Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 28 Nov 1934

Vol. 54 No. 3

Private Deputies' Business. - Cattle Export Quota.

Mr. Curran

I move:

That the Dáil condemns the Executive Council for its neglect to secure a quota for the export of cattle to Great Britain adequate to the needs of our agricultural industry.

I should imagine, in view of the whole cattle industry of the country, that the Government would accept this motion right away, because there is no doubt that they have failed in their duty as regards the cattle and live-stock industry of the country. Some time ago a Bill was introduced into this House—the Slaughter of Cattle and Sheep Bill—by the Minister for Agriculture. I am sorry to see him absent now. By that Bill he hoped to remedy the position, but we find later on, when it did not have the desired effect, that he was blaming the farmers. If only even a small section of the farmers would do what they ought to do, the whole trouble of the cattle industry would be solved! Now he has turned around and blamed the exporters. Is it to be contended that, even with the Slaughter of Cattle and Sheep Bill, the industry is in a healthy state? It is not. To quote the words of the Minister's own representative, he said that even at 25/- a cwt. it must be admitted that that did not give anything like an economic price to the farmer.

I have listened to debates here to-night. I have listened to speeches from the Government Benches—particularly one from Deputy Corry. Deputy Corry talked about "once again the cost of production"—that the farmers should get the cost of production and all that sort of thing. That is a matter upon which we can all agree, but it is admitted that, even with the legislation introduced into this House, 25/- a cwt. live-weight for cattle is not a paying proposition and does not give the farmer an economic price. I think it was Deputy Goulding who referred a while ago to the decay on the small towns. Why has the decay set in in these small towns? It has set in because of the fact that the agricultural industry, on which these towns were dependent, is no longer in the state in which it was. That is the reason, and that is the only reason— that the country, on which these towns were really dependent, is no longer in the same position in which it was before the Fianna Fáil Party came into office. Hence the decay in the towns; hence the unemployment in the country about which we heard so much a while ago in a long debate in this House.

I should like if the Minister for Agriculture and the Executive Council would get down to facts and ask themselves what are the causes of the present situation. The Minister for Agriculture will stand up during this debate sometime and talk in his usual aggressive manner of Deputies opposite and say that they do not give him one suggestion. He will criticise Deputy Curran's destructive criticism and ask what is the solution of the problem. What is the solution of it? The solution of it is to seek a trade agreement with Great Britain, even if you cannot get the economic war settled. There is no doubt that the economic war and the dispute with Britain are responsible for the state of the cattle industry in the country to-day. I am not a great statistician but looking at the Press this morning, in so far as I could judge, the British Government have collected the land annuities from the farmers. Yet we have the Government sending round bailiffs and sheriffs collecting money from the farmer which he has already paid.

The President himself talks of how the British take money even though he is not inclined to give it. He says they take it by force. I could use the same analogy regarding the land annuities. Great Britain has collected them off me and our own Government want to take them off me again. It was never intended that the farmer should pay land annuities to two Governments. Hence we have a situation up and down the country such as never existed in this country before, a situation brought about by the dispute with Great Britain. Certainly there is no credit to the Government in what their agents have been doing down the country. Granted that sheriffs must go out, they could do these things as they were done before, in a reasonably courteous manner and in accordance with the traditions of this country. That is not what is happening now. They have made a dumping ground of this country. They are insolent even if a farmer goes to them to buy his own cattle. The farmer is not getting any sort of chance at the present time. It is well to face up to this problem. I know that in so far as my own county is concerned the warrant for this year's rates amounts to £171,000. With the exception of last year, the highest figure ever reached before was between £80,000 and £90,000. These are the facts and that is what makes the position difficult. The money is simply not there.

Mr. Dillon

Not even in Clare.

Mr. Curran

You may talk about your beet and wheat schemes, and things of that kind, but they will not solve the problem. If you take the Government policy, pushed to its furthest possible end, you will still have a lot of land in the country which will not be a paying proposition under present circumstances. I have been informed that about 60,000 acres of beet, and about 700,000 acres of wheat, would meet our requirements. That acreage is only a fraction of all the arable land of the country. Take an individual like myself. If I produce a reasonable amount of wheat and a reasonable amount of beet, as I have at the moment, and if the rest of my farm is not a paying proposition, certainly I cannot expect beet and wheat to make the whole farm a paying proposition. That is the problem we have to face in the country at present. It must be remembered that, for good or ill, the live-stock industry is the main asset of the individual farmer. It was on his young stock he depended to meet his obligations in the past. It is on these he is dependent at the present time. But the economic war has made his position impossible.

I want to give a specific case to the President and Minister for Agriculture. The Minister knows very well that some time during the year his Department refused export licences to farmers and dealers who had not shipped a minimum of 30 cattle per month. I took up that case with the Minister and licences were granted to such people. Then the Department refused licences to people who had not shipped a minimum of 20 cattle per month. I also took that matter up with the Minister and he agreed to give licences to these people. A man who came under the latter category had some cattle at a local fair and he would not take the price which was offered for them, £7 per head. In the meantime, a licence came along from the Minister's Department and he shipped the cattle. He would not get £7 for them at the local fair and the price they realised on the other side was £18 odd. That is the market that the President tells us is of no use to the farmer. We have had the statement recently made to the cattle exporters by the Minister's representative. What does it mean in essence? It means that the farmers have been robbed. He told the exporters that he is prepared to take over the cattle industry of the country if needs be. I want to tell the Minister this, that while admitting that there was robbery and jobbery perpetrated, it will be nothing to the robbery and jobbery that will be perpetrated if the Minister takes over the cattle trade.

A Deputy

That is terrible.

Mr. Curran

It is not terrible at all. The Minister would not be convinced or believe it until he heard at the Ard-Fheis how cattle licences had been sold in the country where you had given them to your own political supporters and friends. They are being sold at anything from £2 to £3 per head. They are being juggled about, making that price for anybody to whom the Minister cares to give them. I know the difficulty in which the Minister finds himself in trying to regulate the situation, but he must admit that this has happened. His own supporters at the Ard Fheis put it before him. Only for that is so, he would probably be saying that I was telling an untruth on this occasion. I do not want to tell any untruth. I want to put the whole situation as I know it before him. A situation has been created in this country which has got to be met just like the labour problem. There are more cattle than we can consume in the country. What is to be done with them? You cannot convince me that the free beef scheme, the factory to deal with old cows, and things of that kind will solve the problem. Even if the farmers were to get the minimum price of 25/- per cwt., it is not an economic price. I should like the President to take a note of what I said a moment ago. Look at the difference between £7 and £18 per head. Of course you have to take expenses from that, but they would be there in any case. The Government of course, will turn round and say that Britain would have imposed a quota whatever happened here. Mind you, to the ordinary man in the country—to me at any rate—the position between the two Governments, our own Government and the British Government, is simply sickening.

You have the statement of Mr. Thomas that the door is still open: that they are prepared to negotiate. Our President says the same thing: that they are prepared to discuss this and come to an amicable arrangement. The Government may try how they will to solve the problem of farming in this country, but I submit that if they cannot settle the economic war they will not succeed unless they make a trade agreement with Great Britain. We have the position that the British Government and our own Government are squeezing the land annuities out of the farmers. That is not just or fair. In my own constituency the rate warrant this year is £171,000. With the exception of last year it used to be in or about £80,000 or £90,000. Is not that a big burden to place on the farming community? It certainly is, and there is no use closing our eyes to it. The arrears, so far as my constituency is concerned, amount to a considerable figure. I do not see how in present circumstances the payment of them can be met. Judging by some of the actions of the Executive Council the cattle industry is worth something to this country, or at least it ought to be. It seems a very strange thing for the Government to send its representative over to Scotland to buy a high priced polled angus bull—to pay £300 or £400 for that animal—and bring him home and then to adopt the policy of killing calves. You have county committees of agriculture putting forward schemes to foster the live-stock industry of the country. What avail are they going to be? If I were in a position to carry out what I feel, what I would do would be to scrap the whole live-stock industry in present circumstances, because of the way it is being handled by the Executive Council.

In present circumstances I do not see any sense in trying to foster the live-stock industry or in purchasing high priced bulls for this country because cattle raising is not now an economic proposition. We all know that at the Dublin Spring Show and at other shows throughout the country public money is being expended for the purpose of giving premiums to bulls. Everybody who attended the Spring sales at Ballsbridge is aware of that, but in present circumstances what is the use of it? As I said before, I know that the Minister for Agriculture will stand up and abuse everybody. He reminds me very much of a sporting incident that happened in this country. There was a certain owner who had a horse running in a race. It was supposed to be a good thing. It was backed to win, but it got beaten by a head or a neck. The owner was grumbling at everybody. The trainer was heard to remark: "He blames everybody but the horse." The Minister for Agriculture is blaming farmers, shippers and everybody but himself. I say that the blame rests on himself and on himself alone. He told the farmers that they should keep their cattle off the market for a bit. That was the story last year when the crux was about the stall-fed cattle. He then said that we had them all cleared off. Yes, because they were cleared out of grass. I say that it is idle to tell the farmers to keep their cattle off the market. In many cases they have to put them on the market in order to raise money to meet their ordinary expenses. That is the situation that has arisen in connection with the whole problem.

