The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1886-01-16 00:00:00

LONDON MUNICIPAL REFORM.

A meeting of the general council of the London
Municipal Reform League was held on Tuesday
evening in the Memorial Hall, Farringdon-street, Mr.
J. F. B. Firth presiding. Among those present were
Lord Hobhouse, Mr. H. L. W. Lawson, M.P., Sir U.
J. Kay-Shuttleworth, M.P., Captain Verney, M.P.,
Mr. Bolton, M.P., and Mr. E. H. Pickersgill, M.P.
The balance-sheet showed that the receipts of the
league for the year had been £lO5l, and the expendi-
ture, including an adverse balance standing over from
last year, £992.
The Chairman, in moving that the financial state-
ment be received, took occasion to contrast the cir-
cumstances under which they met now with their
position at the time the late Parliament was elected
six years ago. At that time, as far as this league
was concerned, it was not in existence; there were
few people in Parliament who had given special atten-
tion to the subject or were prepared to offer any solu-
tion of a most difficult problem. At the present time
there were 100 members of the House of Commons
elected who were upon the council of the league, while
it had been made very clear in the recent elections
that candidates who supported London government
as it exists had not been considered by their consti-
tuencies as worthy of support. The fact that the
City had now put forward a scheme of reform of its
own was in itself an illustration of the influence of
the league. Against that scheme one of the strongest
' vestries had already pronounced in the most contemp-
tuous terms. There was reason for satisfaction with
the position and prospects of the league, but time was
pressing, as was shown, among other things, by Mr.
Smith's letter to the Times showing how great hal
been the loss to London from the non-settlement of
the water question on even the extraordinary terms
proposed by Sir R. Cross.
The report was received.
Mr. Phillips, vise-chairman, presented the report
of the special committee appointed to work out the
plan of a single municipality for London with district
councils, an abstract of which report appeared in the
Times, and moved its reception, the motion being
seconded by Mr. T. C. Potto.
• Lord Hobhouse, having pointed out that Sir W.
Harcourt's bill practically annihilated the district
councils by giving them only such powers as the
common council chose to attribute to them, held that
it was desirable to give to the district councils a
definite legal status and definite duties. The question
was whether that should be done by putting the whole
of their duties in an Act of Parliament or by giving
power to work it out in a more gradual way. From
a statesman's and practical point of view it was im-
possible for Parliament to lay down an exhaustive
division of functions between the common council and
the district councils. He should therefore be sorry to
see a scheme like that set forth in the report em-
bodied in a bill presented to Parliament, because in so
much detail there would be found a quantity of over-
sights and contradictions which the wear and tear of
practice would soon bring to the front. He submitted
that the more detail they put into the scheme of the
league the more opportunities they would give to their
enemies for defeating the-bill.
A good deal of discnision followed, in which,
among others, Mr. Bolton, M.P., Sir U. 'Kay-
Shuttletiorth, M.P., and Mr. Lawson, M.P., took
part, and eventually the report was received, the 27th
inst. being fixed for a meeting to consider its
adoption.

"At a public sale in New York the other day a
'Cattleya Cypripedium Morganiarum ' sold for 750
dole." We always thought one of those things would
bring about that much at public auction. They are
valuable to scare off tramps and burglars.
It is said to be a fact that young men who practice
on the horizontal bar don't experience as many falls
as those who practice at the saloon bar.

ANOMALIES OF IRISH GOVERNMENT.
(From the Tim's.)

