I have made my speech. I have said my say. I have fulfilled my small

mission to you. I thank you from my heart for the kindness with which

you have received me, which I shall never forget. And if I have in past

times felt an unquenchable sympathy with the sufferings of your people,

you may rely upon it that if there be an Irish Member to speak for

Ireland, he will find me heartily by his side.

* * * * *

IRELAND.

VIII.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 14, 1868.

_From Hansard_.

[This speech was spoken on the occasion of a proposition by Mr.

Maguire, M.P. for Cork, for 'a Committee of the whole House to consider

the state of Ireland.']

When this debate began it was not my intention to take any part in it;

for I had very lately, in another place and to a larger audience, added

my contribution to the great national deliberation upon Irish affairs

which is now in progress. But the speech of the noble Lord the Chief

Secretary for Ireland, and some misunderstanding that has arisen of what

I said elsewhere, have changed my intention, and therefore I have to ask

for the indulgence of the House, in the hope that I may make on this

question a more practical speech than that to which we have just

listened.

It is said by eminent censors of the press that this debate will yield

about thirty hours of talk, and will end in no result. I have observed

that all great questions in this country require thirty hours of talk

many times repeated before they are settled. There is much shower and

much sunshine between the sowing of the seed and the reaping of the

harvest, but the harvest is generally reaped after all.

I was very much struck with what happened on the first night of the

debate. My hon. Friend the Member for Cork, in the opening portion of

his address, described the state of Ireland from his point of view, and

the facts he stated are not and cannot be disputed. He said that the

Habeas Corpus Act had been suspended for three years in his country--

that within the island there was a large military force, amounting, as

we have heard to-night--besides 12,000 or more of armed police--to an

army of 20,000 men--that in the harbours of Ireland there were ships of

war, and in her rivers there were gunboats; and that throughout that

country--as throughout this--there has been and is yet considerable

alarm with regard to the discontent prevalent in Ireland.

All that is quite true; but when the noble Lord the Chief Secretary

opened his speech, the first portion of it was of a very different

complexion. I am willing to admit that to a large extent it was equally

true. He told us that the condition of the people of Ireland was

considerably better now than it was at the time of the Devon Commission.

At the time of the Devon Commission the condition of that country had no

parallel in any civilised and Christian nation. By the force of famine,

pestilence, and emigration, the population was greatly diminished, and

it would be a very extraordinary thing indeed if with such a diminution

of the population there was no improvement in the condition of those who

remained behind. He showed that wages are higher, and he pointed to the

fact that in the trade in and out of the Irish ports they had a

considerable increase, and though I will not say that some of those

comparisons were quite accurate or fair, I am on the whole ready to

admit the truth of the statement the noble Lord made. But now it seems

to me that, admitting the truth of what my hon. Friend the Member for

Cork said, and admitting equally the truth of what the noble Lord said,

there remains before us a question even more grave than any we have had

to discuss in past years with regard to the condition of Ireland.

If--and this has been already referred to by more than one speaker--if

it be true that with a considerable improvement in the physical

condition of the people--if it be true that with a universality of

education much beyond that which exists in this island--if it be true

that after the measures that have been passed, and have been useful,

there still remains in Ireland, first of all, what is called Fenianism,

which is a reckless and daring exhibition of feeling--beyond that a very

wide discontent and disloyalty--and beyond that, amongst the whole of

the Roman Catholic population, universal dissatisfaction--and if that be

so, surely my hon. Friend the Member for Cork--one of the most useful

and eminent of the representatives of Ireland--is right in bringing this

question before the House. And there is no question at this moment that

we could possibly discuss connected with the interest or honour of the

people that approaches in gravity and magnitude to that now before us.

And if this state of things be true--and remember I have said nothing

but what the hon. Member for Cork has said, and I have given my approval

to nothing he has said that was not confirmed by the speech of the noble

Lord--if this be true, surely all this great effect must have some

cause.

We are unworthy of our position as Members of this House, and

representatives of our countrymen, if we do not endeavour at least to

discover the cause, and if we can discover it, speedily to apply a

remedy. The cause is perfectly well known to both sides of the House.

The noble Lord, it is clear, knows it even from the tenor of his own

speech--he spoke of the question of the land, and of the Church. The

noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn--whose observations in this

debate, if he had offered them, we should have been glad to listen to--

understands it, for he referred to the two questions in his speech at

the Bristol banquet. The right hon. Gentleman at the head of the

Government understands it not only as well as I do, but he understands

it precisely in the same sense--and more than twenty years ago, when I

stated in this House the things, or nearly the things, I stated recently

and shall state to-night, he, from your own benches, was making speeches

exactly of the same import. And though there is many a thing he seems at

times not to recollect, yet I am bound to say he recollects these words,

and the impressions, of which these words were the expressions to the

House. He referred to an absentee aristocracy and an alien Church. I

would not say a syllable about the aristocracy in this matter; if I had

to choose a phrase, I would rather say an absentee proprietary and an

alien Church.

