§ MR. WEIR (Ross and Cromarty)said the subject of the Motion which he now proposed to move he had brought before the House on many previous occasions, and he was now going to make another attempt to see if he could not soften the heart of the Government in connection with this matter, and persuade them to make another effort to put a stop to the enormous extensions which were being made to the deer forests in the highlands and islands of Scotland. This was an old-standing grievance. Twenty years ago there were agrarian grievances in the Highlands and islands of Scotland, and the Government of that day established the Napier Commission, which reported that no one could contemplate the changing of good pasture land into deer forests without regret. The Report of the Napier Commission was issued in 1883, but nothing had been done to prevent the extension of these deer forests. He submitted that the Government had neglected this matter throughout, though happily Sir George Trevelyan, when at the Scotch Office, did succeed in introducing a Bill, which he passed into law, securing fixity of tenure to the crofters. He could not understand why the Government were so blind to the facts. It ought to be their policy to keep the Highlanders, who were a fine, sturdy and martial race, in the Highlands.
453 The rentals for deer forests amounted in 1870 to £73,000, in 1877 to £230,000, and in 1886 to £363,000, while at present they amounted to over £500,000. The increase of the deer-forest area was condemned by all who had the interests and well-being of the Highland people at heart, but of course the owners of the deer forests did not want their high rentals disturbed. Between 1883 and 1899, thirty-four new forests were created, and the extensions between 1891 and 1898 amounted to 142,000 acres, while since that date the increase had been even more rapid. The House would doubtless be told that no evictions had taken place. That was true, but what about the evictions before the deer forests were made? Years ago the people were evicted from the land to make big sheep runs, and now, as the leases of the sheep farms ran out, the farms were being turned into deer forests. What was wanted was that the people should be put back on the land, and the sheep runs used by the people for the benefit of the people.
Some consideration should be given to the Reports of Royal Commissions. Where was the use of appointing such bodies unless action were taken on their findings? For twenty years the recommendations of the Napier Commission had been before the country, but nothing had resulted. The Liberals would have taken action by which 500,000 acres would now have been placed at the disposal of the people, but Sir George Trevelyan was opposed by the then Opposition on the ground that the Bill he introduced was not sufficiently generous. It had been suggested that landlords, when they desired to extend their deer forests, should come before Parliament with private Bills. He 454 shought that would be a very cumbertome process, especially as machinery already existed whereby the matter could be properly dealt with. Hitherto the Crofters Commission had done its work most satisfactorily, and he thought the time had arrived when its powers might be so extended that the Commission should be the body to decide what land should be set aside for the people. All that was necessary was that the Government should put that machinery into working order. Before the Napier Commission reported, the usual plea of the Government was that there was no land in the Highlands suitable for the people. The Deer Forest Commissioners, however, showed that there were now used for sport no less than 1,782,785 acres of land suitable for occupation by the people, of which 795,000 acres were suitable for new holdings, 440,000 acres for the extension of existing holdings, and 548,000 acres for moderate-sized farms.
The excuse now was lack of money. It was a strange thing that the Government could find any amount of money to put the Boers back on their farms, and to do things in others lands. Why did they not set their house at home in order? That would be the more creditable course to pursue. For years the Government dangled before the eyes of the country the promise of a scheme. At last the Congested Districts Board was established, its chief function being that of migrating crofters and cottars from the congested areas to other parts. That Board was endowed with many powers, for the carrying out of which Parliament had voted altogether about £150,000. But of that sum only £18,000 had been spent on the purchase of land, and £21,000 in connection with small holdings and loans; as the greater part of the latter sum would be repaid, it might be said that 455 only £18,000 out of £150,000 had been spent on the main purpose for which the Board was created, viz., the migration of the people from the congested areas. On the Island of Lewis there were 30,000 people. How they lived was a mystery. But not a single shilling had been expended in Ross-shire or Argyllshire on migration. A Report had been prepared on the social condition of the Island of Lewis. He would therefore not press that matter, but simply express the hope that the Government would speedily act on that Report. There would doubtless be legislation when the Liberal Party returned to power, but he wanted the present Government to get a share of the honour and glory. As they would not have the chance much longer, he urged them speedily to take up this Report and deal with it satisfactorily.
