I move: "That the Dáil agree with the Committee in Financial Resolution No. 10."
Financial Resolutions—Report Stage. - Financial Resolution No. 10—Customs.
I should like to ask the Minister to help the House by giving some information with regard to these duties. The final decision on the individual matters can more satisfactorily be taken on the Finance Bill, but it is quite impossible for the House to pass from this particular stage without hearing some statement from the Minister as to what is the principle behind the proposals in the Resolution and what the actual effects of the duties are. No memorandum of any kind has been circulated to give Deputies any idea as to what either the principles or the actual proposals themselves are.
There are quite a number of items in this Resolution which will very definitely raise housing costs. Under No. 7 it is proposed to put a tax on "tiles and slabs of all kinds made wholly or partly of clay, earthenware, or cement, and not otherwise liable to duty." That is going to raise the price of putting in fireplaces. It is going to have even a wider effect. The Minister must know that, even for fireplaces made here, the tiles are imported in sets. I suppose there never was an occasion when a set of tiles for a fireplace was imported without one or two of the tiles being broken, and replacements had to be brought in. As I understand it, not only will 5/- per cwt. be put on these tiles when they come in, but there is not a single case of the making up of a fireplace that will not involve at least another 2/6, plus a 6d. tax, for tiles to replace broken ones, even if brought in afterwards by parcel post. No. 7, then, I say increases the cost of housing to some extent. No. 8 imposes a duty of 5/- per cwt. on roofing slates of all kinds, which will also increase the cost of housing. No. 10 imposes a duty of 9d. per cwt. on glazed pipes. That means a duty of 2d. per yard on 4-inch pipes, 4d. per yard on 6-inch pipes, and 8d. per yard on 9-inch pipes, all of which are widely used in housing. Then we have a tax on wallpaper and, under item No. 1, a tax on materials required in connection with road-making.
I should like to ask the Minister to help the House by stating briefly, under each particular reference, whether there are industries in this country producing these goods and whether in the case of linoleum it is simply a revenue tax on a household necessity. In order that the House may be better able to deal with these matters on the Finance Bill, I ask him to tell the House whether these are articles that are being manufactured here; are these tariffs that are put on to help the development or the coming in of factories for the making of these articles here; or are they simply taxes put on again at the point where the Minister can catch people in their own homes?
I want to get some information with reference to No. 15—"Paper without any matter or design printed thereon."
I would like to know from the Minister the purpose for which this tariff is being imposed. Is it for the purpose of increasing the revenue or of inducing some group of persons to establish a factory in the country for the manufacture of this class of paper? Paper is the raw material of the printing industry. One class of paper known as news print is not manufactured here. It is calculated that, in order to manufacture that class of paper and sell it at an economic price, four up-to-date paper-making machines, running night and day, would be required. It is estimated that the daily newspapers published in Cork and Dublin consume approximately 16,000 tons of paper per year. The output of these four machines, during the same period, would be in or about 26,000 tons, so that Deputies can see the big difference there is between these two sets of figures.
I have before me the census of production for 1933. Under the heading dealing with printing, publishing, bookbinding and engraving, the amount of wages paid in 1932 is set down at £677,731. That will give the Minister an idea of the importance of this industry to the country. The imposition of this tax, I must say, will not interfere to any great extent with the publishing industry in the country. The Minister must be aware that some of the larger firms have secured in open competition very big contracts for the publishing of magazines, novels, etc. Many of them have been enterprising enough to tender for work across Channel and to secure contracts there running into many thousands of pounds. The Minister must also be aware that the job printing or commercial firms consume a considerable amount of this class of paper in a year. Any interference with that industry would have very serious effects on the persons employed in it. There is a good deal of uneasiness at the present time in the minds of some of those people that this tariff may be followed by another one in the near future. If we could have an assurance from the Minister that that is not intended, it would produce good results and would encourage these firms to go ahead with any developments in their industry that they may be contemplating. I am aware of at least two cases in which very enterprising employers contemplated adding to their installation of machinery and plant for the purpose of extending their business. I fear that they would hesitate to go ahead with these developments and that, consequently, a number of people would lose their employment, if they had not some assurance that further tariffs were not intended.
