Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 2 Nov 1928

Vol. 26 No. 12

IN COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - VOTE 32—GARDA SIOCHANA (RESUMED).

Question again proposed:—

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £483,373 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1929, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisí an Ghárda Síochána (Uimh. 7 de 1925).

That a sum not exceeding £483,373 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1929, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Gárda Síochána (No. 7 of 1925).—(Minister for Finance.)

Mr. MacENTEE

I do not intend to detain the House very long in the discussion of this Estimate. But there is one point I would like to raise upon which I would like to have some information from the Minister. In reply to a question which I put down regarding the raid upon Roebuck House recently, the Minister admitted that Roebuck House had been searched by a party of police under a warrant at 10.30 a.m. on the 25th October. He then went on to say that the officer in charge, having notified Madame Gonne McBride that they were about to raid the house, and having been informed by her that Mrs. Despard had met with a very serious accident on the preceding night, the party carried out the raid without interfering in any way with Mrs. Despard and that, as a matter of fact, the ambulance did arrive and Mrs. Despard was removed while the party of police were in the house.

Madame Gonne McBride has made a statement to me regarding this occurrence and part of it at least is in direct conflict with the statement which has been made by the Minister. The Minister stated that the raiding party had already arrived and were engaged in carrying out the search when the ambulance which was to bring Madame Despard to the hospital reached Roebuck House. Madame Gonne McBride, on the other hand, states: "When the ambulance drew up at my door, I went out to give the doctor's instructions to the attendants. I then saw twenty men emerge from the trees near the gate and run over the grass to the ambulance." Now there is a very important conflict of statements there. It is important, if we are to ascertain what was the real motive and the real reason that inspired this raid, to know if the raiding party were in the house before the ambulance arrived, or, if the ambulance reached the house first, whether the raiding party directed their first attention to the ambulance? That is a point upon which I think we are entitled to require some proof from the Minister that his reply was founded upon fact. In view of the fact also that the Minister said that the search was carried out upon a warrant, I should like to know under what Act that warrant was issued, to whom was it issued, by whom was it issued, upon what ground, and the date and the hour upon which it was issued. It certainly seems more than a coincidence that that raiding party should have arrived after the ambulance had reached Mrs. Despard's house. We have the Minister's statement, on the one hand, that the raiding party reached the house first. On the other hand, we have Madame McBride's statement that the ambulance reached the house first. It is very pertinent to the ascertainment of the motive for this raid to determine which of those statements is correct. If the ambulance reached the house first, if the raiding party arrived afterwards and directed their first attention to the ambulance, what was the conclusion that was to be drawn from that? What was the suspicion that actuated that raiding party and what were the grounds of their suspicion? Were they acting upon information that the St. John's Ambulance, the official ambulance, had been ordered to attend at Roebuck House at 10.30 on the morning of the 25th October? And if so how did they receive that information?

We were told in this House recently that the Post Office did not interfere with private correspondence. We were very sceptical as to that fact, and I think some information was afterwards placed before the House which, at any rate, made the statement that correspondence was not interfered with open to doubt. I should like to know whether the same supervision which is exercised over the mails is also exercised over the telephones, and whether the fact that a telephone communication had been sent asking that the St. John's Ambulance should be sent to Roebuck House at 10.30 o'clock on the morning of the 25th October was the information upon which that party of police acted? And, if so, why did they act in that manner? What were the grounds for that raid? Was it a deliberate act of State persecution? This lady is an elderly lady who has secured worldwide regard for her work and sacrifices in the cause of humanity. She came to Ireland in the days of the trouble here, and notwithstanding the fact that all her family affiliations were on the other side, espoused the cause of the people in Ireland and nobly served it. She met with an accident, and surely the least that lady is entitled to expect from the people whom she has served to the best of her judgment and to the utmost of her ability is that she should be treated with common humanity.

One of the things which we want the Minister particularly to direct his reply to is to explain to us, or to prove to this House, first of all that that raid was not intended to harass and persecute her in the hour of her suffering; and, secondly, that it was not inspired by an unjust suspicion that the ambulance was intended to remove some other person. If the Minister had suspicions that that ambulance was to be used for any other than its ostensible purpose, to remove the injured lady to hospital upon medical instructions, then I think he is entitled also to show to the House upon what grounds he suspects the St. John Ambulance Corps of being a party to such a proceeding. The ambulance was either there to remove Mrs. Despard or some other person, or some other thing. I think that the Minister is entitled to disclose to the House the grounds upon which this raiding party, when it reached Roebuck House, directed its attention, not to the house, but to the ambulance.

