HC Deb 04 May 1898 vol 57 cc310-33
MR. T. M. HEALY

moved to add the following additional sub-section— No electoral disability or loss of any Parliamentary or other franchise shall be incurred by any person by reason of a grant of outdoor relief having been made to him under this Act or by reason of any such grant ratified under this Act. He said: This clause has been in every Act since 1880, and I may say that I suggested its insertion in the first Irish Distress Act, of 1880. My suggested Amendment would not have been carried then, but the Canadian Legislature sent a special protest to the British Government against imposing electoral disability under the guise of relief. This provision was, therefore, inserted in the first Act of 1880 as a result of the protest from the Canadian Executive, and in every Act dealing with Irish distress that has since been passed, to the number of over a dozen, the section which I am proposing now has been added. While I object to the whole clause, and shall vote for its exclusion from the Bill, regarding it as an attempt to throw a duty from the State on to an impoverished community, I shall endeavour to mitigate its hardships as far as I can.

MR. GERALD BALFOUR

There was a special Act passed by Parliament, passed as the honourable Member said, in 1880. Whether it was or was not a desirable Act, I will not now discuss; but it does not seem to me, when we are passing a provision of this kind, especially having regard to the changes in the law introduced by this Bill, that it would be desirable to adopt the Amendment of the honourable Gentleman. In the first place, it must be remembered that we are about to elect the Boards of Guardians by a very different franchise to that which has been in existence hitherto, and there must be a very important distinction drawn between the various distress Acts, to which the honourable Gentleman has referred, and the present proposal of the Government, but in addition to that Parliament has, in passing those Acts, considered and sanctioned each individual Act separately. This Amendment would take away from Parliament its sanction altogether, and under those circumstances I do not think it would be desirable for Parliament to depart from the general and well-established principle, that those who have been forced, without a cause, to go to the Poor Law Act for relief should not continue to vote for a Parliament or a General Board.

MR. T. M. HEALY

I will not delay the Committee further. I would only say I do sincerely trust that no county council will ever be found foolish enough to put the clause into operation, because that clause is only intended to impose electoral disability.

MR. GERALD BALFOUR

The intention is certainly not to impose electoral disability. The ordinary law of the land will do that, and provides that where relief has been received votes shall be taken away.

MR. T. M. HEALY

Well, I say now that there is a bold advertisement by the Government to the people that if they want to preserve their votes the county council should not be foolish enough to put this clause into operation. Whenever the British Government passed a Measure for alleviating the distress of Ireland they accompanied it with the proposal which is now rejected. Let the county councils remember, if they take upon themselves, at the expense of the rates, this burden which the British Government, mean as it is, has hitherto taken over, in that case they will be opening up a means for disfranchising the people.

Upon the Motion that Clause 12 stand part of the Bill,

In moving the omission of the clause,

MR. DILLON

This is a most extraordinary clause, and I venture to say it is entirely out of place in a Bill not intended to be hostile and coercive towards Ireland. The object of this clause, and the effect of it, if passed, will be to transfer for all future time the whole responsibility and the entire burden of dealing with any exceptional distress in the west of Ireland from the shoulders of the British Government—that is the way I read it—to the shoulders of the ratepayers of the poorest counties of Ireland. There can be no doubt that this is the object of the clause, and when I protested against the clause what was the answer given by the right honourable Gentleman. He said, now we have shifted the burden of the rates on to the shoulders of the occupiers, and the landlords are no longer to be responsible in the congested districts for any share of the poor rate, or for all the poor rate of the small holdings, it will be necessary to pass a relief Act next Session. A more miserable reason for this clause it is impossible for the mind of man to conceive.

MR. GERALD BALFOUR

The honourable Gentleman is in error.

