Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 23 Jun 1927

Vol. 20 No. 1

NOMINATION OF MINISTERS, MEMBERS OF EXECUTIVE COUNCIL.

The PRESIDENT

My nomination as President of the Executive Council has been approved by the Governor-General. I now beg to submit formally, for the assent of the Dáil, the names of the Deputies whom I am proposing as Members of the Executive Council. I would like to preface my remarks by saying that I am submitting a list of ten Ministers, nine and myself. I am amalgamating two Ministries. It is my intention to bring forward legislation on the resumption after the adjournment, when it is proposed to set up another Ministry —a Ministry for Works—which would include the administration of the Board of Works, the Stationery Office and Supplies. I move that the Dáil assent to the nomination of the following Deputies as Ministers, members of the Executive Council in charge of the Departments named hereunder:

Deputy Kevin O'Higgins, Vice-President, Minister for Justice and Minister for External Affairs.

Deputy Ernest Blythe, Minister for Finance.

Deputy Desmond Fitzgerald, Minister for Defence.

Deputy Patrick McGilligan, Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Deputy Professor John M. O'Sullivan, Minister for Education.

Deputy Patrick Hogan, Minister for Lands and Agriculture.

Deputy Finian Lynch, Minister for Fisheries.

Deputy Richard Mulcahy, Minister for Local Government and Public Health.

Deputy J.J. Walsh, Minister for Posts and Telegraphs.

It is my intention also to introduce a Bill which would take the administration of the Land Commission from the Ministry of Lands and Agriculture, and place it under the Minister for Fisheries, as I have already announced. I am asking Deputy Burke to act as Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Finance. It would be my intention, after the introduction of the measure I have mentioned, to ask the assent of the Dáil to the new Ministry, but that will not arise until November. All these nominations are for the Executive Council. The Executive Council will then consist of ten Ministers. I formally move these nominations.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

On a point of procedure, is it the intention to have each nomination dealt with separately, or to have the nominations dealt with en bloc? Are we to vote on the nomination of each Minister or to take the whole lot en bloc?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The nominations are for the Executive Council and must be assented to en bloc.

Mr. MORRISSEY

I want to raise an objection to the appointment of the Minister for Industry and Commerce on the grounds that the administration of his Department has not, to say the least of it, been what it should have been in the lifetime of the last Dáil. From the declaration made by the President this afternoon, we may, I think, safely assume that the same practice will operate in the future, that there will be the same want of sympathy with the unemployed, with those employed on the Shannon scheme, and with the question of the extension of unemployment insurance that there has been in the past. There are to-day in this country anything from 50,000 to 80,000 unemployed. I want to state that in my opinion no serious attempt has been made by that Department to deal with the question of unemployment or to provide a remedy for it.

I suppose we may assume, if the policy is to be the same, as we are told it is to be, that no serious attempt will be made to remedy the unemployment-evil. We contend, notwithstanding the statement which was made by the Minister for Industry and Commerce in the last Dáil, that it is the duty of this Government, or any Government that will be functioning in this country, to provide work for the people, and that if they fail to provide work it is their duty to provide maintenance.

The Government have failed to do either one or the other. There was a good deal of talk during the election campaign about the unemployment problem. There was a good deal of foolish talk about it by persons who knew very little about it. There was a great deal of talk about the dole, and usually we found that some candidates in their election addresses stated that one of their first duties, if elected, would be to abolish the dole and find remunerative employment for those who are unemployed. It is, perhaps, no harm to mention for the information of some of the old Deputies, and perhaps of all of the new Deputies, that there is no such thing as a dole in the Free State. Men and women who are unemployed only receive unemployment benefit in accordance with the number of stamps which they have to their credit. As soon as these stamps are exhausted the unemployed person has either to beg from door to door or try to obtain outdoor relief from the County Home. We say that men who are willing to work, and who are anxious to work, should not be reduced to that position.

We say that a government which look upon that position, as apparently the present Government do, as being a normal situation have failed in their fundamental duty to a large body of citizens. The Department of Industry and Commerce have, as I have said, during the past four years, shown a complete want of sympathy, a complete want of any desire, apparently, to deal with that situation seriously. There is a good deal of talk about oaths, and a number of matters that are supposed to be of major importance, but to us the greatest and most important question confronting the country to-day is what is going to be done with the 50,000, 60,000 or 70,000 or 80,000 unemployed. We do not say that the Government can settle the unemployment question with a wave of their hands. We know that they cannot, but we do say that they ought to show a desire to deal with it, and we think this House is entitled to have an expression of opinion from the President, or somebody on the Government benches, as to whether there is to be any departure from their old policy of dealing with the unemployment problem. We want to know whether they are satisfied that the normal state of affairs in this country is to be represented by 50,000 or 60,000, or 70,000 or 80,000 unemployed. I mention these figures because we do not know the exact number of unemployed, and the Minister or his Department does not know the exact number.

Mr. McGILLIGAN

We have given it.

Mr. MORRISSEY

The Minister has not given the exact number of unemployed. He stated in this House that he did not know and could not find out the exact number. It may be 40,000 or it may be 80,000. The Minister can give us the figures for those who register for unemployment benefit, but anyone who knows anything about the unemployment problem knows quite well, and the Minister knows quite well, that they represent only a number, perhaps only a comparatively small number, of unemployed.

That number may represent 80 per cent. of the unemployed or it may represent only 40 per cent. We are in the position that we do not know, but we do know, that notwithstanding the sugar beet factory, the Barrow drainage scheme, and emigration to the extent of 30,000 per year, there are from 50,000 to 80,000 unemployed. We have heard very often, and we heard a good deal about it during the election, that 18 new factories have been started in the country and that they have given a good deal of employment, but we have not been given the other side of the picture and told how many factories have been closed down and how many people have been driven out of employment. We would like to know that. The fact remains that, notwithstanding the amount of employment given by the starting of new factories, and by the increased work which has been given on the roads, and the reduction in population caused by the tide of emigration, there is no appreciable reduction, as far as we can see, in the number of unemployed from one month to another, or from one year to another. I say that in itself is a condemnation of the policy of the Department of Industry and Commerce. It shows that no serious attempt has been made to deal with the problem.

