The Sun. — London, England, 1830-03-12 00:00:00

=~ i ~ two ron. I be con - opi- to • sting )3rts )ned gem , Rory !S 10 , for ,hind{ lere- efors ht to dimie The wale, 11 eX iouse rgest n be- I. It ut of is its ed.-- that mong e be- s bad Mr. held them otally , atlas, ititute )or in led in 'le re" and a 'ready intro . I with to the ) per- Frieod riptioo uld be 11 over EN . pre wrote In one is mo- human at the scenes. Dave s great public , Tag tie peach useful lblic.--- English would !cl with nted at 'ln local 3n was he poor the less ier they gentle• in Ire rere not ince the been se such a system would only render labour more dis- Proportionate than it is at present to the capital of the country. The poor laws would make the supply of labour greater in relation to capital than at pre sent ; for though the ab.olute wealth Af the country had increased very ranch, the relative condition of the labourer had not been improved. He would like to know whether, in giving poor laws to Ireland, it warintended to pay wages out of the poor rates as in Engl ani l_( , No !" was replied by General Ga!,- "Yne.)—He was glad to hear that " No ;" and he should afterwards apply it; but if they did not apply the poor rates to pay the wages of labour, how were they t o increase the demand for labour ? He should like to know, however, what was to be dune. It was said that great advantages would result to Ire land from introducing the poor laws into that country, but he wished to know in what shape they were to be introduced. They were promised the greatest Possible advantages, but not shown how they could be obtained. To support his view, he would quote an able pamphlet, written by a friend of his, an Eng lish gentleman, which might perhaps recommend it to some of the Members—a gentleman whom he would be glad to see in that House—he meant a Pamphlet on the poor laws in Ireland, written by Sir John Walsh. He says, " that the Irish must maintain their own poor, and some thing must be done. Now , I protest most strongly against this indefinite something. It seems to spur us blindly upon a course of ac tion, and to oblige us to move before we see our way." As there was no definite plan yet laid down, he would ask, when the Poor rates were intro duced, were they to be coupled with the law of settlement? If that were the case, the result would be, to make litigation in every parish ; and whatever extent of good the poor laws might confer, would be more than balanced by the great evils of the law of settlement. He had the authority of the very able auth or o f t h e L e tter to Mr. Canning on Select Vestries, to say, that the law of settlement was a part of the poor laws ; and that, without it, those l a'ts could not be carried into effect. [The Hon. Member read a short passage to this effect from the pamphlet he mentioned.] The law of settlement, then, was to be considered an essential part of this system, and the source of mischief which could not be avoided. Mr. Pitt, in 1796, stated that the law of settlement was to be mistrusted. He said, in the words of Mr. Pitt, mistrust the law of settle ment as a source of mischief. Hs wished gentle men to reflect also on the means by which they pro posed to carry the poor laws into effect. Did the parishes of Ireland, particularly the remote parishes, Possess the means of providing overseers, church wardens,ardens, an d p e r sons who would be responsible for he , money, and who had intellige nce and skill to a pply it ? He believed not; and some gentlemen recommended poor laws as a means of inducing ab sentees to return to Ireland! But who were the absentees—who were the great proprietors ? The Duke:of Devonshire, the Marquis of Lansdowne, the Marquis of Hertford, Earl Fitzwilliam, &c. He mentioned them not with blame, but approbation, for their estates were much better managed than those of a resident proprietor. But were they to be induced by poor laws to reside in Ireland and take upon themselves the offices of churchwardens and overseers? He objected to attempting to accom plish such an important effect as to make the gen tlemen of Ireland reside at home by a side-wind of legislation. g s lation. It wou ld b e b est e ff ec t e d by that species n legislation w hi c h made the country prosperous and happy, and gave them security. Some gentlemen recommended the poor laws on a principle of assimilation. The two countries must be made alike ; but it should first be shown that the law proposed to be introduced was useful, not merely that it would assimilate the two countries to each other. Other persons contended, that as there were poor laws in England, and as the labourers came from Ireland to England—tending to make the wages of labour equal in both countries —the landed gentlemen of Ireland should be made to provide for the poor of Ireland, that they might not, by immigration, injure the labourers of Eng land. He was prepared to assert, that the poor laws would not diminish immigration. If they Were not to pay the labouring classes out of the poer rates, as the Honourable Member for Liverpool said, the poor laws would not in any degree di minish the quantity of labour that was poured into the English market. At present, the portion of the Irish who came" here were the strong, and the healthy, and the active. If poor laws were intro duced into Ireland, the practice of sending the Irish out of the country in a summary manner eould not then be acted on. Before any man was sent home, en inquiry must be introduced, and such a system would be a great benefit to the lawyers. It would be a new carcase for them, which they would be eager to devour, not excluding even the gentlemen of the Northern Circuit. The only way in which poor laws in Ireland could be a benefit to the la bourers of England would be raising the wages of labour in Ireland. At present the peasantry of Ire land came into England because wages were higher here than there. It would throw a little light on this subject by comparing the northern with the southern part of England. In Northumberland the poor rotes were 7ts, a head ; in Sussex, they were 20s. a head ; and in the former the wages of labour were hi g h er t h an i n t h e l atter. Th e H on . M em b er then quoted a passage from the Report of a Com mittee which sat in 1817, to show the effect of these rates. It stated that it was in consequence of these high rates that the funds for the employment of labour were diminished, and that in consequence of that diminution the wages of labour were re duced. If t h e l a b ourers o f I re l an d w h o now came here