Commons Sitting of 20 June 1883

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Sea Fisheries (Ireland) [31]; Vice-Royalty (Ireland) [37], debate adjourned.
Report—Inclosure Provisional Order (Hildersham) * [209]Land Drainage Provisional Order (No. 2)* [210]; Metropolis Improvement Provisional Order * [173]; Metropolis Improvement Provisional Order (No. 2) * [174]; Metropolis Improvement Provisional Order (No. 3)* [175]; Metropolis Improvement Provisional Order (No. 4) * [214]; Local Government Provisional Order (No. 10)* [206]; Local Government Provisional Order (No. 6)* [195]; Local Government Provisional Order (No. 8) * [199].

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  SEA FISHERIES (IRELAND) BILL.
  (Mr. O' Kelly, Mr. Blake, Mr. Leanly, Mr. O'Connor Power, Mr. O Donnell.)
  [BILL 31.] SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  MR. BLAKE,in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, he thought that at the outset it was well to state that there were two reasons which would recommend the Bill to the majority of the House and to English Members. In the first place, it did not propose to make any claim whatever upon the Imperial Exchequer, and if the Bill became law the British taxpayer would not be asked to contribute anything to carry out the object it had in view; in the next place, the Bill had the approbation of the great majority of Irish Members on both sides of the House. The object of the Bill was to develop an important Irish resource out of purely Irish money. Now, the leading draw-
  1048
  backs to the development of Irish fisheries were, first, a want of means on the part of the fishermen to procure suitable and sufficient beats and gear. This drawback was caused in a great measure by the disastrous Famines of 1847 and 1849, and subsequent years; and no portion of the Irish people suffered so much in these periods of depression as the fishermen in consequence of the people being obliged to fall back on meal diet, to which fish was not a suitable accompaniment. The result was that the beats and gear had to be sold, and the people were never in a position afterwards to regain them so as to enable them to follow successfully that calling. Now the requirement of loans to enable fishermen to procure beats and gear was to a great extent met by a fund appropriated for that special purpose, and it was not intended, for the present at least, to make any request to provide money for that object. In passing he thought he might say that the fund now used to provide those loans was exclusively Irish money, also that already £50,000 had been expended in the last 10 years; and to show the honesty and punctuality of the fishermen, he need only add that of that sum of £50,000 the arrears at present amounted to only £1,000; and this £1,000 the Report of the Board of Works showed that a good deal of it was recoverable. What was at present chiefly required for the development of the Irish fisheries was proper harbour accommodation for fishing beats; but before he proceeded to dwell on that subject, he thought it would be desirable to describe the descriptions of fishing in Ireland. There were two classes of fishing in Ireland. There was migratory fish, which included mackerel, herrings, pilchards, &c.; and there was permanent fish, that was where the fish remained more stationary, such as cod, plaice, ling, hake, &c. Now, the seat of the great mackerel fishing in Ireland was in the South. It had been hitherto carried on along the coast, at Kinsale, with very good results, and that fishing was of so large a character that it had not only attracted English fishermen, but also many Manx and Scotch fishermen, and some French fishermen came there also. As regarded the habits of migratory fish, the pilchard afforded a remarkable example. About 100 years ago there was a great pilchard fishery on the coast of Cork;

  1049
  but for some unaccountable reason they passed over to Cornwall, and Irishmen went over there to teach the Cornish people how to capture and cure it. Some years ago, however, the pilchards had abandoned the Cornish coast and gone again to Ireland; but, in the intervening years, the Irish fishermen had got out of the habit of curing pilchards, and the consequence was that these fish remained uncaptured on the coast of the County Cork. Hitherto mackerel kept near to Kinsale; but now it had moved more to the West, and was to be found in great quantities off the coasts of Kerry and Clare, where there were not sufficient harbours of a good character to afford shelter to the beats fishing for mackerel. Migratory fish afforded an illustration of the proverb, "Make hay while the sun shines." The fish were to be found in one place for a time, and if they were not captured immediately they might move off again to some other point. In the County Clare, which was represented by his hon. and gallant Friend opposite (Captain O'Shea), there was a harbour called Carrigaholt, about 12 miles up the Shannon, and in 1881 about £28,000 worth of mackerel was brought in there; but, in consequence of the want of accommodation for the beats, the fish had to remain there a great length of time without being landed. And so the beats were delayed often three times as long as they ought from the fishing grounds; and he had the authority of Mr. Brady, the experienced Inspector of Irish Fisheries, for stating that if there was sufficient accommodation at Carrigaholt, last year £100,000 worth of fish would have been brought in there; so that owing to the want of accommodation £80,000 worth of fish had been lost to the fishermen and consumers. Along that line of coast, front Carrigaholt to Liscannor, County Clare, there was no harbour for 30 miles; there was no suitable harbour, in fact, from the mouth of the Shannon to Galway Bay, a distance of 70 miles, for large fishing craft. This was only an illustration of what might be said of other long stretches of coast without harbours, while fish abounded outside, and numbers of hardy and industrious men were ready to reap the rich harvest of the sea if they only had shelter for boats. Now, let them see what was the state of the Scotch coast. Before the Harbours
  1050
  Committee a few days ago they had the Scotch Inspector of Fisheries, and he stated that there was scarcely five miles of the Scotch coast that had not a harbour, and that harbours were rarely 10 miles apart; and the consequence was so much advantage to the Scotch fishermen, that the amount of fish caught on the coast of Aberdeen itself exceeded in value the rental of the entire county of Aberdeen. Let the House turn its attention now to the herring fisheries which were to be found on the East Coast of Ireland, and it would find another illustration of the uncertain habits of migratory fish. Mighty shoals of herrings were found some years ago on the Galway coast, and also on the coast of Donegal, and so important were the Donegal fisheries that the Irish Parliament spent large sums in making harbours there and in facilitating the transport of fish through the country, and in this way hundreds of thousands of pounds were realized by the people of Donegal before the Union. Some years since, however, the herrings "sought fresh fields and pastures new," and now the coasts of Donegal and Galway were almost abandoned by them, and nearly the whole of the herring fishing of importance was on the East Coast, where there was insufficient harbour accommodation. Now he came to the fishing banks where certain classes of fish remained permanently. There were in Ireland several important fishing banks. There was the "Nymph Bank," running from the coast of Wexford to the coast of Cork, so called because it was discovered by the cruiser Nymph. Fifty years ago this bank was considered of so much importance that a Company with a capital of £50,000 was formed in England for the purpose of fishing it; but so great was the jealously caused by the project amongst English fishermen, that representations were made to Parliament of the injury it would do to the English fishing industry, and, incredible as it might seem, the Bill was thrown out by the House of Commons when it was introduced in 1804, and the opportunity of properly developing that great fishing bank was over since lost. Next there was a very important bank of ling and other fish on the Kerry coast; and coming along by Galway, Clare, and Mayo there were other important banks frequented by permanent fish. Going

  1051
  around by Donegal there were other mighty banks, and some from Tory Island to the coast of Londonderry. These were not a half, perhaps not a tenth part, of the resources of Ireland in the way of fisheries. In 1837 a Bill, founded on the recommendation of a Royal Commission, was introduced by the Government, which was calculated to resuscitate the fisheries; but, again, a Bill was abandoned, which promised to do much good for the Irish fishermen, in the interests of the Scotch fisheries. Thus the Irish fishermen had had to struggle against very adverse influences, and this now gave them a stronger claim to be afforded the opportunity of prosecuting their industry successfully. There was no reason to suppose that there was not as much fish on the Irish coast as formerly; but the fact was, that while the capture by English fishermen amounted to about £8,000,000 worth, and by Scotch fishermen to £3,000,000 worth, that taken immediately off the coast of Ireland was only £500,000 a-year, while a considerable portion of even that was taken by fishermen not belonging to Ireland, showing how inadequately the Irish coast was fished. He would now pass on to the harbours that were recommended for the development of the industry. There were 15 maritime counties in Ireland, and there were recommendations by the Inspectors with regard to 14 of them for improving and increasing harbour accommodation. Now, to show the great desire of the Irish fishermen to prosecute their calling he had only to say that there were applications made for the improvement and construction of 100 harbours, and of those the Inspectors had recommended upwards of 70 as of pressing necessity, at a cost of over £250,000—namely, Cork, 10; Clare, 9; Donegal, 15; Down, 2; Galway, 9; Kerry, 6; Londonderry, 1; Louth, 2; Mayo, 6; Sligo 2; Waterford, 6; Wexford, 2; and Wicklow, 2. The Bill proposed to take the sum necessary for those works from the Church Surplus Fund; and, as that relieved the British taxpayer from any charge in the matter, he hoped the Government would consent to this expenditure of Irish money for Irish purposes. The Report of the Fishery Inspectors for last year, and, indeed, for many years past, showed the great necessity there was for increased harbour accommoda-
  1052
  tion, and the great advantage the people would derive from it. Many of these harbours, the Report stated, would not require any large expenditure to put them in a proper condition, but, small as the expenditure would be, it was entirely beyond the means of the localities to raise it. He was glad to say he had a very much higher authority, as far as rank was concerned, to quote upon the desirability of establishing fishery harbours around the coast of Ireland. In the paper which the Prince of Vales read yesterday at the Fisheries Conference on behalf of the Duke of Edinburgh, His Royal Highness said—
  "The fisheries on the coast of Ireland offer a wide field of enterprize, and their development would tend to promote the welfare of the Irish people. Already the English, Manx, and Scotch boats which prosecute the mackerel fisheries have commenced to find their way to the West Coast of Ireland, where they have obtained remunerative returns for their labours. Within the last three years Dingle Bay has become a considerable rendezvous of the mackerel drift boats for the early season's fishery. The experiment was first tried in 1881, and was so successful that increasing numbers of boats have resorted there in the two following years, making it their head-quarters for the prosecution of the deep-sea drift fishing, and sending their fish by steamer to the English markets. The necessities of the crews of these boats must undoubtedly give a considerable stimulus to local traffic, and contribute towards the prosperity of the surrounding district; but I hope this will not be the only result. I look for the gradual extension of an organized system of fisheries up and down the whole West Coast of Ireland, which is singularly favoured in the possession of numerous natural harbours most suitable for fishing ports if the inhabitants of those coasts were to realize that the sea will yield them a far more abundant harvest than their rocky and barren soil will give—a harvest practically inexhaustible, always ripe and ready for the sickle."
  He also stated that Ireland was well furnished with natural harbours. That was the fact to some extent; but around the circuit of Ireland, which was 2,500 miles, there was a great deficiency of natural harbours which did not require some outlay to render them complete. There were numerous creeks which fishermen utilized; but, owing to the tempestuous character of the sea along the coast, breakwaters were essential, in addition, in many places. Before the Famine years there were exactly five times the number of men and three times the number of boats engaged in the Irish fisheries. The reason for this was—and he wished to impress this