MR. DILLON

The object of this Bill would be to transfer the whole of the responsibility and burden of dealing with exceptional distress in the west of Ireland. Now as to the counties where the distress exists. I fancy I can follow the working of the right honourable Gentleman's mind. He, in connection with the present distress, imagined that he had hit upon a most ingenious and delightful device, which was to apply a system by which he would interpose between the Government and the starving people, whenever there happens to be starvation in the country, some local board upon whom he can shift the burden of responsibility, and unto whom he can slay, Until you have entirely drained all your resources we are not called upon to give any relief at all. He has experimented with that system in a slight degree by means of what he calls the labour test; but there is one difference with regard to the present distress. He proposed that the Government should bear three-fourths of the extra cost. He now proposes by this Bill that the Government is to have no responsibility whatever, or to have anything to do with it. The clause is very plain. What is it it proposes to do? The clause proposes that where there is no exceptional distress in any Union in the west of Ireland, that the first recourse of the Union is to be to the county council, and if it can convince the county council that there is exceptional distress, the county council goes to the Local Government Board, and if they are satisfied they may, if they think fit, by order, authorise the guardians, subject to the prescribed conditions, to administer relief out of the workhouse for any time not exceeding two months. Now what will be the effect of that action on the Government, either that of which the right honourable Gentleman is a Member, or any Government of the future? The unfortunate people in the starving districts of the west of Ireland will apply to the county council. The county council will say, No; if we agree to grant this relief—the greater the distress the greater the burden to relieve; they will say, If we agree to put this clause in motion, we cannot tell to what depths of bankruptcy and ruin we shall be brought. We have no guarantee that when we put this clause into force the Government will come to the relief of the country. What has happened to the Ballinasloe Asylum? When Irish Members attempt to put pressure upon this House, the Government will say go to the county council, and in the meanwhile the more the distress, the greater the distress, the more unwilling the county councils will be to put this clause into force. What will be the result? There will be scenes in this House—the Government referring us to the county councils, the county councils refusing to listen to our appeals, the people starving, and until deaths have occurred from starvation—and we know now what definition the Government gives us of death from starvation—until people actually perish from lack of food, the Government will say, "Go to the county councils; look to clause 12" A more ingenious system for saving the British Treasury and erecting a barrier behind which it will be hidden in the future. I cannot conceive. I put it to the right honourable Gentleman is it reasonable or fair to drag into a Bill like this a clause of this character, a clause which has no analogue in legislation either of this country or Scotland? I say it is a most cruel thing to introduce a clause which can have no other purpose than that, which has no elements in it of benefit for the people of Ireland, but which, on the contrary, is an oppressive clause, and has no analogue in this country which this Bill is to follow. The Government will find it is impossible to say a word upon it. Suppose this clause is admitted, we must remember that the Congested Districts Board has done some good in the west; but, generally speaking, there is a mass of poverty in the west which remains as it has done for 40 years, and we are to look forward to the same class of events that have occurred during the last 30 years. Now, supposing in 1879 this clause had been in operation—we know in that year a sum of £2,000,000 was distributed as distress followed on distress. Now, no county council which was not out of its mind would have put that clause into operation, because, so long as they set that clause in motion, not a shilling would have come from the British Treasury. The answer would have been "Raise your rates," and until they had raised their rates to straining point, they would receive no relief from the British Treasury. One of two things would happen; either disease of a dreadful character, bringing many deaths, would break out, and violent passions would be let loose in these parts of Ireland; or, on the other hand, these counties would be overwhelmed in misery by the working of this clause. Each of the districts would be obliged to provide something like £100,000 to keep the distress away from their own district. I cannot imagine a more unjust and unreasonable clause. I do not like to occupy the time of the Committee at greater length, because I am in hopes the right honourable Gentleman will abandon this clause and let us get over the ground. There is only just one more point I wish to draw attention to. In the course of the Debate on the Congested Districts Bill at the beginning of the Session the right honourable Gentleman said that if the Government were assured that Irish Members would not oppose the Congested Districts Bill, it was possible that he would consider the matter later. Now, if he wants to deal with the congested districts, I do urge that the proper place for such a clause as this is in a Bill for the congested districts. When he comes to deal with that matter, with some sympathy for these unfortunate people, he might draft a Bill with adequate provision for the Congested Districts Boards, and he might move in some clauses in this Bill, and then we might consider how far we could give a quid pro quo in the way of relieving the Imperial Treasury from the responsibility of dealing with any future famines in Ireland, as this clause is intended to do, if the Government will give some statesmanlike Measure at the same time which will give us promise of a gradual and moderate improvement. We have no assurance of any adequate scheme to relieve these continually recurring famines, but the right honourable Gentleman proposes by a simple clause to shift from the Imperial Treasury to the most poverty-stricken districts of Ireland the whole problem of dealing with these famines.

MR. FLYNN (Cork, N.)

