GREAT NORTHERN (IRELAND) AND MIDLAND RAILWAYS BILL [BY ORDER]. (Hansard, 12 April 1905)

§ MR. LONSDALE (Armagh, Mid.)
I am fully aware that in moving the instruction which stands in my name I am taking a course which is somewhat unusual. But I think I shall be able to show to the House that the circumstances of this case are peculiar, and justify a departure from the ordinary methods of procedure in regard to Private Bills. It cannot be denied that the question at issue in this instance ought properly to be investigated by a Committee of this House. Points of detail are involved which cannot be placed before the House, upon a Motion like this, with so much facility as it is possible to do in Committee. It is, for that reason, very unfortunate that the Portadown Urban District Council, for whom I am acting in this matter, were not allowed to lay their case before the Committee in the ordinary way. They petitioned to be heard in opposition to the Great Northern 1478 and Midland Railways Bill, by which they considered the interests of their district to be prejudicially affected; but the petition was not lodged at the proper date, and the Committee on Standing Orders having refused to waive the Standing Order, they are unable to go before the Committee and state their case by counsel. I believe, Sir, that the Portadown Council are deserving of some sympathy in this respect, because I understand the failure to comply with the Standing Orders of this House was not due to any fault of their own. I am informed that they did not receive a notice of the Bill of the railway company in the ordinary way because they were not the occupiers of any lands affected by the railway company's proposals. When their attention was drawn to the Bill at the end of last December, they found that in Clause 33 the railway company were taking powers to close two level crossings in the town and to extinguish all rights of way over them. An election of the council was then pending, and the matter was left to be dealt with by the new council. The first meeting of the new council was held in February, and it was then decided to oppose Clause 33 of the Railway Bill, unless the company would bind themselves to construct bridges to carry the public roads over the railway. The solicitor to the district council was then advised by a senior member of the Bar, who was consulted, that a petition against the Bill could be lodged at any time within ten days after the First Reading of the Bill. That was an error, the latest date for depositing petitions being February 12th. It is owing to this mistake, for which the district council were clearly not accountable, that they have been prevented from resisting what they regard as an act of aggression on the part of the railway company, before a Committee of this House.
That, Sir, is my explanation why I am asking the House now to consider this matter, and to pass this instruction. I will ask the House to remember that this is a dispute between a great railway company and the representatives of the public over a question of the maintenance of certain rights of way which are of great importance to the people of 1479 Portadown. The section of the Great Northern and Midland Railways Bill which I propose to omit, authorises the promoters, as I have already pointed out, to stop up two level crossings within the urban district of Portadown. Portadown is an important town in the county of Armagh, in the constituency of my right hon. friend the Member for North Armagh, who, unfortunately, is out of England, and therefore unable to support the people of Portadown in this endeavour to uphold their rights. The Great Northern Railway line passes through the town of Portadown, and the two level crossings which are proposed to be closed by this Bill, are important means of communication between certain residential districts and the centre and business part of the town. The principal crossing of the two is known as Shillington Street crossing. This crossing adjoins the public market and fair green, and when the council many years ago acquired this property and opened up the markets, they widened the thoroughfare which leads straight from the centre of the town through the markets and across the railway by the level crossing, giving access to a district which is being rapidly covered with houses to meet the growing needs of the population. A considerable suburb is, in fact, growing up in this neighbourhood, and if this crossing is closed without a bridge being built in place of it, the residents will be seriously inconvenienced and the development of this portion of Portadown will be greatly restricted. If the Shillington Street crossing were closed, the people living in this new district would be compelled to make a wide detour to the north or the south in order to reach the business part of the town. This would be a great hardship, particularly to working men in passing to and from their work; and I cannot help thinking that I shall have the sympathy of the House on behalf of these people, to whom time is a matter of great importance.
I understand, Sir, that the railway company contend that the Shillington Street crossing was at the time of the construction of the railway simply a private farm road which terminated in a field, remote from any public or private road. 1480 I am informed, however, that this is not the case. There is a public right of way, which has existed from time immemorial, along Shillington Street, and through a lane and footpath into the public road on the west side of the railway. There are inhabitants in the town who will prove it to have been open for seventy years. The crossing was constructed for the purpose of preserving this right of way, and if it is now closed without a bridge being constructed a most important artery will be stopped. The second crossing, which is known as McFadden's crossing, is very largely used by factory workers, several hundreds of whom pass over it four times daily; and if they were compelled to go round another way it would involve a very considerable loss of time to them. I observe that the promoters of the Bill point out that the owners of factories lying to the west of the railway will be compensated for any inconvenience which they may suffer by the closing of this crossing. But, Sir, I am concerned for the workpeople, who would be seriously inconvenienced if the most direct means of access to their work were stopped. If the Railway Company find it desirable in their interests to close these two crossings they ought to construct bridges over their line for the accommodation of the public. I should like to point out that the directors of the railway company declined to discuss this question of bridges with a deputation from the district council. The Portadown Council were, therefore, compelled to take measures to oppose the Bill, and this course has been unanimously approved by the people whom they represent. This Motion is not moved with any desire to hamper the operations of the railway company. The clause may be easily omitted without injury to the rest of the projects contained in the Bill, and time and opportunity would thus be given to the railway company and the district council to arrive at an arrangement by which important public interests would be preserved. I submit, Sir, that there is nothing unreasonable in the request of the Portadown Council, and I venture to ask the House to give me its support in behalf of the people of Portadown, whose interests are threatened by the action of the railway company in this instance.