  1053
  point upon the House—the Famine of 1848 and 1849 had obliged thousands of the fishing population to abandon their occupation, and part with their beats and gear, and most of them had never since been able to obtain others. Even now, those having beats and willing to work were obliged to live for a great part of the year in enforced idleness owing to the want of suitable harbours. They had not harbours which afforded them sufficient shelter. If the weather was at all strong, the fishermen were afraid to go to sea, knowing the difficulty they would have in getting back again. Weather of a certain roughness was suitable for fishing purposes; but it frequently happened that before they had had time to make any considerable haul the men became alarmed at the prospect of rougher weather, and returned to land. In a great number of instances where harbours had been made, important results had followed from the increased number that had gone to fishing pursuits with advantage; and in places where harbours had been improved, the fishermen had often been enabled to make two additional fishings in one day. The testimony that was given by His Royal Highness was, he thought, of a most satisfactory character, as showing what could be accomplished by having suitable harbours around the coast, and showing also that the non-development of the fisheries did not arise from any indisposition on the part of the people to fish. They required very much larger beats and improved harbours. The coast of Ireland had always been celebrated for the quantity of fish in the seas around it. The Danes were induced to invade the country on account of the largo quantities of fish resorting to its shores, and English Monarchs in the 16th century received large sums from some foreign Potentates who desired to purchase for their subjects the right of fishing in those waters. The French and Flemish fishermen fished on the Irish coast whenever permitted. The best fishing localities were handed over to foreigners for a consideration, and efforts were even made to prevent Irishmen themselves from deriving benefit from their fisheries. The Cromwellian Parliament was inundated with Petitions from English fishing stations praying that the fisheries of Ireland might be discouraged on account
  1054
  of the great injury caused by the competition of Irish fishermen to the trade of the English fishermen abroad. The result was that the fishermen were almost exterminated by the effects of the "transplanting law." Oliver Cromwell, who was a very practical person, sent some cargoes of Irish fishermen to Barbados, and other West India Islands, where they were sold at a good price to the planters, and where signs of their presence survived to this day. Not many years ago, for example, an Irish sergeant who had arrived in the principal port of Barbados with his regiment was surprised to hear himself greeted with the words "God save you," uttered in the Irish language by a negro who had boarded the ship. Concluding that the negro must be an Irishman, the gallant sergeant asked him how long he had been in Barbados. "Three months," replied the negro, who had come from a neighbouring island; and the sergeant, thinking that his friend's complexion had been changed from white to black in so short a time by the scorching sun, rushed, in great excitement, into the cabin where his wife and family were in order to have a last look at their fair faces before the commencement of the change which he anticipated would be caused in the hue of their skins by the baneful climate. The Irish Parliament, during its brief existence, did a great deal to promote the Irish fisheries, and the year before the Union was the most flourishing the Irish fisheries had for a long time. It gave large sums for the making of suitable harbours, and also for means of inland transport; but four years after the Union, as he had mentioned, the Bill to promote the fishing of the South-East Coast was thrown out of the House by a majority of 1. In 1832 there was a Royal Commission appointed to report on the condition and best means for improving the Irish Sea Fisheries, and its chief recommendations were embodied in a Bill; but on the day before the second reading was to be proposed the Duke of Sutherland headed a hostile deputation from Scotland to the Premier, and the Bill was abandoned. These were among the discouragements which the Irish fisheries had suffered; but, notwithstanding them, the Irish fishermen, by their own effort, had placed the fisheries before the Famine in a fairly flourishing condition.

  1055
  An hon. and gallant Baronet opposite, a Member for a Scotch constituency (Sir George Balfour), very often flourished in that House, and yesterday produced, for the last time in the Committee on Harbour Accommodation, a Return of the money spent by England on Irish Harbours, which the Return placed at £2,000,000; and whenever anything was asked for the Irish fisheries, this hon. and gallant Baronet quoted his Return, made out in 1875. However, he was authorized by Mr. Brady to state now that the whole sum expended by the British Government since the Norman Conquest on Irish fisheries was only £150,000; the remainder of the £2,000,000 was spent upon Royal Harbours—Kingstown, Dunmore, Howth, and Donoughadu—and he was in a position to state that the Government well recouped themselves for their expenditure by the sums received for postal purposes. That beggarly sum of £150,000 included the amount voted for the construction of harbours on the Western Coast during the late years of distress, since when the usual annual grant was suspended—now three years. A deputation, last year, waited upon the Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Courtney), who gave them a courteous, but reluctant, interview; but the only result of the united efforts of nearly 30 maritime Members was that they obtained the magnificent grant for this year of £4,000. Supposing they had Secretaries of the Treasury of the same disposition as regarded expenditure on Ireland—and in justice to the present occupant of the Office he should admit he had never known them better—it would take nearly 100 years before the last of the harbours now recommended could be finished, to say nothing of other harbours which, in the meantime, might be considered necessary. By the proposal which he now made he would relieve the Government from any demands for the future on this subject, and relieve the Irish Members from the humiliation of making them. His proposal was, as he had stated, that the money should be taken from the surplus of the Irish Church Fund. They were told that there was probably no surplus. His authority for holding the contrary opinion was the Premier himself, who, on introducing a measure for applying a portion of the Fund to the payment of arrears, said that a certain
  1056
  sum was available. But some hundreds of thousands of the sum so granted had not been spent on the payment of arrears. At all events, let the House affirm the principle of the Bill, and the Irish Members would take their chance for the money. He contended, however, that it was the bounden duty of the Government, even if the money were to come out of the Imperial Exchequer, to grant the sum required. The hon. Member for Youghal (Sir Joseph M'Kenna) had shown, in an able pamphlet, and the hon. Member for Galway (Mr. Mitchell Henry) had also proved, in a letter to The Times, that Irishmen contributed far more than their fair share of the Imperial taxation; and therefore, in equity, a large amount was duo to them by way of compensation for past over-contributions. But, even independent of that, the Imperial Government were bound to do all in their power for the benefit of Irish industry, and especially of the Irish fisheries, which had been not only discouraged by this country, but repressed in an arbitrary and cruel manner. There was even a still stronger motive, the motive of self-interest, he might say almost of self-preservation. The chief portion of our food supplies came from America, which some years ago put such heavy taxation upon goods of English manufacture that very little of them found their way into that country. We had, therefore, to send nearly all gold to America for our food supplies; and this ho ventured to think that even the most enthusiastic Free Trader would admit was rather a losing game for England. But suppose a dearth occurred or a war broke out, which prevented those supplies from coming over, in what a position should we be We should have starvation staring us in the face, and all for not having spent seine money on what might furnish us with ample quantities of good and wholesome food. There was also at the present moment considerable alarm about the great decrease of the North Sea fisheries, which constituted our chief source of supply. Therefore, it was matter of considerable importance for England to do all she could to develop the Irish fisheries. There was another point on which he wished to touch. The 11th clause of the Bill provided that the Commissioners might, when they saw fit, defray the entire cost of any harbour. That would

  1057
  dispense with the condition requiring that, at least, a fourth should be raised by local subscriptions, the effect of which was, according to the Report of the Royal Commission on Irish Sea Fisheries in 1870, that harbours were not constructed in the most suitable places, because the people were often too poor to raise any portion of the money, and there was not sufficient interest felt in the fisheries to induce the cesspayers to contribute. When he was an Inspector of Fisheries a harbour was recommended to be made in a certain county at a cost of £2,000, the local subsidy being £500. About two miles distant a much more suitable harbour could be constructed for £1,500; but the local contribution could not be raised. These local contributions depended pretty much on the' temper of the lord of the soil. If the harbour would be useful to him for yachting purposes he would contribute. A further clause gave power to appoint four unpaid Commissioners to represent the different Provinces, and to be associated with the paid Inspectors for carrying out the Bill. It would be desirable to have such a control exercised over the Department in the manner his Bill provided for. The Chief Secretary's time was so much occupied with other matters that he could not possibly attend to the fisheries; and it would be a great advantage to introduce an unpaid element into the Fisheries' Department. In conclusion, he would express the hope that as the Bill was promoted in the interest of the most hard working, the most enduring, and the most deserving portion of the people, the right hon. Gentleman would give an affirmative reply to his Motion for the second reading of the Bill.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. Blake.)
  THE O'GORMAN MAHONsaid, that the hon. Member who had just concluded his speech had expressed a hope that those Members whose knowledge of the subject would be able to influence the House would do their best to press this Bill on the Government. On the part of his constituents he tendered his thanks to the hon. Member; but he was, at the same time, obliged to acknowledge that the hon. Member's speech was of so exhaustive character that there was little
  1058
  left to say. There had been no point omitted or neglected in the hon. Member's speech, and no point which was not sustained in a vigorous and powerful manner. The peculiar formation of the county which he (The O'Gorman Mahon) represented rendered it almost a matter of duty that he should stand up on behalf of the Bill. The county of Clare was surrounded by water on three sides. On the East, the South, and the South-East it was bounded by the River Shannon, and on the West by the Atlantic Ocean. It was united to Ireland simply by a neck of land; and if a short trench were dug from Scariff, in the County of Clare, to Kinvarra, in Galway, it would be rendered a complete island, holding no communication, except that artificially effected by bridges, with the rest of the Kingdom. Under these circumstances, the necessity of harbours for the fishermen was so obvious that, as an humble Representative of that proud county, he felt an extreme interest in and a desire to support this Bill. He hoped Her Majesty's Government would take this question into consideration in a business-like way, instead of giving soft words and futile promises, and that English Gentlemen, no matter from what division of the country they came, would see the necessity of urging upon the Government that this Bill should be read a second time. If the proposals contained in it were carried out it would give a guarantee of peace, tranquillity, and order, which no Coercion Bill ever could effect, for coercion led to irritation and excitement. The employment of the poor, and the prosperity resulting from that employment, would be the best guarantee for the peace and harmony of the country. The form of the County Clare, as he had said, was very peculiar, and there were several harbours there already, both on the Shannon and on the Atlantic side; but they were comparatively useless. The inhabitants of this territory naturally depended on the fisheries to an unusual extent; and he need not point out the necessity of providing them with suitable harbours, but none such at present existed; and their most profitable industry was, therefore, pursued at a great disadvantage. In fact, the deep-sea fishery, the development of which was of the utmost importance to the people of this district, could scarcely be carried on at all, owing to the natural

  1059
  obstacles in the way of the fishermen. No breakwater existed, and there were no facilities for the reception of the larger vessels which were necessary for deep-sea fishing. The wretched canoes of the peasantry were wicker-work elongated baskets covered with greased skin or hide. He knew them when ho was a boy, for he had spent many a night out in them with his father's fishermen tenantry; and he learned there lessons of the industrious character of the people which would never be effaced from his recollection. The cry was continually raised in England that Irishmen were lazy, indolent, thriftless; but these poor people worked all night long with nothing between them and the bottom of the ocean but a hide-covered wicker basket, for the purpose of obtaining subsistence for themselves and their families. There was not a more hard-working and industrious population anywhere; but they were poor, and what they wanted were facilities for obtaining beats and harbours, because at present they dare not venture far off for fear of being blown into the Atlantic; whereas, if they had fishing loggers, they would be able to face a contrary breeze. He sincerely trusted that the Bill would receive the support of the House, and that the two hon. Gentlemen now on the Treasury Bench (Mr. Trovelyan and Mr. Courtney) would assist the Prime Minister, who always desired to do all he could for Ireland. At Knee, the place with which he was connected in Clare, there was ample opportunity for the formation of a good harbour; and if an engineer went down with him ho would point out the mode in which a harbour could be built, which would not only be of service to fishermen, but might, in the future, offer shelter to the ships of Her Majesty's Navy; and the necessary works need not be very expensive. On the opposite side of the Shannon an excellent harbour could also be made at Carrigaholt, an historic place, from which there departed at one time those Irishmen who at Fontenoy showed Englishmen how Irishmen could fight. The gallantry of the Irish Brigade defeated the British Forces in that hard-fought battle, and elicited from an English King the utterance of his memorable curse on the vile Penal Laws which drove such chivalrous soldiers into the ranks of England's enemies.
  1060
  History, it was said, repeated itself. Do not insist on banishing Irishmen from their native land. This coast was the seat of mountains of wealth rolling along for miles; but without sufficient appliances the people could not avail themselves of that source of wealth. It was a favourite imputation that Irishmen were lazy; that they lacked the self-acting principle; that they were indolent; but give them the opportunity of earning their bread well and honestly at home, and put a stop to the present exodus of people from a country which they loved, and very beneficial results would soon manifest themselves; and so they might avert the recurrence of a similar catastrophe. A judicious outlay, such as was recommended in this Bill, would do much. They demanded no money from the English taxpayer; it was their own money they wanted to expend; and was it not a humiliation to be obliged to come over to an English Parliament and ask for permission to spend their own money in furtherance of the welfare of their own country?
  MR. MARJORIBANKSsaid, that the hon. Member who moved the second reading of the Bill had referred to the East Coast of Scotland as an example to be follewed in Ireland. The hon. Member alluded to the evidence recently given before the Committee now sitting on the Harbour Accommodation of the United Kingdom, to the effect that there were a great many harbours on the East Coast of Scotland. These harbours were to be held up as an example to be avoided rather than followed. It was quite true that along the East Coast of Scotland there was an infinity of harbours; but these were all small harbours, dry at low water, and, indeed, with the exception of Aberdeen, Buckie, Fraserburgh, and Peterhead, there was not a really proper fishing harbour along that coast. If he thought that this Bill was to promote the formation of harbours of that description, which were dry at low water, he certainly could not give it his support. It was absolutely necessary—and ho believed might well be made an absolute condition of the giving or lending of any Government money—that harbours to be constructed by its aid should have a considerable depth of water at low spring tide. The hon. Member proposed to apply £250,000 to

