The Sun.
London, England, 1838-02-07 00:00:00

IRISH POOR LAW.

TO THE FRIENDS OF ‘,:REAL JUSTICE" TO

IRELAND.

I respectfully address the following observations to humane
persons of all parties and stations, whether Whigs, Tories, or
Radicals, or persons designated by any other name of dis-
tinction, political or religious ; and I humbly hope that, if my
remarks shall be found to possess any value, a variance from
the political opinions of the author may not be a bar to their
consideration by persons of humanity, or to their diffusion by
the Press.

I was fully aware, when I had a seat in Parliament, that
many sincere friends to the poor of Ireland sat upon the oppo-
site side of the House from me ; and I acknowledge that
some of the best managed estates in that country—estates
whereon the people are most comfortable—are those of Tory
absentee proprietors. I therefore feel bound to disconnect
this subject from all party feelings. I have a confidence that
there is a disposition among men of all parties in England ti
do a tardy act of justice to Ireland by a legal provision for her
poor ; but I think the condition of those to be relieved is r.o,
understood, either by the British people or by British Mem-
bers of Parliament :•they are groping in the dark, misled by
the ignorance of some, and the wilful misrepresentations of
others.

There is one or other of two great misfortunes hanging over
us at the present moment—namely, the imposing on Ireland
the proposed Poor Law Bill in its present form, or the total
defeat of any legal enactment for the relief of the poor. Either
of these would be great evils—the danger is imminent. There
is a power opposed to any system of legalized relief, but the
popular voice calls so strongly for some measure—it cannot be
directly opposed ; but that power will be applied, through the
medium of the just objections to the Government Bill,
to the defeat of all and every proposition for relief.
It has been said thtt the object of a Poor-law was simply
to relieve destitution. I deny that this should be the sole
object—a far more important object should be connected with
that relief ; I mean the diminution of destitution. Any Poor-
law must act either beneficially or injuriously in this respect.
Then in order to frame a fitting Poor-law for Ireland, the
causes of destitution should be clearly understeod and constantly
kept in mind. This part of the question appears to me to be
wholly lost sight of; and that nothing else is considered, but
how a certain (vaguely computed) number of paupers are to
be imprisoned and fed in these prisons.
My object, then, in the following observations shall be—
First, to enquire into the causes of the extraordinary poverty
which is admitted to exist in Ireland. Secondly, to shew the
injurious operation of the proposed Poor-law Bill, with refe-
rence to poverty produced from these causes. And, Thirdly,
to suggest such amendments as would tend to obviate the ob-
jections, and render it practically useful.
If we look to all the Parliamentary Reports in which the
condition of the Irish people has been referred to, we shall find
that the poverty and crimes of that people are all traced to the
nature of the relationship between landlord and tenant, and to
the circumstances connected with the holding and letting of
lands. I shall shortly refer to a few of these circumstances
as stated in evidence.

Ist. The extraordinary subdivision of land. The induce-
ments to this were either the avarice of the landlord, to obtain
the highest possible rent ; or else his political ambition to
create the greatest
.possible number .of forty shilling free-
holders—or both acting together.
2d. The letting to middlemen. By which the landlord
obtained a greater security, whilst the middleman was induced
to give this security, by being permitted the power of extortion
over the occupier, through the means of the unnatural compe-
tion created by minute subdivision.
3d. The letting of lands in joint tenancy. Whereby each
individual tenant might be destrained for the rent of the whole
concern, and the honest industrious man made responsible for
the deficiences of the rogue or the idler.
4th. The extraordinary powers of destraining for rent pos-
sessed or used by the Irish landlord, which made him indiffe-
rent to the responsibility of the tenant whom be accepted on
his lands.