I hope that I have made my point clear to the Front Bench. I would ask them, if they cannot settle the economic war, to try and have a trade agreement with Britain and get the highest quota possible for our cattle. According to what we read in the newspapers there is supposed to be goodwill on both sides: that the door is open, that it was never closed and so on. I say to the Government: "Leave the land annuities out of it and seek for a trade agreement; mind you we are entitled to it." That will solve the problem and it is the only way to solve it. We have had a lot of talk about unemployment, the poverty in the towns and so on. There is poverty in the country and the people are leaving the rural areas for the towns because of the hardships to be endured in connection with farming at the present time. The farmers are not able to pay wages. It is all very well for Deputy Corry to talk about a standard rate of wages for agricultural labourers. I have a great regard for these men. I find them honest good workers. I try to pay them as much as I can afford, probably more than anybody else in the district, but that is not enough. The Minister for Finance spoke about unemployment to-night, and gave the figure of £175 as the cost of employing a man.

Mr. MacEntee

On public works.

Mr. Curran

What is agriculture? Is the man who is engaged at agriculture not to get a decent wage at all? Why not apply that argument to agriculture, and see how it works out? We offered to submit a statement of facts and figures to the President in connection with the farming industry at the present time but he refused to meet us. It is idle to talk about a man at £175 on public works. The agricultural labourer is the greatest asset we have in the country. That unfortunate man has no eight hour day and no six day week. His conditions of employment may be somewhat different if he is employed on farms convenient to towns or cities. The branch of agriculture that Deputy Corry spoke about—the marketing of milk in towns—is the only branch that is paying at the present time. Unfortunately all farmers are not in that position. Only a small percentage of them can avail of the advantages to be derived from close proximity to towns and cities.

I would appeal to the Government to look into the situation. The position is serious, and it is not helping matters to be sending out the bailiffs in the way that they are being sent out at the present time. I would appeal to the Government to take a reasonable view of things. I say again that the law, in so far as it affects the collection of the annuities at the present time, is unjust. In support of that I can quote the statement of the President made more than once as well as the statements of very prominent statesmen throughout the world that the law ought to be just to be obeyed. I feel that if the Government realised the position in which they are putting the agricultural community they would hardly go to such extremes as they are going. We have had statements from the Government Benches about the position of the country, and the position of the towns particularly. There are farmer Deputies in this House who ought to be acquainted with the situation. It is not to-day nor yesterday that the farmers' position has been difficult. It has been gradually getting worse, and yet the Government will not face up to the problem and see what is to be done in connection with it. I have made a suggestion, because I do not believe that this Bill recently introduced or the establishment of a factory to convert our cows into meal or meat will solve our problem. The problem is there. There is a surplus amount of cattle to be dealt with. That can only be dealt with in a way which will remedy the situation for good and all. If the Government and the farmer Deputies would look into the situation they could bring about a remedy for the position; otherwise it cannot be remedied. The problem is there; there is one way of dealing with it, and only one way, in my opinion. It is all very fine to talk about the factories of which we heard here to-night. It is not very pleasant to hear about the conditions of employment which have been spoken of from the Labour Benches, and that is not going to solve the problem. If that is the industrial development that is going to take place in this country— child labour and female labour——

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not like to interrupt the Deputy, but some clarification seems to be called for. There was a motion on the Paper in the name of Deputy Norton and others, which was disposed of to-day. The debate on that motion may not be resumed. It extended over a long period. There are on the Order Paper four motions which are somewhat related. It is not quite clear to the Chair which of those motions the Deputy has been dealing with so far— the justice or injustice of collecting annuities during the economic war, the burden of rates, the agricultural policy or the problem, to which least reference has been made, namely, the securing of a larger quota for the export of cattle to Great Britain.

Mr. Curran

I am discussing No. 22.

An Ceann Comhairle

I was wondering whether the Opposition proposed to take the four motions in globo.

Mr. Dillon

That was not the intention.

Mr. Curran

Anybody will realise that in discussing that particular motion you have got to refer to many things. I am sorry to transgress the rules of the House——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair realises that the motions are interrelated.

Mr. Curran

Very well. I am not going to keep the House much longer, in any case. I put up the position of the farmers to the Executive Council and to the Fianna Fáil Party. Most of them, I am sure, must know the condition of farming. They have farmer friends and farmer supporters as well as I have, and it is up to them to see the farmers of this country get a fair and square deal in connection with the whole agricultural policy of the Government. I hold that they are not getting it at the present time owing to the fact that their principal asset, the cattle industry of the country, is ruined. The Party opposite cannot deny that, because it has been spoken of at their own meetings. It has been spoken of there, and truthfully so. It cannot be denied that a great injustice has been done to the farming community since the continuance of the economic war, and particularly since the advent of the quota restrictions imposed by Great Britain. Those restrictions have created a very difficult situation, because there is a surplus amount of cattle to be dealt with. Human nature being what it is, we all know that when a person goes into a market to buy any commodity of which there is a surplus he will avail of that surplus in order to get the commodity at as cheap a price as possible. That has been admitted by the Minister himself, or at least it has been admitted by his representative. It is not fair, on the face of his own admission that the farming community has been robbed, that the Government should try to rob them again now by collecting the land annuities which they have already paid.

Deputies O'Reilly and Dillon rose.

An Ceann Comhairle

The motion will be seconded.

Mr. Dillon

I do not wish unduly to stand in Deputy O'Reilly's way, but I think the House would prefer to have the motion seconded in the usual way. The motion on the Paper raises, in my view, the whole question of the Government's apparent intention to destroy the cattle industry. Deputy Curran in introducing this motion said that no one on that bench could deny that the industry has been ruined because some of their own supporters have complained at their own meetings of the ruin wrought in that industry. Deputy Curran has apparently forgotten that one of their own colleagues went down the country and boasted before the people that what it took our fathers a hundred years to build up, thank God it would only take a hundred days to tear down. Senator Connolly took his cue from the President, who thanked God that the British market was gone. He thanked God that the day had come when the Irish people would be deprived of the means of disposing of that very surplus to which Deputy Curran has referred—a surplus which, if properly used, could be made the foundation upon which a prosperity could be built up in this country which would provide enough for everybody. I remember the time when the President and his colleagues were stumping this country and telling us we were all West Britons with our eyes centred on England. We were asked why we did not look abroad, where the President said there were ample alternative markets which would consume all the produce we had to sell in the British market. What has become of the alternative markets? They vanished away. They are one of the promises which Deputy Dowdall described as Fianna Fáil statements. They were made with the purpose of deluding our people into supporting the existing Government. Having got the support which those promises were made to get, the promises were forgotten and the truth was revealed. What have the alternative markets been reduced to? They have been reduced to the German buyer, Deputy Briscoe's protégé in the Dublin cattle market, who purchases our cattle for 18/- and 16/- per cwt. and carts them away.

We are meant to bow down and thank him for coming here and taking them, and we are meant to pay him £300 a week in bounties for carting cattle out of this country at a price which would disgrace a knacker, much less a cattle dealer. I have no gratitude to any man who comes here and purchases our Irish cattle at 12/- or 14/- per cwt. holding up the produce of the cattle industry of this country to the public odium of the world. They are not being bought; they are being carted away for the price of their skins, and the man who is doing it is being paid the money of the Irish taxpayer to the tune of £300 a week in bounties to do it. God knows I should hate to see good food destroyed, but I would sooner see it destroyed than see it used as a medium for degrading the cattle industry of this country before the whole world, and for suggesting to the world that our cattle are worth no more than 12/- or 14/- a cwt.

Mr. MacEntee

It was 16/- or 18/- two sentences ago.

Mr. Brennan

Yes, and it is down to 10/-.

Mr. MacEntee

I know that before the speech is over it will be down to 8/-.

Mr. Brennan

If you visit the cattle market, you will know.

Mr. Dillon

The Minister for Finance will have ample opportunity of trying to prop up the crazy structure of his colleague, the Minister for Agriculture. He had better invoke the President and the Minister for Local Government too. He will want them all, and he can throw Deputy Corry and Deputy Donnelly into the fray then, but he still will not carry much conviction. In the meantime, I would suggest to the Minister that out of deference to the Chair he should hold his tongue. The German buyer! That is one of the alternative markets provided. The German buyer having at last brought the blush of shame to the brazen cheek of the Minister for Agriculture, he produces his second alternative market.

In the Slaughter of Cattle Act, with the prudent assistance of those distinguished agriculturists, Deputies Davin and Norton, who would not know one end of a cow from another, they found a brilliant scheme for disposing of the surplus cattle in this country to the poor and needy. Nobody on any side in this House but would be glad to see any man who he knew was a hungry man, getting what would stand between him and destitution, but it is a humiliation and a degradation to any one who lives amongst the people, and who respects them as neighbours, to see able bodied men, 20 and 21 years of age, coming in for the lump of beef just as the few unfaithful came 70 or 80 years ago to the souper kitchens. It is a contemptible thing to see men who had some dignity, some sense of propriety, and some sense of justifiable pride, having thrust upon them a system which likens them, in the mind of their neighbours, to the patrons of the souper kitchens. I remember Deputy McGovern stating in this House that the policy of Fianna Fáil was to turn this country into a soup kitchen, but that unfortunately they had forgotten the soup. They have taken Deputy McGovern's advice, and have provided neck beef with which to make the broth, and our people are to be brought down by this Government— which is the poor man's friend—to the state where every individual, when he reaches the age of manhood, has to be introduced to the manners and customs of middle nineteenth century paupers. We were told by the Minister for Agriculture that in conferring that boon upon our people, to turn them into patrons of soup kitchens, he is providing another alternative market for our cattle trade.

