HC Deb 09 August 1898 vol 64 cc666-703

2."That a sum, not exceeding £30,726, 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, 1899, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Board of Agriculture, and to pay certain Grants in Aid."

3."That a sum, not exceeding £26,787, 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, 1899, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Charity Commission for England and Wales, including the Endowed School Department."

4."That a sum, not exceeding £132,085, 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, 1899, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board."

MR. MONK (Gloucester)

It will be in the recollection of the House that this Vote was closured before an opportunity was offered of making any remarks either upon the Vote itself or the administration of the Department. I do not know whether my right honourable Friend the President of the Local Government Board is aware, but I may mention that I had a Notice of that on the Paper yesterday to reduce the salary of the Secretary of the Local Government Board by £50; but, in order not to wound the susceptibilities of my right honourable Friend, I withdrew the Motion, and have put down a Motion to reduce the Vote by £50, for I think no one more fully deserves his salary than the Secretary of the Local Government Board. It will, perhaps, be in the recollection of the House that when, in 1896, the Vote of the Local Government Board was under consideration, complaints were made of the great delays which took place in the administration of that Department, and the right honourable Gentleman the Member for Wolverhampton, as well as myself, took part in the discussion. The President of the Local Government Board then stated that he had arranged that an inquiry should be made by a Departmental Committee as to the staff and organisation of the Local Government Board, and consequent, I suppose, upon some arrangement with the Treasury, a very considerable increase has taken place in the staff of that Department. I find that the salaries of the staff are increased by £8,926, and that there is an increase of £4,208 in the salaries of district auditors, making a total increase of £13,134. Now, I am sure that no one will find fault with that large increase, provided that there has been efficiency in the administration. I am glad to see the right honourable Gentleman is now in his place. I was reminding the House that in 1896, two years ago, when the Local Government Vote was under consideration, the right honourable Gentleman informed the House that he had appointed a Com- mittee to consider what increase was necessary in his Department, and the consequence of that, I presume, has been that there has been an increase of £8,926 in the salaries of the clerks, and £4,208 in those of the district auditors. No Member of this House would object, I am sure, to that large increase, provided that there was a practical advance in the efficiency of the Department. But, notwithstanding this large increase in the staff, the number of clerks having been increased from 266 to 326, I have received complaints from different quarters that great delay takes place in attending to the correspondence of the Department. The Department takes a very long time to answer complaints or questions properly addressed to them, and of this I will give a practical illustration. A rural district council in Hertfordshire obtained the sanction of the Local Government Board to construct waterworks for a parish in its district, and was also authorised to apply certain moneys belonging to the parish to that purpose, and to raise a loan sufficient to complete the sum necessary to construct the waterworks. On the 17th of May last I ascertained that the rural district council had issued a precept to the overseers of the parish to raise a rate partly for the purchase of the land upon which the waterworks were to be constructed, and partly for the legal expenses connected with it. Now, it appeared to me that the payments to which I have referred ought to be charged to capital account, and I so advised the parish council, of which I am the chairman, and wrote to the Local Government Board, giving them full particulars. I wrote upon the 17th of May, and for five weeks no notice was taken of the matter. I spoke on two occasions to my right honourable Friend, who assured me that it should be attended to, and he expressed surprise that I had heard nothing in reference to it. So it went on to the 20th of July, when I received a reply, but then I did not get the opinion of the right honourable Gentleman, or of his advisers, as to the legality or illegality of the precept issued by the rural district council. In the meantime part of the rate had been collected, but on my advice the collector ceased to collect the rest of the rate. What I ask is, What has the Department been doing between the 17th of May and the 29th of June, when the Local Government Board at length called the attention of the rural district board to the matter? The whole thing was practically pigeon-holed, and I think, with this large increase of staff, an earlier reply ought to have been required from the rural district board, but I have no doubt it was entirely forgotten. I put this question to the House: If a Member of this House finds it is absolutely impossible to get a reply from this Department on behalf of his parish council, what possible chance have those unfortunate parish councils who have not a Member of this House to whom they can appeal in matters of this kind to obtain a reply for them? Now, I merely state that case as an illustration; but I put it to the right honourable Gentleman whether he should not keep a little tighter hand over the rural district councils, and not allow them to expend, in respect of the parishes in their district, large sums, without their cognisance, unless or until they have been properly audited by the Government auditors. I think the parish councils ought to have a larger voice, and a greater power in superintending those works which are sanctioned within their boundaries, and that the entire control should not be left to the rural district council, unless the rural district council is supervised by the Local Government Board. To put myself in order, I beg to move the Vote be reduced by the sum of £50.

COLONEL BLUNDELL (Lancs, Ince)

said his constituency was interested in a local loan, and he thought it ought to be understood that where money was borrowed for some object clearly desirable, but not necessary, the generation that borrowed should pay; but where a large expenditure was forced upon a locality, ruled by any conventional system, care should be taken that the particular generation that borrowed the money should only bear its own share of the expense of an undertaking which would probably benefit many future generations.

MR. LLOYD-GEORGE (Carnarvon Boroughs)

I am very glad that the honourable Member for Gloucester raised this question. It is a very important one, and a complaint which is common all over the country. It is not a complaint which is levelled against the right honourable Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board, or any official in that Department. On the contrary, so far as my experience goes, it shows that they have done their very best to reduce the grievances from which the local authorities suffer from the undermanning of the Department. I think they have done their work capitally, under the circumstances. It would be very difficult to say where there is a more efficient staff than that of the Local Government Board. But it would be impossible for them, as constituted at present, to do the work well. They may extend their staff by 60 to 600, but the result would be the same. The real thing is that the heads of the Department cannot take upon themselves the multifarious duties cast upon them by Parliament every year. There are several Acts of Parliament passed this year which impose fresh duties on the Local Government Board. The Local Government Hating Bill, for instance, casts very onerous duties upon the Local Government Board, and it is impossible for them, as at present constituted, to cope with the ever-increasing work which is cast upon them. We had a Debate upon this subject in 1896, and we called attention to the matter then, and since that time the position has been considerably aggravated and intensified. The answer given by the President of the Local Government Board was an excellent one, and I certainly do wish that he had been able to introduce legislation, or make some alteration of the rules which are now in force under the Act of 1888. The Committee which was appointed recently for the purpose of looking into this matter in their first Report reported that the staff was undermanned. In the second Report that was made a more important point was referred to with regard to the devolution of the powers upon the local authorities. Now, I am sure that, under the Act of 1888, the Local Government Board had power to devolve a good deal of the powers now vested in them upon the local authorities; and I venture to impress upon the right honourable Gentleman that the time has now arrived when he ought to take this matter into serious consideration. I would venture to suggest that the right honourable Gentleman should not look to the officials behind him for advice, but should take the matter into his own hands. It is only natural that the officials should be 10th to give up any of the work. They are not afraid of work there; on the contrary, they are rather greedy of work. I think if the right honourable Gentleman took the matter in hand and did something in that way, he would meet the wishes of both sides of the House. I am not asking him to do anything revolutionary in the matter, but whether he will do something in the way of the Act of 1888, which rendered it necessary to lay the Provisional Orders upon the Table of the House. I venture to suggest that something might be done in this way. Take the powers which are now entrusted to the Local Government Board, and which might be left to the local authorities, under the powers already entrusted to the Local Government Board; take the question of the sanction of loans. If an urban council wants a loan of £500 or £ 1,000 they apply to the Local Government Board, which send down an inspector to inquire into the matter, and, having done so, they do not give you any opinion upon it. They do answer your letters, but there is a great difference in answering a letter and attending to the requests that are in that letter. After a good deal of pressure they begin to hunt up the papers, and they find that the inspector has made his report, and that it has been handed over to some clerk—some permanent official. He is overloaded with work, and has to get this report out from a mass of reports that are waiting their time, and in the end he sees that there is nothing to be said against it, and sanction is given. But it is a very serious thing for the local authorities to have to wait all this time; it may be that that local authority wants a water supply, and under the present arrangements they might have to wait for years. Now, that is a matter which, in my opinion, might be delegated, not to the local authority itself, but to some higher authority—it may be the county council. It is suggested that there should be a limit of £5,000, and that when the loan that is required is under that amount, then it should be left to the local authority to see how the money is to be spent. I object to that, and I think that it ought to be subject to the supervision of some higher authority. The county council, for instance, would look into these matters, in which they have no local interest; and I think that it would be necessary that this power should vest in the county councils, like the parish boundaries, which are thrashed out before the county councils now. I think if the Local Government Board could see their way to do something in that way, and I venture to suggest that it should be done in the course of the next Session of Parliament——