What is the obvious remedy which for this state of things has been found

to be sufficient in every other country? If I could do so by any means

that did not violate the rights of property, I should be happy to give

to a considerable portion of the farmers of Ireland some proprietary

rights, and to remove from that country the sense of injustice, and the

sense--the strongest of all--of the injustice caused by the existence of

an alien Church. Just for a moment look at the proposition the noble

Lord is about to submit to the House. It is very like the Bill of last

year. I will not enter into the details, except to say that he proposes,

as he proposed then, that the Government should lend the tenant-farmers

of Ireland sums of money, by which they would make improvements, which

sums of money were to be repaid by some gradual process to the

Government authorities. He proposes that the repayment should be spread

over a considerable number of years--I do not know the exact number, and

it is not of importance for my argument. These tenant-farmers are very

numerous--perhaps too numerous, it may be, for the good of the country--

but there they are, and we must deal with them as we find them. The

number of them holding under 15 acres is 250,000; holding between 15

acres and 30 acres, 136,000; holding over 30 acres, 158,000--altogether

there are more than 540,000 holders of land. It is to these 540,000

land-holders or occupiers that the noble Lord proposes to lend money, on

the condition that they make certain improvements, and repay after a

certain number of years the sums advanced to them. I think I am right in

saying that there is no limitation in the Bill as to the smallness of

the holding to which the advance of money will be refused; and therefore

the whole 540,000 tenants will be in a position to come to the

Government, or to some Commission, or to the Board of Works, or to some

authority in Ireland, and ask for money to enable them to improve their

farms.

The House will see that if this plan is to produce any considerable

result, it will be the source of a number of transactions such as the

Government have not had to deal with in any other matter; and I expect

that the difficulties will be very great, and that the working out of

the plan with any beneficial results will be altogether impossible. What

I ask the House is this--if it be right of the noble Lord, to enable him

to carry out his plan, to ask the House to pass a measure like this--to

lend all these tenants the money for improvements to be repaid after a

series of years, would it not be possible for us by a somewhat similar

process, and by some step farther in the same direction, to establish to

some extent--I am not speaking of extending it all through Ireland--a

farmer proprietary throughout the country? If it be right and proper to

lend money to improve, it surely may be proper, if it be on other

grounds judicious, to lend money to buy. I do not know if the right hon.

Member for Calne is here; but very likely he would spare me from the

severe criticisms he expended upon my hon. Friend the Member for

Westminster.

Now, I am as careful as any man can be, I believe, of doing anything by

law that shall infringe what you think and what I think are the rights

of property. I do not pretend to believe, if you examine the terms

strictly, in what is called the absolute property in land. You may toss

a sixpence into the sea if you like, but there are things with respect

to land which you cannot, and ought not, and dare not do. But I do not

want to argue the question of legislation upon that ground I am myself

of opinion that there is no class in the community more interested in a

strict adherence to the principles of political economy, worked out in a

benevolent and just manner, than the humblest and poorest class in the

country. I think they have as much interest in it as the rich, and the

House has never known me, and so long as I stand here will never know

me, I believe, to propose or advocate anything which shall interfere

with what I believe to be, and what if a landowner I would maintain to

be, the just right of property in the land.

But, then, I do not think, as some persons seem to think, that the land

is really only intended to be in the hands of the rich. I think that is

a great mistake. I am not speaking of the poor--for the poor man, in the

ordinary meaning of the term, cannot be the possessor of land; but what

I wish is, that farmers and men of moderate means should become

possessors of land and of their farms. About two centuries ago, two very

celebrated men endeavoured to form a constitution for Carolina, which

was then one of the colonies of this country in America. Lord

Shaftesbury, the statesman, and Mr. Locke, the philosopher, framed a

constitution with the notion of having great proprietors all over the

country, and men under them to cultivate it. I recollect that Mr.

Bancroft, the historian of the United States, describing the issue of

that attempt and its utter failure, says: 'The instinct of aristocracy

dreads the moral power of a proprietary yeomanry, and therefore the

perpetual degradation of the cultivators of the soil was enacted.' There

is no country in the world, in which there are only great landowners and

tenants, with no large manufacturing interest to absorb the population,

in which the degradation of the cultivating tenant is not completely

assured.

