I take it we will be discussing these Estimates as a group?
Committee on Finance. - Vote 32—Office of the Minister for Justice.
Yes, the Justice group, Votes 32 to 40. There is also a motion to refer back.
That can be moved formally.
Technically, it is Vote 32 that will be before the Committee.
I move:-
That a sum not exceeding £35,631 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1946, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Justice.
I think I will start off with the financial aspects of the Votes, and will deal with the other aspects later. On all these Votes, except one, there are increases, due mainly to the upward revision of the cost-of-living bonus which became effective on 1st January, 1945. The big figure is, of course, that for the Gárda Síochána. The increase in that case—Sub-heads A and B—for salaries, wages, pay and allowances, is approximately £250,000, representing on an average an increase of about £30 a year for each individual. This is due to the new pay Order made last January. The maximum pay, including bonus, of an ordinary member of the force has been raised by 11/6 a week.
Turning to sub-head B, on page 147. it will be noticed that under the heading "Allowances for Casual Expenses for Officers and Men Employed on Detective Duty," the estimated cost is £11,103 as against £7,775 for last year. This is accounted for by the fact that provision has been made for an increase in the detective allowance from 7/- to 10/- per week. On the next page, under sub-head H, the item "Maintenance and Running Expenses of Motor Transport" is responsible for an additional £3,425 over last year. The increased expenditure was necessitated by the fact that a major overhaul is being undertaken this year, as transport has suffered considerable wear and tear during the emergency years. The increase of about £250,000 under sub-heads A and B is offset by certain decreases under other items, notably the total decrease of £89,000 in the two L.S.F. sub-heads O and P.
As Deputies are aware, early in the year it was decided that the L.S.F. should cease its activities in the way of parades and patrols. That was due to the fact that the work they had to do was very onerous, including patrolling at night, and it was felt that this was not necessary. The force has not been disbanded yet, and I would like to take this opportunity to repeat what I have said on other occasions. I wish to congratulate and thank the members of the L.S.F. for the great service they have rendered the State during all these years. I hope that, before the force is finally disbanded, some token of our regard for them will be given in the way of a medal or something of that kind. That point has not been fixed yet. I know that members of every Party in the House join with me on this point. The members of the force belong to every Party in the House, and a wonderful spirit was displayed during all the years of crisis. The cessation of those activities of the L.S.F. has accounted for the big reduction of £89,000.
There was a lot of talk last year about policing in Dublin and the need for more police. That has been provided for, to some extent. The present estimate provides for 5,909 ordinary Gárdaí, as compared with 5,802, which has been the number for several years past. This will allow some margin for increasing the numbers of inspectors and station sergeants in Dublin. The number of inspectors and station sergeants is already, however, up to the maximum allowed by the Gárda Síochána Vote. It will, therefore, be necessary to have an amending Act before the number can be increased. A Bill is in course of preparation and is nearly ready, and I expect to introduce it soon.
I might mention that it is proposed to create a new police district in the metropolitan area by dividing the present "E" district, which stretches from Ringsend to Inchicore, into two districts; one to include Sundrive Road, Crumlin and Terenure sub-districts, the other Donnybrook, Irish-town and Rathmines sub-districts. This readjustment will automatically involve an increase of one superintendent and three inspectors.
In the Prisons Vote, the net increase of £6,629 is mainly due to an additional £8,795 in the pay and allowances of prison officers, and £2,040 in the maintenance and equipment of buildings, which items are offset to some extent by a decrease of £2,710 in the victualling sub-head and £1,500 in the cost of escort, etc., of prisoners. The victualling estimate is calculated at a cost of £23 per head for 730 prisoners for 1945/46 as against £26 3s. 6d. per head for 745 prisoners for the year 1944/45. The reduction in the victualling estimate is not due to a reduced dietary. It results from a lowering of the prices quoted by the contractors for various foodstuffs. There is something hopeful there.
That is serious.
Mr. Boland
They are getting the same food, but it is being purchased more cheaply. The number of prison officers to be employed this year is 289, 12 more than last year. I think that is about all I have to say on the financial side, so I now turn to the question of crime.
I regret to say that the figures for criminal offences still stand at a high level. The total number of indictable offences reported to the police in 1944 was 16,045. This figure is practically double the figure for 1939, but it shows a decrease of 1,260 when compared with the figure for 1943—the first decrease recorded since the beginning of the emergency.
Deputies were very interested in the figures last year, so I will read the table showing the numbers of indictable offences reported to the police during each of the years 1939 to 1944, inclusive:—1939, 8,202; 1940, 9,014; 1941, 13,180; 1942, 17,213; 1943, 17,213; 1944, 16,045.
Let us hope the decrease will continue.
The following table classifies the indictable offences reported to the police during 1944. The corresponding figures for 1939 are shown for the purpose of comparison:—
|
1944 |
1939 |
|
|
Offences against the person |
588 |
439 |
|
Offences against property with violence: burglaries, housebreaking, malicious injuries, etc. |
2,603 |
1,460 |
|
Offences against property without violence: larcenies, etc. |
12,627 |
6,159 |
|
Other offences |
227 |
144 |
There was a decrease in juvenile crime during 1944. I am glad to be able to say that, too, though it is not satisfactory yet. The number of persons under 18 years charged with indictable offences in 1944 was 2,730 as compared with 3,385 in 1943. The following table shows the figures for 1939 to 1944, inclusive:- 1939, 1,605; 1940, 1,803; 1941, 2,562; 1942, 3,350; 1943, 3,385; 1944, 2,730.
There was a considerable increase in the number of prosecutions for summary offences instituted by the police during 1944. The total number of prosecutions in 1944 was 144,453, as compared with 107,961 in 1943 and 103,921 in 1939. The increase is mainly accounted for by prosecutions for offences under the Road Traffic Act, the Emergency Powers Acts, the Licensing Acts and the School Attendance Act. The following table shows the increases in prosecutions under those Acts:-
|
Offences under |
1939 |
1944 |
Increase |
|
Road Traffic Act |
57,831 |
73,747 |
15,916 |
|
Emergency Powers Acts |
— |
6,570 |
6,570 |
|
Licensing Acts |
8,228 |
14,757 |
6,529 |
|
School Attendance Act |
7,197 |
13,330 |
6,133 |
Prosecutions for unlighted bicycles account for the bulk of the increase in respect of road traffic offences.
As regards crime arising from the existence of unlawful associations, I am glad to say that the past year has been a peaceful one. There are at present 55 persons in custody under sentence for such activities and 104 persons detained under Emergency Powers (No. 20) Order, 1940. A year ago the corresponding figures were 78 and 210. The cases of those persons detained under the provisions of Emergency Powers (No. 20) Order, 1940, are constantly under review, and whenever any one of them can be released without danger to the security of the State an Order is made for release.
There is nothing special about the Vote for the District Court. In regard to Vote 36—Circuit Court— there was a Supplementary Estimate introduced here recently, and Deputy Costello complained about the delays in bringing people to trial. He said it was very bad, but I do not think it was quite as bad as he represented. The total number of cases awaiting trial as on 31st March of this year was 49, which is a considerable reduction when compared with the position this time last year, when the figure was 138. Of these 49 cases, only ten were returned for trial before 1st October, 1944. In five of these ten cases, the trials are not being proceeded with, and I think it will be found, on examining the remaining cases, that there were special reasons for the admitted delay, but this is primarily a matter for the Attorney-General.
In regard to the Votes for the Supreme Court and the High Court, there is nothing special.
There has been a further marked increase in the general work of the Land Registry. A total of 17,473 dealings have been disposed of during the year, which represents an increase of 4,127 dealings. The arrears are now entirely cleared off and each new dealing is completed within five or six days. On the question of fees charged in the Land Registry, a committee, under the chairmanship of the senior taxing master of the High Court, Master O'Hanlon, was appointed towards the end of 1944 to examine the present scale of fees and to recommend any alterations which might be considered desirable. I have just received the committee's report, but I have not yet had time to study its recommendations. I think there is a majority and a minority report, but I have not had an opportunity of studying them yet.
With regard to the Registry of Deeds, there has been a further increase in the volume of work so far as registrations are concerned. There is no evidence to show that the increase is due to speculative buying, the transfers being for residential or occupational purposes. There is nothing calling for any special comment in the Estimate for the Public Record Office and Charitable Donations and Bequests.
If it is necessary at this stage to move that the Estimate be referred back, I will do so formally on behalf of Deputy Costello.
The Deputy who so moves may not reserve his speech till later.
I will move it and speak.
Very good. I thought the Deputy might desire to speak later which would not be permissible.
I move:—
That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.
I want to address myself particularly to the picture presented by the Minister's figures of the state of the country in regard to crime, which I think is one which ought to cause us rather grave concern. I regret that we have not had some report from the responsible police authorities, through the Minister, as to what explanation or explanations they have to offer for this very large and very grave increase. One realises that, in the atmosphere such as we have been living in for the past five years, an atmosphere created by war and war conditions, some increase in crime, particularly some of the crimes mentioned by the Minister, is almost inevitable, but we find a very large increase in the figures for crime with violence. I am speaking now of the increase as compared with 1939. There may be some little differentiations between the figures for this year and last year, but in every case the increase on the 1939 figures is very substantial.
Mr. Boland
About double.
The Minister will, I think, admit that that is a matter of very grave concern, and we ought to ask ourselves whether the forces at the Minister's disposal are adequate so far as the prevention of crimes of various classes is concerned. One would imagine that the Gárda Síochána, with the assistance given by the L.S.F., would have been able to check or to keep within more reasonable bounds this very substantial increase. We can all, I suppose, give reasons which occur to ourselves, but I certainly would like to have had a statement from the responsible police authorities as to their view, first, on the cause of this 100 per cent. increase; and, secondly, whether they can hold out any hope that not only will there be no further increase but there will be a substantial reduction.
The increase in juvenile crime is one which should cause us even more grave concern. I take it that what is described as juvenile crime refers to crimes committed by persons up to 18 years of age. I think it is due to some lack in our system and I am not so sure—I do not want to develop the point on a debate like this and I doubt if the Ceann Comhairle would allow me—that to some extent, at least, it is not due to the pig-headed attitude we have taken up in this House in refusing to raise the school-leaving age. We know that owing to economic circumstances—I do not want to try to place the blame at the moment—for a number of years thousands of young fellows have been leaving the schools at 14 and not entering employment of any description until they are perhaps over 20. That in itself must inevitably lead to crime.
It is a common thing to see at street corners and crossroads groups of boys from 14 to 18 and 20 years of age thinking and planning where they will get an easy shilling or two or an easy pound or two. These are boys who have never got the habit of doing any work. Some have never got the opportunity of engaging in work of any description, and I venture to suggest that, even apart from those of them who are driven, or allow themselves to be led, into crime, it is an ill thing that we should have in this State boys from 16 to 20 years of age who have never been engaged in any useful or gainful employment.
So long as that state of affairs is allowed to continue, so long as boys are allowed to leave school at 14 years and are not given an opportunity of engaging in useful employment from that age up to 20, so long will we have not only the present alarming figures for juvenile crime but a steady increase in the figures. I do not want to labour that point any further. It is a matter which, I am sure, is one of grave concern to the Minister and his Department. It is so grave that I think we ought to decide here and now that it is a matter which will be tackled and that, whatever the root causes may be, we will do our best to deal with them.
The Minister gave us some figures with regard to the prisons. I do not know anything about prison conditions beyond what I, in common with other people, read from time to time and beyond what little information—I do not use the phrase in the sense of suggesting that any information has been withheld—can necessarily be given by a Minister in introducing an Estimate as to what prison conditions are; but I should like to know how present-day prison conditions in this country compare with prison conditions 15 or 20 years ago. I should like to know whether there have been any changes for the better, whether we are taking advantage of the experience gained from experiments made in prisons by other countries and whether we are giving facilities in our prisons not so much with a view to providing an easier time for prisoners but something beneficial for them, something which may not only lessen the harshness of their position while in prison but may help to turn them out better types than when they entered the prison. I should like the Minister to give us even general information on that point.
Another matter on which I should like some information is the matter of recruiting for the Gárda Síochána. I suppose every Deputy has had his share of trouble in that respect for the last 12 months. There seems to be a complete want of knowledge in the country as to what are the requirements, first, in regard to numbers; secondly, physical conditions; and thirdly, the standard of examination. I am informed that the standard for admission to the Gárda Síochána is now so high that nobody who has not had the opportunity of getting a university degree has much hope of getting in.
Mr. Boland
That is all wrong. There is nothing in it.
I am going to give the Minister the opportunity of telling the House what the exact position is. If he does so it may save himself and members of the House a lot of unnecessary worry and trouble. Will he also tell us whether the physical minimum requirements laid down in the regulations are being strictly adhered to? I ask that question because occasionally one sees a man in the uniform of the Guards and one doubts if he would measure up to the height, chest measurement and so on that is laid down. The Minister might also tell us the total number recruited into the force during the past 12 months, the total number of applications received during the same period, and I would be glad if he would give some indication as to the number likely to be recruited in the coming 12 months. I am informed that there are men whose names have been on the waiting list for years. Although they fulfilled all the requirements at the time their applications were put in, and perhaps for some years afterwards, they have been so long on the waiting list that they have now passed the age limit, while others who applied comparatively recently have secured admission to the force. I know, of course, that a person who applies for admission and does not succeed always assumes that he did not get in because somebody was pulling the strings against him, or perhaps I should say, pulling the strings more strongly for his opponent.
These are just a few matters that I desired to raise on this group of Estimates. The main question, and the one that is really serious and urgent, is that relating to crime. I would be glad if the Minister could give us some further information on that matter, and some assurance to the House that he hopes not only to be able to check an increase in the number of crimes, but that he is prepared to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure a substantial reduction in the number.
I think that the Estimate for this Department is one of the most important that comes up for discussion. This is a Department which, one may say, covers the whole civic life of the community. It has been said that in certain areas of the country there has been an increase in crime. References have been made to the extent of the crime increase among the younger generation. I think the reason is that people are being driven into crime by the present economic conditions. The vast majority of the larceny cases that come before the courts are due, I think, to the low wages people are getting, so that at the moment people are being driven into crime in order to eke out an existence. I am of opinion that it is the present economic conditions that are responsible for the breaking of the law in 90 per cent. of the cases that occur. It is deplorable that such a state of affairs should exist. I do not find it too easy to speak to-day owing to the fact that I had to have all my teeth removed during the week. That may be all the better for the Minister for Justice.
Mr. Boland
Surely the Deputy did not intend to bite me.
I would like to impress on the Minister the need for giving his sympathetic consideration to the cases of widows of members of the Gárda Síochána. A great deal has been said about the efficient and capable manner in which members of the Gárda Síochána discharge their duties. These men usually have fairly large families, and when some of them die their widows and families find themselves on the verge of starvation. I think it is a disgraceful state of affairs, that the Government does not take steps to see that the widows of men who had served the State are properly provided for when the breadwinner is taken away.
A case occurred in the County Tipperary not too long ago where a fatal result followed a disagreement between members of the Gárda Síochána. When reports are given to the Minister for Justice that members of the Gárda Síochána are disagreeing, or that there is discontent in a Gárda barracks, something should be done about it. Remember the people in the country districts look to the Guards for a headline because they are the men who are responsible for the maintenance of law and order in a district. How can you expect to have law and order in a district if the Guards are fighting among themselves?
I happen to know a good deal about the particular case, and I suggest to the Deputy, unless he has very full and very accurate information, that it would not be helpful to go into the matter.
I know that in the past the Minister's attention has been drawn to cases where discontent existed in a Gárda barracks. In one case I approached him myself in his private office, and he told me that it was a matter for the Commissioner of the Guards—that it was completely out of his hands.
Mr. Boland
And so it is.
I think it would be easy for the Minister to take the necessary steps to investigate these cases himself, cases which usually have very serious consequences as far as law and order are concerned. I am not going to refer to that matter further. I would much prefer to give the details to the Minister himself although he does not appear to be on very friendly terms with me. He is the only member of the Government who never speaks to me.
Mr. Boland
That is too bad.
That speaks badly for the Deputy himself, I am afraid.
