NEW CLAUSE. (Hansard, 24 May 1898)

§ MR. M. HEALY
In this clause will the Government make it clear as to the power of appointment? It is not clear as to whether after the first appointment there will not be a new appointment. The Act only deals with the first appointment, and it appears to me it would be possible hero to appoint two officers. I think the offices of the county of Londonderry should be given to the officers of the guardians of the peace of the city of Londonderry. I do not think there should be two officials upon the now appointment. One good thing in this clause is that it does not apply to salary, so that 649 if two officers were appointed you would not get the salary. In 1877 there was a great endeavour to cut down these appointments. In Cork the Clerk of the Peace is also the Clerk of the Crown and Peace for the city of Cork, and I am at a loss to know why Londonderry should be under a different statute. It is all very well to say that the Government does not find the salary, but in a year or two the Government will come and say we provided for an officer but did not provide for his salary, and now we come for that. I do hope that the Government will state now that they will not create a new office.

§ MR. VESEY KNOX
I think the reason why no representations were made by Londonderry upon this point is that the city of Londonderry objects to the thing altogether. Inasmuch as the Clerk of the Crown and Peace for the city of Derry is not a very old man, the contingency has not arisen. I cannot see what advantage it could be to the locality to have the Crown appoint separate officials for the counties and cities. If the localities appointed them for themselves it might be a different thing; but as the appointment is made by the Crown, I do not see why the localities should object to the offices being combined. I should be glad to have an explanation as to what is to happen in Belfast. Do I understand that the Clerk of the Crown and Peace in county Down is still to draw the same salary as he did when he was doing the larger amount of work?

MR. T. M. HEALY
I move this Amendment formally. Some of these Gentlemen are anxious to know what is to become of their jurisdiction when the city is merged into the county at large. I am far from saying that it is the most appropriate Amendment, but I move it formally.

§ MR. ATKINSON
I do not quite gather to what the honourable and learned Gentleman particularly alludes.

MR. T. M. HEALY
The coroner of Galway is elected by the freeholders of Galway, and not by the corporation. You provide that the county and city of Galway shall be merged into the county at large, and you have provided for the Clerks of the Peace and Crown of Galway, and this gentleman is apprehensive that, though you provide for the other officers, who are exactly in the same position, he will be excluded. That is his view, and it does appear to me that this clause, if it is necessary for the two officers mentioned in it, ought to be necessary for all the other officers of the merged boroughs.

§ MR. ATKINSON
The existing coroner is made perfectly safe. It is provided that he shall remain coroner in like manner in the coroner's district of the county of Galway. He is now appointed, and he holds his office and exercises his jurisdiction over the county and town as if it existed by the previous Amendment.

MR. T. M. HEALY
I am sorry I put down my Amendment before I saw that the coroner was added by sub-section 4. I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.