twenty years of age, and the youngest sixteen; and, whether he will now allow the suspected juveniles to be released, in order that they may be sent to school somewhere? lar question did not arise with regard to | Coercion Act, of whom the eldest is not the Ulster tenant right custom; whether, in consequence of an expression of opinion of one of the Judges of the Court of Appeal in Ireland, an Act to amend the Land Act of 1870 (34 and 35 Vic. c. 92) had not to be passed making it unnecessary to state in Landed | Estate Court conveyances that holdings were subject to the Ulster custom; and, whether therefore, the Government intend to introduce an express provision into the present Land Bill to prevent the same difficulty from arising with regard to statutory terms? MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, he did not in the least degree wish to disparage the importance of the point raised in the Question; but he hoped he would be permitted to adjourn any treatment of it until it came into its proper place in Committee on the Bill. It would cause great confusion if he were to make future portions of the Bill the subject of reply to Questions. PRISONS (IRELAND)—KILMAINHAM PRISON. MR. T. P. O'CONNOR (for Mr. SEXTON) asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Whether he is aware that the sanitary accommodation in Kilmainham Prison is insufficient and filthy; whether he will give his early attention to the subject; and, whether, especially, he will cause the sanitary appliances of the Prison to be increased in number and kept in good order? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. LAW): Sir, I have received a Report on this subject from the General Prisons Board. The sanitary accommodation in Kilmainham Prison is stated not to be either insufficient or filthy. On the contrary, the sanitary appliances are, I am informed, adequate and kept in perfectly good order. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. Law): Sir, I assume that the Question has reference to William, Patrick, and Lawrence Quinlan. Before the hon. Member gave Notice of his Question the attention of his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant had been called to the matter, and he has been pleased to order the discharge of Lawrence, the youngest brother, but finds no ground for discharging either William or Patrick, both of whom are considerably over 20 years of age. PROTECTION OF PERSON AND PRO- MAJOR O'BEIRNE asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, If he will state on what grounds Michael Kelly, of Drum Kieran, county Leitrim, was arrested, on the 9th March last, under the Protection of Person and Property (Ireland) Act; if a careful investigation into the cir cumstances of the crime which caused his arrest was made by the county inspector, resident magistrate, and subinspector of the district; whether it is a fact that previous to his arrest Michael Kelly had borne a good character; and, if the authorities under the Local Government Board have given out-door relief to the prisoner's family? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. Law): Sir, Michael Kelly, of Drumahaire, not Drum Kieran, was arrested, as stated in the Lord Lieutenant's Warrant, and in the Return presented to Parliament, pursuant to the Protection of Person and Property Act, on the ground of being reasonably suspected of having, since the 30th September, 1880, been guilty, as principal, of a crime punishable by law-that is to say, assaulting and beating one of Her Majesty's subjects-committed in a prescribed district, and being an act of PROTECTION OF PERSON AND PRO- violence, and tending to interfere with PERTY (IRELAND) ACT, 1881 ARRESTS OF BOYS. MR. T. P. O'CONNOR said, that his information was entirely the contrary of the right hon. and learned Gentleman's statement. MR. HEALY asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Whether it is true that three brothers have for some time been lying in Limerick Gaol under the the maintenance of law and order. Careful investigation was made into the cir cumstances of the crime which caused his arrest. Previous to his arrest he had borne a bad character, and had been repeatedly convicted at petty ses sions for assaults and other breaches of | after the additional information which the peace. The Local Government Board have not received any application from the Guardians of the Union in which Drumahaire is situated for authority to give outdoor relief under Section 2 of the Protection of Person and Property Act. CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTION OF has been supplied to him in respect to the Crown Estate at Stagsden, Bedfordshire, he is prepared to grant the inquiry into the management of the said Estate asked for in the House on 20th May? LORD ELCHO asked the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister, before he answered the hon. Member for Bedfordshire, to allow him to put a further Question: Whether, since his last statement on the subject, in which his right hon. Friend had said there was nothing like hardship or severity inflicted in the general management of the estate, any additional information had been re MR. T. P. O'CONNOR asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Whether P. M Manus was tried at the Drumshambo Petty Sessions on the charge of taking part in a riotous and unlawful assembly on January 2nd last; whether the charge was not dismissed; and, whe-ceived from Mr. Gore; whether the right ther he has not since been arrested and imprisoned in Kilmainham for precisely the same alleged offence? