Lords Sitting of 7 July 1879

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Summary Jurisdiction (97).
Third Reading—Gas and Water Provisional Orders Confirmation * (101); Local Government Provisional Order (Artisans and Labourers Dwellings)* (102), and passed.

POLICE (IRELAND)—DISTURBED DISTRICTS AND INTIMIDATION.

  QUESTION. MOTION FOR RETURNS.
  LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNE, in rising to call attention to the continued disturbed state of parts of Ireland; and to ask, Whether Her Majesty's Government deem that the time has arrived when measures should be taken to assert the supremacy of the law; and to move for a Return of all persons now receiving police protection in Ireland, and of police posts of constabulary located in disturbed districts and a Return of farms now unoccupied from intimidation? said: My Lords, when, a fortnight ago, I had Notice of the same Question on the Paper the Premier objected that at a quarter past 6 I did not go forward with it; but the reasons for my not doing so are easily understood; and the answer that was given in "another place" on the same evening did not encourage me to press I forward such a matter. When the case was brought forward, in 1870, by the noble and learned Earl (Earl Cairns) it took him nearly two hours to state his case. I shall not occupy your Lordships at such length, as I wish to give other noble Lords an opportunity of speaking on the subject, which they would not have had if I had brought it on at a quarter past 6. The state of things in Ireland is such that no one can bring forward such a question as this without being compelled to state some disagreeable facts; and the statement of these renders a residence in Ireland dangerous, for it is a crime now to ask that crime be repressed. The late Government followed the Acts relating to the Church and the land in Ireland by two measures for the repression of crime; but I am sorry to say that the present Govern-

  1685
  ment did not think it necessary to continue those measures. I think if they had done so the state of the country would not be what I am now obliged to show to your Lordships that it is. I know Her Majesty's Government have the greatest difficulty, from circumstances which we are all aware of, of carrying on the Business of the country at all, and still more of passing any exceptional legislation—not to speak of repressive measures. I confess that I was very much surprised the other day to see a noble Lord—a supporter of Her Majesty's Government, and one whom everybody respects—rise to ask Her Majesty's Government why the police were not removed from the district of Donegal, where Lord Leitrim was murdered? It is the fact that in that part of the country—a fact which Her Majesty's Government are perfectly aware of —that there are several gentlemen who are living in fear of their lives through being under the sentence of death by the secret societies. That is a very unfortunate state of things, and one that requires to be remedied. It is commonly believed in Ireland that Lord Leitrim was under sentence of death for 20 years before he was murdered. That this sentence of death is no trivial matter is shown by the various crimes perpetrated, from time to time, in places often widely distant. A very strong evidence in proof of the ramifications and power of the Irish secret societies is to be found in a statement which appeared in The Cork, Examiner, relative to a murder perpetrated in London some time ago. It is there stated to be ascertained that the body found under the viaduct of the Metropolitan Railway in Camden Town is that of a person who was under the ban of an Irish society—Nagle, a Fenian informer. It goes on to say that the authorities at Scotland Yard have in their possession several documents, found on the body, which leave no doubt as to the identity of the person. A large cheese knife—such as grocers use—was found run through his heart; and upon the point, which had penetrated several inches, was fixed a paper containing his name, and the information that his life had been taken as the penalty of his treachery to these societies. Three arrests were made at the time, but no clue could be obtained, and the prisoners were discharged. To show the state of Ireland,
  1686
  I will now read to your Lordships not what I stated last year, but what the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack stated in reply to the case I laid before your Lordships. He said—
  " I do not wish to conceal from your Lordships anything which is within the knowledge of Her Majesty's Government. I am afraid that it is the case in one particular district of Ireland to which the noble Lord more immediately referred—the district of part of Galway, Mayo, and Roscommon—where, for the last 12 months, a state of things has prevailed which has, in a very great degree, caused anxiety and pain to the Government."—[3 Hansard, ccxxxix. 1209.]
  The noble and learned Lord then goes on to refer to the occurrences which have taken place there, and says that the several outrages must have been committed with the knowledge of the people living in the neighbourhood, and yet nobody has been brought to justice. Then he goes on to say that these outrages are not isolated acts, but show that a large amount of organization exists, and that there is also an amount of terrorism exercised in their neighbourhood which prevents any evidence being given against the authors of the crimes. The noble and learned Lord said that these things had given great anxiety to Her Majesty's Government, who would watch very narrowly, and, if they deemed necessary, would apply to Parliament for further powers. I want to know from Her Majesty's Government what has been the effect of this narrow watching? Has any check been given? Has anyone been brought to trial or convicted for any of those crimes? Not one single person. No. Crime is increasing steadily, as I shall show your Lordships later on —its ramifications are extending and becoming daily more dangerous—the powers that are possessed by the Government are utterly inadequate to cope with the difficulty, and I think the time has arrived for some measures to be taken. As evidence that agrarian crime is increasing, I rely on the statement of no less a person than the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland—I am very sorry the noble Duke could not be here to-night; he was here when I first gave the Notice, but I have no doubt the very serious state of parts of Ireland has been sufficient to make him feel it his duty to return there to see what measures are necessary to be taken to repress crime

