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

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 Englanil_(, 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 to 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 author of the Letter 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
la'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, and persons who would be responsible for
he
, money, and who had intelligence and skill to
apply 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.
gslation. It would be best effected by that species
n
legislation which 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 higher than in the latter. The Hon. Member
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 the labourers of Ireland who 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 their money home, and poor laws pro-
voting them the means of return at the public
expence would only induce them to flock over
here more numerously than at present. He had to
complain,_ too, of the cruelty that was sometimes
practised under the present system of poor laws.
n-m,_atl who had resided 40 or 50 years in
of Iti".ci, and who had spent the best part
wttuiltslife in labouring in this country, the in-
Ireht,il e demanded casual relief might be sent off to
snpaottive:o3l, Trithryia, was not sending a man back to his
it was tearing him away from the
"ere he had grown and flourished. English
Women
to t who had married Irishmen, were sent
an Irelandthe 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
re ern of passing Irish labourers back into Ireland
begtoo.red revision. The inquiry he proposed would
proL_Rreat service, if it only gave a negative to the
vehrrltian of introducing poor laws into Ireland,
.4en m. L
theiriLignt encourage misguided hopes, and mislead
such " 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
inquiry support them than he should be. The
ready'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 Increased. lie believed, too, that such an
Y would demonstrate that a great deal had al-
ready been d
attended One.
his motion 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,
next in who were opposed to that measure. The
of, Wry to which he would direct the attention
%Jon_ •
(ion
of _ I.nittee was connected with the administra-
binutorldteeePwit
did not!rhat are called the Grand Jury Laws. He
ascertain
administeri "e a revisal of these laws : far from it—
nett the subject to undergo consideration,
n how far the present system of.
melts of th:g those laws either limited the employ-
them a kind
To
of a district, or provided for
beneficial. T employment which could be called
the.subject,,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, that
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 at 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 state.
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 beggary existed 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 tomawhai-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.niitt pc Of case ;