Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 15 Jul 1932

Vol. 43 No. 8

Allocation of Time. Motion:— Emergency Imposition of Duties Bill, 1932, and Finance (Customs Duties) (No. 2) Bill, 1932.

Minister for Finance (Mr. MacEntee)

I beg to move the motion which stands on the Order Paper and which provides:—

That the business of the Dáil at its sitting on Friday, July 15th, 1932, shall be proceeded with as follows:—

(1) In the case of the Emergency Imposition of Duties Bill, 1932—

(i) The Second Stage (resumed) of the Bill shall be the first Order of the day, and the proceedings on that stage, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 1 p.m. on the said day by putting from the Chair forthwith the Question, that the Bill be now read a Second Time, and after the said hour no Question shall be put from the Chair on any amendment to the motion for Second Reading.

(ii) The Committee Stage of the Bill shall be proceeded with immediately upon the conclusion of the Second Stage, and the questions necessary to bring to a conclusion the proceedings in Committee on the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, and shall be decided without amendment or debate.

(iii) The Fourth Stage of the Bill shall be proceeded with immediately upon the conclusion of the Committee Stage, and the Question necessary to bring to a conclusion the proceedings on the Fourth Stage shall be put forthwith and shall be decided without amendment or debate.

(iv) The Fifth Stage of the Bill shall be proceeded with immediately upon the conclusion of the Fourth Stage and the proceedings on the Fifth Stage, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 3 p.m. on the said day by putting from the Chair forthwith the Question necessary to bring the proceedings to a conclusion.

(2) In the case of any Recommendations to the Finance (Customs Duties) (No. 2) Bill, 1932, received from the Seanad the Recommendations shall be considered by the Dáil (and not in Committee of the whole Dáil) and the proceedings on such Recommendations if not previously concluded shall be brought to a conclusion at 4 p.m. on the said day by putting from the Chair forthwith and successively the Questions necessary to bring the proceedings on such Recommendations to a conclusion.

(3) Immediately upon the conclusion of the proceedings on any Seanad Recommendations to the Finance (Customs Duties) (No. 2) Bill, 1932, the Dáil shall stand adjourned, without Question put, until Wednesday, October 19th, 1932: Provided that if no such Recommendations are received from the Seanad, the Dáil shall stand adjourned upon the conclusion of the proceedings on the Fifth Stage of the Emergency Imposition of Duties Bill, 1932, without Question put, until Wednesday, October 19th, 1932.

Mr. Hayes

We had no notice of this motion. Can it be accepted without notice?

Mr. MacEntee

I submit that in view of the extreme urgency of the business before the House the motion should be accepted.

Mr. Hayes

The motion that the Minister desires to move refers to three separate and distinct things. Is there any precedent for a motion like that?

An Ceann Comhairle

In view of the consequences that might ensure from delay, I am of opinion that there is urgency in the matter. I have been so assured by responsible Ministers and being so assured—I am not the judge of urgency—I am prepared to accept the motion and submit it to the House for decision.

Mr. Hayes

May I ask is there any precedent for the guillotine motion which contains three separate things, one, the Emergency Imposition of Duties Bill, 1932; (2), the Finance (Customs Duties) (No. 2) Bill, 1932, and (3) the motion for the adjournment? Would the Minister tell us what the urgency is about in all three?

Mr. MacEntee

I do not think it is necessary for me or for any other person to labour the urgency of that part of the motion which deals with the Emergency Imposition of Duties Bill, 1932. As I said yesterday, our trade has already been attacked and I do not think any Party in the House is prepared to stand up and say that the Government are to be left powerless to make a defence against that attack. As regards Part II of the Motion, the Seanad adjourned on Wednesday without having concluded the proceedings of the Finance (Customs Duties) (No. 2) Bill, 1932, and a special meeting of the Seanad is being called to conclude the business this morning. As the Bill must become law and as it is desirable to avoid recalling the Dáil on Monday in order that the Bill should become law, that Bill becomes a matter of urgency also.

Mr. Hayes

Is it not a queer thing surely that the Minister in the Seanad would not know that——

Mr. Flinn

A "quare thing surely." It is in the Abbey the Deputy ought to be.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair is not responsible for the action or in-action of the Minister in the Seanad.

Mr. MacEntee

Does the Deputy's point arise on the question of urgency?

Mr. Hayes

Yes.

Mr. MacEntee

Would not this Bill fall to be considered to-day in any event? As a matter of fact I do not wish to say anything about the other House and I am not going to. They are taking steps to-day to rectify their mistakes, and the only thing we want to know is whether the Opposition in this House are in the position that they are going to hold up the financial business of this House and whether they want to come back here on next Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday? It is they have been clamouring for the adjournment.

Mr. Hayes

The urgency of the Finance (Customs Duties) (No. 2) Bill arises from the neglect of the Executive Council, that first of all in the other House they did not transact their business properly and now they find themselves having to do it like this. I have personally no objection to this but I submit——

Mr. Flinn

May I submit that that is a "quare" tale?

Mr. Cosgrave

The position is that the Government in the last couple of months has bitten off more than it can chew. It has tried to do business during the last two or three months without exactly knowing where it was going. The position is that with regard to that particular matter, the Finance (Customs) (No. 2) Bill, the ordinary Finance Bill and the Butter Bill, one of these measures was quite sufficient for an inexperienced Ministry such as that to deal with. They imposed various tariffs, made certain alterations without having kept their eye upon the business that was to be transacted, and at the present moment they had in order to put all these extraordinary measures through, to get the Seanad to meet and this House to meet with a notice of motion such as is before us, in order that the laws passed by the State would not be brought into disrepute. They have dragged the administration through the mud. They are covered with the slime of their own making——

Mr. Flinn

We heard all that before.

Mr. Cosgrave

Whether the Deputy heard it before or not he has got to admit that it is true. There is nothing but incompetence stamped upon what the Government has done. Nothing. The two Houses have got to be assembled to-day and we have got to have a time limit in regard to it in order that the Minister for Finance shall not be brought before the court for collecting moneys to which he is not entitled.

Mr. MacEntee

Was that ever done on a previous occasion?

Mr. Cosgrave

No.

Mr. MacEntee

It was.

Mr. Cosgrave

When?

Mr. MacEntee

Was not the public Safety Act passed on a Saturday afternoon?