In proof of these statements I may refer to the evidence
given in the Lords and Commons' Reports of 1824, 1825,
and 1830, and to the late reports on the Irish Poor-law Inquiry.
I shall make a few short extracts from these reports, with a
view of inducing a reference to the reports themselves, by
those who are desirous of being more fully informed.
In the Commons' Report, 1830, (page 380), Mr. Bucheno
says :—" The distress which exists in Ireland appears to me to
be the consequence of the bad relation between landlord and
tenant. He describes the kindness and generosity of English
landlords, and then goes on to remark But in Ireland there
is no such feeling; all the landlord looks to there is the im-
provement of his income, and the quantity of rent he can
abstract.' Again, (page 384), he says the Irish landlords
look upon their land merely as a money interest, and he ac-
counts for it thus Ireland was settled at the Cromwellian
period, by persons who were soldiers and traders, who had
imbibed a mercantile spirit, and who, in fact, seized the
country as a profitable speculation. I think that spirit has
continued.' In the Commons' Report, dated June 30, 1825,
page 4, at the head of the list of matters to which remedial
measures should be applied, the Committee places the defec-
tive state of the law of landlord and tenant. Again, in 1830,
the Commons' Report, page 9, alludes to the wretched condi-
tion
of ejected tenantries in certain districts, and other evils in
the state of the tenantry, and then observes :—" Your Com-
mittee conceive that it is the imperative duty of individuals of
the Government and of the Legislature, to consider what
means can be devised to diminish this mass of suffering, and
at the same time secure for the country a better economical
condition, promoting a better management of estates, arid re-
gulating the relations between landlord and tenant on ra-
tional and useful principles." In the Lords' Report, in 1825,
the extraordinary powers of distress enjoyed by the landlords
are referred to by Mr. Nimmo. He states that he considers
these powers injurious, because they have the effect of making
the landlords indifferent to the responsibility of the tenants
whom they introduce upon the lands, The fact is al-
luded to, that a great portion of the small te-
nants have no stock ; and that, consequently, the land-
lord has nothing to resort to but the growing crop. Mr.
Nimmo replies—" Yes ; and I think the principle cause of that
is from the great powers in the hands of the lessors ; there
has been a general destruction of the stock of the country ;
the whole of the stock of a farm has been swept of the boy
killed the goose with the golden eggs—without any consideration
of the future condition of thc country." This is a most important
observation ; it accurately and unexaggeratedly describes the
condition of a great portion of the Wrest and South of Ireland.
What 'have quoted above are the statements of distinguished
and competent individuals; and we lind an illustration of their
statements in the pages of the evidence taken before the Irish
Poor Inquiry Commission.
I shall take a sample from the state of the parish of Burri-
shooll, as described in evidence, Appendix A. I should pre-
mise that in this parish all the impoverishing causes already
detailed, as well as many others, have been in operation.
Subdivision ; extortion by landlords, middlemen, and agents;
repeated distraints ; the whole stock of the country has been
swept off (as described in Mr. Nimmo's evidence above quoted) ;
ejectments; changes of occupiers; &c. &c. And what is the
consequence ? Mr. Hughes states that, out of a population
consisting of nearly 11,000 souls, he does not believe that there
are a dozen families (exclusive of the clergy, gentry, and shop-
keepers of Newport), who can have as much food as they would
wish to consume at any one meal ; and yet this food is only
potatoes, with water to drink ; and this is under their best
circumstances ; at other times they cannot supply them-
selves with more than one meal in the day, and sometimes
many of them not even that, unless it be supplied by charity.
Now let us recollect these are the landholders of the country
—the payers of the rents—brought to this state by the proceed-
ings of the receivers of the rents; that from these persons a
a rental of about 7,0001. annually is extracted, either by mid-
dlemen or landlords—a rental not large in proportion to the
extent of the parish, but which is an intolerable exaction, con-
sidered in proportion to the means ofpayznent.
Let it be recollected—that those people are without the
power of helping themselves to get out of this wretched con-
dition. Many of them have not cloathing so as to be able to
leave their own houses, even to work in their own fields—
how, then, can they look for work abroad? Their stock
having been swept away, they cannot have manure to improve
the condition of their land—so that it is progressively dete-
riorated by cropping without manure—and their poverty in-
creasing.

