That is all the expenses up to date. Well, that is a large sum. It is a big sum of money for people like us to throw away, as was, in my opinion, done. Not only was this money thrown away, but some millions of money, that could have been made available for purposes that are very urgently in need of money here at home, were practically thrown away. Not alone have we had to pay £36,000, but a sum of over half a million pounds that could have done a world of good if spent in the Gaeltacht, is lost to us. The losing of that money is due solely to bad management, and to want of foresight on the part of the gentlemen who occupy the Government Benches. If I remember rightly, some time early in 1925, having in mind the probability that something like what has happened would happen—that the decision that has been given or some decision of that kind would be given by the American courts—Deputy de Valera made an offer that so far as he and those he represented were concerned they would be glad to end the litigation and to end the expenses of the litigation, and to use their influence to get that half-million of money, roughly £600,000, then held by certain banks in America, handed over to be used for the benefit of the Gaeltacht. That offer was made publicly and turned down by the members of the Front Bench opposite, with the result that the Gaeltacht lost that money. Not alone did they lose that £600,000, which was so badly needed, but we have now to foot a bill of £36,000 along with it, because those gentlemen were too high and mighty. They thought they had nothing to do but to go to America and dictate to the American courts what they were to do with the money. They made an effort to dictate. They got certain decisions in the courts here and endeavoured to get the best advocates they could on the American side to argue the case for them in the American courts that the decision given here by the judges nominated by themselves should bind the American courts. Of course they did not get that decision, as we know to our cost. They could have avoided that. They could have the money, and they could have avoided all the discredit, in some respects, of our fighting this out—fighting out disagreements and difficulties of that kind in the American courts.
Nobody on this side of the House was anxious that the money should be frittered away by payments even to Irish lawyers, and certainly not to American lawyers. We certainly were not anxious that legal discussions about matters that we should have endeavoured to settle in some way at home should be dragged into the American courts. But the gentlemen opposite would not have anything of the kind, and now they have lost that £600,000 to you and to me, and the ratepayers of this country have to foot a bill for £36,000 as well. That is hardly good enough. It is due to a want of foresight. It is, to my mind, even worse. They were so bigoted, so narrowmindedly hostile that they turned down any friendly discussion with the people on this side as to how that money might best be used to the advantage of Ireland in general or to the advantage of the Gaeltacht in particular, because that was a subject on which we thought there might be general agreement amongst our people.
They were so uppish and narrowminded and they had such little foresight they felt certain that they had nothing to do but ask the judges in America to agree to what they wanted. They had won their military victory here. "We have beaten the Republicans—we have beaten them in the field. We have established our Free State courts. Our courts are recognised, and you Americans have recognised the Free State. Therefore, you will hand us over the money." But they got a drop, to use a slang phrase. There is not much satisfaction for Ireland in that, even though a great deal of that money is coming back into Republican funds. It would have been better for Ireland if all that money could have been spent in the way suggested by Deputy de Valera. It would have saved the ratepayers here the additional £36,000 they are now asked to pay. There is no credit to Ireland in general; no credit to any party in the way the matter has been handled.
There is another matter that I think I might also mention. I am not quite sure, if the case is taken into the courts by some of the subscribers to the loan, that American subscribers might not get a decision that not alone are they entitled to the funds that remain in the bank which are now being divided pro rata amongst the bond holders, but certain legal men associated with this case who won it so far as it has been won for the bond holders are of opinion that the Free State has made itself liable to pay back all the money collected in America, and that means paying out another three or four million dollars. They are fortified in that opinion by statements made by President Cosgrave himself and by the Free State representative in Washington, Professor Smiddy. Not alone have they publicly declared it, but they have sworn affidavits which were handed in when this case was being tried in America, pledging the honour of the Free State and its Government to pay back all money that was raised on loan in America during the years 1919-1921.
It is quite on the cards that action might be taken in the American courts by bond-holders on the basis of the affidavit sworn by President Cosgrave that your body here has accepted responsibility. Having insisted on that responsibility, they took over the Republican funds, £80,000, that remained here in certain banks, and certain moneys in America. Not alone have they made affidavits and public declarations in your name, but they have by specific and legal action done everything possible to assure anybody who was interested that they have accepted responsibility. Therefore, it is quite possible the £36,000 the Minister for Finance puts down here as the ultimate limit of the amount that will have to be paid in the way of legal expenses in connection with this Dáil Bonds litigation may by no means be the limit of the amount that may have to be paid by the taxpayers here. But that is supposition. I know, however, that the matter has been discussed, and I know that lawyers connected with the case, who have succeeded so far in getting this money for the bond holders, have discussed it with certain bond holders. What they have decided to do I do not know, but it is quite on the cards that further legal action may take place and further costs may be asked for from the citizens here towards expenses as a result of this litigation, and, again I say it, as a result of the want of foresight, the want of patriotism, generosity and broad-mindedness on the part of the gentleman opposite in not, at any rate, offering to discuss, in a friendly, practical, patriotic way, for Ireland's interests, the offer made as far back as 1925—that all this money be drawn out of the banks, that the litigation be dropped, and that the money be used for Irish purposes.
What purposes the money will be used for now goodness only knows. I have seen in American papers all sorts of associations formed trying to get a share of this money. There are churches in San Francisco and Los Angeles, public bodies in Boston, Massachusetts and other places, all appealing to the bond holders to give them their bonds, so that this money might be used for various public works in America. I think Ireland, the Gaeltacht particularly, wants that money more than any public institution in America. We would have it if the gentleman opposite had any sense of patriotism when the offer was made. However, there is no good in regretting that now, but we have to bear in mind that because of their want of patriotism the citizens and the taxpayers geneally are paying through their noses.
