The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-13 00:00:00

~,

THE StIN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 13, 1849.

The first amendment, for the insertion of the words
"or treasonable practices," having been per,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL sa.d he could not ac-
cede to that amendment, for it was at variance with the
principle of the Bill, which the House had already
affirmed. His Hon. and Learned Friend sought to eon•
tinue—not the Act of last session—but an entirely dif-
ferent Act. But the measure of last session was framed
in strict conformity with former precedents; and it ap-
peared to him (the Attorney-General) that it was
better they should adopt the exact words of former Bills
auspendieg the Habeas Corpus Act, rather than that
they should, by agreeing to a new measure, open the
door to doubt an litigation without the control of pre-
' 'ions practice. He felt bound to oppose the amendment
because it wens at variance with the principle of the Bill,
and necauese it was contrary to the known practice of
Parliament.
The Committe then divided, when there appeared
'or the amendment ... ..• ..• 12
Against it ••• ••• ••• 79,7
Majority against the amendment ... 0
The remaining amendments of Mr. Anstey were then
'negatived without a division, and the clause was ordered
to stand part of the Bill.
The second clause having been put,
Mr. ANSTEY moved the omission of the clause. He
thought it would be unreasonable and unjust to confer on
the Lord-Lieutenant the power of selecting any place he
might please as a goal for carrying out the object of the
Act, because a person might by that means be removed
to a part of the country where he would have no oppor-
tunity of entering into communication with his friends,
or of preparing his defence.
The motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was
negatived without a division, and the clause was agreed to.
The third and only remaining clause was also adopted.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL then moved the insertion of a
clause to the following effect:—" Provided always, and
be it enacted, that nothing contained in this Act shall
be construed or taken to warrant the arrest, committal,
or detainer of any person for procuring or seeking to
procure, in a legal and constitutional manner, the hold
ing of meetings to petition Parliament or address the
Queen, in accordance with the law and constitution, or
for attending or taking part in the proceedings of such
meetings.
Sir Ur. GREY would not waste the time of the Com-
=Wee by again entering into a question which had al-
ready been decided after a discussion which occupied two
hours, when the House rejected the same motion in the
shape of an instruction to the Committee.
Mr. BERNAL said a question of form was also in-
volved in the motion, namely, whether the clause moved
by the Honourable Member came within the scope of
the Bill.
J. O'CONNELL said, unless the Chairman should
absolutely divide against him, he would divide the Com-
mittee. However, if the Right Honourable Baronet the
Secretary of State for the Home Department would an-
woetrio. A
one
question plainly, ho would withdraw the
as it or was it not the intention of her Ma-
jesty'B Government to prevent the agitation for the re-
Peal of the union? He did not speak of the Repeal As-
'lodation in particular, or any agitation which he (Mr.
I O'Connell) might originate, but did they mean to in-
terfere so as to prevent the people of Ireland from agi-
tating for a repeal of the union?
G. GREY said, no doubt the Lord-Lieutenant of
Ireland
would exercise the powers committed to him as
he alight think best; but in adopting this course neither
he nor any other member of the Government would ex-
tend any immunity to those who might bring them-
selves within the suspicion of being engaged in treason•
able
designs•—(Cheers.)
After a few words from Mr. BxRNAL and Mr. Hufix,
Mr. B
IA • OSBORNE said it was- in vain for the Hon.
if ember for Kilkenny to attempt to improve the Bill, but
he
w"
really anxious to know the practical effect of
the measures on the Repeal Association let him go over
1141:d agitate for repeal, and be would then satisfy himself
"ce•—(Hear and laughter.)
u • tr. O'CONNELL said no definite answer had been
given to his question, and he would, therefore, take the
of the Committee.
The Committee then divided—
For the clause... ••• •
Against it ...
Majority ••• ***-94
1., The bill was then ordered to be reported; the House
41.11ned, and the report was received.
RELIEF OF DISTRESS (IRELAND) BILL.

... 11
... 105

Tileiduse then went into Committee on this Bill.
P. SCROPE said the turn which the debate
zad taken led him to believe that the object which he
ts 44 84
in view could not be brought fairly before the
e—catraittee by taking the debate on the present oc-
flisi"----(Hear, hear.) He was not opposed to a vote
.or the relief of Irish distress, and he did not wish, there-
sore, to obstruct the vote, his object being to attach a
condition to it, supposing the vote to be agreed to. He
should be most unwilling to object to a vote which he be-
fleved to be absolutely necessary in order to prevent
sr:is"' and to refuse which, therefore, would entail on
te lsiature a responsibility of a very fearful inasmuchcharac-
ter, as Parliament had recognised the prin-
cipsesgat the
nervation.people of Ireland should be preserved from
He thought, therefore, that if any vote
should be come to in that House which should appear on
the face of it to recognise the withdrawal of that right to
relief, and impose the necessity of leaving masses of
People to perish from want, they would incur a heavy
responsibility. To proclaim that no funds should be pro-
vided for the relief of those who were reduced to the ex-
-uoy of destitution weal be to absolve them from
their allegiance to society, and give them license to plun-
der and commit violence of every description without the
Possibility of opposing any check to them. Hroherefore,
for
- one would incur no such fearful responsibility. He
had seen reports from Ballina and Westport, and other
Places, stating that the paid guardians had already been
forced to refuse relief to large numbers when it was abso-
lutely necessary, while in other instances many had been
Put on half allowance, and he had private information to
the same effect. If, then, under these circumstances,
they refused relief they rendered themselves answerable
he believed would be fatal for all the consequences, which
not only to thousands of lives but to the safety of society
itself. He would not, therefore, bring forward his pro-
position at that stage, but would move it on bringing up
the report..
Mr. GRATTAN then rose to move the amendment
of which he had given notice, " On motion for relief of
distress (Ireland), to insert after the word that' the
words the collectors of excise in Ireland be henceforth
directed, and do in future pay into the office of vice-
treasurer of Dublin the amount of all Crown and quit
rents, and that the same be appropriated to the relief
of distressed poor-law unions in that country.' " He
complained et the attacks that had been made upon
the people of Ireland, and assured the House that he
for one did not come there to beg; and he believed,
if the people of that country were but fairly treated,
they would do without assistance from England.—(Cries
of" Hear, hear.") These were the premises he would
"Y down, and it, would be for Hon. Members to say
Whether he made out his case or not. Why, there was
quite enough of money in Ireland to support the people
if they
would only leave it there. There were such
u
items ``iraai,d 2O to g
sQueen Victoria, 10 gs. ; paid to
Queen Victoi
and so on ; Paid to Queen Victoria, 50 gs.;"
; and that •money and these vouchers were
103uittig of the
isatuuche's bank. Let that money not be taken
their comingt
heeountry, and there would be no necessity for
to England to ask relief. The objection
of Honourable Membess in that House was, that Eug-
:!sh moisey should be devoted to Irish purposes ; but
re
there as a case of Irish money lying there, which
!sscould be no objection to devote to Irish pur
),,es• When the drummers and fifers of Cromwell
bade over to Ireland, and the London companies, they
aeis;sstarge tracks of land divided amongst them, for
"'", they paid merely a small sum of Id. or lid. per
abre,
b-Y way of quit-rent; that money amdunted to
out 700001. annually; and although it had been some-
that reduced of late, it still averaged 50,0001. per annum.
flNow let them come to a proper understanding, and when
°n• Members talked of their coming to England to ask
for
money, let them first refund the money which be
longed to Ireland. Let them only leave the money there
instead of carrying off these crown-rents and quit. rents
Thedecorate Carlton-terrace and St. James's Palace.
usecanlreetcoould be neither justice, nor propriety, nor good
in acting thus, and then saying that the Irish.
the 11, that House as mendicants. lie did not think
in th,,tn• Member for Tavistock was justified in sneering
If waY at the Irish Members and the Irish people.
the Irish landlord.; only did their duty there would be
no necessity for their coming to that House to ask for
assistance. The absentee
proprietors were the bane Of
Ireland, and had left its
people in a state of pauperism
estarvation. Ile complained also of the attacks upon
t_h..!rish Members and the Irish people by the press,
awuncl h were filled with the most offensive personal abuse
!iiegusting falsehoods. He gave the strongest con-
tradiction to those attacks that the forms of Parliament
would allow him. The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded
to
t read over along list of peers and gentry of that coun-
try
who possessed estates in Ireland, which they rarely
utr never visited, and who left the people to misery and
orvation, while they abstracted the rents and profits
..sihe land and spent them elsewhere. Many of these
"Weasels and gentlemen were, be was ready to admit,
excellent landlords; but they were very bad Irish land-
rds- Resident landlords could do a great deal. They
could keep the people quiet. If they wished to keep the
People out of the hands of bad leaders let them give them
coed leaders.---(Cries of "Hear, hear.") He suggested
that the
best thing they could do would be to impose a
'at of 10 per cent. upon the absentee Irish landlords; if
the did that the people of Ireland would willingly dis-
Zroe with their 50,000L—(Hear, hear.) The Hon.
embers said they would grant it because it would
u°l?iti..the test• lie said " No;"—it was only the begin-
reg of a series. If they were to be thus treated as
!ndicants it would be better for them at once to take
eft. their clothes, and come to that House in the old
Faerments that had been sent to Ireland.—(Great
Ireland Whatever concessions had been made to
theruan, d the British Minister had invariably mulcted
Red and made them pay for it in pounds, shillings,
Isseeence. Look at the Petition of Rights, which had
conceded by Charles I. only on condition that the
Parr
calleisZraellt should vote him a sum of 130,0001. He
cats" aPou the Hon. Members for Ireland not to be de.
spurn and duped any longer—let them act like men, and
the the filthy lucre.—(Great cheering.) Now, look at
by th
ren
,ergekamount that was annually drawn out of Ireland
takes[ u
a sentee p rop
04 sterling
It was stated that te
Was 4,000,00 annually; but he would
it at 3,000,000/., and, calculating that for fifty years,
4,'R tothe present time there was a sum of 150,000,0001.
averWo out of Ireland. Take the crown rents at an
4,2:,1;° of 70,0004 for fifty years, and that would make
u0Z,e00:1)1., so that instead of coming as beggars to that
eceolFtrravoef he Would take the liberty of telling the Chan-
e Exchequer that he would find it difficult to
6.ityne the fact, that there was altogether a sum of
08,000,0001.
yearss,tearendngett,aukeanthoeumtatoilcialnrewlainudld dbuerianbgletltioe
lastshow that he had been mistaken in a single figure. lie
truted Ulu the Lion. Member for Tavistock, now that he

