The Carmarthen Journal and South Wales Weekly Advertiser

MEETING OF THE ST. CLEARS CON- SERVATIVE ASSOCIATION. SPEECH BY MR. G. HILL SMITH, B.L. ON Friday evening, Mr G. Hill Smith addressed a public meeting at the National School, St. Clears. The room was well filled by an attentive audience. The chair was taken by Colonel Carleton Smith, who was supported by Major Glascott, Mr. J. H. Thomas, Mr. Carver, Colonel Davies-Evans, and others. The chairman, in a few appropriate words introduced Mr Hill Smith, who was received with applause, and said-My object, as you will have gathered from the remarks of the Chairman, is to give you some information on the Irish question and I start with the assumption, as I always do, that our political opponents are actuated by an honest desire to do the best they can for Ireland and the Irish people. As reasonable, thinking men, we ought so to get all the facts connected with this question in our minds before we form any opinion upon it, because no man's opinion on any subject, whether political or social, would be worth the paper on which it is written, or the breath which gives it utterance, if it is not the result of a fair and a calm and a careful consider- ation of the facts underlying that subject. It occurs to ine that there are a great many facts about this great question of which you cannot help being in complete ignorance. You have been gathering your knowledge and opinions with reference to this question from what you read in the newspaper, where a great many phases of the matter are brought before you in detail, which it is absolutely necessary to understand before forming a just conclusion. I hope to lay before you such information as will enable you to judge whether the opinion you have already formed has been based upon a sure foundation, or whether in view of that information you should be inclined to form a different opinion. Now, the point for us to realise to our minds is, what underlies this agitation which has characterised Irish life during the last five or six years, and upon the existence of which is based the claims that have been made during the last couple of years in reference to a new revolution in the constitution of this country. IRISH INEQUALITIES A FALLACY. Those who are old enough to remember will recollect that Mr Isaac Butt, more than eighteen years ago, brought forward in the House of Commons a proposition in the shape of a reso- lution pointing to the character of a Home Rule which he advocated. And he based the acceptance of that resolution before the members of the House of Commons and the country, upon what he alleged to be a fact. That fact was that the Irish people occupied a position of inequality in comparison with the English and the Scotch, that they had grievances under which the English and Scotch people do not labour and that, therefore, he, as the mouthpiece of a national opinion and a national feeling, was justified in bringing forward this resolution and heading an agitation for its redress and its removal. Well, the Prime Minister, M rglad STOD e, who then presided over the affairs of the United Kingdom in Parliament, met Mr Butt in argument on the floor of the House of Commons, and established to the satisfaction of that House, that what Air Butt stated to be a fact, was a fallacy, and that there was no foundation whatever for the statement which he made and when that celebrated statesman went to the north of Scotland subsequent to the close of the session of 1871, he addressed a large meeting in Aberdeen and he called the attention of the meeting to what had taken place in the House. He referred particularly to what had taken place with reference to Mr Butt's proposition, and indicated the line of argument adopted, and he established to the satisfaction of the meeting that the view entertained by the ministers of the day and those who followed Mr Gladstone at that time, was perfectly sound. And he put the whole fact in a nut-shell in a way very peculiar to Mr Gladstone. He asked a question from the platform, and to his own question gave his own answer. The question he asked was, What are the inequalities under which the Irish people labour 1" And then he proceeded to give his answer, an answer based Upon all his authority as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom at the time, based upon all the knowledge that he had as a Cabinet Minister-he had all the facts of the case in his hand before him, and the answer he gave to that question was, 11 1 declare I know of none but two one, that they pay less in taxation for imperial purposes into the Imperial Exchequer than either the English or the Scotch and the other, that they derive more benefit from public money than either the English or the Scutcli "-(applause). Now, the truth of that statement of Mr Gladstone's has been absolutely and conclusively proved in the most extraordinary way in recent years. Sir Joseph M'Kenna, a Nationalist mem- ber, applied that the Government should issue a return showing the amount per head per annum paid by