§ COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)said, he wished to draw the attention of the House to a gross financial injustice to Ireland under the head of several Votes which the Irish Members, in their desire to facilitate Business, had not thoroughly discussed when the House was in Committee on the Estimates. One fact to which he wished to refer was that whereas a sum of £240,000 was being voted in aid of the highway rate in England, and £35,000 in aid of the highway rate in Scotland, there was no similar Vote for the highway rate in Ireland. It had been calculated that Ireland's share amounted to £50,000, a sum which would reduce county rates in Ireland 1s. in the pound. Ha might be met with the argument that if Ireland had not got the money to reduce county rates it 219 was given to her in other ways. No doubt, a sum of £50,000 was being voted towards Irish drainage and Irish fisheries; but that was not an adequate equivalent. He protested against the proposed expenditure of £30,000 upon drainage works, on the ground that it was an unfair application of the money of the Irish taxpayers. Some constituencies would contribute far more to this expenditure than would ever be returned to them in resulting benefit. He complained also that the Irish Members were not consulted before the Government determined upon an expenditure of £30,000, which would pledge Ireland to find eventually no less a sum than £700,000 for drainage purposes. The money which the Government had allocated for the furtherance of horse breeding, for the fishing school at Baltimore, and for other objects was really provided out of the Irish rates, although the people of Ireland had not yet realized the fact.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)said, he was sorry the hon. and gallant Gentleman should be under the impression that justice had not been done to Ireland in this matter. The hon. and gallant Member thought that some similar concession to that made in the case of highway rates in England should be made with reference to the county cess in Ireland; but in England they received £540,000 from the Carriage Tax, but they had no such tax in Ireland, so that the cases were not parallel. It was not the view of the Government that the expenditure of £30,000 upon drainage works must necessarily commit Parliament to a final expenditure of £700,000. It would not be right to commit either Parliament or the Local Authorities of Ireland in that way, the information at present possessed not being full enough to justify such action. The Government believed that the expenditure now proposed would be most beneficial, even if the Local Authorities of the districts which were specially interested in the drainage of the Shannon, Barrow, and Bann should object to tax themselves for any subsequent development of the scheme. The Government were satisfied that this money could be applied usefully in relieving the waterlogged districts of Ireland, and that great 220 public advantage would result. The expenditure had been recommended by the Commissioners who had been appointed to inquire into the subject, and the Government relied absolutely upon their recommendation. Next Session the Government hoped to present to Parliament proposals in connection with this question of drainage which would be recognized as deserving the local efforts which they must involve.
§ COLONEL NOLANasked what was the total expenditure which would be necessary to complete the scheme for which this sum of £30,000 was wanted?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHThe scheme for which this sum is wanted may form a portion of a much larger scheme, or it may be complete and satisfactory in itself. We have laid it down as an absolute condition of this expenditure that not a single farthing shall be spent wastefully.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)said, he had every reason to suppose that the £30,000 and moneys voted in subsequent years would be expended to the greatest possible advantage; but, at the same time, it seemed to him that the Government was in the greatest possible danger of seeing a considerable amount of money practically thrown away. Pressure had been brought to bear—or was about to be brought to bear—upon the Government by ambitious engineers with private interests to serve to induce them to adopt a limited scheme. He was anxious to see the work done well, and on a large and thorough scale; but not to see the money spent in Ireland in a wasteful and injudicious manner. He was satisfied, however, that there would be a great waste of public money if a partial scheme was sanctioned. He desired to point out an absurd anomaly in connection with this grant of £50,000; £1,000 of this sum was to be given to encourage the industries in Donegal. Mrs. Ernest Hart, a business-like lady, had done much to encourage home industries there; and, recognizing her merits, the Government had agreed to allocate this small sum in aid of the technical education of the poor people in this district. But what had occurred within the last week? A quantity of wool put out by Mrs. Hart, first to be dyed and afterwards to be used in knitting and weaving, had been seized by the emis- 221 saries of the Government, which proposed to subsidize the industry. In 1879 and 1880 there was very great distress in Donegal, as in other parts of Ireland, and an advance was made in certain districts, including Donegal, for the purpose of furnishing seed to the poor occupiers who could not provide themselves with it. From that day to this the districts so aided had been laden with a seed rate, intended to recoup the expenditure thus laid out. In the recovery of this seed rate seizures had been made in Donegal during the past week, including a considerable quantity of the wool to be used in the very industry which the Government said they now wished to assist. In the circumstances, he thought he might reasonably appeal to the Government to cause the wool so seized to be surrendered, otherwise the industry would be paralyzed.
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER SECRETARY FOR, IRELAND (Colonel KING-HARMAN) (Kent, Isle of Thanet)said, he could assure the hon. Gentleman that this was the first information the Government had of the seizure of the wool. Personally, he was much interested in those home industries, and he would take care that every inquiry was made into the facts mentioned by the hon. Member.