§ Mr. CREANasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland what are the duties of a Local Government inspector and inspector of workhouses holding an inquiry under the Poor Law Acts in references to charges against officers of a workhouse; in addition to taking evidence does such an inspector make any report or recommendation to the Local Government Board; is it with his sanction that a gentleman who has already, without hearing evidence before any sworn inquiry, reported that the only way of securing peace and harmony and proper discipline in a workhouse would be to dismiss an official, should subsequently hold an inquiry into the charges made against such official; did Mr. Fitzpatrick, an inspector under the Local Government Board, recommend to them the dismissal of Mr. Thomas Murphy, a wardsman at the Midleton union, without having taken evidence on oath or holding any sworn inquiry; did the Local Government Board so advise the Midleton Board of Guardians by letter of the 18th February, 1910; 2739W and did Mr. Fitzpatrick subsequently, against the protest of Mr. Gardner Wallis, solicitor for Mr. Thomas Murphy, proceed to hold a sworn inquiry into the matters on which he had already prejudged the wardmaster, Mr. Thomas Murphy?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Local Government Board inform me that the chief duty of an inspector at an inquiry is to procure information on which the Board may safely act in arriving at a decision in the case. He furnishes the Board with the sworn evidence, and also with a confidential report giving a summary of the evidence, making such comments as occur to him on the demeanour and credibility of the several witnesses, and supplying the Board as far as possible with all the material for the formation of a right judgment which his personal conduct of the inquiry may enable him to furnish. The Board base their decision on the sworn evidence, and not upon any opinions which the inspector may express. In the present case the inspector of the district had reported prior to the inquiry that he was of opinion that proper discipline could not be maintained in the workhouse so long as wardsman Murphy retained office, and the Board suggested that they should call on him for his resignation. The guardians were, however, practically evenly divided on the point, and asked the Board to institute an inquiry. The Board pointed out that the matter in dispute was one which the guardians themselves should investigate, but, on being pressed by the guardians for a local inquiry by an inspector, they directed the inspector of the district to hold one. No application to have the inquiry held by another inspector was made to the Board before it was opened at the end of June, and it was only on the first day of the inquiry that the objection mentioned in the question was raised. The evidence in the case is very long, and the Board have not yet come to any decision on the subject.