Without trying to exaggerate in any way, I put it that if the Ministers learned nothing else during the election campaign they learned there is a deal more poverty, and even starvation, than many members of the House or the Government may have realised. By virtue of our position we are, perhaps, brought more in touch with it than members of the other Parties. It is not a problem out of which anyone with a sense of decency would like to make political capital. It is bad enough in actual fact without exaggerating it. So far as we are concerned, this is the most important Department of all, and I think we are entitled to know whether the policy of that Department for the next five years is to be the same as it has been in the past five years, and whether any real sincere attempt is to be made to relieve unemployment. If not, I am going to vote against the nomination of the President for the office of Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

I would like to have the situation made clear in regard to the proposal of the President. Am I to understand that it is proposed that permanently the Minister for Justice should also be the Minister for External Affairs? Is it the intention of the President to introduce legislation to make that permanent, or am I to take it that it is only a temporary expedient, and that at a later stage we will have a new Minister for External Affairs, and that, in fact later, instead of having a Ministry less, we will have an additional Ministry? As I am not clear on this point, I would like to have information on it before we go any further.

Mr. ANTHONY

I desire to support the protest of Deputy Morrissey against the appointment of Deputy McGilligan as Minister for Industry and Commerce. I also wish to emphasise the figures that Deputy Morrissey gave with regard to unemployment. We are all aware that the official figures published from time to time by the Labour Exchanges do not really represent the actual amount of unemployment that exists in the country. These figures simply represent the numbers that register day by day and those who are drawing unemployment benefit. We are also aware that when the unemployed people cease to draw benefit they automatically go off the roll of the Labour Exchanges. The figure of 60,000 unemployed has been mentioned. I would go further than Deputy Morrissey and say that those affected by unemployment number, roughly, about 200,000.

It was stated by the President to-day that during the last 3½ or 4 years building operations on a large scale have taken place in the Saorstát. It was stated in Cork during the elections, and in fact all over Munster, that a very large number of houses had been built. The Government Party took the credit for having most of them built. I tell the Dáil that the amount of money allocated by the British Government for the burning of Cork City Hall was devoted to the building of houses in the city. The credit for those houses was taken by the Government Party. When computing the number of houses built in the Free State and the amount of money spent in building, it is necessary to subtract the amount contributed by the British Government as compensation for the burning of Cork City Hall. In addition, houses built for British ex-service men out of British funds have been included in the figures given for the Free State.

Towards the close of the last Dáil a motion was put down by Deputy O'Donovan asking that the case for flax cultivation should be considered. On reading that motion I find that Deputy O'Donovan did not ask for a tariff or a subsidy, but that the case for flax should be considered. In Cork we have the only flax factory in the Free State. It is fully equipped with machinery, and the men and women operatives are highly skilled, yet Deputy O'Donovan's motion was turned down. These amongst other reasons urge me to support Deputy Morrissey in the protest he has made against the appointment of Deputy McGilligan.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

Might I now have the information that I asked for?

The PRESIDENT

I intimated that I would deal with the whole matter at the end of the discussion.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Deputy Heffernan has asked a question.

The PRESIDENT

I think that is a question of law. I do not know that any necessity arises to introduce legislation to deal with the matter. I could certainly combine four Ministries out of the eleven if I was disposed, and it would not be necessary to introduce legislation to deal with it.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

I want to have the situation made perfectly clear. The President is combining certain Ministries. He states that it is his intention to introduce legislation to establish a new Ministry. I want to know if it is the intention of the President permanently to maintain a combination of Ministries as he has announced?

The PRESIDENT

No.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

His decision is going to affect my attitude and the attitude of our Party towards the nominations made to-day. Are we to understand there is to be a reduction in the number of Ministries, or actually an increase at a future date? According to the statement made by the President, I understand it is his intention to increase the number of Ministries, rather than reduce them, at a future date.

The PRESIDENT

No.

Mr. DAVIN

I want to refer briefly to another aspect of the unemployment policy of the Government, which would go to show that there is a complete lack of sympathy or consideration for the position of the unemployed. In many cases that come before me—and I think the same applies to other Deputies on these Benches—I find that the machinery of the Government Department responsible for dealing with the claims of those who become unemployed does not work in the effective way that one would expect. In several cases, I find that a number of men throughout the country are being compelled to pay unemployment insurance contributions, the money being deducted from their wages and their cards stamped, but when they become unemployed and apply for benefit they are told they are not eligible because they possess small holdings with valuations of £2 or £3. I want to know why these people should be compelled to pay unemployment insurance contributions and have their cards stamped, seeing that when they look for benefit they do not get credit even for the stamps on the cards. I protest emphatically against that policy being pursued by the Department, and I say that the Minister should alter the regulation or the law that compels men to pay for unemployment insurance, when they will not get credit for the payments they make. Deputies were asked in the past not to put down too many questions on the Order Paper concerning claims for unemployment benefit and other matters, because of the expense incurred by the State in having to get replies within a period of 48 hours.

I have had reason to protest to the Minister on account of failure to reply to communications addressed to his Department within a reasonable time. These communications requested information as to whether or not he was prepared to sanction payment of unemployment insurance benefit to men who had made application. I have addressed queries to the Minister's Department, and I have invariably found that unless these communications were repeated there was hardly any likelihood of receiving a written reply within a period of about a month. If we put questions in the House, the replies will cost from ? to 3/- in telegraphic expenses, but we will get the reply within forty-eight hours. As against that, we cannot get a reply, as I have explained, within a month if we address a communication to the Department. Those two matters show that there is complete lack of consideration for the position of the unemployed. I hope these matters of detailed administration will be righted in the future, and that the State will be saved money in providing us with answers through the medium of the House by the institution of a more effective system of dealing with correspondence in the Department of Industry and Commerce.

Mr. T.J. O'CONNELL

I want to take the earliest opportunity of protesting against the proposal foreshadowed in the President's statement as regards the division of Ministries— the taking of lands from the Department of Agriculture and the giving of them to the Department of Fisheries. In the course of the campaign in the West recently, I was through every village in South Mayo. If there were two Departments which were criticised and about which I heard frequent complaints, they were the Department of Fisheries and the Department of Lands. Everybody who has had any experience of the West knows that the Land Commission has bungled matters very seriously there. In many cases land distribution has been a farce in the West. Land has been held there by the Land Commission for the past fourteen or fifteen years, while people have been forced to exist on uneconomic holdings adjoining these undivided lands. All over the constituency of South Mayo —and what is true of South Mayo is true of Galway and the West generally—there are serious complaints about the bungling of the Land Commission. The complaints with regard to the Fisheries Department are almost equally numerous. Now the suggestion is that the Department of Lands is to be taken from the Ministry of Agriculture and handed over to the Ministry of Fisheries. Something might be said for the change if the Department of Fisheries had made a great success of its own job during the past four or five years. If that were so it might be justified in taking on another job, but anybody who knows the Western seaboard knows that this Department has been anything but a success. It has not taken the steps it should have taken to develop the fishing industry. Now, in addition to that great task of developing the fishing industry, it is proposed to superimpose upon it the task of the division of land. I take the earliest opportunity of protesting against that proposal.