had heard these facts, would blush for shame for the at-
tack, he bad made upon the Irish people. H.e thought the
Hon. Member was altogether unjustifiable in the charges
he had brought against them; he should be glad to know
whether the Hon. Gentleman really thought that the
people of Ireland had swindled the country. He cared
little for their 50,0001. that, was to be voted that night,
because he could tell them 50,0001. would not do, nor five
times 50,0001.—(Ironical cheers.) He thought it better
to speak out and be honest at once. He had never been
insensible to the kindness of England; but when he
heard so much talk of the British Association, and the
large sums subscribed by the people of England, he
would remind them that the whole amount did not ex-
ceed 600,004, and that if the names of the subscribers
were looked over, it would be found that the great bulk
of them were persons who were connected by property
or relationship with Ireland. He admitted, however, the
kindness and the liberality of England in the season of
Ireland's distress, but they had heard quite enough of it
from the Hon. Member for Tavistock, and he would say
to him—

fit
" To
To:Jobuoi
ta
John
John
ni I
hn
niotawhnt
hash
trshlooutilmgar eethe
lately
moretl
tihgtl
oai i
etut
hgonahnanit
iliotun t
—(Cheers.) And he believed, if the accounts were fairly
ablanced between the two countries Ireland would be
found to owe England nothing. Let! the people of Eng-
land bear in mind who it was that really wished to sepa-
rate Ireland from England. It was one of their own
countrymen—not one of the mere gentry, but one of the
nobility, a high and titled Bishop—the Bishop of Dvrry
—who rode in at the head of his followers, and said to
the BAH of Charlemont, " Now is the time for us to slip
the connexion—let us have blood, and blood enough."
" No," said Lord Charlemont, " there shall be no blood-
shed if I can help it," for his Lordship was attached to
the connexion with England, and he, with other Irish-
men, united together in opposition to such a proceeding.
What was the use of this grant? Why, this 50,0001.
would not last the Irish any time.—(Hear, hear, and
laughter.) Twopence out of every shilling of it would
go to feed the poor, and the tenpence was divided
amongst the officers. There were 131 unions in Irelami,
and it appears that there were 50 more to be added.
Did they really think that this would do any good?
Why they built the most ridiculous teetotal poor-houses
that could be conceived, which cost from 5,0001. to 8,000/.
and 12,0001. They gave the paupers gardens too, and
so very generous were they in their attentions to them,
that they gave them for their odours plenty of sweet-pea
and mignionette.—(Great laughter.) There was a ridi-
cule ace mpanying this extravagance that was quite dis-
gusting. In the union to which he belonged, one of the
guardians, who had nothing else to do, pushed his stick
completely through the wall of the workhouse, it was so
very ill constructed.—(Laughter.) In the Colbridge
union they had, at one time, the highest rate of any in
Ireland. In consequence, however, of his having the
advantage of a better resident gentry than other parts
of the country possessed, they were able to get rid of the
Government officers and to support the poor themselves.
To be sure t hey owed the Government a small balance of
301., which he would be willing to pay them back, for he
did not want their dirty money .—(Great laughter.) He
held in his hand a book called " The Irish Crisis,"
which he was informed was published and circulated
at the expense of Government. He found that
it had got upon the cover the harp without the
crown. Merely such a thing as this was made
evidence against some of the unfortunate Irish
who were charged with high treason. He had purs
chased this book before the Act was passed for the sus-
pension of the Habeas Corpus, for if he had bought it
now it is probable he would be arrested under this Act
and thrown into prison. This book, however, was
written by an Englishman high in favour with the Go-
vernment. It commenced with a falsehood, and it ended
with lies. It depicted the poverty of the Irish, and
laughed at them for their poverty. He believed Lord
Clarendon to be an honest man, but at the same time
he thought he was very ill advised. The Habeas Corpus
Suspension Act was not wanted in Ireland, but it was
necessary in order to keep their eyes and their ears
closed until the revolution was completed. There was
now a gradual change of property in progress. Their
policy was, first to vilify the Irish people, to call them
barbarians—their priesthood surpliced ruffians—their
landlords tyrants, exterminators—and these same land-
lords they were now endeavouring to sweep down in
one general mass of ruin. It happened that a friend
of his, an individual in this town, had lent 50,0001.
in Ireland against his (Mr. Grattan's) advice—
(Laughter)—and he had never been able since to
obtain any interest for his money.—(Hear, hear.) He
did not wonder at the disrelish of the English to specu-
late in that country. for who would leave his soft downy
bed in London to sit upon a naked rock in Connemara?—
(Great laughter.) He was not a leader nor exterminator
—he liked the aristocracy—he admired the coach and
six before the miserable one-horse jarvey.—(Continued
laughter.) If they gave the Irish freedom, they would
support them in war or peace; but if they gave them
chains and slavery, they would curse them, they would
hate them, and they would get rid of them when they
could. Now, there was nothing like speaking the truth.
The Irish would act as the English themselves would
act under similar circumstances—as the Norman barons
at Runnymede acted. They ought to tax the absentees,
if they would not send them back to Ireland. The time
would come when they would regret not having done so.
Let them not pride themselves in their vain glory, upon
their wooden walls and their military forces. They
might depend upon it, if republicanism had succeeded
upon the continent, the Irish people would not be left in
their present low and miserable condition. The
time might come when this country would
deeply regret their policy towards the sister
country. There might be a reflux of the
tide when the Irish people would obtain what they
wanted. Whatever might happen, he should have the
satisfaction of supporting that which he considered more
conducive to the interests of both countries—for he
would rather his right band to be cut away from his
body than take any other course. He was fur freedom
for England equally with Ireland. His countrymen
were born in every way equal to the English, and he,
for one, would never submit to be treated as a slave.
The Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving his
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN said he apprehended that the pro-
position of the Hon. Member for Meath could not be
entertained. It was a motion affecting the Crown rents.
It was, therefore, not competent for the Hon. Gentleman
to submit such a motion.
Mr. H. GRATTAN—Her Majesty's name does not
appear in this proposition.
The CHAIRMAN—The Hon. Gentleman will per-
ceive by the terms of his proposition that he intends to
deal with the revenue of the Crown. It is not compe-
tent for any Hon. Member to bring forward a motion
professing to deal with the Crown revenues, unless with
the consent of the Crown, signified in a proper manner.
Mr. ORMSBY GORE rose for the purpose of making
some explanations in regard to what had been said about
the condect of the Irish landlords. The charg, s brought
against these gentlemen were most unfounded. It was
said they did not attend to the poor in the districts where
they resided. The charge was without foundation.
They could not, of course, be everywhere.' A man
could not be expected to reside in halt a chzen counties
at one and the same time. He himself, when in Ireland,
resided in Westmeath, but he had also property in the
county of Sligo; he could not, of course, reside upon
both, but he felt himself as much bound to support those
resident upon the one as those upon the other. He had
no hesitation in saying that Ireland had been in a great
degree robbed of the benefit which must have accrued
from a resident gentry, in consequence of the system of
government which had been pursued towards that coun-
try. He contended that Ireland had been used by all
the political parties of the country as a stalking horse,
to suit and to forward their own views and interests;
and what he wanted to see was a system of legislation
pursued towards that country which would have the
effect of benefiting its population, and promoting its
interests. Ireland had been misused by all parties. She
had been robbed of her manufactures, her resident
gentry had been driven from her soil, and he believed
that all the gold in California would not place her inde-
pendent. He, therefore, advised the Government to look
not only to the poor-law as regarded that country, but
to take into consideration those laws which it was con-
sidered was necessary for the benefit of the country. It
was remedial measures that Ireland wanted, and did the
Government bring in those in a proper spirit they should
have Isis support.
Mr. STAFFORD said that he was glad to be able to
discover the grievances of Ireland independent of all
sectarian spirit. He did not, however, see, that the
system pursued by the Government for the raising of
money for the support of Ireland was a right one. The
continual application of sums of money raised by the
general taxation of the country to the relief in Ireland
was vicious in principle, and unjust in practice. It had
already been fraught with the worst consequences as re-
garded Ireland, and he would not, therefore, give his
consent to a further extension of the principle.
From the information before the House, it ap-
peared that year after year the amount of
pauperism in Ireland was increasing, and as a
proof of it he might state that while in the month of
April last there was 20.781 receiving out-door relief,
there was in the month of July, 414,400 ; that, then,
showed the increase of the poor, notwithstanding the
measures heretofore adopted by Government for the
support of them, and what ho aimed at was the intro-
duction of a measure which would have the effect of, in
some degree, doing away with this amount of Irish
pauperism and alleviating the distress which at the pre-
sent time prevailed in that country. A gentleman
from Lancashire who had purchased a considerable pro-
perty in Ireland, had stated to him, that in consequence
of the exorbitancy of the rates he was obliged to dis-
miss 120 labourers, whom he employed daily, and to re-
turn to his native country, thus leaving the land uncul-
tivated and the labourers unemployed, and therefore de-
pending on the workhouse protection. Could the pre-
sent generation boast of being superior to those before
them? or could posterity not say of them that there was
such tracts of land lying waste in 1849, and through the
negligence of Government no system for their reclama-
tion was adopted ? that the labourers, unemployed,
and yet willing to work, died of starvation; and also
that the landlords were ruined because they were
obliged to support those labourers idle in a workhouse?
He looked upon the excuse held forth by Government as
a mere mockery, because it could not be said on the pre-
sent occasion, at this season of the year, that there was
any harvest. and he believed, from the feelings and fears
of the people of Ireland, that there would be a very
trifling harvest next autumn, because there is scarcely
any corn sown, in consequence of the apprehension of
the farmer lest his crop should be seized by his landlord.
Again, be did not see how Irish proprietors, with only
00 acres in one parish, while English proprietors had
25,000 acres, could afford money for the employment of
the labouring classes; and he considered that Govern-
merits as they would not themselves suggest any remedy,
should allow those who understood the wants and condi.
Lion of that country to introduce remedial measures for