I think this clause raises an entirely novel element in the Bill. This is a Bill to establish county councils and district councils and agricultural rating grants in Ireland, and now we find it is a Bill to relieve the British Treasury of the responsibility of relieving Ireland, and for throwing the responsibility upon the poorest districts of that country. I cannot see what reason there should be at all for this clause, unless it be that by its means the Treasury hope to escape from the responsibility they are under at the present time. Now, it must be remembered that where this poverty occurs is in the poorest districts of Ireland. If anything could be said in favour of this clause it would be that there might be counties fairly prosperous which would be able to contribute something towards the relief of the poorer parts of the county; but take the county of Kerry at the present moment, and see how that stands. First of all, we contend that this poverty and these recurrent famines are owing to the misgovernment of the country in the past. At the present moment all these things exist. Take Mayo and Kerry. In the latter there are several unions, in which large numbers of the people are being fed by the cities of Cork and Dublin. Now, suppose this clause were in operation. In some of those districts the rates now are nearly 4s. 6d. in the £, and, then, supposing this clause were passed, the guardians would represent this terrible state of things to the county councils, who would say, "While we admit the poverty, we will not move until the last moment." In a place like Kerry, where the rates run to 12s. 6d. in the £, you can see how difficult it would be to move the county council to put this clause into operation. You are between the devil and the deep sea. The charitable contributions which now come from the various towns and communities would then be withheld. The Government, when we approach them, would say let the county councils act first, and the last state of the unfortunate people would be worse than the first. By this clause, or by this Bill, the British Government cannot hope to get rid of their responsibilities, and which are recognised as being theirs by every civilised nation. That this chronic poverty and these constantly recurring famines are owing to the improvidence and the extravagance of the people I deny. Everybody knows these people are industrious and abstemious, and live on the hardest of fare. They are the worst clothed, the worst fed, and worst treated peasantry in Europe, and these are the people who would be thrown upon the county councils by the operation of that clause. The honourable Member for East Mayo has indicated how this clause could be dealt with in another Measure, and if such a Measure should be introduced I believe it would pass in a very short time—in a single afternoon—because I do not believe anyone would offer any opposition to it at all. But that such a clause should be introduced into a Bill of this kind certainly exceeds all power of reasonable comprehension, and we are going to extend all the opposition in our power to it. I trust the right honourable Gentleman will see that we have not been anxious to labour the Debate upon this Bill, but this is a clause which is not a matter of mere verbiage; this is a clause which raises this principle: that the wealthy British Treasury is trying, by means of this clause, to relieve themselves from a responsibility which, in the sight of God and man, is theirs, and not a responsibility of the Irish people. I hope the right honourable Gentleman will see his way to withdraw this clause.

MR. TULLY

I think this clause is one which reveals the true British spirit in dealing with all Irish affairs. It is the spirit in which you, while trying to do good for Ireland, incorporate something or other which sets up one set of Irish people against another. That is what you are doing here. You want to set the county councils against the people in the distressed districts, who have been driven there because of the economic laws passed in this House. They have turned out and driven the people away from the good lands in order to make bullock pastures from which to feed the British artisans. That is the object and purport of this clause. We were told last night that the men elected on the county councils would be the same men as those who composed the boards of guardians—that is to say, the traders, the commercial class, and the well-to-do. It is these people, the traders, to whom it is most hateful to hear of the distress; it hurts their business and destroys the commercial credit of the district when this cry is raised. The men who are on the county councils will not be anxious to enforce this clause. This is the spirit in which everything has been done in every English Act, and which has always made the Act hateful to the Irish people. You have done the same thing in the poor rate. You put the poor rate into the landlords' pockets, you have made them clerks for the poor rates, and they have taken the opportunity, which you gave them, to raise the rents, so that the poor rate comes from the people. Your object in doing that was to put a scourge upon the people, and to drive them out into the districts where the land is poor, and off the good lands. You now want to put one set of Irishmen against another. I think that all Irishmen ought to resist this clause. It is a specimen of the British generosity to Ireland. For my part I should like to see the landlords abolished; but this was the spirit which was applied to the landlords in the Land Acts. I think it is a clause which the people will take care not to apply. If there is distress, there will be distress so long as the clause is in operation; but I think this device for shouldering upon the people of Ireland the responsibility of this country will not succeed, and that the clause will be a dead letter.

MR. P. J. POWER (Waterford, E.)

said that the right honourable Gentleman had admitted that the problem of the congested districts in Ireland and the poverty that existed in parts of Ireland had engaged his attention, and also the attention of his predecessors. It spoke very badly for the capability of his predecessors that nothing effective had ever been done in this matter, and that year after year Parliament was face to face with this question of poverty in Ireland. The right honourable Gentleman might on this occasion endeavour to lessen that poverty, and say that it was so acute as it was made out to be. The fact that they could get an able-bodied man to work for 4s. a week, and to go a long distance to his work, was conclusive evidence that there was acute poverty. The present condition of the country was a standing disgrace to a rich country like this, the richest country in the world. It was a disgrace that year after year the representatives of Ireland had to come before the House and proclaim the poverty of their people, The Government had acknowledged the poverty that existed, and yet they did nothing to meet that poverty; they endeavoured to shirk their responsibilities and to throw upon district councils and county councils the duties that belonged to the Imperial Government. The poverty of these counties in Ireland was the direct result of the misgovernment of the Irish people. The clause was a subterfuge; it endeavoured to throw upon the people the burden of relieving the great distress that existed in Ireland. He believed that if the clause were passed in its present form the counties would be reluctant to put it into operation.