I had hoped to hear from the President some statement as to his proposals in regard to the regions known as the Gaeltacht. Nothing has been said as to that question. In the course of one speech in the election campaign, the President suggested that his intention was to create a special department for the Gaeltacht. The President, in his announcement now, did not make any reference to that matter. I suppose it is again a case of forgetting the poorer areas of the country. In Connacht the complaint is general that that province —the poorest of the provinces—was forgotten by the last administration. At the very outset of the career of the new administration we have an indication of the same thing. One of the Deputies now proposed for membership of the Executive Council was Chairman of a Commission which inquired into the problem of the West. Every Deputy knows that the western area has a special problem of its own. In the report of the Commission which I have alluded to, the statement is made that "the withdrawal of the Congested Districts Board and the placing in the hands of the ordinary Government departments of matters previously dealt with specially by this Board has been a serious drawback in many ways to the districts concerned." The old British Administration recognised that the West had a special problem of its own. They set up a special Board and gave it extra-legal powers to deal with this particular problem. One of the first things that the Irish Administration did was to abolish the Congested Districts Board and merge the work in that of the Land Commission. We have now a statement by a Commission set up by the Government that that was a mistake and proved a drawback in many ways to the districts concerned. Despite that, no attempt has been made during the past twelve months to put into operation the findings of the Gaeltacht Commission. Neither is any suggestion now made with regard to that question. The only proposal made is one which is bound to be retrograde —the merging of two Departments which had to do specially with those districts. I do not believe that that plan will be a success.

Mention has been made of unemployment. The Deputy proposed as Minister for Industry and Commerce states that he knows the number of unemployed people. I wonder does he include in his computation the number of people who have to go from the West of Ireland to other countries for employment—the number of migratory labourers. I protest against the proposal of the President to merge these two Departments, and I protest against his omission to deal with the setting up of a Ministry, as foreshadowed by him some time ago, to deal with the special problems which exist in the West.

Mr. BAXTER

The point made by Deputy O'Connell with regard to the transfer of the Department of Lands to the Department of Fisheries requires explanation. I should like to hear the justification for this change. I am not going to comment on the competency of the Minister who is to take up this work, but I think we should have some justification for the change. As regards the point raised by Deputy Heffernan, the President has not made the position clear. We compliment him from these benches on the amalgamation of two Ministries. One Minister is now to do the work formerly discharged by two Ministers. I think that proposal will meet with general approval. On the other hand, the President informs us that he intends later to introduce legislation for the formation of a Ministry to take charge of public works. We have, I think, eleven Ministers at present. Are we going to have another? The President tells us that he could so amalgamate Ministries that one man would do the work of three or four men. We view with dissatisfaction any proposal to establish another Ministry, which would mean an additional salary. I am aware that the work to be carried out in connection with the Drainage Acts will be onerous in the future, but I do not understand why a Deputy in the position of Parliamentary Secretary would be any less capable of discharging that work than he would be if raised to the position of Minister.

I do not think that the office requires to be raised to that position and dignity in order that the work would be effectively done. If we are to give support to the proposal that the names submitted to fill the offices which the President has named will have our approval, let it not be taken that we are giving support to the proposition that at a future time another Ministry is to be set up. The President is not proposing that now, I hope. If he is, he cannot have our support. When the time comes, we will deal with that. We think there is no necessity to set up another Ministry even though it was the intention of the President that that Ministry might be filled by the man already doing the work of Minister and acting as Minister. The position is that the office is being created, and when you create an office it is difficult and unsatisfactory to abolish it.

With regard to the names submitted, we have no desire to make unfavourable comments on the Deputies who are to fill the positions as Ministers. We might, in the case of some of them. But we recognise that we will have, at a later stage, an opportunity of making complaints against the methods of administration which undoubtedly we must come up against in the course of our work here.

Mr. McMENAMIN

I rise to enter my protest against the reappointment of the Minister for Fisheries. It is suggested by the President that not only is he to be the Minister for Fisheries, but also that he is to be Minister for Lands. On behalf of those for whom I speak, I must register my protest against his appointment. He has been an utter and absolute failure as Minister for Fisheries. It would be improper at this moment to go farther into this matter, because the appointment of these Ministers is of an urgent nature owing to the peculiar constitutional circumstances that arise. But I must here take this opportunity of registering my protest against the conduct and the abject failure of the Minister for Fisheries in his office. There will be other occasions for dealing with this matter, but so far as the fishermen of the Irish coast are concerned, it is their unanimous opinion that if there has been any Minister in the past that has been a failure, it is the Minister for Fisheries. I rise to enter my protest against his reappointment as Minister.

Mr. COLOHAN

I hope that the new Ministers will pay attention to the criticism passed here this evening. In particular I would ask the Minister for Industry and Commerce to pay attention to the views put forward by the Deputies on these benches. We all know that, in many cases, unemployment benefit has been kept back for a considerable time from people in dire want, and this is all through the sloth of his Department in dealing with the matter. I will pass from that now and hope that the Minister will be a little more amenable to the representations made from these benches in such matters.

With regard to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance, I now understand that that office is to be turned into a Ministry of Works. I would like the Parliamentary Secretary to consider the question of raising the wages on the River Barrow scheme to at least that paid on the Shannon scheme—32/- a week—and also that these men would come under the scope of the Unemployment Insurance Act. When these men are thrown out of employment for short periods of two or three weeks they cannot get any unemployment benefit. That is a great hardship. I think that in dealing with a scheme of that magnitude, the workers ought receive some consideration. The Department ought not try to take all the sweat and blood out of them in order to cheapen the scheme. We all know these men are standing up to their knees in water in all weather and still they are paid only 30/- a week and are not entitled to unemployment benefit. They receive none of the benefits of that Act. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will consider that favourably and raise the wages to 32/- a week. It is not so very much. It is a moderate demand from these benches and I think it should be met. With regard to the Department of Lands, I would ask that in the future no migrants should be placed on the lands of North Kildare until the people in Kildare first receive their portion.

Mr. P. HOGAN

What about Deputy O'Connell's point?

The PRESIDENT

Do you agree with Deputy T. O'Connell on that point?

Mr. COLOHAN

I do not. I say to Deputy O'Connell, let him keep his migrants in his own county.

Mr. McGILLIGAN

Another split.

Mr. COLOHAN

I am speaking now to the Minister, and I hope that he will put a stop to the planting of these men in Kildare until Kildare men are first satisfied——

Mr. CORISH

Is that possible?

Mr. COLOHAN

Now we are going to have a new Minister for Local Government, and while I cannot say many fine things of the last Minister, still I am prepared to say that in some cases he did his best.

Mr. CORISH

For Kildare.