the benefit of that country. He also thought it neces-
sary that Government should give a detail of the state of
the twenty-one unions in Ireland, to which a cursory and
very vague allusion had been made from the debates in
that House, and in " another place." The people
of that country e °slid become acquainted with
the Ministerial system, and through such knowledge
public opinion would tell strongly against them. He,
therefore, hoped that they would consider that this
trifling grant would effect very little good, and that it
would not be wise for them to persevere in this course
of proceeding when some specific measure was requisite
for the employment of the labouring classes. As there
was no subject relative to Ireland that the Government
understood better, he wished to know why the Ministers
had not convened Parliament before the Ist of February
as so many unions were in a state of bankruptcy. He
considered that those who have Ireland at heart should
speak out in condemnation of the Government, because
in reference to many parts of Ireland the time for. deli-
beration has passed by, and that now only was the time
for action—(Hear, hear)—and not for deliberation.
For how, he would ask, could the Committee
debate and deliberate, when it was known that every
day tended to check the cultivation of the land, and to
sink the most wretched parts of that country in a still
deeper and worse condition. He thought that it was
the duty of her Majesty's Ministers to have considered
that question long before, and to have come to some de-
' cision for ameliorating the state of a starving people;
but such, he regretted to say, was not the case, for be
found several mistakes in their mode of proceeding.
First, in the Union of Ballina he found a mistake of
10,000 paupers, which would have escaped the notice of
the House had he not been conversant with that locality;
and, secondly, he also found a mistake on their part of
100 holdings; and thus, with such mistakes, do Govern-
ment come forward at the eleventh hour and complain
that those unions are doomed to death if this House do
not grant them 50,0001. for 414,000 paupers, who could
not be sustained more than six weeks by this
grant. He was aware that the Irish Members could see
that the tide of pauperism and misery was now rising,
and that the present Connaught would be the future
Munster. He would not allude to alienation, because he
did not believe that any such feeling existed, and that
the way to win the affections of the Irish people was not
to pander to their faults, but to use every effort to im-
prove their condition by a salutary system of employ-
ment. He did not see that any good had been effected
by the 10,000,000/. that had already been expended on
unproductive works, and he also felt convinced that no
good would arise from the present grant ; and he, there-
fore, thought that the system ought to be changed, for,
if not, the Government would be held responsible. He
considered it very unfair and unjust that Government
should place them in such a position as to be thought not
to commiserate the forlorn condition of the country ;
and he, therefore, felt it to be his duty to rise and speak
against any Hon. or Right Honourable Gentleman who
would put them in the position of closing their
eyes and ears to,the misery and distress of Ireland. The
Hon. Gentleman then proposed the following as an
addition to the original motion :—" That the continual
application of sums of money, raised by the general
taxation of the country, to the relief of local distress in
Ireland, is vicious in principle, unjust in practice, and
impolitic with respect to the suffering districts them-
selves, as tending to destroy all spirit of self-reliance.
That the Committee cannot assent to any vote of money
far the temporary mitigation of such distress until it
shall have received from her Majesty's advisers an
estimate of the whole charge which will be requisite for
this purpose. That it is the duty of her Majesty's
Government to introduce, without delay, measures
which may obviate the future necessity of applying to
Parliament for the relief of local distress in Ireland."
Mr. :MORE and Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose at the same
time, and the former gentleman having, on repeated
cries being raised for the Noble Lord, given way,
Lord J. RUSSELL said—Sir, I certainly felt relieved
by the statement of the Hoc. Member that he did not
intend to oppose the grant of 50,0001. for the immediate
relief of the distress of Ireland. I own I consider that
the visiting upon the distressed unions of Ireland and
their inhabitants, who are entirely without the means of
support, the censure or indignation which Hon. Gentle•
men may feel against the course taken by the Govern-
ment, would be in the first place extremely unjust, and
in the next place would be visiting upon the unoffending,
the starving, and the miserable, those faults which—if
they are to be censured as faults—are those of the per-
sons who are in possession of the government of the
country. I am glad, therefore, to find that the Hon.
Gentleman, instead of refusing the grant, moves his
three resolutions upon the conduct of the Go-
vernment. But, Sir, with regard to these re-
solutions, I cannot but think that the Honourable
Gentleman has taken a course which can hardly be
defended as consistent with past usage. The first reso-
lution says that in the opinion of this Committee the
application to Parliament for any sum of money for the
relief of the distress ought to have been accompanied by
an estimate of the probable amount that will be required
for that purpose. Now I say, in the first Ilace, this has
never been done by a Government. I alluded the other
night to the cases of 1822 and 1846. In the first instance,
the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for the Univer-
sity of Cambridge, when Secretary for Ireland, had
brought forward, in the month of April, a Bill with re-
spect to the employment of the people by grand juries,
and a vote of 50,000/. for the employment of the people
by means of a grant was agreed to. At a subsequent part
of the same session of Parliament, two months after-
wards, there was another proposal for a grant of 100,0001.,
for the same purpose. Then again in 1846, the first vote
of the House in the early part of the session was a sum of
50,0001. for the public works in Ireland, which was fol-
lowed by a vote of 50.000/. for piers and harbours in Ireland,
and by 50,0001. for drainage in that country. Altogether
228,000/. were voted in loans, and 150,000/. in grants
for Ireland, in the early part of the session. Such
Sir, has been the course of the Government up to the
present moment ; coming forward at the beginning of
the session with a vote for distress as it existed, and then
proceeding to vote further sums according to the neces-
sity
of the case—(Hear)—and it appears to me an
obvious and a necessary course. If the Government
came forward and said, " Let us have 400,0001. or
500,000/. for the relief of the distressed unions in Ire-
land ;" why, Sir, you might to be sure send that sum,
but you would have no security that there would not be
a further sum of equal amount asked for the same pur,
pose. This course seems likewise necessary, because it
is impossible to say how much may be required for cer-
tain districts where distress prevails until we know the
urgency of the case. Now, Sir, with respect to the
union of Belittle the poor-law guardians of that union
state that it is certainly possible to collect the further
rate due on that union, but they add, that in their
opinion to do so would be to destroy the means of
the farmers, to injure the prospects of the next harvest,
to cause the tenants to emigrate, and involve the land-
lords ; and therefore they advise the Commissioners to
allow the industry of the country to maintain the popu-
lation as far as possible, by making an advance in aid of
the union, and not compell ng them to strike another
poor-rate. In May, they are of opinion, that there would
be means of support derivable from the property of the
union, when the rate might be struck, and they had no
doubt would be paid. Would it, Sir, under such circum-
stances as these, be wise or prudent in us to say, there
will be no such means in May; and that, therefore, this
House shall vote a sum sufficient for the relief of that
union for the whole year?—(Hear.) I conceive, conse-
quently, that according to precedent, and according to the
dictates of practical reason, we have taken in this in-
stance a course which is perfectly justified by the cir-
cumstances; and that we should, on the contrary, have
been liable to censure if we had taken the course
pointed out by the Hon. Gentleman. And yet, Sir, a
vote of censure upon us forms the first part of the Hon.
Gentleman's resolution.—(Hear.) The next part of the
Hon. Gentleman's resolution is, that " the continual ap-
plication of sums of money raised by the general taxa-
tion of the country to the relief of local distress in Ire-
land, is vicious in principle, unjust in practice, and
impolitic in respect to the suffering districts themselves,
as tending to destroy all spirit of self-reliance." Why,
Sir, I think that this is nothing more than a mere
truism.—(Hear, hear.) I agree with the spirit of the
resolution, that there is nothing worse than continual
grants of the public money to the relief of local distress
in Ireland or anywhere else; I agree that it is calculated
to make the people improvident, and to destroy their
spirit of self-reliance; 1 agree that it is vicious in prin-
ciple and unjust in practice. But I must also confess
that there are many cases in which a grant may be all
this vicious in principle, unjust in practice, and impolitic
as a general rule, but which, nevertheless, becomes jus-
tified on the part of the Government and this House
by the force of extraordinary circumstances. A mea-
sure which is wrong in principle may be forced on us
for the purpose of saving a part of the population.
This is one of that nature. But the Honourable
Gentleman goes on to say that " it is the duty of her
Majesty's Government to introduce without delay mea-
sures which shall obviate the future necessity of ap-
plying to Parliament for the relief of local distress in
Ireland." Now, Sirs on this subject I can refer
the House to what has been done by her Majesty's Go-
vernment, and what it proposes to do. With regard to
what has been done, let us not omit from our retrospect
that which has been, and is, the extraordinary feature
ofnhis case—that extraordinary feature which, as far as
the present crisis has gone, makes it unparalleled in the
history of the world. That feature, however, has been
entirely omitted by the Hon. Gentleman in his observa-
tions. he Hon. Gentleman speaks of the distress that
has prevailed in Ireland, and which dues prevail at the
present moment, as the usual sad ordinary distress of
that country. Now, Sir, the case, as I apprehend, has
been—by whose fault, tenant or landlord, I shall not
stop to say—that an immense population has grown up
in certain parts of Ireland, more especially in those
districts which lie upon the sea coast, where sea-weed
for manure is plentiful and cheap, which population
having no employment upon the land or in any other
manner, were fed out of the small patches of
ground held by them with the potatoes which
they cultivated.—(Hear.) This being the case, for the
last few years a succession of calamities has come upon
them, and swept away the food of this part of the popu-
lation. They have had no other employment, and there-
fore no other means of subsistence—consequently there
have been in that period multitudes of persons alto.
gethcr without food, or the means of procuring food.
Now, Sir, we can imagine such a state of things on a less
civilized state of the world—we can imagine in a distant
country a failure of the food of a population, and two or
three millions swept away, other people taking their
place. But for us to allow the , operation of famine to
sweep away and devastate those parts of Ireland where
the people are dependent upon this condition of things
for their food, would be a course inconsistent with the
humanity of this House—would be inconsistent with
the duty of the Government—would be contrary to the
feelings of the country—and would be most shocking
to civilized nations.—(Hear, hear.) Well, Sir, in 1847
we made extraordinary exertions to keep the people
of Ireland alive under the pressure of most extraor-
dinary difficulties. Tho people of this counry, in 1847,

