Lords Sitting of 11 May 1876

MINUTES.
Public Bills—First Reading—Chelsea Hospital Accounts* (81); Statute Law Revision (Substituted Enactments)* (82).
Second Reading—Partition Act (1868) Amendment* (38).
Third Reading—Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) (44); All Saints, Moss* (70); Local Government Provisional Orders (Nos. 2 and 3)* (62–63).

AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS (SCOTLAND BILL—(No. 44).
(The Lord President.)

THIRD READING.
Bill read 3a (according to Order).
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, that in order to meet the views of his noble Friend the noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Argyll), who thought it was not advisable that the Inclosure Commissioners of England should be the authority to appoint the oversman, he proposed that the following clause should be substituted for the 23rd clause:—
"Provided that where two referees are appointed an oversman may be appointed by the sheriff as follows: If either party on appointing a referee requires by notice in writing to the other party that the oversman shall be appointed by the sheriff, then, unless the other party dissents by notice in writing there from, the oversman and any successor to him, shall, on the application of either party, be so appointed."
At the same time he must explain that the Inclosure Commissioners were already operating in Scotland in the matter of drainage, and had a large number of Inspectors there; but he had no objec-

351
tion to substitute the Sheriff for them for the purposes of this Bill. He wished further to explain, in reference to a point to which the noble Earl (the Earl of Airlie) had called attention in the Committee, that the letting of grass lands was not included in the Bill.
Amendment made; Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

NATIONAL SCHOOL TEACHERS (IRELAND) ACT, 1875.

  OBSERVATIONS. QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE: My Lords, in the few remarks I wish to make before putting the Question I have placed upon the Notice Paper, I shall ask your Lordships to consider not only what the operation of this Act has been up to the present time, but what it may be expected to be in the future. There are three points established by this Return which I hold in my hand—to which I wish particularly to draw attention—first, that 65 Unions have contributed, 98 refused; secondly, that out of the entire number 44 are in Ulster, of whom 35 have contributed, and 9 refused; and, thirdly (and this has been used as an argument to denote the success of the scheme), that the rateable value of the contributory Unions exceeds by some £600,000 that of the non-contributory. Now, my Lords, I ventured to predict last year, that this voluntary rate would not recommend itself to Boards of Guardians generally, and it seems that up to the present time that prediction has proved true. Every Board of Guardians that refused to contribute in September has had an opportunity of re-considering its decision, and I very much doubt—but speak under correction—whether it will be possible to point out a single instance in which a decision of non-contribution arrived at in September was reversed in January. At all events, not one half of the Unions have put themselves under contribution. Again, if we are to judge of the success of the scheme by the numbers who adopt it, we cannot do so fairly unless we take into consideration the results in separate Provinces. Ulster came forward, and adopted the scheme in 4 out of every 5 Unions. But how about the rest of Ireland? Leinster is the best—1 in 3; Munster something less than 1 in
  352
  4; and Connaught 1 in 10, or 30 Unions out of 119 altogether; and further, among the very 65 Unions that did contribute, at no less than 23 of them resolutions were proposed hostile to the scheme—in 16 such resolutions were actually passed. They most of them stated disapproval of the principles of the Act, but for the sake of the teachers consented to avail themselves of it for one year. Then with regard to valuation, I confess I fail to see that the excess in the case of contributory Unions speaks very favourably—in fact, it seems to me rather the contrary. Let us look at the acreage in each case, and we shall find in round numbers that out of 20,400,000 acres, 12,700,000 are not under contribution, 7,700,000 are. Now, my Lords, at one time I was of opinion that to make this Act compulsory would have been a satisfactory solution of this difficulty, but I am bound to say that I hold to that opinion no longer. The inequality of the rate would be a manifest injustice on poor Unions, where the population is scattered and schools abound. My noble Friend the noble Marquess opposite will bear me out with regard to the County of Kerry. There, the only Union that contributes is saddled with 5½d. in the pound, and none of the others in the county have come forward. But look at the valuation of these Unions—Caherciveen, the contributory one, is valued at about 2s. 2d. an acre; Dingle, 3s. 9d.; Kenmare, 1s. 4d., while not a single Union in the county reaches 8s. And there are many similar cases in other parts of Ireland. This question of a high rate has in many cases deterred Unions from contributing. It has influenced Boards of Guardians up till now, and it is an objection time is not likely to do away with. I contend, therefore, my Lords, that this difference in rating value speaks rather against than for the success of the scheme, the richer Unions having come forward, and the poorer held aloof. This is, then, my Lords, what we have to show the success of the scheme up till now. We have less than half the Unions contributing in the whole of Ireland, only one fourth in what may be called Catholic Ireland as opposed to Protestant Ulster, and a number of those that have contributed, expressing opinions unfavourable to the Act. Now, as to the future. I have already raised the objection as to the