The depopulation of the Highlands was a very serious matter indeed. A great deal was heard of "Imperial policy." He was as Imperial as any "Imperialist;" he desired to see our great Empire maintained; but he wished the Government would make some Imperial experiments nearer home; our own people had the first claim to be looked after. The Highlanders were becoming poorer every year; large numbers had to seek parochial relief; and the taxation increased. If only the people were given access to the land, less of this wretched poverty would exist, and a fine, hardy race would grow up in thousands. That was a sad and unhappy state of things. The object of the House ought to be to keep the people in the country, whereas they had been driven off the land into the slums of the towns. The Highlands was the very place where the people ought to be kept as a nursery for 456 the Army and Navy. The land ought to be distributed amongst those who want to use it. Let the Highlanders have the land, and provide them with technical education. This would give the population a chance of staying in their native land instead of devastating the country in order that deer might thrive. They had now a difficulty in getting recruits for the Army amongst the Highlanders, because, when they came back from the battlefield, they found their homes burned down and their parents turned out of doors. That was not the way to increase recruits for the Army. He implored the Government to do something to stay the extension of these deer forest areas, and they should give the authorities power to allocate land now used as deer forests for the people to live upon. Send the deer up on to the hills, and not down into the fertile valleys.
*MR. JOHN DEWAR (Inverness)said he desired to second the Motion of his hon. friend. During the last few days they had been discussing the problem of the unemployed, but the discussion had been confined very much to the question of the unemployed in our great towns. But they had also got an unemployed question in Scotland, and they were unemployed because they could not get an opportunity to work. There was plenty of land to be had, and plenty of men to till it, and yet the men could not be brought back to the land. There was a demand for small holdings in the Highlands, and yet they could not be obtained. The complaint in England was that they could not get people to go into the country to take up small hold- 457 ings, but in the Highlands there were hundreds of people anxious, and willing, and able to take small holdings, and they could not get them. He did not entirely condemn deer forests, because they were in many places a benefit, for some of the land was suitable for nothing else; but where deer forests made it difficult to get small holdings, then he thought their existence constituted a national danger. The creation of sheep farms swept away the tenants and drove them down to the sea shore. Some of those who turned their estates into sheep farms are sorry that they turned off the tenants. Those sheep farms are now unlettable and, although deer forests are fashionable and popular at present, the time may come when they, too, will be unlettable; and there was a danger that in the future in some instances they might find the deer forests would be vast tracts of uninhabited land which could not be used either for holdings or deer forests. It was a great pity that the Highland population should not be encouraged to settle upon the land. It might be said that they could not prevent a man doing as he liked with his own, but this law had its limitations, and if they prevented a man getting a higher rent as a deer forest, there were ways of compensating him.
Amendment proposed, at the end of the Question, to add the words—
And humbly to represent to Your Majesty that the present unrestricted extension of deer forests in the Highland crofting counties in detrimental to the welfare of the Highland population and Imperial interests, inasmuch as it renders more acute the difficulties which have so long existed in regard to the Highland land question; and seeing that the Royal Commission appointed in 1892 scheduled 1,782,785 acres of land in the 458 crofting counties as capable of being cultivated to profit, or otherwise advantageously occupied by crofters or small tenants, this House is of opinion that steps should be taken with a view to admit of the ready acquisition of such of these lands as may be required for occupatfon by the people; and further, that the future extension of deer forests be subject to a Board, such as the Crofters Commission, with power to limit new deer forest areas to those lands only which are not suitable for cultivation or occupation by crofter tenants.' "—(Mr. Weir.)Question proposed, "That those words be there added."
MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY (The Lord - Advocate, Buteshire):It has been argued that the people of the Highlands should be able to get a living under proper economic conditions on the land of the Hightlands, and that is what everyone would be glad to see attained. I confess that the hon. Member seems to me, in the course of his remarks, to have forgotten the precise terms of the Amendment he has moved, because it is really one which is strictly limited to the extension of deer forests, and that alone. The hon. Member argues that the extension of deer forests is detrimental to Imperial and local interests, and he tried to show the truth of his proposition by the startling method of reading the figures of the valuation made in successive years, showing that under the regime of which he complained the total rateable value had increased about three or four-fold. It is rather startling to be told that a state of things which has increased the valuation of the country four-fold is detrimental to local interests.