I hope that hon. Members opposite, and hon. Gentlemen on this side who

may be disposed in some degree to sympathise with them, will not for a

moment imagine that I am discussing this question in any spirit of

hostility to the landowners of Ireland. I have always argued that the

landowners of Ireland, in their treatment of this question, have

grievously mistaken not only the interests of the population, but their

own. I was told the other day by a Member of this House, who comes from

Ireland, and is eminently capable of giving a sound opinion upon the

point, that he believed the whole of Ireland might be bought at about

twenty years' purchase; but you know that the land of England is worth

thirty years' purchase, and I believe a great deal of it much more,--and

it is owing to circumstances which legislation may in a great degree

remove that the land of Ireland is worth at this moment so much less

than the land of England. Coming back to the question of buying farms, I

put it to the House whether, if it be right to lend to landlords for

improvements, and to tenants for improving the farms of their landlords,

to those who propose to carry on public works, and to repair the ravages

of the cattle plague, I ask whether it is not also right for them to

lend money in cases where it may be advantageous to landlords, and where

they may be very willing to consent to it, to establish a portion of the

tenant-farmers of Ireland as proprietors of their farms.

Now, bear in mind that I have never spoken about peasant proprietors. I

do not care what name you give them; I am in favour of more proprietors,

and some, of course, will be small and some will be large; but it would

be quite possible for Parliament, if it thought fit to attempt anything

of this kind, to fix a limit below which it would not allow the owner to

sell or the purchaser to buy. I believe that you can establish a class

of moderate proprietors, who will form a body intermediate between the

great owners of land and those who are absolutely landless, which will

be of immense service in giving steadiness, loyalty, and peace to the

whole population of the island. The noble Lord, the Chief Secretary,

knows perfectly well at what price he could lend that money, and I will

just state to the House one fact which will show how the plan would

work. If you were to lend money at 3-1/2 per cent., in thirty-five years

the tenant, paying 5 per cent., would have paid the whole money back and

all the interest due on it, and would become the owner of his farm; and

if you were to take the rate at which you have lent to the Harbour

Commissioners, and to repair the ravages of the cattle plague, which is

3-1/2 per cent., of course the whole sum would be paid back in a shorter

period. Therefore, in a term which in former times was not unusual in

the length of leases in Ireland, namely, thirty-one years, the tenant

purchasing his farm, without his present rent being raised, would repay

to the Government the principal and interest of the sum borrowed for

that purpose, would become the owner of his farm, and during the whole

of that time would have absolute fixity of tenure, because every year he

would be saving more and more, adding field to field, and at the end of

the time he would be the proprietor of the soil.

Let not the House imagine that I am proposing to buy up the whole of the

land. I am proposing only to buy it in cases where men are willing to

sell, and to transfer it only in cases where men are able and willing to

buy, and you must know as well as I that there will be many thousands of

such cases in a few years. Every Irish proprietor opposite--the noble

Lord the Member for Tyrone (Lord C. Hamilton) himself, who made so

animated a speech, and appeared so angry with me a short time ago--must

know perfectly well that amongst the tenantry of Ireland there is a

considerable sum of saved money not invested in farms. Well, that saved

money would all come out to carry into effect transactions of this

nature; and you would find the most extraordinary efforts made by

thousands of tenants to become possessors of their farms by investing

their savings in them, by obtaining it may be the assistance of their

friends, and by such an industrious and energetic cultivation of the

soil as has scarcely ever been seen in Ireland. I said there were

landlords willing to sell, and there are cases in which, probably,

Parliament might insist upon a sale--for instance, the lands of the

London Companies. I never heard of much good that was done by all the

money of the London Companies. I was once invited to a dinner by one of

these Companies, and certainly it was of a very sumptuous and

substantial character, but I believe that, if the tenants of these

Companies were proprietors of the lands they cultivate, it would be a

great advantage to the counties in which they are situated. I come then

to this: I would negotiate with landowners who were willing to sell and

tenants who were willing to buy, and I would make the land the great

savings-bank for the future tenantry of Ireland. If you like, I would

limit the point to which we might go down in the transference of farms,

but I would do nothing in the whole transaction which was not perfectly

acquiesced in by both landlord and tenant, and I would pay the landlord

every shilling he could fairly demand in the market for the estate he

proposed to sell.

