Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 13 Mar 1930

Vol. 33 No. 14

Military Service Pensions Bill, 1929—Fifth Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

Mr. Aiken

When speaking on this debate on the last day I pointed out that this Bill proposes to amend the Constitution and that it does not state specifically that it amends it. Leaving that point I just want to put before the Dáil before this Bill goes to a vote that we are asked to vote a sum of money which amounted last year to over £200,000 and which amounts almost to the same thing this year, and that no one in the country has any definite information as to where that money is going. They only know that a few members of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party and a judge appointed by the Cumann na nGaedhcal Government sat for a while and made up their minds that it was a good thing from their own point of view to give certain moneys to certain people throughout the country. We have pressed time and again for lists of names and addresses of the pensioners throughout the country and we have been refused these addresses. A couple of years ago we asked for a list of addresses and names and we got lists of names with no addresses. The Minister made the excuse that it would entail a great deal of work in his Department to give us the addresses. I think it entails very much more work in the Minister's Department to jumble up the lists which he gave us in the fashion in which they were jumbled up, than would have been entailed by giving us the lists and the addresses. We got a long jumble of names from all over the country. They were jumbled up. They were neither in alphabetical order nor in counties, and we had to go to the trouble of compiling them from the counties and putting them into alphabetical order in order to make some effort to find out who were getting pensions.

I think the people of the country have a right to know who are getting military service pensions, and the only way by which they will be able to know that is by the Department of Defence publishing lists containing the addresses of the different pensioners. The Minister has made no case why those addresses should not be given. I hope before this debate concludes that he will, at least, promise to publish a list with the addresses. On the Second Reading in Committee Stage we examined this Bill very thoroughly. It was shown definitely that a large number of the pensioners did not receive their pensions until 1927. Some of those pensioners were located in the Co. Monaghan. They did not receive their pensions until the two elections of 1927. The Minister has given no reasonable explanation whatsoever as to why, if these men were entitled to their pensions, they did not get them until Mr. Blythe got into a tight corner in the Co. Monaghan. Deputy Ward asked questions about a few of the pensioners whom he located in Co. Monaghan. The Minister gave no reasonable explanation as to why these men did not receive their pensions until 1927. On the Committee Stage the Minister made some effort to gloss over the facts, but Deputy Ward's case is still there to be answered. I think anyone reading Deputy Ward's speech and the speech of the Minister for Defence will see that the Minister for Defence failed to answer the case put up by Deputy Ward. I hope Deputy Ward will point out to-day exactly the points which the Minister glossed over, and how futile was the case made by the Minister.

Dr. Ward

There are some aspects of the procedure of the Board of Assessors in arriving at a decision in these cases of applications for pensions on which I would like some information from the Minister. The nature of that information will bear a close relationship to the necessity for maintaining the right of the Comptroller and Auditor-General to examine the evidence on which claims to pensions have been successfully established. It is rather a pity that the Minister could not approach this question with an unbiassed mind. From his attitude to Deputies who are in a position during the debate on this Bill to give information about these cases one is driven to the conclusion that the Minister has definitely set out to maintain the position that pensions have not been awarded for other than military service. A person in the position of the Minister for Defence, or indeed in any other Department, should not, I think, set out to maintain that black is white. If available information is placed at his disposal he should, instead of becoming abusive towards the people who supply that information, rather welcome it, especially when it comes from members of the Opposition Party.

According to the Military Service Pensions Act, passed in 1924, military service means active service in any rank. Active service has not been further defined for the Board of Assessors as far as I am aware, and I gather from the Ministerial utterances during this debate that intelligence work in the I.R.A. constitutes active service within the meaning of the Act. I would like to know from the Minister if any such instructions had been issued to the Board. Deputy Duggan informed me in discussing the case for a claim that a man must have proved that he took part in ambushes in order to succeed in being awarded a military service pension. I want to know if this is so, and, if it is not so, I want to know what does active service mean, by whom is it to be defined, how is it to be defined and if that definition is put before the Board of Assessors. It is true, of course, that Deputy Duggan was trying to explain the reason why Thomas McCloy of Drumacoon was not awarded a pension when he told me that it was actually necessary to have shot people in order to qualify for the pension. He may not have been aware at the time that this man had been certified by all the officers in his area as having taken part in all the I.R.A. activities in that part of the country. The Deputy's intention may have been to deceive me and put me off for the time being.