Englishmen, Irishmen, and Scotchmen respectively to the Exchequer. That return was granted by the Government. It was prepared with all the authority of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and with all the accuracy characterising returns from that department, and dealt with the subject down to 1885, the last year that could be covered by the return. The accuracy of that return has not been questioned to the present moment and what did it show ? every Englishman paid to the Imperial Exchequer ii2 8a 6d every Scotch- man, E2 12s 9d and every Irisliniai), El 6s 6d— (applause). Therefore, taking the tax-paying community—which applies to landlord, to tenant, to merchant, or to shopkeeper-the position occupied by the Irish people at the very time when Mr Gladstone was making that statement, and up to the present moment, is a position nothing inferior to, but superior to that of England or Scotland—(applause). Then another Nationalist member, a month or two afterwards, applied for a return which would show the amount of public money granted to the United Kingdom for public purposes at the public cost. And that return went back for twenty years. It showed that for a period of twenty years, on an average, there had been advanced out of the public Exchequer for public works in Ireland, upwards of a million sterling more than was ad- vanced in England or Scotland. Therefore the question of inequality was clearly established to be impossible and untenable in 1871, and that is absolutely true up to the present time—(hear hear). It is therefore a fact that the position of the Irish people as a whole afforded as little justification for Mr Butt's agitation as their position now does for the one which has char- acterised Irish life during the last five or six years—(applause). THE IRISH TENANT'S PRIVILEGES. But it may be said by our Gladstonian friends, while that is perfectly true of the people as a nation, yet we must remember the fact that they are an agricultural people as distinct from England and Scotland, which are practically manufacturing countries. And if it could be truly said that the Irish agricultural tenants occupied a position of inferiority as compared with the English and Scotch, then I should be forced to say that there was a good deal of reason for an agitation within constitutional bounds, the object of which was to raise this people to the same level occupied by their English and Scotch brethren. But let me put before you the facts underlying that aspect of the question. Do not take these facts from the enunciations of my lips, not from the Quotations of statesmen on oue side or the other, but from documents, public in their character, which are open to the inspection and to the perusal of every man throughout the length and breadth of the United Kingdom, the whole set of which may be acquired for the sum of two shillings and seven-pence halfpenny. What are those public documents 1 They are the statutes of the United Parliament of the United Kingdom, and from these statutes we find that in 1870 there was granted to all the tenantry in Ireland by law, what had been the property d merely the tenants in Ulster by custom—the tenant right interest—custom going back 150 years, when the Scotch and English settlers were brought across, and it was found expedient to give them exceptional privileges. And what did that tenant right represent ? I trust you will allow me for a moment to explain what that tenant right interest is. If I am in possession of a farm since 1870, and am desirous of giving up the possession of that farm, or have been evicted out of it by my landlord, the Act of 1870 confers upon me certain rights and privileges. These rights and privileges are, that I am entitled to get the full money value of my tenant right interest in that holding before leaving it. The tenant right interest is represented by three elements. The first, and the most material, is the value of the improvements which have been made upon that farm, either by the tenant occu- pier or by his predecessors. These improvements may embrace buildings, out offices, drainage, or fencing. The second element in the tenant right is your occtipation right in the farm. For instance, if you were giving up a place of business you would expect to get from the incoming purchaser a sum representing the interest which you have in your business, a business which you have gathered by your attention, punctuality, and industry. Then the third element of the tenant right is practically the money value of the landlord under whom you hold it. If I had a farm under a man who was kindly disposed, and did not press me, and who in bad seasons gave me time to pay, the farm held under such a man as that would bring a higher price under the third head of the tenant right. That right would run up in value in pro- cess of time from about ten years' purchase to forty of the annual rent. Let me put that in figures. I have a holding worth E20 a year of rent, and I am going to leave it. I get for it a sum ranging from £ 200 to E800, and with the two