Mr. COLOHAN

I want to call the Minister's attention to the system of giving out road work in large contracts to contractors who are not giving sufficient employment to local labour. In Newbridge there are four men employed on such contracts, whereas, if the work had been given in small contracts, we would have forty or fifty men employed and have the money spent in the neighbourhood, instead of having huge profits going away across the water. I think that is a matter that should receive careful attention from the Minister for Local Government in future. I do not know what will be the attitude of the Minister for Defence in the future. In my constituency there is a big military station. I hope that the Minister's first action will not be the reduction of the number of workers there. I am going to give fair warning that we will not have that.

As to the Minister for Education, I am very glad to see that he has been nominated for that position. He is the only man in the whole bunch of them of whom everybody is in favour. As for the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, I am sorry that my late colleague, Deputy Norton, is not here.

Mr. HORGAN

I think it is due to the Dáil that when an amalgamation of Ministries is proposed at least a reason might be given for the suggested amalgamation. Is the explanation that the Ministries, as formerly constituted, were incompetent to carry out their duties, or is the amalgamation for reasons of economy? At least we are entitled to have some information to guide us as to what action we should take. To my mind it is only reasonable to expect that information of that kind might be given us. I was out of the House for a moment, and if I have misconstrued what was going on, I hope I will be excused. I do not quite understand whether the Ministers are to be taken en bloc or separately.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Together.

Captain REDMOND

"The more we are together——"

Mr. HORGAN

We are entitled to some information from the President as to the reasons for the amalgamation. There is one system that has been set up under the Dáil that, to my mind, calls for serious and earnest consideration, as it affects a good many public boards, in fact nearly all, in the Free State. I refer to the system known as combined purchasing. I understood, when it was first introduced, that it was introduced for reasons of economy; but from my information, instead of it being a means of providing economy in the supply of materials for public boards, on the contrary, it is more expensive.

Mr. GOREY

On a point of order, is this a proper subject to introduce at this stage, or are we going to listen to a series of Estimates debates? All this can be properly thrashed out when the Estimates come up for consideration. I think it is now out of order.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

It is not out of order yet.

Mr. HORGAN

I was saying that instead of this combined purchasing system leading to economy, on the contrary, it is leading to more expense and greater inconvenience to public bodies than if they were allowed to continue as under the old régime. I happened to have been a member of a public body for some time, and it was our experience, for the short time the combined purchasing system was in existence, that it led to a good deal of inconvenience for public bodies, and was not at all as satisfactory as the old system. I ask whoever is responsible and whatever Department is concerned to pay attention to the matter in order that it may be put on a more economic and satisfactory basis than that which it occupies to-day.

It is very hard for a new member like your humble servant to criticise generally and be expected to vote for Ministers en bloc. It would appear that at a moment's notice we are expected to launch out our opinions of how the Ministries are being conducted, and we do not get a reasonable opportunity of making due preparation. After all, in order properly to examine into the affairs of particular Departments, you must attack the heads. That is what we have been asked to do. We are told now that our position is that we will have to accept them in the manner in which they have been suggested. It is a very unfair manner of doing business, and the President, in my opinion, has not treated the Assembly with reasonableness.

Mr. EVERETT

Why did you not vote?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Deputies will have an opportunity of discussing the administration of each Ministry. We are not called upon now to debate the administration of each Ministry; we are merely called upon to say whether as a group these people are suitable to be on the Executive Council. The President, I think, could not treat the House more reasonably than he is treating it under the Constitution. Another and a better opportunity will arise for discussing the administration of the various Departments than this particular opportunity; in fact, other and much better opportunities will arise.

Mr. DALY

I was just about to join in the chorus of requests, but now I do not know if I am in order.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Perhaps the Deputy will postpone his request?

Mr. DALY

What I wanted to mention is the matter of the Awbeg drainage. Am I out of order?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I am afraid so.

Mr. O'GORMAN

I rise to oppose the appointment of Deputy Walsh as Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. I think he has clearly demonstrated within the last few years his unfitness for the post. As you all know, the postal charges have been doubled and the services have been halved. In addition to that he has imposed a tax called a statistical tax for which I think no justification can be found. It is probable the failure in that Department may be traced to the fact that it is plain and palpable that for a considerable period he has devoted far more time to almost everything else than he has devoted to postal methods. I am confining myself, not through personal motives, to the point that he be not appointed. As has been mentioned, there will be future occasions on which we can discuss the administration of his Department.

Mr. WHITE

I am somewhat disappointed that I was not offered the Ministry of Fisheries. I would like to ascertain from the President if, by adding Lands to the Department of Fisheries, it will mean the whole and entire administration of the Land Commission?

The PRESIDENT

Yes.

Mr. M. DOYLE

I would like to mention, first of all, that I have no personal animosity to any of the Deputies named to fill the different Ministries. With regard to this fusion of the Ministries of Fisheries and Lands, I would like to know is this move made in order to expedite the division of lands and hasten the vesting of lands which are purchased under the 1923 Act? If it is done for this motive I am quite satisfied. After all, this is a thing that is engaging the attention of the whole country. The unpurchased tenants are complaining that there is no sign of their lands being vested, and they are losing a small reduction which, at the present moment of depression, would be very valuable to them. If this is meant to expedite the division of lands and the finishing up of land purchase under the 1923 Act, I heartily endorse it. On the other hand, I have great fear that it is going to delay the matter because by going out of the hands of an experienced Minister and going into the hands of an inexperienced Minister, I fear it will not tend to hasten the division or vesting of lands throughout the country.

Mr. JOHNSON

I would like to intimate to Deputies that the motion before the House is one of assenting to names to fill certain offices. If the Dáil assents it is accepting responsibility along with the President for the fitness of these particular individuals for particular offices and, by implication, is assenting to the proposition laid down by the President as to the amalgamation of various Ministries. Reference-has been made to the conduct of the Department of Industry and Commerce by Deputy McGilligan who, it is proposed, should continue to fill that office.

