§ MR. JOHN O'CONNOR (Kildare, N.)
I beg to ask the secretary to the Treasury whether he will publish and lay upon the Table immediately any correspondence that may have passed between the Treasury and the promoters of certain railway schemes in the south of Ireland in the years 1905–6, having the object of uniting existing railway systems north and south of Cork City, especially with regard to any proposals or promises made to such promoters on behalf of the; Treasury of financial support of these schemes out of a fund at the disposal of the Treasury, arising out of and in consideration for local taxation of certain; districts in the county Waterford in respect to railways constructed in the county Waterford.
§ THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. MCKENNA, Monmouthshire, N.)
I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by publishing any such correspondence, as I have already stated the nature of the offer which the Government have made.
§ MR. POWER (Waterford, E.)
Is it not a fact that application by the railway company to devote the whole of this 1298 £93,000 towards connecting the railways of Cork was promptly refused in 1901?
§ MR. MCKENNA
Yes, Sir. The ground of refusal was that the money was allocated under another Act and that the allocation of this Act did not expire until 1905.
§ Mil. FLYNN
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if the Cork Railway Bill sanctioned by a Committee is to be hung up the much-needed connection of railways in the City of Cork will be indefinitely postponed?
§ MR. MOONEY (Newry)
The correspondence between the Treasury and the Railway Company, was issued as a Parliamentary Paper in 1901–2. Why should the hon. Gentleman draw a distinction between this correspondence and that which is published?
§ MR. T. M. HEALY
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the action of the Government in this matter has the strong support of many Irish Members?
§ [No Answer was returned.]