I feel that there will not be any great objection to the imposition of the 5 per cent. duty, but in view of what I have said, as well as from other sources of information at his disposal, the Minister, I am sure, must be satisfied that we are not able, and never have been able, to produce news print in this country to any considerable extent. The Ballyclare mills, which are outside the jurisdiction of this State, did turn out a good article for a number of years, but, as the Minister must be aware, I do not think they were ever able to turn out the amount of paper required. All this paper is turned out on reels and, as I have already said, if that particular class of paper is to be sold at an economic price four of these up-to-date paper-making machines are required and must be kept running night and day. They are fed at one end by two substances not manufactured in this country. The finished product comes out at the other end of the reel. I think that if the Minister were to give the assurance that I have asked, that it is not contemplated to put any further burden on the industry, it would tend to allay the uneasiness to which I have referred.
I desire to support the appeal that has been made to the Minister by Deputy Anthony in connection with another type of paper— reel paper, which is superior in quality to news print. There is a danger that even the 5 per cent. duty will, if imposed, result in serious loss to the city of Dublin. I am given to understand on the most reliable authority that a very important industry has been developed in the city of Dublin for the re-export of a cheap class of novel. The contract for the printing of these novels has been secured by a Dublin firm in competition with cross-Channel firms. The margin of profit on the printing of that class of work is so slender that even the imposition of this 5 per cent. duty would be sufficient to upset the delicate balance that secured that contract for this city. I understand that the maximum amount of revenue that the Minister can hope to obtain from the imposition of this duty is in or about £34,000, while the trade that would be likely to be lost to the city, if anything were done to jeopardise the position that exists at the moment, would be in or about £50,000 or £60,000. Good employment is given to a considerable number of printers in this industry. Members of the House should be specially interested in their welfare. They are engaged on this special class of work to which I have referred in the intervals when they are not employed in printing the Oireachtas debates. It was the enterprising methods of the firm in question that succeeded in securing this valuable trade for the city of Dublin in keen competition with cross-Channel rivals. It would be a pity if anything were done that would result in the loss of it to the city. If it were once lost it might be a very difficult matter afterwards to recapture it.
That is not the only firm, I understand, that would be affected in the city of Dublin by the imposition of this duty. There is another firm which sends out of the Saorstát a considerable amount of school work, work, too, that was secured in open competition with outside firms. There is the danger that this firm would lose this work as the result of the imposition of this duty. Another undesirable result of it would be that the price of school books for the children would be increased, or, perhaps, that only an inferior type of book would be put on the market. The loss, however, of the contract would be more serious to the city and to those engaged in the industry. It is not possible to get in the Saorstát the quality of paper required for this work. It has to be imported, and, that being so, this tax if imposed would simply become a revenue tax. These are points to which I think the Minister should give his very serious consideration. He should weigh up the serious losses likely to result against the possible and, I would say, very doubtful advantages that would accrue from it. Deputy Anthony dealt very fully with the matter of news print. The duty in that case is calculated to inflict not only a certain amount of hardship but a big loss on the daily newspapers published in this country. I understand that in the case of Irish daily papers, such as the Irish Press, the imposition of the duty would mean an extra charge of in or about £40 a week. Many other reasons could be advanced why this tax on paper should be carefully considered. Some opportunity may be presented to the Minister to deal with the types of business to which I have referred and he may be able to obviate the hardship and enable the balance to be maintained and the printing contracts, secured after very strenuous efforts and kept by very careful manæuvring, to be held, thus avoiding loss to the country and to the printing industry in the city of Dublin particularly.
May I intervene, in view of what has been said by Deputy Anthony and Deputy Keyes, to point out that in any case in which any of these articles are used as the material of an industry in which there is an export trade, any duty which is paid on the import of raw material is refunded as a drawback when the manufactured article is exported. The imposition of these duties does not affect any existing export trade.
It affects newsprint.
Yes, but these concerns are very wealthy.
