§ The House went into Committee upon this Bill, and clause 1 having been agreed to,
§ Upon clause 2,
MR. T. M. HEALYI press the right honourable Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury for an explanation as to three cases which appear in this clause, and which, I think, are sufficient to attract attention, and require some explanation. The first case was that of a man who borrowed a sum of £140 under this Act. A remission of debt has been made of £137 16s. 9d., so that he practically only repaid £2 out of a debt of £140 borrowed by him to improve his holding. Then I turn to the loans under Lord Ashbourne's Act and I find that a widow was lent £2,500 for the purchase of her estate, and a very large amount has been remitted. It discloses a very serious state of things that these large amounts should be advanced by the Land Commission under these circumstances. The landlord has got that £2,500; he has got his money in his pocket, and the British taxpayer has had to find it. In the third case the borrower has been let off £58 6s. 11d. I say it is not in the interest of the tenants at all that these loans should be made. The Land Commission should not be allowed to advance these large sums in this way, and I hope that the right honourable Gentelman will say that he will take steps to see that the Land Commission, should not be allowed to advance these extravagant sums. They are shown to be excessive by the remissions which the Government have had to make. I await the right honourable Gentleman's explanation with some curiosity.
§ * MR. HANBURYIn the cases which the honourable Gentleman has referred to I may say the Government does not forego its right to recover. We do not forego anything. This Bill does not affect our position, but as the honourable Gentleman requires information as to these three cases I will say, in the case of the man who borrowed the £140, he was evicted when he had only paid £2 3s. 3d. He was afterwards made bankrupt, and has since died. In the next case the holding was sold in 1112 1887 to another person, who also soon fell into arrear, and the holding was again put up for sale in 1890, when there were no bidders. A caretaker was placed in charge by the Commissioners, who could not find a purchaser until 1897. As the purchaser would pay nothing beyond the remaining instalments of the annuity, the arrears of £545, including £394 for interest, are treated as irrecoverable. In the remaining case the purchaser purchased 72 acres for £815 in 1890, repayable by an annuity. He soon fell into arrears, and the holding was offered for sale in 1892, but there were no bidders. The holding was taken possession of by the Commissioners, and worked at a loss until 1897, when it was sold at the nominal price of one shilling, in addition, of course, to the remaining instalments of the purchase annuity.
MR. T. M. HEALYI can only say, in my opinion, the Treasury ought to take the matter up, and that loans of this kind, involving such large losses, should not be allowed to be made.
§ MR. CALDWELLThe Secretary for the Treasury has given the usual stereotyped answer, and I, in reply, will ask a stereotyped Question. Does he know of a single case where the Treasury, when it has had to write off a debt of this kind, has ever recovered a single farthing?
§ * MR. HANBURYI can answer that by another Question. Does the honourable Gentleman know of a single case where money has been recovered from a bankrupt who has died.
§ MR. CALDWELLThe right honourable Gentleman knows perfectly well that in cases where a debt has been written off it has never been recovered.
§ The clause was agreed to.
§ The remaining clauses were agreed to.
§ DR. CLARKI wish to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will reprint this Bill. We do not know what has been done in the last ten minutes, and how the Bill has been reconstructed?
§ * MR. HANBURYAll the Amendments are really for the same purpose, and were only necessary because the Bill has been drafted in an old form not now used.
§ The Bill was reported to the House.