MR. KILBRIDE (Galway, N.)

asked what this clause proposed. It proposes to make the large ratepayers, men who farmed hundreds of acres in Galway, pay for the relief of the peasants of Connemara. There was introduced into the Bill a principle which relieved the landlord of the liability of half the rates. Taking as an example the county which he had the honour to represent, he should like to know why the shopkeepers in the town of Ballinasloe should pay for the relief of the people of another place. He could not see why a national charge should be confined to a county. If they were going to make the county the unit of area, he would suggest that the right honourable Gentleman should make a preferential charge or a charge over the whole of Ireland. He agreed with the honourable Member for East Mayo when he said that this was meant as a relief to the British Treasury. They all knew that this clause would not be put into operation in the western counties. The effect would be that the people in these remote districts might apply to the county council, and the county council would refuse to come to their relief, and that Irish Members would have to appeal to the British Treasury to relieve the distress. Then they would be told to go to the county council. He did not know that the county council would allow themselves to be responsible for such a state of things. All this was a difficulty that had existed in Ireland for generations. It was the British Government who were responsible for that state of things, and not the people of Ireland. If the people of Ireland in the past had had their way these congested districts would not exist now. If the right honourable Gentleman were really desirous to relieve distress in those poor districts it was not done, in his humble judgment, in a Bill of this sort. It could only be done by opening the purse-strings of the British Treasury. That alone could make a permanent impression on these congested districts At present the income was only £40,000 a year. What was that in the hands of a board which had such an enormous coast line? Until the Congested Districts Board are in a position to expend a very much larger sum than at present they would not be able by any such legislation as this to relieve themselves from the responsibility of having to safeguard the lives of these people from starvation.

DR. J. A. RENTOUL (Down, E.)

If the honourable Gentleman who has spoken looks at the clause he will see that there is provision made, because the county council is to apply to the Local Government Board, and the Board may, if they think fit, authorise the guardians to act. That being so, there is a safeguard with regard to large ratepayers.

MR. DILLON

What about the people who are starving?

DR. RENTOUL

With regard to the large ratepayers, there is protection contained in the clause by the intervention of the Local Government Board. As to the clause generally, I myself am very much afraid that the clause will not work. Consequently I should be glad if the Attorney General and the Chief Secretary will consider this matter between now and the Report stage. I fear it will prove a dead letter. I think the county councils will not act in this matter. I should be extremely astonished if the county council did act in this matter. The honourable Member who last spoke also said it was not fair to place all the burden upon the well-to-do parts of the county. I think there is a great deal in that argument. As to the existence of congested districts, I do not think I have so much sympathy. I have my own opinion as to how these congested districts came into existence. The honourable Member for Cork spoke about congested districts being brought about by misrule. My knowledge of Ireland is this, that the people attempted to live in Ireland in certain parts which could not possibly support them. Men are attempting to live in Ireland, whereas in similar districts in Scotland the ground is left uninhabited. The people will not move, and the result is that it perpetually encourages them to lead that sort of life which people to-day live in some parts of Westminster, where they actually take rooms in crowded streets at 10s. a week in order to participate in the charity distributed there. The same congestion would be found in Scotland if people did the same thing. Now that local government is given to Ireland, I do not think it would be wise to take the responsibility from the county councils in this matter. On the other hand, I do not think the clause, as it at present stands, will apply to any case of exceptional distress in Ireland. If that is so, the excellent object which the Chief Secretary has in view of making the people in the district have some voice and responsibility in the matter, will not be carried out.

