The Sun. — London, England, 1837-02-14 00:00:00

4nvas entertained by the House whether the Poor-law Amend "nent Act ought to be altogether repealed and set aside.— Hear, hear.) He should strenuously oppose such a motion. erhaps the Hon. Gentleman would say if he was prepared to ring forward his motion in that reasonable shape in which it .could not be objected to, because in that case a Conrnittec n ight be named on Monday without any opposition or debate. Mr. WALTER said the Noble Lord proposed he should take a course which would defeat the object he had in view ; be begged therefore to adhere to the terms of his original motion, and if the Noble Lord had no objection he would bring the question forward on Wednesday night, as an amend ment to the order of the day being read. Lord JOHN RUSSELL had no personal objection to the motion being made on 'Wednesday as proposed by the Hon. Member; but he thought there would be an objection, on the part of the House, to a motion being brought forward on a day on which it was arranged that orders of the clay should base precedence. Mr. WALTER —Then he would say Tuesday—( A laugh) —or any other day the Noble Lcrd would name. He would say Monday or Tuesday.—( A laugh, and cries of " Saturday.") Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he did not know any day, except a notice day, on which it would be convenient for the Hon. Gentleman to bring forward his motion.; but there was a notice of a motion by the Hon. Member for Middlesex , and he imagined that on that day the House could take the two discussions. POOR-LAWS (IRELAND.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I beg to move the order of the day for the House resolving itself into a Committee of the whole House on so much of the King's speech as relates to the establishing of poor-laws in Ireland. The House having gone into Committee, the following pas sages in the King's speech were read by the clerk : " My Lords and Gentlemen, his Majesty has more espe cially commanded us to bring under your notice the state of Ireland, and the wisdom of adopting all such measures as may improve the condition of that par t of the United King.. dom. His Majesty recommends to y our earl y consideration the present constitution of the Municipal Corporations of that country, the collection of tithes, and the difficult but pressing question of establishing some legal provision for the poor, guarded by prudent regulations, and by such precautions against abuse as your experience and knowledge of the subject enable you to suggest. His Majesty commits these great in terests into your hands in the confidence that you will be able to frame laws in accordance with the wishes of his Majesty and the expectation of his people. His Majesty is persuad.ed that, should this hope be fulfilled, you will not only contribute to the welfare of Ireland, but strengthen the Law and Consti tution of these realms by securing their benefits to all classes of his Majesty's subjects." raird JOHN RUSSELL then rose and spoke to the fel ' 1„1 . ,- in , effect : I feel, Sir, the great importance of the sub jTa vaich I am about to bring under the consideration of the House ; at the same time, I feel it is one which, while it has received much discussion, while it has been the subject of a Report made by Commissioners appointed by his Majesty, who collected a great deal of information in relation to it, is likewise a matter which I can rely confidently the House, thus prepared, will come to the consideration of, not only with the necessary information at its command, but with a desire to form a safe and dispassionate conclusion. I will preface what 1 have to say on the subject of Poor-laws for Ireland with so me few observations as to the advantage s which ma y be derived from Poor-laws in general, the manner in which a Poor-law should be applied, and the abuses to which it is subject. These are matters which arc illustrated, I think, very fully and sufficiently in the history of this country. It appears, from the testimony both of theory and experience that when a coun try is in such a state that it is overrun by numbers, both of marauders and of mendicants, having no proper means of subsistence, a prey on the industry of the country, and rely ing on the indulgent charity of others, the introduction of Poor-laws serves several very important objects. = (Hear, hear.) In the first place a Poor-law acts as a measure of peace—( Hear, hear, hear)—enabling the country to prohibit vagrancy, and to prohibit those vagrant ss occupations which are so often connected with outrage. It acts in this way by the very simple process of offering a subterfuge to those who rels on such means for subsistence. It is an injustice eo the com mon sense of mankind when a single person or family are un able to obtain the means of subsistence, when they are alto gether without the means of livelihood from day to day, to say they shall not go about the country to endeavour to obtain from the charity of those who are affluent that which cir cumstances have denied to them. But when once you car. say, Here are the means of subsistence so far as subsistence is concerned—that is offered to you ; when yen can say this, you can say on the other hand, You are not entitled to demand charity, you shall no longer infest the country in a manner in jurious to its peace, and which is favourable to the imposter. —( Hear, bear.) Another way in which a Poor-law is bene ficial is, that it is of itself a great promoter of social concord, showing a disposition in the state and in the community at large to attend to the welfare of all classes.—( Hear, hear.) It is of use, also, inasmuch as it interests more especially tho landowners and persons of property in the country in the welfare of their tenants and their neighbours.—( Cheers ) A person possessed of considerable property, who looks only to receive the rents of his estate, may be careless as to the number of persons who may be found in a state of destitution, in a state of mendicancy, or ready to commit crime and act as marauders in the neighbourhood of his estates ; hut if he is compelled to furnish means for the subsistence of those who arc destitute, it then becomes as well his interest as his natural occupation, to see that all persons around him are well provided for, that they are not in want of employment, and that, his immediate tenants can live in a state of comfort. —( Hear, hear.) I conceive that those objects, and several others which are collateral to those, were obtained by this country by the Acts passed in the reign of Elizabeth. When we look to the state of the country immediately preceding and during the greater portion of that reign, we should be in• dined to think, if we. viewed it as a matter of so remote a time, hut nearer to our own time and to our own neighbour hood, that it must be very difficult to bring the country into that condition ef peace, order, and civilization which it now enjoys. We are told with respect to crime in the reign of Usury VIII., that no less than 70.000 persons were executed in this country for theft and various crimes. We are a!so told by a magistrate of the county of Somerset, who wrote in the reign of Elizabeth, that in that county alone forty persons were executed in the year for theft and other lawless prac tices; and the county was in such a state of insecurity that the cultivators of the soil found great difficulty in protect ing their herds and docks and crops from robbery. Gangs, comprising no less than sixty persons, sometimes attacked them, such was the state—not of that county alone—but of most of the counties in England.—( Hear.) The writer adds that the forty persons who were executed in one year did not cone'itute more than a fifth of all those who were guilty of similar offences, but the remainder escaped prosecution alto gether. A number of other instances might be furnished of the deplorable state of the country at that period. Even in London such was the extent of manic, that a Commission seas issued empowering a certain high officer to execute martial law in the streets, and persons found committing depredations in the street were taken up under that Commission and hanged without trial. Now that was a barbarous state of society, which it was difficult to remodel ; but the means taken were many combined together. Various changes were made, both ivith respect to the law and the police, into which I need not enter on the present occasion ; but there was one in particular which I think tended to the improvement of the country, to the establishment of peace, and to the creation of that which I consider almost the greatest benefit that can he conferred on any country, namely, a high standard of comfortable subsist ence for the labouriug classes.