to seek employment, and who returned at the end of the year, were as sure of being sent back at • that time, they would come over in great numbers. They came here only for a temporary purpose—they remitted th e i r money home, and poor l aws pro voting them the means of return at the public expence would only induce them to flock over here more nu merous l y t h an at presen t. H e h a d t o complain,_ too, of t h e crue lty that was sometimes p r actised u n d er t h e present system o f p oor l aws . n - m,_atl who had resided 40 or 50 years in of It i ".ci, and who had spent the best part wttui l t slife in labouring in this country, the in- Ireht,il e demanded casual relief might be sent off to snpaottive:o3l, T rit h ry ia , was not sending a man back to his it was tearing him away from the "ere he had grown and flourished. English Wo men to t who had married Irishmen, were sent an Ir elandthe with their husbands, and had been landed quays at Belfast or Waterford, strangers in a orange e taut :country, and left to the mercy and hospi syst/ of strangers. He considered that the present r e ern of passing Irish labourers back into Ireland begtoo.red revision. The inquiry he proposed would pro L_Rreat service, if it only gave a negative to the veh rrltian of introducing poor laws into Ireland, .4en m . L thei r i L i g nt encourage misguided hopes, and mislead su c h " But he looked for more than this from an it should end, as some gentle men se _ inquiry. z:aibeoun:ern6ed to suppose, in showing that they would t cial to Ireland, no person would be more inq u i r y support them than he should be. The read y ' e :_mk also show to what extent means al might Vsted in Ireland to relieve the poor; and it tageo Stily"Vi to what extent they might be advan inquir In creased. lie believed, too, that such an Y would demonstrate that a great deal had al ready been d attended One. his motio n To him it seemed likely to be with so many advantages, that he thought gen tlemen should be supported both by those gen and those wished to have poor laws in Ireland, ne xt in who were opposed to that measure. The of, Wry to which he would direct the attention %Jo n _ • ( i on of _ I.nittee was connected with the administra binutorldteeePwit did not ! r hat are called the Grand Jury Laws. He ascertain administeri "e a revisal of these laws : far from it— nett t he subject to undergo consideration, n how far the present system of . melts of t h:g those laws either limited the employ them a kind To of a district, or provided for beneficial. T e mployment which could be called the.subj ect,,h : illUstrate his views on this pert of 1 "uld mention a fact. -It was Ilia constant habit of those who were charged with the execution of the presentments for public works to put off that work till the latest possible moment, and the consequence was, that the poor labourer at the approach of the Assizes of spring or autumn, was called from the planting of his seed in the potato garden, or the gathering in of his harvest, to do the county work, at the time when it was the most inconvenient and injurious to him. It was to the augm'entation of the local taxation through the means of the Grand Jury, as well as the man ner in which the money was employed, that he wished the attention of the House to be directed; and he thought that a further illustration of the ex tent to which this taxation had been carried might not be inapplicable to his purpose. He would take an average of four years for a certain period, and show how that taxation had increased in the county of Limerick. in the year 1808 the sum of 6,7001. was collected in this manner. It increased then to 8,4001. In 1816 it was 16,0001.; in 1820, 20,0001.; in 1821, 31,0001.; and ►n 1828 it reached 40,0001.; so that for the last eight years it had doubled in amount. In the city of Dublin 'in the year 1771, the local taxation in the same manner was only 2,400/. a year, while i►► the year 1828 it had risen to 27,000/., being twelve fold above the sum raised in 1771, and this, too, during the time when there were an Irish Parliament and a resident Nobility in the Irish metropolis. 116 came now to a point which was worthy of the attention of the House. Here was a sum of 800,000/. annually collected from the tenantry of the landlords of Ireland. This was the real poor rate. Take away that burden from the industry of the peasantry, and poor laws would be wholly unnecessary. If they added to that the church rate—which lie was not disposed to exaggerate in amount before tire Member for the University of Oxford (Sir R.lnglis), who had taken that rate under his peculiar protection, but which he thought might be fairly set down at twopence in the acre—then they had 80,0004 or 90,0001, to be added to the 800,0001. of local taxation, which might, if not wholly removed, be much more bene ficially applied, and which was now taken from the poor and the industrious to be thrown away on the idle or the opulent. Very little had been said of the disturbance created by the collection of these rates, but he believed that more and disturbance had grown out of the church rate and the raising of the local taxation than out of all the other causes to which they were so often ascribed. The next sub ject to which he wished to draw the attention of the Members of the House, both English and Irish, was the effect produced from the expenditure on public works. And he begged to observe, that if he knew anything on these subjects, he was indebted to the information derived from his Riat Hon. Friend, the Member for Kerry (Mr. M. Fitzgerald), who had devoted his attention •te the subject with un remitting zeal and assiduity. He thought, however, lie could riot better illustrate this part of the subject than by showing from the evidence of Mr. Telford, in his examination before the Committee of 1819, what were the consequences of the application of public money to public works in Scotland. " The people, before these improvements took place, had no beneficial object to exercise their industry upon. In the course of opening these roads, and constructing the Caledonian Canal, there have been employed annually about 3,200 men on an average. At first these men could scarcely work at all ; they were totally unacquainted with laLour ; they could not use the tools ; but they have since become excellent labourers. Of that number, by the gradual influx and departure of the workmen, we consider that one-fourth left us annually, taught to work, so that these works may be considered in the light of a working academy, from