SECTION 21.

I just want to ask a question. I want to know what is the object of publication.

Supposing the registration is cancelled, and that the establishment continues to carry on and export butter as creamery butter, surely you would publish the fact that it is no longer a creamery and that it has no right to call its produce creamery butter?

Can you not prosecute?

Yes. We should communicate with our trade agents in England and elsewhere and get them to publish that fact if this particular institution is doing any form of Irish trade over there.

Question—" That Section 21 stand part of the Bill "—put and agreed to.

I move:—

To insert before Section 22 a new section as follows:—

(1) Any register kept in pursuance of this Act shall be—

(a) deemed to be in the proper custody when in the custody of the Minister or of any officer of the Minister authorised in that behalf by the Minister; and

(b) admissible in evidence without further proof on production from the proper custody.

(2) Prima facie evidence of any entry in any register kept in pursuance of this Act may be given in any court or any legal proceeding by the production of a copy of such entry purporting to be certified to be a true copy by any officer of the Minister authorised in that behalf, and it shall not be necessary to prove the signature of such officer or that he was in fact such officer or was in fact so authorised.

(3) A certificate, purporting to be under the hand of an officer of the Minister authorised in that behalf by the Minister, that any premises specified in such certificate are not entered in the register specified in such certificate shall be conclusive evidence of the matter so certified, and it shall not be necessary to prove the signature of such officer, or that he was in fact such officer, or was in fact so authorised.

(4) Any person may—

(a) inspect any register kept in pursuance of this Act on payment of such fee, not exceeding one shilling for each inspection, as shall be prescribed;

(b) obtain a copy, certified in manner hereinbefore mentioned to be a true copy, of any entry in any register kept in pursuance of this Act on payment of such fee, not exceeding sixpence for each folio of the copy, as may be prescribed;

(c) obtain such certificate as is hereinbefore mentioned that any specified premises are not registered in a specified register kept in pursuance of this Act on payment of such fee, not exceeding two shillings and sixpence for each certificate, as may be prescribed.

The main object of that amendment is that it will not be necessary to produce the original register on each occasion, and that a certified copy will be available for proving cases in court or for other purposes that may be necessary.

It is a common form amendment.

I presume that it is common form, but I am rather doubtful about the words " it shall not be necessary to prove the signature of such officer." I do not know will that have a bad effect.

No. It is the same procedure as in connection with the Local Registration of Titles Act. You have not to prove the signature.

I cannot see why these words should be introduced, " Any person may inspect any register kept in pursuance of this Act." That may be the cause of some difficulties in the trade. Though it may be right that a Department Inspector may go into the creamery and inspect the register, at the same time I do not know that every Tom, Dick and Harry should have the right to go into the creamery and demand the right to inspect the register of the creamery.

It is in reference to the Department's Inspector.

Question: " That the new section stand part of the Bill "—put and agreed to.
Question: " That Section 22 stand part of the Bill "—put and agreed to.