COMMITTEE.

HC Deb 14 May 1891 vol 353 cc712-72

Considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

Clause 10.

(4.54.) MR. M. J. KENNY (Tyrone, Mid)

It is proposed to make an exception in the cases of the Lord Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls, I suppose, because they are Judges of the Court of Appeal. But I would ask why the Lord Chief Baron, who is also a member of the Court of Appeal, is not likewise excepted?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND(Mr. MADDEN,) Dublin University

It is not necessary. There will be no successor to the present Lord' Chief Baron, and as he was appointed before 1888, he cannot be nominated without his consent.

Several verbal Amendments agreed to.

Amendment proposed, In page 10, line 34, after "1859," to insert "and in their case, and in the case of persons formerly employed by the Commissioners of Church Temporalities in Ireland or by the Land Commission, who have since served continuously in the service of the Crown, their periods of service (if any) under the Commissioners of Church Temporalities in Ireland or under the Land Commission, as the case may be, shall be taken into account for all purposes of superannuation allowance, and such portion of the superannuation allowance (if any) as the Treasury determine to be properly payable in respect of such service shall be charged on and paid out of the Irish Church Temporalities Fund."—(Mr. Goschen.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

(5.0.) MR. SEXTON (Belfast, W.)

I should like to know from the right hon. Gentleman upon what principle he proceeds in this Amendment?

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,) Manchester, E.

It will affect only two or three officials. It was felt it would be very hard that they should be placed at a disadvantage by change of tenure of office.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment proposed, In page 10, at end, to add the words "Notwithstanding anything in section seventeen of 'The Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1885,' any Commissioner acting alone in carrying the Land Purchase Acts and this Act into effect may submit any question of law arising under the said Acts for the hearing and determination of the Judicial Commissioner, and it shall not be necessary that any Commissioner shall sit with the Judicial Commissioner when he is hearing or determining any question of law under the provisions of that section."—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)

MR. SEXTON

This Amendment is an example of the peculiar drafting which renders it so difficult for a layman to gauge what is intended to be done. If we examine the Amendment by comparison with the Act of 1885, we find there is to be a reversal of practice; and surely such a change should not be proposed without the Government offering some explanation. What are the treasons which have induced the Government to propose this alteration, which will decrease the powers of the Commissioners, and which substantially repeals the Act of 1885? It provides that it shall not be necessary for any Commissioner to sit with the Judicial Commissioner when hearing and determining a question of law, but under the Act of 1885 any person is entitled to require that in such a case all three Commissioners shall sit.

MR. MADDEN

No, Sir; the question of law has to be decided by the Judicial Commissioner alone. In those circumstances, it is only a waste of the valuable time of the other Commissioners to require them to attend during the arguments.

MR. SEXTON

The present system has been in operation five years, and I see no reason for a change. We know that questions of law and fact are very much intermixed in land purchase transactions, and it might be very useful for a Judicial Commissioner, such as the very bumptious official who now fills the post, to have with him on the Bench gentlemen acquainted with the condition of fact to which the law is to be applied. I do not think that any competent lawyer would object to the assistance of laymen in such a case, and I am not so sure that the law would be so efficiently administered in their absence as in their presence.

(5.11.) MR. MADDEN

With regard to the first portion of the Amendment enabling a Commissioner sitting alone to refer points of law to the Judicial Commissioner, it has long been felt it was desirable that the Commissioner should have such a power of reference. Under the Act of 1885 any of the parties interested may require that a question of law shall be referred to the Judicial Commissioner, whose duty it is to decide questions of law, but the Commissioner cannot himself refer such a question. If the other Commissioners sit with the Judicial Commissioner they have absolutely no function whatever, and surely it would be wiser to leave them at liberty to go on with other work in which they can be usefully employed.

(5.14.) MR. M. HEALY (Cork)

It is clear that under the law as it at present stands either party to a matter before the Land Commission may require that any question of law shall be heard by the Judicial Commissioner, although it is not competent for the Lay Commissioners themselves to refer the matter to their judicial colleague. It is only natural they should desire to have a power of reference of that nature, and I agree that some provision ought to be inserted securing it to them. It is perfectly true that the Land Purchase Commissioners, too weakly, as I think, abandoned the right which the Act of 1885 gave them. It is a somewhat strained interpretation of that Act that, although the Lay Commissioners are sitting with the Judicial Commissioner, they have no voice in the decision. I cannot assume, as the Attorney General for Ireland seems to think, that it is a nonsensical provision inserted without any meaning. I admit that the clause is somewhat obscurely worded, but the meaning is that the Lay Commissioners are to sit for some useful function, and to express their views, and not be as if they were mere wooden dolls. If they committed an error, and overruled the Legal Commissioner, any party interested could appeal to a Superior Court. For my part, so far from amending this section in the direction which the right hon. Gentleman proposes, and ratifying and legalising what appears to be an erroneous view of the law, I would be disposed to amend the Act of 1885 in the exactly contrary direction, and thus make it clear that the two Lay Commissioners should sit with the Legal Commissioners with co-ordinate jurisdiction. I would, therefore, strike out the following words from the Amendment:— And it shall not be necessary that any Commissioner shall sit with the Judicial Commissioner when he is hearing or determining any question of law under the provisions of that section.

(5.19.) MR. MAC NEILL (Donegal, S.)

I am very much inclined to agree with my hon. and learned Friend. I think that if the Attorney General for Ireland looks at this matter he will perceive that the Amendment is desirable. If any question of law arises, the Lay Commissioner has to refer it to the Judicial Commissioner. How can he do that except by stating a case? And as Baron Dowse said, there is nothing so difficult for a layman or for a Resident Magistrate to do. The present construction of the Act of 1885 was never put upon it by Mr. Justice O'Hagan, but only by Mr. Justice Bewley, for whom I have the greatest personal and professional respect. If the former construction were again put upon the Act it would be of the utmost value to have the Lay Commissioners sitting with the Judicial Commissioner, just in the same way as the assessors sit with the Judge of a Court of Admiralty. I say, upon my own responsibility, that I certainly will be no party to anything that will disparage these Lay Commissioners. I believe a set has been made against them by the Government, and for that reason I will stick to them. We will not have this condemnation passed against them without protest.

(5.22.) MR. M. J. KENNY

I would ask the Attorney General for Ireland what he means by the words in the Amendment "any Commissioner acting alone"? They usually do act alone; but would not these words, if adopted affect the jurisdiction in these cases where the Commissioners have to act together? Would they then be entitled to refer a question of law to the Judicial Commissioner for his opinion? It appears to me the restriction might have inconvenient consequences. I do not at all agree with Mr. Justice Bewley that he alone had the power of deciding a question of law. His decision occasioned a great deal of surprise, and it is not the construction usually placed upon the words of the Act. On the contrary, it appears that the function of the Lay Commissioners was little more than those of mere assessors. I quite admit-that there is a great deal to be said against their deciding questions of law, and that for the Purchase Commissioners who know nothing about law it would be absurd to give them coordinate jurisdiction on questions of law with a man of legal experience and; ability. I would point out to the Attorney General for Ireland that it is proposed by further legislation to alter the character of the Land Commission, and that in addition to the Judicial Commissioner there is to be a Land Judge, who would practically be a Judicial Commissioner. If this Bill should become law, as we may expect it to do either this year or the next, it will-be extremely difficult to carry out this. Amendment in practice, because there would be a confusion arising whether the Judicial Commissioner would have* the sole power of deciding a question of law or be associated with the Land Judge. With regard to the latter portion of the Amendment, the Attorney General for Ireland said it would save much time if the Lay Commissioners were allowed to go on with their own business and not be brought down to the Courts to sit beside the Judicial Commissioner to listen to him giving a decision, in which they have no part whatever. I think a great deal more time would be saved if, in carrying on the operations of this Act, all the business were carried on in the Four Courts, and not one portion of it there and another portion about a mile and a half away. This change would be greatly to the convenience not only of suitors, but to the members of the Bar practising in the Court.

(5.28.) MR. MADDEN

There may be a great deal to be said for the last suggestion of the hon. and learned Member, but it does not arise on this Amendment. I must entirely disclaim, on the part of the Government, any desire or intention to disparage the non-Judicial Commissioners by this Amendment. But I would point out that it will be utterly impossible to have two Commissioners sitting with the Judicial Commissioners on questions of law, when you have the Judge nominated by the Lord Chancellor in addition to the present Judicial Commissioners. These two Judges might be sitting at the same time, and you could not have the two Lay Commissioners sitting with both. I would also point out that assessors do not assist the Judges on questions of law, and in this case only questions of law pure and simple could be decided by the Judicial Commissioner.

(5.32.) MR. MACNEILL

How can these questions of law come before the Judicial Commissioner except on cases stated, and how can a Lay Commissioner state a case?

MR. MADDEN

It will come before him under the new system as it comes before him now—on a memorandum submitted to him by the Lay Commissioners. Surely the hon. and learned Gentleman doss not suggest that a conversation with two Lay Commissioners sitting beside the Legal Commissioner would be a better way than a carefully prepared memorandum?

MR. MAC NEILL

I do. The Judicial Commissioner may at times require to be further informed with regard to the facts, and some of these the Lay Com- missioners may have dismissed from the memorandum as of no importance; and it is therefore desirable that they should be sitting beside him.

MR. M. J. KENNY

I would again ask the Attorney General what is the meaning of the words "acting alone?"

MR. MADDEN

Each of the Commissions does, in fact, sit alone, but the words may be struck out.

MR. M. J. KENNY

Then I move to strike them out.

(5.35.) Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment, to leave out, in line 2, the words "acting alone."—(Mr. Kenny?)

Agreed to.

Question proposed, "That the Amendment, as amended, be there inserted."

MR. M. HEALY

I move to leave out all the words of the Amendment after the first "Commissioner," in line 5.

Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment, to leave out from the word "and," in line 5, to the end of the Amendment.—(Mr. M. Healy.)

Question proposed, "That the words 'and it shall not be necessary' stand part of the proposed Amendment."

(5.37.) MR.SEXTON

I would suggest to the Attorney General for Ireland that with a view to the increase in the number of Judicial Commissioners, although it is very unlikely that more than one of these will be dealing with questions of law at the same time, we might agree to have the assistance of the two Lay Commissioners if either of the parties interested so required. The right should, I think, be reserved to the litigant where he thought it advisable owing to the nature of the case or the complicated facts. Very frequently it is a technical matter referring to the value of land, and just as a Judge in an Admiralty Court is assisted by two old sea captains, so should the Judicial Commissioner have the assistance of the Lay Commissioners. I would therefore suggest that my hon. Friend should withdraw his Amendment and alter the concluding part of the Amendment by inserting after "necessary" these words "unless when any person interested shall so require."

(5.39.) MR. MADDEN

I think the Amendment inadvisable, as it might have the effect of deranging the whole course of procedure. We therefore cannot accept it.

(5.40.) MR. M. HEALY

Under the Act of 1881 it was necessary that the three Land Commissioners appointed under that Act should sit together, and they have always done so, for the hearing of appeals. Tens of thousands of appeals have been heard under that Act, and it has never been suggested that that state of things should be put an end to, and that any one of these Commissioners should have this power. However optimistic the right hon. Gentleman is, I do not think he will suggest that the points of law under the Land Purchase Act can be equal to the number of cases arising under the Act of 1881, and, if it has been possible to preserve that provision of the Act of 1881 for 10 years, I do not think the right hon. and learned Gentleman need be at all apprehensive that there will be such a block of business in the Land Courts as he has suggested. The Land Purchase Commissioners have administered about £9,000,000 in some six years, and I venture to say that an extravagant estimate of the questions of law which have arisen is one per month. The Attorney General states that no useful purpose would be served by my hon. Friend's Amendment. But does he remember the Judgment of Mr. Commissioner Lynch, which two days ago I moved to be laid on the Table of the House? Does he remember that the question then was, the circumstances which constitute legal duress in compelling a tenant to purchase? This is the kind of questions most important from the tenant's point of view, and I quite agree that if either of the parties so require, the Lay Commissioners should sit with the Judicial Commissioner.