which eight hundred have annually de parted improved workmen. These men have either re turned to their native districts, having had the experience of using the most perfect sort of tools and utensils (which alone cannot be considered less than ten . ..per cent. on any labour,) or they have been usefully disseminated through out the other parts of the country. Since these roads were opened, and made accessible to wheel-carriages, wheelwrights and cartwrights have been established in the country ; and in different parts the plough has been intro duced, and other improved tools and utensils are now used. In the western and more mountainous parts they fre quently used crooked sticks with iron on them for ploughs, but, now the plough is used, and these improvements have aloe led to the inclosure and cultivation of more land. I also conceive that by this mode of employment the moral habits of the great mass of the working classes changed. They see they may depend on their own exer tions for support, and' this appears to me an object of the first importance ; but it goes on silently, and is scarcely perceived until apparent by the results. I consider these improvements one of the greatest blessings ever confer red on any country ;" and he declares " they have been the means of advancing the country one hundred years." This was the result of the execution of public works in Scotland. He would now read the evi dence of Mr. Nimmo, a man of great talent and judgment, who spoke of the effect of public works in Ireland. " Mr Nimmo, in speaking of the consequence of the employment of capital by individual enterprise in Ireland, says that in one village near which the works were un dertaken, there were only a few cabins, and now it con tained upwards of forty houses, with glass windows and slated roofs. And Mr. Griffith, another engineer, stated that the people who came to look for employment at first, were haggard, naked, and willing to work at any price, but that in a very short time, so strong was the effect produced by the demand, they found it difficult to pro cure workmen at very high wages." He invited gentlemen to look at what would have been the effect of this if the poor laws had been in operation in Ireland. The peasantry were here stated' to be haggard, naked, willing to work, but unable to find employment ; and yet, in a very short time from the operation of the employment of this money, labourers were scarcely to be obtained at any price, arid the whole state of the district was im proved. It was from these men too that the ele ments of emigration were derived. These haggard peasantry were the men who came to look for em ployment in this country because they could not ob tain any at home, and who rendered the condition of the labouring classes still more miserable. But let them look at the reverse of all this—let them consider the effect produced by the consumption of excisable commodities, the building of new houses, the paying of taxes. Let them suppose the starving peasants of Ireland becoming the friends of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and of this country, and they would estimate as it deserVed the applica tion of -money on such purposes. He would show the Hon. Member for Aberdeen, the greatest eco nomical authority in the House, that he did not wish to draw on this country for the means of carry ing on these works. He would propose that a sum of money should be advanced by Government on the mortgage of the county rates, or other securities, and to be repaid with interest at the end of a term to be fixed. This was a proposition to which he thought neither the Hon. Member for Aberdeen nor the strictest friend of economy could make any ob jection. He passed now to a subject of great im portance, although it did not at first sight appear to have any obvious consequences. He meant the local restrictions on trade on the buyers and sellers at public fairs and markets. He had moved for a Committee on this subject some years ago, and from the inquiries then entered into he found that these tolls amounted to live per cent. ad valorem on all the - goods sold; and if they changed hands often it was easy to understand that the duties must soon absorb the original cost of the article. These tolls were collected through the means of oaths, which led to fraud, perjury, and deceit; and it would be as desirable to put an end to a system which tended so much to produce immorality as to deterio rate the property of the peasantry, and throw ob stacles in the way of their trading, which too fre quently led to disturbances and the breaking of heads. The Hon. Member then observed, that another point to be desired was the application of capital to the culture of the waste land. He was anxious to see the result of an experiment for that purpose. There were two millions of acres in Ire land which could be reclaimed at an expense of seven pounds an acre, and which it wns calculated would yield a rent of twenty shillings an acre. Supposing - , according to the calculations of the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Queen's County (Sir H. Parnell), that the population of Ireland doubled itself in thirty years, how much, he would ask, reuut not thi..; ie crease of cultivated land add to the property and re sources of the people ? With these reliefs from the burthens which pressed on the labouring portion of the population, and with the benefits of eduCation more extensively diffused, and with the demand for labour increased by the proper application of the natural resources, he thought that Ireland would be in a condition of prosper . ty and comfort, without the application of the poor laws. He trusted for the assistance and acquiescence of the House in the ap pointment of a Committee to inquire how these ob jects might be advanced ; " and he hoped, th a t although a political economist, and one of those landholders whose selfishness was described to be so intense, he had not shown any very inflexible selfish.. ness in the views, he advanced, or in his desire to cast the burthen of the local taxation on the re venues of the landlords. Ireland did not require the interposition of the law so much as the exercise of the moral virtues of industry and frugality. If these were evils which the law had created, to these however the law must be applied, either by way of remedy or removal, because it was the duty of those who had made the enactment to see that - they did not operate to produce effects contrary to those which were anticipated. The subjects he wished to bring under the