I think we are further entitled to demand of him that he will prove to the House that the statement which he made in his reply is correct—that the ambulance arrived while the search party were already engaged in raiding the house. In order to do that, I submit that the Minister must disclose to the House the Act under which the warrant with which that search party was armed was issued, the grounds for that warrant and the date and hour upon which it was issued. I think we are entitled to know that, in order that we may be able to satisfy ourselves that this warrant was not issued in virtue of something which was communicated to the Minister by some person who had access to the records of the Telephone Department.

There is just one other point I wish to deal with, and that is the statement which was made by the Minister for Agriculture. I regret the Minister is not in his place, because we on these benches are beginning to acquire a certain affection for the Minister. We regard him as one of our most effective speakers. He is a delight to listen to and a delight to follow. But he made a statement in the course of this debate upon which I would like to have the opinion of the Minister for Justice. In the course of the debate on the Army Estimate, the Minister committed himself to the statement that this Government was raising the sum of £1,600,000 odd in order to ensure that certain people would have the right to do wrong. He was so pleased with the bon mot——

Mr. FITZGERALD - KENNEY

Surely we had all this yesterday?

Mr. G. BOLAND

It is no harm to repeat it.

Mr. MacENTEE

The Minister was so pleased with the bon mot that he repeated it in the course of this debate, and he said, though this time he was slightly mixed, that one or other of these forces is maintained in order to ensure that certain people will have the right to do wrong.

Mr. FLINN

Power to do wrong.

Mr. MacENTEE

Power to do wrong. There are some things which will bear repetition; there are other things which will not bear repetition. I suggest that that statement of the Minister for Agriculture is one of these. It has been twice repeated from the Government Benches, and I wish to know whether the Minister for Justice endorses that statement. It seems to be an authoritative one, but it may have very serious consequences in the country. The Minister for Justice is charged with the effective administration of certain laws which the Minister for Agriculture has put before this House. There is a Forestry Bill, for instance, which the Minister for Agriculture has introduced and which imposes certain very stringent penalties upon people who venture to cut down their own trees without a permit from the Minister for Agriculture. So severe are those penalties that in the other House, I believe, an amendment was introduced limiting the power of the courts to impose penalties in this regard, and limiting the amount of those penalties to £100, I think, in the case where it could be proven that the thing was not wilfully done with knowledge. What would be the position of an individual who finds himself penalised to the extent of £100 under an Act introduced by the Minister for Agriculture as a result of a prosecution presumably initiated by the Department of Justice, who has in mind the statement twice repeated from the Government Benches, and presumably endorsed by the colleagues of the Minister for Agriculture, that this Government is spending something like one million and some odd hundred thousand pounds of the people's money in order to ensure that the people shall have the right to do wrong? I am sure the unfortunate individual who is fined £100 for cutting down trees without the permission of the Minister for Agriculture will feel that after all he is getting very poor value for his money and is securing a very small share of the benefit of that one million and some odd hundred thousand pounds if he cannot in a minor way, to the extent of cutting down his own trees, exercise this power to do wrong which the Minister for Agriculture has informed him is secured to him by the expenditure of public money to the extent of one million and some odd hundred thousand pounds.

The Minister himself was unable to define which of the forces was securing to the people the power to do wrong; but either the Army or the Guards, according to the Minister, have secured that power to the people, and one or other of them is costing the State and the people £1,600,000 or £1,800,000. I think we are entitled to have from the Minister for Justice either a clear endorsement of the Minister for Agriculture's statement or a clear rejection of it. He must either accept it or reject it. Apparently the Minister for Agriculture at the present moment is in so little favour with his colleagues in the Government that even they refuse to take him seriously.

The attitude of the Labour Party upon these Estimates is a peculiar one. We are entitled to have a little further information from them, I think. A few days ago this House was discussing a motion in the name of Deputy Tadhg O Murchadha asking this House to express the opinion that provision should be made for pensions and allowances for widows and orphans. The Minister for Finance asked the House to reject that motion upon the grounds that in order to make it effective it would be necessary to provide £750,000 from the public purse. It is quite clear from the revenue returns for the past eight months that it is not possible to secure that £750,000 required to provide pensions and allowances for widows and orphans except by imposing increased taxation upon the country.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE.

took the Chair.

Mr. MacENTEE

If those pension allowances are to be granted by this House, they can only be granted as a result of corresponding economies which must be made in the public services. Yesterday the Labour Party voted in support of Vote No. 10 for the Office of Public Works, and by doing so they endorsed the principle that one man is entitled to hold two jobs and to receive pay from two sources for carrying out work which can only be done in the time of one of them.

Mr. FLINN

I contend the same.

