The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-02 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1837.

meet over which the Noble Lord presided, and were used
with reference to the letter that had been read, and to that
letter only.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the House at its ri-
ing do adjourn till Monday.—Agreed to.
SOUTH AUSTRALIA.
Mr. LEADER wished to ask the Hon. Member for De-
vonport (Sir George Grey), if the second Annual Report of
the South Australian Commissioners had yet been made to the
Secretary of State, because it ought to have been made in
June or July last ?
Siy GEORGE GREY would make inquiryon the subject.
CUSTODY OF INSANE PERSONS.
The Custody of Insane Persons Bill was read a second time.
POOR LAWS—(IRELAND.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—Sir, I rise to bring under the
notice of the House a subject of so much itnportance that I
would not conceive that I was fulfilling my duty if I did not
again state to the House the general p; upon which
we bring forward a Bill, making provision for the esta-
blishment of a system of Poor laws for Ireland.—( Hear,
hear, bear.) I do not propose to go into the question
in detail, nor to refer particularly to any of those parts of the
measure, which may be better dealt with in the Committee;
but as it is a measure which, if carried, must have great in-
fluence on the future destinies of Ireland, I think it my
duty that I should state my reasons for the propriety
and policy of now introducing it. Sir, with respect to
measures that have been adopted with regard to the poor,
I think that there has been generally a very great and very
unfortunate distinction with respect to the tendency of
their policy. It has been generally considered that
there was some way—some royal road, by which the pros-
perity of the country would be established by means of legis-
lation. Sir, the view I take of a Poor-law rests upon
entirely different principles. I maintain that the general
comfort of the poor, their general prosperity, the maintenance
of due wages upon which they are to live, depends upon ge-
neral legislation, but rot upon particular laws framed for that
purpose alone. For instance, Sir, the general principle upon
which the prosperity of a country, and particularly of the
poorer classes, depends, is their being perfect security for
life and property—freedom of choice of occupation
or profession, that the road to distinction should be open to all,
and finally that there should be no monopoly of sect or class,
or race, which should lead any one to despair of due reward
for meritorious services. These are the principles upon which
the main prosperity of the country must depend ; but they
arc not the principles upon which we have founded our law.
lam not now, Sir, speaking solely in reference to Ireland ;
for by some law specially directed to that end, you must make
the con lition of the labouring classes so advantageous that •
sufficient wages should be given to them for their due main-
tenance before you can ameliorate their condition.--( Hear.)
I wish, therefore, to state at the commencement, that the mea-
sure I shall have the honour to propose, has no such object in
view, and when I state, that I know I may disappoint
the view of many who considering the condition of
Ireland, and considering the numerous classes—the
hundreds of thousands that are insufficiently maintained, have
supposed that by some law of the nature of a poor lay, that
that evil might be remedied, and the nation placed in a pros-
perous condition. If we followed the example of England I
should by no means maintain that it is to the Poor Laws, how-
ever well-governed or directed, that the prosperity of this '
country was to be attributed. It is owing to the feelings and
independence of its inhabitants, and to those national provi-
sions of the Government—to the security of life and property,
and for those provisions which the Government affords to that
freedom which enables everyone to look fora due reward of his
exertions, and to the absence of religious and political monopoly
—(Cheers)—it is to these, I say, and to causes such as these,
that we are to look for the main support and prosperity of this
country. Admitting all this, and stating all this as lam
disposed to do, there remains another question, a question af-
fecting deeply the prosperity of the country and the condition
of the labouring classes, but affecting them in a different de-
gree
from many questions of government and constitution.
In - every country moved from a state of misery, or from a
state of comparative social want, to one of interest and pros-
perity, there must always be a number of persons in a state
of utter destitution. Now, the question, Sir, is what
provision shall be made for those persons. If you make
no provision at all for them, if the State says we hold it to
be irreconcileable with principle to make such a provision,
I think you cannot in justice say that such per-
sons shall not enjoy that right which seems to belong
to them from nature, that of obtaining by some legal
enactment from their richer neighbours the means of
.existence. If you do not deny them that right, but if you
say that you will make no State measures for their subsistence
—if you will say that, you cannot but be well aware that you
will increase mendicancy, and they will exercise their rights
of subsistence by asking alms. It is true, however, that there
arc many in the community who, under the pretence of asking
alms commit pilfering and theft, and by that means
put to great confusion the order of the community.