Let it be recollected, that unless the evil be corrected by the
landlords being compelled to change their course of proceed-
ings, you would have from this parish alone an annual claim
of ten thousand souls for relief during at least four months of
the year, and a progressive increase of pauperism. This one
fact, which cannot be denied, is worth a thousand vague cal-
culations of the total amount of poor in Ireland.
Let it be recollected that this is only a sample of a state ex-
tending itself over many other districts of Ireland.
Now, if I could suppose that the Legislators of the Imperial
Parliament would read these observations, I would call upon
them to keep these facts in mind when they are constructing a
Poor-law Bill for Ireland—a Bill without Settlement. I
would earnestly press upon them—that their Bill would not
be worth one farthing for goo& unless it be of such a nature
that, whilst it provides for the relief of the poor—conditioned
as I have described above—it shall also act in correcting the
causes of destitution—by throwing a fitting responsibility on
thelandlords for their respective tenantries ; but, on the other
hand, it would be of incalculable power for evil—if it supplies
(as it must do, to be of any use at all) relief to the pauperised
tenant—without creating that responsibility—because it would
compensate the misdoings of individuals by a national taxa-
tion, instead of forcing these individuals to correct the evils
created by themselves. It would be paying the rack rents of
the bad landlords out of the purses of the good landlords. I
shall be answered this responsibility cannot be created ; I main-
tain it can, by the means I shall hereafter point out.
It has been justly said that the poverty of the Irish people
had been created by the misgovernment of England. I admit
it ; but what has been the leading feature of that misgovern-
ment ? What has been the grand injustice perpetrated in the
Government of Ireland as compared with the governm:2nt of
England? The refusal of the poor man of Ireland of the
right to support from the land of his birth, which was given to
the poor man of England. Thus the Irish landlord had un-
restrained power without any correcting antidote to indulge
every b2.(1 passion, every bad impulse which malice, avarice, or
ambition could prompt him against the unfortunate occupiers
of the soil in Ireland. I would ask any unprejudiced person
whether this would have been the case if there had been a
Poor-law in Ireland ?—if the landlords would have reverberated
on themselves and produce their own cure? If a proper Poor-
law had existed, the penal enactments against the Catholic
people, directed to the impoverishment of their condition, would
have been practically so many blank parchments.
Again, the poverty of Ireland is charged ripen absenteeism.
Very true. But why does absenteeism injure us ? Becau.te
the landlord can carry away his rents without any responsi-
bility for the condition of the people. Produce this responsi-

b:lity, and then the evil of absenteeism may be defied.: I
maintain that in no other way can absenteeism be corrected.
It is perfectly absurd to talk of a tax upon absenteeism, so
long as the Union between Great Britain and Ireland is to
be sustained. It is onlydiverting the minds of the peoplefrom
a real of j?ct to an ignisfrutus.
The evil of pauperism, is not confined to the estates of ab-
sentees. I maintain that there is not an ev:l found cn such
estates, which is not often found in an aggravated ferns on
the estates of residents. No one who has a practical know-
ledge of Ireland can deny this.. I call then for a Poor-law
such as will make the landlord? whether absent or present, in
a just degree responsible for the condition of those salsa de-
rive from him, in so far (and in so far only), as the pr( fi sof
the labour of the occupiers are drained into his pocket through
the medium of excessive rent. This can he done by a proper
regulation of the ratepaying clauses, with reference to the
proportion of rent to the estimated value, and in connection
with a judicious law of settlement.
I have endeavoured in the foregoing observaticnis, to show
as briefly as possible, the causes which have directly operated
in producing Irish poverty; and I have drawn the conclusions
that the evil has been created by the non-responsibility of the
landlord, and can only be corrects d by such a Poor-law as
will create that responsibity. In th e second part of these ob-
servations I shall inquire whether a Nor-law such as the Bill
now proposed, divested of a law of s tTitlement of any descrip-
tion, and limited to workhouse relief; can have any useful
operation in relieving or removing the poverty of Ireland.
W. SHARMAN-. CRAWFORD.
Crawfordsburn, near Benyon, Ireland,

Jan. 31, 1838.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

SIR,—As the Meeting in the Borough of Southwark, yes-
terday, did not terminate until fiy. o'clock, I must confess my
surprise at seeing a report thereof in your Evening Paper of
that day, although, as a constant reader of your valuable Paper,
I have seen much of the celerity with which you (regardless of
cost or difficulty) publish Reports. My object in troubling you
with this communication is to beg the correction of an error in
the report of the remarks I felt it my duty to make at the
Meeting alluded to, principally because it refers to a historical'
fact. My statement was, that in the sixth year of the reign
of William and Mary the Triennal Bill was passed, which had
previously been rejected by the King—and not the Bill of
Rights, which was sworn to by the King and Queen on their
accession. Your insertion of this, in correction of the above,
for the reason stated, will increase the obligation I am
under, as a humble individual of the public, to your exertions
in the cause of the people.
In haste, yours respectfully,
J. C. BARNES, 131, Tooley-street.