—(Cheers.) That much was effected by the Act of the 14th, and others, and chiefly by the great Act of the 43d of Elizabeth. The principle of that Act was, that the infirm, the cripples, the orphans, and impotent persons should be relieved by the public, and that able-bodied persons unable to procure employ ment whereby they might obtain their living should be set to work. The Act in question was founded on principles adapted to that time, and which I have no doubt were applied with great effect. That, then, I conceive to be the use of a Poor-law. I may here mention, that a short time after the passing of the 14th of Elizabeth, an Act was passed in Scot land, enacting a system of relief for the poor, but leaving out that part of the law which provided that able-bodied persons should be set to work. The Scotch Act provided compulsory relief for those who were unable or incompetent to work. It was a long time before any considerable mischief was found to arise from the English Poor-law. No doubt, many abuses arose in particular parts of the country. There were abuses stated by a writer at the beginning of the last cen tury, but it was not till towards the end of the cen tury, that some very fatal abuses prevailed. I conceive it was the object of the Poor-law of Elizabeth to provide in the first place for the relief of those per sons who were infirm and unable to work ; and in the next place, by compulsory measures, to set able-bodied persons to work—to set them to hard labour, which was dis tasteful to them, and, in fact, to place them in a situation inferior to that of the able-bodied independent labourer. But there arose about the end of the last century, from circum stances which occasioned a great scarcity of provisions, the cause of which I need not go into now—there arose a notion that the principle of the Poor-law was that all persons, whe ther industrious or idle, whether deservin,g or undeserving, were entitled to be maintained by the parish funds. The evil of this system soon began to be felt. It was impossible such a notion of the law could be carried into effect without occa sioning the greatest evils. For a long time the idle and pro fligate found it more to their interest to live on the parish funds than to obtain their livelihood by the regular course of employment; they found that they possessed greater advan tages living in that way than if they had sought regular em ployment, and had relied for the means of subsistence on their character and industry. lam alluding now to facts that arc so notorious that I need not no into them. I will refer to one case which is mentioned in the Report of the Commissioners. It is the case of Soulbury, where the poor increased to such an extent that the landlords gave up their land, the farmers gave up the occupation of their farms, the clergyman gave up his tithes, and the whole parish was left in the undisputed pos session of the paupers. It was after mpny inquiries into these abuses that the Poor-law Amendment Act was introduced into Parliament and became law. The principle of that Bill, as I conceive, is to act fully and fairly on the principle of the 43rd of Elizabeth ; it is to place the pauper labourer, the pau per who cannot find work, and the infirm who applyifor support, in a situation more irksome than that of the independent, in dustrious, and successful labourer. —4 Hear, hear.) Now this means by which this is accomplished are by offering all such persons a residence in the workhouse ; by giving them, as the Poor-law Commissioners state—and I will not enter into the dispute whether this is the case or not—a sufficiency of food, warm clothing, and a comfortable warm residence ; but at the same time placing them under a certain degree of confine ment ; so that while they have the necessary clothing, the means of subsistence, and often a warmer residence in the THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1837. 'as mote than 2s. an aci e paid for mendicity. Now this is in itself a very heavy tax, a, id which cannot be assumed upon the whole to amount to less th an bete veen 700,0001. and 800,0001., perhaps a million in the yenar. nd let it be observed that this practice of mendicancywhich: rail es so vast a sum in the country is not like a well-constituted f 'oor-law, which affords relief to the really indigent.--( Hear. for ) It is the practice in Ireland the farmer to afford relief to the mendicant who asks for it —the potatoes are there res .dy for him—there is no inquiry into the circumstances of the mendicant : generally it is not near home that he begs, and the farmer has no means of 1 knowing him. But that N (Lich seems to afford relief to the distressed also promotes and keeps up impostors.—( Hear.) We have a statement wit' a respect to England which shows the advantage that Me' Alica,lcy obtains from imposture. A medical gentle s eeen has, stated with respect to Suffolk, that he has during continuance of th e o ld Po o r-law discovered every sPee'ess of the simulation .of disease. Those who pre tended to. 'oe affected with cataleidsy, those who shammed crip ples, atn - st the shamming of sortie of the most agonizing and excrumkating diseases, and all this for the purpose of receiving relict from the parish.—(Herr.) It cannot, then, be supposed that, in Ireland, where men linancy is so general, and where re'sief is so freely given, but th a t th e num b er o f impostors must kr2 enormous.—( Hear.) But th ere i s ano th er e vil to which a Poor-law would peculiarly apply, and which is, in truth, one of the greatest evils to which the country is subject—it is that the usual manner of livelihood with what I call the labouring classes should be derived from their small holdings of land.— ( Hear.) If you deprive the poor labourer of his small holding of land, he is immediately driven into a state of destitution — and he becomes a man ready for the commission of any outrage, in order that he may supply by outrage what mendicancy may be unable to procure for him.--( Hear, hear.) I put the case without referring to the question whether the landlord or the tenant has acted badly or not ; but in either case, where the labourer is turned out of his holding, it leads to the commission of outrage. If you suppose a number of persons in possession of of their small holdings, and that they are driven suddenly out of them by their landlord, you can then suppose the combina tions that are formed—that they return in numbers—that they came in arms, and endeavour to deprive the tenant succeeding them, and thus repossess themselves by force of the land. But put the case the other way. A tenant is in possession of a holding for three or four years, and this without paying any rent, and the landlord is compelled to get rid of him. That bad tenant, such is the state of the labouring classes, collects the sympathy of that class, and they arm themselves against the landlord. A band is formed for the commission of crime, and the crime finds an excuse, and, I will say, a justification in the sympathy of the peasantry of the country.—( Hear. ) Let me advert to our case, for there are many cases of out rages, all arising from this source in Ireland. The case oc curred about two years since, and I noticed it in the police re port ; it shows the sympathy of the peasantry for a person in the condition I have described. A tenant was dispossessed from his holding ; a person had taken possession, and he came upon the land, with a farm servant, to cultivate it ; the farmer who had been in possession came near to them with a gun in his hand; he immediately aimed at the new tenant—it missed ; he cocked the gun again, fired at the servant, and shot him dead on the spot. There could not be a more un provoked homicide than that.—( Hear.) It was evident that the farm-servant, who had nothing to do with the holding, and who went there to earn his wages as a labourer, was thus basely murdered ; and yet the police, who were in an hour afterwards at the place, could not find persons to give them information as to who committed the murder. Information was n fused because the sympathy was for the person who was driven from his holding. The state of society has been produced by the absence of any legal provision for the poor. It has produced on the one hand the most extensive mendi cancy, and on the other the most extensive crime.—( Hear, hear.) It has produced, too, a third consequence, namely, the indifference or neglect, the want of care on the part of landlords as to the manner in which their property is cultivated and their tenants live. In a great part of Ireland the same indifference prevails as to the comfort of the tenants on the part of the landlords. In this country the state of the la bourers is looked to, and even in what repair the farm-houses may be. A great amelioration, I believe, in this respect is taking place in Ireland ; but generally with the landlords in Ireland they regard the connection as matter of bargain be tween them and the tenant, and merely to obtain a certain rent for him. They no more care for the welfare of the te nantry than if they had to do with an indifferent or third person, and that there the transactions are to end. The competition for land in Ireland likewise gives rise to very high rents, to very high nominal rents, and which no unfortunate tenants can pay. The extreme competition for land, leads to most injurious consequences, and of course it leads, too, to the extremely bed cultivation of the land.—( Hear.) There are parts of Ireland in which tenants would be glad to improve the land, but will not do so because there is an extreme competition for land, and also from extensive vagrancy they find it impossible to do so.--( Hear, hear.) I will take the liberty of readhig, a sen tence from the report of Mr. Nicholls, in which he deals with the evils that arise from this source. They arc thus disposed of in a very few words :—" Ireland is now suffering under a circle of evils, producing and reproducing one another. Want of capital produces want of employment—want of employment, turbulence and misery—turbulence and misery, insecurity--in security prevents the introduction or accumulation of capital— and so on. Until this circle is broken, the evils must continue, and probably augment. The first thing to be done is to give security—that will produce or invite capital—and capital will give employment. But security of person and property cannot co-exist with general destitution. So that, in truth, the drain age, reclamation, and profitable cultivation of bogs and wastes —the establishment of fisheries and manufactures—improem merits in agriculture, and in the general condition of the coun try—and, 1 7 istly, the elevation of the great mass of the Irish people the social scale, appear to be all more or less contin gent upon a law providing for the relief of the destitute."