The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1881-08-06 00:00:00

'IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

In the HOUSE OF LORDS, August 1, Lord Carlingford moved
the second reading of the Irish Land Bill, the objects and
provisions of which he described at considerable length, con-
cluding with an appeal to their Lordships to assist in the
Passing of a measure which, without injuring the money
interests of the landlord, would, he believed, have a bene-
ficial influence on the Irish people.
Lord Salisbury, in criticising the Bill, objected that i
gave a new definition of tenant right never before thought
of, by conferring upon the tenant that which he had never
bought, and could not sell without wronging either his land-
land or the Orchaser, and by depriving the landlord of
his right to select his own tenants, to fix his own rents,
to arrange his own estates by consolidating small
farms, or adding one farm to another, and even to select the
sites on which the cottages of the labourers employed on his
estate shonld I,e built. As to the course to be taken with
rgeard to the Bill, the noble Marquis recommended the House
not to reject it, but, accepting it on the responsibility of
7511ni8tebrs, WTI Cnd i IA Committee by removing those features
whiol seemed to him fraught with glaring injustice.
'Lord O'Hagan 'stated that in his experience no measure
20r Ireland ever introduced in Parliament had received so
general an approval as this ha.4l in that country. The noble
and learned lord, at considerable length, argued thkt all the
strongest :provisions of the Bill were in accordarte with
Principles to which the body of the landlords had professed
their adherence before the measure was framed.
Lord Lansdowne held that some of the provisions of the
Bill were antagonistic to others. He was in favour of an ex-
tension of the proprietary of Ireland; but while, on the one
hand, that was to some extent provided for in the Bill, on
the other, the measure so fortified the position of the tenants
that they would not be disposed to become proprietors. He
regarded the tenure clauses of the Bill as its main
leitture ; and he distrusted those clauses in themselves and
because of the arguments by which they were supported.
Re denied that this Bill was a development of the Act
of 1870, and asserted that it was a departure from that
Statute. Alter a hostile criticism of the Bill, extending over
nearly an hour, the noble marquis said that the Bill was
the result of an agitation, and was a point of departure from
Which a new agitation would proceed. At the same time he
concurred with Lord Salisbury that the wiser course
for the House would be to try and amend it, and throw
upon the Government the responsibility of its injustice.
Lord Inchiquin opposed and Lord Monteagle supported
the Bal.

