The Sun.
London, England, 1849-05-18 00:00:00

COPYHOLD BILL.

Mr. AGLIONBY, in answer to a question from Mr.
Heathcote, stated that it was his determination to pro-
ceed with the Copyhold Bill on Wednesday next, not-
withstanding it was the Derby-day.
Mr. ANS rEY, as the Noble Lord the Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs was not in his place, wished to
a.k the Noble Lord the First Minister of the Crown
whether he would lay on the table of the House the
copy of a letter of the 22d November, 1848, addressed
by Under-Secretary Lord Eddisbury to Mrs.
Castellari, stating that an Englishwoman by her
marriage with a foreigner adopts the nationality of her
husband, and even after widowhood loses all claim by
right to the assistance of her Majesty's Consul in the
place where her husband died, in recovering or ascer-
taining the state of his property there. And whether he
would also lay on the table the instructions which deter-
mine the conduct of her Majesty's Consuls in such cities.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL could not answer the ques-
tion in the absence of the Noble Lord at the Head of
Foreign Affairs.
NEW ZEALAND.

Mr. AG LIONBY wished to ask the Under-Secretary
for the Colonies whether any circular or other dispatch
had been addressed to, or any dispatch received from,
the Governor of New Zealand, on the subject of convict
immigration, other than those already presented to the
House; and whether any information bad been received
on the subject of a Legislative Council being held at
Wellington, for the southern province?
Mr. HAWES said that no dispatch had been received
from the Governor with respect to the meeting of the
Legislative Council, but he had reason to believe from
private letters, that such meeting had taken place.
There had been no dispatches received since those that
had been laid on the table.
CANADA.

Mr. HAWES, in answer to a question from Mr. Glad-
stone relative to compensation for rebellion losses in
Canada, said that no other papers than those that had
been laid on the table of the House were in the Colonial-
office on the subject.
SHEEP STEALING.

Mr. HAWES, in answer to a question from Mr.
Bright, said that sheep stealing was still capitally pu-
nished in Van Diernen's Land.

LAND IMPROVEMENT AND DRAINAGE
(IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.

On the motion for the second readin...of this Bill,
Mr. GROGAN said if five-shilling and two-shilling
rates were struck in the distressed unions of Ireland that
the effiacy of the measure would be materially
inter:ered with. What they wanted in Ireland were
zealous, energetic, and intelligent guardians of the poor.
Mr. P. SCROPE approved of the provisions of the
Bill generally, but what he complained of was that it
contained provisions of a most serious character, and did
not appear what its name proposed it should be, "An
Act fur the Effectual Relief of the Poor in Ireland." In
many of the workhouses of that country relief was not
given as it ought to be,' and the consequence was that
destruction of human life was frightful. In one union
alone, that of Ballinasloe, out of 5,000 persons, upwards
of 400 died in the course of a week. In Kenmare, they
had heard from the respectable chaplain of that estab-
lishment, that the unhappy inmates were compelled to
wear their clothes night and day; a state of things
which produced the most frightful consequences, while
in Skibbereen, six and eight were found to lie in the
same bed, the width of which was three. and a half
feet, and the length six feet. Was it not no-
torious, that the poor preferred dying outside
rather than go into the workhouses? He did not
mean to say that that was the general character of work.-
houses in Ireland, but there ought to be no such in-
stances. But was the outdoor relief of a better descrip-
tion? Many frauds were used, and in spite of the ut-
most vigilance, these frauds could not be put a stop to.—
(Hear, hear.) Even numbers of those who received this
relief bad no house, and nothing for clothing, nothing for
fuel. It was the universal testimony that these unfortu-
nate creatures were reduced to a condition frightful and
shocking to all beholders. Some steps should be taken
to secure a more adequate relief than was at present
afforded. But there was an excuse en account of the
deficiency of funds. He thought if a demand was pro-
perly made, Parliament would not withhold, for the next
four months, relief to these starving people, at the rate
of three farthings a day; that would be sufficient to pre-
vent any loss of life, and they need not lose the money.
