asked the Minister for Defence if he will state why Volunteer James Browne, No. 26962, who was employed as Storeman in the Command Supply Stores, Limerick Command, and was not transferred therefrom until some time between September 5th and October 8th, 1923, has been denied additional pay as storeman for any period after July 29th, and if he will state why no reply has been made to a letter on the subject, dated 17th January, 1924.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - PAYMENT OF MILITARY STOREMAN.
TOMÁS MAC EOIN
Private Browne was not granted additional pay after the 29th July, 1923, because subsequent to that date he did not perform the duties of Storeman. A reply was not sent to the letter of the 17th January last, as the necessary enquiries were not completed.
I would ask the Minister if he will himself read the letter to which the answer has now been submitted, and satisfy himself that the answer he has now given to me is a satisfactory answer to the letter?
I have read the letter myself, and the outstanding fact in the case, from the point of view of anything practical, for Browne or anybody else, is that James Browne did not perform storeman's duties after the date mentioned, and our regulations are, that being the case, that he cannot receive the additional pay.
Is it a fact that he was in custody until the end of August and in custody on a charge which was proved to be unfounded?
I cannot say definitely what the dates are, but he was in custody for some time, and the charge was not proved, but during the time he was in custody he did not perform the duties of a store-keeper.
That is a logical deduction.
Does the Minister recognise that not only was the charge not proved, but that the magistrate who tried the case directed that special intimation should be sent to the authorities saying that there was no case whatever against the defendant?
I have not gone into the matter as deeply as that, and I do not think any point will be served by actually doing it.