  1061
  improving some 70 harbours. That would not do very much on 70 harbours, and he would rather see the £250,000 expended on some 15 or 20 good jobs. Big beats were necessary to work the fisheries properly in the stormy waters of the Atlantic; and they could not use big beats without harbours having a sufficient amount of water to give them shelter at all states of the tide. What was wanted was a number of good deep harbours, into which the beats could run when they were overtaken by the terrible storms which rage in that ocean. These people could not go out in small boats to prosecute their fishing with any prospect of success. It had been stated yesterday, in the Committee on Harbour Accommodation, on which he was sitting, that during all the troublous times in Ireland there had not been a single case of crime brought home to the fishing population. They had, all through, been the most orderly and most loyal portion of the population; and that alone should have some weight with English and Scottish Members in inducing them to support the Bill. He believed it was the fact that on the 2,500 miles of Irish Coast there were only 82 lights. That was an additional reason for doing something, as lights and harbours went very much together. He should vote for the second reading of the Bill, not that he would thereby pledge himself to all its details, but because he believed that one of the most pressing needs of Ireland was an extension of her harbours. He believed that it was perfectly impossible to estimate the advantage which would he gained by that country through the development of her resources—in the relief of distress, in the provision of good food to her people, and in the general advance of the orderly and quiet state of the country.
  SIR HERVEY BRUCEsaid, he felt it to be his duty, as an Irish Representative, to give the Preamble of the Bill his hearty support, though the Bill itself would require considerable amendment. A part of his county faced the sea, and a number of men there were engaged in the fishing industry. During the prevalence of North-East or North-West winds, however, they could not go out, owing to the want of harbours where they could put in during stress of weather. People who endeavoured to
  1062
  assist themselves deserved to be assisted, and this was true of the fishing population in several parts of Ireland. In the town which he represented the people were, at the present moment, expending some £60,000 or £70,000 in endeavouring to make safer places of refuge for fishing beats on the Coast, as well as to increase the navigable powers of the River Bann, and to make it more easy of access. The Irish Society, too, which was so often abused, had contributed to this object the munificent sum of £30,000. Considering all the circumstances of the case, he hoped the Government would take a favourable view of the Bill.
  MR. O'SHEAsaid, he should support the Bill of the hon. Member for Waterford (Mr. Blake), whose exertions in the cause of Irish fishermen ought to be fully recognized. He wished to explain, in reply to the speech of the hon. Member for Berwickshire (Mr. Marjoribanks), that their ideas on the West Coast of Ireland were very much more moderate than the ambitious schemes which found favour in Scotland; and when the hon. Member advised that the number of the harbours which it was proposed to deal with should be reduced, he was unaware that although these were called harbours, yet in many cases they were little more than creeks. Three small works had been done at a cost respectively of £600, £300, and £250, near to the places mentioned by his hon. Colleague (The O'Gorman Mahon), which had raised the inhabitants of these districts from a condition of penury into a very comfortable state. He was very glad, indeed, that the hon. Member for Berwickshire had borne testimony to the character of the men for whose sakes the House was asked to pass this Bill. Before the men in these three places got the grant they were almost wholly without beats or gear of any kind; but directly they got the grant, which was given with the most scrupulous care and judgment, they set to work, and the great catch to which the Prince of Wales alluded yesterday was made. Immediately they got that catch, the men, without spending anything on themselves, set to work to pay their debts and their rents. With regard to these little creeks, a great many of them could only be used at certain states of the tide, because of the rocks outside,

  1063
  where even the little native canoes could not pass; but if these creeks were improved, and employed as they could be for a small outlay, the inhabitants would be able to fish three or four times the length of time they were able to do so at present. He sincerely trusted the Treasury would not stand in the way of this Bill being accepted, seeing that it was supported by all shades of Irish opinion in the House. It was only two or three days ago he was talking to a very distinguished foreigner on the subject; and, after explaining to him the unprotected state of the County Clare, and the total want of fishing harbours, the gentleman replied that, generalizing from such details as those, he could well understand the difficulties of the Irish Question.
  MR. PLUNKETsaid, he desired to add a few words to the entirely unanimous accord which had hitherto characterized the debate in support of the main principles of the Bill. He wished, as far as he could, to give his hearty support to the measure. It would be impossible, either for himself or for anyone else, to add to the fulness or force of the statements made by the hon. Member for Waterford (Mr. Blake), especially having regard to his great experience on the subject; and he certainly could add nothing to the appeals made by the hon. Member for Clare (Mr. O'Shea), on behalf of those desolate and, he might almost say, desert places which the great O'Connell used to describe as "the parishes which lie next to America," and which, in the view of extracting wealth from the soil, were placed in most unfavourable circumstances. But if on dry land Nature had been somewhat stingy to these sea-bordered counties, she had been prolific in the supply of a great amount of food for the people in the sea itself. These were great sources of food and wealth, which might be utilized in their interest, and the interest of the people of other parts of the Kingdom. He wished to make a contribution to this debate from his own personal experience. He had spent a great part of his life in the County of Clare, the Kingdom of Kerry, the County of Galway, and the other counties on the Atlantic sea-board; and he could say it was true that there were ample 'opportunities for forming harbours which would be sufficient for the
  1064
  purpose of encouraging deep-sea fishing enterprize there. At present there existed hardly any harbours at all which were suitable for that purpose. The fishing population of these districts were hardy, industrious, and brave people, who were willing to face great risks; but the risks they at present had to encounter were, to a great extent, prohibitive of successful fishing operations there on a large scale. It was impossible to have proper fishing-beats without harbours into which those beats could run. As a matter of fact, the canoes were good enough for fine weather and fair seas; but it was most dangerous, almost amounting to certain destruction, to venture out in them when the weather was beisterous. He was sure it was correct to say that the takes of fish might be increased six-fold if only the people had proper harbours and proper ships. It was a happy coincidence that on the very day when this unprecedented unanimity was witnessed on the part of the Irish Members, there should appear in the leading journal the admirable speech which was delivered yesterday by the Heir to the Throne, at the Fisheries Exhibition, and which was composed by his brother, the Duke of Edinburgh. In that speech the case of the Irish fisheries was thus put with great force—
  "This, I think, is a remarkable proof of the benefits which might accrue to the inhabitants of the Atlantic sea-board of Ireland, if they could be induced to adopt fishing as a means of livelihood, instead of only pursuing it in an intermittent fashion. To follow the fisheries on these coasts, however, well-found vessels of sufficient size arc necessary to contend with the Atlantic seas."
  This was precisely the difficulty which stood in the way, and which this Bill sought to remove. There was no want of courage or willingness on the part of the population, nor was there any want of material in the shape of fish. All that was really wanted was a not very great amount of assistance in the way of money, for the purpose of constructing harbours in proper places. Under the existing law, it was necessary, in order to got a contribution for the formation of a harbour, that there should be a subscription raised on the spot; but it was often impossible to do this in the very places where harbours were most wanted. Difficulties might arise as to some of the provisions of this Bill; but he sincerely trusted that the Govern-

  1065
  ment would see their way to adopting the principle of it, and that they would hold out a hope that before long they would be able to give effect to the very useful policy which the measure proposed.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERassured Irish Members that he should not detain the House for more than a few moments, inasmuch as very little required to be said. The case was a very strong one, and had been most clearly stated; but he should just like to state that the experience he had gained in Ireland made him anxious that the House should pass the second reading of this measure. He trusted the Government would take the same view. The facts really lay in a nutshell. There was great poverty on the West Coast of Ireland, and there was enormous wealth. There was sufficient fish there to prevent the poverty, and there were the fishermen there to catch it. Yet there was hardly any chance of their being able to catch it, because they had no harbours. The whole matter was really quite clear. He had often heard it stated that this was rather against the Irish character, because there were these fish and the fishermen did not catch them. If, however, anyone went to the West Coast he would almost wonder that so much fish was caught, in the circumstances, as actually was caught. He did not know any sight in the United Kingdom that was more magnificent than an Atlantic storm at Kilkee; but one was surprised to find that any fishing was possible with the chance of such storms coming on suddenly without any good harbours to which the beats could run. Until the fishermen got big beats there would not be much fishing there. One fact was very encouraging as respects the fishermen, and that was the great success of the Reproductive Fund. This success, he thought, reflected great credit on these poor inhabitants of Ireland. It was an extraordinary fact that almost every penny advanced by that fund had been repaid. The circumstance showed a great deal of industry, as well as a great deal of honesty, as the fishermen must have worked hard to be able to fulfil their engagements. The question arose as to how these harbours were to be made. His hon. Friend the Member for Waterford (Mr. Blake) said there was an Irish Fund which might supply
  1066
  the money required. He did not think the House could resist the appeal to make use of that fund. There might, perhaps, be some doubt as to whether there was such a fund disposable, although he himself believed there was a surplus left. As to the harbours themselves, he admitted that the history of the Irish fisheries, and the conduct of the rest of the Kingdom towards Ireland in the matter, made the claim more than usually strong; but he did not think it would be to the advantage of Ireland to introduce the principle of gifts from the Treasury for this purpose to any large extent. On the other hand, for fisheries as well as for any other development of Irish resources, he should be inclined to lend liberally, and to lend at a low rate of interest, whenever security could be obtained. In the present case, however, it was asked that the expense might be taken from a fund, that might be said really to belong to Ireland; but unless some considerable sums of money were spent there was no chance of anything satisfactory being done. The small sums that were given year by year by the Treasury had not the remotest chance of relieving the districts. He did not think the Treasury ought to be blamed for it, because, after all, they were but the custodians of the chest of the taxpayers of the country. He did not pledge himself to every detail of the Bill, although he confessed it seemed to be carefully drawn up; but he hoped the House would pass the second reading.
  MR. ARTHUR ARNOLDsaid, that upon the Harbours Commission, of which he was a Member, an Inspector, the best-informed official who came before them, gave evidence to the effect that he had been for 38 years constantly engaged in supervising the fishermen, especially on the West Coast of Ireland; that there were more than 21,000 men on the register, representing a population much exceeding 100,000 persons; and that during those 38 years there had not been a single conviction for crime amongst them. That was a fact of the most remarkable kind with regard to the people themselves. The Inspector strongly advocated the construction of harbours; and the most striking fact with reference to the harbour accommodation that came before the Committee related to the place on the Shannon,

