§ MR. DAWSONasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Mr. John E. Vernon, named as one of the Land Commission, is the same person as Mr. Vernon, agent to the Earl of Pembroke and other proprietors; and whether, if appointed Land Commissioner, he can retain the agencies referred to? The hon. Member explained that in putting the Question his anxiety was that the Court should have the full confidence of the country, and as those who did not know the high character of Mr. Vernon might be in doubt on the subject, he wished to disclaim any reflection on that gentleman.
MR. GLADSTONE, referring to the disclaimer given by the hon. Gentleman, said, he had not the least hesitation in stating that the Question was a very legitimate one, and ought to be a Question put for his own satisfaction and that of the House and the public, and not as intended to cast any reflection whatever. Evidently, the gist of the Question had reference to the land agencies, properly so-called, held by Mr. Vernon, which were and had been numerous, and had, in fact, contributed to his eminent fitness for the office of Land Commissioner. The whole of his agencies falling under the Land Bill would at once disappear. He had the single agency of the Earl of Pembroke, which did not fall into that category. The agency to the Earl of Pembroke was purely and exclusively an agency of villa and town property. Mr. Vernon had not proposed to resign that agency. It in no way interfered with the Land Bill. He felt, also, perfectly certain that Mr. Vernon would never allow 35 the agency to interfere with the discharge of his duties as Commissioner, for, unquestionably, the public would have the full claim to the command of his time—what might be called, in general terms, his whole time.
§ MR. DAWSONexplained that his reason for troubling the Prime Minister with the Question was this. The Earl of Pembroke had in "another place" taken a decided action with reference to the Land Bill, and had, by letters in The Times, shown a great and a vast divergence from the ideas of the Government on this subject. It might naturally be supposed that the appointment of a man receiving a large income from, and intimately connected with, a noble Lord who had so frequently and so emphatically declared himself against the principles of the Bill, should give rise to suspicion. He (Mr. Dawson) and those who knew Mr. Vernon did not suspect him; but it might be different among those who did not know him.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, that as the hon. Gentleman had referred to the Earl of Pembroke, he might be allowed to say a word. It was this, and it was only justice—the Earl of Pembroke, no doubt, had not taken the same view of the Land Bill in all points as the Government had done; but he felt bound in justice to say, and it was really within his knowledge, that the Earl of Pembroke had not approached the consideration of the Land Bill in the character of Irish proprietor, but in the character of a Peer of the country. His first declarations on the Land Bill—although he was a decided Member of the Party opposite—were what might be called, relatively and comparatively, of a very Liberal character, rather favouring some of the principles of the Bill, and his own estate had none of the interests involved which were concerned in the Land Bill.
§ MR. NEWDEGATEasked whether it was to be understood that the tribunal which Parliament had appointed was to consist of partizans of the Government, or persons imbued strongly in favour of the Land Bill?
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he could only refer to the declaration which he thought it his duty to make at the time when the constitution of the Land Commission was under consideration. He then stated it was their desire that the Members of the Commission should cer- 36 tainly not all be known as standing in the same Party connection with the Government; but he said, at the same time, that it was necessary, in regard to the working of the Land Bill, that the members of the Court should be in sympathy with the principles of the Bill.
§ MR. CAINEasked if Mr. Litton would be allowed to continue his practice at the Bar while acting as a member of the Commission?