I would much prefer to give the Minister the particulars in private of a case where there is a good deal of discontent in a certain Gárda barracks in my area. This is a case where the whole parish is up against the Guards. I know, of course, you will find a number of cranks in every town, but where you find the whole community is up against the Guards, there must be something wrong. I would ask him to investigate that case and see if something cannot be done. I think that no Guard should be left more than six years in the one place. If he is there for a longer period he gets to know the people and is in everything that is going on, so that he will be influenced in some shape or form in the discharge of his duties. I think that if the Guards were shifted around about every six years no influence could be brought to bear on them by local people. Take the case of publicans. They will say that they know McNally who has been a Guard in the town for 20 years, and that he comes into their premises on Sunday nights. You have that sort of thing. Therefore, my suggestion to the Minister is that no Guard should be left in a town or parish for a longer period than five or six years.
Some attention should also be given to the stations to which the Guards are sent. I understand that married Gárdaí may be stationed in districts where there are no schools and where they have no facilities for educating their families, while single Guards may be stationed in cities or large provincial towns. The authorities should look into these matters and try to facilitate the married Guards so that they may educate their children.
I wish now to refer to prison treatment. Not long ago I asked the Minister if he would allow the five Deputies for Laoighis-Offaly to visit Portlaoighise Prison. The Minister said he would not. I think it is very unfair that the Minister should refuse to have an investigation into prison conditions in this country. The Minister should not forget that in this House, on the 21st March, 1928, he demanded an investigation into prison conditions. Political prisoners, he said, were suffering the most appalling conditions.
What is the date, Deputy?
21/3/1928, Dáil Debates, column 1603. He demanded an investigation into prison conditions.
The Deputy will understand that administration for the past year is all that can be brought under review.
I understand that quite well, but the present Minister was Deputy Boland in 1928. The Minister cannot be divorced from the Deputy and I wish to refresh his memory. I cannot see why, when he demanded an investigation into prison conditions at that time, he should be disinclined to have prison conditions investigated now. I ask the Minister a straight question: When was he in Portlaoighise Prison to have a look around for himself? I do not think he has been there too often. When were any of the Deputies for the constituency there? They would not be let inside the gate. I have here a letter which I received about an hour ago. Strange as it may appear, I was forwarded a copy of a resolution from the Kilmacow Comhairle Ceanntar, Fianna Fáil. The resolution states that this Comhairle Ceanntar refuses to take any active part in the coming Presidential or local elections until such time as an impartial inquiry into the conditions of political prisoners at present serving at Portlaoighise Prison is instituted. There is a resolution coming from the Minister's own supporters, to be placed before the Minister for Education, Mr. Derrig, at a meeting in Kilkenny next Sunday. I am glad that the Minister's own supporters in the Fianna Fáil organisation are beginning to see that, as far as prison conditions are concerned in this country, there is no treatment whatever provided for these men.
There is the case of a man who has been released from Portlaoighise. He made a statement, which is true and correct. The account that he gives is heartbreaking to any Irishman. With your permission, I will quote from the statement, which is signed by the man concerned:-
"I am not allowed to go to Mass or to the Sacraments unless in prison clothes. I was two years and nine months in the prison before I went to Mass. I went after a conversation with the Reverend Father Sullivan, S.J., who undertook to inform the Minister for Justice that it was to be understood that we were not compromising our principles."
Is it not an appalling state of affairs that in this country there should be these prisoners who, owing to the treatment they are getting, will not be allowed to attend Mass or the Sacraments? Would not you have better law and better justice in Russia than there is in this country at the present time? At every meeting I address throughout the country I make reference to this matter. I read the statements of the Minister for Justice, as the Minister knows very well, because every time I address a meeting down the country the Minister knows about it next morning.
Mr. Boland
Indeed I do not. I do not bother my head about what the Deputy says.
The Minister was very much annoyed when I read a certain statement from the pamphlet that was published here in the city.
Mr. Boland
Not at all.
I say he was.
Mr. Boland
Not at all. Do not get that idea into your head.
Was not the Minister responsible for the circular that was issued from the Gárda barracks?
Mr. Boland
I was not.
If he was not responsible for sending it out, he was responsible for having it withdrawn.
Mr. Boland
Neither one nor the other.
If that is so, then he does not do the duty of his Department at all. It might be as well if the Minister were a thousand miles away. I can safely say that the Minister for Justice at the present time is the worst Minister for Justice that there was ever in any country in the world, because there is a law for the rich man and a law for the poor man. That is a serious statement for anyone to make and I would not make it if I could not stand over it. The ordinary man in the street, the worker, is getting no show; the law is on the side of the big capitalist.
There is a particular case to which I referred in this House some time ago of a certain official who was brought before the courts. There was an outstanding case of fraud. Instructions came down from the Attorney-General that no proceedings were to be instituted in that case. I know for a fact that the Minister himself and the Fianna Fáil Deputies interceded to have no proceedings in that case. Where is your law? Where is your justice? How are you to get the ordinary rank and file to respect justice and order? Who advised the Attorney-General not to take proceedings? Strong political influence was used. If that person had been a Fine Gael supporter or a Labour supporter he would have toed the line. Simply because he had the Fianna Fáil Party at his back, the Attorney-General issued instructions that no proceedings were to be instituted against him. I met one of the jurymen, who said that he had such a dislike of justice that he did not care whether he ever went near the courts again, because he was convinced as a member of the jury that there was an outstanding case of fraud and he was shocked that the person concerned was acquitted. He was acquitted by the judge. That will show what influence was used.
In connection with prison conditions, I am afraid, if something is not done, there will be very serious consequences. I am told that many political prisoners in Portlaoighise are suffering from tuberculosis and that they are neglected medically. Has the Minister any reports before him as to the number of times the doctor attends these prisoners? Has he any medical reports as to their state of health? Why are so many of them being removed to Grangegorman? What is setting them mad? It is because they are being beaten with bunches of keys and kicked around as animals would be kicked around. I have proof here, if the Minister wishes to see it, by James Crofton, who was charged with refusing to answer questions as to where he obtained a sum of £50 which was paid to him by one Michael Moriarty of Fenit, County Kerry, and found guilty by military court and sentenced to five years' penal servitude. That man made a statement when he came out of prison. He said that men were knocked unconscious by being beaten with bunches of keys and kicked around as if they were animals. He stated that there would be more respect for animals than for these Christian Irishmen. If the Government has no respect for these men's political views, let them for God's sake treat them as Christians, and give them proper clothing and food to keep body and soul together.
I ask the Minister for Justice if he has a love for religion to see that these men are allowed to practise their religion and to hear Mass. As a Catholic I should be ashamed to stand up in this House to ask that these men should be given freedom to practise their religion. I would prefer to have taken another line on this Estimate, but I am satisfied from the information I have that prison conditions are disgraceful. I live only five miles distant from Portlaoighise and I am in a better position to hear of incidents that occur within the walls of that prison than the Minister for Justice. I say that the treatment these men are getting is a downright disgrace, and the Minister should take steps to remedy matters. There is one good act the Minister might do and that is to demand the release of political prisoners, because it is a downright disgrace on the part of any Government to have men in prison because of their political views. When replying I should like the Minister to state how many of these prisoners have been removed to Grangegorman Asylum, their state of health when they were sent to Portlaoighise prison, why they had to be removed to Grangegorman or Dundrum lunatic asylums and how long they were detained there. Imagine these men being beaten until they reached such a stage. I am sorry that I have to say that such conditions exist within five miles of my home. Steps should be taken by the Government to see that such treatment is stopped, and that there is a general improvement and an investigation into present conditions. What the Minister wanted in 1928, and what he demanded on behalf of prisoners then has nothing to do with the present position. He was not a Minister then. At that time he referred to Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney as a castle hack. Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney was a decent man. He did some bad things but he was not half as much of a castle hack as the present Minister.
Mr. Boland
May I remind the Deputy that I withdrew that remark and when I was given the opportunity I apologised to Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney?
It is not the first time for the Minister to apologise for statements made here that were without foundation.
The Deputy must confine his remarks to 12 months' administration of this service.
I am appealing for better prison conditions in the hope that something in that respect will now be done. I should like to know what the Department is doing about rents. Is it not disgraceful to have the position that Deputy Byrne described to-day where landlords are charging families up to 24/- a week for rent. A Town Tenants Bill should be introduced to deal with the payment of ground rents to absentee landlords. The Earl of Drogheda is drawing an enormous amount of money in ground rents from tenants in Mountmellick. Would it not be better for the Minister to introduce some type of legislation to enable tenants and occupiers of houses to buy them?
Mr. Boland
If we are to have a debate on the position of town tenants now this Estimate will never end.
Is the Minister in the Chair?
Mr. Boland
I am appealing to the Chair and suggesting that it is not in order to discuss the position of town tenants now.
And not alone that, but the Deputy cannot advocate legislation. He can only deal now with the affairs of this Department.
We all realise that law and order have to be maintained and that there must be means of punishing those who commit murder. I suggest that we are not dealing with guilty persons in the modern way. In America they look forward, but here we are going backwards. I consider that criminals should not be hanged, but should be dealt with in the modern way, by means of the electric chair. I cannot understand why there is not an electric chair in Mountjoy Prison for dealing with persons found guilty of murder. I have always been against executions of a political nature, but we must have law to deal with murderers. While it is the duty of every Deputy to see that the law is carried out, instead of having executions on the gallows the electric chair should be used. I understand that a certain amount of money is being voted in this Estimate to pay an English hangman. We need not have any English hangman coming here if we had the electric chair. I am 100 per cent. against political executions, but if murder is committed action must be taken by the Government. There should, however, be other means of dealing with murderers than hanging. I heard of a case in Mountjoy Prison where a criminal was alive three-quarters of an hour after he was said to be executed. I know of one case where the job was so badly done that the whole neck and head were torn off. That is a disgrace. I have firsthand information about that. It came straight from Mountjoy Prison. The Minister should look into my suggestion to see that it receives consideration. I impress upon the Minister the advisability of having an investigation made into prison conditions because they are no credit to the country or to the Government. I also ask him to do his best to have political prisoners released. The Minister referred to them as dangerous men, but he should not forget he was at one time referred to as a dangerous man. These prisoners should not be held in prison for years, some of them being barefooted, and without blankets. Any that must be held should be treated as political prisoners. We have had German and English prisoners of war. The majority of the English prisoners were let go home although they were supposed to be prisoners of war. They were treated as prisoners of war. Respect was paid to the German and the British prisoners. We should also respect our own prisoners. Is it not an appalling state of affairs to have our prisoners suffering? The only reason I intervened in this debate was to appeal on behalf of these prisoners, because they are men with a good national outlook. They have the same ideals as the Minister had when he was posing as a republican. I would be glad if the Minister would give every consideration to this matter and see that these men who have the same outlook as Wolfe Tone are either relased or given fair treatment.
The figures given by the Minister this evening indicate a reduction in the incidence of crime in this country. Of course, the figures he has given over the emergency period since 1939 indicate that there is room for substantial improvement in that respect. I suppose it is the abnormal times we are passing through, the scarcity of goods, and the abnormal conditions generally which have accentuated that problem. I am sure the House is glad to hear anyway that there is an indication of improvement. I often wonder whether our detective machinery is sufficient for dealing with the problem because, when we come to examine the duties of the Gárdaí, we realise that the administrative duties of the Gárdaí occupy probably more time than can be devoted to the detection of crime. When we consider the amount of statistical information that has to be collected by the Gárdaí, who have to act as school attendance officers and have to collect production figures over the whole country, and the variety of other responsibilities that are thrust on them, we can appreciate the amount of time that is left for acutal detective work. It must be rather small. On the other hand, when we look at the Estimate of £2,416,000 for the Department of Justice, a sum of money that is approaching practically £1 per head of the population, we might say at first sight that our police force is costing an abnormal sum But, when we advert to the other responsibilities of the police force, we appreciate that we cannot certainly charge against the crime detection organisation in this country that sum of money; that actually the Gárdaí are used for a variety of duties, quite a number of which should not be the responsibility of a police force at all.
The Minister has referred to the L.S.F. We all appreciate the patriotic motives that prompted a lot of young people to join that organisation in the interests of their country during the emergency. The Minister was rather vague about what was proposed to be done with the force. Under subhead P there is a sum of £14,000 for the L.S.F. The Minister has not informed the House exactly what that sum of money is to be spent on. If the L.S.F. is not an active organisation at present, and I understand it is not, what is the purpose of this sum of £14,000? I think the House should get more information as to that.
There is one other matter to which I want to draw the Minister's attention in a particular way and that is the fees which have to be paid for land registration. Our Land Registry is a very fine, very efficient and very effective institution so far as accurate information regarding every holding in the country is concerned. I suppose in that respect it is second to no other institution in the world and I appreciate what a very advantageous service it is to the country. But I submit that the appreciation in the charges is out of all proportion to the services that have to be rendered at present.
The Minister indicated that there is a substantial increase in the number of transactions which have taken place in recent years. If we compare the aggregate figures given in the front of the Books of Estimates we find that the Land Registry cost £45,000 in 1936-37 and that we are asked to vote £56,200 this year. The Minister, I think, told us before that the staff has increased and that the actual cost has increased. But there are complaints all over the country from every solicitor's office as to the huge increase in the amount of the fees charged. If there is such a substantial increase, I cannot understand why we should have a footnote to this effect:—
"This amount includes £1,400 in respect of four officers on loan to other offices."
Surely it is very undesirable to second officials of one Department to another Department and charge their salaries against the original office. One could understand that where it is between two Departments that are giving public services to everybody; but here is a particular institution giving a particular service to a number of individuals interested in land transactions of one sort or another and, if you take officials from that particular Department, it means that you are simply increasing the fees on a number of individuals and not on the general community, if the fees have to meet the cost of the office.
As I say, this is a very important and efficient service, but it is felt by people all over the country who have experience of the fees paid for a long number of years that no attempt has been made to justify the existing set of fees in operation. Even with the increase in the cost of administration, salaries and everything else inclusive, the Minister or nobody else has attempted to justify the substantial increase in the fees. Certainly nobody can justify the fact that four officials have been seconded to another Department and that a sum of £1,400 is charged against this Department which has to be met out of fees. The appropriation for fees alone amounts to £35,000 and for the Registry of Deeds fees, £1,300, making a total in receipts of £48,000. We can appreciate that with the number of dealings in land that have occurred, especially in the emergency period, and with the appreciation of land values, there is a very substantial increase in the incidence of transactions and that an increased staff might be required for that reason. But I would like the Minister to make some attempt to justify the very substantial increase in the fees, and especially to justify a situation in which, with the increased amount of work in the office, the Government saw fit to second to another Department four officials and charge their salaries to this Department.
I think that is highly unsatisfactory, particularly in a country like ours where our primary industry is agriculture and where our economy should be based on ensuring that the agricultural industry and the services related to it are efficient and economic. We must condemn a situation in which the fees for transferring holdings are out of all proportion to the fees charged a few years ago. Up to the present time we have not had any really satisfactory answer from the Minister with regard to that. The fees in some cases have been multiplied four and five times over, but the increase in the aggregate cost of the office has, according to the long list in the front of the Book of Estimates, gone up from £45,000 to £56,000, that is, by £11,000 or roughly 25 per cent. The fees have been increased by far more than 25 per cent. I would like the Minister to give some information on that point and to state how he can justify an increase in the fees to five or six times what they were some years ago. It is a very important matter for the country and we certainly want much more information about it than we have got so far.
I would like to congratulate the Minister on the able and impartial manner in which his Department has been administered. I cannot recall any period in the history of our State when there was in the minds of all decent men a more widespread confidence in the administration of the law than there has been under the Minister. The emergency placed considerable additional duties on the Guards and they rose to the occasion as we would have expected. They knew that the Minister would have confidence in them and they knew that he would stand by them. This confidence must have been of great help to them in their great efforts to protect the lives and property of our people.
I consider that the peace and security we now enjoy are due in no small degree to the manner in which the Minister has looked after the Guards and administered the other departments under his control. I would also like to congratulate the Minister on some recent judicial appointments, which were warmly approved of by lawyers and others in connection with the courts and by all sections of the community.
With regard to the Land Registry, I would like to mention that the registrar has done great work in bringing the dealings up to date. It is now possible to have a dealing completed within a short space of time: you can have it done within about ten days and get back your documents. That was a wonderful piece of work for the registrar to achieve and great credit is due to him and to his officials for bringing the system up to date. That will be some little compensation to the people who have to bear the very heavy fees imposed by the Order made last year. It seems rather unjust that the law should compel people to have their titles registered in the Land Registry and then impose such exorbitant fees.