Lord Waterford was sure that any legislation which was
.esed in reference to Irish land would hereafter be applied
to English land also. He believed that this measure would
Only be a fresh starting point fur agitation, as it was an
answer to agitation which aimed at nothing short of the dis-
lmemberment of the Empire. At the same time, he was for
giving the Pill a second reading and making moderate
amendments in it. He rearetted that the proprietary clause
did not go further, because, in some in.tances, sale of his
Property would be the only escape for the landlord. He
tild not approve the emigration scheme, because Ireland, as
a whole, was already too thinly populated.
Lord Dunraven described the Bill as one which deprived
the landlords of their ownership of the land. Practically
the measure gave 'the three F's,- which certainly was a less
Valuable tenure to the landlord, while it was one which
chimed in more with, the feelings, prejudices, and send-
rnents of the Irish people. He was of opinion that if the
Bill was to pass its action ought to be as wide as possible,
and include lessees and tenants paying over £lOO a year;
and that on the whole the House would do well to pass it.
Lord Lytton condemned the measure as revolutionary, mis-
chievous, and dangerous. If the Opposition did not sum-
raarily reject the measure, it must be remembered that
submission was not approval.
Lord Stanley of Alderley asked what were the intentions
of the Government with respect to -outrage in Ireland?
Lord Spencer assured the House that the Povernment
attached great importance to the perchase clause of the
BIM He then dilated on the difference between the English
and Irk& land systems, and defended the Bill against the
miticisms of Lord Lytton and other noble lords.
The Duke of Argyll moved the adjournment of the debate.
The motion was agreed to, and their Lordships adjourned
at half-past one o'clock.
111 the HOUSE OF COMMONS, Lord Hartington, in answer to
c„
• H. Tyler, said that the pecuniary aid given by the Indian
Government to Abdurrahman amounted to 29a lakhs; in•
chiding 9 lakhs found at Cabul, in addition to a number
of guns, of which he gave a list. He had no reason to believe
that it was the intention of the Indian Governmen Ito give
further assistance to the Ameer or to employ any Anglo-
Indian force in Afghanistan. In answer to Sir W. Barttelot,
he said he had not received any positive information as to
the movements of General Hume's force, but he inferred
from a telegram he had received that a British force was still
at Chaman.
In answer to Sir S. Northcote, Mr. Gladstone said that, so
le▪ r
as he was aware, no information had been received of
the signing of the Convention with the Boers.
In answer to Lord Bective, Sir C. Dilke denied the rumour
that the Khedive had applied for the protection of the
British and French Governments.
Mr. Gladstone, in moving that for the remainder of the
Session Orders of the Day have precedence of Notices of
Motions on Tuesday, Government Orders having priority,
and that Government Orders should also have priority on
...Wednesday, notified that it was intended to abandon for this
wassion the Rivers Conservancy and Floods Prevention Bill
and the Augmentation of Benefices Act Amendment Bill, and
that Ministers would use all available means for forwarding
BoPply, and with that view would discontinue morning and
resume the usual afternoon sittings.
Subsequently, after a short discussion among the Scotch
Members, Sir W. Harcourt intimated that he should not go
?II with the Educational Endowments (Scotland) Bill; and
Mr. Gladstone informed Sir R. Cross that the Ballot Act
Amendment Bill would be withdrawn, and a simple Con-
tinuance Bill introduced.
Mr. J. M'Carthy pressed the Government to name a day
ter discussing the administration of the Coercion Acts.
Mr. Gladstone replied that the Appropriation Bill would
he the most fitting opportunity.
Mr. Parnell, after expressing his dissatisfaction at the
Premier's reply, proceeded to say that he and the other
l4ish members would be failing in their duty if they longer
neglected to bring the subject of these Irish arrests under
the notice of the House, and they had a right to demand
that the Government should give them a day for bringing
the subject forward. His hon. friend had been told by the
?rime Minister that he could bring on the kmatter on the
Appropriation Bill. But did the Prime Minister think that
the bash members would be content to wait until the Ap-
Propriatioa Bill was brought in, when the House would be
too impatient to listen to what they had to say and would
be anxious to get away at any cost? Justice and truth
reqnired that Irish members should do their duty fear-
lessly in this matter, and he therefore should not shrink
[rani using all the forms of the House that were available
.0 prevent the Government from appropriating the remain-
ing Tuesdays and Wednesdays of the Session, and from
being successful in their attempt to prevent this subject
from being brought before the House. For months past the
Government had done their best to totally extinguish the
though
of private members in that House. It seemed as
'uollgh they were getting into the way of looking upon the
Government as the Deus ex niachinti, of that House, and of
co_nferring upon the Prime Minister the attributes of Jove,
While private members were debarred altogether from any
.opportunity of discharging the missions in respect of which
• sir constituents had sent them to that House. (Hear.)
a'alr by day, during the last three or four months, he had
~been receiving letters from these prisoners. They said that
the Irish members ought to urge upon the Irish Chief Secre-
tary the duty of informing the House—
The Speaker said the hon. gentleman was going beyond
the question before the House. (Hear.)
Mr. Parnell said he would be very sorry to go beyond
the question, and he wished to confine himself within
Proper limits. The Prime Minister had moved that during
the remainder of the Sessiorr Government business should
have precedence on Tuesdays and. Wednesdays, and he
. Parnell) had endeavoured to point out that it was the
operative duty of Irish members to bring the question of
these suspects and the evidence on which they had been
arrested before the House. These men had been arrested
Without a charge, almost without an accusation. (Hear.)
The Government had repeatedly refused to give any replies
..te questions which Irish members had put with respect to
lam]. It was absolutely necessary for the fair fame or
raallY honourable men in Ireland that Irish Members should
not allow the Government to continue to libel those men.
The Government had arrested the hon. member for
Tipperary ; they had arrested a trusted priest—(Cries of
" Order.")
The Speaker said he must caution the ton. member. The
Illation before the House was of a very limited character,
aild the hon. member was not entitled to bring on the ques-
tion of the imprisoned suspects.
Mr. Parnell said if the motion of the Prime Minister were
acceded to Irish members would practically be deprived of
an Opportunity of bringing the case of the imprisoned suspects
before the House. (Hear.) He had desired to show that the
Government ought to give facilities for rescuing the character
of these suspects- from the unworthy disparagement cast
Poia them. He would not presume to continue his observa-
tions if the right hon. gentleman in the chair ruled that he
_as out of order in saying that a good priest and a good
arialiman—(Cries of "Order.')
The Speaker said he was surprised that after his ruling the
~on. member took the course he had done. (Cheers.)
_Mr. Parnell, amid cheers from Home Rulers, insisted that
Irish members would appear to have lost sympathy for the
,allapects if they did not 'bring their case before the House.
ktmee of "Order," which became the louder on the hon.
olenaber persisting in speaking, which he did in a louder
Voice. He was understood to say during the clamour that
t.he Prime Minister was endeavouring to make himself a
grant and that the authorities of the day were always on
tee side of the powers that be.)
While Mr. Parnell, amid loud cries of " Order " and
:`,Name," was standing, Mr. Gladstone rose to speak, and
ice clamour became still greater. They resumed their seats
and silence was restored, when
The Speaker rose and said : I have repeatedly cautioned
-
the hon. member for the city of Cork, and notwithstanding
these repeated cautions he has held language utterly unpar-
Bamentary and improper (" No," from an Irish member),
and I hereby name Mr. Parnell as having disregarded the
anthority of the Chair. (Cheers from both sides of the
Rouse.)
Mr. Gladstone having said that he•was about to move—
Mr. Parnell rose and said: I will not wait for the farce of
a division. I will leave your House, and the public will see
that there is no longer freedom of discussion left to the Irish
members. (Cheers from the Home Rulers.) The hon. gen-
tleman then left the House.
Mr. Gladstone: Sir, I was about to move, when you rose
from the chair, that the words of the hon. member be taken
down. I never heard such words—(Cries of "Order.")
Mr. Healy rose to order. As he understood, when an hon.
Member was named a Minister of the Crown must make a
Motion without a speech. (Hear.)
Mr. Gladstone: I thank the hon. member for reminding
ale that I ought not to have made a speelh. I moveethat
Mr. Parnell, having been named, be suspended from the
service of the House for the remainder of the
.sitting.
The House divided, and there voted--
For Mr. Parnell's suspension .. 131
Against it .. • • • • .. .. 14
Majority .. • • .. —ll7