I come now, Sir, having made these preliminary observations
with respect to the general principles by which any law' of
this sort must be governed, to state what I conceive ought to
be its application with respect to Ireland. Ido not wish, as
far as I can avoid it, to enter upon disputed or controverted
points; still it cannot be denied that until a late period, I may
say the end of the last century, the Irish people did not enjoy
the benefits of a free Constitution, or the same rights and
liberties which we possessed.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
It is stated that in consequence of this Ireland has always been
misgoverned. Ido not wish to enter into that question now,
one way or another, further than to state, from what I conceive
to be the best testimony, what has been the condition of the
poorer classes in that country, and to say how far that condition
has not improved, like that of England, from the reign of Eli-
zabeth down to the present time ; and to show that there now
exists in Ireland a large class whom we are to consider not
with respect to their rights and liberties, but as to their physi-
cal condition, and to see her that condition may be ameliorated.
The first authority to which I shall refer you as to the state of
Ireland is Sir William Petty. In 1677 he states that the
population amounted to one million one hundred thousand, of
whom three hundred thousand were composed of English Pro-
testants and Scotch Presbyterians, seventy-five thousand of
whom were of a rank which placed them above
the necessity of work—of the entire population nearly one
million lived in 100,000 families and houses, and the re-
maining portion lived in hovels without windows or doors.
Such was the miserable condition, which Sir William Petty
described of a population exceeding one million. We have
not any very accurate accounts of the increase of the po-
pulation, for a long time after that. There was an ac-
count published in 1712 ; and as regarded the number
i,f houses in Ireland, in 1725 and 1126. In 1712
the population was 2,099,000, and, in 1726, 2,309,106. At
that time, it will be observed, the population being little more
than two millions, was not above one-fourth of what it is at
the present moment ; but it was at that time generally a grazing
country ; there was very little arable land, and it was thought
necessary to make by law provision for the cultivation of the
land. The increase of the population does not seem to have
been very great during the reign of the two first Princes of
the House of Hanover. The population was calculated—
In 1754
1767
1777
1785
Now, Sir, such being the condition of the people, if we could
have conceived that at time efficient laws had been introduced,
and that the people could have been united as one commu-
nity, and the causes of dissension which subsist unhap-
pily to-day, perhaps necessarily to-day, could have been
avoided, there was no reason why the increase of
population from 2,840,000 should not have taken place corn-
mensuratc with an increase in the comforts of the people and
a general improvement in their social condition; so that popu-
lation and improvement should have gone hand
in hand. But there were several causes, of which I shall
enumerate only a few, which seem at that time to have
produced a very considerable and very rapid increase in popu-
lation, without any similar increase in the comforts of the
people, or the nature of their condition. One cause of this
particularly was the encouragement given by the Parliament of
Ireland to the cultivation of arable land. An exhort duty was
made of 3s. 4d. perbushel on the exportation of wheat and other
grain,Atm th earn
cd
atuhsies
,waass ei nt aacptee
edairns 1784, by
atsh elr
ish
practice
which
grew up, after the conversion of pasture into arable land, which
took place generally throughout the country, of greatly divid-
ing properties, and of both landowners and farmers subletting
their properties and holdings, and thus giving opportunity, by
furnishing cabins and small portions of land, for great increase
of population without a like increase of comfort and civiliza-
tion. Another cause was the measure which passed in
1793, giving the right of voting for Members of Parlia-
ment to the forty shilling freeholders ; and I think that if
one had calmly considered the state of Ireland under the Go-
vernment of this country, during the last century, and wished to
take measures by means of which that state might be changed
to one of equal rights and privileges, I think that if any one
had looked impartially to that state, he would have said that
the best way of effecting that amelioration would be, that the
higher classes should first be admitted to the privileges of
voting for representatives in Parliament, and that then the
right of voting should have descended to the poorer members
of the Roman Catholic body.—( Hear.) The course which
the Legislature followed, however, on that occasion was
of a different description, and went to confer the right of
voting for Members of Parliament on the Roman Catholic
freeholders generally. This egift of the right of voting
did not however change the relations formerly subsist-
ing between the Roman Catholic and Protestant popula-
tion. The consequence therefore was, as was stated to this
House about the year 1795, as I think, that it became a custom
for the great7pro,,rietors to have a great number of voters of
the poorer class upon their prope tics Whom they brought up
to the poll, and used their frarchise for the accomplish-
ment of their own purposes, and not for the advancement of the
interests of the community at large. This was one cause which,
;n hi; opinion, tended to produce an increase of the population
in Ireland ; and a cause which did net tend to produce a cor-
responding increase of comfort and civilization in that country.