It has been very generally assumed in the course
of the discussion on the Home Rule question that the
administrative government of Ireland differs widely
from that of England and Scotland, that popular re-
presentation is imperfectly recognised, and that
"Dublin Castle" exercises almost despotic powers and
embodies the authority of a complicated bureaucratic
system. Mr. Gladstone in his address to the electors
of Midlothian said: "Down to this hour Ireland has
continued greatly in arrear both of England and Scot-
land with respect to those powers of local self-
government which associate the people, in act and
feeling, with the law." Mr. Chamberlain, immediately
after resigning office last summer, told a Liberal
audience at Holloway that "the majority of English-
men had not the slightest conception of the system
under which this free nation attempts to rule the
sister country. It is a system," he went on to say,
"which is founded on the bayonets of 30,000 soldiers
encamped permanently as in a hostile country. It is
a system as completely centralised and bureaucratic
as that under which Russia governs Poland or that
which prevailed in Venice under the Austrian rule.
An Irishman at this movement cannot move a step
or lift a finger in any parochial, municipal, or educa-
tional work without being confronted with, interfered
with, controlled by an English official, appointed by a
foreign Government, and without a shade or shadow
of representative authority." "The Radical Pro-
gramme," published with the zmprimatur of Mr.
Chamberlain and of the National Liberal Federa-
tion, speaks of the Irish as "a nation of serfs,"
subjected to an "odious and intolerable" foreign
supremacy.
Do the facts justify this passionate language or
may we dismiss it as "a tale of little meaning,
though the words are strong"? There are some im-
partant differences between the machinery and the
methods of administration in Ireland and those with
which we are familiar in Great Britain; but a candid
inquiry, we think, will show that they do not seriously
restrict popular liberties, and that in many respects
they are to the advantage, not to the disadvantage, of
the Irish. We do not contend by any means that
anomalies of historical origin or arising out of diverse
social conditions may not be mitigated or removed ;
but we gee no ground for the charge that popular
rights in Ireland are overridden by a bureaucratic
despotism.
The Lord Lieutenancy is an institution which casts
a thin disguise over the realities of the situation. The
Viceroy has in Ireland substantially the patronge di-
vided in England and Scotland among the principal
Ministers; but, though he directly represents the
Queen, his acts are subject to the rules of Ministerial
responsibility, and in practice they are checked and
controlled by public opinion and Parliamentary pres-
sure, precisely as are those of the Prime Minister and
the Home Secretary. The Irish members are able to
question the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant in
his place in the House of Commons about every detail
of administration, great and small, and, as a matter of
fact, Mr. Forster, Mr. Trevelyan, and Mr. Campbell
Bannermann were thus called to account during the
last Parliament much more frequently than Sir
William Harcourt. The Chief Secretary, who is
generally in the Cabinet when his nominal head is
not there, has responsibilities of his own. He is, for
instance, at the head of the Local Government Board
for Ireland, associated with permanent officials, almost
always Irishmen, and in this capacity the Board
exercises an authority over the conduct of Poor Law
guardians, and, in some matters, over the manage-
ment of municipal affairs, with the same administra-
tive objects and subject to the same responsibility as
the department at Whitehall over which Mr. Balfour
now presides. The Chief Secretary can be called to
account in the House of Commons for anything con-
nected with the administration of the Poor Law in
Ireland as effectually as the President of the Local
Government Board in England. But, it is argued,
these administrative Boards do not represent the
people, and prevent the elected representatives of the
ratepayers from acting as they please, That is
exactly the function of a central controlling autho-
rity, as John Stuart Mill points out in his "Repre-
sentative Government." The proceedings of local
bodies, such as Poor Law Boards and munici-
palities, are limited by Acts of Parliament, and
it is for the central body to take care that those
limitations are not exceeded. The Irish local
bodies are not subject to any restraints which
do not apply to Great Britain, and Mr. Chamberlain's
imaginative description of "alien interference" looks
somewhat absurd when placed side by side with the
examples of reckless expenditure and contempt for
administrative rules to be found in the report of the
Select Committee on the Poor Law Guardians Bill.
The scene at the Itilinallock Board shows that the
guardians, under the influence of agitators like Father
Sheehy, are only too willing to defy the law. Nor
can it be seriously alleged that the municipal corpora-
tions and town commissioners are mere clay in the
hands of the potter, when it is seen how the Dublin
City Council uses its patronage and enters into its
contracts with an avowed Separatist purpose. Mr.
Davitt's appointment to the Port and Docks Board "
and the price paid for Mr. Parnell's paving stones are
illustrative of an independence as remarkable as the
nomination of suspects as sheriffs by several provin-
cial councils, and the defiant refusal of Limerick to
pay for the extra police. In one point, indeed, the