MR. J. A. PEASE (Northumberland, Tyneside)

I feel that the House will have to allow me to explain my position. I propose to vote with the Irish Members, below the Gangway. It is very obvious that if the Irish people can come to this House at any period of exceptional distress, then assuredly the Government will have to pay money out of the British Exchequer, and the interests of the British taxpayers will be touched. It has been stated on both sides of the House that the clause as it stands will become inoperative. It certainly will cause a good deal of friction. Many of the Nationalists in Ireland have opposed it, and, I think, on very good grounds. It deals, I understand, with cases of exceptional distress. Now, cases of exceptional distress have occurred over and over again. Anyone who has visited the west of Ireland must see what the effect will be in the future. The Imperial Government must see that this is a very difficult matter. But it is better for the Imperial Government to face enormous difficulties than to leave them to the county councils to deal with. In the English Bill of 1880 we have nothing of this kind introduced, and I do not see why an exception should be made in Ireland because Ireland is poor. An appeal has been made to this House over and over again for money out of the Imperial funds. There has been the question of agricultural distress, and we have had Commissions which have reported in favour of Imperial intervention. It is to the Imperial Government that the Irish poor must look for assistance rather than to district councils. I hope that the Government will see their way to make some modification in this clause, if they cannot withdraw it. Now, Sir, I have listened carefully to the arguments which have been used by honourable Members opposite who object to this proposal. I quite admit that a Measure dealing with the permanent difficulty of distress in the west of Ireland must be sustained upon Imperial funds and not those of the county or district. All arguments against the proposal have resolved themselves into this: that it is designed to save the Imperial Treasury from bearing any share in the relief of exceptional distress where such relief appears to be necessary: that will be a matter for consideration in every case, as it is now. The general object of this clause is to extend the principle of union rating. At the present time, as the Committee know, the burden of outdoor relief falls, as a rule, on the electoral district. This will be changed by the Bill, all the expenditure being thrown on the union at large. It is a further extension of the principle to provide that, where there is exceptional distress, the county council, taking to itself a certain responsibility with regard to the suspension of the existing law as regards outdoor relief, shall, at the same time, take upon itself a certain part of the burden of the expenditure thereby incurred. Mr. Lowther, we have a double object in this clause. As the Committee know, outdoor relief has only been given to Ireland under certain strict conditions, but some four or five times within the last 15 years it has been found necessary to relax those conditions in consequence of the exceptional distress existing in the west of Ireland. It is considered inconvenient and undesirable that recourse shall always be had to Parliament before these rules can be relaxed in these exceptional cases, and at the same time it is undesirable to repeal the laws which, when a normal condition of things has to be dealt with, are wise and wholesome laws. Therefore it is provided in the clause that when the guardians have an exceptional condition of distress to deal with they can appeal to the county council, and the council can refer to the Local Government Board to relax the conditions of outdoor relief. Well, if the county council has this power—for power, practically, it will be—it is eminently desirable that it should at the same time take a certain amount of pecuniary responsibility on behalf of the ratepayers. There is an additional reason why it is desirable in these cases that the county council should take upon itself a certain portion of the pecuniary responsibility. Sir, we have now had considerable experience of the existing practice, which up to the present year has been that, where exceptional distress has existed in the west of Ireland, the local authorities have been practically relieved of all responsibility, and the entire burden has been thrown upon the Exchequer. The result has been that it has been practically to the interest of every person in these distressed districts to magnify this distress; and this has been done consistently, not merely during the present year, but on every previous occasion. This exaggeration has had a most demoralising effect upon the population concerned, because, when periods of difficulty occurred, they were taught not so to conduct themselves as to diminish the distress in the future, but simply to look to the Imperial Exchequer, or to the public bounty. There can be nothing more fatal to the morale of a population than to have this idea continually held up to their minds. I do not for a moment contend that this proposal in itself will be a method for dealing with the permanent condition of things in the west of Ireland, but I do think it most important that we should endeavour to drive out of the minds of the people in the west of Ireland that their condition, when the harvest is a little worse than usual, is a condition which the Exchequer of this country is bound to come forward to relieve. Now, Sir, it has been said that the proposal will be inoperative. My honourable Friend the Member for East Down takes that view. I do not believe it at all. I firmly believe that when a condition of things exists that calls for relief from outside the guardians will make a representation to the county council and the county council will, under the circumstances, if they feel additional relief is necessary, be bound, in the interests of humanity, to exercise their powers under this clause. In no sense will this clause lay on the unions or the county councils burdens which they cannot bear: but I do think, in the interests of everybody concerned, that a far greater share of the responsibility should be thrown upon the local authorities to deal with this question than has hitherto been done.