raised an immense subscription for the purpose of re-
lieving, the distress of the Irish people. It lasted through
the entire year, and 200.000 persons were saved from
starvation. By the agency of the British Association
and the Government, many more—more than a million
—were kept alive. The Hon. Member asks what good
has this done—what trace remains of it? And he says
that the people are at present unbenefited and without
means of employment. I deny the consequences. I
think the efforts made by the House and the people of
this country in 1847, and by the British Association in
1848, enabled many persons to emigrate—enabled them
to get over the immediate season of difficulty in Ireland,
and to find in other countries a reward for their toil, and
a future comfort which is likely to be far more than they
originally enjoyed.—(Hear, hear.) Therefore, so far—
whether the money was rightly spent or not—whether it
was most prudently distributed or otherwise—all this I
consider to be but a small part of the real question. The
real question is, whether or no it was advisable to keep
as many people alive as possible?—(Hear, hear.) That
object has been accomplished; and being so, I think, as
a nation, we have reason to be proud of what we have
done in this matter. Well, Sir, I will admit, if after
these exertions you find you have the same thing to re-
peat, and nothing to do but to spend millions a year to
keep alive the destitute poor of Ireland, who are called
idle, but should more properly be called unemployed—l
admit, Sir, that this would be most unsatisfactory- But,
in the first place, let it be recollected that while this
House consented to grants of immense sums of money,
they laid it down as a distinct rule that in future legis-
lation on the subject the property of Ireland should be
made responsible for the support of the poverty. Now
let us consider how much was implied in this rule. We
have heard a great deal of the Irish landlords and
a
their conduct to their tenantry. There are good
hanodn.lordasentalnedmanbad landlords
agree Ireland ,
withl believe there are as good landlords in Ireland as
as
him
there are in any other country—men whose conduct,
under the present trying circumstances, has deserved
the greatest approbation. But with regard to the bad
landlords of that country, before the poor-law was
passed they did absolutely nothing for their tenants, but
receive the rents of their estates. They built no houses
they erected no barns, they expended nothing whatever
on the land. Not a tenant nor a beggar on their estates
received any help. Such was the bad landlord of Ire-
land. But the bad landlord can be so indifferent to the
welfare of the people on his estate no longer. Whether
he lived in Ireland or not, a rate was levied for the sup-
port of the destitute poor upon his property, and appro-
priated to that purpose. Well, Sir, we fixed upon Ire-
land a large and extended poor-law. What has that
.poor law done in the last year? No less than 1,700,0001.
were collected and paid for the maintenance
of the infirm and able. bodied poor of Ireland. And,
I am happy to say, that by calculations which I
have seen made by perfectly competent persons, the
number of the able-bodied poor supported by the poor-
law has been by no means as great as might have been
anticipated from the former accounts furnished by the
Commissioners of Poor-law inquiry in their previous
investigations. I am told that out of that sum of
1,700,0001. not 300,0001. has been applied to the relief
of out-deer able-bodied poor in Ireland. Well, then,
you have advanced this step, that with regard to the
support of the, poor in Ireland a great proportion of the
cost is collected out of the rates levied upon the property
of that country. I take the advances made by the Bri-
tish Association and by the Government as I find them,
and they only amount to one-fifth or one-sixth of the
whole sum given for the support of the poor in Ireland
—the remaining four-fifths or five-sixths having been
contributed by the property of Ireland. We have
seen, with respect to the relief of the poor of
Ireland, that the poor-law has greatly contributed to
their support; and I think it a reason why the
House should be more ready than in 1822 and 1846 to
come to the assistance of the very destitute in that
country. But not only this is the case, but the number
of unions to which large contributions have been made,
have been considerably less. Out of 131 unions, there
are not above 21 who have had such support. If you
are confining the evils of the principle to a narrow dis-
trict, as we propose, the result will be unmarked by
those disadvantages which are anticipated. We pro-
pose to confine them at present to those places by the
sea-shore where the people lived on potatoes, and used
sea-weed as a manure. The Hon. Gentleman told us
there was no hope of any improvement or of any remedy
with regard to the distressed unions. I hold in my hand
the report of the Poor law Commissioners, representing
the very distressed state of many unions, and which is
dated the 11th of December, 1848. In that report it is
said that " in several unions the out-door relief is far
less in extent than it was at the corresponding period last
year. For example, in the ICanturk union there were, in
the week ended 27th November, 1847, 18,460 persons
relieved out of the workhouse, at a cost of 4721.; in the
week ended 25th
November, 1848, the number was
2,323 only, at a cost of 46/. In Killarney union, the
number receiving out-door relief in the week ended 27th
November, 1847, was 8,495, at a cost of 2891. In the
week ended 25th November, 1848, the number was 2,129,
at a cost of 661. These instances show the degree in
which an improved management, assisted by additional
workhouse accommodation, has served to keep in check
the out-door relief which suddenly arose in 1847.8
under the influence of the example of the Temporary
Relief Act, and while the machinery of administration
under the permanent poor-law was yet new and inexpe-
rienced:' Therefore we do see that, with regard to some
of the unions, there has been a very considerable diminu-
tion of the pressure upon the poor-rate.
Mr. STAFFORD asked where the passage cited by
the Noble Lord was to be found?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER pointed
to page 8 of the " Papers relating to the Aid afforded to
the Distressed Unions in the West of Ireland."

