asked the President if the report stated to have been received by him regarding an alleged meeting in or near Glasgow between Deputy Mulcahy and the British War Minister was to the effect (a) simply that Deputy Mulcahy was observed in conversation with the British War Minister or (b) that portion of the alleged conversation was overheard and transmitted to the President, or (c) that the meeting took place under circumstances sufficient to arouse suspicion in the mind of any responsible person, and if (b) and/or (c) be the fact, to ask the President if he will state the purport of the alleged conversation and/or the suspicious circumstances.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Statement Concerning a Deputy.
also asked the President if in relation to the falsehood regarding Deputy Mulcahy given publicity by the President in the Dáil on 28th September last as a reason for bringing the Constitution (Amendment No. 17) Act into operation, he will state:—(a) whether the President's informant alleged that Deputy Mulcahy and the British War Minister met by accident or by prearrangement; for a lengthy or a brief period; in the street, in an hotel, in a private house or in an official or State building; during the daytime or by night; once or several times; on what named date or dates; (b) whether the meeting was alleged to have taken place between Deputy Mulcahy and the British War Minister only, or if either or both were alleged to have some or many companions.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 3 together. As I have already informed the Deputy, I do not intend to add anything to the statement on this matter which I made to the Dáil on the 4th October.
Was the refusal to hold an inquiry, announced on 4th October last, intended to shield the President more than to shield the President's lying informant? May I ask if the person who told that lie to the President, if he did so, is no less an offender against ordinary conduct than the President in refusing to make the kind of inquiry he is asked to make?
May I ask if the information in the possession of the Minister is from police reports? May I take it that the screed we have just heard is derived from police reports, or is this also from Glasgow?