Mr. Cooney

They are not going to die of starvation under this Government.

Mr. Dillon

Do not be so sure.

Mr. Cooney

That was your Party's policy.

Mr. Dillon

If this Government carries on much further, for those industrious farmers who never asked for doles, who do not want doles, and who do not want anything but liberty to earn a living, that will be the position. There are decent, respectable men in the country who are working hard all day——

Dr. Ryan

And keeping us here.

Mr. Dillon

—who have learned what hunger means since Fianna Fáil came into office.

Dr. Ryan

And they are keeping us here.

Mr. Donnelly

Let the Deputy keep his eye on Galway.

Mr. Dillon

We will keep an eye on Galway and we will keep an eye on the unfortunate farmers some of whom managed to protest at your meetings. I freely, admit you have managed to deceive some of them by spurious blatherskite about the Republic—the Republic you are afraid to declare—that you have managed to blackmail them with the suggestion that if they mention their grievances or protest at the injustice, they are traitors and are playing England's game. I admit that that has been done.

Dr. Ryan

They believe that.

Mr. Dillon

You are cowering here in Dáil Eireann and saying: "Don't hit me with the baby in my arms." I freely admit that you have managed to induce a few people up and down the country to say: "God knows, and the President of the Republic knows, that it is playing England's game to say anything now; we had better put up with it." There are Deputies sitting on the opposite benches who know that the people are genuinely suffering as a result of the present political and economic policy, but whom, if they came out and spoke out their minds publicly, Deputies on the opposite benches would call traitors for doing so. The President knows that the last thing anyone in this country wants is to have that taunt hurled at him. There are many simple men up and down the country who imagine when warriors like Deputy Corry or some of the other "Eloquent Dempseys" on their benches thump the tubs and talk about Caithlin Ní Houlihan, that they can see some from of treachery, because President de Valera's supporters exposed the grievances or protested against the wrongs imposed upon them. It is good enough for the country to boast of support got under these terms, but it is not good enough to deceive any intelligent Deputy, least of all the Deputies sitting behind the Ministerial benches.

The President stated that this motion was of no significance. Speaking in Ennis he said:—

"Thank God the British market is gone. If you are suffering hardship why not grow wheat, or beet, or cut peat and make your fortune."

Even for the sake of argument, if the proposition be admitted by intelligent and reasonable farmers of growing wheat at a profit of 27/6, and beet at 30/-, take a lesson from Germany and Italy, two countries that the President professes to watch with the greatest anxiety in their political gyrations. The President mentioned a guaranteed price of 27/6 for wheat. The guaranteed price of Mr. Hitler is nearly 50/-. The guaranteed price paid by the French Government is even greater, while the guaranteed price provided by the Italian Government is at least as great. Let us suppose that the Government really means and believes that wheat can be made a substitute here for the cattle trade. I do not believe it. I believe that is pure "eye-wash," and fraud, but for the sake of argument let us examine the proposition on the merits. Why must agricultural labourers be hired in this country at rates which make it possible to produce wheat at 27/6, when the Minister for Industry and Commerce is crying out for monopolies for manufacturers in Dublin, Cork, Limerick and elsewhere, in order to secure that they get a price from the consumer by which they can pay fat dividends and big wages to the operatives. If the operatives in factories in Dublin are entitled to fair wages—and I think they are— why are not the operatives in every factory up and down the country represented by small farmers, entitled to fair wages? Why is the Minister for Industry and Commerce clamouring for tariffs, monopolies, and Control of Manufactures Acts, in order to secure fat profits and big wages for industrial operatives, while we have a dummy sitting there as Minister for Agriculture, who is afraid to say a word on their behalf?

Dr. Ryan

The Deputy will never be accused of being a dummy.

Mr. Dillon

I may not. Let us not lose our tempers with one another, because we may start saying nasty things.

Mr. MacEntee

Will the Deputy say which motion he is discussing?

Mr. Dillon

That is an old gag, and it will not work on me. I am discussing this motion:

That the Dáil condemns the Executive Council for its neglect to secure a quota for the export of cattle to Great Britain adequate to the needs of our agricultural industry.

Mr. MacEntee

I thought he was talking about industrial monopolies.

The President

Might I make a suggestion? It is obviously quite impossible to discuss one of these motions without somehow referring to the other. I was asked to-day whether we could not give public time for clearing away some of these motions on the paper and I wonder could we get agreement from the Opposition to take one of these motions, make it a sort of central motion and dispose, by the vote on it, of three or four others which are practically of the same type. We would be prepared to give public time and we will have some more public time available on account of the longer time I have given for the preparation of amendments to the Citizenship Bill.

Mr. MacDermot

Might I ask to which motion the President refers, because No. 23, which has to do with rates, is really vastly different from No. 22?

Dr. Ryan

Deputy Curran managed to discuss that motion.

Mr. MacDermot

I think, nevertheless, it is a motion well worthy of separate discussion.

Dr. Ryan

It was dealt with twice in the last session.

Mr. MacDermot

No. 24 is a motion proposed, not by the Opposition, but by Independent members.

The President

There is a motion on the paper in the name of the Deputy with regard to economising time in the House and I think he ought not to be averse to the suggestion.

Mr. Dillon

I would suggest that the President should leave the matter over until the end of this evening's session.

The President

The only thing is that it would put in order a wider discussion than is in order.

Mr. Dillon

I venture to reassure the President that, within the terms of the motion on the Order Paper, I shall travel quite as widely as may be necessary. I was explaining to the Minister for Finance that we called on the President to deal with quota questions and I called in evidence the fact that the President, speaking at Ennis, thanked God that the British market was gone. I called in evidence the fact that the Minister for Lands, Senator Connolly—I have forgotten what he is now: he was Minister for Lands and Fisheries and he is now Minister for some other office—proclaimed that he rejoiced that he could tear down in 100 days what took 100 years to build. I am now in the process of examining the justification made by the President and his colleague for these monstrous statements and explaining to the House the pudden-headed reasoning which leads these men into the catastrophe into which they are at present marching cheerfully to the strains of Caithlin Ní Houlihan's funeral march. I was dealing with the question of wheat and I was reminding the House that where we have a loquacious and vigorous Minister for Industry and Commerce clamouring for every kind of restriction on trade in order to secure fat profits for entrepreneurs, many of whom, as Deputy McGilligan said, have not names which appear in the Annals of the Four Masters, and for their employees, we have a dummy sitting there who is driven from post to pillar, flapping his wings in dismal dismay in the Department of Agriculture; and, when the storm gets too violent, sending the Secretary of his Department out to contradict 90 per cent. of what he said the day before and, in fact, to make the best case he can to cover the confusion into which the unhappy Minister has got himself.

What I want to say is that if this country can afford the monopolies and the protective tariffs and all the rest of them, it surely can afford to provide a price for agricultural produce which is being thrust upon the agricultural community by the Government itself such as will enable farmers to pay a decent wage and to make a fair profit. We are told that it is perfectly simple to substitute wheat for cattle. It makes one almost despair that it should be necessary to deal with a proposition of that kind in the presence of a man who masquerades as Minister for Agriculture, or perhaps I should say, is Minister for Agriculture, but who masquerades as a competent Minister for Agriculture. He knows perfectly well that if any farmer intends to grow wheat permanently, he must grow it in rotation with other crops. He knows also perfectly well that wheat is a greedy crop and he knows that in middle Europe, when countries like YugoSlavia and Czecho-Slovakia found that they had no market such as we had in which to dispose of their agricultural produce, they were largely driven back on subsistence farming, and when they began to grow wheat on land that was rich when they began the operation, they got yields from their land very similar to the yields we can get from our land here at the present time. They were getting yields of 8 to 10 barrels of wheat to the statute acre and after the subsistence farming had gone on for a certain time, unaccompanied by a live stock industry to provide the manure wherewith to enrich the soil, the yield of this same land fell to 2 barrels and now it is as much as they can do to get any wheat out of the land at all. The reason for that is that they have gone on taking crops out of the land and have not put back the animal manure which we have been putting into the land for generations in this country.

It is perfectly true that at the present time on much of the rich land of the country, 8 to 10, and more than 10 barrels of wheat can be got out of the statute acre, but if we keep it up, if we continue at it, and at the same time pursue the policy which the President advocates and which Senator Connolly advocates, we shall be reduced to the same level of subsistence farming that obtains in middle Europe to-day. That is one of the difficulties in this problem but there is another difficulty. Even the Minister for Agriculture knows this, and he does not know much. Even he knows that you cannot grow wheat on the same land year after year. You must have some other crop to put in between in order to make the rotation that will induce the land to yield. If we have wheat and roots and another cereal crop and grass—to take one possible rotation—who is going to eat the three intermediate crops? How are we going to dispose of them? Will we bury them? Will we burn them? And if we do not, what will we do with them? If we have a small farmer who grows an acre of wheat and subsequently grows an acre of turnips, is that farmer to eat the acre of turnips and if he does not, what is he to do with them?

Mr. Cooney

Give them to the Blue Shirts.

Mr. Dillon

The helpful Deputy from North Dublin intervenes with an intelligent and pertinent observation. I suggest to the Deputy that he should confine himself to matters with which he is more familiar. The Deputy, I should imagine, is rather more familiar with Drumcondra and that neighbourhood. I shall not suggest to the Deputy that he should grow turnips in Drumcondra. In the meantime, I would suggest that he should keep his mouth shut or go to the Library or somewhere else where he is more at home.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy knows more about farming than the Deputy opposite does.

