The Express.
London, England, 1849-03-27 00:00:00

r.:~~.

hoped would be a temporary calamity. He had given his
reasons why he preferred the rate in aid to the exteneion of
English taxes to Ireland. If they went on the union prin.
ciple, it mutt be remembered that Ireland had been
exempted from a number of taxa which now oppre red tke
people of this country. There might be those who preferred
the extension of English taxes to Ireland. He was not
ens of that kind ; he preferred the measure as proposed try
her Majesty's government; he believed it would be found
the least oppressive of the two, and his belief wss that if
government bad, in the first fissions, proposed the extension
of the income tax, they wcied have been met by a larger
opposition than they now exterienced. If hon. gentlemen
suceseeded in imposing such • tax on Ireland, and did Oaths
their harry, they would repeat at their leisure.
Lord JOCELYN supported the amendment, not objection
to the (quid apportionment of taxation between the two
countries, but objcuticg to a measure like this, unjust in its
principle, and which he believed would increase, not dimin-
oh, pauperism.
Mr. FRENCH treated the measure as unjust, impolitic,'
ungenerous, unwise, end, as a measure of relief, valueless.
lie denounced the existing Irish poor law and its administra-
tion, and, after exposing its neglect and abuses, asked Eng
lisp members whether this was a system in the support of
which they would violate every principle of justice ?

Mr. FAGAN, in the name of his conetituents, supported a
rate-in aid, though be thought the imperial resources ought
to be applied to the relief of the famishing people of Ireland.
The trope:titian of Sir R. Peel had taken hold of the feelings
of the Irish people, who would see it carried out ; and, in
his opinion, it something of that kind were adopted, the
population and capital of Ireland would be brcugbt mote
upon a level.
Mr. H HERBERT said, no one d,nied the existence of
distress in Ireland, or the necessity of relieving it, but he
had not heard one argument in favour of the mode in which
it was propo-ed to afford relief. What he complained of
was, not taxation, but that ministers, with ell their informa-
tion, bed produced only this temporary measure to prop up •
/WM which, by their own c nfesrion, had failed. Mr.
Hubert expressed his more disapprobation of the
language used in the north of Ireland; but, in excuse,
observed that the people of that country had been taught, on
many mations, that this was the only language that would
avail; and he advised the ministers not to semen themselves
behind the disunions of the Irish people.
Mr. P. SCROPE said he would not follow the hon. gen-
tleman, and other hen, members who had preceded him in
the debate, through their attacks upon the Irish poor law;
but he was unwilling from the deep interesthe had always felt
on every matter affecting the condition of the Irish people,
and the study he had devoted for many years to such sub-
jects, to allow the present discussion to pass without sub-
mitting a few remarks on the motion before the house. In
speaking to that matter, hon. gentlemen had argued as if the
new poor law Led bee n the cause of all the existing misery of
Ireland. Bat what was her condition prior to 1847 ?
You were going upon a system of out-door relief,
the recipients of which were to be a colossal army of 40,000
labourers and their families. After 1847, you continued
out-door relief to a vast extent, but you charged upon the
property of Ireland the sums expended for that poor relief
which had been previously defrayed out of the imperial
revenue.. Be had heard this poor law deprecated as an
attack upon end spoliation of all property in Ireland ; and
one which was driving all Its best tenantry out of the
country. Why how stood the case of these tenants ?
Previously to 1847, they had been compelled always to pay
the greater part of their rents, whatever might be their
money amount, in potatoes. When the potato crop had
failed, they were still caned upon to pay the same scale of
rents which they had paid previously ; a wale founded on
the culture end the average crop of the potato. The same
landlords, in many instances, were now attempting
to extort the same mount of rents—perhaps ex-
orbitant in the first instance—which they had been
in the habit of receiving under the existence of
that old potato system of culture which has new. for two or
three years past, so signelly failed. (Hear, hear.) As for the
rate which had been lev on the land for the relief of the
poor, it was idle to attribu'e the sufferings of the tenantry to
that, as one of their excessive burdens. He found that in
Cannaught, one of the worst districts as to prevailing dieters
in all Ireland, the average poor-rate for the y_ear
Sept. 1848 bad been but 2.. 74. in the poen]. (Hear, hear.