An Ceann Comhairle

Was this statement made in the House?

Dr. Ward

It was made in the House but not in a speech in the House.

An Ceann Comhairle

It was a private conversation the Deputy had with a member of the Board of Assessors? The Deputy is going into a private conversation.

Dr. Ward

The conversation was not private; there was nothing private about it.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is not alluding to anything that happened in the course of debate in the House; it is not on the Records in any way?

Dr. Ward

No. At this stage I think we are entitled to hear from the Minister his definition of active service and we would like to know if the Board of Assessors has been instructed to act on a certain definition in accordance with the obvious wording of the Act. I would also like to know if secret service in the Free State Army is active service within the meaning of the Act. If it is active service within the meaning of the Act, then the people who were not in the Free State Army so far as the ordinary public can judge —the people who are pensioned but who have not served in the Army— may have complied with the law. That might explain the number of cases that we have in County Monaghan where there are many people drawing pensions who were never in the Free State Army so far as the ordinary public are aware and who would not be entitled to a pension unless secret service is considered active service within the meaning of the Act. If there have been pensions granted for secret service work the Minister might explain, because it would require explanation, why harmless people like the people in Monaghan should require so many secret service agents during the civil war. It is well known that the only time they were active was during the general election. These men were filled with drink, sent around in that condition full to the brim and armed to the teeth, and God help anybody who said boo to the Minister for Finance during the Parliamentary election. That may be the service for which they are pensioned and I hope the Minister will give us a satisfactory explanation in that connection. If the Minister gives the explanations and definitions that I have asked for we will be in a better position to judge whether any possible defence can be made for awarding pensions in many cases that I am aware of. Assuming secret service was a pensionable service in both wars, the Minister will still have something to explain in some of the cases that I have raised during this debate. Going back to case 21 on the Order Paper of 30th June, 1928——

An Ceann Comhairle

Surely the Deputy is not going to give us individual cases on the Fifth Stage?

Dr. Ward

I propose to reply to the Minister's explanations as put before this House. They are not in accordance with the truth and I propose to prove that they are not in accordance with the truth, if that is in order.

An Ceann Comhairle

On the Fifth Stage we must confine ourselves to what is in the Bill. Considering that we had the matter fully discussed on the Second and the Committee Stages I think we cannot now, on the Fifth Stage, again take individual cases. The debate must now be of a general nature. As I have said before on many occasions, we can never in the House establish what the facts are where there is a difference about the facts in a particular case. Certainly on the Fifth Stage we must not go into individual cases.

Dr. Ward

Do you definitely rule against me although I am in a position to prove that the Minister made certain explanations to the House on the Committee Stage that are untrue? I am able to prove that he has contradicted the statements he made on the Second Stage and that his information is misleading to this House. The House is liable, as a result of being misled by the Minister's statement, to allow this Bill to pass. Am I not to be allowed to show up this thing to the House or am I to be closured? If the Minister has made misleading or false statements to the House, I surely should be allowed to disprove them.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy must not on the Fifth Stage deal with the question of individual cases of pensioners and all the facts or alleged facts concerning them. That is what the Ceann Comhairle is ruling.

Dr. Ward

On the Second Reading of the Bill the Minister stated that certain cases of court-martial that I cited here had never taken place. He declared that these courts-martial had never taken place. He admitted he had detailed information, as a result of the representations or complaints that I made in this House, and that in several matters I had been of great assistance to him. He had found that a certain case I mentioned here as having been court-martialled did exist; as a result of his inquiries he found that the particular man I alluded to had been court-martialled.