  1687
  —be that as it may, at the dinner of the Lord Mayor of Dublin, in January last, the noble Duke said—
  " I am sorry to say that crime has, to a certain extent, increased, both as regards offences against property and offences against the person."
  He was alluding to agrarian crime, and there was no doubt there had been an increase of agrarian crime. The noble Duke went on to explain that he lived in Westmeath, in the disturbed part of Ireland, and had found there only loyalty and good-will. Did the noble Duke, when he made that statement, remember that one of the first letters he received on going to Westmeath contained a widow's cap for the Duchess? The noble Duke goes on to say he trusts not to the enforcement of the law to suppress crime, but to the influence of education as years roll on to get rid of agrarian crime, and all sympathy with it! I submit, with every respect to the noble Duke, that this may be philanthropical, but it is not the language we should expect to hear from a person in the position of the Chief of the Executive in Ireland. And your Lordships will be the more surprised to hear it, when I tell the House that, only two months previously, a land agent had been murdered in close proximity to the residence of the noble Duke. I do not think it a state of things that should be permitted. I will not trouble your Lordships with long statistics, but I must refer to a few. The Police Returns that were given in reply to my Motion last Session showed that there were 502 agrarian crimes between 1875 and 1878; 48 convictions for minor crimes; but in that time there were 40 murders, I am not sure they were all agrarian crimes, but there was only one capital punishment during some three years, and I do not think that one execution for so many murders is likely to have a very deterrent effect. Another Return from Hancock shows that agrarian crimes had increased within the year three-fourths, though there had been a steady increase in crime since 1870. This increase of crime has been, he thinks, partially the consequence of the impunity which has attended the murder of Lord Leitrim. Surely that, my Lords, is a very unpleasant state of things to exist under
  1688
  what we call a civilized Government? Now, my Lords, it happens that no one
  of Lord Leitrim's class has been murdered since last year, and I will directly explain the reasons of this; but many of other classes have been murdered; and I do not come here to plead for the lives of any special class. The class to which I belong can absent themselves from the country; they can take greater measures of prevention; but the poor farmer, who is obliged to be about night and day—for him protection is more necessary than for any class, and
  it is for the protection of my poorer neighbours that I ask the Government
  to take such measures as may prove effectual in suppressing crime. I really do not like to give so much evidence upon this matter; but, as the state of the country is very disturbed, I think it necessary I should trouble you with a
  few details. The part of a letter I will read is from a gentleman who is a constant resident in Ireland, and who, until these disturbances took place, took an active part in public matters, and who is not an alarmist. He says—and I beg your Lordships' attention to it—
  " Neither the large nor the small tenants asked for any reduction until these disturbances occurred, and then the large graziers thought it was a favourable time to excite the smaller tenants, and hoped, in the confusion that might arise, to get their rents lowered. Another cause was to get up an election cry."
  Other letters go on to say—
  " The speeches delivered at these meetings are utterly lawless; their resolutions end with no Petition to the Queen or to Parliament; they repudiate Parliamentary government altogether; they claim their landlords' property, and declare their intention to take it by force; they declare that those who oppose them are enemies of the human race, and show how they may be removed by assassination. The meetings were not at first attended by any of the Roman Catholic clergy; but I am sorry to say that since those meetings I have in my possession a document which will show that the Roman Catholic clergy are re-organizing and taking the lead in new meetings that are to be assembled. At the meetings that have been held the speakers were chiefly Fenians, and some well-known Members of the Ribbon societies. Those have greater influence through the fear than the love they inspire. As yet the mischief is not deep; but that it is serious is evident when Archbishop M'Hale has thought well to condemn it. But up to this the Government has done nothing, and if nothing be done to check lawlessness, matters will daily become worse, and by winter we shall have a civil war. That is the opinion of men of all

