1 60 Revietvs.
by the Board of Works. At the time of the visit of the Cambrian and Irish archreologists, an ordinar}' mason was seen cahnly tinkering away at the ruins, pulHng down a bit here, and building up a bit there, in imitation of the old style of work, without an)' kind of superintendence what- ever. The vandalism perpetrated some time ago by the same authorities, at Ini.smurray, is being repeated here with a vengeance."
Such being the case, it is with consternation that we read the following on p. 24 in the Sixtieth Report from the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland, 1891-92 : — "It is feared that owing to want of funds further explora- tion of these monuments [in the Baron}' of Corcaguiny, W. of Dingle] cannot be undertaken this j-ear, as there is a strong feeling that the money immediately available should be devoted to an exhaustive examination of the mounds on the Hill of Tara. Inquiries are being made from the best authorities as to the most satisfactory way of carrying out this work."
On referring to the " Ancient INIonuments Protection Act, 1882", it is evident that no mention is made of the power of the Board of \\' orks to expend public monc}- in excavations, but onh' to maintain. " The expressions
- maintain' and ' maintenance' include fencing, repairing,
cleansing, covering in, or doing an}' other act or thing which may be required for the purpose of repairing any monument, or protecting the same from decay or injury." The authorities of the Irish Board of Works can scarcely have fully appreciated a later clause which runs : "If any person injures or defaces any ancient monument to which this Act applies, such person shall, on summary conviction, be liable at the discretion of the court by which he is tried to one of the following penalties ..."
It docs not appear that in the past the Superintendent of National Monuments has ever sought archaeological advice from the Ro}-al Irish Academ}-, or from the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland. The restorations done