Mr. MacENTEE

The Labour Party must face up to facts in this matter. If they want to carry out their social programme there must be corresponding economies made in the public services, and those services in which public money is being wasted must be curtailed and drastically overhauled. There is no other way out of it. If we want to provide pensions for widows and orphans, then we have got to save some of the money that, we contend, is at the present moment being squandered wastefully. There is no middle way. You cannot impose another penny of taxation on the backs of the people. You have got to reduce the staffs in your public services by cutting out, and dispensing with, every inefficient and useless man. Now there are, and there must be, a considerable number of useless people in the Civic Guards. That must be the case, because, according to the statistics—and they cannot be controverted—it takes almost twice as many policemen to preserve law and order in the twenty-six counties of Ireland, per head of the population, as it does in England and in Scotland. If you consider those figures it is obvious that there is great room for retrenchment in regard to this particular service. If that retrenchment can be carried out—and the statistics show that it can—and if we can reduce the strength of this force to a figure comparable with that of the police force in England and Scotland, then I think that any Party which takes responsibility for putting before this House a motion asking the Minister for Finance to make provision for pensions and allowances for widows and orphans is bound to vote against this Vote, and to see, or declare at least, that it is their wish that economies will be made which will provide the money to enable them to make their social programme effective.

Mr. G. BOLAND

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance started a bad precedent yesterday by telling a story. If the House does not mind, I am going to give a quotation. Taking one consideration with another, "a policeman's life is not a happy one." That used to be the case some years ago. I am sure there is no Deputy in the House who will admit that he has not read Kickham's book "For the Old Land." Deputies who have read the book will remember in it the story about the seizing of the pig. It has been known to history since as the Glenmoynan pig. The bailiff whose job it was to seize the pig took one of the guards in his day to do the job for him. I think Joe Sproule was the name of the guard, and anyone who has read the story will remember his agonies in driving the pig to the pound. In those days a policeman's life was not a happy one. The bailiff's life would seem to be a more happy one, like Murty McGrath's in the story. This is apropos of the cost of such seizures now. I have had brought to my attention the case of a poor man in the County Roscommon who was in arrears in the payment of his annuities to the Land Commission.

Mr. FITZGERALD-KENNEY

Might I ask does that arise on this Vote?

Mr. BOLAND

I will show that in one second. I hope to satisfy the Minister, too. This cow was seized and sold for £6. Only 12/6 out of the £6 went to pay a share of the man's debt, because the full amount realised was almost entirely eaten up in paying the Guards' expenses. Amongst the Guards' expenses was the cost of a motor car. That was one item in the bill. Their expenses reduced the amount realised so much that only very little was available to meet the man's debt. I kicked up a row with the Land Commission about the matter.

Mr. JASPER WOLFE

Is that another English Sunday newspaper story?

Mr. G. BOLAND

Abair aris é ma's é do thoil é. I did not read it at all. I was told it by a responsible official in the Land Commission. At all events, all that was available for this unfortunate man after his cow had been sold for £6 was 12s. 6d. When Joe Sproule seized the pig he had to foot it with the pig to the pound, but these gentlemen get motor cars, the expenses for which are taken off the unfortunate people. I see in the Estimate that transport expenses are estimated to cost £56,500. I admit that I have not gone very carefully through the Estimate. Surely the amount taken off the unfortunate man that I am speaking about for the cost of the motor cars for the Guards must be over and above what is provided in this Estimate for transport. Therefore I put it that the expenses should not be charged twice. A somewhat similar case occurred in Connemara, where an unfortunate man had his cow and calf seized to meet a decree. The animals were seized by the bailiffs, but this man, instead of having 12s. 6d. credited to him, had only 7s. 6d. credited to him to meet his debt to the Land Commission. The police were the main cost of the expedition in that case too.

Mr. FITZGERALD-KENNEY

Were they responsible for the man not paying his debt?

Mr. BOLAND

Since those days the working men, when they wanted to refer to a man having a good job, said: ‘Oh, he has a bobby's job." That is the last word with ordinary Dublin working men when they want to describe what a really good position would be. At all events, this sum of £56,000 odd is something to go on with. I was told the other day by the Minister for Justice, when I put a question to him that the 250 Civic Guards who went to Rome paid their expenses out of their own pockets. My information was to the contrary, but I suppose I must accept the explanation I got and that they did save the money themselves. I made a certain statement with regard to the C.I.D. during the prisoners' debate in this House some time ago. I said then, and I still say, that this force was never intended for a police force. It was got up for one purpose alone, and that was to make sure that the civil war would not be allowed to die out. I say it was got up for no other purpose. I had occasion to bring up the case of a friend of mine, Peadar O'Donnell, as to the way he was treated. The Minister at the time had no explanation to give in regard to that case. But I believe he had as much then as he has now. He simply got out of the case by what I suppose would be called parliamentary astuteness. I think that is the correct word.