At a subsequent stage he denied another case that I had mentioned had been court-martialled. The second case I had mentioned was a very notorious one. It had received a considerable amount of public notice; the children in the streets knew all about it; it was a dirty case. The Minister discovered that he could not maintain the position that there had not been a court-martial, that he had made himself rather ridiculous by taking up such an attitude so he discovered on the Committee Stage that the man he knew all about on the Second Reading—he had the file before him, and knew all about him, Deputy Ward had been of great assistance to him —he knew nothing at all about, and that it was another man he knew all about. I think the obvious inconsistency speaks for itself. It would be interesting if the truth were known, to know how some of these men got pensions. In one particular district where they had applied for pensions time and again, coming on the June elections they put their heads together and decided that they would invite the Cumann na nGaedheal organiser and have a conference with him. They decided that it would be a good time to press home their claims and be guaranteed their pensions. They worked at the June election for the Minister for Finance, the goods were not delivered, but they were not so green at the September election; they demanded a written guarantee this time, so that they would not be had again. One of the people who secured a pension in that way was a man who was court-martialled and expelled from the Army. The Minister knew all about him at one time—he had the file before him; Deputy Ward had been of great assistance to him—but he subsequently discovered it was necessary to replace that case by a still more notorious one. The Minister complained of these things being sprung on him, that he had not adequate notice. I suppose I should have given him a copy of my speech before I delivered it, in order that he might be in a position to reply. The Minister complained that he cannot carry everything round in his head. He need not shift the blame on to the members of the Fianna Fáil Party if Providence has not been kind to him in arranging what he is to carry about in his head.

The period of service upon which some of these pensions are alleged to be based does not altogether tally with the Minister's contribution here regarding some of these cases. For example, in one case that I raised where a man was court-martialled and expelled from the Army, the Minister informed the House that the man did not draw any pension during the period of his expulsion. I find that this man was court-martialled and expelled in the autumn of 1921. According to a reply given to me on the 30th June, 1928, I find the man was drawing his pension for the entire period from the 1st April, 1921, to the 30th June, 1922. That is part of the period of service upon which the pension was based, and during three-quarters of that time the man was not a member of the Free State Army, and he was not a member of the Irish Republican Army. At a later stage on the Third Reading the Minister stated, regarding this particular case, that the man was reinstated. He suggested that I had misled the House by not informing it that the man had been reinstated. In reply to a question by Deputy Aiken, asking if he was reinstated before the attack on the Four Courts or after, the Minister replied that he was reinstated before the attack on the Four Courts. We find that the reinstatement consisted of his being allowed to join the Free State Army on the 24th of September, 1922, some months after the attack on the Four Courts. These are only examples of some of the inconsistencies that the Minister for Defence put before the House in the course of this debate. Instead of being reinstated before the Four Courts were attacked, the man referred to was allowed to join the Free State Army some months afterwards, and apparently by joining the Free State Army his dirty past was wiped out.

The Minister has suggested that certain of these pensioners in Co. Monaghan whose cases I have raised here are drawing their pensions because of intelligence work in the I.R.A. in pre-truce days, and that that explains why men could be engaged in whole-time employment, drawing full salaries and never absent from their work. I want to tell the Minister that that is not so, and in substantiation of that statement the Minister can consult the Co. I.O. of the area, the Brigade I.O. of the area, and the Divisional I.O. of the area. All these will testify that these people were not on active service in any of the wars, and that they were certainly not in the Intelligence Department. Your ruling, on this stage of the Bill, sir, will considerably curtail discussion.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy has done very well up to the present.

Dr. Ward

I had intended doing far better. I am sure the Minister will be relieved to find that all the various inaccuracies he has put before the House on the different stages, and the various different stories which he has told about these mysterious cases are not all going to be exposed. There is another class of case on which the Minister was very eloquent. The Minister asked us to believe that once a man had been certified for a pension practically no power under the sun could deprive him of that pension. I do not suppose it is necessary to quote his actual words. I do not know if I would have leave to do so, but in any case lest they should be quoted, he will not seriously deny that that was the line he took.

Mr. Fitzgerald

Column of reference?

