§ MR. P. A. MCHUGHTo ask the Chief' Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Kilrushughter School, county Sligo, was, previous to 1893, recognised as an agricultural school for upwards of twenty-five years; that the conditions on which it was sanctioned for continuance, in September, 1899, differed from those which existed in September, 1893; that the Commissioners of National Education gave instructions, on the 23rd September, 1893, to their agricultural superintendent to visit the farm; if so, will he state on what date were these instructions carried out; on what dates did the superintendent visit the farm, subsequent to these instuctions; and whether, in view of the loss the teacher sustains through' this neglect on the part of the agricultural superintendent, the Commissioners will reconsider the inclusion, in accordance with Rule 200, of the sum of £13 14s. 6d. in his consolidated salary, which he earned as agricultural fees and gratuities prior to the 31st Match, 1900.
(Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) This school was not recognised as an agricultural school. The farm held by the teacher, Mr. Melville, was recognised, prior to 1893, as a school farm. in connection with which special fees were paid to the teacher by the Commissioners for the instruction of the pupils in practical agriculture. The farm, being the property of the teacher, ceased to be a school farm on the retirement of Mr. Melville from the position of principal of the school. From the 1st April, 1885, it was a requirement that a teacher appointed to conduct a national school with a farm attached must possess a certificate of attendance at a course of agricultural instruction at the Albert Istitution, Glasnevin, or a certificate of competency from some other authority satisfactory to the Commissioners, as a condition of payment of the special agricultural fees. Mr. Healy was appointed principal on 1st September, 1893. On the 3rd September the manager of the school applied for the recognition as a school farm of certain land held by Mr. Healy, on condition, inter alia, that the teacher gave a guarantee to attend one of the courses of training at the 224 Albert Institution. Mr. Healy was summoned to the course of instruction held in September, 1894. He did not attend, nor did he attend any subsequent course of instruction in agriculture. On 20th September, 1893, the manager's application for the official registration of Mr. Healy's farm as a school farm was referred for report to the agricultural superintendent, who took the opportunity of viewing the farm when visiting the neighbouring schools of Doonflynn and Ballacutranta for the purpose of annual inspection. The definite consideration of the case was necessarily postponed pending Mr. Healy's attendance at the prescribed course of instruction at the Albert Institution. The Commissioners do not admit liability in the 'matter of Mr. Healv's claim. He received no payment" as agricultural fees and gratuities prior to the 31st March, 1900." To his failure to attend a course of agricultural instruction must be attributed the delay in the settlement of the case. The attendance was an obligation on his part of which he was fully aware; and although it may have been inconvenient for him to have attended in September, 1894, no reason has been adduced for his non-attendance at any subsequent session of instruction.