HC Deb 17 March 1885 vol 295 cc1570-84
MR. T. A. DICKSON,

in rising to move— That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the tenure of holdings known as Town Parks in and near towns in Ireland; how they are affected by the Land Acts of 1870 and 1881; and to report if any changes on the existing Laws could be beneficially made, said, his object in moving for the Select Committee was to obtain an inquiry into the law which now regulated Town Parks in Ireland. At present conflicting decisions were give in the Law Courts, and, as a consequence, great uncertainty existed. He did not intend to take up the time of the House at that late hour (1.30) by going into details; but he might observe that the question of Town Parks had been an open question ever since the passing of the Land Act in 1881. When the Land Act was being passed, the Prime Minister said that the whole question connected with Town Parks in Ireland was one deserv- ing of inquiry; and the right hon. Gentleman promised that an inquiry should be made into the question. And, again, in 1882, the Prime Minister, on being questioned as to Town Parks, said that some legislation was desirable. Another object he (Mr. T. A. Dickson) had in moving for a Select Committee was to give tenants of Town Parks, and those who lived in the smaller towns and villages in Ireland, an opportunity of stating their grievances; and, if necessary, to have the law more clearly defined. He would move for the Committee of which he had given Notice.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the tenure of holdings known as Town Parks in and near towns in Ireland; how they are affected by the Land Acts of 1870 and 1881; and to report if any changes in the existing Laws could be beneficially made."—(Mr. T. A. Dickson.)

