HC Deb 26 July 1900 vol 86 cc1438-44

Considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

[Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]

Clause 1:—

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRE- [LAND (Mr. G. W. BALFOUR,) Leeds, Central

said that the Amendment he now proposed to move was to be taken in connection with one which appeared a little lower down in the Paper, and was moved in accordance with the pledge he gave approving the recommendations of the Committee.

Amendment proposed— In page 1, line 7, to leave out 'portion of.'"—(Mr. G. W. Balfour.)

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment proposed— In page 1, line 11, to leave out from 'them' to the second 'in,' in line 12."—(Mr. G. W. Balfour.)

MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)

said that this was an attempt to prevent by statute the teaching of the Irish language. He had never known of a case in which an Amendment of this kind had been moved, except in the case of the Pigott Commission. Where was the necessity for the Amendment unless it were to limit and restrict the action of the Commission?

Amendment agreed to.

MR. T. M. HEALY

said he was afraid that the form of the rules would exclude the schools of the Christian Brothers from the benefits of the Act, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would accept the Amendment he now proposed.

Amendment proposed— In page 1, line 14, at end, to insert, 'Nothing in any rule made in pursuance of this section shall exclude from participation in the benefits of the said Acts any school which would be entitled to participate in such benefits if this Act had not passed.'"—(Mr. T. M. Healy.)

MR. G. W. BALFOUR

said if the Amendment were accepted the difficulty which the hon. Member believed to exist as to want of a definition of the word "school" would remain. He could assure the hon. Member that the Government did not wish to exclude the schools of the Christian Brothers from the benefits of the Act.

MR. T. M. HEALY

said that if he withdrew the Amendment he would like to have a definite assurance from the right hon. Gentleman that this was an improper use to make of the Act. He thought if the Rules were laid on the Table it would be an effective preservation, and therefore he begged to withdraw this Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 2 agreed to.

Clause 3:—

MR. T. M. HEALY

said when the original Act was introduced, considerable sums were granted in different parts of Ireland for prizes, but from year to year those sums had been diminished until now, instead of a boy winning a £40 scholarship as a first prize, the amount had fallen so low as to be only some £25. It was said that that was owing to the fund having become bankrupt, but Irish Members found that it could still be drawn upon for other purposes. There was now an attempt to pay pensions to those who had been responsible for education under the Intermediate Education Act of thirty years ago. They were no doubt deserving persons, but if they were deserving of pensions they should be pensioned out of the English funds and not the Irish. It had always been laid down that a pension was deferred pay, and if that were so he did not see how persons who had never entered into a, contract with the State could be entitled to a pension. They were not Civil Servants, and they should not be pensioned out of the Irish Church Fund. He begged to move.

Amendment proposed— In page 2, lines 1 and 2, to leave out the words 'out of the funds placed at their disposal grant,' and insert the words 'recommend grants of,' instead thereof."—(Mr. T. M. Healy.)

Question proposed, "That the words, proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."

MR. G. W. BALFOUR

justified giving a permissive power to the Board to grant pensions to its officers, stating that a re- commendation in this sense was made by the Commissioners some years ago, and the proposal was in the interests of education itself. It was very desirable that these offices should be pensionable, and therefore he hoped the hon. Gentleman would not press his Amendment.

MR. FLYNN (Cork, N.)

hoped the hon. Member would go to a division. He looked upon this clause as an excrescence on the Bill. The officials were paid £800 a year for doing work which was neither continuous nor laborious, and they ought to insure their lives on the endowment policy system. He really objected to this species of foster-father philanthropy towards these poor afflicted officials! It seemed to him that it was impossible to bring in a single Bill dealing with any phase of Irish life—social, educational, literary, or what not —without it being burdened with superannuation clauses or clauses creating or preserving vested interests. If the right hon. Gentleman was determined to create vested interests, he should not rob the Irish Church Fund to do it; he should go to the British Treasury. The Report of the Commission never contemplated such retiring allowances; and he trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would either accept the Amendment of the hon. Member for North Louth or excise the clause altogether from the Bill.

MR. T. M. HEALY

said that this clause had nothing whatever to do with the rest of the Bill, which was intended to improve the educational system of Ireland. There never had been any agitation in favour of these pensions, and they never had been suggested in any public minute, 30 far as he knew. There was, he maintained, a very strong feeling in regard to engrafting on an Education Bill a system of pensions to public servants whose general action had been of no value, whoso names were not known, and whose deeds were not notorious. He did not think the people of Ireland would be much the better off after this Act was passed than before it. It was not going to create a new heaven and a new earth in Ireland. He had no doubt these gentlemen were all most excellent Tories, hut was that a reason for granting them superannuation pensions? When dealing with the Dublin Corporation Bill, which sought powers to grant certain superannuation allowances, some gentleman connected with Ireland exclaimed "that is a job;" but when pensions were to be given to some gentlemen connected with some particular Tory Department, these same oracles cried, "Oh, they deserve it!" If these excellent and most admirable Tories must be pensioned, let it be done by the British Government, and not out of this miserable Irish Church Fund.

