Letter to Sir Robert Chalmers, circa 22 June 1916
1
CHIEF SECRETARY'S
10586 — 22.JUN.1916
OFFICE Under Secretary, Please see Mr Magills draft reply
to Mr Whites question No.38 for tomorrow. Mr Clary MP wrote to you on the 18th May
suggesting that a clause be inserted providing that
neither the unrepealed portions of the Whiteby Code
nor the Criminal code shall be applicable to cases
arising out of the rebellion. In reply to him on
the 20th item you said, as to the question of claims
for malicious compensation it is proposed to put a
clause in the Bill making this quite clear and I am
obliged to you for making the suggestion. It is understood that many cases of the kind in
question are pending before the Recorder of Dublin.
21/6 Reply that I agree to draft reply
& telegraph what A.G says
RC 21/6/16 Also
Telegraph to Mr Magill
what Clary said & what I replied,
with dates. RC 22/6 2 POST OFFICE TELEGRAPHS.
Message Received in Chief Secretary's Office.
Date 191
Handed in at the} J.C Office at Chief Secretary's Officce T.O Dublin Castle JU 21 16 Received here at} 1.580 TS
From Magill To Brennan CHIEF SECRETARY'S
10586 — 22.JUN.1916
OFFICE Whites 38. The Home Secy has
not yet decided to sub section
six of the draft bill. I think we
must fire a non committal
answer & suggest following for
Under Secy'sConsideration (begins)
'The question referred to by the Hon
Member is under Consideration in
connection with the legislation which
the Govt hope to introduce dealing
with Considerations which have arisen
out of the recent disturbances in Ireland'
(ends). 3 Urgent
PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION N.I.
date and hour of Receipt
11am
CHIEF SECRETARY'S OFFICE T.O. DUBLIN CASTLE
JU 21 16 CHIEF SECRETARY'S
10586 — 22 JUN 1916
OFFICE
Attorney General
For favour of your observation.
J. B. 21/6
FROM ...... Power
TO ...... U.S. [Table not fully transcribed. See image/table.] Item notice for Thursday 22nd June No.38
Mr Patrick White to ask the Prime Minister
whether it is the intention of the government
to assist the passage of leglisation exempting
the Corporation of Dublin from any claims
that it may be responsible for in consequence
of injuries to property owing to the recent
Rebellious outbreak, and whether having
regard to the promise made that no legisaltion
of a contentious nature would be introduced
during the war period no assistance will be
given to any measure relieving the
corperation of any liability until all
claims are fully met from other government
sources.
I don't quite follow this part at A, unless the suggestion if that if the Corporation
all claims of liability, before compensation has been presented by this Govt.
The latter might find to provide the required compensation which the aggrieved person
the know list his sight against the As to the first part of the question,the answer
must depend on what is the Govt. policy. I have on several occasions stated my view in writing to
the effect that? as no reason for exempting the Corporation from liability
in any area in which upon the facts,legal liability foreign language text 22.6.16 4 URGENT
PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION N.I.
date and hour of Receipt
11am
CHIEF SECRETARY'S OFFICE T.O. DUBLIN CASTLE
JU 21 16 CHIEF SECRETARY'S
10586 — 22 JUN 1916
OFFICE
FROM Power
To U.S [Table not completely transcribed. See image/table.] Item notice for Thursday 22nd June No.38
Mr Patrick White to ask the Prime Minister
whether it is the intention of the government
to assist the passage of leglisation exempting
the Corporation of Dublin from any claims
that it may be responsible for in consequence
of injuries to property owing to the recent
Rebellious outbreak, and whether having
regard to the promise made that no legisaltion
of a contentious nature would be introduced
during the war period no assistance will be
given to any measure relieving the
corporation of any liability until all
claims are fully met from other government
sources.
10586 — 22.JUN.1916
OFFICE Under Secretary, Please see Mr Magills draft reply
to Mr Whites question No.38 for tomorrow. Mr Clary MP wrote to you on the 18th May
suggesting that a clause be inserted providing that
neither the unrepealed portions of the Whiteby Code
nor the Criminal code shall be applicable to cases
arising out of the rebellion. In reply to him on
the 20th item you said, as to the question of claims
for malicious compensation it is proposed to put a
clause in the Bill making this quite clear and I am
obliged to you for making the suggestion. It is understood that many cases of the kind in
question are pending before the Recorder of Dublin.
21/6 Reply that I agree to draft reply
& telegraph what A.G says
RC 21/6/16 Also
Telegraph to Mr Magill
what Clary said & what I replied,
with dates. RC 22/6 2 POST OFFICE TELEGRAPHS.
Message Received in Chief Secretary's Office.
Date 191
Handed in at the} J.C Office at Chief Secretary's Officce T.O Dublin Castle JU 21 16 Received here at} 1.580 TS
From Magill To Brennan CHIEF SECRETARY'S
10586 — 22.JUN.1916
OFFICE Whites 38. The Home Secy has
not yet decided to sub section
six of the draft bill. I think we
must fire a non committal
answer & suggest following for
Under Secy'sConsideration (begins)
'The question referred to by the Hon
Member is under Consideration in
connection with the legislation which
the Govt hope to introduce dealing
with Considerations which have arisen
out of the recent disturbances in Ireland'
(ends). 3 Urgent
PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION N.I.
date and hour of Receipt
11am
CHIEF SECRETARY'S OFFICE T.O. DUBLIN CASTLE
JU 21 16 CHIEF SECRETARY'S
10586 — 22 JUN 1916
OFFICE
Attorney General
For favour of your observation.
J. B. 21/6
FROM ...... Power
TO ...... U.S. [Table not fully transcribed. See image/table.] Item notice for Thursday 22nd June No.38
Mr Patrick White to ask the Prime Minister
whether it is the intention of the government
to assist the passage of leglisation exempting
the Corporation of Dublin from any claims
that it may be responsible for in consequence
of injuries to property owing to the recent
Rebellious outbreak, and whether having
regard to the promise made that no legisaltion
of a contentious nature would be introduced
during the war period no assistance will be
given to any measure relieving the
corperation of any liability until all
claims are fully met from other government
sources.
I don't quite follow this part at A, unless the suggestion if that if the Corporation
all claims of liability, before compensation has been presented by this Govt.
The latter might find to provide the required compensation which the aggrieved person
the know list his sight against the As to the first part of the question,the answer
must depend on what is the Govt. policy. I have on several occasions stated my view in writing to
the effect that? as no reason for exempting the Corporation from liability
in any area in which upon the facts,legal liability foreign language text 22.6.16 4 URGENT
PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION N.I.
date and hour of Receipt
11am
CHIEF SECRETARY'S OFFICE T.O. DUBLIN CASTLE
JU 21 16 CHIEF SECRETARY'S
10586 — 22 JUN 1916
OFFICE
FROM Power
To U.S [Table not completely transcribed. See image/table.] Item notice for Thursday 22nd June No.38
Mr Patrick White to ask the Prime Minister
whether it is the intention of the government
to assist the passage of leglisation exempting
the Corporation of Dublin from any claims
that it may be responsible for in consequence
of injuries to property owing to the recent
Rebellious outbreak, and whether having
regard to the promise made that no legisaltion
of a contentious nature would be introduced
during the war period no assistance will be
given to any measure relieving the
corporation of any liability until all
claims are fully met from other government
sources.
How to cite
Letters 1916, published by the Austrian Centre for Digital Humanities, Vienna, 2026 (https://letters1916static.github.io/letters1916-static/item__3319.html)