But the productiveness of the soil would done ropy

them. The reclamation of the waste lands might afford
employment to the paupers; they might, at least, pro-
! duce sufficient for their own subsistence. The Society
of Friends had succeeded in that plan in some is
stances. Common sense told them that if they had idle
men, and idle land, to put the idle men on the lani,
They had roads unfinished, and drainage incomplete. it
they set to work in a straightforward way, nellithg
would be easier than to make these people self-support-
lug, and so diminish the poor-rate. The Noble Lord bas
often stated that it was the first duty of a Government
to preserve the lives of the people. To secure thet,°b;
ject responsibility should be placed somewhere. IP:
people of Ireland were starving in numbers, and stePi
should be taken to preserve th, m from the extremitY
destitution. There should be some rower of conspellicg,
relief where it was properly required. It was true I"'
the Noble Lord would tell them the relieving-officer was
liable to be dismissed in case of refusing relief, but wb°
was the loss of Bs. a week to him, and that was all the
penalty that could be inflicted for a neglect of duty °r
refusal of relief, which might result in the loss of Ka-
man life.
Mr. OSBORNE said that a Committee was sitting ap
stairs to inquire into the working of the law, and whi,
did the Government bring in a Bill to amend this Pt
law before that Committee bad made its report?
objected to this peddling system of amending the levr'-:
(Hear, hear.) Until they come to something like
national rate the present s} stem would be, as it 13°„)
was, utterly inefficient. The Hon. Member (Mr. Serol,l
I
bad asked what was eight shillings a week; but be eec
tell him that eight shillings a week was a fortune in f",,"
:
land. Four shillings a week was the average loge;
He objected to appij ing the principle of the English pc)°',
law in Ireland. In Cashel there was an army of 10,00 v
paupers receiving relief every week, and these PI
peopie were actually selling their pounds of yellows meat,
to obtain clothing. The existing law was inefglecl
As to employing the people on waste lands, he feared
was not a scheme that would pay, and he objected t
this peddling system of amending what was originally;
detective scheme of legislation. He would not divide U 1
this Bill, and would wash his hands of' all responsibiliti
under the circumstances.
Lord C. HA MILTON, who was imperfectly be,B,r,,di
was understood to complain of the absence in the 13/1'0",,
all allusion to the impoitant question of settlement.
hoped the Government would take some steps to rereaul
that grave defect.
Mr. CALLAGHAN said he thought this was a Or!.
what hurried and imperfect way of amending the la
He thought that the tenancy Crown lands should be
eluded in the rate. These lands had been hereto/ll'
exempt.
Colonel DUNNE said that he had no confidence ill
that Committee on the poor-law up stairs. The C 3131:
mittee were completely under the influence of the pc),,,-;
Member for Manchester. He would support 8°74
clauses in the Bill and oppose others, although
agreed with the Honourable Member for Mildiel„
that the Bill would be perfectly futile, as it would to,
go to the root of the evil. He approved of 65,„1
a maximum rate. Why should not that income:,
which was paid by abseatees from Irish proPel
be taxed for the support of the poverty of that countrYbd
Irish income, wherever it was expended, should ,
taxed for the support of the pauperism of that count%
He thought that the money laid out should be laid out,
reproductive works. He should not then discuss the
details of the Bill, which could be most properly eti",o
in Committee. He rose principally to warn the goo
against that Committee on the peor-laws sitting up stal,-1,
with whose conduct he was quite dissatisfied.
Mr. H. HERBERT would defer to the general 00►
e15;111
and avoid the discussion of any of the details of thi5,174
on that occasion. At the same time he could not Tio
at the state of Ireland, and the utter break down of irs
poor law, without entering his protest against the
ciple of the measure, and if any Hon. Member had felt'4l
posed to move an amendment he would have divi"4l
against the second reading, because he considered l'of
union rating, which was its main principle, was one„f
the most dangerous that could be introduced into 117,
country. He believed that if they carried this misebi:ir
ous Bill it would utterly break down and fail in its Po
leased object. The only effect would be to drag d°,ol
the comparatively well conditioned districts to the 1%1
of the worst, and next session they would find te.,:j
would have again to ask for grants from the ImPello
Exchequer or suffer the people to die from starvation et
they were now.—(Hear, hear.) He complained
they never had this question of union rating 96
placed before the House. In the present instance, it
„"tiit
mixed up with other matters, the object being evideeby
to obtain its enactment indirectly. He would ask, I' be
the average area of taxation in Ireland should
nearly 10,000 miles, whilst it was so much smalleorse.
