§ Bill considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ Clause 1 (Short title) agreed to.
§ Clause 2 (Extension of power to grant outdoor relief).
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)In the absence of my hon. Friend the Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton) I beg to move the first of the Amendments which stand upon the Paper in his name.
§
Amendment proposed,
In page 1, line 8, to leave out the words "thirty-first day of December, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-six," and insert the words "thirtieth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-seven."—(Mr. T. M. Healy.)
§ Question, proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)874 I am sorry that I cannot accept this Amendment. The effect of the alteration with subsequent Amendments which the hon. Member proposes would be to extend the scope of the Bill in all directions. The Bill is one to meet a temporary emergency, and I cannot accept any Amendment extending the date of its operation.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)The next Amendment I have to move for my hon. Friend is one that I think the right hon. Gentleman opposite can very properly accept. Its object is to include in the relief fuel as well as food—the one being as necessary as the other.
§ Amendment proposed, in page 1, line 11, after the word "food," insert the words "and fuel."—(Mr. T. M. Healy.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)Yes; we can accept that.
MR. FITZGERALD (Cambridge)It seems to me that the word "and" before "fuel" does not convey what the hon. and learned Member means. He probably wishes to use the word "or," because the words "food and fuel" would imply that the one could not be given without the other. I do not offer opposition to both being given; but I think that if the Amendment were altered as I suggest it would make it clearer.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)If you put in "guardians to administer outdoor relief in food or fuel," it would be, perhaps, more satisfactory.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Amendment proposed, in page 1, line 11, after the word "food," to insert the words "or fuel."—(Mr. T. M. Healy.)
§ Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and agreed to.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)I would ask the right hon. Gentleman opposite if he can agree to the next Amendment of my hon. Friend, namely—
In page 1, line 20, to leave out all after "to," to end of line 21, and insert "any electoral division or divisions, and may, from time to time, renew any order so revoked.The matter is not one that I feel inclined 875 to press an opinion upon against the Government, who must have much better information upon this matter than we have. I simply move the Amendment for the purpose of eliciting from the Government their view concerning it. I think, however, there is something in what my hon. Friend (Mr. Sexton) meant.
§
Amendment proposed,
In page 1, line 20, leave out all the words after "to," to end of line 21, and insert the words "any electoral division or divisions, and may, from time to time, renew any order so revoked."—(T. M. Healy.)
§ Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)The Bill as it stands, I think, is right. We have power to revoke orders generally, or re-enact them generally. The Amendment of the hon. Member would deprive us of some part of the power we possess, without giving us anything in substitution for it.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)We have had from time to time different Bills of this kind introduced. I think we ought to be able, by having a resident Lord Lieutenant in Ireland with power to deal with these matters, to get what we want without coming to Parliament from time to time. However, I will not press the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ MR. O'DOHERTY (Donegal, N.)I beg to propose the Amendment which stands in my name as follows:—
Page 1, line 26, after "revoked," insert,—"Provided also, That in a union in which, in the opinion of the Local Government Board, there may be reason to apprehend delay or difficulty on the part of the guardians in administering relief outside of the workhouse, the Local Government Board shall themselves make such provision as aforesaid.My Amendment is intended to meet the case of Unions, which, within my own knowledge, constantly refuse outdoor relief. The Union in my district during the whole time of its existence has never given any outdoor relief whatever, and I was astonished to hear to-night that the relieving officer of that district has received his pension. If that means that for the future there is to be no relieving 876 officer I shall take even stronger exception to the state of things there. The right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland has already, I think, given some intimation in reply to an hon. Member on these Benches that this relief may be distributed by Committees. It seems to me that much more effectual relief could be given in that way than could be given by the cumbrous machinery of the Boards of Guardians. It is because I think that that I have put down this Amendment. I am quite in the hands of the Government in regard to it.
