SECOND READING. (Hansard, 31 July 1893)

§ * LORD ACTON
said, the Irish Education Act of 1892 provided for the compulsory acquisition of sites for schools in case of necessity, and required that in all opposed cases the authority of Parliament should decide. For the convenience of Parliament the necessary notices had to be given at a particular time, causing a delay of three-quarters of a year in cases unopposed, whilst those which were opposed were remitted to Westminster to wait, for indefinite months, the fortune of war. But whether the wasted interval was long or short, it was a loss which was compensated by no gain, and it seriously impeded the efficiency of Mr. Jackson's Act. In order to obviate that delay, it was proposed, by a consensus of authorities, to assimilate the case of schools to that of cottages by following the precedent of the existing law in Ireland under the Labourers' Dwellings Act, 1885, which required that disputed cases should be confirmed in Ireland by the Privy Council. The consequence of that is that the necessary notices can be given during any three weeks of the year without incurring that long interruption. The late Chief Secretary had explained how much was wanting in Irish popular education to bring it up to the desired and normal level; he need not urge that argument on their Lordships; but he was sure he might say this—that the 868 policy introduced last year by the Government of the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Salisbury) would be materially promoted if the House would pass this measure, and it would be frustrated if they did not.

§ LORD ASHBOURNE
said, he would be sorry to say a word in opposition to a Bill to facilitate the measure for the better education of any section of the Irish people, and he would be the last to put difficulties in the way of the smooth and efficient working of the machinery. As the Act which the present Bill sought to amend was only passed last year, it was hardly possible that any cases could yet have arisen showing how the machinery of the Act had worked. He desired to draw attention to the fact that the noble Lord was seeking to facilitate the compulsory taking of land for dwellings. He wished to put in a very strong caveat against the suggestion that to take land from the owner compulsorily for any purpose was a light matter. Even as to labourers' dwellings, Parliament should watch most carefully any proposals for the compulsory acquisition of land. Under the Act of 1885 it had been found that a tribunal nearer home, in Dublin, existed for dealing with the matter; and provision was made for appeals to the Lord Lieutenant and Privy Council, where he had himself presided for six years, with the valuable assistance of several of the Judges. That procedure in the Privy Council had worked well and efficiently. Without its interference injustice would have been done in many cases, and many Orders open to the most serious objection would have been passed. But this Session a Bill had been introduced to sweep away that power of appeal to the Privy Council in matters under the Labourers' Act. That was a very serious matter; and if this proposal was first to take away the power of Parliament in these matters, and then in a, short time to sweep away the power of the Privy Council, and so allow the compulsory taking of land without any Parliamentary check, it was obvious that would be very unsatisfactory. He wished, therefore, to put in a strong caveat against the compulsory taking of land being dealt with as a 869 light matter. He would assume that the Government quite intended to resist all suggestions to sweep away the protection of the Privy Council in legislation of this kind. He had said this in order that it should not be thought that any Bill brought into that House to do away with the intervention of Parliament as a safeguard in compulsorily taking land was to be regarded lightly, and in order that it might be a matter of consideration whether, even under the Labourers' Act, Parliament should not watch jealously the efforts being made to weaken the authority which was established in 1885.

§ LORD MORRIS,
in supporting the Bill, said, he had not gathered that his noble and learned Friend (Lord Ashbourne) was going to offer any opposition to it. He referred particularly to the provision for taking land compulsorily not only for schools, but for what was almost as essential in remote parts of Ireland—residences for teachers. In the wilder parts of the South and West suitable residences were not often to be found. The only question really was as to the tribunal of appeal. To give an appeal to the Houses of Parliament would frustrate any wise end. Roman Catholic priests or school managers in the South and West, or Presbyterian curates from Donegal coming to London, whore they had never been before, would be practically an absurdity in matters of this sort regarding small bits of barren and useless laud taken for schools or residences. As regarded the tribunal, be concurred with his noble and learned Friend as to the excellence of the Privy Council in Ireland. It corresponded, in a great degree, with the Privy Council here, and went into those matters, with which its members were well qualified to deal, with great caution. In numbers of instances they had prevented cases of oppression. He hoped, therefore, their Lordships would give a Second Heading to the Bill, which, in his judgment, was a most meritorious and proper one.