Sir, the increase has been from 2,845,932 in 1785, to
7,767,401 in 1831, little more than fifty years, without
its being possible to say that, as in England, the in-
crease was owing to an increase in commercial, manu-
facturing, and agricultural occupations, increased the prospe-
rity of every kind and, generally, increased the well-being
of the people. • Sir, I conceive this to be the state of Ireland,
upon which, without going into the details of the Poor Law
Commisioners' Report, we have now to deal. Those Com-
missioners went with very great labour and attentioit
into the whole subject of Poor-laws in Ireland ; but I_
,ort,inly do think that in their Report, they confound
many subjects which they ought to have kept separate; d
that they too much considered it was their business to examinend_
how you could improve, by means of state measures, the

general condition of the community—(Cries. of " Hear")—
and have not confined themselves to the question of the des-
titute classes, which was more especially committed to their
care. As to the improvement of the general condition of the
people, I certainly still think, that it must result in the main,
fronran improvement in the general Government and legisla-
tion: and that one cannot expect by any special laws
declaring that the state shall set up public works in one place,
or drain a bog in another, &c., interfere with the general
progress of the community with any great or decided be-
nefit.—( Hear, hear.) You may remove obstacles—you
may grant facilities.— ( Hear.) Some Hon. Friends of mine
have introduced Bills for these purposes with the object of pro-
moting the application of capital; but I think that we, as a Go-
vernment, should have undertaken a perilous task if we had held
forth any hopes that by immediate and direct measures of ours
we could improve the state of the Irish population.--( Hear.)
Sir, I am convinced for my part—knowing the industry of the
Irish people, knowing their many high qualities, with a
full participation in the enjoyment of freedom and
the security of property—that they will make prospe-
rity for themselves. —( Cheers.) But, Sir, I must take leave
to call the attention of the House to some particulars in which
I think the Commissioners are mistaken. They have thought
it expedient to tax mortgagees who have established a kind
of property which they have come to under the belief that it
was to be olcarly income, and not cur lened with taxes. Yet
the Poor-law Commistions, contrary, as I think, to all just prin.
ciples, have thought it advisable that the mortgagee's should be
taxed. Sir, with respect to other parts of their reconlmenda-
tions, and which belong more immediately to the subject, there
is, I think, insuperable difficulty in adopting their recom-
mendations. They have stated that great evils would flow
from the adaption of the workhouse system. They have stated
that vast numbers in Ireland (the numbers I will afterwards
revert to) are in a state ef great distress; that the workhouses
would overflow with the numbers; that restraint would be
possible; and they propose, therefore, that only the sick and
the blind, and persons totally unable to work, should he re-
ceived into the workhouses. With respect to this division of
the subject, had Ireland been in the condition of Scotland I
think we might have said, as was said by those who framed
the Scotch law, that the able-bodied should not receive relief
in the workhouses ; because the population of Scotland falling
rather short of what was needed, there was security in the
disposition of the able-bodied that they would not become a
burden upon the community. But when such a claim is likely
to be made, when we have a superfluity of labour, I do not
see how, having a workhouse, you can shut the door of
the workhouse to the able-bodied.—(llear, hear.) One
comes and. says, " I am old and a crippl., and unable
longer to work; I have nothing to sustain me; admit me to
this house, where I understand you give raiment, and food, •
and shelter; and let me pass the rest of my days protected
against entire destitution." That person is admitted. Well,
another comes and says, " It is impossible for me to obtain
work; I have looked everywhere to find employment; I can.
not obtain land—there is riot any one who will let it to me; I
cannot obtain hire for my labour; I am therefore in a state of
complete destitution, and I ask you to receive me into the
workhouse." Now, is it an answer to that man to say, "It is
very true that you must starve if you are not received into the
workhouse, but you have strength of limb, you are able-
bodied, and we cannot receive you ?"—( Hear.) Is not the
one man who is able to work, but who cannot obtain labour—
who cannot obtain a single twopence for his labour—is he not
in a state of as great distress as the man who is prevented from
obtaining work by infirmiiics and age ?—( Hear. hear.) But
there is another proposition of the Poor-law Commissioners
which requires consideration. I allude to their recommenda-
tion to establish a system of emigration, and have depots
where certain persons are to be received, whether able-bodied
or not, for the purpose of emigrating. ( Hear, hear.)