  353
  inequality of the present rate, and the circumstances by which it is brought about, and have attempted to point out, that is an objection which we can hardly hope to overcome. We heard a good deal last year about the force of example in this matter, how that when non-contributory Unions saw how the system worked with their neighbours, they would imitate them. Now, my Lords, I have pointed out that Ulster is the Province where the Act has met with especial favour, and I must confess with regret, that the fact of that Province having largely availed itself of the facilities under the Act, is hardly a criterion for the rest of the country doing likewise. We have had, I believe, no instance yet of any change of opinion in the desired direction, nor have we had an opportunity of witnessing any "relapses" that may take place among Unions that were originally under contribution. That such relapses are contemplated in some cases, I have no doubt, and I can bear witness to a notice of motion appearing in one Union in which I am interested, and which is now returned as contributory. That notice of motion appeared early this year, but was postponed on the representation of the Local Government Board that were it passed, it would not come into operation till 1877. It may be said that time will work wonders, but we have here sure indication of the feeling that prevails on the matter, and the time must be very far distant if it will ever arrive, when this Act will become what I maintain any scheme dealing with this question should be to be of value—universal throughout Ireland. And in the meantime what goes on? In addressing your Lordships last year upon this question, I ventured to lay stress on what seemed to me the most serious objection to the scheme—that it would give rise to sectarian discussion, and cause acrimonious disputes, which would eventually re-act harmfully upon the entire system of national education. Last year the noble Lord opposite did not believe that these "faction fights," as he called them, would ensue; but surely he is not prepared now to deny that they have. Look at a resolution passed by the Union of Ardee on the 28th of September, 1875—
  "We refuse a voluntary contribution in support of a System of education that is anti-national, that has been so strongly condemned by
  354
  the Irish hierarchy, and is forced on the country, notwithstanding the demands of the vast majority of the Irish people for denominational education."
  There are resolutions breathing a similar spirit, though less violently worded, in the Appendix to this Return. I myself assisted in a debate where the National system was attacked on sectarian grounds, and what I am most anxious to impress upon your Lordships is—that as long as this system remains in force, you run the risk of a yearly revival of these discussions in every non-contributory Board of Guardians in Ireland. My Lords, I have a very lively appreciation of that risk. The National system has proved itself, from the manner in which it has overcome many and great difficulties, to be eminently suited to Ireland. But it is not yet safe from its enemies, and it would be very much to be deplored, and the consequence would be very serious, if any hesitation in dealing with this recognized grievance were to cause it to fall in the estimation of the Irish people. And for what are we running the risk? For the sake of a scheme that satisfies nobody whom it affects. It does not please the teachers, because it does not touch them all equally, but makes the majority of them, poor as they were before, worse off still. It does not please the ratepayers, for not one-half of the Unions have adopted it. Nor does it please the landlords of Ireland, if we are to form an opinion from the division that took place in your Lordships' House last year. The landlords have done their duty well, and have supported the system for the sake of the teachers, even though in many cases it may have been against their opinion to do so. It has had a fair trial, but it has failed—or, at all events, its chances of success are so small and so remote as not to justify its further existence in the face of the dissatisfaction and risk that attend it. The Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant acknowledged the other night that—"He felt something required to be done." All I hope is that Her Majesty's Government will to-night confirm that acknowledgment, and will tell us that that something will be done quickly. In the debate upon this question in the House of Commons, to which I alluded, various suggestions were put forward, and to one the Chief Secretary appeared to lean.