Now was it oonceival le, was it possible, that a rate of this
amount should have really operated to break the backs of
these tenantry ? Or was it not rather the 20s. in the pound
still exacted for the rent? (Hear, bear.) It was surely ab-
surd to argue, when the country was actually labouring
under a third visitati in of the potato famine, that the rate
of 2s. 7d. was a principal cause of its distress. Be-
sides, there was proof at hand to show that the
rate was in many instances not only cheerfully paid,
but that the ratepayers were, thexaselve., in • con-
dition of competency, or comfort. For example, he
would iastance the case of Mr. Bingham's property in the union
of Bettina. It was to other causes that the house must look
for the discontent which ensued on the passing of measures
intended for the remedy of Irish distreu. And he had him-
self no doubt that the most unfortunate circumstance con-
nected with their legislation for that country was the de-
gree of hurry in which it was passed. (Hoar, hear.)
Every provision of this kind was sure to be made after a
hurry-skurry fashion. The house usually waited till the
eleventh hour, until the exigency for a remedial measure
had become most urgent, and then the measure was intro-
duced and expedited through parliament under ciream•
stances which left it no character of an set of selteustaining
or permanent legisleCon. (Hear, hear.) He did think that
the character of the remedies proper to be applied on a large
scale to the relief of Irish misery had been much mis-
understood. He had himself, so long ago es 1848,
foreseeing the probable failure of the potato crop, brought
forward two propositions with such an object—the one
• poor law ; the other, a plan for the employment of able-
bodied labourers, on a very large scale, on works the most
essential to the substantial improvement of Ireland, and the
extensive occupation of her unemployed peasantry in the
cultivation of her waste, and the draining of her wet, lands.
Unhappily, neither of these propositions was entertained,
The passing of a poor law was postponed until after the
failure of the potato crop had occurred twice, and the neces-
sity of an attempt to face the accumulated evils that bad
ensued could no longer be delayed. The consequence was,
that this all-important measure was so precipitately carried
through its venous stages, that it had, proved exceedingly
defective and inadequate in many respects. One million of
money was disbur.ted for the avowed purpose of out-
door relief among an enormous mass of applicants, but
in such a manner, and under such a system, that
it seemed to have?wen impossible to have determined who were
deserving recipients of this money, and who were not
It was very certain that whilst this enormous fund was being
distributed, and long after it had been all issued, masses of
the wretched unemployed peasantry died off by aeons, so
that it was often found necessary to bury their boa a in large
common graves, without shrouds, or even the ordinary rites
of burial. (Ilea-, hear.) After such accumulated distre s
es had followed upon no less than three years of potato
famine, was it not most unreasonable to expect, however, that
any poor law would, directly it had bean enacted, operate to
remove them so long at the g verament and the legislature
pet...aced in withholding those auxiliary measures of relief
which, by providing for the employment of able-bodied la-
bowers on a great scale, could alone afford present relief to
the sufferings of the people? (Hear, hear.) The house
would perceive from the reports and documents on
this subject which had been already laid before them
that all the most intelligent guardians and com-
missioners concurred in this seatement "that the
want of employment was the main evil of Ireland." The
small farmers, who had formerly always managed to main-
tain themselves, had been total'y evicted from their holdings
by hundreds and by thousands. They cou'd no longer earn
the means of paying their rent. But what measure for pro-
viding employment had the government introduced ? Where
in one locality, labour was largely employed, there was little
or no distress. Everybody knew who heard him that for
two centuries and • half the authorities were bound by the
law of the land to find labour for the employment of the
able-bodied. The law of England might have been right or
wrong in decreeing such a compulsory prevision; but in
either case it had been always open to her Majesty's govern-
ment, since 1848, to bring forward some greet measure of
employment for the poor of Ireland. The universal
destitution now experienced there from the want of
such employment for them was still unsatisfied. But
why? Was there no field there for such general
employment? On the contrary, it was universally admitted
that the field for labour was inexhaustibly extensive then.'
and in few countries could it be more largely occupied to
greater national benefit. Nothing could be more pupae-
terous than the common talk about Ireland being overpeopled.
