THE DEBATE ON IRISH LAND-HOLDING.
M R. LEFEVRE succeeded on Friday week in pledging the iyi House of Commons to two important propositions re- specting landholding in Ireland. The Government and the House accepted, without a division, a Resolution embodying the statements, first, that it is important to make a considerable addition to the number of owners of land in Ireland among the class of persons cultivating the soil ; and secondly, that with a view of so doing legislation should be adopted without further delay for the amendment of the Bright Clauses of the Irish Land Act, 1870, and for securing to the tenants of land offered for sale the opportunity of pur- chase, consistently with the interests of the owners. The Chancellor of the Exchequer went so far as to hold out some hope that the matter would be dealt with this Session, and though from the general attitude of the Government it may be doubted whether any legislation proposed by them on the subject will be of any substantial value, yet this half-promise is evidence of the strength of the case made out by Mr. Lefevre. But the most remarkable feature of the debate was the unanimity with which the Irish Members supported the resolution. All alike admitted that the class of cultivators of the soil owning their own land should be increased, and in- creased through the action of the Government. Mr. Kavanagh, indeed, wished to limit the process to occupiers of from 100 to 500 acres, a limitation which, as was subsequently shown, would restrict the benefits conferred to about 30,000 out of 600,000 tenants, or to about one in twenty. But this suggestion was not endorsed by any member of Mr. Lefevre's Committee, and was emphatically condemned on both sides of the House, Member after Member declaring that nothing but good can result from transforming even the smallest tenant- cultivators into owners.
Ireland, in fact, presents a unique ease for the establishment of a peasant-proprietorship. The land is cultivated by 600,000 tenants, occupying, on the average, thirty-two acres each, while 450,000 of them hold less than thirty acres apiece. On the other hand, the landlords are but 16,000 in number, of whom only 12,000 own more than 100 acres each ; while two-thirds of the whole acreage of the country is, as Mr. Bright pointed out the other night, in the possession of 1,942 persons, or less than three times the number of the House of Commons. And this is not the situation of a country where commerce and manufactures hold sovereign sway, and the agricultural interests are unimportant. It exists where agriculture is the pursuit of the nation, and where there is such a passion for the possession of land, that sums equal to from twenty-five to forty times the rent are often given for the mere right of occupation. It is only recently that it has been possible to speak with accuracy on these subjects, for it is not yet five years since the first trustworthy Return of Landowners in the United Kingdom was published, and Mr. Lefevre has done the greatest service in at once ascertaining and laying before the Legis- lature the facts disclosed. England is not a land of peasant cultivators, as Ireland is, nor is she distinguished by the number of her small proprietors ; yet England, in similar districts, has ten times the number of landowners of less than fifty acres that Ireland possesses. Nor does it appear possible (even were it as radically beneficial a measure as the conversion of tenants into owners) to introduce the Eng- lish system of large farming into Ireland. There is too keen a desire for the possession of land to allow of the conver- ,examples, and can dismiss peasant-proprietorship with the would be that of a famine, or some universal and severe form single and not very profound remark that its establishment of distress. But, in such a case, the position of the State . must in most countries be mischievous, because it diverts would not be really altered. For relief would have to be given capital from the cultivation to the purchase of land, recom- in any case, and would be given by virtue of the general neces- mends some measure increasing the facilities for establishing sity, to all alike, and not to a particular class, by virtue of any small owners in Ireland, is the strongest evidence that the special relation in which the State stood towards it. case of that country may be considered alone, and without The only other objection—one which seems to be rather reference to larger questions. anticipated on the part of the Treasury, than openly urged by Now, in the attempt to convert tenants into proprietors, the any opponent of Mr. Lefevre's proposal—is that the State will Church Act has succeeded, and the Land Act has failed, be trading extensively with public money for the benefit of a About 4,500 tenants of glebe-lands in Ireland (two-thirds of particular class. Now it is too late to object on principle to the whole number) have purchased their holdings at rather any such use of public money. Landlords have had their more than the market price, being assisted by the loan of three- loans for the drainage and development of their land, and fourths of the purchase-money on mortgage, repayable, prin- municipal corporations and local boards are continually borrow- cipal and interest, by thirty-two annual instalments. Under ing for local improvements. In fact, the principle is estab- the Land Act, on the contrary, only 600 tenants have become lished that for any purpose which commends itself to the purchasers, although the property which it was intended they nation the public money may be used, on terms involving no should have the opportunity of acquiring, namely, that sold eventual loss. Mr. Gladstone suggested the other night through the agency of the Landed Estates Court, has, during that this process should not be enlarged indefinitely, but -the time the Act has been in operation, amounted to the value should be confined to the moneys confided to the State of £6,000,000, and comprised 12,000 distinct holdings. Thus as a Banker. But he accompanied this caution by an less than 1 in 20 of the tenants of the land sold have become emphatic declaration that he considered the nation absolutely owners. To what is this difference to be ascribed ? There pledged to very considerable further advances for the are several variations of detail in the terms offered to the attainment of the object contemplated by the Bright tenants by the two Acts, but Mr. Lefevre's Committee came Clauses ; and further, that should the amount (f1,000,000) to the conclusion that it was not, substantially, to these differ- originally contemplated be exceeded, and should the pro-, ences that the great