(5.45.) MR. M. J. KENNY

I am afraid there will be some confusion if we have the state of things under this Act and the state of things under the Act of 1885 going on concurrently. There will also be some difficulty in deciding whether the words "Judicial Commissioner" would refer to the Land Judge who may be appointed.

MR. MADDEN

Oh, yes; they certainly would.

MR. SEXTON

As cases of duress are not of a technical character at all, I think it important that in such cases the three Commissioners should sit together should the litigants so require.

MR. M. HEALY

I will withdraw my Amendment, in order to allow my hon. Friend to move the words he suggested.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment, after the word "necessary," in line 5, to insert the words "unless when any person interested shall so require."—(Mr. Sexton.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

(5.47.) The Committee divided:— Ayes 89; Noes 151. — (Div. List, No. 227.)

Amendment, as amended, agreed to.

(6.0.) MR. LEA (Londonderry, S.) (who had upon the Paper the following Amendment:— In page 10, line 34, at end, add,—

1. (1.) Nothing in section seventeen of 'The Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1885,' shall be deemed to limit the jurisdiction of any member of the Land Commission under Part V. of 'The Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881,' and the Acts amending the same, and anything done by any member of the Land Commission in carrying the said Acts into effect shall be as valid and effectual as if it were done by the Land Commission: Provided that any person aggrieved by the decision of any Commissioner acting alone in carrying the said Acts into effect, may require his case to be reheard by three Commissioners, of whom the Judicial Commissioner shall be one, but none of such Commissioners shall be the Commissioner before whom the case was originally heard.
2. (2.) Rules for carrying into effect the Land Purchase Act and this Act shall be deemed to be rules under "The Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881,' and shall be made by a majority of the Commissioners, which majority shall include the Judicial Commissioner)":

Mr. Courtney,

I am—

MR. M. HEALY

On a point of order, Sir, I wish to ask you whether, having regard to the title of this Bill, the Amendment of the hon. Member is in order?

THE CHAIRMAN

I should like to hear the Amendment explained before I give any decision.

MR. LEA

I am in some difficulty about the Amendment. When I came down to the House an hon. Member suggested to me that the question of holidays depended very much on the course taken on my Amendment, and I have been urged to postpone the proposal until the Report. In deference to the strong feeling that has been expressed in all parts of the House, I will defer moving the Amendment till the Report stage.

MR. SEXTON

I can tell the hon. Member there will be a lively discussion on it when it comes on.

(6.3.) MR. M. J. KENNY

I beg to move the Amendment which stands in my name. It simply proposes to ensure that when the permanent organisation of the Land Commission is constituted those Commissioners who in the last 10 years have been engaged in carrying out the various Land Acts shall be the first to be appointed. There are altogether about 72 Assistant Commissioners in Ireland, 64 of whom are laymen, while about eight are Assistant Legal Commissioners. Something like one-tenth of the whole number have from, practically, the very beginning of the Act of 1881 been engaged in administering it, about three of them being lawyers, and seven or eight laymen. These gentlemen have devoted themselves exclusively for the past 10 years to the work of the Land Commission. The lawyers have ceased to practice and have cut themselves adrift from their profession, whilst the farmers and others have practically lost their former occupations. They have practically been Civil Servants for the last 10 years. I would urge that these gentlemen should be assured of employment. It would, I think, be absurd if, in the organisation of the permanent Department, a great number of gentlemen who have only been engaged for two or three years should be placed over the heads of those who have served for 10 years.

Amendment proposed, At the end of the last Amendment, to add the words "Provided that the Assistant Commissioners appointed under 'The Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881,' for a period of seven years, and each Assistant Commissioner appointed in the room of any Assistant Commissioner so appointed shall be selected under this provision in preference to any other Assistant Commissioners."— (Mr. M. J. Kenny.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there added."

(6.7.) THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. GOSCHEN,) St. George's, Hanover Square

There is no doubt some force in some of the pleas urged by the hon. Gentleman, and no doubt they would be taken into consideration in the selection of the gentlemen under the Bill; but the Government do not bind themselves absolutely to do what the hon. Member asks, and they, therefore, cannot accept the Amendment.

MR. M. HEALY

I think the Committee will feel that the right hon. Gentleman has dealt in a rather summary and cursory manner with this important Amendment. These men have been engaged in working the Land Acts for the past 10 years. It is left entirely to the discretion of the Lord Lieutenant and his advisers to say whether they should be entirely cast adrift or whether, after they have served a long period of years and presumably done their work in a satisfactory and efficient manner, they should be again appointed. In the past nine years, ever since the Land Act of 1881, it has been necessary for the Lord Lieutenant to appoint the employés of the Land Commission from 12 months to 12 months, and regularly as the appointments have expired, they have been again made by the Lord Lieutenant. I think the Lord Lieutenant will be placed in an invidious position by having this duty imposed upon him.

MR. SEXTON

I rather think that the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he made his courteous reply could not have been informed of the very limited operation of the Amendment, and I certainly trust the right hon. Gentleman will see his way to give effect to the principle of seniority. There are 72 of these Commissioners, 62 of them only four years in the service, and 10 of them having been engaged since the Land Act was passed. There could be no question as to the choice of the latter, and there should be no objection to this Amendment being carried out.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I hope the Committee will not spend any more time in discussing a point which cannot, I think, be described as other than relatively trivial. There must be nothing to hamper the selection of the Executive in this matter, and any rule that would tend to do so would militate against the Public Service. The hon. Gentleman opposite must know that seniority is in no sense a guide, and that ability must be taken into account.

MR. CHANCE (Kilkenny, S.)

I would ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will agree to the Amendment if the words "as far as may be practicable" are inserted?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I cannot accept that. It would practically compel us to select Assistant Commissioners unless we had some specific complaint.

MR. M. J. KENNY

Surely the right hon. Gentleman ought to accept this Amendment, because it is only fair that those who have had to forego their ordinary avocations to become Civil servants should have the preference over those withdrawn after a period of 12 months.

MR. LEA

The question of administration under the Bill is one of extreme importance. I urge on the Chief Secretary that he ought to be very careful in making permanent appointments that the best men were chosen. I think that age and experience ought to be considered, and even if words were not put in the Bill distinctly affirming that, I trust that the right hon. Gentleman will see that the age and experience of the present Assistant Commissioners are fully taken into account. It is on that understanding only that I will vote against the Amendment.

(6.27.) The Committee divided:—Ayes 87; Noes 154.—(Div. List. No. 228.)

Question proposed, "That the clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

(6.40.) MR. SEXTON

It is greatly to be regretted that the Amendment placed upon the Paper by the hon. Member for South Derry (Mr. Lea) should not be considered during the Committee stage when it might be properly and effectively discussed, but should be reserved for Report stage when the opportunities of effective discussion are limited and the Amendment cannot be fully and thoroughly debated. The Committee has determined that the men who are to have the expenditure of vast sums of the public money, amounting probably to scores of millions, are to be practically left entirely to their own discretion in the disposal of these enormous sums. I think I am right in urging that the Amendment ought to be made according to the usual practice while the clause is under debate in Committee, because it is one that will have an important effect in revolutionising the procedure of the Land Commission. We who take a deep interest in this subject have certainly entertained the full expectation that the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman would be submitted in Committee. Is it to be said that by a manœuvre of this kind, without notice, the hon. Member has a right to withdraw an Amendment of such importance from the stage at which it can be fairly discussed and when hon. Members may listen to and reply to the speeches of Ministers, in order to postpone it to the eleventh hour of the procedure on this Bill when the few Members interested in the measure can only speak upon it once? For my part, I am not disposed to consent to such a state of things. If the hon. Member is not prepared to move his Amendment now, we shall hereafter insist that it shall be brought in as a new clause in Committee and not upon the Report. I should like to hear from the Government what is their intention with regard to this clause, because if it should be intended that an Amendment of this character shall be inserted in the Land Department Bill that would give some advantages which would, to a certain extent, compensate for its present omission.

MR. LEA

In reply to the hon. Member for West Belfast, I may state that I have only postponed the Amendment of which I gave notice in accordance with what I understood to be the general feeling of hon. Members on this side of the House, because, although I have had no communications from hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway, I have been' in communication with hon. Members-above the Gangway, which have led me to assume that in postponing my Amendment I was doing what would be for the general convenience of the House. I may add that I was somewhat induced to take this course from another motive, although I do not put that as the reason of the course I have taken. The Amendment originally stood in the name of the hon. Member for South Tyrone (Mr. T. W. Russell), and it was owing to his illness that I consented to move it. I may also be allowed to state that I am supported by the strongly-expressed opinions of the people of Ulster, who have passed resolutions upon the subject in which they expressed their desire that some such Amendment as this is absolutely necessary for the good working of the Bill.

(6.45.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I do not wish to complain of the discretion of the hon. Gentleman in putting a question to me, not in regard to the clause as a whole, but in regard to the action of the Government when on Report the subject comes up again for discussion. The views of the Government upon the question of the constitution of the Land Commission and Land Department are now well known to the House, for they are embodied in this Bill and in the Land Department Bill. The hon. Gentleman said that he might be prepared to accept the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman opposite or the principle of it if it came on in the Land Department Bill, but he is not prepared to accept it in this Bill. I do not understand on what principle the hon. Gentleman acts. As far as I am concerned, it appears to me that if the provision is good when carried out in the Land Department Bill, it is good in this Bill. I think the hon. Member opposite is well advised in desiring to move his Amendment on Report rather than at the present stage.

MR. WADDY (Lincolnshire, Brigg)

I think we ought to object to this clause, for we entertain strong views against multiplying the burden on the Consolidated Fund for purposes such as those mentioned here, because it means that we are removing from the control of the House matters which ought to be jealously watched.

(6.48.) MR. KNOX, (Cavan, W.)

The Amendment of the hon. Member is one which, if accepted, would be regarded by the whole of the farmers in a great part of Ulster as well as in other parts of Ireland, as absolutely disastrous to the successful working of the Bill. I have listened with consternation to the speech of the Chief Secretary, which seemed to imply his willingness to accept the Amendment of the hon. Member, or something like it. Nothing could be more disastrous, and it would be viewed with the greatest alarm by the farmers in all parts of Ireland.

THE CHAIRMAN

Order, order! That is not the question before the Committee.

MR. SEXTON

I, too, should like to protest against the decision at which the Government have arrived, and I give notice that if they countenance any attempt to introduce the hon. Member's Amendment into the Bill we shall offer the most strenuous opposition.

(6.50.) The Committee divided:— Ayes 149; Noes 87.—(Div. List, No. 229.)

Clause 11.