Now, I must say generally, with regard to emigration, ;
that though it is a wholesome resource in some respects,
those who propose it ought not to look.only to the wants
and convenience of this country—( Hear)—they ought not '
altogether to overlook the wants and convenience of the place the
emigrants are to be sent to.—(Hear, hear.) If you say " These
men are not needed in this country, and therefore are to goabroad,"
you must, at the same timeeudmit that those persons who are resi-
dent in your colonies have a right to say, " We are very much in
want of persons who shall occupy themselves either as labourers or
as artisans in this colony, but if you tell us that you will send
none but persons of bad moral character—persons who are physi-
cally unable to work—persons who are unfit to be members of
your community, we say, on the other hand, do not let them
be members of ours." I think that this claim on the part of the
colony is a fair claim, and that, in considering the advantage to
the mother country, you must at the same time consider the dis-
position and wants of the colony. But what would have been
the effect, such a view being taken •by the colonies, of amassing
in these depots, in these workhouses, without regulation (for
such, in fact, they would have been), a number of persons with
no other title to admission than that they were candidates for
emigration t_( Hear, hear.) They would not have been subject to
regular rules—none could be laid down to them ; and when the
ship for which they had been waiting was ready to take them, a
number of them might say that they were not willing to embark,
and the agents for emigration might protest against receiving the
scum of our population for their colonies. So that, while the
Poor-law Commissioners have put a negative on workhouses, in
proposing these depots, they propose a worse kind of the same
establishment, and one which I think would lead to great evil.
Such were the reasons which induced us to think that a further
inquiry must be made ; that further deliberation must take place
before any scheme or plan of Poor-laws could be introduced under
the authority of Government. I must now advert to the calcula-
tions made by the Poor-law Commissioners, in so far as they
will assist the scheme which I had the honour to propose to
the last Parliament, and which lam about to propose to-night.
I do think certainly that the Commission has overlooked many cir-
cumstances in the calculation they have made. I have already
stated that I think it is the business of the Government, with re-
spect to a Poor-law, thus to frame a provision for the destitute ;
and in framing a provision for the destitute, let it not be thought
that we accomplish a trifling or unimportant advantage. In
furnishing relief for the destitute, you do in the first place afford
to all coming under that denomination the security of food, rai-
ment, and shelter, which, considering the misery which must ex-
ist in any country deprived of Poor-laws, must by every humane
person be deemed a very high advantage. In the second place,
you thereby obtain the power of preventing and punishing mendi-
cancy. You are enabled to provide a better police, you have the
means of establishing a greater security for property, you can esta-
blish better order in society, and you thus promote civilization and
a general improvement throughout the country.—(Cheers.) In
the third place, you connect the interest of the landed proprietors
with the state of the labouring classes.—(Cheers.) The effect of
there being at any moment a great number of persons out of em-
ployment leads to the consideration on the part of the landowners
as to whether it is better for them to have those persons employed
at wages, and doing some profitable work, or is it more advanta-
geous to have them in workhouses where their labour is of no
avail? With respect to the number for whom the Poor-law
Commissioners think that provision ought to be made, I find
they say in their report, " We cannot estimate the number of
persons out of work and in distress during thirty 'weeks of
the year at less than 585,000, nor the number of persons de-
pendent upon them at less than 1,800,000, making in the whole
2,385,000." That is the general estimate of the Commissioners,
and if it be analysed with care, it seems not to rest upon any suffi-
cient data. With respect to the particular towns or villages to
which their refer, their estimate does not seem to be bsrne oat.