— ( Hear.) Now, with respect to that part of the case, we have come to the opinion that it is expedient and right to introduce a law for the relief of the destitute. The next question is, in what manner is that -relief to be given, and to whom is it to be I have shreds stated that I do not think that vie given ? ought to limit relief to certain classes—Olean ) You must give relief on the ground of destitution, and to every class and person who is destitute.—( hear, hear.) The next question arises, whether you arc to afford relief in any other manner than it is now given in sonic of the improved districts in England—that is, by in door relief to the paupers? —( Hear.) The Poor-law Commissioners have expressed a very strong opinion upon this subject, and they give reasons which I think conclusive on the subject. They are of opi nion, and I think so with them, that the administration of out-door relief would lead to a most pernicious system, mix ing up mendicancy and charity with labour—a system of persons partly obtaining support by labour and partly relief from the public purse; and if we were at once to adopt this system, I certainly do think that not only would those evils take place in Ireland that existed in England, but I believe that those evils would be very much greater, and that out-door relief in Ireland would absorb a much greater part of the profits of the land.—( Hear, hear.) I am confirmed in this opinion by a report which I lately received containing reso lutions bearing very much on this subject. It is a report from the Mendicity Institution of Dublin. They " declare that they do not think it wise to administer out-door relief to any person not labouring in the Institution itself." I will next come to the question whether, if we adopt the present system of workhouse, that system of workhouse can be rendered effec tual to any purpose ? There is one objection to them stated on this ground, and it is urged very strongly by the Com missioners. I know it was felt very strongly by some indi viduals in that Commission that the workhouses would not be safe—that there would be too much violence—that there would be such an indisposition to the restraints that those re straints could not be enforced. Mr. Nicholls, for the purpose of establishing this fact, made a full inquiry into all the va rious houses of industry, the mendicity institution, and the other institutions that exist in Ireland, and he says that the conduct of those persons in these institutions gave no reason to apprehend anything of the sort. He observed that in some of these houses of industry they have carried the system of restraint further than in some of the old English workhouses; they have established the separation of the sexes and of the members of families, such as were established in the new union workhouses in England; and he did not find any regulation proposed to be made which did not now exist ; on the con trary, every regulation is submitted to by the inmates of those houses of industry. I should think, therefore, as far as the question of settlement is concerned, there need not be any fear that there will be any violence used, or that we cannot protect the workhouses in Ireland as well and as securely as in England, for the object of obtaining the result we desire, of maintaining good order and industry in those houses.—( Hear, hear.) The next difficulty, or rather another objection, has been stated, which lies at the bottom of the whole question. It is, whether this species of relief will not be so much sought after that the workhouses will be altogether crowded with applicants, and that there will be no means of afford ing relief to those who will come in such numbers to ask to be supported in the workhouses. But, Sir, whil e I am ready to admit that that portion of the population which consists of persons decrepid and infirm will seek refuge in workhouses, it is, in my opinion, very doubtful that any person who can obtain any sort of subsistence by his indivi dual labour will crowd into the workhouses, wh ere t h ey will be subject to confinement and labour. The evidence goes to show that the objection which has been taken to workhouses in England cannot be taken as a test in Ire land ; and nothing is more unlikely than that labourers who can obtain any sort of employment, or who have any other means of livelihood than by confinement within workhouses, will crowd into the workhouse, either because the quality of the food or the habitation is very much su ps-Tien—(llean hear, hear.) It remains to be considered how far a law so constituted can be carried into effect. And on this part of the sub j ect Mr. Nicholls has made various suggestions, to whic h I sha ll shortly ad vert, as containing the plan which lie proposes to ad opt on this subject. In the first place, with respect to the mode of administering relief, and the question of vagrancy. To every destitute and decrepid person, the authorities having, the superintendence of the administration of relief shall order relief to be given ; that is to say, we do not propose to give them an absolute right, which in fact I do not think exists in England ;_ we do not propose to give an absolute right to destitute and decrepid persons to secure relief in the workhouses. The reasons for this are, that not only would it be found difficult to create workhouses, and very unsafe to establish at once, in the whole of Ireland, that every per son should be at once relieved, but there is also the difficulty of introducing a sound general principle of relief at once into the country. We do not therefore propose to establish at first more than four or five, or ten or fifteen, workhouses in Ireland. If we say that all persons in Ireland shall be allowed to have relief in these workhouses, then these workhouses will certainly be overflowed in the be ginning, and the experiment may be said to have failed, when in fact it had only failed because it was not established throughout the whole of the country, but only in a portion. It is impossible to have evidence of the true working of the system until the whole is hereafter estab lished.; and in order to give effect to it, it must afford relief to all that require it. But then it may be said, and it has been very much insisted upon, that the way of preventing such numbers from flocking into the workhouses is to establish the law of settlement, and to say that a residence of three years in the district, or some other qualification, should be established, by which certain persons only should be entitled to relief. But, Sir, on reflecting on the course of legislation that has been pursued in England, I have not made up my mind to propose any regular law of settlement in Ireland.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear !") I am quite convinced that the law of settle ment is one of the greatest evils of the Poor-laws of England. It circumscribes the market for industry, it confines it, owing to divisions in parishes, in many cases to a small extent of country-; it confines the market for industry to a very great and injurious extent. It likewise led to immense litigation ; and any person who had attended the quarter sessions and seen the disputes that arise there between one parish and another, as to whether a person had been hired for a year and a day, whether he had been ordered to go home on the day before the expiration of that term, so as to destroy the settlement, or whether he had served a full year and a day, and va rious other similar questions—any person who had attended to this litigation and those disputes will not have any wish that I should in this Bill introduce the question of settlement. —(Hear, hear.) If I were to introduce the question of set tlement, I think it would have these two consequences—one because we cannot immediately Say that we will give relief, or indirectly a claim to relief at all to the destitute poor of Ireland ; neither can we say, in the second place, what is cer tainly greatly to be desired, that we will at once prohibit alto gether and put an end to vagrancy. When the whole of the workhouses are in operation, and when we are enabled to re lieve at them all such as are fairly entitled to have relief in the workhouses, then you may say we will not permit vagrancy. First, then, to all destitute persons who seek nothing but sub sistence, that subsistence we give, and tell them that we will not allow them to disturb the peace and order of society by seeking subsistence by other means. But until you can say this t t is not just altogether to prohibit vagrancy, and I there fore do not propose to prohibit persons seeking alms, if they can show that they have been to the workhouse or have ap plied to the guardians of the union, and have been refused relief. This, I think, is a necessary step in the transition from one state to another. If the scheme succeeds we will be hereafter and finally able to prohibit vagrancy. The next question that arises is that with respect to the local ma chinery. I propose, with regard to this point, that there shall be a board of guardians, to be elected once a year, as in England. I propose that the county cess payers shall have the first