Mr. Cosgrave

Precisely, but not without notice. But I am speaking now about financial matters. I am exposing the incompetency of the Minister for introducing into this House a measure which he had to amend with such a number of amendments as the Minister for Finance knows. It just so happens that if the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance had not happened to have turned his coat——

Mr. Flinn

Which coat?

Mr. Cosgrave

His political coat.

Mr. Flinn

I have not turned a coat.

Mr. Cosgrave

If he had not turned his political coat during the last ten years he would be ashamed to make that statement. I want to see business done.

(Interruptions).

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy must be heard. There will be opportunities for reply.

Mr. Cosgrave

Being a sensible, commonsense man, I am prepared to let that motion go, saying what I have said—that a more incompetent administration never appeared in this House and I hope never will.

General Mulcahy

I would like, sir, to have your help in understanding this. Do I understand that we are going to have a Second Stage discussion resumed on this Emergency Duties Bill?

An Ceann Comhairle

As soon as this Motion has been disposed of.

General Mulcahy

And that there shall be no debate upon the Committee Stage of it and no debate upon the Report Stage. That is the position in respect of this Bill, introduced here into the House yesterday at a time when the President was in the precincts of this House but did not come in to the House to explain what was going to be done under this measure, nor what policy was being pursued by the proposed application of this measure. This is being done in circumstances in which we have had no single word of explanation from any Minister on the far side as to what is the meaning of any particular section or sub-section or bit of a sub-section in this Motion. We are going to pass this measure, which gives absolute financial control over every possible kind of thing in this country, without any direct reference to any particular emergency that exists because of any condition in any other country. These are absolute powers over the financial conditions in this country. As I say, we have had no explanation, good, bad or indifferent, from the Ministers on the far side as to what they mean. The President deliberately kept out of this Chamber, both when the measure was being discussed yesterday and when the Second Reading Motion was being made. I, for one, protest vehemently on the way in which this House is being treated.

Mr. Davin

Ah!

General Mulcahy

I do not know what Deputy Davin's intervention means. If this House is being treated in this way with the co-operation and with the support of the Labour Party, then I think that we ought to have some explanation from the Labour Party on this particular matter. I do submit that this House, adjourning as it did last night, with the expectation that the President would be here to-day to give some explanation both of his policy and of the details of this particular Bill, should adjourn the Second Reading until such time as the President is prepared to come back to this House and say that this measure, is, in his opinion, necessary for him, and what are the circumstances in which, in his opinion, this Bill is necessary for him, and where the policy that is enshrined in this particular Bill, in these circumstances, is going to lead our people.

Mr. Dillon

I would appeal to the Ministers to look well and carefully before they insist upon pressing this Motion. The Minister knows perfectly well that the condition of the House at the present moment is that we are not apprised of what the President himself has to say on this Bill. There are many members of the House anxiously awaiting to hear what the President has to say. We all know that at this moment he is engaged on State business of the first importance. So far as I know, the whole country is watching that State business with every hope and with every desire to help, in any way they can, in its successful conclusion. If this Motion is pressed through now, the House is being asked to take a step of the greatest possible gravity, although that might not be imagined from the way in which it was referred to by some speakers on the Fianna Fáil Benches last night. We are asked to take that step before the President himself has informed the House of what his opinion of the situation is. I have no desire to embarrass the Government in any way in the course of the negotiations which are proceeding, but I do appeal to members not to allow a consideration of convenience about coming back on Monday or coming back on Tuesday, or on Wednesday, to influence them in the arrangement of business to-day. This Dáil will not hesitate to come here on Saturday, Monday or Tuesday, or at any other time that the Government may think it necessary that they should come in order to deal adequately with the question. I do not think that the members are asking anything unreasonable when they suggest that the President himself should be here, before we are asked to deal with as grave and weighty a matter as this Dáil was ever called upon to deal with. We are ready to come on any day or at any time that will suit the convenience of the Executive to deal with this matter with the utmost possible despatch.

Minister for Finance (Mr. MacEntee)

I should like to deal with the points raised first of all by Deputy Mulcahy and secondly, and expanded to some extent, by Deputy Dillon. This Bill is introduced as a Government measure and on the collective responsibility of the Cabinet, with the full sanction—it could not be introduced otherwise than with the full sanction— of the President and of the Executive Council. What has been said from the Government Benches expresses the mind of the Government.

General Mulcahy

It is not intelligible.

A Deputy

Says you!

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy, in that matter, will have to speak for himself only.

General Mulcahy

I am speaking for myself. It is not intelligible to me.

Mr. MacEntee

I am sorry.

Mr. O'Hanlon

Has the President gone to London armed with the collective responsibility of the Cabinet?

Mr. MacEntee

The President in London is competent to speak for the Cabinet. As to the urgency of the matter, the British have already taken powers, as I have indicated, to hurt, if they can, and to restrict and impede the normal course of our trade with that country. Are we, simply because negotiations or conversations are taking place at the moment, to leave ourselves defenceless pending the outcome of those conversations; or are we to do the prudent and wise thing—that is, to arm ourselves with powers which, we hope, it may not be necessary to use, but which, in a certain eventuality, we may be compelled to resort to? We have not taken the initial step in this. We did not propose to put up penal tariffs against British produce or British manufacture. We adopted an extremely reasonable attitude from the beginning—to submit what is a very grave issue for this country to arbitration. We put up what I believe are fair conditions and conditions which no man, impartially minded in the matter, could say were impossible or unreasonable. All that has been futile and we have not been able to bring the matter to the court where we believe it can be fairly tried. An attempt has been made by force to coerce us to do something else, and we are supposed to stand with our hands tied by our sides to be smitten on both cheeks.

Mr. Blythe

The other night, before the introduction of this Bill, but when it was foreshadowed, I said we seem to be facing up to an economic war unless some negotiation, of which we were not informed, were in progress. I suspected that the Government would surely make some last attempt to prevent what would be a real calamity taking place, and I seem to have been correct, in that matter, and that some negotiations were going on. Now it seems to me that the Government, have, for the first time, as far as we know, entered upon negotiations on this matter, because what was published, so far, indicated that there were no negotiations going on. There was merely a statement that this was a matter that might be referred to arbitration and then there was long-distance correspondence. We now know that, apparently, negotiations had begun, and I think the wise and prudent thing for the Government to do would be to try, with all its strength, to make a success of these negotiations.