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. Law): Sir, M'Manus was charged at Drumshambo Petty Sessions with the offence of intimidation under the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, 1875; but the ground of his arrest and imprisonment in Kilmainham, as appears by the Warrant, is riot and unlawful assembly. PEACE PRESERVATION (IRELAND) ACT, 1881-ARMS LICENCES. MR. T. P. O'CONNOR asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Whether it is a fact that Mr. Denis Hogan, of Ballyvaughan, county Clare, has been refused licence by Mr. D. B. Franks, the resident magistrate of the district, although he presented a certificate of character and of his fitness to carry arms assigned by two magistrates of the district? hon. Gentleman had any reason to doubt the general accuracy of the Report which had been made to him by the Department of Woods and Forests; and, whether, if he had received any further information on the subject, he would kindly state from what quarter it had come? MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, that since he made a statement on this subject, it had been made known to him that a certain error, not of very great consequence, had crept into it. In the summary he gave him, Mr. Gore omitted to deduct the acreage of plantations and other allotments, and in consequence the average rental was misstated by him at 258., instead of which it ought to have been 288. Apart from that error, which was admitted to have taken place since that time, his hon. Friend the Member for Bedfordshire (Mr. J. Howard) had supplied much information which he relied upon to a different effect. In this conflict of opinion it would certainly not be THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR right for him (the Prime Minister) to IRELAND (Mr. Law): Yes, Sir; Mr. propose that there should be an inquiry Denis Hogan applied to Mr. Franks, into the management of this particular R.M., and licensing officer of the Bally-estate, because that would imply an unvaughan district, for an arms licence under the 4th sub-section of the 4th clause of the Peace Preservation (Ireland) Act, 1881; but the certificate which he produced did not comply with the requirements of that enactment, and the magistrate, therefore, declined to act upon it. CROWN LANDS-THE STAGSDEN CROWN ESTATE. favourable judgment with regard to the statement of Mr. Gore, in whom they reposed as much confidence as in any public officer; but, on the other hand, in justice to his hon. Friend, he thought the proper course would be this-not that he (Mr. Howard) should be dependent on a verbal statement made by him (Mr. Gladstone), but that Mr. Gore should make a special Report with regard to this estate. When that Report was made, his hon. Friend would form his own judgment on the points with which he had to grapple, and the House would also be put in possession of the facts, and in a position to judge of them. MR. JAMES HOWARD (who rose amid some interruption) said, that, to put himself in Order, he would conclude with a Motion. He had been many years a Member of the House, and he thought there were few Members who would charge him with having wasted its time. He would not have taken the present course if he did not feel that he owed a duty to a certain number of his constituents that he should call attention to this subject. In this matter he had been met in the most unfair manner by the Government. In the first place, when he brought the question privately under their notice, he was met by the most erroneous statements, which, however, he was at once able to disprove; and then, when he asked a Question in the House, the Premier made a statement based upon an over-estimate of the size of the estate to the extent of 25 per cent, which completely upset all his other calculations; and the House was left with the impression that he (Mr. Howard) had brought forward a trumped-up case. LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL rose to Order. There was a Notice of Motion on the Order Paper in the name of the hon. Member for Cardiganshire (Mr. Pugh), who proposed to move to reduce the salaries of the officials of the Woods and Forest Department by £2,100. The Notice of the hon. Member would raise the whole question now being dealt with by the hon. Member for Bedfordshire. He wished to know, therefore, whether that hon. Member was in Order in anticipating the judgment of the House ? MR. SPEAKER: The Notice of Amendment referred to by the noble Lord is not of a character to exclude the observations of the hon. Member for Bedfordshire. MR. JAMES HOWARD said, he would mention several other cases in which the rents on the estate had been greatly raised by the Crown Agents. For instance, in another case, a farm had been in occupation of a family for more than a century. The original rent was £323; in 1854 the farm was re-valued, and raised to £432; but in 1874, when the Crown came into possession, the agent, Mr. Clutton, raised the rent to £808, beHe would tell the House some sides