Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Select Committee Coroners Bill, 1925 díospóireacht -
Thursday, 29 Apr 1926

SECTION 15.

I move the following: —New section. After the preceding section to add a new section as follows:

15.—(1) The appointment of a coroner under the provisions of Section 153 of the Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Act, 1840, Section 1 of the Borough Coroners (Ireland) Act, 1860, and Sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, shall be subject to the approval of the Minister for Justice.

(2) The Minister for Justice may, if he thinks fit, remove any coroner from his office for inability or misbehaviour in the discharge of his duties.

At present the appointment of a coroner is made by the local authority, whether it is a borough or a county council, and in this new section I suggest it should be made subject to the approval of the Minister for Justice. Under the existing Acts it is subject to the approval of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health, or the approval of the Local Government Department. Apparently the coroners consider that the Minister for Justice is the proper man, and I think they are right.

It is a judicial office.

The power of removal is given to the Minister.

Is the new section wide enough? You refer here to " inability or misbehaviour in the discharge of his duties." Suppose a coroner is convicted of a criminal offence or is a notorious profligate or drunkard, he might still be able to hold inquests.

Mr. O'Sullivan reminds me that sub-section (2) is taken from the Local Government Act of 1898.

Is not the wording of the sub-section clearly insufficient? " Misbehaviour " is a curious sort of word. I think it should be " misconduct." Then again, why should we confine the misconduct to the discharge of his duties?

I quite agree with you.

He might be notoriously misconducting himself otherwise.

Would it do to give the Minister power to remove him for misbehaviour or other causes?

Would it not be better to say: " The Minister for Justice may, if he thinks fit, remove any coroner who is, in the opinion of such Minister, incapacitated by age or infirmity in the due discharge of his duties, or for misconduct "?

I think that would cover it.

Would not that mean that whoever happens to be the Minister at the time will be the judge of the misconduct?

Somebody must be the judge. You might put it this way:—

" (2) The Minister for Justice may, if he thinks fit, remove any coroner from his office for misconduct or if satisfied that, by reason of physical or mental infirmity, he is incapable of the due discharge of his duties."

That would be better. I beg to move that the new sub-section (2), as suggested by you, sir, be substituted for that already appearing in my name.

New sub-section (2) agreed to.

Section 15, as amended, agreed to.

I have a suggestion to make here which I already made to Senator Brown. There is power at present to enlarge coroners' districts; there is no power to amalgamate them and my idea is that there are too many of them and that it is not a paying job.

Their salaries are low.

Yes. If we are going to provide, as we set out to do in a succeeding new section, for a revision of salaries, we ought on the other hand to seek some opportunity for economising. We should seek, if necessary, on the application of the county councils concerned, to amalgamate counties. I have in mind places like Carlow and Kildare, and I am quite sure if the county councils there agreed, it would be an economic thing to have one coroner for both counties. I suppose that in the two counties they would not have more than thirty inquests in the year.

The same would apply to Sligo and Leitrim.

The reason I did not mention county amalgamation is that the power of appointing a coroner under the existing law, and under a section of this Bill, is vested in the local authority of a particular district. Take the case of Carlow and Kildare. If you amalgamate them, what are you to do with regard to the local body that is to appoint a new coroner?

He could be appointed at a joint meeting of the two councils.

Very often in the case of one county you have two or three coroners, and that situation needs to be remedied.

If the county councils of Carlow and Kildare were agreed that one coroner would do for both places, why should they not be empowered to appoint one coroner?

They are the only counties to which this could apply.

What about Sligo and Leitrim?

With a motor car the coroner could easily cover the whole area.

There are four coroners for Sligo and Leitrim, and that number could be reduced to two.

If the salaries of coroners are to be revised, I think there should be some economy effected, particularly in regard to districts. It is perfectly ridiculous at present. In some counties a coroner does not hold six inquests in the year.

In Limerick there are five coroners, including one for the county borough.

Why there are so many is due to the fact, I imagine, that a coroner does not look to make money out of the job, but it gives him some sort of status.

These districts were created at a time when the coroner had to drive around on a sidecar.

They were created at a time when there was agrarian crime and there was an enormous amount of work to be done.

It is ridiculous to think that Limerick should have five coroners. They do not need that number, unless they are going to kill all the Germans connected with the Shannon Scheme.

I have no doubt when you and Senator O'Farrell go down there will be a lot of inquests.

In the case of amalgamated counties you would have to give power for the appointment of a coroner to the two bodies sitting together. As the law stands, you would not have power to appoint a coroner to this double county district. That was really why I did not mention it, together with the fact that there were only a few counties concerned.

Perhaps we may leave out the idea of amalgamating counties then, and have one coroner for each county?

The Committee agreed.

Barr
Roinn