Their This Bill, then, presents itself to me, an independent Scottish Member, as but an act of incomplete justice to Irish landlords. I think the amount that we pay under it, £12,000,000, constitutes a very small penalty for our past legislation, by which we have caused them to lose £70,000,000. What the effect of the Bill will be it is not for me to saythe Irish landlords and tenants know more about that than I do; but I fear there are elements in the Bill which will not conduce to peace. It is possible that again a hostile feeling may arise; but, at any rate, your Lordships have done your best. After all, we know that there is much loyalty in the Irish people. loyalty is shown in the gallant Irish soldiers who fight the battles of the Empire, in that splendid body of men the Irish Constabulary, and recently that loyalty was called forth by the peacemaking visit of our Sovereign, who, by his happy speeches, never-failing tact,. and genial manner, succeeded, assisted by our gracious Queen, in winning the hearts of the Irish people. I trust that this Bill may make for peace, and that the Irish farmer, when he is made proprietor, will be less amenable to the seductions of the Irish patriot, whether that patriot be found in Parliament or in Ireland. It is never sufficiently taken into consideration that we are dealing with a country which is very close to these shores. Many Irish Nationalists still look forward to separation, and Mr. Parnell said in America that he would not take off his coat for anything else. I hope this Bill will tend to knock all these ideas out of the head of the Irish patriot. Recently we sent 250,000 men 6,000 miles across the sea to maintain the integrity of our Empire in South Africa. Ireland is only eleven miles from Great Britain at the nearest point. That is the distance from Hyde Park to Woolwich in one direction, and to Richmond in another, or one mile less Ithan the distance between the south I have from the very first resisted this kind of legislation. I resisted the Land Bill of 1870 and the Land Bill of 1881, and I resisted the policy in 1896 of trying to kill Home Rule by kindness and the introduction of another Land Bill, against which, there being no division in your Lordships' House, I entered my written protest under, I think, seven heads. Looking, as I have recently done, through the Journals of this House, what do I find? I find that in your Lordships' House, which is supposed to be the great Court of Appeal and the House which gives protection to property, contracts, and everything else, and puts its foot down on wrongful legislation, in all this course of Irish legislation from 1870 down to the present time, there has not been a single Division against the principle of any of these Bills. This legislation has resulted in the necessity of a measure such as this, which is to get rid of the loyal Irish landlords. Having resisted all this legislation, I accept this Bill heartily in this sense that it is a Bill that does partial justice, and only partial justice, to Irish landlords. For what has been the effect on the landlords of Ireland of your legislation? How much the disturbance clause of the Land Act of 1870 cost your Lordships I know not, but it gave any tenant of a tenancy of £50 a year rent, or under seven years value of his rent if disturbed by his landlord for any cause. Thus, if a landlord wished to resume his property he would have to pay the outgoing tenant £350 if the rent was £50. This might mean many millions taken from the landlord and transferred to the tenant. I have placed myself in communication with one of the bestknown land agents in Ireland, and I asked him whether it was true that landed property in Ireland had gone down something like 40 per cent., and he replied in the affirmative. I then asked how much of that was due to our legislation, and he replied 20 per cent. Two days ago I wired to him to know how much 20 per cent. on the landed income or north sides of the Firth of Forth; of Ireland would amount to if capitalised, and I venture to say that nothing on and the answer came back, £70,000,000 earth will induce the people of this country at twenty-two and a-half years' purchase. Therefore, according to the opinion of one of the most competent land agents in Ireland, past legislation has reduced the capital value of the property of Irish landlords by £70,000,000. The Earl of Wemyss. to allow Ireland to be in a different position from that of Scotland or Wales. What has been done in the case of South Africa will be done with a hundred times more zeal for the maintenance of the unity of the United Kingdom. THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE than it is, because the extent to which COUNCIL (The Duke of DEVONSHIRE): vendors can be relieved of the cost is not My Lords, I do not think it necessary to yet determined, and cannot be deterfollow the noble Earl through his eloquent, mined without previous very careful though somewhat discursive, review of investigation of the administrative the course of legislation on Irish land machinery, and the reference of the results since 1870. It cannot be denied that of that investigation to the Treasury. It much of the legislation has been excep- is not intended under the