hundred or the eight hundred pound3 in my pocket I am at liberty to walk away whenever I like. Therefore, you see, when you are told by Gladstonian speakers that the result of a man giving up his holding is to confiscate his means and make them the property of the landlord, you are told what is absolutely untrue, and in the teeth of the Act of Parliament. Again, when you are told that a man has his improvements confiscated, you are equally led astray. If l am served with a notice to quit, under the Act of 1870, the moment it is served, 1 have a right to serve a claim in the County Court, and ask the judge to ascertain what my tenant right is worth, and the case is heard in the Couuty Court before the notice to quit expires. I bring forward what evidence I can, and if, as the result of that hearing, the County judge says, your tenant right interest is worth £ 300, what is the result ? Until the landlord puts down the £ 300 in cash to me, he cannot move one inch further upon his notice to quit. Therefore, when you are toid that a man has his improvements confiscated, you are told what is untrue. Then comes the question—and the fun of it is that the Nationalist speakers are the readiest in proclaiming it, unfortunately for them- selves—in reference to an Act which I will yet refer to, the Land Act of 1881. Mr Timothy Healy wrote a handbook of that Act, and in his own handbook he says In measuring compen- sation for disturbance, the Court will take into account the difficulty and expense a tenant may have to incur to get another farm equally good it will estimate the ordinary losses of a forced flitting in short, it will be the duty of the Court to estimate in money the whole injury to the tenant from eviction." And again, "a tenant to whom compensation is awarded may remain in possession until the amount of the compensation is paid over to him." So that there is nobody has a clearer knowledge of the law than Mr Healy and in my experience there is nobody who has so deluded audiences in England and Scotland as he has done (applause). Then there is the eviction for non-payment of rent. Realise to yourselves what that means. The Act of 1870 says practically to the tenant, You have fallen into arrears with your landlord, and you are going to be dispossessed you have spent your capital, and you have invested a certain amount in your property there, and it is not fair that you should be deprived of that pro- perty." Therefore you prove before the County Court what your improvements are. Supposing that I am in a holding of £ 20 a year, and I owe JE80 Arrears and I be proceeded against, my answer is "I have fenced several fields and made other improvements. That represents capital." The County Court inquires into the value of these things, and it ascertains that they represent 9200 and how is that worked out ? Under the Act of 1870 on the one side I owe the landlord R80 on the other side the landlord owes me R200. The landlord pays me the zC120 in cash, and with that I walk away (lau-,y b ter). Are my improvements confiscated ? Why, I have been paid the full money value of them and, therefore, you are misled and deluded when you are told by anybody that the result of an eviction for non-payment of rent in Ireland is to confiscate the improvements—(applause). Well, then, you may ask yourselves this question, If that is the case, why is it that we have not heard in any of these cases of evictions, of the tenant going to the court and asking for this payment ? The answer is on the surface. What has been the object of the Nationalist agitators throughout Ireland ? The whole burden of their song has been, if you are proceeded against for your rent, do not pay if you are sought to be evicted do not go into the County Courts, be evicted, and the eviction will make a grand dioramic view to be brought through England and Scotland to im- press upon the people's mind the misery you endure!"—(laughter and cheers). And under the touch of the Nationalist orators, and their English allies, the tenantry in Ireland have put out of their own pockets upwards of X200,000 of gold, which the British legislature declared to be theirs. But if they have the opportunity of utilising the machinery provided by the law to recover what is due to them, and do not utilise that machinery, have they any right to come to an honest-minded community, and say, Here I have lost X.100 take pity upon me get up a subscription, and make me the object of your com- miseration all over your platforms in England and Scotland?" The law said the £100 be- longed to you, and appointed courts to establish it for you. You never went near them you have lost your money, and you have nobody else to blame but yourself. Now take the Act of 1881. If you are a tenant in England or Scotland, and have entered into a contract to pay jE25 a year, and seasons are bad and foreign competitions against you, you must accommodate yourself as best you may. You would feel your- self bound as honest men to give up the possession of that, the hire of which you feel your- self unable to pay. But the doctrine in Ireland is, -first get a hold of a man's property and then do not pay a price for it keep hold like grim death of the very thing you are not paying for- (laughter). Now under the 1881 Act, hundreds of thousands of the tenants went in and had a fair rent declared for the period of fifteen years. The Act says the rents must be fixed for fifteen years, and at the end of the first fifteen years the tenant is entitled to come back and have the process gone over again. Well, one of the conditions of that Act, and one of the inducements to landlords to accept it, was that the rents, when so fixed, were rents to be paid when due, that is in November, instead of six months afterwards. 