asked the Minister for Finance whether he is aware that a sum of only £100 was given to Mrs. Ellen MacCarthy, of Fianna Road, Thurles, as compensation for her son, James MacCarthy, who was murdered by British Forces on the night of March 27th, 1920; whether he will state why such a small amount was paid; and whether he will re-consider the matter with a view to increasing the award.

An application for compensation by Mrs. Ellen MacCarthy, of Fianna Road, Thurles, in respect of her son, James MacCarthy, was carefully considered by the Compensation (Personal Injuries) Committee, and a recommendation was made that a sum of £100 should be paid to the applicant by way of compensation. At my request the case was specially reviewed by the Committee in November, 1924, but after the fullest consideration of all the facts the Committee reported that they were unable to vary their original recommendation.

In these circumstances, and having regard to the fact that the Committee has long since ceased to function, I am unable to have the case reopened, as suggested by the Deputy, or to hold out any prospect that any payment will be made to Mrs. MacCarthy beyond the sum of £100 which she has already received.

Is the Minister aware that James MacCarthy was employed as a baker at a wage of £4 a week, and that he contributed his earnings to his mother; also, that he was the first victim of the Black-and-Tans in Thurles, and that the dependents of other victims at that time received £600 compensation?

I did not quite hear what the Deputy said. Compensation in these cases was paid on the recommendation of the Committee, and all I did in any case when representations came to me which indicated that the awards seemed to be insufficient was to send it back to the Committee and ask them to review the facts. In a few cases, as the result of the recommendations being sent back, a variation was made. In this case no variation was made in the recommendation. I know the facts. The deceased was employed as a baker, and I think there were two other sons living at home, both of whom were bakers and employed. Consequently, this son was not the sole support of his mother by any means.

Is the Minister aware that this son was the sole maintenance of his mother, and that the others were not contributing anything in that respect?

I am not aware of that.

There is a difference between making an award of £600 in some cases and £100 in the case of this man's mother.