§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House, at the conclusion of the Morning Sitting this day, do adjourn until Monday, 29th May."—(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
§ LORD R. CHURCHILL (Paddington, S.)I do not, of course, rise to offer any opposition to the Motion, or raise any question of a personal character; but I want to put a couple of questions to the Chancellor of the. Exchequer on matters of first-rate importance. The first question I put to the right hon. Gentleman on account of his authoritative connection with the Treasury. Some 10 days or a fortnight ago I asked the First Lord of the Treasury for a Return setting out the payments which are the first charges on the Irish Exchequer in connection with the demands made by England under certain clauses of the Government of Ireland Bill, and the First Lord of the Treasury gave what I understood to be a promise that the Return should be prepared. I cannot think it is a Return that would take long to prepare. The information ought to be in the Treasury. I would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will undertake to inquire at the Treasury whether the Return is being prepared; and whether he will also undertake that it shall be presented, if not immediately on the recommencement of business, at any rate within a few days, because the matter is one that will require a great deal of study? It is merely a financial Return, yet one which is absolutely necessary for the information of the House. The other subject upon which I would put a question to the right lion. Gentleman is as to Lord Herschell's Indian Currency Committee. It is almost a public scandal that this Committee having been appointed months ago, and having held frequent sittings, that now, when we are getting on towards the middle of summer, we should be without any promise or pledge that the Committee is going to make a Report. Numerous questions have been put to the Government as to when the Committee will report, and we have always been bidden to hope that the 1407 Report will not be long delayed. The right hon. Gentleman is perfectly aware that until the Committee reports the Indian Government are absolutely precluded from deciding anything whatever in the preparation of their financial policy. I know that Ministers have no authority over Royal Commissions; but I should imagine that they can exorcise the greatest possible influence, and if the Members of Lord Herschell's Committee are entirely unable to agree upon a Report, at least let us have from them the evidence, and any expression of opinion which two or more of them may have agreed upon.
§ MR. CHAPLIN (Lincolnshire, Sleaford)I do not wish to raise any general discussion whatever on this Motion: but it may be convenient to the Government if I follow my noble Friend in submitting two questions to the Government. One of them has been anticipated by my noble Friend. I had intended to press a question as to the Report of Lord Herschell's Committee; but what my noble Friend has said leaves me nothing to add, except to call attention to a paragraph which I noticed yesterday in the public Press. The following was telegraphed from Calcutta:—
The exchange, after remaining fairly steady for some weeks, has now fallen to a point which is almost the lowest ever reached. Great anxiety is expressed on all sides for the Report of Lord Herschell's Committee. Indeed, the tension has become almost intolerable, and longer delay may have serious results, as the Government of India must speedily decide whether it will be necessary to call a special Session of the Legislature at Calcutta in July for the purpose of imposing fresh taxation.I presume the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself will not deny that that is a true statement, and that there is no exaggeration in it; and before we separate for the Recess I do hope the right hon. Gentleman will reply to the question of my noble Friend, and will tell us distinctly whether there will be any Report at all; if so, when that Report will most probably be presented, and how long India is to be left in a state of suspense? I pass to the second question I wanted to raise, and on that I shall have to address myself partly to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and partly to the Minister for Agriculture. It arises from an answer given 1408 to mo yesterday in reply to a question. I asked if the Government had made up their minds as to whether they would give effect to the Departmental Committee which has recently sat upon the question of swine fever? That is a question which, in the agricultural districts, is considered of the greatest importance. It is, moreover, one with regard to which there is now a general consensus of opinion that the time has come when this matter ought to be taken under the control of a Central Body— namely, the Government—like the unfortunate diseases, foot - and - mouth disease and pleuro-pneumonia. At the commencement of the Session I asked the Minister for Agriculture if he was prepared to deal with this question, and he replied to me that he thought it necessary to appoint a Departmental Committee to inquire into all the circumstances before taking that step. I pointed out to him, and urgently pressed upon him, that if he wished to deal with the question economically and effectually he could not do better than deal with it at once—at the beginning of the Session, and for one reason in particular—namely, that at that time he had a most effective staff' of Inspectors, who would have been perfectly well able to carry out the work. As pleuro-pneumonia has greatly decreased, a large part of the staff of Inspectors may be dispensed with; and, in all probability, there will not be the present facilities for dealing with swine fever if action is postponed for an indefinite period of time. I must say I have never been able to see the necessity for the appointment of that Departmental Committee. It always appeared to me, I must confess, like a pretext for shelving the question, at all events for the present, and I am confirmed in that by the Report of the Committee, in which there is absolutely no new information. Be that as it may, the Committee reported, as it was a foregone conclusion they would, in favour of the policy which I advocate—namely, that this matter should be taken up and dealt with by Her Majesty's Government without delay. Two paragraphs of the Report, to which I will in a few brief words call attention, bear out what I say. In Section 24 they point to the overwhelming evidence given to the effect that if 1409 proper measures were adopted swine fever would be