CROWN LANDS IN WALES. (Hansard, 29 April 1903)

MR. BRYNMOR JONES (Swansea District)
said he rose to call attention to the administration of Crown Lands in Wales; and to move, "That this House regrets that the Government have not taken steps to carry out the unanimous recommendation of the Royal Commission on Land in Wales and Monmouthshire, that a Commission, the members of which should have the powers of Judges of the High Court of Justice, should be appointed to survey the Crown Lands in Wales and Monmouthshire, and to make an extent of the rents, dues, etc., payable from such Crown Lands, and is of opinion that sales of such Crown Lands should cease except where necessary in the public interest, and that they should be afforested wherever desirable and practicable."
He desired at the outset to say that in moving this Motion he was not inspired by any desire to complain of the conduct of the Commission of Woods and Forests.
Attention having been drawn to the fact that forty Members were not present, and numbers being counted, and a quorum being made—

MR. BRYNMOR JONES
resumed his speech. He did not desire to say anything in complaint of the conduct of the Commission of Woods and Forests, which was specially charged with the administration of the Crown lauds in Wales. Mr. Stafford Howard, to his personal knowledge, had discharged his duties with very great tact, had generally exhibited a sympathetic spirit, and had taken great pains to acquaint himself with the local circumstances of the Welsh tenants with whom he had to deal. But that gentleman and the Commission of Woods and Forests had for many years been bound down by general and traditional rules which have prevailed in regard, not only to that part of the Crown estates, but the whole of the hereditary possessions of the Crown. He wished to call attention to the 901 fact that for a long series of years the Government had been guilty of great laxity and neglect in regard to the possessions of the Crown in Wales, and that the present Government in particular had failed to carry out the unanimous and, as he ventured to think, the reasonable recommendations of the Royal Commission on Land in Wales and Monmouthshire. The Government had, in fact, sinned against the light.
The Report of the Welsh Land Commission had been blamed for its length, and for being too detailed. They had been condemned for having gone in some respects beyond their province. He did not admit that any one of these offences could be justly laid to their charge; but the Report was made in 1896, and there was not the slightest evidence that the Government had taken the trouble to consider their recommendations, whether wise or not, or to consider the evidence and the facts on which these recommendations were made. One of these recommendations was that a Commission, having the powers of a Judge of High Corut of Justice should be appointed to make a survey of the Crown Lands in Wales, and also to have the power to make an extent of the rents and dues and other payments paid by the tenants in Wales to the Crown. The Government had not done any thing to carry out the recommendation. He had read the Annual Reports of the Department of Woods and Forests, and though he found traces in them that the views of the Land Commission had received attention, and that there had been some modification of the policy of the Department in consequence of the Report of 902 the Land Commission, he did not find any evidence, either in these Reports or in anything that had been said by the Members of the Government, to show that they had endeavoured to carry out this recommendation, or had even considered whether it ought or ought not to be carried out. Now it might be said, and he quite agreed, that that was a strong recommendation, because the Statutory Commission, with the powers of a Judge of the High Court, would have a right to ask for the production of title-deeds, and the right to settle boundaries of estates; but ho would like the House to notice that it was not a recommendation of some wild Radical like John Griffiths, or Richard Jones, but the recommendation of three great landlords, Lord Carrington, Lord Kenyon, and Sir John Trevelyan, who were strong supporters of the Government; it was the recommendation of economists and scholars like Dr. Frederick Seebohm, Principal Rhys of Oxford, and Mr. Groom, ex-Chairman of the County Council of Monmouth. It was therefore a recommendation, he ventured to say, which any Government ought to take into its most serious consideration.
Now, it might be asked why the Commission made this particular recommendation. To give a complete answer to that would involve a relation of all the circumstances under which these Crown lands in Wales had become part of the hereditary dominions of the King of England. He would content himself only by saying that the first and principal reason was the fact that they discovered from the evidence of Mr. Russell Sowrey, and other persons, that there was no proper information at the 903 disposal of the Department of Woods and Forests as to the boundaries of the Crown estates in Wales, or as to the rents issuing from them; and that the Department was really in a very difficult position in regard to the enforcement of any claim against these Estates. Of course, from a legal point of view the Department was right in treating these estates as being one parcel of a great amount of land which it had to administer. But the Welsh people, owing to historic and other circumstances which he could not give in detail, did not agree with the simple legal view of the Department, and the view which had been taken by Government after Government, Liberal as well as Conservative. They regarded these Crown lands, owing to their special history, as Welsh national property, in the development of which Welshmen were vitally interested as a nation, separate from other nationalities in this island. They might be right or wrong in that, and he would not argue the point that night. What was the position of the estates at the present moment? So far as the Welsh Land Commission could gather from, the evidence—and their chief authority was the principal clerk to the Department of Woods and Forests—the acreage of unenclosed land in Wales belonging to the Crown in 1894 was 84,100 acres. And there was beside that a considerable quantity of enclosed land which the Crown had acquired in various ways from time to time. The Crown had also mineral rights over something like 300,000 acres of land in Wales. The return from these lands amounted to about £21,000 per annum. Everyone would agree that an estate of that kind was an important 904 estate, the management of which the Welsh Members were reasonably entitled to bring under the notice of the House. But the recommendation of the Commission was not founded simply and solely upon what they gathered as to the number of acres belonging to the Crown, and upon facts forced upon them by the people, and by the order of reference given to the Commission. He would go back to the year 1787, when some kind of attempt was made on the part of the Crown authorities to discharge their duties in regard to these lands. Since 1787 no less than 279,791 acres of Crown land in Wales had been sold. Had there been no such sales