They do not state that those persons are in a state of destitution
far flirty weeks in the year, In a pamphlet written in opposition
to the Report of Mr. George Nicholls, and the plan proposed by
the Government, it is stated that the meaning of those persons be-
ing in distress was that during the thirty weeks in the year they
had not more than one meal in the day. I ask, could that fact be
known to any individual even by the most careful investigation ?
There may be individuals in Ireland who for a certain time have
only one meal in the day, but without the most searching of inves-
tigaions from day to day, from hour to hour, and even from per-
son to person, I don't think it can be said that there is any precise
number of individuals in that particular state.—( Hear, hear.) I
imagine what was meant was that this number of persons, though
not in a state of destitution, are in a state of comparative distress,
andhave insufficient means of subsistence. A gentleman of Dublin,
Mr. Stanley, has taken great pains to analyse the population re-
turns, and other statistical documents respecting the condition of
Ireland, and from him, and on his authority 1 will state one
or two very important deductions which must be made from the
Commissioners estimate. One is as to the number of persons who
are employed partly in manufactures. There are statements made
in the population returns with respect to the landowners, which
would appear to show that there are very few persons employed in
trade, and that great numbers are employed in agriculture. Now
this refers to the calculations that have been made with respect to
the number of persons dependent on agricultural employment. In
the census returns for Ulster it appears that the number employed
in the linen trade was only 8,859; but when the British Linen
Company made their return respecting the value of the unbleached
linen sold in 1821, they stated if to be 2,109,3091. In the county
of Armagh 1,683 adult males appear to have' been employed in
every branch of manufacture, but the return states the quan-
tity of linen sold to have been 563,799/. In 1831 there were
in Ulster 189,037 landholders not employing labourers, and.
only 29,301 employers of labourers.—(Hear, hoer.) Now I
think it is obvious that there are a considerable number
employed in manufacture in Ulster, besides those employed
in the cultivation of the land, and that the population de-
rives profit partly from the one and partly from the other. There
is another point which appears to me to have been overlooked, and
it is one of no little importance, as it affects the income enjoyed
by the labourers of Ireland as the produce of their labour. The
labourers come over here every year in great numbers, and are en-
gaged in gathering in the harvest..
alone 20,000 come over to this country annually, and carry back
with them to Si. to 151. each. The amount of the earnings of the
Irish labourers in Great Britain was to be. inferred from the fact
that a bank in Lincolnshire (Messrs. Handley and Sleaford) pays
about 8,0001. annually to the labourers employed in that district.
When we take into our calculation the whole produce of the la-
bourers of Ire:and and the whole of their income, we ought not to
forget the sum obtained by their labours in England, because
whether engaged in any preliminary occupation, or whether in as-
sisting.at our harvest, their occupation equally tends to the increase
of their income ; and whether the money is earned in Ireland or
from English employment, it is clear their carrying over this 10/.
or 151. each is an income for the benefit of themselves, and for
the general advantage of the labourers of Ireland. I think
it
cannot be calculated that less than 500,000/. is earned by the
Irish labourers in this country every ye.a!* And .e
observe with respect to the habits of the Irzenortheir people,
foresight,
make thatt n
doe
think it speaks very much for their industry,tbs long journey every
f
and for their prudence, that they Nava
year, and carry back the money they Avis earned in order to pay
their landlords their rent.—( Cheers.) know that in instances in
which Englishmen are engaged in the army, the navy, and as
casual labourers, or as manufacturers, it often happens that if the)i
Si.r 10/. at once, they spend it in three or four ys, ant
profitably waste it in dissipation.—( Hear. )
receiveWhknsteeaid of lavit, it ent
th;sse men from Ireland, coming over in great numbers
carrying back with them what they have received
everYeayea_r,
through the bunks of England, and placing it in the banks of Ire-
land, is great proof that they are not that improvident, or careless,
or indolent people that some persons suppose.—(Cheers.) 1 say,
then, that if many omissions have been made by the Poor-law
Cornraissionyrs, it is neceseary that we should endeavour to come
to some more correct conclusions, though we cannot come to any
that are perfectly free from doubt with respect to the num-
ber of the destitute poor in Ireland. It has been calculated by Mr.