MR. SPEAKER

Order, order! The honourable Member is now discussing legislation.

MR. LLOYD-GEORGE

No, Sir. I should in that case have gone into a much larger question of devolution.

MR. SPEAKER

I understand the honourable Member to say something about something being done next Session, and I gather from that that he referred to legislation.

MR. LLOYD-GEORGE

Then I have used the wrong word. What I should have said was that perhaps this question might receive some consideration during the next Recess. Most of these things could be done without any legislation at all. Now, with regard to appointments, I think the recommendations by the Committee dealing with these appointments might be carried out. At the same time, I do not think the appointments ought to be left entirely to the local authorities, when the right honourable Gentleman could exercise the powers of the Act of 1888. Another point is the question of boundaries. I do not see why the question of boundaries of one county and another should have to be determined by the officials of the Local Government Board, who at present have to determine the issues. There is also a way out of that under the Act of 1888 without any legislation whatever. There was the Commission which thrashed this question out in the House of Commons. There was a dispute between towns, as to a representative upon the Local Government Board. The Local Government Board sent a gentleman down and investigated the circumstances, and the result was a very heavy expense. Now, such a question as that could be very much better adjusted by gentlemen down in the localities, and who know the districts thoroughly. Now, from the Report of the right honourable Gentle man's Commission, one of the great difficulties which the Local Government Board laboured under is the difficulty of adjusting the local jealousies of county councils and urban authorities, county councils and town councils. I venture to suggest that if the right honourable Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board can see his way to make the experiment, that if the county and the town councils of Wales during the Recess met as they did once before at Shrewsbury, and agreed upon a general scheme, I would ask this: if they are able to agree upon a general scheme, and submit it to the right honourable Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board, will he consider favourably putting into operation the powers already vested in him under the Act of 1888? Would he consider favourably the delegation of certain powers to a body of that kind which would be purely administrative Bowers, and which would result in relieving the congestion of the business of the Local Government Board, whilst they would contribute largely to the benefit of our local administrations, and I am sure would also benefit the Local Government Board in the long run? I ask very earnestly that the right honourable Gentleman will look into the matter during the coming Recess and see what can be done.

MR. DRAGE (Derby)

Before the right honourable Gentleman answers that question would he allow me to ask a question with regard to the administration of the poor law? In the first place I would like to ask the right honourable Gentleman whether his attention has been called to a recent decision of a metropolitan magistrate under the Industrial Schools Act of 1866, by which the children known as "ins and outs" can be taken away from their parents and remanded to an industrial school, because it seems to me that the right honourable Gentleman is in this difficulty—that either he must go forward in the direction of the Hammersmith Schools or else the Industrial Schools Act must be put into force, and the children are taken away from the custody of their parents. The House is probably unaware of the fact that it is possible for parents to take their children in and out of the workhouse, a practice which is followed always with the result, and sometimes with the object, of depriving them of education, which leads to their being brought up to a life of vice and crime, and is also prejudicial to their health. I suggest that the time has now come when the right honourable Gentleman should take measures to enforce the law under the Industrial Schools Act of 1866. Besides unscrupulous parents who remove children from respectable employment back to the workhouse there are unscrupulous employers who take advantage of children being pauper children to pay them inadequate wages. Further powers should be given to the guardians to prevent the abuse. The Girls' Friendly Society and the Metropolitan Association for Befriending Young Servants have done immense good in such cases. But difficulties are sometimes placed in their way by boards of guardians, and I hope the right honourable Gentleman will do anything he can to assist these associations. Of late there has been a great increase of vagrancy, largely owing to the lack of uniformity and continuity of administration of the Act of 1882 on this subject. The right honourable Gentleman has directed an inquiry to be made on this subject, and it would be interesting to know what are the results of that inquiry.

MR. LEWIS (Flint Boroughs)

May I allude to the question raised by my honourable Friend the Member for Carnarvon, which was also alluded to by the honourable Member for Gloucester, namely, the desirability of devolving from the Local Government Board to the local authorities some portion of the huge amount of work which now falls to the share of the Local Government Board. It has been evident for a long time past that the Local Government Board has been overworked and undermanned. I do not for a moment wish to say that it is not well manned as regards the capacity of the gentlemen who are there, and particularly the Permanent Secretary of the Local Government Board is one of the ablest men in the Civil Service; but, Sir, the appointment of the Departmental Committee to consider how the difficulties can be overcome shows that we have now arrived at a critical stage in the proceedings. That being the case, it is of extreme importance that this opportunity should be taken, not for the purpose of perpetuating the centralisation of what ought to be provincial work in London, but for devolving a certain portion of that work upon the local authorities. Wales is ready for devolution of that character. The Welsh county councils have repeatedly expressed their opinion upon it. I think that Wales has shown conclusively that some devolution of this kind is necessary. We have seen quite recently in educational matters devolution extended to Wales. We have a central board which controls intermediate education in Wales, and which represents the Welsh county councils and other authorities. It is marvellous how, in connection with a subject so thorny as that of education, every difficulty has been surmounted. The progress has been so satisfactory that you find the Secretary of the Charity Commissioners, speaking in Yorkshire, commending the example of Wales to Yorkshire. We are ready for this devolution. We are prepared to accept it, and to say that if you entrust us with these powers we will exercise them in such a way as to do the devolution you confer upon us no discredit whatever. We have had the experience of some years of the working of county councils, and they have amply justified their existence. I would ask the right honourable Gentleman to- trust the county councils still further. I know that in the past the Department has made an effort to devolve a large amount of its work upon the county councils. That effort met with considerable opposition on the part of the Association of Municipal Boroughs. Now, I think that if the right honourable Gentleman were to give us some devolution of that kind in Wales he would not meet with the same opposition; at all events, the kind of opposition that was made in England. I venture to believe that he will find that nothing would give greater satisfaction generally in Wales than a favourable response to this appeal.

THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. CHAPLIN, Lincs, Sleaford)

I will endeavour briefly to reply to the various statements that have been made on the different questions. As to the question of poor law reform and poor law children, the Department is quite alive to the necessity of dealing with it. We have also been considering the point which has been raised with reference to the advantages conferred by the Exmouth training ship. The work done on board that ship has been admirable, and still more admirable results are expected to follow. Representations will be made to as many guardians as can be found to induce them to send the children under their charge to undergo the same admirable training, and I can assure the honourable Member who has called my attention to the subject that any means I can employ to further this training on the Exmouth shall be used. An honourable Member put to me a question as to the Yeovil board of governors, and I have a very distinct recollection of what took place in that particular case, but I will make it my business to more fully inquire into it, and to see whether I can in any way meet the views expressed on behalf of the board as to the termination of the engagement of their officers; but, as far as I remember, the case did not appear to be one of extreme importance. At the same time, it appears to involve a principle in the work of the Local Government Board, which has been in vogue for many years. Perhaps I may be permitted to say a word before I sit down with regard to the progress we have been endeavouring to make with reference to the arrears of work since the last addition was made to the staff of the Department. I need not remind the House that the Local Government Board came in with an unenviable notoriety in regard to the amount of its arrears, and certainly a year or two ago the amount of these arrears was appalling. I do not say that the condition of the Department is altogether what I should like to see at the present time, especially with regard to the work connected with the loans, where we are still in arrear, and this is mainly due to the abnormal increase of work in regard to that particular feature. Now, it is a question which must come under our consideration whether I should not again ask for an increase of staff, so as to permit of the duties being adequately discharged; but in other branches of the Department there has been a great improvement already. I take the case of appeals against allowances, where the number of cases of arrears has been reduced from 1,050 to 350, both current and in arrear, of which number the current cases were more than half. Then I come to the Statistical Department, which was enormously in arrear at the beginning of 1897. The reason for that was that practically the whole staff of that Department was appropriated to the extra work caused by the passing of the Eating Act. At present, however, there are no arrears in the Statistical Department, and the work is more forward than it has ever been before, and the Returns have been got out earlier than last year. The audits of the county councils and local authorities are also more forward than they have been for many years, and, with the exception of that branch of the Department to which I have referred, there is nothing of which the Department need be ashamed. The arrears which exist in the Engineering Department are partly owing to the great increase in the number of applications. There were over 40 in one week not very long ago. Another fact which has been taken into account is the retirement or change of duty of several of the best men, and the new men—I need not explain in detail— require a great deal of supervision and teaching. On the whole, the arrears we have to face now are not of long standing, they are of recent date; and, as I have said, we have every reason to congratulate ourselves upon the present condition of' the work.

SIR H. FOWLER (Wolverhampton, E.)

I think the House will be agreed that it is unfortunate that, this important Vote Should have only been brought on a few minutes before 10 o'clock, last night, and that the House is reduced to the defective method of discussing it on the Report stage. I do hope that in future years some better arrangement will be made to secure to the House a really full discussion of the important work of this Department. My honourable Friend the Member for Gloucester introduced two questions into this Debate which are of great importance. The first was directed—I won't say to the reconstruction of, but to an improvement in, the administration of the Local Government Board, with which the right honourable Gentleman has just been dealing. That was a step in the right direction, but it was only a step after all, and I do not think that the Report of the right honourable Gentleman's departmental Committee was adequate. I think the Committee was timid in its scheme of reorganisation of the administration of the Local Government Board, while the Treasury has chosen to reduce the proportions of the scheme, without regard to the special exigencies of the case. I am bound to say that the right honourable Gentleman takes a very optimistic view of the state of the Department; at any rate, outside opinion is not so well satisfied as inside opinion appears to be with reference to its progress. The right honourable Gentleman has himself admitted a defect in regard to the Engineering branch. I venture to encourage the right honourable Gentleman to again approach the Treasury, and, if need be, to throw upon it the responsibility if it will not accede to the demands of the Minister anxious to-remedy a public inconvenience of a serious impediment in the local administration of the country. With reference to the other question to which my right honourable Friend referred—the question of devolution. Well, Sir, that, I think, is one of the first questions that ought to engage the attention of the Local Government Board. I have not had the advantage of seeing what the right honourable Gentleman calls a. Report, but, from what I can gather, seems to have been a sort of fiasco, because the Committee discovered, after they had taken all the evidence, that they themselves were not properly consti- tuted. I think the right honourable Gentleman ought to settle that question for them at once. Devolution is one of the first questions that ought to engage the attention of the Local Government Board, but I do not think that a Departmental Committee is the best tribunal to which the question should be referred. I think it should have been referred to a Select Committee of the House. The right honourable Gentleman will probably recall the great controversy which arose with reference to the devolution of power to the newly-formed county councils. Well, Sir, in those days there was a great distrust of county councils, and honourable Gentlemen opposite did not take that enthusiastic view of their capacity and power that we took on this side of the House; and, if I remember aright, the clause which has been referred to to-day—namely, clause 10 in the Local Government Act—was a compromise which, instead of defining what powers were to be transferred, included a Provisional Order, which the Local Government Board had power to put in for the transfer of the duties of any Department which appeared to be of an administrative character. Well, practically, Sir, nothing has been done under that clause, and I think we are very much indebted to honourable Members for raising this question in a practical form. We understand that the right honourable Gentleman has instituted this inquiry, but it need not be abortive, because the right honourable Gentleman will be the best judge, upon the evidence given, of what should be done, and I am sure, if he makes one or two Provisional Orders, and not be frightened by local difficulties and jealousies, I think he will find that Parliament will be ready to support him in carrying out the ultimate end and intention of this great scheme of local government. This House has complained —everyone has complained—that we have capital Bills ready in the Departmental pigeon-holes, but Parliament has not the time to deal with them, and so a vast amount of good work is left undone. You have admirable organisation in these county councils, singularly capable of doing the work quickly, well, and economically, and practically they are crying out for more work to do. I think it is a great pity that a valuable instrument like the county council should be allowed to rust for want of additional powers. I know I am touching on dangerous ground, and must keep clear of legislative suggestion, but I may, perhaps, express my opinion that the only practical way to relieve the present congested state of public business in this House is by a large measure of devolution to local-authorities of an administrative character. I am pleased to hear that the right honourable Gentleman will give his best consideration to the scheme put forward with reference to Wales, and I can see no reason why, in such a case, with freedom from a great deal of the jealousy that crippled local government in this country, if the local authorities can agree on a dividing line between the various classes of local authorities, and present a scheme which they are prepared to support, totally irrespective of political differences, I cannot see why the Local Government Board should not look on it with favour, and endeavour to secure the sanction of Parliament to it through the medium of a Provisional Order. I recognise with pleasure the spirit and intention indicated by the right honourable Gentleman in dealing with this matter, and I congratulate him on the improved state of his Department. I believe, if he had been a little more pertinacious, and applied a little more pressure to the Treasury, and the Treasury would be a little more generous, there would be less complaint of delay than there is at present. I hope the right honourable Gentleman will seriously take up this question of devolution as a means of solving great problems that have long perplexed the House.

Question put, and Resolution agreed to. 5. "That a sum, not exceeding £114,773, 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, 1699, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board in Ireland, including certain Grants in Aid of Local Taxation.

MR. DAVITT (Mayo, S.)

