The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-13 00:00:00

LABOURERS' COTTAGES IN IRELAND.

On the motion for going into committee of supply,
Sir H. BRUCE rose to move that the restrictions placed
by the Board of Works in Ireland and the Treasury on the
advances of money for the building of labourers' cottages
in Ireland were inexpedient and calculated to render the act
sanctioning the advances in a great degree inoperative. The
hon. baronet referred to some correspondence between the
Treasury and Sir Richard Griffith in support of his motion.
Mr. F. PEEL reminded the house that it was not with-
out considerable difficulty that the principle of the Land
Improvement Act was extended to building operations in
Ireland—in the first instance to farm buildings, and ulti-
mately in 1860 to the erection of labourers' cottages. When
Parliament authorised Government to make advances for
the purpose, it was necessary at the same time to lay down
conditions under which they should be made, and the hon.
baronet now asked whether the restrictions created were not
unnecessary. He believed they were quite defensible, not
merely as protecting the Government, but likewise as pro-
' tecting the owners of property, and especially those who
had eventual interests in land.

Sir F. HEYGATE called attention to the extraordinary
character of the specifications required by the Treasury.
Why, for example, should the best description of slates be
required for labourers' cottages, and why should none but
the best foreign timber be used?
Mr. POLL A.RD -URQUHART hoped the Government
would do nothing to induce Sir R. Griffith to relax the very
salutary regulations laid down by him. If the working of the
act were not so guarded it would lead to the greatest abuses.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE asked the hon. baronet to re-
member that such legislation was entirely exceptional, and
that it was with great difficulty the bill was passed by the
House of Lords. In the interest of the remainder man espe-
cially, it was necessary to fence the act with conditions, and
under those circumstances he asked the hon. baronet not to
press his amendment.
Sir H. BRUCE withdrew the amendment.
THE STATE OF IRELAND.

Col. DUNNE rose to bring before the house the present
depressed condition of Ireland, together with the amount
of taxation imposed upon that country, and to move for a
select committee to inquire into the cause of such depres-
sion, and the effects of the taxation she now bore. The hon.
member regretted his inability to bring forward the motion
of Ireland ataf an
earlier period of the session, Comparing the returns
iettahehardetudrneerseoaafeldB6wli,thhienf2oounydeetrheatte thethe
numberpopula-
tion
of 2,000,000 and
more. That could not be a matter for w
con-
gratulation, as Irelandlar as capable of supporting a much
ger population than she
possessed in 1841. Again, since
1847, which was the first year after the potato famine, her
agricultural produce of all
her cereal crops were less,
sortsu had diminished enormously;
the quantity of stock in the country was
crops were less, and
• Ireland had been au
exporter
of grain,
was less. Heretofore
had been obliged to import grolagrtaail but of late years she
t or £5,000,000. Then the value of railweae;Dtennteerftf4L"L°°
i depreciated, and there was a falling off in-trhoe' ---production-4 --• been
; every species of Irish manufacture. So that, judged of
I every possible test, there could not be any doubt
itato by
the
depressed condition of Ireland. It might have been n ee-
sary to have detained the house at great length
in developing his contention, but that had been
rendered unnecessary by the frank admissions of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer in his budget speech. The
hon. and gallant member then proceeded to take a general
review of the taxation of Ireland from the Union to the
presert time, comparing the public debts of the two coun-