Mr. Dillon

Probably it is the kind of farming that prospers in the Minister's brain—the farming that is born in Capel Street and flourishes on the Quays—but, unfortunately, the farming on which our people live is not of that class. That is the mistake into which the Minister and his colleagues are fallen. They are trying to farm from Upper Merrion Street and the unfortunate creatures who are farmers are trying to farm on the land of the country.

Mr. Cooney

Born in Mayo and flourishing in Donegal.

Mr. Dillon

Who is going to eat the produce——

Dr. Ryan

The Blue Shirts.

Mr. Dillon

—of the three intervening seasons? We cannot expect from the Minister, judging from his imbecile interjections, any constructive suggestions. We cannot even expect him to apply his mind to it for it would break if he attempted it, but the fact is that there is no solution of that question. Unless you have a live-stock industry side by side with a wheat growing economy, the thing becomes utterly impossible and cannot be carried on for two good reasons (1) the land will become impoverished and (2) the by-products of wheat production will be unconsumable.

Now we come to beet—beet at 30/- a ton, less freight from the farm to the factory. That is the other substitute market. Will the Minister for Agriculture have the barefaced audacity to suggest that any farmer can pay a labourer a living wage and produce sugar-beet at 30/- a ton, less freight to the factory, plus whatever sugar-beet pulp he can get back? The Minister knows as well as I do that a living wage cannot be paid to the farm labourer and make a profit on that basis. Bear in mind that part of the price the farmer is going to get for his beet is the sugar pulp returned— returned by the Minister for Agriculture who sits in a Cabinet with a President who thanks God that the market in which we disposed of our cattle is gone; who sits in a Cabinet with another Minister who thanks God that we destroyed in 100 days what it took 100 years to build up. And this Minister is going to dump two or three cwts. of sugar-beet pulp on every farmer's doorstep. What is he to do with it? Eat it or make porridge of it? Is it any wonder the poor man is a dummy? The only astonishing thing is how he opens his mouth, even in the backwoods of South Kerry. I do not blame him for going to the Dingle Peninsula, because he will not find a safe spot to go out in at the present juncture, considering the state of mind the farmers of this country have been reduced to. Having bestowed his benison of three or four cwt. of sugar pulp on the farmer's doorstep, leaving the farmer to consult President de Valera and Senator Connolly as to what he is to do with it, the Minister stumps out feeling that he has discharged his duty to the farming community.

Can any farmer hire labourers to cultivate and save beet and pay them a living wage and get 30/- a ton for his beet less freight? It cannot be done, and the Minister knows it. The only possible way of making the thing pay for itself is to hire slave labour, and that is what is being done in the country by people who were farmers, but who have been reduced by the Government's policy to a condition in which they are little better than slaves themselves. That would be bad enough if it were an economic proposition. It would be a heartless thing to make it an economic proposition at that cost. But it is not an economic proposition. It is going to cost, I think, £1,200,000 in direct and indirect subsidies. So that with that expenditure of money and committed to the principle that the public money ought to be spent in the country, it is spent in such a fashion, at the instance of the Minister for Agriculture, that the people for whose welfare he is responsible are reduced to slavery and destitution, while his colleague, the Minister for Industry and Commerce, manages to secure a state of affairs for the industrialists and their employees which is comparative luxury.

If this country is going to prosper it can only prosper on the foundation of the cattle trade. Every other branch of agriculture is linked up with the cattle trade. The milk industry, the butter industry, the preservation of the fertility of our soil, the consumption of our rotational crops, all lead to the same fountain head, and that is the cattle industry. We condemn the Government for not attempting to secure for that industry a quota which will make it possible for the people to carry it on. We do so because we are convinced that if the President put his mind to it in the morning he could get a quota to make it possible to carry on that trade profitably and satisfactorily for the whole community.

Mr. Donnelly

What is the guarantee that he could get it?

Mr. Dillon

The guarantee that he will not get it is that the President, who is no fool and never was a fool——

Dr. Ryan

He has to listen to a fool.

Mr. Dillon

Neither was Machiavelli nor Satan. Not that I would dream of likening the President to the latter. I have on one occasion likened him to Machiavelli. The President, speaking recently at the Ard-Fheis, which was rather a stormy gathering, broke into one of his purple passages when the water was getting particularly stormy and we had an oration about the Republic. I have no doubt that that lock of black hair was shaken into his eye and that he thumped the table and spoke of John Bull. And then he said:

"Do you want a trade agreement whereunder we will take from the British manufactured goods in exchange for which they will take more of our agricultural goods?"

and some poor amadán in the back benches, knowing what was expected, said "No." Is not that true? The Deputy will find very shortly, when it becomes manifest to the people that if the president wanted to make a settlement in the morning he could make it, that the President will say: "What about my mandate from the Ard-Fheis? Did I not ask them there assembled from the whole country— the greatest Ard-Fheis that railway tickets could bring to Dublin; we whipped them up from every corner of the country—did they want to make a trade agreement, and the voice of Erin spoke from the body of the hall and said `No.' "

Mr. S. Jordan

United they said it.

Mr. Dillon

Deputy Jordan has fallen into the trap. He does not want to make a trade agreement. He thinks you ought not to make a trade agreement.

Mr. Jordan

Do not mind what Deputy Jordan said.

Mr. Dillon

What does Deputy Jordan think? Does he think the President ought to make a trade agreement, or does he think he ought not?

Mr. Jordan

I will tell you one thing he is sure of, and that is that the Ard-Fheis was united, not like your Ard-Fheis which is divided. You do not know the colour of your shirt now.

Mr. Dillon

The Deputy is clear on this—that the Ard-Fheis was united, but he does not quite know what they were united about. I will tell him. They were united on the doctrine of Deputy Donnelly: "We have been trailing after de Valera for the last ten years and with the help of God we will trail after him to the end." You are perfectly right. There is not sufficient independence of thought in the whole bunch to make it safe for you to go out in the rain alone for one hour. If you went out alone you would not last for one week. My advice to you is: Stick to him as closely as you possibly can, because if he ever deserts you, you will be ditched by the people in three weeks.

Dr. Ryan

We will send for O'Duffy.

Mr. Dillon

No two Deputies in the Fianna Fáil Party are more perspicacious than Deputy Donnelly and Deputy Jordan. You do not know what you are united about; but with your hand on the tail of de Valera's coat you are safe from John Bull and every possible danger. That is what you are fit for. It would be dangerous for the country and dangerous to yourselves to let you out alone.

Mr. Jordan

It would be more dangerous for the country if you came over here.

Mr. Dillon

I think I am entitled to rejoin briskly to the interruptions I have been subjected to since I addressed the House. I trust, Sir, I did not go further than your indulgence will permit. I point out again to the House that the ultimate prosperity of this country, industrially and agriculturally, depends upon the live-stock industry. I make no disguise of it that if I had an ideal to set before me in the management of this country I would like to see every man and woman in it secured against the possibility of destitution. I would like to see every man and woman in it, from the richest man down to the poorest, get from the community a minimum which would discharge the obligation of the community to protect everyone of its members from the possibility of hunger or destitution.

Mr. Cooney

But the Deputy denies the poor the right to free meat.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is entitled to speak without interruption.

Mr. Dillon

That is the ideal I would set before me. But in setting that before me, I would think with special contempt and loathing of the cheap politician who would try to buy votes with food. I would think with special loathing of the politician pursuing the setting up of social services with no other object in view but the buying of votes. I would convict any politician of that base purpose of setting up social services without first seeing clearly his way not only to set up but to maintain them for all time. I say it is nothing short of a crime against the people to set up social services with the one hand and with the other hand to destroy the means of maintaining those social services over the years.

I would like to make available to our people that cover of social services which would provide for every man and woman in the State an absolute and permanent guarantee against destitution. Having provided that, I would like to leave it to every citizen of the State, man and woman, to go out and by his own initiative to increase his wealth and improve his position if he can. But in having that ideal before me, I would recognise that in order that the effort should have any hope of being realised, I would hasten to augment to the best of my ability the material prosperity of the State to which we all belong.

No member of this Party, and few members of this House would consent to the compromise of one iota of the independence or sovereignty of the Irish nation in order to secure that social service or any other social services. But in the knowledge that we had that sovereignty, as we have had, that we have that independence, as we have had, that we have an absolute right to decide now and for all time what form of Government or Constitution this State will have now and for the future, I would turn my mind to securing for the wealth-producers of this country the best markets that the world can offer them for the sale and realisation of the wealth they are producing. It is manifest to every man and woman in this House that not only the best market but the only market in which the fundamental wealth of this country—the agricultural surplus —can be realised, is the British market. I would go to that market suffering under no inferiority complex and I would point out to them the advantages of linking their economy with ours. I would point out to them the hopelessness of offering to our people any material consideration with a view to inducing them to compromise their rights to sovereignty and independence. I think they have been taught that lesson and no people in the world know better than the British to-day that no material consideration will induce our people to part with any part of their sovereignty, or with any part of their independence.

And that being secured, as it is secured at this moment, I would go and make the case with them that we ought to put an end to whatever financial difficulty separates us. In so far as the land annuities were concerned, if I were in the President's shoes, I would say perfectly squarely to them that without yielding my position I would not ask them to yield theirs. They are just as much entitled to feel strongly that these moneys are due as President de Valera is to take the other view that they are not due. Surely the matter could be argued before a Court of International Justice who could consider the dispute, though the Minister for Finance in one of his flightier moments has said that if the court were set up and found against them they would not pay in any case. Does the Minister remember that speech?