I think it is incumbent upon us, at any rate on these Benches, to oppose the motion containing that proposition. The fitness of the present Minister for-Posts and Telegraphs has also been questioned. I think, too, this list would have been greatly improved had the name of Deputy J.J. Walsh been attached to some other Ministry than that of Posts and Telegraphs. It is a certain fact, that nobody will dispute who has knowledge of the circumstances, that the recent administration, or perhaps one might say the administration for a long time past, of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs has made very difficult the proper working-of his Department, and that the recent development in that Department, which has already been discussed in this House, and discussed much more fully and intimately outside, shows that there has been no confidence in the public mind in the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs in the administration of that Department. There are very many men who have the highest admiration for the Deputy personally, and for his competence in other walks of life, but who unanimously agree that in the work of his Department he has failed, and ought to make a change. In asking the House to assent to this general proposition en bloc we have to ask ourselves whether we are approving of those names for those offices, and by implication also whether we are approving of the proposals of the President indicated in his opening statement, the setting up of a new Ministry of Works, the amalgamation of the offices of the Ministries of Lands and Fisheries, and also of the combination under the one Minister of the two Ministries of Justice and External Affairs. I think the House cannot be satisfied with those various propositions. I think the President in proposing them has made a departure which was foreshadowed in including all those Ministers as members of the Executive Council. I want to repeat what I said in an earlier discussion on this subject. The inevitable consequence of this enlarged Executive Council is that we are going to have an inner Council of three or four persons who are going to work in and among themselves, leaving an outer fringe nominally to accept responsibility, but who will, in fact, have no active say in the decisions come to by the inner circle. That is one of the consequences of this large Executive Council which I, for one, predict. The matter is before the House, and is one which we have either to assent to or disagree with, and I propose to ask the House not to agree.

Captain REDMOND

The position in which Deputies are placed is a rather difficult one, because if objection is taken to any of these appointments the only alternative is to vote against the whole of them.

Mr. MORRISSEY

Or not vote at all.

Captain REDMOND

Or not vote at all. But it is a distinctly unfair position, because though one may be in favour of perhaps nine out of the ten appointments and names submitted, one may not be in favour of the remaining one, and to vote for them all commits you to expressing a view of which you are not in approval. I must say that I am in complete agreement with the suggestion to amalgamate the Ministry of Justice with the Ministry of External Affairs, but I think that there should be some explanation given as to the reason for the proposed amalgamation of portion of the Ministry of Lands with the Ministry of Fisheries. It was intimated some time ago, through a speech. I think, delivered by the President, that it was the intention of his Government to set up a Ministry which would deal with what are generally known as the congested areas, and are we to take it that the transfer of the Land Commission to the Ministry for Fisheries is now a fulfilment of that pronouncement? If so, of course, it will not be a separate Ministry. If not, is it the President's intention to carry out what he previously expressed?

We are called upon now to vote, to approve or disapprove of the nomination of ten Deputies for ten different positions, and while I have nothing whatever to say against any of these Deputies in their personal capacity, I must register my protest against the proposed continuance in office of the present Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. I think it certainly would have been, to say the least of it, advisable to have tried him elsewhere, because he has not in any way shown, during the period of his office in that capacity, that he has conducted that Department in the manner in which it should have been conducted by a responsible Minister. I do not think I would be going out of my way if I were to say that for a Minister to have made the attack that he did upon a portion of his own staff who were unable to reply to him, in the place he made the attack, was altogether improper conduct for a responsible Minister, and I do think that something ought to be done to prevent the recurrence of such a state of affairs in the future. Now the position I am placed in is that while I have no objection to the nomination of most of those Deputies to the positions which they are called upon to fill, I have objection to some of them, and that being so, if I were to record my vote for them all I would be taken as approving of all the appointments. I do not approve of all the appointments and therefore I cannot record my vote in favour of the appointments en bloc, and the only way, in my view, to protest against the appointment of any of them, while approving of the appointment of some of them, is to vote against the proposal in toto.

The PRESIDENT

As you mentioned, sir, as the session proceeds opportunity will be afforded to Deputies for dealing with matters of administration. I do not propose to enter at any great length into the administrative matters which have been the subject of most of the discussion, but just to touch very briefly upon them. May I say, in answer to those Deputies who made inquiries regarding the proposal to place the Vice-President in the combined office of Minister for Justice and External Affairs, that the reason is not, as the new Deputy from Cork has suggested, that the Minister who had charge of the Department was incompetent.

Mr. HORGAN

I asked was it so, or was it for reasons of economy.

The PRESIDENT

I presume I am entitled to answer the Deputy. When the Deputy gets older and gets more experience he will approach matters with less prejudice and will learn to sit quietly in his place while getting an answer. If the Minister for External Affairs, Deputy Fitzgerald, who, I regret to say, is very ill at the moment, were incompetent to discharge the duties of Minister for External Affairs, I would hesitate to nominate him to the Ministry of Defence. I thought that that would have been obvious to the Deputy, and I am sure that in a short time he will appreciate the point. The Minister for External Affairs was a most competent Minister, and in the negotiations which took place both at Geneva and the Imperial Conference gave evidence of his ability, capacity and patriotism, and that tribute was paid to him by others as by me, by people of other countries, and I would be very sorry that it would go out from this House that there should be any question of the competence of the Minister in a matter of that kind.

It is unnecessary to introduce legislation to effect the discharge of the duties of both of these Ministries by one Deputy. I do not know whether it is quite appreciated in the House, or outside, that for a considerable portion of the last five years Ministers of this State have worked harder and for longer hours than Ministers in any other State. The strain has told on some of them. It so happens that it was not my intention to have amalgamated these two Ministries, but the Vice-President, who has been one of the most hardworked of all the Ministers, told me within the last week that as his work had lessened in his Department he thought he would be able to take on the work of the Ministry of External Affairs. That is one more tribute, if tribute were necessary, to his anxiety to discharge the duties of his office, or any office of State, regardless of any personal inconvenience. This morning he went to bed at 2 o'clock. That is another evidence of the fact that Ministers do not spare themselves in their work.

It is unnecessary to amalgamate these two Ministries so far as law is concerned. I do not anticipate any other amalgamation of offices. I am not now asking for approval of that proposal. I am asking for the approval of the appointment of nine Ministers other than myself. The House has already acquiesced in my appointment. I may say that from the point of view of the Constitution they are entitled to the same support as I was. Their policy is the same as mine. There is no difference. There is agreement between us. There is no intention to have an inner and outer Ministry. We have not had it at all events since I have had responsibility for the administration. There were occasions, even while the Executive Council consisted only of seven members, when we had the benefit in council of some Extern Ministers. From our experience during the last four years we have found that the Extern Ministry proposal was not a workable one. I think that a close examination by any person interested in proportional representation will convince him at once that, as regards the idea underlying the Extern Ministry proposal, a Coalition Government in power could not expect support through the appointment of Extern Ministers. That would not be the way to do it. If there be coalition it should be in the Executive Council and not by the appointment of Extern Ministers.

I thought that in connection with Government policy a little more attention was paid to addresses given by the President of the Executive Council in various parts of the country, but as I find I have been wrong I will have to reiterate now what I said on many platforms. One peculiarity of the present situation is that I am attacked from the extreme right for not adopting a certain policy and, at the same time, threatened by the left that if I adopt that policy I am going to hear more about it. I read with infinite care the Report of the Gaelteacht Commission. The principal recommendation in connection with that report was that a special commission should be established with a paid chairman to watch administration in the Gaelteacht area. I am stating it rather briefly and, perhaps, crudely, but that is the kernel of the proposal. That did not commend itself to the Executive Council. The Executive Council considered this report, and has had it examined in every department of the State, as I explained on the hustings. Unlike others, I do not say one thing on the hustings and another thing here. I explained on the hustings that our proposal was to set up a special Ministry.