1 need hardly tell you that the Irish tenant glories in the fact that he does not pay at all. Then came the Act of 1882. There are some people in Scotland and some of their brethren in England who would be glad to have such an Act. It is kuown as an Arrears Act, and applies to the case of a man who was in arrear of his rent, whether he was sued for it, or not. Let me illustrate its provisions. I was in arrear four years for my E20 a year farm. I was unable t.) pay that amount I went before the Court, and I satisfied that Court that I could not p:ty that JS80, and what was the result ? The lirst clause of this order provided that the State out of the public Exchequer should pay-it pro- vided that there should be produced and paid over to the landlord for me, as an absolute gift, never to be repaid to the public Exchequer, the amount of one year's rent. That is to say, in the case I have given you, £ 20 is to be paid out of the public Exchequer. The second clause of this order compelled the landlord altogether to wipe off the remaining £00 standing against the tenant. So that the tenant, owing yesterday C80, goes through the process of the Court and rises out of his bed to-morrow morning, without hav- ing had to put his hand in his pocket, utterly and completely clear of the debt—(applause). AN EASY Cur TO PROPRIETORSHIP. Then came the Act of 1885, under which, if the tenant wants to become the owner of his holding, he may do it on most equitable terms. If you agree, says the legislature, with your landlord to It buy, tell us the terms and we will provide the purchase money Suppose I am tenant, having got E20 a year rent fixed for my holding, and I arrange with my landlord to buy at twenty years' purchase. Twenty times twenty is four hundred. That agreement is communicated to the Govern- ment, and the officers of the State produce the whole £ 400 out of the public Exchequer, and it is paid to the landlord as a loan to me. From the moment of its payment I have ceased to have anything whatever to do with landlords, agents, notices to quit, or anything of the kind I am now liable to pay by instalments the amount that has been advanced at 4 per cent. for my benefit. Take from the very outset of the transaction the benefit I get. Yesterday, I was liable to pay R20 a year, and I was nothing but a tenant all my life- time. To day, I am an annuitant, and stand only liable to pay 216 a year, which is 20 per cent. better from the very start. And I am only an annuitant for a numbsr of years. When I have paid R16 a year for nine and forty years I have paid off both principal and interest, and in my jubilee year I say, By the beneficence of the United Parliament nine and forty years ago I got rid of my landlord by my honesty since I have got rid of the State, and now stand here the owner of my holding, owing not one particle I have got rid of the State, and now stand here the owner of my holding, owing not one particle to any human being "—(applause). Supposing you want to buy a E20 farm in Scotland or England you must have the money of your own or you must borrow it. The first difficulty of course will be to induce somebody to lend you £ 400. Anyone with money to knd likes a margin of security. But, supposing you overcome that difficulty, you pay 4 per cent. interest for 49 years, and in the 50th year you have still the £ 400 to pay—(laughter). The State says to the tenant We will make you owners of your hold- ings on condition that you will not have to go to the money-lenders. We will provide you with money on such terms that your condition from the start to the finish will be much better than it previously was. That is the principle of what is known as the Lord Abhbourne Act. Coming next to the Act of 1887, it said to the tenants in Ireland, You have gone into Court and have had your rents fixed 1887 is an exceptionally bad season, and the Court will see what reduc* tion on even your fair rents you will be able to get." These are facts and advantages which no tenant in England and Scotland or throughout the world enjoys. Therefore, when you are told by Gladstonians that the Irish tenants occupy a position of inferiority, you are told what is absolutely untrue, and you are told it for the purpose of making the foundation for an agita- tion which has no real solid foundation upon which to rest, that it may delude you