tries at that period, and contended that throughout the
period since the Union the taxation of Ireland had been so
unduly severe as to bring about a state of things quite con-
trary to the spirit of the Act of Union. The theory, always
had been that the Union was to be for the benefit of the
two countries ; but when it was found that one was pros-
pering, while the other was being exhausted by over-taxa-
tion, it was clear that the Act of Union was not being fairly
carried out. He had no wild or absurd notions ahou'; the
future of Ireland; but, instead of seeing the population
frittered and driven away in emigrant ships to foreign
shores, he sincerely hoped and trusted he should live to see
the people of Ireland happy and prosperous in their own
country, That day would not arrive, however, until some
different system of taxation were adopted; and, with the
view to obtain some recognition of that by the house, he
would conclude by moving for the committee of which he
had given notice.
Colonel FRENCH seconded the motion.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
question was one that deserved serious consideration, and
there was no necessity for any apology for bringing it be-
fore the notice of the house. He could not, however, agree
with the hon. and gallant member in all his views. For
instance, he could not agree in the general statement that
taxation was no diminution of the wealth of the country
so long as the money was spent within the limits of the
country. With regard to " absenteeism," as it was called,
that was undoubtedly a matter for very deep regret; but
he could not see how it could be made less frequent
except by setting before the landlords' eves the better
example of the British landlords. The hon, and
gallant gentleman complained that Ireland paid more than
her fair share of taxation, and that, though the figures
showed but seven millions, she actually paid eleven mil-
lions; the difference being made up by her in, as he said,
the Irish tradesman taking duty-paid goods from England
to the extent of £4,600,000. If that were so, Ireland must
be richer than England, because England did not pay
£4600,000 on Customs' duties annually. The Customs re-
venue levied in England was equal to 186 Id per head, and
in Ireland 7s 10d ; excise in England was 13s 6d per head,
and in Ireland 9a ; stamps in England 7s 6d per head, and
in Ireland is 'Old; land and assessed taxes in England 2s
lld per head, and in Ireland nothing; the income tax in
England was 9s Id per head, and in Ireland 2s fild ; but
those figures were no proof that Ireland was lighter taxed
than England, because the low rate of taxation might, ow-
ing to the poverty of the country, be in fact more oppres-
sive than the higher rate in England. Ireland, however,
paid no duties which England did not ; but England paid
duties which Ireland did not. The right hon. gentleman
then entered into minute details of Irish expenditure in com-
parison with England. The property-holding classes in
Ireland must not be considered poorer than those in Eng-
land, but in the adjustment of income tax in Ireland con-
siderable modifications had been made in favour of the lat-
ter. In England the owners of landed property were as-
sessed up to the rack rent, and in some instances on more
than they received (exception only being allowed for the
land tax and sewerage), but in Ireland the assessment
was based on less than the owner received in rent, viz.,
on the poor law valuation. The operation of schedule
D in the two countries was similar; for where in England
a tenant would have to pay on £250, in Ireland he
would only have to pay income tax on £125. It
was difficult to imagine himself an Irishman, and to inform
them what was for their interest and benefit; but he was
convinced that equality of taxation lay at the root of full
political equality. Admitting distress to exist, the remedy
must depend, in a great measure, on Ireland's own energies
and powers; and he saw no injustice, danger, or inconveni-
ence in assisting that country with loans of public money
for internal improvements. He hoped the hon. gentleman
would not press his motion, because the Government could
not assent to it,

Mr. LONGFIELD admitted that up to 1852 Ireland was
improving. It had prospered, despite of its exhaustion
after the famine, and would have continued to prosper had
the same circumstances prevailed. What were those cir-
cumstances?. He answered, lightness of taxation. At that
period the taxation of Ireland was about 1114 s. the head.
What was it now ? Double that amount. In 10 years its
taxation had been doubled, and in that would be found the
cause of its present depression. He could not deny, in the
abstract, that the taxation of Ireland should be the same as
that of England; but he held that the condition of the two
countries should also be considered in the matter, and that
in this case what was just in the abstract was neither just
nor wise when reduced to practice. He should support the
motion.

Mr. GREGORY also bore testimony to the importance of
the motion, and then proceeded to call attention to the con-
dition of the western parts of Ireland. He described it as
being of a most lamentable character, and reminded his
hearers that what was last year denied was now admitted to
the full by the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself. The
right hon. gentleman, in the course of his speech, had stated
that equality of taxation was the basis of political equality ;
but what they complained of in Ireland was that, while ex-
penditure was going on in every part of England, there was
nothing done for Ireland but in a grudging spirit. The
right hon. gentleman had also claimed credit for the Govern-
ment with regard to the Galway grant, and said they had
dealt with great liberality in the matter—thus setting at
nought the decision of the committee of the House of Com-
mons. This was one of the prevalent causes of discontent in
Ireland, that whenever an act of justice was carried out in
that country the Government proclaimed it to be a conces-
sion. The people of the west of Ireland were desirous of ob-
taining a loan for constructing a work of great local impor-
tance—a harbour of refuge ; and as he believed the right hon.
baronet was anxious to alleviate Irish distress, he trusted he
would turn his attention to this matter. (Hear, hear.)
Sir P. O'BRIEN said that something more than the tem-
porary relief of distress, which was general all over the
country, was required for ameliorating the condition of Ire-
land, and he believed that nothing would tend more to the
improvement of Ireland than the settlement of the relations
between landlord and tenant.