extinguished in a reasonable time, and they go on to say—But we are satisfied from the evidence submitted to us that, owing to the impossibility of securing uniform action under the jurisdiction of the Local Authorities, it cannot be extirpated unless under the direction of a Central Authority.Well, the Minister for Agriculture, 10 days or a fortnight ago, was asked whether he was prepared to give effect to the recommendation of the Committee, and he replied that he could give no answer until he had had an opportunity of seeing and studying the evidence. Yesterday he was asked the game question, and he gave the same reply, whereupon I myself ventured to ask him where there was any information whatever contained in the Report of the Committee which was not perfectly well known already, and which he could not have obtained in his own Department; and I venture to say, having read the Report with great care, and having referred to it again since I asked the question yesterday, that the statement I made was absolutely true, and that there is absolutely no information of any sort or kind contained in the Report which could not have been obtained in the Office of the Agricultural Department. The Committee has reported most strongly in favour of this thing being done, and it appears to me that all the Minister for Agriculture and the Government have to consider is two things: first, they have to frame the Estimates, which are necessary; and, secondly, to obtain the consent of the Treasury to the money necessary for giving effect to the Report. It has been whispered to me that the Estimates foreshadowed in the Report are of enormous proportions. I do not know whether it is true, because I have not seen the evidence; but I have heard it stated that the amount required will be £400,000. I cannot understand what necessity there was to go to a Committee for evidence on that point. Estimates for a purpose of this kind ought to be settled in the Department itself, and it seems to me extremely foolish to go to a Committee for such information, however that Committee may be constituted. But I think, on this point, I can offer 1410 the Government a word of consolation. If, when I held the position of Minister for Agriculture, I had been deterred by the Estimates first presented to me, we should never have had the Pleuro-Pneumonia Act at all. We had that Act, however, and it has been attended with absolute and complete success. I would, therefore, suggest to the Minister for Agriculture that he should not be deterred by any rumours or any evidence given to the Committee of the enormous sum which is likely to be required for this purpose. I cannot, of course, say what may be the case in Ireland—I should have to refer to the Irish authority before dealing with that country but. I will undertake to say this— that, so far as England is concerned, I believe that the sum sanctioned in the Pleuro-Pneumonia Act would be sufficient to enable the Government to deal successfully with the difficulty. The Government could safely embark on a measure at once. There is not likely to be any controversy or opposition in the House. If they brought in a measure without delay, it might be put into operation by September. Even in the present financial circumstances of the Government, the Chancellor of the Exchequer might stretch a point and make a very useful concession to the agricultural interest. I do hope that the Government will favourably consider this proposal. Surely the present situation of the agricultural interest demands some consideration at the hands of Her Majesty's Government. The position of the agricultural interest never has been worse, I believe, than it is at the present time for many years; but no step has been taken by the Government in its interest, with the exception of the appointment of a roving and general Committee of Inquiry. Even there I should have been ready to go with you, but for the absolute conviction in my mind—a conviction amounting to absolute certainty—that the inquiry would be productive of nothing but delay, and, therefore, would be mischievous rather than useful. Everything for which we have asked with regard to the agricultural interest has been refused. Early in the Session we asked the Government whether it would not be possible to give some further relief from local taxation; 1411 but the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Prime Minister absolutely put their feet down upon any proposals of that kind. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is aware that I have always been a great advocate of currency reform in the interest of the agricultural portion of the community. I entertain that opinion to-day as strongly as ever I entertained it. It is an opinion which I believe is growing every day, not only in this country, but in foreign countries. You used at one time to treat it with ridicule and sneers, but it is now supported by many men on the Continent and in America of such experience, and such ability, and such knowledge of the subject, that you are no longer entitled or able to treat it in that way. Although you had an opportunity of doing something effectual on this subject when the Conference was held at Brussels, you did everything in your power to bring the proceedings of the Conference to nothing. I know the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer differs from me on that point. I have given as much attention to it, and studied the proceedings as closely, and had as much information upon it as anybody in the country, and I adhere most deliberately to the opinion I expressed in the Debate we had some time ago. At an earlier period of the Session the Government were asked to give effectual guarantees that there should be no possible risk of a return of pleuro-pneumonia to this country, and to pass a short Act which should make the slaughter of all foreign animals landed in this country compulsory. Even there we were met with the opposition of the Minister for Agriculture, on grounds which I thought then, and still think, were inadequate and unreasonable under all the circumstances of the case. Everything almost that we have asked has been refused; and now with regard to this very simple matter, which could be so easily done at comparatively small cost, the Government seem unwilling to make up their minds to act without delay. I do not wish to detain the Committee longer: but, in view of the reply I received from the Minister for Agriculture yesterday, I thought I could not allow this opportunity to pass without endeavouring to impress on the Government the 1412 necessity there is for dealing with this question at once.