The original object of the Local Registration of Title Act was to achieve a simple method of registering title to land. It was designed so that the title to land would be something the same as the title to shares in a company. When a change occurs in the ownership of company shares you simply hand in a share certificate with a simple transfer document and the company cancels the old certificate and gives you a new one. That procedure still applies to companies, but the Land Registry procedure is much more complicated. It is still possible with any company to register a transfer of shares, no matter what the amount may be—it may be £1,000,000 —and the registration fee is the large sum of 2/6. In the Land Registry the registration fee may be as much as £30, notwithstanding the fact that £1 per cent. ad valorem duty has already been charged by way of the stamp on the document.
I suggest to the Minister that the Local Registration of Title Act has already failed in its purpose. I give one illustration of that proposition. This system was made compulsory in regard to land which passed into the Land Commission, but it was also left open to any owner of either land or house property to come into the Land Registry and have the title registered there if he wished. It was considered that this would be such a great boon that property owners would be delighted to avail of the services proposed. However, in 50 years, only 1,200 property owners have come in and voluntarily registered their titles. That is surely sufficient evidence of what people who own property think of the Land Registry and the facilities it provides.
Now, even if the Land Registry were highly desirable and even if these fees had not been imposed, I would still say that there is no room in this small State for two separate and distinct methods of recording a title. We should have one uniform system and I suggest that that can be achieved without any great difficulty by the repeal of the Local Registration of Title Act and the return of all titles to the registry of deeds. The present position in regard to titles in the Land Registry is that over 300,000 titles have been registered there, in all. Of these only 23,000 have been completely registered and the remainder, about 360,000, are partly in the Land Registry and partly out of it—they partly depend on the Land Registry and partly on the Registry of Deeds. They are neither in one nor in the other. I suggest that these figures justify the contention that the Local Registration of Title Act has failed in its purpose, and I suggest that the Minister might consider setting up a select committee to inquire into the whole matter. In addition to saving public funds, there would be available in the Four Courts an excellent building which could be made use of for sittings of the Circuit Court.
I am sure my friend, Deputy O'Connor, did not intend to be provocative when he opened his remarks by congratulating the Minister for Justice on the able and impartial administration of justice in his Department. That had the effect upon me of throwing my mind back to the days before the Minister for Justice came into this House, in considering the efforts that were made to bring an appreciation of the necessity for the administration of justice to the people of the country and to the Deputies of the Party to which Deputy O'Connor now belongs.
Mr. Boland
If the Deputy is going to go back that far, it will be a very interesting debate. It will go back to his own colleagues as well as to us, but if he wants to have it that way he is welcome.
If the Minister would let me——
Mr. Boland
If the Deputy is going back to 1922, we can go back to 1916 and 1918 and I do not see any reason why we should not. I just say that much. I am always ready for it.
The Minister is jumping a little ahead. I was about to say something nice about him.
Mr. Boland
If we are to get back to that period, we can all deal with it.
I do not understand what the Minister intends. I want just to register here and now, if the Minister lets me, my recollection of the efforts of the late Kevin O'Higgins to bring the administration of justice into repute and to set up an impartial administration of justice. The people who are now, if Deputy O'Connor is right, enjoying a measure of impartial administration of justice, must realise that that is due in large measure to the impartial administration set up by Kevin O'Higgins in that period. I do not want to go back into the past and, if the Minister does not wish to listen to the remarks I have to make, I do not propose to make them. I am quite satisfied to join with Deputy O'Connor in saying that there is a fair measure of impartial administration of justice in this country at the moment. I am quite prepared to say that, in any respect in which I personally had any relations—and they were not many— with the Minister for Justice and his officials, I received nothing but courtesy and consideration. I certainly would not allow this occasion to pass without some reference to the man who died, who was murdered, in order that justice should reign in this country. The Minister, I understand—unfortunately I could not be here—in his opening statement did give some figures to show that the incidence of crime had somewhat decreased. I have no very great belief in figures, and it appears to me that the outstanding feature, during the last year, of the administration of justice in this country, at least of criminal justice, was the number of judges who were sitting day after day hearing criminal cases of one kind or another, and that the position was such that the Government had to appoint at least one additional High Court judge, numerous additional district justices, and at least one, if not more, temporary Circuit Court judges. In spite of the fact that there were, during a considerable portion of the last year at all events, sitting in this city a judge of the Central Criminal Court; two judges—and sometimes, I believe, three, but certainly two—of the Circuit Court; half a dozen or more district justices; the Court of Criminal Appeal, and the Special Military Tribunal, there were still great delays in the bringing to trial of prisoners awaiting trial. Now, I do not blame either the Minister or his officers, or the men who conducted the prosecutions—the State solicitors or anybody else—for that situation, but I think that there is something more than the mere congestion of business, or the number of prisoners who have to be tried, responsible for the delay in bringing prisoners to trial. I took a brief myself in a case last January 12 months—15 months ago—on the distinct understanding that I was to be under no obligation to defend the man concerned unless his trial took place before the end of January. We are now getting into almost the middle of April, and he is still awaiting trial. There are explanations, of course, but the facts are there. We have had to have a new High Court judge appointed. We have criminal courts sitting constantly—not sitting intermittently, or at periodic intervals as in former days—we have all types and kinds of criminal courts sitting and yet I have a definite feeling that the amount of crime, so far from being on the decrease is on the increase. That is a matter that should give every Deputy, no matter what his political affiliation may be, food for thought.
I have the firm conviction that it is not by ruthlessly prosecuting these unfortunate people—and many of them are unfortunate in so far as they have been forced into crime by economic conditions or circumstances beyond their control—or ruthlessly condemning them to prison, or by filling the jails of this country, that you will get at the root of this problem, because it is a social problem and a social evil that will have to be met in a different way. I have had the feeling, as a result of my experience with criminal courts—and I have given expression to it on other occasions—that the whole system and machinery of the law is against the prisoner in the dock. I have the feeling that many of those old principles upon which we were bred as students and which we took from the British criminal law—and I wish to goodness we still had them—are now being more honoured in the breach than in the observance. I have had the experience where, in the case of a prisoner, so far from being presumed innocent before he was proved guilty, the whole force of the State machine was directed against the prisoner.
In that connection, I have noticed in recent months, if not in recent years, a tendency on behalf of members of the Government to criticise judges and, in particular, district justices, in regard to their sentences in criminal cases. There has also been a sort of, shall I call it, unexpressed or at any rate partially expressed view, that juries ought to be got rid of, and some step was taken in that direction when the number of jurors in Circuit Courts throughout the country was reduced from 12 to seven. I want to raise my voice here, for anybody who will listen to me, and ask the people of this country to hold on as hard as they can to the jury system in civil or criminal cases, as the only hope left to them for the maintenance of their civil rights. If there is any tendency to do away with the jury system either for civil or criminal work, I want to do at least my part in raising as much opposition as possibly can be raised effectively against any such tendency before it is too late. I feel that the rights and liberties we are supposed to have under the Constitution, the right of free speech and the right of trial by jury, are being corroded and eroded—perhaps in a manner that is not too manifest at the moment or that is clearly observed by the general public—and that in a very short time, unless the people wake up to the facts of the situation, they may find themselves deprived of many of the rights and liberties which are supposed to be stated in the Constitution.
I do say that we ought, as far as possible, to get back to normality in the administration of the law in this country, and particularly the criminal law. I have had occasion to refer on a Supplementary Estimate to the fact that there are far too many temporary judges. It is a bad system, and the Minister agreed that it was a bad system, and I hold that it should be put an end to. If there is a necessity for temporary district justices or temporary Circuit Court judges, that necessity has lasted so long that it will justify the Government in asking the House to permit it to appoint permanent judges. That tendency has not had its root either to-day or yesterday. It comes from the, if you like, natural view of the person who is prosecuting: that the person who is supposed to be impartial to justice is not doing his job in the way the prosecutor wants. It appears to me that the whole tendency is to criticise the district justices, and sometimes the judges, but particularly the district justices, because they are not doing what is called their duty in inflicting penalties. That is the view of the prosecution: that anything that the prosecution, representing a Government Department or a particular section of the Government, wants to have done should be done and that whatever they say should prevail in court.
Real freedom for the people of this country is to have impartial administration of the law, and I would far prefer to see a criminal getting off scot free rather than that an innocent person should be convicted. I do not mean that I wish to see criminals getting off, but it would be better to have such a thing happen, provided that in the administration of the law impartial justice will be administered. The Minister knows that there have been several cases in recent years where it was admitted that people were convicted in the wrong. I want to say that, although it is perhaps inevitable that some such cases would occur, still they do occur in the minimum number of occasions. There were two cases in my own recollection.
Mr. Boland
They were two jury cases.
Yes, two jury cases, and it is in that connection that I mention the matter. I said that the people of this country should hold on to the jury system, and I still say it, notwithstanding that. The juries, in this city particularly, have been extraordinarily useful to the community and deserve the greatest tribute that could be paid to them for their work in the maintenance of the law during the last 23 years, and juries can be trusted to do their work under the direction of an impartial judge. Those two cases were cases where, if they had been gone into, the result would have been very different. I do not want to say very much on the subject lest it might be thought that I am criticising the Minister. I do not say that, because I think he acted very properly in that case, but I want to make an appeal to the Minister to bring this country, so far as the administration of the criminal law is concerned, back to normality. I am not permitted to speak, on this Vote, on the type of case that is being sent to the Special Military Tribunal. I am entitled to say on this Vote that, so far as the Minister's control of the officers of the Gárda are concerned, that court should be used only for the purpose for which it was set up—for the trial of what might be vaguely called political crimes. It is being used for that purpose and it is being used for purposes for which it should not be used. Recommendations for the sending of these cases to that tribunal come sometimes from the officials of the Department of Justice and sometimes from the Gárda. I know of my own knowledge that there is a tendency in the Gárda to recommend that particular cases should be sent to that tribunal, where they will be heard without a jury. That is, I think, contrary to the public interest, having regard to the circumstances of the country, and it is calculated to breed a lack of confidence in the administration of the law and bring about a situation which I should not like to see.
I have spoken about the use of temporary judges. Following upon that. I should like to refer to the making of appointments of various kinds, under the control of the Minister, on political grounds. I think that nobody can controvert the statement that appointments of State solicitors, country registrars, under-sheriffs and officials of that type are now made on a political basis and by way of political patronage. That is bad from the point of view of the public interest. If a State solicitor dies, how many solicitors will one see around the Lobby of this House looking for the job and bringing political influence to bear in their favour? How many letters does the Minister receive from T.D.'s and politicians throughout the country in those cases? That should be abolished. The same state of affairs obtains in respect of county registrars and under-sheriffs. Every appointment of that kind which does not come within the scope of the Civil Service Commission or the Public Appointments Commission is made on the basis of political patronage or political jobbery. That system should be ended.
I should like to refer to another matter arising out of a case in which I have been engaged. In the course of the investigation of alleged offences, statements are taken by the Gárdaí from accused persons or potential witnesses. I ask the Minister to instruct the Gárdaí that the greatest possible care should be taken in connection with these statements. The Gárdaí do act fairly properly, on the whole, in that connection, but a situation of the kind which arose in the case to which I have referred should not be allowed to occur. Certain witnesses were to give evidence. They had been interviewed by the Gárdaí and statements had been taken from them. For the purpose of the defence, the solicitor in charge wrote asking for copies of the statements made by those people so as to make them available to counsel. That application was refused. We were told that the statements would be available in court but that they would not be furnished before the hearing. In my opinion, that is contrary to justice and fair play.
Mr. Boland
Surely that would not be a matter for the Minister for Justice. Would it not be a matter for the court?
We wrote to the State Solicitor. The statements were in the possession of the Gárdaí, and, therefore, it is a matter for the Minister for Justice.
Mr. Boland
I never interfere in those cases and no Minister for Justice ever did. Do not put the blame on me.
Perhaps I am unfairly blaming the Minister. On some other Vote, I may raise the matter. Statements are taken by the Gárdaí. I am, I think, quoting the opinion of the late Chief Justice when I say that those statements are the property of the persons who give them. The actual documents are, of course, kept by the State but the person who makes a statement has right to a copy of that statement when going into court. The Minister should give instruction to the Gárdaí that these statements be made available to the witnesses.
Mr. Boland
That matter has never arisen, so far as I am concerned. The Attorney-General deals with those matters. The Deputy should know that, seeing that he himself was Attorney-General.
I do not think that we shall get any distance by that sort of talk.
Mr. Boland
No request of that kind and no complaint in connection with this matter ever came to me.
The reason I raised the matter is that these statements are taken by officials for whom the Minister is responsible. They are in the custody of his officials and, when we write to the responsible officials, we are told that we cannot get them. I have been speaking in this House since I became a member on the subject of statements made in running-down actions. I am informed that my raising of this matter has become a sort of joke to the Commissioner of the Gárda. A colleague of mine, Mr. Lavery, who is not now a member of the House, also raised this matter. The Minister said he would look into it, but nothing was done. I raise the matter again pro forma and I shall continue to raise it as long as I am in the House. That is a matter for which the Minister is responsible and which is within the scope of this Estimate. Statements are made to Gárda officers by citizens doing what they believe to be their duty. If they find themselves in court as witnesses for the defence and counsel for the State, or the State Solicitor, having obtained statements made by them to the Guards, proceeds to cross-examine them on those statements and to probe and challenge the statements, it will mean that no citizen will give any statement or any assistance. That is why I am asking that the situation should be fairly met.
Is not that a matter for the Attorney-General's Estimate?
The Minister is responsible for the people who take these statements. These statements will not be freely given by citizens if they find themselves in the position to which I have referred. If they do not give statements, they will be asked why they did not help the Gárda or they will be told that they are as bad as the criminal in the dock. If they do give the statement, any little slip they make may be used against them. The effect will be that citizens will not give the Gárdaí the assistance to which they are entitled.
Another matter to which I desire to refer was raised here previously. It is a matter that attracted great public attention in the past 12 months—the number of verdicts which were upset in the Court of Criminal Appeal. I do not propose to go into that matter save to say that it is a case for great public congratulation and an ease to the public conscience that there is a Court of Criminal Appeal which will see that, where there is an unsatisfactory trial or a departure from the law, it will not allow it to go unchecked. There was a tendency to suggest that it was a shame that we should have all those new trials, with the additional amount of public money that had to be spent. If that attitude were allowed to go unchallenged, then a grave public injury might be done. Everybody who practises in the Court of Criminal Appeal knows that it is a matter of extreme difficulty to get that court to upset any verdict of a jury, and when a verdict is upset, it is invariably one that it is right and proper in the interests of justice should be upset. The system of the Court of Criminal Appeal was secured in England after many years of agitation and endeavour, because of the fact that some juries had, under the direction or the compulsion of judges who acted more as prosecutors than impartial judicial personages, wrongly convicted certain persons. The Court of Criminal Appeal is one of the safeguards for securing that in the administration of justice, so far as human effort can provide, no innocent person will be condemned. No matter what happens there will be in the administration of justice some miscarriages of justice—some, indeed, sometimes pass unnoticed. It is not a great safeguard, but I think it is some safeguard, and I think it should be made clear to the public that whatever additional expense has been caused by the new trials consequent on the quashing of verdicts, it was money very well spent indeed.
In this Estimate, in common with other Estimates, we have a substantial increase in expenditure over last year. That increase, of course, is explained by the fact that it has been found necessary to increase the pay of the Gárda, an increase which was amply justified by the rise in the cost of living and the emergency. In that connection there is one point I should like to make. The time has arrived when we must, in planning for the future of the Gárda Síochána, as for other branches of the Civil Service, plan for economy. I am not going to suggest that there is any possibility of a reduction in the remuneration of individual members of the Gárda. It is essential that the members of the police force in any country should have a remuneration which would compare favourably with the standard which they could earn in any other occupation. That is essential for the stability of order in the State but we are reaching a stage now when a large percentage of the present personnel of the Gárda will be retiring and we have got to consider whether the present numerical strength of the Gárda is or is not too great for the requirements of the State.