England? He put that question to the Right "•:'
ps
Secretary for Indeed. He had asked him on presOis
occasions, why one area of taxation should exist be
be
England and another in Ireland, and he trusted thil"o.
would not receive a reply. The Hon. Gentleman Pry
ceeded to read some statistics of the state of poper.o
in the union with which he was connected. On the
age
of May there were 3,232 paupers in the house: tom 03
arrangements for this large number, they were fcrese
to distribute them in various buildings. There 1;4,
over 13,000 receiving relief altogether. The mortep
was increasing in toe house, though there was no c 0e
lees, and it was as well ventilated and managed as 6D9
one in Ireland. When he left, the mortality was 1 i)."
cent. in the week. It had now risen to per cent,'l
fifty-three had died in one week. This was in en
; was called a prosperous union, because it had ase's
them for no money, and he had a right to be proel
when he stated, that within the last thirteen moeti.ja
there had been collected in that union, without the
~°l,l
of a policeman or soldier, 40,6801. out of an an" ~s,
rental of 80,0001. In some places the rates had bee
14s. in the pound. The lowest was 6s. In j.,8.
the board of guardians memorialised the Poor-law urea
missioners to reduce the area of taxation, and dee°
to be allowed to carry out the law in a practical was
but the Commission turned a deaf ear to all their reP4
seutations,• though they neither asked them form °,70(
nor relief, but to carry out a clause within our Act be
Parliament. The adherence of the Government itch
theories against interfering with a labour market ern'ial
di I cot exist, had ruined that union. Many a land
who would now have been employing labour was n°,7,iji
despair, and thousands of those who might have tlee".so,
and profitably occupied, were forced into the workbollo
They were accused of using harsh language oceasioneolo
but be thought, under these circumstances, they 'fd
justified in it. It was the Government who had change,
the language of manly self-dependence into that el„„ye
spair and beggary, and when he thought of the 0701
not only of the union to which he had referred, bn
every other union in the county, he felt that he otbt
sufficient justification for any strong language be 133'
have
W used either on that or former occasions.
• Sir . SOMERVILLE said he would confitr,,,s4
observations to a reply to the objections that bad
made by the Hon. Members who had spoken, lee/ore
the details of the measure to be discussed at a futtsol
stage. It was not to be expected that an icarrioe,
measure like this should pass without some oppeen:ec'
but he confessed he was surprised at some of the out of
tions that had been Made. The Hon. and Ge111:lit
Member for Portarlin;ston had blamed the Governwits
for not waiting for the report of the Committee.
re,
thought there was 9011:1e inconsistency in that aloe
seeing the lion. end Gallant Member was one Of L'etif
who, when the Government proposed the appointoirte
of that Committee, urged that it should have beeoPf
pared with its own measures without waiting , Derr
Committee at all.—(Hear, hear.) Looking, hove rge
at what had passed last year, he thought the Greveocb
ment would have been chargeable with a breise
of faith, if it had not proposed the el)Pieel
ment of that Committee. The Committee eel
now sat for a long time, and the Goveraiele
felt that, in the present state of Ireland, they 10,4
bound to come forward with such measures as 5e.,,,
most urgent, without waiting for the report of the u_dy (0
mittee, which might come so late in the session rise
leave no time for its consideration; but though the Ca el
mittee had made no report, it had collected a great the
of evidence, which had been laid on the table el ;c'
House, and thus assisted in showing the way to Pr-ol
tical amendments in the law. He, therefore, thoegis
the Government had exercised a sound discretleesi'
laying this Bill before the House, in order to give Poe
tiers time to consider its details, and also for its eircsrle
tion in Ireland. The Hon. Member for Stroud had 13100
a great many objections which appeared to him 1040
very little connexion with the poor-laws. One insPo'
point he had mooted, the insufficiency of the meat.)