Lord J. RUSSELL—I say, then, that you do find
there is a prospect of improvement with regard to some
of these unions. I come now to the consideration of
what prospects can be held out for the future. And here
I must notice a statement which has been made by the
Hon. Gentleman opposite, that my Right Hon. Friend
said that the present grant was not the last which he in•
tended to propose. Now, my Right Hon. Friend has no
recollection whatever of having made any such state-
ment. That be said, and that I said afterwards, that we
would not pledge ourselves that this would be the only
grant during this session of Parliament, is perfectly
true; and I say again now that I would not consent—if
the 50,0001. were granted at once, without any further
remark or Observation—l would not consent to bind my
hands to any course, and not have regard to future con-
tingencies. I think I should not b. doing my duty in
the position in which I am placed, if I consented so to
be fettered with respect to the conduct of the Govern-
ment.—(Hear, bear.) But having said this, I do admit
that there is one point of view in which this question
has been placed, in which I think the reasoning, not of
those who have objected to the grant, but of those who
have ,desired explanations anti discussions upon this
grant, is natural and reasonable—l mean when they say
" Here are very considerable taxes imposed upon Great
Britain, in which Ireland has no part;—here are many
parts of :Ireland which, seem not only not to be suffering
extreme distress, but in reality appear as capable as
many parts of England or of Scotland of bearing their
share of the pressure; and therefore that subject ought
to be considered by those who have to administer the
laws." Sir, I stated the other night that I should think
it to be my duty to propose to the Committee of the
House of Commons those measures which I thought ne-
cessary for the amendment of the poor-law, and to provide
for the future amendment of that law in such a manner
as I thought would be beneficial to Ireland and the least
burdensome to this country. The Hon. Gentleman
finds fault with the Government because they proposed
to appoint a Committee—he says they 'should
have at once come forward in the month of No-
vember with measures upon this subject. Why, Sir, we
thought last year that it was desirable, upon this import-
ant question, to obtain the benefit of experience; and
amongst that experience I found, in almost all the reso-
lutions I have seen, and the representations I have re-
ceived, that one of the main charges with respect to the
poor-law is, that it was proposed in this House by gen-
tlemen who had the conduct of affairs in this country,
and who had not sufficient knowledge with respect to
Ireland. If that is the case; if that is the accusation
against us; if we had met Parliament and said, " Here
is the measure ready prepared—we have not consulted
Irish gentlemen on the subject, but it is ready prepared,
and we do not mean to alter it on your representations;"
it would have been immediately said," Why not consult
those who have local experience upon the subject, and
tell them what your plans are, and ask their advice as
to whether they would be practicable and beneficial ?"
Sir, I think that one of the amendments to be proposed
in the poor-law should contemplate an encouragement
to these who would be prepared to lay out their
capital, and to improve and cultivate the land in those
parts where, partly from the entire failure of the crops
of the :ast three or four years, or partly from the
amount of the local burdens, there is now an unwilling-
ness to enter upon the occupation of land. But, in so
doing, I confess I should not be prepared to rush at once
into that division of the country which the Hon. Gentle-
man seems, in his recent speeches, to contemplate. I
own I cannot imagine that there should be such a divi-
sion with regard to property in Ireland, and that each of
the smaller properties in Ireland should be formed into
an electoral division, without leading to the consequence
of a law of settlement, and thereby doing that which I
think has been a great misfortune in England, and which
I should be sorry to introduce into Ireland—namely, im-
peding the free circulation of labour—(Cheers)—and
depriving the labourer of that reward to which he is
entitled. Besides which a law of settlement implies a
law of removal. If you find a man in Kent, and remove
him, upon his becoming chargeable, into Gloucestershire,
he is pretty sure to be fed and maintained in Gloucester-
shire ; but what would be the consequence of men rush-
ing, in the spring of the year, from Connaught into
England or Scotland, and your driving them back again
to those districts in Connaught which are most
distressed, and where they are utterly incapable
of obtaining work ?--(Hear, hear.) Why,
theie conld
not be a greater cruelty inflicted upon Ireland than to
enforce that strict law of settlement and removal. There-
fore, in proposing any plan of amendment to the Com-
mittee I shall endeavour, in the first place, to provide
for the greater encouragement of capital and of industry;
and, in the next place, I own I do consider it just,
that, in some way or other, Ireland should be made fur-
ther to support the cases of exception in Ireland—
(Cheers)—and that those cases should not come exclu-
sively as a charge upon the public expenditure—(Hear.)
Whether what I should propose upon this subject is
practicable or not, is of immense importance; and on
the solution of that question would very much depend
what course we might think necessary hereafter to take.
The Hon. Gentleman says that it is the duty of her
Majesty's Government to introduce, without delay,
measures which may obviate the future necessity of ap-
plying to Parliament for the relief of local distress in
Ireland. I do contemplate measures which would have
that tendency. There are other questions respecting
, local taxation in Ireland, with regard to which west-

sures are under consideration, and upon which I think
it *ill be necessary to legislate in the course of the
present session. I do myself consider that it may be
possible to go throttgli this great transition—one of the
most extraordinary transitiOtla that ever took place—
(Hear, hear)—a transition which is not the act of any
Parliament or of any Government, but a transition which
has been brought about by the calamity of the loss of
the potato crop ; a transition from the state of a popu-
lation living upon their own plots of ground, to the state
of a population consisting chiefly of farmers and
labourers.—(Hear.) I tad look forward with hope that
that transition may be brought abbift without any very
great loss of life ; though no doubt with a very great
lose of property, for a very considerable loss of property
has already taken place ; but, considering the vastness
of the change—considering the sudden manner in which
that change has come upon upon us—,with less of suf-
fering and with less of loss then acy one could have
anticipated who had been told tiro years before that
the loss of the food of the country for so many years
would have taken place. Now, I leave It td the
Hon. Gentleman to pursue his own course, and if he
thinks necessary to press his motion as a declaration
against the policy of the Government to a division, I