§ SIR W. HARCOURTIn reply to the noble Lord opposite, I may say that, as to the Returns he desires of the charges on the Irish Revenue, I will take care that everything is done to accelerate their publication. I agree with the noble Lord and the right hon. Gentleman with regard to Lord Herschell's Committee, as to the vital importance of an early decision on the Indian Currency question; and, though I have no official information, I believe the final stage has been reached at which an agreement is likely immediately to be arrived at. I hope the House will, with the very shortest delay, be informed of the decision of the Committee, and from reports which have reached me, I do not despair of an agreement among the persons forming the Committee. The House must not, however, take this as an official communication. The right hon. Gentleman has spoken, and most fairly spoken, of the importance of the measures to put down swine fever. Well, Sir, I recognise the importance of that subject. In fact, I hope the result of the Motion I have submitted to the House will be to enable me to go into a part of the country where this question is one of vital importance. I wish to relieve my right hon. Friend the Minister for Agriculture from the greater part of the burden of responsibility for an immediate decision not having been arrived at. I have not had placed before mo officially the cost of this work. My unfortunate position is this. As I ventured to point out in my Financial Statement, there are constant demands being made on the Government to undertake new works of every description. Some of these works may be desirable; but it is absolutely necessary, in the position I hold, that I should examine what will be the cost of these new undertakings before they are commenced. I must toll hon. Gentlemen opposite that if demands for such a sum as £400,000 are made, I shall have to ask for more money, and probably I shall have to ask for the repeal of the clause that was put into the Customs and Inland Revenue Bill abolishing the Goschen stamp. The right hon. Gentleman opposite does not seem to think that it would cost £-100,000 to stamp out swine fever; but 1413 surely we must see how much it would cost before we come to any decision. We will look into the; matter, and if we find there is power to carry out the recommendations of the Committee, and we can do it reasonably, it shall be done. The right hon. Gentleman can be assured that we shall approach the subject with every desire to deal with it. in a manner that will give some relief to the agricultural interest. I cannot be tempted, even on the present occasion, to follow the right hon. Gentleman into a discussion of bimetallism.
§ MR. CHAPLINI never mentioned bimetallism.
§ SIR W. HARCOURTEven the original promoters of the Brussels Conference, when the fatal 30th of May was approaching, postponed it until the end of November. I will agree with the right hon. Gentleman that we also should postpone the question and any further discussion on it till the end of November. The right hon. Gentleman alluded to another large subject—that of local taxation. He reproaches us with not having made any further grants in relief of local taxation. I do not propose to argue that question over again; but he knows very well that in the course of the last few years there has been something like £4,000,000 a year chargeable upon the taxpayer for the relief of local taxation. Whether if we had left these £4,000,000. in the hands of the Exchequer we might not have been able to do more for the agricultural interest and for the other interests of the country is a very arguable question. I do not believe that there is such a sense of relief from what has been given in reduction of the rates as at all adequately corresponds to the amount that has been granted. I believe myself that if the £4,000,000 had been devoted to the stamping out of swine fever, and many other objects in connection with the agricultural interest, agriculturists would have obtained more benefit than they have, as a matter of fact, obtained from these grants, which I am afraid, in many cases, are like rivers running through the sand and disappearing in swamps. This is, I think, a matter for very serious consideration 1414 before we enter into any further expenditure in that direction. I am glad to learn, from the able Report which my right lion. Friend the President of the Local Government Board (Mr. H. H. Fowler) has prepared, that there has been a very sensible relief to the rates, and that in the agricultural districts the rates are now very much lower than they were in former times. Remember what this £4,000,000 represents. It means 2d. on the Income Tax. This ought to be borne in mind when complaints are made as to the height of the Income Tax.
§ *MR. COHEN (Islington, E.)pointed out that the Goschen tax on securities to bearer had been repealed precisely because it had not yielded as much as it had been expected to yield, and the right hon. Gentleman would recollect that the yield for 1892–3 was not, as he stated by a lapsuslinguœ, £(500,000, but £60,000.
