§
As respects every advance under the Land Purchase Acts for a purchase in pursuance of an agreement made after the commencement of this Act, the following provisions shall have effect; (that is to say,)
§ SIR THOMAS ESMONDE (Kerry, W.) moved in paragraph (a) to leave out the words "money and not of," so as to provide that money should not be paid in lieu of guaranteed land stock in advances under the Land Purchase Acts. He said the Amendment affected the success or non-success of the purchase portion of the Bill. He therefore asked the Government to give it their favourable consideration. It would inflict a hardship on nobody; it was purely a matter of routine, and perhaps the Government would see their way to accept it.
§ MR. VESEY KNOX (Londonderry)supported the Amendment. He had always thought that the original creation of Guaranteed Land Stock was a financial mistake, and that it would have been infinitely better to have given the landlords Consols, for neither the State nor the tenant got any advantage from the additional quarter per cent. interest on the Guaranteed Land Stock, owing to the small amount of that stock in the 367 market. Indeed, he had never been able to understand the reason for creating a separate stock for the purposes of land purchase. What he would suggest was that the Government should come to a compromise in the matter, and that instead of stopping the issue of the stock they should alter the character of the stock issued, and make it Consols. The landlords would be as much benefited by getting Consols as by getting Guaranteed Land Stcok; the additional quarter per cent. would be saved to the State, and the tenant would get all the advantages be now got. The amount of money involved was 33 millions sterling. The section proposed that the rate of interest on that large sum should be left entirely to the Treasury, or to the National Debt Commissioners, which was part and parcel of the Treasury, to prescribe; and it was to be prescribed by the Treasury every half-year in respect of the half-year that was passed. It would, therefore, be impossible for the tenant to know what rate of interest he would have to pay six months ahead. The only thing he would know would be that the interest could not exceed 4 per cent. It was possible, for instance, that the Treasury might prescribe 3 per cent. to be the rate of interest which was, of course, a great deal more than was at present charged, and a half per cent. more than the rate of interest at which the Government could borrow in the open market. The tenant, in these circumstances, would feel that he was charged more than he ought to be charged. It was, therefore, absolutely clear that, if the Government left to the Treasury this unprecedented and unreasonable power of prescribing every half-year what they considered to be the proper rate of interest that should be charged the tenant-purchasers for the past half-year in respect to this large sum of money, it would inevitably lead to conflicts between the tenant-purchasers and the State, and to angry Debates in the House. The National Debt Commissioners had a difficulty in making out the money to pay the 2½ per cent. interest on the Savings Banks Account, and there was nothing to prevent them from charging 3 per cent. interest on the tenant-purchasers in order to enable them to square the Savings Banks 368 Account. It would merely be a swindle of the kind that the Treasury had often perpetrated before. He could hardly conceive that the Government realised that they were leaving this enormous power in the hands of the Treasury. The difficulty would be met by the issue of some form of stock, such as Consols, at a fixed rate of interest.
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,) Leeds, Centralsaid the object of the clause was to substitute cash for Guaranteed Land Stock in the case of advances to the landlord under the Land Purchase Acts. The Guaranteed Land Stock stood in the market at £110, which was a considerable premium; and it seemed unreasonable to continue a system under which the vendor received £130 really for every £110 nominally, which was practically an advance from the State of 10 per cent. The hon. Member for Londonderry complained that the scheme as it stood would leave to the Treasury the fixing of the rate of interest at which the sinking fund might be accumulated.
§ MR. KNOXsaid his complaint was more than that. The Treasury, besides fixing the rate on the sinking fund, which, perhaps, was unavoidable, also fixed the rate of interest on the loan.
§ MR. GERALD BALFOURthought it would not be possible for the Treasury to do that. He thought the rate of interest on the loan was fixed by law—[cries of "No!"]—or, at any rate, by a rule laid down by the Treasury beforehand, and that it would not be possible for the Treasury to alter it by an ex post facto arrangement. The Treasury at the present time loaned a considerable amount of money under the Local Loans Fund. The rate of interest under that system was constantly complained of by Irish Members and others. But why was it difficult and impossible to alter that rate of interest for the borrowers? Simply because the stock had been issued, and it was necessary to pay the interest on that stock; and the system proposed by the Amendment was really a repetition of the Local Loans Fund system. He also thought the hon. Member underrated the power of the Irish Members when he said that they could not effectively criticise the action 369 of the Treasury were the Treasury to raise the rate of interest on the tenant-purchasers. He believed the Irish Members could not only effectively criticise it, but effectively prevent it. It would not be possible for the Treasury, in face of such opposition—to say nothing of the sense of justice of the House—to increase the burden of the Irish tenant in order to relieve somebody else. He could hardly believe the hon. Member seriously maintained that such a thing was possible.
