§ MR. HEALYsaid, he rose to make some remarks upon the action of the Sub-Commissioners intrusted with the carrying out of the Land Act in certain parts of Ireland. He wished it to be distinctly understood that the statements he was about to make were not within his own personal knowledge. He was merely the mouthpiece of the tenants of Kerry and Cork, who considered they had fair reason to complain of the administration of the Land Act in their 1152 counties. A mass of evidence had been put into his hands showing that many decisions given by Messrs. M'Devitt, Walpole, and Murphy left the rents double and sometimes treble Griffith's valuation. The important point he desired to raise was that those three Sub-Commissioners, Messrs. M'Devitt, Walpole, and Murphy, were operating in one of the most distressed districts in Ireland, and that their decisions had given the utmost dissatisfaction. It was remarkable that Messrs. M'Devitt and Company were hearing the cases on the estates of Lord Kenmare and the Marquess of Lansdowne; and he wanted to have from the Government a distinct denial, if such could be given, that the reason why the Sub-Commissioners who previously acted in those districts (Messrs. Reeves, O'Keefe, and Rice) were removed was not because of the decisions which they gave, and which were satisfactory to the tenants in some cases, but because of a Memorial of landlords in the district asking for their removal, and for the appointment of the present Sub-Commissioners.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, the hon. Member had been misinformed.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he made himself the mouthpiece of grievances in the locality. He had not had an opportunity of investigating the matter. In Kerry and Cork there was a tremendous amount of dissatisfaction with the decisions of the present Sub-Commissioners.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he understood the hon. Member to say that these gentlemen were sent to Kerry in place of another Sub-Commission, against which the landlord party had presented a Memorial. There was no Memorial, no such representation from Kerry.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he had been informed that the previous Sub-Commission had been sent adrift—if the statements which had been made to him were untrue, it was desirable that they should be corrected—and that Mr. M'Devitt had been appointed a Sub-Commissioner in response to a Memorial of landlords of Cork.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he had said there was no Memorial. He thought the hon. Member was alluding to Kerry. There was no Memorial from anybody in favour of Mr. M'Devitt. He never heard of such a thing.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, that being the case, lie was very glad to hear it, but a solicitor said Mr. M'Devitt got his appointment through his contesting Tyrone, and that he stated in one of his stump speeches—"Now we have our heel on the landlords, and we will crush the life out of them." Afterwards the Duke of Abercorn drew attention to M'Devitt's speeches—perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would contradict that—and said he would bring them before the House of Lords, when M'Devitt denied altogether the accuracy of the report, and said that, instead of being a tenant's man, he was altogether a landlord's man.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, that was not the case.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, that story was believed, and they had now the misfortune of having M'Devitt reinstated in the graces of the Government at the expense of the poor tenants. If, however, that statement was untrue, he would give the right hon. Gentleman some statements which were true. He would show the nature of the decisions given by Mr. M'Devitt and Company. In more than one ease the judicial rent was allowed to be nearly 150 per cent over Griffith's valuation, in other cases 40, 50, 70, 100, and 120 per cent over Griffith's valuation. These decisions had given immense dissatisfaction. He gathered that from a letter written on 15th April last, by the Rev. John Savage, C. C., and published in The Cork Examiner. This respectable Catholic clergyman expressed, on behalf of his flock, deep dismay at the removal from the district of the previous Sub-Commission, and the substitution of Messrs. M'Devitt and Company, whose decisions in other places he had no reason to be satisfied with. The district was essentially poor, and it was but fair that the Sub-Commissioners who had some acquaintance with it should have been allowed to remain there. Mr. M'Devitt was a barrister whom the Irish Benchers improperly called to the Bar without having attended his terms, on the express statement that he did not intend to practise. He was no sooner called than he took all the practice he could get. Mr. M'Devitt was a Northerner, and why was he not sent to the North? The poor serfs of Kerry and West Cork were obliged to submit to decisions which he supposed would not be tolerated in Donegal. He had received a commu- 1154 nication from a respected Catholic clergyman on the subject of the recent proceedings of the Sub-Commission. That gentleman said that the Sub-Commissioners were getting completely under the influence of the Government, and of persons high in authority; and their proceedings were such that the people were gradually losing all confidence and all hope on the subject of reduction of rent. He did not ask for the dismissal of Mr. M'Devitt; but he asked that he should be sent elsewhere, and that Mr. John Rice, who knew the district, and was generally respected and trusted by the people, should be allowed to remain. It was a curious fact that those in the district over which Messrs. M'Devitt and Rice had been placed, whose estates would be most interfered with, were Members of the Government. They had Lord Kenmare and Lord Lansdowne in Kerry; and why was it to go abroad, that in consequence of representations made by these Noblemen, men like Mr. John Rice had been removed from the district?