  1689
  classes; and if the Government do not soon do something, men who have hitherto kept aloof from the movement will join it either from fear, love, or popularity."
  My Lords, I may mention that these meetings will not be so large or so dangerous at present, because a large number of the labouring people at this time of the year come over to work in England. For the same reason the last half-year's rents were all readily paid; and it is only as the agitation began that the refusal to pay rents came with it. They demand abatements equally, whether let high or low; and the police are afraid to set their face against these monster meetings. Another case of a friend of mine, who was noticed by the police and Her Majesty's Government that three men were named to murder him—he took their advice, and lives out of the country. Again, in the county of Donegal, a gentleman received the same notice, but tried to let his place. An English friend went over to see it, and intended to take it; but, on going on board ship, a well-dressed man asked—" Are you the gentleman going to take such a place?" He said—"Yes; what is that to you?" "Oh, nothing; but if you take my advice "—putting his hand on a revolver in his breast pocket—" you'll remember Lord Leitrim's fate, and not come." I am ashamed to occupy so much of your Lordships' time, but I am obliged to make my case as clear as I can. The next point I will call your attention to is these monster agrarian meetings. And there is a very curious coincidence connected with them—that they come very closely after the discussion in "another place" of what are called the "Bright Clauses" and the Committee of Inquiry that preceded. And I must say that the language used by a right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bright) in speaking on this subject in "another place" was, at any rate, taken hold of, and taken as a good hint that agrarian agitation would meet with some support from him, and, perhaps, from the late Government. The right hon. Gentleman spoke in his usual eloquent, but very acrimonious language—language that I cannot see was of any use or avail except to set class against class, landlord against tenant. He stated there were only 12,000 landlords in Ireland, whereas there were upwards of 600,000 tenants; and he said—
  1690
  "That a man must be unable to reason on the question, if he did not see that that state of things was unnatural, was utterly untenable, and must be changed."
  What does that mean? It seems to me that it comes to this—there are few rich, but many poor. But this is a state of things that has existed through all time. I cannot tell whether it was in connection with that or not; but two hon. Gentlemen, Members of the other House, whose proceedings have lately received much sanction from the right lion. Gentleman, went over to Ireland just after that speech, and then began those monster agrarian meetings. There can be no doubt these Gentlemen got a good deal of assistance in their proceedings from the speech of the right hon. Gentleman. The right hon. Gentleman went on to say the principle was the same as that that had been adopted on the land question—and I confess I think it is—for parts of the Land Act accepted the practice of confiscation without compensation—a paying of black mail to crime—it could but encourage lawlessness, and the first bad season the results crop up as was foretold. I must now ask your Lordships' attention to what took place at one of these meetings. Up to the present time I think there have been five or six meetings held, one at a place called Irishtown, and another at Milltown, the place made notorious by the murder of two persons a year ago. First of all, I must say it is not so much the numbers attending these meetings, but their organization. They march, as far as they are able, in military form. There is no violence and no licence at those times, and, therefore, they are more difficult, probably, for Her Majesty's Government to attempt to interfere with; but this military organization may be improved by the Bill—the Volunteer Corps (Ireland) Bill—which is coming before your Lordships' House, and which I am sorry Her Majesty's Government have assented to in another place," as they will be then more dangerous, for they will come armed and drilled, at the expense of the country, to these monster meetings. One speaker supported the principle of " the land for the people and the people for the land," and said that, if necessary, they must be prepared to lay down their lives for it; or, in other words, take the lives of the

  1691
  landlords who enforced their legal rights. I now come to a resolution moved by a gentleman well known to the country at present—a gentleman of education, family, and position, also a magistrate holding a commission of the peace for the county of Wicklow, Mr. Parnell. This is what this gentleman said—
  "There must be a re-adjustment of the land question based on the principle that the occupier of the land shall be the owner thereof, so as to prevent the further confiscation of tenants' property by unscrupulous landlords, and secure to the people of Ireland the natural rights in the soil of the country."
  That has a very plain tendency, and the gentleman goes on—
  " You must show the landlord that you intend to secure your homesteads, and hold firm your grip on the land."
  He also says he does not rely on a representative Government, but on their assembling, as they are doing in spite of all difficulties, to show their force by the resolution, and by the numbers they meet together. The next resolution ended in this way—
  " If any one enforces an unfair rent he is an enemy of the human race, and we pledge ourselves to assist, by every means in our power, to the getting rid of such oppression."
  The gentleman who seconded that Resolution—I suppose they are all gentlemen now—is named Walsh, but commonly known in the county as "Ton-bridge," the name of an unfortunate process-server who was murdered. The greatest proof I could give your Lordships of the disturbed or dangerous state of society in Ireland is the letter of his Grace the Archbishop of Tuam to the Westport meeting. He said that an Irish Member of Parliament had unwittingly expressed his readiness to attend a meeting convened in a disgraceful manner, and he pointed out that the people should be warned that such combinations led to disaster. The Archbishop spoke of " night patrolling, acts and words of menace, with arms in hand, all the result of lawless and occult association," &c. Anyone acquainted with Ireland knows that Archbishop AV Hale has taken a prominent part in politics for more than half-a-century as the chief instigator to agitation; and you could not have better evidence of the state of Ireland, for he is better informed than even the Government, for he gets his information from the parish priests in
  1692
  his large diocese; and at this very time, in Connemara, a part of his diocese, the priests, under his direction, are trying to exterminate a small Protestant colony, by a persecution which Her Majesty's Government have used all means they could to prevent, but without the least success whatever. My Lords, I have only a few more words to say, and I am much obliged to your Lordships for the patience with which you have listened to me, and I am sorry to occupy so much of your time. I have already directed your Lordships' attention to the purport of these meetings—to the lawlessness of their resolutions—to their contempt of all government—to their determination to seize by force the land they now occupy as tenants, and their determination to enforce their desires, if necessary, by assassination. The fact of the disturbed state of society is proved by what I have stated, by the admission of the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Lieutenant, and by the letter of the Roman Catholic Archbishop, and, as I have shown, crime is increasing both in itself and in the terror it creates. Her Majesty's Government have promised to ask for further powers, but have not only done nothing, but they have consented to repeal the only Act by which these meetings could have been prevented—the Convention Act; and it is only by that Act these monster meetings could have been checked. I only conclude now with the Motion of which I have given Notice, asking Her Majesty's Government when they will be convinced that some deterrent measures are necessary, and to give the Return asked for, and, if possible, show further evidence of the very unfortunate state of Ireland at the present time.
  Moved that there be laid before this House, Return of all persons now receiving police protection in Ireland, and of police posts of constabulary located in disturbed districts; and a Return of farms now unoccupied from intimidation.—(The Lord Oranmoŕe and Browne.)
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND
  GORDON: My Lords, I certainly do not rise to complain that the noble Lord has put down the Motion which he has upon the Paper, which is to call attention to the continued disturbed state of parts of Ireland. Any discussion on the state of any part of Her Majesty's Dominions must be of the greatest interest

