§ Mr. DORISasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that within the present year the Marquess of Sligo was engaged in a civil action in the Irish Courts against the Westport Urban Council; that after the commencement of this action the Irish Local Government Board wrote letters to the urban council, dealing with the cause of action, which were of a threatening character; that the solicitors to the Local Government Board acted as solicitors for the Marquess of Sligo in the action against the urban council; that the 1948W bacteriologist to the Local Government Board was a witness against the council in the action; and if, in view of the effect upon pust and efficient administration of so many of the officers of a great public Department entrusted with the control of local authorities ranging themselves in a civil action against a local authority, and particularly in a case where the plaintiff happens to be a near relative of the Vice-President, the chief executive officer of such Department, he will confine the Commissioners, solicitors, and other officials of the Local Government Board to their official duties, and thus prevent a recurrence of the state of things experienced in the case referred to?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI am aware that in November, 1911, an action was brought by the Marquess of Sligo against the West-port Urban District Council in connection with the discharge of sewage into the Carrowbeg River, and that judgment was given in favour of the plaintiff. The judge, in order to give time for the carrying out of the necessary works, suspended the operation of his Order for six months with a further stay if necessary. In August, 1912, nothing having been done by the district council, the Local Government Board —the Vice-President being absent on leave at the time—wrote reminding the district council that they were likely to incur further costs if they failed to comply with the Order of the Court. The firm of solicitors and the bacteriologist employed by the Board are not debarred from engaging in other professional business, and in the present instance the parts which they took in the proceedings did not in any way encroach upon their official duties. It is not proposed to require them to devote themselves exclusively to the public service.