Mr. 0 Donnell, Mr. Leamy, Mr. A. O'Couner, and Mr.
Mr
spoke, and Mr. Newdegate called upon the Prime
er to apply his mind to the revision of the Rules of
Parliament. In the end Mr. Gladstone's motion for the
!Precedence of Government business was carried by 111
to it
On the order for going into Commtttee of Supply, Mr.
Gourley called attention to the administration of the
Greenwich Hospital Fund.
A brief discussion was raised by Dr. Cameron on the
Dowers of the Local Government Board for the prevention
and control of formidable epidemic-diseases, and Mr. Ask
Mead• Bartlett spoke on the annexation by Russia of the
Akhal Turcoman territory. Sir G. Campbell, Lord Hart-
ington, Mr. O'Donnell, and Mr. Onslow made some observa-
tions, and the order for Supply was then withdrawn.
The Regulation of the Forces Bill was passed through
Committee, and several other Bills were forwarded a stage,
after which the House adjourned at five minutes past one
o'clock.

In the HOUSE OF LORDS, August 2, the debate on the Land
Law (Ireland) Bill was resumed by
The Duke of Argyll, who entered into a minute criticism
Of the provisions of the Bill. He argued that the conduct
of the Government in respect of the measure had not been
consistent, and complained tiny ha the Bill tney laid down
no general principle for the guidance of the Land
Court to which such extensive powers were to
.be
given. At one time they announced their intention
to lay down such a principle, and their having
failed to do so was an abandonment of duty. He
doubted whether the Government had any idea of the
Principle on which the small farms of Ireland ought
to be valued. He asked whether it was the object
of the Government to have people kept on plots of
land out of which they could not support themselves
and pay rent. As to free sale, if tenant-right was
acquired by the tenant in his contract, as was usualiy
the case in Ulster, it was quite just to give it to
him; but this Bill gave it to every tenant in Ireland
'whether he proved that he had equitably acquired
It or not. He told their lordships he had not a doubt
that, after the passing of this Bill, there would be a cessation
of all improvements by landlovds in Ireland. This
WOlll4 be a great mil to a people who were already so much

in the hands of usurers. He hoped the emigration provision,
minimised as it had been, was only a beginning. His noble
friends on the Government benches reminded him of a row of
jelly fish, creatures which were beautiful in appearance and
had an elaborate nervous system, but were destitute of a
skeleton and a backbone, and which, when seeming to be
swimming, were simply floating with the current. Having
paid a tribute to the domestic virtues of the Irish, the noble
duke concluded by saying it was high time to tell them that
HO people could prosper who pleaded poverty as an excuse
for crime.

