I support the very reasoned case made by Deputy Cowan in relation to this motion. I agree that the Minister in reply made a reasoned case against the motion mainly grounded on the wording of the motion, but he did not try, as far as I recollect his speech, to make a case against a favourable review of the very small number of outstanding claims that remained to be dealt with. In Volume 143, at column 1159, of the Official Report, the Minister said:—
"Round 1919 an appeal was made to them by the Dáil or the Sinn Féin organisation to throw off their uniforms and go out and join the forces of the country fighting for freedom at that time."
It is significant in relation to that statement that the Trade Union Congress, which was then a very strong and united body supporting the claims of the Sinn Féin organisation held a special secret session in Drogheda where they gave their unanimous support to the demands that were being made at the time. I remember quite well as Chairman of the Standing Orders Committee of that congress a deputation from the organised body of the R.I.C. accompanied by an Irishman from Liverpool who was theleader of a body of Irishmen in Liverpool, making an application to the congress for their case to be heard. They submitted a statement dealing with the demands that had been made by General Collins and other leaders of the I.RA. calling upon the R.I.C. to surrender their uniforms. The Trade Union Congress, after hearing the statement in secret session, gave their unanimous support to the demand made by the representatives of the I.R.A. and Sinn Féin organisation on behalf of the people as a whole. To that extent, having been associated with the matter at the time, I feel bound to say that every genuine applicant who responded to the appeal made at that time should have his case favourably reviewed.
The Minister has pointed out, and I am sure Deputy Cowan realises that there is something in it because the Minister is relying upon a certain section of the 1934 Act, that it is not necessary to pass amending legislation in order to comply with the reasonable request submitted by Deputy Cowan. The Minister has, however, given figures, and these figures have been given now for the first time as far as I understand. According to the Minister the original committee in 1922 dealt with 1,136 applications and gave awards in 502 cases. I am pretty certain that all those who received awards as a result of the investigation carried out by this 1922 committee did not actually receive pensions.
I am certain that there were a number of cases that were held up by the responsible Minister at that time, some of which were deserving applicants in whose favour awards were made but who did not receive pensions until after the 1934 committee had reviewed their applications.
The Minister went on to say that the 1922 committee, which dealt with 330 cases, gave awards in 50 cases. Between the two committees that investigated these claims the total number of awards was 552. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to state, if he has the figures available, what number of the 552 in whose cases awards were made did in fact draw pensions.
It is not desirable that we should make comparisons at this stage between the various classes of people who made sacrifices up to and including 1922. It is not fair that a limit of three or four years should be laid down in order to prevent young men who joined the constabulary after a certain date from receiving pensions. That principle has not been applied in the case of those who joined the I.R.A. a year or two before the Truce, and it should not apply in this particular case. Undoubtedly, arguments for or against cases of that kind can be adduced, but it is not desirable to make comparisons as to the extent and cost of the sacrifices made by the people who rendered national service at the period in question.
I would ask Deputies to admit that the man who surrendered his main source of livelihood at a particular period was making a great sacrifice. Many of these men were sons of small farmers. It does not necessarily follow that every young man who remained in the R.I.C. up to the conclusion of the Truce was not giving assistance to the I.R.A. while continuing to wear the uniform of the R.I.C. I know of men, and had contacts at that period with young men who joined the R.I.C. both before and subsequent to 1916, who remained in the R.I.C. on the instruction of the I.R.A. because they were regarded as being very helpful in view of the places in which they were serving at that time. There is evidence to show, and I was given reasons to believe, that many young men and many comparatively old men who remained in the R.I.C. up to the period of the Truce were among the first men taken into the Garda Síochána when that force was established. There was a certain amount of hostility to that type of people being brought in and given responsible positions in the Garda Síochána, but I am one of the Deputies who heard these reasons being given by those who founded the Garda Síochána. It is known to all Deputies that one of the highest officers of the Garda Síochána was a man who remained in the R.I.C. and who was subsequently rewarded by a high position in the Garda Síochána.
We are talking to the converted when we are talking to the Minister. I accept Deputy Cowan's assurance that there are less than 30 genuine claims outstanding. That is a good argument in favour of the reasonable suggestion advanced by Deputy Dr. Hillery. The Minister is carrying two portfolios at present but I would suggest that the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary should, during the five or six weeks' holiday period, study the files on these cases. I am sure that there is a summarised version of the case on each file. The files are not very big or very numerous. They could be studied within a short period by the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary or by a deputy appointed by the Minister.
There is no necessity to set up a committee such as was in existence in 1922 or 1934. Deputy Cowan and other Deputies who have spoken in support of the motion know that the leaders of the R.I.C. at that time are still alive. One of them lives only a short distance from the City of Dublin. I think two of the three recognised leaders live in the City or County of Dublin. I am certain that the leader who lives in Kildare, and who is probably known personally to the Taoiseach and most Ministers, would make himself available if advice were needed in doubtful cases still outstanding. With Deputy Dr. Hillery, I would urge that the small number of claims still outstanding should be reviewed personally by the Minister or somebody appointed by the Minister during the Recess.