HC Deb 17 August 1883 vol 283 cc1090-7

Bill considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

Clause 12 (Advances by Land Commission).

MR. PARNELL

proposed in page 7, line 30, after "holdings," insert— And for the purpose of assisting the removal thereof of persons or families as provided by Section 11 of this Act. He intended subsequently to move to insert, after "advances," in line 31— Where the estate or estates are purchased solely for the purpose of re-sale to the tenants.

Amendment proposed, In page 7, line 30, after "holdings," insert "and for the purpose of assisting the removal thereof of persons or families as provided by Section 11 of this Act."—(Mr. Parnell.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, the hon. Member had an Amendment on the Paper, the object of which, no doubt, was more fully carried out by the words now proposed. The Amendment on the Paper was to insert, after "holdings," "and for such other purpose or purposes as the Lord Lieutenant may approve." Now, those words seemed extremely vague, and gave large powers to the Lord Lieutenant, which might have subjected him to all kinds of applications. The words which had now been suggested by the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell) would not only sufficiently carry out the object of the hon. Gentleman, but they would, he (Mr. Chamberlain) thought, meet the views of the hon. Member for Mayo (Mr. O'Connor Power). The Amendment was one of which the Government had already approved, and they would be glad to accept it.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

said, he was glad the hon. Member for the City of Cork had altered his proposal, because really, as the Amendment stood on the Paper, the Lord Lieutenant could advance money to Companies for every conceivable purpose. His (Mr. O'Connor Power's) Amendment lower down, however, was not affected by the present proposal. His Amendment had reference to advances generally; but the Amendment of his hon. Friend (Mr. Parnell) had reference only to the £50,000 which the Lord Lieutenant had at his disposal.

Question put, and agreed to.

On the Motion of Mr. PARNELL, Amendment made, in page 7, line 31, after "advances," by inserting— Where the estate or estates are purchased solely for the purpose of re-sale to the tenants.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

said, he was not quite clear that the Lord Lieutenant and the Land Commission were fully empowered, by what the Committee had already done, to make advances for the purpose of carrying out migration; and he wished to say, in explanation of the Amendment which stood in his name on the Paper, that he contemplated the lending of money to a public Company for the purpose of carrying out migration only, because that was the only form in which he could introduce the question of migration upon this Bill. In his judgment, migration could not be successfully carried out by public Companies; and the creation of a peasant proprietary contemplated by the Chief Secretary in this Act, through the agency of public Companies, would never be carried out. Entertaining these views, he was only anxious to test the opinion of the Government with regard to the agency of these public Companies. The Government believed, according to the general scope of the Bill, that public Companies could be utilized for the creation of a peasant proprietary in Ireland. If that was true, it was equally true, in his judgment, that public Companies could be used for the purposes of migration; but he should never have thought of making the proposal himself. He had so much interest in the question of migration, that he did not want it to be said by-and-bye that he silently assented to a scheme of this kind, and that he was willing to have a scheme of migration tested upon any such grounds as these. If, however, the Government and his hon. Friend (Mr. Parnell) thought differently, he would be quite willing to see the proposal tested, and he should rejoice if they succeeded.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he did not understand the last remark of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. O'Connor Power), because his own proposal—the proposal they now had before them—was a proposal to lend money to public Companies for the purposes of migration; and it was evident the hon. Member himself contemplated the lending of money to public Companies as an alternative scheme. They were dealing with a proposal to lend money for the purpose of purchasing estates and re-selling them to tenants, and they had just accepted an Amendment which carried out in principle the Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member (Mr. O'Connor Power), and which, if any cases arose, would enable the Government to lend money for the purchase of estates, not only for the purpose of reselling them to the tenants already in possession, but also for the purpose of settling upon them persons who might be removed from congested districts. The only difference between the Amendment the Committee had accepted and the Amendment of the hon. Member (Mr. O'Connor Power) was that the hon. Member's Amendment did not limit the amount. The Government had all along said this was an experiment, and that the amount to be advanced should be limited to £50,000.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