I do not want to prolong this discussion unduly, but I notice in the items set out in the Schedule to this Resolution one or two items relating to commodities which are imported from Germany. The point which I want to raise in regard to these imports is one which, though small in itself, regarded in connection with the many other annoyances which are caused to traders by these taxes, should receive the consideration of the Minister. We have heard a great deal lately about the commercial relations which are being developed between this country and Germany. That development was consolidated some time ago by a commercial agreement between the two countries. In view of that, and in view of all we have heard about the development of these relations, the position in regard to invoices for German goods is rather extraordinary. When a trader gets an invoice in respect of goods which are being imported from the country with which we are striving, according to the Minister for Industry and Commerce, with all our strength to develop trade relations, that invoice, which is in the German language, is brought down to the Customs in order to have the goods cleared. The trader is met with the difficulty at the Customs that there is nobody amongst all the Customs officers able to translate the invoice. This is the country with which we are supposed to be opening up a new trade. There is nobody at the docks who is capable of translating a simple invoice. The trader is requested to take the invoice back to the head of his firm and request him to have the invoice translated, with a statement to the effect that to the best of his knowledge and belief the translation is an accurate one. That may seem a very small point but, in the case I have in mind, the goods were ordered for a certain event. Owing to all this delay in having the invoice translated and in obtaining a certificate that the translation was accurate, according to the trader's information and belief, the goods arrived at their destination a week too late for the event for which they were ordered. This may be a small point, but I suggest to the Minister that it would be far better that the Customs authorities should employ one official with a knowledge of German than that every trader in this country who imports goods from Germany should be required to have a German expert on his premises.
I should like to know from the Minister how many of the products mentioned in Reference No. 1 are produced in this country. Are there any produced outside the gasworks? These materials are used universally for road making and will continue to be so used until concrete displaces them, if it ever does. This Resolution differs from the last one inasmuch as it is, unquestionably, a money-finding resolution. Asphalt, bitumen, pitch and tar of all kinds, whether imported in crude form or after treatment or preparation and mixtures of any two or more of those substances are to be subjected to a duty of 3d. per cwt. A gallon would weigh 10 lbs. or 11 lbs., so that this is quite a stiff duty, since most of this stuff is, I think, imported.
I do not know what purpose is served by taxing rice flour and rice meal. Rice is a valuable food but it does not enter largely into the daily ration of people who are not delicate. The quantity used in this country is not very great and it can never be a competitor of any product we produce here. It seems to me insane to put a tax of 2/- per cwt. on it. It is not a product that the so-called idle rich use.
Item 7 refers to tiles and slabs of all kinds, made wholly or partly of clay, earthenware or cement. The Minister for Industry and Commerce was very slick when we were discussing a similar item in the last Resolution. He said that the Resolution did not deal with tiles but only with surrounds for tiles. We have got tiles in this Resolution. I presume that the clay tiles referred to here will be facing tiles in surrounds of grates. If that be so, they are not made here. I do not know that we have the clay to make them. This is one more shot at putting up the cost of house-building. The costs are going up and it is difficult to get money to finance housing. Another item here refers to roofing slates of all kinds, on which a tariff of 5/- per cwt. is imposed. I wonder what is the need of all this, having regard to the potential slate supplies in the country.
Excepting larger slates, this tax is doubling the price of slates. Is any serious attempt being made to develop the Killaloe or Nenagh area as well as smaller areas, so that we will have slates if this is intended for anything but for revenue purposes?
Glazed pipes made wholly or mainly of clay or earthenware, and glazed connections (for pipes of any kind) made wholly or mainly of clay or earthenware.
There is a duty of 9d. per cwt. In the last Resolution, where we were not making the article taxed, there was a side note stating that the Minister for Industry and Commerce and the Minister for Finance could let the articles in duty free. There is no such qualification here in reference to glazed pipes and connections, and I take it that the Ministers, either separately or collectively, have no power to admit these goods in tax free. Here again we have a big item of expenditure in house building. There is the main, and, in nearly every house, sub-mains, and house connections, all of glazed piping. Deputy Mulcahy gave the increased cost per yard at 2d., 4d. and 8d. for 4-inch, 6-inch and 9-inch pipes respectively. Such goods are not made here.
Who told you?
I challenge contradiction of that statement. Substitutes in the shape of concrete pipes are made. Anyone could make concrete pipes. Can good ones be made? Again we are groping in the dark when we are dealing with sanitary goods.