MR. BRODRICK

said, he was quite astonished at the way in which the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tyrone (Mr. T. A. Dickson) had brought this question before the House, considering its extraordinary importance, and the effect it would have in raising again all the questions connected with the Irish Land Act, which the House had been told, time after time, from the Ministerial Front Benches, were not to be re-opened. He thought the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tyrone would have done well if he had made some excuse or apology to the House for re-opening a matter which had been decided on several occasions in the House by large majorities adverse to the view the hon. Gentleman himself took. But, on the contrary, the hon. Gentleman came before the House, and introduced this question of a Select Committee in a very few words, as if it were the most ordinary operation in the world, and without explaining, in the smallest degree, to the House the necessity which had arisen for entering into, and again opening up, the large questions which were embraced. He (Mr. Brodrick) proposed to enter into the subject at some length even at that advanced hour of the morning—1.35—["Oh, oh!"] He could assure hon. Gentlemen that if they thought the question could be passed over, because it was brought forward at that late hour, without adequate discussion, they were very much mis- taken. They, on the Opposition side of the House, could not forget what the position of the question was. On several occasions—he believed he might say in each year since the passing of the Irish Land Act—measures had been brought forward by hon. Members sitting on the Ministerial Benches, and by hon. Gentlemen sitting below the Gangway on the Opposition side of the House, which proposed to re-open questions connected with the Irish Land Act. On those occasions matters of a very conflicting character were brought forward from that and from this side of the House. He and his hon. Friends thought that there were a large number of questions which ought to be discussed, and which were deserving of the consideration of the Government; but the position in which they were placed was that the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury, while admitting that certain hardships had been inflicted upon the landowning class in Ireland, and while admitting that there were matters which might require to be re-opened—matters of minor importance—said distinctly that he would not be a party to re-opening, in any sense, any of the questions dealt with by the Land Act. Moreover, the right hon. Gentleman particularly directed himself to the point which the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tyrone had raised that evening; and he warned the House against allowing a narrow opening to be made which would subsequently be widened, and lead to the introduction of subjects of great importance connected with the Land Act. He was sure that if the right hon. Gentleman were now present he would bear him out in the quotation he was about to make; indeed, in the absence of the right hon. Gentleman the House ought not to take the course which it was now proposed they should take. On the 14th of March, 1883, the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury distinctly said— It is an essential part of our duty to make it clearly understood, that we can give no encouragement, either on the ground of crime, as stated by the hon. Member for Mid Lincolnshire (Mr. Chaplin), or on any other ground, for entertaining hopes of the disturbance of the provisions of the Land Act contained in this Bill."—(3 Hansard, [277] 483.) Those provisions more particularly included the subject introduced by the hon. Member for Tyrone, and the Prime Minister was most careful not to limit himself to matters of organic structure in the Bill, but distinctly covered the whole ground. Even more recently than that the late Chief Secretary (Mr. Trevelyan) pronounced himself on this subject. Last year that right hon. Gentleman said that Her Majesty's Government, after a full and final consideration of the subjects at issue, had come to the conclusion that it would not be safe for the Government to reopen the question, and that there was only one essential particular in which the Government had not said its last word, and that was the question of the purchase of holdings. He (Mr. Brodrick) therefore concluded that this was an entirely new departure on the part of the Government—he would not say that it amounted to a breach of faith on the part of the Government, but it amounted to a distinct change in their former determination. He believed that the pledge, of which this Motion was the outcome, was given by the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (Mr. Campbell-Bannerman), whom he did not now see in his place, at an advanced hour of the morning, when it was not known even that the Motion on which he was speaking was about to come on. It would have been but courteous to the House for the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland to have been present on this occasion, to explain this extraordinary change of policy on the part of the Government. If the Government were prepared to allow the Select Committee, he (Mr. Brodrick) and his hon. Friends would have a perfect right to move for Select Committees to inquire into half-a-dozen subjects on which they felt they had been grossly ill-treated, and in which their interests had been equally neglected. He did not wish now to enter into these subjects; but if they were to be re-opened at all, he and his hon. Friends would get their heads in at the door as well as other people, and they would introduce questions on going into Committee of Supply—and, indeed, on every occasion when they could occupy space and time belonging to the Government. If the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tyrone succeeded in passing his Motion, he (Mr. Brodrick) would certainly move for a Select Committee to consider the position, status, and occupation of the Sub-Commissioners appointed under the Land Act; and he believed in such a Motion he would receive support from the Irish Gentlemen sitting below the Gangway. Again, he saw no reason why they should not open up the question of the Purchase Clauses of the Land Act, and ask Parliament to consider why those clauses had been wholly inoperative. He did not see why the Emigration Clauses, on which so much stress was laid by the first of the numerous Chief Secretaries (Mr. Forster) who had officiated under this Government, had not been put into operation; and why the absurdly inadequate sum advanced by Parliament to promote emigration had not been used and needed. Parliament would require to be assured that every effort had been made to carry out what they were told were the most important and necessary clauses of the Bill. Now, these were a few of the questions which he and his hon. Friends certainly would raise if the Government showed any signs of giving way in this particular. This Motion was only in a very minor degree directed to the needs of the tenant-farming class in Ireland. It was chiefly directed to the needs of the well-to-do butchers, who drove their cattle to the market towns, and who occupied the town parks, sometimes by the year, and sometimes for a shorter period. He submitted, therefore, that this was not a question which, even from the point of view of those whom the Land Act was chiefly intended to benefit, should be re-opened and resettled. If the deficiencies in this immortal piece of legislation—the Land Act—which they were told was to gratify the pockets of the tenant farmers, and amuse their minds with litigation, were responsible for the present disaffection of the Irish people, most unquestionably the Motion of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tyrone was wholly inadequate, and absurdly inefficient to supply the need. To re-open the question in a manner which could not possibly tend to any good end it would be most unwise for Parliament at this moment to do. So far as this immediate Motion went, he should give it his most sincere opposition. He had referred to the speech in which the Prime Minister expressed his view of the question. The right hon. Gentleman was not able to be present now to repeat that view. The right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland, who had gone back from the pledge given to Parliament, was also absent, and the late Chief Secretary (Mr. Trevelyan), who was formally committed on the subject, was not present on this occasion; and, therefore, at that advanced hour of the morning—1.45—the House was not in a fit position to deal with the question raised by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tyrone. For that reason, he (Mr. Brodrick) begged to move that the debate be now adjourned.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Brodrick.)

