§ 5. £137,341, to complete the sum for Public Works and Buildings, Ireland,—
§ MR. TULLYdrew attention to the drainage works at Drumheriff on the Shannon, and conplained that the overseers only gave employment to workmen who were recommended by gentlemen belonging to one local political Party. He did not think that that ought to be done in the case of works carried on under the supervision of the Board of Works. Workmen ought to be eligible for employment, where there was competition, as in this case, if they were recommended by clergymen of any denomination or by the local Magistrates. He hoped that in future the Chief Secretary would take care that no petty local political considerations were permitted to prevent men either of one Party or the other from getting employment.
§ * MR. HANBURYsaid that the point raised by the hon. Member was new to him. He quite agreed that political considerations ought not to influence the question of employment of men and he undertook to make inquiries.
§ MR. DILLONsaid that he should raise the whole question of model schools on the Report stage. He wished to know why the item £2,500 which appeared under this Vote for the Queen's College, Belfast, was so much larger than the item £385, for Galway College. He did not; however, begrudge Belfast College any expenditure in buildings that were required to render the college more efficient; but if the Nationalist Members did not object to this item he hoped that the hon. Members for Belfast would imitate their liberality and not object to expenditure on the other colleges.
§ * MR. HANBURYsaid the sum might appear at first sight to be large, but this was the last instalment of a sum promised by the late Government, part of which was voted last year, to complete the sum for the endowment of a charity school.
§ SIR JAMES HASLETT (Belfast, N.)said there were a number of Catholic professors in the college, and that a Presbyterian president did not make a Presbyterian college. He thought it would be only fair that there should be a similar treatment in regard to colleges in other cities.
§ MR. DILLONprotested against a comparison being drawn between a city like Belfast and cities like Galway or even Cork. The people of Belfast were better able to subscribe to the college than the people of Galway and Cork. Moreover, the people of Belfast were in entire sympathy with their college and were proud of it, which was not the case with the other cities.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ £19,503, to complete the sum for railways, Ireland,——
§ MR. TULLYwas understood to refer to the case of the Cavan and Leitrim Light Railway Company. An Act was passed last year by which the Treasury contribution of 2 per cent. could be capitalised so as to extinguish a certain proportion of the share capital of the 664 company, thus making the contribution which the cess payers were liable to considerably lighter. Previously to that Act being passed the shares of the company were run up by stock speculators from £5 to £7 17s. 6d. The Government had held as a lien on this line a block of shares which were worth £65,000, and by selling these the Treasury had, he believed, made a profit of something like £13,000. That sum had been applied to reducing the share capital of the company, which was a considerable advantage to the people in Leitrim. The right hon. Gentleman had in answer to a question the other day told him the particulars of this transaction. It appeared to be a very extraordinary thing that the Government should have sold a large portion of these shares at a lower price than they obtained for others shortly afterwards. The difference in the price so realised would have amounted to a very large sum. He did not know all the details of these transactions at the time they took place, or else he should have called attention to them before.
§ * MR. HANBURYsaid that the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down admitted that the Government had made a very good bargain in reference to this matter, and his only cause of complaint appeared to be that the bargain was not a better one. The Government had taken these shares as security, and when they rose in value they had sold a portion of them at a considerable profit, the amount of which they handed over to the locality. The hon. Gentleman appeared to think that if the Government had held over for some time longer they would have made a much larger profit. It was, of course, easy to be wise after the event, but the Government in his opinion were amply justified in realising the value of the shares when they could secure a handsome profit. As regarded the precise dates at which the different transactions had taken place, he was-sorry that he had not the figures before him at that moment; but he would make inquiries into the matter, and would give the hon. Gentleman such information with regard to them as he could. ["Hear, hear!"]
§ Vote agreed to.