In the past year or two we have had demands for increases in the numbers of Civic Guards. These demands were based, I suppose, on the increase in the prevalence of crime. I should like to turn the Minister's attention to one aspect of this question, namely, that in every sphere of activity there is a tendency to turn to more modern and up-to-date methods. We farmers are advised to adopt mechanisation more extensively. People in industry are asked to instal more modern plant and machinery and I think that there is need for the introduction of more modern equipment in regard to the administration of the law and the equipment of our police force.
I believe that two members of the Civic Guard, equipped with modern means of transport, would be at least as effective as four members of the same force depending upon the original Shank's mare which was the equipment of the police force when first maugurated. I believe that great economy could be secured if we could get away from the old-fashioned, out-of-date methods of equipment of our police force and adopt more modern and progressive ideas such as in other spheres of activity. The Civic Guard of to-day stepping out on beat duty is no better equipped for the discharge of his duty, so far as modern means of transport or equipment for his own protection or defence are concerned, than the original cave-man stepping out of his cave 7,000 years ago. I think that that is a condition of affairs which should not be allowed to continue.
I can see, first of all, a basis for economy in the case of this service through the provision of more modern means of transport and equipment. I can also see greater efficiency arising therefrom. Anyone who gives the matter any thought whatever must realise that a man who is compelled to perform monotonous duty, pacing slowly up and down the same beat for eight hours in the day, cannot, at the end of the sixth or seventh hour, be as mentally alert or efficient as a man who is just stepping out from the Gárda station. We all know the effect which a monotonous manual occupation has on the mind. We have that in regard to such occupations as factory work where men are performing the same monotonous duty for hours. The result is that their minds become more or less stagnant. The same applies in the case of a person pacing slowly up and down for a long period of time. If that system were superseded by the provision of modern transport and if, say, two members of the Gárda equipped with modern transport patrolled an area, and patrolled it effectively, perhaps a greater area than can be patrolled by ten or 12 men on foot, in that way we would be bringing our police force up to date.
I spoke of equipment for defence in respect of the Gárda. I think a block of wood is rather out-of-date as a weapon of defence. It is crude, and it is not suitable for the duty which a Guard has to perform, that is in case resistance is offered by a person being taken into custody. I think modern science ought to devise some more up-to-date weapon than a block of wood to overpower a person who resists arrest. I am not suggesting for one moment that, for ordinary normal duty, a Guard should be armed with firearms. There, again, I do not think you have an effective weapon for the purpose of overpowering an offender and bringing him to justice; you have a weapon which might result in the death of the offender, thus frustrating to a great extent the purpose for which the Gárda is on duty. I am suggesting that by modernising the equipment of our police force we should be able to effect an economy in that service.
With regard to the point which I have raised that a number of members of the Gárda will be retired in a short time, I believe that here again there is an opportunity to remedy something which appears to me to be an injustice. In retiring Guards who have reached the age limit, I think it will be necessary to stagger the retirements, so that they will not all go out in the one year. I think the Minister indicated to us at another time that that will be done. When the time for those retirements comes, and I suppose it will come in a short while, I would suggest that an opportunity should be given for the promotion of members of the Gárda who have given good service over a long period. I suggest that, as new recruits come in, efficient members of the Gárda rank and file should be promoted. As every Deputy knows, I am sure, there is in the Gárda a number of very efficient men in the rank and file, who have never been able to obtain promotion by reason of the circumstances under which the force was established. As we all know, when the force was established, it consisted of men who were all of about the same age. Then we had sergeants who were of the same age as the Gárdaí, and once the rank of sergeant was filled there was very little scope for promotion from the rank and file. I think that was rather an unfortunate position, but it was unavoidable. It was unfortunate because many of those men in the rank and file had given good national service in the struggle for independence. Over the past 20 years they have given very good service to the country in the Gárda. In bringing in a number of new recruits to the force, I think that men who are suitable for promotion should be given an opportunity of obtaining promotion, even if it were only for a comparatively short time before they retire. We would thus have a position in which men of mature experience would hold rank in the force, instead of having the officers composed entirely of new men coming in with very little experience. I think that would be desirable not only from the point of view of efficiency but also from the point of view of doing justice to men with, first of all, good national records, and secondly, with long service in the force.
I think there is general uneasiness among all sections of the community regarding the very substantial increase in the amount of crime prevailing in this country at present as compared with 1939. I am strongly of opinion that it would be possible to secure greater efficiency in dealing with the enforcement of the law if we introduced into this country a system which I have recommended here before, and which I think is long overdue, that is, that in the case of a serious crime there should be an immediate and thorough investigation, if possible before a judicial officer, so as to secure the fullest possible evidence from those who are in a position to give accurate information. I believe that one of the reasons why we have had such prolonged trials in this country—in many cases unsatisfactory trials, because retrials have had to take place—is that the method of taking statements, first of all from persons who are suspects, and secondly, from persons who are believed to have been witnesses of a crime, is rather antiquated. I believe that more efficient and up-to-date methods could be introduced. Wherever a serious crime is committed, every possible witness should be examined thoroughly— if possible, as I have said, as part of the coroner's inquest proceedings—and that that investigation should be recorded by a verbatim shorthand reporter, so that the statements would be afterwards admissible in evidence and would be really reliable evidence inasmuch as they would have been taken immediately after the crime had been committed. As everybody connected with the enforcement of the law and the administration of justice will admit, there is scarcely anything more unreliable than the human memory. Cases have occurred where men of repute have definitely identified accused persons, and it has been proved afterwards that the guilty persons bore very little if any resemblance to the people who were identified. Mistakes and grave errors are frequently made in regard to time and place in connection with crime. The extent to which the human memory can err, even with the best possible intentions on the part of a witness, is almost unbelievable, and although great reliance is often placed in court upon statements made by people in regard to events which happened a month or two previously, I think such reliance is altogether unjustified. The human memory is very prone to error, and that is why I have frequently advocated a more thorough investigation immediately after a crime is committed.
Another matter which would make for greater efficiency in the detection and prevention of crime is some system by which members of the Gárda would be made familiar with the circumstances arising in connection with serious crime. Our Civic Guards are stationed in quiet country districts up and down the country, and in many cases a Civic Guard is brought face to face with a very serious crime perhaps only once or twice in his lifetime. He gets very little opportunity of making himself familiar with the manner and means of dealing with such a situation. Members of the medical profession never become completely qualified until they have put in a period of apprenticeship in the hospitals where they meet all kinds and types of human maladies. It is unfortunate, or perhaps it is fortunate, that there is no similar institution where a Civic Guard can be trained. There is no place where you can rely upon having murders, robberies or crimes of violence of a serious nature perpetrated frequently.
That is why I hold that some system should be introduced in relation to the training of young recruits by which representations of such incidents as murders, burglaries and so on could be provided for the benefit of the young recruits, to show them how to deal with such situations and make themselves familiar with the steps they would be called upon to take. That is a matter which requires consideration in relation to the training of any recruits to police force. One cannot learn to swim merely by reading about the art of swimming in books, and neither can one learn the administration of a Guard's duties merely by studying books on police duties.
I am in complete agreement with those who have deplored the tendency to juvenile delinquency in recent years. The Minister last year was strongly of the opinion that the entire blame for that state of affairs rested on the parents. I do not entirely agree with that view. It may account to a certain extent for the prevalence of this undesirable state of affairs, but it is not the sole reason. Modern conditions make for increased delinquency amongst our own people.
The desire on the part of young people to take part in amusements which were outside the scope of young people 40 or 50 years ago—attendance at cinemas and such-like entertainments—a tendency which is undesirable, is a great cause of juvenile crime. Efforts are being made at present to have cinemas so controlled that juveniles will be excluded from certain performances, or, better still, that certain performances will be provided for juveniles. That is desirable not only from the point of view of the modern training of the young but from the point of view of their physical health.
There is no question whatever that the attendance of young people at cinemas which do not close until after 11 o'clock at night is highly injurious to their health. I do not think there is any insurmountable difficulty in the way of providing matinées at an early hour on Saturday or Sunday evenings which school children could attend and from which they could get all the enjoyment they are entitled to without attending night shows. So far as parental control is concerned, there is nothing the State can do. It is mainly a matter for the Minister, who is in the House at the moment—a matter of education, and by that I mean not only the education of children but the education of adults, because people have to be educated in their duties not only in regard to the State but in regard to the upbringing of their children.
It is highly desirable that some tribute should be paid to the manner in which the Civic Guards have performed their duties since the establishment of this State. They have carried them out in a manner highly creditable to them. It is also desirable that we should ensure that the standard should be maintained and even raised still higher. At the inception of our national police force, the late General O'Duffy—the Lord rest him—declared his ideal in these words: "Party may succeed Party in the ebb and flow of the political tide, but the Guards will continue to serve with imperturbable discipline and increasing efficiency any Executive elected by the people of Ireland." We hope that ideal will be adhered to by the Guards and by the Minister who is in control of the force, because it is upon the efficiency and impartiality of our police force that we depend to a great extent for our freedom and liberty as citizens.
For that reason, when charges are made against the Guards, as serious charges were made against them particularly in connection with the reprieve of an unfortunate prisoner some time ago, in fairness to the Guards and to the community in general, these charges should be thoroughly investigated and we should have a clear statement as to the action and decision taken in regard to them. It is very undesirable that the police force upon which the people have to depend for their liberty should be represented as law-breakers, and if charges of this sort are made in the House or outside they should be thoroughly investigated.
The same applies with regard to our prison service. Very serious charges were made against officials of the prison service—they were circulated, I think, to every member of the House —in the statement quoted by Deputy Flanagan. Charges of that kind should be thoroughly investigated. We should have in regard to our prison service a system whereby it would be open to a completely impartial and reliable visiting committee to see the conditions which prevail in our prisons and to see that the unfortunate men who are interned there are fairly treated. There is no use in pretending that the danger does not exist, that men who are completely deprived of their liberty may, in the course of time, be unjustly treated. Human nature is frail, and there is always the danger that in any prison system a condition of tyranny and injustice may grow up. In prisons, you are dealing with men who are absolutely powerless, and that fact should make us very careful to see that these men who are at the mercy of their keepers will have adequate protection.
Nobody wishes or desires that prisons should be so remodelled and improved that they will become a kind of hotel or home from home, but we need to be very careful to ensure that they do not become, not hotels, but hells for the unfortunate people interned there. I make that suggestion not with any desire to embarrass or hamper the administration of law and justice, but in order to ensure that law and justice will be maintained and that no one can ever point the finger at either our police force or our prison service and allege injustice to our fellow creatures.
I make the appeal also in the interests of these unfortunate creatures who are at the mercy of their guards. We cannot afford in this age to ignore completely any charges of that kind which are made. We must investigate them.
We know that we are living in times when brutality and callousness are likely to prevail. We are living in an age when the world has been at war for five or six years. The atmosphere created by that condition must extend throughout the length and breadth of the globe and we cannot pretend that this country can be kept immune from its influence. We know that terrible things have happened in other countries and we want to be absolutely certain that nothing of the kind will happen here, either to those who are prisoners or to those who may be politically opposed to the Government of the day. We claim to be a democratic country. We are a democratic country, and we are going to keep our country democratic by ensuring that the law is impartially administered and that in no sphere of the administration of justice is the executive Government allowed to encroach upon the rights of the citizens.
In view of the unsettled conditions which are likely to prevail in the world for some years after the war is over and which may extend to this country arising from economic circumstances, such as perhaps the return to this country of men who are now obtaining their living in, or in the fighting forces of, other countries, it is essential that our police force should be thoroughly efficient and should command the confidence of the people, so that there would always be a readiness and a willingness on the part of the people to co-operate with the Gárdaí in ensuring that the law is observed.
We should also have complete confidence in our courts and in this connection I should like to join with Deputy Costello in his advocacy of the retention of the jury system. The jury system is one of the last surviving fortresses of popular rights as against pure departmentalism and officialism. Juries are an old-fashioned institution. They may be somewhat erratic at times and may try the tempers of legal gentlemen, Government Departments and perhaps even of judges on the bench, but they are an institution of the people. They are, in fact, the people, being called in to decide whether a person is or is not guilty of a crime against society. There is always a danger that by eliminating such a system as the jury system in the interests of higher departmental efficiency, you may remove another safeguard which the people possess.
In that connection, I think it was never desirable to have the trial of criminal offences removed from the counties to the City of Dublin. Many strong reasons could be given to show why a city jury is not qualified to deal with crimes committed in remote rural districts. Very often city men may not understand entirely the ways of living of people in rural Ireland. For that reason I think that trial by jury should become trial by jury in the county in which the crime has been committed.
I also think that the manner in which jurors are treated reacts to some extent against the preservation of the jury system. The fact that jurors are not compensated to any adequate extent for their services is, to my mind, creating a strong sentiment throughout the country in favour of the abolition of the jury system. Certainly, people who have served on juries would like to see the system abolished. They would like to see themselves saved from the hardship and inconvenience of performing such a civic duty. It might, therefore, be a popular proposal to abolish the jury system. I do not think that we should allow that consideration to influence us. The rights of the plain citizen are more important than merely satisfying the natural desire of people to escape irksome and unpleasant duties. I think that the duties of jurymen should be made less irksome and less inconvenient by compensating them reasonably for their services. I think the Minister will agree with me when I say that jurors are not reasonably compensated for the losses they sustain by reason of their jury service. They are the only people in the courts who are not adequately recouped. Every witness, every member of the legal profession and every other official connected with the courts is, I think, reasonably recouped. The only exception is the unfortunate juror who may be away from his work for a week or even two weeks, and who may suffer thereby grave loss, inconvenience and hardship. Therefore I think that the grievances which jurymen have reason to complain of should be removed. If they were we would have a stronger public opinion in favour of the preservation of the jury system which, I think, is desirable in view of its importance for the protection of the rights of the citizens.
Deputy Cogan was talking about the Gárda Síochána. I would like to raise this issue very bluntly: are we going to have the Gárda Síochána in this country run by the politicians or run by the Commissioner? Now, I do not conceal the fact that members of the Gárda Síochána have sometimes requested me to intervene with the Commissioner on their behalf by getting me to write a letter to the Commissioner. I have said to them: "I can write the letter to the Commissioner, but in my opinion if you get me to do that conceivably what you want will be granted, but there will be a black mark on your record for the rest of your period of service in the force—when a Guard goes outside the force to get persons to intervene gratuitously for him, in the proper administration of the force, with the person appointed to administer the force." So far, the Guards to whom I have given that advice have accepted the advice from me, but not without saying to me on occasion: "Well, I suppose you are right, sir, but it is wonderful what some fellows can wangle." Then I see my friend Deputy Fogarty go up to a Gárda station in North Dublin. We read all about it in the newspapers. I seem to remember that a superintendent was transferred and that a sergeant of the Guards was transferred recently. Now, there may be some mystical explanation of that in the Minister's mind, but when the average man in the street reads that a sergeant of the Guards has come into conflict with a Deputy and that the net result is that the sergeant of the Guards is transferred out of his station, while the merits of the conflict seem to have been on the side of the Gárda——
Mr. Boland
The Deputy is raising this case?
Is it not as well to raise it?
Mr. Boland
I am very glad that the Deputy is raising it.
My purpose in raising this matter is that I want to carry conviction, if I can, to the minds of the Gárda, Síochána through the country that they will do themselves no good by making contact with any member of Dáil Eireann with a view to influencing the Commissioner, and that if it is their duty to arrest Deputy James Dillon or Deputy Fogarty or Deputy Norton or any other person in the State—if they do their duty conscientiously and in detachment—they will not be penalised for doing it. I do not think that that impression is universal. I am bound to say that when I find that Deputies of the Fianna Fáil Party feel themselves entitled to barge into a Gárda station and tell the superintendent where to get off and the sergeant where to get off, I begin to wonder if that is happening in the green wood, what must be happening in the dry. It does happen, occasionally, that cases of that kind come into the public light, but if that kind of thing can come out in public what may have been going on under the rose?
I want an assurance given in this House of a character that will carry conviction to everybody in the Gárda Síochána and outside it, that if the Gárdaí do their duty they will not be penalised for hitting prominent men, and that if individual members of the Gárdaí seek to secure preferential treatment by cultivating the good offices of influential members of Dáil Eireann, the Commissioner, no matter how influential that Deputy is, will see that the Gárda who sought to use a Deputy for the purpose of upsetting discipline in the force will be penalised rather than promoted for the interest which he sought to use. If we do not do that, and if the Gárda Síochána in this country is going to be led to believe that political pressure on the Commissioner can secure preference for individual members of the force, we will start on the slippery slope which will end with the corruption of the whole force. Whereas, if we can carry conviction to public men and to the members of the force that no preferential treatment will be given to the pets of Deputies and that no penalty will be imposed on a Guard who does his duty no matter whom it hits, then we will have a police force of which we may all be proud and in which we can all have absolute confidence.