can only say that I think we have taken the course
which is best adapted to the exigencies of the case ;
that I do not think it would have been advisable to have
brought forward a Bill for the amendment of the poor-
law without a Committee ; and that I do not think we
should have been justified, not having measures pro-
posed, in refraining from asking this House for
a small temporary grant for the relief of distress. ' I
feel confident—and nothing will persuade me to
the contrary—that this House will assent to the grant
which we have proposed. I feel confident that they
will not visit upon those wretched and desti-
tute persons in Connaught any faults that we may
have committed—or any want of foresight in not pro-
posing measures in November last—or any want of
adaptation in our present measures to the end we have in
view. But, agreeing to that proposal, undoubtedly the
House may think it proper to accompany the vote with
the resolution which the Hon. Gentleman has proposed.
With respect to that, however, it is entirely in the hands
of the House to decide as they shall think proper. I
nave given what, I must say, I think is a fair account
of theposition in which we stand.—(Hear, hear.) I have
given some view to the House of the nature of the mea-
sures that we shall have to propose. My belief is, that
you cannot by any one measure remedy a state of society
which has been, from the year 1760 at least, one of
suffering, of crime, of division of landlord from tenant,
of division of one class from another, of conspiracy
frequently repeated, of laws of repression continually
enacted, and the hope of permanent tranquillity con-
stantly frustrated.—(Hear, hear.) If it be true, as I be-
lieve it is, that that hope has been frustrated because the
state of society in Ireland brought on these contentions
for land, brought on those assassinations of proprietors,
brought on that perpetual war of one class against an-
other—if that.be true, then it is only by a total change in
the state of society that those evils can be remedied.—
(Hear, hear.) And it it is only by a total change in the
state of society that these evils can be remedied, let me,
with all deference to the Honourable Gentleman, tell
him, if he were on these benches to-morrow, to propose
measures for the purpose, that a great social change can-
not be effected in one, two, or three years; that it must
be the work of time; but that I do believe, with time,
with perseverance, and with a judicious adaptation of
remedies, we may arrive at the result which we all de-
sire, that of seeing the state of Ireland improved and
rendered happy.—(The Noble Lord resumed his seat
amidst loud and prolonged cheers.)
The Marquis of GRANBY objected to the proposed
vote, on the,ground that it was unjust towards the people
of this country, and that it would not confer any per-
manent benefit on those for whom it was intended. He
thought, after reading the papers before the House, it
was impossible not to admit that there was a vast and
alarming extent of distress in Ireland. In certain dis-
tricts deaths and fever were increasing, and the guar-
dians of the unions were without money or credit. Not-
withstanding the statement of the Noble Lord of the
progress made last year, he feared there was very little
hope of the condition of these people being bettered
under present circumstances. He did not think that
the Poor-law Commissioners and the resident gentry of
Ireland entertained the same idea as that adopted by the
Noble Lord. The vice-guardians of a union in the west
of Ireland, writing to the Poor-law Commissioners in
Dublin, told them that they could form no idea of the
privations and sufferings of the people, and added that
such was the pitiable state of the whole labouring popu-
lation, that they (the vice. guardians) could not see
any prospect of the cessation or diminution of their
present distress, but, on the contrary, they were
compelled to express their fears that the wants
and sufferings of the population would consi-
derably incresse. What then, he asked, was the blight-
ing influence which produced these effects, and drove
capital from the country, but the Irish poor-law, under
the operation of which a tenant never knew that his
property would not be taken away from him for arrears
of rate? The Noble Lord admitted that the present
grant was vicious, and what his Hon. Friend (Mr.
Stafford) and those who supported him wished to effect
by the proposed amendment was, without objecting to
the grant of 50,0001., to guard it with such conditions
as should prevent the House being called on to make a
similar vote. They wished not only to put the fire out,
but to take precautions against it breaking out again.—
(Hear, hear.) How long was this state of things to
continue? How long were they to have the Irish
people dependent on English liberality? Had the Go-
vernment no plans to bring before the House? They
replied that they had appointed the Irish Poor-law
Committee; but the present was the time not so much
for deliberation as for vigorous action. The Govern-
ment were not always so ready to refer matters to a
Committee, and when laws sanctioned by the wisdom of
two centuries were to be laid low, the Government
would not wait for the evidence tendered before the
Lords' Committee on the navigation•laws last year.
Colonel SIBTHORP commenced with " Sir, I will
not vote for this grant on any consideration whatever."—
(Hear, hear.) He had listened with great attention to
the speech of the Hon. Member for Northampton, and if
he understood him right, it was that this was a con-
ditional vote. Now, he yielded to no man in that
House in humanity and in consideration for his fellow-
creatures, his whole course of life would bear him out
in that, but he could not give his support to the motion.
The Speech of the Ministers placed in the hands of
their Sovereign was, in his opinion, equivocal and
Jesuitical—there were no Solid grounds in that Speech
on which he could rely. He said he had no con-
fidence whatever in the Noble Lord when that Speech
was introduced ; and he repeated now he had no
confidence in the Noble Lord with regard to the present
proposition. The Noble Lord had told them at the com-
mencement that this was to be the first vote; but at the
same time he had told the House he was not in a situa-
tion to bring forward measures of amelioration. From
this he inferred that the Noble Lord meant this vote to
be of yearly bccurrence. The vote was only to keep the
Noble Lord and his party in their present seats. These
last,
onel a
single
h.-- -a ( last.—(Hear
tlrd e b
, andd lug h Lordvot e
were the grounds which would urge him to vote against
the motion. He would remind the Government that
wt
ujetlaena able
l ea
h t
oe
bring
sreirhno.
they might draw too much out of a well, and thus find
it
did not hold out any hopes that this grant would be the
a
laughter.)
should, t eNoble
h e r
therefore, measures.
Remembering the past, he would not trust the Noble
Lord
o r a
that
against this Jesuitical, low, and dirty motion.
Mr. HUME said he could not vote for the amendment,
because it agreed to the grant while it said it ought not
to be given. Now, as he (Mr. Hume) dissented from
the grant entirely, he must vote against the proposed
amendment and then take the sense of the House against
the original motion.