Irish Poor Law differs from the English to the ad-
vantage of the tenants, for only one-half of the rates
are paid by the occupiers, who, through the elected
guardians, now rule most of the boards, the remainder
falling on the landlords.
But whether the system of central supervision be
good or bad—and it is apparently necessary both to
prevent jobbery or extravagance and to protect
officials against wrongful dismissal and other forms of
petty tyranny—it does not differ in Ireland from
that prevailing on this side of St. George's Channel.
Speaking of England, Mr. Fowle, in his excellent
little manual of the question says : "From first to
last, the Poor Law has been exactly what the Poor
Law Board has made it, and there has been no
relaxation of the absolute control which the Board
has exercised over every detail of administration."
The case of the National Board of Education, the
Intermediate Education Commissioners, the Board of
Werks, the Fishery Board, and the Prisons Board is
somewhat different. In all the elective element is
excluded, and the three last-mentioned boards are
directly subject to the Treasury in London. It is the
Financial Secretary of the Treasury who is responsi-
ble for dealing with any matters arising in connection
with them in Parliament, having the advantage, how-
ever, of the advice and assistance of the permanent
members in Dublin. The arrangement is not satis-
factory, but it is the necessary consequence of the
special indulgence in financial affairs conceded to
Ireland. The expenditure of these bodies is not pro-
vided for, wholly or partially, out of local rates,
but out of Imperial taxation, and the pro-
posal to give boards or councils elected in
Ireland the unrestricted power of voting away
immense sums and dealing with immense in-
vestments to which the taxpayers of Great Britain
are by far the greatest contributors cannot be seri-
ously entertained. If it is intended that the Imperial
grants should be withdrawn, under a system of im-
proved local government, or voted only in proportion
to the amounts raised by local rates, the elective plan
may be introduced, subject to proper securities; but
while the whole of the cost of primary education in
Ireland is borne by the Imperial Exchequer, and
while the Board of Works, the Fishery Board, aud
the like expend and sink a large capital advanced on
the Imperial credit, the strict control of the Treasury
is as imperatively required as it would be under
similar conditions in England or Scotland. It would
be difficult to point out any public duties of which
the cost is borne by the Imperial Exchequer, while
the uncontrolled responsibility of administration is
allowed to rest with elected representatives.
The same argument applies with still greater force
to the Constabulary, tho cost of which is also an
Imperial charge. We need not touch here upon the
political reasons for refusing to place the Irish police
under the control of local elected bodies. The
financial point cannot be got over. The charges for
the jadicial establishmenias and for the stipendiary
me gistracy are also Imperial charges; but it is diffi-
cult to believe that the transfer of the appointment of
those functionaries to elected councils, such as would
be returned in Ireland by the popular vote, is within
the range of practical discussion. It has certainly
never been even proposed for England or Scotland.
The appointment of the unpaid magistrates and the
supervision of their conduct by the Irish Executive
I are subject to the same checks and responsibilities,
I enforced by Parliamentary vigilence, which are found
I effectual in the case of the Lord Chancellor and the
Home Secretary in this country. There is no dif-
ference in the systems except that the most important
duties of the magistracy are confined, by a number of
recent statutes, to the stipendiaries, a movement in
the direction favoured by English Radical reformers.
The complaint that the magistrates, both paid and
unpaid, belong to a class not in sympathy with the
masses of the people is fouuded on the fact, in so
many ways significant, that the whole of the educated
opinion of Ireland, Protestant and Catholic, is in
revolt against the domination of the National League.
It is equally unreasonable to point to the grand
jury system in Ireland as constituting a grievance to
which there is nothing comparable in England or
Scotland._ The grand juries acting for fiscal purposes
and the magistrates with the associated oesspayers at
baronial presentment sessions are, no doubt, nomi-
nated bodies exercising large rating powers which it
would be difficult to justify in theory. But, what-
ever be the theoretical weakness of the system, it
stands on the same basis as the fiscal powers of =gig-
trates at quarter sessions in England, and in practice
it has, in recent years at all events, been economic 4
and free from the suspicion of jobbery. The expendi-
ture on roads, bridges, &c., will have to be placed, in
both countries, under the control of elected bodies,
but the change will not be greater in Ireland than in
England, and it is to be feared that, in the former
country, at any rate, the results may not be entirely
agreeable to the ratepayers.
The grievance of which the Irish may with some
justice complain is that they are not allowed to estab-
lish a system of denominational education for them-
selves. As we have seen, however, they cannot put'
in a claim to do this unless they are
willing to forego the great advantage they at
present enjoy in receiving large Imperial grants
without any such conditions of proportionate
contribution and the like as are insisted upon in
the grants from the general revenue of the State

