Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 25 Apr 1923

Vol. 3 No. 7

GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SALARY AND ESTABLISHMENT BILL. 1923. - THE PREAMBLE.

I move the Preamble as follows:—

WHEREAS Dáil Eireann has resolved and by Article 60 of the Constitution of Saorstát Eireann provided that the salary of the Governor-General of the Irish Free State shall be of the like amount as that payable at the date of the coming into operation of the Constitution aforesaid to the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia and shall be charged on the public funds of Saorstát Eireann;

AND WHEREAS Dáil Eireann has also resolved and by the said Article 60 provided that suitable provision shall be made out of the public funds aforesaid for the maintenance of the official residence and establishment of the Governor-General of the Irish Free State;

AND WHEREAS it is expedient that specific provision should be made for the payment out of the public funds aforesaid of the salary of the Governor-General of the Irish Free State and the maintenance of his official residence and establishment pursuant to the said Article 60;

AND WHEREAS the amount of the salary which, at the date of the coming into operation of the Constitution of Saorstát Eireann, was payable to the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia was the yearly sum of £10,000;

BE it therefore enacted by the Oireachtas of Saorstát Eireann as follows:—

I move the following amendment:—To delete the words "Whereas Dáil Eireann has resolved and by Article 60 of the Constitution of Saorstát Eireann provided" and substitute the words "Whereas it is required by Article 60 of the Constitution of Saorstát Eireann." The amendment I have down is merely a verbal one, and it is intended, as I think, to express the mind of the Dáil in respect of the relations between the Governor-General and the public, and to say in the Preamble, instead of the words "Dáil Eireann has resolved and by Article 60 of the Constitution provided," the words "Whereas it is required by Article 60 of the Constitution." It is in consequence of that Article 60 that we are making this provision. The proposition is to put into words what the Minister himself has given expression to a few moments ago. The Constitution has been agreed to. It was more or less of a bargain, and by virtue of that bargain we are providing this salary. That is what I want to say in the Preamble. I submit it is an important point in regard to the draft as presented to us.

Deputy Johnson's form of the Preamble has the great merit of being correct history. This is a historical matter. It is not by volition of the Dáil that this is done; it is through the operation of the Treaty. I suggested already on the Second Reading that first the Preamble should recite that "Whereas by the Treaty this office is created," and then read "Whereas by Article 60 of the Constitution," etc. I think in the interests of historical accuracy that Deputy Johnson's amendment should be accepted.

Deputy Johnson's amendment does not seem to me to have any merit of historical accuracy which the Preamble as it stands has not. The Dáil did resolve and did provide that the salary of the Governor-General should be so much. It is not laid down in the Treaty what the salary of the Governor-General should be. That was done by resolution of the Dáil following negotiations. Deputy Johnson's amendment seems to me to be a counsel that wherever a thing may be done with bad grace instead of good grace it should be done with bad grace. I believe, when it is something we agreed on, that it should be done with good grace. It seems to me there is a certain amount of Rip Van Winkleism in connection with the attitude of some of us towards the position of the Governor-General. The fears that Miss Mary MacSwiney conjured up on a certain occasion seem not yet, in some minds, to have been allayed.

What were they?

This is not anything that would be vital if the amendment were to be adopted, and I certainly think it is preferable as it stands. As the President has said, in everything in connection with this particular matter the British have dealt with us in the most friendly and reasonable way, and they have behaved with the best of good grace in the entire matter. Even apart from that, I do not think that it is a dignified attitude to be doing things with a bad grace when we might do them with good grace.

I congratulate Deputy Johnson on bringing this and the other amendments forward, because in this Preamble it is desirable we should emphasize the fact that Article 60 of the Constitution stands as it is. Deputies who were here will recollect a very strange phenomenon, and that is, that despite efforts on the part of certain Deputies, the Ministry absolutely refused to consent to make that Article tally with a similar one in the Dominion Constitution. My recollection is that it was pointed out that in the three Constitutions express provision was made to the effect that the salary of the Governor-General should be changeable as to amount whenever the Dominion thought proper. For reasons that I have not yet been able to fathom, that was omitted. Therefore, this amendment is to be encouraged.