  1067
  —Carrigaholt—which had been mentioned that day. With respect to it, the Inspector said that if there were a harbour made there, at a cost of £10,000, the increase in the value of the fish taken would be £100,000 a-year. He (Mr. Arnold) asked the Inspector whether the people would not be willing to find security for a charge of £400 a-year to meet the cost; but he answered that he thought it would be impossible, as there was no town population where the harbour was required, upon whose rates the loan could be charged. He made it plain to the Committee, however, that it would be very desirable that fishing boats should be chargeable with dues in the harbours to be constructed. He showed that if harbours were constructed, it was probable that beats of large size and safer build would make use of them, and that the dues would very easily recoup the expenditure. The impression he (Mr. Arnold) had derived from the evidence given before the Committee had set him strongly against grants of public money or loans, which were no better than grants, because there was no expectation of paying them. But the Bill simply asked that the Irish people should deal with a portion of the Church Surplus by the agency of persons, who should determine whether the money should be advanced either by grant or by loan. Under these circumstances, the Bill ought to receive the support of the House.
  SIR EARDLEY WILMOTsaid, that in the last Parliament he appealed to the late Prime Minister to utilize the great majority he had at his command to assist, in some measure, the material resources of Ireland. Unfortunately, that had not been done; and here they were, at this day, considering a measure which, he thought, would render great assistance to the people of that country. He desired to bear testimony to the thrift and industry of the Irish fishing population, having heard those qualities highly spoken of by men who had had personal experience of them. The Irish fishermen, on the evidence of Mr. Brady, were persons devoid of criminal propensities; and the Duke of Edinburgh had stated that, in examining the Naval Reserves of the Second Class, he found no more well-conducted men than those who had been engaged in the Irish sea-fishing. Unfortunately, the boats and. gear of these fishermen were insufficient to enable them to
  1068
  reap the abundant harvest of fish which was always to be obtained off the Coast of Ireland; and it was the duty of the House to see that they were assisted in that direction. The necessity for harbours was also very great; and he was sure that if the fishermen of Ireland were properly encouraged they would add largely to the national wealth. He agreed that the Irish Church Surplus could not be better applied than in increasing the comforts and well-being of the Irish people, and in developing the resources of the country; and for that reason he should cordially support the Bill.
  MR. COURTNEYsaid, he felt great difficulty in saying a word which would at all disturb the unanimity of sentiment which had hitherto prevailed in this discussion, especially when he considered the nature of the suggestion which formed the main part of the Bill. The Bill practically proposed that the sum of £250,000, forming part of the Irish Church Surplus, should be handed over to a mixed body of Commissioners, and distributed by them, partly by grants and partly by loans, in improving the harbours round the Coast of Ireland. It was said the Fund in question was an Irish Fund, and the application was supported with unanimity as far as they had heard; and they had, besides, received the very valuable support of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bradford (Mr. W. E. Forster). The hon. and gallant Member for Clare (The O'Gorman Mahon) said it was a humiliation that Irishmen should come here to ask the allocation of an Irish Fund to a strictly Irish purpose. He (Mr. Courtney) hoped he should say nothing to intensify that feeling of humiliation; and he should, as far as possible, approach the subject as if he were an Irishman. Speaking from that point of view, he hoped to be able to submit to the House reasons which would convince them that it would be imprudent and inexpedient to assent to the second reading of the Bill; and he hoped, further, to be able to persuade the hon. Member for Waterford (Mr. Blake)—whose real and self-denying efforts in this cause must have excited the admiration of all—that it would be expedient that the Bill should be withdrawn. [Mr. WARTON: Oh!] Perhaps the hon. and learned Member for Brid-

  1069
  port would listen to what he had to say. The hon. Member for Waterford said there could be no doubt whatever as to the capacity of the Irish Church Surplus Fund to meet the proposed grant of £250,000. Now, he (Mr. Courtney) was ready to admit that if the Fund could be maintained against attacks made upon it from time to time for appropriations, it would be sufficient to make such a grant; although the sources of supply were not so absolutely secure as they could wish. The revenue derived, and which would be necessary to support the charges already incurred, was not absolutely unassailable; and although he hoped they would keep intact those sources which fed the Fund, and on the maintenance of which alone the existing charges could be defrayed, yet ho must own they would have some difficulty in repelling the demands made for the diminution of the sources of supply. If it were quite clear they had this money in hand, it became a necessary preparatory condition that they should take into account what other demands might be made upon the fund, and compare the relative importance of the demands so made. For, after all, this was only a limited demand, made in the interests of a particular class—the fishermen of the maritime counties of Ireland. They ought, then, to consider this claim in relation to other demands—to the perfectly natural demand for a portion of the Surplus for the development of intermediate education; to the agitation for an increase of their stipends and pensions which was now raised by the teachers of the national schools; to the demand for assistance for the development of railways in the West of Ireland; to that for the extension of arterial drainage in Ireland; and other claims which were continually coming upon the Treasury. They were bound to look into these matters before they could proceed to give this £250,000. The hon. Member for Waterford might say that this line of argument encouraged him to persevere, lest, in the general scramble for allocations of the Fund, he should be left out; but he (Mr. Courtney) would suggest that the Representatives of Ireland should meet together and discuss this question, and come to a determination among themselves as to which of these claims ought to have precedence and preference.
  1070
  There was, moreover, no direction or instruction given in the Bill as to the way in which the grant should be distributed. There had been no attempt made to fix the principles on which those harbours should be assisted, if assistance was in itself desirable or necessary. The whole thing was thrown haphazard into the hands of the Commissioners to do just what they liked. To turn, however, to what he thought was a conclusive reason why this allocation should not he conceded, they had heard the speech of the hon. Member for Berwickshire (Mr. Marjoribanks), Chairman of the Harbours Committee of the House, now sitting, and the speech of the hon. Member for Salford (Mr. Arthur Arnold), a Member of the same Committee; and, while both hon. Gentlemen expressed their intention of supporting the Bill, they had, in stating their experience of that Committee, in his opinion given very cogent reasons why the Bill should not, at all events at present, be supported. He should have thought that, before consenting to this grant, it would be necessary, first, to complete the work of the Select Committee on Harbours, to ascertain the present condition of the harbours of the country, what were their several needs, and in what way they could be best improved. What they wanted was to develop the deep sea fisheries of Ireland; and, in order to do that, they must have thoroughly good boats and harbours to run into at all states of the tide. That was a matter which required more consideration than he feared they could give to it on the floor of the House. But the hon. Member for Berwickshire had said that if they were to take this £250,000 and distribute it over the 60 or 70 harbours of Ireland, they would not succeed in making one good harbour—all that would be done would be simply to provide landings and piers useful when the tide was at its height.
  MR. MARJORIBANKSsaid, he certainly did not state that the spending of £250,000 would not result in the construction of one good harbour. What he said was that he should prefer to see the money spent on 15 or 20 harbours, because he did not think 70 good jobs could be made out of £250,000.
  MR. COURTNEYsaid, that was precisely what he understood, and be was

  1071
  endeavouring to reproduce it. The design of this Bill was to spend this money among 70 harbours. [cries of "No!"]
  MR. BLAKEobserved, that the 70 piers and harbours had been already recommended; and it was for the mixed Commission to say what harbours should be selected for construction, enlargement, and improvement.
  MR. COURTNEYsaid, that these 70 harbours had been recommended by the Fishery Inspectors, who would be the working Members of this mixed Commission; but, at all events, he submitted that they ought, first of all, to complete the work which the Committee on Harbours had in hand before they handed over this sum of money to a Commission uninstructed, without knowledge, and without ascertaining the principles of distribution. As a mere matter of business, if an Irish Assembly were going to give £250,000, it would prescribe conditions upon which that Committee should distribute the money. The particular conditions under which this money would be distributed were in dispute. They would have to prescribe what style of harbours they were going to build, the kind of beats they were going to provide, and the kind of fisheries they wore going to encourage.
  MR. O'CONNOR POWER: We will put that in the Bill.
  MR. COURTNEYsaid, they did not put these things in the Bill; but they would have to ascertain them, and settle their principle of action, before they created an Executive Commission, and gave them the money to apply it as they pleased. The Select Committee now sitting would give the House their conclusions, which would, no doubt, be disposed to carry out their recommendations. The hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell) and the hon. and learned Member for Mayo (Mr. O'Connor Power) knew, from their experience of Select Committees, that the House had allowed the carrying out of the recommendations of Select Committees, when they had ascertained the modes of action most desirable to adopt. He was surprised at the speech of the hon. Member for Salford (Mr. Arthur Arnold); and, for his own part, he had attempted to look at this question as an Irish Member. ["Oh!"] He appealed to hon. Members opposite whether he had not done so? Looking at this question as one of
  1072
  themselves, he was convinced that it would be imprudent to pass this Bill. He might discuss it, if they wished to do so, in another way; and he might remind the House that there was that underlying fundamental question, whether it was desirable to make such grants at all? It would be very foolish if he attempted to conceal his own view, since, as he might remind the House, on a former occasion, when he was in a position of more freedom and less responsibility, as hon. Gentlemen opposite well knew, he had expressed his opinions as to the inexpediency of making grants. What he had said were his own opinions; but he should mislead the House if he stated they were the opinions of all in authority. They desired to approach the question with open minds; but they wanted to be instructed, as the Select Committee now sitting would instruct them, as to the way this problem should be dealt with. At present there was merely a haphazard proposal; and the House wanted information and instruction from the labours of the Select Committee. He certainly thought it would be most injudicious to pass the Bill; and he, therefore, hoped the hon. Member for Waterford would not press the second reading.
  MR. GIBSONsaid, ho thought the Secretary to the Treasury must be of a very sanguine mind if he had a vestige of hope that the hon. Member for Waterford would withdraw his Bill. When the hon. Gentleman endeavoured to speak as an Irishman, he set a very high ideal before him, and his small measure of success was not to be wondered at, for it was an ideal that was not to be achieved in a moment. This was not a question of yesterday or to-day; but the history of the country, its geographical position, and the whole circumstances surrounding it showed that the question of dealing with the fisheries was one of the first moment. These fisheries were of great value, and might be made of still greater value; and it was a misfortune that the people who got the least value out of them were the Irish people themselves. It was therefore important that any fair, well-considered, and prudent measure on the subject should receive full attention. The present measure was not a large or ambitious measure. No one in the country was entitled to speak upon