  1693
  to all your Lordships, and must, of course, have especial interest to noble Lords who come from that part of the country. I quite admit the great importance of the subject to which the noble Lord has called our attention; and the only surprise which I would venture to express upon the present occasion is, that the noble Lord did not take advantage of the opportunity which was, given him of calling your Lordships' attention to this subject 14 days ago. If the inquiry was so necessary to be made, and if steps to be taken were of such a particular and necessary character, I confess that I was astonished that the noble Lord should have let the time elapse without bringing the matter before your Lordships: more particularly as on that particular occasion the noble Lord was in possession of the House, and had the opportunity offered him by your Lordships of bringing the matter before us. The noble Lord has no doubt told us, if not tonight certainly upon another occasion, I that the reason he did not bring forward the subject when he was in possession of the House was, that the hour was too late, and that he did not consider he should be able to do justice to his case, or enable other noble Lords to do so, and, therefore, he postponed it. My Lords, I beg to protest—and in that I shall be most probably supported by the great majority of those whom I have the honour of addressing—against the idea that in the month of June the House of Lords are unable to enter upon any discussion, however urgent, after 6 o'clock in the evening. My Lords, I should be very sorry that it should go forth to the country that your Lordships are bound to adjourn any matter of inquiry which is proposed to be brought under your notice at such an hour. My Lords, I am glad that the noble Lord has on this occasion confined the remarks which he made to a small portion of Ireland, and that he has not included within the indictment which be has preferred a larger space of the country than that really affected, as he has described it, at the present time. My Lords, I think it is gratifying that at the present time a great portion of Ireland is not certainly in an unsatisfactory condition; and I may mention that as regards the largest county of Ireland—the county of Cork—it has been the
  1694
  privilege of Her Majesty's Government to release from the operation of the Peace Preservation Act the county of Cork, the city of Cork only excepted. The county of Cork has been under proclamation since the year 1875, and Her Majesty's Government have thought that the time has arrived when that could be, as far as the county is concerned, put an end to. The same may be said of the county of Kerry; and shortly, if it has not already been done, the county of Kilkenny will be released from the operation of the Act. Therefore, while we have still to look at the gloomy and disagreeable side, yet I think it is most satisfactory that we have another side to look at which does not present all these difficulties to which the noble Lord has alluded. No doubt in Ireland there has been, and exists at the present time, a considerable amount of agricultural depression; but we know that agricultural depression does not apply to Ireland alone, but that it is shared in a far greater degree, I believe I might say, by this country. I fancy, from what I have been given to understand, that the harvest in Ireland during the last year was by no means a bad harvest; and I also hope, unless I have been misinformed, that the prospects of the harvest in the incoming year are by no means unsatisfactory. The noble Lord has quoted several letters. Of course, against the bona fides of those letters I have nothing to say; but there are assertions in them which I cannot say are borne out by the facts of the case. In one of these letters the gentleman stated that the Government have done nothing. Now, I hope, before I sit down, that I shall have shown your Lordships that the Government have done something. I think it was the same gentleman who stated that the police are afraid to act. Now, I think I am speaking in the presence of Members who come from the other side of the water, and I have never heard it charged against the Irish Constabulary—
  LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNE: My Lords, the noble Duke has misunderstood me. It was not want of courage, but want of moral skill, in suppressing the monster meetings that I mentioned.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND
  GORDON: The noble Lord said the police were afraid to act; and if they

  1695
  were afraid to act that sounds to me very like a charge of want of courage. With regard to another point — the noble Lord has stated that the only Act which would have enabled the Government to put down the proceedings to which he referred had been repealed. But the Convention Act was passed for a very different purpose, and was repealed because it was not supposed to be of any use at the present day. The noble Lord said he demurred to that assertion. He says it is the only Act by which such meetings can be put an end to. I say that is not a proper description. The Act was passed for the purpose of putting an end to what were called "Delegates " meeting for the purpose of holding Parliaments, and certainly did not apply to the general question which the noble Lord has raised; and also there is this fact—that that Act, while passed for preventing certain illegal assemblies, might be applied to the suppression of meetings to which there could be no legitimate objection. Therefore it was that Her Majesty's Government consented to the repeal of the Act in question. I will not touch upon the Volunteer Corps (Ireland) Bill, which is to come up to-morrow to this House; but I cannot agree with the noble Lord that these meetings will become more dangerous owing to the superior organization of those who may attend them: because I cannot think that the class of persons who will form the Volunteers in Ireland will be persons from whom Her Majesty's Government or the public at large have any reason to anticipate disaffection. My Lords, there can be no doubt that there is disturbance in certain districts in Mayo, in Galway, in Roscommon. In those districts the position is unsatisfactory. No doubt, in one district—the prohibited district of Connemara—there has been a state of things which has been very disgraceful. The attention of Her Majesty's Government has been called to that state of things, and they have taken measures which they hope will prevent any further breach of the peace there. Extra police have been sent into that district, and if disturbances take place in that part of the country means will be taken to repress them. The disturbances to which I now allude are not of an agra-
  1696
  rian character, but of a totally different nature; but there is no doubt that in Mayo or Roscommon, or a portion of these counties, there has been a considerable amount of agrarian agitation. There is no doubt that for some time there has been a secret society existing in that part of the country; and there is no doubt that the secret society has had a great deal to do with these monster meetings to which the noble Lord has alluded. There was a meeting at Harris-town (or Irishtown), and one at Milltown, and, no doubt, that at those meetings very violent language was used, and the tenantry were recommended that unless 25 per cent were taken off the rent they should pay no rent at all. No doubt, this is a doctrine that finds great favour with the tenantry—and I think it would find favour with the tenantry in all parts of the country; but I think, if carried to its extreme extent, it might lead to something very like confiscation. At these meetings this kind of language was used; but I do not agree with the noble Lord when he does not admit that Roman Catholic clergymen of that part of the country denounced these meetings. From my information — and I have endeavoured to inform myself as to what has taken place, and I am liable to contradiction if I state what is not the fact—I am told that from many of the pulpits in that part of the country the Roman Catholic clergy have denounced these meetings as meetings which ought not to bed tolerated, and such as they are not able to countenance or support; and I am also told that the reason for that was the expression of opinion of the Roman Catholic Archbishop, Dr. M'Hale. Dr. M'Hale was known to entertain very strong views on the subject—views which he has held and expressed for many years, and which were perfectly well known years ago — he does not countenance these meetings; he considers that the doctrines which have been approved at these meetings are not such as any Christian minister ought to support; and he has enjoined his clergy that they should take no steps whatever in favour of the movement. My Lords, there is no doubt the process-servers have been treated in a most summary manner by the tenants in this part of the country