provided for the administration of relief.—(Hear, bared
But that was a matter which could be consolole
when they went into Committee. The Honottratist,
Member who spoke last had alluded to his coo ato
and said that he had on several occasions refuse 6'
answer to questions pat to him as to the area of t
tion. He did not remember of the question, ae nos
by the Hon. Member, ever having been put to h,,161
fore. The question had been discussed in the Jat°ool
and on that occasion he opposed the smaller area 0' 000
ation. That was a matter of opinion, however, en vv,flo
the Hon. Member might fairly differ from hitt]. floe'
Hon. Member seemed to think that the Poor-law `',;oos
missioners were bound to agree to the recommende',.• to
of any union that might choose to memorialize tilewijol
make alterations in the area of taxation. That Wss,,,ier
the case. Parliament had vested a discretional Pieef
in the Commissioners, and he was of opinion that le
had acted wisely in refusing to accede to the relue6ooo,
the memorial from the union of Killarney. 111 low
case when he was on that Commission, they fed,
agreed to reduce the area of taxation in the bay et
of Drone, in the county of Carlow. They did stbet
the earnest request of the parties resident filo ie
barony, who were uuite as unanimous as they we sbei
the Union of Killarney; but, nevertheless, when vros
agreed to the alteration general dissatisfactionropef
created, and imputations of partiality and im,Pfiest'
motives were made against the Commission.--k 600
hear.) He hoped ho had answered all the flue° wie4
of the Hun. Member, as he was desirous of bee
the utmost attention to what the Hon. Gentlerc.„,7o-03bab,
said, feeling as he did that there was no Hon.
whose suggestions deserved more consideration,--;:(.,,,0rir
hear.) Every attention would be paid by the 114.7,1 be
went to any suggestions that might be made, ties
trusted they would receive every aid in Cornang4
lat
make the Bill satisfactory.
ference to the omissions in the Bill—what hesvisioe°
thal\tira'llVtEheßdNis°cNussSiolinlwThilichsahiaddittawkeans
offer would be with reference to the pru 030ett
contained in the Bill. He thought they were .00 OL,
trodeeti et
indebted to the Government for the in •
„09
the poor.law into Ireland, as it had been the
showing the rottenness that existed, in too many.that.rard
lace
ee
rsloiniftioudret;
eUe' (1
had heard
had been appointed. He was surprised ho
of
ofvvi
tthh
great
rsouncti aalosxyisettrymt
ointlliererleapnodr.
•
nothing from Hon. Members on the subject
town rate in one of the provisions of the Nu
popular 1
report
sthhooncldhoorolomokit
tuaziraum rate had certainly never, been

England— (hear, hear)—and he wantetl to know, if the
maximum rate shoul fail, what party would be called upon
to contribute ?—(Hear.) The Lion. Member for hurry
(Mr. Herbert) had stated that the union rate was very
unpopular in England, but he (Mr. V. Smith) differed
in opinion on that subject, and should have no übjec •
tion to see the union rate introduced into Ireland. His
object now was to warn the people of England of
the measures contemplated in the present Bill.
The Bight lion. Member then alluded to what had
been proposed a few nights ago by the Honourable
Member fur Limerick county (Mr. Monsell), as to giv-
ing increased powers to the boards of guardians in Ire.
land, on the subject of emigration, and, in conclusion,
said he hoped some provision would be introduced into
the present Bill on the subject.—(Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said his Right Honourable Friend
(Mr. Vernon Smith) had asked him a question relative
to the maximum rate, and he was therefore desirous
of addressing the Home on two or three points. His
Right Honourable Friend had asked him, as it
was proposed to impose a maximum rate in Ire-
land, as there had been no such rate imposed
in England how the poor were to be pro-
vided for in the event of that rate being ex-
hausted ? They were aware that the condition
of a number of unions was such, although the amount
of the rate was far from being excessive, that
money was required from this country to supply
the want. That being the case, he did not see much
value in an abstract declaration that the property of the
Union was liable for the support of the poor. If they
came to inquire relative to the expenditure of the 50,0001.
in Ireland they would find that 8,2451. had been given to
the Ballina Uunion, and it appeared that the amount
raised in Ballina on the second rate was 3s. lid. in the
pound, and that the date of that rate was on September
21, 1848, while he found that in some unions eleven or
twelve shillings in the pound had been called for, yet in
those unions which had required relief rates of three
shillings, three shillings and sixpence, and four shil-
hogs only had been made. If, then, such was the
case, it was a proof they had no security against being
called upon by means of an abstract declaration, such
as had been alluded to. It might be asked why rates"
of a larger amount had not been called for, but
the collectors said there had been great diffi-
culty in collecting the rates that lied been levied.
