§ Mr. HACKETTasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that the Thurles Rural District Council petitioned the Local Government Board against the Provisional Order made by their inspector after an inquiry held by him under the Labourers Act, 1906, and that the council pointed out to the Board the reasons on which the inspector disallowed a portion of their improvement scheme; whether he can state the number of owners and occupiers of land proposed to be taken for the purpose of the part of the scheme which he rejected and who consented at the inquiry or had intimated their consent to the district council in writing; and whether the inspector disallowed any portion of the scheme against which no legal objections were raised at the local inquiry?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI understand that the Solicitor to the Rural District Council wrote a letter to the effect stated in the question to the Local Government Board, who replied pointing out that the inspector had no power to issue a supplemental order authorising the acquisition of the sites rejected by him, or not included in his original order. In six of the cases in question neither owner nor occupier appear to have objected to the acquisition of the sites, and in a seventh case the occupier consented, but the owner dissented. In these seven cases the inspector rejected the sites on the ground of unsuitability.