I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War will he refer to the portion of the Report of the Army Sanitary Committee on Dublin Main Drainage Scheme which states that the scheme would be fraught with serious 1722 danger to the health of the garrison at Pigeon House Fort; whether it is to be understood that the Committee have reported that there would be more danger to the health of the garrison of Pigeon House Fort from discharge into Liffey Estuary at a point half-a-mile to east of Fort, as proposed by Corporation scheme, of the clarified and precipitated effluent of the sewage than now exists from the discharge of the crude sewage of the city into the river both above and below the Fort; whether he has received letters, dated 6th July and 28th July, from the Town Clerk of Dublin, on behalf of the Corporation, inquiring on what terms the War Office Authorities were prepared to part with the Pigeon House Fort to the Corporation; whether any reply, other than a formal acknowledgment of their receipt, had been sent to either of these letters; and whether he can state what are the negotiations between the War Office and the Corporation?
§ MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN
The responsibility of advising the Secretary of State for War whether to give or withhold his assent to this scheme, as required by the Act, rested with the Army Sanitary Committee. They reported that one of two alternative modifications in the scheme must be adopted in order that the occupants of Pigeon House Fort may be sufficiently protected as regards health. The Committee made no such comparison as suggested in the second part of the question. The fact that the condition of the Liffey is bad would not justify mo in accepting a scheme of which the Army Sanitary Committee expressed the opinion I have quoted. With regard to the latter parts of the question, as I stated yesterday, the letters referred to have been received, and I hope that an answer may very soon be sent.