Mr. COGAN said it was a melancholy position for an

Irish member to get up in that house to confirm the ex-
istence of distress in Ireland ; but, coming from the
more favoured district of Leinster, he could bear testi-
mony to the statement that great distress existed in all
parts of the country. They did not, however, claim on
this occasion any grant from the Consolidated Fund, but
merely asked for a committee to investigate the causes of
the distress, and also the mode in which the taxation of the
country was regulated. There were other questions, also,
which required to be considered. And these were chiefly
tenant-right and religious equality. (Hear, hear.) The hon.
gentleman then referred to the presence of the Chief Secre-
tary for Ireland at a meeting in the City the day before, the
object of which was to raise a sum of £50,000 for the pur-
poses of proselytising in West Connaught. So far as his po-
litical experience went, and his reading of history, it was
new to him to see a Minister of the Crown placed in so deli-
cate a position as the right hon. baronet taking part in a
meeting the object of which was to destroy the faith of the
people of West Connaught. (Hear, hear.)
Sir R. PEEL complained that the debate .had wandered
far beyond its original limits, and took exception to the
course pursued by the hon. member for Galway in importing
the Galway grant into the question of Irish distress. He
had also reason to complain of the severe terms in which
the last speaker had thought proper to comment upon his
appearance at a meeting yesterday in the City. He could
assure the house that when he entered the room he had no
intention of speaking; but he was merely led to attend the
meeting in consequence of a book which he had received,
entitled, "Good News from Ireland." (A. laugh.) After
Lord Hturowby had taken him to the meeting, it was cer-
tainly true that he got up and said that he had gone there
for the purpose of hearing the remarks of the speakers; but
at the same time, as a man who was firmly attached to his
own religious creed, he took a true liberal Protestant view
of the observances of others, and had no desire to interfere
withi those observances. Upon those grounds, and those
grounds alone, he ventured to take part in the discussion,
and to move a vote of thanks to the chairman. But no ex-
pression with reference to the Roman Catholic religion had
escaped his lips ; and, in conclusion, all he had to say upon
that part of the ease was that he felt himself, under
t To circumstances,h eprove
right
t that at
ail
topnue perfect fbetaco
baronet
ot
nlhi
eebte
year
to
ea
rawleBanst tt9einnldtroe meetings
enedti
hn ags
variety d
oos uff ctshht ae t ik is t ni
c s d .
made more prodigious strides in the march of civilisation
and general improvement than any country in Europe; and
if since that period her progress had been checked, it was
owing to the excessive drought of the season of 1859, and
the excessive wet of the season of 1850 and 1861. Un-
doubtedly there had been an enormous emigration from Ire-
land, and even at that moment it was going on; for great
inducements were held out by the American Government to
persuade vigorous young Irishmen to leave their country,
and take service in the American army. The Irish Govern-
ment, however, had been at some pains to prove to those
poor people that they were being deluded in the grossest
manner, and the recent declarations of General Meagher
showed that the gallantry of the Irish was not meeting with
the consideration which it deserved in America. He entirely
dissented from the declaration that the Irish who left their
country retained to their last moment a hatred of England;
however, if it was the fact that they did, he could only say
that the realm whence they went was no loser by the de-
parture of such people. In conclusion the right hon.
baronet stated that. from all the information before him, he
was led to believe Ireland was likely to be blessed with an
abundant season ; and he expressed a hope that the hon.
and gallant member would rest satisfied with having origi-
nated a most interesting discussion.
Mr. WHITESIDE accused the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer of attempting to perplex and puzzle the house by a
display of statistics. The chief point of the right hon. gentle-
man's speech seemed to him to be that the Irish people
should submit to the taxation put upon them with patience.
The hon. gentleman (Col, Dunne) had charged the British
Government with not carrying into effect the terms of the
Act of Union. That he thought a very fair charge to make,
and he thought that the hon. and gallant gentleman had
.
treatedt the question with great moderation. He hoped
beemeseoGii
vooenv
tewarx]nt
dieoennate.
rwv
A:
tingle
country
takeu lltr would
intoo n l
d theirne never
e rc consideration imd ea rdaet i on how
best to relieve the people from the distress caused by
prospe-
rousex-
Irb.yMe°AnGtinUtllaißlyE
carping or. religious questions.
said Ireland
colrnelsanidedration ofht itnheedhohauset. The
public
money was not expended there, andcohmePinstancedt ther was

