in a single Session, and that each reform must wait for its proper time. I am somewhat astonished that this reproach should come from the right hon. Gentleman, who was in office for something like three years, and in that time, so far as I know, no important Measure of Irish reform was passed. [An HON. MEMBER: "Thanks to the House of Lords."] Even, as regards this Bill, the right hon. Gentleman, who had a majority behind him, practically acquiesced in not insisting that it should be referred to a Grand Committee. MR. J. MORLEY: That proposal, I think, was talked out. that the system of local government in Ireland requires reform and that in the direction of giving a much larger public control to ratepayers than they at present possess." The attitude taken up by my right hon. Friend then is the attitude taken up by the Government to-day. We hold that the present system of Local Government in Ireland is unsatisfactory and that it requires reform in the direction of increasing public representation. But to acknowledge that general proposition is a very different thing from accepting the provisions of this Bill. If we assent to the Second Reading of the Bill we thereby merely signify our dissatisfaction with the existing system of Local Government and our belief that it ought to MR. GERALD BALFOUR: In the be reformed, but in acquiescing in the first instance it was; but afterwards the second reading we do not necessarily go hon. Member for North Mayo made a further than that. statement to the effect that he would draw a distinction between the two Perhaps I ought to not press that Motion, and I presume parts of this Bill, which seem to me to that he acted with the concurrence of have been welded together in a strange the right hon. Gentleman opposite. At fashion. There is no such close connecall events, if he had chosen to use his tion between the reform of the Poor majority, he could have had the Measure Law Boards in Ireland and the reform sent to a Grand Committee; and, as a of the machinery of the Labourers Acts matter of fact, he did not take that as to justify the two things being incourse. Last year the then Opposition cluded in one and the same Bill. The did not vote against the Second Reading: Government themselves have on the they allowed it to be taken without a stocks a Bill dealing with the AmendDivision; but it is hardly accurate to ment of precedure under the Labourers say that by taking that course we signi- Acts, and if there was time to introduce fied our approval of the proposals and that Bill and to carry it through in the provisions of the Bill. present Session we should do it. In the Bill under consideration the two subjects to which I have alluded are linked together in such a way that it would be impossible to separate them. The first part of the Bill would Revolutionise the existing system of Poor Law administration. The operative clauses are the fourth, which abolishes ex-officio guardians; the eighth, which gives the Poor Law franchise to all who are now entitled to vote for Members of Parliament; and the 12th, which makes the by a Bill brought in by a private Member. qualifications of guardians the same as The great questions of English and Scottish the qualifications of electors. Those are local government have been always treated by successive Governments as subjects of first-class importance; and a Measure to deal with this subject adequately ought always to be a Government Measure. I do not believe that the Irish question is so much more easy to deal with than the English or Scotch, that a different plan can be adopted with any hope of success. Therefore, I do not think this is a serious effort at legislation. I look upon it not so much as a Bill as a series of abstract propositions affirming Chief Secretary for Ireland. MR. J. MORLEY: The main parts of the Bill. MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I think that was not the phrase used; but, even so, that is hardly a true account of what actually took place. The present First Lord of the Treasury on that occasion said: "For my part I am not prepared to admit that this is a subject that ought to be dealt with by piecemeal instalments or that the question of local government in Ireland should be settled very large proposals, and they ought to be considered upon their merits. It is not sufficient to say that they correspond to proposals which have been accepted already by this House for England and Scotland. The right hon. Gentleman opposite does not deny that there are in Ireland differences in the system of rating which would certainly have to be taken into account in considering whether | before substituting for it another system we should alter the system of administration which exists at present. But he said "If it must be acknowledged that the rates are almost entirely paid by the landlords" [Nationalist cries of "No" and "Onehalf", "who would be to a large extent deprived of representation under this Bill; on the other hand we must remember that the county cess is contributed in the main by the occupiers, and that the expenditure of the cess is controlled by the Grand Jury. which would expose the poorer parts of elector. Well, I do not deny that the Grand Jury system is anomalous, but the fact that one anomalous system exists in connection with local administration does not justify the adoption of another anomalous system. It is essential that we should consider most carefully, not for an auditor to surcharge them, and, merely whether the change proposed by this Bill is similar to a change already effected in England and Scotland, but also how such a change would work in Ireland. Take as an instance the Union of Belmullet. In the whole Union there are 3,519 holdings, and of these 3,068 are valued under £4. Therefore, the occupiers of these holdings neither pay poor rates at present nor have they a vote in the election of the guardians. Under this Bill you would give the entire power of electing the guardians to these persons who pay no rates at all. In this union constant demands are made for assistance