EARL GREY ON IRELAND.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XVI, Issue 28, 2 November 1888, Page 25

EARL GREY ON IRELAND.

(Conlcvdid.')

Before considering his educational proposals, I will draw attention to the persistent manner in which he argues in favour of making the ministers of the three different churches iv Ireland stipendiary i of the State. I have no doubt that in advocating this plan he is quite sincere in his motives from his point of view, but for my own part, I think a State-paid clergy a very undesirable thing either for the State or the Church, and least oi all for the people. Catholicity h%s Buff3red much in the past through its connection with the State in various ways. It suffers from it to-day even in countries like Franoe, Sp*in, Italy, Austria, etc.. where its connection wa3 of a natural growth. I "have often heard it stated on good authority, but cannot vouch for the accuracy of the statement, that a Catholic priest is not a whit more respected by his people than a minister of the Protestant religion is in England. He ia merely a State officer paid to perform°religious services at so much a year. How different in Ireland where there were no State-pai i priests. I often think that if the French priests threw up their stipends and united religiously anJ politically with their people, the Bunny land of France would be as glorious a country as ever it was. Ireland will never have a State-paid clergy. But to return to his lordship's educational theories. He says :— " It can lurdly be wrong in principle fora nation to sanction any public pioviaion for instructing the people ia religion. ... To me it has always appeared very difficult to understand how some ot those who insist upon making provision for the secular education of the whole people can hold it to ba wrong that any provision whatever should be made for their being instructed in religion. I am far from biin^ indifferent to the great benefits arising from the general diffusion in a nation of that secular knowledge, and that cultivation of the uuderstandiag by which men are rendered more able to engage in all the various engagements of life, and to serve better both themselves and the community. But experience has only too clearly proved that mere intellectual instruction is not sufficient either to mak« men good subjects to the State, or to secure their own welfare. For both these objects taey require to be taught the great truths of religion and their duty to God, a sense of which can alone subdue the ' unruly wills and affections ' of mankind ; indeed, for the pcice, order, and prosperity of a community, it is far more importaat that its members should generally understand and feel their responsibility to their Creator, than tint they should be well instructed in secular knowledge." On this th«3is, he argues thU private institutions hhoull be aided from the State purse. Ie must be observed, however, that since the disestablisment of the Irish Church, the Conservatives have been in power several times, and have unfortunately d jne nothing to extend the noble principles lai i down by Earl Grey. The remainder of the chapter is taken up with a miaut-i prects of the debates on the Irish Church, in which he points out that several speakers spoke in glowing terms of the •• prosperity of the country " at the time, and thus implie* that the Cnurch could not be a cause of discontent in Ireland. Ido not see that it was more than a sentimental grievance since 1838. At that time the;tithcs were commuted,' and the landlords were forced to pay them. The tenants had nothiog to do with them. The landlords squeezed every penny they could out of their tenants, and after being relieved of the tithes in 1869, I have not li-ard of their making tbe slightest abatements on that account therefore, it was immaterial to the tenants whether the money went to the landlords or parsons, but from an economic point of view it was better for the country to have the amount paid to the parson, becausa they lived in the country, while the landlords, aB a rule, lived out of it. Disendowmeut and disestablishment were altogether a landlord question as far a3 the tithes were concerned. However that may be, the measure na&per v a just one, and paved tb« way for a general nniou