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERNo such representations have been made.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, that he had no right to speak, and he had no authority in the matter, which lay under the control of the Chief Commissioners. But he believed the reason of Mr. Rice's removal—Mr. Rice was in all respects an excellent man—had some connection with property in the county of Cork, and it was a rule that a man should not exercise jurisdiction in districts where he had interests of his own.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he supposed that it was on the same principle that a gentleman who came from Bradford was sent to govern Ireland. Men who knew nothing about countries were the men sent into them. Mr. Rice was a native of Cork, and he had been chosen by Mr. Disraeli's Government as a Member of the Richmond Commission. He was good enough for the Government of Mr. Disraeli; but he was not good enough for the Chief Secretary for Ireland. The right hon. Gentleman apparently considered that the best men to send to Ireland to give decisions on matters vitally affecting the people was a foreigner. The right hon. Gentleman himself was a foreigner, and he thought 1155 the proper way to rule Ireland was by strangers; but the people of Ireland had very good reason to be suspicious of strangers. They knew what invasions led to in times past, and they would not have strangers any longer. They would have none but men whom they trusted; and if the Government refused to appoint these men, they would never produce contentment or peace among the people. He would mention another case in the county of Kerry. That was a case of a County Court Judge, Mr. O'Connor Morris, for whose actions, he admitted, the Government were not responsible. Mr. O'Connor Morris had recently to fix a fair rent for lands, of which the old rent was £3. The landlord's valuator, Mr. Cruikshank, valued some of the land at 10s. 6d. an acre, the bog land at 4s. 6d., and other parts at 10s. and 12s. 6d. an acre. Notwithstanding this evidence on the part of the landlord's valuer, the Judge fixed the rent at £2 12s. 6d. an acre—only 7s. 6d. below the old rent. Then he would refer to the appointment of Mr. J. R. Headeck as a Sub-Commissioner for Antrim and Derry. He hoped the farmers of the districts over whose interests Mr. Headeck would have jurisdiction would note the fact that Mr. Headeck was a Tipperary landlord, whose rents were considered by his tenants to be so excessive that he had recently been brought into Court by them. A man appointed to fix fair rents should be above suspicion; and it was an extraordinary fact that out of the whole of Ireland the Government should select for the counties of Derry and Antrim a landlord who was on the worst relations with his tenants. He would ask, also, why the names of the Sub-Commissioners had never been furnished to Parliament, as had been promised? The Government ought to appoint men of whom hon. Members sitting on that side of the House could have no complaint to make. That very day he addressed the Attorney General for Ireland a Question concerning Mr. Headeck's appointment; but he received no reply.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTER, interposing, said, he at once answered that Question by stating that Mr. Headeck was appointed a few days ago. He added that if the hon. Member would give him an opportunity of inquiring into the truth of the charge which had been made he 1156 would give him the required information.
§ MR. HEALYobserved, that he asked the Question of the Attorney General for Ireland, and that the Chief Secretary for Ireland said nothing about the matter.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he got up and said he should be able to reply to the hon. Member fully next week.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he had no recollection whatever of the right hon. Gentleman's reply. One of the Questions he had on the Paper related to Messrs. M'Devitt, Walpole, and Murphy. The right hon. Gentleman read a statement showing the number of appeals which had been made from their decisions. In his opinion, that simply proved that the tenants were poor men, and that they had no hope of justice; whereas the landlords had a powerful association at their back, and were prepared to push matters to the bitter end. The tenants were stricken down in the Courts; but the landlords were supplied with funds and allowed to carry on their own organization. The tenants' organization, as far as it appeared above the surface in the Courts, had been "felonized" by the right hon. Gentleman. In India, he believed, there were political representatives, who sent Reports to the Crown as to the feelings and condition of the people; but there was no one to stand between the Irish people and the Government. The information of the Chief Secretary for Ireland was derived from Executive officers who carried out the functions of the law. Independent men ought to be appointed in the various districts of Ireland to report to the right hon. Gentleman what the feelings of the people really were. Unless it were the intention of the Government to keep up a sense of exasperation, they would take some steps to ascertain the feelings of the Irish people, and to put the administration of Ireland into harmony with those feelings.
§ THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IERLAND (Mr. PORTER)said, he thought the hon. Member had made charges against individuals under circumstances of very great unfairness. The removal of Mr. Rice was not mentioned in the Question put by the hon. Member that afternoon. [Mr. HEALY: It was involved in it.] No Notice whatever had been given of it. Mr. Rice was removed by the Land Commission, 1157 and not by the Government. Supposing he had been a person connected with the ownership of land—not as a tenant, but as a landlord in the district—would not the hon. Member himself have said that he was not a proper person to sit as a Judge there? In fact, it had been repeatedly urged by the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar) in the House that Mr. Bomford, one of the Sub-Commissioners, had been improperly permitted to sit and discharge business in the county of Cavan, with which he was in some way connected. As to Mr. Walpole, everybody who knew Ireland must admit that a more upright gentleman did not exist. The objection raised against Mr. M'Devitt at the time of his appointment was that he was too favourable to the class of tenants. There was, in reality, no more foundation for that allegation than there was for the complaint now made against him. With regard to the charge made against Mr. O'Connor Morris, an able and upright Judge, no Notice had been given of it. When the matter was investigated, no doubt it would be found that that gentleman had good ground for pronouncing the decision complained of. The allegation as to Mr. Headeck was that he was engaged in litigation with his tenants, and that he had treated his tenants badly in Tipperary. If, however, it was a fact that some of his tenants were in the Land Court, it did not at all follow that they and Mr. Headeck were on the bad terms that had been described. It was unfair that statements not founded on facts should be made about a Sub-Commissioner which could only have the effect of prejudicing the community against him. Whatever charge might be brought against the Government, nobody could suppose that they would willingly do anything to bring the Land Act into disrepute. Certainly, the removal of Mr. Rice and the appointment of Mr. Headeck were not made with any such object; and he felt sure that landlords and tenants in the North of Ireland would be calm enough to wait until the charges had been substantiated. It had been insinuated that Mr. Rice had been removed on account of influence exercised by landlords, and particularly by two Noblemen who had been named. He was able to say that this statement was without foundation. If they approached 1158 the Land Commission with the view of interfering with the administration of justice, he was certain what answer they would receive. He urged the extreme unfairness of making charges of this kind, and he asked the public to suspend its judgment, and not to be misled by uncorroborated statements in newspapers and private letters.
§ MR. O'DONNELLsaid, that no one had any idea of attributing suicidal conduct to the Government. The fact remained that events occurred which very much astonished the Government when their attention was directed to them. He was aware that the Government were anxious to appoint Sub-Commissioners who would make the Land Act popular; but it was a fact that gentlemen were appointed Sub-Commissioners who had failed to secure the confidence of the classes for whose benefit they were appointed. The Government did not deprecate newspaper criticism in support of their policy, and they should not altogether disregard unfavourable criticism, particularly from friendly journals. The Cork Examiner was very fair and moderate, and yet it said that there were Sub-Commissioners of whom it would be glad to speak with confidence if it could. These questions could not take the Government by surprise if they were fully informed as to the antecedents of the gentlemen they appointed. But when an objection was raised they required three or four days or weeks to obtain information. He recommended the Government to pay more attention to the opinion of fair and moderate newspapers. He was certain that as time went on it would be seen more and more clearly that the whole object of the Irish Party was to make the Land Act more and not less efficient than it now was. It was already admitted on both sides of the House that the Act needed amendment, and there were many Members of the House who were now of the opinion of the small handful of Irish Irreconcilables of six months ago. With the object of permanently removing the grievances of the tenant, the Members of the Irish Party would support any measure that might be introduced on either side of the House, and if the Government would regard them as the mouthpieces of the vast majority of the cultivators of land in Ireland, it would greatly add to the prospect of peace in 1159 that country; but up to the present time the Government had set their face against every kind of counsel pressed upon them from those Benches. Now he asked the Government to turn over a new leaf, and to listen with confidence to the demands of the Irish people, instead of perpetually thwarting all proposals of reform. If they did this they would see the beginning of a new era. If they went a short way towards meeting the Irish Party, they would find that that Party would go a long way towards meeting them. After the heat and turmoil of the present conflict were passed history would admit the fact that on the whole the Irish Popular Party had been right in their contentions and their policy.
§ Main Question, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put, and agreed to.