election, and afterwards, the rate being imposed, any person properly described as a rate payer shall have the power of voting in the election of the board of guardians. Mr. Nicholls has entered very minutely into the question whether or not we ought to have ex-officio guardians in the same man ner as in England. The opinion I have come to is, that it is not advisable to introduce a similar provision. —(Hear, hear.) In the first place, by the proportion which the ex-officio guar dians bear to the number elected the character of the board of guardians is altogether destroyed. I therefore propose that there shall be a smaller number of ex-officio guardians, and that they shall not exceed one-third of the number of elected guardians. Mr. Nicholls has likewise examined another ques tion, viz., whether clergymen should be admitted as members of the board of guardians? He states, and, as I think, truly, that you cannot have the ministers of one profession, without the ministers of the other ; and, in the present state of Ire land, the presence of different ministers of religion on the board of guardians might raise many questions of dispute ; and I think it would be better if the board of guardians were confined altogether to laymen—(Cheers)—and from clergymen of all denominations, from Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Presbyterians, he had received assurances of their willingness and anxiety to co-operate with the board, while some of them stated that they would rather be in the position of mediators between the board of guar dians and the destitute poor, between the administrators of the law and those whom it would affect, where their exertions would be more efficacious in reconciling the poor to the law, and to those who would be exposed to their angry denuncia tions. I do think that for these reasons it were better that they should not be members of the board, but rather remain in that position in which they would be better enabled to use all fair argument in favour of the law than if they aided in its administration.—(Hear.) Now, Sir, with respect to the ques tion of rating, it is proposed that the board of guardians being once constituted, and under the direction of the Commissioners whom I shall afterwards describe, shall impose rates according to the net annual value of the hereditament. The question then arises, and it will be found fully treated by the Poor-law Commissioners, how much of this rate shall be imposed on the owner, and how much on the occupier ? It is proposed by the Bill which I hope to be allowed to introduce, that of the full net annual value taken from the tenant, one-half shall be paid by the tenant and the other half of the rate by the owner of the laud—( Hear, hear)—that this provision shall be carried through in all gradations, and that when there arc many tenants holding, some under others, such tenant who is the lowest occupier shall deduct one-half, and the person to whom he pays it shall have the power of deducting a cer tain proportion of the half as rate, and shall pay the rate which he receives from the occupier. So that, in point of fact, all owners liable to be rated, and paying a sufficient amount, shall be entitled to vote for the board of guardians. But with respect to others who hold property under 5/., it is proposed that property of the annual value of Si. shall not be liable to the rate, and shall not have the power of voting for the board of guardians. It is proposed, likewise, according to the Report, that those owners and occupiers shall have a plu rality of votes in cases where the property exceeds a certain amount. With respect to the other questions which are treated of in the English Poor-laws, it is not necessary in any Poor-law for Ireland to introduce provisions on these subjects. For instance, bastardy need not be introduced, and apprentice ship is not propos e d to b e i n t ro duced, as in the law relating to England. With respect to the eases of the Mendicity Insti tution and other charitable institutions, is is proposed that they shall be under the direction of the Commissioners, who are to have the conduct and management of the whole administra tion of the law. With respect to the Commissioners, I think that the safest manner of introducing such a law as I have described is the simple machinery which has been found so advantageous in England, and through the aid of persons fully acquainted with the principles of the law of England, and who have been employed in carrying it into opera tion. We therefore propose that, instead of forming a se parate Commission for Ireland, the Poor-law Commissioners for England shall have the power of intrusting to one or two of the Commissioners, and if there is only one, to any of the Assistant-Commissioners, the power of sitting in Ireland as a Board of Guardians, in order to carry the law into opera tion there. It is proposed that in case it should be necessary to add to the strength of the present Board of Commissioners if the present number shall not be found equal to the task, then the Board shall have the power of adding one Commis sioner, thus making four. When there are four Commis sioners there will be found very probably one or two in Ireland and the others in England. I think this a better mode of pro ceeding than by establishing a new Board of Guardians.— ( Hear.) It is far safer that we should have persons already intimately acquainted with the operation of the law.—(Hear.) It is far better that they should have the power of communi cating from time to time with England, because if we esta blish a separate board of Commissioners in Ireland, a totally separate board, we shall probably, in the course of a few years, find the Commissioners of England and Ireland acting upon totally different principles. According to the tes timony of the gentleman at the head of the Commission in England, he believes that three Commissioners only will ,be able to conduct all the operations required both hero and in Ireland. These Commissioners will be entrusted with the power of putting the law into operation from time to time, ac cording as they may see opportunity, in the different districts which they may think most favourable, and then they would proceed to other districts. They would form unions either of pa rishes or of any other divisions, or, without attending to the present divisions, they may form unions, and having formed an union they will proceed to adapt any building that may be standing for the purpose of a workhonso, or they may build a new workhouse, if necessary. There is a considerable dif ference of opinion between some of the persons who have con sidered this subject with respect to the size of the workhouses and the unions. A gentleman who has published a pamphlet on the subject, written with very great talent, proposed that there should be 500 unions, and that the number of inmates in the workhouses should be limited to 200 in each workhouse. Mr. Nicholls proposed that the unions should be mere exten sive ; that there should not be above 100 unions ; and that each should be capable of containing 800 inmates. This calcula tion is made according to the circuits of Kent, Sussex, Oxford, and Bath. The amount of pauperism in Suffolk is one per cent. of the population. I can -mention an instance in East Kent of a place where the able-bodied persons are 16,000, but there are not more than 24 in the workhouse. But suppose in Ireland the workhouses are to be fully occupied, Mr. Nicholls calculates that the whole expense for ea c h p erson , i nc l u di ng lodging, fuel, clothing, and diet, is Is. 6d. per week. We have calculations made by various persons, and several calculations made by order of the Poor-law Commissioners, and the calcula tion of the expense of the workhouses in England by Dr. Way, and they all come to the same conclusion on the subject—that Is. 6d. per week is quite sufficient. If, then, you take 100 unions, the whole expense will be 312,000/. ; if you occupy only three-fourths, the expense will be 250,000/. ; and if only one-half, the expense will be 208,0001. Of course, as an original outlay, we must calculate the expenses of workhouses at 700,000/. This would be the amount of the whole expense according to this plan. But, Sir, while I consider that this plan is one of great importance—while I consider that it will in many respects improve the condition of the people of Ire land—while I consider that it will have many collateral ad vantages, as, for instance , accustoming the people to see ex amples of cleanliness and regularity, order and peace, in the workhouses ; and likewise, if the Board of Guardians are well formed, of seeing the different classes of the people acting to gether with cordiality and confidence, from the magistrate to the lowest of the rate-payers—while I calculate that this plan will have these advantages, I must say, that to suppose that merely by machinery of this sort the people are to be saved at once from the state of destitution in which they now are, is too unreasonable to be supposed. In order to do this, I think, we must look forward to having the means of employ ment in Ireland, and we must look forward to having some vent in emigration, in order to relieve the country during . her state of transition. Let it not be supposed that I believe, when I speak of emigration, that the present eight millions of inhabitants living in Ireland may not be very well sustained, and sustained with good and sufficient means, by the soil of Ireland—(Hear)—but I do believe that hitherto, with the means of so doing, a practice has prevailed, and still