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

I have listened very carefully to this Debate, and I think I may say that I have an open mind on the question. My conclusion is that the most damaging speech made against the clause was that to which we have just listened. The right honourable Gentleman has admitted that the relief of the Imperial Exchequer will be an incidental consequence, and in legislation consequences, and not objects, have to be dealt with; and it must be assumed that when the proposer of a law declares certain consequences which will ensue, he intended such consequences. I will not go into the historical aspect of the question, like the honourable Member for East Down, and I do not regard it as a question between landlord and tenant, or between the different classes in Ireland. The whole question is one as to whether responsibility for exceptional distress should be local or imperial. I will first deal with the point of the right honourable Gentleman, that the responsibility ought to be local. What was the argument he gave for that? It was an argument which, I think, establishes our case. The argument was that if a local body should take the responsibility of recognising this distress, they were bound, at the same time, to accept the pecuniary responsibility as well. Our whole point is that the question of distress ought not to be dealt with piecemeal, but as a great problem to be permanently settled. We submit that the problem is Imperial, and the solution must be on Imperial responsibility. But that is not the position of the right honourable Gentleman. He says that the local bodies are the best to deal with it. Let us see how it works out. You put the responsibility of a particular congested district not merely on the congested district itself, but on the county to which the congested district belongs. Now, Sir, I can understand the argument of making the responsibility of a congested district a national responsibility, but I can understand no argument in favour of making it a county obligation. What is the fact? Is it not the fact that the counties in Ireland, in which these congested districts are situate, are the poorest in Ireland? You are asking poor Kerry to assist poor Kerry, poor Mayo to assist poor Mayo, poor Donegal to assist poor Donegal, and Galway in the same way. It would be much more reasonable to ask Dublin or Meath, or the other counties in Ireland, to come to the rescue of those congested districts than the poor counties to which the congested districts belong. Therefore, I say, if you are to extend Irish local responsibility over these congested districts, the extension should take the shape of an Irish and national responsibility, and not to be confined to the poor districts. I understand that the county of Cork is to be divided under the jurisdiction of two county councils. One portion of the county, I believe, contains the whole of the congested districts of the county of Cork. So that, even in the county of Cork itself, you limit the responsibility for a congested district, not to the county at large, but to the residents of the congested district itself. I do not think I need say more to show that this proposition carries its own condemnation with it. The honourable and learned Member for East Down said that the origin and source of the distress in these congested districts was due to the fact that people would not leave the land, and attempted to live in certain portions where it could not possibly support them, and he went on to say that the proper remedy was for them to abandon the attempt. I observed, with some shock, that the right honourable Gentleman the Chief Secretary cheered that observation. What does that mean? Let us strip it of the language in which it is clothed, and come down to concrete facts. What does it mean? It means that the remedy the Chief Secretary has to offer, the one remedy to which he assents, is that there shall be more emigration. The right honourable Gentleman assents to that proposal. It almost breaks one's heart and makes one despair of anything like an attempt—I will not say of a just and generous kind, but of a statesmanlike kind—in dealing with this problem in Ireland, to hear such a resolution as that put forward by an honourable and learned Member representing an Irish constituency. I speak of this subject not merely from an Irish, but from an Imperial point of view, and I say that the British statesman must be blind, and deaf, and almost insane, who puts forward the view that a further bleeding of the Irish population is necessary to give prosperity to Ireland, and greater efficiency to the nation. I may say that, so far as we can prevent it—so far as every patriotic Irishman can prevent it—not one single man, woman, or child shall be taken from the already depleted population of Ireland. The reason I call attention to the cheer of the right honourable Gentleman is that we now understand what he means by the permanent settlement of the congested districts. It is not to extend the holdings of the poor, although there is plenty of land.

MR. GERALD BALFOUR

The real question is this. I have no doubt whatever that any man who has studied the question knows that there are parts of the western counties of Ireland in which the population cannot be adequately accommodated. As to the remedy, that is another question.

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR

The honourable and learned Member for East Down left no doubt whatever about the remedy he proposes, and I interpreted his words in the only way they can be interpreted.

DR. RENTOUL

The honourable Member and myself are both emigrants to our great advantage.

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR

I have two comments to make to that interruption. In the first place it is more flattering to me at least than it is relevant; and secondly, in the case of the honourable and learned Gentleman—I omit myself altogether—what has been England's gain has been Ireland's loss. But, treating the interruption seriously, does anybody imagine that there is any parallel between the ordinary Irish peasant trained only on a patch of land, and the honourable and learned Gentleman who, with the advantages of education in Ireland, started life in England with considerable advantages. Coming back, however, to the speech of the honourable and learned Member, and putting on it the only interpretation it will bear, I want to know what the right honourable Gentleman the Chief Secretary meant by cheering it. If he means that these people are living on small patches that they cannot make self-supporting, I agree. I do believe there will be recurrent famine in these districts until the patches on which the people live are enlarged, but I hold that the enlargement should come from the soil of Ireland, and not from the soil of any other nation. The right honourable Gentleman has made an admirable speech in favour of my honourable Friend's Motion against this clause, and I hope that when we go into the Lobby it will have the full support of all the representatives from Ireland.