Dr. Ward

The 13/2/'30, col. 241, Volume 33, No. 1:—

"As far as I can make out, the Board of Assessors granted a pension on his first application on 1st January, 1927. Once the Board had granted it the delay in giving the pension was only contingent upon the time necessary to make certain inquiries as to whether the man was ineligible for it by reason of having been sentenced to a term of imprisonment. The man had the pension granted to him on the 7th January."

It took from January until May to make the necessary inquiries. The pension was awarded in May; the first payment was made in June, and things went on with a rush. The election was in June also. In column 242, Vol. 33, No. 1, the Minister says:—

"That was the decision of the Board. After that we had no power to alter it. The man was certified as due for a pension in January. The suggestion was that this man was violently hostile in April or May, and that the Government took action to buy his support by granting him a pension. The Deputy knows that unless the man was sentenced to a term of six months' imprisonment there was no power to withhold the pension from him after 7th January."

I think the Minister knows that that is a somewhat misleading statement, and is not in accordance with the facts. I think he must know that men could be victimised later on, and the fact that certificates were issued to them was not a guarantee that they were going to get pensions if they did not support Mr. Blythe in the following Parliamentary elections. In substantiation of that I would refer the Minister to reference number S.P. 8408:—

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is being irrelevant now by quoting former irrelevancies of the Minister.

Dr. Ward

I am trying to satisfy the Minister.

An Ceann Comhairle

I appreciate the Deputy's desire to satisfy the Minister, but I am not satisfied that the Deputy has said anything at all so far relevant to the Fifth Stage of this Bill. He had seventeen minutes on cases, and he said he was sorry he was hampered by the ruling of the Chair. He then strayed off into other matters dealing with the question of the Minister's payment of pensions. If the Deputy will consult the Bill he will find that the Bill is not concerned at all with the Minister's paying of pensions; it is a question of the findings of the Board of Assessors with regard to certificates.

Dr. Ward

It is very difficult to satisfy you and satisfy the Minister at the same time.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy may take it from me that I am not concerned with the Minister; I do not want him to satisfy the Minister, but he must satisfy me.

Dr. Ward

If the Ceann Comhairle had not interrupted me when I was giving quotations it would not be necessary to prove to him that the statements in these quotations were not consistent with the facts. If I have been allowed to put those quotations before the House I claim that I should have been allowed to prove that they are not consistent with the facts.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is not serious in that suggestion?

Dr. Ward

I claim that my version of these cases is true of the general position regarding military service pensions as administered, and I claim that the case that I have made is in itself sufficiently strong to make it necessary that we should allow the Comptroller and Auditor-General to see the evidence. If the Minister or the Executive Council is not satisfied that a case has been made against the administration of the Military Service Pensions Act, would the Minister undertake to have an inquiry on oath conducted into these cases and into other cases that we would put before him? He tells us that he has the evidence of reliable Army officers and that that is sufficient for him. I want to direct his attention to the fact that if perjured evidence in substantiation of a claim has been submitted by these officers, and if it were proved, as the result of any inquiry, that certain officers had supplied false or perjured evidence, those officers would be in a very serious position and would be liable to prosecution. I suggest in such circumstances that verbal or written evidence submitted to the Minister in explanation of these cases is not evidence that could be relied upon, because these men's own personal liberty if you like is at stake.

The Minister's attitude all through this thing appears to have been to defend the awards at all costs, and I think it is rather a pity that he should have become so bitter and touchy. Perhaps we have been hard on him, but if so we are not making any apology for it; we were merely discharging what we consider to be a duty. I think, a Chinn Comhairle. on account of the way in which you have more or less circumvented me in this debate that I will have to conclude. I submit, in conclusion, that it would be an outrage to pass this Bill and to perpetuate the graft that has been practised under the Military Service Pensions Act.