consideration of the Com mittee were all of a particular nature. They came before the House unconnected with any party consi derations, and he trusted for the support and co operation of all meu, of all opinions, in support of the inquiry he proposed. For these reasons he looked also for the support of the Noble Lord (Lord L. Gower.) All parties were at un end—all factions were extinguished—all animosities had ceased; and now, if ever, was the time come when the subject of the evils was to be considered, and remedies to.be suc- cessfully applied to them. He concluded by moving f a a Select Committee, to inquire into the state of the poorer classes in Ireland, and the best means of mprocing their condition. General GASCOYNE rose to second the mo- Lion, and observed, that although he had been an -advocate for the introduction of the poor laws into Ireland, he had never contemplated the probability of their being so introduced without considerable modifications. No one, surely, could suppose that he would wish to introduce all the abuses which had crept into the laws respecting the poor in this country. -His Hon. Friend (Mr. Rice) had asked what poor laws he would introduce ? He answered at once, those which were in operation in Scotland. He would divide the poor and the helpless equally among the holders of all the land—absentees as well as residents—and compel them to provide for them ; aad he would make the absentees pay in the same proportion as in Scotland, where, if the resident paid fourpence in the pound, the absentee was called on to pay eightpence. He thought, however, that great good might result from the inquiry, and that they might be able to put an end to that system of passes which at present formed one of the burthens of the country, and one which was ever recurring; for, although the custom was to give the Irish pau pers a shilling, and pass them to their own country, they returned again as soon as they had an opportunity. He would correct this by im pos►ng a slight punishment on the pauper. — The Honourable Member talked of eleven houses of industry, and of the effects likely to be produced from charitable institutions. But did the Hon. Member forget the institutions of England, and her contributions to the support of houses of industry ? Why, the payments of England on that head amounted to ten or eleven millions, being nearly three times the sum collected by all the pub lic payments made under every local demand in Ire land. He observed, that whenever an Irish Member brought forward any proposition in that House, lie always ended with a demand for money; and he confessed he thought the latter part of the Hon. Member's speech, when lie spoke of public works, indicated a something of the same kind. How the Hon. Member proposed to defray the expenses he proposed unless by a tax of some kind, he was at a loss to imagine ; and he had ►io doubt that his Hon. Friend vf ould come into the Committe at last with a proposition for a small sum to be given by this country in the way of advance. He had great pleasure, however, in hearing from his Hon. Friend that so much good had already been done in Ireland by the sums advanced in that way, that the country was so prosperous that the people were likely to be in a condition to bear their share of the general load of taxation to which all were subjected. The Hon. Member had asked where the churchwardens and overseers were to be found, if the poor laws were to be introduced into Ireland; and lie had founded his opposition to them on that ground. He would answer, where were the magistracy to be found ? Surely, if they could find a class of people to make magistrates of, they could also find a class of men from whom they could select officers for the ad ministratio❑ of the poor laws. The Hon. Member concluded by expressing air opinion that a modified system of poor laws in Ireland would do great good ; but as he also thought that the inquiries of the Committee would afford much useful information, he seconded the motion of the Hon. Member with great pleasure. Mr. F. LEWIS conceived that the Hon. Mem ber for Limerick deserved great thanks for the able manner in which he had brought this important subject under the notice of the House. It was al most superfluous for him (Mr. F. Lewis) to say that he entirely concurred with the Hon. Member for Limerick in the necessity of the appointment of a Committee on this subject. It was clue to England no less than to Ireland, that we should inquire into the condition of the Irish poor, with a view to their relief. Since the great measure of last year, almost all distinctions between the two countries were removed ; they were now indisputably united, arid one of few distinctions that still remained con sisted in the laws which existed in this country for a compulsory provision for the poor, while no such laws existed in Ireland. That was an important subject, which deserved to be approached with caution, to be treated with due deliberation.-- There were two points to be taken into account in reference to this subject. The relief of the suffering poor i►i Ireland was to be balanced against the con sideration that the forced adoption of at compulsory rate for the relief of indigence and misery there would put into jeopardy every species of property in that country. It should be borne in mind, that in adopting any such measures for their relief there was a risk of its being followed by such a result. — With regard to the tolls at fairs and markets in Ire land, it certainly appeared necessary that the House should consider that subject immediately, with a view to devise some measure calculated to remedy that evil, at the same time that due attention would be paid to the compensation of local vested inte rests. He would venture to say that, upon inquiry, it would be found that these vexatious imposts and local duties at fairs and markets depressed the value of property to a tenfold greater amount than that of the benefit which they conferred upon the par ticular individual to whom they happened to be. long.