Sir, with reference to distress in the West of Ireland, we Irishmen feel humiliated when I called upon, in the discharge of our duty, to come begging for relief from this House on behalf of our fellow-countrymen, who inhabit a land as naturally rich and fertile as any country in Europe. While English Members show an impatience, and look upon our demands as an inroad on the common exchequer, it must not be forgotten that in this instance the demand had to be made by the Government. Sir, the relief of distress which was necessitated this year will entail, I believe, a charge of £50,000 more—in a word, in this year we have had fully £100,000 expended in order that men, women, and children in the west of Ireland should be saved from absolute destitution. These, Sir, are simple facts relating to the distress of this year, but these facts are of minor importance when compared with the stern fact so familiar to all of us—namely, that the distress of this year was only a symptom of a recurring malady. The periodical character of this distress is so fixed, as it were, in the economic and social conditions of the people in these distressed districts, that unless a barrier is erected against its recurrence it is almost certain that within the next five, six, or seven years Irish Members will again have to appeal to the Government to advance public money towards the relief of the poor people. Now this, Sir, is a matter which I respectfully ask the House to calmly consider before we leave for the long vacation, and I respectfully call the attention of the right honourable Gentleman the Leader of the House to this problem. Sir, I am content that chronic distress in these districts is capable of being remedied—in fact, I think that is now the general opinion of all those who have made a study of the question. I am precluded, I believe, from discussing legislative remedies, but there are facts which I feel will help to carry conviction. I have alluded so far to the distress of these districts direct, but it will be in the memory of honourable Members that in 1891 large sums of money were called for by the present Leader of the House, who was then Chief Secretary for Ireland, to expend in these districts on the building of railways, which had for their object the relief of the poverty. I have not the exact figures with me, but I believe the right honourable Gentleman obtained from Parliament over half a million of money for the carrying out of these various and useful works. In 1886 there was also distress in these very districts, and a sum of £40,000 had to be voted by Parliament to meet the evil of that particular year. Then again in 1889 and 1890 there was a far worse visitation of this calamity. Not less than two millions of money had to be expended in 1889 and 1890. In the early sixties we had the same evil in a modified form, while history tells us that earlier we had a famine, the like of which I hope will never be experienced in Ireland again, and which appealed to the sympathy of the whole civilised world. Going still further back, we had the famine of 1821 and 1822, which cost the Exchequer £300,000, whilst a charitable public subscribed the same sum. Then, Sir, during the century in which we live we have found the famines of 1821 and 1847, and we have had instances of it in 1860, 1879, 1886, 1891, and the present year, and I think I would be well within the mark in saying that the relief of these various famines must have cost in public money eight or 10 million pounds. Now, Sir, I prefer not to dwell upon all the suffering that these famines have inflicted on the Irish people. My object is to bring home to the public mind of England what this evil costs in taxation, in the hope that they may see how much cheaper it will be to grapple with it.

MR. SPEAKER

The honourable Member is now advocating legislative measures, which is not in order.

MR. DAVITT

I was suggesting that some remedy was required, but I am precluded from discussing that remedy. All I wish to do is to point out that this distress is a symptom of a recurring malady, and that, unless some action be taken, we will again have this distress in a few years' time. I wish to put before the House facts showing how this distress arises every few years, in order that some suggestion may follow as to future action. Of course, Sir, if you tell me that I am not privileged to do so, I must sit down.

MR. SPEAKER

The honourable Member's argument points to legislation, and consequently is not in order.

MR. DAVITT

In that event of course I must bow to your ruling, Sir. I only wish to say this, that we appeal most confidently to the Leader of this House, who has already attempted, in 1891, and subsequently, to provide some remedy for this state of things. I appeal to him earnestly that during this Recess he will think this matter out, that he will bear in mind the facts and figures I have mentioned, and that though this recurring distress has cost an enormous sum of public money to the taxpayers of this country, yet it has cost hundreds of thousands of lives to the people of Ireland. I contend that it will be a great reproach and a scandal to the Government of this country, unless, before another visitation, of distress comes along, some attempt has been made to grapple with this evil. I maintain, Sir, that if the people living in these congested districts, people who will have to be relieved out of public money and private charity, if they are allowed to exercise their industrial energies on the land, and if additions are made to these holdings, I maintain that we should have an end put to these periodical petitions for help. These poor people, as well as their representatives in this House, do not wish to appear as mendicants before this Parliament and before the world. There are natural means at hand to enable them to free themselves from poverty and destitution if this Parliament will enable them to do so. I confidently appeal to the right honourable Gentleman to go on with the work he began when he founded the Congested Districts Board, and he will build a monument, the foundation of which he laid a few years ago, in 1891.

THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (MR. A. J. BALFOUR, Manchester, N.)

Sir, the honourable Gentleman has accused the House of being reluctant to discuss questions connected with distress in the west of Ireland. I think, Sir, in that he was rather unjust to the great majority of the Members of the House, who, I am convinced, have aways taken the greatest interest in one of the most perplexing and embarrassing problems which the statesmen of this country, or indeed, of any country have had to face. Now, Sir, what is that problem? It is not simply that in Ireland we have occasionally to deal with exceptional distress; that is, unfortunately, an incident which cannot be avoided in any country. Times will come—they have come, for example, in Lancashire, in connection with the cotton industry; they have come in other parts of this country in connection with other industries—in which large sections of the population have been reduced, through no fault of their own, through the operation of economic and natural laws, to a state of deep distress. I do not know that in their case this House has ever thought fit to come to their assistance by grants of public moneys as they have in the case of Ireland; but there is this justification, among others, for the difference between them, that in this country there almost always is in the distressed area a considerable population not affected by the particular causes of distress, and in consequence of that fact it has been found possible, as a rule, to deal with such cases of exceptional distress through the ordinary machinery of local assistance. The local poor law and local charities, supplemented, no doubt, by general charities, these have been found sufficient to deal with those cases apart from contributions from, the Imperial Exchequer. In Ireland, unfortunately, that is not the case. In Ireland, when these periodical distresses have occurred, it is true, as the right honourable Gentleman has pointed out, that from time to time this House has been asked to come to the assistance of the poor agriculturists in the west of Ireland, and the taxpayer generally has been required to subscribe to the assistance of one particular class of the community. Sir, the justification for that exception in the case of Ireland lies partly in historical causes, to which I do not think it necessary or desirable to allude; but even more in the special circumstances of the case, and among the special circumstances, especially, the fact that there is no class in these western districts who are capable of coming to the assistance of their poorer brethren, there is no large supply of local wealth out of which their necessities can be fully met. Undoubtedly, local resources should first be taxed as far as they can be fairly taxed for that purpose, but they are not sufficient. Even in the present year, in which we are supposed to behave with undue harshness, as I understand, in the matter of distress, the country has contributed a great deal more than the local authorities were asked to do, and the fact to which the honourable Gentleman has referred, of recurring distress and recurring assistance from, this House, has found a new and melancholy exemplification. Of course, the causes of this distress, the economic causes of this distress, are not far to seek. They arise from a cause which may be described in one word, want of variety in the sources from which the local population derive their subsistence. For a long time it was the potato alone in many parts of the country on which they depended. Hardly anything else was at their disposal, hardly any other source of livelihood was open to them; and when the potato disease declared itself, and when, from time to time, that disease has recurred in any serious form, people dependent on potatoes necessarily and obviously must suffer acute distress. Sir, the want of variety can only be met in two ways. You may increase the variety of the agricultural products, or you may increase the number of trades or professions which these people have at their disposal. Both of these objects ought to be aimed at by anybody who desires to remedy the distress in the west of Ireland. We may point to the action of the Congested Districts Board as one machinery by which variety in industries has been augmented. If a man is dependent partly on fishing and partly on potatoes, let us say, to take a very simple case, it is manifest that unless there happens to be a failure of fishing and potatoes in the same year, he has, at all events, some resource on which he can depend, even though fishing may be less prosperous than in previous years, and although the potatoes may be suffering more or less from serious disease. The greatest difficulty, no doubt, arises from those parts of Ireland where there is no access to the sea. There you cannot hope to increase the variety of their interests by fishing, but something may be done in the way of planting other industries. Everybody knows how difficult the operation is. Everybody acquainted with the history of economics knows that it is no simple matter to introduce new industries, cottage industries or other industries, artificially, in a population where there is neither the natural education nor that natural aptitude that conies from generations of experience, and where capital is not forthcoming from local or other sources, and in order to supply the necessary machinery and necessary plant for the new industries which it is desired to found. There remains only one other means by which this variety may be obtained, and that is by so increasing the size of the holdings in the occupation of these agriculturists who have neither fishing to depend on to supplement their income nor other industries other than fishing. Unless we can increase the size of the holdings, I do not see how it is possible altogether to prevent the recurrence of these periodical seasons of distress when the potato disease makes its periodical visitations.

