There is a Message from the Dáil:—
The Dáil has passed the Dundalk Harbour and Port Bill, 1925, with the following amendments, to which the agreement of the Seanad is desired:—
(and then they give the amendments).
PRIVATE BUSINESS. - DUNDALK HARBOUR AND PORT BILL, 1925.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
This is the first occasion on which a Private Bill amended by the other House has come before us. I take it that it is my duty in my official capacity to move formally the agreement of this House with each of the different amendments made by the Dáil. I therefore formally move that the Seanad do agree with amendment No. 1, which reads:—
In page 8, Section 10, line 12, after the words "port of Dundalk," the words "and residing within five miles from the courthouse of Dundalk" have been inserted.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Seanad agree with amendment 2, which is consequential:—
In page 8, Section 11, line 29, after the word "company" the words "and residing within five miles from the courthouse of Dundalk" have been inserted.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Seanad agree with amendments 3, 4 and 5, as follows:—
In page 8, Section 15, lines 52 and 56, after the word "chairman" in each case the words "and vice-chairman" have been inserted.
(4) In page 9. Section 16, the section has been deleted and the following new section has been inserted instead thereof:—
"In addition to the Commissioners for the time being nominated by or elected pursuant to and acting in execution of this Act the chairman and vice-chairman for the time being of the Dundalk Urban District Council and the chairman for the time being of the county council of the county of Louth and the successors from time to time of each such chairman and of such vice-chairman of the Dundalk Urban District Council shall be Commissioners to act in execution of this Act, and each of them shall continue to be a Commissioner to act in execution of this Act during such time as he remains chairman or vice-chairman respectively of the said urban district council or chairman of the county council respectively. The provisions of Section 9 of this Act shall not be applicable to either the chairman or vice-chairman of the Dundalk Urban District Council and their respective successors or to the chairman of the county council of the county of Louth and his successors during the time that they retain their offices as such chairman and vice-chairman respectively of the Dundalk Urban District Council and chairman of the county council of the county of Louth, and they and each of them shall exercise the same rights and authority as any other of the Commissioners."
(5) In page 24, Section 82, lines 51, 52 and 53, the words "to direct prosecutions by indictment or otherwise against the offender for any nuisance or other offence" have been deleted, and the words "in any case which can under this Act or otherwise by law be prosecuted by them before a court of summary jurisdiction, to direct prosecutions before any such court in respect of offences" have been substituted.
Question—"That amendments 3, 4 and 5 be agreed to"—put and agreed to.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
I would like to say with regard to this Bill that when it was in this House there was a section or clause that had been inserted at the Committee Stage, but it was deleted in this House on the motion of a Senator and deleted by a substantial majority. I notice that in the subsequent, discussions in the other House it was stated that I, as Chairman, should there and then have directed the Bill to be re-committed to the Committee. This seems to me to be a complete misapprehension as to what the proper procedure is. The striking out of a clause in a Private Bill that has been inserted in Committee does not leave any subject matter for re-committal. It is only the insertion of new matter, and even, in the case of new matter, the Bill usually is not re-committed unless the new matter is considered by the Chairman to be one of substance. All that happened in this House was that something inserted by the Committee was deleted. I have no experience of, nor do I know of, any case in which that has constituted a reason for the re-committal of a Bill.