§ * MR. GINNELL (Westmeath, N.)I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury to state by whom the Treasury is moved to intervene in cases under the Irish Land Act of 1903; can it intervene motu proprio; will it immediately test the validity of the decision in King-Harman and Hayes, or any of the numerous cases now ruled by that decision, in which money was paid as price and bonus on house property to a person to whom that property did not belong, by a fictitious sale to a person to whom the house 988 property already belonged; how does the Treasury insure that every transaction represents a real sale; is money advanced by the Treasury in Great Britain to finance transactions of this character; and will he name any statutory authority for the Treasury making itself a party to, and the State responsible for such transactions in Ireland.
§ MR. MCKENNAThe Treasury intervene in cases under the Land Purchase Act of 1903, of which they get notice from (1) the Judicial Commissioner (2) the Estates Commissioners or (3) the Land Judge, and in which public funds are or may be affected. They were not parties to the case of King-Harman and Hayes, and I gave in my Answer on Wednesday last† the reason why the Treasury do not consider that there is any ground on which they could intervene. I do not feel able to add anything, to that Answer.
§ * MR. GINNELLBut how do they distinguish between these transactions and other cases of swindling?
§ MR. MCKENNAThe Treasury has to see whether any liability is likely to accrue to public funds, and in the King-Harman case they were informed that the security was adequate.