MR. DAVITT

I am sorry to interrupt the right honourable Gentleman. It is true that in this very year, in places where subsidiary industries were established by the Congested Districts Board, the cry of distress was raised almost at once, and large sums of money had to be distributed, whereas in Clare Island, which was purchased by the Congested Districts Board, and in which the holdings were enlarged, no distress whatever prevailed in the island, and no money of any kind was distributed. That illustrates, I think, the last point of the right honourable Gentleman.

THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY

I do not gather that there is any conflict between the honourable Gentleman and myself on this subject. We are both agreed, as I understand, that variety is what is wanted, whether the variety is obtained by industries other than agricultural industries or by increasing the variety of agricultural products, and that is only possible if the holdings themselves are enlarged. That is the problem, and the problem can only gradually be solved. I should be trespassing on your ruling, Mr. Speaker, if I were to discuss with the honourable Gentleman the means by which that solution could be effected, but I think the whole House must be at one with me in thinking that in those parts—in any part of the country—dependent on agriculture alone, it is to the increase of the size of the holdings, and to that chiefly, that we must look. I do not wish to underrate what has been done in the way of improving the actual yield of the holdings as they now exist. I think a good deal has been done, but undoubtedly the condition of agriculture in the west of Ireland has been such that the best methods of agriculture, the best method of raising stock, the best methods of turning the land to account, have not been always within the reach of the population. I think the Congested Districts Board has done much to remedy that, and is in process of doing more. Much may be done, but still it is obvious that if a holding be too small to support a family in comfort, year in and year out, no mere improvement in the method of agriculture would afford a sufficient remedy for that evil. I hope, therefore, we may gradually see in the west of Ireland, especially those districts of it to which I have referred, such gradual growth in the size of the holdings as may ultimately make these recurring distresses more and more rare an their occurrence, and in time, it may be, finally to disappear altogether. I emphatically endorse what fell from the honourable Member in one part of his speech. I quite agree with him as to the demoralising effect of these applications to the community for assistance, whether they are addressed to the charitable public, or to this House. The honourable Member knows, and I know, that sometimes the cry of distress is—I will not say a fictitious cry, but an exaggerated cry. I do not say that as a matter of blame to anybody concerned, for it is absolutely inevitable. If people have once sunk into the unfortunate, but in this case inevitable, position of having to apply to Parliament or the country for assistance, when distress occurs, the process is too simple and too obvious not to be occasionally resorted to when, as a matter of fact, distress does not amount in quantity or quality to a degree which would justify the giving of assistance. I do not say that as a matter of criticism or blame; I mention it as a fact, which no one who is acquainted with the district in question can dispute, and such a fact is extremely demoralising; and every lover of Ireland, whether he sits on the other side of the House, or on this, would desire that it should disappear as soon as possible. That the Irish in the west of Ireland should be put far above the necessity of appealing for public assistance is my most earnest desire, and as far as the Government can further that object, I can assure the honourable Member that they will do so. I rather think the honourable Member had in his mind legislative projects and machinery, to which I might find it impossible to assent. I think it right to say that—without trespassing upon your ruling, Sir—in order to avoid misconception; but I, for my part, fully concur with the honourable Member in the object he has in view. I think he has put his finger on the evil with which we have to deal, and I should be glad to give him, or any other person, every assistance in my power to carry out this object.

MR. DILLON (Mayo, E.)