and demoralise you, as they have deluded and demoralised people throughout the length and breadth of the country—(hear, hear). THE PLANK BED. Having described the provisions of the Crimes Act, which, he said, only provided new machinery for dealing with old crimes, the speaker pro- ceeded-This new machinery was necessary be- cause the ordinary procedure, which, in England and Scotland, is sufficient to maintain law and order, had been paralyzed by the organisation of the Land League. The Crimes Act, you should bear in mind, is only in operation against people who commit crimes. I care not if he is an M.P. or any other person if he has committed crime then he is a criminal, and should take the position of a criminal in the sight of the law— (applause). I say this, that men who, like Mr Dillon and Mr O'Brien, stand on platforms and state that they know a certain thing to be illegal, and that because it is illegal they are to do it, and incite the people to do the same thing—these people are more responsible for their actions than their dupes who obey their behests, and they should be treated accordingly—(applause). Now that the Crimes Act operates against criminals without respect of persons, it is amusing to find that all claim to martyrdom has ceased. In 1881, when Mr Parnell and various of his colleagues went to Kilmainham, they got spring mattresses from their homes, sofas from their hotels, and plenty of beef and plum pie, so that they came out of prison thriving after their little holiday, and in fine humour to pose as martyrs before their admiring fellow countrymen. The Crimes Act of 1881 has revolutionised that style of things. The M.P. who commits crimes, like his dupes in lo\ver stratas of society, finds, in- stead of the spring mattress, the plank bed, the seat in the corner instead of the sofa, and prison fare is substituted for the roast beef and plum pudding (laughter). All call to martyrdom has been taken away, and the result is that the moment so and so M.P. gets in he begins to whine and make the discovery that he is of delicate constitution. Such are the heroes of the Nationalist movement (applause), with the exception of Michael Davitt, who havinglaid down the plank of his platform, maniully stuck to them and uttered no word of complaint. ARE IRELAND'S LIBERTIES DESTROYED. It is said that the Crimes Act destroys the liberties of Ireland. Such statements are absolutely untrue (applause). If Mr Dillon only delivered in Ireland the speeches he reserves for Scotland and England, nobody would ever touch him (applause). Free meetings are not abolished. Any man who is engaged in loyal procedure, or in constitutional criticism upon constitutional measures, is as free to go throughout the length and breadth of Ireland as he would be in Scotland or England but if he stands on an Irish plat- form and incites his audience to deeds illegal, improper, dishonest, and unjnst, if he seeks to shelter himself behind the body of dupes before him, and get them to do that which he is not manly enough to do himself—(cheers)—if he tries to bring the administrators of the law into contempt and shame, he is engaged in that which in Scotland would be considered illegal, and would be prosecuted by the common law of the United Kingdom (applause). I have lived in Ireland all my life and all the Coercion Acts which have been passed have never incon- venienced me for a single moment. Why ? Because I have recognised my primary duty as claiming to be a citizen of a free empire, to obey the laws of that empire (loud cheers). It is those who have corns who generally suffer from the stamping of other people's feet (laughter). It is those who are engaged in criminal offences who feel the effects of this criminal law. And we are told that the most dreadful part of the law is that it is permanent. That, in my opinion, is the greatest commendation that can be passed upon it. Other Acts have been passed, and the result has been that crime has been put down, and criminals have had to lie low, but they looked forward to the time when these Acts would cease, and they would be free again so that the result of our experience of the use of every single Crimes Act that was passed, was that it led to a large increase of crime. Now it is permanent in its character. It says to the people, "There is no rift in the clouds before you if you want to live as a citizen of this country, you must consort yourself with the principles of the constitution or the empire;" I and it points out to the honest and law-abiding that British protection is not extended to them for a month or year, but for all time. If your life is in danger, there is protection for you there is protection for honest labour and industry in this law for all time. If criminals cease to live, then and not till then this law will be a dead letter on the statute book. That Crimes Act has been producing its effect. It has restored law and confidence, which is the great underlying foundation of every prosperity, commercial and otherwise (applause). It has caused men to come out