said, he was then to understand that the Lord Lieutenant could only advance a limited amount. He wanted to know exactly how matters stood. Had the Land Commission and the Lord Lieutenant power jointly or separately, with the consent of the Treasury, to make advances? It was a mistake to say that the advances were not limited, because all the advances made under this Act, like all the advances made under the Land Act, were limited by the 31st section of that Act, which said that— The sums annually advanced for these purposes shall not exceed the sums annually voted by Parliament. Parliament had to vote the money from year to year for these purposes; and, therefore, the advances were limited. He had understood that if his hon. Friend's (Mr. Parnell's) Amendment were adopted in its altered form the Land Commission would be free to make advances.

MR. TREVELYAN

said, that what was proposed was, in the first place, where the Lord Lieutenant recommended and where the Treasury approved, a Company might purchase land for the purpose of settling families on it, the purchase money being lent in the same manner as it would be lent to a Company purchasing land for the purpose of re-sale. Special words had been used in order to show that whatever was done would be carefully examined. Secondly, a Company having purchased land would be able to borrow money under the 31st section of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, the provisions of which were well known; and, thirdly, the sum of £50,000 would be granted altogether to public Companies for the purpose of aiding in carrying out migration. That would not be a loan, but a grant.

THE CHAIRMAN

Does the hon. Member for Mayo (Mr. O'Connor Power) move his Amendment?

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

said, that, until the matter was cleared up, the best course for him to pursue would be to move his Amendment pro formâ. The Chief Secretary and the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, and his hon. Friend (Mr. Parnell), did not seem to agree in the matter. He was told that the amount of money to be advanced was limited to £50,000. Was that so or not? He would like a straightforward answer.

MR. TREVELYAN

said, he could only repeat what he had said—namely, that grants in the shape of grants, and not of loans or advances, could only be made to the extent of £50,000; but, besides that, advances might be made for the purpose of purchasing estates with the object of re-selling them to the tenants, and under stricter supervision for the purpose of preparing the land for migration.

THE CHAIRMAN

Does the hon. Member move?

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

said, he would move, because he would like to know what the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Chamberlain) meant when he said there was a difference between his (Mr. O'Connor Power's) proposal and the proposal of the hon. Gentleman the Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell); because, if there was a difference between what had been accepted and what he proposed, it was not correct to say that his object had been attained by what had been accepted. The right hon. Gentleman subsequently said the difference was that there was no limit to the advance in his proposal. Did the right hon. Gentleman still adhere to the statement that he (Mr. O'Connor Power) had come down to the House of Commons to make a proposal giving unlimited power to make advances?—because, if he did, he had misunderstood the proposal.

Amendment proposed, In page 7, line 34, after "company," insert—"Provided, That, whenever the company propose to purchase estates for the purpose of settling upon them tenants removed from more thickly-populated lands, the Land Commission may advance to the company, for that purpose, such sums as the Treasury think fit; but such sums shall not exceed the amount annually granted by Parliament for the purpose, and no advances shall be made to such company without proper security that those advances shall be expended for the purpose aforesaid."—(Mr. O'Connor Power.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he ought to have said there was a limit in the proposal, because it contained the words— The Land Commission may advance to the company, for that purpose, such sums as the Treasury think fit; but such sums shall not exceed the amount annually granted by Parliament for that purpose. Therefore, of course, the amount advanced would be limited to whatever sum might be fixed by the Treasury and approved by Parliament.

MR. MACFARLANE

said, there was some misunderstanding between his hon. Friend (Mr. O'Connor Power) and the Treasury Bench. In the one case a grant of £50,000 was to be made; and in the other case a sum of money was to be granted, limited only by the will of the Treasury. There was, therefore, no substantial difference between the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Chamberlain) and his hon. Friend (Mr. O'Connor Power).