We all regret the absence of the Chief Secretary, and also the cause of his absence, and we trust he may soon be able to resume his work. I have been extremely desirous of going at some length into the disputed cases which have arisen between us as to the disposition of relief in Ireland, but in the absence of the right honourable Gentleman I do not care to go into the question. Now, Sir, the speech to which we have just listened is a speech full of sympathy with the condition of the people in the west of Ireland, and I deeply regret that, perhaps partially owing to your ruling, Sir, we have not had a more definite foreshadowing of an earnest attempt on the part of the Government to deal, though at the eleventh hour, with this deplorable state of things. I know, Sir, that we are debating this subject under circumstances of great difficulty, and what I propose to confine myself to for a brief period is a criticism of the administration of relief which has obtained during the present year, and also to make a slight comparison between that system and the system adopted by the Congested Districts Board with regard to the administration of relief in the west of Ireland during the present year. I have protested on every possible occasion against the spirit and the method of that administration, and I do so, Sir, because I believe it to be based upon a radically false idea. The extension of the principle laid down by the Chief Secretary for the administration of relief in the west of Ireland during this distress, if it were accepted by us without protest, is likely to postpone what we all desire—namely, the application of a permanent remedy. Why do I take that view? I take that view because, in my opinion, the Government, in dealing with this question, have uniformly, or, to a great extent—whatever they may say in their speeches— overlooked the real facts of the situation. Now, the First Lord of the Treasury states in one sentence—and he is perfectly correct, in my judgment—the only ground upon which the Government can justify their action in coming to the relief by a special grant for those western districts. He pointed out that we have had depression in England, Scotland, and Wales, and other parts of Ireland, and that the Government had not felt called upon to make special grants. Then why, he asked, had successive Governments felt themselves compelled to make special grants of money to meet the ever-recurring periods of distress in the west of Ireland? And he went on to explain why. He said— Because here you have a population occupied in one single industry, and in some large districts there is no population sufficiently wealthy to come to the relief of their fellows who are in a state of starvation, whereas, in other parts of the country, there is always some section of the people who are not suffering distress, and who are able to hear a portion of the exceptional distress which affects their neighbours. Now, Sir, that is at the bottom of the whole question. You have here a population living in an entirely exceptional way, a large population and a large area of country in a chronic state of bankruptcy. Even in an ordinary year the population is always on the verge of starvation, and is not able to meet its ordinary and normal obligations, and, as the right honourable Gentleman has truly said, the Government is bound to come to their relief by the special means of public funds—Irish funds, but still public funds—because the district is so poor and the mass of the population is so sunk in poverty that it is impossible for the surrounding population to bear the extra burden of its relief. That being so, and being so in the words of the right honourable Gentleman himself, how does he justify the new departure, which seeks to throw this extra yoke upon people in this chronic state of poverty? There it is, Sir, that I say that this new policy of the Government is radically wrong. Nothing could be imagined more cruel, or more indefensible, or more unjust, than to say that in such distress as we have in the west of Ireland in a year like the present, "You must increase your rates, in order to feed those who are actually starving." Now, Sir, it would be very difficult to get into the minds of men who live in a country like England any adequate appreciation of the actual facts. I have in my hand a copy of one of the exceedingly interesting letters, which have appeared in the Manchester Guardian, by Professor Long. Mr. Long is a prominent agricultural expert, a strong Unionist in politics, and a supporter of the Government, and therefore his words ought to carry great weight, because they put in a striking light—I am not exaggerating the intensity of the poverty— the frightful condition of the people. This is what he says— Father Healy has employed a good many men who have been glad to work for 6d. a day, which, I take for granted, is a wage he would have increased had he possessed the means. So much was work sought at the Government pay of 10d. a day that 50 men walked 40 miles in one day to see the guardians, and endeavour to induce them to grant orders for relief work, but entirely without success. Let us all endeavour to comprehend what this means to under-fed men, with families wanting food. Can we imagine the apparent hopelessness of life [...] one who, after such an expenditure of physical energy, returns to his cabin and his famishing little ones still further from all that he needs, worn, and weary, and almost abandoning hope? Just imagine a population where you have a large body of men anxious to work for 6d. a day, and walking a distance of 20 miles and back again in order to get orders for relief work at 10d. a day! If that is the condition that prevails, it is no use to provide temporary remedies; you must deal with the matter in a way which will bring these people permanently out of their chronic condition of distress and starvation. As long as you have these families living on holdings which are entirely too small for them, and as long as they are charged rack rents of 10s. or 15s. an acre for land worth only 1s., you cannot improve their condition. Without going back over the disputed points between us and the Chief Secretary, I hold that the Government are going backwards when they propose, by the legislation introduced this year and by the administration of the present relief works, to depart from the previous practice and to shift on to the shoulders of these bankrupt and poverty-stricken unions so large a proportion of the relief of exceptiona1 distress as they can squeeze out of them. That is the present position, and I say that in my opinion this is a step backwards, and is a policy which we must oppose, not only because of the temporary consequences which will follow upon it, but because it seems to me to indicate that the Government are approaching this question in a less sympathetic spirit and with a less larger comprehension of the problem they have to deal with than previous Governments have done. Now, Sir, there is one part of the speech of the right honourable Gentleman which I heartily accept. What are the ways of dealing with the poverty in the West of Ireland? One is the way which has been practised so largely in the past, of waiting until the cry of distress of starvation is raised, and until it is proved that the people are in danger of starvation, and then giving charitable doles. A more immoral or more wasteful way of dealing with the condition of things in the west of Ireland it is impossible to conceive. We are, of course, continually subjected to the painful and horrible task of raising this question. But what are we to do? Are we to allow these people to lie down on the roadside and die of starvation? I know that hundreds and thousands of people have existed in Ireland during this year for months on one meal a day, and that less than a moderate sufficiency for a human being. We cannot see this kind of thing going on without raising a protest. We are told when we repeat the stories sent to us from, the west of Ireland by people who live on the spot, that we are exaggerating and giving currency to exaggerations. Sir, I quite agree with the right honourable Gentleman that there never is a case of distress in Ireland or in any other country where you have not a great deal of exaggeration. It is impossible for any man—I have often felt it myself—to live in the midst of starvation or distress verging on starvation without indulging in exaggeration. I admit myself that I should be disposed to exaggerate even for the purpose of arousing public opinion when you see this suffering round you. You cannot remain absolutely calm and critical and cool, and you are very apt to overdraw the picture. And, of course, the poor people who live on the spot very often exaggerate, for wherever you have distress you have demoralisation. I have myself been a witness of the fact that the people who are the least distressed often make the loudest outcry. I have over and over again, in my own experience, found that the people who make no complaint whatever, and who are too proud to make complaint, are brought to the very verge of actual death from starvation before anyone knows that they are in distress; whereas the men who are not in extreme want shout, and clamour, and complain. These things will always occur wherever you have extreme distress. Demoralisation is widespread wherever you have this system of temporary relief. Now, Sir, there, is another method which has been to a great extent ignored in Ireland, and that is the endeavour to apply steady, permanent relief which will not stop at the moment when the people come to die of starvation, but will go on from year to year for the purpose of removing the people altogether from this danger and putting the population in a position to support themselves. That is the policy for which we plead, that is the administration of relief for which we plead; and there cannot be the slightest doubt that if all the money which has been paid away in Ireland for temporary relief had been wisely administered with that view from the beginning we should not have famine or such distress as prevails in Ireland at the present day. The right honourable Gentleman alluded to the labours carried on in the administration of the rebel of distress to a certain extent by the Congested Districts Board in the last two years, and he spoke of the introduction of new industries. Sir, something may have been done towards the introduction of new industries, but I have watched a large portion of the Congested Districts Board's labours very carefully, and, while I know that a good, deal has been done in certain spots, it is but a drop in the ocean, and it is not the way in which to get the best value or the best return for your money, because I have always noticed that in dealing with populations like those of the west of Ireland, what you have got to do is, as far as possible, to follow nature. Whenever you attempt to plant anything amongst the people which is artificial, and about which there is a great deal in the newspapers, and glowing descriptions of the wonderful good that has been done, it is still an exotic, and does not at all give promise of that permanence which would arise from some scheme having for its object to enable the people to do that which they are accustomed to do, and which they are entitled to do. That, I think, is the guiding principle which should govern the administration of relief in Ireland, and the right honourable Gentleman appears to have been entirely converted to, or rather to have adopted, that view in regard to the people in the west of Ireland. These unfortunate people are industrious and hard-working. They understand thoroughly one branch of human industry, and if you would take these people to-morrow, and put them— I will not say on rich land, but on poor land, giving them aid to a fair and reasonable amount, you would be perfectly astonished as to how they would create a little capital out of that soil, and in a very short time become so independent as to save the lives of the population. It is only by opening to these people an opportunity for exercising the industry which they know, and which they have practised for generations, that you can restore their prosperity. It is perfectly useless to do otherwise, and I confess that I have listened with some disappointment to the statement of the First Lord of the Treasury, which was otherwise so sympathetic, when he spoke of gradually and slowly improving the condition of things. I know it will take some time, but if the Government would apply themselves vigorously and actively to the task, it would not be at all as long a process as the right honourable Gentleman seems to imagine. It has only, up to the present time, been done experimentally in one or two cases under the Congested Districts Board, and the result of those experiments has been astonishing. Whenever the cry of distress has been raised before in Ireland, those of us who have had the misfortune of being obliged to study the question, knew perfectly well that the first cry would come from the islands of Clare and Achill, and that even where there might be less distress than in the rest of the country, they would be almost the first and foremost to cry out that they were starving. They were tortured by all kinds of expeditions by the police to levy the biggest rents in those islands, and the distress and suffering in those islands was almost perennial. But now the land has been distributed amongst the people, and in this year of acute distress we did not get a single application for relief from those islands. Well, Sir, there you have an example, as well as on the French estate in the county of Galway, where a similar course was adopted of the one effectual method by which, whenever public money is available, and can be used, of putting an end for ever to the recurring and miserable cry of distress, and this demoralisation of the people. Sir, there is one other consideration which I would venture to press upon the House before I sit down. The First Lord of the Treasury, in his speech, asked the House a question as to why it was that the House of Commons was called upon, and felt compelled to make special provision and special grants for this recurring distress in Ireland, when no such thing was done for the rest of the United Kingdom. He gave an excellent reason, to which I have already alluded, why the population, which was at such a dead level of poverty, could not be charged with the relief of any part of the locality. But, Sir, there is another reason which I have heard given in this House before, but to which the right honourable Gentleman did not allude on the present occasion—a reason which, in my opinion, is even more powerful than the reason he gave, and it is this. He has himself frequently admitted, and I think the Chief Secretary also, that this Government—I do not mean the present Government, but the Government of Great Britain—has a responsibility for this state of things in Ireland which imposes upon it an obligation to rescue the people from the position in which they are placed. It cannot be said that this poverty-stricken people are in anything like the same position as people in any other part of the United Kingdom. Their ancestors were driven into the position by the operation of hateful laws which were directed against that unfortunate people. The expression "To hell or Connaught" has passed into the history of our country, and these populations have been the victims of dreadful civil wars and proscriptions, and sweeping evictions, such as have horrified all who have read of them in the history of Ireland. It is not only because they are sunk in this terrible condition of poverty, from which they are, by the admission of the Government, utterly unable to extricate themselves, but it is because they were sunk into that position by the action of the Government of this United Kingdom that the obligation in all justice and honour is thrown upon the Government of this great and wealthy Empire to come to the rescue of this people and place them in a position where they shall become a self-respecting and self-supporting population, instead of being in the wretched state of perpetual mendicancy under which they now exist.