§
Amendment proposed,
In page 1, line 26, after the word "revoked," to insert the words—"Provided also, That in a union in which, in the opinion of the Local Government Board, there may be reason to apprehend delay or difficulty on the part of the guardians in administering relief outside of the workhouse, the Local Government Board shall themselves make such provision as aforesaid."—(Mr. O'Doherty.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)When the hon. Member for Mayo (Mr. Dillon) made a proposal of this kind in the debate on the second reading I felt very much inclined to go with his intention. But on making inquiries I found that there was considerable objection entertained to the course that I then thought was feasible. An objection which seems to me to be a good one is this—that the Guardians might, perhaps, for the purpose of saving their rates, stop all outdoor relief, ordinary as well as extraordinary, if we adopted this plan and put the whole responsibility on the Local Government Board. What we propose to do is to authorize the Local Government Board to send down one or more temporary Inspectors carefully to supervize the administration of relief; and if they find that Boards of Guardians are not doing their duty, and are lending themselves to any attempt to bring about a miscarriage of the Act, they will exercise their full powers. Under the circumstances, I do not think it will be advisable to assent to the proposal.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)When the hon. Member put this Amendment on the Paper it struck me that it was a very important one, for 877 the reason that in one particular Union in Donegal in the time of the deepest distress, when everybody recognized that something exceptional was absolutely necessary to save the lives of the people the Board of Guardians of that Union persistently refused, under the direction of the Chairman, to issue one single farthing in the shape of outdoor relief. I have here a Return of the number of persons in receipt of indoor and outdoor relief in 1881, 1882, and 1883; and though in every other Union in Ireland, especially in the scheduled districts of the earlier Relief Act, there was abundant outdoor relief given, and though in other Unions in Donegal itself sometimes the cases went up to nearly 400 in a single Union, in all these three years the Guardians of Dunfanaghy refused to give any outdoor relief at all. This was due to the action of a single man, Mr. Oldford, a magistrate and landowner. The holdings on his property are all small, valued at under £4, and under the existing law the poor rate charges are defrayed especially by the landlord. This gentleman considers that every 1d. given in outdoor relief is a charge upon his own pocket; and the consequence is that there is no such thing, and never has been any such thing, as outdoor relief given in the Union of Dunfanaghy. If the right hon. Gentleman, by means of his Inspectors, is in a position to set aside the decision of Mr. Oldford's Board, who are simply his creatures, and if in spite of the opposition of the Guardians you can prevent outdoor relief being withheld, there will be no objection to the proposal being accepted. But I do not see how the right hon. Gentleman reconciles this with his previous statement that the Local Government Board declines to accept responsibility in these matters, as it might thereby cause Boards of Guardians to neglect their other duties. I do not see how the thing is to operate without the authority of the Local Government Board being brought in to supersede that of the Guardians.
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)The authority of the Local Government Board will be brought in; but my hon. Friend must be aware that the Local Government Board has power to dissolve Boards of Guardians if, through their own fault, their duties 878 are not duly and properly discharged. If a temporary Inspector goes down to a district and finds that outdoor relief is not given according to the terms of the Act, it is competent for him to recommend the Local Government Board to appoint Vice Guardians, and to intrust them with the management of the Unions. That course will unquestionably be taken if the spirit and intention of the Act are not carried out.
§ MR. O'DOHERTY (Donegal, N.)After the statement of the right hon. Gentleman I do not intend to press this Amendment; but unless something of an effectual character is put into the Bill, either now or on Report, I am afraid you will find it difficult to get the Local Government Board to induce the Guardians to put the Act in force.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)We have got an important pledge from the right hon. Gentleman to the effect that unless Boards of Guardians properly discharge their duties they will be dissolved.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 3 (Revival of 46 & 47 Vict. c. 24, ss. 1 and 2).
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)Instead of the Amendment upon the Paper, I might, perhaps, move to leave out all the words after the word "Act," in line 7, down to the end of the sub-section. As you have put the total cost in the Bill at £40,000, I think the better course would be to leave it to the discretion of the Local Government Board as to the period over which this expenditure shall continue. My view is that it is undesirable that the Local Government Board of Ireland should be continually coming to Parliament to relieve their local and limited distress, and that it would be well to trust the Local Government Board entirely, without binding them to a specified time. Parliament has fixed an amount beyond which they cannot go; why, therefore, should the time be limited? I have no doubt we shall be able to relieve the existing distress in the time here set down, still I do not see why, when we come to the 31st of March, and fresh necessities arise, we should have to come to Parliament again for a new Bill.