What he inferred then from those things was this—that
With a small amount of rate they might have great
amount of distress.—(Hear, hear.) It seemed to him,
therefore, that there was no way of providing for the
destitute poor in Ireland, but by placing some limit be-
yond which those who cultivated the land in that coun-
try should not be called on to pay for others.—(Bear,
hear.) The view which he took of the proposed maxi-
mum rate was this, that by allotting a certain portion
upon property for the relief of the poor, they provided
for the poor with greater certainty, and secured at the
same time the cultivation of the land in Ireland.—
(Hear, hear.) Still there might be an amount of dis-
tress greater than that which would be provided for, and
his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. V. Smith). had asked
whether to meet such distress there could be a general
rate in aid, or whether the relief would be contributed
out of the Consolidated Fund. His (Lord John
Russell's) opinion was that the rate in aid
:should
not be continued in Ireland, and he would not there-
fore propose a further continuance of the Bill for
that purpose.—(Hear, hear.) As to having recourse to
the Consolidated Fund, he thought it would be much
better to leave those who required relief to the resources
of the same kind they had before the measure of the
poor-law was passed, than to make such a charge upon
the Consolidated Fund.—(Hear, hear.) If they retained
the maximum rate, he had no doubt that the amount that
would be raised would be used with due economy. He,
therefore, thought, upon the whole, the passing of the
Bill with a maximum rate would not give any reason for
a rate in aid, or for coming upon the Consolidated Fund,
and he considered that the measure, taken altogether,
Would prove to be advantageous, and would be for the
benefit of all classes of the community.—(Hear, hear.)
His Right Hon. Friend (Mr. V. Smith) had also alluded
to the necessity of introducing some provision relative to
emigration. The Hon. Member for the county of Lime-
rick (Mr. Monsell) had paid attention to that subject,
and as. he should be desirous in Committee to have a
clause introduced, he should be glad to have the as-
sistance of the Honourable Gentleman, as his wish
would be to make it effective. The Noble Lord then
referred to another subject which had been intro-
duced, namely, as to the area of taxation. Government,
he said, had been asked whether it was intended to in-
troduce a small area, without any explanation having
been given as to what a large area or what a small area
was. In all those questions there were two sides, and it
was, he confessed, a very important subject. He would
take for instance an electoral division of 8,000 acres.
Suppose it was proposed to cut it in four, and make divi-
sions of 2,000 each, it requires more care and calculation
than merely to use a pencil and compasses. A gentleman
of ability and experience (Captain Larkin) was at pre-
sent engaged in making enquiries on this difficult
subject, and he would, no doubt, soon be able to furnish
important information, and would be able to point out
what was essential to be done, and what new unions
would be absolutely necessary. lie (Lord J. Russell)
was ready to admit, that if the unions had been better
regulated at the time of the passing of the Poor Law, it
would have been better fer the working of that measure.
—(Hear, hear.) He could only, in conclusion, further
state, that whatever appeared to be necessary for the
efficiency of the present measure should be introduced
into the Bill in Committee.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HORSMAN adopted the opinion which had been
expressed, that the Government had brought for-
ward the measure with the very best intentions;
and he agreed also that in considering the present mea-
sore they should be influenced by one feeling only—
namely, a feeling of making the measure the best they
possibly could for relieving the distresses of the country.
(Hear, hear.) It was confessed that, after all that had
been done, the condition of Ireland was worse than ever.
Re felt assured, and was, therefore, bound to say, that
the general distress of Ireland required that this measure
should not be/ passed, particularly when not only the
People, but the priest and the proprietor, were subject to
the evil influence of misery and distress in that country,
which that measure would not relieve, but would
rather increase. He also considered that there was a
requisition for the combination of good measures, to
counteract the combination of the evils of that country;
and, as that measure showed that the poor-laws were
broken down, it was the duty of the Government to re-
vive that measure of the poor-laws as much as possible.