prevails, which will render it unlikely that this operation should have a successful result without some collateral sources for easing the country of her superabundant labour. As to the nature of the public works to be engaged upon, that is a point which I will not discuss now. It appears to me that there are various means open for the application of the Tabour of the poorer classes which might lead to the happiest result ; but at the same time they should be adopted with great judgment and sound discretion. I think that with care and good judgment we way find materials for public works of such a nature, which, whilst they serve the tempo rary purpose of employing the time of the indigent, may be the means of opening new sources of industry, and for the pro fitable investment of capital in Ireland. The opening of im proved communications between districts, for instance, and the improving of bogs and ditches, are subjects well worthy of the application ;of labour and the investment of capital. This, however, as I said before, is a branch of the subject upon which I will not enter at present. It may be remarked that there is no great quantity of capital in Ireland available for such purposes as I have mentioned, but it should be recollected that if we provide means by which a feeling of security, which does not exist at present, may be promoted amongst the owners of property, capital will immediately begin to flow in for investment in that way. I have now to say a few words in reference to emigration, in connection with the subject before the House. I know there are some who entertain notions upon this subject far beyond those which I am in clined to adopt, in favour of an enlarged system of emigra tion. It is a scheme entertained by some that one or two millions of our poor population might be exported to our colonies, and immediately find means of support in the new field of employment there opened to them. Now, putting aside all other difficulties which may be in the way of this desired result, and viewing the attempt merely in respect to the effect of such a proceeding upon the colonists, I think that the ferment created amongst them would -be so great as to throw hopeless impediments in the way. It would at once be supposed by them that we were sending in amongst them a vast quantity of our useless population, paupers who conferred no benefit upon the country they were exported from, and, therefore, as they would argue, likely to prove an evil instead of a source of benefit and productiveness to the new soil in which they were to be placed. I know that there is a very great feeling of this kind already prevalent in our colonies, and in some even it has been thought desirable to exercise a sort of control as to the class of emigrants which should be admitted. It is a plan which has recently recommended itself to the Colonial-cffice, and which I hope will be persevered in, not to give large tracts of land indiscriminately to parties proposing to emigrate, at the imminent risk of their not being properly cultivated, and the parties themselves not benefitted by their posy session ; but to sell the land at what might be consi. dered a fair and good price to persons who, by shoeing themselves ready to advance a little money upon it, gave the best possible earnest of their intention and ability to improve and render it productive.—( Hear, hear.) In one colony alone, that of New South Wales, the sale of lands in this way, dur ing the past year, has amounted to 100,0001., and this sum might be employed with success in the conveyance of emi grants. lam aware, also, that a notion used to be prevalent that persons sent out in this way from amongst the poorer classes of Irish, were not of a description to be very desirable or useful to employers; but I am convinced that this feeling of prejudice or jealousy will not long interfere in the way of their employment, when it is found that there are many emi grants from Ireland willing and able to cultivate the lands of those who may hire them.—( Hear, hear.) With regard to this subject I may state, therefore, that it will be proposed that there shall be an emigration station at the different sea ports of Ireland, and that the persons proposing to emigrate, having raised a sufficient sum for that purpose, should inform the agent, who would send them to the seaport, where' a ship, to be provided by the agent, should be ready to convey them. The Government would pay the expenses of the agent, and also provide some proper officer to take the command of them. By means of these precautions, the colonists will be certified that the persons brought amongst them are proper persons for the purpose, and not merely paupers, driven away to prevent them from starving in their native land. This is a plan which, if adopted, will of course not contemplate any vast quantity of persons being sent away together ; but it will at the same time afford a vent by which a redundant population—and par ticularly those who cannot find adequate employment at home _may seek it with facility elsewhere.—( Hear, hear.) In es tablishing a system of Poor-laws for Ireland it appears to me that we must look upon these two subjects—public works and emigration—as means for co-operating with, and perfecting any, such an enactment. We should look also to the general improvement which, we are informed on all hands, is going on in Ireland, and we shall find much to hope for in the accom plishment of these objects. If, on the other hand, the whole state and condition of the country were going backward—if the whole revenues of the country were diminishing—there would then indeed be some difficulty in such a plan as that I now suggest ; but considering, as I do, the whole country to be in the way of improvement, I think there is much to hope for from the plan, and every reason for its adoption. It is proper, how ever, that the House should understand that what I have stated in regard to public works and emigration bears no direct reference to the measure which I now hope to intro duce. These subjects form no part of my present object, which is strictly to carry a Poor-law Act for Ireland; they are subjects, therefore, which I merely touch upon now, as worthy of consideration as future resources, in co-operation with the measure I now propose. I would observe also, that I do not consider that these are branches of the sub ject in which the Poor-law guardians could properly be em ployed ; Ido not think it would be safe to entrust them with the management of public works and emigration, in addition to the labour and duties of their immediate department, al though, at the same time, I think they may be made very use ful in diffusing information on the subject. There is one other question collateral to this matter which, before I sit down, I wish very briefly to touch upon. The Poor-law Commis sioners for England, in the end of their report, make use of the following observations :—" It will be observed that the mea sures which we have suggested are intended to produce rather negative than positive effects ; rather to remove the debasing influences to which a large portion of the labouring population is now subject, than to afford new means o f p rosper i ty an d virtue. right principles ep and erfectiy'aware that for th e genera l diff us i on habits we are to lo o k, not so muc h to ofWe r any economic a rrangement and regulations, as to the influence of a moral and religious education ; and important evidence on the subject will be found throughout our appendix. But one great advantage of any measure which shall remove or diminish the evils of the present system is, that it will in the same degree remove the obstacles which now impede the progress of instruction and intercept its results, and will afford a great scope to the operation of every instrument which may be employed for elevating the intellectual and moral condition of the poorer classes. We believe that if the funds now destined to the purposes of education, many of which arc applied in a manner unsuited to the present wants of society, were wisely and economically employed, they would be sufficient to give all the assistance which can be prudently afforded by the State. As the subject is not within our Com mission we will not dwell on it further, and we have ventured on these few remarks only for the purpose of recording our conviction that as soon as a good Administration of the Poor Laws shall have rendered further improvement possible, the most important duty of the Legislature is to take measures to promote the religious and moral education of the labouring classes."—( Hear.) These are the words with which the Bishop of London, the Bishop of Chester, and Mr. Sturges Bourne conclude their valuable observations on the Poor-laws - of England and Wales; and if the remark is true in regard to England, it is doubly so in my opinion in respect to Ireland. _( Hear, hear.) I do not wish to enter now upon disputed points connected with this subject, but I have always heard it admitted, even by those who disapprove in general of the present system of national education pursued in Ireland, that it is proper and expedient that the Roman Catholics of Ire land should be educated ; and whatever means are to be adop ted for so doing, I think it should be such a system of educa tion that the great mass of the people may look to it for im. provement and instruction.