asked the Minister for Finance if he is aware that early in 1922 property was stolen from Patrick Parle, Thornville, Wexford, and from Fraser Meadows, same adress; that the property was recovered by Republican police and arrests made; that the suspected persons were identified by Meadows and removed to Waterford Jail; that the property was lodged in South Main Street Barracks, Wexford, pending the trial of the persons suspected at the Circuit Court; that subsequently South Main Street Barracks, Wexford, and Waterford Jail were taken over by Free State troops; and that the prisoners were released and the property of Parle and Meadows appropriated; that in October, 1923, the County Court Judge reported for £12 to Parle, and £20 to Meadows; whether those amounts were paid, and if not, for what reason.

I am not in a position to say whether all the statements in the Deputy's question are correct. Reports were, however, made in these cases under Section 15 of the Damage to Property (Compensation) Act, 1923, recommending payment of the amounts indicated by the Deputy, but after consideration I came to the conclusion that the cases did not come within the scope of Section 15 of the Act, and I accordingly refused to authorise payment.

Do I understand the Minister to say that he came to the conclusion that this case did not come within the scope of this section?

Yes.

Then I take it that the Minister has taken it upon himself to reverse the decision of the Circuit Judge on a question of law?

On a question of fact.

May I ask the Minister whether the question as to whether certain cases came under a section of an Act of Parliament is a question of law or of fact?

There is no appeal in these cases. They are reports and the Minister has discretion to review them.