Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 20 Jun 1928

Vol. 10 No. 18

PUBLIC BUSINESS. - CHILDREN BILL, 1928—COMMITTEE STAGE.

Mr. HAUGHTON

I desire to have inserted in sub-section (i) an amendment to this effect:—

"Or is found destitute, notwithstanding the fact that the child's parent or parents are in possession of some property which it has been proved to the satisfaction of the court is valueless."

As one who, like many other members of this House, for many years acted as a Justice of the Peace, I know that cases like this arose occasionally under the British regime, where children whose parents were absolutely destitute were, nevertheless, in possession of some petty property—house property or land—and if these parents were not of good reputation, it was highly desirable that the children should be safeguarded by being sent to some industrial institution. If this idea is not already covered in this admirable Bill —which I trust will always be associated with the name of Senator Brady a Bill which has been long called for and earnestly desired, not only in this country, but across the Channel—and if it does not clash with the principle of the Bill, I should like to have such an amendment inserted.

Mr. BENNETT

I think it would not be advisable to accept the amendment without having seen it in print. Perhaps it would be permissible to consider it on the Report Stage.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I understood that amendments were being introduced to this Bill to make the duty of the magistrate quite specific, because I do not know what is going to happen about "likely to continue"—"where the parents are unable and likely to continue to be unable." Supposing that they do not continue to be unable what happens?—There is no provision to enable a child to get out.

Mr. BRADY

Since the last day the suggestions thrown out by you have been very carefully considered. I am advised that the Bill as it stands carries out the purpose for which it is intended. I did not like to raise a point of order as against Senator Haughton's point, but Senator Bennett referred to the fact that Senator Haughton did not give any notice of his intention to move this amendment, much less table it. But I can assure Senator Haughton that the Act as it stands—and I think, with great respect, that this also applies to your difficulty, sir—gives the magistrate the fullest power to investigate the merits of each particular case, because if you look at Section 58, the section in which we are proceeding to make this small amendment, you will find that the magistrate has power to adjourn the case and satisfy himself, on inquiry, of all the facts regarding the particular application before him. I suggest—I do not know if I am saying more than I should say—that these words "and likely to continue" were inserted in the Bill at the suggestion of a very experienced magistrate. I will say no more than that. The Bill, as originally drafted, did not contain these words, but on his suggestion they were added. I think it will be found in practice that a magistrate has vested in him the fullest powers of inquiry into each particular case, and that therefore it is absolutely impossible, assuming the exercise of judicial discretion, that the Bill would be abused. If, for instance, a case such as Senator Haughton indicated comes up before him, and he finds that the parents are in a position to support the child. I take it that be would refuse to send it to an industrial school. If, on the other hand, that possibly the means were uncertain and precarious, that one day the parents might be in a position to support the child, and that another day they would not, he would have the fullest discretion, either to commit the child to an industrial school or not to do so. As I said on the last day, the particular case which drew attention to the infirmity in this Act was before the chief magistrate in Dublin, Mr. Cussen, who actually refused, after the fullest hearing, to commit a child to an industrial school. I hope the House will pass the Commit tee Stage now, as it is very desirable that this Bill would reach another place as soon as possible.

Mrs. WYSE POWER

Might I ask Senator Brady what arrangement the Bill contains for the removal of a child from an industrial school when the parents have got work? Not longer ago than a year a man came before a magistrate to ask that his two children be given to him, and he told the circumstances under which they had entered an industrial school. He was in hospital, and there was poverty in his home. The children were committed to the industrial school. The man became cured, was able to take up his work and was at his work. He applied to the industrial school for his two children, and they refused to give them. He came before the magistrate. Inquiries were made, and everything the man said was verified. After an adjournment of a week or so the man got the two children. I do not think that that practice is desirable. I do think that when the Senator is making arrangements to put children in he ought to make arrangements to get them out in such cases as that.

CATHAOIRLEACH

The question is the difficulty a magistrate would have in construing these words "likely to continue." How would any magistrate be able to prophesy whether the inability was likely to continue? But if you do put these words in is there not great force in Senator Mrs. Wyse Power's suggestion that you should provide some machinery for getting them out?

Mrs. WYSE POWER

Besides the parents having to go before a magistrate, I think that there ought to be some simple machinery, such as an investigation by the relieving officer of the conditions under which the child lives, so that the parent might get his child out without having to lose a day's work going before the magistrate.

Mr. BENNETT

Senator Mrs. Wyse Power has raised a very important question. She admits that there must be some investigation, and I think an investigation before a magistrate is much simpler than a consultation by the relieving officer with the Board of Health. The Board of Health assembles only at rather long periods, and in practice I think an investigation by a magistrate would be better than what Senator Mrs. Wyse Power suggests.

Mrs. WYSE-POWER

You must remember that a working man loses a day when he goes to the court. That is important.

Mr. BRADY

I have great sympathy with the point raised by Senator Mrs. Wyse-Power—namely, the desirability of the revision of an order of this kind. Perhaps the House will consent to allow the matter to remain over until Report, when we might meet the point. I would again remind the House that this little Bill is not intended to alter the law generally regarding industrial schools. Its purpose, as the title indicates, is to amend the law in one very small respect—namely, to alter the clause which obliged a child to beg before it is sent to an industrial school. That is the only object which this Bill seeks to attain, and however desirable an amendment of the whole law relating to industrial schools may be, in the meantime it is very urgent that this particular disability should be removed.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I quite sympathise with you in all that, but do you not see that the difference in your Bill is this:—Under the old system the question whether a child should or should not be committed depended upon proof of a well-ascertained fact. Now it is proposed to be one in which there is to be great speculation, that is, the future ability of the parents to support the child. There must be great speculation on that. Therefore, I think it would be worth your while, between this and the Report Statge, to look into that.

Mr. BRADY

I undertake to do that.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I think, Senator Haughton, it would be better for you to reserve your amendment for the Report Stage. I will give you leave to move it then.

Mr. HAUGHTON

I am quite satisfied. The matter has been largely dealt with by Senator Brady.

Mr. GUINNESS

I take it that the insertion of such words as "proved to the satisfaction of the magistrate," is what is intended.

CATHAOIRLEACH

That is involved in the Act at present. It is not in this Bill.

Mr. GUINNESS

If it was brought into this Bill it would clarify matters.

CATHAOIRLEACH

This is an amendment to Clause 58. Clause 58 does contemplate a sort of investigation by the magistrate, and this would be one of those cases which would require investigation. But I do think that the other matter of providing means of revision is met.

Mr. BRADY

I agree.

Bill put through Committee without amendment and ordered to be reported.

Mrs. WYSE POWER

Might I make a correction of something I said on the last day? I stated that I thought the cost of a child per week in an industrial school was 12/6, or 15/-. I have found definitely that it is 12/6— 7/6 from the State and 5/- from the local authority, so that the amount I meant the last day is supplemented by 5/- per head.