This proposal, now before the House, might have a sort of psychological justification if something that is being done by the British is an injury or would be an injury to the trade of this country. There might, then, be a demand, in the country, for some action by the Government even although that action, while it might do some damage to the British, would only increase the damage done here at home. But I recognise, as I said, that there might be some reason for the Government to do something, and that if they could not do anything better they might be compelled to hit back, although the hitting back might not have the desired effect, and might put an additional burden on the people here. Now there is an alternative. Negotiations are going on and my view is that the Government here should not hurry on with their economic war preparations, and that they should not try to get the country plunged into that position. So far, only two blows have been struck, as it were. The first blow was struck by our Government here, and that blow was returned by the British Government. Now negotiations are going on. I think if blows are struck now, while the negotiations are going on, if we propose to strike a third blow in order to prevent a fourth blow by the British we will only succeed in making things worse. I do not see why the Government should not await the issue of these negotiations and call the Dáil together again next week if necessary. Now that negotiations have been begun do not let us imagine there is nothing to do but to pursue a policy of returning blow for blow. I must say this: that in all the negotiations that we carried on with the British we found that there was an eminently reasonable consideration given to all arguments. Even in matters where there was great difficulty we were always able to make progress. We were never, in any matter, faced up against a stone wall. If this Government finds itself up against a stone wall in any matter it is because of its unreasonable attitude, and because of its desire to fight, and because of its desire to raise the temperature of the atmosphere. I suggest there should be no reason for raising the temperature now. I suggest that the Government, entering upon negotiations, should say it is sincere, and that they want a settlement and let that operate on the mind of the other party, and it will operate on the mind of the other party. Nobody can enter upon negotiations if he feels, in advance, there is going to be no settlement. No person entering upon negotiations will succeed if he feels that he will fail to effect anything. Nothing will be lost by recognising this and there may be a great deal gained. I would regard the entering into an economic war here as an absolute calamity. I believe, that from the point of view of the material well-being of our people, it would be more serious than civil war. It might not do the great amount of damage that the Civil War did but, so far as other damage is concerned, it would be very likely worse, and it would be no real consolation to the people of this country that they succeeded in doing damage to the British. We have no particular interest in making the British suffer. We are not concerned to deal with the British side at all. We are concerned to consider our own people and to do our best for our own people. I suggest that the Government, in entering upon an economic war, have had no regard for the interests of its own people. They are behaving like a mad bull. The policy they are pursuing would be regarded as reasonable only in Bedlam. They should not fling this country into an economic war but they should let the negotiations operate, and I say, if these negotiations are not successful the fault will be with the representatives of this country. Many negotiations have been conducted, and much more important negotiations and negotiations in which larger sums of money were involved. (Interruptions.)

Mr. Cooney

Traitor.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Cooney must withdraw the word "traitor."

Mr. Cooney

I withdraw.

Mr. Blythe

When negotiations about public debts were carried on there was a much larger sum of money involved than there is here. The claim of the British Government was larger in these negotiations than the sum involved in the negotiations that are taking place now. These negotiations were carried on successfully, and I am satisfied, remembering the new position created in the world at Lausanne, and the new movement throughout the world that is taking place that a satisfactory settlement can be reached if the representatives of this country, in this business, have due regard to the interests of this country, and are not concerned in proving that the wrong they did years ago was right. If they deal with the business between the people a satisfactory settlement can be got on the question, if the true interests of the country are not neglected for a mere Party advantage.

Minister for Education (Mr. Derrig)

Deputy Blythe considers, apparently, that the moment is opportune for making a satisfactory settlement but, at the same time, he wants to tie the hands of the Government and not to allow them to take proper steps to defend themselves in case the present attempt at a settlement fails. What has brought about the change in which Deputy Blythe admits there is a good chance of a satisfactory settlement? What has brought about that change? Has it emanated out of Lausanne, or, is it that this Party is asking the country to support them in facing this position of crisis in which the British Government would be compelled to state their case in a fair court, and that we would abide the result?

Knowing Deputy Blythe's experienced career as a negotiator one feels that perhaps too much emphasis may be laid on his advice at this juncture. Anything we are doing or propose to do will, in the first place, be done in the full light of public knowledge, and everybody in the country will know it. We will not be in the position that we will go to London and do something, conceal it for six months and then publish it to the world; neither will we be in the position of having settlements signed by individuals, initialled by individuals, upon which it will be proposed to bind this country for very substantial sums.

Mr. Cosgrave

Would the Minister say what is the particular item that he has mentioned?

Mr. Derrig

The agreement signed by Major Hills and you.

Mr. Cosgrave

May I say that that instrument was brought before this House?

Mr. MacEntee

It was not.

Mr. Cosgrave

I will give you the day and date—June 26th, 1923, and July of the same year.

Mr. Brady

On a point of order, is it in order to interrupt the Minister in this way?

An Ceann Comhairle

If the Minister gives way to the Deputy it is quite in order.

Mr. Derrig

I have no objection.

Mr. Cosgrave

I say it was not private; it was brought before the House.

Mr. Derrig

If the document was brought before the House, as Deputy Cosgrave alleges, why is it that the British Government suggested it should be published, and the Irish Government could not see their way to agree?

Mr. Cosgrave

I have given the dates on which the information was brought before the House.

Mr. Derrig

You might have made reference in this House to the fact that a settlement was made in connection with the land annuities, but—and I am open to conviction—I question whether the text of the Agreement was made public. So far as we know, the text of the Agreement was never made public until we received a reference to it in the British dispatch which enabled us to trace it.

What is the object of Deputy Blythe's speech? One could understand the position of the Party working themselves into a frenzy, into a regular series of Jeremiahs during the last couple of days as to the dreadful things that are going to happen the country, but are they afraid now that a settlement will come about? What is their attitude? They seem to have changed over-night. Deputy Blythe feels that it is not the Government who have to take responsibility for the whole matter, who will have to face the country be their actions right or wrong, that they are not some way trustworthy or competent to undertake the task that they are at present facing. I think that if Deputy Blythe were reasonably sincere or had reasonable commonsense, he would realise that no matter how high an opinion he may have of himself as a negotiator it may at some time be necessary to change negotiators, and, that it would not be the slightest disadvantage to this country to change negotiators at this juncture. It is a very significant matter as Deputy Flinn pointed out last night that the Party opposite had on the question of the Oath run away from the position which they themselves had taken up and that they did not stand up to Mr. Thomas when he tried to argue that there was an essential difference between South Africa and the Irish Free State on a constitutional question. The Party ran away from the position they had taken up that this country stood on terms of absolute equality, that this country was absolutely sovereign and that we could take any step we wished so long as it concerned our internal domestic affairs. In two matters, the matter of the letter read in the House of Commons and in the matter of the Statute of Westminster, as it affected them, they ran away from the constitutional position they had themselves taken up.