§ Amendment proposed, in page 2, line 7, to leave out all the words after the word "Act," to the end of the sub-section.—(Mr. T. M. Healy.)
§ Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)The answer to this, as I have already said, is that the Bill is brought in for a merely temporary purpose. The hon. and learned Member says, truly enough, that it may be necessary on some future day to extend this operation; but we must remember that we may spend the whole of the money at our disposal before the date in the Bill. I hope it may not be so; but if that should happen, and this Amendment is accepted, the clause will be left without any efficacy at all.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)At any rate, the Amendment can do no harm, and it might possibly do some good. I do not see why it should not be accepted; but, at any rate, I will not divide the Committee on the question.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)I wish to move, in page 2, line 11, after "Act," to insert "either as a whole Union or as containing a named Electoral Division." I desire that the Act should include not only the whole Union, but a part of it. At present the Schedule is limited to the whole Union; but I think there are some Unions in which the Electoral Divisions should be put in the Schedule. Poverty does not go by sudden jumps—that is to say, it does not become general all at once. The Union of Tuam may be better off than most of the Unions, but certainly two of them are not so well off as some of the better parts of the five Unions, and I may say the object of my Amendment is to prepare the way for the insertion at the end of the page after "Westport," of the words "the Electoral Division of Tuam, in the Tuam Union." If the Electoral Division of Tuam is included, I have no doubt that the inclusion of two or three other Unions near it would be proposed, Loughrea for for instance. That would be a very good one to introduce. The amount which 880 would have to be expended upon those Electoral Divisions would come altogether to a very small sum, probably not more than £1,000 or £2,000 in the £40,000. Probably not more than six Electoral Divisions would come under this Amendment, and they would take a very small part of the Church money to be expended under this Bill. I would beg the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary to give us liberty to insert such Electoral Divisions in the neighbourhood of these five Unions which, though not in the Unions themselves, are still within the reach of their poverty. So far as my experience goes, I may say that poverty shows itself in the towns more than in any other parts of these Unions. It shows itself in the place I speak of—namely, Tuam—more than anywhere else. The statistics for the year 1880 show that there was more indoor relief in that Union than anywhere else in the whole of Ireland. The gross total was greater than that in two or three of these Unions. There is a strong case indeed for the inclusion of the Electoral Division of Tuam. The rates there would have increased very largely only that they have reached the maximum. When the rates do that they are spread over the whole Union. The Tuam Electoral Division is now at the highest point it can reach, so far as rates are concerned, unless the whole average of the Union is raised. I would strongly urge the right hon. Gentleman to accept this Amendment, as it would afterwards allow several Electoral Divisions to be put in. I do not believe it would be out of order, later on, to move the Amendment I have given Notice of at the bottom of the page; but I think it would be rather more in Order if the present Amendment were accepted first. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will give me power to move these words at the bottom of the page.
§ COLONEL NOLANIt would simplify matters if you would tell me that I can put in an Electoral Division with the whole Union.
THE CHAIRMANI do not see how the Amendment will run; but perhaps the Chief Secretary will. I will put the Amendment as proposed.
§
Amendment proposed,
In page 2, line 11, after the word "Act," to insert the words "either as a whole Union or as containing a named Electoral Division."—(Colonel Nolan.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted.'"
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)I think I understand what the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Nolan) means; but I am afraid I cannot assent to the Amendment. It practically makes no great difference whether a Union at large is named in the Bill, or certain specified Electoral Divisions, because the grant is in all cases, as the hon. and gallant Gentleman knows, an Electoral Division grant, and it is directed to be made with reference to the pressure of the distress in the particular Electoral Divisions. We may, therefore, fairly presume that the Electoral Divisions, as now proposed to be put in the Schedule, are those which the Government will select. Under these circumstances I cannot consent to the Amendment. Now, as to Tuam, the circumstances of that particular place do not seriously justify its inclusion in the Schedule. The small valuation, the large population, and the high rate of other Divisions, are the reasons why they are included in the Schedule. In the case of Tuam there are no such reasons. The rate there is very little higher than the average rate over the whole of Ireland, and it is 2s. in the pound lower than the lowest rate in the Scheduled Unions. For these reasons I can hold out no hope of including Tuam in the Schedule.