  1073
  the subject with greater authority than his hon. Friend, who had devoted much attention to it, and had, moreover, for some years held an important office in connection with the Irish fisheries. The Secretary to the Treasury bad advanced no arguments against the substance of this Bill, the main objects of which were simply to create a Fishery Board of Commissioners, to be selected by the Irish Executive—that was to say, upon the authority of the Lord Lieutenant; and this Board was to decide upon the best mode of administering the objects of the Bill. The Bill did not propose to lay down what the Commissioners were to do. If the Bill was too wide and elastic in its terms, that was a matter which might be dealt with in Committee. Then the Commissioners so appointed by the Lord Lieutenant required the sanction of the Irish Executive to the works they proposed to carry out. There was, therefore, a check upon the appointments of the Commissioners, and also a check upon the mode in which the works were to be carried out. The Bill did not propose to give a single shilling by way of subvention to any person in Ireland; but merely sought to create a fund to enable piers and harbours to be provided for fishermen. Upon the question of finances, there was a Surplus arising from the Irish Church Fund, after satisfying the claims under the Arrears Act, of about £1,200,000; and a portion of this Surplus it was proposed to apply for the purposes of this Bill. If the Government were not prepared to consent to the application of this Surplus Fund for the purpose, the people of Ireland were quite willing to take the money from Imperial funds, if that would better suit the views of the Government. This, however, was a matter of detail, which did not interfere with the principle of the Bill. He felt sure the Chief Secretary would do his best to give a favourable consideration to every part of the Bill, reserving the right to introduce in Committee such Amendments as he thought necessary in order to make the Bill workable. He hoped the Bill would be read a second time, even if it were only for the purpose of expressing a distinct declaration of opinion that every encouragement ought to be given to the Irish fisheries; and afterwards they could avail themselves of
  1074
  the lights and experience that might be given to them by the Report of the Committee now sitting on Harbours.
  MR. WILLIAMSONsaid, he entirely approved of the scope and principles of the Bill, and hoped the House would assent to its second reading. He feared our statesmen had not begun to realize the national importance of this question of providing shelter for those hardy men who supplied us with food, and who might form the basis of our Naval Reserve. In any aspect they liked to take of this question, he was sure it was one of national importance; and he was surprised to hear the Secretary to the Treasury—and he feared that speech was an illustration of what he had just said—that our statesmen had not yet begun to realize the national importance of the question. He did not say this Bill was perfect. There might be some clauses capable of amendment; and if hon. Members would choose to extend the Proviso as to the financial part of the Bill, he was ready, for one, to aid them in that. If the Surplus Fund was not sufficient, ho, for one, would be ready to vote for the payment of the necessary money out of the Consolidated Fund. He hoped the Government would waive their opposition to the Bill.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)said, he would not intrude long in the discussion; but as he was largely responsible for advising the House in a matter of this kind, he felt it was his duty to say a few words. It appeared to him that the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Gibson) had placed the question, to a great extent, upon a fair footing. He had practically said he would be happy if he could take this money from the Consolidated Fund; but he was conscious that that was impossible; and he might have gone on to finish his sentence by the remark that that would not be in the power of the House on the present occasion. If this Bill proposed to take £250,000 from the Consolidated Funds for the purpose of the construction of harbours, it would not be possible for the House to pass the second reading of this Bill without the previous consent of the Crown. Therefore, he thought the right hon. and learned Gentleman had put the case on its proper footing

  1075
  when he said that this was simply a proposal to deal in a certain way with the Surplus of the Irish Church Funds, provided that Surplus existed; and even this he qualified by saying he thought the House, in passing the second reading, would be merely expressing the general opinion that, assuming the works were required and fund sufficient, this was not an unreasonable measure. He (Mr. Childers) was able to go somewhat further than his hon. Friend (Mr. Courtney). He had always been in favour of some special form of assistance to Irish fisheries, and had expressed that opinion in his days of freedom from Office. While, therefore, he entirely concurred in the objections to the details of this Bill which his hon. Friend had so forcibly stated, he was able to say that, provided the Irish Church Fund would bear the proposed charge, the sites for harbours to be assisted were recommended by the Committee now sitting, and in each case approved by the Government. Ho thought the Government ought not, on the question of principle, to object to the second reading of the Bill, but that it was their duty to examine the clauses and amend them before the next stage. Upon that understanding ho would, on behalf of the Government, assent to the second reading. There were details in the Bill as to the constitution of the managing body, the condition of grants and advances, and other matters, with some of which he could not agree, and others which he could not understand; upon these and other questions he must reserve his right of action in Committee.
  MR. PARNELLsaid, he was glad that the right hon. Gentleman, with his usual good feeling on Irish questions, had assented to the second reading of the Bill, reserving his right of discussing the details in Committee. The Irish' Members were quite as desirous as the Secretary to the Treasury that money coming from the Irish Church Fund should be properly spent, and not frittered away in little jobs on the Coast. They thought the Lord Lieutenant would be able to choose Commissioners from amongst the Inspectors of Irish Fisheries, who would be able to point out the harbours that should be dealt with. He would not detain the House further than to express, on behalf of himself and the other Irish Members, his great pleasure
  1076
  at the attitude which the Government had taken on this question.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Bill read a second time, and committed for Monday next.

  VICE-ROYALTY (IRELAND) BILL,
  (Mr. Justin M'Carthy, Mr. Richard Power, Mr. O'Kelly, Mr. Kenny.)
  [BILL 37.] SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  MR. JUSTIN M'CARTHY,in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, the Bill had for its purpose the abolition of the Office of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. The Bill consisted really of but three clauses—the first declaring that on and after January 1, 1884, the Office should be abolished; the second, that the powers of the Office should be transferred to a Secretary of State; and the third, that such Secretary of State should be a Member of the House, representing an Irish constituency. If the House was not prepared to accept the latter proposition, he would not press it in Committee, and would merely ask them to affirm the principle that the Office should be abolished. The House was well aware that this was not the first time a proposition of the kind had been made. A proposal of the same nature had been introduced, some 30 odd years ago, by the late Earl Russell, then Lord John Russell, in the House of Commons. That proposal had the same purpose in view, but was of a more complicated character. It proposed to make arrangements to take effect, provided Her Majesty in Council abolished the Office of Lord Lieutenant; but it did not propose to abolish the Office at a stroke. That measure was carried to a second reading with a very large majority in its favour; but was, nevertheless, not carried beyond that stage. The reason of its not getting beyond a second reading was partly owing to the fact that Government found foreign questions attracting too much attention; but chiefly on account of the very doubtful support accorded to it by the Irish Members of that day. Many Irish Members voted against the measure. The speaking and voting which took place in that debate formed a curiously interesting study in Irish politics. Ho might call the attention of the House to the fact

  1077
  that the late Earl Russell made a somewhat remarkable statement on that occasion. He said—
  "I do not think it would be desirable that Ireland, when deprived of its Lord Lieutenant, should never have an opportunity of seeing its Sovereign; and I have great pleasure in stating …. that it is Her Majesty's gracious intention from time to time to pay a visit to Ireland, and to have the residence in the Phoenix Park maintained for Her Majesty."—(3 Hansard, [III] 180.)
  He would not take much notice of that statement, except to say that the promise was never carried out; and the opportunity was lost for ever, which might then, perhaps, have been turned to good account. He should. have supposed that it was only natural that in the City of Dublin there should be an interest in keeping up the Viceroyalty, in consequence of the costly pageantry which was kept up therewith; and yet, on the occasion of Lord John Russell's proposal, only 10,000 of the inhabitants of the City, headed by the Lord Mayor, were found to sign a Petition against the Bill. Many, if not most, of the Irish Members opposed the measure, on the ground that it was a first step towards the withdrawal of the Law Courts and the whole system of Judicature from Dublin to Westminster. In vain did Ministers assure them that no such thing was contemplated. The fear had become fixed in their minds, and they would not listen to the proposal. It was a curious fact that Mr. Maurice O'Connell, eldest son of the great O'Connell, voted and spoke against the adoption of the Bill. Mr. Maurice O'Connell, however, explained that he did not regard himself as especially an Irish Member, but as a Member of the Imperial Parliament. He said he did not at all feel bound, even in this matter, to look first of all to the interests of Ireland—he was bound to consider the interests of the whole Empire; and the feelings of English and Scotch Members counted for as much to him in Irish policy as the opinion of the Irish Members. He even confessed that if he were to regard the matter from the point of view of a Repealer he could not ask a greater boon than the abolition of the Viceroyalty. Therefore, while Mr. Maurice O'Connell, as a Repealer—and it was only as a Repealer that he had been elected—was in favour of the measure, Mr. Maurice O'Connell, as a Mem-
  1078
  ber of the Imperial Parliament, was against it. That was not the kind of argument that was likely to carry conviction to the minds of the Irish Members now. The nephew of the great tribune, on the other hand, voted and spoke in favour of the measure; but it was hard to decide the patriotic character of the Irish Member of that period by the way he voted, for men of honesty and national feeling voted for and against the Bill. For example, he found that Mr. Fagan, Member for Cork, a man of great integrity and true national sentiment, voted for the measure; while Members like his hon. and gallant Friend below him (The O'Gorman Mahon) voted against it. The late Judge Keogh voted for it; but of his support he (Mr. Justin M'Carthy) should not, as an Irishman, feel specially proud. Mr. Sheil spoke and voted in favour of the measure. In the debate Mr. Sheil replied to the speech of the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. W. M. Torrens), whom he (Mr. Justin M'Carthy) was sorry not to see in his place to-day, and who was then Member for Dundalk. Mr. Sheil's opening sentence was worth quoting. He said—
  "The fervid nationality of my hon. Friend the Member for Dundalk has overcome his habitual good sense."—(1bid., 1042.)
  There was very little chance of the "fervid nationality" of the hon. Member for Finsbury overcoming anything now. English Members advanced stronger arguments in support of the Bill than the Irish Members. Mr. Bernal Osborne asked why should the shadow be expected to remain when the substance was gone? Why should the Irish Viceroyalty flourish when the Irish Parliament had ceased to exist? And he also said he regarded Viceroyalty as the proof and emblem of national serfdom, and pointed to the fact that very few Irishmen had ever held the Office. The Motion for the second reading was then carried, as he had stated; but the Bill was allowed to drop. A second attempt was made, eight years after, by the late Mr. Roebuck to have a Motion carried in these words—
  "In the opinion of this House, the Office of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland ought to be abolished, and an Office of Secretary of State for Ireland at once created."—(Ibid., [149] 712.)
  That Motion was defeated by a large majority, and from that time to this