SIR T. G. ESMONDE

I am afraid that, however well-intentioned the right honourable Gentleman is, this clause will be found to be very defective. I would ask the right honourable Gentleman to study the conditions of unions in the West of Ireland. Let us suppose that there is a period of exceptional distress in one of the divisions of the county of Kerry. The county council of Kerry agree that this is exceptional distress, and they allow a certain amount of money to be voted for the purpose of meeting it. A part of that money is to be a county charge; the other part is recoverable from the particular district concerned. Now, how are you going to recover an additional rate in a division where the annual valuation of an enormous number of ratepayers is twelve, or ten, or even seven shillings? How are you going to make these people pay an additional rate to meet exceptional distress, when they are already taxed to the amount of ten, eleven, or even twelve shillings in the pound? No matter how well-intentioned, it would be absolutely impossible to put this clause into operation in such a case. You must remember that a great number of these ratepayers are themselves in a condition of chronic distress, and I do not see how you can get an additional rate out of them. My honourable Friends have taken a wise course in this matter. The issue is whether this recurrent distress in Ireland is to be remedied locally, or is, by the Imperial Parliament, to be settled once for all. I do not think this question is very difficult to settle. I believe that if the local industries in many of the dis- tricts in the west of Ireland were properly developed—even the one single industry of the fisheries—we would have much less distress than at present. The proper policy is to give the Congested Districts Board enough of money to deal with the question. The Board does already an enormous amount of good in some districts, and its action, limited as it has been, has done much to prevent recurrent famine. The proper policy is to face the situation boldly, and for the Government to announce that they are prepared to put it in the power of the Congested Districts Board to develop the resources of these districts. That is the only way of settling this question of recurrent distress in the west of Ireland. The right honourable Gentleman assures us, of course, that this clause will not bar all treatment of exceptional distress by the Imperial Parliament. But the treatment of distress by the Imperial Parliament is not such as we should desire. This year in the west of Ireland there has been exceptional distress. I did not believe the distress was so great until I had learned its extent for myself. No doubt in the west of Ireland people are dying of starvation, and such a condition as that is a disgrace to the Imperial Parliament. I hope the right honourable Gentleman will not think these remarks are made in any offensive spirit. We have endeavoured to lay the matter before him, and while, no doubt, he means well, we hope he will take adequate action in the matter.

MR. HORACE PLUNKETT (Dublin Co., S.)

The opinion has been expressed on the other side of the House by more than one speaker that the Government should frankly declare that they are prepared to apply some permanent remedy to this problem. Now the honourable Baronet who has just sat down says the question is: are the Government going to take up this matter, and settle it once and for all? Does any man in the House imagine that this problem of the distress in the west of Ireland can be settled once for all? It must inevitably take many years of hard and incessant work to settle. I think it would be hardly fair to say that the Government are not making a beginning. As to whether they are doing all they should do is a matter for argument, but to say that a beginning has not been made would be a flat contradiction of the facts. It has also been stated that the right honourable Gentleman the Chief Secretary has declared in favour of emigration. I have had an opportunity of discussing with him every remedy that has been suggested, but I never heard him mention the word "emigration." Everybody must admit that there are a large number of districts in the west of Ireland that will not, no matter what you do, support the people in them, and a certain number of these people must be moved. No one suggests that they should be moved out of the country. We discussed this question in connection with a Congested Districts Bill a few Wednesdays ago in this House. I think this proposition was freely admitted then. But the question arises, how is the land to be obtained into which to move these people where land is not available adjacent to their holdings? It has been proposed that these lands should be obtained by compulsory powers, but the Chief Secretary, on the occasion of that proposal, proved conclusively, I think, that to do so at that stage, at any rate, would make it more difficult for the Congested Districts Board to obtain land. I have come to a very definite conclusion upon this problem. I believe that it is necessary, in order to permanently deal with the distress, to spend a vast amount of money in education in these districts. Until these unfortunate people have been morally and intellectually raised above their present condition—

MR. J. DILLON (Mayo, E.)

Morally!