Mr. Grattan Esmonde

I deeply regret that Deputy Ward is so upset about this Bill and that he has taken the whole thing so much to heart. I have known the Deputy both in this House and on Committees; I think he is irrepressible and that he will rebound and recover from his present distress. But from what he has told us, I fear the House has got a very bad impression of the morality of the people of Monaghan. I know that in Co. Wexford there has been none of the suggested embezzlements and perjury which the Deputy suggested was prevalent in his constituency.

I think the Deputy will admit that pre-Truee military service was not public service but secret service. I think that the Public Accounts Committee in their first Report were correct in saying that pre-Truee military service was closely analogous to secret service and therefore should be treated accordingly. It just struck me that if this Bill were not passed and if the Comptroller and Auditor-General were entitled to see all the records of the secret military service of those persons who had also joined the National Army subsequent to the Truce, he would equally be entitled to examine the accounts, and particularly the stores accounts, of the Irish Republican Army. By such an examination possibly many of the regrettable accidents which are occurring throughout the country might be avoided.

Mr. Allen

What are they?

Mr. Esmonde

Occasional land mines exploding in dumps. Possibly these accounts might also be submitted, and I suggest to Deputies who are so keen on insisting on the rights of the Comptroller and Auditor-General that they should urge upon their friends of the Irish Republican Army to submit their accounts also, and particularly their stores accounts, for his examination.

Mr. Fitzgerald

Deputy Aiken complained that in a list which I supplied no addresses were given, and he spoke of my unsatisfactory way of dealing with certain cases mentioned by Deputy Ward. When Deputy Ward referred to certain cases by number he mentioned one case—I think it was late in the evening; my office was closed and I had not access to the papers—under a certain number. The details he gave of that case were practically identical with those of a case that I remembered perfectly clearly having dealt with, and I said to him that that case had been dealt with and that certain changes had been made. He then came on to a consecutive number and proceeded to give similar details which were practically identical with the case he had just mentioned. Then I realised that I would need to look up my book, so to speak, and I asked the Deputy if he would mind telling me if he had given these details on the occasion of his asking the question. He gave the sort of answer one expects from him. He did not answer "Yes" or "No." The result was with regard to point No. 1 that I assumed from the information he gave that he was referring to the case of another man, and the first opportunity I got I told him that my remarks on that occasion referred to No. 2 case and not to No. 1. He says now that I had to do that because No. 2 case was more injurious than No. 1. He then went on to point out what he called inconsistency. I said the man was not paid from 1928.

Dr. Ward

On a point of information, may I refer the Minister to columns 2199 and 2200 of the Official Report of the 5th December where he dealt with this case No. 21. I asked: "Will the Minister state whether he is referring to No. 21 or another." The Minister replied: "No. 21 is the case —— I remember, one case. I do not remember any other case. I have the file here."

Mr. Fitzgerald

I had that one case. I did not know it was 21 or 22. The information the Deputy gave, if he will look the matter up, was practically identical in the two cases. When he did refer to No. 21 I decided that was the case I had in mind. When he came to 22 I found his details were practically identical. Then I realised that I did not know whether it was one or the other. I looked up the matter at the earliest opportunity, and came to the Dáil and told the Deputy that the information I had given him about a certain case did not apply to No. 2, but to No. 1 case. Speaking from memory, I think at a later stage I said that the information at my disposal was such as to lead me to believe that the court-martial referred to in No. 1 case had not actually taken place. Later on this afternoon the Deputy referred to it, and said that I had stated that the man was not paid for the time during which he was dismissed from the Volunteers. Actually he knows perfectly well on a certain day in 1928—I do not remember the date now—he made certain statements about one case. He said that the man had been court-martialled and dismissed from the Volunteers. I looked that matter up and got no further assistance from the Deputy. I got certain information which led to the man losing his pension in respect of the period during which he was dismissed. The Deputy comes along afterwards and quotes from one thing, and says the man was paid during that time. He knows perfectly well that I explained to him that the removal of the payment in respect of that period was a result of information I got after he asked his question. That was made perfectly clear at the time, though he now tries to blur it.

Dr. Ward

May I refer the Minister to column 238 of the 13th February, 1930, referring to No. 2 case?