  355
  I do not desire, however, to occupy your Lordships' time by discussing alternative schemes; I merely desire in conclusion to express a hope that Her Majesty's Government—this Session, if possible—if not, early in the next, will bring forward some proposal which will effectually set this vexed question at rest. The noble Earl concluded by asking Her Majesty's Government, If they intend to take any further steps in the matter of the salaries of Irish National Schoolteachers?
  THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, that as far as the Bill of last year was concerned he wished to speak of it in terms of great commendation. He thought it was a wise measure, inasmuch as it proceeded on the assumption, first, that payment by results was the best way of increasing the salaries of these teachers; and secondly, that the best claim which a district could establish for aid from the Government was the fact of its having made some effort to help itself. He thought this principle was of special importance in Ireland, in which country there existed a somewhat inordinate desire to rely upon assistance from the Imperial Exchequer. For his own part, whenever such demands were preferred, he always bore in mind that whereas the population of Ireland was one-fifth that of England, the sum contributed by the Imperial Exchequer towards local objects in Ireland was no less than half the sum contributed in England. He thought, therefore, that the Act was much to be commended, because it provided that any increase which might be given from the Imperial Exchequer towards the fees receivable by those schoolmasters should be supplemented by contributions from the localities. He hoped, however, their Lordships would not suppose that he underrated the importance of raising the salaries of the National school teachers, for it was of the very highest importance that the children in the different localities should be educated by men who were loyal, and who entertained a kindly affection for the Government of the country. How far, then, had the Act of last year been successful in rendering the teachers more contented? In the Unions which had become contributory they had, after a fierce struggle, obtained an increase of their salaries—a distinct
  356
  warning being given to them, however, in many Unions that the concession was only to be regarded as a temporary one. In the non-contributory Unions the position of the school teachers was one of real hardship. They were performing the same duties which they had discharged previously to the passing of the Act, but in consequence of that legislation they were deprived of about one-third of their result fees. The natural result was that the teachers were discontented with the Guardians, and, also, he was afraid, with the Imperial Government. He hoped Her Majesty's Government would take steps to remedy this unsatisfactory state of things. The refusal of the Unions to contribute to the salaries of the teachers was in some instances justified on the plea of poverty. He had the misfortune to live in a Union where a rate of 6d. in the pound would be required to provide the necessary sum—and the rates in that Union already amounted to 5s. in the pound; so that in that case he did not think the Guardians could be censured for refusing to contribute. On the other hand, there were many cases in which poverty could not justly be pleaded. In 37 of the Unions which had refused to contribute, a rate of 1d. in the pound, and in 76 others a rate of 2d. or less, would have sufficed. Then there was the contention that the incidence of this tax was unfair, as it fell solely upon the owners and occupiers of land: but this could hardly be alleged when it was remembered that general taxation already contributed 86 per cent of the cost of National education in Ireland. What, then, was the real reason of the refusal of many Unions to contribute? The general belief was that it was due to the opposition of the Roman Catholic hierarchy to the National system. No doubt any Government was bound to pay some respect to the opinions of those who differed from them upon a question of this nature; but their Lordships should not forget that it was vain to hope to conciliate an opposition of this kind. In spite of it the National system had thriven, and it was the duty of the Government to continue and to carry out a policy which had, on the whole, met with considerable support in the country, and which Parliament had on many occasions approved. He must express a hope that in addition to the question