§ MR. KNOXasked the right hon. Gentleman to say what was to be the rate of interest as he read the clause.
§ MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid that it would be 2¾ per cent. If stock were issued to supply the money to be advanced to borrowers, the difficulty of altering the interest was very great indeed—practically prohibitive.
§ MR. JOHN DILLON (Mayo, E.)pointed out that if the purchase-money were paid in stock which was at a premium of 10 per cent., it was obvious that the tenant would be able to buy his holding more cheaply; and now the Government were going to withdraw that bonus. When land stock was at 93 the Government absolutely refused to interfere, though urgent appeals were addressed to them. By this clause the Treasury was left to fix what interest they liked. It was idle to talk of the Treasury not daring to make changes which would be opposed by the Irish Members. The other day, when Irishmen of all parties joined in asking the Government to undo what was admitted to be a dirty trick on the part of the Treasury, they were met by a non possumus. How could private Members follow the operations of the Treasury, which were always as secret as possible If this change were made the tenant ought to be recouped by some change in the regulations.
§ SIR THOMAS LEA (Londonderry, S.)said that this was not merely a question of the tenant's interest, but of the promotion of land purchase in Ireland. The lower the rate at which money could be borrowed, the better the terms on which the tenant could buy and the landlord could sell. The Treasury ought to charge a lower rate of interest on all this land-purchase system.
§ DR. CLARK (Caithness)said that he was not in favour of land purchase, but he should support the Amendment. The action of the Treasury was mean and contemptible. Five years ago, when land stock and Consols were below par, the Treasury would not hear of paying cash.
§ MR. GERALD BALFOURsaid that it was unreasonable to expect the Treasury to pay more than they had undertaken to pay. Every speaker had proceeded on the assumption that it was the interest of the Treasury which was at stake. That was an entire delusion. The interests at stake were those of the guarantee fund, and ultimately of the Irish ratepayer. What happened when this stock was appreciated? As the payments were made they had to be invested, and the best investment was to buy up the stock. If for every £100 of stock £110 had to be paid, a deficiency must occur some time, and that would have to be met out of the guarantee fund, because the Treasury was not in the first place liable.
§ COLONEL WARING (Down, N.)endorsed what had fallen from Nationalist Members. He spoke as one of those who differed from the general impression as to the desirability of land purchase, being entirely sceptical as to its alleged ultimate benefits. In fact he believed that half a century hence its results would be disastrous to Ireland. Therefore he spoke in an entirely disinterested manner when he said that if the Government really wished to kill their own pet project nothing would be inure calculated to bring that about than the proposed change from land stock to coin. When in 1891 the hon. Member for South Hunts proposed that coin should be paid instead of land stock they said, "Oh, no; it is quite impossible that the Treasury could undertake to find coin." The attitude of the Treasury was, "Heads I win; tails you lose."
§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)contended that in this matter the Government were acting with great unfairness both to landlords and tenants. God knows, the Government need not cheat their own friends. [Laughter and cheers.] He did not blame the Chief Secretary; he did not believe he had a bit to do with it; it was another 371 example of the characteristic meanness of the Treasury. These men sitting in Whitehall were constantly on the watch to see how they could rob the unfortunate country. He hoped the landlords would join with the Nationalist Members in this matter, and he thought that united they should be strong enough to beat the Government.