—(Hear, hear.) He should address a few observations to the House, in reference to the pro priety of the introduction of the poor laws into Ireland. He had heard with great satisfaction from the Honourable Member for Limerick, that there already existed in different parts of Ireland a great number of charitable institutions for the re lief of the poor there. He thought his Hon. Friend had referred to the existence of these institutions to show that there was no necessity for poor laws in Ireland; and he (Mr. F. Lewis) had anxiously waited to hear from his lion. Friend some practical conclusion on that point, or some proposal for the, extension of legislative aid to those institutions. His Hon. Friend however stated that there was at present a tendency in Ireland to disparage such in stitutions, and he afterwards suggested that Parlia ment should make grants of the public money for their support. Now he (Mr. F. Lewis) could not well reconcile those two propositions, and he did not very clearly see what good could be effected by pub lic grants to institutions, the utility of which was even a t present questioned, and the . eharacter of which met with gcnetal disparagement in Irehind. iris Hon. Friend had then approached the subject of the poor laws, and he had asked, what modifica tion of them it was proposed to introduce into Ireland ? Now, whether or not it would be con sidered wise to introduce a mortification of the English poor laws into Ireland was a question which certainly deserved the Trost serious, cautious, and deliberate consideration. If he (Mr. F. Lewis) might be permitted to offer a suggestion upon the subject, he should rather recommend an imitation of the Scotch system of poor laws, for it was only upon such .prineiples as that system was founded that a proper system of compu:sory provision for the poor could be administered in Ireland. The great difficulty in adapting a system of poor lows to Ireland was to find proper persons to administer them, and it ap peared to him that the mipet proper persons to ad minister the law were the persons who paid rates under it; for they would be roost likely, in consideration of their own interests, to take care that the law was properly administered. The Scotch system, therefore, under which the rate payers administered the law, was, it appeared to him, much better adapted for Ireland than the system which -existed in England, where the administration of the law% was corn- mated to the overseer, who might be under the eomphtte controul of the Magistrates. The Scotch poor law was administered by the elders of the pa rish, who were themselves the payers of the rates, and a system 4atreed upon such principles he con ceived would he by far the best adapted to the stat e . of Ireland. iie thought that in the report of the Committee of 1817, to which reference had been made, a part of it was too strongly expreased, in which it was stated that poor laws had no tendency to' increase the capital or funds of a country, but on the contrary had a tendency to diminish them. These and other points, however, he was of opinion could he more conveniently and advantageouslydis- cussed in Committee than in that Rouse. There ivas another point to which he should briefly advert. Ile differed from those who stated that Ireland did not suffer much from absentees. A resident gentry was one of the greatest blessings a country could possess, while the evils resulting from an absentee proprietary, more particularly ►n Ireland, could scarcely be overrated.—(Hear, hear.)—He hoped that the Committee would he granted; but he trusted, at the same time, that Members would not go into it with foregone conclusions, but would strictly and impartially examine every proposition which might be submitted to them w►th a view to . . relieve the distress of Ireland. Mr. G. DAWSON commenced his observations by complimenting his Hon. Friend the Member for Limerick on the able and eloquent speech which he had just trade. He then proceeded to express a hope that his Hon. Friend would confine the labours of the Committee to one point—namely, the best means of finding employment in Ireland for the poor of that country, who now came over to Eng land, and that he would not extend them over the numerous points which he had mentioned, as such enquiries could lead to no practical advantage, and would only disappoint the object which his Hon. Friend had in view. It would terrify the Hon. Members whom his lion. Friend had nomi nated on the Committee, from :mewling its sittings, if they were to be compelled to examine into the operation of the Grand Jury laws, the laws for the education of the poor, the amount of market tolls, church rates, poor rates, and various other objects, which his Hon. Frie►►d had announced with such rapidity, as to render it quite impossible for him to take them down. The state of the poor in Ireland well deserved the consideration of the House. His lion. Friend, the Member for Limerick, was opposed to the introduction of any system of poor laws into Ireland, whilst another Hon. Friend of his, the Member for Liverpool, was a warm champion for their introduction. He had listened with great at tention to both their speeches, and with all deference to his Hon. Friend, the Member for Liverpool, he must say that he had never heard any speech on the imposition of the English system of poor laws upon Ireland so devoid of every thing like common sense or argument as the speech which he had just delivered. He was anxious to express his own opinion upon the subject. It was naturally divisible into two parts, and he would seize that opportunity of saying a few words upon both. He should object to the imposition of the whole of the English system of poor laws upon Ireland, from a conviction that it would tend more than any other measure which the imagination of man could devise, to pauperize and barbarize Ireland ; and the reasons upon which he rested that conviction were the same with those so ably stated by his Hon. Friend the Member for Limerick. There was, however, a part of that system which he conceived that it would be as well just as necessary to introduce into Ireland. He thought that the aged and the impotent, the halt and the blind, had a right, because they were help less, to be maintained by the richer part of the corn• murky. He therefore wished for the introduction of a law which would give every person who came under that description a claim of relief on the parish in which he was either born or settled. He was sure that the people of Ireland would have no objection to support those who were the original objects of the Act of Queen Elizabeth. In the part of the country with which he was best acquainted the people were willing enough to assess themselves for the relief of such objects ; but voluntary as sessment was faulty in this respect,—any cold hearted person could decline contributing to it, and could throw the burden of his shoulders upon those of individuals whose hearts were more open to the dictates of charity. One of the most striking and horrible things in