the Crown would at this moment have had in Wales more than 200,000 acres of land free from all rights of commonage, and 150,000 acres subject to rights of commonage. Taking the area of Wales and Monmouth at 5,120,000 acres, the Crown would now have had but for these sales one fourteenth of the total area. But the Crown estates in Wales had been diminished not only by sales made by the Crown authority, but by grants made by Sovereigns of England of their own motion. These had diminished what the Welsh people believed to be their own patrimony. Again, for many generations, even down to the memory of living men, there was land-grabbing in the true sense of the term. According to local tradition, and the admissions, made by one witness called by authority before the Commission, there had been actual taking possession of land by persons who ought, above all others, to have been very careful indeed in defining their boundaries, and in their treatment of the estates of the Crown. There was very considerable agitation in regard to 905 this matter at the commencement of last century, again in the twenties, and again in 1848 and 1849. These led to considerable disturbances and unrest in Wales and the Chartist agitation culminated in a very serious civil commotion in monmouthshire and Glamorganshire and the agricultural parts of Wales. The Government appointed Commission to investigate the cause of these riots, and the result was that special legislation was passed for the counties in South Wales. But throughout the whole of Wales there continued to be the greatest feeling of distrust on the part of the people, who were just rising to an appreciation of their rights, and could make their voice heard. The Times newspaper thought it worth while to send round a special commissioner to examine into the state of things in the Welsh counties, the condition of which was very imperfectly known to the then Press of England. The Times newspaper itself was moved to speak on the subject in consequence of an agitation in reference to an estate which had been very prominent lately in the deliberations the House of Commons. In a leading article that newspaper in 1849 said— Public attention has of late been somewhat attracted to the Board of Woods and Forests, but we do not remember much discussion as to the proceedings of that body in connection with a property situated in North Wales. We have received communication— This appeared to him to be important— from persons well acquainted with the locality, complaining of the grievous malversation on the part of those who should have acted as guardians of the public interest. The Crown property in North Wales was described as most valuable, and then followed a very good enumeration of the mineral right and other resources of 906 the Crown in Wales. The Times also said that Crown property in Wales had been looked upon as a legitimate source of political corruption; that Crown property of enormous value in North Wales had been appropriated by private owners with the privity and connivance of Crown agents; that the documents in Cardiganshire had been made away with; and that all was at present obscurity. The Times added that it was time that state of things was brought to a termination. One could not, of course, expect consistency on the part of a now very aged and respected newspaper any more than in the case of an ordinary politician. For aught he knew The Times might now repent of the strong language of its comparative youth; but he could give more than one case, on absolutely proved testimony, which would verify all the language in the article from which he had quoted. From the very necessities of the case he was compelled to go back to what might be called ancient history. He would not like, on mere suspicion, to cite modern instances. All they asked for was that a Commission should be appointed to clear away suspicion from landowners in Wales. He would give one case. Mr. Thomas Johns was a Welshman who had rendered very great service with regard to literature. He was for forty years a Member of this House, was Lord-Lieutenant of Cardiganshire, and steward of the Crown manors. When Mr. Johns died a part of the estate came up for sale. It was put up to auction, and doub being raised as to the title to 7,000 acres, it was found that this distinguished person had enclosed that extent of Crown land. There might be an excuse for some of the landowners who had 907 enclosed Crown lands in the same way, because there was a theory that they had certain rights to sheep-walks, and that the law of England did not apply to Crown lands. There was no thing in that legal pretension, and it was discarded long ago. The case he mentioned was never challenged before the Commission. The Commissioners went over the country, and they found that it was perfectly easy for a man to put up a stone wall and a notice that trespassers would be prosecuted, especially as the Woods and Forest Department had no proper survey or maps. The Commission demanded that a proper survey should be made; it was made in the Middle Ages, why should it not be made now? Then, as regarded the sales which had taken place, there were a series of very remarkable transactions connected with them. It might be said that the present Commissioner had nothing to do with that. He quite admitted that; and he was glad to know that during the last few years only small sales had been carried out by the Commissioner of Woods and Forests. He should, however, like to mention one case that came before the Commission—a case which the Commission could not understand. In 1857, 23,000 acres of land were sold to Sir Watkyn Williams Wynn by the Commissioner of Woods and Forests. The Commission did not know whether the price was too high or too low; but he would assume that the price was fair. This land was, however, contiguous to a rising town in the most healthy part of Wales, to which people were beginning to flock. Why was this land sold to a man who was already such large proprietor of land that he was called in jest "the King of Wales." [MR. WILLIAM ABRAHAM, Glamorgan- 908 shire, Rhondda: What was the price per acre?] He was very glad that question had been asked. The price was 5s. an acre, and the agent to Sir Watkyn Williams Wynn said that nothing astonished him so much as the enormously increased value of that apparently waste mountain of land. Of course it was all due to the increase of population, to the development of the mining industry and to other circumstances. What the Commission could not understand was why land in a progressing county, which was increasing in value year by year, should be sold at a price even less than its mere agricultural value. There were other points strictly relevant to the Motion which he could mention, but he thought he had made out a strong case. When a Royal Commission, constituted as the Commission on Land in Wales was constituted, submitted an unanimous recommendation, the burden of proof was shifted from them on to the Government. He should like to know why the recommendation of that Commission had not been carried out. In conclusion he was glad to know that with regard to the matter of sales, a change for the better had taken place, and he would merely content himself with moving his Motion.