Mr. FITZGERALD-KENNEY

It is a very good word.

Mr. BOLAND

But the fact remains that cases like those of Peadar O'Donnell and Mick Noonan, and others too numerous to mention, are proof that this Government have done all they could to ensure that civil war would not die out. It is in spite of any efforts of theirs if it has done so. The ordinary policeman here is, I believe, as good as the ordinary policeman in any part of the world. At least, that is true of any I have met. They do their duties as well as the policeman in any other country. I do not begrudge them having a bobby's job. I do not think that it is fair to include in the police force these other people—the irregular police who are the real authors and the continuers of the civil war. I remember well that the first public case they had was a very badly framed-up bank robbery charge in Arklow. In that case the Dublin magistrate had to reprimand the officers concerned. That was in 1922. The Minister for Justice at that time, I suppose, was only just beginning to have some incipient ideas of what he might come to himself. He is only just beginning to feel his way in the political world, I imagine, and he may not be familiar with the case to which I have referred. That was the position when that section of the police started, and they have kept up that practice. That charge does not apply to the ordinary police.

I now come to the question of the number of Civic Guards and Civic Guard barracks. When I was speaking on the Vote for the Office of Public Works I was told this was the proper Vote under which to raise the matter. I think a good case could be made for reducing the number of Guards in sparsely populated places. I admit that in big centres of population, owing to the increased traffic and the various duties the police have to perform, you want a good number of Civic Guards, but in the country districts with the transport facilities modern science has provided there is no occasion for so many barracks. We will be told there might be irregulars, or people like the gentlemen referred to last night, who have to be hunted, but the special squad of the C.I.D. are engaged in that work. If any disturbance occurs in those areas a good telephone service has been provided by the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, so that the police can be immediately summoned, and they have motor cars to take them to the spot where they are needed just as quickly as if they were stuck in those out-of-the-way barracks. There could be a considerable reduction in the number of these smaller barracks, and that would also mean a reduction in the number of Civic Guards.

There are barracks where there are only two Civic Guards, and as I suppose one of these must be in charge of the other, that means in barracks of that type you have a sergeant. By doing away with these, good economy could be effected. There are places in the country where there may have been barracks in the remote past, but certainly not for a good many years before the Great War occurred. I have heard of a number of instances, and I am sure Deputies on the other side know of some also, where barracks have been put up in outlandish places. In one instance the only reason that occurred to me for putting up barracks was that in that particular area during the last fighting a column was able to keep on fighting. That was simply a matter arising out of war, the area being suitable for that type of fighting, but this is a peaceful area, and there is no occasion for putting police there, except it might be for the purpose of fanning the flames of civil war again. There is no occasion whatever for a police barracks in that district.

Mr. KILLILEA

I want to say a few words more or less in reply to remarks made yesterday by the Minister for Agriculture. He said that only for the Civic Guards he would not be able to address public meetings, and, of course, he told us the Army was here to see that people had a right to do wrong, and that the Civic Guards were here to see that the people had a right to do right. I think he cannot have it both ways. If the Minister for Agriculture goes out and starts calling people rubbish and weeds he cannot be surprised if the people turn around and say things back to him. If it is the duty of the Civic Guards to prevent people making remarks in answer to him, then it is the duty of the Guards to stop the Minister when making remarks of the kind I have mentioned to the people. I would mention an incident that happened in Ballygar. One night Deputy Broderick was addressing a meeting there. An innocent chap was standing outside his own door. After the meeting was over a number of C.I.D., who were, as they say, "half jarred," went around the town. This chap who was standing outside his own door was delicate, and he had not been outside his house for six months before that. He was the only man they saw. I admit that the meeting was a bit rowdy. They went over to this chap and they kicked him for two hundred yards along the street. We called at Deputy Broderick's place to see if he could do anything, but he was not seeing anybody that evening.