contrast in the working of the two Acts vision of money for this purpose come into competition was to be attributed. The distinction really lay in this,—that in with its use for local improvements, he should not hesi- the case of the Church Act, the Commissioners made it their t,ate to give the preference to the former claim. Local im- business to explain to the tenants the facilities offered to them provements can be effected without Government aid, though at and to save them trouble, and sold the property in lots which greater cost ; the question is merely an economic one. Con- were suited to the proposed purchasers ; while, under the Land vesting the disaffected Irish tenant into an owner—a man Act, incompatible duties are thrown upon the Landed Estates with something he can call his own, something which he can Court, which is asked to consult at the same time the lose, and therefore a man who has an interest in the preserve- interests of both vendor and suggested purchasers in the mode tion of law and order—is, as Mr. Gladstone said, a question of offering the land for sale. The tenants naturally want the which rises into the higher region of politics, a question property offered in small lots, if they are to buy. The vendor, involving considerations of a moral and social order, and one on the other hand, will not risk the chance of having some of which goes to the root of the unhappy topic of Irish discon- such lots only purchased and the remainder left on his hands, tent. The claims, therefore, of such a measure as that pro- and perhaps rendered unsaleable in the general market. The posed by Sir. Lefevre's Committee upon the public purse far true remedy for this state of things is to appoint some public outweigh the only other claims with which they may possibly body, whose duty it shall be to act as intermediaries between come into competition. the vendors and the tenants. The Landed Estates Court will Whether the present Government will boldly take the "then be wholly unfettered in selling in such a mantes as it matter in hand seems, from the utterances of its representa- .eonsiders most beneficial to the vendor, while the tenants will tives, to be doubtful. But largely supported, as it is, by the -lave a representative who, if convinced that they will par- landlord element in the country, it cannot approach the sub- chase, will go into the market and buy like any other par- ject better than by bearing in mind Mr. Bright's eloquent • chaser. In fact, this intermediary body will, in its communi- appeal to the Irish landowners, to question themselves whether cations with the tenants of properties offered for sale, act very each one of them would not feel himself enormously much as the Church Commissioners have done. It will explain strengthened in his position by the transfer of 100,000 tenants .to the tenants the facilities offered, and will ascertain whether into his own ranks,—into the class of owners.
a sufficient number of them are willing to buy, to take the property substantially off their hands. Only in such cases will it purchase, and it will then be able to acquire the property THE LESSON OF BAG-ENDER/if. offered by the Landed Estates' Court in bulk, cutting it up OUR Northern contemporaries are amusing themselves just afterwards, as it finds most convenient. The experience of the now with scolding at a Mr. Langhorne Burton, a gentle- Church Commissioners shows that it is not likely to make any man who possesses a good estate in Lincolnshire, strong bad bargains. sion of ten small farmers into one large one and nine agricul- This remedy was unanimously recommended by Mr. tural labourers. Opportunity has been given for this process. Lefevre's Committee, and was warmly advocated in the When, in 1848, the Encumbered Estates Court was established, House. There seem to be only two possible objections to it. it was thought that land would pass into the possession of That upon which most reliance appears to be placed is that capitalists, who would either themselves cultivate, or let in the State, by acting as intermediary, selling again to large bodies large holdings to responsible tenants. One-fifth of the land of tenants, advancing considerable portions of the purchase- in Ireland has passed through this Court, and is now owned money, and thus making itself a recipient of annual payments by about three times as many proprietors as before. But the from many small cultivators, would run the risk of being looked result has nevertheless been most unsatisfactory. The class of upon merely as a new landlord, who might be appealed to persons who bought were mere land speculators, and have made from time to time in bad years to forego his rent, or otherwise the very worst landlords in Ireland. Indeed, the advent of help the tenant. Now, the answer to this is really very simple. one of these proprietors into a district has generally been The peasant-purchaser, who pays his annual instalment of loan followed before long by agrarian outrages ; and the existence to the State, ignorant though he be, will not be long in learn- of these " land-jobbers," is the only reason which induces the ing that he is every year investing more and more capital in Secretary for Ireland to support Mr. Lefevre's resolution. his holding, and that the consequences to him of failing in his Whatever, then, may be the advantages of large farms, payments are the more serious the nearer he approaches to Ireland is not disposed to embrace them, and it is therefore wiping off his debt. And it is confidently alleged by those who unnecessary to complicate this question with that of the rival know Ireland that a public opinion will very soon arise which merits of the English system of landlord, tenant-farmer, and will insist on fair-play between one cultivator and another, and agricultural labourer, and the Continental system of ownership will not only justify, but support, the State Creditor in strictly of the soil by those who cultivate it. Mr. Lefevre, indeed, enforcing his demands. Those who have made exertions to pay could not avoid glancing at the course of legislation (so much their instalments, and to confirm themselves in the possession akin to that which has been recommended by his Committee) of their land, will not approve of leniency to idler neighbours ; adopted by one Continental country after the other, with the and bad cultivators, who cannot pay their way, will have to sell express view of converting tenant-cultivators into proprietors, to those who are reaping the benefit of the State aid. The But the fact that Mr. Lowther, who is unimpressed by foreign only case in which such a public °pillion would not operate
Previous page