no dockyard in that country, as protnised at the time of the
Union. Every statement he made on a former occasion
relative to Irish distress was substantiated by reliable evi-
dence. With regard to the religious question, he asked the
Protestants to leave Roman Catholics alone, and their
harmony would be complete. The conduct of the, right
hon. gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland in attending
an aggressive meeting of an aggressive body was an insult
to Ireland, and it was a gross violation of civil and religious
liberty. The right hon. gentleman had said that he was
induced to attend the meeting in consequence of his reading
a book entitled "Good News from Ireland." He (Mr.
MagUire) had read the book, and he declared it to be a mere
trap for the religious credulity and fanaticism of England.
The meeting was an attack on the Roman Catholic Church,
and the right hon, gentleman had acted imprudently in
attending it. The tenant question was one of the causes of
the misery of the country and the exodus of the people. He
supported the motion.
Mr. WHALLEY hoped the Government would accede
to the motion. He should vote for it, believing that the
inquiry might result in something that might assist the
house in the future discussion of the subject.
Col. DUNNE replied, and said, considering the period
of the session, he would not press the motion to a division.

The motion was then withdrawn.
THE CASE OF SERGEANT•MAJOR LILLEY.

Viscount PALME Li.STON appealed to the hon. member
for Brighton not to bring forward his motion on this sub-
ject, seeing that the Commander-in-Chief had decided upon
referring the conduct of Colonel Crawley to a court-martial,
(Hear, hear,)
Mr. CONINGHAM replied that there were other per-
sons in high places compromised in this matter, and upon
this ground he could not agree to postponing his motion.
This matter was only a part of the whole military system,
and as long as he had a seat in that house he would stand
up for non-commissioned officers, whether against general
officers or royal highnesses and commanders-in-chief. The
hon. member then proceeded to call attention to the court-
martial held upon Paymaster Smale.

Col. NORTH rose to order, and asked whether the hon.
member was justified in referring to the proceedings of a
court-martial ?

Gen, PEEL supported the motion of order on the ground
that the hon. member was not justified in quoting from a
document not in the possession of the house.

The SPEAKER, ruled that the hon. member was in
order.

Mr. CONINGHAM then proceeded to read quotations
from the protest addressed to Col. Crawley by Paymaster
Smale on the subject of his court-martial and with respect
to the gross infringements of her Majesty's regulations of
which he had been the victim, and continued—Those quo-
tations, which have been corroborated by the memorandum
just issued from the Horse Guards, conclusively manifested
that the mere trial of Col. Crawley by a court-martial would
but imperfectly fulfil that wide and searching investigation
in this country into the conduct of all concerned, which
public opinion demanded. They had never had the opinion
of the Judge Advocate upon the question, although that
opinion had been referred to in the memorandum of his
Royal Highness. He should like to know what was that
opinion. It was perfectly idle to attempt to burk and
suppress inquiry; the interests of justice, the disc:pline of
the army, required that it should take place. If non-
commissioned officers were liable to be treated as they
had been in India, not only by Colonel Crawley, but like-
wise by general officers, the disaffection would be wide-
spread through the army. He would therefore entreat
the noble lord at the head of the Government, if
he was without doubt as to the authority of the Secretary of
War, not to hesitate, but to enforce that authority to its
utmost limits; and that, notwithstanding his high position
and his high birth, his Royal Highness should be made to
feel, in common with the most humble individual in the
realm, that if he had done wrong he should not escape jus-
tice. He appealed to the noble lord not to make a scape-
goat of Colonel Crawley, but narrowly to investigate the
conduct of every one engaged in a most discreditable
transaction.

