HC Deb 02 April 1900 vol 81 cc952-4
CAPTAIN DONELAN (Cork, E.)

On behalf of the hon. Member for Cork (Mr. Maurice Healy), I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade on what grounds the Board of Trade, when alienating foreshore, make a distinction as regards first communicating with the harbour authority between foreshore under water and foreshore which is not under water; will he explain why it is that, seeing that foreshore which is available for conversion into piers and quays is the most valuable, the Board of Trade let it pass into private hands without consulting the harbour authority; and, also, why, in selling the Ballinacurra foreshore to Lord Midleton, the Board of Trade did not make it a condition that Lord Midleton should grant to the Cork Harbour Board the lease which he had agreed to grant in 1884, and the granting of which the Board of Trade then prevented by refusing their consent.

THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. RITCHIE,) Croydon

The Board of Trade, when considering an application for a grant of foreshore below high-water mark, communicate with the harbour authority in order to ascertain their views as to the effect on navigation of the works proposed to be erected on such foreshore. In cases of accreted land above tidal influence, no such question can arise. After the Board had agreed to grant a conveyance of the land in question to Lord Midleton, in order to avoid litigation as to title, they received a letter from the Harbour Commissioners asking that the land might be granted to them. The Board endeavoured to induce Lord Midleton to agree to grant to the Harbour Commissioners a long lease of the land, but they had no power to insist on such a condition. The Board are not aware whether the land sold is identical with that which the Harbour Commissioners desired to lease from Lord Midleton in 1884.

CAPTAIN DONELAN

May I ask is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Cork Harbour Commissioners wrote to the Board of Trade in January, 1899, requesting that this foreshore might be vested in them for public purposes, and that it was not until the following August that the Board of Trade wrote in reply stating that a similar application had been received from Lord Midleton?

MR. RITCHIE

Yes, but it does not in any way qualify the answer I have given. I understand that before the application had been received from the Cork Harbour Commissioners an arrangement had practically been come to with Lord Midleton.

MR. FLYNN

Then why was it not communicated to the Cork Harbour Commissioners for a period of eight months?

MR. RITCHIE

The Board of Trade could not have acceded to the application of the Cork Harbour Commissioners without running the risk of serious litigation. They could not give them the title to land which was claimed by Lord Midleton as having been in possession of his family for 200 years.

MR. FLYNN

Will the correspondence between Lord Midleton and the Board of Trade be made available to Members of the House?

MR. RITCHIE

I think there is no necessity for anything of the kind.

CAPTAIN DONELAN

Will the right hon. Gentleman suggest to Lord Midleton the desirability of carrying out this improvement?

MR. SPEAKER

Order, order!