Mr. Fitzgerald

I have not the case here.

Dr. Ward

"The man is not being paid a pension for the period during which he was outside the Volunteers."

Mr. Fitzgerald

What date is that?

Dr. Ward

The 13th February, 1930.

Mr. Fitzgerald

The date of the question.

Dr. Ward

It was not a question. This occurred in the course of the debate. "The man is not being paid a pension for the period during which he was outside the Volunteers." I have shown here in the answer of the Minister to this question of the 13th June, 1928, that his pension was paid during the entire period from 1st April, 1920, to 30th June, 1922.

Mr. Fitzgerald

The Deputy interrupts me to say this, that in 1928 he asked a question and got information indicating that the man was accredited with service for a certain period that he should not get credit for. At a later date, he raised the same thing and I said this man is not now getting payment for that period. He said there is a contradiction. It is nothing of the sort. When I got the information that the man had not given service during a certain period, without any further assistance from the Deputy, the man ceased to receive payment for that period. I told the Deputy that. He now seems to have a grievance that when we got information we acted upon it.

Deputy Aiken complains that no addresses are given. I have had a number of cases brought up to me from Fianna Fáil. At least, one case was brought up to me by Deputy Walsh. He said he believed that a certain man was getting a pension to which he was not entitled. I said to Deputy Walsh that I should be glad to have any information he had in the matter, as I have said to other Deputies, Fianna Fáil or otherwise. The difference between Deputy Walsh and Deputy Ward is that Deputy Walsh really wanted to save the public purse. Deputy Ward merely wished—I do not know whether I will be allowed——

Dr. Ward

Go ahead, get it off your chest. You will feel better after it.

Mr. Fitzgerald

It is not the Deputy who matters; it is the Chair. Deputy Ward wished to take up an attitude different from Deputy Walsh, Deputy Walsh came forward with the information which he got. He knows, I think, that we went into the matter as thoroughly as we could and I think he knows the result of it. Certain Deputies on the Opposite Benches periodically ask for lists of these men. Deputy Aiken says how can we give any information when we do not know the men's addresses. We cannot actually identify them. Deputy Ward incidentally talks about getting information from Deputies who are in a position to put valuable information before the Minister. Where is the valuable information? There is nothing to prevent Deputy Ward coming along if he really wants to get this matter done in accordance with the law or if he thinks there is anything wrong, if he is not merely anxious to injure men in their daily life for the reason that these men defended the State against anarchists who were out to destroy it. If he is really anxious for the public purse and has a proper case he has as clear a method of doing it as Deputy Walsh.

Instead of that, what does he do? Every time he gets up I give him all the information at my disposal. If he has anything that will be useful to refute that, let him come forward and give it to me instead of trying to make speeches which have no other effect than to suggest that people who are probably only getting money to which they are duly and lawfully entitled are ordinarily dishonest people. Deputy Walsh went about the thing in a perfectly straightforward and honest way. He knows quite well how he was received. The same thing applies to every Deputy, Fianna Fáil or otherwise, independent of what I may think of that individual Deputy. There is nobody in this House more anxious than I am to get after anybody who is getting money to which he is not entitled.

Mr. Aiken

Will the Minister facilitate by giving the addresses?

Mr. Fitzgerald

Deputy Ward tells us there are Deputies who are in a position to put valuable information before us. Let them come forward. Do not let us publish the names and addresses of men merely for the purpose of trying to victimise them on the assumption that they have done something to support the State.

Mr. Aiken

The Minister claims he is anxious to facilitate us in preventing money being paid to men who did not earn it.

Acting - Chairman (Professor Thrift)

It is quite irrelevant to this Bill.

Mr. Aiken

Why does not the Minister give us the addresses which are necessary to identify the pensioners?

Mr. Fitzgerald

Because I do not propose to make myself a party to waging blackmail warfare. If the Deputy wants any address of a particular man I will tell him whether he is or is not the man. If he has any information he can put it before me as one of his own Party did. The others want names and addresses to publish in scurrilous little rags. They want to get up here and throw out —I will not say a blackguardly suggestion. They have not the ordinary guts to come forward and prove it afterwards. Deputy Ward has been talking about this thing for months. Let him come forward and bring his sworn evidence with him.