§ COLONEL NOLANAlthough there will be great disappointment felt, and although the accuracy of the information of the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary is very much challenged in a large portion of the West of Ireland, I think I had better ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)Mr. Courtney, I beg to move to insert after "Act," in line 11—
The grants may be made to the Local Government Board or any other body or persons on such terms as the Lord Lieutenant may approve for the relief of distress within the limits of the scheduled Unions.882 Now, this proposal is made with the view of meeting certain exceptional cases. I do not want to throw any discredit or doubt on the honesty and good intentions of the Boards of Guardians in the West of Ireland; but I hold from my own local knowledge that the people of the scheduled Unions are really in a very critical condition, and that the money to be granted under this Bill must necessarily be administered quickly to be of any service to them. I am strongly of opinion that it will reach them more rapidly and effectually through the machinery which is now actually in operation than through any machinery which the Board of Guardians can get into operation without extra expense; and I may point out to the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary that the words I have used are taken from the 20th section of "The Arrears of Rent (Ireland) Act, 1882," by which Act a large sum of money was set aside to assist the emigration of the people of these very scheduled Unions. I cannot see, therefore, what objection can be raised to my proposal, the more especially if I succeed in convincing the Chief Secretary that its operation will lead to good results; and I think that nobody who has given any attention to the condition of things which chiefly brought about the introduction of this Bill can doubt for a moment that the proposal I make is a practical proposal, and one calculated to make the Bill a great deal more effectual than it will be without it. Now, the Chief Secretary has said that one of the strongest arguments that have been placed before him in opposition to my suggestion is that the Guardians will probably stop all ordinary outdoor relief if a grant of money is made to a Relief Committee or to some individual for administration. I do not see that there is any force in that argument at all, because the Act specially provides that a grant shall be made in relief of certain electoral districts of a Union; and I take it that the money must be spent within those electoral districts. Well, the electoral districts chiefly contemplated by this Bill are in the most remote parts of large Unions, and far away from where the Boards of Guardians meet; and I am convinced that at this moment the Boards of Guardians are not giving—indeed, they have not given for some time—any 883 outdoor relief in the Islands on the West Coast. What the inhabitants are relying upon is the relief fund raised in this country and in Ireland. I do not think the Guardians of the Unions are able to give outdoor relief; the Unions are exceedingly impoverished, and the rates are at such a high figure that they very nearly swallow all the resources of the inhabitants. What I particularly wish to impress upon the Chief Secretary is that my proposition simply amounts to an indication to the Lord Lieutenant, who will, no doubt, act after consultation with the Local Government Board, that he is at liberty to make a departure from the ordinary practice whenever he thinks the circumstances of any particular Union or district require it. What I want is that the Lord Lieutenant, who, as I am informed, is taking a very warm and deep interest in this question of the relief of distress, and who is in personal communication with Mr. Brady, Mr. Tuke, and other individuals who are exerting themselves in a very noble way to relieve these unfortunate people, shall have the discretion to place money at the command of men like Mr. Brady and Mr. Tuke, where he is convinced that the necessity is urgent, or where he is convinced that the condition of things is such that it is all but impossible for the Guardians to administer relief. Achill Island and Tory Island, for instance, are places where the Guardians cannot administer relief. The Guardians have their private business to attend to, and it can hardly be expected they will do the work which Mr. Brady and Mr. Tuke and other gentlemen have undertaken. Why allow ourselves to be tied down by red tape in this matter? Why not avail ourselves of the machinery which has been created by the few generous-hearted men who are working nobly in the relief of these distressed people? I am satisfied that my proposition will not only result in efficiency, but in economy.