I do not agree with Deputy Cogan that every time a criminal makes wild allegations against respectable public servants there ought to be a public inquiry, because if that rule were applied, criminals would be making allegations every day of the week, on the sound old principle that if you throw enough mud some of it will stick, but where an acting district justice acquits a man of a crime alleged against him on the ground that the man has been brutally beaten by the Guards in the Gárda station, and where another judge, a fortnight later, says that there is not a shadow of foundation for that allegation against the Guards, and that the gentleman who made it is a tough old crook who has made similar allegations whenever he was arrested by any police force he ever came in contact with, then I think there ought to be an inquiry, not only into the incident, but into the discretion of the district justice who chose to accept the word of an abandoned old criminal against experienced officers of the Gárda Síochána.
How far does that impinge on the independence of the judiciary?
I want the Minister to inquire into this criminal's allegations that the Guards beat him, and I want the full report of that inquiry set against the temporary district justice's condemnation of two officers of the Gárda, because he accepted the allegation that members of the Gárda had brutally kicked this man and split his skull. I am not such a fool as to imagine that there are no black sheep amongst the Gárda. You cannot get that number of men anywhere without finding one or two bad apples in the barrel, and if a prisoner is beaten or manhandled by the Gárda while in their custody, the officers responsible for that should be very heavily penalised; but let Deputy Cogan be careful lest he should lay down the proposition that every time an old "lag" alleges that a trusted officer of the public service has beaten him up, there is a prima facie case that that has happened, because anyone familiar with prison administration or with police work knows that the first thing the old “lag” always thinks of is: “Can I persuade somebody that I got beaten up?” We are all familiar with the blow of the bunch of keys. Nobody can see any mark of the keys, but keys are supposed to have some mysterious manner of bumping off a man's face, injuring him savagely, but leaving no traces.
We are all familiar with the stories, which are circumstantial to the last degree, but insupportable by any title of objective evidence. That is the kind of charge no man can ever meet. It is one man's word against the other and, of course, those whose heads are as soft as their hearts are always prone to accept the under-dog's word and to blame the poor unfortunate over-dog, quite forgetting that the over-dog is a respectable man who goes to the Sacraments and raises a respectable family, whereas the under-dog is a thug who would not be in penal servitude if he did not deserve to be there.
There is one very irritating thing. There are plenty of respectable, decent, honourable men in the public service but the terms of their service forbid them from meeting criticism. I remember reading an article in which a gentleman, brought down from Mountjoy to Portlaoighise, described how the warder called him "a bastard" insulted him publicly on the railway platform and used language that made this poor fellow's ears turn red. Poor, gentle creature; all he ever did was embezzle his neighbour's money, and at the idea of bad language his heart was broken. I would not refer to that fellow at all but for the fact that he slandered a decent man on whose lips foul language had never been heard during 30 years in the prison service; a man who was at Holy Communion every week of his life, who was, if anything, too gentle. That was the reputation he had amongst his colleagues. That little squirt can come out and slander that respectable man and he cannot say a word; he has got to sit silent, and some of the softies are going around shaking their heads and saying: "Is it not awful to think of a prisoner being manhandled by this savage, who actually called him a bastard on the Kingsbridge platform?" The fact is that the man would probably refrain from repeating the word with the freedom with which I repeat it. He is rather a puritanical type of man and I am credibly informed by those who know him that, if anything, his only shortcoming as a prison officer is that he is too soft, and as for abusing or belittling or befouling a man in his charge, it is as unthinkable as that he would commit a murder.
I beg Deputy Cogan to be a little more circumspect. I know he does not mean to say that every time a criminal makes an allegation against the Gárda Síochána or a member of the prison service that establishes a prima facie case against the officer and ought to be inquired into because, if that rule applied, service in the prisons would become impossible for any respectable man.
Before I depart from the Gárda, I want to say one other thing. When the British Army came home from Dunkirk, the boast was made—I do not know whether well-founded or not— that it was the Guards' division brought home their equipment, and from that the moral was drawn that discipline which appears to the average layman to be too meticulous has its uses in times of crisis; that if men can march and if men have pride in their appearance and exceptional esprit de corps, in the thick of battle, in the heat of the darkest crisis, when all exterior neatness is gone, there still remains a central core of morale which means that in peril of their lives they bring home their equipment from the beach of Dunkirk. There is no use in closing our eyes to the fact that the uniforms of the Gárda Síochána are a good deal dustier to-day than they were ten or 11 years ago. I see more Guards going around with their necks open, and their uniforms looking as if they had not brushed them for three years, than I used to see. I remember once asking an accounting officer—not the accounting officer for the Department of Justice—whether the junior officers of his Department could not spruce themselves up a bit, and his reply was: “I think they are clean enough the way they are.” I think that is the atmosphere that is getting abroad in the Gárda Síochána, that we are clean enough the way we are and that this business about going around like martinets, not smoking on duty, obeying all these irksome rules, is not Irish, that it is a kind of British way in which to act and that if you can smoke a cigarette behind the door, it does not make much difference. I think that is quite wrong. People may allege against me that I am a bit of old-maidish in this matter. I do not think I am. I think it is rigorous observance of discipline in matters of that kind that creates the attitude of mind in a Guard or soldier which enables him to carry on in times of difficulty and crisis and I see a slackening in the minor discipline of the Gárda Síochána which I think is regrettable and which, unless corrected, will seriously demoralise the force, taking the long-term view.
I do not think that Guards ought to smoke when on duty. I do not think anybody else in uniform ought to smoke when on duty. I do not think Guards ought to allow themselves to appear in ambiguous situations, that is to say, I think if a Guard wants to go into a public house drinking, it ought to be perfectly clear that he is not on duty. There ought to be some distinguishing mark, such as not wearing his belt, to indicate that he is off duty, and not drinking on duty. I think all those things will help to maintain discipline in the Guards themselves, will help to persuade the public that the Gárda have a high standard, and in that way will increase the co-operation that ought to exist between the public and the Gárda Síochána as a whole. I do not want to impose any strictures on the Gárda. If I thought it necessary I would do so. On the whole, I think it is a very capable force, but the matters to which I referred want to be put right, if we are to be sure that it will continue in the future to be what it has been in the past.
With regard to the prisons service, I want to say something that will make me very unpopular with everybody. The system of recruiting governors from warders is not a good one. I know that democracy implies that officers in the Army should come from the ranks, that officers in the police should come from the ranks, and that officers in the prison service should come from the ranks, but in practice that does not work. A man's training as a governor needs to be radically different from the kind of training of a warder. A warder is trained to look after prisoners and to enforce discipline. He is in intimate personal contact with prisoners, and is obliged, in enforcing discipline to be the kind of man who could be pretty tough; a man who could present a stiff extension, sufficient to warrant prisoners knowing that they are quite safe as long as they conform to the rules, but that, if they want to get tough, the warder can get tough too, and that should force be necessary to maintain discipline, it is available if called for. The position of a governor is different from that of a warder. He is more or less in the position of an arbitrator, and is continually on guard to see that prisoners do not make hares of the warders and, on the other hand, that the warders will not make hares of the prisoners. To do that effectively the position of a governor requires an entirely different approach from that of a warder. A warder after 20 years' training gradually becomes chief warder, and his outlook in the service is set. If he is lifted out of that position, and made a governor, to be a good governor he has to unlearn a great part of what he has already learned from experience, and most middle-aged men cannot do that.
There are other social implications into which I need not go. A governor is a judge between prisoners and warders and inasmuch as that is one of his functions he ought to stand apart from the warders. If a governor who was a warder lived next door to another warder, if his children have grown up with other warders' children, and, if a warder's wife is his wife's friend it is extremely difficult for that governor, if the necessity arises, to impose any penalty that he must impose on his personal friend, if he errs in any way. That truth may as well be faced. We are concerned for those comparatively defenceless persons who have found their way into prison, and men who are to be governors should enjoy our confidence, not only in their good faith but in their competence to do the very delicate task which it is their duty to do. We ought to have a system analogous to the cadet system in the Army by which deputy-governors would be taken in under experienced governors and trained for the job, and warders should aspire to the same position in the service as that of a regimental sergeant-major, that is, a chief warder. It is an honourable position, one that any man should not be ashamed to occupy. A man entering the prison service should be trained by a governor to do governor's work. If we want to get the right type of men for the job we are not going to get them at the salaries offered at the present time. I think the highest salary paid governors at present is £600. Of course, there are certain perquisites from the prison and a free residence. A bad governor can make a prison life a hell and a good governor can make it the opposite. It is a mighty difficulty job. To do it effectively the best type of men are wanted but they are not going to be got if the highest salary is £600.
Deputies may say that this is too much money to pay governors. If they do, they can make up their minds that our prisons will be dirty, and smelly. As it is, we have a pretty high standard in our prisons and we ought to preserve it. It would be a shame to let that standard go down. Deputies may make up their minds that unless fair salaries are paid we are not going to get men to maintain the present standards. Before I leave the Prisons Estimate, I want to say that by courtesy of the Minister for Justice I went to see Portlaoighise prison. As my views on the administration of that prison have been made public and have been communicated to the Minister I do not propose to repeat them. It is a long time since I was in Mountjoy. I do not underestimate the difficulty of keeping a jail of that kind in the condition we would like to have it.
Portlaoighise is a jail where people go for a minimum period of three years where they can be washed and kept up to a certain standard. It is a jail that can be very much more easily kept than others. It is very large and a much more modern building. Mountjoy is a jail for dealing with sentences varying from seven days to six months. Many of the prisoners there could be more properly sent to mental homes than to prisons. It is very difficult to keep such a place clean when people are constantly passing in and out. The Minister will correct me if I am wrong but I am told that some cells in Mountjoy are verminous. It is quite possible for prisoners to get lousy in Mountjoy. I submit that it is shocking for a man to be brought to a public institution like a jail and that it is possible for him to become contaminated with vermin. I say that every person going in there, no matter what the trouble and the cost, ought to be made clean, and the jail ought to be kept clean, so that a prisoner going in clean would come out clean.
I believe that the Bridewell is dirty and lousy and that anybody temporarily incarcreated there is liable to come out lousy. I say that it is a very great reflection on the public administration that it should be possible for a person to go into that place of detention clean and come out verminous. Do not think that I am holding up our administration here to peculiar odium. I am afraid that if you went into the Tombs prison in New York you would probably come out lousy. But that ought not to happen here. It may seem remote from here. But, after all, there are decent people who get into trouble of one kind or another and they have to put up with enough without the added humiliation and degradation of coming in contact with vermin and filth that they never experienced and never wish to experience in their whole lives.
Now I do not believe that it was the dirt or the verminous condition of Mountjoy jail which gave rise to the recent riot there. I do not know what gave rise to that riot. I would be glad to hear from the Minister his version of it. I can well imagine that it might not be in the public interest to conduct an inquiry simply because three or four thugs proceeded to smash up the place hoping to precipitate an inquiry. If the Minister is entirely satisfied that there was no error of judgement in the management of the prison that is likely to recur, I would be quite prepared to accept his decision that, in all the circumstances, he did not propose to hold an inquiry into that matter. If three or four thugs want to kick up a riot in a prison, it would be a very great mistake on the part of the Legislature to play right into their hands by insisting on an inquiry, if that was the purpose of the thuggery committed by them. But I would be certainly prepared to accept the Minister's assurance that, having all the facts of the case before him, he is satisfied that no inquiry is necessary. If he is not personally satisfied, then I think an inquiry should be held.
I think we ought to look into the condition of the prisons. I have never been in Limerick jail and I am not in a position to speak of it. I was once in Sligo jail. I was not through the cells; but I must say that I was impressed by the atmosphere of Sligo jail. To tell the truth, I think it was a friendly kind of jail; it had not the atmosphere of a jail at all. It was quite unlike Mountjoy jail or Cork jail. It is an older jail, possibly not as well equipped as others. There were very few prisoners in it, most of them being local people in jail for trifling offences. I am not pretending that I know all about Sligo jail—I do not— but it made a favourable impression on me. I was never in Limerick jail; I only passed by it.
Now I come to the Borstal. I have been on a visit to the Borstal by leave of the Minister. I think it is right to say at once that the Minister would be perfectly entitled to tell me to keep my nose out of the inside of that instituation; that he had plenty of officers to advise him without my poking my nose in there. But he did not. He said at once: "If you want to see for yourself, go ahead. You are perfectly free to go and the governor will show you anything you want to see". I had perfect freedom to go into any part of the institution and to talk to the boys and was given every facility by the governor. I believe these facilities were given on the express instructions of the Minister.
I think the condition in the Borstal is deplorable. The building is clean. I do not want the House to think that I am now alleging that that institution was verminous or dirty. I do not think such things existed there. But we are professing to operate a Borstal institution in the Cork jail. There is not a hen-run on which you can exercise the boys. There is nothing but a jail in the middle of the City of Cork. The boys do get out to play an occasional game of football on the university grounds, I think. They have a playroom. I think I will surprise the Minister when I say that the premises are so bad, so unsuitable for a Borstal, that I think it is becoming impossible to maintain discipline in the place at all, because everyone is so uncomfortable about the inadequacy of the premises that humanitarian considerations are persuading the authorities to make concessions in discipline to these young fellows which I think are making the maintenance of discipline in the institution extremely difficult if not impossible.
I beg the House to remember that the inmates of a Borstal institution are as tough a gang of hoboes as you could wish to meet. There is nothing soft or innocent about them. Now, all honour to the Minister for Justice for feeling uncomfortable about the inadequacy of the premises in which he has to run the Borstal institute. I sympathise with him in his dilemma that, in his desire to offset the difficulties created by the inadequacy of the premises, he is going too far perhaps in sanctioning a relaxation of discipline which I believe in the long run will injure the boys more than if they were kept a bit more under somebody's thumb. Notably, I think it is a mistake that the boys on coming in at first have all the privileges that boys who are there six months or one year or two years enjoy. I think it would be much better to put them under somewhat more rigorous discipline for some time until they display a readiness to reform and then give them access to the special concessions the Minister has made available for them.
There are only two other matters on which I want to touch. One is the Special Criminal Court. I think we are all going daft. It is lovely to see some other fellow yanked up before a special court and sentenced to a term in jail for an offence against the Emergency Powers Orders. When he is convicted, people will say. "If he did that, what better did he deserve?" But why should we suspend the whole system of jury trial in respect of offences against sugar rationing, offences alleged against persons in respect of the price charged for jam? Why should a person's reputation and fair name be put in jeopardy before a court where, according to all the standards of law, he has no more chance of defending himself than he has of jumping over the moon? There are virtually no laws of evidence; anything can be brought in. So far as I can see, State counsel can do anything they like. There is nobody to say them nay, because there is not a single man sitting on the bench who knows a ha'porth about law. There are three Army officers, conscientious, good men, but who know nothing whatever about law.
We started these courts in this country with profound reluctance, because we said: "The blackguards who have to be tried will murder the jurymen and murder the witnesses." These courts were first instituted in this country to deal with persons who would murder any civil judge who sought to try them. That was the only justification for them. Is it seriously proposed by anybody that a female shopkeeper from Ballinrobe who is charged with charging 2d. a lb. too much for jam would murder the jurymen if convicted? Is it alleged that persons committing offences against the special Emergency Powers Orders will challenge the competence of any civil court to try them? On the other hand, they are most anxious to go to these courts and stand their trial in the ordinary way. I warn the Minister that if the present business of dragging all and sundry to Arbour Hill is continued, public sentiment will cease to support the enforcement of the verdicts of that court, and that might be very serious. Courts of that character may be necessary for some time. It is very important that the people of the country should be reassured that recourse will not be had to that kind of procedure except when the ordinary system of trial by jury is rendered impossible by threats of the accused and his friends to murder the witnesses and jurymen and judge in the event of the accused being convicted. That, in my submission, is the only valid ground on which you can set up a military court to try them in times, at least, when active war is not being prosecuted in the country, and when martial law is not in force. The people do not believe that it is just or right to try purely civil offences in courts of that character, and growing resentment is beginning to manifest itself in the country.