Stanley, upon various data, with respect to Dublin, on information
supplied to him from every accessible source, that the total number
of destitute poor in Dublin, throughout the year, is precisely two
per cent, on the population, or 5,646. Taking one per cent. for

vvhic

the rest of Ireland, wesshoald have 82,806 ; or, were we to take
one and a half per cent. for the rest of the population, we shoeld
have 121.386. Without placing faith in this calculation as entirely
correct, I think we may safely consider that it is founded on better •
data than those given by the Poor-law Commissioners.—( Hear. )
It should be remembered, with regard to the number of persons to
be provided for by a Poor-law of this kind, that though there are ra
great many in a very bad condition in life—though their csb.ns are -
very miserable, and their food is of a very mean kind, yet there are
'persons who would rather remain in that condition than receive alms
or go into a workhouse. There is certainly a remaritable difference
with regard to the statistics of Great Britain and Ireland with respect
to this subject. It is stated by the Poor-law Commissioners that
in Ireland there are 884,000 (in round numbers) for 15,000,000
of acres, while in Great Britain there were 901,000 faeeiliee for •
34.010,000 of acres. The difference is to be found chiefly emocer
the landowners not employing labourers, the employers of labourers
in Ireland being as 95,000 to 187,000, or nearly as 1 to 2—a pro-
portion not differing very greatly from tl.c proportion of 15 to 34 ;
but the landholders not employing labourers are as 564,000 to
163,000, or more than 3to 1. In like manner, the families wholly
dependent on hire are in Ireland 224,(00, and in Great Britain
605,000—n0t more than Ito upwards of 21- The landholders not
employing labourers may, I think, be reckoned es persons in a law
condition of life, but still not among the destitute persons for whom
the Poor-law ought to be provided. I said at the commencement
that I did not intend to most the various points whit!) may be
matter of discussion in• the progress of the Bill which I have
the honour to propose. In the first place, I wish to state
the general principles upon which the Bill is framed, and then
the general nature of the evils against which' it is intended to .
provide. The Bill is founded, as I stated last year, on what in
England is called the workhouse principle; it does not propose to
provide out-door relief.—(Cheers. ) I think I should not be justi-
fied in proposing out-door relief.—( Hear, hear.) With respect to
the workho ise system, there is the testimony of various persoas—
of the Governor and Deputy-Governor of St. Peter's Hospital,
Bristol ;of Mr. Weale, the assistant Poor-law Commissioner ;of
the Vestry Clerk of Birmingham ; of the Clerk of the Liverpool
workhouse ; cf the Governors of ie Birmingham workhouse ; andof others employed districts to which the Irish resort ; and those
persons declare that the repugnance of the Irish to enter into a
workhouse is as great, if not greater than that of the English.
This, then, will form an answer to the opinion that there will be
shoals of those persons, who could obtain labour if they pleased,
ready to enter into the workhouses in Ireland. But while we prove
the existence of the repugnance on the one hand, on the other we
establish the fact that greater means will be at cur disposal for the
relief of the needy ; and when we afford wholesome and good
food and raiment and shelter to the necessite us—when it cannat be
said that the means of existence are denied, no man will have a
right to become a common begger, or to prey on the property of
the communitv.,-(Cheers. ) lam well aware, that with respect
to a part of this evil, the relief of the destitute, there arc other
resources that must he looked to : but, as I said before, I should
not think it expedient to place on them any great reliance. As
regards certain parts of the country, no doubt there exist evils
which cannot be cured unless the means of emigration are pro-
vided. Taking that view, we have thought it proper to introduce
into this Bill a clause nearly the same as that in the English Poor-
law Bill, which allows means to be taken, with the consent of the
Commissioners, to provide for emigration. Though, however, this
power is given, I do not hesitate to say that it must be exercised with
caution—it must be used with great care ; those to whom it is con-
fided must never think of exporting to the colonies the dregs of the
population—(Hear, hear)—or persons who are unfit to remain in
this kingdom ; it must be considered rather as a drain by which a
certain portion of the population may be taken off.—( Hear, hear.)
We are in justice bound not to excite the jealousy of the colonies
by gieing them reason to suppose that we are about to export to
them those whom we think unfit to live among ourselves.—(Hear.)