SATURDAY, JAN. 16, 1886.

to schools in this country. Any scheme which gave
complete control over this and cognate subjects to
local elected bodies would involve the withdrawal of
the Imperial contributions, which, it is estimated
amount to nearly £4,000,000 a year, including
education, law and justice, prisons, police, and so
forth. But Ireland is not a prosperous country,
and since power has passed into the hands of a party
preaching socialistic doctrines her resources are
dwindling, her credit is sinking, and capital is flying
from her shores. What probability is there that she
will be able to bear alone the burden the taxpayers of
England and Scotland now so largely share, even
without counting the cost of those wild projects of
national development which Mr. Parnell holds out
to his credulous followers? Under the existing
financial system, Ireland is treated with peculiar
tenderness. So far as any differences in taxation
and expenditure exist between the two countries
they are all in favour of Ireland. It is cal-
culated that the burden of Imperial taxes
amounts in England to .C 2 is. Bd. per head of
the population, and in Ireland only to .E 1 4s. lid.
Ireland, as we have seen, obtains large special grand)
out of the Imperial Exchequer, while, on the other
hand, she is exempted from several important items
of charge. The land-tax has never been imposed
upon Ireland, nor the inhabited-house duty, nor the
assessed taxes, and the income tax is levied more
indulgently than in this country, the occupiers of
land, in particular, paying only on "Griffith's valua-
tion? It is clear, therefore, that the farmer or the
trader in Ireland is at an advantage, so far as the
incidence of Imperial taxes is concerned when com-
pared with his competitors in England or Scotland.
It remains to notice the gradual changes in the
Irish legal system, completed by the Judicature
Acts, which have at length brought the substance
and the procedure of Irish law into entire harmony
with that of England. In some matters of practice
unimportant differences remain, but, generally speak-
ing, they are not to the disadvantage of Ireland.
Law reformers in England will be puzzled by one of
the articles of indictment against "Dublin Castle
put forward in "The Radical Programme "—"The
magistrates, paid and unpaid, throughout Ireland in
any cases of difficulty send up queries to the Castle,
so as to be advised by the Attorney or Solicitor-
General, both of whom have offices in the Castle;
and prosecutions, instead of being undertaken by
the magistrates or by private individuals, as in
England, are instituted invariably in the name of the
Irish Attorney-General and under his direction." It
does not seem a very serious ground of charge
against the Irish Executive that it relies upon the
services of a public prosecutor instead of trusting to
the haphazard system whicn is still tolerated here.
In Ireland, where terrorism like that of the National
League has obtained an ascendancy, it would be as
hopeless to trust to the initiative of private individuals
for grappling with organised crimo as it would be to
depend upon a police controlled by local elected
bodies for suppressing outrages and bringing crim;nals
tepunishment. This is the one point on which the
claim of the majority of the Irish people to equal in-
stitutions with Englishmen and Scotchmen must be
overruled by considerations of a higher order. The
law must be made to prevail, life and property must
be protected, terrorism must be put down with the
strong hand, even if in so doing we have to suspend,
under local and temporary conditions, the operation
of principles of Enelsh law, including trial by jury
itself, which the Irish masses have perverted and mis-
used to their own discredit and to the danger of
society.