HC Deb 23 June 1896 vol 41 cc1661-71

(1.) The City shall be divided into fifteen Wards.

(2.) Two of such Wards shall have the boundaries defined on the "Ward Plan" signed by William Henry Houldsworth, Baronet, the Chairman of the Committee of the House of Commons to which the Bill for this Act was referred.

(3.) One copy of the Ward Plan shall he deposited at the Private Bill Office of the House of Commons, and one other copy shall he deposited in the Parliament Office of the House of Lords, and one other copy shall he deposited at the Town Hall in Belfast and shall be preserved there and open to public inspection at all reasonable times.

(4.) The Council shall by Resolution at a meeting specially summoned for the purpose within three months from the passing of this Act or within such extended period as may he allowed by an Order of the Local Government Board, define the boundaries of the other thirteen Wards so that no such Ward shall at the time of defining the same comprise an estimated population of less than sixteen thousand or more than twenty-five thousand persons. The boundaries of the said thirteen Wards so far as practicable shall be denned by imaginary lines drawn along the centre of streets or roads or some natural or other well defined boundary.

(5.) When the Council have defined the boundaries of the said thirteen Wards they shall cause the same to be marked upon the copy of the Ward Plan signed as aforesaid and deposited at the Town Hall, and shall submit the same to the Local Government Board, who on being satisfied that the division of Wards is in accordance with the provisions of this Act, shall make a certificate to that effect upon the Ward Plan and seal the same.

As soon as may be after the giving of such certificate, the Council shall publish notice thereof, in the Dublin Gazette with the names or numbers and a general description of the Wards as defined on the Ward Plan, and as from the publication of such advertisement in the Dublin Gavette the said Ward Plan shall be final and conclusive.

(6.) Each of the said fifteen Wards shall be described by such number as the Council shall determine.

(7.) The division of the City into Wards under this Act, and the said Ward Plan shall for the purposes of all proceedings connected with the preparation of lists and registers of electors and of all proceedings preliminary to the November Municipal Elections of the year one thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, and with respect to the functions and duties of the Lord Mayor, Town Clerk, and Revising Barristers of the City in relation to the purposes aforesaid, come into operation on the publication of the said notice in the Dublin Gazette, and for all other purposes on the 25th day of November, one thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven.

*MR. W. JOHNSTON (Belfast, S.) moved to leave out sub-section (2). He said he hardly need apologise for taking part in the discussion on this Bill, as he had the honour of being the only living person who had ever represented the whole of the city of Belfast. When this Bill was introduced in the first instance he was asked, and readily consented, to give his name as one of the sponsors for it, being always glad to see the development of Belfast, and an extension of its boundaries and its industries. But in the Hybid Committee some alterations were made in the Bill that he was quite unable to agree to, and he was now obliged to move the omission of this sub-section. In order that the House might understand what was proposed to be done by this subsection, he must refer to previous Debates upon this Bill, in which claims were made that the Roman Catholic minority should have a representation on the Corporation. A plan was started, and it was concurred in by the Belfast Corporation, that such provision should be adopted as would enable this minority to have by extraordinary means a representation that they could not have by ordinary means. He objected to this new principle; he objected that Belfast should be thus experimented upon. In point of fact, these two words were pencilled out by a Roman Catholic priest, and the scheme received the sanction of the Corporation. In this way the Roman Catholics got by a jerrymandering process what they could not get by justice. [Nationalist cries of "Speak up, speak up!"] He was not afraid of any sentiments he uttered, still less of hon. Gentlemen opposite. The new principle adopted in this Bill would not for a moment be tolerated if it were sought to be applied to a Scotch or English city. ["Hear, hear!"] The representation of the minority might be advisable, but, in this case, these two wards had been so arbitrarily pencilled out as to exclude a Protestant from ever representing them. He objected to this principle, and in the name of the Protestants of Belfast, he protested against it. He had very much pleasure in moving the omission of this sub-section from the Bill.

