[ DAIL IN COMMITTEE. ] - THE PREAMBLE.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

We will now take the Preamble.

"Whereas the Acts mentioned in the First, Second and Third Schedules to this Act in so far as they are in force in Saorstát Eireann and are temporary in their duration are limited to expire as respects the Acts mentioned in the First Schedule to this Act on the 31st day of December 1922 as respects the Act mentioned in the Second Schedule to this Act on the 18th day of February, 1923 in so far as same relates to tramways and on the 31st day of August, 1923 in so far as same relates to other matters and as respects the Act mentioned in the Third Schedule to this Act on the 15th day of February, 1923."

Then the next recital deals with the two Acts mentioned in the fourth schedule.

"And Whereas the Acts mentioned in the Fourth Schedule to this Act in so far as they were in force in Saorstát Eireann and were temporary in their duration expired on the 31st day of August 1922.

"And Whereas it is expedient to provide for the continuance as in this Act mentioned of the Acts mentioned in the Schedules to this Act and of the enactments amending or affecting the same and that as respects the said Acts mentioned in the said Fourth Schedule to this Act such continuance should be retrospective to the date on which such Acts expired as aforesaid."

Is the Minister satisfied that we may legally continue an Act which has ceased to exist? It appears a purely formal and pedantic point, yet most questions, or many of them that are brought before the Court for decision, are precisely of that type. It is quite possible that if we purport to continue an Act, merely using these words, the judge may decide that as the Act had previously lapsed and as we had not taken measures to revive it, that it is not revived. I suggest even though it is a formality that we introduce the word "revivor."

Mr. O'HIGGINS

In that third recital, "whereas it is expedient to provide for the continuance," we would be prepared to insert "revival."

I think the legal word is "revivor."

Question put: "That the Preamble, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
Agreed.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

I beg to move the First Schedule, which consists of twentytwo Acts, all of which would expire on the 31st of this month.

Question put: "That the First Schedule stand part of the Bill."
Agreed.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

I beg to move the Second Schedule. It consists of one Act which would expire partly in February and partly in August of next year.

Question put: "That the Second Schedule stand part of the Bill."
Agreed.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

I move the Third Schedule. It consists of one Act which would expire on the 15th February next if not renewed—"The Harbours, Docks and Piers (Temporary Increases of Charges) Act, 1920."

Question put: "That the Third Schedule stand part of the Bill."
Agreed.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

With regard to these Acts mentioned in the Fourth Schedule, and which it is sought to renew, the first, entitled "The Local Government (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1916," gives a lot of additional powers to local authorities. One of them deals with the question of notifying disease in barracks. It arose out of the war conditions at the time diseases which were not previously notifiable were made notifiable by that Act. Some members might hold that that was particularly necessary at the moment. The renewal of this Act will, of course, provide for it. I have the text of the Act here.

The other Act provided that buildings be acquired for the accommodation of wounded soldiers, and so on.

The first Act mentioned in the Schedule—"The Local Government (Allotments and Land Cultivation) (Ireland) Act, 1917"—as the title suggests, bears on the whole allotment scheme that is in action at the moment. Local authorities would have no power, unless the Act is renewed, to acquire land and let it out in the way of allotments. The legality and validity of the existing schemes depend on the existence or the continuance of the Act.

It is understood the Act is not continued in so far as it applies to the European war conditions. Is that correct?

Mr. O'HIGGINS

Yes.

Perhaps the Minister would move Clause 1, Sub-section 2, formally again.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

— I move Clause 1, Sub-section 2, again.

Would it be possible to read Section 5, and Sections 6, 13, 21, and 23? Would they be too long to read now?

Let us get on with the business.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

I could, of course, read them, but taken like that they would not convey much to anyone.

Perhaps Deputy Hughes would read them.

I do not want to hear anything about these diseases, and I do not think any of the other Deputies do either.

Will the Minister give us any assurance if that Act is really in operation up to date, or was it up to August?

Mr. O'HIGGINS

It was in operation up to August.

Was it enforced?

Mr. O'HIGGINS

It was the existing law of the country. It was enforced, I suppose, as much and as little as most of the laws.

I commend the Ministry for trying to re-enact this Act even by this improper method. I think it is a very necessary Act, and if you can get it passed through in this way much good will be done if it is enforced.

Question put: "That Clause 1, Sub-section 2, stand part of the Bill."
Agreed.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

I beg to move the adoption of the Fourth Schedule, which includes the two Acts which expired in August—the Local Government (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1916, and the Local Government (Allotments and Land Cultivation) (Ireland) Act, 1917— which it is desirable to renew.

Question put: "That the Fourth Schedule stand part of the Bill."
Agreed.