§ MR. BRUENasked the Secretary to the Treasury, If it is true that the Commissioners of Inland Revenue propose to abolish the Carlow district as a separate district for the collection of Income Tax; and, if so, to what district or districts the eight Poor Law Unions comprised in the collections are to be added; whether time will be given before the change is finally made for the expression of opinion, for or against it, on the part of the public in these eight unions, whose interests and convenience may be affected by such centralisation; and, whether he will lay upon the Table of the House a Return of the Revenue annually received under each of the Schedules of the Income Tax in each of the eight unions of the Carlow district, and the expense of collecting this tax?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHSir, it is true that the Board of Inland Revenue have decided to abolish the office of Surveyor of Taxes at Carlow, as part of a scheme for the reduction of their Tax establishment in Ireland. Of the eight Poor Law Unions, which formerly composed the Carlow district, Enniscorthy Union has been added to Waterford district, Mount Mellick Union to Athlone district, and the other six Unions to Kilkenny district. I can see no reason for delaying the proposed reduction in the staff. The convenience of the taxpayers has been, and will be, consulted as much as possible; but an unnecessary Government officer ought not to be maintained merely because private interests might 1448 be affected by the abolition of his post. I have in my hand the Return for which the hon. Member asks, and will be glad to lay it on the Table. The saving that will arise from the withdrawal of that officer is £484 a year.