§ (3)Sub-section (1) of this Section shall apply to existing Irish officers in the civil service of the Crown, who, although receiving salaries not charged on the Consolidated Fund, are removable only for misconduct or incapacity, including (after the date of Irish Union) officers removable under Section seventy-three; of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Ireland), 1877: Provided that, in the case of any such officer whose salary is payable otherwise than out of money provided by the Parliament of the United Kingdom, the provisions of that Subsection with respect to the payment of salaries and pensions out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom shall not have effect, and in the case of any such officer whose salary is payable out of money provided by the Parliament of the United Kingdom those provisions shall have effect with the substitution of payment out of money so provided for charge on and payment out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom.
§ Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANSI beg to move, at the end of Sub-section (3), to insert a new Sub-section—
(4)Sub-section (2) of this Section shall apply to any officer to whom Sub-section (3) of this Section applies, with the substitution of a reference to a period of forty years' service for the reference to the period of service entitling to a pension.This Amendment has been put down in pursuance of an undertaking given in Committee to my hon. and gallant Friend. It provides that Sub-section (3) of Clause 898 51, which now extends to certain Irish officers who hold their offices on a good behaviour tenure, and in consequence draw certain salaries, gratuities, and pensions, shall extend to certain other officers, whose salaries are not charged on the Consolidated Fund, but who are entitled to retire on a pension before the completion of the pensionable period of service. These salaries are not charged on the Consolidated Fund but on money voted. There is a slight alteration in Sub-section (2) in that the class officers to which this now extends are required to have a period of 40 years' service before being entitled to retire.
Captain CRAIGI should like to ask the Attorney-General for Ireland what officers not included in the Bill are now by the words of this Amendment included, and particularly whether the Amendment includes clerks of the Crown and Peace and Under-Sheriffs. I need not point out to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that he gave an undertaking on this Clause that he would look into the case of the clerks of the Crown and Peace, and bring forward an Amendment which would cover their case. Reference was also made to the Under-Sheriffs. I should like to know whether they will be put on the same footing as clerks of the Crown and Peace. These officials by a recent Act of Parliament are being made at least quasi officers of the Civil Service, and I should like the right hon. and learned Gentleman to tell us exactly what is their position.
§ The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND (Mr. Denis Henry)As regards the clerks of the Crown and Peace, the hon. and gallant Gentleman may take it that they are very amply covered by the provisions of the Bill. So far as Under-Sheriffs are concerned, you could not possibly put them on the same footing as clerks of the Crown and Peace, and for several reasons, including this: that up till 1st November the Under-Sheriffs were simply appointed during the pleasure of the High Sheriff and for the first time, now they are under a new system. We could not possibly recognise pensionable rights in the same way as in the case of clerks of the Crown and Peace.
Captain CRAIGHave these sub-Sheriffs fixity of tenure which will prevent some official superior removing them from their position, it may be without 899 justice? Have they not been given, so to speak, fixity of tenure by the Bill which I mentioned, and which was passed earlier in the Session?
§ Mr. HENRYUnder the Sheriffs Bill of this Session the Under-Sheriffs are appointed by the Lord Lieutenant, and they are removable by him. That is the precise meaning.
§ Mr. MOLESWhat will be their position in the future? I quite recognise the present position of the existing Under-Sheriffs, but seeing that in the future the Under-Sheriffs will be appointed by the Lord Lieutenant, ought they not to have the same rights as other officials?
§ Mr. HENRYUnder-Sheriffs will be appointed by the Lord Lieutenant, and be dismissible by him. They have no pensionable rights.
§ Mr. MOLESThat is not quite an answer to my question. What I want to know is what will be their future position in respect to pensionable rights?
§ Mr. RONALD McNEILLI am rather surprised by the answer just given by the hon. and learned Gentleman. He will perhaps remember that I had a conversation with him on this subject following what had been said earlier, and my recollection is that he told me the position of Under-Sheriffs was to be safeguarded completely by this Bill. So far as I now understand him, their position has been entirely altered. Hitherto, as he knows, Under-Sheriffs have been appointed by the Sheriffs, and although the office was only nominally for a year in many cases, or most, and certainly in some that I have in mind, it was practically a life office, and the men concerned were perfectly certain they would not under ordinary circumstances be turned out. Under this Bill the right hon. and learned Gentleman tells us they are going to be appointed by the Lord Lieutenant, and are dismissible by him. That means that they have got absolutely no security of tenure and may be turned out without any compensation whatever. That seems to me to amount to this, that their present position is, by this Bill, being altered to 900 their disadvantage very seriously. This is quite different to what some of us understood was the intention of the Government.
§ Mr. HENRYMy hon. Friend will recollect that under the old regime the Under Sheriff could be removed from his office by the High Sheriff who appointed him, and these men were constantly removed year by year. This officer was appointed by the High Sheriff, and only given a small wage or salary. He now gets a substantial or a moderately substantial salary from the Treasury. Under all the circumstances it is difficult to put him on the same footing as the Clerks of the Crown and Peace.
§ Mr. R. McNEILLBut the present Lord Lieutenant now has power to remove him.
§ Mr. HENRYOh, yes; under the new-Sheriffs' Bill the Lord Lieutenant alone has power over the Under Sheriff, and not the Sheriff.
§ Mr. McNEILLUnder this Bill?
§ Mr. HENRYNo, under the Sheriffs Bill of this year.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.