either from the Government or from the poor rate, and under the Bill of 1886, which was carried by the right hon. Gentleman opposite, the majority of the occupiers of holdings in the union were actually in receipt of outdoor relief. The hon. and gallant Member for Armagh has told us of cases of guardians who were themselves in receipt of such relief, and it is easy to conceive a condition of things under this Bill in which not some but all of the guardians would be in a position to demand outdoor relief. If you put the whole power of electing the guardians into the hands of persons who have demanded assistance over and over again, have you any guarantee that such persons, if elected guardians, will not vote in their own favour? I quite admit that the system of ex-officio guardians has not been a commanding success, but therefore, they have a strong motive for keeping within the law. But, if your board of guardians consisted entirely of men of straw, it would be useless for an auditor to attempt to surcharge them. Reference has been made to the Local Government Board's power of substituting paid guardians for the elected guardians-a power which, I am sorry to say, it has been found necessary occasionally to exercise. I am not at all sure that under the fourth clause of this Bill that safeguard of the interests of the ratepayers would not be swept away entirely, for the clause declares that boards of guardians shall consist in every case of elected guardians. Whether it is the intention of the promoters of the Bill or not, I am inclined to think that the clause would take away from the Local Government Board the power of superseding elected guardians and appointing paid guardians in their stead. From what I have said to the House I think the position of the Government as regards this question will be tolerably clear. We are not able to accept the Second Reading of this Bill in the sense that by doing so we accept the principle of its provisions. We adhere to the position we took up last year when we were in opposition-namely, that in accepting the Second Reading of this Bill we acknowledge that the system of local government in Ireland stands in need of reform by an increase in popular representation; and I trust, Sir, although it MR. T. M. HEALY said that it was exactly 10 years since they heard the same speech, when it was made by Lord Randolph Churchill. All is difficult to forecast with certainty the the House of Commons pretty much like future, that before we leave office we Lazarus begging crumbs from Dives. shall be able to take up this question, They had been begging the House to do not in a piecemeal way, but as a whole, something for their country, but unless and that we shall not leave office with- there was revolution, or bloodshed, or out leaving behind us a Local Govern- murder, nothing happened. When outment Act for Ireland as one of the rages did occur, there was a great outcry, achievements we have been able to but there was always legislation. accomplish. [Cheers.] Irishmen knew very well, of course, that the adhesion of the Tory Party to this Bill was the merest Parliamentary hypocrisy. They had to do it for their They had all constituents, because Conservative working men liked to have a pretence made to them that the same laws would be passed for Ireland as were passed for England. There was no genuineness or earnestness about this support of the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman talked about local government and safeguards, and how in the interests of the ratepayers he had had to appoint paid guardians. What was the case in which he had had to do it? That of Athlone, where the miserable paupers were deprived of the consolation of the nuns by reason of the action of the right hon. Gentleman. grown much greyer and balder since that time, but there was no sign yet of any Scheme of local government for Ireland. MR. GERALD BALFOUR: There was a Bill in 1892. Mr. GERALD BALFOUR: The nuns are in Athlone Workhouse to this day. MR. HEALY: I am speaking of them as nurses. MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Yes. The nuns are there to this day, and so far as I am aware, they never left. MR. T. M. HEALY said, he did not think the right hon. Gentleman was acquainted with the facts. The right hon. Gentleman would bring in Bills about park regulations and matters of that kind, but to any Bill which the Irish people desired, he gave this kind of critical assent. MR. T. M. HEALY: Yes, there was the "put them in the dock" Bill; but the fact remained, and had remained for the last 96 years, that the monkeys in the Zoological Gardens had as much control over their keepers as the ordinary Irishman had over his local affairs. Every year the Government pretended they were going to reform all this, but every year they found the same English question arise to prevent anything being done. Some racket in the Soudan or in Burmah was started, and of course that was of much more importance. Irishmen wanted hon. Gentlemen opposite to be kind enough to allow them to develop their Empire. It was a poor thing, but it was their own. He must congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on the plan he had adopted for dealing with Irish Bills. He had always thought it was a good plan for the Tory Party. Hitherto Irish Members had had to complain that the cemetery for Irish Bills was another institution across the Lobby, but the Tory Party had now discovered that the Rules of the House of Commons were adequate for strangling every Irish Bill. Hon. Gentlemen opposite found that they might allow even a Bill for the Separation of Ireland to be read a Second time on a Wednesday afternoon, and yet go home and enjoy their coffee in the most perfect confidence that no harm had been done. They could go to their con- *MR. SERJEANT HEMPHILL said, stituencies and say we approve of this that a short time ago a Bill brought Bill and we give it our adhesion. We in by the noble Lord the Member know that Ireland ought to have local for Rochester, which vitally affected the government, but