What will county medical officers of health say?
Have any sanitary authorities been consulted about this? Those of us who are charged with responsibility in local authorities when improving the sanitation in congested areas must look very seriously at this matter. Without doubt, I think, the machinery, the supervision, the general management and work of the Dublin Corporation is first in the Free State in that respect. It should be first, because it has a large and dense population to deal with. I have the advantage of being a member of that body, and I have tried to set a standard in the Dublin Board of Health area. It is a common thing for a man in the county board of health area to get a pick at the main sewer, to make a connection anyway, and to fill the place up again. That would be a monstrous thing if it came to the notice of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health. Has this question been brought before that Minister or before any sanitary engineers? A pipe is supposed to be made to a certain standard, and firms with reputation for generations make sure to keep to a standard. The Minister may not be aware that before any sewerage is certified a sanitary engineer has to see the place when open, and to make a smoke test under pressure.
We are not taxing pipes as glazed.
You are taxing glazed pipes used for drainage from houses. Before any house in the City or County of Dublin is certified fit for occupation a smoke test of the pipes under pressure is made.
This does not deal with a smoke test.
It deals with pipes that have to stand a smoke test. From that remark, obviously the Minister does not know the seriousness of what he is doing. It is a common thing to see the smoke coming through a pipe under pressure, where there is a flaw. Now we are going to have concrete pipes and of what standard? For copper tubing, which we discussed a short time ago with the Minister for Industry and Commerce, no standard is required. Any person could get a plain piece of copper sheeting, bend it up, solder it in the middle, weld it, and that would suit. What about the man that the Minister takes in under this provision, the speculative house builder, who if anything goes wrong when a house is built has to put it right? Under the regulations by which a loan is given under the Small Dwellings Act the understanding is that any constructional defects that show themselves within two years will have to be made good by the builder. Here is muck thrown at him that the builder must use.
He is the boy that will be paid for it.
No man can be paid if he has to pay full price for an inferior article, and it should be the Deputy's interest as much as mine to see that when the public is called upon to pay a good price for a good article they should get it. I do not know if concrete pipes have been made satisfactorily for drainage purposes if they are largely used. The Minister has no idea what it means to put down a sewer. It will cost from £1 to 25/- a yard. If a man constructed 300 or 400 yards and on a test being made if the smoke comes through concrete pipes, who is going to pay for making things right? What is the use of telling a man that the Minister for Industry and Commerce and the Minister for Finance said that they were going to be made here? Have a standard and have production before you put on a tariff. It is one thing for the speculator to lose a few pounds, but it is another thing if we are developing sanitary drainage in a new area in the City of Dublin and the pipes used proved porous. Where are we then? I feel confident that the Minister did not consult a single sanitary engineer about this imposition. Another thing about this matter is that 9d. per cwt. is a very heavy tariff, because these goods weigh heavily. Why did the Minister fix 9d. per cwt.? Why did he not say 2d. per yard on 4-inch pipes, 4d. per yard on 6-inch pipes, and 8d. per yard on 9-inch pipes?
Why did he not do it that way? It is not by accident, and the Minister should disclose his design in putting it the way he has. All bookkeeping in respect of the articles is carried on on the basis of the thickness of the bore of the pipe—four inches, six inches, nine inches, 12 inches, or whatever the thickness is. There is not a single entry in the commerce of the articles on the basis of weight, and the Minister fixes the tariff on weight. It is no wonder that, when you ask him a question as to how much this will produce, he can only give a guess. Apparently, he has made it deliberately awkward, so that he can only give a guess, but he will make sure that the guess will be an under guess.
There are other goods in respect of which there are no exemptions. We have glazed pipes made wholly or mainly of clay or earthenware and glazed connections for pipes made wholly or mainly of clay or earthenware. There are connections such as Armstrong junctions; there are Buchan traps for use under rain pipes; and there are Broads traps to keep back the gas from connections into main sewers. These are not made anywhere in concrete, and the Minister has made no exception in relation to them. It seems to be a case of saying to the poor slum-dwellers: "We will build houses; we will give money to the local authorities," while taxing the materials to provide houses for the slum-dwellers. Then, again, we have glass of all kinds imported in sheets or strips, whether flat or bent, curved or otherwise shaped. I do not know if any glass is made here, and I take it that this refers to window glass. It would be news to me to learn that there was any glass made here, and it would further be news to me to learn that there was any sand in this country suitable for transparent glass for windows.