clause that the tional in character; and to enter with State shall pay the whole of the vendor's advantage into this review it would be costs. I repeat in more general terms necessary to refer to the exceptional cir- that which I have said previously in cumstances which induced Parliament debate, the Commissioners will be an from time to time to make special legisla- administrative body acting under, and tion affecting this kind of property in Ire- directly instructed by, the Government to land. The existence of such special facilitate as far as possible the transaccircumstances must be evident, and the tions they will be appointed to carry out, noble Earl has mentioned that not one of and with such limitations of cost as may these special measures have been resisted be possible. They will do their best, with in the House on the Second or Third the machinery at their disposal for the Readings. This House, if it represents purpose, to reduce the cost of transfer. nothing else, does, at any rate, very much represent the interests of property; and the noble Earl must agree that these measures would not have been assented to without challenge on the part of any Member of the House, if circumstances had not existed which made exceptional legislation in regard to Irish land a matter of absolute and urgent necessity. I am very glad to hear that, though the noble Earl disapproves of the whole of this legislation which has hitherto been enacted in regard to land in Ireland, he accepts the present measure as a necessity following the legislation he has eloquently condemned. It only remains to answer questions raised by other noble Lords. The first of these, from the Earl of Belmore, was on the subject of the leases held under Trinity College. On a former occasion I stated that the Question was under the consideration of the Government, and that we had in contemplation the appointment of a small Commission to consider the whole subject. I am not able to say that an absolute decision on that point has been arrived at, but I can give the assurance that the matter is still under the consideration of the Irish Government, and that it is possible that a Commission will be appointed. The questions raised by the Earl of Dunraven have reference to two points. The first deals with the extent to which vendors under the Bill will be relieved from the costs attending transfer of estates. The Government are unable to make the clause to which reference has been made more definite The noble Earl thinks that it is quite possible that the whole of the £12,000,000 provided in the Bill will never be distributed in the mode proposed. On that point it is not possible for me to say more than that the opinion of the Government does not agree with that of the noble Earl. The sum of £12,000,000 was arrived at on as careful an investigation All the and no doubt it would have been—if the bonus had been made at the rate of 15 per cent. But it is not open to the noble Earl to suggest to the Government that his estimate of the total sum needed is more likely to be accurate than ours, I observe that there are still some Amendments to be moved to the Bill. I have only seen them since I entered the House, and it is impossible for me to state beforehand how the Government and, because he thinks £12,000,000 may | jacent to or in the neighbourhood of the esnot all be wanted, to require us to adopt tate sold." These words, I think, will have his estimate and increase the percentage to be restored, but at the same time we shall from 12 to 15 per cent. suggest to the other House that words should be added which will give a discretion to the Estates Commissioners, when they consider that such a qualiin order to facilitate the sale of the fication might with advantage be omitted, estate. Before I sit down, I think I may say that the Government have, perhaps, been somewhat disappointed at the extent to which the very large concessions which have been made by this Bill appear to be deemed to be insufficient and unsatisfactory by those to whom will deal with every one of them. There are some which are of a drafting or consequential nature. There are two or three, I believe, which are not, in the opinion of the Government, inconsistent with the principles of the provisions of the Bill, and which they may be able to accept. There are, however, one or two Amendments, which apparently propose to revive questions which have already been discussed, and on which the Government and the House have already expressed a strong and definite opinion. I earnestly trust that the Amendments of that nature will not be pressed. I am not, of course, able to forecast with any approach to certainty what view may be taken in the other House of the Amendments which have either been carried against the Government, or to which the Government have assented more or less under protest. But I am able to say that I do not think the position of the Government, at all events in the other House, will be altogether irreconcilable with reference to some of these Amendments. If contentious questions raised by Amendments still on the Paper are not insisted upon, I have reason to believe that the Government will be prepared to suggest to the other House that the two Amendments