Mr. MacEntee

The Minister for Finance has denied he said it.

Mr. Dillon

It was printed in the Press—was he wrongly reported?

Mr. MacEntee

I never made that statement.

Mr. Dillon

Perhaps the Minister would have it contradicted now in the Press.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy's colleagues point out that things are attributed to them in the Press which they have not said.

Mr. Dillon

I do not remember seeing any letter from the Minister repudiating any report of his speech. Perhaps he was too shy or perhaps, like a certain section of the Press, they might not believe him, and then it might be necessary to withdraw the Government advertising from the Irish Press as well as from the Independent, and that would not be to his advantage.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Perhaps it would be better to go on now with the motion.

Mr. Dillon

I have suggested to the President that the time has come to secure to our people a market for the disposal of their goods. I have suggested to him that he could do that in the morning, if he wanted to do it. If he could not arrive at an agreement with the British Government on the land annuities, he could make a bargain with them on the basis of compromise. If he had done that two years ago, he would have saved the cost of the compromise up to now. The President could make a trade agreement with Great Britain, an agreement that would be to the advantage of our people. It is obviously an advantage to Great Britain to have food supplies close at hand when she wants them. But the difference between the President's supporters and the rest of the country is that the country knows how to use a negotiating weapon but the President's supporters look upon it as a bludgeon with which to split the skull of the other party to the bargain, and when they cannot do that they bring it home and spend the rest of their time trying to dash out their own brains. It is a good negotiating point and nobody knows that better than the President. Nobody is better aware than the President of the case that could be made and the agreement that could be got if he wanted to get it. But I charge the President here and now that he does not want to settle the economic war. I charge him that he does not want to make any trade agreement with Great Britain. I charge him that he wants to keep boiling in this country a war spirit and a war hysteria in order to distract the minds of the people from the things that matter. I do not know if the President read recently the memoirs of an acquaintance of his —Mr. David Lloyd George. He was referring to General Nivelle and he described how that General was planning and organising calmly in February, but he says that, within 12 months, he was a wild dram-drinker from the puncheon of self-confidence. I believe that the President started out with some highfalutin schemes and plans for the reorganisation of the whole country. I believe that a great many of his supporters started out on the same lines. But he has now become a frantic dram-drinker from the puncheon of war. Whenever anybody dares to raise his voice to warn him regarding the path he is travelling and the inevitable catastrophe that awaits the policy he is pursuing, the war-cry is raised. The word "traitor" is bandied about and the suggestion is drummed into the ears of the people that the country is fighting for its existence. The Minister for Justice is sent down to Ballina to tell the people there that they are groaning under the weight of the chains of British oppression as represented by the retention of our ports at Cobh and Berehaven. The Minister for Agriculture is quite right. That stuff does go down with our people.

Dr. Ryan

That is what is galling you.

Mr. Dillon

I admit that it is worrying me. You have done more to demoralise and degrade our people within the last couple of years than was done in seven centuries by the British.

Mr. MacEntee

Does the Deputy not think that it is a very serious thing that these ports should be occupied by the British.

Mr. Dillon

I think that it is a damn sight more serious thing, since you think it is such a dreadful business, that there is not a man amongst you with guts and courage enough to sit down with the British and try to make some arrangement to get them out of the ports. If you were worth the confidence that was placed in you by the people and if you were fit for your jobs, you would be quite fit to do that.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy has not answered the question whether he thinks it desirable that the British should be there or not.

Mr. Dillon

It would be a matter of complete indifference to me if the whole British Fleet were assembled in the Liffey, provided the sovereign independence and liberties of our people were secure.

Mr. MacEntee

Are the two things compatible?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The question does not arise on this motion.

Mr. Dillon

If the Minister desires a discussion on the existing situation and the arrangement for the accommodation of the British Fleet at Irish ports, I shall be glad to discuss the question with him at length. But I shall ask him, in preparation for that debate, to set out the material or spiritual injuries that that arrangement is inflicting on our people. I shall consider these injuries carefully, at length and with an open mind.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The question does not arise on this motion.

Mr. Dillon

At present, I am discussing, or trying to discuss, in face of the Minister's disorderly interruptions, the question of securing a fair share of the cattle market in Great Britain for the farmers of this country. I have pointed out to the Minister that at present every branch of agriculture is dependent, directly or indirectly, on the cattle trade. I do not know if Deputies realise the full measure of the catastrophe this Minister's policy is bringing on the cattle trade. I do not know if the Deputies realise that, while the British Government has put a quota on store cattle and a quota on fat cattle, that Government has been mighty careful not to put a quota on young cows. Therefore, we have a situation at present arising out of that Minister's policy where, at one end, the foundation stock of the cattle industry is being carried over to England and, at the other end, the calves and the young cattle are being made worthless and are being wiped out. At the present moment, our cows are going abroad—our best cows. Why are they going abroad? Because the large farmer in Roscommon or Mayo has got to pay his bills or he cannot get his Christmas goods. He has got to pay his annuity or President de Valera's bailiff will be on his doorstep. He has got to pay his rates or the Vice-President's bailiff will be on his doorstep. He has, say, six bullocks, a couple of calves and two good cows. He goes out into his field and looks at his stock. He says: "I had these six cattle at this fair, that fair and the other fair, and I was not asked where I was going. The calves are not worth selling. There is one animal there I can get a buyer for, one animal I can get a price for, and I have got to get money." He takes his best cow to the fair. Deputies are aware that, at the present time, there is no difficulty in getting £15 or £16 for a good, young cow. Is there any other beast for which you can get anything like that price at present? That individual who masquerades as a competent Minister for Agriculture has so arranged matters that, at both ends, the foundation stock of our cattle industry is being wiped out. What is being left is not a smaller quantity of good cattle, but the leavings of the entire cattle population of this country. In two or three years, if the present insanity continues, we shall find that our cattle will have gone back to the standard that obtained in this country in 1870, before there was any attempt at all to improve the stock. It took us many years—one might say it took us generations—to build up the quality of our Irish cattle. If the Minister for Agriculture, by his incompetence, is going to allow that work to be destroyed and leave us—the people who have got to make our living out of the country no matter what happens; we have got to stay on the ship whether it sinks or floats—to clear up the mess he will leave after him.——

Dr. Ryan

You will never get the chance.

Mr. Dillon

God help the country if somebody does not get the chance to clear up your mess.

Dr. Ryan

I hope you will not.

Mr. Dillon

If I could remember the name of the man who had the task of clearing out the Augean stables I should apply it to the present circumstances. It is a job not for a Hercules but for a super-Hercules. The tragedy is that if we do not get him soon and give him an opportunity to start working, no Hercules will be able for the job.

Mr. Donnelly

You had him and you expelled him.

Mr. Dillon

Whatever name he goes under, he will want to be a Hercules in spirit to do the job the Minister for Agriculture will leave after him. Perhaps it is just as well that, in discussing matters of this character, from time to time, a note of hilarity should be introduced, because the danger of these discussions, which affect the every-day lives of those of us who live in the country, is that we lose our tempers about them and I do not suppose that much good is done by that. Let it not be imagined, however, that I approach this matter in a spirit of levity, because I do not. I honestly believe that a situation has developed in this country, at the present time, which is going to be desperately difficult to remedy. It is going to destroy the foundations of prosperity in the country and to make it impossible to carry on the social services or the industries of the country.

There have been in the last ten years some useful and prosperous industries all over the country. They depend for their prosperity upon the capacity of the people to buy the goods produced. I am a farmer, and I am a shopkeeper, and I know what I am talking about. I say that the consumption of goods largely of Irish manufacture is steadily going down amongst the agricultural community— the small farmers—because they cannot afford to pay for the goods. I know you can keep them going for a certain time, but every responsible man knows that the longer the wastage continues the greater will be the catastrophe in the end. We ask the Government to realise what is the inevitable result of their present course of conduct. We ask them to realise that the cattle industry as a whole is the lynch-pin of commerce, and that every other branch is interlocked with it, and that if you destroy the cattle industry you are throwing the whole economy of this country out of gear, with the result that the whole structure will come toppling down about your ears.

We are not, as I pointed out before, a colony. We are an independent, sovereign nation. We cannot resort to the expedient New foundland resorted to. When they brought down their prosperity about their ears they simply handed it over to the British Government and said, "Clear up the mess." We cannot do that. We have to clear up our own mess. People may say that this is all political window dressing. I want to repeat that I did, with the full approval of my colleagues, what no member of the Oireachtas did since it was founded; I went with my hat in my hand to the head of the Government and I asked him to receive myself and my colleagues, and he would not even discuss the question with us. I asked him to meet us and let us tell him, in the privacy of his own office, the reasons why we felt it urgent to alter the system of the allocation of licences. We asked him to discuss with us the possibility of making a trade agreement, even though the economic war went on at the same time, about such commodities as the economic war did not affect, and we asked him, if he thought we were coming here in a panicky spirit, to open the courts to these people and let them go into the courts and let the courts examine and judge individual cases and inform him whether these people were really being driven to destitution. There was implied in that urgent desire, as clear as day on the part of myself and my colleagues, the offer to the Government of every cooperation we could give in order to avert immediate catastrophe. And simply because the Government thought it was better political tactics, contemptuously to reject that approach, and to present the picture before the country that we came with our hats in our hands it was turned down. Perhaps I was a fool to make that request, but I believe that I would be lacking in my duty if I did not make it. It was not, I suppose, for me or my colleagues to make it. But we asked because we believe that the Government's present policy is driving our people not only into destitution but into despair. There is no use closing our eyes to things. If men are driven to despair they will do things that they ought not to do. If men are driven to despair no counsel of prudence will stay their hands.