Another incident, even worse, happened at a Labour meeting in Woodford. I had an experience myself in a place called Creggs. I was making an attempt to address a public meeting there. One of the principal hecklers tried to make a bit of an attack on me. I do not know whether it was in his favour or not, but he did everything possible I believe, but he did not do anything creditable to the Guards or C.I.D. at that meeting. Of course, there is nothing about that. I had occasion to waste £1 3s. on the day of the election in sending wires regarding the conduct of the Guards at different polling booths. There was nothing about that. Those men were never checked for it. As a matter of fact I could not get a reply to any of the wires I sent. A short time ago I raised the question regarding a mail car raid in a place outside Tuam. The houses of prominent supporters of ours were raided, not once or twice or three times, but the raids went on for months, and there was no raid on any of the houses of the Government supporters. The Minister said, of course, that the Guards did not know what the politics of these people were. We asked the Minister to give us the names of even one supporter of the Government whose house was raided, or one instance where a house was raided that was not the house of a Republican supporter. Of course, he said that was not his duty. Personally, I have nothing to say about the Civic Guards. I am one who does not care a whole lot about them. I will admit that frankly. They have duties to perform and they should carry out those duties. But in outlying stations we have Civic Guard barracks with three or four men in them. In these places there is no danger of the people going wild—they are quite calm. The only little bit of excitement would possibly be during election time. If the Minister for Agriculture gives the people an idea of his policy, or shows that he is inclined to help the people, they will not say anything to him. But if he and I start abusing the people, we deserve to get whatever comes to us. I support the plea put forward to reduce the Gárda, and I hope the Minister will keep a closer eye on the way they carry out their duties.

Mr. S. JORDAN

I also am opposed to this Vote on the grounds that the amount of money asked is altogether too large, as we can do with a smaller force. Like Deputy Boland, I know of country districts where there are as many barracks as in the old R.I.C. days, when the country was particularly unsettled as a result of the land agitation. I refer particularly to County Galway. At that time, around Athenry, the country was dotted with police barracks, which were of course necessary owing to the land agitation. But the land question is practically settled. There is a certain amount of dissatisfaction still, but nothing like the dissatisfaction of that time, when the agitation was against the landlords. They were very plentiful in Galway at that time—a lot of them have left since. Notwithstanding that, in practically all these places there are Civic Guard barracks to-day. Around Athenry, practically every R.I.C. barracks is now occupied by Civic Guards. That, to my mind, is not at all necessary. There are Civic Guards stationed in peaceful districts where there is never any disturbance. They are unnecessary, because, as has been stated, there is splendid telegraphic and telephonic communication to centres like Ballinasloe, Athenry, Tuam, Galway, etc., and the outlying country districts do not need Civic Guard barracks. The Guards have very little to do in these places, and a considerable reduction could be made, and ought to be made, particularly in view of the statements made on the Army Vote. It was made plain from both sides of the House that the Army for defensive purposes was practically useless in case of invasion and that it was more or less a police force. We do not want a second police force. I believe that those who said that the Army was practically useless as a defence force spoke honestly. Certainly if any Power attempted to invade the country it would be very easy to beat five or six thousand soldiers. If the Army is only a police force, as was stated, there should either be a reduction in the Army or the Civic Guards, and, as we are discussing the Civic Guards Vote, I press for a reduction of that force, as the present number is not necessary, especially when it is claimed that the country is peaceful. As far back as twelve months ago we were told of the peaceful state of the country. At election meetings I heard very prominent people say: "Who gave you the right to walk freely about the country; to go to a fair and come home with your money safe without fear of anyone taking it from you? We have established law and order and everything is quiet and settled." If conditions are quiet and settled, we ought to be able to do with a smaller force than was necessary to bring about that condition.

I do not like harping too much on the statements of the Minister for Agriculture or making too much "bones" about them, as they say in society circles. The Minister for Agriculture stated that he received valuable assistance from the Civic Guards, and as a result was able to address election meetings. He is quite right. He certainly did receive valuable assistance. He received so much assistance from them, and he was so "stiff" as a result of that assistance, that he could stand up and slander people at election meetings. I am sorry he is not here now. I hope he will come in before I finish. I should like to tell him of something he did say. The Minister for Agriculture, with Deputy Broderick, was addressing a meeting in Athenry during the September election and made a statement——

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

I hope the Deputy is not going to give us the speeches made at the September elections.

Mr. JORDAN

I am not. But this has a bearing on the question. The Minister for Agriculture said that, as a result of the assistance received from the Civic Guards, he was able to address public meetings. He is quite right. I want to point out the difference between what occurred in his case and what occurred in mine. When he was speaking he slandered me, and I state here definitely that he got his information from Deputy Broderick, who is at present in the House. Under the protection of the Civic Guards the Minister was able to make that statement in my absence. When I reached Athenry I heard of the statement, and afterwards wrote both to the Minister and Deputy Broderick to come to the next meeting that was being held under the auspices of the Fianna Fáil Party and make the same statement, if they were able to prove it.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

The Deputy should confine himself to the Vote before the House.

Mr. JORDAN

I am coming to the most important point. I issued that challenge off the platform. I said if the Minister did not prove the statement I would not allow him to hold his meeting—that I would go on his platform. A C.I.D. sergeant from Ballinasloe, named Harmon, who was in the crowd, stated in the presence of another man that if I attempted to do it he would take my life. That is what the C.I.D. and the Civic Guards are for. It is nothing to laugh at. We know what election times were, if other Deputies do not. Some of them, like the Minister for Agriculture, could go round and say what they liked, but we could not.

