throwing out of the Bill. I do not pro- | who are supposed to derive benefit from pose to go into the merits of the case it. They distinctly told us that the Cork again. The local people are iu favour and Macroom Railway affords ample acof it; the Local Authorities have twice commodation to the district already; over decided upon it; the Irish Privy they, therefore, objected to be burdened Council has given its sanction to it; and with taxation for it; they maintained the the House of Lords, including two Lord line, if constructed, would never pay; Lieutenants, both the late and previous and I think it is perfectly obvious that and present Lord Chancellor, and the a narrow gauge line of railway of this Chief Secretaries past and present, in nature, instead of being able to pay, addition to the Members in this House will be a dead loss. The consequence who represent the district, have decided will be that it will have to be taken up in favour of it. I hope, therefore, the by the Grand Jury as soon as it ceases House will not listen to the appeal to pay, and the community will be taxed which has been made by the hon. to the extent, probably, of 1. in the Member, but will do in this matter what pound, simply for the purpose of gratifyI consider to be justice to Ireland. ing the interests of Sir George Colthurst, who, at that time, was Member for the city of Cork, and his tenants. The hon. Member for West Mayo Mr. Deasy), who is intimately connected with the county, is altogether opposed to the scheme. MR. SEXTON (Sligo, S.): I quite agree with the hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury in the conclusion to which he has arrived, and I would ask my hon. Friend the Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar not to persist with his opposition to the Bill. MR. M. J. KENNY Tyrone, Mid): I think the hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury is somewhat mistaken in the statement he has made, that this Bill commands the universal assent of the locality through which it is to pass. The House has been familiar with the Bill since last year, and hon. Members who belong to the Party who sit on these Benches have reason to be familiar with it by reason of the fact that they were waited upon by two deputations of local ratepayers who came over from Ireland to make representations in regard to the Bill. One was a deputation from the tenants of Sir George Colthurst, who were naturally in favour of it, because it suited their personal convenience, and because this line of tramway-which I believe is really a bogus line-is to run past their houses, and will, of course, be of some benefit to them. It was sup ported also by the local landlord party, and by the Grand Jury, specially packed by Sir George Colthurst, who, in 1884, was High Sheriff of the county of Cork, because the line is intended to benefit his own property, and will be of, advantage to his tenants. He sent a deputation of tenant farmers to us, all of whom lived in the immediate vicinity of the proposed line, and, of course, they were in favour of it; but immediately, afterwards a large deputation of tenant farmers came across who do not live in the immediate vicinity of the line, but, DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid): Will my hon. Friend allow me to interrupt him? I only wish to say that the hon. Member for West Mayo (Mr. Deasy) did oppose the Bill at the outset, but he has since withdrawn all objection and opposition. MR. M. J. KENNY: My hon. Friend the Member for West Mayo has ceased to be a Member for the city of Cork, and he does not trouble himself now about the affairs of that city. Probably it would have been different if he had remained one of the Representatives of that city. Not only did the hon. Member for West Mayo oppose the construction of this line, but the hon. Member for East Cork (Mr. Lane), who was not then a Member of this House, was also strongly opposed to it. DR. TANNER: I must again interrupt my hon. Friend. The hon. Member for East Cork is one of the strongest aiders and abettors of this Bill. MR. M. J. KENNY: I remember that the hon. Member who now represents East Cork Mr. Lane) distinctly stated last year that he had been led by error into supporting the Bill; but as soon as he found out the real nature of the measure, and the real intentions of the promoters, he at once communicated with my hon. Friend Mr. Parnell, who was then the junior Member for the city of Cork, with a view of inducing him to oppose the measure, on the ground that it proposed to burden the locality with an enormous MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Doneannual charge. Alrea ly the local rate-gal, E.: I would make an appeal to pavers are petitioning against the Bill, hon. Members who are supporting the Persons living in the locality, rated at Bill to agree to the very reasonable pro£1,500 per annum, have petitioned posal that that burden should be reagainst it, and are altogether opposed stricted to those who are to enjoy the to it. Their contention is that this benefit. There are certain districts sheme, which is brought in under the which are already within reach of a provisions of the Tramways Act of 1883, railway. Such districts will derive no is open to great objection, on the ground benefit at all from the proposed line. that there is no prospect of the line being They have signed a Petition against it, able to maintain its way. The only thing and they have moved against it not that