What is this Ministry to do? Mention has been made of fisheries. The question of fisheries is to a very large extent the problem of the Gaelteacht. I admit that there are promising fisheries in Arklow and Howth, but the main fishery activity of the country is along the seaboard in the Gaelteacht area, and it is obvious, if you are to have a Ministry dealing with Gaelteacht problems, that fishing is one of the most important industries in connection with the Gaelteacht. Deputies who read the Gaelteacht Commission's report will recollect that the Land Commission, reclamation, drainage, and so on, were dealt with at great length in that report. I do not know whether Deputy O'Connell has disclosed to other members of his party the proposal in that report regarding the distribution of land in the Gaeltacht. It occurred to the Executive Council that a division in the administration of the Land Commission was not desirable and that one person should have charge of it. I may say, in answer to one of the remarks of Deputy Baxter, that for a long time the Minister for Lands and Agriculture has reported to me and other members of the Executive Council that the work of that Ministry was far too much for him. I think that Deputy Baxter and other Deputies will agree that a more hardworking Minister than the Minister for Lands and Agriculture would be impossible to find. Even this new Ministry with Land Commission and Fisheries, and such other services as are to be dealt with in the Gaelteacht, will be too much for the Minister. It will be necessary for him to ask for a Parliamentary Secretary in that connection. I should have mentioned that before. The work of the Gaelteacht, as anybody knows who made a study of it, is a great work in itself, requiring not alone great administrative skill and continued attention, but it will have in its train, and we had better realise it now, disappointment and dissatisfaction, and occasionally a lack of patience in connection with its treatment.

I do not anticipate, and I have said so on platforms outside, that it is going to be solved within the next five or ten years. My own view. as I explained five years ago at the Fountain in James's Street, is that its solution would cause disappointment even to the second generation after ours. I presume I have made those two points clear as regards the Ministry for External Affairs and the new Ministry.

Mr. T.J. O'CONNELL

With regard to the new Ministry, is it a Ministry for the Gaelteacht or a Ministry which will include fisheries and lands—lands not only in the Gaelteacht but all over the State?

The PRESIDENT

Yes. It is not exclusively for the Gaelteacht. If I left anybody under that impression I regret it. It was not my intention. I thought I had said, anywhere I was speaking about this, that the whole of the work of the Land Commission, and I expect and hope the work of expediting land purchase and vesting, will be improved, and that we may anticipate better results. But I should like it to be understood that first of all we have to introduce a Bill to effect this change and to transfer the Land Commission to the Ministry of Fisheries. I could only hear an occasional word of what Deputy McMenamin said, but I understood that his speech was mainly in condemnation of the Minister for Fisheries—I thought at one time it was the Minister for Justice, but I suppose it was the Minister for Fisheries. I should like to say on that point that I am sure the Deputy will admit that the last four or five years in connection with fisheries were perhaps the worst four or five years within living memory, or even in a hundred years. Some allowance ought to be made for that. I have got returns showing the sales of fish from the Ministry, and I find a marked improvement for 1925 as against 1924, and again a marked improvement in 1926. I do say that there is room for more improvement, but some allowance must be made for the peculiar economy of that particular service. Boats were purchased some years ago at prices then current which were regarded as normal, but which have since been shown to be abnormal, and these things are not settled rapidly. Much the same sort of complaint might be urged in connection with the fisheries problem as has been urged, I am sure, by some agriculturists—that the Agricultural Credit Corporation which we have set up ought to have been set up some years ago. I think the Minister disposed of that in his treatment of the matter in the Dáil when he explained that when prices had reached bottom was the time when loans could be made available with some possible expectation of their return.

As regards the new Ministry, I thought I made it clear that proposals in that connection would not arise until November, and that I was simply giving an intimation that that was the intention. I think those of us who have been here during the last two or three years, remembering the extra work which has been entailed by reason of the passage of the Drainage Acts, will admit that a considerable addition has been made to the administration in that connection. These matters will be dealt with not earlier than November in proposals which will be introduced in the form of legislation at that time.

Mr. DAVIN

Will the establishment of that Ministry still involve the existence of a Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance?

The PRESIDENT

No. If it were not for that service the Minister for Finance would not require a Parliamentary Secretary. The difference, of course, as between the two will amount approximately to £500. It is not a net £500. I am one of those who believe that if there is a sufficient amount of work to be done the State should be prepared to pay for it.

Mr. JOHNSON

Are we to take it from that that there is no intention to rearrange anything only to improve the position of the chief of the Department?

The PRESIDENT

I do not think I gave any intimation of that view. Purchases, which at present get a very small portion of the time, would require very much more attention, just the same as the extension of the activity under the Drainage Act will require more attention and more time, and I am one of those who believe that in a matter of that kind when service is rendered it ought to be paid for. There is, of course, the Stationery Office as well, which is included in purchases.

Mr. DAVIN

Is it clear that the new Minister when appointed will automatically become a member of the Executive Council and increase the membership by one?

The PRESIDENT

I should say so, but that is anticipating a bit. It is not my intention, if I have any responsibility for the administration, to have any Extern Minister in future. A good deal of the fire has been directed towards the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, and I think most of it was concerned with administration, which would more suitably form a subject for consideration on the Estimates when they are before the Dáil, and I do not propose to deal with administration in connection with what I have to say as to the person whom I have nominated as Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. What I would like to draw attention to is this: that that, like other services that we took over was a very expensive service. We got a service fashioned on the British postal service, which deals with a more densely populated country, and the same facilities were afforded here as were afforded there. The loss on the Post Office when we took it over in 1922 amounted to over £1,000,000. Last year the loss was slightly over £400,000. That, in my view, is a remarkable tribute to the administrative capacity of the person in charge of that Department. Deputy O'Gorman will realise that in effecting those economies there must necessarily have been some restriction in services, but that this State could not afford a loss on the Post Office of £1,100,000. It is beyond its capacity to bear it.

I proceed now to deal with the main charge of the serried ranks on the opposite side, and that is as regards unemployment—unemployment with its various reactions: the wages paid on the Shannon scheme, the infirmities that there are in our Unemployment Insurance scheme, and so on. I observed that Deputy Morrissey, when dealing with this subject, neglected to give any indication of what he would propose to the Dáil if he were the Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Mr. MORRISSEY

It will be time enough to tell then.