§
Amendment proposed,
In page 2, line 11, after the word "Act," to insert the words "the grants to be made to the Local Government Board or any other body or persons on such terms as the Lord Lieutenant may approve for the relief of distress within the limits of the scheduled Unions."—(Mr. Dillon.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
884§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)I have not very much to add to what I stated in reply to the hon. Gentleman below the Gangway. I do not think I am generally open to the charge of being pedantic in regard to Poor Law administration, or, indeed, in regard to any other branch of administration; but I do feel that it is a very serious thing—it is an entirely new departure—to supersede the Local Authority by private persons unofficially organized, and with no real official responsibility. I am sure my hon. Friend (Mr. Dillon) must feel that it is so. It would be difficult to exercise that control over this voluntary Committee, that it is most important and most indispensable should be exercised over any Body administering public funds. Then, I think, with all respect to my hon. Friend, that the argument which I used in reply to the hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway is a sound argument. I am perfectly satisfied that to make funds in the hands of private persons available for administration would tend to discourage Boards of Guardians from giving outdoor relief; it would undoubtedly tempt them to save the rates and to throw all the responsibility upon the Local Government Board. The Lord Lieutenant, as the hon. Gentleman says, will, no doubt, be advised by the Local Government Board. The hon. Gentleman says it will be entirely in the discretion of the Lord Lieutenant to set the machinery created by the Relief Committee in motion. As a matter of fact, the Local Government Board are strongly adverse to this particular method of administering relief, therefore it is pretty certain the Lord Lieutenant will be hostile to the course suggested. It is true that the words proposed to be inserted here are to be found in another Act; but then that Act had a very different object in view. A course which was expedient in the case of the Arrears Act does not seem to me to be equally expedient in this case. Under these circumstances I must withhold, though with great reluctance, my assent to the Amendment.
§ MR. RATHBONE (Carnarvonshire, Arfon)Of course, I can see a great deal of force in what the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. John Morley) has said; but there is one particular in which I think his remarks do not apply. The 885 right hon. Gentleman is anxious not to impair the action of Boards of Guardians; but there are certain actions which the Guardians are incapable of performing. Perhaps it is not within the knowledge of all hon. Members that Mr. Tuke and some of his friends undertook to supply seed to the inhabitants of the Island of Achill, without which the whole Island would have gone without unsown potatoes, and there would certainly have been a famine. Mr. Tuke and his friends have carried out what they undertook; they have supplied the whole of the inhabitants of the Island of Achill with seed potatoes at an expense of over £1,500. When he went over to Ireland Mr. Tuke found that there was a line along the Coast where the potatoes had been destroyed by the violent storms of last year to the same extent as in the Island of Achill; and here again, unless someone steps in to supply seed, there will be famine this year. But when we came to look at the matter we found that a much larger expenditure is required than the sum for which we made ourselves responsible—indeed it is probable that the expenditure may rise to £4,000. Now, the distribution of seed is a thing which the Guardians cannot do; and, therefore, we should not be interfering with them in any way if we entrusted this duty to a private Committee. Moreover, I think I can suggest a plan to prevent any abuse of the funds. If the Government will allow a part of this £40,000—say a sum not exceeding £2,000—to be given towards meeting the further claims upon the Relief Committee, Mr. Tuke and his friends are perfectly willing to provide an equal amount. I do not think it is unreasonable to ask the Government to provide half the sum which is necessary to complete the work which Mr. Tuke has undertaken. I have not moved an Amendment on this point; but I think the Government would do well to consider whether it is not possible for them to meet us in the way I suggest. If we are fairly met by the Government I am in a position to promise that the money will be forthcoming on the part of Mr. Tuke and his friends.
§ COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)I have a suggestion to make to the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary which I think will meet with his acceptance; it is that he should assent to 886 this Amendmeut upon the understanding that it applies to the Islands only. As a general rule Relief Committees are not wanted in inland places, because the Guardians live there. Mr. Brady likes to go to these Islands. I do not know Mr. Tuke's habits, but he may like going there also. Besides, there is the fact that in these Islands you have the clergymen, and you can trust them to see that relief is properly administered. I see great reason why the Amendment of the hon. Member for East Mayo (Mr. Dillon) should be accepted for the Islands only. As the Chairman of the Clifden Union I should not advocate its operation generally; but if we confined it to the Islands I am persuaded we should not interfere with the work of the Poor Law Guardians.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)May I ask the Chief Secretary whether, when the Local Government Board were expressing their views on this point, they informed him what amount of money they entrusted to Mr. Tuke three years ago for the purpose of assisting the Irish people to emigrate, and also whether we are to understand that Mr. Tuke and the benevolent gentlemen who were considered good enough to emigrate the Irish people by the 1,000 are untrustworthy when it is a question of saving the lives of the people? Is that the argument of the Local Government Board? Probably it will be found that tens of thousands of pounds were for emigration purposes intrusted into the hands of the very people who the Local Government Board now say are not trustworthy. A more conceited lot of people than the Local Government Board in Ireland never cursed any country. This opposition is only a dodge. The Local Government Board will appoint special Inspectors at £300, £400, and £500 a-year, and pay them out of this fund. These Inspectors, who can only be compared with mummies of the Persian epoch, will go down to the distressed districts to administer this Act, and then these persons, who probably never had the smallest experience in the administering of relief, will send up Reports, and they will be read out by the Irish Secretary as the official intelligence of Ireland. The Local Government Board appoint their own parasites, and then, when Members of the House of Commons want information, they find it 887 supplied by the most ignorant people. I agree that the argument of the Chief Secretary that it is dangerous to supersede a Local Authority is a strong one; but what is the qualification for Guardians in the scheduled districts? You will probably find that no man may be a Poor Law Guardian unless he has a £30 valuation; whereas in some parts of Ireland, not one-tenth as poor as these Western districts, you find the qualification for Guardian is a £10 valuation. In these Western districts there are no men of £30 valuations, except people of a class who have very little sympathy with these poor cottars, and these are the people who will not give outdoor relief. We do not mean an attack on the Local Government Board, but we mean an attack on the thirty pounders. These men have officials like George Brown and others, who before the revolution sat in this House, as Whigs, sent down to administer this relief when there are gentlemen like Mr. Tuke and Mr. Brady and this Relief Committee, the very persons to whom you entrusted, for emigration purposes, a sum of money much larger than it is necessary to entrust them with now, on the spot. Before I sit down I should like to say of Mr. Brady that I do not know any official in the whole world, or in Ireland at least, half as good or worthy as he is. I do not know one who has served the Crown or the people to such advantage and benefit; and certainly I think the Government might associate a gentleman like Mr. Brady with a matter of this kind, and trust him to the full.
§ MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)I am afraid I shall have to go to a division upon this Amendment, because I am so thoroughly convinced that in this particular instance the Chief Secretary has been misled by the stupid information from Dublin. I must say I do not think the right hon. Gentleman advanced any argument which ought to weigh at all against my Amendment. He said it was a dangerous departure from custom and sound principle to intrust the administration of a public fund like this to these local Committees of irresponsible persons. But, Sir, I contend that the case is extremely exceptional, and we have here on record the fact that only a few years ago a fund, five or six times the size of this, was intrusted to a Committee composed almost of the very same 888 men that the present Relief Committee is composed of. The words of the Arrears Act were—
This fund shall be administered by Boards of Guardians, or such persons as the Lord Lieutenant shall direct.In the case of the Arrears Act, the discretionary powers which I seek to give His Excellency in the case of this Act were given by Parliament to the Lord Lieutenant. I have this very evening received a long letter from Mr. Brady, and he plainly intimates in his letter the chances of a famine in Clare Island, and tells me he heartily approves of my suggestion. We must remember that the proposal put forward by the Local Government Board is this—that they should send down special Inspectors to administer the fund. Is that what common sense dictates? Here we have men, officials of the Government, on the spot. Mr. Brady is a salaried official of the English Government, and is doing this work without 1d. of expense, and doing it with good heart. He has been on the spot for the last fortnight, and I may say he is personally acquainted with almost every inhabitant of these Islands, In order to meet the requirements of red tape, we are to have him superseded by men sent down from the Local Government Board, about whom we know nothing, and who may be utterly ignorant of the work they are called upon to do. These men are to be paid large salaries for their labour. Men who up to this have done excellent work are to be superseded by men from Dublin, who may be ignorant, stupid, idle, prejudiced against the people, and who may not take that care and trouble which is necessary in order to see that food is given to the people who want it. I cannot see any reason to justify the rejection of my Amendment. The Government and the Treasury have every security in the fact that the whole thing is left to the discretion of the Lord Lieutenant. I have moved this Amendment in view of the exceptional circumstances of these Islands and remote parts of the Coast, which are, practically, not reached except by these self-sacrificing men. In the absence of some satisfactory assurance from the Government in the matter, I must, though reluctantly, go to a division.