(7.0.) MR. SEXTON

I propose to move the omission of the 1st sub-section of this clause, in order that I may briefly state my views with respect to the constitution of the Body which, in this scheme, is to be charged with the duty of carrying into effect the provisions of the Bill. Before the Committee can come to any satisfactory agreement on this matter, considering the great extent of the operations to be undertaken by the Board, the nature and importance of those operations, and the poor population that will be affected, it is indispensable that further information should be given by the Chief Secretary as to the intended constitution of the Board. The Board will have control over a region which includes nearly the whole of the Western seaboard of Ireland, and the Committee ought to have some better security than 'has yet been given them that the Board will efficiently discharge the functions to be intrusted to them. On what principle I should like to know has the right hon. Gentleman come to the decision that Electoral Divisions in which the rateable value per head of population does not exceed £1 6s. 8d., should be treated as congested districts? I notice that the greater part of Donegal, Sligo, Mayo, Galway, and Kerry, and no small share of West. Cork, and every county on the Western coast, except Clare, is to be included! within the operation of these clauses, and therefore we ought to have some better security than we at present have for efficient discharge of the functions of the Board. I see no reason, moreover, why the limit of 20 years should be prescribed in the Act in respect to the Board, especially as the payments under the Act are to remain for 49 years. I shall move to omit the words referred to, in order that the Board may be established without regard to any length of time. I must demur also to the principle of nomination contained in the clause; I think that, as it is of supreme importance that a Board should command the full confidence of the people, the mode of election should in some manner and to a large extent be in the hands of the people themselves or their Representatives. We want to know what manner of men are to be entrusted with these duties; will they be residents in the Western counties and in touch and sympathy with the people? Will they have had personal experience of the nature of the question to be settled and of the evils to be ameliorated by a wise administration of this Act? I trust the right hon. Gentleman will give us their names—why should it be a nominated Board? Look at the duties it will have to perform. It will have to consider the provision of aid for migration and emigration; it will have to see to the proper settlement on their new holdings of the tenants migrated; it will have to find money for the amalgamation of small holdings; it will have to see to the supply of seed and oats either at cost price or by way of gift; it will have to develop agricultural and other industries including forestry: indeed all its functions are outlined in language so general that I feel unable at this moment to enter into a criticism of them. I shall, in order to raise this question, move that in addition to the five nominated Members of the Board there shall be five elected Members. That will give the Government a majority of two on the Board in the persons of the Chief Secretary and a Member of the Land Commission. I have not yet come to a conclusion as to the best mode of electing the Members, but I might suggest the desirability of leaving the choice in the hands of the Irish Members in this House.

Amendment proposed, in page 11, line 3, to leave out the words "Twenty years after the passing of this Act."—(Mr. Sexton.)

(7.13.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

As the Amendment deals with but one point, I should perhaps not be strictly in order in traversing the wide field opened up by the hon Member. But, Sir, with your permission I will endeavour to explain the opinions of the Government on the various topics raised. The hon. Member first asked by what process I arrived at the method by which the congested counties are to be selected. The Bill of last year, as the hon. Member is no doubt aware, embodied the plan adopted by Lord Spencer's Administration in the year 1883, which at the time was considered a convenient though rough method of determining the area. But further examination convinced me that while some districts were excluded which ought to have been included other districts were included which ought to have been excluded. I therefore cast about for some self-acting automatic method of determining the districts with which the Bill should deal. It seemed to me that the best and indeed only satisfactory method of limitation was to choose the electoral divisions in which there was a very low valuation. At first I selected the limit of £1, but on working it out it became evident that the area which it would include was too restricted, and that a large district would be excluded which required dealing with. I therefore increased the limit by one-third, i.e. to £1 6s. 8d., that being about half the average poor rate valuation throughout the whole of Ireland.

MR. SEXTON

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the figures?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Yes. Under the first scheme with the £1 limit the total population of the districts which would be included is 244,448, the number of electoral divisions dealt with 152, and the operations of the Bill would have been confined exclusively to three counties, namely, Donegal, Galway, and Mayo. That evidently was too restricted an area. But under the Bill as it at present stands the population dealt with would number 565,000 (I am, of course, working on the Census of 1881), the number of electoral divisions would be 394, and the districts would include parts of the West Riding of Cork, Kerry, Donegal, Galway, Leitrim, Mayo, and Sligo.

MR. BRYCE (Aberdeen, S.)

No part of Clare?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

No part of Clare.

MR. SEXTON

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the total Poor Law valuation?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

No, I have not that here, but I do not think it is material to any arguments that have been advanced. If there is any further information I can get I shall be happy to supply it. The reason why we introduce the limit of time is obvious, and, as I think, conclusive. We hope and believe that the operation of the Congested Districts Board will be to diminish the area in which congestion exists. If the Board succeeds, its task will in the course of time come to an end, and then the funds with which it has been intrusted will be set free for purposes in which the whole of Ireland may be concerned. We give the Board a sum of not less than £1,500,000 out of the Church surplus, the income from which is about £40,000 a year. The Board will have power, no doubt, to deal with the capital as well as the interest, but I shall be sincerely disappointed to find it necessary to exhaust the capital; and if they do not exhaust the capital, this sum will be available for Irish purposes when the Congested Districts Board has fulfilled its functions and purposes. Then the fund should be set free for other, and possibly more general, purposes. The next question asked me was—what lay members are to be appointed. I have, of course, given much thought to the question, and I have selected in my own mind the gentlemen whom I shall ask to serve on the Board; but I could not venture to give my invitation until the Committee had passed the clause under consideration. I have looked over precedents, and I find it is not customary to give the names of Commissioners while the measure from which they are to derive their powers is passing through Parliament; and in this case no harm will be done, and every purpose will be served, if the names are given on the Report stage. I agree this is information the House has a right to have before parting with the stage upon which details can be dealt with. I could hardly say to those gentlemen whom I have in my mind,"If the House of Commons passes the measure will you serve?" I have thought it more fitting, more regular, more in accordance with precedent, to wait until a provisional sanction has been given to the plan of the Government before asking these gentlemen whom I have in mind to undertake the duties and accomplish the ends for which this Bill is introduced. As to the question of there being an elective element on the Board, I frankly admit I am of opinion that this part of the Bill should be, as far as possible, divorced from anything in the nature of politics I entirely agree our first object should be to secure the services of gentlemen who are well acquainted with the West of Ireland and the people. They should be sufficiently in touch with the feeling of the people to secure their sympathy in any effort they may make to carry out the beneficent objects we desire to see accomplished. But I do not think the end would be attained by introducing in this matter the elective element. We have ample experience of the work of Boards both in England and Ireland, and we have to consider that here the Board will have to deal with large sums of public money which are to be distributed through various constituencies, and I should be sorry if those concerned in this grant in a Parliamentary or a political sense should feel that they could be applied to by their constituents to get a larger slice of the public cake than otherwise they would obtain. Let us, in attempting to carry out the objects in view, avoid hampering the Bill with the electoral element, which would in the first place make the Board far too large for practical purposes, and would also, I fear, by the introduction of politics, hamper the members of the Board in view of the opinions of their constituents and the influences which might be brought to bear for securing pecuniary advantages to a locality from this large sum of public money. These are the views which I hope I have uncontroversially stated which have induced the Government to take the course they have adopted, and I trust the hon. Member will not consider it necessary to press the view he has put forward with great moderation.

(7.25.) MR. SEXTON

The financial duties of the Board will not expire in 20 years. The whole scheme is founded on the idea that this Congested Districts Board will be in a position to act as long as the purchase advances are running, namely, for 49 years. In order to make the clause reconcilable to common sense these words should be left out.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I would agree to a provision that the term should expire unless Parliament should otherwise determine — a provision, in short, to show that the appointment of the Board is not made for all time. We are dealing with a Board appointed expressly for the purpose of abolishing a particular state of things; and to make this Board eternal, so to speak, is to imply that we are never to succeed in our object. I think it is extremely likely that the Board will not accomplish its purpose in 20 years; but still I do not wish to make the Board permanent, and I will not adopt any suggestion which will give more elasticity and not stultify our great object in view.

MR. SEXTON

Of course nothing human is eternal; but we must remember that though the main object of the Board should be accomplished in the course of years, there' will still be functions for the Board to perform—a decision will have to be arrived at as to what shall be done with the money before the Board passes out of existence. Gulfs will have to be tilled up, and many arrangements made. The right hon. Gentleman is willing to insert "For 20 years, or until Parliament shall otherwise determine?"

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Yes; I am quite willing to do that.

MR. SEXTON

And then there is the question of the names.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

It can hardly be expected, I think, that I should give the names of gentlemen who have not yet been applied to. That would not be fair to them.

MR. SEXTON

It would greatly add to the force of the letters of invitation the right hon. Gentleman proposes to write if the names were received with applause in the House. As to the question of elected members, I may say personally I do not think there is the least danger of these evils to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred. Let the election be with the Irish Members, who are quite as anxious as the Govern- ment or the right hon. Gentleman to meet the real needs of the people in the West of Ireland, and the right hon. Gentleman need not trouble himself that the elected members will be influenced by considerations other than those of humanity. The men elected need not be politicians; but if you give Irish Members this small power, I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will find that it will result in the nomination of men better able to discharge the functions of the Board proposed to be established than any he could name. I am disposed to accept the compromise the right hon. Gentleman has suggested, but I shall feel it my duty to press for the elective element in the appointment of the five unofficial members.

(7.30.) MR. M. HEALY

Upon the limitation of time I may observe that no provision is made for what shall be done when the 20 years expire, and it is almost essential that the Board should continue longer. Much business will remain to be transacted, annuities to be paid, loans and advances to be adjusted, outstanding liabilities and assets to be dealt with, and things of that kind, by some Act of Parliament in the nature of a winding-up Act. That being so, I think the form is immaterial, whether you add the words suggested by the Chief Secretary, or strike out the words as suggested by my hon. Friend. One thing we cannot do—that is, leave the clause as it stands, providing that the Board shall lapse at the end of 20 years, and making no provision as to what shall happen then.

MR. M. J. KENNY

Doubtless, it will be necessary to come to Parliament to wind up the affairs of the Board at the end of the period of its operations, but it is also certain that 20 years will not suffice for the work of the Board. With a view to meeting that winding up which, in the natural course of events will be necessary, may I suggest that a temporary continuance might be expedient, and we might provide for this by adding, after the words "for 20 years after the passing of this Act," the words "or such longer period as the Lord Lieutenant in Council shall from time to time determine."

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I think the view of the hon. Member for West Belfast and his friends will be met by the words "For 20 years after the passing of this Act and thereafter until Parliament shall otherwise determine."

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed, in page 11, line 3, after "Act," to insert "and thereafter until Parliament shall otherwise determine."—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment proposed, in line 7, after "agriculture," to insert "forestry."—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)

Amendment agreed to.

(7.35.) MR. SEXTON

To test the sense of the Committee on the principle that a Board with these powers and functions should have an elective element upon it, that it may command the confidence of the people among whom it is to carry on its operations, I move this Amendment.

Amendment proposed, In page 11, line 7, after the word "agriculture," to insert the words "of five members, to he elected in the prescribed manner by such of the Members of the Commons House of Parliament as represent constituencies in Ireland."—(Mr. Sexton.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. M. HEALY

Surely we ought to have some reply to this. The matter is hardly disposed of by saying it is desirable to keep the Board non-political. There need be no apprehension on this point. We are entitled to assume that an electorate such as my hon. Friend suggests "would make their selection on the best possible grounds, and with the best possible motives; but if the right hon. Gentleman objects to this particular mode of election, perhaps he will offer some alternative method, for I suppose my hon. Friend is not absolutely wedded to this particular proposal. It might very well be that other bodies—such, for instance, as Boards of Guardians—should have a voice in the determination. On Boards of Guardians the Political Party to which the right hon. Gentleman belongs is largely represented, so he could not complain that any selection they could make would be influenced by motives he would consider improper. All we contend for is that there should be some elective element introduced into this Board. Surely the right hon. Gentleman desires that this Board should command public confidence in Ireland, and particularly in the districts where the Board will carry on its operations. The elective element will secure this public confidence.

(7.38.) MR. SHAW LEFEVRE (Bradford, Central)

I apprehend the object of the Amendment is rather to elicit the names of the persons to be nominated—

MR. SEXTON

No, the elective element is quite apart from the official nominations.

