I beg now to move Estimate 60 for District Justices, £15,500. It embraces salaries, allowances and incidental expenses, and I move accordingly.
DAIL IN COMMITTEE. - DISTRICT JUSTICES.
Are we not to have any details of how many people are provided for, and what the salaries are?
This Vote provides for the payment of twenty-seven District Justices, and their necessary clerical staffs and necessary travelling expenses through the areas of their jurisdiction. The Justices have been out for some time now. The reports received from them have been extremely satisfactory. As in the case of the Civic Guard, a great mass of the people welcomed them and gave unmistakable signs of their satisfaction at their advent. That is one of the promising symptoms in the situation to-day, one of the most healthy indications in the life of the country. It may be necessary later to appoint, perhaps, two or three more Justices of this kind. Some of the areas are rather large for one Justice to cover with satisfaction to the public in the administration of matters that should not be held up over-long. This system, as tried so far, has given satisfaction and worked smoothly, and is gradually restoring order and an orderly outlook throughout the country. Of the Registrars' Schemes—the Schemes for Clerks have not been finally sanctioned as yet. Certain temporary and provisional recommendations have been put up. Any Registrars appointed so far are appointed on a probationary period of, I think, two months, and it is hoped that in that time they will have acquainted themselves thoroughly with the nature of their duties, and that the Justices will be able to judge whether or not they are likely to develop into eminently capable clerks. We must have in this case, in the personnel of these Courts, the maximum of efficiency in order that the business and necessary litigation of the public will be transacted smoothly and with the greatest possible expedition and general efficiency. I have very little to add, except that I am prepared to answer any points raised. The Courts are not able to deal at the moment with absolutely all the problems of social disorders, and all the breaches of law that confront us in the country. It may be necessary, for instance, that wholesale seizures of land will have to be dealt with by military rather than by the police and courts. This is simply part and parcel of the irregularism which is being done under cover of armed resistance to the Government, and which prevails in certain areas. Proper division of the functions in a well-ordered State is gradually being arrived at and will, of course, grow as the Army nears the completion of its particular task.
There has been some criticism through the country, partly on account of the personnel of these Justices, and partly on account of the money spent on them. I am not going to deal with the matter or personnel, because we know in Ireland the matter of personnel enters into everything, and criticism could be continued indefinitely on that. But it does seem to be rather peculiar that the Justices who are, to a great extent, taking the place of the older Justices, should be paid a good deal more than the older Justices. The Minister says that probably some other Justices will have to be added to the present list. I should like to know whether these Justices are engaged practically every day in the week on the actual work connected with their Courts? It seems to me, perhaps, that in some cases the military will be dealing with some of the work that the Justices would ordinarily be doing. I think it was understood that these appointments were more or less temporary, and that the salaries and soforth were more or less temporary. Now, I am not unwilling that any office that requires an exceptional class of man or an exceptional kind of allowance, that that allowance should be generously made, but I should like the Minister, if he could, to give us a specimen of the work of one of these Justices and show the country that it is getting value for the money spent on them. It may be a mistaken impression, but there is an impression in the minds of a great many people that these Justices ought to be able to get on fairly well with the salaries they have without extra allowances for travelling. It may be that their areas are so big they have to have these allowances, but further information would be welcomed by the people.
A certain amount of dissatisfaction with the personnel of the Justices was inevitable. There were for these 27 positions probably 150 applicants, and I do not think I or any other man could fill these positions and give universal satisfaction.
I agree.
I simply did my best and selected from the applicants people whom I believed best capable of filling the position and giving satisfaction to the people. Now, on the question of payment, the payment seems high, and would of course be high if there was any security of tenure. There is none whatsoever. The positions are temporary and the people are removable at will, and in any case a Judicial Committee will, of course, report to the Government on the entire administration of law in the country. These men had to give up their positions, where they were barristers had to give up their practice, and if solicitors they had to give up that particular line of business and accept these positions, facing the fact that in 6, 8 or 10 months' time, they might have to fight their way back to their practices. Now, to get the proper type of men, you had to get people who were doing reasonably well in their professions, and then to induce these men to give up their professions, and take a position in which they had no security of tenure, it was necessary to pay a rather high salary. Naturally men would not be placed in positions of that kind, and given security of tenure, and be paid as high a salary as they now have. As to the work, it is hard; the areas are very large, and no Justice has less than 20 days' work in the month. Some of them have more. I should say the average would be about 260 days in the year. They tell me it is not a full day, but a man who travels a long distance and holds his courts, which last probably three or four hours, has done a pretty full day's work, and they have more than 20 days in a month. To give an idea of the districts, I have one in my mind, and if the Deputy or any other Deputy who is interested would come to my office I can show him a map setting out the 27 districts, and giving some idea of the size of the area to be covered. But one Justice that I refer to, his area reaches from Bray to Stradbally in Leix, taking in Athy and the area of Athy Union, which embraces Stradbally and Leix. I may say on this matter of the District Justices, that it will probably be necessary to appoint people as honorary Justices, not to exercise judicial functions, but to administer what I call ministerial functions, a certain number of the small duties of the Petty Sessions Justices in the past, such as the signing of warrants or the committal of lunatics. That is a matter that is in an unsatisfactory position at the moment, the law being that a lunatic must be committed on the certificate of a doctor and two Justices of the Peace. Now, it is impossible to adhere to that at the moment, and I have suggested as a temporary arrangement to Asylum Committees, that the certificate of the doctor and two public representatives, men who have been elected members of a local authority, would probably be sufficient public safeguard at the moment, so as to prevent a man being wrongly committed. I do not think that there is any other point raised by the Deputy that I have not touched on.