Mr. S. BRODERICK

Contradict the statements?

Mr. JORDAN

You were present yourself at an election meeting at Menlough.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

The Deputy must keep to the Vote.

Mr. JORDAN

I am talking of the prejudiced action of the Guards. Deputy Broderick was present when a Civic Guard assaulted a man at a meeting. The Guard was not reported. He was considered to have done his duty because he was protecting Government speakers and keeping them in power—"The right to do wrong," from our standpoint, anyhow. We know very well what they are capable of. If there was less money available, there would be less of this kind of work. The Gárda should realise that they are the servants of the people, and that everybody in the country has to pay for their upkeep and their maintenance; they should not be allowed to do things such as I have described. I suggest there should be an investigation held into the conduct of the Gárda on these occasions. If the Government want any information I am quite willing to supply names and the particulars of the actions of which they have been guilty. I ask for a reduction in this Vote, because we are told that the Army is only fit for police purposes. We do not want two police forces. We have an Army or we have not, and as long as the Army is described as a useless force which would be no use in the case of invasion, I suggest that the Civic Guard force should be very much reduced.

Mr. COONEY

I wish to put a matter to the Minister which I would like him to deal with when he comes to reply. On the 17th October, I addressed a question to him in connection with the regulations governing the storage of petrol. As a result of inquiries made before putting down that question, and since, I am satisfied that there is grave neglect on the part of the Gárda authorities in this matter and that petrol is being stored in tenements in this city with a consequent danger to life. Of course I am not so much concerned about property. The lives of the individuals who occupy the tenements should be the concern of all of us, although apparently the only light in which they are considered useful is in so far as they can produce the amount to pay the rent. I think it is a disgraceful thing that the Gárda Síochána should have to wait for orders from local authorities before taking action in this matter. The Minister undertook to supply a list of the number of prosecutions under this head. I received this morning the following letter:

With reference to the question which you asked in the Dáil on the 17th ult., regarding the regulations for the storage of petrol, I am directed by the Minister for Justice to state that a report has now been received from the Gárda Síochána from which it appears that the local authorities have not availed to any great extent of the services of the Gárda in enforcing this Act. Only one prosecution has been instituted by the Gárda on behalf of local authorities since the 1st January last.

I submit that that indicates clearly there is great looseness on a matter of vital importance, and I should like the Minister to explain or endeavour to defend that action. Here is a commodity from which a substantial amount of revenue could be gained, but, as a result of this looseness, revenue is lost to the State. We have excellent activity on the part of the Income Tax people where workmen are concerned. There is no question of their being able to evade the responsibility for income tax, but the people who store petrol in every hole and corner of this city certainly evade their responsibility.

These are the two points which I wish to put. I did not, as a matter of fact, intend entering into this discussion, and were it not for the fact that I received this letter, I would not have done so; but when I received this letter I thought it my duty to bring this matter to the notice of the House.

In connection with the Gárda Síochána, as a whole, so far as the uniformed force is concerned, I think as a body they are certainly, in the main, a fairly decent type of police force. But —as some other Deputies have stated here—there is that auxiliary corps known as the C.I.D., and I think it would be well for Deputies and the people of Ireland generally if some light could be thrown upon the policy and the object for which that force is being maintained. I believe—and I am sure I voice the opinions of my colleagues in this matter—that money is being spent lavishly on this force, not for the purpose of detecting or preventing crime, but for the purpose of furthering the interests of a political party in this country, and for the purpose of keeping alive political strife. The Minister smiles; but I honestly believe that; and from what I have seen of the activities of this force, I certainly think they are operating not for the good of the community. Deputy Jasper Wolfe was good enough to stand up here last night and adopt the rôle of defender of the police force in all its works and pomps. But the memory of the Irish people is not so short that they cannot recall that Deputy Jasper Wolfe, as Crown prosecutor, was proud to defend the predecessors of this force at the time of the murder of the late Lord Mayor MacCurtain. I think it would be just as well for the Gárda, or the non-political element in the force, that Deputy Jasper Wolfe should reserve his encomiums for something else. It is not a credit to the force to have a man with the record of Deputy Jasper Wolfe paying them tribute. These are the two points upon which I would like the Minister to give me some information—first as regards the petrol regulation; and, secondly, with regard to the necessity for maintaining this secret service establishment at such a huge cost to the community.

