THE IRISH LAND QUESTION.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXIX, Issue 11, 14 March 1901, Page 27

THE IRISH LAND QUESTION.

A cable message received here recently, stated that Mr. J. E. Redmond, Chairman of the Irish Parliamentary Party, had moved an amendment in the House of Commons to the Address- in -Reply asking for the Imperial credit for the compulsory and wholesale purchase of land. Mr. T. W. Ru^soll, in a violent speech, seconded the amendment, urging that a timely concession be made lest bloodshed ensue. The landowners were mere rent chargers. Sir. B«*lfour paid that, compulsion would be not only wild and ruinous, but would ruin the laborers it sought to benefit. The liioli Laiulb Piuuliaae Aouj had successfully created 60,000 peasant proprietors. Mr. Wyndham said that it would be impossible to risk 120 millions, and plunge Ireland into litigation. Sir Henry CampbellBannerman supported the amendment, which was rejected by 235 to 140. It will be in the memory of our readers that prior to the General Election. Mr. T. W. Russell, who then held office in the Salisbury Government, made some strong speeches in the constituency which he now represents, in the course of which he said many hard but well-deserved thingn against the Irish landlords. He spoke deliberately knowing full well that his remarks would cost him his position. Mr. Russell's speeches fell like a bombshell among the landlords, with the result that Lord Salisbury, no doubt acting at their instigation, relieved the well-known LiberalUnionist of the secretaryship of the Local Government Board. Addressing a meeting of North of Ireland tenant farmers some few weeks ago Mr. Rusbcll again dealt with the land question, and in view of the fact that he seconded Mr. Redmond's amendment his remarks are well worth quoting. Mr. Russell, who by the way is not an Irishman as might be supposed but a Scotchman, said : ' English politicians begin to feel that the Irish question is coming up again — most of them know MORE OK CHINA THAN OF IBELAND. and they have a dim idea that Unionist Ulster is going to take a hand in the game this time. With every newspaper writing, before a word is said on such, we know that the battle has been fairly begun. We go into this battle with a just cause, with a platform upon which we can stand. And let me say this to the Irish landlords and their Press organs — we shall not allow the Unionist party nor the Unionist cause to be bound up with their selfish ends and aims. If the Union is to exist for the sake of Irish landlords, then the Union is in evil plight, and I for one would cease to defend it. The Union is essential for the prosperity of the whole people, and we Bhall not allow a class — even if they have the ear of the Prime Minister, and have a powerful Press at their command — to push themselves forward as if they alone were the Irish Unionist party. I repeat here that the present land system is doomed. It cannot stand. Mr. Justice Meredith and his colleagues have destroyed the last cha'ice it had. It must go. It is draining the country of ita wealtb, It is destroying every interest that is worth preserving It is poisoning the national life. Since Strongbow landed in Ireland niaeteen-twentietha of the disturbance and disorder which have prevailed have been duo to land. It has been the cause of anguish, pain, sorrow, and utter ruin to tens of thousands. And here to-nigbt, on this historic ground, with all its recollections of gloriou« fights, with all its memories of heroes and martyrs in this struggle, we pledge ourselves to do our Bhare in making an end of the trouble — to do our part in bringing about a state of things in which the ' man who plants the corn shall eat, and praise the Lord' — to labor for the hastening of that time when the land shall no longer bo deemed forsaken or called desolate.' 'THE ENGLISH AND IRISH LAND SYSTEMS. • People talk of landlords and the land system in Ireland and in England as if th p y were one and the same thing. There is absolutely no analogy between the two things. Take the English sybtem and examine it. The landlord is the sole and only owner of land, buildings, and everything in and upon the noil. He lets the

farm at a given rent as a going concern. He erects and maintains the home and farm buildings. He drains and fences the land — in fact the owner acts as owner, and as a matter of fact he gives back to the land much of what he gets as rent. In many oases the rent simply represents 3 per oeut. on the expenditure in maintaining the farm as a going conoern. Compare this with the Irish system. The Irish landlord owns nothing but the bare soil — he has erected no farm buildings, he has neither drained nor fenced the land, he has made no farm roads. All this has been done not by the man who is called owner, but by the occupier. The naked truth is that the Irish landlord takes, but docs not give back. He draws what is in faot if not in law a rent-charge. That is all. Not a sixpence does he spend on tho land, and much of what he draws is spent out of the country. Could two systems be more unlike ? The Irish system may be summed up thus — First, there is a landlord whose one object iB to ueonre his rent, and he performs no duty to the property he owns ; second, there iB the occupier, afraid to improve the land because in due time the Land Commission will arrive, and in spite of Acts of Parliament will rent him to some extent upon whatever improvements he may have made ; third, there is the laborer, ground to powder between the two parties — orowding into the towns or crossing the Atlantic, until there is hardly a man capable of doing a day's work left in some parts of the country. Could there be a worse system ? And add to all this the miseries of a gigantic law suit going on constantly in every pariah— cases dragged from court to court, with an array of lawyers and judges revelling in the spoils. No country could stand it. Ireland least of all. And it must end, for mending is impossible.' ' Free trade has done more than anything el Be to make England what England is to to-day. It has done this because England is to so large an extent an industrial country. Ireland occupies a totally different position. Ireland is not industrial in the same sense as England. Ireland is agricultural. Nobody contends that free trade has benefited the agricultural districts of England as it has done in the great centres of industry. Nothing of the kind. And what helped to make England helped to unmake the greater part of poor Ireland. lam not arguing the right and the wrong of free trade. lam showing its effect upon Ireland. Along with the advent of this policy Ireland was scourged by a desolating famine — a famine which absolutely prostrated the country. But four years after these two untoward events England imposed additional taxation upon Ireland amounting to £2,000,000 per annum.