  1079
  no serious attempt was made to get rid of the Office. What ho now proposed to do, certainly at no unreasonable length, was to show that the Office did no positive good either to England or Ireland, but that it did a great deal of positive and. negative harm; that it did not, as many supposed, unite the people of Ireland with those of England, or cause the authority of the Crown to be more respected; but rather tended to bring it into something approaching disrespect. He hoped to show that where the authority was exercised much it tended to make rather ridiculous that which it ought to elevate in public estimation; and he hoped to persuade some of his own countrymen that the Office in nowise tended to maintain the national spirit, but rather to degrade, humiliate, and extinguish that national sentiment. If they reviewed the history of the Irish Viceroys they would find them to have been either men who did nothing or men whose energy resulted in evil effects to England and Ireland. It was a remarkable fact that after the Reign of Elizabeth, and during a certain portion of the Reign of James I., there sprang up in Ireland a sudden and wide-spread growth of prosperity which then promised to be lasting. Ho would trouble the House with a sentence or two descriptive of the state of Ireland at that period. Clarendon, in the first book of his history, said of Ireland before the Civil War—
  "Ireland, which had been a sponge to draw and a gulf to swallow all that could be spared and all that could be got from England, merely to keep the reputation of a Kingdom, attained to that good degree of husbandry and government that it not only subsisted of itself and gave this Kingdom all that it might have expected from it, but really increased the Revenue of the Crown 140,000 or £50,000 a-year, besides being of considerable advantage to the people by the traffic and trade from thence. Arts and sciences were fruitfully planted there, and the whole nation was beginning to be so civilized that it was a jewel of great lustre in the Royal diadem."
  Were there any other years of Irish history, excepting, perhaps, a few years before the Union, when such a description would apply? But when the Civil War broke out, Ireland became the victim of English quarrels. It chose to remain loyal to a King who, perhaps, deserved little loyalty. The Irish people had been long characterized by a passion for Royalty which he should almost call
  1080
  servility, and which must have taken great pains on the parts of successive Sovereigns to root out. Then came the days of Cromwell, and from that period they might trace the decline of Ireland. It seemed to him that since that period the Irish officials were either incapable or worthless men, doing neither good nor harm; or men who, when they moved at all, produced a baleful effect upon Ireland and England. There were, however, two or three honourable—he should oven say illustrious—examples. Take one man — Lord Chesterfield—who was sent to Ireland on the most inauspicious occasion. Chesterfield saw, with the instinct of genius, that Ireland was a country which must be governed according to Irish ideas, or it could never be governed at all; and to that task he set himself in a way which no Irish official ever did before or since. Ho could not repeal the Penal Laws; but he took good care that they were never put in operation. He took care that whatever discontent there was should be allayed and not embittered. Needless to say, the old ascendency class assailed him with all the energy and bigotry which they could command, with the view of bringing him into disrepute at the Royal Court. He established so much tranquillity and contentment in Ireland that at this very time, instead of asking for more troops for Ireland, he sent four regiments away to assist the Royal troops against the Pretender in Scotland. He was allowed to have his way while the danger of the rebellion lasted; but at the very moment the danger was over the counsels of the ascendency Party in England prevailed, and Chesterfield was recalled. He walked to the place of embarkment surrounded by a cheering populace, who asked him to return as soon as possible. He never at any time seemed to have required police protection. His case was an instance of how a sincere and high-minded man, anxious to do good for the country, was sacrificed to the cabals of English Parties. The same observation might apply to the case of Lord Fitzwilliam. When Lord Fitzwilliam was recalled the Catholics of Ireland saw that their hopes were gone, and the result was the outbreak of 1798. After that came the Union and other painful events with which they were all so familiar. These were striking and

  1081
  remarkable instances in which Viceroys were liable to be recalled, and the hopes of the country sacrificed to some sudden move in partizan policy in England. He did not think he could mention any other really good Viceroys. The Viceroys never had the power given to them of carrying out anything in the shape of reform, even if they had been inclined to do so. Lord Carlisle was popular, to a certain extent, because he gave good dances and danced well; but in Ireland they wanted a statesman, and not a dancing master. Lord Clarendon adopted the means of governing Ireland by a scurrilous newspaper published in Dublin at the time—a paper the like of which he did not think at present existed in any part of the civilized world. It was infamous in the blackest sense of the word. It made abominable charges against men and women, and levied black mail from them if they were weak enough to yield. This paper was hired to write up law and order and abuse the enemies of the Crown — it was converted into a sort of Government organ, paid for by the Crown. This arrangement continued until the proprietor of the paper demanded too much money, and the matter was taken into a Court of Law, where the Viceroy was obliged to admit that he had hired the proprietor of this paper to make accusations against respectable and honourable men in Dublin. It would be something if they had a Secretary of State governing Ireland whom they could see sitting on the Bench opposite, and whom Irish Members could examine as to his policy, and who could come under the censure of the House if he did wrong. Some years ago he had heard the present Prime Minister explain, in a lecture, the evil caused in our Colonies by the practice which governors followed by surrounding themselves with a "British Party." The result of the practice was that the Governing Body was merely suspected of being hostile to the Colonists. Now, that was precisely the effect of the Viceregal system in Ireland. The Viceroy in Ireland was supposed to confer titles and distribute rewards for something or other. Ho gave away offices, and invited the wives and daughters of a certain class in Ireland to the Castle; and in this way he was supposed to impress on them the stamp of respectability and
  1082
  loyalty. The result of that was, undoubtedly, to get round Dublin Castle or the Viceregal Lodge a body of supporters whom the great body of the Irish people regarded as hostile to the national sentiments; and anyone could see that the longer this continued the more and more alien must the Viceroyalty become to the feelings of the Irish people. They had a striking illustration not long since of how the Viceroy and those around him formed one little State and the people of Ireland another. Last autumn the Centenary of O'Connell was celebrated, and on that occasion an Exhibition of Irish manufactures and products was opened. He had the pleasure of being in Dublin on that occasion, and he never saw a more striking spectacle. If ever there was a national ceremonial politically, industrially, or even sentimentally, if they wished, it was the ceremonial in question. It represented the whole interests of the Irish nation. Where, then, was the Irish Viceroy? The position of the Viceroy on that occasion might well be likened to the position of an Austrian commandant in a Venetian town in former days. He sat apart in the Castle, or the Viceregal Lodge, practically alienated from everything connected with the interests of the Irish people. He (Mr. Justin M'Carthy) was very much struck by the marvelleus change in the position of affairs. The people kept order for themselves. They needed no assistance, and if the Viceroy did not appear himself, he certainly did not trouble the people much with his Police Force. The right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Plunket) might suggest that the patronage of the Viceroy had been rejected. He (Mr. Justin M'Carthy) did not care if the patronage of the authorities was rejected, because that only showed how little sympathy there was between the people and the official who was placed over them. If in another country the patronage of the Government were rejected by the people on an occasion of that kind, what would be thought? Why, that between the people and their rulers there was an almost impassable gulf. The people of Ireland had nothing to do with the Viceroy. As far as they were concerned, they had shaken the whole traditions of the Office away from them—they did not want to

  1083
  go to his dances or dinners. Even when the Office of Viceroy did positively neither good nor harm, it stood in the way of good that might be done, thus negatively doing harm. Socially it did harm, because it created in Dublin a class of "flunkies," and encouraged sycophancy. This kind of social demoralizing influence produced some political evil by separating still farther class from class, and at last driving the people to that degree of antagonism that they were inclined to regard anyone who had friendly relations with the Viceregal Party as necessarily inimical to all the national aspirations. He hoped that the House would now accept the policy approved by Lord John Russell. Let the House say, as had been said before—"Abolish this mock dignity — this sham ruler-ship—and give us a Secretary of State, who will be answerable to the House of Commons." If the right hon. Gentleman would rise in his place and say that Her Majesty's Ministers did think it worth while to make this change at a time like the present, because they believed much greater changes were necessarily near at hand, and that they hoped before long to be able to say that Ireland was entitled to a measure of self-government, he would not press his Bill to a Division. As, however, he felt he could hardly expect any such offer as that to be made, or any such argument to be used, he would have to press his Motion for the second reading to a Division, and endeavour to get the sense of the House in its favour once more. What he asked the House to do was to put an end to a wretched, decaying, and demoralizing system. The system, as it stood, was only a delusion to the English Members, a mockery to the Members for Ireland, and a snare to the simpleminded noblemen who seemed occasionally to fancy that by a few Court dinners they could charm away Connemara distress, and that by patronizing a few dozen shopkeepers in Dublin they were conciliating the hearts of the nation. He begged to move the second reading of the Bill.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. Justin M'Carthy.)
  MR. J. N. RICHARDSON,in moving that the Bill be read a second time that
  1084
  day three months, said, he had listened with very great interest to the speech of his hon. Friend—he had listened to him with the interest which always accompanied any remarks of his in that House on historical subjects. He hoped his hon. Friend would believe that he was just as sincerely desirous of seeing legislation for the benefit of their common country as he himself was. This was a subject on which there was room for very diverse opinions; and though one might well be liable in after times to change one's mind upon it, at the present moment he must say that his feelings upon the matter were so strong that he could not agree with the proposal now before the House. As to the occurrence in Dublin in the autumn of last year, he could not follow his hon. Friend into the particulars, as he was not familiar with the circumstances; but he would just observe to the House that the Viceroy in Ireland and the Chief Secretary for Ireland and the Secretary of State as mentioned in the Bill were very much in the position of Ulster Members at times, for they represented to a certain extent two wings. He could quite understand the displeasure with which a certain portion of the Irish community would regard the refusal of a Viceroy to attend a celebration such as that mentioned by his hon. Friend; but it was well to look at the other side of the question. If the Viceroy had been asked to go up to the North of Ireland and to attend the celebration at Belfast in commemoration of some persons with whom a section of the people in the North sympathized very largely, he would no doubt have refused, very properly, because otherwise he would be outraging the sentiments of a large number of people over whom he was supposed to rule in the South of Ireland. Thus he could quite believe that a somewhat similar feeling would prevent the Viceroy from taking part in a celebration which would outrage the feelings of persons in the North of Ireland. Of course, he only mentioned this for what it was worth; but it seemed to him that the system of Party government which so entirely appeared to suit the populace of England and Scotland in many ways did not suit the populace of a very large part of Ireland. If a grievance existed in Great Britain a party rose up willing to remedy

  1085
  the grievance, and when it was remedied those who were in favour of the remedial legislation acquired a certain loyalty and gratitude to the Party which carried it. On the contrary, in a considerable portion of Ireland—he regretted this, but no one in the House could hide it from himself—no feeling of gratitude was ever aroused by the efforts of either of the two great Parties of the House. ["Hear, hear!"] The hon. Member for Waterford County (Mr. Blake) cheered that remark, and he apprehended he had accurately expressed his sentiments. There was certainly a tendency in a considerable portion of Ireland to regard the discussions— the cold-blooded discussions—which took place in that House about Treasury matters, about money matters, about official routine, as a general unwillingness on the part of Parliament to grant certain concessions to Ireland. He did not agree with that sentiment. He believed that both Parties in the State, and certainly the Liberal Party, were extremely willing to meet in every way they could the views and the wishes of the Irish people. He felt very strongly, however, that they might carry a Land Bill and amend it in certain directions; and he believed that in certain directions that Parliament or another would amend it until it became what the Prime Minister and the Liberal Party had intended it to be in 1881. Though they might carry a large scheme of peasant proprietary, though the House should grant, as he hoped, a large scheme of county government in Ireland, a certain portion of warmhearted fellow-countrymen would regard these measures not as granted by an English Party, but as wrung from the British Parliament as a whole—despite all this concession, all this legislation, a hostile feeling, he feared, would exist towards this Parliament. It therefore seemed to him to be very desirable that they should maintain in Ireland some power or some individual above all Party. If his hon. Friend had proposed in his Bill a scheme by which the Lord Lieutenant would not be a direct Representative of a Party, as ho was, and could not fail to be, as well as a Representative of the Queen—if he had proposed that the Lord Lieutenant should not necessarily go out of Office with the Ministry which had appointed him—he might have been able to support his
  1086
  Bill. At present they had, as they bad had occasionally in the past, a good Viceroy; and he could not help regretting that when such Viceroys went to Ireland, and became acquainted with the feelings of the people, they could not remain longer than the Ministry which sent thorn there. He could not help thinking that unless the Island was to be visited more frequently than it had been by a Family of which he spoke with the greatest diffidence and intense respect—unless they could see more of that august Family in Ireland, it would be a very serious thing to do away with the Office which represented that Family. He could bear testimony to the benefit which a Viceregal visit conferred. He did not speak in the interests of the residents of Dublin who were alluded to by the Mover of the Bill, and in whose interests he believed the hon. Gentleman said the Viceroyalty was kept up; he spoke on behalf of the community at large. Newry, he believed, had been visited by three Viceroys. By the Duke of Berwick, who burnt it, in 1690, by Lord Spencer in 1870 or 1871, and by the Duke of Marl-borough in 1879 or 1880; and he should never have believed, unless he had seen it in the course of one of those visits, how beneficial such an event could be in smoothing down asperiites and removing the sense of old grievances. He could not but think that a Viceroy with the courtesy of Lord Chesterfield or of Lord Spencer would he a great benefactor to Ireland. He believed that the Office of Viceroy might be made extremely beneficial to the country if it were made permanent, as he had suggested, and if the holder would make himself personally familiar with the various districts. He begged, in conclusion, to move the Amendment of which he had given Notice.
  Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day three months."—(Mr. J. N. Richardson.)
  Question proposed, "That the word ' now' stand part of the Question."
  SIR EARDLEY WILMOTsaid, he had always been in favour of the abolition of the Viceroy's Office; but he could not support the present Bill. In the first place, it was an anomaly in our Constitution that the Administrative and