VISCOUNT CRICHTON

pointed out that the Committee moved for was altogether unnecessary. He supposed the object of the Committee was to collect evidence with regard to Town Parks; but, as a matter of fact, evidence had already been collected and laid before Parliament. A Commission had taken evidence on holdings in towns as well as in regard to other holdings; and if legislation was desirable on this subject——

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR,

rising to Order, asked if the noble Viscount was justified in discussing this question on the Motion for the adjournment of the debate?

MR. SPEAKER

The noble Lord must confine himself strictly to the Question of the adjournment of the debate. He cannot now enter into the subject-matter of the Motion made by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tyrone (Mr. T. A. Dickson).

VISCOUNT CRICHTON

said, he thought the grounds his hon. Friend (Mr. Brodrick) had brought forward afforded a very good reason why the debate should be adjourned. His hon. Friend had drawn attention to the fact that the Prime Minister, as well as the Chief Secretary for Ireland (Mr. Campbell-Bannerman), and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. Trevelyan), the late Chief Secretary, were all absent. It was not very long ago that the latter right hon. Gentleman made a very strong speech in the House on this subject, in which he practically said that the Government had said their last word upon the subject of the Tenure Clauses of the Land Act; the Government were ready to reopen the question of the Purchase Clauses; but on the Tenure Clauses they had said their last word. He (Viscount Crichton) hoped that, in the absence of that right hon. Gentleman and of the Prime Minister, the House would accede to the Motion of his hon. Friend (Mr. Brodrick).

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes 21; Noes 45: Majority 24.—(Div. List, No. 64.)

Original Question again proposed.

MR. TOTTENHAM

said, that it appeared to him much too late to consider a matter of this importance; therefore, in order to give hon. Members a better opportunity to go into the affair, he begged to move the adjournment of the House.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn."— (Mr. Tottenham.)

MR. SEXTON

said, he supposed it was scarcely necessary to call the attention of the House to the nature of the proceedings upon which they had now entered, and the nature of the plea put forward by the hon. Member above the Gangway (Mr. Brodrick). If this was the first time this subject had been brought forward, there would have been some sense and use in moving the adjournment of the debate and of the House; but the hon. Member who had just made the latter Motion had attended so little to the proceedings of the House, that he was probably ignorant of the fact that the hon. and gallant Member for the County of Galway (Colonel Nolan) had, a short while ago, moved for an inquiry into the subject of the tenure of houses in towns in Ireland. His Motion had included the terms of the present proposal, and the views of the Government were given upon the whole question then. The hon. Member probably did not know that the Government had signified their readiness to agree to the appointment of a Committee such as that now moved for. Therefore, the whole question had been before the House. The Government had proclaimed their views, and hon. Gentlemen who now tried to bring about either an adjournment of the House or an adjournment of the debate on that plea, pleaded only their inattention to the proceedings of the House, and a conspicuous manifestation of dulness. As a reason for the adjournment of the debate, and for not proceeding with the consideration of this question at the present moment, it had been said that the Bessborough Commission had, some time ago, considered the question, and that it was desirable that the effect of their inquiry should be ascertained. Well, he (Mr. Sexton) would ask the House to bear in mind that this subject bad been dealt with already during the present Sittings; that the Government were present when it was considered, and had declared their views fully upon the subject; and that hon. Members who did not care to attend the proceedings of the House, and who were not present on that occasion, were not entitled to plead their own ignorance.

MR. PLUNKET

said, he hoped the Government would now consent to the adjournment of the House. He ventured to say that there was no hon. Member present who remembered a proposal so important as that which had been made by the hon. Member opposite (Mr. T. A. Dickson) being assented to in a thin House, and under circumstances such as the present. No explanation whatever had been given upon the subject; and he (Mr. Plunket) contended that, under the circumstances, it was most unusual, and would be an evil precedent, to grant a Committee on a subject of this kind at such an hour. The Motion now before the House was not for the rejection of the proposal for the appointment of the Committee, but that an adjournment of the House should be taken, and that the debate upon the Motion of the hon. Member for Tyrone should be postponed until such time as a fair opportunity could be afforded for the discussion of the questions which arose upon the Re-solution.