Mr. Hayes

On a point of order——

Deputies

Sit down!

Mr. Hayes

I take it it is in order to make a point of order in respect to the business of the House—is the Minister running away from the Motion?

Mr. Flinn

Is that a point of order, or is it a gross abuse of the rules of the House?

Mr. Hayes

Is the Minister running away from the Motion or is he being completely irrelevant?

Mr. Flinn

Is it in order to put a point of order to you, sir, in the form that the Minister is running away from the Motion?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister is in order.

Mr. Derrig

Deputy Blythe has definitely stated that if the negotiations broke down the responsibility will be on this Government. Deputy Blythe's co-operation in a matter of this kind on a national issue cannot extend any further than that. The first time ever the land annuities question was brought into the House I, for one, appealed to the House that it should be dealt with as a national matter. I pointed out that in the days of the old Irish Party, in financial matters gravely affecting the economic welfare of the people, we had always even Irish Unionists who agreed with us on that special question and were prepared to stand by us. At least, if Deputy Blythe cannot help, he certainly should not attempt to weaken the position in any way. I suggest that when his Party try to place the onus for any failure that may occur on us they are not doing any good either to themselves or the country. If the negotiations do break down, and I hope they will not, they will have ample opportunity to take up the cry throughout the country.

A Deputy

It will be too late then.

Mr. Derrig

With regard to the particular proposal before us, it has not been suggested, and it would not be suggested by the President if he were here, what steps exactly we propose to take under this. We are asking for powers to deal with the situation. We are faced with the responsibility of answering a threat, of answering the embargo that is sought to be placed on our goods and we are not going to take any step without the most careful consideration. We realise that any step we may take may be in the nature of a double-edged weapon. We realise that, as a result of any steps that are taken, our own people may suffer to a certain extent, and any measures we may take will have to be very carefully thought out if they are not going to injure our own people as well as the foreigner; but we simply must have these powers.

Is it suggested by Deputies opposite that if the negotiations break down, if there is no possibility of a settlement, that the Irish case should be left completely in the air, that the Government which is responsible for that case should not be in a position to take whatever measures they consider fit to safeguard their own people? Deputies opposite have laid great stress on the situation that is going to develop in this country, but the Deputies themselves, if they were in the same position that we are in or in a much less serious position, would undoubtedly look for these powers. As they know themselves from experience, when a Government seeks these powers, various arguments can be made against them; but if a Government is not going to have powers to deal with an emergency and be prepared to take steps to meet it, then that Government is powerless either in maintaining order in its own country, in maintaining a proper condition of affairs to enable its own people to get a living and in the matter of negotiations with the foreigner, it is not going to be in a reasonably strong position.

Mr. Dillon

On a point of order, I am sorry to have to interrupt the Minister, but is it in order to discuss the merits of the business and not the merits of the question as to whether that business is to be taken now or not? We are not discussing the merits of the business. This is a discussion on the question as to whether it should be taken now or whether we should wait until the President returns. The Minister is taking the opportunity to discuss the merits of the business on this question. I did not discuss the merits and I do not want to discuss them. But the Minister is discussing the merits of the business and not of the question of whether the business should be taken to-day or when the President is here. That is the whole difficulty at the moment.

An Ceann Comhairle

Ministers have been asked to explain why this business should be taken now, and it is very difficult to explain without stating the merits of the case.

Mr. Derrig

Deputy Dillon knows very well that if these negotiations, as they are called, are likely to proceed it will be quite impossible to ask the House to meet again to deal with this matter, in my opinion.

Mr. Cosgrave

Why?

Mr. Derrig

We have reached a position in which we must do one thing or the other. We cannot come back and ask for these powers. We simply must have them now and we must be in a position before starting negotiations, if they are negotiations, to say that we have taken all precautions, before they are started, to take suitable steps if the possibility of settlement breaks down. It would be quite impossible in the midst of negotiations, once they have been started in a proper manner, to come to the House and ask for these powers. The Deputy knows that very well himself. Besides, surely the Government here ought to be allowed to take the same powers that the British Government is taking?

Mr. Cosgrave

The same powers?

Mr. Derrig

The Opposition Party in this House has all the time been talking about the dreadful things we are going to do, but it is time enough for the Opposition to find fault with us and to tell the country the terrible things we are doing when we actually commence to do them. Up to the present we are only seeking to arm ourselves either for peace or war, and I suggest that the best way in which you can get proper and reasonable peace is to arm for the other eventualities.

Mr. Davin

I do not want to say any word in this discussion which would be likely to embarrass anybody engaged in the present conversations or negotiations. I quite agree that President de Valera with the knowledge that he must have had at his disposal late last evening, was quite right not to respond to Deputy Mulcahy's demand for his intervention last night. Deputy Blythe has incorrectly stated that negotiations are about to begin this morning. The fact which must be apparent to most people is that negotiations took place some considerable time ago here and across the Channel and that the negotiations which he is now referring to are negotiations that are about to be resumed. I would ask Deputy Blythe to remember that this economic war has not been started by the people of this State and that the demand for holding up the legislation recently introduced by the present Government would be justified if Deputy Blythe could say on behalf of the British Government that they would not proceed any further with the Act passed and already put into operation by them. As we are aware it is true that at this very moment an economic war is being carried on by the British Government, but if the Deputy could get up here and say that that war would cease immediately the negotiations were resumed, I think he would be making a very good case in support of his demand for the holding up of the legislation now before the House. What he is really demanding is that this Government and the people of this country should stack their arms while the economic war is being carried on by the British Government and the people on the other side of the Channel. No member of this Party will, in a light-hearted fashion, give a vote for a Bill which proposes that such drastic powers should be given to the Government here.

Mr. Fitzgerald

They will give it all right.

