§
Order read, for Further Consideration of Postponed Resolution—
12. "That a sum, not exceeding £11,473, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1896, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of Her Majesty's Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues, and of the Office of Land Revenue Records and Inrolments.
* MR. PRITCHARD MORGAN,appealing to the Speaker, asked whether, having regard to the promise made yesterday by the Leader of the House that he should have an opportunity of bringing the subject of the mining royalties in the Welsh gold mines before the House at a reasonable hour, and to his having been informed by the Whips that it would be reached by dinner time, the hour of Midnight was a proper time to expect him to go into a question of great importance—
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir M. HICKS BEACH,) Bristol, W.If the hon. Member desires to postpone it, it shall be postponed.
MR. PRITCHARD MORGANsaid, he would have it postponed if there was a distinct understanding that a time would be fixed.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUEROf course I cannot do that.
* MR. PRITCHARD MORGANthen asked the Leader of the House when he would have an opportunity of bringing it forward.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYI would advise the hon. Gentleman to take it now.
* MR. PRITCHARD MORGAN,complaining that he had not been treated fairly, proceeded to state his grievance. In 1884, now 11 years ago, he went to Wales, taking a considerable sum of money in his pocket, and, having purchased freehold land, worked there for three years with the object of starting the gold-digging industry. During the whole time the Government knew what he was doing. They did not interfere with him in any way, but, after he had expended a large sum of money, they came down by their officials and levied an enormous tax upon him. He fought the question with the Crown in the Courts of Law. The Crown brought, an array of legal talent against him, and what he had to say was that, this being a bonâ fide dispute between the Crown and himself with regard to ancient law that had not been considered for 300 years, the Government of the day ought never to have asked him for costs. The then Chancellor of the Exchequer, the right hon. Member for St. George's, Hanover Square, promised the House that the costs would not be asked for until after the Report of the Royal Commission on Mining Royalties had recommended what should be done with regard to this particular subject. But on the very day Parliament was dissolved in 1892, and before that Report was printed, the right hon. Gentleman issued execution against him and forced him to pay the costs in breach of the undertaking that had been given. Again, the Committee reported that the royalties charged and which had been reduced to one per cent, were fair, but the Crown immediately after raised them again. That was not treating an industry in the manner in which it ought to be treated, espe- 1094 cially when they had professions from right hon. Gentlemen sitting on tin-Treasury Bench (and belonging to both Parties) of a desire to give employment to labour in every conceivable way. They knew very well that the last Election was fought on the promise of giving the working men of this country full cupboards and plenty of work, and at any rate this Government, having made so many professions, ought at least to consider the matter in a fair and liberal spirit. Most of these mines were contained in the waste lands of the Crown in Wales. They were of no value, and even for grazing purposes would not keep a rabbit per square mile. They were barren hills for the most part, containing all sorts of precious metals, difficult to find and when found difficult to treat. For 17 years previous to his going down to Wales the Crown received the enormous revenue of 11d. per annum from these mines, but up to the time when he had obtained £88,000 worth of gold the Government had received in fees and royalties nearly £8,000, or equal to 10 per cent, of the product. He contended that royalties, and especially those upon Crown lands, should be paid upon the basis of profits and not upon the basis of produce. In these metalliferous mines they had to carry on two distinct businesses; namely, that of mining, and then a metalliferous process for the purpose of extracting the metals from the ores. The right hon. Member for Cambridge University, in an interview he had with the right hon. Gentleman when he was Secretary to the Treasury, said he was of opinion that the royalties ought to be charged on the basis of profits, adding that that was his unofficial and consequently honest opinion of the matter. Those who worked the mines had to make their own roads, they had to be at considerable expense to obtain postal and telegraphic communication, after opening up the mines they obtained ore which was not of sufficient value to pay for its removal, 1095 and as a consequence, they had to expend enormous sums of money in the erection of machinery for the purpose of treating it on the spot. Her Majesty's Government would make no allowance for that enormous expenditure, but they took 1–15th of the produce of the mine. In Australia, assistance was given the miner, but here the object of the Woods and Forests Office was to wring from the miner the last farthing they could get. He asked that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should have a fixed rule, and say he would charge so much per cent, on all mines. In 1888, when gold was first discovered, the landowners in Merionethshire wrote to the Woods and Forests seeking leases. Leases were sent to them, but the visual working conditions were struck out. These leases were granted indiscriminately for thirty years, at £1 a year, pie asked the. Government to take steps to compel these leases to be surrendered, if the landlords would not work the mines. At present, the landlords would not work the mines themselves, nor allow anybody else to work them. That was unjust to the State. If one mine could pay the State £8,000 in a short time, surely the others could do so in like manner. If those mines which were now lying idle were worked, the State would derive a direct benefit from them in the way of royalties, fees and charges, and an indirect benefit through the employment of the labour of the districts. Legislation was necessary to carry the contemplated mining schemes into effect, but meantime he trusted the right hon. Gentleman would establish uniformity in royalties, and reduce royalties to the lowest possible amount. He trusted, further, that the right hon. Gentleman would do something for Scotland and Ireland. In 1888, he announced that Wales would prove a payable gold-field. That statement had been, amply verified. They had taken a ton of gold from one vein, and were working a new vein now. There was an area of 40 square miles in 1096 Merionethshire, all of which was auriferous, containing an enormous number of veins running parallel with each other through the country. He knew there was plenty of gold in Scotland, which was locked up and not allowed to be worked by the Duke of Sutherland. There was also gold in Ireland, and even in England there was a possibility of getting gold; and, having regard to the necessity which existed for the development of our own revenues, he trusted the right hon. Gentleman, now that he had been convinced by the Office of Woods and Forests that Wales was proving a permanent paying gold-field, would remove all the barriers to the working of the gold-fields of the kingdom.