MR. FINDLATER

said, the right hon. and learned Gentleman who had just sat down (Mr. Plunket) had evidently forgotten the observations of the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton). He (Mr. Findlater) had been present during the last occasion this question was before the House, and he distinctly recollected every circumstance which had taken place, and which he could vouch had been most correctly detailed by the hon. Gentleman. It could not be fairly contended that the House was now taken by surprise, as the matter had been fully discussed on the last occasion.

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR

said, that everyone knew perfectly well what the right hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. Plunket) meant by asking the House to postpone the consideration of this subject. Next time this question came on, they would find themselves confronted by a blocking Motion putagainst the proposal by one of the many Conservatives whose sole occupation in the House seemed to be the putting down of Motions of that kind. ["Oh, oh!"] He did not refer to the hon. Member for Cambridge shire (Mr. Hicks), who seemed to occupy his time that evening in making inarticulate utterances. He (Mr. T. P. O'Connor) must express his surprise at the language of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for the Dublin University, who had given a lecture in taste to the hon. Member for Sligo. The right hon. and learned Member had declared that the hon. Member had not conducted himself in a mannerly fashion——

MR. SPEAKER

I must say that the remarks of the hon. Gentleman seem to me to have nothing to do with the Question before the House.

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR

said, he was simply replying to the remarks the right hon. and learned Gentleman had thought fit to make upon the speech of his hon. Friend the Member for the county of Sligo; but as Mr. Speaker had ruled that he (Mr. T. P. O'Connor) had no right to reply to those observations he would drop that part of the subject. He hoped the Government would strenuously resist the attempt of Conservative Members to defeat the appointment of this Committee. The Government had pledged themselves to support such a Motion as that now brought forward by the hon. Member for Tyrone. As the hon. Member for Sligo had pointed out, the Government had practically stated, when a kindred Motion to that of the hon. Member for Tyrone was before the House, that if such a Motion as the present were brought forward it would receive their support. Well, the Government had now an opportunity of carrying out their pledge, and he should be very much surprised if they allowed themselves to be intimidated from the course they had alleged it to be their intention to take by such Motions as were now being made by Members on the Conservative Benches. He (Mr. T. P. O'Connor) was afraid he should be violating Parliamentary usages if he were to characterize these Motions as they properly deserved, and as he characterized them in his own mind; but to say that, at 2 o'clock in the morning, the hour was too late for them to proceed with a Motion of this kind was really to show a most lamentable ignorance of what were now the established usages of the House. Why, the most important Business of the House was now done at a much later hour than 2 o'clock in the morning; and if hon. Members representing the Conservatives were in the habit of attending the House as much as some other hon. Members, they would know that 2 o'clock in the morning was a most reasonable hour for the conclusion of Business like that now under consideration. The House had expressed its view in a most decisive manner upon the question of adjournment. The Motion for Adjournment had been defeated by a majority which any reasonable minority would accept as final. But the minority to-night had not thought fit to do so, and they were now repeating the Motion which had already been successfully and triumphantly defeated. He trusted the Government would not yield to such opposition.

MR. LEA

said, he was glad that hon. Gentlemen opposite had thought fit to oppose this Motion for Adjournment. The matter was now ripe for consideration, having been thrashed out over and over again. The Prime Minister himself had on two occasions said that this was a subject for inquiry. A debate had taken place in the House the other day—a debate which had been referred to by the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton)—the outcome of which was that the Government stated that they would not grant a Committee such as was then proposed; but that they would grant a limited Committee such as was asked for on the present occasion. It was, as everyone knew, impossible for the hon. Member for Tyrone (Mr. T. A. Dickson) to get another day for his Motion. If the Motion were put off, hon. Members on the opposite side would put a block to it, preventing its coming on after half-past 12 o'clock at night, which would practically have the effect of shelving it for the Session, notwithstanding that it had been occupying the attention of hon. Members for five or six years; and the result of shelving it for the Session would, of course, be to shelve it for the present Parliament. He hoped hon. Members below the Gangway opposite, together with all hon. Members on the Ministerial side of the House, would resist the present Motion, the object of which was to prevent the Motion of the hon. Member for Tyrone being brought on. He looked upon the course taken by hon. Members on the Conservative Benches opposite as being nothing more nor less than an act of absolute Obstruction.