MR. G. W. BALFOUR

said that so far as he was concerned he knew nothing of these gentlemen personally, and he knew nothing about their religion or their polities. The proposal was made, not in the interests of any individual, but in the interests of education itself. It was not desirable that they should have gentlemen in the position of assistant-commissioners filling a non-pensionable office under the ordinary Civil Service rules at a certain age. The Government had introduced this provision at the very earnest request of the Commissioners themselves, and it was in the interest of the service that it was submitted.

MR. T. M. HEALY

Why not put it on an English fund?

MR. G. W. BALFOUR

said that at the present time these salaries were paid, not out of an English fund, but out of the income of the Intermediate Education Hoard, and a large part of that income was derived from taxation. These persons were appointed on the distinct understanding that their office was pensionable, and it was practically impossible to get rid of any of these officials except they were pensioned.

MR. T. M. HEALY

asserted that if they were civil servants they would have to pass competitive examinations in order to secure their appointments, but they had not done so. They were appointed through favouritism, and got their appointments through the nomination of their particular friends in the Tory party. They were appointed because they had obtained the ear and favour of the ruling class in Ireland, and now at the end of their time it was said that these gentlemen who obtained their offices through pure favouritism were to be pensioned because they were civil servants. They had no claim to a pension. Yet Ireland had to provide for them. It was typical of the way in which Ireland was treated. This was the penalty Ireland had to pay for a new system of education. They had to pension a number of superannuated frauds to the extent of

MR. T. M. HEALY

I do not propose to move the next Amendment, but I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will incorporate into this clause the words of the preceding clause, and the words "with the approval of the Treasury."

MR. G. W. BALFOUR

Yes.

Amendment proposed— In page 2, line 6, after the word 'grant,' to insert the words 'with the approval of the Treasury.'"-(Mr. T. M. Healy.)

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

£4,000 a year, because they wished to give their children technical education.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes, 73; Noes, 17. (Division List No. 245.)

AYES.
Allhusen, Augustus H. Eden Fisher, William Hayes Phillpotts, Captain Arthur
Arrol, Sir William Gibbons, J. Lloyd Platt-Higgins, Frederick
Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John Goschen, Rt. Rn G J (St George's) Plunkett, Rt. Hon. H. C.
Balcarres, Lord Goschen, George J. (Sussex) Powell, Sir Francis Sharp
Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r) Green, Walford D. (Wednesb'y) Purvis, Robert
Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds) Hanbury, Rt. Hn. Robert W. Rentoul, James Alexander
Banbury, Frederick George Haslett, Sir James Horner Richardson, Sir Thos. (Hartlep'l)
Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol) Hornby, Sir William Henry Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas. T.
Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John Knowles, Lees Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)
Bullard, Sir Harry Lawrence, Sir E. Durning- (Corn) Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)
Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire) Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool) Seely, Charles Hilton
Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.) Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.) Simeon, Sir Harrington
Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie Smith, Abel H. (Christchurch)
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm) Macartney, W. G. Ellison Smith, James P. (Lanarksh.)
Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r) Macdona, John Cumming Talbot, Rt. Hn J. G (Oxf'd Univ.)
Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry Maclure, Sir John William Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray
Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse M'Killop, James Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E. (Kent)
Colomb, Sir J. Charles Ready Malcolm, Ian Welby, Lt-Col. A. C. E (Taunton)
Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow) Melville, Beresford Valentine Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart-
Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W. Middlemore, Jn. Throgmorton Wylie, Alexander
Curzon, Viscount Milward, Colonel Victor Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy
Dalrymple, Sir Charles More, Robert J. (Shropshire)
Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- Morgan, Hn. F. (Monmouthsh.) TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
Faber, George Denison Murray, Rt. Hn A Graham (Bute) Sir William Walrond and
Finch, George H. Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) Mr. Anstruther.
Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne Penn, John
NOES.
Caldwell, James Healy, Maurice (Cork) O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)
Channing, Francis Allston Healy, T. M. (N. Louth) Pease, Joseph A. (Northumb.)
Crilly, Daniel Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire) Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)
Doogan, P. C. Lambert, George
Flynn, James Christopher Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'land) TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
Goddard, Daniel Ford Macaleese, Daniel Captain Donelan and
Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Scale- Macdonnell, Dr M A (Queen's C) Mr. Patrick O'Brien.
MR. T. M. HEALY

said that they had now come to the last Amendment on the Paper, and he hoped the Government would not in any way derogate from the undertaking they had given, but would accept it at once. It was a very reasonable Amendment.

New clause:— The Board under this Act shall, in addition to the members already appointed, consist of five additional members, who shall be nominated by the Lord Lieutenant"—(Mr. T. M. Healy.) brought up and read the first and second time, and added.

Bill reported, as amended; to be considered upon Monday next.