MR. PLUNKETT

I do not use the term in any way that reflects on the character of the people—I have never said anything against their morals, but I will withdraw the word "morally," and substitute "socially"—until they have been socially and intellectually raised above their present condition, which I believe can be done, although it is not the proper time to say in what way—but until this has been brought about I believe it is impossible to effectively assist them. But we are not dealing with the question of permanent relief, but of temporary relief. The only question we are now dealing with is, whether, when exceptional distress arises, the district or county council shall have the first responsibility in connection with that distress, or whether it should all be thrown on the Imperial Government. There is, of course, a third alternative, which I do not think has been suggested—that the financial responsibility should be spread, not over particular counties, but over the whole of Ireland, and personally I do not say that I should be very much opposed to such a proposal as that. I should like to see this question as to responsibilities in cases of exceptional distress a little further considered. The honourable Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool has told us of the effect of the Chief Secretary's plan in county Cork; still I am not prepared to say any better suggestion can be made; and as the Government have frankly admitted that the permanent remedy was an Imperial question, and have further admitted that in cases of temporary distress, if the local resources were unduly pressed upon, the Imperial Government must step in, I must say that I am not prepared now to object to the clause, which simply gives the local bodies power to obtain funds, and does not change whatever responsibility there now rests upon the Imperial Government.

MR. DILLON

The right honourable Gentleman who has just sat down has not told us whether he was in favour of this clause or against it, and I certainly did hope for some more definite statement from a gentleman who is looked upon as an expert on the question. The right honourable Member assured us that the first thing to be done was to educate the people, morally and intellectually, in Ireland, when they are at present starving.

MR. PLUNKETT

I withdrew the word "morally."

MR. DILLON

Socially, then. It is very cold comfort to a people who are starving to say that the first thing to do is to raise them socially and intellectually.

MR. PLUNKETT

The honourable Member misrepresents me. I was not dealing with the question of temporary distress, but with a permanent remedy.

MR. DILLON

Whether you are dealing with temporary distress or permanent remedy, exactly the same principle arises. Because the first step in a permanent remedy is not to socially and intellectually lift the people, but to place them under some new circumstances by which they can earn a decent living. If you give these people an opportunity of doing that, and leave them alone, I know they will elevate themselves socially and intellectually, as Irishmen have done in other countries to which they have gone. Now I turn to the speech of the right honourable Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland, and throughout it he said that this clause is not intended to relieve the Imperial Exchequer of responsibility for temporary distress. Well, Sir, I cannot accept any such statement. If he proposes—if he really means it, why not put something into the Bill which will bind him in that responsibility? What was one of the arguments in favour of granting this power to county councils to relax the law with regard to temporary relief? One of the strongest reasons was that it is necessary at certain intervals to come before the House of Commons for a Bill when there would be exceptional distress in Ireland. And why does he not wish to do that? Why, because it compels the Government to admit that there is exceptional distress, and one of the principal objects in drafting this Bill is to avoid coming to Parliament. That is one of the exact reasons why we do not want this clause to be passed. We have had experience of this, and when a Bill would be brought in Ministers would deny that exceptional distress did exist. I say it would be impossible to extract from a Minister such an admission. That one reason in favour of this clause is a very strong argument against it. The right honourable Gentleman said that if this clause were passed it would not relieve the Imperial Exchequer of the responsibilities of dealing with distress in the western counties, yet it was shown that such distress really did exist. It has been shown by the representatives of Ireland in this House that the demands of relief committees would be met by the one answer, that if there was distress amongst the people he would have the best means of knowing, and the county council, who would be on the spot, had not. Therefore I maintain that the way this clause would work would be as I say—the effect of the county council not acting would be his reply on every Bill. Let me turn to the question which was raised by the honourable Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool, and to which no answer has been given. There is no doubt that in this Bill the principle of union rating is to be substituted for divisional rating, but that does not carry us to the principle of county rating for exceptional distress, and I have not heard one argument in favour of confining all the responsibilities to the poorer counties, and not separating them. We have had some experience in Ireland, because after the great famine the Government of this country tried to apply in Ireland the system of national aid, and for two years the rate was levied all over the country to aid distress in the west and South of Ireland. One year it was a sixpenny rate, then it was twopence or threepence, and nearly £300,000 was levied from the ratepayers to relieve the Imperial Exchequer. I would put this to the right honourable Gentlemen from the north of Ireland opposite, and to their constituents. I hope we shall obtain some support from them in this stand we are taking. I appeal to the honourable Member for the St. Stephen's Green Division and to the Members for northern constituencies—if they allow this clause to pass, they will be acting badly for themselves, because distress may at any time come to Dublin or other parts of Ireland.

The honourable Member was still speaking at half-past five, when, by the Rules of the House, the Debates was adjourned.