Mr. Davin

If they do it will be only done for the purpose of enabling the people of this country to defend themselves against another Government who have already started this war and in order to enable that measure, should it be found necessary, to be put into operation in as short a time as it is possible. It will be only done with an emergency. I hope it will never be necessary to use it. And if it is necessary to use it, I hope it will be used in a manner which will hurt the people of this country as lightly as it possibly can be done.

General Mulcahy

We all hope that.

Mr. Davin

This is an issue which should not be made a Party matter. This is a great national issue in which the Government of the country for the time being is entitled to claim the confidence of all the members of this House and the confidence of the country as a whole——

General Mulcahy

Without explanation?

Mr. Davin

——in order that the negotiations which are now being resumed will be carried to a successful conclusion on behalf of the people of this country.

General Mulcahy

And without explanation?

Mr. MacDermot

There is a question which I would like to ask the Executive Council. I know that the powers that are being taken by the British Government are strictly limited by their pledges and in order to raise the moneys which they rightly or wrongly contend have been retained by this country. Is it the intention of the Executive Council to use the powers they are now asking for, to recoup themselves to the same amount which the British Government are proposing to raise from the duties on Irish produce; or is it their intention to plunge into an economic war which goes far beyond the war of which the Deputies here have recollections?

Mr. Hogan (Galway):

The Minister for Education stated that he wanted to know the reasons why we changed our mind and why we thought that these negotiations would be more successful now. He gave another reason. He said there was a new Government. That is quite right. In fact the new Government can do better. Any Government that persuades a country that their policy is the correct one and gets a majority for it and goes out to exploit that majority properly will do better. That is the reason as well as Lausanne and the general world conditions. What we want to be sure about is this, that the new Government are going to take full advantage of their position; that they really desire to settle. They can make a settlement. They could do better than we did in our time. They should not take full credit for that for two reasons; first, because we did our job and secondly, because they did not do their job. There are two reasons there and the English Government are acting in that way. There is a new Government in Great Britain now and the moment a new Government comes in they are in a position to make new concessions and arrangements. All parties in England are acting in this matter. What is happening at the present moment? Sir Stafford Cripps and Major Attley are acting in this on behalf of the Labour Party of England. Is Sir Stafford Cripps a traitor? Is Major Attley a traitor? They are not. And there is no more reason for making the case that we are acting as traitors to this country than for making the case that Sir Stafford Cripps and Major Attley are traitors to their country.

We are not tackling the situation as it could be tackled at all. In every average country the representatives of that country have the interests of the country at heart. If we had the interests of the country at heart and if the Government had the interest of the country at heart there is no doubt that a settlement could be come to on this occasion. We are asked to unite. Deputy Davin asked us to unite behind the Government. Unite about what? I do not know at the present moment what the dispute is about.

Mr. MacEntee

Oh!

Mr. Hogan

Wait now a moment. It comes to this. You can state your case in general terms. The dispute by this time has come down to details. One thing we can be certain of and that is that the dispute is not about the land annuities. It is about the tribunal. What is the trouble about the tribunal? I do not know. Who is to be chairman? We have not been told. There is one man who can tell us. President de Valera. Is it our nomination? We do not know. We have got nothing but the vaguest information on that question. Now I put this to Deputy Davin and to the Labour Party—be-fore the country is to be plunged into an economic war which as Deputy Blythe says will have more serious economic disadvantages than a civil war, should not the country know what the fight is about? What is the issue? Surely this issue will be clarified by President de Valera who is meeting the Prime Minister to-day? I do not know that he will come to an agreement. I hope he will. Surely while these negotiations are going on and while these discussions are taking place in London this Bill should be adjourned until the issues are clarified for us. What I complain of is this— when this Bill is passed we are beginning an economic war and the country is being rushed into an economic war that will lead, first, to poverty, and, then, to revolution. There may be people on the opposite benches who like that and that is what I am afraid of in the circumstances. I am afraid that there are Deputies on the benches opposite who are more concerned to see a social and economic revolution in this country than to see a settlement of this question. I do not want to make any extreme statement but I know perfectly well that is so. There are Deputies who are very much more concerned to see that and that is what we complain of. You have a great chance. President de Valera has got as good a chance as any leader of a majority party ever got in this country. He has a great chance. I deny, as Deputy Davin says, that negotiations began. Negotiations never begin until people get down to business and we have never yet got down to business. They may be beginning now, but they are not being resumed, and what I complain of is this, and I would say it to you, sir, and, through you, to the country, that the procedure and the sequence of events look very much like as if the present Government were more anxious for a fight than for a settlement.

Mr. Davin

Is Deputy Hogan aware that an offer of arbitration was made by the British Government and accepted, so far as I know, by the present Government?

Mr. Hogan

I am aware of it.

Mr. Davin

What led up to that?

Mr. Hogan

I am aware of it, and I am aware that both sides have agreed to arbitrate, but, so far as I know, the form of the tribunal is at issue.

Mr. Davin

Was that not done by negotiation?

Mr. Hogan

All right, have that.

Mr. Cooney

It is a sorry day for the Deputy's Party and that is what is wrong.

Mr. Hogan

I am aware that negoti-tion was offered and accepted, but, so far as I know, it is the form of tribunal that is at issue. I do not know what exact detail is in issue or in dispute. Does Deputy Davin know? Is it the chairman or is it the nominees? It is only a detail, remember. Am I right in that? Will anyone challenge that statement? It is only a detail and none of us can say specifically what that detail is. Is it the chairman or is it our nominees? It has been suggested by somebody that the real question at issue is as to whether our nominees should be taken from outside the British Empire. Is that it? If that is the issue, if the position that the Government is taking, is that there are no two persons in Ireland, North or South, who could be our nominees, the country should know that, and should understand it, before beginning an economic war. What does Deputy Davin think? If the issue is the chairman, let us hear exactly what is in dispute about the chairman, and let the country know it before plunging into this war.

If the Government persist in going ahead with the Bill, I think they are throwing away a magnificent chance that they have got of making a good settlement. They say that the English have taken the initiative, that the English have passed the Bill and why should not we? Let me take them on that argument, from their own point of view, that because the English passed the Bill, there was no reason why we should not pass a Bill. Look at it from their own point of view. The English are not imitators. They are occasionally original and they do not do exactly what other people do. If you want fight, the most effective form of fight is not to do exactly what the other man does, but to exercise a little imagination and originality, and agree that because the English have passed a Bill is no reason why we should. Looked at from our own point of view, is it good business for us to do it? The Minister for Education asked "Should we run away?" There is no question of running away. The English run away often and then come back and win. Every country does it. —the French, the Germans, they all run away a bit, they trim, and, then, they come back and win. All the talk that is being put up on the opposite benches does make it look extremely like as if the Government were prepared to throw away a great chance which the last election gave, not only to them, but to the country. I am satisfied that they could make a settlement. Let us have a decent issue. Let the President come back and tell us that the British insist on nominating the chairman. We have heard of a Feetham Court, but there is no question of a Feetham Court. If there is we will unite behind you.