I warn the Minister now that, if he allows his colleague the Minister for Supplies, or others, to have constant recourse to this court for offences against the Emergency Powers Orders, very soon public opinion will refuse to support these decisions and clamorous demands will be made for some justice to be done. As Deputy Costello has pointed out already, the verdicts in very many of these trials have been upset on the ground of extravagant departures from natural justice having been permitted. I do not believe it was the fault of the members of the court, but I believe it was because they were not equipped to do their job. The thing is now becoming a scandal and ought to be stopped.
Another matter I wish to deal with is juvenile deliquency. People have been speculating on the causes of that for a long time. I have said all I want to say on the child guidance clinic on the last stage of the Mental Hospitals Bill. I think there are certain other things which contribute to it, but one of the greatest surprises I got was when I looked at the statistics. I always believed that juvenile delinquency was closely associated with overcrowding, that where you had a family crowded into one room in a tenement the people drifted into crime. But it appears that that is not the reality at all. There is just as much juvenile delinquency in houses with five rooms as there is amongst families living in tenements in the poorest slums.
We must remember that juvenile delinquency is not confined to the children of the very poor. It comes from the astonishing development—whether it is due to Sinn Féin or the war I am not quite sure—by which the parents are getting afraid of their children. There is a kind of general assumption that the parents are wrong and the child is right and that it is a kind of indecency for a parent to correct a child or impose his will on the child. It interferes with the natural development of the juvenile's ego. I do not know whether I blame Sinn Féin in the wrong for that, but I remember that, in the old days, Sinn Féin preached the doctrine that the old people were done for and should be got rid of, and there were fellows in patrols going around whacking people on the heads. I think the grey heads on the Front Bench still like to think of themselves as young fellows who are up and doing and that they are streets ahead of the old chaps. There is a queer kind of tradition that, if you are a Sinn Féiner, you have the gift of perpetual youth and that, if you are not a Sinn Féiner, you are old the day you get out of the cradle.
That kind of artificial subservience to youth, that kind of fantastic myth— that wisdom, seniority, parenthood, responsibility, are all rather hallmarks of inferiority, that all mature people are "ould cods" and that the future is with the young—has created an atmosphere in which the enforcement of parental discipline has become almost impossible. You do find parents solemnly saying that they wanted Johnny to do such-and-such a thing but he would not do it. "I wanted Johnny to go into business but he wanted to become an aircraft man; would you write to Mr. Traynor and see could he get him a vacancy in Baldonnel"; "I wanted Johnny to earn his living but he wanted to be a radio operator and do two years at the Atlantic College, and go to sea"— Johnny not having the slightest intention of going to sea or doing anything that involved hard work, but desiring only to have the time of his life in Dublin, studying radio, at the end of which time he would shake a leg and look around a bit. There is a case where Johnny was behaving utterly outrageously. If I had behaved in that way, with his years, I would have had another part of my anatomy well chastised as a child. But parents are now rather admiring of the antics of the young and, as for any school teacher or preceptor who gives Johnny what he is looking for, an action for damages is instituted. If District Justice Goff prescribed six strokes of the birch, the whole Fianna Fáil Party goes into convulsions.
Mr. Boland
I do not think there was a single protest from the Fianna Fáil Party. There was from the Labour Bench, but not from this side.
I am glad to hear that the Fianna Fáil Party is hard-headed in that regard.
The Deputy should not mention a judge by name.
Why not? In any case, he is not a judge now; he has retired long since.
He should not have been mentioned.
Why not?
I do not think it is proper.
What?
To mention a district justice by name in a discussion of this kind.
Why not? I cannot imagine why not. There were questions asked about him in the House and one would think he was a kind of bogeyman because he prescribed that a fellow should be given six strokes about his posterior. Some of the fellows who spoke about it would have been better if they got the strokes about their posteriors.
I think you are bound to admit that gangster pictures are very harmful. I know we are told that all gangster pictures end up with the overthrow of the gangster and law and order prevailing; but the impression I get from listening to people talk is that if the moral is supposed to be good the impression carried away by the young people is: "It is a hell of a life, even if a short one, and it is well worth it; 1 per cent. get away with it, and I may be the lucky one." That really has become something of a social problem. I suppose the Minister has had the opinion of District Justice McCarthy of the Children's Court and the probation officers. They ought to be able to tell the Minister pretty generally if there is any common source of juvenile deliqnency. When I am speculating on these sources, my opinion is not really worth much, as I do not come much in contact with the delinquents themselves.
Another of the contributory causes must be manifest. The school-leaving age is 14 in the City of Dublin, and from 14 to 16½ they have nothing to do but get into mischief. The natural tendency is to be gregarious and to get together gangs of fellows, and where you have a gang you must have something to do, or the gang will fall to pieces. We know that about political parties; when you get a political party together you must keep it on the road battering away, or it will fall to pieces. The Fianna Fáil Party would be gone long ago but for its stiff taskmaster, who has kept them organising cumainn all round the country and earning their £400 a year, day and night—and, signs on it, look at them. It is being kept together by being given work to do. Children's gangs will not keep together if there is not something for them to do. The odd thing is that, if they are provided with something constructive to do, they will do it just as cheerfully and as constructively as if they were robbing their neighbour's houses.
Therefore, I suggest to the Minister that he should consider whether there is any means whereby he can promote the organising of boys' clubs by voluntary effort. I understand the St. Vincent de Paul Society is doing a great deal of good work in this city at present, and I think there is a great deal more which could be done. I emphasise that it must be done by voluntary workers. Possibly, the Minister might help the voluntary workers to get that kind of thing going and, of course, there is also the raising of the school-leaving age.
That is not a matter for the Minister for Justice.
Oh, I could not tell whom that is for, but we are discussing the causes of the juvenile delinquency and I am saying we should keep them off the streets and keep them out of gangs; and one of the ways to do that is to raise the school-leaving age, for boys, now. The girls do not get into as much trouble as the boys, but both of them do get into trouble. If we are not in a position to give them academic education, let the girls do two years' training in domestic economy, which will be of use to them later, whether they are old maids or married women. Let the boys have two years' training in a mixed course of academic and practical subjects, which will make it easier for them to get jobs, other than blindalley occupations, when they are 16 years of age.
Now, I think juvenile delinquency is probably due to a wide variety of causes, but that should not dishearten us. The right thing to do is to find out as many of the causes as we can, and to remedy them as we find them; then, as other causes mainfest themselves, we can apply ourselves to remedying them also. The principal cause of all delinquency, of course, is the fact that Adam ate the apple that Eve asked him to eat, and I suppose the remedy for that will only be discovered when the Kingdom of God comes upon earth. Apart from crime, all our other evils, economic or social, and so on, have been the consequence of that unfortunate apple-fest. Human nature will be human nature as long as we are all in this world. What grieves me about juvenile delinquency is that the bringing of children into contact with the law at all leaves a mark upon them which may prove fatal to their psychological development for the remainder of their lives. I would resort to any means, however difficult or expensive, in order to reduce the number of children who are committed to industrial schools for offences.
It is all very well to be taking the Minister's Estimates as one, and I suppose that that is the most convenient thing to do when really, in order to discuss his Estimate accurately, when so much ground has to be covered, it would mean unduly trespassing on the time of the House. I should like, however, to hear a report from the Minister as to the present state of our reformatories. I mean with regard to equipment, and so on.
Mr. Boland
That is for the Department of Education.
I beg the Minister's pardon. He puts them in, and the Minister for Education lets them out.
Mr. Boland
That is about it.
Well, we shall have another day for that. I am bound to say this, however. I have troubled the Minister repeatedly with representations, not only on individual cases, but on general matters relating to the prison service, industrial schools and reformatories, the Borstal institution, and matters of that kind, and I have consistently found him to be openminded, liberal, and anxious to do the very best for those committed to his care.
I blame him only for failure to press more strongly on the Government the necessity for certain reforms, as to the urgency of which he himself is already convinced. I said earlier to-day that I am under no illusion as to the nature of the Minister. He is a shrewd, tough old politician, but I must say that in the administration to this Department I always found him to be an openminded and liberal Minister in the administration of the prison services, a Minister in whose hands they are safe, always and only provided that he will get a little tougher with the authorities upon which he must depend, such as the Minister for Finance and the Office of Public Works, in getting the necessary finances to carry out the reforms which I know he desires as much as I and every other Deputy in the House desire them.
I have just a few words to say on this Estimate. There is one thing that I should like to say in connection with the Estimate, and not alone the Estimate but the Minister's general attitude with reference to the Gárda Síochána, and that is that this continual amount of praise that he gives the members of the Gárda Síochána—who, in the vast majority of cases, deserve it—is not, in my opinion, good for the Gárda or good for the public. I think the Minister should appeal for co-operation between the Gárda and the public, and if the Minister from time to time could assure the public that members of the Gárda are subject to disciplinary action, that the Gárda are the servants of the people and are the police force of the people, I think he will find, generally speaking, throughout the country, that there would be more co-operation. If the people realised that, they would have more confidence and there would be more co-operation, which, I am sure, the Minister desires, between the police force and the people generally. If the people could be assured that disciplinary action would be taken—I believe it has been taken in some cases—against members of the Gárda when they outstep their duties or abuse their position, you would get greater co-operation from the people and they would have greater confidence. That attitude would decrease the amount of crime which we are told is on the increase.
I know of areas in my own constituency where crime, whether it be small or big or serious, is detected a very short time after being committed, and that is due to the co-operation, that exists between the people and the Gárdaí. Now, people read the papers, and they hear what is going on, and sometimes, even when things do not appear in the papers, it is extraordinary how something that might happen in Mayo is well known to the people here in the City of Dublin. I knew of a case here in the City of Dublin, long before it went into court, where a man was beaten up. Those things occur, and if the Minister, when he is replying, would give a statement and let the people know that his Department has taken disciplinary action against members of the Gárda for outstepping their duty or not carrying out police regulations, it would reassure the people. The Gárda are the custodians of peace here. They are the force whose duty it is to see that law and order prevail here, and the people would be greatly reassured and have greater confidence if the Minister would make a statement to that effect.
I do not say that so far as the majority of the Gárdaí are concerned they have not administered their duties impartially, and the Minister is quite correct in saying that they have, but in various towns—and we all mix around among the people—there is such a word as "discretion" and it is to the interest both of the Gárda Síochána and the people generally to have friendship and co-operation existing amongst them. I would appeal therefore to the Minister to let the people know, when he is replying, what action has been taken by his Department or by the Commissioner, say, over a period of two years, in this matter of disciplinary action. Some few years ago we had here what has been described in another country as a "purge". We had a purge in the Gárda Síochána. Superintendents were removed, chief superintendents were removed, sergeants were removed, and others were reduced, as a result of information which was conveyed to the Minister by Deputies of this House. That was some years ago, and the Minister, when he did get the information and realised what was happening, took the necessary action.
My only reason for mentioning this fact is that the Minister should assure the people that so far as he is concerned, while praising the Gárda for doing their duty efficiently and facing sometimes terrorist action from certain quarters, carrying out their duties fearlessly on behalf of the people, regardless of consequences to themselves, he will also assure the people that if certain members of the force are not carrying out their duty, the people have at least the Minister himself, the Department of Justice, or the Commissioner, to whom to send their grievances and complaints. Let them send individually or through Deputies. I am sure the Minister will not deny that the people of any constituency are entitled to send grievances and complaints to him, through their public representatives, for investigation. From my experience of the Minister, these complaints are thoroughly investigated. If they are not substantiated, no action is taken but, if they are, necessary disciplinary action is taken by the Commissioner. The people generally ought to know that. People living in the country sometimes think, from reading of the commendations of district justices, that they have no redress if they are suspected by the Gárda or if they are called up for investigation or even for charging.
There is another matter which I should like to mention. Some years ago, the Minister and his Department decided that there would be no promotion in the Gárda save by competitive examination. That should have met with the approval of every man. It became well known that no promotion could be made, so far as the rank and file were concerned, except by competitive examination. It puzzled me when I read so frequently in the papers of commendation of Gárdaí and sergeants, and I learned that this commendation carries a certain amount of £ s. d. This system was handed down from the previous régime. I think that it is a bad practice. That a Gárda should proceed on duty with a view to getting a conviction against a man and getting commendation from the district justice, with a certain amount of cash as a result, at whatever time it is distributed——
Are you sure of that?
I am so informed. The Minister will correct me if it is not true. I think that that course should no longer be adopted. Whatever might be said regarding the promotion of a Gárda to a better station—a first-class station—I do not think that commendation from a district justice should carry any great remuneration. The Gárda force serves practically every Government Department. The Gárdaí are officers of the Department of Agriculture to see that weeds and thistles are cut. They are officers of the Department of Education to see that the School Attendance Act is enforced. They are officers of the Department of Lands for the purpose of looking after people who propose to fell trees. They are officers of the Department of Industry and Commerce in connection with the dole and with the signing of documents for unemployment assistance, and they are officers of the Department of External Affairs for the purpose of passports. I have often had the feeling that, no matter how efficient the Gárda force is; it would be more efficient if the Gárdaí were better paid. They have to deal with many different people, and they meet all types and classes. They have so much to do and they deal with so many people that it would lead to greater efficiency if they were better paid.
Like Deputies.
So far as I am concerned, £480 does not pay me for the work I do. I know myself the difficulties that confront them, and I know what happens from time to time. It does not affect them all, but there are particular cases from time to time in which, if certain things do not happen, it will be necessary to see the weeds are cut early, the dog is licensed, and the children are going to school. The Gárda should be in a position of independence in regard to all these matters. I should like to make reference to a matter which happened in my constituency. I am sure it has been brought to the Minister's notice. Where evictions are taking place and the sergeant or Gárda is satisfied that the removal of the particular person would endanger his life, he should have authority from the Minister or the Commissioner to prevent that eviction from taking place. In my constituency. I read the evidence of a Guard that he had advised that a person about to be evicted should not be removed. The Gárda gave evidence to that effect. The doctor furnished a certificate that the person should not be removed. Yet the person was removed, and before the Dublin Union was reached the person was dead. In spite of what the Gárda did, and in spite of the doctor's certificate, that old lady in Dundrum was removed and died on her way to hospital. The Minister should give general powers to the Gárda to prevent that, when they are satisfied that removal will endanger the life of the person concerned, in the same way as a sergeant can have a person removed to the asylum when medical evidence is brought before two peace commissioners. The old person to whom I have referred would be alive if the advice of that Gárda from Dundrum had been carried out.
I notice that there is an item in the Estimate referring to prisons. Recently, a number of temporary warders were recruited from the military police for Mountjoy prison. I am sure that the Minister appreciated what these men had done when he decided that recruitment should be confined to them. In case any other vacancies occur, I ask the Minister to alter that system so as to render eligible those people who gave service in the voluntary forces such as the L.D.F., the L.S.F., the Red Cross, A.R.P. and Auxiliary Fire-fighting Service. I might add that the sergeant, corporal or private in the Army, if eligible, should be given an opportunity of applying and being considered for these positions.
There is one other matter to which I should like to refer though I do not know whether the Minister has any control over it. I shall not mention any names but there is a number of district justices in this country over whom there should be some control. They love to make big speeches; some of them make wild speeches, speeches that are not correct. I read one in the papers recently in which a district justice said that a sergeant was removed to keep him far away from a certain Deputy. That is not correct and the Minister knows it is not correct. He knows that the Deputy had nothing whatsoever to do with the removal of that person. The Deputy certainly did pass certain complaints from his constituents to the Minister but the statement that was made was incorrect. The Minister knows that well and the district justice had no justification for making it. I should like to draw the Minister's attention to that matter. The Minister knows very well that the Deputy had nothing whatever to do with the removal of the sergeant except to pass complaints or letters received containing matters that should be investigated by the Minister, the Commissioner or the Department of Justice.