MR. SHAWLEFEVRE

At all events, the effort has been made to draw from the right hon. Gentleman the names of the nominated members. I will only say that precedent is against such a course being taken at this stage I take it, however, that the Chief Secretary will give the names on some future stage of the Bill?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Yes, on Report.

MR. SHAW LEFEVRE

And may I venture to suggest that in making their selection the Government should consult Irish Members as to, at least, two or three names? I am sure that would give satisfaction in Ireland if the right hon. Gentleman does not see his way to adopt the elective principle. It would be in accordance with custom to consult Irish Members before asking gentlemen to serve.

(7.40.) MR. MACNEILL

As representing one of the most congested districts, and having regard to the welfare of the poverty-stricken people, I feel bound to insist upon the importance, in the functions this Board will discharge, of its members being in full sympathy with the people they desire to assist. Dealing with such questions as migration and emigration and the other matters in contemplation, philanthropy will have no success unless the people have full trust in the machinery employed. Upon this ground I strongly urge, the adoption of the elective principle. As regards any embarrassment to politicians, I do not think that should be considered for an instant. God knows, I would risk any embarrassment and prejudice to political position, and would sacrifice any small personal ambition if I could be in any way instrumental in bring ing, in the slightest degree, peace and relief to these suffering people. Political relations will not enter into the matter so far as we are concerned. If any man shows me that he is actuated by the motive to improve the condition of our people, I am heartily with him in the work. I do not think of his political opinions when he is engaged in the noblest of all tasks, that of helping his fellow-men. Political questions will not come from us; they have not come from us hitherto. The chief person who has endeavoured to introduce political matter into this congested district legislation is the Marquess of Salisbury himself. He has used the Congested District Board in political speeches for political purposes. I simply make this observation—that politics on this subject will not come from us. We can trust the good sense of the people to know who are trying to do the best for them; we can trust to their rectitude and principles, and we know that any attempt to bribe them by relief will be as unsuccessful as such efforts have been in England. As interested in Donegal, I must ask the right hon. Gentleman through what medium, by what channel, is this public money to be administered? It is not charity, it is money of the State diverted to meet the sad necessities of the people, which are in themselves the condemnation of your administration in the past. I shall have more belief in the benevolence and philanthropy of the Government when I know who is to administer this fund. The right hon. Gentleman is no novice in these matters, and he must know how many Boards have been unsuccessful; let him in this case, in which our desire to help the people is not second to his, place some confidence in us—he cannot treat Irish Representatives as mere children, and proceed on the assumption that he knows what is good for the people, and we do not. The composition of the Board is of the utmost importance when we consider, and we cannot forget it, that in these very districts scenes of atrocity have been perpetrated, not, at all events, without the sanction of the Government. I think the right hon. Gentleman might meet us fairly in this matter.

(7.50.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I am afraid some of the observations of the hon. Gentleman were not entirely of that non-political character he recommends. It is not possible to give the names of the gentlemen whom it is proposed to invite to join this Board. The principle of selection, however, will be to obtain as representatives men who have endeavoured to carry out public relief work in the West of Ireland, men of good capacity who have shown an active interest in the welfare of the rural population in Ireland. It is not proposed, however, to secure the services of men who have been mixed up on one side or the other with the unhappy differences which have divided society in the West of Ireland, as elsewhere in Ireland. Political convictions may be entertained of course, but I do not think it will conduce to the good working of the Board that any of its members should have been in the past in any way associated with the acrimonious disputes which we have had occasion to deplore.

MR. MAC NEILL

Really I am amazed. Has not the right hon. Gentleman taken prominent place as a political partisan, and is he not to be the President of the Board? Will he alone merge the politician into the philosopher and philanthropist?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The hon. Member appears to forget we are discussing the nomination of members.

MR. MAC NEILL

It is a ridiculous idea to suppose that a politician cannot be a member of the Board. A man without political leanings is often the most prejudiced. Let us leave political considerations out of view, let us select men who will have the confidence of the people, let the elective principle be conceded, and let us know the names of those gentlemen, or some of them who have been selected. Is Mr. Tuke, whose name is familiar to us in connection with Irish emigration plans, one of those gentlemen selected? We must have some control over the money. The right hon. Gentleman, I am sure, will not try to make political capital out of the matter, but can he guarantee that his friends will not?

(7.56.) MR. M. J. KENNY

I believe everyone in Ireland is anxious that the work it is proposed this Board should take in hand should be properly executed, because every per- son feels that for many years past the settlement of the question of the congested districts has been a most difficult problem. Unfortunately, it is too much the practice in Ireland to entrust every public function to Boards nominated by the Crown or by its Representatives. The results we can see by looking at the works carried out there, and I greatly fear that if the Congested Districts Board is to be a purely nominated Board we shall find their operations will not be more satisfactory than the operations of other Boards nominated on similar principles have been. It has been said that the Board of Works have to administer the money of the British taxpayer, but here you propose to do an exclusively Irish work with exclusively Irish money. The Congested Districts Board have to work on the Irish Church surplus, and that is a purely Irish Fund paid by the tithe-payers of Ireland previous to the disestablishment of the Irish Church. There is left £1,500,000, and it is proposed to use the interest for the benefit practically of those who subscribed the money. This work, then, is to be carried out by a Board which is to be nominated by the Chief Secretary for the time being, and he is to be Chairman of the Board. Anything more calculated to lead to unsatisfactory, if not disastrous, results, could not be conceived. We do not ask that the whole Board shall be elected; we simply ask that the wishes of those who are to be operated on shall be to some extent consulted. I will not enlarge upon the functions of the Board. Something like 500,000 of the poorest people in Ireland will be deeply affected by the operations of the Board, and what indications do we get from the right hon. Gentleman that suitable persons will be chosen to compose the Board. We get an indication that some of those associated with works of certain character will be selected, persons who have become notorious by organising emigration schemes. I believe that instead of proceeding on the lines of emigration you will find it better to proceed on the lines of migration. Certainly you have only to come in contact with public opinion to ensure the failure of the operation of the Board.

MR. SEXTON

After the engagement of the right hon. Gentlemen to give the names of the proposed Commissioners on the Report stage of the Bill we shall not divide upon that point, but we shall divide upon the Amendment before the Committee.

(8.3.) The Committee divided:— Ayes 44; Noes 90.—(Div. List, No. 230.)

(8.10.) MR. SEXTON

The Chief Secretary takes power for the Crown to appoint two or more persons to be temporary members of the Board. The right hon. Gentleman has previously expressed a wish that the Board should not be too cumbrous, and I will now move to add after the words "two or more persons," the words "not exceeding five."

Amendment proposed in page 11, line 13, after "persons" to insert "not exceeding five."—(Mr. Sexton.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I imagine that the power will be sparingly exercised by the Crown for the reason I have already stated to the Committee. I, however, have no objection to the Amendment.

Question put, and agreed to.

MR. M. HEALY

In the first part of the clause it is provided that there shall be one member of the Board who shall represent agriculture. The Committee have added the word "afforesting." Is the second portion of the clause it in provided that two or more persons may be appointed to represent "fisheries, agriculture, or other special matters." What is the meaning of the repetition of the word "agriculture" and the non-inclusion of "fisheries" in the first part of the clause?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The idea is to have a small and permanent Board consisting of five members, one of whom shall especially represent agriculture. It is thought well that we should temporarily have expert information.

(8.15.) MR. CHANCE

What is to be the tenure of the members of the Board? There is not a solitary word in the clause to show whether these men are to be appointed for life or for five minutes. You may get on the Board gentlemen like Lord Clanricarde, Mr. Ponsonby, or some such characters; or, at any rate, you may have gentlemen appointed who will not attend, and there does not seem to be the slightest power given either to discharge them from serving on the Board and to appoint fresh members, or to supplement the Board by fresh members. Then we may wish to get rid of gentlemen appointed. We may have men on the Board who may think that emigration is the best plan to adopt, or others who think it well to spend everything on fisheries. Under the circumstances it seems there ought to be some indication, no matter how slight, on the face of the clause as to what the tenure of these gentlemen shall be, and how any of them can be got rid of.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I presume the tenure of the members of the Board will be the same as the tenure of members of other Boards. The Board of National Education is very analogous in many respects. I imagine the tenure of the two Boards will be the same; but I will inquire into the matter, and if the tenure is not the same I will take care it is made so.

MR. M. HEALY

Under the 2nd subsection there are to be what are called temporary members of the Board. There is no Board in Ireland having members of such a character as temporary members, and I think the point raised by my hon. Friend is a perfectly just one. What we ask the right hon. Gentlemen is, what is to be the tenure of the temporary members of the Board. I would suggest that the 2nd sub-section should be amended by the addition of the words— And also in the same manner to appoint for a period specified in the warrant, two or more members to be temporary members of the Board.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I accept that.

THE CHAIRMAN

That is out of Order. The Committee have already agreed to the words "not exceeding five,"

MR. SEXTON

The wording as to, the temporary members is unfortunately very clumsy. The right hon. Gentleman suggests temporary members, and then he defines their temporary character by referring to fisheries and agriculture, which are not temporary but permanent.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The agricultural or fishery work of the Board may be of a temporary character, and it is desired that when such work does arise, the permanent members shall have temporary expert assistance.

MR. CHANCE

It is hardly fair to the Irish Members that the duty should be thrown on them of making the clause workable.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

It is perfectly workable.

MR. CHANCE

The right hon. Gentleman will have an opportunity of ascertaining that in the next 12 months. He admits that he does not know what the tenure of. office of members of the Board will be. He presumes it will be like that of the members of another Board, but I am afraid he is not in a position to inform the Committee what the tenure of the other Board is. I should like to know whether the temporary members can form part of the quorum of three, and whether the temporary members will be able to vote. It is not fair to the House to ask it to give £1,500,000 of public money to as Board as to the composition of which it knows nothing.

MR. MAC NEILL

It is quite evident the right hon. Gentleman does not know or care what the tenure of office or the functions of the members of this Board are to be, and he does not think it worth while to consult the Castle Officials in this matter. Will the right hon. Gentleman be able, after the short adjournment which usually takes place about this time, to give us a rough sketch of the constitution of this Commission?

(8.25.) MR. M. HEALY

I beg to move to insert the words— A temporary Member of the Board shall hold office for such period as may be mentioned in the warrant appointing him.

Amendment proposed, In page 11, line 15, after "matters" to insert "a temporary Member of the Board shall hold office for such period as may be mentioned in the warrant appointing him."— (Mr. M. Healy.)

Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and agreed to.

MR. SEXTON

I think it is desirable that some short code of rules should be drawn up for the guidance of the Board, and I would suggest that such rules should be made by the Lord Lieutenant in Council.

MR. M. HEALY

I presume that the Board will have a seal, and therefore I should like to know why the orders of the Board are not to be given under its seal, but are to be signified under the hands of three members.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

My view is that as the Board by common consent is to perform a great many important duties, it is necessary three members of the Board should be concerned in every one of its corporate functions.

(8.31.) MR. CHANCE

Under the clause as drawn, the Board will have no power to make rules, which will be of binding force even upon themselves. Either the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary does not regard the Bill seriously, or else he desires that these gentlemen should make ducks and drakes of the public money.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 12.

MR. SEXTON

We now pass from questions relating to the constitution of the Board to the financial scheme in relation to Part 2 of this Bill. This part of the Bill is intended to operate within an aggregate area of seven counties, containing a population of about 500,000, and the amount that would be required under this Act would be about £44,000 per annum. Now there are one or two points in reference to this clause upon which hon. Members on these Benches would be glad of some information. First of all I should like to know whether inside these congested districts the operations of the Land Commission and the Congested Districts Board are to go on side by side. If this is to be so, we ought to have some clear and definite explanation as to what will be the effect of these joint operations. For example, there may be what I may term double defaults arising within these districts, namely, defaults under the ordinary working of the Land Purchase Act, and defaults also under this special portion of it. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will inform us whether these defaults will be lumped together and taken as constituting one charge of the counties, or whether they will be dealt with separately. The matter is one which I imagine will need closer attention on the Report stage than it has yet received, or is likely to receive, in Committee.