Mr. Davin

Hear! Hear!

Mr. Flinn

Well done!

Mr. Hogan

But that was never in question. There was never any question of a Feetham Court, never at any time—so far as I know the only question was one of the British insisting on nominating the Chairman—and why, then, should Deputy Flinn—but I do not mind him, because he is always darkening counsel; it seems to be his function—but why should Deputies, who have the interests of the country at heart, darken counsel in this crisis by making a statement of that sort? If, as I say, the English make that case, you will have something to unite about. You will have the country behind you, but you cannot expect the country to rally behind you, or any party, unless you show that you mean business, and you have not shown that yet. If you persist with this Bill, it certainly leaves the impression in my mind that you are more desirous of an economic war for an entirely irrelevant purpose, for which you got no mandate from the people, than for a settlement of this important question.

Let me make one point more. In all these discussions I would ask Deputies to give up, once and for all, the statement that the Land Annuities were paid as a result of a secret agreement. That is inaccurate to the knowledge of every Deputy in this House and, above all, inaccurate to the knowledge of the Labour Party and Deputy Davin. There was an agreement made in England in 1923, and amongst other things it referred to the Land Commission annuities. The President announced in June 1923—I have his quotations here—in this Dáil, that that agreement was made——

Minister for Education (Mr. Derrig)

He did not give the text of the agreement.

Mr. Hogan

Yes, certainly, he gave the effect of the agreement——

Mr. Derrig

Read it.

Mr. Hogan

I will. In the Dáil Debates of the 26th June, 1923, the President said:

At the recent negotiations which took place in England, we came to a provisional arrangement which binds us, or in which we accepted liability for the payment of a certain sum pending a settlement regarding the major question. That sum, in all, amounts to £160,000, over and above the amount we will get in Land Purchase Annuities.

That was followed by the Land Act of 1923, which contains Section 12——

Mr. Derrig

And on which there was no discussion.

Minister for Finance (Mr. MacEntee)

On which discussion would not be permitted.

General Mulcahy

Is that the precedent adopted here?

Mr. Hogan

After the President had stated that in the House, and had stated here, on two or three other occasions, that we had agreed to transfer the Land Commission annuities to the British, for the purpose of service of land stock, we came on with the Land Act of 1923 in this House, and inserted a section in that Act, under which the Land Commission annuities were to be transferred by the Ministry of Finance to the British National Debt Commissioners. That was accepted by the majority of the House.

Mr. MacEntee

In the middle of a civil war.

Mr. Hogan

In 1923. That was accepted by the majority of the House, and that was a secret agreement!

Mr. Gorey

On a point of order. Some sort of reference has been made by Deputy Smith, and I should like him to repeat it.

An Ceann Comhairle

Not in this debate.

Mr. Gorey

I understand there is a certain amount of whispering scandal between Deputies on the Government Benches as against me and I know nothing about it.

An Ceann Comhairle

That does not arise.

Mr. Gorey

If they had courage they should stand up and state it openly.

A Deputy

That is nothing new.

Mr. Gorey

It is nothing new.

Mr. Hogan

Here are admitted facts. Here you have an agreement made with the British, announced by the then President in the House, sanctioned by a majority of the House.

Mr. Derrig

On what occasion?

Mr. Hogan

When they passed Section 12 of the Land Act of 1923. Is it denied that Section 12 expressly gives the Minister for Finance power to transfer the annuities and it was passed?

A Deputy

When?

Mr. Hogan

In August, 1923. After that, every year our accounts appeared with the annuities transferred to England. They were transferred to the knowledge of everyone and this is a secret agreement! Language should mean something. I ask Deputies to give up talking about a secret agreement. There could be no agreement more open. Whether it was a secret or not, the amount payable is in dispute at present. The President, for whatever reasons you like, has a majority which enables him to go to England and re-open the question, and I believe he could get a good settlement. I am afraid he and his Government are taking every possible step to prevent a settlement being arrived at. I am asked now to agree to a Bill that everyone admits will have the most serious consequences imaginable to the country, and yet I go so far as to say that Deputy Davin and every member of the Labour Party must agree that we do not know at present what point of detail of difference there is between us and the British.

Mr. Davin

Can you not find out from the proper channel?

Mr. Hogan

What is the proper channel? The proper channel is the President, and the President will only be able to tell us when he comes back after meeting the Prime Minister—the proper man to meet.

Mr. Everett

How did England pass the Bill when the Prime Minister was in another country?

Mr. Hogan

That is no reason why we should pass it. I put it to Deputies, who want a settlement of this issue, and who do not want anything ulterior, that it is their duty to postpone this until the President comes back and tells the House, and through the House the country, what exactly has occurred between him and the Prime Minister of England. We can meet here next week; we can meet here the week after, and the country can get a full warning of what the position is and then we will all be in a position to judge as to what attitude we should take on whatever policy the Government puts before us. I say it is in the last degree unpatriotic to attempt to rush this Bill at this juncture.

Minister for Defence (Mr. Aiken)

Deputy Hogan said that he believed we should get a good settlement. We believe it. We believe we could get a much better settlement with England if we got a little bit of Irish opposition in this House. Really it appears from the venom that poured forth from Deputy Blythe to-day that he knew we were going to get a good settlement if we were let alone without pro-British opposition. What is his reason for repeating the old British slander, that we were spoiling for a fight? Deputy Hogan himself said that we were anxious for a fight.

Mr. Hogan

I believe that. I am afraid that is so.

Mr. Aiken

That is because Deputy Hogan has developed the pro-British mentality.

Mr. Hogan

That is just bunkum.

Mr. Aiken

That is just true.

Mr. Hogan

The Minister for Defence should realise that it is nothing short of impudence for the like of him to accuse me of a pro-British mentality. It is only a joke.

