HC Deb 20 May 1895 vol 33 cc1589-90

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, in view of the fact that Section 93 of the Act 1 and 2 Vict., chapter 56, provides that any guardian who is concerned as contractor for workhouse supplies renders himself liable to forfeit £100, and that Section 22 of the Act 6 and 7 Vict., chapter 92, provides that any person who has been convicted under the first-mentioned section shall not be capable of being elected or of acting as a guardian—(1) whether it is the duty of a Local Government Board Inspector, when made aware of the facts of the case, to institute proceedings against any person who violates the above Acts; (2) whether Mr. Lynch, Local Government Board Inspector, is aware that Mr. Moran, the defeated candidate at the late poor law election for the Westport Union, offended against the law in supplying bread to the Union during his term of office as guardian of the poor; and, if so, why does he not prosecute Moran; and (3) is he aware that the late Dr. Brodie and Mr. Robinson, Local Government Board Inspectors, issued writs and recovered the usual fine (£100) for similar offences as those with which Moran is charged, in two cases?


I am informed that it is the duty of the Local Government Board, but not of their Inspector, if satisfied that the law has been violated, to institute proceedings as mentioned in the first paragraph. The Board state that there was no corroboration of the charge made against Moran, and that there was not, in their opinion, sufficient evidence in support of it to justify them in instituting proceedings against him. With reference to the third paragraph, I am told that the proceedings mentioned were taken by the Poor Law Commissioners and the Local Government Board respectively, and that in both cases the evidence was considered sufficient to justify the taking of the proceedings.

MR. W. O. BRIEN (Cork City)

May I ask, was it not the duty of the inspector to report to the Local Government Board that he had been offered proofs that this man was fraudulently carrying on business?


I think he is now no longer a guardian.


Is it not the fact that at this moment the question is pending whether or not this man is to be a Poor Law Guardian? Is there no prospect of bringing him to justice if, as I have satisfied myself, the charges are true and can be proved?


I have just said that I was going to look into the matter a little further.


I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been drawn to a resolution of the Westport Board of Guardians, passed at their meeting on the 9th instant in which they say that, owing to the failure of potato crop and the want of remunerative works, the outdoor relief rate has become so high that they have resolved to discontinue it; and what steps he proposes to take in order to enable the Board to carry on the work of the union.


My attention has been drawn to the resolution referred to. The question of affording employment on relief works to increased numbers in this union is now under consideration.