proper official lecturer. If the authorities thought it would not be worth while having them every day in the Gallery, at the beginning —and I put this to the Minister, who rather agreed—I suggest that if Finance would give the money to pay even one lecturer he might lecture two days a week at the Gallery, two days at the Museum, and, if they could come to an arrange-, ment, two days at the Municipal Gallery. The snag about the lecturing business— and I can tell you it because I was a lecturer for six years in London—is that unless you give a fairly good salary you will not get a proper lecturer. In Dublin the possibility of a lecturer making money, apart from his particular job, is not very big, and it is no use giving £50 and getting someone to lecture, because that kind of lecture is not worth having. Unless you can get somebody who is properly trained, he will not do very much good. That is realised in the London National Gallery, and lecturers are paid sufficient to attract the right type. It must be made worth while, because, although a lecturer may lecture for only a few hours in the day, that is more or less deceptive, because in order to be able to do it there must have been a considerable amount of making up and training at some time or another. There should be proper payment, so that persons worth while could be got, and, if the authorities thought it would not be worth while doing it for the National Gallery alone, they could, at the beginning, have one lecturer for the three places I mention.

The Committee adjourned.