THE CHAIRMAN

I would point out to the hon. Member that this is a matter which would be more appropriately dealt with on the next clause.

MR. SEXTON

I am always anxious to abide by your decisions on points of procedure, and I shall therefore confine what I have to say to asking for the information I think we ought to receive from the Government. I should like to know what are to be the resources of the Congested Districts Board. I should be glad to know what is the present amount of the Irish Church Surplus Fund, and, secondly, in what counties it is to be applied. I observe that by Sub-section 4 of this clause two sums are provided from the Irish Reproductive Fund and the Sea and Coast Fisheries Fund, and I should like to hear what is the present amount of those funds. Then, looking at the nature of the functions to be discharged by the Board, it seems to me that £40,000 a year will hardly be sufficient to meet all the purposes provided for in this clause. I will move to leave out the first subsection.

MR. CHANCE

I have an Amendment which should come first. (8.40.)

(9.20.) Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members being found present,

MR. MADDEN

The Bill assumes that the Irish Church Surplus is able to bear a charge of £1,500,000. This implies that it exceeds that amount. The resources placed at the disposal of the Congested Districts Board will be the interest at 2¾ per cent. on this sum, as referred to in the clause, and the Irish Reproductive Loan Fund and the Sea and Coast Fisheries Fund.

MR. CHANCE

I beg to move after the word "fund," in line 23, the insertion of the words "in favour of the Congested Districts Board." At present the section seems absolutely meaningless. A charge has to be made, and you must make it in favour of some individual or Corporation. In this case obviously the charge would be made in favour of the Board.

Amendment proposed, in page 11, line 23, after "fund" to insert "in favour of the Congested Districts Board,"—(Mr. Chance.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

(9.26.) MR. MADDEN

I think if the hon. Gentleman will read the sub. section and the next he will see that adequate provision has been made. In the first place the capital sum is charged on the Church Surplus Grant, and bears interest at 2¾ per cent. per annum, and the first sub-section provides— And such interest shall, so far as not required for the purposes of the Guarantee Fund, as hereinafter mentioned, be placed at the disposal of the Congested Districts Board for the purposes of this Act. Then the next sub-section directs that— The interest on the Church Surplus Grant shall be paid by the Land Commission at such times as the Treasury direct, and so far as not for the time being required, may, under the directions of the Treasury, be invested, and the income of such investment shall be dealt with as if it were the said interest. So that the intention is that it should be at the disposal of the Board.

MR. CHANCE

But there is not one word directing that this charge shall be in the Board's favour, nor does the section contain a solitary word directing either that the interest should be paid to them, or more properly, that it shall be applied as they may direct.

MR. MADDEN

The intention of the Act is that the money should be placed at the disposal of the Congested Districts Board for the purposes of the Act. I will consider the criticism of the hon. Member, and will take care that the proper provision is made.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

(9.31.) MR. SEXTON

I should like the Committee to consider what the Board is to do with the £40,000. It is to assist emigration or migration, place the emigrants or migrants under favourable circumstances to obtain the means of living, supply money for the amalgamation of holdings, make good any loss on amalgamation, provide seed potatoes, and develop agriculture and other industries. But the first function of the Board is the afforestation of tracts of land. All that you hope to do for £40,000. I think that is absurd. I do not think any human being concerned in the drafting of this Bill has applied his faculties to considering how far the amount placed in the hands of the Board will go. Why should this £1,500,000 of money lie up for years? You only propose to use the interest upon it. If you are going to try a large scheme of afforesting—and in the matter of timber Ireland is worse off than any country in Europe—how can you do so with £40,000? The sum will go no length at all. I think you ought to take power in the Act to use— Such portion of the principal sum as from time to time the Lord Lieutenant, with the sanction of the Treasury, may think fit. and I move to add those words.

Amendment proposed, In page 11, line 23, after the word "Fund," to insert the words "and such portions of the said capital sum as the Lord Lieutenant, with the sanction of the Treasury, may from time to time appoint."—(Mr. Sexton.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

(9.38.) MR. MADDEN

The hon. Gentleman has raised a question of great magnitude and importance. I am quite sure my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary, who, for the moment, is absent, would be very glad indeed to augment from any available source, the sum available for the purposes of this portion of the Bill. I, however, cannot pledge the Government in this matter. How far the House would be disposed to allow the principal of the Irish Church Surplus to be made use of by way of loan or otherwise is a subject worthy of discussion, and I am sure my right hon. Friend will listen with the greatest attention to anything that may be advanced on the point.

(9.40.) MR. M. J. KENNY

I think we ought to have a more definite statement from the Government.

MR. MACNEILL

The right hon. Gentleman not long ago made an observation that was construed by Gentlemen on this side of the House as meaning that he was prepared to appropriate not merely the interest, but the £1,500,000 also to the works contemplated in the congested districts portion of this measure. The Bill aims at emigration and migration, the consolidation of small holdings, and the giving of technical instruction in agricultural districts. Ten months ago the Chief Secretary said the capital of the Church Surplus Fund was to be appropriated to the congested districts. Now the Attorney General for Ireland is adroitly put up to say only the interest of the money is to be used. As this matter has been in incubation for two years, surely the right hon. Gentleman need not change his mind at the last moment, as he appears to have done. I appeal to the Government to let us appropriate the capital as well as the interest.

(9.45.) MR. SHAW LEFEVRE

I would suggest that some portion of the capital of the fund should be set apart for works of a permanent character.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I will explain how the matter stands. Hon. Gentlemen are perfectly accurate in supposing that the original idea was that not only the interest but the capital should be devoted to these purposes. When I said so I had in my mind the Bill of last year. But the reason which made me modify the Bill of last year, and which at the moment escaped my recollection, was that you cannot carry on land purchase unless you have a Guarantee Fund, and you cannot have a Guarantee Fund in the congested districts unless half of it is supplied by the Church Surplus Fund. If the Commissioners undertook large schemes they might run away with a million or a million and a half of money in a short time, and not leave anything to form half the Guarantee Fund for land purchase. Land purchase, after all, is the main object of our Bill, and anything which destroys that hits the Bill in a vital part. The sum of £40,000 a year is not an inconsiderable sum of money to spend among a population of 500,000; and, on the whole, we prefer the scheme we have now adopted instead of that of last year. I would point out that if it be not expended in one year, the surplus can be expended in the following years, so that if the Commissioners had a scheme costing £200,000 they could carry it out by accumulating the income for five years. If you choose to give your Board power to spend and possibly to squander the capital of your fund you will diminish and destroy the whole land purchase scheme. If, on the other hand, you choose to adopt the scheme which we have felt ourselves compelled to propose, you will have the land purchase scheme untouched, and will have the sum of £40,000 in one year, £80,000 in two years, £120,000 in three years and so on, to spend on any scheme which the Board think it will be wise to carry into effect. As between these two rival projects, and I do not think there is a third, I think we ought to decide upon the one we have adopted in the Bill.

(9.50.) MR. SEXTON

I do not think the right hon. Gentleman is limited to the two; there is a third plan better than either. It is not a choice between having no guarantee on the one hand, and locking up the whole of the money on the other. The right hon. Gentleman seems unable to detach his mind from Part 1 of the Bill with which we have been long occupied. He argues as if he were dealing with the £1,200,000 Guarantee Fund and the £30,000,000 Stock, where one being the multiple of the other, if you diminish one you diminish both. The right hon. Gentleman has become so habituated to his argument on Part 1, that he will not consider the taking of a shilling of the fund. But observe there is nothing to suggest that £40,000 will necessarily be required for the purposes of guarantee in the congested districts. For all we can tell a much smaller sum may be sufficient. There is no such relation between the £40,000 and the capital as between the £1,200,000, and the £30,000,000 in the other part of the Bill. There may be, of course, a call upon the guarantee in the congested districts, but it is only a quarter, and not a half, of the default that will fall upon this special guarantee; half is paid out of the landlords' guarantee; of the other half, half is paid by the rates, so that a quarter only of the default ever falls upon the £40,000. That diminishes the demand by one-half. Then what I suggest is that from time to time, (of course I did not intend it immediately) for matters of public importance a demand shall be made on the capital under the sanction of competent Irish authority. I do say that to deprive yourself, as far as you can, of capital, and say that it shall be absolutely locked up for 20 years, no matter what meanwhile may be the necessities in Ireland, is an absolutely fatuous course to pursue. Why should not the Lord Lieutenaut be able to draw upon the capital for purposes relevant to the congested districts scheme? If the experience of two or three years shows you that the guarantee will not be drawn upon to any great extent by reason of default, then you can proceed with greater confidence, making larger demands upon it for purposes of practical utility. Having accumulated a sum to secure you against default, you then may take power to appropriate part of the capital for migration, emigration, and the other objects in view. If you migrate a man you must find him the means of living on his new holding, if you emigrate him you must start him in life after paying his passage money, if you amalgamate holdings you must find the money. How are you to touch the great scheme of afforestation? Why, afforestation to be useful in the West of Ireland means covering miles and miles around the wild bays of the bleak sea coast. If you intend to set seriously about the work, and not merely play with the difficult problem before you, you must certainly leave yourself free to use your capital, and not lock it up, willy-nilly, in this way.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

This is the first time I have heard a grant of £40,000 a year for 20 years in aid of a population of 500,000 spoken of as mere "play." The hon. Gentleman could not get such a grant for any other equal population in the United Kingdom.

MR. SEXTON

It is Irish money.

(9.55.) MR. M. HEALY

This Church surplus is an expansive fund; some years ago we were given to understand it was nearly exhausted, and yet we now find that there is an amount of £1,500,000 available. It may be there will be a future expansion still, and even if the right hon. Gentleman persists in somewhat obstinately adhering to his clause, so far as it relates to the £1,500,000, at any rate, he might free his hand as regards any future expansion which we may find in the next few years, and we do not know what new developments may be in store for us. At least, let the right hon. Gentleman leave himself free to that extent. He says £40,000 is. a large sum for the purpose, but we know what large sums have been expended in the congested districts, and how little has been accomplished. If you consider the nature of the duties of the Board, the various objects they have to promote, I think you will find that the sum of £40,000 will not go a long way in dealing with the enormous problem presented by these congested districts in Ireland. I think the right hon. Gentleman will find before he has his scheme at work very long that a little more elasticity is desirable. This Amendment pledges the right hon. Gentleman to nothing; it leaves the matter in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant to deal with the fund in a practical manner.

(10.0.) The Committee divided: — Ayes 47; Noes 95. — (Div. List, No. 231.)

Verbal Amendments (Mr. Chance) agreed to.

(10.14.) MR. M. HEALY

In Subsection 3, Section 20 of the Arrears of Rent (Ireland) Act, 1882, and Section 12 of the Tramways and Public Companies (Ireland) Act, 1883, are repealed. These I take it have become obsolete. There is a provision in the Land Act of 1881, in relation to emigration which is equally obsolete, Section 32, and, now that he is concentrating all the powers in relation to emigration, I would suggest that the right hon. Gentleman should include this section in this repealing provision. It has, I think, never been acted upon.

Amendment proposed, in page 11, line 32, after (3) insert "Section 32 of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, and,"—(Mr. M. Healy.)

MR. MADDEN

It never was, I think, an operative section. I see no reason why it should not be repealed.

Amendment agreed to.