  1697
  —that tenants have been visited by armed parties at night, and threatened that they would be shot on the spot, or their premises burned down, if they paid the rent which it was thought they ought not to pay. In view of this state of things, Her Majesty's Government have had the necessary steps under consideration. In the first place, they have communicated with the Lords Lieutenant of the County Galway and Mayo, and have asked their views of the crisis. We have asked them to recommend what steps they think should be taken, or advisable to be taken, to prevent this lamentable state of things in this part of the country. From the tenour and tone of the noble Lord (Lord Oranmore and Browne), it would seem that Her Majesty's Government have taken no steps whatever in reference to these transactions. Now, my Lords, they selected Colonel Bruce, who is the Deputy Inspector-General of Constabulary. He has been sent down on a special mission, and has been told that he is to consult with the resident magistrates on the state of the country, and to report from time to time what steps are necessary to be taken to protect life and property. He has been desired to state what regulations should be enforced and what are wanted. He has been told to report whether any more resident magistrates are required in these districts. He has been told generally to report on what he considers necessary in the present state of things, and that he is to concert with the resident magistrates as to what steps are to be taken for the maintenance of law and order; and to make known as publicly as possible the determination of Her Majesty's Government to restore order and to maintain peace. That being so, I cannot understand how it is that the noble Lord is able to say that Her Majesty's Government have done nothing, or taken no practical steps. They have desired that there should be an additional supply of improved huts sent down to this part of the country to provide residences for those police who are not already supplied with house accommodation. They have sent down extra police to the districts, and other police have been drafted into the police already there. The police force has been now recruited to a larger extent than the provisions of the Act give power to the Lord Lieutenant to the
  1698
  amount of 200 men; and the Inspectors of Police are desired to employ patrols, and if necessary to supply cars, and set up a system of patrolling with the view of meeting the state of things which Her Majesty's Government are quite willing to admit has existed and does exist. Her Majesty's Government are determined that this illegal combination shall be grappled with at the outset in order to prevent it from spreading. They are determined to use every means that the law gives them to cope with the evil. They believe that the existing powers they have are sufficient, and that they will prove ample for the purpose. But should it unhappily turn out that the powers they possess are not sufficient, they will then lose no time in considering whether it is necessary to ask for further powers to enable them to do that which they certainly intend to do—namely, to restore order and maintain peace in these districts. There is no objection to the Returns the noble Lord has asked for.
  LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNE: My Lords, I wish to offer a short explanation with regard to the statement about the Roman Catholic clergy. Nobody knows their power more fully than I do—nobody, therefore, will be morel anxious to believe that they are under the direction of their Archbishop in the support of order, or in the prevention of crime. What I stated was, that there was a meeting, an account of which was published in the Mayo paper, and in which Canon Burke, and other priests, joined, for the purpose of organizing meetings in the County of Mayo for the same purpose as these monster meetings that have taken place. I know nothing of it myself; I only give the account published in the Mayo paper.
  EARL SPENCER: My Lords, I think there is some difficulty in granting the whole of the Returns asked for by the noble Lord. From my experience, it does not seem to me prudent to publish such information to the world at large. It may be a very good thing in substance to grant the case of the noble Lord (Lord Oranmore and Browne); but it would be wrong to publish the Returns to all the world. I would, therefore, call the noble Duke's attention to this matter, before he gives the whole of the Returns.
  THE DUKE or RICHMOND AND GORDON: I intended to say, and I thought I had said, that there was no objection to the Returns asked for by the noble Lord; but there may be some difficulty and inconvenience about granting all he wants.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: Surely it would be better that the Returns should not be granted. We only wish to assist the Government in the matter; but I entirely agree with the noble Earl behind me (Earl Spencer) that the latter part of the Motion should not be granted. I hope that portion will be omitted altogether.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON: I will consider what information can be given.
  LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNEsaid, ho would withdraw his Motion altogether. When ho rose to draw the attention of the Government to this subject, he certainly did not anticipate that the Government would grant all the Returns that he asked for, as they would give additional proof of their unwillingness or incompetency to deal with the dangerous state of matters which exist in Ireland.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

  SUMMARY JURISDICTION BILL.
  (The Lord Chancellor.)