The self-some complaint was made two centuries since, when
she did not support one-fourth of the population she now
possesses. The hon. gentleman then read two or three ex-
tracts from reports front boards of guardians, all of them
*Binning the same opinions, namely, that there was an un-
limited field for the employment of the poor ; that the Im-
provement of the land and increased value of all property
mast follow on that employment being provided ; and that in
some localities there were actually not labourers enough at
hand to take up all the works that were being carried out.
The question, then, was—what should be dans ? The argu
meet in favour of the rate in rid was that the people would
perish without it. That it was a metier of absolute neon-
sity, and thst therefore aid should be afforded in some shape
or other. The objections which he entertained to a rate it
aid were precisely the same as he had upon a former occasion
urged—namely, that it was contrary to the principle of the
poor laws, the well known principle that local destitution
should be provided for by local responsibility. His opiates
wee, that the principle sought to be established by those wise
supported a rate in aid had the opposite quality to that of
mercy. It hod the effect of injuring those who gave as well
as those who received. It lied out a premium to
the mismanagement of land, and would materially
injure threes very districts which the rate in aid
might relieve from responsibility. The consequences
of such a mode of relief from responsibility would
be that the landlords of Mayo and Galway will care
very little about exerting themselves in the discharge of
their duties as proprietors. And why should they, when
they find they will be relieved from responsibility_ by a
nation 1 fund raised expressly for that purpose ? He did
not wish to use harsh expressions when speaking of the land-
lords of Ireland, but he found these very sentiments set
forth in a newspaper (the Daslin Evening Mail) of the 7th
of March, which has always had the reputation of being the
sperial organ of the lauolords of Ireland. That journal
stated " That if once the rate-in-aid was collected, the
Mayo and Galway squires would let the northeres pay their
parr rates for them, and lay out their lands in grass farms."
Bat, then it may .be said, money must be
ot,tainei to prevent starvation and the sacrifice of
human life ? How was it to be raised ? The right
hon. gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was
coming on Friday to act the house to veto 100,0001. upon
the credit of the ra'e in aid, if that bill be passed. It was
well known the rate could not be collected this summer ; the

imperial resources must therefore be drawn ugsgjoy-7;"*"......_
must be advanced for properly meeting the "weir
Now, if he was asked how he would raise ties),
money, his mower would be the same as on • fermirils„
sion, The mode he would suggest was reasemable ante
instead of taking loans upon the credit of ther sty%
would recommend that they should be taken ups ay.."
rity of the land itself. Why should not the hags It
roving of Connaught be made responsible tee %sde,"
the pauperism upon them ? If the necessary fugaZT
LI made
the soles vai
oflalrish ble t
estae
tes, and, a pthe money
ower should be tah7;
the relief of Irish pauperism should be uneaaair
their 'tensity. That could be done without fallictiag bolt
upon any one. It would be merely placing the udegy-"""..
the right bone to make the ow ners of land in the eruZ
and southern districts r eponsible respectively for the dual
tion thereof. The landlords penes' the power to key aaZ►
penny of their rents; they can seize the last cow, aysy-ti;
bed under the shier of their tenant who neglects to
his rent ; end why should not the estates of the Ludt:sill
liable to seizure u well as the chattel property of the
tenant? Why should not the same law be for the poop."'
well as for the rich ? It was very hard that the poor got-'
be subjected to the moat extreme severities, while the
prietors of land were exempted from liability aarteePo:
least to far as their lands were concerned, Bo arakple.!
that the most just and equitable principle was to eau( "‘
ment frern the land where destitution and peat:grim ex fn.
Who ought to be responsible for the relief of the pOjPniat"l•
which existed in the west of Ireland, except those towline th
land belonged and who had created it ? The hon. gegje
then read an extract from a report of Capt. Lang, a pm%
inspector, who died while engaged in the performsnea gay
duties, at Bantry, in the county Cork, is cearymoo.,
his views. The report a tributed much of the Napes
which existed to the misconduct of landed merle:ow.
eat
to their pittiless exaction of the lost farthicg of their
rsta
If pauperism (continued Mr. Scrope) had been incremsd
those means, and if it was necessary that the pose
tin
thrown upon the world by their landlords should be riling
from starvation, from whom was it most just and %ugly
that the means of relief should be exacted ? Why, ea.
tainly, from the owners of the land. They had, by
neglecting their duties to their tenantry, canted-31
pauperism which existed, and they should now be bad
responsible for its relief. The fact was, some of the hudlonie
of Ireland had found it a profitable system hitherto to lama.