§ MR. SMITH-BARRY (Hunts, S.)supported the Amendment, although in doing so he admitted he might appear very inconsistent. In 1891 he moved an Amendment that the landlords should be paid in cash instead of in land stock, and at that time he was opposed by every section in the House. At that time it was probable that land stock would stand at considerably below par. He was gently sat upon and crushed by the First Lord of the Admiralty, then Chancellor of the Exchequer. He was told by Mr. Sexton that his proposal was one of "extreme audacity." The hon. Member for Derry City said that if the hon. Member brought forward many Amendments like this the sooner the Government got rid of him and provided him with a place elsewhere the better. [Laughter.] The hon. Member for Northampton said this was an instance of "the reckless greed of Irish landlords"—[laughter]—and the Leader of the Opposition said this was "the coolest of all proposals" and that "here was a typical Irish landlord who comes here asking for more." Of course the typical Irish landlord was the most horrible thing that could occur to anybody's mind. [Laughter.] But now that this stock, instead of standing below Dar, was very much above par, the Treasury stepped in and said—Well, you shall not have the benefit of it. That was so like them. [Laughter.] He hoped the Government, in the interests of purchase, which they had at heart, would withdraw the proposal they had made.
§ MR. JOHN REDMOND (Waterford)urged the Government not to take the responsibility of refusing a request which came to them from all sections of Irish Members. Under the existing law the machinery of land purchase had come almost to a standstill in Ireland, and one object of this Measure was to remove the clogs and defects in the machinery. But if the Government insisted on keep- 372 ing this clause in the Bill they would be creating a new obstacle in the way of the working of land purchase. No matter how much trouble the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary and the Leader of the House, whom he was glad to see in his place during this discussion, had taken in considering this question of land purchase, they could not with any confidence set up their opinion as better than the opinion of all sections of Irishmen who had studied the matter.
§ MR. GERALD BALFOURdid not think hon. Members quite realised the difficulties that would ensue if the Amendment were adopted. They had to consider the whole financial arrangements in connection with land purchase, and he must repeat, that if the Amendment were accepted the result would be, not to give an advantage to the Treasury, but simply to place a burden upon the Guarantee Fund—[cries of "No!"]—yes, that was so, and he had not heard a single argument to the contrary—which ultimately the ratepayers of Ireland would have to bear. [Mr. KNOX dissented.] The hon. Member shook his head, but not one speaker had got up to say that was not the fact. Hon. Members must show that this loss would not fall on the Guarantee Fund, and up to the present they had failed to do this. When this stock was originally created the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton objected to its creation on the ground that it would be more valuable than Consols, pointing out that they were bound to give the landlord entitled to receive £100 or £1,000 the equivalent of that amount and nothing more. It had been shown how extremely difficult it was to forecast what the fluctuations of the stock might be, but, with the price of Guaranteed Stock at £112, it was obvious that if this enormous advance in the price could have been foreseen Parliament would not have agreed to the proposal then made and accepted. This Amendment had been supported on the ground that it would give a stimulus to purchase. It might do so, but he did not know how the £10 or £12 would be divided. Possibly, the landlord would get the whole of it, or possibly it would be partly divided between the landlord and the tenant. It would be impossible at the present time to raise the general question of 373 interest. That was part of a large question, and it would have to be raised as part of a large question; but if they were now going to continue to issue stock instead of cash they made it far more difficult to adjust the interest to be paid by tenant-purchasers when the rate of interest fell than would be the case in the proposal of the Bill. He appealed, therefore, to the House to leave the Government proposal as it stood.