MR. LOUGH (Islington, W.)

I think, Mr. Speaker, that no one will deny out right to say a few words on the important subject raised by the speech of my honourable Friend. I have no intention, Sir, of going outside in any way the limits which you have properly imposed upon the discussion; but there is on suggestion I should like to make to the House. The Report of Supply we are now considering includes the Vote for the Local Government Board of Ireland. Now, I think we have a serious complaint to make of the Local Government Board in connection with this matter in one respect, and it is in respect of the fact that we do not get sufficient information from it about this subject. Now, what will happen, Mr. Speaker? Relief will be distributed, and then the same thing will occur again, as has happened many times during the last 80 years. Now, Sir, is the Local Government Board going to allow the incident to close in that way without any addition to what I will admit, if you like, for the sake of argument, is the useful help they have given up to the present time, or are they prepared to give no further guidance in regard to the problem with which we have to deal for supplying us with more information? It is said that the suffering in the present emergency has been exaggerated, yet we know that something must be done, and we require more information to enable us to guard against a recurrence of such distress in the future. Now, let me suggest one other point upon which I think information is required. We have got a Congested Districts Board in Ireland, but we want to know whether the area of suffering caused by these famines is extending. There is now no place where we can get this information. A few years ago one of the most distinguished members of the Irish Local Government Board retired after 50 years' service, and the first thing he did attar his retirement was, as a sort of legacy, to write a book on these famines, giving some particulars from which possibly my Honourable Friend got some of the facts he has given on this matter this evening. But why should he have to wait until a private individual who has left the service of the Government gives us such information? Why should not the Government examine into the particular crisis we have had now and tell us to how it differs from previous ones, and whether it has been worse or better, and exactly what area it has covered? The First Lord of the Treasury, in his sympathetic speech—wihieh I think adds another obligation to those he has placed Ireland under by has conduct of business in this House during the present Session—states that there had been distress in Lancashire and other parts of the United Kingdom just like that in Ireland. In that I do not think he is quite accurate. There is no distress like it in any other part of the United Kingdom. It occurs in Ireland with, persistent regularity, but what has been referred to as the Lancashire famine results from trade disturbances caused by the American War, and if there be distress in a great industrial centre in South Wales it is the direct consequence of circumstances of an entirely different character, and the cause of which is well known. If distress arises in industrial communities, it is due to fluctuations in trade, but in Ireland there are no such fluctuations, or, at any rate, they are very slight. Of course, it may be that in a wet season the potato crop fails, or some other crop fails, but we do not find that a short crop in any other country has flung the people into famine, and caused the Parliament to take such a step as we are called upon to take here. No, Sir, broadly speaking there are no fluctuations in Ireland which will account for these frequent outbreaks of distress. A fluctuation, amounting to only 5 per cent. of the whole agricultural produce of Ireland, should not bring the people to the starvation point as it does. Why is this? I say that the Irish Local Government Board should give us assistance in the form of fuller information. The Local Government Board has never given us such help. It has been in existence now in Ireland for 50 years, ever since the poor law system was established. These famines have been no better since the poor law was established than they were before, and we cannot get full and true information about them. I should have wished to put a question on this matter to the First Lord of the Treasury if he were present, but perhaps the Attorney General may be able to give us a promise—and I am quite sure that he could do so without overstepping the limits of prudence—that the Local Government Board will prepare an elaborate Report upon all the facts connected with the present distress. There is one curious fact that I should like to have inquired into. My honourable Friend has stated that about £100,000 has been spent, partly by this House, and partly by local representative bodies, in relieving distress—£50,000 by this House, and over £50,000 from other sources, making £100,000 altogether. Well, now, I should like to see if that £100,000 was spent, as probably it was spent, on ordinary food and stimulants in Ireland. If so, three-fourths of the amount went straight into the Treasury as clean as if it had been handed over by this House to the British Treasury, and the amount actually spent would be reduced to £25,000. That is a matter that might well be inquired into by the Local Government Board. They might ascertain what has been done with the money, and if it has been so spent the fact will throw a light upon the whole question. We ought to get information from the Local Government Board as to the areas in which this distress has existed, and as to whether those areas are widening or not, and as to the classes of people who suffer. I believe that in that way valuable material might be gathered for the guidance of this House in dealing with the question.

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR (Liverpool, Scotland)

Mr. Speaker, I am very glad indeed that we are precluded by the tone of the Debate from going back to some of the vexed and rather aggravating questions that have divided those on these benches from the Government during the course of the Session. I think myself that the First Lord of the Treasury, in one of the statements he made, gave a justification for the attitude we took up in regard to certain proposals in the Local Government Bill as to these distressed districts, because he declared, and nobody has denied the statement, that the distress of the people in those districts was largely aggravated by the fact that the districts as a whole were so poor as to leave no residue of the population in a position to assist the most distressed section of the people. Sir, that is our position. Our position with regard to that part of the Bill was that it required the poor to support the poor to an extent that could not properly be placed upon them. I think the speech of the First Lord of the Treasury was one very well calculated to inspire a great deal of hope with regard to the future. My honourable Friend the Member for East Mayo alluded to the statement of a rather controversial character of the First Lord of the Treasury, that the solution of this problem must be of a slow and gradual nature.