Mr. Aiken

If the members of the Opposition have not developed a pro-British mentality, why should they repeat these slanders——

Mr. Hogan

You have developed the slave mind.

Mr. Aiken

—that the British always spread about the Irish people? The British justified their repression for the last 500 years by saying that the Irish wanted a fight and that the British had to give it to them. We want peace in this country, but we are not going to act as the last Ministry did— keep our eyes shut and our mouths open to see what the British or somebody else will drop into them. We are taking steps so as to be in a position to stand up for the rights of the Irish people. It is up to the Opposition, if they have any Irish blood in them at all, to support us. Deputy Hogan made a statement which is bound to reduce the morale of the Irish people and weaken them in standing up against the British.

Mr. Hogan

What is it?

Mr. Aiken

He said that this fight, if it goes on, is going to lead to poverty and social revolution.

Mr. Hogan

I am afraid it is—I think that.

Mr. Aiken

Let us get down to "brass tacks." What does poverty mean? It means that a person has not enough of the necessities of life. Here we are in a country with three times as much food as we can eat and we are going to be poverty-stricken! I think that is the best yarn that anyone ever spun.

Mr. Kennedy

He means the cattle ranchers and graziers of Meath.

Mr. Aiken

Deputy Hogan advised the people to tighten their belts and we are going to advise them to loosen their belts and eat their own food. The Irish people, because of the political and economical oppression of the British, have been tightening their belts in a land of plenty. They have been producing food for John Bull to grow fatter. If this war goes on the one result will be that the Irish people will grow fat on their own food and John Bull can grow thin or get some other stuff to grow fat upon. We will start a new industry in this country, that is the slimming industry. We are in the strongest possible position to stand up to England in this matter. We have the food; we have more food than we know what to do with. We have a market here for £35,000,000 worth of foreign goods, and we can offer foreigners, who want a market for their industrial products that we cannot produce at present, a slice of that market in return for taking some of our goods that we want to get rid of. But, even if all comes to all, and the trade between this country and other outside countries stopped, we would be in the happy position here that we would have more food than we knew what to do with. I tell you this, that if you go into the slums of Dublin and see the unemployed labourers there who never see milk or butter, they will be damn glad to get some.

Mr. J.J. Byrne

You do not know what you are talking about. Talk common sense.

Mr. Brady

I want to appeal to the Chair. The Minister is evidently not going to be allowed to speak and if we make an interruption when one of the Opposition is speaking we are called to order.

An Ceann Comhairle

The conduct of debate in the House should be left to the Chair.

Mr. Aiken

Deputy Blythe said that he always found the British reasonable —the British were always good fellows. We were always apparently terrible scoundrels in this country. Deputy Blythe said that they always made progress when they were treating with the British. We do not want progress in the particular fashion in which the last Ministry progressed. We want to reverse it and progress in the other direction.

Mr. Blythe

I am afraid that is what you are doing.

Mr. Aiken

We are going to progress so as to get a better life for our people. For years there has been a steady progress out of this country. Fully 300,000 of the finest of our young people had to leave. We are going to arrange matters here so that when the young people grow up they can remain here and get health and strength on their own food. The members of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party, because of party discipline, have to support a few of their anti-national leaders here to-day, but I hope when they go around the country, and when the Party Whips are off, that they will talk plainly to their supporters and tell them not to be panicky—that this country is in a fine strong position and that if we only stand by our rights we can secure here a decent livelihood for the Irish people. If we are always going to run away from the British what will they do? They will simply give us a kick where we deserve to get it. That is what they have been doing with the last Ministry. The British have opened the fight. They have struck the first blow.

Mr. Blythe

Not at all.

Mr. Aiken

Are we, who have the power to arm ourselves, to put our hands in our pockets or to put our hands up? Should we not do the right thing—that is, stand for our rights here? The British have taken powers to impose tariffs on our goods. We are only asking the Dáil for authority to say to the British that if they are not going to buy our goods we are not going to buy their goods and that we will go elsewhere for the things we require. It is no secret, even to the pro-British members of the Opposition, that England has almost 3,000,000 unemployed. We buy almost £35,000,000 worth of British goods. Is a market worth £35,000,000 to be despised by the British, who cannot find work for 3,000,000 of their population? Not a bit of it. We are in a strong position. We buy more British goods than England buys of Free State goods. It was a most amusing thing to observe in the long list of the tariffs the British put on that they did not impose one on tinned milk. The reason they did not do it is because there is a factory in England depending upon selling the tins here. If we only stand for our rights and say to the British, "We are not going to buy your goods if you do not buy ours," then the British will come to their senses pretty quickly. The British stand to lose in this. From a social point of view, if this goes on a good lot of Irish people who never got a decent feed in their lives will stand to gain.

Mr. J.J. Byrne

That is a nice thing to say of any nation.

Mr. Aiken

It is a nice thing to tell the truth. There are thousands in this country who see meat, if they are lucky, once a year, and a lot of them never see butter or milk when they grow up. That is the truth of the matter.

Mr. Keating

Where do those conditions exist? Not in my constituency, anyway.

Mr. MacDermot

I am very reluctant to interrupt the Minister, but is not this discussion going altogether beyond the question of the order of business and, if this debate continues along these lines, are Deputies going to get any chance of discussing the Bill itself?

General Mulcahy

Apparently not.

Mr. Blythe

Is it usual to discuss a Bill on a motion of this sort?

An Ceann Comhairle

On a motion of this sort it very frequently happens that Second Reading speeches are made. That is what is occurring now. If Deputies so desire they can settle this matter immediately and proceed to the Second Reading of the Bill. As Deputy Blythe has remarked, the procedure has been adopted time and time again of having Second Reading speeches on such motions.

Mr. MacDermot

Will those of us who desire to speak on the Bill itself be prevented from doing so now?

Mr. Blythe

Speak on this motion.

An Ceann Comhairle

It is a matter for the House to decide.

Mr. MacDermot

I rose to ask the Minister a question. Will that debar me from speaking again?

An Ceann Comhairle

Not at all.

Mr. MacDermot

Perhaps the Minister will give an answer to the question I put him?

Mr. MacEntee

At a later stage of the Bill.