SIR W. H. HOULDSWORTH (Manchester, N. W.)

said that, as Chairman of the Committee which considered the Bill, he would explain what took place. The evidence adduced before the Committee was not confined to one side; strong evidence was given by both parties of their desire that some representation should be given to the Catholics of Belfast on the City Councils. Indeed, no stronger evidence was given on the point than by the representatives of the Corporation themselves, and therefore in those circumstances the only question which remained to be settled was how that representation could properly be insured. Evidence was given showing that the number of Catholics in Belfast was no fewer than 70,000 out of a population of 350,000. The provision in the Bill was that the boundaries should be settled by a Commissioner appointed by the Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant, with a power of appeal to the Privy Council, and he was not prepared to say that if this provision had remained and the boundaries been settled in that way the Catholics might not have got some representation. But the Committee were very anxious that, if possible, this question should be settled as soon as possible, and in an amicable manner. ["Hear, hear!"] Therefore, the Committee suggested to the parties before them that if they could come to some agreement among themselves as to the division of the wards, that would certainly be the most satisfactory way of settling the question. The Committee were told in the first instance that no such agreement was possible, and some days were then spent in the effort to strengthen the hands of the Committee. The Whitsuntide holidays came on, and gave the different parties leisure to confer together, and although it had been stated that the Committee indicated in some way or other that they would not pass the preamble of the Bill unless some arrangement was come to, he was glad to say that such a statement was unfounded. ["Hear, hear!"] The Committee formed no opinion whatever, but, in the interests of all parties, indicated that the best way of settling the question was by amicable arrangement. Fortunately, such an arrangement was arrived at by the representatives of the Corporation on the one side and the Roman Catholics on the other, and the Committee were informed by the representatives of both sides that, although neither party had got all it wanted, the arrangement which had been come to was mutually satisfactory, and that they were prepared to see it embodied in the Bill. In the circumstances, therefore, the Committee had no option but to sanction the scheme, unless some policy in the general interest of the public dictated some other course. But he was not aware that the public interests generally would be injured in any way if the agreement were carried out. Therefore the Committee gave effect to it, and followed precedent in doing so. He had got hope that the result of this agreement would be to produce greater harmony than had ever existed in Belfast before, and strongly recommended the House to support the Committee.

MR. JOHN DILLON (Mayo, E.)

said that, after the speech from the Chairman of the Committee, who considered the Bill, he did not think the Member for South Belfast could expect much support in the Motion he had made. The hon. Member for South Belfast had stated that the wards marked out in the map and signed by the Chairman of the Committee had been pencilled out by a Roman Catholic priest. Was the hon. Member aware that the Corporation of Belfast were unanimously a party to drawing up these wards.

MR. JOHNSTON

Is my statement not correct?

MR. DILLON

said it was just as correct to say the Lord Mayor and the Corporation of Belfast pencilled out these wards as to say they were pencilled out by a Roman Catholic priest. [Cheers.] The Committee devoted several days to the discussion of this question, and were at first informed that it was quite impossible to come to any amicable arrangement for fixing the delimitation of these wards. But, as the Chairman of the Committee had stated, the Whitsuntide holidays came on, and both parties sought to come to an amicable arrangement. The result was very instructive to those who took an interest in the factions in Belfast. When the parties came together it was found to be, not only possible, but perfectly easy, to come to an arrangement, and this arrangement was arrived at by the representatives of the Roman Catholics on the one side and the Corporation on the other in a very few interviews. The Lord Mayor and the Roman Catholic Bishop of Belfast said they were perfectly satisfied with the arrangement made.

MR. JOHNSTON

Pilate and Herod.

MR. DILLON

said the hon. Member now described the Lord Mayor of his own city and the Roman Catholic Bishop as Pilate and Herod—[Nationalist cheers]; which was Pilate and which was Herod? ["Hear, hear!"] This was an example of the hon. Member's conduct. [Cheers.] This was an instructive lesson to the House, and showed who it was that really kept up a factious spirit in Belfast. [Nationalist cheers] If the people were left to themselves, and not stirred up by hon. Gentleman like the Member for South Belfast, a better spirit would long have prevailed. ["Hear, hear!"] There were some men who hated to see faction dying out. He entirely agreed with what had fallen from the Chairman of the Committee. He was confident that the agreement arrived at, giving the Catholics representation on the Council, would not only remove a difficulty, but would have a beneficent effect on the future of Belfast. ["Hear, hear!"] So far from trying to stir up the embers of religious strife, as the hon. Member for South Belfast had done, he rejoiced at the moderation displayed by the Roman Catholics, in having agreed with a good grace to accept as satisfactory an amount of representation on the Corporation cosiderably less than they were really entitled to. The Committee and the House were to be congratulated upon this arrangement, and he should be much surprised if the hon. Member for South Befast obtained the support of a dozen Members to vote for his Amendment. ["Hear, hear!"]

MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER (Belfast, W.)

would like hon. Members to remember what it was they were committing themselves to by this Bill. He ventured to say that, when the principle of the Measure was applied to some English borough, a very different story would be heard. With the object of this decision of the Committee he entirely agreed; but he objected to the principle being made a precedent in an Act of Parliament. That the electoral result in Belfast were unsatisfactory to one party he regretted, and he wished there were more representation for Catholics. Still, what had been done in Belfast was done in every city and borough in the United Kingdom. With the franchise it possessed it had returned its representatives to the City Council, and the representation turned out to be wholly Protestant. But now it was sought to give the Separatists representation on the Council by unusual means through an Act of Parliament. The plan would fail in its object. It had failed already in his own constituency, where precisely the same scheme was tried and was defeated because there was a shifting population. Exactly the same thing would happen in these two wards. There would be a change, and the moment it became effective, they would be asked to perform the same operation again. The precedent with regard to Liverpool was entirely illusory. There, by agreement, the whole of the wards were readjusted, but here they proposed to give two wards and to earmark them as separatist wards. This precedent would be quoted over and over again. It was now quoted for Belfast, to-morrow it would be quoted for Sheffield, Liverpool, or Bradford. Unless they applied a general principle that would cover all cases, it became a very serious thing indeed to apply it to one particular case. He appealed to hon. Members before they gave their moral assent to this proposition, to ask themselves whether they were really prepared to vote this in their own cases. In the desire to bring about peace and quietness, immense pressure was put upon the House and upon the Committee. That was a short and easy way, but it was not a safe way. If they once assented to this proposition they would be asked to do it again in two years time. If not, what would happen? These two wards would be stereotyped, and it would be considered an offence against the decision of the House of Commons for any alteration in the representation of these two wards were to be brought about by any process whatever. He was quite willing that some private arrangement should be arrived at which should not receive the sanction and deliberate authority of Parliament in a Bill. Though he was prepared to agree to that, he could not assent to this matter being registered as a decision of Parliament.

MR. VESEY KNOX (Londonderry)

said he thought that the House would feel that the speech just delivered was to be most seriously regretted. Let him recall the attention of the House to what the facts were. In the city of Belfast one-fourth of the population were Catholics, and under the system which had hitherto existed, they had no representation in the corporation. The Committee was asked to enlarge the city area, and to redistribute the wards, and to so redistribute the wards that in some wards there might be a Catholic majority. That was thought to be not an undesirable object, and the two sides were asked to confer and see whether they could not come to some agreement. The parties did confer. They met twice, and they came to an amicable agreement. They arranged that two of the 15 wards in the city should be drawn so that the Catholics should have a majority in them. Of course, it was perfectly true, as the hon. Member for West Belfast said, that it would be possible to destroy that practice by resorting to the same practice which was resorted to in West Belfast. In West Belfast, the Catholics, who were in a majority there, were forced out of it by means which he need not refer to in detail. He thought it was very much to be regretted that the hon. Member should have made in that House a threat, for it came to nothing less, that similar means might be taken to thrust the Catholic people out of these two wards.

MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER

said he made no such statement. He pointed out that when there was a shifting population, a change must inevitably happen.

MR. KNOX

said that if the hon. Member objected to the word threat, he would say it was much to be regretted that he made such a prophecy, and that in doing so he was not really expressing the views of the vast majority of the people of Belfast. The Corporation of Belfast were unanimous on this question, and he did not hesitate to say that the vast majority of the Protestants as well as the Catholics were anxious that the reproach which had been so often hurled against Belfast should be removed by amicable agreement. It had been removed, at any rate for the present, by this Bill, and he did not believe that any means such as the hon. Member had foreshadowed, would be taken to upset the agreement arrived at.

MR. W. E. M. TOMLINSON (Preston)

said nothing had been done by the Committee to set a precedent which should be accepted by the House in all cases. There were sufficient precedents before the Committee to justify them in allowing the arrangement which was unanimously agreed to by both parties, who wished to bring about a different state of things. No precedent had been set except that it was desirable, when circumstances allowed, to bring about an amicable settlement of these cases. The House was perfectly free to deal with each case on its own merits.