from their hiding-places to engage again in their honest industry and labour, and to feel that they are yet, what -they thought they had ceased to be for ever, free citizens of a free stutc (loud cheers). You have also nearly two millions of law-abiding citizens in Ireland who are living under the same law as the rest of Ire- laud. There is no exceptional legislation for us. The British law that you live under is ours. We have lived and prospered under that law, we have extended our resources, we have sent the produce of our looms and factories throughout the world. We have flourished because of our connection with this great empire, and we have a right to claim that, whereas we have been born members of this great empire, we should remain members of it still—(applause). Are you now going to lend power to those whose object is to rend asunder that banner we have borne, and to break up this great constitution, the creation of centuries, martyrs' blood cementing it, and the power of a united people gathering it together—to those whom Mr Glad- stone characterised as men plunged to the lips in 0 treason, and whom Lord Spencer himself says are even now in rebellion against the law—(loud cheers). We seek not to dominate over any portion of the community we demand for our- selves every right which every British man enjoys, y and we demand for our brethren in Ireland, Roman Catholic and Presbyterian, Gladstonian, Conservative, or Nationalist, every right and privilege that we enjoy, but no more. We ask that we shall not be dominated over by men who have the whole control of the south and ivest of Ireland for" by their fruit ye shall know them." If you go through the south and west of Ireland you find cities that some years ago were engaged in a thriving business, with rank grass growing on their streets, and their people following the O'Briens and Healys through the mountain sides to dodge the police and you find want prevailing z, in every home. You come across magnificent rivers like the Shannon, and from the mouths to their source their waters do not drive the wheel of a mill. In the north, where we have lived under the same laws, you find industry in every part, with ship-building yards at the mouths of our rivers, employing thousands of hands, and, honesty characterising our dealings, and loyalty to the Queen and the constitution making its operation and its mark upon us (loud cheers). We realise the fact that our own prosperity is bound up with the prosperity of our country inseparably. We know that the United Parlia- ment has ever been ready to redress every honest grievance that has been brought before it in a constitutional way. We have no faith whatever in the Parnellites take away ten of the eighty- -five,, dtjd"l challenge you to put your hand upon the head of any one of the remaining seventy- five as being the owner of a single sixpence of his own making (applause). As Sir William Harcourt has said, the last thing they would "desire would be peace for Ireland, because their occupation would be gone and they would be relegated to obscurity. These are not the people into whose hands you would commit your affairs. And if you are not prepared to give over the whole management or your local affairs to men of the Parnellite stamp, by what earthly authority can you coolly turn round and give us these men for our political leaders ? You have no right to shove down our throats a dose of government which you would not have yourself. I defy anyone to say that he has a right to give us a Joe Biggar and a Timothy Healy to manage our affairs. You have no right to do this. First take them as leaders to yourselves for twelve months, and if you find they are statesmen to rely upon, then ask us to swallow the dose, but not till then. You have no right to send us in Ulster the starvation, ruin, and desolation which these people, by their policy, have brought upon the South and West of Ireland (applause). I ask you to satisfy yourself that I have given you a correct summary of the facts of the case, of the actual position of the Irish people at the present time, and I ask you to bring commcn-sense to bear upon this great question, because I know that the result can only be that, remembering the traditions of the past and the hopes you have with reference to the present and the future, you will not turn your back upon these traditions, but true to what are your rights as well as ours, you will, in the face of the stern facts of the situation, resolve at all hazards to maintain the unity of this great Empire (cheers). The address was listened to with great interest and attention, and when the speaker resumed his seat there was prolonged applause. Major Glascott, in moving a vote of thanks to the speaker, fully endorsed his statements, and gave an interesting account of the effect of the Nationalist movement upon the relations between landlord and tenant on his father's property in co. Waterford A vote of thanks to the Chairman, proposed by Mr J. H. Thomas, was cordially responded to, and brought the meeting to a close.