I make my position quite clear. I am of opinion that no annuitant or ratepayer who has the money to pay should refuse to pay his rate or annuities. I feel that is not a popular thing to say, but I have said it in the country and I am not afraid to say it here to-day. I think it is unjust that he should be placed under a statutory obligation to do that. But considering, and weighing, the evils of not paying, against the benefits, I am convinced that the evils of breaking the law so long as you are able to comply with it far outweigh the benefits, and I am convinced that anybody who has the money ought to pay. But let me say this, and I am prepared to say it: If the Government attempts under any Land Act, or any other Act, to go to the house of a tenant purchaser in this country who is genuinely unable to pay, and in the name of the law attempts to break up his family and exact payment the result of which may throw him and his family into the poorhouse, I say that man would be a fool if he did not stand upon his threshold and defend his home.

Dr. Ryan

Save yourself! Face both ways.

Mr. Dillon

My words will appear in the official transcript of this Debate and I shall repeat them outside anywhere. It is to avert that situation in which you are going to destroy a man's living and practically wipe out his home that we are moving this resolution. It is to avert the possibility of that situation developing that we went hat in hand to Government Buildings to get a hearing. It is to avert a situation like that that we have opened up this discussion. We do not want to make political capital out of it. If we can help you to get a better quota or to make any settlement with the British Government we are quite ready to do so, and to help you to get that settlement. It is because it is driven into our minds that you do not want to settle and that you are either ignorant or indifferent to the sufferings of the people that we open up these things here and endeavoured to open them up with the President. It is in the face of that great emergency that I appeal, not only to the Government but to Deputies opposite. If they have not the courage to come and vote with us in the Lobby and demonstrate in that way, let them tell the Government that they know that there is hunger and destitution in many houses in the country where there never was such before. Let them tell the Ministers to their faces that there are small farmers, and weak families, who are hungry, and that hard-working men cannot get the wherewithal to buy the necessaries of life while they have to stand at their doors and see their neighbours walking home with four, five and six pounds of beef in their hands. But because these farmers are hard-working men, and want to work, they are thrown aside and must submit to have their livelihood wiped out by the Minister for Agriculture. They must submit to see everything they require raised in price by his colleague the Minister for Industry and Commerce and to see their rights and their political philosophy and their belief in patriotism shaken, abused, and bedevilled by President de Valera. Freedom is abolished politically, industry is shaken, and there is no one in the country who does not know it as well as I do. Some of you have told the Minister for Agriculture, but you might just as well be telling a feather pillow. Go and tell the man that runs it. Go and tell the man who, at this moment, is virtual dictator of this country.

Dr. Ryan

It is a good job the other dictator failed.

Mr. Dillon

Jeers are not going to save this, nor are the jokes of Deputy Corry going to affect this issue. They may be pertinent on another occasion but not on this. Go and tell the Government what you yourselves know. Tell the President that the case we make here is a fair case and a just case, and if you were doing your duty by your own constituents you would join with us in pressing the case we are making upon him. We are ready to give any help we can to avoid disaster in this country and to save not only the prosperity but the very fabric of the State itself. We are doing all we can to try to open the eyes of the Government at the present moment to the danger of driving people to despair and violence which can result in nothing but the undoing of themselves and of the State as well.

Nobody recognises that more than I, and it is because I know the mind of these people, because I have lived and been brought up amongst them and realise the old resolute Land League spirit that is in them, and because I realise what a desperate thing it would be to start that thing up again and to stir up another land war, that I appealed to the President.

Dr. Ryan

The Deputy did his best to stir it up when the Land Act was passing through this House.

Mr. Dillon

The Minister can go around this country and read my speeches and those of my colleagues and he will see that I warned him when he was starting that infernal Land Act that he was starting a land war. I warned him of the danger of doing it and that if it was once started it was more than he or I could stop.

Dr. Ryan

It will be stopped.

Mr. Dillon

But the thing can be stopped; the evil can be remedied without resorting to the insolent back-chat such as we have had from the Minister for Agriculture. That is the language of a "Buckshot" Forster, and it will not work in this country, and if you tell farmers who are driven half to madness that you will soon stop them, you will damn soon find that you will not succeed. It is that kind of damn-fool blatherskite that is largely responsible for the situation that is developing in this country. Do not try to exasperate the people. They are suffering under terrible stress at the present time, and as a result of their distress they have been driven to do certain things. Possibly, if I were under the same stress, I should do the same things myself. I know that they were wrong, but for heaven's sake do not exasperate them further. Show them that you have some understanding of their trials and difficulties. Do not be jeering at them and threatening them.

Mr. T. Crowley

What country is the Deputy speaking of?

Mr. Dillon

For God's sake, you keep quiet.

Mr. Crowley

What country are you talking of?

Mr. Dillon

Try to do something along the lines that we advocate here to-day, because, if you do not, this country will meet with absolute disaster and collapse. None of us wants it, because, as I said before, all of us have to sink or swim with this ship no matter what may happen. Surely we can find some common ground even if we differ on certain issues. Let us try to find a common ground on the basis of ameliorating the difficulties under which the small farmers of this country are living, and by joining in an assurance to them that their difficulties are understood, that their distress is appreciated, that demands will not be made on them which it is physically impossible for them to meet, that the Government is going to put its back genuinely into the business of finding some way of making the carrying on of the agricultural economy of this country possible, and that they will not stop at one thing or another in the exploration of the whole question but that they will be glad to open negotiations with Great Britain or any other body with a view to securing a wider and better market for our agriculture, which is the ultimate foundation of all the prosperity which this country can ever hope to enjoy.

Mr. Corry

After listening to Deputy Dillon here for over an hour, I can only say that it is no wonder that Eoin O'Duffy threw that baby out of his army.

Mr. Dillon

Perhaps the Deputy will excuse me if I leave now.

Dr. Ryan

Do not be afraid.

Mr. Corry

I can remind the Deputy that his split shirt is a cold job for the winter. Now that Deputy Dillon has made his exit, let us examine this remedy that Deputies Curran and Dillon have found for the farming community. Here it is:

"That the Dáil condemns the Executive Council for its neglect to secure a quota for export of cattle to Great Britain adequate to the needs of our agricultural industry."

I note that all the farmers are leaving the House. I suppose they are all going back to the bullock. Let us examine that remedy side by side with present day conditions of this market which the President is to be condemned for not seeking. I shall not go into any fancy figures at all in order to show what this market is. I shall give you an extract from a sub-leader from yesterday's Daily Mail which tells of the conditions of this great market that we are asked to go over and beg for. It is headed “The Beef Problem,” and here is how it starts:

"The first of the great cattle shows which precede Christmas, that at Norwich, is over; the second follows at Birmingham this week; and the third opens at Edinburgh next week. Though these displays all prove that the quality of British cattle is higher than ever, and though a hopeful spirit is abroad among farmers as the result of our present national policy of protection and subsidies, the position of the livestock industry is still one of no little difficulty.

"The price of beef has fallen so low that the farmer cannot sell his fat stock with any profit, despite the subsidy of 5/- per cwt. which is now being paid by the Government."

That is the market that you are to beg for—the market that the British farmer, himself on the dole, cannot sell his own stock in at any profit despite the subsidy of 5/- a cwt. from the British Government to try to help him dispose of his own stock.

Mr. Holohan

What is the price?

Mr. Corry

About 38/-. The article continues as follows:

"For this state of affairs there are three causes. The first is insufficient restriction of imports. The second is change of fashion, which in many households has brought the abandonment of the big Sunday joint. The third is depression in the heavy industries, whose workers were, thirty years ago, large consumers of beef. The first of these causes can be eliminated at the expiration of the various Trade Agreements into which this country has entered."

That shows, I suppose, that the Canadians and the Australians are going to get an increased market!

"... A tariff of 20 per cent. on Dominion meat and 40 per cent. on foreign meat would give British agriculture fair play."

That is the market that the Executive Council are to be condemned for not looking for—that market in which the English farmer cannot sell his beef at a profit, even though he gets a subsidy of 5/- a cwt. from the British Government; and the increased quota that we are going to get is very fairly outlined here when it says that as soon as their agreements with the other Dominions lapse they are going to see that we are going to be further restricted in our quotas. They are going furthermore to put a tariff of 20 per cent. on that produce. That is the market that we are asked to pay £5,000,000 a year for. That is the market that is going to fatten the farmer, make him pay his rates and annuities and have money for jam. That is the market about which we hear the baby of the Dáil going into high jinks here all night. I cannot call it anything else. He worked himself up into such heat that I was afraid on a few occasions I would have to go over to hold him. Deputy Dillon made some comments on Deputy Cooney's knowledge of agriculture. Well, Deputy Cooney was raised on a farm in South Armagh. Deputy Dillon did his farming in a window box in North Great George's Street. He sowed his wild oats in the King's Inns and he comes here to tell us all about it. That is the market, as I say, that we hear all the noise about. Deputy Dillon came along with his deputation consisting of three Deputies of this House who boasted that they could pay their annuities but would not. That was the deputation that the President was asked to interview, yet Deputy Dillon gets up here with his tongue in his cheek and says that he advised anybody who could pay to pay. Let him give that advice to his own colleagues over there.