  357
  of remuneration the Government would deal with the not less important question of training. Out of 10,000 teachers 6,000 received no training at all—and this in defiance of the fact that part of the original scheme of the late Lord Derby was that every teacher should undergo a 12 month's course of training, and that the Royal Commission urged upon the Government that not less than 12 months' training was necessary for National school teachers. He hoped that Her Majesty's Government would give to the House a satisfactory assurance on this subject.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, Her Majesty's Government had no cause to complain of his noble Friend for having brought forward the subject now under discussion, nor for the manner in which he introduced it to their Lordships' notice. The noble Lord was perfectly competent to deal with this subject, having paid very considerable attention to it; if he had not a theoretical he had at least a practical knowledge of the working of the Act in Ireland. On this subject there existed a state of things which did not always occur in that House—namely, that all their Lordships were agreed as to the desirability of improving the education of Ireland. In order to do that, it was necessary to improve the condition and status of the teachers, so as to induce the best persons to take those appointments. That was a truism equally applicable to England; and they, in England, as the progress of education had gone on in this country, had experienced great difficulty in obtaining schoolmasters, unless very considerable additions were made from time to time to the salaries which they received. The object of Her Majesty's Government was, if possible, and always had been, to improve the condition of the teachers in Ireland. They had shown their desire to do so by the measure which they introduced and carried last year. By that measure they hoped to remedy at all events some, if not all, the grievances which were said to exist; that by that legislation they would be able to remove the grounds of complaint in a great part of that country. He did not look upon the working of the Act as so bad as his noble Friend behind him seemed to do; but, at the same time, it would not be altogether honest if he were to say that
  358
  the Government were satisfied with the results, especially as they had hoped that the greater part of the country would have availed themselves of the opportunity which the Act afforded. On the other hand, it must be remembered that among the 70 Unions which had become contributory under the Act, thus adding to the salaries and position of the teachers, were some of the most important communities in Ireland—Dublin, Cork, Waterford, and Belfast—and that the sums given to the teachers by means of those contributory Unions was no less than £128,000.No doubt up to the passing of this Act the state of things which prevailed was anything but satisfactory. The amount in 1868 of State aid was £270,000, whereas the local contributions were only £56,000. In 1874 the amount of State aid was £274,000, and of local contributions £70,000. No doubt that was a very unsatisfactory state of things, and it was hoped that the country would come forward and meet in a fair, generous spirit the money which was given by the Imperial Exchequer if this Act was passed. He could not quite agree with the statement of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Lansdowne), that the position of the teachers in the non-contributory Unions was worse than it was before. They were not in as good a position as the teachers in the contributory Unions; but to some extent their position was improved, for the amount they received was somewhat larger than it was before, and they were paid by salary, instead of by results, an alteration which met one of their complaints. He had said that the Government were not altogether satisfied with the results of the Act of 1875, and they were now considering what steps could be taken with a view to arrive at a more satisfactory state of things. At the same time, the subject was by no means an easy one. His noble Friend (the Earl of Donoughmore) said, that whatever arrangements were made with respect to teachers should be universal throughout Ireland. Of course this end might be arrived at, if the Government substituted for the present voluntary rate a compulsory rate to be levied all over Ireland. But his noble Friend objected to such a change, and thus the difficulty of dealing with the question was seen. Another course was shadowed forth by the Chief Secretary