The PRESIDENT

If we were on the opposite Benches there and the Deputy was here, and we had a constructive suggestion to offer to him we would say that the interests of the State were much more important than the continuance in office of any individual as a Minister.

Mr. MORRISSEY

We know what the Government said when they got constructive suggestions—they were very often flung back at us.

The PRESIDENT

The position comes to this, that we have not been asked to resurrect the dole. I understand that there have been some applications outside. But unemployment, the economy of the country, and all these things have their relation to the wealth and to the capacity of the country to afford more employment to its people. In looking over the election speeches, I find very few exhortations to the public to buy Irish-manufactured goods. There was always the sledge hammer of protection, an embargo on goods coming in, or something like that, but never a word in praise of goods manufactured in this country.

Mr. CORISH

Yes, there was.

The PRESIDENT

Very seldom indeed. On one occasion ex-Deputy Hennessy was attacked on one of our platforms about the adverse trade balance by a person who I am sure would address the multitude to-morrow on the iniquities of the Minister for Industry and Commerce in not extending the Unemployment Insurance. Ex-Deputy Hennessy asked him to come on the platform and inquired where the coat he was wearing was made. The gentleman walked away. He said he had tried on that adverse balance trick on five platforms and had not been found out before. That is at the root of unemployment in this country. Our goods and our manufactures must be increased; our production generally must be increased, if we are to find employment. I asked on many platforms in the country during the last month could agriculture afford employment to a greater number of people than it was giving employment to at present, and nobody told me it could.

Mr. DAVIN

Why?

The PRESIDENT

If agriculture is unable to do it we must look towards industrial activity. And what are the things that react against the expansion of industrial activity? Rates, taxes and all those items, and to a large extent industrial unrest. Thank God, at any rate, after our five years we have had less industrial unrest than there has been for a long time.

Mr. DAVIN

What about the middlemen's profits?

The PRESIDENT

I listened to the Deputy very carefully, and I would tell him that that has not been solved by any of our critics.

Mr. DAVIN

It has not been faced.

The PRESIDENT

We faced it, and asked for a solution. Do not imagine for a moment, and do not let anyone outside think that we are clinging to office. If we are no use to the country we want to get out and to let someone else in who will be of use to the country. If there were any other government sitting here, and they wanted constructive suggestions, we would bring them along by the dozen. We are attacked for not solving the housing problem. Everyone knows that the work done in the last five years compares more than favourably, and is fifty per cent. more than was done in the thirty years previously.

Mr. T. LAWLOR

The foundations were laid more than five years ago.

The PRESIDENT

There were foundations laid for more than that which were not completed. The fact of the matter is we had to raise the money by taxation to enable us to do this work. What was the meaning of the raising of that money? It presses on industry. Why is it houses cannot be provided without taking money out of the taxpayer's pocket? Where is the contribution from the ranks opposite towards the solution of that problem? Is every penny's worth of useful service to be paid for in that connection? We are paying from the public coffers, either from the municipalities or from the State, a contribution something like £150 towards the construction of every house. Yet, we are asked, to-day, what we are doing for unemployment. Is that an economic service and why should it not be? Let us have a little honest talk here, now, when there is no fear of an election within the next twelve or eighteen months and let us examine our economic and political consciences to know what things there are which can contribute to greater employment throughout the country. Let us set out to do this work and stop this unnecessary denunciation of one another here. Surely the country is still worth working for and seeing what can be done for it.

Mr. MORRISSEY

Give the people the opportunity to work.

The PRESIDENT

So far as this is concerned we are told on the one side by those who are described as rich people—and there are very few rich people in this country—that taxation is far too high, that rates are too high; and we are told on the other side that we should raise more money by taxation and spend it on the people. Does not every Deputy know that the raising of money costs money, that the spending of money costs money in its spending and that the wheels of industry are much better set going from outside than through a central Government source?

Let us examine what has been the effect of the work done. Deputy O'Higgins has given the House the figures. He pointed out that there had been ten thousand employed owing to tariffs on industries; six thousand employed on the roads; six thousand employed on building houses—an average of three thousand per year for the last four years—seventeen hundred employed by reason of the Trade Loans Guarantee Act; one thousand people—nine hundred and ninety-eight to be exact—employed on reconstruction in Dublin, making a total of twenty-four thousand, to say nothing at all about the numbers employed on drainage, sugar beet, forestry or the Shannon scheme.

Mr. MORRISSEY

May I ask a question? Does the President realise that most of the six thousand men employed on the roads are employed only for two or three months and will be unemployed for the rest of the year?

The PRESIDENT

I am dealing with unemployment as it stands, and I say that for twelve months something like six thousand men were employed on the roads and will be employed possibly for the next twelve months. I was giving these figures in reply to the statements made opposite and I was showing the necessity for conserving every penny of national wealth and getting the best value for it.

Mr. MORRISSEY

Conserving human life is more important.

Mr. JOHNSON

Will the President give an idea of what he thinks the number of men hungry and unemployed in the country to-day are going to do?

The PRESIDENT

There is provision made in State institutions for dealing with persons who are hungry.

Mr. MORRISSEY

There is not.

Mr. JOHNSON

How is it administered?

Mr. EVERETT

Is the President aware that the Ministry for Public Health has sent instructions to the public authorities not to give more than 5/- and that these authorities are subject to the Local Government Department?

The PRESIDENT

As I stated a moment ago, we are attacked from the right because of the size of the taxes and the size of the rates, and from the left we are asked to insure, at considerable administrative cost, that if a man gets out of employment it should be made easy for him to come under the Act somewhere.

Mr. DAVIN

He has the right to live.

The PRESIDENT

It may not have been put in so many words but does it not come to that in the long run?

A LABOUR DEPUTY

Certainly not.

The PRESIDENT

Let us take the question raised this evening to the effect that certain people having small holdings of land and getting employment in an insurable occupation and paying their contributions towards those insurable occupations should be paid unemployment benefit. But you cannot have it every way.

Mr. MORRISSEY

They are often deprived if they have only two acres.

The PRESIDENT

I am not aware of that.

Mr. T. LAWLOR

Is the President not aware that the relieving officers in the city are precluded from giving relief to persons who are distressed because of unemployment?

The PRESIDENT

That is a very general question. I would like a particular case.

Mr. LAWLOR

I understood the President to say that there were provisions made for people so situated, and I say that there are not.

The PRESIDENT

I deny that.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

We can only have one Deputy speaking at a time. The President is replying on the debate and he is entitled to reply. If Deputies do not agree with him they must take some other opportunity of registering their disagreement. He must be allowed to speak now.