  1087
  Executive power should be in the same person; and, in the second place, it was also an anomaly that the Executive should be the Representative of any Party. The Lord Lieutenant went to Ireland as a Party man, he governed as a Party man, and as a Party man ho quitted the country. His opinion, however, was that, without reference to politics, there should always be someone in Ireland to represent the Sovereign who was of no political Party, and who should maintain a State worthy of that Sovereign. Besides, the nomination of the Viceroy was always accompanied by the appointment of men who were not natives of the country, Englishmen being almost invariably chosen to fill the chief Offices in the Administration. Irishmen desired that the Office of Lord Lieutenant should, whenever it was possible, be filled by an Irishman; and he should be glad to see, much as he respected the present Chief Secretary, his position filled by a person more conversant with the requirements of Ireland. Then, again, the Lord Lieutenant's stay in Ireland was, as a rule, far too short to admit of his making himself acquainted with the wants of the country. In former times, the Lord Deputy, as he was then called, remained many years in Ireland. He did not go out on every change of Administration. They had heard from the hon. Member for Long-ford (Mr. Justin M'Carthy) that Lord John Russell had indicated in 1850 that a change of the nature now desired was at that time in the mind of Her Majesty's Government; but the change had never been made, and it could not really be said that the administration of Ireland had improved since 1850. Still, it was impossible, he admitted, that the administration of Ireland could have been better carried out that it was being carried out by Lord Spencer; and, therefore, looking at the surrounding circumstances, he was obliged to ask himself whether this was really the time at which such a measure as the present Bill ought to be introduced. He could not think that the moment was appropriate; but he hoped that at some date, not too distant, they might witness such a change as that which Mr. Roebuck, when he brought the matter before Parliament, had so strongly urged.
  MR. PLUNKETremarked, that it must have struck the House as rather
  1088
  curious that, of the two Irish Bills discussed that afternoon, one professed to confer very large powers on the Viceroy, by entrusting him with the direction of £250,000 for the assistance of Irish fisheries; while the other, introduced by the same Party, was intended to abolish his Office altogether. The seeming inconsistency might, perhaps, be susceptible of explanation; but he, for one, could not explain it. Arguments had, from time to time, been undoubtedly advanced in favour of the present proposal; but the hon. Member who had introduced the Bill had brought forward none at all of a substantial character. The long review of the history of the earlier Viceroys, with which the hon. Member had begun his speech, was interesting enough; but it had little or no connection with the Bill before the House, and might be passed by as irrelevant. The hon. Member had said that Viceroys had often been very unpopular, and had called attention to the fact that the Exhibition in Dublin last year was not attended by the Lord Lieutenant. But he had frequently seen, and hoped soon to see again, Viceroys heartily cheered by Dublin crowds; and the truth as to the Exhibition last year was, that it was opened in circumstances which compelled the absence of loyal men. Nor was it the fact that the Viceregal Court merely promoted "flunkeyism" among the Dublin shopkeepers. The Court in Ireland was precisely like that in London; but, of course, on a smaller scale. Its Levées and other entertainments were equally representative, and it could not be fairly described as the Court of a foreigner with an entourage of foreigners. The only contention of the hon. Member which rose to the dignity of an argument was that it would be advisable to have in the House of Commons a Minister responsible for the affairs of Ireland, whose actions could be challenged in the House itself. But, surely, this state of things existed already. The responsible Minister was there, on the Treasury Bench; and he put it to Irish Members themselves to say whether they did not challenge all he did, and whether their challenges were not answered? Ho had no hesitation, however, in saying that it would have been impossible for the Lord Lieutenant to have performed his difficult duties as ho had done during the last year if he were a Minister obliged to be

  1089
  in attendance in the House of Commons. He had really heard nothing in support of the proposed change; and it seemed to him, as it would to most hon. Members, that the moderato and firm way in which Lord Spencer had exercised his powers admirably illustrated the advantages of the present arrangement, and amply justified the existence of his Office. He hoped, therefore, the House would reject the Bill.
  MR. GRAYsaid, he could perfectly well understand the hon. Member for Long-ford's (Mr. Justin M'Carthy's) discontent with the present arrangements as to the Viceroyalty; but, at the same time, he could not understand how a Member, with his political views, and desiring a greater extension of self government for Ireland, could advocate a measure which would go still more to reduce that country to the position of an English Province. The position of the Viceroy was certainly a very anomalous and a very unconstitutional one. He thought Her Majesty's Representative in Ireland should be above Party and above politics—he should be appointed, like the Viceroy of India and some Colonial Governors, for a term of years, and ought not to go out with an Administration. He should be the Representative of the Queen, not the Representative of a Party; and there should be in the House of Commons a responsible Minister for Irish Affairs to answer for the administration of the country. At present the position of the Viceroy was a most extraordinary one. Sometimes, as in the present case, ho really governed that country, controlled even the minutest details of the administration, interested himself in the political work of the Government to a great degree, and held in his own hands the reins of Government. Now, if the House compared the position of affairs under Earl Spencer and the Chief Secretary to-day, with the position of affairs under Earl Cowper and the Chief Secretary 18 months or two years ago, they would find that then the right hon. Member for Bradford (Mr. W. E. Forster), as Chief Secretary, was that responsible Minister, and that Earl Cowper, in an elaborate manner, did the ornamental; at the present moment, it was his right hon. Friend (Mr. Trevelyan) who did the ornamental in an equally admirable manner; and
  1090
  Earl Spencer it was who was now the Chief Minister and Governor of Ireland, responsible for its administration, and holding a seat in the Cabinet. Now, he thought it would be very well to abolish that most anomalous and unconstitutional state of affairs; but to abolish the Viceroyalty altogether, and transfer its duties to a Secretary of State, would be to abolish one of the most formidable recognitions of the nationality of Ireland, and to abolish an Office which would have again to be established, if at any time they were to have an Irish Parliament. In his opinion, therefore, they should have an Irish Viceroy who would be above Party, and who would represent the Queen alone; and they should also have a responsible Minister for the administration of Irish affairs, who would represent, if possible, au Irish constituency, and not, as at present, a Minister who, although not a Member of that House, really ruled the roast in Ireland in all important matters. While he very much desired such a reform as that, which, in his opinion, would be far more Constitutional than the system at present in existence, ho could not vote for the total abolition of au Office which would have the effect of reducing Ireland still more into the position of a mere Province of England.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsaid, that, to some extent, he took a similar view of the Bill as the last speaker, and would oppose it. There were two views that might be taken of the future of Ireland. They might look to have Ireland play a greater share in the management of her affairs, or they might look to Ireland managed exclusively by Imperial means. Ho thought, from whichever point they looked, the proposition contained in the Bill was one that could not well be adopted. If they had an independent Assembly of a greater or less extent, they would require a recognized Head of the Executive, a person of dignity, and one who should hold very much the same position towards the Executive as the Queen held in this country, independent of any other power in the State, and unattached to any Party. Under such circumstances, he quite agreed that the Viceroy of Ireland should hold the Office for a specific time, and that he should be a person independent of the English Par-

  1091
  liament. But the Bill dealt with the Office in connection with the existing Imperial Parliament, and would throw the responsibility of government on the Chief Secretary. That was practically the condition of things which existed prior to the appointment of Lord Spencer, and during the time of former Chief Secretaries; and the arguments which had been used in favour of the Bill simply meant a return to that state of things, so far as political and Executive affairs were concerned. They would, however, in such a case, still be obliged to have some official in Ireland responsible for carrying on the administration of the country, and that official would be a subordinate far less responsible to public opinion than were those Lord Lieutenants in former times who were second in political power to the Secretaries. He would just add one word on the social aspect of the question. There was, undoubtedly, a good deal of social harm occasioned in former times by the Viceroyalty in Ireland, for the reason that a large number of persons, whose means did not make it desirable that they should go to the expense of going to the Courts held in Dublin, used to go; and, undoubtedly, the high standard of living and expense thus introduced was fraught with a certain amount of social harm, and many families who had moderato fortunes thus lost them. But that practice did not now prevail. This was a question on which Irish Members had at all times within his recollection held different opinions. Mr. Butt, his late Colleague, always said that the maintenance of this institution was the maintenance of one of the last vestiges of Irish nationality. He shared that view, and should, on all grounds, vote against the Bill.
  MR. O'BRIENsaid, that Earl Spencer's administration in Ireland furnished a very good proof of how mischievous a Lord Lieutenant might be. Ho was neither a Sovereign nor a subject. He was directing a vast network of secret and irresponsible power of all kinds, and the people of Ireland had no remedy against an abuse of that power. They might fairly assume that if the Chief Secretary were the Representative of an Irish constituency he would be a great deal more accurate and circumspect in his replies to Irish Ques-
  1092
  tions. In Ireland they had all the disadvantages of a Russian despotism, with a spurious and second-hand Czar. The only frank argument he had ever heard in support of the Viceroyalty was that it enabled £53,000 to be spent in Dublin. But was not that a melancholy proof of the condition to which English misrule had brought a city which was once a great commercial capital? It was not a proof at all for retaining this palpable sham, which was of less pecuniary advantage to Ireland than one good factory. As to the opinion that nationality could be in any manner served by it, he could understand the tenderness of the hon. Member for Limerick (Mr. O'Shaughnessy) for the interests of Irish nationality. But it seemed to him almost too absurd to argue for a moment that the interests of Irish nationality depended upon the sort of gentlemen who clustered around Dublin Castle. The place was simply a hotbed of false and mean West Briton sentiment. The people who were reared up there had ceased from being Irishmen, and never could become Englishmen, although they sometimes affected to pose in the character. Whatever wore the results of the abolition of the Viceroy, he believed the people of Ireland and the people of England would be able to understand each other a little better. He, therefore, certainly would vote for the Bill.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, this was rather a funny Bill. A few moments ago the House was engaged in discussing a Bill by which the Lord Lieutenant was to have the power of appointing Fishery Commissioners; whereas now it was proposed to abolish the Viceroyalty. He did not see any clear gain, from a national point of view, in substituting under the provisions of this Bill one sort of foreign official for another foreign official. They might as well have a Lord Lieutenant as a Secretary of State carrying out the policy of coercion. The Bill spoke of "that part of the Kingdom commonly called Ireland." Well, that was the way he was accustomed to see it spoken of in Royal and Viceregal Proclamations; but it was, surely, in a sense of severe sarcasm that his hon. Friend the Vice Chairman of the Irish Parliamentary Party had adopted that peculiarly British phrase. If they went further into the Bill, there was a clause