miscellaneous charges for drainage, of the leading facts of the case. This fire insurance, and so forth, making estate was purchased by the Crown £838 in all. Again, in another instance, seven years ago from the trustees of the rent was raised from £771 to £1,140; Lord Dynevor; and since then the im- in another, from £299 to £521. The perious treatment and the rack-renting tenant of this last-mentioned farm was of the tenants had been a public scandal 76 years of age, and he was allowed throughout the county. Not long since just one month to decide whether he one of these tenants committed suicide, would sign the lease, of which he disapleaving behind him a memorandum, proved or be turned out of his farm. which was so shocking that he would But the imperious conduct of the Crown not read it to the House. [Cries of Agents was not confined to the tenants "Oh!" and "Read!" from the Irish upon the estate; for they did not scruple Benches.] Well, if the House desired to set the rural sanitary authority, of to hear it, the memorandum was, so far which he (Mr. Howard) himself had been as he remembered, to the effect that the a member, at defiance, and, rather than Crown Agent was his murderer; and carry out the orders of that body, they there was evidence produced at the Coro- had pulled down between 20 and 30 ner's inquest to show that this man had cottages. All he wanted was an inquiry repeatedly declared that he could not into the circumstances by an impartial live under the Crown. The Prime Mi-body. Was it to go forth to the counnister had understated the rent of this unfortunate man, and had said nothing about the tenant having to pay the tithe, insurance, and other matters. The rent altogether was 388. 5d. per acre, and this for some of the poorest land in Bedfordshire. He would also let the House know what other tenants on the estate had to say. try that respectable tenants, holding under the Crown, were to be treated as vassals, as they had been, and to be rack-rented in the fashion he had described, and yet an inquiry into the facts refused; and this, forsooth, under a Liberal Government! He would never rest until the facts of the case were fully before the public. The hon. Gen tleman concluded by moving the adjourn- | statement he made. With regard to ment of the House. THE O'DONOGHUE seconded the Motion. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."(Mr. James Howard.) MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, he gathered from the speech of his hon. Friend (Mr. J. Howard), that he attributed to him the responsibility for the statement he had made and the interruptions it had caused. He could only say that he was very sorry if, in any of the particulars of his answer to his hon. Friend, he had failed to satisfy his hon. Friend. It was not intended, and he was still more sorry that he had obliged the hon. Member to make the Motion. His hon. Friend had said that he was not one of those who were in the habit of wasting the time of the House, and that he (Mr. Gladstone) believed to be entirely true; but if that were to imply that those hon. Gentlemen who had not been in the habit of wasting time were to choose the present juncture to begin the habit of taking up the time of the House, the position of the House in regard to Business, which was already serious, would become woeful indeed. As to the immediate subject of the Motion for Adjournment, he might say that he had not measured the estate or inspected the books; and his hon. Friend had had the advantage, whatever it might be, of putting forward a number of statements which he had, no doubt, given in perfect good faith, but in regard to the correction of which, or the filling up of which, or the further illustration of which, no person in the House at that moment, he would venture to say, was in a position to take any action. In these circumstances, he trusted that the House would reserve its judgment, and that his hon. Friend would see the propriety of withdrawing his Motion. He ventured to think that if his hon. Friend would allow the matter to go forward in the manner suggested-namely, by obtaining a statement from the proper officer responsible, that would be a preferable mode of dealing with the subject. The error of stating that the rent was 258. an acre, instead of 28s., was not an error of the proper officer, but an error committed by those who made the summary for him (Mr. Gladstone) in the Mr. James Howard what had been said as to the cruel suffering of tenants of the Crown, he would only venture to say one thing, and he thought it absolutely necessary to say it, and that was as to those who managed the Crown estates. He thought the House would appreciate the signi ficance of his statement, when he informed them that the agricultural interest of the Crown property was considerably over £100,000 a-year, and at that moment there were but three farms in hand. LORD ELCHO said, he would not have interfered in the discussion; but the accusation of murder against Mr. Gore obliged him to say one word in his defence. MR. JAMES HOWARD: I rise to Order. Mr. Speaker- [Cries of "Order, order!"] MR. SPEAKER ruled that the noble Lord was in possession of the House. LORD ELCHO, resuming, said, he certainly gathered that such a charge was made. Now, whoever had had the pleasure of knowing