There is just one point. I take it that these 20, whatever they are doing, mean 20 separate courts in 20 different places?
Yes.
I should like to draw the Minister's attention to the committal of lunatics. It is a very serious matter, and I think there has been a lot of licence lately in committing people to District Lunatic Asylums. It is a very important matter from the ratepayer's point of view, because I find that some people are admitted who should not have been sent there at all, and the moment they get inside a lunatic asylum they are there for their lives, as a rule. It is nearly impossible to get them out. There seems to be nothing done to bring these people back to sanity, and have them restored to their people, and their people do not want them, as a rule. Mostly all the upkeep of those people is put on to the contributing Councils, and this is becoming a very serious matter. People are committed for very trivial things at times, and I think you ought to revert to something like the old system of holding some sort of a court and taking evidence, because I am satisfied that a doctor's certificate and a certificate of two local representatives is certainly not sufficient to commit a man for his whole life to a local lunatic asylum, and there ought to be something more than a certificate of a doctor and the signature of two other persons. A Petty Sessions should be held, or some inquiry, and evidence taken.
I am sorry to find that Deputy McGuinness thinks that two members of local authorities would not be as effective a check in that matter as two Justices of the Peace, say two of the old Justices of the Peace in the past. I think that Deputy McGuinness, perhaps as much, or more than anyone else, would realise that members of local authorities have only one great interest in life and that is to keep down the rates, and that they are even more likely to exert themselves in that direction than Justices of the Peace. However, it is a matter that I will consider very carefully and if he wishes to make representations, or to send in a memorandum on the matter I will read it very carefully.
The real point I make is that there should be an inquiry, and evidence taken on oath before a person is committed to an asylum. From experience I find that it is necessary for the safeguarding of these people.
As a member of one of the Committees of Management of a mental hospital since 1920, I may say that the scheme already suggested by the Minister for Home Affairs has been in operation and personally I think that the scheme was entirely satisfactory. Of course it was impossible to find Justices of the Peace in 1920, and the different Committees decided to admit patients on a doctor's certificate and the signature of two members of that Committee. I am well aware that no public representatives of the ratepayers would be willing to put their signatures to a certificate in order to put a person into an institution where that person would be an encumbrance on the rates, and so far as I am concerned, as a member of a Committee of Management, I quite agree with the suggestion put forward by the Minister for Home Affairs, but I think it would be better if he confined the signatures to two members of the Committee of the Mental Hospital where the patient is to be put. I think that would meet the matter. Then, of course, Deputy McGuinness would have an opportunity of interviewing the patients. I have done so and it was not a pleasure. I can assure you it was more or less a misfortune to have to travel three or four miles to see a patient before signing a certificate, and I can assure you I would not like to see any more of them. If Deputy McGuinness agreed that the signature of two members of the Committee of Management, with a doctor's certificate, shall enable them to admit a patient I think the ratepayers will not suffer by it.
I think whatever simplifies the method of sending people into asylums at the present moment would be the better thing. I think there are a good many people at large at the present moment who would be better in.
Deputy McGuinness raised a very important point on the Estimates about the seriousness of committing people for life to the asylums, but I do not think that his remedy was a good one, that is, seeking the assistance of laymen. I think it would be a better protection if, instead of one Medical Officer, we had two.
And two fees.
It might save a lot of money, a second fee might save the cost of maintaining a man for life, but the system the Home Minister proposes is only a temporary affair. It is a mistake for anybody to question it at present. I can understand Deputy McGuinness's point in bringing in laymen. If he brought them in to ascertain whether this poor man, whose sanity was in question, should contribute towards his maintenance, that would be a pertinent question for the laymen, but I think the point of sanity would be more a question for the doctors. I have grave doubt myself as to the benefit of asylum treatment; but, of course, that is a matter for medical men.
I think this Vote of £15,500 for District Justices is agreed to.
Motion made and question put: "That the Dáil in Committee having considered the Estimate of the amount required in the year ending 31st March, 1923, of £15,500 for the salaries and expenses of District Justices, recommend that the sum of £15,500 be adopted by the Oireachtas."
Agreed.