has been said in its favour is that only this year, but in previous years. It its construction would involve the ex-is perfectly absurd that persons living pen liture of money for the benefit of the labouring classes; but I contend that that is one of the greatest possible delusions from an economic standpoint. Suppose there are £20,000 or £30,000 spent in the payment of wages among the navvies and other persons engaged in these works. The money may benefit the men who receive it, but the locality will be very little benefited. There may be a small temporary benefit, but in the end there would be a permanent charge on the rates. Thus the locality is to be taxed in perpetuity for the benefit of a small gang of navvies; and the navvies who construct lines of railways in Ireland are not local navvies, but persons who come from a distance and go about in gangs from one public work to ancther. The idea that the construction of this tramway line will benefit the locality seems to my mind to be all moonshine. I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury has supported the scheme, for I am perfectly certain that if he had had the opportunity of inquiring into the question he would have taken the opposite attitude. MR E HARRINGTON: Kerry, W.): My hon. Friend the Member for Mid Cork Dr. Tanner excited some laughter when he said that this question was one which ran through the heart of his constituency; but I maintain that it runs through the heart of Irish property gene rally. I would ask hon. Members on both sides of the House whether there can be any doubt whatever as to the Irish feeling on this matter, or of these who represent the locality principaily affected by the measure? If the Bill were decided by the vote of the Irish Members alone, I am satisfied that it would be carried by a very large ma within a mile of Macroom Railway Station, which is in direct communication with Cork, should be taxed in order that another line, of doubtful benefi*, should be run in a district which is not theirs. If those who are in charge of the Bill will agree to exclude from the area of the measure Farsan and Macroom, I am perfectly ready to withdraw the opposition to the Bill; but I cannot see how the House can in fairness insist in throwing the charge upon Macroom for a scheme which can in no way benefit it, and in respect of a railway service which they regard as no supplement whatever to their own line. These are the only two districts in regard to which there is any substantial ground of objection; but in respect of these two it seems to me unreasonable that the promoters should refuse to modify their scheme. I would ask my hon. Friend below Dr. Tanner to say whether, if this Bill goes into Committee this afternoon, he will be willing to submit a limitation of the area of charge so as to exclude the districts I have mentioned ? DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid): So far as the proposal which my hon. Friend has made is concerned, I should have no objection to it; but I must remind him that the matter is entirely in the hands of the hon. Gentleman opposite, and, as far as I can see, if the proposition were entertained the Bill would be hung up and practically destroyed for the present Session, and would have to be introduced again. If the House will bear in mind the figures which I have already read in reference to the two districts which my hon. Friend desires to omit, they will recollect that in one of them-Farsan-there were five rated occupiers in favour of the Bill, trict of Macroom there were 12 in favour | proceed with no contentious Business, and 23 against; so that there were alto- but would simply wind up the ordinary gether, in the two districts, 17 in favour Business of the Session. Yet they have of the scheme and 29 against it. Ac- introduced, almost on the last day of the cordingly, you are to hang up the Bill Session, a measure of a highly contenfor another year, and put the unfortu- tious character, and they propose to nate promoters to an immense amount force it through all of its stages in a of expense, in order to gratify the wishes single Sitting. It is notorious that there of 12 persons who may be called on to has been no debate in this House on the give a guarantee. I certainly think merits of this scheme, and that however that it is a ridiculous proposal, and I desirable it may be to introduce Amend. hope the hon. Gentleman opposite will ments into the Bill it would be imposnot give it his serious consideration. sible to have them properly considered The House may rest satisfied that all unless previous Notice of them had been classes and sections in the locality are placed upon the Paper. If the Governunited in supporting the measure, and ment had taken measures to have the the sooner it is passed into law the better Bill brought down from the House of it will be for all parties concerned. Lords on Monday, so that we might have been afforded an opportunity of giving Notice of Amendments on Tuesday, there might have been some slight justification for the course which has been pursued; but, under the circumstances, it certainly seems to me that the Government have been guilty of sharp practice in regard to the Bill. We have been told by the hon. Member for Mid Cork (Dr. Tanner) that the op MR. O'HEA (Donegal, W.): If the suggestion of my hon. Friend the Member for East Donegal (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) were carried out, this Bill, which is framed on the basis of certain areas of taxation, would be entirely changed in its character, and the entire fabric which has been built up would crumble away. I cannot see how the suggestion of my hon. Friend could be carried out compatibly with the retention of the remain-ponents of the Bill are very few; but ing provisions of the measure. Motion agreed to. Bill read a second time. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."(The Secretary to the Treasury, Mr. Henry H. Fowler.) MR. BIGGAR (Cavan, W.): Before you leave the Chair, Sir, I must again protest against the way in which this Bill has been dealt with. It came down from the House of Lords on Tuesday last, and no Notice of it was given to any Member of the House until the Papers were issued next morning. Yet we are now asked to push the Bill through all of its stages. What is the result? The result is that we have had no opportunity of drafting any Amendments which might be considered fair and reasonable; we have been prevented either from giving Notice of Amendments, or from having any opportunity to block the Bill. I think, Sir, that that is a mode of conducting the Business of the House which we have a right to protest against in the strongest terms we can use. Further than that, we were told when the Dissolution was announced that Her Majesty's Government would there have been Petitions against the Question put, and agreed to. MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.): I beg to move, in the Schedule which confirms the presentment of the Grand Jury of the county of Cork, to insert, after the word "Barretts," "with the exception of the parish of Aghina." This is a clause-Section 8 of the Schedule-which reads in this way— The presentment of the Grand Jury of the County of Cork, which is set out in the first Schedals to this Order, is hereby confirmed so far as it relates to the charge to be defrayed by the portions of the baronies of East Muskerry and Cork and Barretts as particularized in the said presentment for the payment of dividends at the rate of five pounds per centum per annum apn the paid-up capital of the undertaking as mited by this Order, and so far as it relates to, the ability of the same portion of the said baronies to provide for the completing, working and muntaining of the undertaking." competition. The entire district to which the Amendment refers will be served by the Bill; and the promoters, therefore, strongly object to the proposed altera tion. MR. FLYNN (Cork, N.): I would ask the hon. Member how he thinks it is possible that a revaluation can be now made for the purpose of this Bill? A large portion of this very district which the hon. Member for Donegal Mr. Arthur O'Connor) wishes to exclude, and a considerable portion of this very parish of Aghina, will be served by this tramway line. No doubt, there is some portion of it which is conveniently I understand from my hon. Friend the situated so far as the Cork and Macroom Member for Mid Cork Dr. Tanner, Railway is concerned; but there are who, although not in charge of the Bill, other parts which will be directly served represents the interests of the promoters, by the construction of this light tramthat he is not, in principle at any rate, way. In addition, it will have the adopposed to the modification of the limi- vantage of competition, and we all know tation which I suggested a short time that in case of the transport of goods ago. He only appeared to be afraid either by sea or land there is nothing so that any alteration of the Bill in Com-advantageous to the general public as mittee would involve delay and imperil the passing of the measure. But I understand that there are other Amend ments which it will be necessary to insert in Committee, so that the acceptance of the Amendment which I propose Mr. BIGGAR Cavan, W.: The would not involve any delay at all, see- position which the opponents of the Bill ing that I propose no further alteration occupy is a most unsatisfactory one. The of the Bill than will be effected by the unfortunate people who live at the terother Amendments to which I allude. minus of the railway will be called upon I simply propose by this Amendment to to pay part of the guarantee, but can by limit the area of charge by inserting in no possibility derive benefit from the line 13, after the word "Barretts," the construction of a new line. I do not words with the exception of the parish see how Her Majesty's Government can of Aghina." That parish is the parish defend a proposition of this sort. As I which is most hardly dealt with by the have already said, part of the property scheme as it is now drawn. There is no which it is proposed to tax is within portion of the parish of Aghina of which one mile of the town of Macroom, and it can be said that it will derive any four miles distant from the terminus of benefit whatever from the Bill. It is the proposed line. Nevertheless, the the parish from which the loudest and occupiers of that property will be taxed best grounded objections to the scheme if the Bill is allowed to pass in its proceed, and there is certainly consider-present shape. I do not see how the able cause for the complaint the rate-Government can defend such a proposipayers make. In order to effect a com- tion, and I fail to see what objection promise in the matter, I simply limit they can urge to the reasonable proposal the Amendment to this particular parish of my hon. Friend the Member for I beg to move that in Section 8 of the Donegal Mr. Arthur O'Connor. The Shedule, page 4, line 13, after the hon. Gentleman who has just sat down word Barretts," to insert the words Mr. Flynn) says that if the Amendment "with the exception of the parish of is assented to, the property affected by Aghina." the Bill will have to be revalued. That is not at all necessary, because under Amendment proposed, in page 4, line the Government valuation every holder 13, after the word "Barretts," to in-holds separately, and there will not be sert the words "with the exception of the parish of Aghina."