HL Deb 23 March 1893 vol 10 cc849-54
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY

asked Her Majesty's Government whether the Royal Land Commission for Wales would allow cross-examination by counsel? He said he had been requested to ask the question on the Notice Paper, which, otherwise, would not have occurred to him. He should not have thought it was necessary to put it, because many things were done in the Sister Kingdom which no one would think of doing in Great Britain, where less exuberance of spirits prevailed; and, indeed, the opinions elicited in this country with respect to the procedure of the Morley Commission were not such as to encourage a repetition of such procedure. But, on the other hand, this Commission had been granted because a certain number of Welsh Members of the House of Commons had asked for it, and in order to secure their votes, they in their turn having asked for it in order to retain the votes of their constituents. Accordingly many extravagant accusations had been made. Mr. Ellis had charged some landowners in Wales with political evictions, and, as that would be an offence under the Corrupt Practices Act, it was absolutely necessary that there should be cross-examination of witnesses in the case of that or similar accusations. Moreover, the extreme Radical Party had Mr. Brynmor Jones in the Commission, who, as an ex-County Court, Judge and a Queen's Counsel, must be an expert at cross-examination, while the landlords had only two members who could in any way be considered as representing their views, and who presumably would not have the same talent for cross-examination as Mr. Brynmor Jones would necessarily have.

LOUD PENRHYN

said he felt it his duty to point out the risk which would be incurred by Her Majesty's Government as well as the landlords if a recent precedent were followed, and if the employment of Counsel on this Commission were not sanctioned. There was far more in the question than met the eye at first sight. The question was whether justice was to be done. If justice were done, and the whole truth elicited, the landowners of North Wales, on behalf of whom he spoke, had nothing to fear. But they feared that there might be a miscarriage of justice if cross-examinations by competent Counsel was not allowed, so as to enable the proper value of assertions made concerning individual cases to be placed before the Commission. He was not expressing any loosely-formed opinion, but making a deliberate statement founded upon what bad come to his knowledge through his connection with the North Wales Property Defence Association, which was conducted on strictly non-political lines, and had been in existence for some years. By its means he had been able to find out something of what had been going on on the part of those who had been loudest in the Land Tenure agitation in Wales. He referred, as a starting point, to the Prime Minister's speech at the foot of Snowdon on the 13th September, 1892. One would naturally infer from that speech that the whole country was seething with discontent, and that the farmers would be eager to ventilate their grievances on the first opportunity. But that had not been the case, and the whole agitation was got up by the advanced section of a political party which, following the example of Ireland, had seen that just now agitation was by far the most paying game. In a newspaper published in Welsh the property of a Company comprising Mr. T. Ellis, M.P. for Merioneth, and Mr. Lloyd George, M.P. for the Carnarvon Burghs, flaming opinions had been published on the subject, and it was prudent and necessary to notice such utterances occasionally. On January 31st four and a-half months after Mr. Gladstone's speech, an article appeared in the paper headed "The Welsh Farmers' Day of Trial. Who will help them? The Land Commission Coming," and stating— To-day Parliament meets. It is now known that one of its first Acts will be the appointment of a Land Commission for Wales. On the results of the inquiry of this Commission will rest the future of Agriculture in Wales. The landlords, like the children of this world in general, have been wise in their generation. Seeing the evil day approaching, they have prepared to meet it. They have formed a Secret Union amongst themselves, and for some time they have been diligently engaged in the work of preparing evidence to lay before the Commission when it comes. And the farmers? What of them? They stand unmoved or as if paralysed, leaving the wheel of fortune to turn as it will, breaking them and pounding them into dust. With a few worthy exceptions, the great body of Welsh Agriculturists are quite unprepared to meet the Commission. It went on to say that the Commission could not make a Report except on the facts placed before them— Who then will place such facts before them? We know that the landlords will—but only their own side of the story will they tell. And we know, and the farmers know, what kind of story that will be. And if the cause of the farmers—their side of the story—is not fairly, completely and effectively stated before the Commission, it may be said of the Welsh farmers: They are damned already. After speaking of other matters it went on to say— It is not too much therefore to say that the salvation of the farmers of Wales depends upon setting the truth before the Commission. But what can be done! Much may be done in every way. It is true that the time has gone far for perfecting an organisation throughout the country. But it is not yet too late to save the farmers from the jaws of disaster. What is wanted is to collect facts in the district, and to place them on record in writing. Then came the most important part: How to utilise these facts.—The next question, after collecting the facts, is, how may they be utilised? The best way would be for the Committee to appoint some fit person to lay the facts from the district before the Commission. But the farmers may ask, Who will go for us? Well, let it be granted that John Jones is a tenant on Lord So-and-So's estate, and that Robert Roberts holds a farm on the estate of Squire This-or-that; John Jones might give evidence concerning the squire's estate, and Robert Roberts concerning the lord's. Or it might be possible to obtain the services of a freeholder with plenty of back-bone, or one whose sympathy with the surrounding tenant farmers is sufficiently profound to give the necessary evidence. Or some tradesman may be found, or some other neighbour who need not fear the frown of any steward, to act as spokesman, and to give evidence on behalf of the farmers. It will not be necessary for the witness to know English. He shall give his evidence in Welsh. For the matter of that, in connection with this Commission especially, care ought to be taken in every Welsh district to see that the evidence is given in Welsh. Then in case no Committee could be got— If things have gone to the ditch so that there be no hope that even so few as two or three may be got to co-operate together, then collect thou, kind reader, as many facts as thou art able in a quiet way, put them in writing, giving the names and the figures, and the dates, as completely as possible, and send them to the Editor of the Genedl. No names whatever shall be published and care shall be taken to guard that no 'one but the Editor himself shall know who supplies him with the particulars. But he ought to receive the private name and address of those who write to him, that he may be able to correspond further with them if need be. For the matter of that the Editor will be grateful for the facts, whether a Committee is formed or not. Care shall be taken to utilise such facts in the best way to secure the desired end. That followed a few months after Mr. Gladstone's statement that the condition of things in Wales was perfectly awful. If anything were needed to show the apathy of the fanners in this agitation, it would be the list of 43 questions addressed by the Secretary to the Welsh Liberal Federation, trying to stir up some interest in this Land Question. Those questions ranged over every conceivable subject, not only relating to land tenure, but whether anybody had lost a dog or a cat, and what he considered its value, and further whether any clergyman had done or said anything which would raise any ill-feeling between landlord and tenant. This was very like holding out a red flag to a bull in the present state of feeling in North Wales regarding the Church. He heartily wished that the task of drawing the attention of the House to this important subject had fallen into better hands.