facture pauperism, but they, and nobody else, should use
be called upon to pay the penalty of their Urdu& By
adopting the suggestion he nal made, that the setergy
advances should be made by the rummer*, and the their
repayment should be secured by a power to sell the Wyk
they would be carrying out that principle whirl aggead
the only gleam of hope for the improvement of the nutty
—namely, changing the proprietary from a mere seeing
one to a proprietary with capital and ability to minus
the soil and improve the condition of the people. Hedy
approved of the rate in aid as calculated to retard this happy
result. If the landlords were compelled to divines tyy
duties—if they were held responsible for the Misled pia.
miser which they had mainly occasioned, and theirprayg.
ties were to be answerable—the governor, nt would be temp
upon a right principle, and they would inevitably pollees
new and a more useful proprietary than thou now is Ita
land, who were either unable or unwilling to nog to
people. The hon. gentleman concluded by calks op:esa
house to encourage, by every means in their power, ta,4
tivation of the land in that country, and equalise fireplugs
of the poor rata.

Sir J. WALSH was surprised to hear the hoe, seem
opposite (Mr. fierope) find an easy remedy for all the ridid
Ireland by the confiscation of ail the property of West
lie believed that practically the experiment eugenic:lkm
been already tried in the distressed districts, and kik.
less the honourable gentleman's sa:acity and knoirkd.d
Ireland would enable him to see the effects whiffing's.
The only argument in favour of the measure had Ima
allegation of necessity. This was the sole animals*
offered to every objection brought against it; end Ma
the admission of the government themselves, the nem
would not satisfy the necessity by which it wee deg i(
Every step that had been taken in the inquiry hydras
committee produced evidence against this measure. km
shown that the necessity, if such existed, was not temp.,
but permanent; this was proved by the evidence el lk.
Power and Mr. Griffin. Other witnesses tad shown theka
policy and Injustice of imposing this rate en one put d
Ireland to relieve another, while England, which yr en
suffering, was untouched. The potato failure affected as
ell parts of Ireland, and hence the injustice of milli ma
province for the relief of another. Another objeetisa
the incompleteness of the measure. The noble lord bel
promised certain other measures as an aceompsaitawt,lt
nothing was now heard of them. Alter first mink
emigration, the noble lord had afterwards &nomad k
impracticable and delusory.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER aid, Ike
by a proviso in the hill, a certain porum of the had
would be applicable for that purpose.

Sir a. WALSH was glad it had not been overlooked. Hi
much distrusted the plan that had been sketched out by the
right hon. the member for Tamworth ; he had no bidai
what were called " great and comprehensive mums' Pis
many cases, as the Reform Bill, and the repeal of ths
laws, they had turned out failures ; and the right be.
baronet would better have consulted his reputation if Imbed
adhered to the principle he acted on one former eseadw,
of not giving his advice until he was regularly celled I.
(Laughter.) If the right hon. gentleman meant tasm*
a commission for buying up the land, his scheme he*
much the earns es the plan which had already been Man
in many districts. The great objection to the
was that it would not get rid of the main GOP
log difficulty—that of finding purchasers foe etttla
The notion that all the evils of Ireland IMO .a
able to the insolvent or bankrupt condition of Me lo*
proprietors was • complete fallacy. It was in night
capital was invested in the land, if there was not aka,*
it the disposition to employ capital in its improvement Is
disapproved of the proposal of the noble lord to take a sU
in committee for 100,0001. befire this bill became law; di
was in effect to destroy the discretion which the Widely
might exercise in the subeequect stages of the bill, suite
run the country in debt before the security was obtained.
The *nations to the bill were so strong that it yoga
possible it might be rejected elsewhere, if not in that hem
Sir G. GREY maid he was anxious to advert to stew olds
objections which had been urged by the hon. gentleman On
had moved the amendment. He had conceived that Ni
points had been dearly established in the former debits—
that an amount of distress existed in ems d
the western unions of Ireland which required n•
traceous assistance from some source or other, to prow*
the people starving in large numbers,—and that that n•
Manama assistance must come, not (rem imperial mown.
bat from those of Ireland. The first position no one bel
attempted to dispute ; and one hon. gentlemen bed even said
that the bill was inadequate for the relief of the distress, sad
that 180,0001. would he required in the course of the present
year. Hence, any reference to the papers on the table, ii
of of the existing distress, was wholly unneceuary. Bet
he was a little disappointed in finding that the second poi.