§ MR. SLOAN (Belfast, S.)
said that if the railway company concerned in this Bill had been willing to meet in all frankness and fairness the representatives of the Portadown Urban District Council there would have been no case for the Notice which appeared upon the Paper that evening. All that was desired was to safeguard rights of way which had been in existence for seventy years. When they took into consideration the fact that the employees in one of the factories who used one of these rights of way four times a day would have to make a detour which would take a quarter of an hour, and thus be robbed of the limited time they had for their meals; and when they took into consideration all the other inconveniences and hardships that arose from closing up these rights of way it was not unreasonable, surely, for them to appeal to the House of Commons to safeguard the rights of the people. Another reason why they urged on the House the necessity of having this clause deleted was the fact that if the Bill was passed as now worded there would be no possibility of remedying this injustice, but the railway company could in future years insert this clause in their Bills and then the Urban District Council of Portadown would have an opportunity of appearing before a Committee of the House and presenting a petition. He asked the House not only to sympathetically listen to the remarks in favour of the removal of the clause but to give them their practical support, and so safeguard the people from an injustice which otherwise would be inflicted on them.

§ MR. CHARLES CRAIG (Antrim, S.)
, in putting before the House the case for the promoters of the Bill, said that the local authority had taken a very unusual course in having such a Motion brought forward in the House, and he trusted that the House would show their disapprobation of it by their vote. The reason why he asked the House to vote against the Motion was shortly this: 1482 that the House was not the proper place for the difficult questions which were involved in Clauses 31 and 33 to be decided, but they were essentially questions which could only be decided by a Committee. His hon. friend on behalf of the Portadown people said that they had been deprived of their right of appearing before the Committee, but he wished to point out that though they had undoubtedly been deprived of the privilege of appearing before the Committee of the House of Commons, they would have the right to appear before the Committee of the House of Lords before which the Bill must go. The expense they would be put to in appearing before the House of Lords Committee would be no greater than would have been entailed in appearing before the Committee of the House of Commons. He asked the House to reject the Motion on the ground that the House of Commons was essentially unfitted, where questions of law and intricate questions of fact were concerned. to give a proper decision.

§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Louth, N.)
said they had witnessed one of the most remarkable comedies ever witnessed in that House. They had arrived breathlessly in order to hear the Motion of the hon. Member for Rochester on the subject of Home Rule, but they were treated instead to an arranged performance of the loyal Ulster Party.

§ MR. CHARLES CRAIG
said the Motion and the date of the discussion on the Private Bill were put down by the Chairman of Ways and Means before the Home Rule Motion was thought of.

§ MR. T. M. HEALY
said that was not the case. Even if it was it only made the matter worse.

§ MR. LONSDALE
asked what authority the hon. Member had for making that statement?

§ MR. T. M. HEALY
said he had uttered two sentences and had been twice interrupted. The hon. Members, however loyal they might be, might allow him to develop his argument. Nationalist Members came down to the House to hear the impeachment, as it were, of the right 1483 hon. Member for Stirling Burghs at the hands of the hon. Gentleman for Rochester, but what were they treated to instead? By an arranged and concerted device of the loyal Orange Party, two of whom supported the instruction and one opposed it, there was an endeavour to prevent the Home Rule Motion being discussed. Was this mere runaway tactics?

§ MR. LONSDALE
Divide, divide!

§ MR. T. M. HEALY
asked whether there was no other night in all the year to discuss this level crossing at Portadown but that night when the hon. Member for Rochester had put down his arraignment of the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition. The hon. Gentleman who moved the instruction was the secretary, the Chief Whip, and treasurer of the loyal Ulster Party, the Member who seconded was the Grand Master of that great institution. And what was the subject that they chose to discuss? Portadown was the most Orange town in Ireland. When a person passed the railway station there he was in the position of a kind of Mohammedan Hadji bound to kiss the carpet. But when the fortunes of their country were in the balance, when the great question of the dismemberment of the Empire was to be under discussion, these loyal Ulster Gentlemen occupied the time of the House in the interests of a level crossing at Portadown.

§ MR. GORDON (Londonderry, S.)
Is the hon. Member in order in wasting the time of the House in this way?

§ MR. SPEAKER
I have not felt called upon to interfere, but I hope the hon. Member will not be long.

§ MR. HEALY
said that but for the fact that he had been interrupted three times he would have been done long ago. He asked the House what reality there was in all the Motions which had been placed on the Notice Paper for a time when the Empire had been invited to watch the development of the question of Home Rule. The Party opposite had balloted fourteen Tuesdays in succession, and at last fortune had gilded the eagles of 1484 Rochester. He rose for the purpose of expressing his sympathy with the hon. Member for Rochester, who was sitting on the back bench seeing his valuable time devoured by the Ulster wolves.

§ MR. SPEAKER
In the speech of the hon. Member there is too much on the question that is to follow and too little on the question now before the House.

§ MR. T. M. HEALY
said he appreciated that ruling to the full. He would only express the regret he felt at the delay in the introduction of the important business which the House had met to consider, through the ill-considered action of the hon. Gentlemen opposite. He moved the adjournment of the debate in order that the hon. Member for Rochester might be able to proceed with the Motion he had on the Paper. It was unseemly that time should be wasted even by the Ulster Orange Party on the trivialities which had been brought forward.