  (NO. 97.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, road.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR, in moving that the Bill be now read a second tune, said, the object of the measure was to amend the law relating to the summary jurisdiction of magistrates. The Bill was divided into three sections. The first part related to the Court of Summary Jurisdiction. The 4th clause enabled the Court to mitigate punishments awarded by Statute; it might, in cases where imprisonment was provided, omit the addition of hard labour, or reduce the prescribed period, or both; in cases where, in addition to the sentence of fine or imprisonment, the offender was required to enter into recognizances, or observe some other condition, the Court might dispense with that requirement. Where the law prescribed a sentence of imprisonment
  1700
  only, the Court might inflict a fine instead. The 5th clause regulated the scale according to which imprisonment might be imposed, as an alternative, whore fines inflicted were not paid. It rendered the scale of fines above £5 more regular than it was at present, and empowered the magistrates to allow fines to be paid in instalments. It provided, moreover, that fines not exceeding 58. should not carry costs, except by the special award of the Court. The 10th clause enabled the summary trial of children charged with any indictable offence other than homicide, unless objected to by the parent or guardian. In such case the Court was to inflict the same punishment as might have been inflicted on trial by indictment—except that no sentence of penal servitude was to be awarded in any case, imprisonment being substituted; imprisonment was not to exceed one month, nor any fine to exceed 40 s.; but, on the other hand, the Court was empowered to direct the offender, in addition to, or instead of, any other punishment, to be privately whipped. Similar provisions were made by the 11th clause for the summary trial of "juvenile offenders," the punishments to be awarded being adapted to this class of offenders. The 12th clause provided for the summary trial of an adult with his own consent. Clause 16 provided an alteration in the existing law of much importance and interest. It proposed that if, upon the hearing of a charge for an offence punishable on summary conviction under this or any other Act, the Court should think that though the charge was proved the offence was of so trifling a nature that it was inexpedient to inflict any punishment, or only a nominal one, it might, if it thought fit, dismiss the information. Other clauses of this section dealt with details and special provisions. The 2nd section of the Bill related entirely to amendment of procedure. The 3rd section contained necessary definitions, savings, and repeal of existing Acts.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a." —(The Lord Chancellor.)
  LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGHsaid, he was anxious to make a few observations on the Bill at its present stage. In some respects, the Bill appeared to bear hardly on Scotland with regard to the mode of procedure in the Border

  1701
  counties. The measure was entitled, "An Act to amend the Law relating to the Summary Jurisdiction of Magistrates." What he wished was to point out some anomalies with respect to the exercise of that summary jurisdiction in respect of offences committed on the Border, due to the omission to give magistrates on either side powers either to apprehend or to cite offenders on the Border. Through that omission many of the offenders escaped punishment altogether. In order to make the case plain, he would mention some particular instances. Supposing an individual committed an offence against the Act known as the " Offences against the Person Act of William IV.," and it was committed in Scotland by an Englishman, no proceedings could be taken against him, because there was a provision in that Act by which all the proceedings against offenders must be commenced by citation, and the jurisdiction of the County Courts in Scotland did not extend to the citation of offenders resident in England; therefore, no man could be cited, whether he was in Scotland or not, who could prove that his domicile was in England. There could be no question that the law in such cases ought to be amended, so that the warrants for the apprehension of offenders should be endorsed by the magistrates possessing summary jurisdiction in England. Even should this Bill pass, this anomaly would still remain, because the Act did not extend to Scotland, and, therefore, no power would be given to English magistrates to endorse Scotch citations; neither would there be any means of apprehending offenders, because the Scotch magistrates would have no power to issue warrants for that purpose, because they could proceed by citation only. Some years ago the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown in Scotland on this point had been taken, and that opinion was that these citations could not be endorsed by magistrates in Scotland so as to be effectual in England, and that the only remedy was to obtain some statutory power to enable the magistrates in England, or the sheriff in Scotland, to issue warrants or citations for offences, not only in the case of the Act of Will. IV., but in the case of numerous other Statutes, and under the Common Law, and enabling citations and warrants to be endorsed
  1702
  and served as might be requisite. He also desired to call the attention of the noble and learned Earl on the Woolsack to the fact that in some cases, such as the General Turnpike Act, the General Trespass Act, the Weights and Measures Act, and several other Acts, it was impossible to proceed either by citation or warrant. If any person committed an offence against any of these Acts in Scotland he must be cited—which was equivalent to being summoned in this country—to answer for the offence. Of course, if he resided in Scotland he could be reached; but if he contravened the Act ands happened to be resident across the Border he could not be cited. On the other hand, Scotchmen contravening the Act and resident in England had a right to complain that instead of being cited, as they would have a right to be in their own country, they were exposed to all the indignity of having a warrant served upon them, and being apprehended as if they were criminals. No doubt, it might be answered that these were small objections, which might be brought before the Committee on the Bill. No doubt, that might be so; but he brought them to their Lordships' attention now, in order that when they came to consider the Bill in Committee they might be able to decide in what way these grievances could be remedied. It seemed to him most anomalous that at the present time, when there was extradition between almost every nation of heinous offenders, there should exist in this country itself a district in which the law could not be carried out and offenders punished. He hoped that the noble and learned Earl on the Woolsack would consider this question, and that when it came before the House again in Committee he would be able to propose some satisfactory remedy for those who suffer under the grievances he had described.
  LORD ABERDAREsaid, that he very much approved of the measure as a whole; but he had to point out the Bill proposed to give an increased discretion to magistrates in many points in which they had hitherto been limited by Parliament. Whatever confidence Parliament might usually have in the magistrates, they had in various ways limited their discretion, and had thought it necessary to define the character of the punishments to be inflicted. But he