Ron had not been so generally admitted as on the former
ticamion, when almost the only question was whether tbs
necessary relief should be provided by a rate in aid or aa
income tax. (Hear.) In none of the sueches in the pre-
sent debate had there been any tender of en income taxi
and all the arguments had gone, either to withholding
assistance altogether, and leaving the people to their fait,
Of to drawing indefinitely on imperial lemma. GI
hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. G. A. Hamilton) hail
add it was unjust that certain districts aboald Is
taxed for the relief of poverty with which they had nod*
to do. But this was as strong an argument against any 'e•
pedal grant as against a rate in aid. If it was a ausibin
violation of justice that Ulster should contribute to theta
el poverty not arising within that province, it was nobs
unjust that that poverty should be relieved from impend
resources. The case had been argued as though Miasma*
first time that such assistance had been asked ; and it "
add the principle of local administration would be Muhl
by applying funds not raised within the district to the idol
el poverty, and in the application of which the intuition
had no direct interest. But we bad been giving minimal
to distressed 011i0131 for a longtime; and this was er see
Principle. From a report on the table, it appeared_ dads
left than 77,0001. hat been applied in one year, in burr,
Glasgow, and other parishes in this country, exchnivellad
the relief of Irish distrese. By • still later MM.,
it appeared that nearly 6,000 Irish pauper' had ben
their way to Liverpool in three weeks; and tbaat
there were now facilities for quickly pining them bark Mai'
many had spread over the country, and the tioor-ratalaf
increasing in almost every parish In England, owing P
mike of Irish distress. (Hear, hear.) He had lstelLeen.
solved moat urgent remonstrances from Scotland "I'
e the large numbers of Irish paupers now laorlisg 001
west of that country ; and, in fact England and SaeliT,
wen now paying a rate in aid very'far exceeding the art'
by this bill on the districts of Ireland. Then i m
t
=7l'sala t the bill would tend to aggravate the evils din*
because it invaded the principle of sdf-depeadeoce.
how could that dependence be mere invaded by relief cold!l
giant a sixpenny rate charged on the rest of Ireland, thuo.l.
relief from imperial resources ? Relief from
latter einem would be more likely to destrol
spirit of independence ; for the rate in aid 7.1:
limited, while, in the ether case, expeeteatj.
were excited of an indefinite amount of ttL,
The poor rate in Ulster was nearly identical in smolt "7
the rate in England, which, in consequence of the iensiff,
tion of Irish paur n rose in this country to le. 9d. is t.";`,
pound. But the hon. gentleman said that the rate is'
would afford but en inadequate amount of relief. If the
gentleman thought that the 500,0001. cc 800.0001•
might be collected in the two years would ha inadegsa
the relief of the distress in Ireland, that might be a "It,
seasgood in for increasing the rate from 83. to le. ia_r;
pound ; but it was no reason for rejecting the bill
gether, without the suggestion of any annal,a
supplying the deficiency which would be
by the rejection of this bill. (Rear, hear.)
admitted that the principle of the rate in sit prop.t.„
Ireland was not strictly analogous to the principle olta"tii
in aid in England. (Hear, hear.) But at the WOO tams .‘tt
principle of the rate in England was different from aia.„
was stated to be to-night. If the poor rate we' maw"-
eisnodneed parishtothtell they
nctout4ntyt.he Baulti ei
fisthi°egron°lset' sad so a
he believed the people of England would much Plate
n,.
have the rate in aid extended throughout the whole rnt
rather than that the minister should come down to Os alof:
night after night to vote sums for the relief dined P°
out of the imperial exchequer. (Hear, hear.) Tian h.&
few instances in which the principle of a rate in
the e.
been acted on in this country, but that was because 7. hest
curnstances to justify it had not arisen. But if they .a,
he believed that every parish in England should he
ai7,A,j
solvent, before one shilling was asked from thO
ems was
exchequer. (Hear.) The principle of the r.ti
in
vicinage; but if the union was inadequate to ineett°'