Mr. Gore knew that there was not a more able servant, or one more just. The fact stated by the Prime Minister showed that the Crown Estates were managed well by the officers of that Department. With regard to Mr. Gore's management, the figures were these. The estate contained 3,097 acres; £119,000 were paid for it, and £21,000 were expended by the Crown in improving it. In 1878 there was a reduction of 11 per cent; 1879, 17 per cent; 1880, of 22 per cent; and in 1881, 22 per cent reduction had been promised. Further, it must be borne in mind that these estates were administered, not for the benefit of the Department, but for that of the nation, and that the Agents were bound to do their duty under an Act of Parliament. The statute in question, the Land Revenue Act, provided that no land should be let except upon valuation, and that valuation must be made by a competent surveyor, who was bound to swear that the land was let at a reasonable rent. Upon these terms this land was let, like all the rest of the Crown Lands. He protested against a charge being made in this manner against a Crown Agent, in an unexpected way sprung upon the House without Notice on the Paper. MR. O'DONNELL said, he fully admitted the general inconvenience of such impromptu debates; but would remind | it is the intention of the Government to the House that in the state of Public reduce the period that the command of Business now-a-days a Motion for Ad- a regiment may be held from five to journment was sometimes the only four years, or after four years' service as means which the House possessed of a major to only two years; whether he controlling the actions of officials. He is aware that the late lamentable disascould not say he was very much struck ters in the Transvaal are alleged to have with the eulogium which the noble Lord been chiefly attributable to the manner the Member for Haddingtonshire (Lord in which young and inexperienced Staff Elcho) had pronounced upon the Agent, Officers took the command of the troops because whenever a public officer was out of the hands of the responsible regispoken of in that House in any terms mental officers, and hurried the men on except those of the most extreme praise, at critical moments; and, whether it is then every Member who had the honour proposed to apply the new rule as to and advantage of his acquaintanceship regimental commands to officers on their felt bound to testify that those who had first and second appointment on the that honour and advantage must admit Staff of the Horse Guards and the Army that that particular public servant was generally? as near a paragon as anyone could be. He was sure, from what he knew of the hon. Member opposite (Mr. J. Howard), that he had not introduced the subject except under the spur of necessity. MR. JAMES HOWARD, in withdrawing the Motion, begged the House to understand that he did not for a momentendorse the dying statement of the deceased tenant of the Crown; and, therefore, the noble Lord (Lord Elcho) had put words in his mouth which he had not uttered or entertained. He had simply stated a fact elicited at the Coroner's inquest. He did not know the gentleman in question (Mr. Gore); but he would embrace the opportunity of saying that it would be better for the nation if our public offices were not filled with aristocrats or their connections, who had to depend on more practical men to do the work for which they were paid. LORD ELCHO rose to explain, and was met with loud cries of "Order! MR. SPEAKER: If the noble Lord desires to make any explanation, no doubt the House will give him indul gence. MR. CHILDERS: Sir, I do not see the connection between the second part of my hon. Friend's Question and the first and third. A great many reasons, some not improbable, and some palpably absurd, have been given for our recent reverses in South Africa; but the only instance in which blame has been attributed in certain quarters to the interference of a Staff officer was in the instance of a colonel of about 27 years' service. I do not think that I could with advantage explain in detail what is proposed and will appear in the Warrant as to the length of a lieutenantcolonel's service; but, speaking generally, it will be from four to six years, and that of a major will be seven years, as LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Whether it is a fact that the Roman Catholic chaplain of Naas jail is presiLORD ELCHO explained that he un-dent or officer or member of the local derstood the hon. Gentleman to accuse Land League? one of those who had to do with the administration of the Department, for which Mr. Gore was responsible, of murder. [Mr. JAMES HOWARD: No, no!] That was what he understood him to say. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. ARMY-MILITARY COMMANDS. MR. HENEAGE asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is true that THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. LAW): Yes, Sir. LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL : May I ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman if he is aware that the Roman Catholic chaplain of Naas gaol is in receipt of a salary of £200? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. Law): I am aware that, being chaplain, he receives a salary; but the amount I do not know. |