  1703
  must say that, on the whole, considering that Justices of the Peace were qualified for their office more by social status than by legal knowledge, it was creditable to them that so few complaints were heard of their administration of the law. With respect to the Bill before the House, he thought it right that the magistrates should have the power of distinguishing between offences occasionally so similar as felony and mere trespasses; but, notwithstanding the power of the Court to draw this distinction so as to bring the case within their jurisdiction, such cases would often be brought to the Quarter Sessions or the Assizes even after the passing of the Bill. Another point for consideration was the proper area of the summary jurisdiction of the magistrates in Quarter Sessions. Were they, for instance, to deal summarily with cases of embezzlement and receiving? His own opinion was that the offence of receiving, which was a very serious one, and often difficult of proof, should be dealt with in the superior Courts, and not summarily. But he saw no sufficient difference in the importance or difficulty of the cases of embezzlement, and obtaining goods under false pretences, to justify a distinction between them, such as was proposed by the Bill, which included the former, but excluded the latter. But, whatever view might be taken of such points of detail, everyone would approve the Bill as far as it tended to expedite and improve the administration of justice.
  THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHsaid, it was certainly correct, as the noble Lord (Lord Balfour of Burleigh) had stated, that he had some time ago obtained from the Law Officers of the Crown in Scotland the opinion referred to. The question, to his mind, was one that well deserved the attention of the noble and learned Earl on the Woolsack.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYwas of opinion that the principle of the Bill was excellent, and that it would effect a great improvement in the existing law. He thought, however, the provisions which dealt with the case of vagrants might with great advantage be modified.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the suggestions which had been made by his noble Friend should receive full consideration. He proposed to fix the Committee for to-morrow week.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday the 15th instant.

CATTLE DISEASE (IRELAND) — CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACT.—QUESTION.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD EMLYasked the Lord President, Why directions have not been given to the Royal Irish Constabulary to assist the local authorities in carrying out the provisions of the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act as to isolation and slaughter? He addressed those inquiries to the noble Duke in consequence of some complaints that had been made in Ireland with reference to the working of the Act. The efficient working of the Act depended in a great degree on the action of the police—the noble Duke had himself admitted that, on a former occasion, a code of rules had been drawn up for Ireland identical with those that were in force in England, and therefore, it was supposed, would have worked with the same efficiency. But it had, unfortunately, been forgotten that the police in Ireland were not on the same footing with regard to authority as the police in England. In England they were under local authorities; but in Ireland they were controlled by the Central Government in this country; and in Scotland isolation and slaughter of diseased animals was carried out under the direction of the police, and a large number of the Inspectors under the Act were policemen. In his opinion, the Act could not be carried out in any other way except by the police. When, some six months ago, disease broke out in the County of Limerick, the police were not allowed to interfere directly or indirectly. Upon that, he communicated with the Irish Government, and was informed that the police in Ireland had been relieved of the duty of providing for the isolation and slaughter of cattle. The reason, he believed, was to save expense. He protested that this course was not the proper course that should have been adopted. The Act had been passed and should be carried out, and that by the right authority, and he asserted that that authority was the police. It was the duty of the Irish