Mr. Aiken

I do not want to take up the time of the House very much longer. The definite allegation was made here by the Opposition that we were spoiling for a fight and that if negotiations broke down it would be the fault of the Irish side. I think that is a damnable slander to cast upon the representatives of the Irish people who are at present engaged in a life and death struggle with the British. Since President de Valera took over office he has carried on the traditional policy of real Irish leaders. He has done everything he can to make a real peace with the British. There cannot be a real peace if the British continue to be tyrants and if we are to be slaves, because the slaves will always, I hope, desire to burst their chains, whether they are economic or political chains. All we want is a decent peace with the British. We do not want to be fighting with them, but if they are going to strike at us we have to be in a position to defend ourselves. All we want the Dáil to do is to put us in a position to be able to defend ourselves if we are unnecessarily and unwarrantably attacked by the British.

General Mulcahy

On a point of order, the Minister for Finance has suggested that there can be further discussion of detailed matters at a later stage of the Bill. Is not the motion now before us aimed at preventing discussion on any later stage of the Bill?

Mr. MacEntee

I was asked if certain Deputies in the House would have an opportunity of making a Second Reading speech. According to the programme in the motion before the House, they will have. The Government are not going to prevent Deputies on the Independent Benches, who have not spoken up to this, from speaking. I hope the Opposition will take up the same liberal attitude.

General Mulcahy

The position is that the Government are simply not going to give any information.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney rose.

Mr. MacEntee

Before the Deputy speaks, I would like to point out that he has already spoken at length on the Bill.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I am merely anxious to speak on this motion.

Mr. MacEntee

We have already discussed this motion for one hour and twenty minutes. I think there has been sufficient discussion and I move that the question be now put.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Before the question is put, I want to make a suggestion to the Minister. I am not going to make a Second Reading speech at all. The Minister will admit that he has not dealt, and that no member of his Party has dealt, with the most important things in this Bill, the Excise Duties. They have nothing on earth to do with any quarrel as to procedure between Great Britain and this State at the present minute. Those can only be dealt with by the responsible Minister upon the Committee Stage, and there are several amendments down dealing with that matter. I want to know why there is no time being given for the Committee Stage at all. Section 2 is not a homogeneous section. Somebody might approve of one part of the section and disapprove of another part. Customs and Excise are on a completely different footing. Why is it not possible to give two or three hours to discuss the Committee Stage of this measure? What is the particular urgency for rising at 4 o'clock? Why not continue on till 6 o'clock if necessary—or until 8, or even 10 o'clock to-night?

Mr. MacEntee

I move again that the question be now put.

An Ceann Comhairle

Before putting the question I should like to say, in reply to a question by Deputy Michael Hayes that I know of no precedent for a tripartite motion such as this.

Question: "That the question be now put,"—put and declared carried.

Main question put.

The Dáil divided: Tá, 69; Níl, 59.

Tá

• Aiken, Frank.
• Allen, Denis.
• Bartley, Gerald.
• Beegan, Patrick.
• Blaney, Neal.
• Boland, Gerald.
• Boland, Patrick.
• Bourke, Daniel.
• Brady, Bryan.
• Brady, Seán.
• Breathnach, Cormac.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Browne, William Frazer.
• Carney, Frank.
• Carty, Frank.
• Clery, Mícheál.
• Colbert, James.
• Cooney, Eamonn.
• Corish, Richard.
• Corry, Martin John.
• Crowley, Fred. Hugh.
• Crowley, Tadhg.
• Curran, Patrick Joseph.
• Davin, William.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• Dowdall, Thomas P.
• Everett, James.
• Flinn, Hugo V.
• Flynn, John.
• Flynn, Stephen.
• Fogarty, Andrew.
• Geoghegan, James.
• Gibbons, Seán.
• Gormley, Francis.
• Gorry, Patrick Joseph.
• Goulding, John.
• Harris, Thomas.
• Hayes, Seán.
• Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
• Jordan, Stephen.
• Kelly, James Patrick.
• Kennedy, Michael Joseph.
• Keyes, Raphael Patrick.
• Kilroy, Michael.
• Kissane, Eamonn.
• Little, Patrick John.
• Lynch, James B.
• MacEntee, Seán.
• Maguire, Ben.
• Maguire, Conor Alexander.
• Moane, Edward.
• Moore, Séamus.
• Moylan, Seán.
• Murphy, Patrick Stephen.
• O'Grady, Seán.
• O'Reilly, Matthew.
• O'Reilly, Thomas J.
• O'Rourke, Daniel.
• Powell, Thomas P.
• Rice, Edward.
• Ruttledge, Patrick J.
• Ryan, Robert.
• Sexton, Martin.
• Sheehy, Timothy.
• Sheridan, Michael.
• Smith, Patrick.
• Traynor, Oscar.
• Walsh, Richard.
• Ward, Francis C. (Dr.).

Níl

• Alton, Ernest Henry.
• Anthony, Richard.
• Beckett, James Walter.
• Bennett, George Cecil.
• Blythe, Ernest.
• Bourke, Séamus A.
• Brasier, Brooke.
• Broderick, William Jos.
• Brodrick, Seán.
• Burke, Patrick.
• Byrne, John Joseph.
• Coburn, James.
• Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
• Conlon, Martin.
• Cosgrave, William T.
• Craig, Sir James.
• Davis, Michael.
• Desmond, William.
• Dillon, James M.
• Dockrell, Henry Morgan.
• Doherty, Eugene.
• Doyle, Peadar Seán.
• Duggan, Edmund John.
• O'Hanlon, John F.
• O'Leary, Daniel.
• O'Mahony, The.
• O'Neill, Eamonn.
• O'Shaughnessy, John Joseph.
• O'Sullivan, Gearóid.
• O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
• Esmonde, Osmond Grattan.
• Finlay, Thomas A.
• Fitzgerald, Desmond.
• Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
• Good, John.
• Gorey, Denis John.
• Hayes, Michael.
• Hennessy, Thomas.
• Hennigan, John.
• Hogan, Patrick (Galway).
• Keating, John.
• Keogh, Myles.
• MacDermot, Frank.
• McDonogh, Fred.
• MacEoin, Seán.
• McGilligan, Patrick.
• McMenamin, Daniel.
• Minch, Sydney B.
• Mongan, Joseph W.
• Mulcahy, Richard.
• Myles, James Sproule.
• Nally, Martin.
• O'Connor, Batt.
• Reidy, James.
• Reynolds, Mrs. Mary.
• Roddy, Martin.
• Shaw, Patrick Walter.
• Thrift, William Edward.
• White, John.

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

Motion declared carried.