HC Deb 02 March 1916 vol 80 cc1208-10
12. Mr. P. WHITE

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he has received a resolution from the Oldcastle Board of Guardians protesting against the action of the Local Government Board auditor in treating the Franciscan Fathers of Athlone as outlaws; what action he proposes to take; whether he will state what statutory authority the auditor had for his action; at what date it was passed; and whether it put a price on the heads of the outlawed priests?

Mr. BIRRELL

As there is a great deal of misconception in Ireland about this matter, I will ask the indulgence of the House for the length of my reply.

Various Irish Poor Law and other Statutes exempt from liability to rating premises used exclusively for public worship and premises used exclusively for charitable purposes. The Franciscans, who are an Order subsisting by public charity, occupy in Athlone, besides their church, a building in which they live. The church is immune from rating liability, and has been always and is so treated. On the other hand, it having been decided by the Lord Chief Baron, in a similar case from Ennis, that premises used as a residence for particular persons who are the owners or some of the owners thereof are not used exclusively for charitable purposes, and are, therefore, subject to rating, these premises in Athlone were included by the Commissioner of Valuation in the lists of premises liable to rating. Thereupon, it was the legal duty of the local authorities to collect the rates on the premises, and, as they did not do so, the auditor, as he was legally obliged to do, surcharged them with the amount of the rates, about £4 or £5. The auditor is an official whose duties are of a semi-judicial character, in the discharge of which he is not under the control of the Local Government Board or of anybody else, nor does he consult the Local Government Board. The surcharge in the circumstances above stated is all that happened, and the Local Government Board had, directly or indirectly, nothing whatever to do with the matter. It is, therefore, not correct to say that the Franciscan priests were treated as outlaws by the Local Government Board, or by the auditor, or by anybody else.

The question of law as to the liability of the premises to rating is not one for the Local Government Board or for me, but the Franciscans can next year, if they are so advised, challenge the auditor's decision in a Court of Law. I may add I am informed that the notion that the Franciscans were treated as outlaws seems to have arisen from observations made in the course of the Ennis case as to the effect of an old and practically obsolete Section of a famous Statute of 1829. Were this Section to be repealed, as it ought to be, I am advised that the legal question of the liability of these premises to rating would be left unaffected.