of the people on i olilical Irish questions. By tbe articles of un ion the Protestant Gburch io Ireland was to be for ever supported by the State. If Home Rule was granted before disendowment it would in all likelihood be an article of that measure that the Church should be maintained as it then existed. Better such a treaty broken by the Imperial rather than the Irish legislature. As far as the prosperity which undoubtedly then existed is concerned, it was entirely owing to the economic laws of demand and supply. It will be recollected that America was still suffering from the effects of her civil war, and Australia had not begun to be a potent factor in British commerce, and therefore lieland aa s food producing cuuntry was naturally prosperous, on account of tbe consequent high pncis and rcdy markets at her door. But a continual increase in the rents took place during these year?, and farmers boun 1 themselves down to p=»y rents which the keen competition of America and Aus ralia rendeiel impossible a few years afterwards. 1 have referred to these facts in L ish economics because the prosperity than existing is used as a plea against further concessions. Earl Grey admitß that when in 1870 Mr. Gladstone attempted to carry bis Land Act through, " the relations of the owners and occupiers of land in Ireland stood much in need of amendment." Previous to Mr. Gladstone's move in the matter the subject was often pressed on the Government by Irish members, and strangely enough Lord Clanricarde, father of the Exterminator, moved in the matter in the Housa of Lords, his motion being referred to a select committee, where it lemained. The Land Law aa it then stood under Lord Cardwell's Act of 1860 failed in defining tbe terms of contract and discouraging written leases. It discouraged the granting of leases for a term of years, and failed to provide sufficient provision for easily and cheaply settling disputes. Owing to tbese defects his Lordship assures us that " great injustice was occasionally done to tenants who had improved thtir land." In ins' ituting a comparison between Irish and English leaseholders, he ad oiits the oft-repeated fact that Englibh landlords make most of tbe improvements, and adds : " Unfortunately in Ireland it is otherwise. Thtse improvements have been effaced by tenants only on an understanding of the vaguest kind, that they should be allowed to hold their land, without being called upon to pay higher rents, long enough to repay themselves. The agreement ■was almost always verbal, and the terms were apt to be forgo.ten before the time came when it gave the landlord a right to ask lor a higher rent. There were too many cases in which landlords availed themselves of their legal right, in order unjustly to deprive tha tenants holding land only from year to year of the fruits of their labour." For these defects his remedy is in accordance with Lord Clanricarde'a Committee, viz , " To give to the owners and occupiers of land freedom to settle witn each other as ihey might think fie the conditions on wbich it was to be held, but requiring that all arrangements of that kind should be made in writing, and should be recorded in such a manner as to make them always easy to be referred to." These arrangements were to be inexpensive. Leases were to be made cheaper, etc. In this recommendation the Irish farmer will Bee little improvement. It ip, however, difficult to prove to an Englishman th*»t, piior to the Plan of Campaign and the introduction of boycottiug as a. fineart, it was utterly impossible to have anything approaching a free contract with an Irish landlord. He fixed the rent at the utmost price possible, often impossible to be obtained, and if the tenant demurred to pny that, he had simply " to bundle and go." Here came m tbe direful effects of the hanging gale*, which enable the landlord to rob the tenant before ejecting him. It not unusually happened that a tenant was two years in arrears without owing a penny. Thus if a tenant took up a lease in 1860 for 21 years, his first receipt would be dated for 1858, so too would the lease itself. The lease would expire iv 1879, but the shrewd landlord would leave it run o'> till 1881. if he failed to come to terms wi'h his landlord at the expiry of his .ease in 1881, the landlord tud a legal right to fix any rent he chose, and compel the tenant to pay it for those two years before he lea»ei, and as a general rule this rent has been fixed m>re on the tenant's ability to pay it, tban on any other grounds of equity. Remember that hn does not owe a single penny of this>. and ihat the landlord in f jrcing payment is simply exercising a piece of tyranny unprecdeuted any wnerj els.-. His home is not sacrod as is that of the Chustian under the Moslem rule in Turkey. No master how severe the atrocities of Tnrkish pashas may be, the people in tbt-ir homes were aa safe from insult, as the English enbject in a sanctuary during the fchxon, Norman, and Plantagenet periods ; but. fur the lii-iU p* s^n'. uo such fortunate rtfage remaine. Often, nay, generally, in the cold M<iich morn'n^a, huudreis, nay thousands, are sometimes tur/ie 1 adrift t > perish by the roadside, or wmd their wa? to the workhouse. It is needless to cite instances ot tbit) cruelty ; readers of the Tablet a<e familiar enough with them. In support of my conteution re the hanging gales, ample, evidence will Le found in Mr. Bence Jonas' work, and alajinTienca's Keahties of In--h Life." But for a fail exposure seT. P. O'Connor's " Parnell Movement,"' A. M . Ru hvau'd " New and other works. I will now pass over the remain ng part of the chapter dealmg with the the Land Question, having already given a sjffioiont indications of his lordship's plan. Ft is unusually severe on Mr. Gladstones Acts, which give a dual ownership to the soil, although he has admitted the right of the tenant ta his own improvers nt-i. In the conch ding chapter after a weary reiteration of the previous contentions we at length come to the plan I'or the future government •4 Ireland. Before entering into the subject, however he enters fully into the subject private Bill Legislation, showing how defective, expensive, and unsatisfactory it in even in England, as well as in Jrejnd. To remedy th h evil be proposed a buffer commission of jud*-es to settle the details, and then submit the moa&urc \o Parliament. As iar as Ireland is cooceruei, the first objection to this proposal is that the liish p< ople have no confi lence whatever in the In&h ju iges, eve^y one from tl.e Lord Chancellor and Chief Justice down to the p^tty \ilage J. P.. are of the genus anti-liish. That is the first and o r c of the most formidable Irish gnevances and underlies most others. His measures for the future are :—