There is another consideration that ought to be given to this amendment. The proposition is in the draft as presented, "whereas Dáil Eireann has resolved and by Article 60 of the Constitution provided." This is a Bill of the Oireachtas, and the resolution which preceded the Constitution was a decision of what we called Dáil Eireann, but what was called officially the Provisional Parliament. As this is to be an Act of the Oireachtas, a mere resolution of this Dáil or of a succeeding Dáil, as it might appear in the future reading of the Bill, will not bind the Parliament itself to pass the Bill. So that, apart from any other consideration, it seems to me to be inadvisable to insert in the Preamble that "Dáil Eireann has resolved," to be followed by the words, "and by Article 60 of the Constitution provided." After all, Article 60, speaking strictly and legally, was decided before there was a Dáil Eireann according to the Constitution. The Constitution that we have drafted was drafted by Dáil Eireann as we knew it, but by the Provisional Parliament as they across the water knew it, and to anybody reading the Act it would appear that it is the decision of Dáil Eireann, as now existing, to resolve that the salary shall be so and so. To put in a Bill which has to go before the Seanad a statement that this Dáil has resolved, and that Article 60 of the Constitution provides for so and so, is not very respectful even to the Seanad. We are asking the Seanad to agree to a Bill, and we say "You are to agree to it because we passed a resolution in favour of it." I submit that that contention adds to the argument in favour of the amendment.

It is rather interesting and surprising to hear Deputy Johnson trying to argue away the continuity of Dáil Eireann. Article 35 of the Constitution provides "Dáil Eireann shall, in relation to the subject matter of Money Bills as hereinafter defined, have legislative authority exclusive of Seanad Eireann." This thing that was resolved and provided by the Constitution is a money matter, so that I think there is absolutely no bottom in the last argument of Deputy Johnson.

The Minister for Local Government has a tendency to regard every phrase in a Bill as sacrosanct from the moment it is attacked —that something in the nature of divine inspiration attaches to it. He has discovered a new criterion to-day—what is good taste and what is not. It is, no doubt, my insensibility to matters of taste that makes me unable to see how the recital of undeniable fact in the history of these proceedings should savour of bad taste, whereas the recital of strictly accurate——

On a point of order, I did not refer either to good taste or bad taste. The expression used was bad grace.

That is a point of explanation rather than of order.

Strict truth is always bad grace.

Very well, by way of footnote, for bad taste read bad grace. I cannot share any fear expressed at any time in any assembly by Miss Mary MacSwiney because I am wholly unaware of what those fears might have been, and I am convinced a priori that even if I were aware of them, I should not share them. What is really at issue here is, an obligation to pay this salary to the Officer of the Dominions known as Governor-General is an obligation imposed upon us by Treaty, and by subsequent legislation. The Provisional Parliament to which Deputy Johnson refers, and with which we have continuity unmistakeable, was to implement the Treaty. In the course of implementing the Treaty by framing a Constitution, we provided in this Article 60 for payment of the Governor-General's salary. The determination of the salary was already arranged. It was to be that payable to the Governor-General of Australia. Now, at the time when this was being framed as an Article of the Constitution, a few of us debated the matter, and we tried to make an alteration in the terminology which would be favourable to the Free State, and we failed. It will be said that we are trying to do now in some oblique fashion what we failed to do then. That is not so. We are trying to recite in the Preamble what exactly did occur, to wit, that whereas the Governor-Generalship was created in accordance with the Treaty, and in accordance with such provisions which are quite within the scope of anyone's research to find, that the salary was to be so and so, and whereas in accordance with those arrangements Article 60 was framed. That, I submit, is a correct account, and to substitute in the name of better grace something more polite and more aesthetically commendable, a statement that it was within the resolution of this House is pure irony. Only a slip was made here the Minister for Local Government would not defend it so tenaciously.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

I have to suggest that to say that "it is not by virtue of the resolution of this Dáil," is to suggest that this Dáil had no option but to pass the resolution. Now that might be said about every line and letter of the Constitution. It was made perfectly clear here that anything that was put up in that Constitution was put up for consideration of the Dáil, and the Dáil was perfectly free to do what it liked in the matter. It did certain things, and amongst other things it passed this resolution. If it had not passed this resolution the money could not have been paid. I merely put it that it is not calculated to increase the dignity of this Parliament to suggest that it was not a deliberative assembly, and had not a choice. It had the choice with regard to the Constitution, and with regard to every clause of it, the choice that it had further back last December in the matter of the Treaty. But we here in this building discussed the matter. We were free to consider all the consequences, and we were free to come to our own decision both with regard to the Treaty and with regard to the Constitution. To those who were putting forward the Constitution, and were standing for it, it was urged that in this particular matter you might very well by standing on small points, by showing a difficult thorny disposition, lose something that was more than a point of wording, more than a point of phraseology, more than a point of abstract, of academic aesthetics, and that you might lose the selection that would be approved by the majority of the people of the country for that particular position.