§ MAJOR RASCH (Essex, S.E.)wished to support what had been said by his right hon. Friend the Member for the Sleaford Division (Mr. Chaplin) on the subject, of swine fever, although he had nothing to allege against the Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Gardner). That right hon. Gentleman had acted to the best of his ability, although he had not done the agriculturists very much good, he (Major Rasch) could not understand, as a matter of common sense, why, if the right hon. Gentleman had before him the Report of the Committee with reference to swine fever, he should also want to go into the evidence that had been placed before the Committee. As to the cost of dealing with swine fever, it had only cost £120,000 to stamp out pleuro-pneumonia; and it was, therefore, utterly impossible that the expenditure on swine fever would amount to as much as £100,000. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer bud only left on the Estimates the sum that had been allocated to pleuro-pneumonia, there would be no difficulty whatever in the matter. The Minister for Agriculture had now only to harden his heart and ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer for an additional sum, and all difficulty would be obviated
§ MR. HENEAGE (Great Grimsby)said, he must congratulate the Minister for Agriculture on the way in which he had acted up to the present time. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would go on in the course he had hitherto pursued. He was glad the right hon. Gentleman had appointed a Committee with reference to swine fever. It was a new thing to him to learn that swine fever was well known through the country, and that veterinary surgeons wore well versed in it. He had been under the impression, until the Committee's Report was presented, that swine fever was a complaint of which veterinary surgeons had little knowledge. He was glad they were now coming to the conclusion that they knew what the disease was. If it was to be stamped out it must be dealt with as a whole, and not approached in a half-hearted manner. It could not be dealt with altogether as pleuro-pneumonia was. Swine ever was a most infectious thing, and it would be necessary to pull down buildings and to use disinfectants on an extensive scale if it was to be destroyed. His own opinion was that money would be absolutely and entirely thrown away if the disease were dealt with in anything like a half-hearted manner.
§ THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. H. GARDNER,) Essex, Saffron WaldenI should not have spoken but for some remarks of my hon. Friend opposite. I cannot imagine that any Government can possibly entertain the proposals that have been made on the subject of swine fever until they have seen the evidence. The foundation for saying that the large sum of £400,000 will be needed, if it exists anywhere, is to be found solely in the evidence of which we are not in possession. Until we have the evidence before us it is quite impossible for us to consider the subject at all. There are various questions that will have to be considered when the subject is dealt with. For instance, swine fever is not confined to a few of the Eastern Counties of England, but extends to Ireland, and it would be necessary to consider the restrictions that would have 1416 to be imposed upon those who send pigs from one portion of the United Kingdom to another. We should also have to deal with what I might almost call the sanitation of the dwellings of pigs. There are, in fact, many largo questions that will have to be dealt with when the subject is taken in hand.
§ MR. MACARTNEY (Antrim, S.)asked whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed, after the Motion respecting the holidays was disposed of, to go on with the other Orders of the Day. Some of those Orders were of the most contentious character, and certainly one or two of them ought not to have been put down for discussion on that occasion. He thought it would conduce to the progress of business if the Government would state that they had no intention to take anything after the 5th Order of the Day—(Supply [18th May] Report)
§ SIR W. HARCOURTWe propose, after this Motion as to the Adjournment, to take only the Conveyance of Mails Bill and Report of Supply.
§ COMMANDER BETHELL (York, E. R., Holderness)said, he wished to know what decision had been come to with reference to the Zulu prisoners? Was it proposed, as had been stated, to restore them to their country in a few months? Considerable apprehension existed, and he should be glad to know what were the intentions of the Government.
§ THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. S. BUXTON,) Tower Hamlets, Poplarsaid, that the reports which had appeared in the papers on this subject, and to which the hon. and gallant Member no doubt referred, might give rise to misunderstanding and unfounded hopes among the Zulu tribes. The report that he had stated to the Secretary of the Aborigines Protection Society that the Zulu exiles would be restored to their country in a few months was not correct. The Government had given the closest attention to these Zulu questions; but they thought that, as the present Administrator was about to retire, it would be better to wait for his Report and for the 1417 appointment of his successor before taking any steps. It was admitted by everyone that Dinizulu and the other Chiefs would have to return to their own country before very long, but the question was when and under what conditions. The friends of these Chiefs would do them ill service by creating the, impression that they would be allowed to return to their country and occupy the positions which they held before exiled. They would, indeed, go back under very different conditions. The Government would deal with the question at the earliest possible moment in a way which they hoped would be satisfactory to all who wore interested in that country. He was glad that the hon. Member had raised this question, as there appeared to have been some misapprehension as to the intentions of Her Majesty's Government with regard to it, and some misrepresentation of what he had said to the Secretary of the Aborigines Protection Society.
§ MR. CLOUGH (Portsmouth)said, he should be glad to have some assurance from the Government that the question of Greenwich Age Pensions would receive early attention after the Whitsuntide Recess. It had been before a Select Committee, which had favourably reported on the Resolution of the House with regard to it, and he was bound to say that his loyalty to the Government had been severely taxed by the delay in dealing with it. As a Member for Portsmouth, he was well aware that great dissatisfaction prevailed at the continuous delays. He, therefore, hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would assure them that there should be no further delay.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ Resolved, That this House, at the conclusion of the Morning Sitting this day, do adjourn until Monday, 29th May.—(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)