§ SIR B. HALLrose pursuant to notice, to present two petitions, one signed by twenty-eight allottees in the Minster Level estate, and the other by forty-five allottees in the Snigg's End estate, complaining of the conduct of Mr. F. O'Connor in reference to the land scheme. He had forwarded a copy of the petitions to the hon. and learned Member for Nottingham, to whom he proposed to ask a question on the subject, but beyond that he should refrain from making any comment on the allegation of the petitioners, or to enter at all into the merits of the case, nor did he propose even to state the substance of the petitions, as he was anxious to avoid saying anything which might give rise to angry discussion. He would simply move that one of the petitions be read by the clerk at the table. [An Hon. MEMBER; The prayer, what is the prayer?] He would rather leave it to the clerk to read the prayer as well as the allegations of the petitioners.
[The petitions having been brought up, the Clerk proceeded to read the one from Snigg's End. It stated that the petitioners were members of the land company of which Mr. F. O'Connor was the chief promoter, and that they were allottees of the estate at Snigg's End; that they had been induced to join the company by the alluring statements contained in certain letters written by Mr. P. O'Connor, and published by him in his newspaper the Northern Star—the benefits granted to the members of the company were, to the holders of two shares, for which 2l. 12s. was charged, two acres of good land, a comfortable house, and 15l.; of three shares, three acres of land, a house, and 22l. 10s.; and of four shares, four acres of land, a house, and 30l.; the house and land to be allotted to them on such conditions as should enable them to become freeholders, and to live in comparative comfort and independence 234 on the produce of their own property—that they had confidence in Mr. F. O'Connor, knowing him to be a barrister and a man of considerable experience, and in an evil hour allowed themselves to be deluded by his representations, and to leave their employment to settle on these allotments; that no one of the many promises made to them by Mr. F. O'Connor had been fulfilled; that the petitioners were informed before they took possession of their allotments that they would be well tilled and manured, and prepared for cropping, but that the amount of labour bestowed on the land was wholly insufficient, and the petitioners were charged most exorbitantly for all that had been done; that, in consequence, their means had been exhausted; that they bad been going wrong ever since; that all their capital was expended on the land, and that the return had been wholly insufficient to enable them to obtain even the common necessaries of life; that, although, as they could prove, no industry had been wanting on their part to till and sow the ground, many of them never tasted animal food or malt liquor, but were compelled to subsist on cabbages, turnips, and such like vegetables, and had been unable to procure a single article of clothing; that the property was wholly vested in Mr. F. O'Connor, and, as they believed, had been conveyed to him, and was his absolutely in law; that he had never given any conveyance of the allotments to the petitioners, as promised, but had, on the contrary, exercised the power of distress as a landlord, though, as the petitioners believed illegally; that until the report of the Committee of the House of Commons appointed to inquire into the subject, they were not aware that the scheme was illegal; that without disputing the general accuracy of the accounts of Messrs. Grey and Finlaison, the auditors, there was one item they did not understand—that was, the amount which was stated by them to have been advanced in aid. It was stated in their accounts that Mr. F. O'Connor had paid 1,400l. to the allottees on the estate; but from inquiries the petitioners had made from house to house, they could not ascertain that more than 835l. had been advanced on that account. The petition concluded by praying the House to take their case into consideration, and to devise means for relieving them from the consequences of belonging, through no fault of their own, to an illegal society, and by a commission 235 of inquiry, or otherwise, to obtain information as to the true state of the estate and the occupiers, with the with of winding up the undertaking.]
§ Sir B. HALLwould now put the question of which he had also given the hon. and learned Member for Nottingham notice. The question he wished to put was, whether the hon. and learned Member intended to convey to the allottees the title he himself held in this property, or to take any steps to wind up the concern, either by means of a Bill or otherwise, and what was the amount he calculated would be returned to each of the 7,000 shareholders?