Now there was a disposition on the other side, when the late Mr. Griffith and myself were across negotiating, to be thorny on this matter on the grounds that it was the one thing they had left, that they had abandoned everything else, and that for them this was a valuable point, as for us it was the objectionable point of the Treaty. That was the view they were entitled to take up, and we merely advised the Dáil that not giving way to their inclination with regard to those particular Clauses, and showing a rather truculent outlook on that matter, might not be the height of political wisdom. The Dáil considered the representations that were made, and decided on a particular thing. It is not true that they were not free to decide otherwise. They were free, but they had decided this way, and it is by virtue of their resolutions that those things are set out now, they having considered representations made to them by those standing for the Constitution.

The Minister for Home Affairs does tempt one to a discussion on free will or self-determination. I really feel that the argument he uses, that we were quite free to accept or reject his proposition, is very amusing when he tells us at the same time that it would be refused at a certain price, a certain cost. We weighed the cost, and the Dáil decided that the price to be paid was not worth it, that we may as well accept it as pay the price of not accepting it. The Minister may say that is freedom, but I do not think the Dáil believes it. In any case, once the Minister speaks of a bargain——

Mr. O'HIGGINS

May I suggest that Deputy Johnson's view is that there is only freedom in a vacuum.

When the Minister suggests that there was a bargain, and that a condition was laid down regarding the acceptance of this particular proposition, it is a very strong argument in favour of deleting this part of the Preamble, which says "the Dail has resolved."

It is their suggestion that this was a free choice, an act of our own volition. That is behind the Preamble; that makes him consider that it is better to pretend that it was a free choice, when we are all aware that it was not. It is on record in the debates on the Constitution, and now in the statement made by the Minister himself, that it was not a free choice, in the sense that it was a formal voluntary act of the preceding Dáil. I suggest that the Bill would not lose any of its value if the whole Preamble were struck out. The purpose of the Preamble is to create an atmosphere before you enter on the serious business to be discussed; at the same time the Minister himself tries to create that atmosphere, that here we have an act of grace, a free-will offering from the Dáil to the Governor-General. I submit that that is not a record of the facts, and that it ought not, therefore, to be in the Preamble.

Amendment put and negatived.

I beg to move the following amendment in the second paragraph of the Preamble to delete the words, "and whereas Dáil Eireann has also resolved, and by the said Article 60 provided," and to substitute the words, "And whereas it is also required by the said Article 60."

Amendment put and negatived.

Question put: "That the Preamble stand part of the Bill."
The Dáil divided:—Tá, 39; Níl, 18.
Motion declared carried.

Tá.Liam T. Mac Cosgair.Donchadh Ó Guaire.Uáitéar Mac Cumhaill.Seán Ó Maolruaidh.Seán Ó Duinnín.Mícheál Ó hAonghusa.Seosamh Mag Fhionnlaoich.Pádraig Mag Ualghairg.Deasmhumhain Mac Gearailt.Ailfrid Ó Broin.Seán Mac Garáidh.Mícheál de Stáineas.Domhnall Mac Cárthaigh.Maolmhuire Mac Eochadha.Earnán Altún.Sir Séamus Craig, Ridre, M.D.Gearóid Mac Giobúin, K.C.Liam Thrift.Eoin Mac Néill.Pádraig Ó hÓgáin.

Tá.Pádraic Ó Maille.Seosamh Ó Faoileacháin.Seoirse Mac Niocaill.Piaras Béaslai.Fionán Ó Loingsigh.Séamus Ó Cruadhlaoich.Criostóir Ó Broin.Caoimhghm O hUigín.Próinsias Bulfin.Séamus Ó Dóláin.Aindriú Ó Láimhin.Próinsias Mag Aonghusa.Eamon Ó Dúgáin.Peadar Ó hAodha.Séamus Ó Murchadha.Liam Mac Sioghaird.Tomás Ó Domhnaill.Earnán de Blaghd.Uinseann de Faoite.

Níl.Domhnall Ó Mocháin.Tomás de Nógla.Riobárd Ó Deaghaidh.Darghal Figes.Tomás Mac Eoin.Seoirse Ghabháin Uí Dhubhthaigh.Seán Ó Ruanaidh.Liam Mag Aonghusa.Tomás Ó Conaill.

Níl.Aodh Ó Cúlacháin.Risteárd Mac Liam.Liam Ó Daimhín.Pádraig Mac Artáin.Cathal Ó Seanáin.Domhnall Ó Broin.Risteárd Mac Fheorais.Mícheál Ó Dubhghaill.Domhnall Ó Ceallacháin.

Top
Share