Ireland was the sight of its wan dering beggars. He believed that the feeling of charity was as strong in Ireland as in. any country in the world : but still, the relief afforded to these beg gars was inadequate, and the ostentatious made of administering it formed a forcible contrast to the simple mode adopted in England. It was not un usual to see a dozen cripples together at a town's end in Ireland. The mode in which they obtained relief was somewhat curious. A case, or box, in which one of these cripples was seated, was placed by some good-natured person at the door of a per son's house, and was left there until the cripple was relieved. After he had received relief in the shape of refreshment or money, as the case might be, it was customary for the person who relieved him, to convey the box to the door of the next house, and to leave the cripple before it. By that person he was passed on to the next house, and so on from house to house. Thus it often happened that these cripples were carried on from one house to another through whole townships, and so were rendered the most offensive objects which could be contemplated. These cripples had no claim upon any person for permanent relief; and he thought that if a law were passed enabling the parishes, in which they were settled, to give them such relief, nobody would ob ject to it. There, however, he would stop. He never would consent to give the able-bodied labourer a claim for relief, for which he could never be ex pected to make any return. It was impossible for any man to travel in Ireland at present, without seeing that a great improvement in the population of that country was Now going on; but that im provement would be stopped if they should deter mine to introduce the entire system of English poor laws. For that reason he should always feel him self compelled to resist such a proposition. Mr. BROWNLOW declared it to be his opinion that there was no occasion for inquiry to ascertain the distressed condition of the poor of Ireland. On that point, to inquire was but to delay—to investi gate was but to procrastinate. The heaviest part of the duty imposed on the Committee, which his Hon. Friend, the Member for Limerick, was so anxi ous to have appointed, would be the consideration of the best means of dealing with and remedying that distressed condition. He (Mr. Brownlow) had been often accused of exaggerating in that House the sufferings of the poor of Ireland; but, he repeated, that whatever language might have been used, either by himself or by others on that subject, neither was, nor indeed could be, any exaggeration. The condition of the poor in lreland.was below, far below, the general European standard ; indeed, lie believed there was no country in the world where there was so much suffering, and so much patience in enduring it, as, in Ireland. He admitted that there were many improvements going on at present in Ireland ; hut the tendency of them all was to de tach the people, who were mainly an agricultural people, from the land. There was at present no prudential check on marriage in operation in Ire land, and that formed one of the grounds on which he rested his argument for the introduction of a system of poor laws into Ireland. So long as men were in a state of reckless poverty, they had no hesitation about marriage ; but surround them with something like comfort, and depend upon it they would look before they leap.—( A laugh.)— He contended, that so long as a mass of un provided be ggar y e xi s t e d in 'lreland, they would never be able to accomplish that desirable consum-• mation, the return of their absentees. On the con trary, the tide would set the other way, and those who could would leave a country, in which they were exposed to all the hazards of mischief which might rationally be expected from a population in a state of hopeless destitution. His Hon. Friend (the Member for Liverpool) had spoken of the pauper invasion from Ireland which of late years had been made upon England, and had wished for the enact ment of some coercive system to check it. Now did his Hon. Friend think it possible that the House would ever pass such a system ? Would such a system be either just, politic, or practicable? Ire land sent to England the raw commodity, which it produced with the greatest facility—labour; but _ . did nothing go back from England in return for it ? Yes, it went p-icked up in boxes and cases—it went to Ireland in manufactures—and an equal quantity of labour', to that which created those manufac- tures in England was displaced by the importation of them in Ireland. Ile was not an advocate for the abuses of the English poor laws; but the abuses were distinguishable from the system. But the Act of Elizabeth, which was the origin of that system, did not sanction those abuses, which were the result of more modern legislation. The Act of Elizabeth, which was nn admirable Act, did not give relief without labour. Lord F. L. GOWER was happy to express his concurrence in the motion of his Hon. Friend (Mr. S. Rice), which had been brought forward with so much ability. In most of the preliminary ob,:ery ations of his Hon. Friend he also concurred. With respect to his remarks on absenteeism, he was glad to find that his Hon. Friend was at issue on this subject with certain political economists. In regard to the infusion of Irish labour into England, which had been complained of, he (Lord GoWer) did not think that the sudden intro duction of the poor laws into Ireland would check the influx of Irish labourers to England ; and the proposal of the Hon. Member fur Liverpool (General Gascoyne),of sending back to Ireland those individuals who came hither with a view of assisting in getting in our harvests, he thought ‘rould tend to increase the evil.—(Hear.)