LORD GEORGE HAMILTON

said, he thought the Government ought to say something about this matter. It was difficult—in fact impossible—to argue the matter in question on a Motion for the adjournment of the House; but the Prime Minister had solemnly pledged himself not to re-open the Irish Land Question. The other night a Motion was made for an inquiry into the system of house tenure in towns in Ireland, and some Member of the Government had given some sort of expression of opinion that they would not oppose it—that the Government would assent to some inquiry of this kind. At the same time, that in no way released them from the pledge they had given over and over again that they would not re-open the Land Question. ["Order, order!"]

MR. SPEAKER

I must remind the noble Lord that he is not now speaking to the Question before the House.

LORD GEORGE HAMILTON

Then I would ask the Members of the Government I see present if they propose at this hour of the morning to take on themselves the granting of this inquiry, when all their Colleagues, who previously gave an expression of opinion that the Land Question shall not be opened, are absent?

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON

It is impossible, on a question of the adjournment of the House, to discuss the point raised by the noble Lord. So far as I am aware—not knowing that this question was coming on, and, therefore, not having had an opportunity of informing myself upon the subject—I believe those Members of the Government who are especially responsible for Irish Business think that this Motion can well be agreed to, and the question disposed of, if desired, at once. At the same time, I would advise the hon. Member for Tyrone, seeing that the Government agree to the appointment of the Committee, to consent to a postponement, on the understanding that hon. Members opposite will abstain from obstructing the Motion on future occasions. I would not press my hon. Friend to take that course until such a disposition on the part of hon. Gentlemen opposite is more clearly manifested than it is at present.

MR. BRODRICK

said, that if there were a disposition on the part of himself and his hon. Friends clearly manifested, it was the disposition for them to oppose the Motion for the appointment of this Committee, at that hour and under existing circumstances, as strenuously as lay in their power. The hon. Member opposite (Mr. T. A. Dickson) had simply a bare quorum of the House at his back—a bare quorum which at any moment might be reduced below a quorum. He put it to the hon. Member if it was not a most unusual course to take, when those whose opinions had been quoted on both sides of the House as being opposed to the Motion were not able to be present—was it not a most unusual course, under such circumstances, for the hon. Member to press the matter forward? Hon. Members on the Conservative side of the House were bound to offer to the course the hon. Member seemed determined to pursue all the opposition they could, and they would continue to offer that opposition until they could show the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Hartington) that their's was a substantial and a genuine objection. If the noble Marquess would take the side of reason in this matter, he would see that the ends of reason would best be served by adjourning the discussion until it was possible for those who were in authority to consider the matter. An expression of opinion had not been yet received from that quarter. He could not say that he thought that a single argument had yet been brought forward against the adjournment of the discussion except that of the hon. Member (Mr. Lea), who said that the Motion might be blocked on a future occasion. "Well, if that were so, the very object of blocking a Motion was to prevent its coming on at a time when justice could not be done to it. For his own part, he would continue to resist the Motion, if necessary, till 5 o'clock in the morning, in order to secure its coming on at a time when it was possible to have a full and fair discussion upon it.

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes 18; Noes 43: Majority 25.—(Div. List, No. 65.)

Original Question again proposed.