Some Deputy suggested that Gárdaí should be changed after a number of years in a certain place. I am not saying that is the general rule in banks, but I worked myself for some time in a bank and I know that there was a sort of rule there that after a certain number of years in a district you were transferred to another district. One of the reasons was, naturally, that it was in the interests of the bank and in the interests of the customers that officials should be transferred after a certain period. Naturally, after a certain number of years in one place you got to know the people in that area. You had your likes and your dislikes, and you might be inclined to talk too much. Anyway, the bank considered it advisable—it was a kind of unofficial rule though it was the general practice—that after a certain number of years you were transferred. That practice served the best interests of the banks and the best interest of the officials themselves because it meant that you did not get into too much debt in the one place. I should like, in conclusion, to agree with what Deputy Dillon said in regard to the Minister. I think I have given the Minister as much annoyance and as much trouble as any other Deputy in the House and I always found that any representations I made to him on various matters were investigated impartially. Whether I liked the reply. I got or not, I was perfectly satisfied with the decision, and perfectly satisfied that the Minister and his Department had thoroughly investigated the matter.
I should like to raise just one point in connection with the methods employed for the recruitment of Gárdaí. In the advertisements appearing in the papers inviting applications it was stated that the minimum height for candidates was 5 ft. 9 ins. In practice, I understand, the minimum height acceptable to the Commissioner, or whoever selects Gárdaí, is 5 ft. 10 ins. I have no objection to raising the standard, but I think it is unfair to advertise for candidates having a minimum height of 5 ft. 9 ins., when in actual practice only candidates who are at least 5 ft. 10 ins. are accepted. Another point I should like to raise is that a number of candidates satisfy the statutory regulations as regards membership of the L.D.F., age, physique, character and education. Their names are accepted and they are measured at the local Gárda station but yet it transpires when the time comes for the examinations that some of them are not called for examination.
That is very unfair, because it is throwing a responsibility on the local sergeant of discriminating between one applicant and another. It gives rise also to a great deal of hostile criticism and discontent amongst applicants. I think everybody who fulfils the regulations laid down in the advertisements should be invited to sit for the examination and that those who qualify and possess the requisite physique should be recruited. The fact that all candidates having the necessary physique and other qualifications are allowed to sit for the examination would give an assurance that everybody was getting a fair chance or at least an equal chance with his neighbours. Some men who applied for admission to the Gárda told me that, in fact, there was a local feeling that there was some secret complaint against them when they were not brought up for examination. I do not want to change the regulations, but I would ask the Minister to see that in future everybody who fulfils the conditions should be given an opportunity of sitting for the examination. That would be in the best interests of the community at large. It would show that justice was being done, and it would remove the onus from the local Gárdaí of selecting one candidate and rejecting another.
I should like to say a few words on this Estimate, particularly in connection with the observations of Deputy Fogarty. It is a well-known legal maxim that, as well as doing justice, it is important that justice should seem to be done. In this State our institutions are yet in their formative period. I think no matter how optimistic any politician or group of politicians may be, it is likely that in 20 or 30 years the present Parties as they are, even to their very names, may no longer be the same. No matter how active present day politicians or even those who may join them in the near future may be, it is unlikely that our present Parties, with the distinctive labels they have, will remain. It is not of any considerable advantage in this Estimate to enlarge on abstract political views or to say what may or may not happen in that way, but I think most people will agree with the desirability of securing and maintaining the utmost respect for the institutions of State, no matter by whom they may be administered subsequently or no matter what particular labels, brands or political affiliations Parties may have in future in this country.
One of the most important attributes of an independent State is the sanctity of the law in all its connotations. In this country throughout its history vast energies, life, property and everything that makes life worth living, have been spent in attempting to secure, and in securing for the major part of this country, institutions of State for which the people of the country may have respect and under which they may be quite certain that their rights and property and the rights and property of their fellow-citizens will be absolutely secure. In maintaining these rights, one of the first essentials is to provide an independent police force. So far as I am concerned, I have no reason whatever to believe that the Minister is not anxious to maintain that force at the highest possible standard. In the last few months, a case has come to the notice not alone of the members of the House and of the Minister but of the public at large, due to the publicity which it received in the papers, in which a particular member of the force was concerned. I had not intended to mention the case by name, but only to bring it to the Minister's attention. It has now been mentioned by two Deputies and there is no advantage in keeping it secret. This particular sergeant was removed from his station and sent to another station. That may, in the ordinary course of events, be normal procedure. I think it is desirable that Gárda officers should not be too long in any one place. But subsequently, as a result of court proceedings, it transpired that this particular sergeant had made certain moves against a member of this House, who up to the moment stands convicted. Let me say that I understand he has appealed against the sentence, but whether that conviction is quashed or confirmed the majority of the people who read the proceedings in the paper are left under the impression—the Minister may have a perfectly good explanation—that that man was transferred because of the fact that he instituted proceedings against a member of this House, who happened, incidentally, to be a member of the Fianna Fáil Party. It is quite likely that the Minister or the Gárda authorities transferred the officer on other grounds, or possibly for very sound reasons, but, irrespective of the reasons for which he was transferred, in view of the publicity and in view of the individual who was concerned in that case it cannot be eradicated from the minds of the people that he was moved merely because a Fianna Fáil Deputy was able to make representations which could not have been made by an ordinary individual who might have no political affiliations, or who at any rate would not have as close a connection with the Minister as a Deputy of this House.
I am anxious, as are other Deputies, to hear the Minister's explanation of that transfer. If the Guards are to function efficiently and properly, and if respect for law and order is to be maintained, then Deputies must refrain from making comments, either publicly or privately, and from making representations to the Minister. If an individual Deputy or a group of Deputies can make representations to a Minister to have a member of the force transferred, particularly when it is seen from a subsequent prosecution that that member had seen fit in the course of his duty to investigate particular activities of a Deputy, it will have a very bad effect on the dignity and the discipline of the force. Before this man was transferred I was approached by two people, who said that they wanted this matter investigated and raised with the Minister for Justice. My answer was that I did not stand for the idea that Deputies should interfere with the Commissioner of the Guards in whatever he considered was essential for the maintenance of discipline in the force. I further said: "I do not care what political affiliations you have—that stands whether you are a supporter or an opponent of mine." It happened that at least one of the people was a strong supporter of Fianna Fáil, but he was so outraged by the current rumour about this case that he felt it incumbent on him to come, in company with a reverned gentleman, and make a complaint. I made no representations whatever to the Minister on the matter, and I feel that, so far as the maintenance of discipline in the force is concerned, no representations should be made. It is quite likely that members of the force or of any other branch of the State services, who have human frailties and human weaknessess like any ordinary private individual, may have to suffer the rigours of disciplinary action, but that is a matter for their superiors and not for public representatives.
I want to say a word or two about temporary appointments, particularly about temporary district justices. The Minister agrees that it is undesirable that judges or justices should hold appointments of a temporary nature. In fact, until the emergency caused a large increase in the number of justices required to deal with the abnormal number of crimes, the practice of appointing temporary justices was very rarely resorted to. The emergency has probably lasted far longer than was anticipated, and the need is still there for a number of temporary appointments, but it is undesirable that temporary justices should deal with cases in which the State is a party. I appreciate that this is possibly more a matter for the Attorney-General than for the Minister, but in view of the fact that the Attorney-General or his Department is not amenable to the House, the Minister will realise that the only method of making representations is to make them here. It is quite fair to say that nearly all judges and district justices endeavour to discharge the functions of their office as impartially as possible, but it is only human nature that a temporary district justice or a temporary judge, who is faced with the State or a Department of State on the one hand and an ordinary individual on the other, may possibly look to the welfare of himself and his family. The odds are in favour of the State or of the State Department. That could be avoided by transferring to permanent judges and permanent district justices all cases in which the State is a party.
In that connection, I want strongly to deprecate the practice that has grown up of Ministers—and the latest example is Deputy Fogarty who follows a good lead—making comments on the findings of judges and justices, and stating that the penalties they inflict are not sufficient. A judge or a justice, or any judicial tribunal or body is there only to interpret the law as it is passed by the Oireachtas. It is not for them to say whether the penalty should be great or small, or whether it should be imprisonment or a fine or a suspensory sentence. If the Government so desires, it has power at its disposal to pass Emergency Orders or legislation prescribing the various penalties and the varying degrees of the same penalties for different categories of offences, so that the justice or the judge will have no alternative but to impose them. But it is entirely contrary to the best principles of administering justice that Ministers of State should come in here and say: "We are sorry, but we could not get the justice to impose a sufficient penalty." If the justice has a discretion under which he can impose a fine up to £500—not that he must impose £500, but anything up to that amount—then it is the job of the justice to impose either £1 or £500, and it is not a matter for any Minister or Deputy to say that he should have imposed a higher penalty or, if it is a case of imprisonment, a longer sentence.
Everyone is concerned about the increase in crime. Various reasons are ascribed for that increase and the war is particularly regarded as being instrumental in bringing about the abnormal number of cases. I think the Minister should give serious consideration to this matter and his officials should not allow themselves to get into the position of imagining that the war is entirely responsible for the increase. We may console and flatter ourselves by allowing ourselves to think that the war has contributed to the increase in crime and a position may be reached when proper opinions and proper judgments cannot be formed with regard to the abnormal increase. It may be that when the war ends this abnormality will remain and no satisfactory explanation of it will have been sought; no proper effort will have been made to ascertain the causes of the abnormal crime increase. If he causes can be ascertained it would be a comparatively simple matter to reduce the dimensions of criminal activities in this country to a scale where the justices and the officers charged with the prevention of crime can effectively deal with it and they will be enabled in many cases to prevent crimes which formerly were of very rare occurrence but which have now become common.
I wish to direct the Minister's attention to the tinkers, and I should like to mention what country residents suffer through the depredations of those tinkers. It is a somewhat mixed problem. Attention was drawn to this matter about a year ago by an ex-member of the House when the Estimate for the Department of Justice was being considered. He was a solicitor and he said he had been frequently instructed by farmers in regard to this matter. In my young days the tinkers went around and lived in shelter ditches; they erected little cabooches or little tents. Latterly they have taken to caravans. Some parts of the country have acquired the name of being soft and the tinkers know those parts pretty well. In my immediate area in Tipperary we suffer quite a lot from tinkers. The people there are kindly disposed towards them.
I made a study of the tinkers. There is scarcely an "O" in the country that has not a tinker tribe associated with them, including my own clan. I remember a lecture delivered at the National Literary Society by the late lamented Dr. Sigerson, a member of the first Seanad here. In that lecture he said that a branch of the McCarthy Mór Clan—the "Macs" were also in it—took to the hills in Elizabeth's time. They lost their estates. They were the proudest stock in Munster and they were one of the few families that had the right of burial on the Rock of Cashel. They roamed Tipperary, Limerick and part of Cork as nomads. Some of them became tinsmiths, others metal workers, and still more of them became dealers in horses. To a great extent that type of thing is still carried on. There is another family in Cork, the O'Driscolls.
Does the Deputy propose to give a résumé of the lecture?
O'Donovan Rossa paid them a great tribute—one that you, Sir, will appreciate.
The Deputy is paying a tribute to a class, without reference to the Vote.
I am indicating the kindly disposition of the Irish towards them and, if you will bear with me, I shall not be very long.
How does all this relate to the Estimate for the Department of Justice?
Those people play on the kindly feelings of the natives towards them, and they carry on all sorts of depredations. Overnight the caravans put up close to a farm. These people will not do work of any kind. Depredations are carried on during the night. In the forenoon, when the men are out working in the fields, these people will go into the farm-houses where the wife, the mother, the sister or the daughter is preparing the midday meal. These tinkers will not take "no" for an answer. They importune in the vernacular for a grain of tea, a grain of sugar, a bit of meat or some old boots. They terrorise the womenfolk. Yet the Irish people are kindly disposed towards them for the historical reasons I was about to mention. These tinkers are descended from a fine stock.
Roosevelt found a similar condition of affairs facing him when he got into power. At that time America had 127,000,000 of a population. He found 2,500,000 people of that type wandering about, walking or on wheels. They had not the proud old traditions of our Irish crowd. They were either hoboes or jailbirds. Mind you, there is something very proud in the Irish tinker. O'Donovan Rossa, peace be to him, was swearing in Fenians 30 miles from his native Skibbereen when a little girl said to him: "My father wants to see you." He went, and the father told him: "They are on your track. There is more than £500 on your head. We never gave anything away. We are outlaws ourselves, and I advise you to clear." He paid them a great tribute in poetry and prose. He had a great regard for them, and that regard permeates through Ireland still. Roosevelt built wooden hutments in the suburbs of cities and towns in the United States, and in a very short space of time he had these people living in them. He took a census, and put those people into various trades and colonies. He put practically the 2,500,000 off the road.
I suggest that something like that might be done for our tinkers; otherwise they will become a race of degenerates. I remember the old plough fittings they made. They are not making them now—the patent ploughs have done away with that. They are doing a little as regards tin ware. You may find a piece of galvanised iron stolen off your hayshed, and later it may be sold in the form of a bucket. They do not do much of that now, but they do carry on some depredations during the night. They sleep during the day and are out at night. I think the Minister should do something for them, similar to what Roosevelt did. They are on the increase. It was suggested that if any of them were to live in a house they would probably get consumption. They certainly are not getting consumption in the caravans. They have proud traditions, and I would not like to say anything bitter against them, because they come of a grand old stock. Something should be done to ameliorate their conditions and make useful citizens of them.
I wish to pay a very deserved compliment to the Minister for the very impartial way in which he has administered the arduous duties of the office which he has held with distinction since his appointment. A Deputy spoke here about the Gárda Síochána and one would imagine that he was speaking of some hoboes from another country who had been washed up on the shores of this country or of men who carried on Tammany Hall tactics. It is very deplorable that Deputies should take advantage of the privileges of the House to attack personally people who have not the opportunity of defending themselves. It is time that a certain decourm in Irish public life were observed. The Gárda Síochána are there to carry out the law passed by the Oireachtas, and I have yet to find any Guard who does other than the duty he is supposed to do, in accordance with the instructions of the Minister or the Commissioner of the Gárda. The Gárda Síochána—Chief Superintendent, Superintendent, Sergeant and Guard—have implicit confidence in the Minister and know that they will at all times get a square, honest and fair deal from him. We hear a lot about purging and various other matters, but if we are to discuss matters as gentlemen here, we should at least do so in a clean and manly spirit.
With regard to child delinquency, that matter will be dealt with under the Mental Treatment Bill, but I suggest to the Minister that child delinquency is on the increase. In some countries, specialists are employed to examine children and report on them before they are committed, and I suggest to the Minister that he should establish special clinics where children on remand could get specialised medical and mental treatment and that, on the basis of the reports, a decision should be taken as to whether or not they should be brought before the court, because in a number of cases the stigma of having been brought before the court will remain as long as the child lives. People will say that, when that person was young, he was in court or was sent to an institution for misconduct. I am sure the Minister has been doing much of this work and will continue to improve on the methods in use.
Another Deputy spoke about dirty prisons. Candidly, I do not believe such statements at all. No matter what experience a man may have of conditions in prisons, it is not fair to say that the responsible officers in these prisons are not doing their duty or would allow anything of the kind to occur. I do not think that any responsible medical officer or prison governor would knowingly allow dirty conditions to prevail in a prison. I listened to another Deputy speaking about promotions from the staff. Any man who, by reason of ability and intelligence, is worthy of promotion should be allowed to go to the head of the ranks. If the principle which that particular Deputy enunciated were carried to its logical conclusion, it would mean that the ordinary private soldier could never be a good general, but it has been proved over and over again that some of the most able army officers and generals throughout the world were men who came from the ranks.
The man who enters a service, knowing that, by ability, intelligence and integrity, he will get somewhere, is bound to take a greater interest in his job, but if he knows he is entering a blind-alley service, he will not be an efficient officer, because he will say: "No matter what I do, I will go only so far and a man without the psychological experience of prison life which I have will be put in over my head." I am not suggesting that there are not good men outside, but any man who is worthy of promotion should have the opportunity of being promoted.
We have had the interesting experience of hearing two Deputies of the same Party and from the same area somewhat at loggerheads about the Minister's administration of his Department. Deputy Fogarty took the view that too much praise, too many bouquets, were being thrown at the Minister, and that, in his opinion, had gone so far that the Minister should be debunked. Deputy Burke followed on the opposite line— he had nothing but praise for the Minister. I would not pay any particular attention to that were it not that these two Deputies represent, virtually speaking, the same area in County Dublin. It happens to be an area in which members of the Gárda Síochána got a good deal of annoyance and persecution from one of these Deputies—and it is not Deputy Burke.