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,), Manchester, E.who rose amid cries of "Oh!" said that the Government had been told by the right hon. Member for the Forest of Dean that it would be the duty of hon. Members to intervene in the discussion on this part of the Bill so far as the clause dealt with the safeguarding of general financial interests. They had now the opportunity of doing so, and to his great surprise the only speech which had been made was one in which the hon. Gentleman indicated that he was willing to support the Amendment, which would not, if carried out, have the effect of putting the purchase of Irish land on an equitable basis. Irish Members on both sides had apparently arrived at the opinion that this was a good opportunity to get out of a hardhearted Treasury—[cheers]—what the Treasury were unwilling to give. He should have been glad if the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the late Unionist Chancellor of the Exchequer, the First Lord of the Admiralty, had been present to deal with the arguments, because they were necessarily more familiar than he was with the financial aspects of the question; but he could not refrain from pointing out to the landowners on his own side of the House that if any of this money was to go to the tenant at all it must be, and could only be, if the land in Ireland was to be sold below its nominal value. On the face of it it was manifest that the landlord would get the whole of the bonus; if the tenant was to get any of it at all it was because the landlord sold nominally at 13 or 14 years' purchase land for which he would get 15 or 16 years' purchase in consequence of the premium. He did not know whether his hon. Friends contemplated this result with equanimity. He believed that they had a strong 374 objection to Clause 34 on the ground—he thought the illusory ground—that it would have the effect of permitting the Landed Estates Court to deal largely with cases of sale, and that this would have the effect of lowering the nominal value of land in Ireland. If the tenant was to get any profit out of this Amendment it could only be because the landlords were going to permit the land of Ireland to be sold at a price below that at which it could be sold. In all probability the money would not go in large quantities to the tenants, but it would, for the most part, go straight to the landlords if the Commissioners of Sales did their duty. He admitted that it was hard to say so; but it must be understood that, so far as it was a bonus, it was a bonus which, if it went to the tenants, went to thorn at the expense of the landlords. He asked all hon. Members interested in sound finance, whether it was a tolerable transaction that the House should deliberately decide that the State or the Guarantee Fund was to lend landlords and tenants, for the sale and purchase of land in Ireland, money which could only be repaid by investing the Sinking Fund at a much lower rate of interest than that which was got for the principal. This had not been supported as a financial transaction by any hon. Member; it was supported simply on the ground that it was a bonus from the Treasury to carry out a great national undertaking. He admitted the value of that national undertaking. He had been the most ardent advocate of purchase; he had perhaps done as much as any man to promote purchase—at all events he had striven to do so. But if purchase could only go on by means of some bonus of this kind, let the House have the courage of its opinions and frankly put down in the Bill that the value of land should be paid in cash to the tenant or landlord, and that in addition there was to be thrown in 10, 15, or 20 per cent. in order to promote and smooth the working of the purchase wheels. He asked the House to remember that while the premium was only 10 or 12 per cent. it might rise to 20, or it might fall to nothing. If their object was to put a bonus on land sales let it be a bonus which did not vary in its amount with 375 the accidents of the English money market; let it be a fixed amount in order to induce persons to carry out the transaction for the benefit of the community at large. It was not reasonable finance, it was not the way to deal with any great national transaction of this kind, and he hoped that the
| DIVISION LIST—No. 343. | ||
| AYES. | ||
| Arrol, Sir William | Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon | Pease, Arthur (Darlington) |
| Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John | Goschen, George J. (Sussex) | Powell, Sir Francis Sharp |
| Balcarres, Lord | Goulding, Edward Alfred | Pryce-Jones, Edward |
| Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Mnchr) | Gull, Sir Cameron | Purvis, Robert |
| Balfour, Gerald Wm. (Leeds) | Gunter, Colonel | Russell, T. W. (Tyrone) |
| Barnes, Frederic Gorell | Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm. | Rutherford, John |
| Barry, Francis Tress (Windsor) | Howard, Joseph | Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse) |
| Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin | Howell, William Tudor | Sidebotham J. W. (Cheshire) |
| Bethell, Commander | Isaacson, Frederick Wootton | Sidebottom, William (Derbysh.) |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Kenny, William | Skewes-Cox, Thomas |
| Camphell, James A. | Lafone, Alfred | Smith, Abel H. (Christchurch) |
| Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r) | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Stanley, Lord (Lancs.) |
| Channing, Francis Allston | Lawrence, Edwin (Cornwall) | Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset) |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'land) | Stone, Sir John Benjamin |
| Coghill, Douglas Harry | Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn (Swans'a | Strutt, Hen. Charles Hedley |
| Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse | Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R. (Essex) | Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier |
| Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole | Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) | Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray |
| Cox, Robert | Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Lvrpol) | Usborne, Thomas |
| Cruddas, William Donaldson | Loyd, Archie Kirkman | Warde, Lt.-Col. C. E. (Kent) |
| Dalrymple, Sir Charles | Lucas-Shadwell, William | Warkworth, Lord |
| Douglas-Pennant, Hon. E. S | Macartney, W. G. Ellison | Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E. |
| Fardell, Thomas George | Malcolm, Ian | Williams, Joseph Powell-(Birm.) |
| Finch, George H. | Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire) | Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.) |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Milbank, Bowlett Charles John | Wilson, John (Falkirk) |
| Flannery, Fortescue | Milward, Colonel Victor | Wilson, J. W. (Worc'sh., N.) |
| Folkestone, Viscount | Monckton, Edward Philip | Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H. |
| Fry, Lewis | Nicol, Donald Ninian | TELLERS for the AYES, Sir |
| Giles, Charles Tyrrell | Northcote, Hon. Sir H. Stafford | William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther. |
| Goldsworthy, Major - General | Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay | |
| Gordon, John Edward | Parkes, Ebenezer |
| NOES. | ||
| Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.) | Doogan, P. C. | Hodderwick, Thomas Charles H. |
| Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir A. F. | Ellis, Thos. Edw. (Merionethsh. | Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H. |
| Austin, M, (Limerick, W.) | Engledow, Charles John | Holburn, J. G. |
| Beaumont, Wentworth C. B. | Farrell, James P. (Cavan, W.) | Horniman, Frederick John |
| Blake, Edward | Farrell, Thomas J. (Kerry, S.) | Jacoby, James Alfred |
| Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn) | Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith) | Jones, William (Carnarvonshire) |
| Brigg, John | Ffrench, Peter | Jordon, Jeremiah |
| Caldwell, James | Field, William (Dublin) | Kilbride, Denis |
| Carew, James Laurence | FitzGrerald, E. Uniacke Penrose | Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey |
| Cavendish, V. C W. (Derbysh.) | Flavin, Michael Joseph | Lambert, George |
| Clancy, John Joseph | Flynn, James Christopher | Lea, Sir Thomas (Londonderry) |
| Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.) | Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.) | Lecky, William Edward H. |
| Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready | Gedge, Sydney | Macaleese, Daniel |
| Commins, Andrew | Gibney, James | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift |
| Cooke, C. W. Radcliffe (Heref'd | Gold, Charles | Mc Calmont, Maj.-Gn. (Ant'm. N) |
| Crilly, Daniel | Griffith, Ellis J. | McCartan, Michael |
| Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.) | Hammond, John (Carlow) | M' Hugh, E. (Armagh, S.) |
| Daly, James | Harrington, Timothy | McKenna, Reginald |
| Dane, Richard M. | Hayden, Luke Patrick | McLeod, John |
| Davies, W. Rees-(Pembrokesh.) | Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale- | Molloy, Bernard Charles |
| Denny, Colonel | Healy, Maurice (Cork) | Morris, Samuel |
| Dillon, John | Healy, Thomas J. (Wexford) | Morrison, Walter |
| Donclan, Captain A. | Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth) | Murnaghan, George |
§ Government would be supported by all lovers of sound finance in the House.
§ Question put, "That the words 'money and not of' stand part of the clause."
| Ayes | … | … | … | 86 |
| Noes | … | … | … | 99 |
| Nussey, Thomas Willans | Roche, Hon. James (East Kerry) | Tully, Jasper |
| O'Brien, patrick (Kilkenny) | Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees) | Ure, Alexander |
| O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.) | Saunderson, Col. Edw. James | Waring, Col. Thomas |
| O'Connor, T. P (Liverpool) | Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.) | Warner, Thomas Courtenay T. |
| Oldroyd, Mark | Shaw, William Rawson (Halifax) | Wedderburn, Sir William |
| O' Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens | Souttar, Robinson | Williams, John Carvell (Notts.) |
| Pinkerton, John | Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath) | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) |
| Redmond, John E. (Waterford) | Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.) | Wilson, John (Govan) |
| Rodmond, William (Clare) | Thomas, Alfred (Glamorgan, E.) | TELLERS for the NOES, Sir |
| Rentoul, James Alexander | Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr) | Thomas Esmonde and Mr. Smith-Barry. |
| Rickett, J. Compton | Tuite, James |
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ The announcement of the numbers was received with load Nationalist cheers, and cries of "Resign."
THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREA SURYThis Amendment having been carried, it is not worth while to discuss the clause any further. Therefore I move—and I think it will be in the interest of business—that the clause be now negatived. Perhaps I should say that we reserve to ourselves the power of reconsidering this matter. ["Hear, hear!" and laughter.]
§ MR. T. M. HEALYSo do we. [Laughter.]
* THE CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANSI will put the Motion now because I think that it is the general sense of the Committee that it should be put.
§ Clause 24 negatived.
§ Clause 25,—