§ MR. J. H. LEWIS (Flint Boroughs)
said that in seconding the Motion, the exigencies of time would only permit him to say a few words. He only wished that his hon. friend who had served with such distinction on the Royal Commission had a longer time at his disposal in which to develop the very interesting arguments he brought before the House. He joined with his hon. friend in paying a tribute to the present Commissioner of Woods and Forests, and he would add that in 909 bringing forward the Motion there was nothing further from their thoughts than to reflect in the slightest degree on the Commissioner of Woods and Forests or the personnel of his office. His hon. friend had referred to some extraordinary transactions which had taken place with regard to Crown lands in Wales. If it had been possible to detail to the House some of those transactions, hon. Members would be surprised at the extent to which political jobbery and corruption were carried on during the first half of the last century. It might be said that those transactions were things of a far distant past; and that they could not now interfere with grants duly made by the Crown. But not only were grants made, but there were enormous encroachments on every side; and the Commission had ample evidence before it of cases of that kind to justify it in passing an unanimous recommendation on the subject. He would venture to ask the Government at all events to give the matter their very careful consideration, and to see whether it would not be proper to carry out the recommendation of the Commission. There was one reason not mentioned in the Report of the Commission why an inquiry ought to be made. At the present time, when a local authority wished to obtain land, especially foreshore, they were utterly unable to find out who the Governmental owners were. What evidence would be at the disposal of the Commission suggested by his hon. Friend? There was no other part of the United Kingdom in which the evidence with regard to the position of Crown manors was so clear and explicit as in North Wales. There was a vast amount of valuable evidence in existence which could be placed at the disposal of the Commission in that respect. There was 910 another very important r point with regard to the leases of foreshores made from time to time by the Office of Woods and Forests. They had obtained a promise to the effect that such leases would not be made in future without due notice to the local authority. He knew one or two cases in which that notice had not been given, with the result that considerable inconvenience was caused to the local authority; and he should like an assurance from the hon. Gentleman on that point. With regard to the last part of the Motion he had now only time to say that it was part of a very great problem; and that the Office of Woods and Forests had a peculiar opportunity for taking in hand the question of the afforestation of waste lands. He trusted that, although the Government might not be able fully to enter into the question to-night, they would consider the matter in the direction indicated by the Motion.

§ THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (MR. ARTHUR ELLIOT, Durham)
said both sides of the House would agree that the Motion was in no way an attack on the present Commissioner of Woods and Forests; and he did the hon. Gentleman who introduced it the full justice of saying that he reviewed and criticised a system, not persons. In the few minutes that remained he should like to call attention to the very deep fallacy which, to his mind, ran under the whole of the drift of the remarks of the hon. Gentleman who introduced the Motion. The hon. Gentleman seemed to regard Crown lands in Wales as being peculiarly the property of the Welsh people, as distinguished from the rest of the population of the United Kingdom. Would the hon. Member contend that the Welsh, Scotch, and Irish people had no concern in the Crown land rights in London, acquired in exchange for definite relief from taxation? He hardly thought that the hon. Gentleman would be able to substantiate that view, which was entirely opposed to the interests of the common citizen of this country. The hon. Gentleman's speech resembled the Report of the Royal Commission in one respect. The Report was one of the longest that had ever come under his notice; and it went through a period from the time of the Black Prince downwards. The hon. Member, actuated by a similar antiquarian spirit, in his speech resembled that Report. He confined himself to the beginning and middle of the last century, and quoted The Times in the earlier half of the century to show that Crown lands in Wales were made the subject of political corruption. But the hon. Gentleman 912 did not bring forward a single particle of evidence to show that Crown lands at the present time were liable to abuse.

MR. BRYNMOR JONES
said that he could not refer to the present position merely on suspicion.

§ MR. ELLIOT
said that the hon. Gentleman having asked the Government to institute a great Commission which would have the power, as a matter of right, to examine titles, should show some case for it. He had shown no case for such a Commission. If time permitted he would like to say more on the subject, because one of the charges was that the Crown was recklessly parting with land which was looked upon nowadays as the property of the public. He had a table showing that during the last half-dozen years the sales of Crown lands had been almost nil. Some 200 or 300 acres had been sold, and in that a recommendation of Sir Henry Fowler's Committee had been followed; but large tracts had been bought which they hoped to use in the future for the benefit of the property which they admimistered.