asked the Minister for Finance whether he will state why McCarthy Brothers, Victuallers, Schull, Co. Cork, who were awarded £75 under the Damage to Property (Compensation) Act, by Judge Rosenthal in November, 1923, have not yet been paid, although every other award made in the same court to other traders in the town has been paid in full; and whether it is intended to pay this sum forthwith.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - CORK COMPENSATION CLAIM.
A report recommending the payment of £75 was made in this case. It is not proposed to make any payment, as inquiries disclosed that the goods claimed for were not taken without the applicants' consent.
Will the Minister state why goods taken in similar circumstances from other traders in the town were paid for in full, and will he state, further, what inquiries he made to ascertain whether the goods were taken in the circumstances stated or not?
I made inquiries from all the sources that I thought would be able to afford information. With regard to the other information, I am not aware that payment was made in any similar case. The practice where there was any suspicion that goods were voluntarily supplied was to conduct inquiries, and if the inquiries resulted in the suspicion being confirmed the payment was not made.
Will the Minister state what gave rise to the suspicion that the goods were not supplied as stated?
No.
Was it because of this man's association with the Republican movement?
Naturally that would be in itself a cause for suspicion, though the suspicion might not be confirmed.
Is it thereby to be understood by this House that because of a man's association with the Republican movement, even though he could prove that the goods were taken, he is not to be paid?
Oh, no.