—( Hear.) In administering Poor laws to Ireland Parliament should keep this in view, that whatever is good for the moral condition of that country they should endeavour to promote, to extend, and to mature. (Cheers.) Not only should we employ ourselves in relieving the indigent, in repressing outrage, and in establishing a feel ing of general confidence in rich and poor by so doing, but we should endeavour also to sow the future seeds of virtuous habits, and heighten the character of the poorer classes of Ireland. We should endeavour to give them that wholesome education which will enable them to do their duty to God and to man; which shall furnish them with motives and incitements to do so ; which shall eradicate and destroy the false notions and views of morality which they bad formerly entertained, as re spects their state as subjects to the State, and as responsible and immortal creatures.—(Cheers.) Provided w e are all agreed upon the advantages of such an education, and that all should have the benefit of it, let us endeavour to afford it by such means as shall not interfere with their religious opinions. —( Hear, hear.) I shall conclude, therefore, by observing that whilst I look upon the law which I now propose to introduce as one likely to effect very great benefits for Ireland, I look still more strongly hereafter to the fruits of such a system of legislation as that I have briefly hinted at ; and I am confident that legislators who shall accomplish such good for Ireland will receive the reward of their own good opinion, and of the good opinion of the whole of the inhabitants of that country.— (The Noble Lord sat down amidst loud cheers from both sides of the House.) Mr. S. O'BRIEN thought the workhouse system of relief one of the least palateable both to the payer of the rate and to those who were driven by their necessities to apply to the public for relief. Poverty ought not to be visited as a crime; yet as a crime it would be visited if the workhouse system were pursued. Another objection that he had to workhouses was the money expended in their erection, which was, in his opinion, so much capital lost to society. The Hon. Member then commented upon the expense of the workhouses in Eng_ land. With regard to the plan proposed by the Noble Lord, it appeared to him that it would not provide for half the amount of distress which existed in Ireland; not ono half those whose distresses would entitle them to demand relief from the Poor.. laws could be relieved even in the Noble Lord's workhouses. He agreed in the utility of emigration, so far as affording the means of emigrating to those who were desirous of doing so, and he thought that ample resources might be obtained for this purpose by the sale of waste lands in the colonies. With regard to the administration of the law, he thought great evil would arise unless it were administered by local authorities, and the country were divided into districts, averaging a popu lation from 3,000 to 4,000. He thought also that the measure would be unacceptable to the Irish nation if the supreme power were vested in a central boa r d i n L on d on i n place of - Dublin. He hoped the Noble Lord would turn his attention again to that part of the measure which fixed the rates to be paid by the landlords and occupiers. If the former were to pay two-thirds, and the latter one-third, such an arrangement, he believed, would be more judicious. He was sorry the Noble Lord had said nothing about medical charities, dispensaries, ~~~ - and other establishments of that kind in Ireland. These, he thought, should not be treated as mattes of chance, but formed. under a regularly organised system. He concurred in the ge neral principles of the measure. Mr. SHAW believed all were willing to enter on the sub ject with the most anxious desire to discuss it impartially, and without anything like party zeal.—( Hear, hear.) He was afraid, however, that the Noble Lord was not fully aware of the difficulty in limine of applying a system of Poor-laws to Ireland, but he agreed with that part of the plan by which it was proposed that there should not be only iii-door relief, and, if possible, that there should not be any law of settlement. It would be advisable also that the system should be carried into operation by the Poor-law Commissioners already appointed, for they were well acquainted with the state of Ireland, and would be more likely than any other Commissioners to shut out local prejudices. He differed from the Noble Lord in some of the details, and particularly as to the manner in which guardians of the poor were to be elected. If Justices of the Peace, for instance, were to be excluded from acting as ex-o ff icio guardians, he apprehended there would be great difficulty in finding fit persons to perform the duty. The Noble Lord had proposed that the occupier should pay one half of the rate and the landlord the other half. The same principle was adopted in the Tithe Bill, but great diffi culties arose from it, because it was found in many cases almost impossible to know in whom the right of inheritance was vested. The principle was sound, but the application, owing to this circumstan ce , was difficult. - He concurred also in the propriety of facilitating emigration, and in providing employ ment for the poor on public works. Though he differed from the Noble Lord as to the mode in which a system of education for the poor was to be carried into effect, he agreed with him as to its necessity; because he considered the proniotiorr of moral and religious education the best means of reforming the morals and increasing the happiness and industry of the people.. Ile believed the landlords were willing to bear their full share• of the burden, and he trusted the Noble Lord would work out such a measure as would ensuse their constant co-operation. The O'C ONO R DON was happy that the House had ad mitted the principle of applying Poor-laws to Ireland, and trusted that the measure would not be hurried through the House, but that time would be given for discussion, and for ascertainine- its applicability to that country. The misery of the poor there' was so iedcscribable, that it was now full time for the Legislature to turn its attention to the subject. The great support which the wandering poor had hitherto received was from the poor cottagers, and he was glad that the burden was now to be transferred to the landlords, who he had no doubt would willingly take a ,share. The distress was such,. that without the introduction of some such measures without delay, it would be almost impossible for the country to bear either the evil or the remedy. As to education, ho consi dered that the only way to elevate the moral character of the people of Ireland. He was grateful to the Governmtnt for introducing the measure, and he trusted their hopes of success would be realised.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. O'CONNELL wished to know from the Noble Lord what were the regulations which he proposed with regard to workhouses, and the maintenance of their inmates. If he understood the Noble Lord rightly, there was to be a certain number, four or five, poorhouses at the commencement, but he did not understand precisely how the funds were to be raised fur erecting and maintaining them, and who were to have claims for admission. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it was proposed that at the commencement there should be from ten to fifteen poor houses, and that all persons applying for relief in the district should be admitted, but the Commissioners and a Board of Guard'ans were to direct how far the relief was to bo extended. There was to be no exclusion of any persons, and the poor were to be supported in the workhouses from rates levied on the oc cupiers and landlords in the district. Mr. O'CONNELL said, then he was to understand that certain persons in a district were to be exclusively taxed or rated, and that poor persons coming from any part of Ireland were to have the right of claiming relief from the exclusively taxed. Next, what was the fund from which the 700,000/. was to be ra:sed? Lord J. RUSSELL said the sum was to be raised by loan on the general taxes, and paid by instalments. Mr. O'CONNELL next inquired if; after 100 workhouses had been erected, there were to be any law of settlement; and if that were to be a parochial or district settlement? Lord J. RUSSELL said that was a point to be discussed at a further stage of the measure. Mr. O'CONNELL asked if he were to understand that a certain district was to be taken, and all persons coming into that district were to have the power of claiming relief? Lord J. RUSSELL—Yes. _ _ Mr. O'CONNELL was not so sanguine as the Noble Lord as to the beneficial results of the plan ; but he had no doubt the gentlemen of the country, and he could speak for himself, would consider it their duty to use every means in their power to carry it into effect. Government having once announced the plan, it would be impossible, and, even if it were possible, it would be inexpedient, not to proceed with it. Such being the case, every one ought to render his assistance, and he for one would be ready to render his assistance in every way in which it might be required to carry out the details of the memr sure in such a manner as, if possible, might make it practically useful.