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

asked what the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Chamberlain) meant when he said that the advances under his (Mr. O'Connor Power's) proposal were not limited? Why was he told that his Amendment could not be accepted, because it was unlimited in character?

MR. CHAMBERLAIN

said, he had misunderstood the hon. Gentleman's proposal; and after the hon. Gentleman's explanation he would withdraw the remarks he made at the outset. He pointed out what seemed to be a slight difference between the wording of the two Amendments. In the Amendment the Committee had just accepted they had practically accepted, and intended to accept, the spirit of the Amendment which the hon. Member for Mayo (Mr. O'Connor Power) had moved. He thought he was bound to correct that, by saying there seemed to be a slight difference, which he mentioned, between the hon. Gentleman's proposal and that of the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell); and after the hon. Member's explanation he thought that slight difference had disappeared.

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

said, that, if the object he had in view were attained, he was quite satisfied. He was very glad that the Government, who so very recently described his migration scheme as impracticable and visionary, had now faith in the scheme.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

On the Motion of Mr. PARNELL, Amendment made, in page 7, line 36, after "shall," by inserting "so far as concerns the re-sale of their holdings to the tenants thereon."

MR. O'CONNOR POWER

proposed, in page 8, line 2, after "holdings," to insert— Excepting always estates purchased for the purpose of settling upon them tenants removed from more thickly-populated lands. It seemed to him that this Amendment was consequential upon what had been agreed to.

Amendment proposed, In page 8, line 2, after "holdings," insert "excepting always estates purchased for the purpose of settling upon them tenants removed from more thickly-populated lands."—(Mr. O Connor Power.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. PARNELL

said he thought his hon. Friend the Member for Mayo (Mr. O'Connor Power) would, on further consideration, see that his Amendment was not necessary in view of the Amendment which had just been accepted. The Amendment provided, in another way, and in other words, what had just been agreed to by the Committee.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

On the Motion of Mr. PARNELL, Amendment made, in page 8, line 21, by leaving out all after "Treasury" to end of sub-section, and inserting "and on the recommendation of the Lord Lieutenant."

Clause, as amended, agreed to, and ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 13 to 18, inclusive, agreed to.

Clause 19 (Amendment of s. 31 of Land Act).

DR. LYONS

proposed to add, in page 11, at end of clause— The Board of "Works in Ireland may, with the consent of the Treasury, constitute an 'Office of Forestry,' to consist of one or more persons, The Office of Forestry shall be supplied with a series of the Ordnance Survey Maps of Ireland, with a copy of the Official Valuation of Ireland, and with such geological, climatological, and like publications as are issued by authority of Government. It shall be the duty of the Office of Forestry to examine any schemes submitted for loans for the purposes of planting by individuals or Companies, and report on the same to the Treasury. It shall also furnish all available information to persons about to plant as to the best variety of timber trees, seeds, and seedling trees suitable for each locality. It shall have power to employ one or more practical foresters for the purposes of inspection, report, and advice on the subject of intended plantations. There may be employed in the Office of Forestry a person skilled in the science and practice of forestry for any or all of the above purposes, and to give instruction in forestry. There may be associated with the Office of Forestry an unpaid Commissioner to advise with the Department on the subject of forestry in Ireland. There may be paid to the officials of the Board of Works such reasonable remuneration for any additional duties hereby imposed on them as the Treasury may determine. It may be lawful for boards of guardians in Ireland, with the consent of the Local Government Board in Ireland, to apply for loans in the same manner as a Company, for the purpose of planting, such loans to be secured on the rates in manner to be determined by the Local Government Board and the Treasury.

THE CHAIRMAN

I do not think this Amendment can be moved; it is beyond the scope of the Bill. Forestry is not included in the Bill.

DR. LYONS

said, he admitted that it was not included in the 19th clause.

THE CHAIRMAN

It is beyond the Resolution upon which the Bill is founded, and, therefore, cannot be put.

Clause agreed to

Forward to