§ Mr. JOHN O'CONNORasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that Mr. Richard Grubb, an auditor of the Local Government Board (Ireland), instituted proceedings for the recovery of a sum of £5 5s. 4d., arrears of collections due by Rent Collector Caffrey, to the Naas, No. 1, district council, county Killdare; whether an arrangement had been come to by Caffrey with the clerk of the council to stop the arrears due out of the poundage fees coming to Caffrey; whether, under the circumstances, it was necessary to take proceedings on a settled matter; whether he is aware that the recovery of the said 1303W sum of £5 5s. 4d. cost £7 1s. 6d., made up of the following items of account, rendered by William Findlater and Sons, Dublin, solicitors: instructions to proceed, 13s. 4d.; letter to auditor to know name and address of defendant, 3s. 4d.; letter to clerk of the council, 3s. 4d.; draft summons, 5s.; two copies, 2s.; letter, enclosing summons for service, 3s. 4d.; letters to Mr. Purcell, re attending in Court, 3s. 4d., and stating he could go by train to Sallins and drive over with the auditor, 3s. 4d.; attending Clane Petty Sessions, defendant was ordered to pay £5 5s. 4d. and 10s. costs, £2 2s.; expenses, 12s. 6d.; stamp on summons, 1s. 6d.; hand service, 2s. 6d.; letter, reporting fully on the case, 3s. 4d.; letter to Mr. Hanna, asking for remittance, 3s. 4d.; attending upon auditor to discuss matters, 6s. 8d,; letter that they had already applied, but had not received any intimation, 3s. 4d.; letter again asking reply, 3s. 4d.; attending on auditor to discuss the position when they were instructed to write to the registrar of Petty Sessions, 6s. 8d.; other letters costing each 3s. 4d.; postage on parcels, 5s.; total, £7 1s. 6d.; whether there was undue haste in proceeding against the collector as there were three months in which the amount could be refunded; and whether the auditor will be required, under the circumstances, to pay the costs of these unnecessary proceedings?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the alleged arrangement between the rent collector and the clerk, the auditor had no cognizance of such an arrangement nor could he recognise it even if he were aware of it, and therefore the question of refraining from taking legal proceedings did not arise. The statements as to the costs and charges incurred in recovering the amount surcharged are believed to be correct. There was no undue haste on the part of the auditor in taking the proceedings against the collector. Under the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1871, amounts surcharged should be paid by the persons liable within fourteen days of the date of certificate of surcharge in cases such as this one where there is no appeal. Failing such payments a statutory obligation is imposed on Local Government auditors to recover by process of law the amounts certified to be due. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative, the auditor having acted in accordance with his duty.