(10.16.) MR. SEXTON

Sub-section 4 provides that the Irish Reproductive Loan Fund and the Sea and Coast Fisheries Fund shall be placed at the disposal of the Board for the purposes of this Act, but shall be applicable only in any county in which the fund is before the passing of this Act applicable; will not the effect of this be that the Congested Districts Board will seize the whole of these funds, but the funds will only be applicable in certain counties, so that though the Board takes the whole, they can only spend part? What is the effect and intention of this sub-section?

SIR G. TREVELYAN (Glasgow, Bridgeton)

I should have imagined from the sub-section that only that part of the Irish Reproductive Loan Fund would be taken, which was allotted to the counties in which the Board operates, but in those counties would the whole of the allotment of the Reproductive Loan Fund be taken and applied to that part where there is the congested population? I should also like to know how much remains of these funds.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The assets of the Sea and Coast Fisheries Fund are —Government Stock, £19,189; amount of outstanding loans, £16,006; cash in bank, £3,586; total, about £38,780. 'Of the Irish Reproductive Loan Fund the assets are—Consols, £43,524, estimated at par; cash, £2,591; amount outstanding on loan, £19,121. As to the question of the hon Member for West Belfast, I think probably the clause will have to be amended to prevent a county suffering loss by the handing over of the money to the District Board. I have had a calculation made as to the amount the counties will absorb, and I think we should withdraw from the power of the Congested Districts Board the amount which the existing Commissioners are to distribute, as they have in the past.

(10.20.) MR. M. HEALY

There is another matter to which I wish to allude. Under the Tramways and Public Companies Act the Treasury made a free grant of £200,000. I do not know to what extent that sum has been availed of, but any surplus there is I think should be placed at the disposal of the Congested Districts Board. An hon. Friend informs me that £40,000 is still unexpended. I think the Chief Secretary will see it is only fair that that sum should be available.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I think it ought to be; and I will see that it is.

MR. SEXTON

What about Subsection (4)?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The Congested Districts Board will only be given control over those parts of the fund which have hitherto been allocated to the congested district counties.

MR. CHANCE

I propose to insert, after "Board," in line 41, "and shall be applicable, in the first place, for the purposes of the said Act, and subject thereto." The sub-section transfers to the Congested Districts Board the powers exercised by two other bodies. Then it reserves to the new Board the right to apply a portion of this fund in the counties to which the fund was already made applicable. But it goes further, for it enables the new Board to take the whole of this money from the objects mentioned in the Act, and to apply it to the consolidation of holdings in one county. The sub-section would enable the new Board to disregard wholly the objects of the bounty of a previous Par- liament, and to apply the whole income to the consolidation of holdings in one county, leaving all the other counties out in the cold. I think that only the surplus which exists after satisfying the primary objects for which the money was given, should be applied to the new objects under this Act.

Amendment proposed, in page 11, line 41, after "Board," to insert "and shall be applicable, in the first place, to the purposes of the said Act, and subject, thereto."—(Mr. Chance.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

(10.30.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I hope the hon. Gentleman will not insist on the Amendment. He will recollect that the origin of these Acts was that the charitable bonuses given to Ireland many years ago should be entirely expended on charitable purposes. Now that we are to have a Congested Districts Board, I think we ought to give them an unfettered hand in dealing with congested districts.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

(10.33.) MR. CHANCE

To my knowledge, grave dissatisfaction exists amongst the fishery classes with reference to the difficulty thrown in their way, and the trouble they have to experience in getting a loan out of this fund. I trust the Chief Secretary will make a note of the point.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The hon. Gentleman will see that by transferring the management of this portion of the fund from one body to another there is a possibility of the object he has in view being attained.

Question put, and agreed to.

Clause 13.

MR. SEXTON

I think it would be worth while inquiring whether 25 per cent. is not too high a figure to fix upon, and whether the congested districts in Counties Limerick, Derry, and Clare, where the valuation is not more than £1 6s. 8d., should not be included.

(10.38.) MR. BRYCE

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to seriously con sider whether, in view of the very large discretion in the way of making experiments which is given to the Congested Districts Board, it would not be well to extend the scope of the Board as widely as possible. They would not come within the definition here given, but there are certain districts along the coast in the western parts of Limerick and Clare where the circumstances are very similar to those of the congested districts of Galway and Mayo; and it seems to me wise that the experiments should be applied to those districts.

MR. KNOX

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has considered the situation of the western part of the County of Cavan? There are 10 electoral divisions, and they are the same in their character as similar divisions across the border in Leitrim, and it naturally seems they should be included in the scheme. Of course, I am aware that where a rule like this is adopted there must always be inequalities, but I think there is something in the character of these districts which leads to the inquiry whether they ought not to be included.

(11.40.) MR. M. HEALY

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is not necessary in some way to apportion the cash part of the Guarantee Fund under this section?

THE CHAIRMAN

There is no Question before the Committee.

MR. SEXTON

I beg to move to leave out Sub-section 1.

Amendment proposed, in page 12, to leave out the 1st sub-section.—(Mr. Sexton.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Of course, the question of the area of the congested districts has been very carefully considered. It is not sufficient to prove that a district is very poor in order to entitle it to claim to form part of a congested district county in the full sense of that expression. There are districts in Ulster and in the South-east of Ireland of which parts are as poor as any that can be found in Ireland.

MR. SEXTON

The map shows only three outside your scheme.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I think it will be found that there are some of the poorer and more mountainous districts on the south-east coast and in Ulster, where the poverty is not less than in the proposed congested districts counties. It will be seen when Clause 16 is reached that, as far as migration and emigration are concerned, the work of the Congested Districts Board is not to be confined to the congested districts counties. But in respect of the general work to be undertaken by the Board, we must be practical and confine it to the large areas in the West of Ireland. The clause says that where more than 25 per cent. of the population of a county lives in electoral divisions of which the rateable value, when divided by the number of the population, gives a sum of less than £1 for each individual, such divisions shall be treated as congested districts. If hon. Members think that 25 is too high a percentage of the population I will not oppose a reduction to 20 or some such figure.

(10.45.) MR. SEXTON

In looking over the map I see that there are counties which have not been selected, but in which the rateable value is as low as in the seven selected counties. I say that the congested areas in Clare, Limerick, and Kerry are nearly as large as in Tralee and Sligo.

MR. JORDAN (Clare, W.)

I will support the appeal made by the hon. Member for "West Belfast in relation to the County of Clare. There are large districts in Clare, from Loop Head to Lisdoonvarna and Kilmihil, which are as poor as any which have been scheduled as distressed districts. I was pleased to hear the conciliatory utterances of the Chief Secretary, and if the reduction from 25 to 20 per cent. would include the Clare districts that would answer my purpose. At all events, I would impress upon the right hon. Gentleman the necessity of including these districts, where there is very little trade or com- merce, and where many of the fishermen are in absolute poverty.

(10.49.) MR. A. O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)

If the Government had adopted the electoral district instead of the county as the area on which to calculate the population they would have found large areas in the southwestern counties quite as congested, area for area, as many of those now scheduled. If, instead of taking 25 per cent. of the population of the county, the right hon. Gentleman would take 25 per cent. of the population of the electoral divisions, that would meet the difficulty.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

For certain purposes 25 per cent. of the union is taken, and for some purposes every poor electoral division is taken into account; but for the purpose of building harbours, &c, we do not adopt that course. After all, the amount of money which we have at our disposal is limited. I am ready to lower the figure to 20 per cent., but I do not think it advisable to go beyond that, or to deal with too many sporadic centres of distress.

(10.52.) MR. M. HEALY

Is not some provision necessary for the purpose of apportioning to the congested districts the specific portion of the cash guarantee?

MR. MADDEN

That has been provided for by Clause 4, Sub-section 5.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendments agreed to.

(10.57.) MR. SMITH-BARRY (Hunts S.)

I beg to move the Amendment that stands in my name. The definition of the Government with regard to a congested district is, perhaps, the best that could be given; but it is absolutely impossible to define every case, and I think it is inadvisable to fix an absolute limit as to what is to be considered a congested district. Some elasticity should be allowed. My Amendment will enable the Lord Lieutenant to extends or diminish the limits proposed in the Bill if he thinks it advisable.

Amendment proposed, In page 12, line 10, after "modifications," to insert "Provided that if within 12 months from. the passing of this Act it appears to the Congested Districts Board that it is expedient to include under the provisions of this section any electoral division other than the divisions hereinbefore mentioned, or to exclude there from any electoral division, it shall be lawful for the Lord Lieutenant, on the report of the Board, to include or exclude, as the case may be, such division."—(Mr. Smith-Barry.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

(10.59.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

There is no doubt that the object aimed at by my hon. Friend is a good one, and possibly it may be necessary—and I think it is—to introduce words of this kind, because if there is a town in an electoral division that division may appear to be poorer than it is on the £1 6s. 8d. scale. On the other hand, there may be electoral districts in which there are rich grazing farms, but which are very sparsely populated, where the people may be poorer than the rating may appear to indicate. I think, therefore, it is advisable to introduce machinery by which we can obtain elasticity, and I would recommend the Committee to adopt the Amendment.

MR. SEXTON

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he does not think that, although the inclusion may be all right, the exclusion ought to be limited?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I think a slight modification of my hon. Friend's Amendment would be desirable.

MR. SEXTON

I will move to limit the operation of the clause by the omission of the words "within 12 months from the passing of this Act."

Amendment agreed to.

Other Amendments made.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 14.

MR. SEXTON

I beg to move the omission of Sub-section (a). I desire to urge upon the House that any scheme of emigration to be successful should be by families, and not by individuals. At present the able-bodied and young of both sexes emigrate, and the old and feeble are left behind, thus making the community deficient in those elements of energy which form the main strength of every country. The Board should not emigrate young men, boys, and girls, but should take an intelligent and sympathetic view of the whole situation, and emigrate whole families. Some provision should, therefore, be inserted in the clause to that effect. It should also be the duty of the Board to take some steps for securing a means of livelihood for the emigrants in their new homes with regard to amalgamation. There is no limit to amalgamation in this clause, and it is quite possible that amalgamation may go too far. I object to aid being given to the occupier of a holding who emigrates without his family.

Amendment proposed, in page 12, line 33, to leave out Sub-section (a).—(Mr. Sexton.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

(11.20.) MR. RATHBONE (Carnarvonshire, Arfon)

I agree with the hon. Member for West Belfast in his preference for the emigration of families, but I hardly think it desirable to include the emigration of girls, who should be excluded, because we know as a fact that the number of girls in these districts is larger than the number of males, and that the means of occupation for females do not exist there in sufficient quantity.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I quite appreciate the argument of the hon. Member in favour of emigration being promoted as far as possible by families, but, at the same time, it is often necessary that the younger and more active members of a family must go out with a view of preparing the future home for the reception of the elder members, because, after all, emigration to a new country involves transition from one mode of life to another, and to say that the younger members of a family are not to prepare the new homesteads for their elders would be to introduce a limitation of the Bill which I think we might find occasion to regret.

MR. SEXTON

I move the insertion of the words "with his family, if any."

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

There can be no objection to that.

MR. M. HEALY

I would point out that there should be some protection of the. right of re-entry conferred by the Land Act of 1880. At present if the landlord in a congested district chose he could put an absolute check upon the working of these sections. As to the amalgamation of small holdings, I think the right hon. Gentleman will see that there should be a limit put to the amalgamation of holdings above £10.

MR. MADDEN

The hon. Member has suggested that there might be amalgamation to an undesirable extent. There can, however, be no process of amalgamation except under the control of the Congested Districts Board, which will not be likely to spend money unnecessarily.

Amendment proposed, In page 12, line 34, after the word "holding" to insert the words "with his family, if any, excepting any such migrant or emigrant under favourable circumstances, in the place to which he first migrates or emigrates.