Well, I hope every Gentleman present will acquit me of intending

confiscation, and that we shall have no further misunderstanding upon

that point. I venture to say to the noble Lord that this is a plan which

would be within compass and management, as compared with that laid down

in his Bill, if it worked at all, and I believe that it would do a

hundred times as much good, in putting the farmer upon the footing of a

holder of land in Ireland. What do hon. Gentlemen think would become of

an American Fenian if he came over to Ireland and happened to spend an

evening with a number of men who had got possession of their farms? I

remember my old friend Mr. Stafford, in the county of Wexford, whom I

called upon in 1849, who had bought his farm and had built upon it the

best farm-house which I saw in the whole South of Ireland, and who told

me that if all the tenantry of Ireland had security for their holdings--

he was an old man, and could not easily rise from his chair, though he

made an effort to do so--'If they had the security that I have,' said

he, 'we'd _bate_ the hunger out of Ireland.' If the Fenian spent

his evening with such men as these, and proposed his reckless schemes to

them, not a single farmer would listen to him for a moment. Their first

impression would be that he was mad; their second, perhaps, that the

whisky had been too strong for him; and it would end, no doubt, if he

persisted in his efforts to seduce them from their allegiance to the

Imperial Government, by their turning him off the premises, though

perhaps, knowing that he could do no harm, they might not hand him over

to the police.

The other day I passed through the county of Somerset, and through

villages that must be well known to many Gentlemen here--Rodney-Stoke

and Drayford, I think they were called--and I noticed a great appearance

of life and activity about the neighbourhood. I asked the driver of the

carriage which had brought me from Wells what was the cause of it.

'Why,' he said, 'don't you know that is the place where the great sale

took place?' 'What sale?' I asked. 'Oh! the sale of the Duke's

property.' 'What Duke?' 'The Duke of Buckingham. Did you never hear of

it? About fifteen years ago his property was sold in lots, and the

people bought all the farms. You never saw such a stir in the world.' He

pointed out the houses on the hill-side which had been built to replace

old tumble-down tenements, the red soil appearing under the plough, and

cultivation going on with such general activity as had not been

witnessed till within these last few years. The appearance of these

villages was such as must strike every traveller from another part of

the country, and it was produced by simple means. The great estate of an

embarrassed Duke had been divided and sold off; he had not been robbed;

the old miserable hovels of the former tenants had been pulled down, and

new life and activity had been given to the whole district. If you could

have such a change as this in Ireland, you would see such a progress and

prosperity that gentlemen would hardly know the district from which they

came.

I think it only fair to my hon. Friend the Member for Westminster to

say, that I do not believe the time is come in Ireland, and I do not

believe it ever will come, when it will be necessary to have recourse to

so vast and extraordinary a scheme as that which he has proposed to the

House. It appears to me that it is not necessary for Ireland. There is

the land--there is the owner--there is the tenant. If the landowners had

been a little wiser we might not have had before us to-night the

difficulty that now perplexes us. Suppose, for example, they had not

been tempted to coerce or to make use of the votes of their tenants;

suppose they had not been tempted to withhold leases--undoubtedly the

condition of Ireland would have been far superior to what it now is. My

hon. Friend the Member for Westminster has some scruples, I believe, on

the question of the ballot, but I believe even he would not object to

see that admirable machinery of election tried in that country. Do hon.

Gentlemen think it not necessary? I was talking, only two days ago, to a

Member of this House who sat on one of the Irish election committees--

the Waterford committee, I think--and he said: 'We could not unseat the

Members, though the evidence went to show a frightful state of things;

it was one of the most orderly elections they have in that country--only

three men killed and twenty-eight seriously wounded.' After all, we may

smile, and some of you may laugh at this, but it is not a thing to be

laughed at. It is a very serious matter, but it exists in no country in

the world where the ballot is in operation.

If you were to try that mode of election in Ireland it would have two

results: it would make your elections perfectly tranquil, and at the

same time it would withdraw from the landowner--and a most blessed thing

for the landowner himself this would be--it would withdraw from him the

great temptation to make use of his tenant's vote for the support of his

own political party; and if that temptation were withdrawn, you would

have much more inducement to grant leases to many of your tenants, and

you would take a step highly favourable, not to the prosperity of your

tenants only, but to your own prosperity and your own honour. Now, Sir,

I shall say no more upon that question except this, that I feel myself

at a disadvantage in making a proposition of this nature to a House

where landowners are so numerous and so powerful, but I have disarmed

them in so far that they will see that I mean them no harm, and that

what I propose is not contrary to the principles of political economy;

and that if Government is at liberty to lend money for all the purposes

to which I have referred, Government must be equally at liberty to lend

money for this greater purpose; and, farther, I venture to express my

opinion, without the smallest hesitation or doubt, that if this were

done to the extent of creating some few scores of thousands of farmer

proprietors in Ireland, you would find that their influence would be

altogether loyal; that it would extend around throughout the whole

country that whilst you were adding to the security of Government you

would awaken industry in Ireland from its slumber, and you would have

the wealth which you have not had before, and, with wealth, contentment

and tranquillity in its train.

Speeches on Questions of Public Policy, Volume 1 · 第 30 / 41 段