IRELAND—GWEEDORE. (Hansard, 25 July 1889)

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL

My Lords, I move for the production of the file in the Irish Land Commission Court numbered 9,133; and to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they can produce a letter found in the house of the Rev. James McFadden, P.P., Gweedore, written by the Rev. D. Stephens, C.C., Falcarragh, and produced in evidence at the Letterkenny Quarter Sessions on the 12th April, 1889. Perhaps your Lordships are aware of the existence of a Blue Book giving the proceedings of the Irish Land Commission, and giving particulars with regard to the Poor Law Valuations, and the Judicial Valuations. That is all they give, except certain observations generally of an empty character, and there are, in fact, my Lords, no means whatever of judging from those particulars the principle on which the rents are fixed. I understand from questions put in the House of Commons and from information in the newspapers, that the Land Commission Court has within a very recent period adopted a new system which I must say 1243 is an immense improvement on the old one, and which goes a considerable way to remove, at all events, some of the objections which have been taken to the operations of that body. They now require all the Sub-Commissioners fixing rents to fill up a schedule which contains very full particulars if the schedule is carefully filled up. That is a great improvement on the old system. They require the Sub-Commissioners to give not only the acreage, but the quality of the land, the proximity to a market town, the state of buildings which may have been erected by the tenant, and all the information which any land valuer would require. Since I put the notice on the Paper, I have understood that all these schedules are accessible to persons in Dublin on payment of Is., and that land proprietors and tenants going to the Land Court can get all the information they may desire. To move for these Returns would cause considerable inconvenience to the Court, and expense to the public, and, therefore, I ask to be allowed not to press for them, and also to move that the Order for the Returns which I recently obtained should be discharged. But the letter to the Rev. J. M'Fadden stands in a different position. The other evening my coble Friend seemed to express some doubt whether I had any evidence as to some of the matters to which I referred. I do not suppose my noble Friend has gone much into the matter, and I am not surprised at his request, because I certainly entered into some details which might naturally appear to him to be unsupported by legal proof. But I can assure my noble Friend that he was mistaken. The statements I made were founded upon a document which I wish to bring to the attention of your Lordships, and which I beg to move may be laid on the Table of the House if there be no objection. I hope the House will believe that in making a statement in regard to the operation of an important Act of Parliament I took very great care to inquire into the accuracy of the facts which I brought before the House. My Lords, I stated that in the opposition to Mr. Olphert and the strike against rents on his estate, as well as on the better known estate of Lord George Hill, there were two priests in connection with the movement. That statement was made upon the evidence of a letter which has 1244 been produced in an Irish Court of Law. Your Lordships will remember the terrible murder committed on the occasion of the arrest of the Rev. J. M'Fadden, and that in consequence of that arrest his house was searched, and in the house was found a letter which has I understand been verified in a Court of Justice, and was not denied by the person who wrote it—the curate of the parish in which the Olphert Estate is situated. That letter is a very remarkable document, and such an illustration of the manner in which evictions are got up that I will read it to the House. [The noble Duke read the letter, in which the writer urged that the particular attention of Dillon should be called to the necessity of despatching an M.P. to the scene of action as soon as the operations were to commence, that he himself had never seen an eviction and would not undertake to manage the matter successfully; he reminded the Rev. J. M'Fadden that he promised to be present at the eviction, and that success or failure depended entirely upon that promise being kept; he reminded him also that it was at his instance the writer took up the flag, and that it was he who was responsible for the whole business, and therefore that whatever engagement he might have he should lay aside and rush to the scene of conflict. The writer added, "You know what Olphert is. You know it will take all our united energies to beat him down."] Now, my Lords, I think that letter shows that I was entirely justified in the statement which I made to the House. I beg the House to remember that in both these cases the agitation was against rents which had been fixed by the Court; they were not the old rents. In nine cases out often they were rents fixed by the Land Commission, and the agitation was directed against two landlords who of all in Ireland had perhaps done most for their tenants.

§ THE LORD PEIVY SEAL (Earl CADOGAN)

My Lords, I am glad 1245 the noble Duke has exercised his discretion with regard to the Motion he has placed on the Paper, and furthermore that he has thought it right that the Order for the Return granted him under a misunderstanding a few days ago should now be discharged. The noble Duke has stated fully the reasons for that withdrawal, and I think the House will agree that it would not be very advantageous for the Public Service that the files of the Land Commission proceedings should be moved for from time to time and granted as Parliamentary Papers. It is quite true that the proceedings in connection with the action of those Courts are published in a schedule, and that those interested in any portion of the proceedings are able to obtain the information they required at the cost of 1s. At any time, therefore, they can obtain full particulars. Under the circumstances, I think it is not desirable that such Motions should be made in Parliament and that Returns should be granted with the result of turning records of those summary proceedings into Parliamentary Papers, whereas other similar proceedings are not to be moved for in Parliament. Now, my Lords, with reference to the letter found in the house of the Rev. J. M'Fadden, I have to say that not only to the knowledge of the Government, but of every one, that letter has been proved in open Court to be entirely and absolutely genuine. It was found in a search made in Father M'Fadden's house, I think, in February of this year. I am not surprised that the noble Duke should have brought that matter forward after the remarks of the noble Earl, who appeared to think that the noble Duke had made statements about Father M'Fadden of which there is no proof in official documents. In 1888 Father M'Fadden was tried in open Court. The facts proved on that occasion have been public property ever since, and the Government have no other knowledge on the subject. Father M'Fadden is now awaiting his trial on another and more serious charge, and I thought it would be the wish of your Lordships that nothing should be said that could prejudice him upon that trial. As to the proceedings which are complete, the Government can only express their regret that any minister of the Gospel, to whatever denomination he belongs, should use the 1246 authority he acquires from his sacred office to assist and encourage those who, for reasons of their own, are opposing the law of the land. I regret I cannot agree to the Motion that that letter should be printed and laid on your Lordships' Table. I do not think it is for the public interest that one special paper or part of any legal case should be excepted from the general body of the evidence in that case and made use of for any particular purpose. If the Motion had been for the production of the whole of the evidence it would have been open to argument. I hope the noble Duke will see the force of that consideration, and that he will not press that part of the Motion which he has put forward.