—Just as Rabelais, when he wanted to go to Paris, contrived to make the po lice pay the expenses of conveying him thither, by writing labels on bottles, " Poison for the King,— poison for the Dauphin;" so the Irish labourers would throw upon us the expense of transporting hem home. But the evil was not unmixed with ;ood for England, which reaped some advantage from this influx of Irish labour. If he (Lord Gower) looked with any thing like apprehension on any part of his Hon. Friend's speech, it was the unlimited field opened to the Committee. He was net prepared to say that any one object he men tioned was not connected with the interests of the poor; but he (Lord Gower) threw it out that it might be advisable to adhere to those points where their interests were more directly concerned. For example—with regard to that extensive—and he might add appalling—subject, the grand jury laws, he could not think that any possible measure connected with that subject, in which the interests of the poor were no doubt vitally concerned, were concerned directly; and if it became a prominent subject of investigation, the Committee would run a risk of not coming, even in a long Session, to the attainment of its ultimate object. On the important subject of tolls and customs, he (Lord Gower) had prepared a Bill, which, if it met with the approbation of the House, and produced any benefit, the credit would be due to his Hon. Frie►id, Mr. Spring Rice, who had contributed the information through the report of the Committee. The Noble Lord con cluded with complimenting the Hon. Mover for the skill and discretion which he had displayed in intro ducing his motion.—(Hear.) Mr. M. FITZGER ALD said that there had been several definitions given of the poor laws that night, which differed materially from each other. The de finition of the Hon. Member for Liverpool (General Gascoyne) was this—that if Irishmen came to Eng land a second time, they were to be punished— fined, he believed. (Here General Gascoyne said, " confined.") Well, confined : that would prevent a repetition of the offence. But if he confined all who so offended, Liverpool must be provided with large gaols. The Hon. Member had talked of the manu factures which England supplied to Ireland ; but the Irish sent their manufactures likewise—their principal manufactures were corn and men.—(A laugh.)—Another definition was given by the Hon. Member for Armagh (Mr. Brownlow), which was the adoption of the Act 43 of Elizabeth. But he (Mr. Fitzgerald) apprehended that the adoption of the Act of Elizabeth would be pregnant with con sequences mischievous to those very persons whom he was desirous of serving. If the principle of a compulsory demand by the poor be admitted, all the evils experienced from the poor laws in England would afford a very slight notion of the evils which would arise in Ireland. The poor laws, it was well known by all who knew Ireland, were not applicable to that country. The whole pauper-population, in stead of being incited to labour, would be encouraged in idleness. He was, however, not disposed to re fuse making a safe and proper provision for the poor ; he was ready to do the only thing for that object— tax the landed interest of Ireland for the purpose of employing the labouring classes. He would re verse, with respect to Ireland, the principle on which poor labour was employed in Eng land, as the only justifiable course that could be pursued. That labour should be employed for productive and useful purposes ; it should be di rected to the improvement of each particular district. The Gallant Member for Liverpool had said, that no Irish Member rose in that House but to call for a grant of public money, and he had stated that such was the fact on this occasion. Was he justified in making that assertion by the tenonr of the speech of his (Mr. Fitzgerald's) Hon. Friend ? Did he - ask for any grant of public money ? Did he seek for any boon that Ireland was not to repay ? (Hear.)—Unquestionably he did not understand him so ; and in all the communications which he had with his Hon. Friend on the subject, his Hon. Friend had always said that his object was, the la bour should be applied on the principle of improv ing the country by it, and that, in turn, the country should be taxed to meet the expence. He (Mr. Fitzgerald) was for a territorial tax in Ireland, dif ferent from that in England—a territorial tax levied for the improvement of the land, and payable out of that improvement. The principle which lie meant to assert was this, that the land should be taxed for the use and employment of the people on it, in such a manner as to repay all expences whatever, both principle and interest. In order to judge of the course that ought to be taken with respect to Ire land, it would be necessary to consider the peculiar circumstances of that country. The peculiarity of the situation of Ireland, as contrasted with that of England, consisted in this,—that a vast proportion of income or revenue, derived from the country. was totally withdrawn from it; and therefore do mestic industry in Ireland did not obtain that just reward which every where else was claimed by those who resided on the soil. That was the peculiarity of Ireland. The absenteeism of that country deprived it of that machinery which gave a stimulus to la bour; and to that point the Committee ought) to direct particular attention. To apply a remedy to that evil, if remedy could be found, ought seriously to engage the conside ration of the Committee. The Noble Lord and the Right non. the Treasurer of the Navy had Ob ected to some of the multifarious objects to which his Hon. Friend proposed to direct the attention of the Committee; but it appeared to him that his HOD. Friend, when attempting in his opening speech to state his view of all the sufferings connected with the distress of Ireland, could not possibly avoid those particular topics on which he touched. lie hoped that the labours of the Committee would be successful, and that such measures would, be woul,l prevent the influx of Irish paupers into this country by raising the condition of the Irish labourer at horr.e. Mn PEEL was decidedly In favour of the ap ,ointment of this Committee, because he thought nothing could be more hopeless or impracticable than to legislate on the" subject of the Irish poor without instituting some pm ehminary inquiry. Much of the value of that Committee would depend on tha mode iu which its inquiry was conducted. If it were a general inquiry into the state of the Irish poor, he did not mean to say that much information might not be gained from it, but he feared that no practical good would be derived from it. Without wishing to circumscribe the labours of that Committee he would thke the liberty of suggesting to the Hon. Mover, though it was t omawhai - unusu - al, an outline of the points on which the Committee might report with the greatest advantage. •ren before the Committee was appointed, or the investigation was commenced. He would evil• the Honourable Member, who would doubtless act as chairman of the Committee, to make his report •n the following heads :—First, to submit a clear statement of the existing etatetments in Ireland, for the provision of the poor; the extent to which the land or property in question is subject to any particular levy, for finding provision for