Dr. Ward

What have you been doing since 1928 about these cases?

Mr. Fitzgerald

I looked into every case, as the Deputy knows. In the one case where I got additional evidence it resulted in a man having a certain portion of his pension taken away. With regard to the other case about which Deputy Ward gets up he is not in as good a position to know about it as a man I know of. He throws certain accusations across the House. On the other hand, I get written statements from other people which can contradict them. When I get sworn statements from Deputy Ward or from his henchmen that will justify me in reopening a case, I will proceed to ask the Board to come together again. Certainly I am not going to do it merely when certain people who have not a very exalted sense of decency throw epithets and accusations about and then do not run the risk of facing up to them. When the Deputy faces up to things we will get after them.

The Deputy stated that there was no power to withdraw a pension. He can, if he likes, say that, but it is not strictly correct. I have not power to do anything unless I have further evidence. If a man has a pension and I get further evidence which makes me think he should not get it, I will certainly do anything that lies in my power to get that case re-opened. In the event of having further information certainly then steps should be taken in respect of the pension in question. Apart from that, I think I was roughly correct in saying that I had not power to withdraw it.

Dr. Ward

You would not explain how you withdrew the pension in reference to No. 8408 awarded on the 27th May on a certificate issued by the Board of Assessors, in the case of a man who assisted a Republican candidate in June and was notified in July that his pension could not be paid.

Acting - Chairman (Professor Thrift)

Is this a fresh case? I will not let any fresh cases be referred to.

Dr. Ward

It is an old case now.

Mr. Fitzgerald

I would suggest that the Deputy has a clear and decent way of doing the thing. Let him come forward if he has a case.

Dr. Ward

You are a good judge of decency.

Mr. Fitzgerald

He can write or come to G.H.Q. with his information and let us get after the thing. I do not know what the Deputy is speaking about when he gets up and refers to Reference No. so-and-so.

Mr. Aiken

The Minister has information for two years, and never acted on it.

Mr. Fitzgerald

There are 13,000 cases and the Deputy refers to one case after another. If he was really anxious to do something instead of just using his privileged position here he would go about it in a decent way.

Dr. Ward

The Minister suggests that I have availed of the privilege of this House to make certain charges against certain men. Anything I have said in regard to these military service pensions here I have said outside, and I will repeat it outside, because it is true.

Mr. Fitzgerald

I should be very glad to receive a statement on oath from the Deputy. I think it was one or other of the two Deputies who asked what instructions I gave the Board as to what constituted military service. I gave no instructions to the Board as to what constituted military service, because I am not entitled to give them any instructions on that matter.

Dr. Ward

Active service, not military service.

Mr. Fitzgerald

That, I am not in a position to give instructions on. That decision does not rest with me.

Mr. Aiken

He means election service to Cumann na nGaedheal.

Mr. T. Sheehy (Cork):

How is the State to be improved by all this cross fire? Let the dead past bury its dead. That is my advice to them all.

Mr. Fitzgerald

This debate was most irrelevant, but I would suggest to any Deputy who feels he is in a position to lay bare the facts, showing clearly that a man is drawing a pension which he should not be drawing, if he is not merely anxious to injure the man without having himself to face up to the responsibility, that he should put such information in writing and come along with all the information that is required and I will look into the thing. If there is a prima facie case which would justify me in summoning the Board the matter will be re-opened. In certain of these cases I have certain information which I indicated on a previous occasion was directly contrary to the information suggested by the Deputy. It came from a man whose service in the Volunteers was on a more important scale and less expensive than the Deputy's. On the face of it as between the two I think more value is to be placed on the work of certain officers whose identity I think I indicated clearly during the debate. Any unprejudiced person will recognise that General Daniel Hogan had a more distinguished career in the Volunteers and was more in a position exactly to know what was taking place than Deputy Ward. I do not want to say anything more about Deputy Ward. I think the people of Monaghan know something about his pre-Truce record.