  359
  for Ireland—namely, to assimulate the Irish system more closely to the English system, where the grants were made according to results and depended very much upon local exertions. No one could wish to perpetuate a system which was the cause of sectarian disputes, and legislation which conduced to strife could not be regarded as satisfactory. The attention of the Government had been and would be directed to this matter. He did not say with confidence that they would be able to devise a remedy; but an effort would be made to meet the difficulty, and meanwhile he thought that the legislation of last year might be looked upon as a step in the right direction.
  THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEdesired to explain what he said with reference to non-contributory Unions. Taking the case of a teacher who before the passing of the Act had been paid £20 as result fees, he believed that after the passing of the Act, if the Union became contributory, that teacher would receive £10 result fees, £10 from Government, and £10 from the Union. If however the Union declined to contribute, then he only got £10, instead of the £20 received before the passing of the Act.
  THE EARL OF BELMOREsaid, there was one point which had so far been overlooked in the discussion—the payment of the school fees. The teachers were naturally unwilling to enforce the payment of those fees, because the attendances would thereby fall off, and so payments by results would be diminished; and consequently in his Union a a resolution had been passed depreciating the enforcement of rates until the school fees were paid. There was another point, which was whether the present machinery of national education under the Board as at present constituted was good. He must confess, notwithstanding the eminence both in Church and State of many persons on the National School Board, he thought an unpaid body very irregular in attendance and which left the working of the machinery in the hands of one or two persons was not well qualified to discharge the duties. He would very much prefer something like the system adopted in this country, where Education was placed under the charge of a Minister.
  LORD EMLYsaid, he believed that nothing would be more unfortnnate than
  360
  any attempt to subvert the representative Board—a body which represented different interests in different places—at present existing in Ireland. He knew persons in England of the highest authority on the question of Education who held that opinion. With regard to school fees he was of opinion that if the noble Duke could induce the Irish Government to follow the lines laid down by the Royal Commission, and to which he had referred in terms of approbation—namely, that of proportioning the Government grant to the amount raised by the locality, those fees would increase enormously, because it would be the interest of the managers to look after them, since an increase in the local contributions was to be followed by contributions of the Government to an equal amount. This would give ample means for paying the teachers adequate salaries. There was another point which had been overlooked, and which was of importance—namely, that persons contributing to the support of schools ought to have a voice in their management. His noble Friend near him (Lord Carlingford) brought forward last year a scheme for the training of schoolmasters; but Her Majesty's Government were not inclined to accept it. To make the system of education acceptable to the people of Ireland, we must give them trained schoolmasters not inferior to those of England and Scotland. We could not require contributions unless we improved the education given to to the people.
  LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNEsaid, that the result of adopting the recommendations of the Commission to which the noble Lord (Lord Emly) had referred would be to turn the national into a denominational system. The whole training of the schoolmasters would be thrown into the hands of the Roman Catholic clergy. The noble Lord would have the whole system of training put into the hands of Roman Catholic Bodies.
  LORD EMLY: I never said a word about Roman Catholic Bodies.
  LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNE: The noble Lord might not have named the Roman Catholic Bodies; but the convents and monasteries were the Bodies through which many teachers were now trained; and were those through whom he asked they should be trained, on a much more extensive scale,