Agreed to.

Amendment proposed, In page 13, line 7, to insert, "That no holding shall be increased in valuation beyond the rateable value of £20.

Agreed to.

(11.30.) MR. LABOUCHERE (Northampton)

I do not wish to interfere with the happy feeling which seems to exist between the Government and my Irish friends in this matter, but it does appear to me that the term "full market value" used in this section is too vague. What is the difference between market value, and full market value? I object to the term entirely in this particular clause, and would suggest that it be struck out as has been recommended by one of the hon. Members for Ireland.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I cannot agree to that.

MR. LABOUCHERE

It is evident that my hon. Friends see something insidious in the term; I shall, therefore, move an Amendment which gives a more practical definition. I beg to move the Amendment which stands in my name.

Amendment proposed, In page 13, line 20, to leave out "its full market value," and insert "the economic value of the landlords' interest, based upon fair rent, such fair rent being understood to mean the margin of profit (if any) that remains after the occupier has been adequately rewarded for his time, intelligence, and outlay in cultivating the holding."—(Mr. Labouchere.)

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

There can be no doubt what is the meaning of full market value.

MR. LABOUCHERE

The object of the Amendment is to give a more practical definition of what is the value of a holding and to declare that the Land Commission, when purchasing with the money of the Church Surplus Fund, ought not to give more than the true economic value of the land. Now, will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to tell me what he means by full market value. What is the difference between market value and full market value? Surely when one speaks of market value he means what a willing purchaser will give, or what a willing vendor will take. Political economists have discussed this question by the hour, and I could do so for a longer time, only I do not wish to detain the Committee.

An hon. MEMBER

Go on.

MR. LABOUCHERE

No, I will spare the Committee. Still, I do urge that instead of vague phrases we should have definite words; and I contend that the Mover of the Bill ought at least to be good enough to tell us what he means by full market value.

(11.37.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I think the hon. Member will admit that whatever may be the merits of the term of "full market value," the words "adequately rewarded for his time, intelligence, and outlay in cultivating the holding," which he proposes to substitute, are calculated to open much wider fields of argument. I have no desire to enter into a long controversy about economic value. The hon. Member is well aware that the market value of an article is understood to be that which it will sell or fetch in the open market. I. submit, therefore, that the words of the sub-section are sufficiently plain, and that the Amendment is unnecessary.

Ms. CHAINING (Northampton, E.)

As I understand my hon. Friend, what he really means is that he wants the market value of the land to be defined as the capitalised agricultural value of the land, and that he does not wish to have included in that value, for the purposes of purchase under this Act, the levy on the toils of Irish housemaids in America or of Irish harvestmen in England. Surely, it would be an outrage, so far as the congested districts are concerned, to take into consideration in fixing the value the income which the landlord annually derives from these American and English sources.

(11.39.) SIR G. TREVELYAN (Glasgow, Bridgeton)

I think the words "full market value" in this particular sub-section are extremely dangerous. The entire success of this scheme depends upon too high prices not being paid for the land. It is curious to notice how very much more careful the framers of the Ashbourne Act were in the terms which they used in order to guide the Commission. For instance, in the Ashbourne Act of 1885, the Commissioners are directed to be satisfied with the security in all respects; and in the 5th section it is laid down that the Irish Land Commissioners, if they reasonably satisfy themselves that a resale can be effected without loss, they may purchase an estate for re-sale to the tenant. Words to that effect appear to me to be much more suited for the purpose of these very peculiar purposes— philanthropic purposes—of this Bill. The market value of estates in the West of Ireland is absolutely nothing at all. If there is any selling value in these estates, the right hon. Gentleman ought to bring up some words which would practically cover the grounds I have indicated by reading the 5th clause of the Ashbourne Act. If he declines to do that, he might agree to the omission of the words "full market value," leaving the Commissioners to act in the public interest. If any words are introduced, they should prove that the nation is to suffer no loss.

MR. M. HEALY

I understood this sub-section to apply to the sale of the sub-tenant's interest in the holding. I can see nothing in the section which contemplates compulsory sale, or makes it impossible for the Land Commissioners or anybody else to compel an ordinary occupier to sell. He may be bribed into doing so by having money given him to emigrate; but if he-wishes to resist, he cannot be compelled into selling. I, therefore, cannot understand the meaning of this subsection; there is no need to fix the price.

(11.48.) MR. MADDEN

A small holding referred to in Sub-section 2 includes a holding purchased under the provisions of the Land Purchase Acts; and then the present sub-section enacts that the purchase of such a holding shall be made through the Congested Districts-Board for such price as may be agreed upon, or, in case of difference, the price may be determined by the Land Commission by reference to the full market value.

MR. COMMINS (Roscommon, S.)

What is wanted is some basis of com putation. If the tenant and the land owner cannot agree upon the price, then there must be some means of fixing it. I do not think that the market value can be taken as the basis of computation, inasmuch as there is no market. The whole difficulty would be met by substituting for "market value" the words "agricultural value."

(11.50.) MR. CHANCE

Sub-section B does not contemplate the purchase of the holdings by the Land Commission or the Congested Districts Board; it merely contemplates the lending of meney in order that small adjoining holdings may be amalgamated. It is an amalgamation section, which provides that a tenant to whom money is advanced for this purpose shall not be permitted to sell separately any of the holdings so amalgamated. I think there should be compulsory powers given to the Land Commission to purchase these small holdings.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I may point out that under this sub-section there is not an open but a restricted market. The tenant can only sell either to his neighbour or to the Land Commission.

MR. CHANCE

The real meaning of the words is that if the tenant attempts to sell to a stranger he is to be punished.

(11.55.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Under the sub-section you restrict the market of the would-be seller, and, having done that, you are bound to ensure some means of coming to an agreement for sale.

MR. CHANCE

Subsection 2 distinctly pre-supposes a breach of conditions.

MR. M. J. KENNY

And the Land Commission are empowered to sell for such breach of conditions.

(12.0.) MR. M. HEALY

Would it not be desirable that the provision generally should apply not merely to small holdings purchased under this Act, but purchased under the Ashbourne Acts also?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I do not think that can be done. We have gone on the principle that the Ashbourne Acts should run concurrently and undisturbed by this Act. I think it would be better to leave the Ashbourne Acts entirely on one side.

MR. LABOUCHERE

The discussion on my Amendment has lasted half an hour, and it has been a very fine criticism upon this Bill, because it has conclusively proved that neither its framers nor anyone in the House know much about it. One half of the half hour we have been discussing the subsection on the assumption that it dealt with the interest of the landlord, and the other half of the time we have been discussing it as if it dealt with the interest of the tenant. It is really impossible for a person anxious to benefit Ireland to move an Amendment of this sort with any hope of its being passed, seeing that the Committee do not understand the matter—I venture to assert, Mr. Courtney, that even you do not understand it—I ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

(12.4.) MR. M. HEALY

There is?one other point which ought to be raised. The clause compels a small holder to sell his holding either to the Land Com- mission or to an adjoining holder. Often arrangements as to a holding are made on marriage. I am sure it is not the intention of the Government to interfere in a case where a proprietor or purchaser of a holding advanced in life wishes to transfer the holding on the marriage of one of his children.

MR. MADDEN

I will consider the suggestion of the hon. Member.

(12.7.) MR. M. J. KENNY

An Amendment has been adopted limiting the amalgamation of holdings, and, therefore, to prevent further accumulation of holdings I would suggest that there should be inserted after "neighbouring," in line 24, the word "small." The section would then read— Where a small holding in a congested district county is (whether under this section or the Land Purchase Acts) liable to be sold, the Land Commission shall endeavour to sell the same to one of the occupiers of a neighbouring small holding with a view to the holdings being amalgamated.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The hon. and learned Gentleman suggests an Amendment which I am far from saying is wrong. If he will put it on Report I will consider it.

MR. SEXTON

I think there is some point in what my hon. and learned Friend suggests. If there are large and small holdings it is desirable the small holdings should be selected for purchase, otherwise the farms would become unduly large.

MR. KNOX

I beg to move the omission of the words "equal to" in line 27, and to substitute the words "may not be greater than."

Amendment proposed, in page 13, line 27, to leave out "equal to," and insert "may not be greater than."—(Mr. Knox.)—-Agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Question proposed, "That Clause 15 stand part of the Bill."

MR. SEXTON

I object to the clause on the ground that, as it stands, no matter how many holdings may be amalgamated, all the dwellings but one will be destroyed. The clause ought to be framed so that people shall not be deprived of their homes unless they are offered facilities for migration or emigration.

(12.14.) MR. CHANCE

There is already power to prevent the sub-letting of dwelling - houses. But under the clause, if a person out of charity gives the shelter of an outhouse to a neighbour for a night he may be punished by being put out of his holding. Why should hospitality be punished as a crime? I think the sub-section is most unreasonable, and I beg, therefore, to move that it be omitted.

Amendment proposed, in page 13, line 36, to leave out Sub-section (1).— (Mr. Chance.)

Question proposed, "That Sub-section (1) stand part of the Clause."

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The whole object of the second part of the Bill is to remove congestion. One of the chief curses under which Ireland suffers is sub-letting, and, though that often rises out of some of the best feelings of human nature, it ends with disaster to all parties. If we are to spend money in securing the amalgamation of small holdings, surely we must not suffer our object to be defeated and the money thrown into the sea. The 1st sub-section, as framed, will secure that the money is not wasted. I earnestly hope that the Committee will not do anything to weaken the operation of the clause.

(12.18.) MR. CHANCE

My point is that this clause does not touch the question of sub-letting or sub-division at all. It practically leaves it as it is already, but it will prevent a family having lodgers or visitors. Under the sub-section if a man permits his neighbour to stay under his roof for one night he runs the risk of forfeiting his holding and being turned adrift into the world.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

The hon. Gentleman is, I think, wrong in his view. The object of the sub-section is to stop the sub-division of holdings.

MR. COMMINS

Why not insert words which will enable a dwelling-house to be occupied without the holding being sub-divided?

MR. SEXTON

We must make it clear that a man is not to be turned out of his holding simply because be gives temporary shelter to a friend or relative. Do you intend that amalgamation should be accompanied by an increase of pauperism; that the families displaced are to be forced into the workhouse? If so, the rates will be largely increased. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will carefully consider the probable results of this sub-section.

(12.24.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

Amalgamation can only occur under this-Act by voluntary arrangement between the parties. You may have two holdings amalgamated. What occurs now in the West of Ireland is that when the son or daughter of the occupier grows up the father hands over to him or her the second holding. That is what we want to prevent. The hon. Gentleman seems to think it is a monstrous hardship for us to say it shall not occur in cases where public money has been advanced to secure the amalgamation of the two holdings. I cannot see the hardship.

MR. SEXTON

What I will not be a party to is the provision that because an uninhabited house is lent by the occupier of the holding to a relative or neighbour he is to forfeit his holding.

MR. CHANCE

May I suggest as an Amendment, the insertion of words such as are contained in line 38, requiring notice to be given that the dwelling must not be occupied before any forfeiture penalty can be enforced?

(12.30.) The Committee divided:— Ayes 132; Noes 51.—(Div. List, No. 232.)

Clause 15, as amended, agreed to.

