HC Deb 15 May 1896 vol 40 cc1427-8
CAPTAIN DONELAN (Cork, E.)

On behalf of the hon. Member for Galway (Mr. J. PINKERTON), I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland - (1) whether he is a ware that Mr. W. E. Ellis, Local Government Board Inspector, surcharged the Chairman of the Galway Board of Guardians in the sum of £1 2s. 6d. for relief given to a family, three members of which were lying in scarlet fever, and which was given by order of Dr. Golding, Medical Officer of the Union; and that the same inspector also surcharged another guardian for signing a relief ticket for a man who had no property whatever, and, upon these gentlemen refusing to pay, caused summonses to be issued against them; (2) whether he is aware that, at the hearing of the summonses at Galway Petty Sessions, on the 27th April, the magistrates (including Mr. Gardiner, R. M.) declared that, while compelled by law to convict, the demand was unfair and unjust, and refused to give costs; and (3) under these circumstances, will steps be taken to remit the fines?

MR. GERALD BALFOUR

The Local Government Auditor states he did surcharge the sum mentioned to the Chairman of the Galway Guardians for outdoor relief given on the Chairman's order to the holder of three acres of land. Section 2 of the 25 and 26 Vict. Cap. 83 enacts that any person who shall be in occupation of land to a greater extent than a quarter of a statute acre, and who shall be considered by the Guardians to require relief, shall be relieved in the workhouse, and not otherwise. The Auditor did not surcharge any Guardian for signing a relief ticket, but probably the hon. Member has in his mind a case in which the Auditor disallowed outdoor relief given to a man rated for a small holding, there being no evidence that he was not in occupation of this holding for which he was rated. I have no information as to the statement in the second paragraph, but am making inquiry. The Auditor states he would have been inclined to stretch a point if this had been an isolated case, but that, the Galway Guardians having so frequently contravened the law in this respect and remonstrances having hitherto failed to influence their action, he felt obliged to make and enforce the surcharge referred to.