which were carried by Lord Macnaghten with regard to procedure on the rent-fixing clauses, at all events, should be accepted. That is to say, we shall not be indisposed to recommend the House of Commons to put back rehearings in place of appeals, and to assent to the Amendment which abolished special procedure for the case of £5 rents. There is another Amendment to which very considerable importance seemed to be attached by a noble Lord from Ireland, which the Government will not be able to accept in its entirety, but which with certain modifications would, I think, go a long way to meet the views which have been expressed. It was agreed last night to omit, in the clause relating to the repurchase of demesnes, the words "AdThe Duke of Devonshire. those concessions have been made. been made to the present owners of Very large concessions have, I think, landed property in Ireland, which previous to the discussions in the conbeen expected would ever have been ference of last year it could scarcely have by any British Parliament. I think that proposed by any Government or accepted on a calm review of these concessions, and the manner in which they have been accepted by the British Parliament, they will be disposed to admit that this measure has been conceived in no unworthy spirit of parsimony or distrust; and although we do not expect that they will ever be satisfied with the great change which has been made in their position by twenty years of land legislation, I hope they will see that this is not an inadequate measure, and will relieve them of some, at all events, of the inbeen exposed. I trust the Bill will now juries or losses to which they have receive its Third Reading, and that the be conducted in the spirit of the dediscussion upon the Amendments may claration which I have been able to make. LORD MUSKERRY: My Lords, the danger of this Bill is that it gives a very imperfect guarantee that it will be the final settlement to the agrarian question in Ireland. This Bill is only the inevitable consequence of the Irish policy initiated by Mr. Gladstone, and that policy throughout has been unjust to the Irish landowners. Lord Salisbury's excuse for continuing this policy was that a continuity of policy which was so necessary in foreign affairs was also necessary in home affairs. I would remind your Lordships that if the Government had been consistent in these views you would have had no South African war, but a South African Republic would be at present in existence. I cannot see why Irish affairs should be dealt with differently from those of the rest of the Empire. With all the discussion about the Land Conference terms, it has been admitted by Mr. Wyndham in the House of Commons that this Bill goes much nearer the tenants' terms under that arrangement than the landlords. How, then, can the latter be expected to receive it with enthusiasm? When old opponents like Mr. Redmond and Mr. William O'Brien assent to terms more favourable than those advocated by the Party which we have helped to place in power, it is time to inquire who are the present custodians of Conservative principles ? I was elected to your Lordships' House as a Conservative representative Peer, but for some time I have been wondering what has become of the Conservative Party Past Governments who claim to be Conservative have been anything but Conservative as regards their Irish policy. Each new Irish Secretary has tried his prentice hand on Irish land legislation, and, so far, each attempt has made matters worse. Now, my Lords, when with no desire to obstruct Mr. Wyndham's policy, we, who are acquainted far more perfectly with the circumstances of Irish property than Ministers can be, as has been proved in the recent debates, put forward most moderate suggestions for making land purchase work more smoothly, little as we like being expropriated, we are met by an almost continuous non possumus on the part of the Government. The Government have thrown over their loyal supporters in favour of the Nationalist Party, who have often declared their disloyalty and hatred to anything Saxon. I would remind your Lordships that the Liberal Government were thrown out on the question of Home Rule. This Bill now before your Lordships is in reality a strong step to bring Home Rule about. The whole of this legislation has not only been unjust and dishonest, but it has shown great cowardice on the part of successive Governments, who have prostituted their sense of justice to the outcry of agitators' and for the purpose of gaining a few votes or disarming opposition in the House of Commons. This Bill has received the assent of some landlords, it is true, but what is the reason they have accepted it? They have accepted it from their experience of the tender mercies of the British Government during the last thirty years. The agitators to whom this Government and preceding Governments have listened so attentively have claimed as a reason for legislation that the Irish farmer was down-trodden and overrented. I would draw your attention to what Mr. Redmond said the other day at Burnley "The very moment the Bill became law and the people became owners of the land, it was would produce double the value it produced at present." his firm conviction that