The Express.
London, England, 1848-03-10 00:00:00

ZiAbsi.-.

Mr. S. CRAWFORD moved 6r leave to bring in a bill to
amend the lr'sh Poor Relief Extension Act, with a view to
repeal the 10th section, commonly called the quarter-acre
clause. Under that clause no pereun who held a quarter of
an acre of land could receive relief; and, as the landlords in
numerous instances refused to accept the surrender of such
holdings, rsons reduced to the greatest distress were left to
starve; and when the landlord accepted the surrender it ems
no uncommon practice for him to pull down the house
during the absence of the tenant, who, when he left the
workhouse, had no home to go to, and was made a pauper
for life. This provision was not necessary for the efficient
working of the law, nor was there anythest like it in the
English poor law. Ile proposed by his bill to allow the
guardians to give relief to persons who they should be
satisfied required it, though they should be holders of a
quarter of an acre of land, such relief to be by way of loan,
the deeds of the holding to be deposited as a, curity.
Mr. O'FLAHERTY secoaded the motion, and read a
long letter corroborating a statement he had previously
made as to the state of the prison at Galway, and the suffer-
ings to which the prisoners were subjected in consequence of
the crowded state of that gaoL
Sir W. SONIERVILLE opposed it, and argued that his
hen friend altogether mistook the interpretation of the
clause and its effects. His hon. friend hail confound-d two
things—the operations of the clause, and the conduct of the
landlord; in dealing with the emaller class of tenants. His
bon. friend had said that the landlords when their ten.ints
were in distress refused to take their holdings off their
hands, so as to qualify them for relief tinder the poor law ;
or if they did not, they pulled down their houses during the
absence of the tenant, and so made him a pauper fur life. If
the landlord would do this during the absence of the tenant
while receiving relief, he might do it during his abeence at
market, or elsewhere. (Hear, hear) But to show the con-
struction which had always been put up in the clause by the
commissioars he would read a letter :addressed by them to
the guardian., of the Balling Union. That letter distii.ctly
stated that in the case of occupiers of land am ,unting to a
quarter of an acre, and having open it a house c r cabin. the
refusal of the landlord in accept the sun, nder of the land
did not disqualify the party. The actual occupation of the
land was necessary to dirquidify a person to relief, and the
guardians were not bound to enter into the question of title,
or Lto ascertain whether the epplicact'e interest had been
legally determined or not : but it in other respects he was
entitled to relief, and had divested himself of the occupancy
of the land, they would relieve him, without reference to any
statement or representation which might be made by the
landlord or agent as to his possession of the title to the occu-
pation. The vioe-guardians of the same unit n had addressed
a letter to the commissioners, stating that in all cases, before
refusing relief, they required proof on the part ofthe landlord,
agent, or other person objecting, that the applicant was really
in possession of the land ; and adding, that they bad in-
structed the relieving officer in all such CAMS not to act on
the word of any landlord or agent, but to refer the matter to
them. And to prevent any possible mistake, and think-