In my experience, Deputy Fogarty seemed to regard his position as entitling him to the right to dictate to members of the Gárda Síochána in his area as to how they should perform their duties, as to where they should perform their duties and as to the persons against whom the law should or should not be enforced. He comes here this evening in the innocent garb, as it were, that he never, as a Deputy, did anything but pass on to the Minister complaints received from his constituents. One would think, from hearing him, that he passed on these complaints without any comment from himself; with merely "Submitted to you, Sir, for investigation, and I would be glad to know in due course what the result of the investigation is".
I know perfectly well that Deputy Fogarty has abused his privileges as a Deputy in his communications to the Commissioner of the Gárda Síochána and in his communications to the Minister for Justice, and that he did not stop at mere exaggeration; that he introduced into his communications abuse very often of these members, and scurrility. I know that he only resorted to these methods when he had failed locally to intimidate those men in the performance of their duties. I think it is about time that the members of the Government Party should put an end to that type of thing. I do not say that it is general in the Government Party, but I do know that at one time Deputies on the opposite benches did think they had some sort of right to interference in the public administration, not only of the Gárda Síochána but of every Government Department; that they regarded their election to office as Deputies of this House as giving a virtual right of a sort of dictatorial control in their local areas.
I know that at one time chief superintendents, superintendents, sergeants and Gárdaí were subjected to a terrific campaign of annoyance—persecution I would call it. There were cases where their scalps were demanded, cases where their removal from the Gárda Síochána was demanded by those Deputies, cases where transfers were insisted on, cases where a local Cumann of Fianna Fáil demanded that men be removed, that men be dismissed and that men be transferred from an area.
Now, all that is past history, and as far as I am concerned I do not want to resurrect it. I do think that Deputy Fogarty is still steeped in the tradition of those early years, and I suggest seriously to the Minister that he should take no more cognisance of communications or epistles from Deputy Fogarty. In nine cases out of ten Deputy Fogarty has always acted not from motives of public interest, not from motives of the pure administration of justice, not from motives to ensure the impartial administration of the law but from purely personal spite, personal prejudice, personal intrigue and personal animosity to individual members of that force.
The Deputy is making serious charges.
I am making serious charges which, if necessary, I will prove before any inquiry the Minister may choose to set up, provided the members of the Gárda Síochána will be given a fair opportunity of going before that inquiry. I make those charges because Deputy Fogarty, in this House, has stated deliberately and with malice aforethought that members of the Gárda Síochána, in his opinion had lost the co-operation of the public, and that they had lost the co-operation of the public because they were not performing their duties impartially. That is one charge which he made here, but he adduced no tittle of proof good, bad or indifferent, in support of that charge.
I challenge him here and now to produce the proof. The second charge he made was that certain members of the Gárda Síochána in his area were abusing their powers, that he had no knowledge whether the Commissioner took disciplinary action in regard to the abuse of powers by members of the Gárda Síochána. Now, if Deputy Fogarty has specific cases where members of the Gárda Síochána have abused their powers in the enforcement of the law, and if he puts those charges in black and white and submits them to the Minister or to the Commissioner, I have no doubt that those charges will be investigated, and that if the investigation discloses the necessity for disciplinary action, that disciplinary action will follow. But I am afraid that, in this again, Deputy Fogarty is introducing personal spleen. He hinted vaguely at a discretion. He did not pursue it, but he threw out the innuendo that the Guards have a discretion. So far as I know, no Guard from the Commissioner down to the most junior recruit has a discreation in law. The innuendo was that certain members of the Gárda Síochána were exercising a discretion. I take it that he must have been referring to the enforcement of the licensing laws. I think that the less Deputy Fogarty says about the enforcement of the licensing laws in the County Dublin, or in any other part of the country, the better. As to the discretion exercised by the Guards, I think that the Guards have exercised a marvellous restraint and a marvellous discretion in their dealings with the said Deputy over a long, long period of years. To my knowledge, there was never a sergeant in his area and never a superintendent in it that Deputy Fogarty did not try to undermine in some shape or form, and if he did not get away with it locally by some form of local pressure, he resorted to higher powers, and in his resort to those powers he did not scruple as to the methods he used.
Again, he talked of a purge. If I understood him aright, Deputy Fogarty wants the right to have a local purge effected. The position is that if anyone crosses Deputy Fogarty's shadow, in Swords, Balbriggan, Malahide or in any other part of North County Dublin there should be a purge. We had evidence of that in the case that was referred to, a case which was subsequently the subject of court proceedings, in which the Deputy himself was accused.
That case is sub judice.
It may be sub judice, but a conviction has been recorded. He also wanted the right—it was an extraordinary argument to advance in this House—for Deputies not only to receive complaints but to pass on these complaints. If I know Deputy Fogarty's mind aright he would almost claim the right to inspire these complaints. I have no doubt that in many cases, and in the particular case which has been discussed, he inspired the complaints. I do not want to give Deputy Fogarty too much publicity, but I think that, in justice to the services rendered by the Gárda Síochána over a long period of years, it is unfair for any Deputy to come in here, knowing very well that these members cannot defend themselves and that they have no redress either inside or outside this House, and do that sort of thing. They are a silent service. He made many other complaints, speaking from the depths of his ignorance and in his own particularly ungrammatical Dublinese.
The Deputy seems to be more concerned in attacking Deputy Fogarty than in discussing the Estimate.
He made an attack on the Gárda Síochána to which I had once the honour to belong. I regard myself as being in the position that I have the right now to defend those men when they are attacked, and have no means of defending themselves.
Personal imputations against a Deputy are not in order.
He mentioned the district justices also. Here we had a typical example of the purity of Deputy Fogarty's motives when he mentions matters in this House. He said that they were given to making long-winded speeches and statements and that there should be some control over district justices. That was a most extraordinary statement. In other words, that they should be gagged, that they should be curbed, presumably by the Minister for Justice, which, in practice, would mean by Deputy Fogarty and the members of his Party. Now the district justices were set up as a body of impartial judges. They were put in a position of privilege and independence, relatively speaking, similar to that of the higher judges, but if Deputy Fogarty in any way reflects the views of the Party, which I hope he does not, he would revert to the system of removable magistrates which we had here under the British régime. I do not think it is necessary to dwell on this, except to point out that a suggestion of that kind is directly aimed to undermine the whole administration of justice in this country. It is a most irresponsible suggestion to come from any Deputy. He also mentioned that district justices were in the habit of commending Gárdaí, and they were so fond of doing so that Deputy Fogarty's friends dare not appear before any district justice because they would get "the works." He also said that these commendations carried an £ s. d. value. I do not know what the Deputy means by that unless it is that he is under the illusion that because a district judge happens to commend the work of a police officer it carries with it a financial award. That is not the case. The commendation of a district justice may or may not be conveyed to the Gárda authorities. Generally, it is, but it is just one of those things that will be recorded on a man's personal file and it does not carry any weight, good, bad or indifferent.
The reward system in the police is based entirely upon the display of energy, ability, detective ability, initiative and a high order of intelligence in the discharge of police duties, particularly detective duties. Rewards are made upon the basis of records, and are given by a reward board—local reward boards and headquarters reward board. When the merits of certain investigations by individual members are thrashed out by these boards it is upon the basis of these investigations and discussions that a reward in made. It never happens that a mere commendation would carry with it any monetary value. I wish to scotch that idea once and for all, because the suggestion behind it is that if you are sufficiently officious in the discharge of your police duties to earn a certain number of commendations, you may get a certain amount of £ s. d. and that, therefore, the incentive to good performance of police duties is £s. d. That is altogether wrong and I am sure the Minister in replying, will dispose of it much more satisfactorily than I can. I do not like to see any Deputy making wild, irresponsible statements which have no relation to fact I felt it my duty to contradict that statement at any rate.
The most extraordinary thing about Deputy Fogarty's contribution to the debate is that he concluded by recommending an increase of pay for the Gárda Síochána, which is most inconsistent with the rest of his speech and it is the only point on which I find myself in agreement with him. If Deputy Fogarty has still any influence with the Minister—and I hope he has not—I hope the Minister will consider that last point and no other.
I should like to congratulate the Minister on having during this year removed one outstanding grievance of the Gárda Síochána. I refer to the question of compensation to dependents of Gárdaí murdered in the execution of their duties. The need to remove that grievance was long-felt, and I am glad that the Minister took the opportunity this year of doing so. On the other hand, I cannot say that I can congratulate the Minister on the Estimates presented to the House this year because under each head there is an increase.
We are in the position that expenditure on the Gárda is up by £600,000 as compared with 1936-37, and almost £200,000 as compared with last year. The Estimate for the Office of the Minister is increased by something like £6,000 as compared with last year, and by £19,000 as compared with 1936-37. The prison service is increased by £55,000 as compared with 1936-37, and £7,000 as compared with last year. The District Court is up by £4,000 as compared with last year, and by £14,000 as compared with 1936-37. The Circuit Court shows an increase of £27,000 as compared with 1936-37, and £8,000 as compared with last year. Every branch of the Minister's Department shows an increase, and since 1936-37 there has been a steady rise. I know that there is bound to be an annual increase by way of annual increments in certain services, but in view of the fact that we are supposed to have reached the peaceful state on which the Minister was so much commended, one would expect, instead of increases all round in the various Departments, especially in relation to the administration of justice and the enforcement of law, a reduction. There have been very large increases, and, as I see the situation, we are rapidly reaching saturation point in the cost of law enforcement, the administration of justice and the prison service. We are reaching the point when the citizens of this country will have to ask themselves whether or not we can afford further increases. I feel that something will have to be done within the next few years to being about a system which will enable us to police the country at a lesser cost without in any way interfering with the pay, emoluments and allowances of the officers or rank and file of the service. The same may apply to the prison service.
I am just wondering if we have not inherited a tradition from the past. I had something to do with the organisation of the Gárda Síochána in its early days, when we were forced into the position that we had to get a police force together and put them into the country—untrained men, men inexperienced in enforcement of law, men ignorant of law, men who had been up to quite a recent time, if you like, law-breakers. It was a case of the poacher turning gamekeeper, but it had to be done, and it had to be done in a hurry. Looking back over the position now, I am afraid that in the hurry we built upon a basis which was, if you like, alien to this country.
We had not time to evolve our own system and, as the House is aware, when a Department of State is set up it is very hard to do anything about it. It certainly cannot be knocked down. We are in this position in relation to the Gárda Síochána that the great majority of the men will be going out on pension within the next five or eight years and, while it may be necessary to stagger the retirements of these men, it will also be necessary to recruit practically an entirely new force. I am suggesting in all seriousness to the Minister that now is the time to consider whether we should continue on the lines on which we have been going for the past 23 years or evolve a system of our own which will perhaps in no way be akin to the systems we had in the past, either the D.M.P. or the R.I.C. systems. In the case of the Gárda, although we were an unarmed force, we had, willy-nilly, to model ourselves, as it were, on the previous administration and organisation of the R.I.C. In the case of the D.M.P. we simply carried on, until 1925, when we were amalgamated with the Gárda Síochána, but we kept on the old D.M.P.system and it is just about 100 years out of date. I mention these matters because I feel we should face up to this position by having a new system, and the time has come when the brains of this House and, perhaps, the brains of the country must be employed seriously to consider whether or not we can evolve a system which will give us good results at less cost. I suggest that there is a possibility of evolving such a system.
Deputy Cogan referred to the necessity for mechanisation and increased mobility, and that, to a certain extent, is the kernel of what I have in mind. I believe that with modern means of communication, particularly by radio, and with the increased mobility available by means of the motor car and the motor cycle, it would be possible to evolve some form of village constable system, linked up with district and divisional areas, at a less cost than the present arrangement. Under the present system you have a Gárda barracks in a rural area in which there is a sergeant and three or four men. The first essential is to have a barrack orderly, who has to remain there for 24 hours, during which time he merely records entries in the station dairy, the comings and goings of the personnel complaints received from the public, telephone messages, and minor incidents.
That man dare not leave the precincts of the barracks during the 24 hours, until he is relieved by another member of the Gárda, and that means that two men are engaged in that way over a part of the period. There is accordingly a wastage of 25 per cent. of the strength of the station. That man's services are lost to the public so far as the discharge of police duties is concerned. This problem was considered by many people, but they do not seem to have made any improvement in the position. It is a relic of the old system when the police were not so much a force for the enforcement of law, as an armed garrison for the suppression of the nationhood of this country; when it was essential to have a barrack orderly who would be responsible for the safe custody of the arms in the station. The force arose out of that peculiar position and the system has continued. I cannot see why we should not evolve some system which would, at least, make the services of the man who has to remain in the Gárda barracks available for the discharge of outdoor duty. If that could be done, the strength of stations in rural parts could be reduced 25 per cent. forthwith. In rural districts in Great Britain these duties are very often performed by the wife of the sergeant or constable in charge of a station, for which she receives an allowance. The system works in England, Scotland and Wales and there are no complaints. We seem to be afraid to adopt a system of that kind here, because we feel that if we reduce the strength of the police force we will have hooliganism in parts of the country. I do not believe that. I believe that we have reached stability, and that we can afford to make an experiment in given areas, and to give a new system a trial.
Incidentally, the amount of records that have to be kept by the police is far too numerous. If we could cut down the clerical labour that has to be done men would be available for outdoor work. A police force is primarily intended for outdoor work, for the supervision of the area of which they are in charge, and if there is ineffective outdoor supervision there will be an ineffective police force. That is largely where our police force fails. In addition, every Government Department that wants anything done, or that wants inquiries to be made, says: "Oh, the Gárda Síochána will do that."
At the present time, the Gárda deliver old age pension books, they fill up unemployment forms, and make out agricultural statistics over a period of six weeks every year, entailing the whole-time services of two or three men in every station. They also look after the issuing of licences of various kinds. Paraffin oil permits are now amongst the duties. The police have a hundred and one other duties of that kind to perform that are purely administrative. I understand that quite recently the Minister for Local Government and Public Health wanted to impose upon the Gárda duties in relation to contagious diseases. I do not know if that is correct, but I understand that something of the kind was attempted. The position is that the Gárda Síochána at the present time is top-heavy with administrative duties, and is unable to carry out the work for which it was primarily intended, the prevention and detection of crime.
If these other duties were taken away from the Gárda Síochána, and were performed by those primarily responsible, by the Civil Service departments concerned, the Gárda Síochána could be reduced by a considerable number in officers and men. I do not want to dwell on that aspect further, except to suggest to the Minister that in view of the early retirement of perhaps 75 per cent. of officers and men of the force, the time is ripe for such an attempt. I believe the conditions obtaining at present warrant the taking of a step of that kind. We are really paying far too much for our police. While advocating a change, I do not want in any way to impair the conditions of service, of pay, or of allowances for the police. I believe that if the Gárda Síochána were reorganised on the lines I have briefly outlined, we would probably be able to pay higher rates, to have a better type of police officer, and a better and more efficient service. When we come to deal with crime statistics, is it any wonder that crime is increasing, when the vast majority of the police force is engaged on administrative duties? I know that at one time in Dun Laoghaire coastal borough where I reside there was in that whole area one policeman with a bicycle on night duty. If the citizens knew that at the time, they would be in a state of alarm.
That position was entirely due to the fact that the police in that particular area were engaged in all sorts of special duties, such as protection and administrative duties, and no men were available for the beats. It obtains largely in the City of Dublin despite the fact that there was an increase in the strength of the metropolitan division with the result that the old beat system has completely broken down and, as far as I know, nothing has been put in its place. Men have been put on special employment at special posts, on protection and administrative duties and the last thing considered is the beat.
In a metropolitan area, or in any large urban area, the effectiveness of a police force depends on the amount of outdoor supervision carried out day and night. If the beat system breaks down there is bound to be an increase in crime, and in the number of criminals getting away. There is also bound to be a low percentage of detection of crime. The Minister did not give the figures of detection or the results of police efforts in the investigation of crime. I do not know whether they are good or bad for last year, but in the metropolitan area over a given number of years they were not very good. Probably they compare favourably with results in other large cities, but in my opinion they were not good. They could not be good. Can we hope for anything but an increase in crime unless there is more outdoor supervision? I do not know how many men are on night duty, but I would not be surprised if only 10 or 12 per cent. of the force are on night duty. That is an extraordinary position. I move to report progress
Progress reported: Committee to sit again to-morrow.
The Dáil adjourned at 9 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Friday, April 13th.