—(Hear, hear.) He was much afraid, however, that the Noble Lord greatly underrated the amount of the evil with which they had to struggle. The Noble Lord had stated that he proposed so to divide the poor to be maintained in workhouses that there should be a hundred workhouses in Ireland, each containing on an average about eight hundred indi~idualg; making in the whole eighty thousand. But on what ground could the Noble Lord entertain any reason to believe that the number of persons in Ireland requiring to be maintained would be so small ? For his (Mr. O'Con nell's) part he could not conceive the possibility of such a thing, or that so small a sum as :300,000/. a year would meet the necessary expense. If be could bring himself to believe in the accuracy of that statement—if he could bring himself to believe that for so small a sum—small as compared with the existing evil—the object in view could be accomplished, ho should not hesitate a single moment in voting for it. But ho repeated his fear that the Noble Lord's calculations were founded on an erroneous data. By the Report of the Com missioners of Poor-law Inquiry in Ireland, it appeared that there were in that country about 565,000 persons in a state of destitution. The sum had been made up from the different localities. The Commissioners had had the evidence of the clergy, of the resident gentry, and of the paupers themselves in the various subdivisions of districts, and that was the result of their calcination. And yet the Noble Lord calculated on there being only 80,000 paupers to maintain in the workhouses. That calculation was founded on Mr. Nicholls's Report. Mr. Nicholls might be a very able man, but it was impossible not to feel that the g►rounds on which he proceeded in his estimate were fallacious. However, he (Mr. O'Connell) would vote for the Bill in all its previous stages; and when it came into the Committee he would endeavour to introduce into it some provisions that, in his opinion, would be calculated to facili tate its object. But it had been said that the plan ought to go gradually into operation. To that he totally objected. He was decidedly adverse to prolonging the evils which must attend a transition state ; a state in which the poor of Ireland would have neither the alms at present bestowed upon them, nor the relief from the public which it was in contemplation to bestow. One object of the Bill was to prevent disturbance in Ireland. But if they began by distributing relief in only one district, would not that excite other districts to disturb ance? If the poor in one district were made comfortable, would not that instantly cause great excitement among the poor in the neighbouring districts, until they were placed in a similar situation ? By broaching the plan they would take away the disposition in Ireland to give alms any longer to those who were by that plan to be made the objects of public support ; and for which purpose a tax in money was in six or eight months to be levied. And when the mea sure should be passed, he knew very little indeed of Ireland and of the character of its people who could anticipate that its result would be to tranquillize the country. By the evidence to be found in the Report of the Commissioners of Poor Inquiry in Ireland, and in other quarters, it dis tinctly appeared that there was no population in the world among which sentiments of affection and attachment be tween parents and children, between sons and mothers, were more powerful than among the labouring population of Ire land. So strong were these feelings, so anxious were the la bourers of that country to do all they could to assist and sup port their poor and destitute friends, that they refused the most tempting offers to emigrate to other countries, and preferred starving at home with their friends. The moment, however, that the Legislature passed a Poor-law for Ireland, all this warm feeling would be diminished, and God knew, therefore, that they ought to hesitate before they took a step the conse quences of which would be to damp natural affections. It was in distinct evidence that there was no keener reproach than that which fell upon any young man in the labouring classes who allowed his poor mother to leave his door without assis tance. The very report of the coining law' would create a state of transition that would almost put down this feeling. Ireland would be rendered one scene of turbulence if the mea sure, once introduced, were not immediately and entirely car ried into effect. What it was thought desirable to do should be done at once. Let the country be taken by districts, by counties, by half-counties ; but let there be no intervening pe riod between the concoction and the execution of the plan. He was much gratified to find that the Noble Lord had thrown overboard the notion of employing any persons in Ireland out of the Poor-rates. That was a favourite project with some persons, but anything more preposterous, he could not con ceive—and he was rejoiced that the Noble Lord had abandoned it. Was it not a fact established beyond the pos sibility of c ontradiction, that Ireland was a country capable of being cultivated to au extent twice or thrice that of its existing cultivation ? One-fourth of Ireland was waste land, capable of being brought into tillage, yet never so brought ; and yet the country was so circumstanced—so mysterious was her con dition—that her labourers, who were capable of bringing her rich and fertile soil into cultivation, instead of being so em ployed, were to be shut up idly in poor-houses ! For bo it remembered that a Poor-law would give no actual increase of wealth to any class. It would be a division of wealth. _lt would apply a portion of the wealth of one class to the feeding of another class within stone walls, and maintaining them in a state of idleness. This did not arise from any indisposition on the part of the labouring classes to labour. It was i n evi dence that the labouring population of that country were most anxious to get labour. Ile was sure he need not appeal to English gentlemen on that point. lie was sure he need not remind them of the hundreds of thousands of Irish who an nually repaired to this country, many of them from the most remote districts of Ireland, in order to obtain labour. Thera was no necessity, therefore, to institute poor-houses in Ireland for the purpose of stimulating the labouring population to work. When, however, by the introduction of their measure, they stopt the sources of private benevolence, it was indispensable t° afford relief in some other way. As it was quite out of th e question to relieve the poor at large, this experiment must be made. It was impossible now to think of endeavour in g to prevent it. The Noble Lord talked of a rate going ;inter than the independent labourer possesses, yet the re-w; traint is so irksome to them that they are not willing to sub , cet themselves to it, except when really in a state of destitu ,ion. This has been proved clearly by the Assistant Corn :rOssioners to he the manner in which the Poor-law works. I. :have consulted two of the Commissioners, with whom I happen to be acquainted, on the subject, and they both say '..he focd is wholesome, and the workhouse accommodation is better than that possessed by the independent poor, but the confinement renders it irksome, and in that way the evorkhouse becomes a place that the poor would gladly -avoid the necessity of having recourse to. It is to these principles, and to this experience, that we must look very much as a guide in any Poor-law that we shall intro= duce for Ireland. We ought to he unwilling on the one hand to introduce a system whic'e will generate - the abuses which have resulted from the English Poor-law ; we ought to be very willing, on the other hand, if we can, to , in troduce some of those good effoctswhich have resulted to Eng land from her system while it was attended with beneficial con sequences. The Poor-law Commissioners for Ireland, in the course of last session, madea report which was laid before this House, in which they recommended many measures ofim provement for Ireland, and in which they suggested certain measures with regard. to the indigent. It is this measure with regard to the relief of the indigent to which I would call the attention of the House, as the principal object of the Bill I am, now about to 'introduce. The other suggestions for the ge neral improvement of Ireland, though I may touch on teem this evening, I propose to leave for future consideration. • The Poor-law Commissioners, with regard to this questiote of im mediate relief of the destitute, propose in the first place that a large class of persons should be provided for at the public ex pense by means of a national and local rate. They advise also that there should he money afforded for emigration, and that 1 depots should be provided for persons preparing to emigrate. 1 In considering that report great doubts occurred to his Majes , ty's Ministers whether it was a good principle to provide only for certain classes, and whether those depots for emigration • could be safely and advantageously adopted. It appears from 1 every reflection on the subject that there can be no reason for saying why there are to be only certain classes to which relief is I to be extended, that is, provided we arc prepared to admi nister relief. The different classes to whom it is proposed to g'se relief are here enumerated :—The Noble Lord here read am extract from the last Report of the Commissioners for in n quiring into the state of Ireland, and stating that in their opi nion relief out to be given to lunatics, to persons who were deaf, blind, and all the la.bouriug poor that were infirm ; that they should be supported within the walls of public institu tions; that for the sick who remained at home there ought also to be institutions to supply them with medicines ; that I helpless widows with children ought to be supplied, as well as other persons similarly situated ; and also suggesting the sup port of persons intending to emigrate. The Noble Lord then continued, by saying—Now this enumeration contains so many persons, there arc so many classes of persons embraced in it, that you could not, if you undertook to provide for so many classes, exclude others. Including these, I certainly cannot see what objection there can be to provide for the des titute and able-bodied man.