  1705
  police, under the Act of Parliament, as in England, to perform the duty which that Act imposed upon them. It must be the desire of the noble Duke, and everyone who lived in any part of the United Kingdom, to stamp out the disease altogether; the noble Duke, therefore, must be anxious that his own Act should be operative in every part, and, therefore, he felt sure, see the necessity of putting a stop to a system which would render it useless in Ireland.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, the noble Lord had only done him justice in saying that he, in common with all their Lordships, desired to see that this Act was carried out in the most efficient and thorough manner possible. There was no doubt that the whole principle of the Act proceeded upon the point that cattle disease was to be dealt with by isolation; and there could be no doubt that if isolation in affected districts were not strictly enforced there was very little hope that the spread of the disease could be prevented. It was scarcely necessary to refer to the difference between the police force in Ireland and in England. The Irish Constabulary were paid and equipped by the Government, and were under their control; whereas the police force in England were local police, and confined to the several counties in which they were formed; and they were also under the jurisdiction of the magistrates of the respective counties—of course, subject to certain arrangements made by the Secretary of State for the Home Department. The duties of the police in both countries were, however, identical; and if the noble Lord would refer to the 50th section of the Act which was passed last year, he would find that it was a provision of the Act that the police of each police district or area, county, borough, town, and place, should execute and enforce the Act and every Order of Council. That was the law. The 85th section of the same Act provided that its enactments should apply to the members of the Royal Irish Constabulary Force and the Metropolitan Police Force. Therefore, it was by Act of Parliament, that the police of Ireland were required to perform the same duty as the police of England. The noble Lord, however, stated that the police had been relieved from the performance of that duty in certain districts in order to save ex-
  1706
  pense. Upon that matter he thought there must be some mistake, because there was no power that could relieve the police of the duty while the Act was in force. He thought the statement which the noble Lord had made was in consequence of this—that, under the Order of 1876, the police were enjoined to carry out the duty of seeing that diseased animals were slaughtered; but when the Act of 1878 passed the duty of seeing those orders carried out was imposed upon the local authorities; and he understood that it was not thought advisable to give special instructions to the police to do that which they were required to do by the Act, because it was supposed that the doing so would interfere with the action and duty of the local authority. Since the noble Lord had been good enough to communicate to him some of the points he was about to bring before their Lordships, he (the Duke of Richmond and Gordon) had been in communication with the Irish Government upon the subject; and he was bound to say that in these communications the Irish Government showed that they had, since the passage of the Act, exhibited every desire and wish to assist the Government on this side of the Channel to carry out the Act of Parliament in the most perfect manner, believing, as they did, that it was necessary to put an end to the disease; and where Boards of Guardians applied for the special assistance of police to enable them to carry out the Act, the Government, when it had not interfered with the more important duties of the police, had allowed the assistance to be given.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he was surprised at the concluding remarks of the noble Duke. It was by Act of Parliament the duty of the police to carry the provisions of the Act into effect; but the noble Duke said they had been directed, when they had the time from other duties, so to do. That was nothing more or less than what his noble Friend (Lord Emly) referred to—namely, that the police had been relieved from the duty. Of course, the police could not be in two places at once; but there was the Act of Parliament, which stated that the police in Ireland were to carry out the Act. The police were the servants of the Act of Parliament, and they were absolutely bound to see that the Act was carried into effect. The

  1707
  police in Ireland were under the control, not of the local authorities, but of the Central Government. Therefore, it was the absolute duty of the Government to give the police in Ireland the necessary authority for doing that which the Act required them to do. This country was deeply concerned in an efficient enforcement of the Act; and he hoped the noble Duke would see that this beneficial Act was carried into effect by the Constabulary in Ireland, as well as by the police of this country.
  VISCOUNT MONCKsaid, he also would urge upon the noble Duke the Lord President to take care to see that the provisions of the Act were thoroughly carried out. He hoped that if the local authorities in Ireland showed any laxity in carrying the Act into effect, the noble Duke would use all the influence of the Government to bring a pressure on them.
  EARL SPENCERwished to make a few observations on the subject, in which he had always evinced great interest. Ho could not help confessing his great surprise at remarks which had been made as to the duties of the Royal Irish Constabulary. In England they were utterly unable to carry out the provisions of the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act without the assistance of the police; for cases for which this Act provided would not be known were the police not to take action. He had always thought that in Ireland there was the great advantage in dealing with these matters that the police wore under the Central Government. It appeared from the observations of the noble Duke that, in certain cases, the local authorities had not called upon the police to do their duty under the Act. That made him think the Act had not been strictly carried out. When he was in Ireland he had continually to deal with cases of pleuropneumonia. He never found the police unwilling to perform any duty which they were called upon to perform; but he knew that their chiefs rather rebelled against their men having to perform small duties, which they thought would make them unpopular in the country; and, for the same reason, they were probably unwilling to assist the authorities in carrying out the provisions of this important Act. He sincerely trusted the noble Duke would put pressure on the Irish Government, in order that the police might do their
  1708
  duty under the Act, and so to assist in its working efficiently.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, he could assure his noble Friend opposite (Earl Spencer) that it was his desire, as it was the desire of all the Members of the Government, to carry out the provisions of this Act in the most effectual manner. He feared that certain of his remarks had been misconstrued; but he had no doubt that in the future the Act would work well. If there was any doubt, however, on the subject, he would undertake to communicate with the authorities in Ireland, and call their attention to the facts which had been brought before the House, and impress upon them the necessity of seeing that the Act was carried out in the most efficient manner.

ARMY—DEATHS AND INVALIDS ON FOREIGN STATIONS.

  MOTION FOR A RETURN.
  THE EARL OF GALLOWAYmoved that there be laid before the House a Return showing the numbers and respective ages of non - commissioned officers and privates in the Army who died or were invalided home from Her Majesty's Indian, Colonial, and other Foreign Possessions during the five years from January 1, 1874, to December 31, 1878, in a tabulated form, set forth in the Notice of Motion.
  THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURYhoped the Return would be granted, as it was of the utmost importance to know whether the present system was responsible for all the offences laid to its charge. It might be that the statements were not just; but it was most important to the nation to know whether there was a fearful waste of life and strength of these young men of 18 or 19 years of age. It was, in truth, a point for great inquiry whether, by reason of losses by shipwrecks, explosions in mines, and other ways, the manhood of the country was not being exhausted.
  VISCOUNT BURYsaid there was no objection to granting the Return.
  Motion agreed to; Return ordered.
  House adjourned at half past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.