only at the proper property of lay patrons-the Benefices time." For 96 years the Irish Mem- Bill-was allowed by the Government to bers had been coming in supplication to be referred to the Standing Committee Chief Secretary for Ireland. All the right hon. Gentleman desired was to get as easily through his term of office as he could, so as to do as little harm as he could to his friends, the landlords, and to block as much as he could any legislation that would give satisfaction to the people at large. The House had heard the kind of speech the right hon. Gentleman had made, over and over and over again, and they knew what had come of them. on Law. It was a Bill of great public the case at the present time. The importance, largely affecting vested in- sources of private charity had been terests, and it was now being carefully dried up and the poor had to be supdiscussed. He appealed to the right ported out of the rates. hon. Gentleman to follow that precedent in this case, and, as he was assenting to the Second Reading of this Bill, to allow it also to be referred to the Standing Committee on Law. I *MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! must remind the hon. Gentleman that the question before the House is that the Bill be read a Second time. The hon. Member must confine his remarks to that Motion. DR. TANNER rose in his place, and claimed to move "That the Question be now put;" but Mr. Speaker withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question. *SIR FRANCIS POWELL (Wigan) *COLONEL WARING continuing, said said that of course he should at once bow that he was very much obliged to the to the ruling from the Chair. The hon. Member for Cork County for his progress made by the Standing Com- courteous interruption. He was not mittee on Law during the period of office speaking merely because he wished to of the late Government, as well as under occupy the time of the House, but the present Government, had not been because he wanted to say one or two satisfactory. words as to certain parts of the hon. Member's Bill. It was proposed by the Bill that the Irish labourer should get an acre of land attached to his dwelling. He was bound to say that he did not think that the labourer required such a large quantity of land to cultivate for his own purposes, and that very few of them would cultivate it with advantage to themselves. He had a very strong opinion that every man who cultivated half-an-acre of land in his spare time would hesitate before he undertook the cultivation of an additional half-acre. He had consulted many labourers upon the subject, and all of them thought that half-an-acre was as much as they could cultivate with advantage. Hon. Members opposite occasionally evinced great anxiety to forward the interests of the Irish labourer in that House, but they did not appear to have endeavoured to induce their constituents to avail themselves of the beneficial provisions of Measures which had already been passed in their favour. It was only a Session *SIR F. POWELL said that he had understood that the question before the House was that the Bill be referred to the Standing Committee on Law. If that were not the case he would not trespass further upon the attention of the House. *COLONEL WARING (Down, N.) said that he had not intended to intervene in this Debate, and was, therefore, not prepared to say much that was new upon the subject matter of the Bill. They had to look upon this Measure in connection with the state of things that had existed in Ireland many years ago. He did not think that the hon. Member for Louth had any very distinct recollection of the state of things that had prevailed in that country at the period to which he referred. He himself, however, was or two ago that a Bill had been old enough to remember what the con- carried to empower Irish Boards of dition of Ireland was in the days before Guardians to build labourers' cottages, and Poor Law Guardians were in existence it was not until an appeal had been in that country. In those days private made to the Local Government Board charity was available to a very large that the local Poor Law Guardians could extent, and the consequence was that it be induced to carry out the provisions of was not necessary to apply to the public the Act. He could not understand the rates for the sustenance of the poor of complaint of the hon. Member for Louth the country. That, however, was not that Irish Members obtained so small a VOL. XXXIX. [FOURTH SERIES.] 2 Y share of the attention of the House. The House divided :—Ayes, 154; The fact was that Irish Members occu- Noes, 207.-(Division List, No. 101.) pied nearly every Wednesday of the Bill committed to a Committee of the BOARDS OF CONCILIATION BILL. Order for Second Reading read, and discharged:-Bill withdrawn. year, and he thought that they might whole House for To-morrow. CORONERS' INQUESTS (RAILWAY Question put, and agreed to; Bill read a Second time. DR. TANNER moved, "That the Bill be referred to the Standing Committee on Law, etc." till To JURORS' (IRELAND) BILL. CATHEDRAL CHURCHES BILL. Second Reading deferred till Wednes PRISONERS' EVIDENCE BILL. Second Reading deferred till Wednes PAYMENT OF JURORS (IRELAND) Second Reading deferred till To morrow. WORKING MEN'S DWELLINGS (No. 2) BILL. Second Reading deferred till Wednesday next. OLD AGE PENSIONS (FRIENDLY THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR, Manchester, E.) It is too late to argue the point at this time of the afternoon, but in judgment this Measure, which has been 1st May. introduced by a private Member, ought my Second Reading deferred till Friday BILL. not to be dealt with by the Standing DISPENSARY COMMITTEES (IRELAND) Committee on Law, but rather by a Committee of the whole House, seeing that the Measure goes to the root of the Local Government system in Ireland. Question put, "That the Bill be committed to the Standing Committee on Law, etc." Colonel Waring. Second Reading deferred till Thursday 23rd April. RATING OF MACHINERY BILL. Second Reading deferred till Wednesday 6th May. |