Mr. MUNTZ had voted against the Government the
other night because he felt that he could not conscien-
tiously do otherwise He felt obliged to do the same on
the present occasion., He did not see how he could call
upon the people of this country, taxed as they were, to
contribute repeatedly, incessantly, and endlessly to the
support of the Irish.—(Cheers.) He differed from those
who thought there were any signs of improvement in
Ireland. For his own part, he thought they were getting
infinitely and rapidly worse. He attributed that distress
to misgovernment, cheap produce, and dear money. What
was the situation of the people of this country, for that
appeared to be left out of consideration? Were they
fit to pay such calls? and ought they to bo asked to
pay such calls?—(Hear, hear.) He had heard
a good deal of late about trade being at present in a very
prosperous and profitable state. For himself, he had
found nothing of the kind, and having visited Birming-
ham on Saturday, he had found a similar ignorance of it
prevailing there. Every one he saw there told him
that trade was exceedingly flat and unprofitable,
and that there was no probability of its
improvement, in consequence of their having to com-
pete with the foreign manufacturer.—(Loud cheers
from the Protectionist benches.) That very morning he
had met a member of his own family, who had just re-
turned from the north of Germany, and having asked
him what was the state of trade there, he was informed
that there was plenty of trade, but it was not trade with
England—the people manufactured their own goods much
cheaper than the English could manufacture them.—
(Cheers from the Protectionists.) He would mention
another curious circumstance. Some three or four years
age the glassmakers of Birmingham same to him and said
they were anxious for free trade; if the glass duty were re-
moved they believed they should do very well. He cau-
tioned them to be careful what they were about, and
asked them if they were quite sure they were able to
compete with the foreign manufacturer. " 0 yes," they
said, " there's nothing like free trade." Well, be ac-
companied a deputation of them to the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth, when he was Mi-
nister, and to his horror they asked three years' pro-
tection.—(Laughter.) He (Mr. Muntz) said to them,
" I thought you were for free trade?" "So we are,"
said they, " but we want three years to prepare for it."
He asked them, " Well, suppose you get three years'
protection, what better will you be at the end of that
period?" But they paid no attention to him. A few
days ago, however, he had received a letter from one
of them, stating that the import duty on flint glas!
was about to expire, and the manufacturers; d
to their inability to compete with the fonrticoangists,
and
the trade in this country would expire with.
manu-
facturer.—(Loud cheers from the protectionists,
anxious for a con-
tinuancelaughter.) They were, therefore, very
owing to the
prove that protection was indispensable,
manufacture. Nor was the
peculiar character of the
.ham that was
lass trade the only one in Binning
of the duty, being persuaded
g
h elf
d
it,n o
suffer-
ingg ,from a similar cause
art the gilt toy trade
other trades equally- bad—
dPe. In these circumstances, he
t h that they
a could
dozen
z e a
protested of
the maintenance the Irish. It
contribute to
upon to
had Tnehirre heard of distress in
srieen that country owas owing to
was said that the distress
'ace of that calamity. Was
and aie bli).,afossr
the potato-rot, as they
Ireland
against the people of. this country being called
the distrose of 1822 or of 1842 owing to the potato-rot?
foo icnogeeturura

He feared the distress was owing to a rot of some other
sort that would not be easily cured. He was 'sorry the
amendment had been moved; for, being opposed to the
grant, he could not support an amendment
which was substantially the same, with the ex-
ception of saying that something should be done
that would not be done. Suppose there was the dis-
tress in Ireland that was alleged—what would 50,000/.
do for it ? It was a mere drop of water in the ocean.
Out of doors there was a strong feelinr: against granting
any more money to Ireland—not arising from any pe-
nurious feeling, but from a conscientious beliet that
they could not afford to pay taxes to the extent they
were doing, and that there must be a reduction of ex-
penditure—(Hear, hear.) That reduction, so far as it
could be effected with safety and honour to the country
he was determined to support, and, in the meantime, he
must oppose this grant, as being inconsistent with jus
tice to all parties.—(Bear.)
The House then divided, when there appeared :
Against Mr. Stafford's amendment 245
For it
Majurity against it — 120

On our return to the gallery,
Mr.IIIJME was stating the reasons why he should
()ppm),
the grant. The Government were bound to
,
come forwa;:o with some other measure to meet the dis-
tresses of Irelano, and to render the money given by
this country really userj to her. As he did not think
the grant good in principle, t;:' likely to be of any ser-
vice, he would take the sense of th' House upon it.
The House again divided ; the numi;ers were,—
• For the original motion 220
Against it
Majority
The vote was then agreed to. The House resanied
and the report was received
The report on the Inland Revenue Bill was consi-
dered, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time to-
morrow.
The report of Supply was received.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL obtained leave to
bring in a Bill to enable overseers of boroughs and sur-
veyors of highways to recover costs on distraining for
rates; also a Bill for the holding of petty sessions in
boroughs, and for providing places for the holding of
such petty sessions in counties and boroughs.
POOR-LAW (IRELAND) COMMITTEE.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE proposed that the names of
the Earl of Lincoln, Sir Lucius O'Brien, Mr. Moore,
Mr. Bright, and Mr. Grace, be added to the Select Com-
mittee on the Irish Poor-laws. _ _ _

On the question that Mr. Bright's name be added,
Mr. TAYLOR objected to the nomination of a dele-
gate of the Manchester school. There was a prepon-
derance of borough Members on the Committee already.
From the unhappy recollection of Mr. Bright's service
on another Committee, he looked with jealousy on the
addition to the present Committee of one who could not
know the interests for which he (Mr. Taylor) felt an
affection.—(A laugh.) The Hon. Member concluded
by proposing to substitute a Welsh Member, Sir John
Walsh.
Mr. M. GIBSON begged to remind the House of the
enormous interest which Manchester and Lancashire
generally had in the proper administration of the poor-
laws in Ireland. The burden imposed by the poor-rates
required to.support the Irish poor in that district was
very large.
Sir W. VERNER complained that the prov;lme of
Ulster was not adequately represented in the Committt:e.
Lord C. HAMILTON thought that there was an
undue preponderance of borough Members amongst the
English representatives on the Committee. As the Com-
mittee was originally proposed. by the Government, six
out of eight of the English Members placed upon it were
borough representatives, and if the Hon. Member for
Manchester should be added the number of borough re-
presentatives would amount to seven out of nine. It was
desirable that at least one English Member representing
a large agricultural constituency should bo added to the
Committee.

