§ MR. P. M'DONALDasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been drawn to a certain Minute addressed by the Registrar General of Dublin to the clerks in his Department; and, if so, whether the contemplated changes in the staff whereby the juniors are to be discharged and the seniors to be advanced has the approval of the Right honourable gentleman; and, whether the head of the Department, whose duty it is to have charge of the safe keeping of all documents and records relating to his office, is the gentleman who, on being called upon by the Court, in the case of the Dublin Corporation against the Kingstown Town Commissioners, to produce certain necessary public documents, stated they were then made into pulp, the consequence of which was that the Corporation was nonsuited?
THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. JOHN MORLEY)The scheme recently 900 adopted for the reorganization of the Registrar General's Department was approved and issued before I took Office, and no occasion has yet arisen for its reconsideration by me. I understand that two gentlemen—one of whom is in his 60th year, and the other in his 54th year—have been selected for pensions in order to forward the work of reorganization. The document which was sought to be produced at the trial referred to was the "press proof" of the Census, which had never been in the custody of the Registrar General; and I am informed by my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General for Ireland, who was counsel for the Corporation on the occasion, that its non-production was not the ground of the non-suit. It transpired in the course of the hearing that the Census Papers of 1861 had been pulped. This was done by order of the Government, in pursuance of an opinion of the Law Officers that these documents are privileged and might be destroyed when they had been used for the official Report.
§ MR. P. M'DONALDMight I ask the right hon. Gentleman how the case was to be proved by the Corporation of Dublin against the Commissioners when these very necessary public documents were destroyed? They were required at the trial, and were, consequently, essentially necessary. I might also ask the right hon. Gentleman if the reasons for the proposed changes were in order to increase the salaries of certain persons who hold high positions in the office, and for this reason it was proposed to discharge some of the clerks of the Department?
MR. JOHN MORLEYI am sure the hon. Member will excuse me if I do not answer that. As to the other points respecting the documents, all I can say is that the Attorney General for Ireland, who was counsel for the Corporation, gives it as his opinion that the document was not regarded as essentially necessary.