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, the hon. Member had imported into his speech charges against the First Lord of the Admiralty when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer. As to these, he could only say that, if the hon. Member intended to make them, he ought to have given notice to the right hon. Gentleman. The hon. Member asked, in the first place, that, if possible, persons who held leases with working conditions should be compelled by law eitherto surrender the leases or to work the mines themselves. It was not in his power to revoke the leases that had been granted without working conditions, or to compel persons to work mines if such conditions had been granted. He promised, however, to examine the question, and do what he could consistently with the law and the rights of individuals. If such leases had been granted it was a mistake. The hon. Member had admitted that those leases were no longer granted by the Department of Woods arid Forests, and, therefore, a difficulty could not arise with regard to future leases. The hon. Member asked that the royalty should be made uniform. He had told the hon. Member, in reply to a question and also in an interview, that he would carefully examine this matter, and would 1097 consult not only his advisers in the Department of Woods and Forests, but would take also independent opinion from gentlemen who would be able to form a judgment as to the possibility of future mining prospects in Wales If he came to the conclusion by such an inquiry that the amount of royalties charged really interfered with the development of this industry, he would take care to remedy the grievance ["Hear, hear!"] He could not say more than that. At present he had no evidence before him, except the statement of the hon. Member that the amount of royalties did interfere with the industry. Within the last few months a very considerable number of leases had been granted, and some, he believed, to the hon. Member himself, at 6 per cent. This was some primâ facie evidence that responsible persons were willing to take those leases and to work mines at the royalties already demanded
* MR. PRITCHARD MORGANsaid they had no alternative. They had to take the leases or leave them, and the only opportunity they had was to take a lease and then to apply for a reduction [Laughter.]
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that where different leases were held by persons who desired to work the produce arising from them at the same mills, there should be uniformity of royalty, and he would undertake, on behalf of the Woods and Forests Department, that any case brought before him would be dealt with in order to secure that uniformity. He was as anxious as any hon. Member that what he believed might become a paying industry in Wales should be developed as far as the Department of Woods and Forests was concerned. He would look carefully into the matter It was a most difficult and complicated question on account of the water rights and on account of the fact that the minerals were sought to be taken not only from waste land belonging to the Crown, but from land belonging to private owners.
§ DR. CLARKsaid, that royalties might be charged on net results, and not or gross results. When a man was working big bodies of ore, yielding only three pennyweights of gold per ton, he could not pay royalty at all; he could only do 1098 so when he came to what were called pay-shoots. There was a class of ores which were not free milling; this was gold associated with other metals, and the ore had to go through a very expensive process, which made the cost of it very great. There was no desire that the Crown should not get a fair royalty. Scotland could complain of a very much greater grievance than Wales, because in Scotland a royalty of 10 per cent. was enacted under an Act of the fourteenth or fifteenth century. In Sutherland and Caithness, as in Wales, there were valuable mineral lodes, and in the streams could be seen any amount of alluvium coming from them. Five or six years ago they were explained by Sir D. Cameron, the present Master of the Mint of Sydney, and he found lodes that would furnish very fair working; but they could not be worked because of the conditions. The Crown demanded 10 per cent.; and he did not know how much the Duke demanded; but together the royalties prevented the working of poor lodes which yielded three or four pennyweights to the hon. On another matter he wished to put a question to the Government. There were some lands in the North of Scotland belonging to the Department of Woods and Forests which had been let for some time to a number of large pluralist farmers, who had a dozen or twenty farms. These lands had now been scheduled by the Royal Commission, which was unanimous in scheduling Crown Lands. He wanted to know if the Government would carry out the intention of the late Government and take these Crown Lands away from the pluralist farmers where there were no leases, and apply the land to increase inadequate holdings and form new holdings?
On the Report of the Vote for the Salaries and Expenses of the Lord Advocate's Department and other law charges,
§ MR. DALZIELasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he still adhered to his statement of a few days ago that the Law Officers for Scotland would be on the same terms as the English Law Officers with regard to private practice, and, if so, whether a Minute would be presented on the subject?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERreplied. He said, the position of the Law Officers for Scotland and England was governed by a Minute which the late Government laid on the Table about a year ago. That Minute provided that the Lord Advocate for Scotland should be always in London during the Session, and the Solicitor-General when his official duties made his presence in London desirable. With regard to both it was provided that they might take such business on behalf of private clients as might be consistent with the proper discharge of their public duties.