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)889 I should like to supplement my remarks, after hearing the suggestion of the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for North Galway (Colonel Nolan). I will gladly undertake, in view of the points which he has put forward, to consider between now and Report whether I could accept the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Dillon), on the understanding that it shall apply exclusively to the Islands.
§ MR. DILLONMr. Courtney, I will very cheerfully withdraw the Amendment.
§ MR. JOHN MORLEYThe suggestion of my hon. Friend (Mr. Rathbone) does not appear to me to have anything to do with the Amendment before the Committee.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)I see that the qualification for a Poor Law Guardian in Belmullet is a £30 valuation. I suppose that in the entire Union there are not 30 people whose valuation reaches £30. As the right hon. Gentleman is Chairman of the Local Government Board, has he any objection to take steps to reduce the qualification from £30 to £10 valuation, at which it stands in other districts of Ireland?
§ MR. JOHN MORLEYI fear I cannot undertake to make such an Amendment in connection with a Bill of this kind; but I will consider it between now and the Report. At the same time, I must say that it is an extension of the scope of the Bill. There are many reasons why we should not take any money from the Treasury for this purpose; amongst others, it would tend to arrest the flow of private benevolence, which we should all be very sorry to see interfered with.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)I trust if the Government accept the Amendment I am about move that the contract will not be given to the Board of Works, because if they get a contract for about £100 they will be sure to spend £2,000.
§
Amendment proposed,
In page 2, after line 18, to insert—(d.) "The Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland may, with the sanction of the Treasury, expend out of the said sum of forty thousand pounds a sum not exceeding ten thousand pounds in the construction of boat-slips and piers, or the execution
890
of any other works of public utility which may, in their judgment, tend to afford permanent employment and prevent the recurrence of public distress, within any of the unions named in the Schedule to this Act."—(Mr. T. M. Healy.)
§ Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)I propose, on Report, to bring up a clause with the view of carrying out the proposal of the hon. and learned Gentleman. We approve of £40,000 in two moieties—one for the distressed Unions, and the other for the repair and construction of roads and other objects. We propose to establish a small Commission of three Members to deal with the matter.
§ COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)I hope the right hon. Gentleman will provide for the improvement of existing piers, as well as the construction of new ones.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ On Motion of Mr. CLANCY (Dublin Co., N.), the following Clause was read a second time and added to the Bill:—
§ (Relief under this Act not to incapacitate from voting.)
§
No person shall be incapacitated from being registered or voting as a Parliamentary elector by reason of his receipt of relief under this Act.
§ MR. O'HEA (Donegal, W.)I rise to move that the word "Dunfanaghy" be added after "Clifden." The whole of the inhabitants of Gweedore are in a condition of the greatest distress; the whole valuation of the district amounts to £561, and that in itself is an indication of the poverty which exists. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will agree to the insertion of Dunfanaghy in the Schedule.
§ Amendment proposed, in Schedule, after "Clifden," insert "Dunfanaghy."—(Mr. O'Hea.)
§ Question proposed, "That 'Dunfanaghy' be there inserted."
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)I have taken a great deal of trouble to ascertain the state of the case about Dunfanaghy Union, and in reference 891 to it I have read an excellent and trustworthy Report. The state of things is, of course, bad enough; but I do not think it is such as would justify our including it in this Schedule. No doubt, Gweedore in the Union is in a state of distress; but I do not think it would be just to other places if we were to include Dunfanaghy.