Of course there is.
Where?
Donegal.
Where?
The Deputy can easily get that information. Ask any builder in Dublin.
Where is it made?
Ask Mr. MacMahon.
It is dealing in a very cheap way with a very serious matter when a Deputy here says that we have sand suitable for window glass in Donegal. Where is it?
Muckish.
Would the Minister advise the use of Muckish sand for ordinary window glass?
Where is it? I do not bet, but I will lay any odds with any Deputy over there that there is no sand in Donegal capable of making good window glass. There is no use in throwing that out here.
Will the Deputy take the word of an expert?
Who is he?
A man in the business.
Who is the expert? I beg your pardon, Sir. Through the Ceann Comhairle, I should like to ask the Deputy who the expert is.
I will bring the Deputy to him.
We are only wasting time. The Minister will not tell us where the glass is made.
We can make the glass all the same.
Where is the sand to be got?
Plenty of places.
What made Bohemia, now Czecho-Slovakia, the centre of glass-making in Europe? The sand. The Minister could have learned that in a fourpenny geography at school and so could the other Deputies if they ever learned any geography.
He would not waste the time of the Dáil for 25 minutes showing that he knew.
It is not a question of showing what a person knows but of showing the House that the Minister knows very little. I have endeavoured to dig out of the Minister where the glass is made. It is one of the most commonly-used manufactured articles and 10 per cent. is being put on to it. It enters very largely into building. Modern architects tell you that they have a formula and they will not produce a plan—I am not talking now of the Fianna Fáil "Plan"—of a house unless the wall space of the rooms and the window areas bear a certain relation. The use of glass is increasing in house-building, but we do not make glass for windows. We have not got the skill. That could be got over, but it has not been discovered that we have the sand to make glass.
It has.
The Deputy knows an expert who knows somebody else who knows somebody else who heard that glass was made in Donegal, and that the sand was there. I was foolish enough to believe that good slates were produced in Donegal and I could get thousands of them until I wanted them. I am waiting for them yet after three years. Glassware and empty glass bottles are going to be tariffed by the Minister.
They are not much good.
I think that empty glass bottles are going to be taxed by empty heads.
There is a great deal to be said for the argument used by Deputy Belton in connection with the tax on sewer pipes. Hitherto, when the Minister for Industry and Commerce put a tariff—that is, a prohibitive tariff—on an article coming into this country, it was for the purpose of enabling an industry to be established here for the manufacture of a similar article. While I do not want to say very much against the concrete product we have at the moment, it cannot at all compare with the clay or earthenware pipe, and anybody who has had anything to do with local authorities, or housing, knows very well that that is a fact. I should like to know from the Minister if any effort is being made to manufacture the pipes which this tariff will prevent from coming in. What Deputy Belton has said about the test that is supposed to be carried out after a sewerage scheme has been completed, is being carried out, so far as I know, by the various local authorities in the country. Almost any piece of concrete is porous. It is very hard to find a concrete product which is not porous, but, apart from that, the weight of these particular pipes is almost twice as much as the weight of the earthenware pipe.
There, again, we are up against a serious situation, because any local authority, or any builder, who has to get these pipes brought from Dublin to Cork, will find the rates of carriage prohibitive. We in Wexford tried some time ago to get some of these pipes. We intended to use them because they were an Irish product, but when we ascertained the price of the carriage from Dublin to Wexford, we found it impossible to use them because it was so high. I should like the Minister to apply himself to the task of ascertaining whether or not we could have earthenware pipes manufactured in the country. Until that is done, I do not think it is a wise thing to keep these earthenware pipes out. The tendency nowadays of various local authorities is to put in new sewerage systems. Up to this, in a great many towns, you had old built sewers which were insanitary to say the least of them. A great number of local authorities have set themselves to put in new sewers. As far as one can see the concrete piping is pretty good, but I am afraid it would not stand up to a test as well as the earthenware type. In so far as glass is concerned, on the point raised by Deputy Belton I know for a fact that there have been experts here from Belgium who examined the sand in Donegal and certified that it is quite capable of being turned into glass.