  1093
  providing that the new Principal Secretary of State should be an Irishman, and should represent an Irish constituency. Well, he did not know what Member of the Irish Parliamentary Party his hon. Friend had in view to be the new Secretary of State in the British Government for "that part of the United Kingdom commonly called Ireland." He had no doubt they could find an Irish Gentleman like the Attorney General for Ireland or the hon. Member for Londonderry City (Mr. Lewis) who would accept the post, or they might find a very genuine Irish Gentleman like either of the two Gentlemen who represented the University of Dublin; but he could not see the national gain from appointing any of them to be Secretary of State "for that part of the United Kingdom commonly called Ireland." Well, suppose the Bill to be in operation, his hon. Friend the Member for Mallow (Mr. O'Brien) had denounced the Castle very fairly as a sink of corruption, or something of that sort; but he did not see how the introduction of a Secretary of State would tend to purify the political atmosphere of Dublin Castle. Even when the Chief Secretary had a seat in the Cabinet he did not observe any perceptible improvement in the condition of Dublin Castle. He could, therefore, only regard the Bill as a grave but somewhat undiscoverable sarcasm on the part of his hon. Friend. The only practical benefit to be derived from the introduction of the Bill was that it gave his hon. Friend the Member for Long-ford an opportunity for a most charming historical survey of former Viceroys. If any considerable number of Irish Members intended voting for the Bill he should not vote against it; but, for the reasons he had stated, he would abstain from voting.
  MR. LEAsaid, he did not remember ever to have heard any of his constituents express an opinion either for or against this proposal; and, therefore, he did not think it necessary to express any view upon the subject himself. But he wished to say that, when questions like the Poor Law Removal Bill or the Bill that was debated this afternoon came before the House, the Government did not and would not pay that consideration to Irish opinion which they ought to do. He regarded it as unfortunate that the Chief Secretary was
  1094
  not a Member of the Cabinet; and, without disrespect to his right hon. Friend, or Earl Spencer, he felt bound strongly to urge that they were unable to bring their views and opinions effectively before the Cabinet, and this was most unsatisfactory. It seemed to him, therefore, that the Irish people were not represented as they ought to be; and for that reason he should give his vote in favour of the Bill if it came to a Division.
  MR. SHEILsaid, the hon. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. O'Donnell) had expressed his intention not to vote against the Party to which he professed to belong. It would be very interesting to know why the hon. Member had spoken against that Party. That was not the first time they had been entertained by speeches from the hon. Member, which, however they might raise him in the estimation of English Members, certainly were not calculated to promote admiration in the minds of Irish Members. The hon. Member's speeches were framed in that peculiar vein of sarcasm which belonged, fortunately, only to himself. The hon. Member had declared that he did not see what gain the Bill would be to Irish nationality. But what would be gained to Irish nationality by speeches such as the hon. Member made? He should like to know from the hon. Member to what portion of the Irish Party he claimed to belong? They often had letters in The Times and other journals dated from the Parliamentary offices of the Irish Party over the signature of the hon. Member. If the hon. Member belonged to the Party, why did he get up and seek to create dissension in the midst of that Party? If the hon. Member found himself unable to work with the Irish Party the best thing he could do would be to disassociate himself from them altogether. The hon. Member had stated that he could not support the measure, but would not vote against it. He (Mr. Sheil) thought it would be better and more consistent, holding the particular view that he did, if the hon. Member were to vote against the Bill, rather than shirk his responsibility by avoiding the Division Lobby.
  MR. TREVELYANsaid, that the debate, which had closed with a good deal of vivacity, had not been throughout characterized by much vivacity. The hon. Member for Longford (Mr. Justin M'Carthy) had given an interesting

  1095
  historical account, but gave the impression that he felt the debate to be of rather a hollow character. The hon. Member had given very interesting accounts of the Viceroyalty of Lord Chesterfield and other Viceroys, from which he was not much disposed to differ. But it was clear that he did not seriously expect to carry his Bill. The hon. Member for Carlow (Mr. Gray) had given reasons for doubting whether the Bill was well advised. It was for hon. Members sitting around the hon. Member to judge of that; but if he (Mr. Trevelyan) were a Member of that Party in the House, he certainly should not vote for the Bill. A measure like this could only be proposed on the authority of the Government as a whole, and the Government certainly had not made up its collective mind that so strong a step was required at the present moment; and ho could not say that the Bill was so drawn as to make the Government think it was seriously necessary at this moment to make up and announce their minds on the subject. The Bill, which related to the government of 5,000,000 people, only consisted of three clauses; and, as far as he understood, there was one clause out of the three upon which the hon. Member did not insist. Ho doubted whether it lay within the Constitutional limits of the power of the Crown to choose its servants under such conditions as were proposed in the 3rd clause of the Bill. Even if there were no such Constitutional objection, no Government could consent to such conditions. If the Government could not return the man of all others whom they wanted for an Irish constituency, they would be forced either to repeal that clause, or, while nominally acceding to it, and appointing as Secretary of State a Gentleman representing an Irish constituency, they would be forced to leave the administrative functions in Ireland in the hands of some thoroughly competent official; and the measure of competency would have to be high, as he would have to discharge the duties both of Lord Lieutenant and of Chief Secretary. The hon. Member for Longford, too, ought to remember that this Bill would deprive Ireland of the services of such men as Lord Chesterfield and Lord Fitzwilliam, as he proposed that the Chief Administrator should not be a Peer of the Realm. There were also other
  1096
  objections to the Bill. It transferred the statutory powers of the Lord Lieutenant to the Secretary of State. But what about the non-statutory powers, of which an enormous number was vested in the Lord Lieutenant? He appointed justices, officials in all the Public Departments, revised sentences on behalf of the Crown, issued warrants for the arrest of the more important criminals. The Lord Lieutenant had sometimes in the course of five minutes to determine questions on which the most important interests of Ireland, and perhaps of the United Kingdom, might depend. Such a crisis occurred three or four Viceroyalties ago; and in the recent difficulties which had arisen with the Royal Irish Constabulary and the Dublin Metropolitan Police, if there had not been a responsible Executive Officer of State on the spot, the most disastrous consequences might have ensued. There was also a great number of statutory powers exercised by the Lord Lieutenant. Hon. Members were probably hardly aware of what the duties of a Lord Lieutenant were. He had to make rules for the government of the Royal Irish Constabulary and of the Dublin Police; he was responsible for all the prisons, and had to decide which should be closed and which remain open; appointed the governors of prisons, regulated lunatic asylums, appointed Sub-Commissioners under the Land Act, and superintended the carrying out of the Crimes Act. He was also President of the Queen's Colleges, appointed Resident Magistrates, gave licences for the celebration of marriage, and appointed Sheriffs for some of the chief towns in the country. He was also President of the Privy Council, and had to make rules under such different Acts as the Judicature Acts and the Cattle Diseases Act. Could such duties be discharged by an official in an office at Storey's Gate, Westminster, who had a seat in that House, or by an official who was hurrying backwards and forwards between London and Dublin? Yet those duties would have to be discharged by the Chief Administrator of Ireland, whoever he might be. It was obvious that no one but a man well acquainted with Ireland, and constantly resident there, could perform such multifarious functions. But, at a time like this, there were personal reasons why this Bill should not be favourably con-

  1097
  sidered. The hon. Member for Longford had quoted Mr. Bernal Osborne as saying that there was no reason why the shadow should remain when the substance had gone. Several such expressions had been used in the course of the debate—phantom, puppet, decaying system. None of these terms could rightly be applied to the Viceroyalty of Lord Spencer. Again, to use the words of the hon. Member for Longford, Lord Spencer went to Ireland at the most inauspicious and dangerous moment at which a Lord Lieutenant could have been sent to Ireland. The hon. Member had spoken of previous Lord Lieutenants not having to go about under police protection; but he was sure he did not mean that as a personal taunt. [Mr. BIGGAR: Yes, yes!] His (Mr. Trevelyan's) interpretation was that the hon. Member meant that Lord Spencer was advocating a policy which placed him in personal danger from which his Predecessors were free. It was not because of his personal qualities, or his political and administrative opinions, but on account of the position he held as Lord Lieutenant which made him disliked, as any Lord Lieutenant would have been at the time he took Office, and in the circumstances then existing. It should not, therefore, be a reproach to him that he had to be protected in his walks from his residence to the Castle. From the first moment of his landing, before there was time to ascertain what manner of man he was, his life, as far as one class of the community was disposed, was not worth one moment's purchase. It was not, then, for his political opinions that the Lord Lieutenant required police protection. It was enough for those against whom that protection was required that he was Lord Lieutenant. It was not for him to dwell on the qualities of Lord Spencer. It might be that his abilities, his experience of Public Business, and his extraordinary industry, were qualities that could be found elsewhere, though it would not be easy to do so; but he had other qualities which had a bearing upon the vote which he hoped the House would give. He had other qualities peculiar to himself—an extraordinary knowledge of Irish Business, gained by doing Irish Business for six hard-worked years, a great knowledge of Irishmen, a great interest in Irish affairs, and an honest determination to apply all the qualities with which
  1098
  Heaven had endowed him to work Irish affairs to the best of his ability for the welfare of Ireland. Lord Spencer had been called a "foreign official" by the hon. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. O'Donnell); but if they calculated the number of years that Lord Spencer and the hon. Member for Dungarvan had respectively spent on Irish soil since they came to manhood the comparison would not be at all to the disadvantage of Lord Spencer. It was impossible to exaggerate the advantage of having a man like Lord Spencer applying his ability and industry to the work of administration on the spot in Ireland at the same time that another person was applying such poor powers as he (Mr. Trevelyan) had to the work of representing the Irish Government in that House. They could not abolish the Viceroy without replacing him in Ireland by a man of equal industry, equal ability, and equal authority; and that man must not be on these Benches, but he must be doing administrative work in Ireland. The hon. Member for Longford (Mr. Justin M'Carthy) had said that he would be satisfied if the Government would undertake to consider the question of the reconstitution of the Government of Ireland, and that, in that case, he was willing to withdraw the Bill. He did not think this was a moment when the Government could enter upon such questions. They were perfectly satisfied with the existing system, and would oppose the second reading of the Bill if the hon. Member insisted on taking a Division.
  MR. CALLANsaid, that in the enumeration of the duties of the Lord Lieutenant and Chief Secretary the right hon. Gentleman had omitted the duties of emigration agent. As he had learned, however, from the right hon. Gentleman that the Lord Lieutenant had authority over the lunatic asylums, he hoped His Excellency would devote some time to the lunatic asylums of the two counties from which Whig Members came to that House—namely, the counties of Derry and Donegal—where all the appointments were Protestant and Presbyterian, to the exclusion of Roman Catholics. But he could not support the Bill; it was a sham, and, as the Chief Secretary had said, the debate upon it was a hollow one. He denied that it was in any sense a Party Bill. It had never been brought before the Irish Party, never

  1099
  considered by them, and some of them had never seen it at all till it was put into their hands to-day. The attack, therefore, of the junior Member for Meath (Mr. Sheil) on the hon. Member for Dungarvan was most unjustifiable. He thought, however, that if a Member of the Royal Family were to undertake the duties of Viceroy for five or six years, and thereby raised the Government of Ireland out of the muddle of Party politics, it would cause great satisfaction in the country. Two changes, however, were required. It was now provided by law that no Catholic could be Lord Lieutenant, and this was a great injustice. He saw in his place the Envoy to Rome—["Hear, hear!" and "No!"] He said "Yes," and was as well acquainted with Irish opinion as the hon. Members who said "No."
  It being a quarter of an hour before Six of the clock, the Debate stood adjourned till To-morrow.
  House adjourned at ten minutes before Six o clock.