Mr. F. MAULE believed, that when the Hon. Mem-
ber for the county of Dublin spoke disapprovingly of the
Hon. Member for Manchester's conduct on a Committee
he meant to refer to the Dublin Election Committee.
This was the first occasion on which the conduct of a
Member of an Election Committee had been called in
question since he (Mr. F. Maule) had been the chairman
of the Committee of Selection. If the Hon. Member had
misconducted himself upon the Dublin Committee, the
question ought to have been raised at the proper time;
but, for his part, he believed that the Hen. Member had
conducted himself uprightly and with as due a regard to
the affirmation which he had made as any other Member
would have done under the obligation of an oath.
Mr. BATESON professed himself unable to discover
the peculiar qualifications which entitled the Hon.
Member for Manchester to be placed upon the Com-
mittee. If Ministers thought the Honourable Member
ought to be one of the Committee, why did they not
nominate him originally? They could not have over-
looked him because the Hon. Member was accustomed to
hide his light under a bushel.—(A laugh.) He had heard
it whispered that the Hon. Member and some of his
friends had made arrangements for the purchase of a
considerable amount of landed property in Ireland as
soon as it should become „sufficiently depreciated.—(A
laugh.) It was impossible to give the Hon. Member
credit for an unprejudiced mind, for when he addressed
the House upon Irish questions he usually exhibited a
virulent and vindictive feeling towards the landed in-
terest of that country. One example of the Hon. Mem-
ber's eloquence would suffice to justify the character
which he attributed to it.—(Hear the Hon. Member read
an extract from a speech made by the Hon. Member for
Manchester, in which the Hon. Member complained that
everything was Protestant in Ireland—that Protestant
judges polleted the seat of justice—that Protestant ma-
gistrates would not do justice to Catholic peasants—that
Protestant landlords exterminated their tenants, and that
Protestant soldiers, by the command of a Protestant
priest, had butchered a Catholic peasant in the presenee
of his mother. The reading of this passage was received
with cheers and counter-cheers.) It was not difficult to
understand the motive in which the Hon. Member for
Manchester's nomination for the Committee originated;
it was a sop thrown to a party which the Government
could not satisfy and dared not offend.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY hoped that the whisper which the Hon.
Member who spoke last had heard relative to the Hon.
Member for Manchester being about to invest capital
largely in Ireland would prove to be correct.—(Hear,
hear.) That, in itself was a good reason for placing
the Hon. Gentleman on the Committee. It ought not
to be forgotten that many members of the Society with
which the Hon. Member for Manchester was connected
had displayed their usual benevolence, he could riot say
more, in .relieving distress in Ireland; and, in addition
to a great sacrifice of time, had made a generous appli-
cation of capital to develope the resources of that coun-
try. It appeared to him that the Hon. Member, instead
of attempting to depreciate the labours of that Society,
ought rather to speak of them with the gratitude and
respect to which they were entitled.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BATESON protested against the uncalled-for lec-
ture which the Right Hon. Baronet had read him. He did
not say a single word against the members of the Society
to which the Hon. Member for Manchester belonged—
(Hear, hear)—and he entertained for them as deep a re-
spect as the Right Hon. Baronet himself could feel.
Mr. HENRY said that he had suggested the Hon.
Member fur Manchester's appointment on the Commit-
tee on account of some remarkable speeches which he
had made.
After a few words from Mr. SCULLY and • Colonel
DUNNE,
Mr. HUME said that never before since he'had had a
seat in that House had he heard any personal motive
attributed to any Hon. Member—(Hear)—and he must
say that the Hon. Member who made this charge had
greatly neglected his duty if he had any complaint to
make against an Hon. Member as to his conduct upon a
Committee, in not having brought it forward at a previous
period.
Mr. REYNOLDS said it appeared to him that this
was a military attack upon a member of the Society of
Friends—the Hon. Member for Manchester had been
attacked by three colonels and a captain.—(Laughter.)
Mr. BATESON—I am not a captain.
Mr. REYNOLDS—AIthough the Hon. Gentleman
had parted with his military rank it still belonged to
him.—(Laughter.) Once a• priest always a priest—
once a lieutenant always a captain.---(Laughter.) It was
clear that this attack was prepared—the volume of
Hansard quoted by the Hon. Gentleman proved that
the attack had not risen at the moment. The charge
made against the Hon. Member for Manchester might
be attributed to him (Mr. Reynolds). It was not be-
cause the Hon. Member was unfit to discharge the duty
the Government was about to impose upon him, but
because he happened to sit on his (Mr. Reynold's) elec-
tion Committee, and the old story of the gray mare,
which was familiar to every man's ears—or it should be
—(A laugh)—applied. It was this—A countryman of his
was indicted at the assizes at Tralee for felony. His
innocence was proved, but, notwithstanding that, the
jury found him guilty. The judge was shocked, and
said—" Gentlemen, the prisoner's innocence was clearly
proved." " Yes," said the foreman, "he is innocent of
the crime now charged against him, but he stole my gray
mare last Christmas."—(Great laughter.) The lion.
Member for Manchester was innocent of the charge found
against him, but he happened not to have put him
Reynolds) out, and put Mr. Gregory in.—(A laugh.) It '
was for that reason he was unfit to be on this_C?me n?l,t”
tee ; but he could assure the House that,
of
wasnas
not
British Members composing that House, thereo
one in Ireland so popular as the Hon. Member.an plileaedwiaags
recognised as the friend of the poor, 9.3
a man
for popular liberty.
After a few words from Lord BERNesArcitd_l3,
' The House divided, when there app l2,
For the motion ............• 74
Against it .......... : ......
.
Majority
The name of the Hon. Member for Manchester was
then added to the Committee, and also the name of Mr.
Grace.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
that the following gentlemen form the Select Committee
on Army and Ordnance:—Lord Seymour, Mr. Fox
Maule, Mr. Hume, the Marquis of Granby, Mr. Walter,
Sir W. Molesworth, Lord C. Wellesley, Sir J. Graham,
Mr. W. Miles, Mr. Cobden, Mr. S. Herbert, Mr. J.
Greene, Mr. E. Ellice, Mr. V. Smith, and Mr. Bankes.
Mr. B. OSBORNE would move that three additional
names be added—Sir De Lacy Evans, Colonel Lindsay,
and Colonell Dunne.

The SPEAKER intimated that the Honourable
Member for Middlesex could not propose these addi-
tional names until to-morrow, alter notice had been duly
given.

Mr. B. OSBORNE (looking at the clock, which in-
dicated a quarter to two)—This is to. morrow, Sir.
In reply to Colonel PEEL and Captain BoLDEno, who
complained that no person connected with the Ordnance
had been placed on the Committee, although that arm of
the service lro.d been subjected to so much attack in the
pt'es's and elsewhere,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
woula oonsulL with the Comiaittee, a 44 zee whether the

name of some Honourable Member representing the
Ordnance could not, be added to the Connatttee.—(Hear.)
The House then Qtijourned at two o'ttlock.