  361
  and with additional subsidies from the State. The great objection which Poor Law Guardians had to contribute was, that as they had been in the habit of having the whole expenses of the National system defrayed by the State, they did not wish to have anything to pay. Besides, they thought that might be only the beginning, and that they might by-and-by have to pay the same share towards Education in Ireland as was paid in England.
  LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, what he had contended for all along was that the system which prevailed in this country should be tried in Ireland—namely, that the State should, under rules and regulations, no matter how severe as regarded secular education and results, extend the same liberal support which it gave in this country to training schools founded and maintained by private persons. That such schools would be supported by the several religious denominations he did not for a moment deny; it was idle to suppose that those who subscribed for the promotion of such institutions would not manage them according to their own religious views, so far as religious teaching was concerned. But the noble Lord who had just spoken (Lord Oranmore) had one rule for this side of the Channel and another for the other. The noble Lord's views would hardly recommend themselves to the Irish people, because they considered that what was good for one country was good for the other. If training schools could be maintained and aided in this country under rules and regulations laid down by the Government, the Irish people naturally felt it difficult to see why such training schools should not, under the same regulations, be maintained and aided in Ireland. He had supported the Bill of last Session, because he thought the Government were right in making an attempt to obtain some increased support for national education in Ireland from Irish sources without surrendering that reasonable amount of control over the education of the country which the State now possessed. He readily admitted that it was a difficult task; but there could be no doubt or question that the localities themselves should contribute towards the payment of the teachers in the schools provided for their benefit. He was glad, however, to find that the Government
  362
  did not accept the results of the Act of last year as satisfactory. It was plain that the present system could not last, and he looked forward with great interest to the time when they would inform the House what steps they meant to take in order to put the matter on a more satisfactory and permanent footing.
  THE EARL OF POWISregretted that so small an amount as that which had been stated had been contributed by the different Unions. He believed indeed that out of the £60,000 put down as the whole sum of the voluntary contributions, upwards of £48,000 had been contributed by children's pence, leaving only about £14,000 as representing voluntary subscriptions; and he asked what would be the condition of the voluntary schools in England if no larger contribution were made by way of annual subscription for them? He also deprecated the creation of a number of small schools in Ireland for which there could be found no efficient teachers, and thought that if the contributions from the Government were in some way made dependent on educational results it would tend to check the multiplication of schools in unduly small districts.
  In reply to the Marquess of LaNsdown,
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONexplained that the additions made upon the whole of the salaries of the teachers in contributory parishes were more than equivalent to the losses which were sustained in parishes which were non-contributory.

  H.R.H. THE FRINCE OF WALES—NOBILITY OF MALTA.—QUESTION.
  VISCOUNT SIDMOUTHasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether any correspondence has passed through the Colonial Office in reference to certain grievances complained of by the Nobility of Malta on the occasion of the recent visit of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales to that island? They complained that the Governor had prevented their presenting an Address to His Royal Highness as a separate body, and that therefore they had to go with the rest of the inhabitants of the island. The Nobility of Malta was a very ancient class. Although they had no legislative powers they had certain rights and privileges of which they were naturally

  363
  jealous, and this of addressing the Throne separately they considered as one of their rights. They had always been a separate body, and were members of some of the best Neapolitan and Sicilian families. He had the honour of being personally acquainted with many of its members, and he thought it would be a great pity if any Government should pass a slight on so cultivated a body of men, and a body who were so thoroughly attached to the English rule. He hoped, therefore, his noble Friend would be enabled to inform the House whether it was true that they had been refused permission to present an Address to the Prince, as was stated, or what grounds there were for the slight which they seemed to think had been put upon them?
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, his answer to the Question of his noble Friend must necessarily be very brief, because he had no information, official or private, on the subject to which it related. He had seen a copy of a newspaper in which complaint was made that the Nobles of Malta on the occasion of His Royal Highness's visit to that island had not received that attention which they considered to be their due—that was a paragraph in the newspaper to the end of which was attached the signature of the Secretary of the Association of Noblemen of Malta. Whether the facts were as there stated he had no official means of knowing. He might, however, mention, which he did officially, that whereas in other Colonies which His Royal Highness had visited his reception was provided for out of the public exchequer and under the sanction and arrangement of the public authorities, in Malta it had been very much matter of private management—which might possibly afford some clue to the complaint now made. Nowhere had any difficulty or hitch occurred in the arrangements connected with the Prince's tour, and certainly Malta was no exception, and it was to be regretted that a single place or class should consider themselves aggrieved by any arrangements made by the local authorities. He could not believe that any slight was designed by the Governor or local authorities, who had every desire to respect the feelings of the population of Malta; and he trusted that when the matter came to be
  364
  further looked into it would be seen that really there was no cause to complain, and certainly no desire to inflict the smallest slight on any particular body.

  STATUTE LAW REVISION (SUBSTITUTED ENACTMENTS) BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to facilitate the revision of the Statute Law by substituting in certain Acts incorporating enactments which have been otherwise repealed a reference to recent enactments still in force—Was presented by The Lord Chancellor; read 1a. (No. 82.)
  House adjourned at half past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.