Mr. Aiken

The Minister is going to keep the addresses then.

[An Ceann Comhairle resumed the Chair.]

Question—"That the Bill do now pass"—put.

The Dáil divided: Tá, 67; Níl, 54.

Tá

• Aird, William P.
• Beckett, James Walter.
• Bennett, George Cecil.
• Blythe, Ernest.
• Bourke, Séamus A.
• Brennan, Michael.
• Brodrick, Seán.
• Byrne, John Joseph.
• Carey, Edmund.
• Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
• Conlon, Martin.
• Connolly, Michael P.
• Cosgrave, William T.
• Crowley, James.
• Daly, John.
• Davis, Michael.
• Doherty, Eugene.
• Dolan, James N.
• Doyle, Peadar Seán.
• Duggan, Edmund John.
• McDonogh, Martin.
• MacEóin, Seán.
• McFadden, Michael Og.
• Mongan, Joseph W.
• Mulcahy, Richard.
• Murphy, James E.
• Nally, Martin Michael.
• Nolan, John Thomas.
• O'Connell, Richard.
• O'Connor, Bartholomew.
• O'Donovan, Timothy Joseph.
• O'Higgins, Thomas.
• O'Leary, Daniel.
• O'Mahony, Dermot Gun.
• Dwyer, James.
• Egan, Barry M.
• Esmonde, Osmond Thos. Grattan.
• Fitzgerald, Desmond.
• Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
• Gorey, Denis J.
• Hassett, John J.
• Heffernan, Michael R.
• Hennessy, Michael Joseph.
• Hennessy, Thomas.
• Hennigan, John.
• Henry, Mark.
• Hogan, Patrick (Galway).
• Holohan, Richard.
• Jordan, Michael.
• Keogh, Myles.
• Law, Hugh Alexander.
• Leonard, Patrick.
• Lynch, Finian.
• Mathews, Arthur Patrick.
• O'Sullivan, Gearóid.
• O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
• Reynolds, Patrick.
• Rice, Vincent.
• Roddy, Martin.
• Shaw, Patrick W.
• Sheehy, Timothy (West Cork).
• Tierney, Michael.
• Vaughan, Daniel.
• White, John.
• White, Vincent Joseph.
• Wolfe, George.
• Wolfe, Jasper Travers.

Níl

• Aiken, Frank.
• Allen, Denis.
• Anthony, Richard.
• Blaney, Neal.
• Boland, Gerald.
• Boland, Patrick.
• Bourke, Daniel.
• Brady, Seán.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Buckley, Daniel.
• Carty, Frank.
• Cassidy, Archie J.
• Coburn, James.
• Colbert, James.
• Cooney, Eamon.
• Crowley, Fred. Hugh.
• Crowley, Tadhg.
• Davin, William.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• Doyle, Edward.
• Fahy, Frank.
• Flinn, Hugo.
• Fogarty, Andrew.
• French, Seán.
• Gorry, Patrick J.
• Goulding, John.
• Hayes, Seán.
• Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
• Houlihan, Patrick.
• Jordan, Stephen.
• Kennedy, Michael Joseph.
• Kent, William R.
• Killilea, Mark.
• Kilroy, Michael.
• Lemass, Seán F.
• Little, Patrick John.
• McEllistrim, Thomas.
• MacEntee, Seán.
• Moore, Séamus.
• Mullins, Thomas.
• O'Dowd, Patrick Joseph.
• O'Kelly, Seán T.
• O'Leary, William.
• O'Reilly, Matthew.
• O'Reilly, Thomas.
• Powell, Thomas P.
• Ruttledge, Patrick J.
• Ryan, James.
• Sexton, Martin.
• Sheehy, Timothy (Tipp.).
• Smith, Patrick.
• Tubridy, John.
• Walsh, Richard.
• Ward, Francis C.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Duggan and P.S. Doyle; Níl, Deputies G. Boland and Allen.

Question declared carried.