Thursday, July I, 1838.
[The above stood over from the pressure of Parliamentary
and other news.]

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SU2V.

Mr. EDlTOR,—Seeing in your last night's leader an in.
voluntary error, permit me to set you right.. You state that
the Irish Waste Land Improvement Company have met with
no encouragement from any Irish landlord; whereas at this
moment we have taken an extensive tract in the county of
Galway from Sir John Burke and his Noble uncle the Mar-
quis of Clanricarde, upon which operations are actively com-
mencing.

A SHAREHOLDER AND MEMBER OF
GRAY'S INN.

Gray's Inn, Feb. 6, 1838.

MASONIC FESTIVAL to CELEBRATE
THE ANNIVERSARY of the BIRTH-DAY of HIS
ROYAL HIGHNESS the DUKE of SUSSEX.

The annual celebration of the birth-day of the illustrious
Grand Master of the fraternity of Freemasons was held yes-
terday at the Freemasons' Tavern. The assemblage of the
brethren on all occasions when honcur is to be done to the il-
lustrious and popular Grand Master is very great ; but it was
yesterday more than usually numerous in consequence of its
having become generally known that the Earl of Durham,
R. W. Grand Master for Northumberland and Durham, would
preside.
Shortly after five o'clock the company began to assemble,
and among those whom we observed were the Deputy Grand
Master, Lord John Churchill, and the following Provincial
Grand Masters :—Colonel Kemys Tynte, Colonel Baillie,
M.P. ; Colonel Wildman, J. Ramsbottom, Esq., Honourable
T. Dundas, Messrs. M'Gillivray, Alston, Reid, and Lewis.
There were also present Mr. C. J. K. Tynte, M. P. ; Mr.
Easthope, M. P. ; Messrs. Marjlrihanks, Willett, Prescott,
H. F. Stephenson, the Rev. G. A. Brown, the Rev. J. Vane,
the Rev. W. Fallofield, Dr. Crucifex, Lord Durhait, &c.
The Earl of Durham entered the room shortly after six
o'clock, and was greeted with immense applause upon tak-
ing the Chair. He was supported on the right and left by
Lord John Churchhill and Colonel Tynte. Air. Fox Manic
was expected to have officiated as vice-chairman on the oc-
casion, but his absence was satisfactorily accounted for, being
at present in Scotland on his canvas for the Elgin district of
burghs.
On the cloth being removed the CHAIRMAN proposed the
health of the " Queen," which was received with immense
cheering, which continued for several minutes.
" The Queen Dowager and the rest of the Royal Family"
was then proposed from the chair, and drunk with applause.
The CHAIRMAN then rose to propose the health of " The
illustrious Grand Master of the Maternity of Freemasons,
his Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex."—( Immense
cheering.) There had been no less than five members of the
Royal Family members of the fraternity, but of all these his
Royal Highness was the only survivor. It was, however, sonic
consolation to know that the illustrious daughter of one of the
five now filled the throne of this kingdom. —(Cheers.) The
health of his Royal Highness was then drunk amidst tumultu-
ous cheering.
Lord J. CHURCHILL then proposed " The health of their
Chairman, the Earl of Durham—a prosperous voyage to him
to Canada, and a speedy return." . .

The toast was received with the utmost eathusiasm.
The Earl of DURHAM returned thanks. In allusion to his
approaching journey to Canada, he said that in the important
and difficult duties which were allotted to him in that country,
he hoped he should ever be guided by the principles which
adorned the craft. He hoped that he should ever recollect that
the main characteristics of masonry were -charity and forgive.
ness to all mankind.—( Cheers.)
The usual toasts followed, which we deem it unnecessary
to enumerate. The Chairman left the cha'r at ten o'clock,
and on leaving the room was followed by a large portion of
the company.