MR. HICKS

said, he begged to move that the debate be now adjourned. It would be in the recollection of those Members who were present on Friday night that at a much earlier hour than this—in fact, at only a little after half-past 12 o'clock—the noble Lord the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice) had said that it was too late to answer Questions. Now, if it were too late to answer Questions at half-past 12 o'clock, surely it was much too late, at nearly half-past 2 o'clock, to go into a question of such importance as that involved in the Motion of the hon. Member for Tyrone (Mr. T. A. Dickson). The House could not forget that this was a part of a great question which had occupied the attention of the House for a whole Session—a question compared with which all other Business was insignificant; and it appeared to him that it was much too late, particularly in the absence of the principal Ministers of the Crown, to go on with the discussion. Further than that, when they bore in mind the late hour at which the House was kept up this morning, and when they remembered that they had to meet again at 12 o'clock at noon to-morrow, consideration for the officers of the House ought to induce them at once to agree to the adjournment of the debate, which he now begged to move.

MR. TOMLINSON

said, he begged to second the Motion. The lateness of the hour was such that they ought not to go on with a discussion of this kind. They all knew that one result of carrying on debates at this hour in the morning was that there were no proper reports of them in the newspapers, and that the public outside consequently had no means of knowing what their Representatives were doing. Those hon. Members who belonged to England did not know as well as some other hon. Gentle- men what the exact points of this inquiry were; but he himself had heard enough to know that some very important matters were involved, and that questions would be opened which had been, to a great extent, disposed of by the Land Act.

MR. SPEAKER

The hon. Member is wandering from the subject before the House, and is out of Order.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Hicks.)

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALKER)

said, he could not help thinking that the time which had been occupied in taking the last two divisions, on a subject upon which the sense of the House had been fully expressed, might have been advantageously devoted to the discussion of the Motion of the hon. Member for Tyrone (Mr. T. A. Dickson). Indeed, on a subject like that, upon which, he supposed, everyone had formed his opinion, probably by this time the debate might have terminated, and a division might have been taken. Without going further into the merits of the case, he would merely observe that when the hon. and gallant Member for the County of Gal-way (Colonel Nolan) had brought his Motion forward the substance of the present proposal had been fully discussed.

MR. STUART-WORTLEY

said, that the hon. and learned Gentleman who had just sat down had been good enough to inform the House that, in his opinion, this was a question upon which hon. Members had all made up their minds. He (Mr. Stuart-Wortley) would ask the hon. and learned Gentleman in which direction the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister had made up his mind on this subject, and if it was for the Motion, for what reason?

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes 16; Noes 41: Majority 25.—(Div. List, No. 66.) Original Question again proposed.

MR. HALSEY

said, it was with great reluctance that he rose to move that the House do now adjourn; but he really thought that, at that time in the morning, it was not proper to go on with the discussion of such a question. In spite of what had fallen from the hon. and learned Gentleman the Solicitor General for Ireland (Mr. Walker), he (Mr. Halsey) was not in the position of having made up his mind on the matter. He was not well acquainted with the question, and wished to have some enlightenment, so as to be able to form an opinion upon it. He was distinctly of opinion, however, that at that hour of the night he was not capable of receiving that enlightenment. He had understood from the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Hartington), before the last division but one, that after the division which was then about to take place, if hon. Members still desired an adjournment, the Government would not oppose it. He appealed to hon. Members opposite to allow the adjournment to be taken. Hon. Members on the Conservative side had a right to discuss the question, and to endeavour to enlighten their minds as to the merits of the subject, which it was impossible for them to do properly at such an hour as that.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn."—(Mr. Halsey.)

MR. HICKS

said, that he, too, sincerely hoped that Her Majesty's Government would now carry out the almost positive promise of the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War, that when the Opposition had clearly expressed their wish that the debate should be adjourned they would consent to those wishes, more particularly when they bore in mind the statement with which the noble Marquess had begun the few observations he had addressed to the House, which were to the effect that he had come into the House perfectly unprepared to deal with the question. If the noble Marquess had come into the House unprepared to deal with the question, how could he expect that hon. Members on the Conservative side could be prepared to go into the question at that hour of the night? He (Mr. Hicks) earnestly trusted that Her Majesty's Government would see the propriety of yielding to the very reasonable demand made by the Members of the Opposition.

Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members not being present,

House adjourned at half after Two o'clock.