The PRESIDENT

An examination of the returns of unemployment in other countries shows that this country is one of the few in respect of which an impression was made on unemployment in 1926 as compared with 1925. Of course, statistics are peculiar things but it is there in black and white.

Mr. JOHNSON

Does the President suggest that the systems on which these figures are based are comparable—that the number of unemployed registered under our system is comparable to those registered under a completely different system?

The PRESIDENT

I must say that my knowledge is really limited. I have not particulars as to how these statistics are returned in the various countries, but if there is one institution in the world likely to be looked upon as in any way reliable in connection with things of that sort it ought to be the Labour Office at Geneva.

Mr. JOHNSON

They are supplied by our own office.

Mr. McGILLIGAN

They make the comparison themselves. They do not take our comparison.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I am afraid the Dáil is labouring under the mistaken idea that we will adjourn tonight for five years.

The PRESIDENT

I had, before these innumerable interruptions began, fashioned out in my mind what I thought would have been a fairly sensible statement, but it has been so much upset by interruptions that I am very much afraid of the bad impression that may be made on Deputies who have come into the House for the first time to-day. Some reference was made to the wages paid on the Shannon. Now we are not on the hustings, but I can say what I said very near the Shannon works during the Election. I said that we have fixed that scale as being the scale paid to agricultural labour in that neighbourhood. I asked: Could agriculture, which forms 75 per cent. of our wealth, afford more? Was there any farmer there listening to me who could say honestly that he could pay a higher wage than that? And it is mainly agricultural labour that is employed there. I got no intimation, even in Deputy Morrissey's own constituency, where I believe they voted for him almost to a man, that they could afford to pay a higher wage. We did not fix it. It is the economic conditions of the country that fix these things, and we are barely instruments in connection with that. If the country can afford to pay more we would be delighted——

Mr. O'BRIEN

Does the President mean to say that it is agricultural work? Is it not navvies' work? Is it not an engineering job?

Mr. McGILLIGAN

The particular work they are at is not.

The PRESIDENT

If I were to answer that in a highly technical way I should say yes, but that it is agricultural labour that is employed there, and giving a pretty good return for its work and well satisfied with the wages that are paid.

Mr. O'BRIEN

Will the President say that if an agricultural labourer was taken into the Civic Guards he should be paid agricultural labourers' wages?

The PRESIDENT

No, I do not say that, but I do say that in an agricultural area, where agricultural labour is employed and where agricultural labourers are satisfied with the wages, I am not disturbed by the noise which is created in connection with the objection to the wages. I understand that one gentleman went down there and said that if his party were elected the wages would go up to 50/- a week, and I understand they did not vote for him. They showed remarkable sense in that.

Mr. COLOHAN and Mr. HEFFERNAN rose.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

We can have only one Deputy at a time interrupting the President.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

Will the President take the agricultural labour standard as the standard on which to base all his wages and salaries?

Mr. McGILLIGAN

For agricultural work, yes.

The PRESIDENT

I feel that I am not called upon to answer that. The policy of the Government during the last five years has been to ease the costs of production, to accelerate production and to make it possible for other people to expand their industry and try to improve the business of the country The Shannon scheme is one evidence of that, and the sugar beet industry is another evidence. It was our maximum effort during these four years. If it has been unsatisfactory, well then, I think, the person who in his conscience believes it to be unsatisfactory should vote against this Ministry and should vote against this motion. If, on the other hand, there is a real consideration of all the elements of the case and some advertence to the fact that for the best part of two or three or four years the business of this country was very seriously interrupted; that every possible inducement that could be given to any person with money to get out of it was given, and that the cost of that has had to be borne by us; that the restoration of order fell upon us, and that the payments consequent upon that destruction fell upon us in our generation—that with all these things such a balance sheet as we submitted during these four years is before the people. I do not see in conscience what justification there is for a vote against those nine Deputies.

Question put.

The Dáil divided: Tá, 66; Níl, 31.

Tá

• Ernest Henry Alton.
• Patrick Baxter.
• James Walter Beckett.
• George Cecil Bennett.
• Ernest Blythe.
• Séamus A. Bourke.
• Michael Brennan.
• Seán Brodrick.
• John Joseph Byrne.
• Michael Carter.
• Mrs. Margt. Collins-O'Driscoll.
• Martin Conlon.
• Bryan Ricco Cooper.
• William T. Cosgrave.
• Sir James Craig.
• James Crowley.
• Michael Davis.
• Eugene Doherty.
• James N. Dolan.
• Michael Doyle.
• Peadar Seán Doyle.
• Edmund John Duggan.
• James Dwyer.
• Barry M. Egan.
• Thomas Falvey.
• James Fitzgerald-Kenney.
• Hugh Garahan.
• John Denis Gorey.
• Alexander Haslett.
• John J. Hassett.
• Michael R. Heffernan.
• Michael Joseph Hennessy.
• John Hennigan.
• Mark Henry.
• Patrick Hogan (Galway).
• Richard Holohan.
• John Jinks.
• Patrick Michael Kelly.
• Myles Keogh.
• Hugh Alexander Law.
• Finian Lynch.
• Martin McDonogh.
• Michael Og McFadden.
• Patrick McGilligan.
• Richard Mulcahy.
• James E. Murphy.
• James Sproule Myles.
• Martin Ml. Nally.
• Richard O'Connell.
• Bartholomew O'Connor.
• Timothy Joseph O'Donovan.
• David Leo O'Gorman.
• Kevin O'Higgins.
• Dermot Gun. O'Mahony.
• John J. O'Reilly.
• John Marcus O'Sullivan.
• Vincent Rice.
• Martin Roddy.
• Patrick W. Shaw.
• Timothy Sheehy.
• William Edward Thrift.
• Daniel Vaughan.
• James Joseph Walsh.
• John White.
• Vincent Joseph White.
• George Wolfe.

Níl

• Richard Anthony.
• Henry Broderick.
• Alfred Byrne.
• Patrick Clancy.
• James Coburn.
• Hugh Colohan.
• Richard Corish.
• Denis Cullen.
• William Davin.
• Edward Doyle.
• William Duffy.
• James Everett.
• John F. Gill.
• David Hall.
• Gilbert Hewson.
• Patrick Hogan (Clare).
• John Horgan.
• Thomas Johnson.
• John Keating.
• Michael Keyes.
• Thomas Lawlor.
• Gilbert Lynch.
• Daniel McMenamin.
• Daniel Morrissey.
• Timothy Joseph Murphy.
• William O'Brien.
• Thomas J. O'Connell.
• Timothy Quill.
• William Archer Redmond.
• James Shannon.
• Jasper Travers Wolfe.

Tellers:—Tá: Deputies Duggan and B. O'Connor; Níl: Deputies Morrissey and Corish.

Motion declared carried.