—( Hear, hear.) There are some I persons in this list, such as the incurable lunatic, the helpless widow with young children, or the sick man—now these are persons in such circumstances, as it is recommended that re lief should be afforded to ; and which circumstances seemed to us calculated to excite individual compassion, and not circum stances to which exclusive national regard ought to be had. If a person in the five-and-twentieth year of his age, in the full possession of his health and strength, and unable by his industry to obtain a livelihood, or who had not the means of support, were to stand at the doors of one of those public insti tutions starving, in want of support, and who was likely, if not relieved, to die in a few days, I cannot understand the princi ple that would distinguish a person in that case as one to whom you would not give relief, when you give relief to the young and infirm. The real principle to be adopted on this subject is, to afford relief to the destitute—to the destitute, and nothing else—( Hear, hear)—and it would, in my opinion, be quite as wrong to refuse relief to the able-bodied person in that situation, as to afford relief to the cripple, to the widow, to a deaf or a dumb person, who was in a state of affluence, and had other meane of support. It is not, then, the peculiar circumstances which excite public or individual compassion that we are to regard ; but, if we have a Poor-law at all, it ought to be grounded on destitution, as affording a plain guide to relief. Then, with respect to the other proposition, that there ought to be a Penitentiary, to which the paupers ought to be sent, and that there ought to be depots for those intend ing to emigrate, if you are willing to adopt a plan to that ex tent, of having a Penieeitiary for vagrants and depots for emi - grants, it is, I say, far better for you to adopt the workhouse system at once ; because if you have a depot for emigrants, it will afford, it appears to me, great ground for abuses. Suppose you get 500 or 600 persons in a depot for emigration, it will be difficult to apply to them that restriction, and enfoice that discipline which you could do if they were hi a workhouse. It may be said than they are mel . ely paseengcrs—that they are in a sort of public inn or hotel until they take their passage, and they are not, therefore to be treated as paupers entirely dependent for support upon the public. Thus, then, they cannot be restricted nor placed under the same disci pline as if they were in a workhouse : and besides, there is no security that they will avail themselves of emigration, for supposing 300 out of 500 who have been for two or three months in one of those work houses are told that the ship is ready in which they were to have embarked, and they refuse to 7n, what means have you to compel them, unless you resort to that which would be so odious as to be impos sible to be carried into effect, that is, oblige men to emi grate ? Thus, then, after supporting them in the depot you must let them go at large, and they would only go to per severe in their usual habits of vagrancy.—( Hear, hear, hear. ) It appears, therefore, to us that you could not adopt that part of the subject without a great deal niece of considera tion than the plan proposed by the Commissioners appears to us to have received. And deeply impressed, as we have been, with the responsibility that attaches to a- Government which proposes a law upon this subject, it occurred to us that the best method of forming a judgment on the subject was seeing whether that law which has been applied to England could, as we understood the Noble Lord, be inforced in Ireland with advantage to that country. For this purpose Mr. Nicholls, one of the Poor-law Commissioners, and who i 3 so well known for his worth, abilities, and intelligence, I requested to go over to Ireland, and ascertain on the spot whether anething resembling the machinery of the English Poor-law could he applied there. I should mention here that Mr. Nicholls, who has had great experience upon this subject, even before the amended Poor-law came into operation, had in one district of this country adopted an improved method in the working of those laws, even before the amended law was carried; but this also ought to be stated, that in the early part of lest year lie drew my attention to the subject of a Poor-law for Ireland, and I have been in constant commu nication with him on this matter since the commencement of the session of 1836. As I was sure that lie was qualified by abilities and experience, so was I also aware that he would carry into the examination of this subject equal caution and zeal. Mr. Nicholls, then, proceeded to Ireland, and the result of his inquiries was, that, supposing it was expedient to extend a Poor-law to Ireland, there was no effectual ob stacle, no sufficient objection to the establishment of a Poor law in many respects resembling the amended Poor-law in England.—( Hear, hear.) The reasons of that opinion are given at considerable length in the report which I have the honour of laying this day on the table ; and I will now state generally what are the reasons given in that report, and why I think it is expedient to establish a Poor-law in Ireland, and to describe what is the nature of the Poor-law that I mean to propose.—( Hear.) I think there can be no doubt of its expediency, if the House will bear in mind the description which I gave of this country in the reign of Queen Elizabeth—there can be no doubt that there has pre vailed in Ireland many outrages consequent upon vagrancy and destitution, and the people being left without a remedy or relief. It has happened in Ireland (I do not now inquire as to the causes, but the fact cannot be disputed), that while the people themselves—unlike the population here—have not improved in their condition, that the population has in creased very much in numbers, that there has been this increase in population while there has scarcely been an increase in the means of subsistence, or what I call the standard of subsistence raised.—( Hear, hear.) So that after a long period of time it is found that there prevails in Ireland, according to the report of the Poor-law Commis sioners of Ireland, such an overplus of labour that four agri cultural labourers in Ireland only produced as much as one agricultural l a b o urer p ro d uces in England. That, it is to be observed, cannot fairly be attributed to a want of in dustry amongst the Irish people; on the contrary, we have it in the evidence of those examined by Mr. Lewis, and par ticularly from one gentleman of Birmingham, that he never found the Irish labourer to refuse work, or fail to perform it to the utmost of his industry and capability. There is not, then, a want of industry amongst the people. It is the country that has been allowed to be in such a state that industry cannot operate upon it. It is admitted that the only subsistence of the peasant is derived from the land which he has—it is taken from his small holding—it is not from the gain of regular wages ; and where there are regular wages received in particular districts these wages are received only by a part, an d no t by the w h o l e , o f th e l a b our i ng popula tion. The peasant g e ts his s u b s i s t ence ou t o f hi s sma ll hold ing; the labourers li ve u pon th e p o t a t oes ra i se d by th emse l ves out of that small portion of land they get; a n d it is by means ofits possession and the use of their industry, often very ill directed, and nut by the application of wages from labour, that they are able to maintain existence. The result of this is stated by the Poor-law Commissioners (though that is a statement of which I doubt the accuracy), that there are nearer to three than two millions of people, for a certain portion of the year, in an entire state of destitution— ( Hear, hear.) 'There is no doubt whatever of this, that a large portion of the people of Ireland, especially those not having land, do practise mendicancy for a great portion of the year.—(Hear, hear.) I have made some inquiry with re spect to the amount and extent of the relief thus afforded to that mendicancy, because it is to be considered that when we say we will adopt a Poor-law (and that we should adopt such a proposition is my opinion), it is to be remembered that a very considerable tax is now raised on the farmers of that country by mendicants-4 Hear)—and which, I may say is now raised as a compulsory rate. With this view I asked of my Noble Friend who sits near me, the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland, to obtain as accurate an account as pos sible of the amount paid in this way from two or three farmers in ten or twelve districts—the amount that was paid for rent, the amount paid for tithes, the amount paid to the Roman Ca tholic priests, and the amount paid to mendicants. The result is, I should say, that in most cases a shilling an acre is paid in the course of the year by the farmers for the support of men dicants. In some cases it has been 6d. an acre, in others 9d. an acre ; , but in one case, where a pe rson h a d a f arm no t ver y considerable in size, it was more than 2s. an acre. That per. son paid 101. a year, not in money certainly, but in food. There