Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-06-21
Parnell Interviewed 10 Davitt's New
Denariure.


Departure.
the Herald correspondent interviewed Mr..
Psrnell to-day with regard to the new de-
parture advocated by Mr.. Davitt and some
other Land League leaders. The correspond
ent asked "What do you think of Mr..
Davitts new departure of the nationaliza-
ton of landw
Mr.. Parnell-In my judgment, however
theoretically sound the plan OF nationalist
ton of the land may be considered in the
opinion of the supporters, cannot see how
il can ever come in Ireland within the region
of practical politics. The original pro-
gramme of the Land League movement
claimed for Irish tenants the right of becom-
ing occupying owners and the cutting down
of rents was to be necessary preliminary to
attaining this right This was the platform
adopted at the Westport meeting in the
spring of 1879, which was practically
the first meeting of the movement,
and certainly The first whereat Mr..
Davitt and l attended. The organization of
the Land League, which was formed subse-
quently in the autumn of the same year,
adopted the same platform, and, so far as l
am aware it has never been departed from
in the resolutions adopted at any of the hun
dreds OF Land League meetings which have
been held since, or at either OF the two
National Conventions.
Correspondent-What is your interpreta-
lion OIL the pAEdse, Tue lduu LOT Tue people,,
which you have yourself used, believe, on
several occasions?
Mr.. Parnell-In using this expression l
never intended to convey my adhesion TO pa-
but meant that if Irish tenants
were converted into occupying owners the
land would be held in such a way and culti-
waited in such a manner as to be of the most
advantage TO the whole people; because ex-
perience has shown that under this system it |
could and would be cultivated to the highest |
pitch and produce the utmost food whereof |
it was capable; and the taxing power, which |
for the purpose of freeing any other classes |
of the community from the burden of taxa
ton and throwing it upon the land an Irish |
national government might hereafter have
under the plan of naturalization, it would |
equally have under the plan of occupying
which, as have said, originally
constituted and has always been up to the
present the programme of the Land League.
see that Mr.. Davitt estimates the compen-
ration 10 be given to Irish landlords at
eI40, 900 900 sterling; that one of the results
of his system would be that tenants would
be sold their land on the payment of an an
nual tax equivalent to about half their pres
ent rent. 1t would not be any easier, ard
perhaps not easy, to obtain the land of
Ireland from the landlords for e140, 900, 900
under the system of the
of land than under the
system proposed by the Land League. II
under the former system the land can be OBJ
tanned for s140O00,000, the Land League
would certainly be able to obtain it for the
tenats for not greater sum-possibly for a
less. If we assume that Mr.. Davitt's esti-
u ate Of el40,000,O00 as compensation to be
paid is correct-a question upon which do
not wish to express an opinion myself, as the
amount of compensation depends chiefly
upon circumstances and very little upon the
adoption of one system or another-the ten
ant farmer would have a smaller annual
payment to make under our system than
lnder the naturalization of land. While
inder our system the payments by the ten
int would terminate at the end OF hfty-two
years, under the other they would continue
orever.
Correspondent-How do you make out that
he tenant would have TO pay lees under
our system than under Mr.. Davitt's?
Mr.. Parnell-Under both systems he would
rave TO pay interest on the compensation
money, also in annual instruments, until the
apital raised for this compensation was
,aid off; and as the compensation in each
ase would be the same, and the rate of in
crest whereat the money could be raised |
night fairly be assumed TO be the same, and
he period over which the annual instruments
n repayment were extended might also be
ssumed to be the same, it would necessarily
ollow that the annual payment by the tenant
7ould be larger under naturalization than |
nder the Land League plan, as the tenant :
nder the former would have to pay taxes in
edition to his annual instruments. To make
his plain l will give you a practical exam
lie to how it would work out under each | s
ystem. l will take as an example the case
t the tenant who now pays as rent to his
andlord e100 per annum. As explained by
Ir. Davitt at Liverpool, this landlord would
e compensated by receiving from the State
capital sum of $1,000, or twenty years
urchase of half the present rent, assuming ,
8 1 have said before, that this land ,
ord could be compelled by parliamentary
nactment or would be willing to take this :
1m in compensation for his interest in the .
e common to both systems. The tenant +
'ould have to pay under the nationaliza- I
on plan to the government hive per cent or +
80, per anuum forever, instead of his former :
ent OF e100. Under our system, which we 7
ave every hope of carrying into law speed I
y, the tenant would become the owner of his
md in perpetuity. He would have to pay !
,ur per cent, or G40, per annum, for fifty | a
70 years. Then his payments would ter /
innate. may point out here that under /
lie system of naturalization for the first '
fty-two years only s10 out of the annual
80 paid by the tenant would be available .
II The purposes CT taxation, the remaining
40 being necessary 10 pay the annual in
and interest for the capital ad- L
anced for the compensation of the land s
,rd.
Correspondent-Whati is your opinion of s
he propriety of advancing the nationaliza-
on programme into Irish politics?
Mr.. Parnell-We have every hope of an
mendment of the Bright clauses of the +
and act in such way as to enable tenants
become owners under the terms have de- q
ribbed above. We have no hope whatever /
lat this government or any government :
kelly 10 be in our time will advance money 4
,r the purpose of carrying out the national i
alton scheme. The conversion of any ten !
Mt into an owner is, according to the views 4
the naturalization party, step in the !
rong directions step which will have TO :
e retraced hereafter. If their views are to
btain we therefore should incur the imputa- i
on OF not knowing our own minds if, after
70 years of successful agitation toward an
ccupy ng proprietary, we start an entirely 8
lterent theory; for, as / have shown, those .
/ favor OF naturalization cannot consistent O
? suDDOrt an exhaustion IF the onrupvioo | Z