Viscount Monck, in supporting the bill, maintained that
the tenants of Ireland had created rights of pi operty in their
holdings, and that the only equitable way of dealing with
them was by giving them a joint interest with the landlord.
The bill would render the tenant more prosperous, and the
landlord would receiie his rent with more regularity.

The Duke of Marlborough believed that the measure wou'd
not be likely to produce contentment in Ireland.
Lord Powerscourt, Lord Fortescue, Lord Middleton, Lord
Waveney, and Lord Delmore continued the discussion.
The Lord Chancellor said it would be expected of him that
he should vindicate his action in being a party to this Bill.
All laws of tenure were made for men and not men for them;
and they must be changed and adjusted when the pressure of
social circumstances required it, when the safety of the State
rendered it necessary, and when we felt that it was inevit-
able. Acting on that principle, Parliament made a much
greater change in the law by the Act of 1870 than that
which it was asked to agree to now. In the circumstances
existing in Ireland at this moment it was a mockery
to talk of economic principles and freedom of con-
tract as applied to them. It was pedantic to rest on
theoretic and abstract principles in this case. He admitted
that things in which he would not have willingly concurred
in 1870 he agreed to now because there existed now what
did not exist then—a state of circumstances which
rendered those things necessary. Having referred to
the leading points of difference between the agri-
cultural interests in this country and those in Ire-
land, the noble and learned lord argued that different
land laws were necessary in Ireland. • He, however,
absolutely denounced as an utter fallacy the pro-
position of Lord Waterford that what you gave to the tenant
you must take from the landlord. As to the bringing about
of good relations between landlord and tenant by armed
power, he asked whether any Irish landlord would get up
and assert in that House that such means would be as well
adapted to that purpose as this Bill. It was the conscious-
ness that it would not which made none of them wish
the bill to be thrown out, notwithstanding all that was
said about- its injustice, its revolutionary tendency, and
the communism embodied in it. Combatting the asser-
tion that the demssid, for this legislation originated
with the Land League, he said that that body was
a result and not a cause. It came into existence in
consequence of the dissatisfaction with the existing law,
which was first manifested most strongly in Ulster. He
relied on the evidence given to the Bessborough Commission/
as showing beyond all doubt a widespread feeling of dis-
satisfaction and distrust. No noble lord had ventured to
get up in that House and say that nothing ought to be done.
Those who had there echoed the complaints of the Irish
Landlords' Committee had not told their lordships what they
would do. Having gone through the various provisions of
the measure, he said that in it there was no confiscation and
no case for compensation.
Lord Cairns approved of two proposals In the Bill—that
for emigration, and that for the encouragement of a peasant
proprietary, and I(regretted that both had not been carried
much further. 't he assistance to be given to emigration
would not increase it more than 3 per cent. ; and the pro-
vision requiring that two-thirds of the tenants should express
their desire to purchase before a purchase could be made
would much obstruct the working of that part of the Bill.
As to the principle of the Bill generally, he called
a witness partial to the Government. Me adopted Mr.
Goschen $ description of it. The noble and learned lord,
analyzing the Bill, maintained that it contained the "three
F's,' and that, while it woqld give something to present
tenants which they had paid nothing for, it would impose a
charge on the future tenantry. He warned the House against
committing any inadvertenceiin connexion with this
measure, Mr. Gladstone having stated that a legal founda-
tion to tenant right was given to the Irish tenant by inad-
vertence in the Act of 1870. He recommended the House
to make such an amendment in the Bill as would prevent
the possibility of the tenant-right being paid for at
the expense of the landlord's rent, because he held
that on this point the words of the Bill were now ambiguous.
The Government had taken the responsibility of presenting
this Bill, and if the House rejected it, their lordships would
be assuming the responsibility which now rested with the
Executive. He hoped their lordships would not make any
alterations in the main lines and features of the measure;
but there were excrescences which marred those lines
and features, and he trusted the House would remove
them.
After some remarks from Lord Kimberley, the Bill was
read a second time, and the Committee was fixed for Thurs-
day, at four o'clock.
Their Lordships adjourned at thirty-flve minutes past one
o'elock.
-

-----
The HOUSE OF COMMONS spent the whole evening in Com-
mittee of Supply and made considerable progress with Class
11. of the Civil Service Estimates.
Some thirteen Votes were agreed to, but the discussions,
though protracted and discursive, led to no practical result,
and the Duly vote which was seriously challenged was the
Secret Service Money.

Some other business was disposed of, and the House ad-
olumed at five minutes past three o'clock.