The Express.
London, England, 1847-02-16 00:00:00

sure; they did not secure the employment and the suste-
nance which the Irish people instantly required to keep
them from darvation, they did not sow the seeds of that
speedy renovation which all admitted to be so essential, and
it was, therefore, that he eupportsei, also, the measure of his
noble friend, which did secure these objects. (Hear.) He
would advert, in the first place, to what that measure would
do in finding employment for the poor. His noble friend's
most carefully prepared estimate was, that, at the very fewest,
110,000 able-bodied labourers would be employed by bin
scheme, represeuting a population of hail a milion. This,
indeed, was manifestly, by no means, the entire body of the
distresaed population; but, surely, if half a million of per-
sons could be placed above destitution, it would be a vast
alleviation of the existing pressure on the government, and
on the reeources of this country. (Hear.) The mea-
sure of his noble friend had been met by, he would not say
able, but by extremely seams oppo Non. The first ohjec-
dem raised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who cora-
emmeed the fight, was an objectien to that which appeared on
the hark of the bill; the right hon. gent. objected tileat on
the back of the bill, beside the name of the noble member
for Stamford, there were the names of the hon. member for
Sunderland, who was considered a great authority on rail.
ways, and of the hon. member for Westmoreland, who was
known to be one of the greatest manufacturers of iruu
in the country. The right honourable gentleman. in-
deed, did not impute corrupt motives to these gen.
tlemen ; but be mid that no doubt their pecu:iar occupation.
might have hod the effect of giving a bias to their judgment,.
He would admit that perhaps these gentlemen might have I
viewed the case placed under their consideration in a certain
degree of connection with their engrossing idea; but he
would remind the right hon. gentlemen that this objection,
so far as it was an objection, might be applicable to Win;
political as well as to persons individual, and, therefore, when
he found three Chancellors of the Exchequer rising one after
another with the tame objection to the same measure, he was
disposed, after the example of the right hon. gentleman,
to view their financial opposition with some jealousy. (A
laugh.) There was the right hon. member for Falmouth
had come forward in the most violent spirit, with all the
sympathetic LantlieniticenirriVsce,,
NnecewuoLotthhcaitalhelife, to
had me n; in.
moat
to
escalatory speech, but that it was no reply to the unanswer.
able speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The right
hon. gentleman's speech might have been in one way Wk.
answerable, but it was also untrue. The right bon. gentle-
man's objections wets based on two pi ineiparpoints, first, he
said that the amount of capital expected by the noble member
for Lynn to be expended, would be by no moans so great as
was announced by the noble lord, and secondly, which was the
same thing in other words, that the extentof labour employed
would be by no means so great. The right hon. gentleman's
speech on the occasion was a most hold and dashing one—
quite courageous enough, in fact, for a secretary at war,
or a paymaster of the forces—(a laugh)--but it was not.
equally characterised by solid weight. The right hon..
gent. stated, in the most positive and off-hand manner, that
the calculations of the noble member for Lynn were all
wrong—were wild fallacies; and that the proportion of
capital actually expended on the labour of railway construc-
tion was twenty-five per cent., but the right hon. gent. and
not condescended to give any fact, or any evidence,
or any data for hie so very succinct and unhesitating
objection. " You are all wrong on the other ride," said tke
right hon. gent.; "you know nothing about the matter: I
tell you that there are twenty-five per cent. of the capital
expended in actual labour, and I tell you that at the utmost'
10001. per mile will employ only forty-five men." Than
spoke the oracle, butthis was a subjectwhich the public would
not consider settled by the ipse of any man, even by that
of the right hon. gentleman and even though an ex-Chan-
cellor of theEzehequer went bail for the accuracy of his pee-
dteessor, and not even though another ex-Chancellor of the
Exchequer said ditto to both. Now he (Mr. Disraeli) held
in his hand, as to thin matter of the proportion of capital I
expended in labour on railways, an analysis of the awns
expended upon some of the greatest of the existing railways,
an analysis drawn up front multifarious documents by his
friend Mr. Laing, whose name would at once be a guarantee,
at all events, of the most zealous care and the utmost good
faith. (lit or. hear.) The analysis exhibited the description
of expenditure on a dear line and on a cheap line in England,
on the Belgium lines, and on the Paris and Rouen line. The
total expenditure per mile on the London and Bit=
line, the dearest line, perhaps, ever conetructedin
wa11,49,6•30/., and of ha, in items unconnected with labour I.
parliamentary expenses, engineering, directions, land come
pensation, 6:e., there had been spent 17 per cent ; on items
connected with skilled labour, 21 per cent. ; and on items et
common unskilled labour, such as earth-works, stations, ea-,
62 per cent. (Hear.) This was a dear line; now for •
cheap line. The Orand Junction line had been constructed
at a cost of 21,0001. per mile ; he would not go through the
items, but state the fact, that of this outlay 57
per cent. had been expended on common or un-
skilled labour; on the Belgian railways, the total
expenditure per mile had been 16,130/. ; of this
the proportion paid for common labour was 4.1 per cent.