There is another matter in this connection. I think it is perfectly impossible that this increased money which is put into the Highlands does not do any local good, and I think the fancy picture of the Highland landlord who gets a large income from the deer forests and lives 459 in London or Brighton is not at all in accordance with the facts. While fully recognising the great difficulties in connection with the settlement of some of the more congested districts of the Highland population, really this increase has nothing to do with the matter, and it does not enhance the difficulty. These particular lands, more than a century ago, were in the hands of small tenants. In recent years reafforestation has not been coupled with evictions, and the increase of afforestation has in no case turned what was arable land into grazing land. The only thing that has happened is that a certain number of sheep farms have been let to sporting tenants.
So far as these various Commissions which have been quoted by the hon. Member are concerned, their findings are entirely in favour of the deer forests from an economic point of view. There is no connection between the increase of afforestation and the question of getting extra land for those who are fit to take it. In the Crofters Act, which provides for the extension of holdings, although the extension of a holding cannot be made upon ground which is subject to an existing lease, there is a special exception if that lease is the lease of a deer forest, or a sporting lease of any description. In other words, a sporting lease or afforestation is no protection against the taking of ground for the extension of a holding, and whatever it may be proposed to do in future by way of taking land for the creation of holdings, it is neither here nor there whether the land is at the moment under deer or sheep. If you were proposing a measure which would more or less allow transfers from one person to another, there would be most probably a good deal less sym- 460 pathy in favour of the sporting tenant than the sheep tenant, and the hon. Member, instead of finding himself in a worse position, would find himself in a better one if this land were afforested. I think that is an answer to the Amendment which is brought forward, and I do not propose to go beyond the terms of the Amendment and deal with the very much larger and more serious question as to how far it is possible by State aid and compulsory legislation to ameliorate the position of the people of the Highlands by the creation of new holdings, further than to say that my noble friend the Secretary for Scotland and myself are fully alive to the importance and the difficulty of the question of ameliorating the position of the people of the Highlands; but that question is not touched by this Amendment. The subject is one which has received the very careful attention of my noble friend in his capacity of Chairman of the Congested Districts Board, and his policy has often been before the House, although it has not always been approved of. I hope I have shown that this subject is not touched by the question of afforestation, and consequently no case has been made out, even upon economic merits, for the drastic remedy which the Amendment calls for—namely, that a man should not be allowed to clear his ground of sheep and put it under deer without first obtaining the sanction of the Crofters Commission.
*MR. CATHCART WASON (Orkney and Shetland)said this Motion raised a subject of great importance to the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. The Highlands of Scotland had done a great deal for this country, and it was on this account that they were 461 venturing to urge this Amendment upon the House. There was no doubt as to the facts which had been laid before the House. Reafforestation was going on year by year, and was increasing. That was a great wrong to the North where men had the capital, but could not get the land on any terms whatever. A distinguished colleague of the right hon. Gentleman had said that the crofters had been rack-rented and driven from their holdings to make way for deer forests; they had been charged rent on their improvements, and they had been reduced to misery and degradation. That was the opinion of the present Colonial Secretary. Anyone who had visited the Highlands and Islands knew that the people were suffering from the want of land. What they blamed the Government for was, that with all the power at their hands and all the resources of the Government, they had not put the law into an efficient state. It was
§ nonsense to say that they did not know what the people wanted, for it was plain to anyone who went to Scotland that far too much land was in the hands of large sheep farmers and the deer forests.
*MR. BIGNOLD (Wick Burghs)said of the 1,700,000 acres of land scheduled by the Royal Commission of 1902, 1,600,000 acres were then, and were today, under sheep, cattle, and cultivation. The Report of the Commission referred, not to the deer forests alone, but also to the low ground. Out of his own estate in Scotland of 30,000 acres, only 256 acres were scheduled, whilst on the estate of Lord Tweedmouth not a single acre was scheduled. He yielded to no man in his desire to see the people restored to the straths and glens.
§ The House divided:—Ayes, 98; Noes, 158. (Division List No. 6.)
463| Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen E.) | Wason, JohnCathcart (Orkney) | Yoxall, James Henry |
| Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr) | Weir, James Galloway | |
| Tully, Jasper | White, Luke (York, E. R.) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES— Mr. Causton and Mr. Spencer. |
| Warner, Thomas courtenay T. | Whittaker, Thomas Palmer | |
| Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan) | Wilson, Henry J. (York, W. R.) |
| AYES. | ||
| Abraham, W. (Cork, N. E.) | Flavin, Michael Joseph | O'Brien, Kendal (Tipper'ry Mid) |
| Ambrose, Robert | Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.) | O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) |
| Barry, E. (Cork, S.) | Hayden, John Patrick | O'Brien, William (Cork) |
| Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire) | Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Chas. H. | O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.) |
| Black, Alexander William | Horniman, Frederick John | O'connor, T. P. (Liverpool) |
| Boland, John | Jameson, Major J. Eustace | O'Dowd, John |
| Bolton, Thomas Dolling | Jones, David B. (Swansea) | O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) |
| Burke, E. Haviland- | Jordan, Jeremiah | O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.) |
| Caldwell, James | Joyce, Michael | O'Malley, William |
| Cameron, Robert | Law, H. Alex. (Donegal, W.) | O'Mara, James |
| Campbell, John (Armagh, S.) | Layland-Barratt, Francis | O'Shaughnessy, P. J. |
| Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H. | Leese, Sir Jos. F. (Accrington) | O'Shee James John |
| Condon, Thomas Joseph | Lewis, John Herbert | Palmer, Sircharles M. (Durham) |
| Crean, Eugene | Lloyd-George, David | Power, Patrick Joseph |
| Cremer, William Randal | Lough, Thomas | Price, Robert John |
| Crombie, John William | Lundon, W. | Redmond, John, E. (Waterford) |
| Cullinan, J. | MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A. | Redmond William (Clare) |
| Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardign) | MacNeill, John Gordon Swift | Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries) |
| Delany, William | MacVeagh, Jeremiah | Roberts, John H. (Denbighs) |
| Dewar, John A. (Invernes-sh.) | M'Govern, T. | Roche, John |
| Donelan, Captain A. | M'Kean, John | Roe, Sir Thomas |
| Doogan, P. C. | Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen) | Russell, T. W. |
| Duffy, William J. | Morley, Charles (Breconshire) | Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel) |
| Dunn, Sir William | Moulton, John Fletcher | Sheehan, Daniel Daniel |
| Edwards, Frank | Murnaghan, George | Shipman, Dr. John G. |
| Farquharson. Dr. Robert | Murphy, John | Sinclair, John (Forfarshire) |
| Fenwick, Charles | Nannetti, Joseph P. | Stevenson, Francis S. |
| Ffrench. Peter | Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.) | Sullivan, Donal |
| Field, William | Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South) | Tennant, Harold John |
| NOES. | ||
| Anson, Sir William Reynell | Flannery, Sir Fortescue | Moon, Edward Robert Pacy |
| Archdale, Edward Mervyn | Flower, Ernest | Morgan, DavidJ (Walth'mst'w.) |
| Arkwright, John Stanhope | Forster, Henry William | Morrison, James Archibald |
| Arnold-Forster, Hugh O. | Galloway, William Johnson | Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute) |
| Atkinson, Right Hon. John | Gardner, Ernest | Palmer, Walter (Salisbury) |
| Bain, colonel James Robert | Gibbs, Hn A. G. H (City of Lond) | Parkes, Ebenezer |
| Baird, John George Alexander | Gibbs, Hn. Vicary (St. Albans) | Pease, Herbert Pike (D'rlington) |
| Baldwin, Alfred | Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk. | Percy, Earl |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Man'r) | Gordon, Maj Evans-(Tr. Hmlts) | Platt-Higgins, Frederick |
| Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds) | Gore, Hn. S. F. Ormsby-(Linc) | Plummer, Walter R. |
| Banbury, Sir Frederick George | Goschen, Hon. Geo. Joachim | Powell, Sir Francis Sharp |
| Barry, Sir Fras. T. (Windsor) | Groves, James Grimble | Pretyman, Ernest George |
| Beckett, Ernest william | Guthrie, Walter Murray | Rattigan, Sir William Henry |
| Bentinck, Lord Henry C. | Hain, Edward | Reid, James (Greenock) |
| Bignold, Arthur | Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. | Renwick, George |
| Bigwood, James | Hamilton, Rt Hn Ld. G.(Midx) | Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green) |
| Blundell, Colonel Henry | Hare, Thomas Leigh | Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson |
| Boscawen, Arthur Griffith | Harris, Frederick Leverton | Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield) |