the poor—for the mitigation of disease, or the preservation of existence; then to consider whether it was desirable in principle to ex tend-such charities; next, to investigate the mode in which they ought to be extended, and the machi nery by which that effect might best • be produced; and, lastly, the effect which the introduction of the poor laws to ;Ireland, if any could be applied, was likely to have on the population of England. It appeared to him that no conclusion could be come to with respect to the extension of the English poor laws to Ireland, or any alteration or modification of them, without very deep and grave consideration. But as the Hon. Mover proposed, as he understood, to introduce into Ireland some modification of those laws, his apprehension as to the propriety of the experiment was considerably lessened. Some gen tlemen said, " Let us extract all the good from the English poor laws, and reject whatever is bad." But the question was, whether there was not ;in inevitable tendency, when any legitimate claim for relief was allowed, for that claim to grow into a regular system, which would gradually extend itself ? What, then, must be the 'intim tation ? If they proposed to give to the poor man in Ireland a legal claim for relief, what was the limitation by which they would confine and contectel that claim ? Every one admitted that there should be a limitation, but what was it to be ? If they said that every man who could not support himself by his labour ought to be relieved, then they would admit the claim of the whole body of the unemployed po pulation, and the owners of land would be obliged to part with their money without very materially, as he believed, lessening the distress. Then, on the other hand, if they would not admit the claim of the healthy man who could not get work, while they acknowledged the right of the individual who, with a family, might plead indisposition, he believed teat this limitation would not be found much hitter than the former; because, if they admitted that species of claim, the step from want of work towards in disposition would, he feared, he found a very short one; and therefore he conceived that such a limita tion would not operate as any very effectual, check. The Hon. Member for Armagh said, " I don't desire to have a spoor rate; I wish to have labour. Ido not want money raised from the land ; but I am anxious that the poor should be employed by a la bour rate." But if he adopt this plan, there would be no relief for bodily distress and infirmity.— (Hear.)—The decrepit man, the lame man, and the blind man, could not labour, and there would be no relief for them, as to such objects the Hon. Mem ber's labour rate would not extend. But what was his labour rate ? It was to be procured within a parish, and applied to labour within that parish. Why, what was this but to subduct from the rich that which at present enabled them to support the poor ? It was absolutely and essentially necessary to consider all these circumstances before they decided on a labour rate. They ought to inquire whether that rate would not have a double effect. In the first place such a rate, in a parish, would, pro tanto, prevent the farmer from employing the poor; and next, it would be the means of creating forced labour, for which there was no necessity, and which would materially interfere with the natural demand.—(Hear.)—Therefore, before they agreed to the introduction either of modified poor laws or of a labour rate, they ought to examine what the prac tical operation of such measures was likely to be, and whether any material distinction existed between them and the English poor laws ? The Right Hon. the Treasurer of the Nary seemed to be favourable to the Scotch system ; but perhaps he was not aware that that system differed in different parts of Scot land,—in the highlands and in the lowlands. On the other hand his Hon. relation, the member for Derry, wished to have a specific tax for the poor. — But he doubted whether that would effectually check the evil complained of. All these were practical con siderations, into which he hoped the Committee would enter at once. He felt all the difficulties which 'surrounded the subject of absentees. But while be was not one of those political economists who denied that absenteeism was attended with evil, still it was a most difficult thing to deal with it. If there were any person who entertained the notion that a tax ought to be levied en absentees, he would refer him to Mr. Burke's letter to Sir J. Byng on the subject in 1774—in which Mr. Burke's argu ment against the tax on absentees would be found to be perfectly conclusive. It was not the invasion of Irish paupers into this country by which the English labourer was affected : it was not from persots of that class that they suffered, but from the invasion of labourers—of men well able to toil and travel, and who were anxious to procure work. He did not know that any system of poor laws could have the effect of checking that source of complaint; and, in deed, he could not say whether those who complained did not overrate the evil that arose from it. The Irish peasant came over here when labour was most wanted, and they could not overlook the fact that cheap labour was important to the farmer as well as to the consumer. For these reason', therefore, he could not help viewing the experiment with appre hension. But certainly they were not t• reject such a proposition without the most liberal and diligent inquiry. Mr. SLANEY was sorry to observe that the Hon. Mover had taken too partial a view of this subject, his mind being evidently made up before he went into the Committee; and he lamented, too, that the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) op posite seemed to think that almost no relief of this nature should be introduced into Ireland. Sure he was that something must be done to raise the moral character of the Irish peasantry. In the last year no less than 50,000 deck passengers came over from Ireland into this country. The injurious effects of this influx must be obvious to every one. He was averse to iutrodu ce the English system, with its abuses, into Ireland, but he must say he thought that some thing might be done bY a system like our own, but relieved of the abuses which had grown up here; The Committee, however, would be the place for investigating this question. Mr. A. DAWSON said that the Hon. Gentle man who had jtist sat down, swamped that these 50,000 persons : from ,Ireland, were ,paupers, and vagrants, ant Talp,l;).o.niit t pc Of case ;