I do not quite place the same interpretation on that statement of the First Lord of the Treasury as my honourable Friend. I should imagine in the first place that the First Lord of the Treasury is not in a position according to the ruling of the Chair, or, indeed, according to the necessities of his office, to make anything like a large promise with regard to the future proposals of the Government. I can quite understand why the First Lord should be cautious, and even modest, in any promises as to future policy that he may give to the House upon this occasion, and therefore I read and interpret the statement of the First Lord in the light of those limitations. My interpretation of what the First Lord meant was that this social problem is large and, to a certain extent, difficult, and that a considerable portion of time, whatever the result may be, would unquestionably be required to arrive at a satisfactory and final solution. I assume that that would be the case even if the First Lord of the Treasury were to bring in large and heroic legislation on the subject. Now, Sir, I wish at once to say that I do not think it would be of the least use for the Government to approach this question in anything like a niggardly or half-hearted spirit. It is a large problem, it is a deep problem, it is a growing problem. At the same time the remedy is not far to seek, and is not very difficult. If the Government would only make up their minds that it was their function and their mission to solve this problem before they left office, I am perfectly sure that the Government would solve the problem. Well, now, I think that it is the mission and the duty of the Government to solve this problem. They have a very large majority, they have very great power, both in this House and in another place, and they cannot apprehend on a question of this kind any resistance from any part of the Opposition. They are certainly in a better position to deal with these problems of Irish life than any Government which has existed before them, and I would almost say than any Government which is likely to exist after them. Furthermore, Sir, this Government is bound to live up to its profession. I will not at this period of the Session cast any doubt upon their desire in good faith to fulfil their promises, but this Government is bound to show that this Parliament can govern Ireland as well, as wisely, and as sympathetically as an Irish Parliament maintained by the people of Ireland themselves would do; and therefore it is their duty to take up these problems one offer another and do their best to solve them. Now, Sir, this question of the western population of Ireland is one in which everybody born west of the Channel, as I was myself, must feel a very deep interest. I was brought up in close contiguity to the population of those districts, and I can speak upon the question from some personal knowledge. I remember distinctly a fact which, when I was only a boy, made a great impression upon my mind and brought home to me the position of these people. There was a sailing-boat going across the bay of Galway, which was manned by two or three men. They had before them a difficult and laborious task, and I found that the entire food supply with which they had provided themselves for this hard day's work was a small bowl of potatoes. Those people were able to do that very hard work and still to be perfectly happy on this very small bowl of potatoes. Well, Sir, that brought home to my mind, young as I was, how small the provision of this people must be, and yet how energetic and contented they could be under that small subsistence. Well, Sir, later on I made the acquaintance of a medical man who was on duty in that part of the country, and medical men, as we all know, are brought more closely into relation with the real lives of the poor than the members of any other profession, with, perhaps, the exception of ministers of religion, and I remember very well that this young friend of mine, who- had just taken his degree, was appointed to one of these congested districts in Connemara, and a fact which is still shocking in my recollection is that he told me that it frequently happened that a woman in her confinement had only a bed of seaweed to lie upon. These are facts that should enable us to realise the condition of affairs. In fact, there has long ceased to be any dispute with regard to the facts. There may be doubts as to whether the distress has reached an exceptionally high point, but there is no conflicting opinion between us as to the fact that the distress in these districts is chronic and requires very serious consideration. Now, I interpret the speech of the First Lord of the Treasury as meaning that, in his mind, the case has been established, and that a remedy must be brought in by the Government; that that remedy must take, as one of its shapes, the enlargement of the small holdings upon which these people are compelled to live; and that, so far as he is concerned, any attempt to solve the problem on these lines will meet with his fullest sympathy and support. I do not understand that as meaning that the First Lord of the Treasury suggests that a Measure of this kind should be brought in by a private Member, but that, according to him, this is the duty of the Government, and a duty which the Government are determined and ready to carry out. For these reasons I welcome the speech of the First Lord of the Treasury as holding out some hope for the future. I should have been glad if he had been able to speak in more specific terms. I think my honourable Friend who introduced this question, and many men in Ireland, and elsewhere, who have sacrificed themselves in this movement for so long a time, have at least the satisfaction of knowing that the conditions of the problem are now admitted, and that there is practically a unanimous agreement in the House as to the necessity of an early remedy.

MAJOR JAMESON (Clare, W.)

I do not intend to keep the House any time, but I should like to say a few words upon the subject of relief of this distress, and also on the subject of obtaining information which can be placed before this House. I do not think that the last answer I had from the Chief Secretary, who I am sorry is not here, was quite satisfactory. I appealed very strongly to the Chief Secretary on behalf of the West of Ireland, and on behalf of West Clare. I pointed out to him the terrible distress that prevailed. I pointed out to him that I had seen it myself, that I had personally driven from house to house for miles and miles, and seen the deep distress, the terrible poverty, pressing upon all sides. When I appealed to the right honourable Gentleman for special relief I was told that they had no means by which to gauge the extent of this distress. What I would ask the Government to do is to send down to the place itself, and to go to the people who have some position there, and live there, and then you would very soon see where that distress is, and how it can be remedied. I myself was one of a deputation that went to the Chief Secretary last February, and we laid before him the way in which we considered the distress in that part of Ireland should be remedied. We had a very nice reception. We had deep sympathy, but nothing else. No man appreciates more than I do the sympathetic speech of the right honourable Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury. The only thing that I am anxious about is that it should not end there; and I think the sooner his sympathy is allowed to bear some practical fruits the better it will be for this country and better for Ireland. The Chief Secretary has always taken the view that there is great difficulty in relieving this distress, because you have two forms of it—chronic poverty and temporary distress. I think every Member of the House will acknowledge that where chronic poverty reigns temporary distress will be more accentuated there than anywhere else, and for years there has been more or less of this chronic poverty in certain parts of Ireland. What I complain of is that no measures have been taken to relieve this distress permanently. We have always asked the Government to give some permanent relief, and no doles of £50,000 a year are of the slightest use. You will never have happiness where you have starvation. I think that is a maxim that everyone here will agree with. There is another way in which we might relieve distress—I have mentioned this before, and I know I shall be laughed at—by teaching the people a system of cooking, in order that the little they have may be-made the most of. We have got an instance in the last twenty-four hours; one of the greatest citizens of London, and I may say he is an Irishman, has given £100,000 in order that the working classes of this great town of yours shall be better fed. No one is more delighted than I am, but I do hope that rich man will recollect, after all, the country of his birth, and that he will allow that fund which is now being made up to help in teaching these poor peasants how they can best apply the poor food—and God knows it is poor enough—they have at present. Unless the Government will spend money, in order that the industries of the distressed part of Ireland shall be made payable, they will never do any good. What I do complain of is that when representatives of the people sent here bring up this matter their opinion is systematically ignored. I trust and hope, after what the First Lord has said to-day, that he will show that his sympathy is no barren thing, and that this great and rich country will help us. You owe it to us and we ask you to do it. What we ask for is really our right. It must be to your advantage that these different places in Ireland where chronic poverty has reigned for years should have a fresh remedy applied to them by this country, and that a proper Vote should be given for this purpose. I appeal to the right honourable Gentleman to give us the full and complete Return we ask for, in order that we may, in an orderly and business-like manner, lay before the House the best way in which remedies can be applied in order to relieve our people from want, and make these dark and black spots in our country happy and prosperous.

Resolution agreed to. 6. "That a sum, not exceeding £26,119, 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, 1899, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of Public Works in Ireland.

Agreed to.

Back to
Forward to