MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 7 March 1876)

THE O'DONOGHUE
, in moving that a Select Committee be appointed "to inquire into the case of the depositors in the late Tralee Savings Bank," said, it might appear at once that the subject was purely of a local character; but inseparable from it there was an Imperial principle upon which he relied. Although the failure of the bank occurred so long back as the month of April, 1847, the recollection of it was as fresh as ever in Tralee, and such of the depositors who were still living and their descendants had never for one moment abandoned the claim which they considered they had upon the Government for the money of which they had been defrauded. It was true that the subject had already been investigated by a Committee of the House of Commons; but he met that by saying that since the holding of that investigation circumstances had occurred which had greatly strengthened the claims of the depositors. When the failure occurred Mr. Tidd Pratt, a Government officer, proceeded to Tralee, investigated the circumstances, and made an award that a sum of £16,000 was due to certain depositors who had deposited their money previous to the passing of 7 & 8 Vict., and he awarded these sums against the managers and trustees of the bank. The Committee evidently thought that the awards of Mr. Tidd Pratt were good and binding, and that the £16,000 would have been recovered from the trustees and managers. However, that was not the case, for a verdict which had been obtained against the trustees in an action 1583 for £100, brought by a depositor, was after argument in the Court of Queen's Bench set aside, Chief Justice Blackburn, who delivered the unanimous judgment of the Court in favour of the defendant, observing that no action could be maintained on the awards, which were bad in form and in substance, and he added that he thought the depositors who had been deprived of their legal right by the insufficiency of the awards of a public officer had a moral and equitable claim to be recouped the amount of their awards. He believed that had the Committee been aware of these facts they would have dealt with this case as they had done with that of the Cuffe Street Savings Bank, and recommended the Government to compensate the depositors. A second class of depositors consisted of those who had lodged their money subsequent to the year 1844, and who by the change in the law made that year were deprived of the security which the other class of depositors had in the personal liability of the trustees and managers. The claim of the second class of depositors was founded on the facts that they were unaware of the change in the law, and that the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt had systematically violated the provisions of the Act 7 & 8 Vict., for the management of savings banks. These allegations were substantiated by the Report of a Committee of that House which some years ago sat to investigate the Tralee case. The Act required that bonds should be given by the officers of the bank and lodged with the clerk of the peace for the county and the National Debt Commissioners, but it was not enforced with regard to the actuary, nor was that fact made known to the depositors, by the neglect of which the actuary was able to carry on unchecked his system of fraud. The complaint was that the National Debt Commissioners, by their neglect, had contributed to the loss, and they being Government officers, the Government was liable for their acts of negligence. There was a striking difference between the Cuffe Street Bank and the Tralee Bank. The trustees of the former had actual notice of what was going on. There the Government called on the bank to have their accounts investigated, but the bank refused; but in the Tralee Bank, owing to the bungling and incompetence 1584 of the Government officer, the depositors were prevented from recovering £16,000 of their money, and therefore he was justified in expecting that the Government would not disclaim responsibility in the case of the Tralee Bank. There was still, he might add, a very small sum in the hands of the Commissioners, and he hoped the Committee for which he now begged to move would be able to suggest some course by which that amount might be made available for the depositors.

MR. HERBERT
seconded the Motion, and said it would be a great boon to those poor people if they got back the money which they had deposited in ignorance of the fact that the trustees were no longer liable to them for their deposits.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, he could assure the hon. Gentleman that he sympathized very much with those poor people in the loss which they had sustained; but the Government were in no sense responsible for the failure which occurred in 1847, owing to the defalcations of the actuary of the bank, which had, he believed, been going on for a considerable time. After the failure Mr. Tidd Pratt had gone over to Ireland, and, having inquired into the matter, had made some kind of award, by which the trustees of the bank were adjudged by him to be liable for a certain class of deposits. It appeared, however, that when an attempt was made to put the award into force it was found to be illegal, and that Mr. Tidd Pratt had not executed his duties in a proper manner. The consequence was that a Committee of the House of Commons had been appointed, which sat during one Session and a portion of two others, to investigate the claims of the depositors.

THE O'DONOGHUE
The invalidity of Mr. Tidd Pratt's awards was not discovered until after the Committee reported.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
said, that would be important if it were the fact; but he found in a draft report which had been drawn up by the late Mr. Henry Herbert, a member 1585 of the Committee, that there was special reference made to the decision of Chief Justice Blackburn as to the invalidity of Mr. Tidd Pratt's award. The Committee, therefore, had the facts fully before them, and they reported that the cases of the Killarney and Tralee Savings Banks had no peculiar features differing from those of other banks that had suffered from the dishonesty of the directors. It was not desirable, therefore, that 25 years after another Committee should be appointed to review the proceedings of the previous Committee, and when many of the witnesses who were examined at that time, including Mr. Tidd Pratt, were dead. It would be a waste of time to do so, and it would be a hardship and a delusion towards those poor people, who no doubt treasured a sense of the wrong inflicted so long ago, that they should for a moment suppose that the House of Commons was likely now to do something for them. It was impossible that any Committee could take a different view from that appointed 25 years ago; and if they did it would be admitting a principle that would apply to every savings bank that failed in the United Kingdom. The Cuffe Street Savings Bank was a wholly different case; because there it was the action of the Government officers which more or less conduced to the loss, since Mr. Tidd Pratt, instead of recommending the winding up the bank, recommended that it should be continued, because he was afraid that by winding it up there would be a run on the other savings banks, and that great mischief would result therefrom; and then Parliament recognized the claim of the depositors by making a Vote of money in their favour. There still was, however, in the hands of the National Debt Commissioners a small sum of about £2,000, which undoubtedly belonged to the depositors in the savings banks if they could be got at. The Commissioners had always desired to give the money back to the trustees, if they would only undertake the responsibility of distributing it, but the trustees had always shrunk from assuming this responsibility. A short Act might be passed authorizing some person in whom confidence could be reposed to distribute the money among those who could make out their claims as depositors. Of 1586 course, the individual employed would be put to a great deal of trouble, and he must not be held responsible in regard to any claim which might be made upon him after the distribution.