Dr. Ryan

Hear, hear.

Mr. Bennett

That is about the twentieth time that the Minister for Agriculture and the Minister for Finance have made statements over which they cannot stand.

Dr. Ryan

It is the second time they made it.

Mr. Bennett

And it is the second time the Minister for Agriculture made it. When I get a chance I shall reply to it.

Dr. Ryan

You should be more careful of what you say.

Mr. MacEntee

You should deal with the Cork Examiner.

Mr. Corry

We have lost through the quota system a market for 40,000 stall feeders in Britain at this price. They would consume about 10,000 acres of oats if you fed them well and 10,000 acres of turnips. We hear all this moaning and groaning here on behalf of the cattle industry, but we apparently forget altogether the position that existed in this country about which, of course, Deputy Dillon and Deputy MacDermot will do the Pontius Pilate and wash their hands saying: "I was not here then." The position was that a farmer down in my county found himself with a farm valued at £50, carrying ten cows, and he was deprived of the market on which that valuation was based, whilst another farmer in another part of the country, with a similar farm, had a valuation of £15 to £20. The benevolent Government that was here at that time said: "Yes, close your eyes and compete with the ranches in Australia, Canada, and every other country in that market. You will have to compete with them here at home. If you want to grow wheat, you can grow it even though you have to compete with them." The valuation of land valued as wheat growing land was three or four times the valuation of land that was valued as fit only for rearing cattle. That was the condition of affairs that existed in my constituency for the ten years while Cumman na nGaedheal were in office. Of course all that has been forgotten now.

I can speak here with a mandate from the farmers, because I was elected by the farmers. I was elected by the farmers in the last three months on the most restricted franchise possible. No man was allowed to vote on that franchise except a farmer. There were 33 candidates and I was elected as the farmers' representative at the head of the poll. Therefore, I can claim that I speak on behalf of the farmers, the farmers who, if we are to take the word of Deputies opposite, have been two years looking for a chance to kick us out of office, who have been two years groaning and moaning under the scourge of the Minister for Agriculture. When these farmers were asked to elect representatives, seven representatives from Cork County, they elected seven members of Fianna Fáil, and not one representative of the groaners, the moaners and the howlers.

Mr. Donnelly

That is a bit hard.

Mr. Corry

It is a fact. That was on a franchise under which no man was allowed to vote except a farmer. These farmers have to pay rates and annuities. Still when it came to the poll, they elected a man who is supposed to be coming down with the scourge and the whip on their backs. Deputy Dillon said that the reason we were still supported was that the President was going around with the baby of the republic in his arms. During the last 12 months I had the pleasure of hearing the late leader of the Party opposite speaking one night.

Mr. Donnelly

Which of them?

Mr. Corry

General O'Duffy. He was asked a question as to what was his policy and he said: "An independent republic for the 32 counties." That was his statement given out in public, and lo and behold! I saw all the big old ranchers and the big farmers who were filling the money bags of Cumann na nGaedheal look up with a lonesome expression on their faces and say: "Oh, he has gone wrong too." When these gentlemen, with the 450-acre farms, the moaners and the groaners, were up here a few weeks ago before the Military Tribunal on certain charges, what did they say? "We were badly advised. We will not do it again; if you let us home we will be good boys."

Mr. Holohan

They are a lot better than you, anyway.

Mr. Corry

These are the soldiers of to-day! There is no doubt that when the shirt was split they got a very bad cold.

Mr. Holohan

Talk about the motion and leave the farmers alone.

Mr. Corry

I was elected by the farmers.

Mr. Holohan

And you are a credit to them.

Mr. Finlay

How long are you a farmer? Five or six years. All your ancestors were farmers, anyway. We know all about them.

Mr. Corry

What is the actual position? I am not going to say that the farming community is not in a bad way.

Mr. Holohan

It is time you said it.

Mr. Corry

But this is not the remedy for them. The production of beef for the British market is not the remedy for them.

Mr. O'Leary

What chance are you giving them?

Mr. Corry

To get rid of the bad policy of the Government that you supported during the past ten years. What remedy did that Government propose for the farming community that was then left with this only market, this glorious market? When our farmers were sending their produce to that market its value was reduced by £13,000,000 in five years. The remedy found for that by the last Government was this: pay us the annuities and we will hand them over to Britain, not half of them, but the whole of them. That was the attitude of the then Government in spite of the fact that the value of our farmers' produce sent to that market was reduced in value by £13,000,000 in five years. What bargain did the late President make for the farmers and what reductions did he get for them? When he went over to England to ask not for a reduction by 50 per cent. of the annuities, not for the wiping out of the annuities, but for a moratorium on £250,000, what happened? His request was refused, and he was told to get back and pay. That was the bargain that the people opposite made for the farmers. They were prepared to go over with their hats in their hands, to beg, to cringe, and to crawl, and that was the reply they got from John Bull at a time when the income of the farmers of this country who had been sending their produce to England was reduced by £13,000,000 in five years, and at a time, too, when the Government then in office was asking the farmers to pay not half the annuities, but the full annuities, not half their rates, but their full rates. I remember that at that period I sponsored a motion here seeking a reduction of £1,000,000 a year in rates, and what was the attitude of the Deputies opposite when it came before the House? They walked into the lobby to vote against it, and said that the farmers were so well off that they did not want that money. Now they come along here and talk a lot of tripe.

Mr. Holohan

Why not do it now?

Mr. Corry

We have done it and we are putting the farmers on their feet. What occurred when the present Government came into office, when the economic war started and the farmers had not lost one penny? You had the ranchers and the supporters of those opposite cutting the wages of their labourers by 4/- and 5/- a week and ordering them out in the night to cut trees, telegraph wires and to block the roads. Those who encouraged them to do that remained in bed themselves and when these men were brought before juries composed of farmers afterwards it was not the people who encouraged them to do that but these labourers who were found guilty.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is hardly relevant to the motion.

Mr. Corry

Those opposite ought to be ashamed of what happened.

Mr. O'Leary

I do not think this debate ought to be turned into a circus.

Mr. Corry

You do not like to hear that. We know very well that the position is serious for the farmers, but it would have been far more serious for them if they had the late Government in power, a Government that was not prepared to do anything for the farming community but let them starve. The only true statement that I heard made here to-night from the opposite side was the statement by Deputy Curran that it was not to-day or yesterday that the farmers' position had got bad, that it had been bad for a number of years and was steadily getting worse.

Mr. McGovern

Question.

Mr. Corry

Question Deputy Curran. You will find his statement in the Official Report. That was the position that we found the farming community in when we came to office; we found a bankrupt community dependent on a bad market which had broken like a reed under them.

Mr. O'Leary

What about the alternative markets that we were to get?

Mr. Corry

The farmers have an alternative market at home, and it is there for anybody who is prepared to take off his coat and work. Anyone who is not prepared to work let him get out, and let somebody else take his place. I admit that it is not an easy job to change the system of farming in this country, but this has to be remembered: that we now have a market that can be protected, and that will be protected for our own farmers, just as the British Government are protecting their beef market for their own farmers. I am not going to say that there is any great profit in the prices that we are getting. But if prices are not good enough we can improve them, but not by holding out to the farmer a reed that is of no use to him. It has been of no use to him for the past five years. During the last five years the prices for fat cattle on the British market would not meet the cost of production.

Mr. Holohan

What price are they at home?

Mr. Corry

No farmer could continue to produce them at the prices paid during the last five years. I gave up trying to do it myself, and I think I was a wise man. Five years ago I got rid of my bullocks and kept heifers which paid me. Deputy Dillon made a statement here to-night in which there is no truth whatever: the statement that all our milch cows were going abroad. Deputy Dillon's knowledge on this is not very reliable, because I can tell him that the export of dairy cows and heifers has not increased. On the contrary, our cow population has greatly increased. Deputy Dillon gave us a very moving picture to-night of the poor man who was left with his bullocks and his calves and his pigs— the man who could sell nothing, and in the end had to drive away his only cow. I could almost see the tears running down Deputy Dillon's cheek when he was telling us the woeful tale about the small little farmer who was left with his six bulls and two cows. No doubt, when Deputy Dillon goes to tell one he tells a good one. This kind of a story was rather overdone. There will probably, within the next twelve months, be a step made in the direction of which Deputy Dillon was speaking——

Mr. Brennan

Hear! hear!

Mr. Corry

— getting a minimum wage for the agricultural labourer. When that day comes along the first howl we will hear will be from the people whom Deputy Dillon pretends he is speaking of. You will hear it from Deputy Dillon's ranchers.

Mr. O'Leary

They will have to start with your own friends.

Mr. Corry

We will hear complaints the same as Deputy O'Leary made the other day about the man who walked away and went to the labour exchange to draw unemployment assistance rather than work for the farmer.

Mr. O'Leary

Certainly, and if you want evidence I am prepared to give it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It does not arise.

Mr. Corry

I know the miserable wage that has been paid to agricultural labourers in this country. It is an unfortunate thing.

Mr. O'Leary

He was getting as good a wage as you paid in your time, and I challenge you——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Corry is entitled to make his speech without interruptions. I have said that repeatedly. There are several Deputies consistently interrupting Deputy Corry. Deputy Corry also might be a little bit more relevant and keep to the motion. A minimum agricultural wage does not, to my mind, arise on this motion at all.