Of course it is.
Of course it is. Did the Deputy see any of the glass?
I know that first-hand. If those concrete pipes are to be used, and I presume they will be used more than ever now when this tariff is on, I suggest to the Minister that representations will have to be made to the railway companies with a view to getting a lower rate for carriage from Dublin or Cork or wherever those pipes are made, because the cost will otherwise be prohibitive. Better still, I think he should apply himself to trying to secure that pipes of this kind will be manufactured from clay.
The Minister to conclude.
I am afraid that the difficulty under which the House has been labouring in connection with those duties is largely one of its own creation. It is quite obvious that the rates of tariff proposed are not intended to be prohibitive. They are imposed primarily as revenue producing tariffs. On the other hand, most of the articles in question are articles in connection with which there is a fair prospect of their production in this country within a reasonable time. The tariffs being imposed will serve three purposes. First, they will produce revenue, which is from my point of view the primary object. Secondly, they will reduce imports, and, where a reasonable substitute for those articles can be produced, divert attention to the home manufactured articles. Thirdly, they are a fair indication to people who are interested in building and that sort of thing that we are inclined to discourage the importation of those articles, and that if they can show a reasonable project for their manufacture in this country it is likely to get Government support. Those are three very laudable purposes, and I think they amply justify the tariffs. It is quite true that for some purposes concrete pipes are possibly not as suitable as earthenware pipes.
Indiscriminately made concrete pipes.
On the other hand, the tariff of 9d per cwt. which we propose is not a prohibitive one. If there are purposes for which concrete pipes will not serve, glazed earthenware pipes can be used. On the other hand, the fact that they have to pay an additional 9d per cwt. will naturally induce people to consider more carefully whether, for a good many purposes for which they now say concrete pipes are not suitable, they cannot after all use them if they are going to save money by doing so. I know a good deal more about pipes than Deputy Belton. I do not propose to tell the House all I know. Properly constructed concrete pipes can be manufactured here. They can be quite gas tight, and will stand up to hydraulic or any other pressure. There is no reason why we cannot manufacture a good type of concrete pipe which would serve all reasonable purposes. There are, I admit, circumstances in which one would have to use the glazed pipe, but that does not matter. In due time we might reach a stage where we can produce those ourselves. In regard to glass, it is obvious that there is a possibility of manufacturing glass in this country. Three years ago people would say that we could not make glass bottles here because it had been tried previously and proved a failure. The fact of the matter is there is not an article mentioned here that we cannot make ourselves if we set ourselves to it, or for which we cannot produce a reasonable substitute. The imposition of the duty at this time is due entirely to revenue considerations.
Of course.
There was a point raised by Deputy McGuire which had no relevance whatever to any one of those Resolutions. He complained that a certain firm—I do not know whether or not it is a firm in which he is interested—had some commercial dealings with Germany. The invoices were brought to the Revenue Commissioners, who were expected to provide a translation staff and place it at the service of that commercial house here in Dublin. Surely if that house is capable of conducting its business, before entering into transactions with another country they should at least see that there was some person, either in its counting-house, or possibly in some other managerial department, capable of doing the necessary translation work.
On a point of order, it is the Customs people that wanted the translation done.
That is not a point of order. It is a point of fact.
Might I ask the Minister, who states that he knows a lot about those pipes, what percentage tariff is 9d. per cwt.?
It all depends on the value.
Taking a tax of 9d. per cwt. on those pipes, what percentage is that? I challenge either of the two Ministers to answer me.
It depends on the value of the pipes.
Of course. What is the value of the pipes? I am asking what is the percentage? Neither the Minister for Industry and Commerce nor the Minister for Finance knows the amount of the tariff that is being imposed here.
There is no responsible Deputy in this House who is going to enter into a bragging contest with Deputy Belton.
It is not a bragging contest. It is a question of asking the Minister to state what percentage tariff he is imposing by his Resolution. I challenge him to give that information to the House. He does not know, and neither does the Minister for Industry and Commerce.