— Mr." Arthur & Connor, Question proposed, “That those words be there inserted." the slightest difficulty in striking out a whole parish if it is thought desirable to do so. THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY Mr. HENRY H. FOWLER Wc verhampton, E): The Government are anxious to see this Bill passed in the form in which it has been introduced by the promoters, and that as little change should be made in it as possible. It has already gone through the House of Lords, and it is desirable that the form in which it left that House shall be adhered to. The Government, at all events, have shown that they are not enamoured of the principle of revising questions which have been settled by the Irish authorities. In this case the Bill has been approved by the Irish Privy Council, the Board of Guardians of the county of Cork, and by all the Local Authorities; and the course I ask the Committee to take now is to accept the decision of the Local Authorities, the Privy Council, and the House of Lords. If not, the effect of altering the measure in the way suggested would be, I am satisfied, to destroy the Bill. I trust that the hon. Member for Donegal (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) will not throw on this House the responsibility of amending the provisions of the Bill on a question we do not understand. bound to collapse, eventually leaving the entire district responsible for the payment of a rate in perpetuity. I trust that the Committee will see their way to accept the Amendment of my hon. Friend, because, although not all that could be desired, it would save the inhabitants of this parish from the risk they are asked to incur, of guaranteeing a railway from which they can by no possibility derive the smallest amount of benefit. Question put. The Committee divided :— Ayes 3; Noes 115: Majority 112.-(Div. List, No. 143.) THE SECRETARY TO THE TREA SURY (Mr. HENRY H. FOWLER) (WolSchedule the following sub-section reverhampton, E.) moved to insert in the lating to the limit of guarantee: "(9.) The capital to which the guarantee set out in the said presentment shall apply is hereby limited to the sum of seventy-five thousand pounds. The guarantee shall apply to so much of the capital so limited as is for the time actually paid up. The aforesaid capital of seventy-five thousand pounds shall not be issued as fully paid up, or be called up, save as said capital may from time to time be required for the actual construction and carrying out of the said undertaking: Provided always, that the entire of said capital shall not be issued until the expiration of a period of two years Parliament, unless the said undertaking shall from the confirmation of this Order by Act of be sooner completed." Sub-section agreed to. MR. HENRY H. FOWLER moved to insert Sub-section 11 (Guarantee by Treasury.) MR. M. J. KENNY (Tyrone, Mid): I think it is a great pity that the Bill cannot be referred to a Select Committee, because, as a matter of fact, this House is altogether incompetent to deal with the question involved in it. The Committee have no evidence before them, or, at any rate, only conflicting evidence, as to the feeling of the local ratepayers on the matter. What is proposed is to construct a light line of railway within a mile of the area at present occupied by the Cork and Macroom Railway, and to compel the "(11.) When in any half-year after the ratepayers, who are already more than opening for traffic of the light railways the amply provided with railway accommo- sums in respect of guaranteed dividend, exsaid baronies have paid to the Promoters any dation, to pay the cost of the new tram-clusive of any sum paid in respect of the comway, although it will only benefit a few pleting, working, or maintaining of the underpersons who live on the route of the taking, the Treasury shall, if and so long as the proposed narrow-gauge railway. I be-light railways are maintained in working order lieve that, under any circumstances, it out of moneys provided by Parliament, to pay and carry traffic, authorise the Board of Works, would be impossible to induce any body to the treasurer of the county, to be put to the of sane men to subscribe to the con- account of the said baronies in the proportion struction of this line. I certainly con- of the sums paid by them, a sum amounting to sider it unfair to expose persons living of guaranteed dividend, exclusive as aforesaid, one half of the sums so paid by them in respect in the parish of Aghina even to the risk during such half-year, but so nevertheless that of being called upon to pay for the rail- the sum so anthe rised to be paid shall not ex. way. They do not want the line, anded a sum equal to interest at the rate of 2 per it is not only unfair but unjust to require them to run the risk of being liable to pay for a scheme which is centum per annum on the paid up capital amited as aforesaid.”* Sub-section agreed to. |