MR. J. C. FLYNN (Cork, N.)

reminded the hon. Member for West Belfast, who protested against what he called exceptional legislation for Belfast, that it was in connection with the Belfast Main Drainage Bill—a private Bill—that his predecessor in the representation of West Belfast, Mr. Sexton, succeeded in introducing a provision lowering the Franchise. The hon. Member for West Belfast, in referring to minority representation, had gone out of his way to make a groundless attack upon Dublin and other cities. What he desired to point out was the exceptional position of Belfast. The minority, the Catholics, though a third of the population, had no representative in that House. Of that they did not now complain, but they were utterly without representation on the municipal Council, [''Hear, hear!"] That was a state of things utterly unmatched in any other part of Ireland, except, perhaps, in a city not very far from Belfast. In Cork, as a contrast, where the Catholics were as nine to one, the Protestant minority held one-third of the representation on the municipal Council. [''Hear, hear!"] It was a matter of universal congratulation that the sects and parties had come together, and had arrived at an amicable understanding. It was to be deplored that such an exhibition of intolerance as they had witnessed should have been voiced from the Benches of that House. ["Hear, hear!"]

SIR JAMES HASLETT (Belfast, N.)

wished to make one or two remarks regarding this settlement. He was quite aware that the settlement was somewhat exceptional. It was exceptional treatment, but the city was exceptional, and the Committee before whom the Bill came did their best not only to carry out the desires of this House, but, if possible, to carry to a successful issue the legislation for the city of Belfast. [''Hear, hear!"] His hon. Friend the Member for West Belfast objected, not to the principle, but to the putting of that principle in an Act of Parliament. That was, he would have been glad to assent—[''hear, hear!'']—to all the Committee had done if it had only been a matter of assent; but he objected to that assent taking legal form in an Act of Parliament. That was a very fair position. [''Hear, hear!"] He confessed that that principle was somewhat exceptional, but Ireland was a land of exception. [''Hear, hear!"] There were scarce two towns governed on the same principle, and enjoying the same franchise. One scarcely knew, when they were travelling from one town to another, whether they were living under the same conditions of life. The Committee was in this difficulty, that if they sent back this Bill with the clause as it was drafted, he had little hesitation in saying that, so far as his knowledge of Belfast was concerned, no independent Commission could have mapped the city into 15 wards without giving in two of those wards a Roman Catholic preponderance. As an honest Commissioner, he did not think he could have mapped out the city honestly and fairly as an independent man without giving preponderance in two of the wards to Roman Catholics. What were the difficulties of the Committee? They were obliged to send back this Bill if it passed, to a Commissioner to be appointed by the Chief Secretary, and he would have been obliged to go to Belfast and hold a close investigation there, not only into the various political and religious phases of Belfast character, but also into the various valuations in connection with the varied sections of the community, and they would have had in Belfast a large amount of friction created which it was thought by all lovers of their city it would be a desirable thing to avoid. The result was the acceptance of this compromise. He neither justified it on the one hand nor condemned it on the other. [''Hear, hear!"] It was an arrangement which he trusted would work out well for their city. He trusted they would have no friction in relation to the matter. [''Hear, hear!"] While it had been held that the next November elections might possibly tell in a different direction, there might be very strong opinion in regard to this. ["Hear, hear!"] He thought a little time and a little calm deliberation, over the entire circumstances of the case would show that the Committee had done the best they could to carry out the views of this Parliament, and he thought they had done the best they could for the city of Belfast.

MR. M. MCCARTAN (Down, S.)

thought the action of the hon. Member for South Belfast would show fairminded men that the rank-and-file of the people were not to be blamed for intolerance and bigotry, the blame resting rather with their leaders. He denied that the hon. Member, in opposing the compromise for minority representation, spoke the wishes of the Protestants in this matter, who gladly welcomed this way out of the difficulty. He regretted the House should be put to a Division on a matter which was the outcome of an honourable understanding. This was about the last feeble flicker of the spirit of bigotry and intolerance, of which the House would hear very little in the future.

Question, "That Sub-section (2) of Clause 29 stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

Clause 52,—