§ MR. O'DOHERTY (Donegal, N.)In the district in which Gweedore is situated there are Islands quite as distressed as the Islands further West and South. The attention of the right hon. Gentleman has evidently been called to the mainland, which includes several electoral districts. I will give a few figures extracted to-day from the Report of the Local Government Board in relation to the whole of that Union, which includes the most distressed district of Donegal. It appears that £410 has been spent on the maintenance of the poor, £736 on medical stores, and £286 on salaries. I assure the right hon. Gentleman that if he depends on any outdoor relief being administered in that district he will be totally mistaken. The Guardians are not elected by the people of the district, because they have not the qualification which enables them to elect Guardians; and unless you deal with the district in the Bill the Guardians will continue the system which has been a disgrace to the district for some time. If the Government will prevent the people of the district in some way from being excluded from the relief given by other Boards of Guardians the Members for Donegal will be satisfied.
§ MR. JOHN MORLEYThe Bill says that the Guardians shall make provision for outdoor relief not only for the Islands, but for the country around.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)I am sorry to appear to be persistent in this matter; but, as one of the Members for Donegal, I should not be doing my duty if I did not urge it upon the right hon. Gentleman. With regard to the whole Union, I would not ask that there should be any steps taken by the Local Government Board to give this relief; but I say that, for the places scheduled with certain restrictions, that relief ought to be given. I have made inquiries as to the condition of the people in the district; I find that they are absolutely without means, that their credit is stopped, and that the amount 892 of their indebtedness is equal to three years' valuation of the whole district on account of meal, potatoes, and other food. It is impossible for the people to be saved from famine next year if they do not get relief. I notice that the scheduled Unions have been exclusively reported on and visited by Mr. Tuke, who, in regard to the districts which he visited, reported to this effect—
We have before us the condition of the whole Coast line extending to Mayo and the Coast of Galway, including Belmullet. Of the condition of the people outside those districts I have no certain knowledge; but it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the poverty in those districts is almost as serious, and requiring the most careful and immediate consideration; first of all with regard to seed; and, secondly, for the present emergency some well-devised system of relief should at once be instituted.I am certain that if Mr. Tuke had extended his investigation beyond Galway, he would have reported that in Gweedore there was destitution as extreme as any he has reported, and with regard to which the Government has thought fit to take exceptional steps. If Dunfanaghy is scheduled it will be open to the Local Government Board to limit relief to the most distressed portions of the district. I do not see of what use it will be to send down Inspectors in order to see that the Boards of Guardians do their duty if the Government omit this Union which is one where, although outdoor relief is most needed, it is not and never has been given.
§ MR. JOHNSTON (Belfast, S.)I move that the Chairman report Progress. I do so as the hour is now so advanced.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Johnston.)
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)I hope, as we are so near the end of this Bill, that the hon. Gentleman will not think it necessary to press his Motion for Progress.
§ MR. JOHNSTONIf there is any prospect of getting through the Bill I am willing to withdraw it.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
§ DR. CLARK (Caithness)Dunfanaghy is a crofter district, and I should say that 893 it is about the poorest district in Ireland. The poverty of the district has been brought about by the same causes as have operated in the Highlands. They have lost all their townlands, and they cannot get work; and their present condition is one of awful poverty. In no place have I seen more poverty than in Dunfanaghy Union.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Amendment proposed, to add at the end of the Schedule the words "Swineford Union."—(Mr. John Morley.)
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Londonderry, S.)It is a remarkable thing that no hon. Member representing the county has asked that this addition should be made.
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. JOHN MORLEY) (Newcastle-on-Tyne)It is asked for by the people themselves, and having regard to the small valuation, which amounts to £4,900, and the rating of 5s. 8d. in the pound, I think it is a very fair claim.
§ MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)I am exceedingly grateful to the Chief Secretary for Ireland, for adding Swineford Union to the Schedule. I know the Union to be a dreadfully poor one; but I have an intense dislike to Unions being put in the Schedule, and that is the reason why I did not ask it in this case; nevertheless, I am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ MR. O'KELLY (Roscommon, N.)The District of Boyle contains a great amount of poverty, and I make an appeal to the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland to consider whether it is not desirable to include Boyle Union in the Schedule?
§ Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
§ Bill reported; as amended, to be considered To-morrow.