HC Deb 16 February 1905 vol 141 cc324-6
MR. CHARLES CRAIG (Antrim, S.)

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what part, if any, Sir Antony MacDonnell, the Undersecretary, took in suggesting or preparing the proposals now known as the Dunraven Devolution Scheme; was the date on which Sir Antony MacDonnell first communicated his ideas on the subject to Lord Dunraven prior to the Second Reading of the Land Bill of 1903; when did the Chief Secretary first hear of these communications, and what steps did he or the Government take in consequence thereof; and whether Sir Antony MacDonnell"s appointment in Ireland is still regarded by the Government as a temporary one; and, if so, when is it intended to terminate it.

MR. WYNDHAM

(1) Sir Antony MacDonnell, in response to a request from Lord Dunraven, assisted him in discussing and formulating these proposals, which Sir Antony erroneously, but honestly, believed to be within Unionist principles. The Government hold that such proposals, embracing as they do the creation of a Financial Board and the delegation of legislative powers other than for Private Bills, are altogether inadmissible. (2) I understand that the two proposals I have named were discussed for the first time by Sir Antony with Lord Dunraven in August or September last. Sir Antony, I know, has discussed other matters at earlier dates with Lord Dunraven, and there is no reason why he should not have done so. (3) I saw these proposals for the first time in The Times newspaper of September 26th last and immediately expressed my total dissent from them. Sir Antony MacDonnell at once wrote to Lord Dunraven stating that he could have no further communications with him in connection with the programme of the Reform Association. The matter was considered by the Cabinet, and the Government expressed through me their view that the action of Sir Antony MacDonnell was indefensible. But they authorised me to add that they were thoroughly satisfied that his conduct was not open to the imputation of disloyalty. (4) Sir Antony MacDonnell undertook the office of Under-Secretary at my special request and without any intention of permanently devoting to Ireland the administrative talents which have won him so high a place among Indian officials. It was in the full knowledge of this fact that his services were accepted; but it is obviously impossible to state the precise date of their completion.

MR. WILLIAM MOORE (Antrim, N.)

Are we to understand from the right hon. Gentleman"s reply that in the matter of these proposals Sir Antony MacDonnell acted without any official sanction or approval?

MR. WYNDHAM

I must ask the hon. Member to give notice of that Question. I have referred to the two points to which I took grave exception, and if he will put a Question on the Paper I will answer it.

MR. CHARLES CRAIG

I asked when the right hon. Gentleman first heard of these communications between Sir Antony MacDonnell and Lord Dunraven. He says he first saw them in The Times. I have no recollection of their being published there.

MR. WYNDHAM

I stated very clearly that Sir Antony MacDonnell had had frequent communications with Lord, Dunraven on many subjects. Why should he not? So have I. But what I also said was that these two proposals to which 1 took grave exception were never before me until I saw them in The Times newspaper.