LORD HARLECH

would not enter upon the invidious task of objecting to any Member of the Commission. It was legitimate, however, to analyse it generally and to criticise its general composition especially if Counsel were not to be allowed to cross-examine the witnesses. Of its nine members only two could be considered as representing the interests of the landlords. Was that fair? Neither of them either spoke Welsh or was accustomed to cross-examine witnesses, one of them being only 28 years of ago. How was so young and inexperienced a man competent to meet Mr. Brynmor Jones, an able advocate, versed in all the subtleties of cross-examination and speaking Welsh? Had there been any pretence of fair play in the appointment of this Committee, somebody on the other side capable of meeting Mr. Brynmor Jones on equal terms would have been selected. He proposed, therefore, to add to Lord Stanley of Alderley's question, "Whether, supposing cross-examination by Counsel should not be allowed, the Government would accept suggestions for adding further names to the Commission?" If neither of these alternatives was accepted, be protested emphatically against the fairness of this Commission.

THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (The Earl of KIMBERLEY)

My Lords, I hope the noble Lord who spoke last but one will not think me uncourteous if I do not follow him through the remarks be made. A very simple question has been asked to which I will give an answer, but I do not think it convenient, or that I am called upon to enter into a defence of the appointment of that Commission. No notice was given me that the names of Members of this Commission would be criticised. I have no reason to suppose that the Commission has not been fairly appointed. More than that I cannot possibly say. It had never been the practice of Her Majesty's Government to interfere as to the course which Commissions may think right to take, and they have no intention of interfering on the present occasion. It will be for the Commission to determine in what way they will conduct the inquiry, and I have not the slightest doubt that they will endeavour to observe perfect fairness in the discharge of the duty intrusted to them, which is to obtain all the information necessary, in order to make a Report which will give the Government the opportunity of judging what legislation, if any, may be necessary. All the arguments used to-day will be placed before the Commission, and will, I am sure, receive their careful considera- tion. As I have not received notice, I am unable to give any answer to the noble Lord's question regarding additional names.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR

My Lords, I should like to say one word with regard to what Lord Harlech has said. He has assumed that a particular Member of the Commission, who was for some time a County Court Judge, will as a member of the Commission act simply and solely as a partisan, and that the powers he possesses will not be exercised for the purpose of eliciting the truth. I am quite sure that the noble Lord in entertaining that opinion is very much mistaken. Any one who becomes a member of a Commission of this description joins it, and whatever may be his own opinions, with a desire to get out all the facts whichever way they may go, and I am sure the noble Lord will find that in carrying out the duties entrusted to the Commission, any examination which takes place by the particular member of the Commission referred to will not be directed to obtaining facts merely to support a preconceived view, but as far as possible towards obtaining the truth.

LORD HARLECH

repudiated entirely any wish to insinuate that Mr. Brynmor Jones would not do ample justice. The distinction he had gained at the Bar would be sufficient to do away with all imputations against him. At the same time every one in Wales or elsewhere forms opinions, and a more equal composition of the Commission ought to have been made.