With respect to public works, no doubt they may be useful, but it
is not in instances where the work begins and ends in the work
itself ; it is only whert it leads to increased means of communica-
tion ; it is only by opening fresh channels for the profitable employ-
ment of capital that public works can be rendered permanently use-
ful. I will not now enter into the various disputed questions, and •
that most justly disputed of all, the question of settlement, which
must be raised in the course of the further discussion on this
Bill ; my .object is to state the general principles, namely, that
the Act is intended to provide relief by means of the workhouse,
and, further, to provide for the relief of the destitute only.—( Hear,
hear.) Sir, I would net lend myself to the belief, I would not en-
courage the persuasion that by means of this we are about to raise
half a notion from a state of distress to a state of affluence and
prosperity—( Wear, hear)—but I think it one of many improve-
ments, by which the security of property may be increased—by
which order may be maintained—by which poverty may be re- .
lieved—and by wheh the various clashes in Ireland may be better
united—the landlord with the peasant, the man of capital with the
man who depends wholly on his labour.—(Much cheering.). Sir,
it is for this Parliament to endeavour to devise means by which the
condition of Ireland may be improved. It would be absurd to
think that evi)s which are of long continuance—some of which
may be said to be centuries old, ethers being of a more recent
date—it would be ridiculous to suppose that such evils will be
cured in three, four, or ten years by means of legislation ;
but this I do believe, that Ireland being now in possession of'
nearly all those political and civil rights which she ought to have
—(A cry of " No, no !")—I say, in possession of nearly all those
political and civil rights which she ought to have; because I think
that those which still remain will—nay, must soon be granted—
(Great cheering)—lreland being in that condition, it appears to
me she has a career before her in which the genius, the talent, and
the industry of her native population will raise her to that degree
of prosperity for which her soil and her country are fitting.—(Much
cheering.) Let us endeavour that all our measures shall aid and
promote that tendency.—( Hear, hear.) Let us endeavour to act
in a fair, impartial, .and benevolent spirit towards that part of the
people whom we represent as fully as we represent any other por-
ion, thus aiding by our measures the promotion of that prosperity
from themselves must have its chief source.—(Cheers.) I
maintain thatif we act thus we shall perform our duty to that coun-
try, and we may look forward, not in a short time, but as the ulti-
mate result of our labours, to the period when we shall have no
reason to be ashamed of the condition of Ireland.—(Cheering.) I
beg-to move for leave to bring in a Bill to provide relief for the des-
titute poor of Ireland.
Mr. SHAW said there was one sentiment expressed by the No-
ble Lord in which he fully concurred, namely, that whets the peo-
ple of Ireland were in the enjoyment of rational freedo.n and secu-
rity of property, they would work out their own prosperity. The
Noble Lord had expressed a desire to avoid all disputed questions,
and he was most anxious to pursue a similar course. The Noble
I.ord had alluded not to the moral or political state of Ireland, but
to that state of destitution which all deplored, and expressed a de-
sire to put an end to. Re did not state that there was any mate-
rial difference between the present measure and thatof last iession.
He supposed it was intended to adopt the system of workhouse re-
lief to the exclusion of out-door relief. Any attempt to give out-
door relief would prove a serious obstacle to the working of the
Bill. It would amount to a virtual confiscation of the landed pro-
perty of the country. He was of opinion that the Commissioners
had over-estimated the number os the poor in Ireland, but he also
thought that Mr. Nicholls hadsomewhat under-stated it.—(Heao )
The Noble Lord had asked how were they to refuse relief to the
able-bodied ? Now, he had to observe, that when/relief was,
by a Poor Law, afforded to the sick, they removed some portion of
the pressure from the able-bodied.—( Hear, bear.). He suggested,
that they ought to commence by only holding out a hope of afford-
ing relief to those who were disabled.—( Hear, hear.) He under-
stood it was the intention of the Noble Lord to introduce a clause
providing for emigration. The carrying such a plan into effect he
should regard as a matter of the greatest importance; because it
would be an effective means of relieving the able-bodied, and at the
same time drawing off from the country the surplus population. He
hoped, too, to find public works resorted to. He did not collect
from the speech of the Noble Lord that it was his intention to intro-
duce Poor-laws generally throughout the country at- the same mo-
ment. Now, it was his opinion that the opening of the workhouses
ought to be simultaneous, and it appeared to him, from the brief
time he had given to the perusal of Ar. Nicholls's Report, that he
also recommended that the establishment of the workhouses should
be simultaneous. This was a point of great importance in facili-
tating the working of the plan, in promoting the utility of the law,
and for securing its final success. It would, too, he thought, take
away a great many difficulties that lay on the way on account of a
Law ofSettlement.—( Hear, hear.) On the whole he was per-
suaded that every Member of that House, and he was sure that
every Irish Member, would, upon this question, lay aside every po-
litical feeling and unite with the Government in endeavouriug to
overcome its intrinsic difficulties.