Mr. Corry

I would respectfully suggest that an agricultural wage is a bit nearer to the motion than talk of the Republic and all the rest of it which we heard all night from other Deputies. However, I will keep to the motion and absolutely to the motion. A motion has been brought forward here condemning the Executive Council for its neglect to secure a quota for the export of cattle to Great Britain. That is the motion. That motion is absolutely answered in the quotation which I read here to-night—the quotation which states that that British market which all the noise is about, and which the Executive is to be condemned for not looking for, is so bad that to use their own words:

"the price of beef has fallen so low that the farmer cannot sell his fat stock with any profit despite the subsidy of 5/- per cwt. which is now being paid by the Government."

They have a suggested remedy, which I would advise Deputies opposite to study, and to end once and for all trying to dupe the unfortunate farmers, an odd one of whom still pretends to believe in them. They say here that the first cause is insufficient restriction of imports, and their suggested remedy for that is as follows:—

"The first of those causes can be remedied at the expiration of the various trade agreements into which this country has entered."

So much for future fat stock markets in Great Britain. The second suggestion is "a tariff of 20 per cent. on Dominion meat"—this Dominion that Deputy Dillon was so afraid of his life we would get out of. Take for example Canada, where every public meeting is started by singing "God Save the King," with the Union Jack flying over them; even the loyal Canadians are now going to be charged 20 per cent. on their meat coming into Britain, according to yesterday's Daily Mail. Is that the market for the unfortunate farmer of this country? It is no wonder that the old shadow Minister for Agriculture opposite, Deputy Belton, shook his head in despair, and moved himself over here on the middle benches. It is no wonder. I am not at all surprised to see Deputy Belton's removal from the post of shadow Minister for Agriculture, but I am very much afraid that when Deputy Dillon, who appears to have stepped into his shoes, comes along with his policy for agriculture the farmers down the country will not have much thought of it. I do not believe he would even get the vote of the man with the two cows and six bulls. Even that man would not vote for that kind of market for his six bulls. That is the position, and that is the market. I would suggest to Deputies that that is not the kind of market any Executive should be condemned for refusing to purchase at £5,000,000 a year. I do not want to go outside the motion, and I do not want to infringe further on the time of the House. I think I have put the case as fairly and as honestly as possible.

Mr. O'Leary

What case?

Mr. Corry

If there is to be a remedy found for the farming community I believe it is along the lines on which the Minister for Agriculture is working at present.

Mr. O'Leary

He does not know what lines he is working on.

Mr. Corry

Deputy O'Leary is as bad as Deputy Finlay.

Mr. O'Leary

I have paid for my farming experience.

Mr. Corry

You are a very sensible Deputy outside the House, but God help us, you are a hopeless Deputy here.

Mr. O'Leary

The people of North Cork do not think so. They put me at the head of the poll.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

And the Deputies might leave it to the people of Cork.

Mr. Corry

The people of North Cork sent in two Fianna Fáil men and one Dan O'Leary.

Mr. O'Leary

They would not do it now, though.

Mr. Corry

Deputy O'Leary and other Deputies over there are very fond of that argument. The farmers of Cork County were asked, within the last three months, to give a verdict.

Mr. O'Leary

And they gave you your answer.

Mr. Corry

They did, faith. They put me at the head of the poll. They knew what they were doing. I tell you they did. They were asked to elect seven representatives. You cannot say, as it used to be said before, that it was men with no stake in the country that elected us; no man was allowed to vote in that election but a farmer, and lo and behold! when the ballot boxes were opened all the Fianna Fáil men were up on top and the Deputy's Party were down below. They got the order of the boot from the farmers of Cork County within the past three months. If that is not a mandate I do not know what is—not one or two but the whole seven. Facts are stubborn things, but the Deputy must be satisfied with those facts and must be satisfied with the verdict of the people.

Mr. O'Leary

For the time being.

Mr. Corry

The people were asked for their verdict and they gave it. That was within the last three months. The farmers of North Cork had a vote in that, and the members of the Deputy's Party were turned down.

Mr. O'Leary

That is not finding a market for the people.

Mr. Corry

They elected Con Meany and turned down your man. They got the verdict of the people as it came from the ballot boxes. I know that they kicked up the dickens of a row, but as the decision was good enough in 1923 and in 1924 you must take your beating now, and not be kicking up rows.

Mr. O'Leary

We are not as badly off as they are down the country. We have our £30 a month.

An Ceann Comhairle

If the Deputy has nothing better to do but to fight out the Cork County Council elections he had better resume his seat.

Mr. Corry

I was only alluding to that because Deputy O'Leary told us about the mandate he had from the people.

An Ceann Comhairle

The allusion was rather prolonged.

Mr. Corry

I regret it exceedingly. There is undoubtedly a serious problem before any Government, as far as the agricultural community is concerned.

Mr. O'Leary

Is that so?

Mr. Corry

That attitude is not the remedy for it. The remedy lies in the plough, and in endeavouring to change farmers from the system into which they were misled during the past nine or ten years. Farmers will have to change their system. I know that that will cost money and that it cannot be done in a day. The problem of the Government is to remedy that position. They must tackle it. A remedy will have to be found. I am prepared to agree with one statement made by Deputy Dillon, that the position of agricultural workers will have to be placed on a solid foundation; they will have to be put, at least, into a position where they will not be at the absolute mercy of any slave driver who comes along. We will also have to stabilise in some manner our agricultural industry. It may cost money, and may be a hard thing to do, but it can be done. If the problem is faced with courage we will succeed.

Mr. Finlay

The farmers' position must be stabilised first.

Mr. Corry

We will stabilise both.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Finlay should put all his remarks into a regular speech.

Mr. Corry

It is easy to stabilise the farming industry. I suggest that we should take courage and do it. It will not be done by paying £5,000,000 yearly for a market across the Channel. That will not carry us very far.

Mr. Finlay

The present prices will not stabilise any market.

Mr. Corry

I agree that they will not stabilise the farmers' position. There is a way to stabilise the farming industry, and it would be better that Deputies opposite should look for some constructive proposals, and put them up to the Government instead of talking thrash and nonsense, and that on the part of people who never followed farming as a trade, who spent one and a half hours crying and moaning over a trifle of that description.

Mr. Keating

I should like Deputy Corry to tell the House where the Continental markets are to be got for our produce. Belgian buyers will be buying cattle in the Dublin market to-morrow at 16/- per cwt., while men in the export trade to Great Britain are supposed to pay 25/- per cwt., and, in addition, to pay a tariff of 12/- per cwt. The President said that the British market is gone and he thanked God for it. Deputy Corry says that he has a new market. Where is it?

Mr. Brennan

Free meat.

Mr. Keating

We are told that the country is going to be saved by growing wheat. If these Deputies had as much experience of the growing of wheat as I have had, it would not be mentioned. In the eighties, when the seasons were bad, farmers who grew wheat in Wexford, which is the model country in the Free State, from which the Minister for Agriculture comes, could not save it because of the damp climate. It sprouted before it was cut. It was Providence during the last two years that gave us good wheat.

Mr. Corry

Did I not tell the Deputy that God was with us?

Mr. Keating

Wexford is not a ranching county. A farmer there with 50 acres of land generally employs six or seven hands as the system there is one of mixed farming. I know a farmer whose wife and two daughters work 14 hours daily. Yet we are told of the great industries that have been started in backstreets where girls and children are employed at 3/- or 4/- a week.

Mr. T. Kelly

That statement is not true.

Mr. O'Leary

Ask Deputy Norton.

Mr. Kelly

I know as much about it as Deputy Norton.

Mr. Keating

I am only mentioning what the Labour Party stated in this House, and they were not contradicted by the Deputy.

Mr. Kelly

They were.

Mr. Keating

Deputy Corry in his speech stated that the farmers put him at the head of the poll at the elections. They did not know him as well then as they do now. If they got the chance to-day they would not put him at the head of the poll if he told them that they must turn away from cattle raising and produce corn. Can the Deputy say whether mixed farming or corn growing gives most employment?

Mr. O'Leary

They do not know.

Mr. Keating

Anyone who was not reared on a farm will not know.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy O'Leary should give his colleague a fair hearing.

Mr. Keating

I tell the House and Deputy Corry that the sooner the economic war is settled the better for this country. The unfortunate farmers are pressed to pay the full annuities by the British Government, while President de Valera says they are only asked to pay half of them. Between the two Governments the farmers are being crushed out of existence, as they have to pay the annuities one and a half times yearly instead of once. The farmers are told that their salvation lies in growing beet at 30/- a ton. I am sure they have not much experience of beet growing in Cork. When they know as much as I do about beet they will realise that it is not economic at that price. Throwing slurs on the Blue-shirts and things like that will not get us here or there. The sooner the people put their heads together to do what is good for the country the better. It seems to be a great thing to suggest that a man is a West Britisher if he looks to the British market. Where is the alternative market? I am not sure that the majority of the people are aware that on every pig fattened for the factory the producer has to pay 7/- to the Government. The people do not know of that tax. Take the case of an agricultural labourer with a thrifty wife who fattens six pigs yearly. That unfortunate man has to pay a tax of £2 2s. Very little is known about that. But for the action of the Government the country would be well off.

Mr. MacEntee

Will the Deputy tell us why?

Mr. Keating

I move the adjournment of the debate.

Debate adjourned.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until Wednesday, 5th December, 1934.