§ MR. F. O'CONNORwould first answer the hon. Baronet's question, and then proceed to reply to the statements contained in the petition.
§ MR. HUMErose to order. He wished to know whether that House was prepared to enter into any or every petition which might be presented respecting all the speculations of past years? If the House of Commons were to become the arbiters in the case of disputed accounts arising out of such speculations, where was to be the limit? And if questions as to the private affairs of hon. Members were allowed to be put and answered in that House, what controversies and difficulties, and what delay in the progress of public business, might not result? He appealed to the Chair, therefore, whether the question which had been put was a proper one. There was an Act of Parliament to facilitate the winding up of joint-stock schemes, which might be made applicable to the present case; but, whether or not, it was not for the House of Commons to become the arbiters between the parties.
§ MR. SPEAKERsaid, it was the practice when a petition was presented reflecting on the character of any hon. Member, to indulge that Member so far as to allow him to give any explanation or to make any defence he might think necessary. Therefore, a petition having been presented reflecting on the character of the hon. and learned Member for Nottingham, if that hon. and learned Member desired to enter into any defence or give any explanation in reference to the matters alleged against him in the petition, he was, according to the usage of the House, at liberty to do so. But with regard to the questions which had been put by the hon. Member for Marylebone, he had much doubt whether they were strictly in order—inasmuch as they related not to any measure before 236 the House; and, strictly speaking, all questions put into that House should refer to some measure before it.
§ SIR B. HALLwould then confine him-self to this, which he submitted would be strictly in order. It would be recollected that there was a Bill introduced in 1848 in reference to this land company, which Bill was referred to a Select Committee, but was not afterwards proceeded with. He wished to know if it was the intention of the hon. and learned Member for Nottingham to renew any measure of that kind in the present Session, or to take any steps to wind up this scheme?
§ MR. F. O'CONNORsaid, he would willingly answer any question put to him in the matter. He had spent a large sum of money out of his own pocket since the report of the Committee had issued, endeavouring to have the company registered, and the matter was before the Court of Queen's Bench at present. There were hon. Gentlemen in this House who knew that it was his intention to have handed over the properties in question to trustees; he would refer to the noble Lord the Member for Bath, and the hon. Gentleman the Member for Rochdale. These were two of the parties to whom he had offered to hand over the estates, when he was informed by the noble Lord the Member for Bath, that he would have nothing to do with them. As to the allegations of the petitioners, they stated that they had entertained great hopes of being able to do more than they found they were actually able to effect. He could only say that, as to the land, he had paid 50l. per acre for one estate, and 46l. per acre for the other. The cottages were built of the best materials—of the very best slates, costing 8l. per ton—and not one fraction of rent had been paid by the occupants of these cottages for two years and a half. When the Committee was sitting he had taken down several noble Lords and hon. Gentlemen; he had taken down the present Earl Talbot, the hon. Member for Limerick, and the hon. Member for Kilkenny, to see the estate of Sniggs's End, and they had expressed their astonishment at the high state of cultivation in which they found the land. Now, as to the aid money, he denied that the allegations of the petitioners were correct. He had, in many instances, paid the allotees 5l. per acre, and some of them had sold their allotments for sums varying from 80l. to 160l. Many of the parties, therefore, who had received the money in 237 aid, had now left their allotments. The hon. and learned Gentleman then proceeded to refer to various calculations and accounts, to show the amount of aid money which he had paid, and he went on to state that the auditor appointed by the Committee of the House had reported that the company owed him 3,400l. The next year the balance showed that the sum of 1,200l. was owing to him; and at the present moment the company were indebted to him to the extent of 4,600l. He had devoted all his energies for four years to the affairs of the company. He had spent, for long periods, more than 30l. a week travelling to inspect estates in all parts of England, from Devonshire to Cumberland, and he had never charged a fraction for his expenses. He had never given a bill for the company; he had never accepted a present on account of the company. He defied any man to prove that any one action of his had been in the slightest degree dishonourable. He defied the hon. Gentleman, although that hon. Gentleman had tried to cook up a report, which the Committee had, however, unanimously refused to adopt. ["Oh, oh!"] He defied him—
§ MR. SPEAKERcalled the hon. and learned Gentleman to order.
