HC Deb 15 July 1902 vol 111 cc243-4
MR. DELANY (Queen's. County, Ossory)

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the final audit of the accounts of the late Urban Council of New Kilmainham was made on the 13th February, 1901, when the solicitor to the Council was represented by counsel; that his bills there presented for opposing the Dublin Boundaries Bill amounted to £2,292; and that the Bills contained disbursements which had not been certified for by the taxing officer; will he say whether any certificates were produced to the auditor; and, if so, for what amount; and, seeing that the solicitor in his bills admitted receiving £1,560 from the Urban Council, and produced a judgment of the High Court for £1,689, with £8 10s. costs obtained before the Council saw the writ or bills of costs, though his taxed costs only amounted to £1,711 10s. 8d., and that the amount claimed by the solicitor was allowed by the auditor, amounting to £4,982, of which £1,560 was discharged by Kilmainham, leaving a liability of £3,432 to be discharged by the Corporation of Dublin, can he say whether this liability, or any portion thereof, has been discharged by the Corporation, and whether he proposes to take action in the matter.

(Answer) The solicitor to the Council attended the audit, but the auditor cannot say if counsel was also there to represent him. Two bills of costs, amounting respectively to £1,737 15s. 6d. and £1,501 11s. 11d., were submitted to the auditor, and the total amount of each of these bills was certified by the taxing master of the House of Commons. The solicitor received two payments of £900 and £550 on account; and a judgment of the High Court for the balance, viz., £1,689 7s. 5d. with £8 9s. 10d. costs was produced at the audit. It appears on the face of this judgment that the Council was served with the writ of summons, and that notice of the issuing of the said writ was published in the Dublin Gazette and in the local press. The taxed costs of the solicitor amounted to £3,239 7s. 5d., asset out above, of which £1,550 was discharged by the Urban District Council leaving a liability of £1,689 7s. 5d., which has since been discharged by the Corporation of Dublin. It does not appear that any action is called for on my part in the matter.—(Irish Office.)