1. Suspending for a time the operation of representative government in that part of the United Kingdom.and entrusting its administration to some authority raised above party influences. The argument! by which this drastic measure is supported seems to me wholly unworthy <i even a well-informed man much less a statesman. Ho admits that (here is, " especially in the House of Commons, a great deficiency of knowledge as to the real wants of Ireland, and what v worse, a strong disposition to listen with favour to very crude and illconsidered schemes for its improvement." This ignorance he would remedy by depriving the House of Commons of the advantage of having accurate information from the Irish Members whose chief faults are that they occupy too much time in teaching them. As to obstruction his lordship forgets that it was the Tories who first reduced it to that of a fine art during the passing of the Church disestablish* ment and the Land Act, 1870. The alternative of supeasion, he says, is concession of Home Rule. Suspension is impossible. Even if possible England would not hazard it. If Ireland deprived of her constitution by fraud were denied representation under the Union, it would be competent for tbe European powers to step in and compel Eaeland to surrender Ireland her full freedom as England ana the other prwerm compelled Turkey to free the Balkan provinces for less caiss. This it separation with a vengeance. As the alternative is Horn.9 Rule we may expect it sooner. 2. Tbe Government of I island to ba entrusted to a Lord-Lieuteaani named in the act, for ten years daring which time he cannot be removed except by tbe Crown in compliance to an address from both Houses of Parliament. (As far as Ireland is concerned a cap bung on a pole a la Gettler would be as efficatious as any Lord-Lieutenant we have had. 3. The Lord-Lieutenant to have full power to carry on the executive government according to his own judgment, and to be solely responsible for his acts. But to rep >rt all his measures to her Majesty's Ministers, and to keep them fully informed as to his views and intentions so as to enable them to call his attention to whatever observations they might consider to be required. 4. The Loid-Lieutenant in Council to be empowered to make from time to time such orders, hiving the force of laws, as he may tbink fit. Ihe drafts to be prepared by a committee of Privy Council and published a month beforehand. 5 Additional members of various opinions to be added to the Council. 6. The Lord-Lieutenant to nominate committees from this enlarged Council, such committees to deal in a quati parliamentary manner with such subjects as may be relegated to them, giving their reasons and furnishing their reports and drafts. When these met the approval of tbe Lord-Lieutenant they were to be published in th* Dublia Gazette and have the force of law. 7. An annnal sum, equal to the average expenditure for the public service in Ireland daring the last three or four years, should be placed by Parliament at the disposal of the Lord-Lieutenant for Irish purposes, regular statements properly audited to be laid before I Parliament. Such is tbe manner in which Earl Grey would govern Ireland. Oa first reading the proposals 1 felt naturally indignant ; but on r aling them over carefully again, and taking into consideration that he is constantly harping on the two facts that tbe administration of Ireland is bad as bad could be ; a'sj that the legislation is worse owing to English party disputes and want of knowledge cf Irish affairs ; I have come to the conclusion that he is a Home Ruler in disguise, and that his proposals are oq a par with Swift's modest proposal. A free explanation of his " Future Remedy " wou.d show that Irish representation in the Imperial Parliament is useless beoauee it cannot promote useful or prevent bad and useless legislation. In the next place we find him travestying the present Castle government by proposing; to make the Lord-Lieutennnt responsible to the Crown. At present he is if in harmony with hie Chief Secretary and officials, more despotic tbau Czar and Sultan put together. This ironical Remedy would place him on a level with other ordinary Governors. Tbe third proposal is another caricature cf the present arrangements by which balfour can imprison his opponents without consulting with his ofh'jinl bead. The idea of reporting his measures to the Ministers and having them published in the Dub, in Gazette is a beautiful satire on the secret doings of tbe Castle such as the m duight orders which consigned poor Mandeville to an early grave. He further hints that tne Kntil s>h Ministry should be responsible for Irish government by f jrcmg them to take cognisance of what is going on in Ireland. By tbe fourth, fifth, and tixth proposals be caricatures the working of liie present irresponsible, unelected, liish Parliament, or Privy Council, which occasionally sits in Dublin and makes orders which have the force of law, as fir as they can enforce them. The provise of calling: on special members for the consideration of particular orders is very beautiful. For instance if Catholic priests were to be sent to gaol, there would be no need to summon Barry, GranarJ, O'Hagan, The O'Connor Don, or any other Catholic. The last proposal, however, contains the cream of the fun. Only just fancy the 1 1 res pou stole liish Government putting duly audited statements of account b> fore even an English Parliament. Tne thing is ridiculoue. If such a thing had been done the Castle system would be wrecksd. It is true but bitter irony on the secret service system. Far easier for the Castle loafers to take their pay through a hole in the wgll and give no account of how they got it or for what object. We hear very much of Irish poverty its cause and its cure so with Earl Grey's views on the subject I will conclude this article :—"lt: — "It has beeu ofien and truly said ttiat the general poverty of tha population has been at the bottom of Irish discontent, and that, if the people were better off, there would not be so much disaffection. And tbo real reason why the country is so poor has also beeu often pointed out; it is simply, that ecterpiise, and industry have not been encouraged by security. No nation can hope to iise to wealth and prosperity excapt by industry and enterprise, which cannot fljur Bb if those who devote their labour or money Jo the work of production have not complete security that they will be allowed to enjoy the

fruits of their exertions. This complete security has never been enjoyed in Ireland." / _-__—-. J# Sl P#