the soil of Ireland If that is true, my Lords, it shows that the agitation on the land question has been fictitious, and that the land has never been assessed at its true value. Again, this bonus of £12,000,000, which is so often and so untruly described as a dole to the Irish landlords, is nothing of the kind. It is neither more nor less than a gift to the tenant farmers of Ireland to enable them to purchase at considerably under value; for remember, that when it is added to the purchase money which the tenants give, not one landlord in a hundred will, as the Bill stands, enjoy his present net income, heavily reduced fourths of whose members are tenant as it has been by Land Courts, threefarmers, whereas every tenant purchaser will obtain a substantial reduction in his expenses. Again, we hear that this £12,000,000 is a gift to Ireland, but it is, in fact, Irish money. certain savings in Irish Administration, It is proposed to be paid off by and thus once more the Irish dog has to be fed with a joint off his own tail. Governments that professed free trade principles have been exercising the highest form of protection as regards Irish land, from which they have taken away every vestige of free contract so far as it could possibly benefit the landlord. And now, after the very bitter experience we have had from the Irish legislation of past years, I think we have a right to ask the Government to guarantee that, at all events on their side of the House, there will be no further legislation bringing forward compulsory sale, no matter how disguised the measure may be. Of course, I am aware that they cannot bind those who are in opposition, but the least they can do is to guarantee that while their Party are in power, now and hereafter, they will not initiate further unjust legislation, and inflict perfectly undeserved penalties on the Irish landlords, who have been admitted, both by Mr. Gladstone and other statesmen who have certainly not shown themselves our friends, to have been most reasonable in their dealing with their tenants and most undeserving of the treatment they have met with. THE DUKE OF ABERCORN: My Lords, I will not enter into all the arguments which the noble Lord who has just sat down, has addressed to your Lordships with regard to this Bill and the action of his Majesty's Government upon it, but I feel bound to repudiate most of the words the noble Lord has used in regard to this Bill, because I consider that they are not at all appropriate to the present occasion. On the contrary, I would venture, on behalf of the Irish landowners, to thank the noble Duke not only for the manner in which he has introduced the measure into your Lordships' House but also for the courteous way in which he has received the various Amendments proposed in Committee. We naturally, as representing the landowners' section in Ireland, have to fight their battles and obtain the best terms that we possibly can for them, but we have endeavoured to do so with moderation. I think that the manner in which noble Lords have brought forward their Amendments, and especially the ability which some of the younger Members have shown, must have met with the approval of the House. It is very pleasant to find that among the rising generation there are noblemen who may be looked to as future Statesmen, and I am sure their appearance in these debates will be welcomed. I hope that the other House will treat the measure, as sent down to it, with the same moderation which it has met with at the hands of your Lordships' House, and that before many days are past this great Land Bill-for, whether you object to it or approve of it, there can be no doubt that it is a great measure, originated in the mind of a great Lord Muskerry. He moved to insert, after the word thinks it inequitable under the circum'Commission," the words "unless he stances that the estate should be dealt with under this section." He said that great apprehension was felt about this clause in Ireland. the Land Commission might seize upon It was thought that the most solvent estates and insist on their being sold at once. He did not himself think that would be the effect of the clause, but a great many people believed that the Land Judge would be of the Commission, and would be bound merely a passive instrument in the hands to do what they told him. Speaking for himself, he did not think that was the meaning of the clause, but he moved the insertion of the words, contained in his Amendment, in order to allay apprehension that undoubtedly existed. Amendment moved "In page 5, line 31, after the word 'Commission, to insert the words 'unless he thinks it inequitable under the circumstances that the estate should be dealt with under this section.’” Lord Macnaghten.) THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND (Lord ASHBOURNE) said the Land Judge was given very wide powers with respect to the whole of the administration. He need not accept the offer made to him by the Land Commission unless he thought it right, and when he put the estate up to auction he was not bound to accept the price unless he thought it a just one. He did not think it was at all necessary to insert the words proposed in the Amendment. Amendment, by leave of the House, withdrawn. |