Mr. CORISH

I want to add my quota to the appreciation, by certain Deputies, of the work of the Civic Guards. I think the country should be thankful to the Guards for the work they have done. In 1922, when they were sent out to the country, they had what appeared to many people a formidable task. The country was in an absolute state of chaos. The robber and criminal had a free hand, and the people of that time were of the opinion that the country would never settle down again. I think that a general tribute should be paid to the Guards because of the state of affairs we are living in to-day. Every Deputy in his constituency receives complaints about slight abuses by the Guards. I know there is hardly a week goes over but I receive some kind of a trivial complaint from people in my constituency. I find they can all be adjusted by approaching the superintendent in my area, and I believe if that were done generally the state of affairs which the Fianna Fáil Party wish to bring about would be reached sooner than by criticism of the Guards in public. They compare the strength of the police here with those in England and other countries. Might I suggest to them that if there were less public criticism of the Civic Guards we would have better appreciation of their work by the people and, in consequence of that, in a very short time probably less Guards would be required to keep peace in this country? I would not have taken part in this debate at all were it not for the statement of Deputy MacEntee this morning. Deputy MacEntee is very difficult to follow at times, but this morning his imagination seemed to have led him very far afield. He stated that he cannot understand the attitude of the Labour Party, the spokesman of which introduced a Bill asking the Minister for Finance to provide pensions for widows and orphans. I can understand that. Deputy MacEntee does not, and never will, understand the attitude of the Labour Party. He is not in touch with the facts that the Labour Party are. It is a lot easier to understand the Labour Party voting for Estimate No. 10 than Fianna Fáil voting against No. 11, which provided £600,000 for badly needed work in the country. If Estimate No. 11 were defeated yesterday it would mean that drainage works all over the country would be stopped.

Mr. COONEY

Where were you when your own motion regarding railway men was on last week?

Mr. CORISH

That is my business.

Mr. COONEY

You were outside the door.

Mr. CORISH

That is my business.

Mr. COONEY

I hate hypocrisy.

Mr. CORISH

Do you?

Mr. COONEY

I do.

Mr. CORISH

You ought to know, because you practise it such a lot. Complaints have been made about the number of Guards. I pointed out a way by which that force could be reduced. I think it should be taken into consideration that the Gárdai have been provided with a great deal more duties than the old R.I.C. Every man knows that there is a greater demand to-day for regulation of traffic. A few years ago any kind of traffic regulations were unknown outside Dublin, Cork and Waterford, but we know that there is a general demand to-day for police to guide the traffic. We also know that in consequence of the Street Trading Act, passed some time ago, that police are required in that direction. There is also a great deal to be done by the Gárdai in connection with school attendance.

To come back to Deputy MacEntee's statements again, he suggests that in order to provide money for pensions for widows and orphans, the Labour Party should vote against this Estimate. I cannot see why this should be done. The Labour Party are not, at the dictate of Deputy MacEntee because he says the police force costs too much, going indiscriminately to cut everyone down. As I said at the beginning, I want to add my quota to the appreciation of the Guards, and I believe, if there were less public criticism of them, they would have the help of our people to suppress crime.

Mr. WHITE

I desire to emphasise what has been referred to by Deputy Davin, that the Guards should pay more attention to their functions as inspectors of food and drugs. There is another matter of very great importance. In my area we are entirely dependent for our bread supply on the City of Derry, and it is delivered by rail or by motor vans. I suggest it is the duty of the Guards, as inspectors under the Food and Drugs Act, to test the weight of the loaves sold and to see that people are supplied with four pounds and two pounds in each loaf. I have already spoken to the local officers of the Guards, but they have not paid any attention to this matter. I consider it is a very important matter for the people in our county, who are supplied with machine-made bread from the City of Derry, that they should get the weight that they are paying for. I ask the Minister to see that directions are sent to the various officers throughout Donegal, for the whole County of Donegal is dependent on Derry for its supply of bread, to see that the loaves are tested.

Dr. TUBRIDY

I have just a few remarks to make on this Vote. Enough has been said already on the Civic Guard Vote, and I do not think there is anything for me to mention. I wish to ask for the assurance of the Minister that in future there will be no victimisation of any guard or sergeant who acts impartially during an election or at any other time in discharge of his duties. A lot has been said of the partial attitude of the Guards during the late elections in September. I know of two instances of two station sergeants who refused to take any part in the election or to co-operate with the local Cumann na nGaedheal leaders. Word was sent round that these men were to be dismissed. It was known in the villages that these men were to be victimised in some way because of their attitude in the election generally. On the day of the election both station sergeants were confined to barracks, and afterwards one was moved to the midlands and the other one hundred miles away. I know these men were impartial and took no part in the election. I hope in the future when station sergeants and others stand out and act fairly towards each party that they will not be victimised.

Mr. FITZGERALD - KENNEY

I would ask Deputy Tubridy kindly to give me the names of those two sergeants he alleges were victimised.