Sir CHARLES STYLES—Looking, he said, to the expences
of the Poor-law in this country, where the number of poor was
comparatively few, calculated that when a Poor-law was brought
into operation in Ireland, the expenditure would not be less than
2,000,0001. a year. In order to limit the expense, a discretion
ought, he thoughteto be given to the Poor-law Guardians. It was
his opinion that if it were only intended to give relief to the aged
and the sick, the machinery proposed must be more expensive than
the necessity of the case would require ; but if on the other hand
it was intended to relieve the whole mass of destitution now in ex-
istence in Ireland, then the landed proprietors should be prepared
to raise 2,000,0001. a year ; but whicherer was intended, it was
absolutely necessary that reief should be insured.
Mr. F. FRENCH begged to observe that the calculations of
Mr. Stanley, es to the earnings of Irish labourers in England, and
the profits they brought home with them, upon which calculations
the Noble Lord appeared to rest, were wholly fallacious. lie had
himself inquired froar poor men who thus employed themselves, and
lie found that the annual amount of what they brought home did
not on the average exceed 31., and in bad seasons it often heppened
where a man left home with 10s. he frequently returned having
but 7s. 6d., thus losing 2s. 6d., his time, and having travelled per-
haps 600 miles to procure work. The Hon. Member next re-
ferred to an Act passed in the last session, by which the Board of
Works were in certain eases empowered to lend 50,0001. in the pro-
motion of public works in Ireland. He knew of an application
for a loan being made under the terms of that Act, and it was re-
fused, the Treasury stating that the Act was only temporary, and
tsar not then to be put in force.
Mr. LUCAS heard with great satisfaction the statement of the
Noble Lord. He begged, however, to observe to the Noble Lord
that aey statement which could be made es to the linen trade in
1824, was not at all applicable to the same trade in 1337, as the
linen trade had greatly diminished since 1824. He hoped that this
uestion would never degenerate into a party one.—( Hear. )
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in reference to
%vhat • had been said by the Hon. Menober for Roscommon, ex-
plained that an Act had passed last year to enable the Government
to advance, in cases of emergence, the public money, under the
superintendence of the Board of. Works. It would, he thought,
be a most unfortunate lesson to teach to the people of Ireland ; it
would be most unfortunate for themselves, if they were to expect
that in every case of distress they were to calculate upon receiving
money from the Government. A case of very great and extraor-
dinary emergency could alone justify such an application. The Act
of last year was intended to apply to such a case, and for the pur-
pose of doing so, it actually passed over the functions of the Grand
Jury. The application to which the Hon. Member for Roscommon
had referred, was considered by the Treasury not to come within
the objects of that Bill, and therefore it was refused.
After a few words from Mr. SMITH O'BU.IEN and Mr. LYNCH,
in reference to the Act of last year,
Lord CLEMENTS thought that a Poor-law never could be
efficient sinless the people had the means of taxing themselves for
the purpose of carrying on public works. The rate-pavers ought to
have a direct control over their own money, and to be afforded tile
means of opening the resources of their eounrry.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. SLANEY said.that the state of destitution which existed in
Ireland was such as ought not to exist in a Christian country. It
was matter of great congratulation to him that on one Irish ques-
tion there was not any difference of opinion, arid he entertained
strong hopes that this would greatly contribute to the success of the
experiment.—( Hear, hear. )
Sir E. SUGDEN was glad to be able to concur in the propo-
sition of the Noble Lord. With respect to the subject of out-door
relief, he thought it was utterly impossible to think of extending it
to Ireland. He was not in favour of the workhouse system if they
could find a better ; but in Ireland he thought they must be content
with this system, and
ne theda
sonlytroeogb joeiitn ens
stgoaiseeset
thetha t ita wasw
of
ayellet.
applied. He enter
element. lie thought that, if ossib e, ought to be avoided, and
he was not certain that it could not be avoided. He would give