The Marquis of HARTINGTON said that, although the
Speaker had decided that the hon. member for Brighton
(Mr. Coningham) was in order, there could be no difference
of opinion in that house as to the good taste and command
of temper which the hon. member had displayed in advert-
ing as he had done to the court• martial on Paymaster Smale,
when his motion only referred to the memorandum of his
Royal Highness the Commander-in-Chief on the case of
Sergeant-Major Lilley. Now, he did not think that was
the proper place to discuss questions of detail affecting the
discipline of the army. (Hear, hear.) Nor would it be
consistent with the feelings of hon, members generally that
an hon. member should come down to that house and make
detailed statements against the characters of officers who
were not present to defend themselves, mad against the cha-
racter of the Commander•in-Chief, who was not present to
defend himself—(hear, hear)•—and when those whose duty
it was to defend his Royal Highness could not be adequately
prepared to do so. He utterly declined to follow the hon.
member in his observations, 'either with respect to the court
martial on Paymaster Smale, or as to the conduct of the
Commander-in-Chief in India or the Commander-in-Chief
at home, who had sanctioned the proceedings of that court-
martial. He would only say that he was corroborated in
that view by the opinion of the Judge Advocate-General, and
on the proper occasion he should be perfectly ready if neces •
sary to defend that opinion. The hon. gentleman had made
a somewhat violent attack upon his Royal Highness the
Commander-in-Chief. The grounds of the attack he was
utterly at a loss to discover, seeing that the finding of the
court-martial never came before his Royal Highness at all.
The final decision rested entirely witth the Commanders-
in-Chief in India.
Mr. PIGOTT—But the memorandum.

The Marquis of H ARTINGTON —His Royal Highness
did certainly, in that memorandum, make some general ob-
servations upon the discipline of the regiment, and stated
his reasons for retaining the two officers referred to in the
service, which he had a perfect right to do. The hon. gen-
tleman said he did not want a victim, or a scapegoat. The
course, however, now adopted by his Royal Highness
would probably be satisfactory to everybody. The officer
who was stated by Col. Crawley to be responsible for the
severity and cruelty of Sergeant-Major Lilley's imprison-
ment had made a directly contrary allegation, and it had
now been resolved, in justice to both, to summon Colonel
Crawley before a court-martial to decide whether he or
Capt. Fitz Simons was really responsible. (Hear.) He had
only to add that, pending such an inquiry, it was highly
improper and unjust that warm discussions should take
place in that house.

Col. NORTH also protested against discussion before
the inquiry took place. No one had heard with greater
astonishment and regret than himself the lamentable occur-
rences that had taken place in one of the finest regiments

in her Majesty's service, and he could only say that where
an officer converted what might and should have been a
bed of roses into a hell upon earth, the sooner he was re-
moved from his command the better. The only question
was, was it really Colonel Crawley who was responsible for
that state of things. The honourable gentleman had quoted
from the proceedings of the court-martial, but he was pro-
bably the only member of that house who had seen
them, and it was hardly just to ask the house to form an
opinion on evidence they had never seen. (Hear, hear.)
So far us related to the Commander-in-Chief in India he
was one of his oldest friends, and he could assure the house
that whatever that officer did was what he sincerely be-
lieved to be for the honour and dignity and the interests of
the service. (Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Sir P. O'BRIEN,.
.

Lord PALMERSTON mach regretted the course taken
by the hon. member for Brighton (Mr. Coningham). He
stated that he was only standing up for justice, whereas he
had in fact done the greatest possible injustice himself. He
had launched into abuse of his Royal Highness the Com-
mander-in-Chief without the slightest ground, and no doubt
to-morrow morning when he returned to his ordinary
calmness of mind, he would be sorry for the expressions
he had been tempted into using while defending his friend
Captain Smale.
Mr. CONINGHAM—Captain Smale is no friend of mine.
Lord PALMERSTON said he had only to add, that the
character of his Royal Highness, as Commander-in-Chief
of the British army, stoc.:l far too high to be in the least de-
gree affected by the animadversions of the hon. member for
Brighton.

Mr. BOUVERIE complained that the hon. member
(Mr. Coningham) had attempted to make the house a court
of appeal from the decision of a court-martial. (Hear,
hear.) If such a course were pursued. there would be an
end, at no long time, to the discipline of the army in India.
(Hear, hear.) A more unwise, imprudent, unfair, or harsh
course could not have been taken towards any officer than
that which was adopted by the hon. member for Brighton,
and he trusted that, whatever might be the attempts to in-
fluence public opinion against Colonel Crawley, ho would
still have a fair trial, and prove himself innocent of the ac-
cusaUon with which he stood charged.
The subject then dropped.
The house then went into supply pc. forms, and imme-
diately resumed.