I move that this House do adjourn until 3 p.m., Tuesday, 3rd February, 1925.
THE SHANNON POWER SCHEME. - PAYMENT OF DECREES..
Mr. COSGRAVE
Upon that question I desire to raise a matter which I brought to the notice of the Minister for Finance on the 3rd instant. I asked him then "If he could state why the amount awarded to Thomas Daly, Eyrecourt, Co. Galway, by Judge Power at the Circuit Court held at Ballinasloe in September, 1924, has not been paid." The Minister replied that "The decree stated to have been made in Mr. Daly's favour in September, 1924, has not yet been received in my Department." I then asked: "Can the Minister say who is responsible for the neglect," and he replied: "I suppose it is the applicant's solicitor." Now, I forwarded a copy of the reply to the applicant, and the next thing I heard was a letter from the solicitor who is accused of neglect denying that he is responsible for any such thing. This is the letter:—
"Ballinasloe,
12th December, 1924.
"Dear Sir,—Mr. Thomas Daly, of Eyrecourt, has sent me a cutting from a newspaper with regard to a question you asked about a decree of his, and in the reply of Mr. Blythe he states that he presumes the applicant's solicitor is responsible for the neglect. This is utterly untrue, and I think you should have something done about explaining the matter again.
"This decree was a re-hearing case, and after it was heard here in September, the decree was filled up in my office, along with other decrees, and sent to the Clerk of the Peace for signature by himself and the Judge. Once it leaves my hands, I never see it again, as the practice lately has been, under orders from the Government, that such decrees are sent by the Clerk of the Peace to the State Solicitor, and he sends them to the Ministry of Finance. If there is neglect on my part, under these circumstances, it is rather curious.
"On the 24th of October, 1924, I had a letter from the Ministry of Finance asking me to send the original decree of 26th September, 1922, up to them, in order to facilitate the payment of the re-hearing decree. I sent it up, on receipt of such letter, and I naturally understood from it that they had received the re-hearing decree, when they asked for the old one. They probably have had it, and it has gone astray in the office.
"I think such statements are very unfair to any solicitor.—Yours faithfully,
"HUTCHINSON DAVIDSON,
Solicitor."
Now, it is evident from this letter that this painstaking and respectable solicitor has not been guilty of any neglect. I suggest to the Minister that he should see who is responsible and that in future, when decrees are granted, they should be signed both by the Judge and the Clerk of the Peace and forwarded to the Minister's Department. Further, the Minister should have them available instead of having Deputies going, as penny-boys, round from one Department to another to try and get these payments made.
I think that the Deputy's statement is very satisfactory. It seems to clear the solicitor from any imputation that I may have cast upon him.