' Well, then, the eon of the Park and Rouen Railway was
22,500/. per mile, out of which 12,5701., or 66 per cent., was
'petit on labour, showing an average on the whole of these
railways in England, France, and Belgium, of 57 per cent
expended in common labour,-11though perhaps he ought
to observe that in the unskilled labour, which was 26 per
cent., coach-builders and one or two other descriptions et
artisans were included. If they took the Irish railways at
16,0001. per mile, and allowed 57 per cent., that would make
9,1201. per mile, which, expended in four years, would Rival
foi each mile 2,2801. The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said that for every 1,000/. per mile 45 men were employed,
therefore, according to the calculation of 2,2801. per mile,
102 men must be employed, and that would make
on 1,500 miles of railroad upwards of 150,000 men,
and reckoning in accordance with the calculation of
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that each man
supported five persene, the number which would
thus be maintained would be 765,0(0 instead of 500,000, the
present number maintained by the public works. (Hear,
hear.) It appeared from one of the blue books, according to
the statement of the Lind Mayor of Dublin, that 40,000 men
were employed on railroads in October, 1846; and there
being then only 300 miles of railway in progress of being
. made, it would follow, that on 1,400 mile. 200,000 men
would be required. ( Hear, hear.) On the Carlow branch
of the South Western Railway 183 men per mile were em-
ployed : ei much for the statement of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, that only 25 per cent. of the capital would
be employed in labour. According to the estimates
founded on the English, French, ands lgian railway*,
there would not be lees than 3,ooo,employed. He
had a document, dated Feb.B, 1847, from ones e ;:ron to
contractors of railroads in Ireland—Mr. Henning which
endeavoured to refute two objections made to his noble
friend's measure. The first was that if railways were un-
dertaken on a large scale English "navies" would be em
ployed. The hon. gentleman proceeded to read the
letter, the purport of which was, that the Irish labourers
were easily instructed in the work necessary for
making railways, and the men employed by the
writer were almost exclusively Irish. In forming a
long tunnel through basalt rock, on the London-
derry and Enniskillen line, Mr. Henning had found
after a little instruction, that Irishmen were capable of doing
the work, and he had only retained three Englishmen on it.
The writer proceeded to state, that the number of English
employed by him did not exceed two-and.a-half per cent.
The second objection (said the bon. gentleman) raised by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer was, that the counties
through which the railways passed were not the
most distressed : he then proceeded to read other
parts of the letter, to show that where railways
hod been constructed in districts where labour was not so
easily obtained, men came from Connaught and the western
coast to perform the work; and thus he inferred that the
entire community would he benefited by the adoption of the
measure of the noble lord the member for Lynn. But then
(continued the hon. member) he was told that the " nevi-
gator " was a gay Lothario, who spent his money on him-
self, and leR his family, if he had any, unprovided for ; it
was said, in fact, that he did not generally marr'.and there-
fore his labour would only support himself. Why he had
received a letter but an hour before from Sir Haney Bruce,
who stated that, so far from the men employed on railways
being unmarried, many of them in his district had families
of from eight to ten children. (Hear, hear, and laughter.)
So much for those English navigators who were to go over
and engross the whole of Irish railway labour. Why, they
were all Irishmen, who had married when they were boys,
and had each families of boys. (" Hear," and a laugh.)
Sir Harvey Bruce said, further, that three children were
considered n very small family that eight or ten were
nearer the mark ; and that the labourers in his neighbour-
hood who had formerly received but 10d. a day were now
earning 3s. To show also how cheap land could
be purchased he further stated that the railway
went nine miles through his estate, and that the
land had only cost 6001. a mile. He thought that that was
' a decisive answer to some of the argument. which had been
adduced. (Hear, hear.) But it was impossible to escape
these Chancellors of the Exchequer. They found fault with
his noble friend for having associated with him in his plan
the hon. member for Sunderland. If he had not consulted
that hon. member, what would then have been the
triumphant argument? It w mid have been said, "You
have • practical man in your partg, the president over forty-
five millions of capital, and he will have nothing to do with
your plan." That was what would have been said. (Hear,
hear.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer had mid that as
unskilled labour was never employed on railways, there
would be no relief in this plan for the poor of Ireland, but
it appeared from the documents he had read, that nothing
else but unskilled labour win employed. Ile would not notice
what had been said about money lent which had not been
repaid—he would leave that topic to the champions of repeal.;
but when a plan was proposed calculated to revolutionise
the whole social character of a country, was he to be met with
the information that the money lent to some corrupt corpora-
tion had never been returned? Let them have statesmanlike
arguments end:correct data on this question; let it I.e argued
on its merits, but let them not be told of the broad streets of
Cork, when they were proposing a broad gauge for all Ire-
land. (Cheers.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer had in
effect told them that at beat their p'.an would make only
heifer Ireland rich. Half of Ireland rich! Ile would be
quite satisfied with that. (Cheers.) They were a very
young party, but they had already shaken a government to
as centre, and if in addition they succeeded in making half
of Ireland rich, he thought they would have dose very well
for one feriae. (Cheers god laughter.) He should like
to know what body of men, ministen that were, or minim
tees that had been, had ever succeeded in making half
.of behead rich! (Hear, and cheene Ile now came
to another Chet:metier of the Exchequer, who represented ,
the principle of naieintefference with private enterprise.
That right hon. gentleman had painted the danger of state
interference when there were more than umel chums on the
national finances. He (Mr. Disraeli) should deal with these
arguments, not with abstract reasoning, but with facts. Pre-
asedente had be. n drawn from the cases of France and
!Belgium, and warnings had been thence deduced against
;contrecting state loam for railways. Let teem recall for a