HC Deb 16 March 1896 vol 38 cc1008-10
MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if the Lord Lieutenant has refused to give his final approval to the scheme for dealing with the Roxborough Road School, Limerick, as amended by Resolution of this House; did Canon Gregg take possession of these premises in 1874, without the sanction of the Commissioners of Education, and hold them till 1880, without having ever paid rent; was Canon Gregg, in 1880, accepted as tenant by the Commissioners of Education at a rent of £20 a year, but did the Judicial Commissioners, under the Educational Endowments Act, find that the Commissioners of Education expended the amount of the yearly rent upon repairs and maintenance, or gave credit for same to Canon Gregg against expenditure by him upon such repairs and maintenance; has the result been that Canon Gregg, holding these premises practically free of rent from 1874 to 1892, lias not been required even to keep them in repair, and did the architect to the Commissioners, in 1894, report that the premises are in a state of dilapidation; and, under what Act are the duties and rights of the Commissioners of Education in regard to these premises denned, and what Statute empowers them to let these premises to Canon Gregg?


As the hon. Gentleman is already aware, from the correspondence between the Roman Catholic Bishop of Limerick and myself, which has been published in the Press, and which, doubtless, he has read, the Lord Lieutenant has withheld his approval of the Scheme dealing with the Roxborough Road School, having regard to the statement made by the Judicial Commissioners, Lord Justice Fitzgibbon and Mr Justice O'Brien (upon which I do not desire to offer an opinion), that an approval of the Scheme, with the omission of Dr. Gregg's right of preemption and no right of compensation, might work a possible injustice. The hon. Gentleman must be further aware, from that correspondence, that, with a view to having the right to compensation finally decided, the Judicial Commissioners published, on the 28th January last, a Supplemental Scheme, dealing with the Roxborough Road School, to which all parties interested have a right to lodge objections and to have those objections adjudicated upon at a public hearing before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The case being thus sub judice, I do not think it advisable to now anticipate the discussion that may hereafter take place of the matters involved in the Question on the Paper.


I have asked only as to matters of fact.


These matters of fact have to come up for discussion before the Privy Council.


Are the statements in the Question true or false?


I cannot give any other answer to the hon. Gentleman.