| Boulnois, Edmund | Hatch, Ernest Frederick G. | Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye |
| Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middx.) | Hay, Hon. Claude George | Ropner, colonel Sir Robert |
| Brown, Sir Alx. H. (Shropsh.) | Helder, Augustus | Royds, Clement Molyneux |
| Bull, William James | Henderson, Sir Alexander | Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford- |
| Butcher, John George | Howard, J. (Midd., Tott'ham) | Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander |
| Campbell, Rt Hn J A (Glasg.) | Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred | Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse) |
| Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H. | Kemp, Lieut.-Colonel George | Sandys, Lieut. -Col. Thos. Myles |
| Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.) | Kimber, Henry | Saunderson, Rt. Hn. Col. Edw. J. |
| Cavendish, V C W (Derbysh.) | Knowles, Less | Seton-Karr, Sir Henry |
| Cayzer, Sir Charles William | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Sharpe, William Edward T. |
| Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor) | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew) |
| Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) | Lawrence, Sir Jos. (Monm'th) | Simeon, Sir Barrington |
| Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J A (Wore) | Lawson, John Grant | Sloan, Thomas Henry |
| Chapman, Edward | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich) |
| Clive, Captain Percy A. | Lockwood, Lieut. -Col. A. R. | Stanley, Lord (Lanes) |
| Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. | Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine | Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M. |
| Collings, Right Hon. Jesse | Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) | Stone, Sir Benjamin |
| Colomb, Sir John chas. Ready | Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.) | Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier |
| Compton, Lord Alwyne | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M. |
| Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas | Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale) | Tritton, Charles Ernest |
| Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasg.) | Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft) | Tufn II, Lieut,-Col. Edward |
| Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) | Lucas, Reg'ld J. (Portsmouth) | Tuke, sir John Batty |
| Cox, Irwin Edwd. Bainbridge | Macdona, John Cumming | Va entia, Viscount |
| Craig, Charles C. (Antrim, S.) | Laurie, Lieut.-General | Vincent, Col. Sir C. E H (Sheffield') |
| Cranborne, Lord | Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) | Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H. |
| Crossley, Sir Savile | Lawrence, Sir Jos. (Monm'th) | Welby, Lt. -Col. A. CE (Taunton.) |
| Cubitt, Hon. Henry | Lawson, John Grant | Whitmore, Charles Algernon |
| Davenport, William Bromley- | Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage | Willoughby de Eresby, Lord |
| Denny, Colonel | Lockwood, Lieut. -Col. A. R. | Wilson, John (Falkirk) |
| Dewar, Sir T. R. (Tr. Haml'ts) | Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine | Wilson, John (Glasgow) |
| Dickinson, Robert Edmond | Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham) | Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.) |
| Dimsdale, Rt. Hon. Sir Jos. C. | Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.) | Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath) |
| Douglas, Rt. Hon. A Akers | Lonsdale, John Brownlee | Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart- |
| Doxford, Sir Wm. Theodore | Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale) | Wyli, Alexander |
| Duke, Henry Edward | Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft) | Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George |
| Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin | Lucas, Reg'ld J. (Portsmouth) | Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong |
| Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. Hart | Macdona, John Cumming | |
| Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Ed. | Martin, Richard Biddulph | |
| Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne | Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumf.) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES— Sir Alexander Acland-Hodd and Mr. Anstruther. |
| Fisher, William Hayes | Middlemore, John T. | |
| Fitzroy, Hon. Edw. Algernon | Mitchell, William |
§ Main Question again proposed.
§ And, it being after half-past Five of the Clock, the debate stood adjourned.
464§ Debate to be resumed upon Monday next.
§ Adjourned at twenty minutes before Six o'clock till Monday next.