The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1886-09-04 00:00:00

THE ADDRESS.

The adjourned debate on the Address was resumed
by Mr. Esslemont, who moved an amendment repre-
senting that the case of the Scotch crofters had not
been remedied by the Crofters Act of last session, inas-
much as it had not provided for the enlargement of
the present inadequate holdings, and the formation of
new buildings.
Mr. M'Laren, in seconding the amendment in a long
speech, dwelt on the defects of the Act, the abuse of
power by the landlords and their agents, and the
generally unsatisfactory condition of the land question.
Dr. Clark, who was several times called to order for
wandering from the subject of the amendment, argued
that the administration of the law in Scotland gene-
rally, and especially in relation to proceedings against
the crofters, was unsatisfactory, and enlarged upon
the harshness of Scotch landlords towards their
tenants.

Mr. Baumann vigorously defended the Duke of
Argyll against the charges which had been brought
against him as a landlord. Either the House ought
to abolish the right of private property, or it should
discourage the ribald and rancorous attacks on la d.
lords, and he protested against the action of the
"political cormorants" who, for their own personal
advantage stimulated their neighbours to break the
Bth and 10th Commandments.

,
Mr. Picton, Mr. S. Mason, and Mr. J. O'Connor
(Tipperary) spoke in support of the amendment.
Mr. Dalrymple, who pointed out the inaccuracies in
the statements of previous speakers, doubted whether
the crofters would derive any benefit from the present
discussion; and

Mr. Anderson expressed his want of confidence in
Mr. A. J. Balfour as a land reformer.

Dr. Tanner indulged in an animated tirade against
landlords in general, and the Duke of Argyll specially,
and, after being several times called to order, was at
last silenced by the Speaker on the ground of tedious
irrelevancy.
Mr. Harris followed, and, after speaking in the same
strain for a quarter of an hour, was also directed to
resume his seat for the same reason.

Mr. A. J. Balfour, who remarked that he was the only
member of the Government who istended to speak
upon the subject, argued that the Act of the late
Government had placed the crofters under a more
favourable system of land tenure than prevailed in any
other country in the world. He glanced at the various
arguments which had been raised during the debate,
and maintained that the question was very inadequately
understood by the majority of those who had dis-
cussed it. The transportation of the crofters te
the sea coast, for instance, had no relation what-
ever to the disturbed districts, and in regard to
the charges made against the Procurators Fiscal, he
pointed to the absence of any charge against them in
reference to the crofters question, and remarked that
it would be impossible to secure competent officers if
they were prevented from engaging in private practice.
He also repudiated the charges which had been ad-
vanced against the landlords in the disturbed districts.
The information at the disposal of the Government, he
said, entirely contradicted the allegation that a general
system of rack. renting prevailed, and this was sup.
ported by the fact that the crofters in Tiree had not
been subject to competition rents. The real difficulty
in the Highlands was not duo to rents but to popula-
tion, and nothing could be done to obviate that
difficulty but emigration. The Government, he said in
conclusion, would loyally carry out the new Act, but
they would also do all in their power to maintain
order.

Dr. M•Donald warned the House that it would have
to deal with an universal Celtic revolt against the
present land law, and denied that there could be any
congestion of population while there was ample good
land locked up in the deer forests. He denied also
that the landlords had spent money in improving the
crofter's holdings, and went at length into the details
of recent cases of evictions.
Mr. Sutherland expressed dissatisfaction with Mr.
Balfour's speech, which he thought would increase the
irritation already existing, and attributed the dissatis-
faction and agitation entirely to the action of landlords
in past times.
Mr. J. E. Balfour pointed out the absurdity of con-
demning an Act of Parliament which was only a few
months old, and of which there could not yet have
been any experience in practice. Whatever defects the
Act might have, it was a larger measure in favour of the
occupying tenant than had ever been passed by any
Parliament.
The discussion was continued by Mr. Nolan, Mr.
Blane, Mr. Flynn, and other Irish members, several
of whom were ruled out of order by the Speaker
and ordered to resume their seats. A division
being then taken the amendment was negatived by 203
to 121.
Mr. Sexton moved the adjournment of the debate,
upon which
Mr. Parnell suggested that Mr. Sexton's amendment
should be postponed until the report stage to be taken
on Thursday, by which he calculated that the House
might get to Committee of Supply on Monday next.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer objected to this
course, and the debate was adjourned.
The House adjdurned at 25 minutes to one o'clock,