§ Mr. F. O'CONNORHe bowed to the decision of the Chair. He had placed 8,000l. of his own money in the land company. They owed him more than 8,000l. still. His greatest, his bitterest opponents had lately come forward to give evidence against him in the Court of Queen's Bench, but they had proved nothing against his character. He had been engaged in political life for eight and twenty years—he had spent thousands on the land company. He had never received a fraction back, or charged them, as he said before, with his expenses even; but he defied any man to charge him with mean, dishonest, or ungentlemanly conduct. It was not wonderful that a plan to elevate the labouring classes should be looked upon with hatred by certain parties in that House, or that a man connected with such a plan should be abused—should be looked upon with hostility and abomination. Not a newspaper in the kingdom but had reviled him and his plan. But what were the facts? It was now known that a man could support himself, his wife, and family, on the produce of two acres of land—such land as could be had for 14l. per acre. This was the statement of the hon. Gentleman the Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire; and 238 if it was correct, ought not a man to be able to support himself on four acres of better land, with a good house, and a liberal allowance to sot him going? As for the petitions, the hon. Gentleman knew that they had been drawn up by a solicitor. [Cries of "Order, order!"] The hon. Gentleman was suffering himself to be made the attorney general of the allottees. Was it not true that many hon. Gentlemen who had entered the Committee prejudiced against him, loft it with those prejudices dispelled? Of the 120,000l. which had been paid up by the company, not a farthing had passed through his hands. It went from the directors, through the person appointed, to the bank, where it was lodged. He had produced to the auditors every cheque and every receipt, and he defied any man to charge him with aught dishonourable. All the allottees were not in the circumstances of those who had petitioned. He held in his hand a letter from one of the settlers on the Minster Level estate, who held four acres in a high state of cultivation, and who asserted that if the others had been as Industrious as he, they would now be as well off. As for the company, he was prepared, tomorrow, to wind up its affairs, if the Government would give him authority. He was ready to hand it over to trustees; he would be willing that the noble Lord at the head of the Government should name three trustees. [Laughter.] Hon. Gentlemen might laugh; but if he had millions of money he would go on buying land with it, and he believed that the landowners of this country would soon see the necessity of bringing their estates into the retail market. He again denied the charges brought against him. He denied that he had deluded or wheedled anybody in any way. God forbid that he should be such a wheedler as he could prove that two hon. Gentlemen in this House were. Cries of "Order, order!"]
§ Sir B. HALLsaid, the hon. and learned Member had not replied to the question whether the hon. and learned Member was prepared himself to bring in a Bill as re-commended by the Committee, or to bring under the consideration of the House any measures for winding up the scheme?
§ MR. F. O'CONNORAlthough the Committee reported that he had kept the accounts, they said he had kept them in a way rather against than for himself. He had been trying to get the company completely registered, but the hon. Baronet 239 asked him how much he meant to pay hack those allottees who were not located.
§ SIR B. HALLsaid, the question he asked was whether the hon. and learned Member intended to introduce a Bill in the present Session of Parliament for the purpose of winding up the company, which the Committee of the House of Commons had declared to be illegal, and of which the Lord Chief Baron had more recently expressed the same opinion.
§ MR. F. O'CONNORdid intend to wind up the concern, and if the noble Lord at the head of the Government would give him an early day, he (Mr. O'Connor) would take the first opportunity of bringing in a Bill to wind up the company, and so wash his hands of the matter altogether.
§ MR. HUMEconsidered that when the conduct of a Member of that House had been examined and sifted, to continue to reiterate charges, as had been done that night by the hon. Baronet, was not in accordance with the rules of that House.
§ Petitions to lie on the table.