§ MR. DALZIELsaid, in that case he was to understand that the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury was in error in stating that the Scotch Law Officers were prohibited from taking private practice.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that the Scotch Law Officers were entitled to continue their private practice.
§ MR. WEIRobjected to Procurators Fiscal in Scotland being engaged as agents or factors for landlords. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman the Lord Advocate would take the matter into his consideration.
§ THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. GRAHAM MURRAY,) Buteshiresaid, that the general tendency of late years had been to improve the position of Sheriff-substitutes, and to get the best men to fill those offices. As regarded official residences, he was afraid that the hon. Member had raised a question to which the Treasury would have something to say. As to Sheriff-substitutes, the tendency had been to bring districts together, and although he was bound to say that perhaps, in comparison with the English County Court Judges, the salaries were not always what they might be, still, he thought that there had been a steady progress in that direction which he hoped would not cease. In regard to the other remarks which had fallen in regard to this subject, he would say that, in his opinion, the most efficient men should be secured for the public service.
§ DR. CLARKsaid, that they did not desire to give to all the Procurators Fiscal official residence. The particular 1100 official in question was paid only £450 a year, and was expected to reside on Long Island. But, unfortunately, the whole of the land in that island belonged to one landlord, who was not a good landlord, and he had absolutely refused a residence to the Procurator Fiscal, and had practically turned him out of the island. He found that this unfortunate official, who was a married man, was lodged over a small shop. He would make a suggestion to the Government that the rights of the foreshore, which still belonged to the Crown, should be granted to this official to the extent of enabling him to build a house upon it. That Gentleman would be very glad to build a house; it was the thing he wanted to do. There were only two legal gentlemen in the Island, and the other had also been refused a residence by Sir John Ord, the landlord. As to the general question of Procurators Fiscal, there were only three or four of them at a salary of under £400 a year, and those were in Caithness-shire and Ross-shire. These offices, he contended, ought to be combined so that the officer might have a fair salary and would not have sometimes to be prosecuting or defending himself. With regard to the sheriffs, he pointed out that in Scotland they were very poorly paid, although their work was being constantly added to. The legislation of last session giving over to them the inquiring into all the fatal accidents had, perhaps, doubled their work without increasing the salaries, and now that they had given the Lord Advocate and Solicitor-General for Scotland salaries on an equality which those of the Irish officers, he hoped they would look into the matter.
§ Resolution agreed to.
§ Other Resolutions in Class II. and Class III. agreed to.
§
On the Resolution (Class II.)
8. "That a sum, not exceeding £2,221, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1896, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Household of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland,
§ MR. JAMES DALY (Monaghan, S.)raised the question of judicial rents in Ireland. He had read many letters from his constituents, stating what a deplorable condition the country was in owing to the bad weather. The flax crop in Ulster which in 1893 was 68,487 acres, increased in 1894 to 105,081 acres; and yet the reports of last month showed that the price was lower than it had been for the last twenty years.
§ * MR. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is hardly challenging the administration of the Chief Secretary.
§ MR. JAMES DALYsaid he only wished to bring under the notice of the Chief Secretary the difficulty which the tenant farmers of Ulster had in paying their rents.
§ * MR. SPEAKERThe subject may be important, but this is not the occasion for bringing it before the House.
MR. T. M. HEALYasked whether it would not be in order as an argument for pressing the Government to introduce a measure affecting Irish Land?
§ * MR. SPEAKERNo, not on the Chief Secretary's Vote.
§ MR. JAMES DALYsaid that as a new Member, he was of course unfamiliar with the rules, and it was only by being pulled up occasionally that he was likely to learn them. He would ask the hon. Members for South Derry and South Tyrone, in accordance with their promises, to impress upon the Government the desirability of introducing some legislation to relieve the tenant farmers of Ulster, during the coming Session.
§ DR. TANNERsaid he desired to refer to one or two technical points which he was prevented from raising when the Vote was in Committee. All the accounts from the inspectors in connection with the various asylums in Ireland, with very few exceptions, were very unsatisfactory. If the right hon. Gentleman wished him to go through the matter he would do so, but as a matter of fact, he would rather deal with the question in gross than in detail. All he sought to do was to endeavour to obtain some improvement in the condition of the poor people confined in these asylums. If those Gentlemen who happened to be inspectors expressed their condemnation of the present condition of the asylums, 1102 Members of the House ought to see that their recommendations were enforced. He passed from this point to the other he wished to mention, showing that he was attempting to deal with those matters in the briefest possible manner at his command. He wished to refer to the Irish Fishery Reports, and especially in connection with steam trawling. The work of the Scotch Members in connection with their fishery reports, had made the fisheries of Scotland what they were. Why should not what had been done in connection with Scotland be done for Ireland? He would content himself with their words. He put the matter to the right hon. Gentleman. He hoped almost against hope, but he thought it was right that the burden should rest upon the proper shoulders.
§ Resolution agreed to.