(12.37.) DR. CLARK (Caithness)

I have not taken much interest in this Bill, but I have been watching it. During the night five clauses have been passed. The Government have moved from a dozen to a score of Amendments and have-adopted many from this side. Good work has been done, and I think that it is time that the Government told us. what course they intend to take. By the course the Government have taken, when the Speaker comes into the Chair we shall not be able to discuss the ex- traordinary conduct of the Government in reference to Public Business. We want some information, and the only way of getting it is by moving to report Progress, which I accordingly do. It is perfectly clear we shall not get through the Bill with the new clauses to-night. Something is due to Members and to officers of the House with the influenza epidemic so prevalent among us. I have had experience of all-night sittings, and I know that they are likely to induce a state of body that may predispose many of us to the malady from which so many Members are now suffering. I observe that many hon. and right hon. Gentlemen have fallen asleep, and the fact is, we have become accustomed to the Midnight Rule. There has been no sort of obstruction; the discussion has been conducted in a business-like fashion; many points have been cleared up, and the Government have been enlightened by the active interest taken in the Bill by Irish Members. I hope now we may be informed what the Government propose to do in regard to the Bill and the Whitsuntide Vacation.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Dr. Clark.)

(12.40.) MR. GOSCHEN

I quite admit the industry which has been displayed, and we have no desire for an all-night sitting. The Government are extremely grateful to the large number of Members in the House who have been willing to continue this business. We are now really within measurable distance of the end of the Bill. There certainly is still one important clause, after which come Clause 17, a clause of machinery, and Clause 18, a clause of definition.

MR. SEXTON

The definition clause is an important one.

MR. GOSCHEN

Yes, important; but not, I think, likely to occupy very much time. Then there are a considerable number of new clauses. A certain number of them, I think, may be ruled out of order, and as regards the others, they may either be discussed on Report or disposed of pretty rapidly at this stage. There is one very important clause to be moved by my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary, a clause upon which considerable discussion may arise, for we have heard that hon. Members opposite attach great importance to it; but with the exception of that clause, I think we may fairly hope to finish the Bill by a reasonable time to-morrow. We understand that a large number of Members, inconvenient as it is, are prepared to come down on Thursday next; and, though we regret that it may be necessary to do so, it will have to be done if the Bill should not be finished to-morrow. The House will not meet till 3 o'clock to-morrow, and the Government will be prepared to move the Adjournment at a reasonable hour—6 or 7 o'clock; and we still hope that it will be possible to come to such an arrangement as will save us from being com pelled to ask hon. Members to return so soon as next Thursday.

(12.45.) MR. SEXTON

We have not grudged time or labour, nor have we made undue use of our position on a subject which so deeply concerns our country. Personally, I am not unwilling to continue longer, and count the holidays. as nothing in comparison with legislation which will affect the happiness of thousands of our people for 49 years, and probably the future of Ireland for all time. I agree with what the Chancellor-of the Exchequer has said with regard to the Bill itself, apart from the new clauses. I think that either to-night or? to-morrow it would be possible to deal with the clauses of the Bill, and also to ascertain what new clauses can be rejected or adopted without much discussion. I think we should continue, then, for another hour or so, and tomorrow probably before 6 we shall reach the end of the clauses.

MR. LABOUCHERE

Personally, in view of the state of business, I think it is somewhat monstrous that we should have any holidays at all. I have not quite gathered from the Chancellor of the Exchequer what are the conditions he proposes. Is the House to understand that if the rest of the Bill passes through Committee to-day or to-morrow we are to adjourn to Monday week instead of Thursday?

(12.49.) MR. GOSCHEN

If we have only to carry over until after the holidays the one clause proposed by my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary, the Government will be prepared to move the Adjournment of the House to Monday week instead of Thursday; but we cannot come to any arrangement which would leave a larger number of clauses over, and there must be, moreover, an honourable understanding that no more new clauses are put down. I trust hon. Members will agree to have the new clauses summarily disposed of or defer the moving until Report.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 16.

(12.51.) MR. SEXTON

In the first sub-head of the first sub-section I presume the right hon. Gentleman intends to alter the figure of proportionate value and population, but may I direct his attention to Sub-head (b). This and the next sub-head enumerate the purposes to which the Board shall address themselves in any Electoral Division where the state of affairs is such as is described in Clause 13. These objects are providing seed potatoes and seeds oats, taking such steps as they think proper for aiding migration or emigration, providing seed potatoes, aiding and developing the knowledge and practice of agriculture, forestry, weaving, fishing, and any other suitable industries. I think it, would be well to extend the clause to the curing of fish, of which the people are very ignorant, the erection of piers and harbours which are most wanted, and the building of fishing boats. As has been before pointed out in the congested districts along the Western seaboard one of the main causes of the poverty there is the fact that there are no suitable harbours and piers for the fishing industry. The consequence is that in rough weather the boats cannot go out or come in. Further, I suggest that boats and gear should be provided either by way of grants or loans. The truth is, the people are not equipped for deep sea fishing, they crawl along the shore, and do the best they can with their limited appliances. The famine years broke up the fishing industry, the fishermen were driven to emigrate and their boats rotted on the beach. From these disastrous times the fishing industry has never recovered, and in no direction could the efforts of the Board be more usefully directed than in providing this sturdy population—half farmers, half fishermen—with boats and gear for deep sea fishing. Then in Sub-section 2, I confess a dislike to the condition attached to the sale of seed. The Board are to be satisfied that the occupier will properly sow the seed supplied to him. That there should be some sort of inspection I allow, but there should be some limitation here, and I do not think it should be open to an unknown officer of the Board to ramble around the holding at any time and without the knowledge of the occupier. How is the Board to be satisfied that the occupier will properly sow the seed? I think it is charitable to assume that the man who buys the seed does so for the purpose of sowing it properly.

(12.56.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR

In the first sub-head I propose to substitute £1 6s. 8d. for £1. With regard to what the hon. Gentleman has said in reference to fishing I wish to give the Board absolute discretion in dealing with 'all these matters, and the clause as it at present stands, and taken in connection with Sub-section 4 is, I think, wide enough to cover the industries referred to by the hon. Member. Sub-section 4 provides that the Board may proceed directly or indirectly, and by the application of money at their disposal, make gifts or loans subject to such conditions as they may consider expedient under this section. This sub-section is intended to govern the rest of the clause, and the several branches of industry mentioned. Of course, I admit that fish curing is an important industry connected with fishing, and I have no objection to introduce it. It certainly is a scandal that the Irish fishing industry should be dependent upon England and Scotland for its boats and gear, and I hope the Board's action will remedy this state of things. Fish curing, I should say, comes within the words of the section "industries connected with and subservient to fishing." To mention curing alone is to give it an impor- tance which, I think, would, be excessive as compared with the numerous other industries from which all of us hope for so much in the West of Ireland.

Amendment agreed to.

(1.3.) MR. M. J, KENNY

I beg to move the insertion of the following subsection:— Acquiring waste common, or such other land as may be suitable for planting trees, and may plant, fence in, and otherwise use it, and, for the purpose of enabling them to acquire such land, the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act (eighth year of Victoria, chapter eighteen), and any Act or Acts amending the same, shall be deemed to be incorporated herewith. I will not now enlarge on the advantages of re-afforesting portions of Ireland. The question has been fully inquired into by two Committees of this House—one being that which dealt with Irish industries, and the other that of three or four years ago on the question of forestry. I would have no objection to the Amendment placed on the Paper by the Chief Secretary being adopted in preference to mine, except that I do not like the one he has given notice of for enabling the Land Commission to acquire and hold land, inasmuch as it is simply an enabling Amendment, and would not allow the Commissioners to acquire land compulsorily, however necessary it might be to do so. It is not only conceivable but extremely probable that in a great number of cases most desirable sites for planting might be found, but the owner, as soon as he heard that the Congested Districts Board was looking after his land, might largely increase the price. Under such circumstances, the Board would have no means of bringing the owner to fair terms. If, however, the Lands Clauses Act was incorporated into this Bill, the site might be acquired in the usual way.

Amendment proposed, In page 14, after line 26, to insert the following sub-section:—" Acquiring waste common, or such other land as may be suitable for planting trees, and may plant, fence in, and otherwise use it, and, for the purpose of enabling them to acquire such land, the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act (eighth year of Victoria, chapter eighteen), and any Act or Acts amending the same shall be deemed to be incorporated herewith.'—(Mr. M. J. Kenny.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

(1.5.) MR. A.J. BALFOUR

I think the hon. Gentleman will probably agree that it will not be advisable to introduce for the first time the element of compulsory purchase in this Bill unless there is a great demand for it, and I do not think there is such a demand. I have been very much interested in the question of forestry in Ireland, and a good many sites have been offered to me. The only difficulty that really arises is when, in addition to the landlord's rights, there are very complicated rights on the part of the occupiers, and I think it would produce some unpopularity and friction if an attempt were made to do by compulsion what I think can be adequately done without compulsory powers.

MR. M. J. KENNY

I regret very much that the right hon. Gentleman does not see his way to provide compulsory powers where they may be absolutely required. There is another point to which I wish to draw attention. The right hon. Gentleman, in the Amendment he has placed on the Paper, proposes only to add "in the knowledge and practice of forestry." That means simply teaching the science, as far as I understand it, and would not involve the actual re-afforestment of any large portion of the country, as it imposes no duty on the Congested Districts Board to plant a single tree.

Question put, and negatived.

Amendment proposed, in page 14, line 30, to omit the words "congested districts of a county," in order to insert, "such electoral divisions "—(Mr. Attorney General for Ireland.)—Agreed to.

MR. SEXTON

I think we ought to have a new sub-head to this section, because it fails in its present form to provide for matter of great importance to the coast population of the congested districts, namely, the means of providing the fishermen with fishing boats and gear.

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I quite concur in the suggestion of the hon. Member, and would suggest the insertion of the words, after fishing, "including the construction of piers and harbours, and pro- viding boats and gear." I will move the insertion of those words.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment proposed, in page 14, line 32, after "agriculture," to insert "and forestry."—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)—Agreed to.

Further Amendment proposed, in page 14, line 35, at end, add "And for the purposes of this sub-section the Land Commission may acquire and hold land."—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)—Agreed to.

MR. CHANCE

I propose to move that the words after the word "money," to the end of the sub-section, be omitted. If the clause is passed in its present form, it might happen that after the Board had spent £5 or £6 a ton for good Scotch seed, the market might fall and the Board might have upon their hands the whole of that seed; so that if, as the clause provides, they were to sell it at its market value they would sustain a heavy loss. The result would be that the Board would probably keep the seed until it rotted.

Amendment proposed, in page 14, line 36, to leave out all the words after the word "money."

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I think we ought to be very careful how we open the door too widely on this matter; but I see the hon. Member's point, and I think his object might be met by providing that the seed should be sold for ready money and at not less than the price of such seed at the time being.

MR. CHANCE

But in the case of a rise in prices there would be this difficulty, that you would compel the Board to exact a higher price than the original cost. I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he can suggest words that would meet this difficulty?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

We do not want to compel the Board to take advantage of a rise, and at the same time we do not wish to compel them to sell at a loss. I think it will take a little time to draft an Amendment that will fairly meet the point, and if the hon. Member will leave it to me I will endeavour to carry out the object we both have in view.

MR. M. HEALY

Would not the case be met by saying that the Congested Districts Board should sell the Seed for ready money?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I think it would be better to allow the matter to be brought up again on the Report.

MR. CHANCE

Very well, I ask leave to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 17.

(1.26.) MR. SEXTON

I move to leave out Sub-section 1, and I ask the right hon. Gentleman the meaning of the proposal.

Amendment proposed, in page 15, to leave out Sub-section 2.—(Mr. Sexton.)

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I regarded the office as an honorary one, but it was suggested to me that members of the Board might properly receive remuneration for any work they might do, and I do not see why the Board should not be able to pay certain of its members for particular duties. I am perfectly certain it would be impossible to do this work in the West of Ireland unless you gave them remuneration for their services. It is for that reason I introduced the provision.

MR. SEXTON

I beg to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 17, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 18.

(1.45.) Committee report Progress; to sit again to-morrow.