Mr. KILROY

I want to add my views also as a protest against this Vote. I remember a few years ago that in our national organisation at the time we aspired to have a largely reduced force if we obtained what we were fighting for, namely, national freedom, which we are now told we have got. In my experience in the country, however, the police force has not been reduced to any appreciable extent. I know a place where there never has been a police barrack at any period but where they are now building one at a cost of £1,450. If we assume that there will be a sergeant and four Gárdaí in that barracks their salaries will approach £1,000 a year. The locality is a poor one and I know that if that money were capitalised and invested in the district it would be a great boon, such a boon, in fact, that the people never aspired to having. Why a police barracks is placed in such a position I cannot understand, because the people there have been exceptionally law-abiding. If it is with the idea of establishing block-houses, such as we had when the R.I.C. were here, I think we can all admit that they would be of even less use than they had been to the R.I.C., so far as their services of protecting a Government that would be in power or any party that would have to use them during a fight. It is utter folly to use them and to distribute them, as they have been, throughout the country.

In the Estimates which I have before me and, of course, they are the same for every Deputy, that for the Gárda is for £2,000,000 this year, all but £46,672. Why £1,000,000 has been harped on by almost every speaker I cannot understand. If it is a mistake on my part I would like it to be explained. I think it needs some explanation, that is, if my figures are correct as against the sum quoted by the Minister and others of £1,631,000. During the debate I also found that the services of the Gárdaí have been generally boosted for their heroism. We do not deny that they are of great service in the country, but I hold that their services have been boosted to a large extent. I know that in my town there was a fire and although there were five or six Guards in the locality it was almost over before they came on the scene. They never gave any service in extinguishing that dangerous fire in which a lot of goods were damaged. According to the Press, however, the Guards were the only people who gave their services. As a matter of fact, some young men risked their lives in extinguishing the fire but they got no credit for it. I have heard cases before about the heroism of the Gárdaí, but they were really not entitled to credit. Boosting them in that way is not right. They should get what they deserve but not more credit than they are entitled to.

Mr. BRADY

With reference to item N.—"Telegrams and Telephones —£14,600." I believe it is unnecessarily high, and I know that one of the reasons that it is so high is the extraordinary activity on the part of the Gárdaí in tracing people who are travelling through the country, people of a particular view. I discovered that quite accidentally when going to West Cork three or four weeks ago. When I arrived at my destination I was told to my surprise by the proprietor of the hotel where I was stopping the name of every village through which I passed on my journey. What particular interest the Gárdaí took in my journey I do not know, but I was definitely told that in each village that I passed through the Gárdaí phoned to the next village, and in that way my peaceful journey was notified to the police. That is not the only thing. When I arrived at my destination there were two gentlemen in plain clothes waiting for me. I do not know what the Minister would call them but the proprietor of the hotel informed me that they were awaiting my arrival. As it happened, I had some trouble with the car and my journey was unnecessarily prolonged.

I may say that this statement is purely for the information of the Minister and is not intended by way of carping criticism. These two gentlemen were in the hotel drinking until after 1 o'clock in the morning. The proprietor informed me that that occurred almost every night. He said that he had great difficulty in getting these men out of the bar, and that as long as they were there there were usually others along with them, although it was a breach of the law. I am merely pointing that out for the Minister's information. I would like him to investigate the question of telephoning calls from from one village to another. If the Gárdaí at my destination had asked me where I came from and what villages I passed through I could have given them the information. From my experience it strikes me that any person of any political party, outside Cumann na nGaedheal, is traced very minutely throughout the country. That would be some explanation as to why telephones and telegrams cost the country £14,600.

With reference to the Gárdaí themselves, I am not going to join those who have generally complained about them. Rather would I join with Deputy Boland in saying that so far as I personally am concerned—and I said it at the termination of the elections— the Guards are quite impartial. I am not saying that because a certain tone has been introduced into the debate, but because I made that statement publicly at the close of the elections in County Dublin. There is just a small point to which I would call the Minister's attention, namely, item M, in reference to the escort of children going to industrial schools. I have been approached on this by the Brothers in Artane. They asked me to raise the question of sending uniformed men as an escort for these children. This, of course, will not affect the Vote in any way. They suggested that perhaps the Minister would be able to arrange to send an escort in plain clothes. It is purely out of consideration for the parents and children that the suggestion is made, and those in charge of industrial schools consider that the presence of a uniformed escort is unnecessary.

Mr. FITZGERALD-KENNEY

Despite all the charges and terrible complaints we have heard about the plainclothes men!

Debate adjourned.

Progress ordered to be reported.

The Dáil went out of Committee.

Progress reported.