It depends on the value.
I challenge the Minister to put a percentage on it. What is the percentage tariff on those pipes?
What pipes?
The pipes you are tariffing here. I challenge either of the two Ministers to put a percentage on it. Neither of them knows. This is incompetence par excellence.
It is 10 per cent. on a 7/6 pipe.
Did the Minister answer my question about the imposition of tariffs on news print? I regret that I was absent from the House during portion of his speech.
I am not going to give any assurance in regard to that, because we hope that paper will be manufactured here.
Is the Minister expecting that news print will be manufactured here?
Yes.
And it is expected that there will be a big demand for it? Will we be able to satisfy the demand?
Yes.
Question put:—"That the Dáil agree with the Committee in Resolution No. 10."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 66; Níl, 43.
Tá
- Aiken, Frank.
- Bartley, Gerald.
- Beegan, Patrick.
- Boland, Gerald.
- Boland, Patrick.
- Brady, Brian.
- Brady, Seán.
- Breathnach, Cormac.
- Breen, Daniel.
- Cleary, Mícheál.
- Concannon, Helena.
- Cooney, Eamonn.
- Corish, Richard.
- Corkery, Daniel.
- Corry, Martin John.
- Crowley, Fred. Hugh.
- Crowley, Timothy.
- Daly, Denis.
- Davin, William.
- De Valera, Eamon.
- Doherty, Hugh.
- Donnelly, Eamon.
- Dowdall, Thomas P.
- Everett, James.
- Flynn, John.
- Flynn, Stephen.
- Fogarty, Andrew.
- Gibbons, Seán.
- Goulding, John.
- Hales, Thomas.
- Sherídan, Michael.
- Smith, Patrick.
- Traynor, Oscar.
- Harris, Thomas.
- Houlihan, Patrick.
- Keely, Séamus P.
- Kehoe, Patrick.
- Kelly, James Patrick.
- Kelly, Thomas.
- Keyes, Michael.
- Killilea, Mark.
- Kissane, Eamonn.
- Lemass, Seán F.
- Little, Patrick John.
- Lynch, James B.
- MacEntee, Seán.
- Maguire, Ben.
- Maguire, Conor Alexander.
- Moane, Edward.
- Moore, Séamus.
- Murphy, Timothy Joseph.
- Norton, William.
- O Briain, Donnchadh.
- O Ceallaigh, Seán T.
- O'Grady, Seán.
- O'Reilly, Matthew.
- Pattison, James P.
- Pearse, Margaret Mary.
- Rice, Edward.
- Ruttledge, Patrick Joseph.
- Ryan, James.
- Ryan, Martin.
- Ryan, Robert.
- Victory, James.
- Walsh, Richard.
- Ward, Francis C.
Níl
- Anthony, Richard.
- Beckett, James Walter.
- Belton, Patrick.
- Bennett, George Cecil.
- Bourke, Séamus.
- Broderick, William Joseph.
- Burke, James Michael.
- Byrne, Alfred.
- Coburn, James.
- Costello, John Aloysius.
- Daly, Patrick.
- Desmond, William.
- Dillon, James M.
- Doyle, Feadar S.
- Fagan, Charles.
- Finlay, John.
- Fitzgerald, Desmond.
- Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
- Hogan, Patrick (Galway).
- Keating, John.
- Lynch, Finian.
- MacDermot, Frank.
- McFadden, Michael Og.
- McGovern, Patrick.
- McGuire, James Ivan.
- McMenamin, Daniel.
- Morrisroe, James.
- Morrissey, Daniel.
- Mulcahy, Richard.
- Murphy, James Edward.
- O'Donovan, Timothy Joseph.
- O'Higgins, Thomas Francis.
- O'Leary, Daniel.
- O'Mahony, The.
- O'Neill, Eamonn.
- O'Reilly, John Joseph.
- O'Sullivan, Gearóid.
- O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
- Redmond, Bridget Mary.
- Reidy, James.
- Rice, Vincent.
- Rogers, Patrick James.
- Wall, Nicholas.
Tellers:—Tá: Deputies Little and Smith; Níl: Deputies Doyle and Bennett.
Question declared carried.