The combination to which he alluded for the benefit of
Ireland was the facility for the disposing of incumbered
estates, a limited liability for poor-rates, and an encou-
ragement for small proprietors; and as this Bill was a
solitary one, he did not think that it would effect any
,ngr,d_ for that country. He would ask could it be ex-
`-e'''tt that any one could venture, under this measure, to
Purchase
property in Ireland, when the maximum rate
aceordi-fig to the Bill might be made much more should
the Government think fit, for the Government is nowa-
days the only means of carrying any measure. He be-
lieved that a limited liability for poor-rates would be
the best means of securing and encouraging; the industry
of the people, and hoped therefore that the area of tax-
ation would be judiciously reduced. He would next ask
What was the use of imposing on the rate-payers a new
ax, when the old one was not paid, and from
a not being paid he thought that measure
totally useless. He considered that the first task
of the House should be either to remit or obtain the
rates already due, but the latter, he believed, could
not be effected. Then let the House look to the conditisn
of crime. In 1844 there were only 400 persons trans-
ported, whereas in 1848 no less than 1,300 were
transported, and the number of convictions in Ireland in
1847 was 170 persons, and in 1848 the number was 2,800.
Therefore he considered he was bound, not only from
these circumstances, but from the evils that this measure
was likely to entail on Ireland, to oppose it. He knew
no better system that could be adopted for the payment
of poor-rates than the lessening of electoral divisions.
As, in consequence of the great extent of those electoral
divisions, many poor persons were known to have
perished through famine on the roadside before they
could roach the workhouse. In the next place, he would
call the attention of the House to the evidence
filenncbec-
fore the Committee of the House, and in that e
was clear that in consequence of the great extent
of
electoral area, that most of the mischief and evil pre-
Tailed, and as such was not the case in England, he
thought that a great injustice was done to Ireland, for
England, considering its valuation and population, was
much less in electoral area than Ireland. He consierded
that a Committee should be appointed for a just and fair
division. He knew from all that he had heard and ex-
perienced that crime prevailed most in the large unions,
and that, in addition to other circumstances, induced
him to oppose the measure, particularly when he bad the
opinions of Captain Hamilton and other men of distin-
guished humanity, who well understood the state of
Ireland, With regard to the multiplication of work-
houses, he believed it was the strongest argument in
favour of a limited area. In a paucity of them there
could be no economy, and it had already occasioned a
great but useless expenditure. The evils of that system
did not terminate with the waste of money, nor even
With the waste of human life; but it had given rise to a
feeling of discontent and dissatisfaction. The founda-
tion of all systems of improvement in Ireland should, in
his opinion, have especial reference to a sufficiency of em-
ployment for the poor, together with a rigid enforcement
of the workhouse test. Those main points being ob-
served, they would have laid the groundwork for useful
schemes in all directions—the substitution of a solvent
proprietary the promotion of emigration—the encou-
risarafesnts of :
aeah
nindustrious population, and the impart-
land contained character to the advances of capital. Ire-
but all
the elements of national prosperity,
they were ill-assorted;
ma
enrdi t
ewd i
re he
ptrhoeacs eh atdov apnatraigi
ae
before them, it would be a
went if it did not assist earl
believed that Ireland
wy in their development. He
change, and that as now undergoing a great
induce the En patriotism and common sense would
glish Pa • nt to cherish new sy mpa-
national cris
thies for her,
is. in assistordertrllorn
her through this great
Historian could not record any
greater events than the reconstruction of society
itself, and the correspondingaolel c
no_ alterationrrgr
a ngis; a forton
hoaefidnttohhwee
lams. And all this was now
witnessed the dissolution of
setting free of old elements
slpornig combined, from whence
hnge-h—(llear, hear.) HO
new combinations would
drew hope from the confidence ad of Parliament dis-
charging its duty, and from his eo
heic looked forward ti on of the moral
elevation of the Irish character;and
to the day when the two nations, united hitherto only in
name, should be united, too, in heart and character.—
(Cheers.) That the Irish people were
this improvement by proper means he
nesvuesrcedpotuibbiteedo!.,
fur he saw that it only required to remove the Irishman
from his native soil to render him a quiet, industrious,
and useful member of the community. Some one had
said that the b
be _ ..n righ test pages of English history were to
t gems of Irish product, and Ireland had woven
""w7 Wrenn for ringland'a brow without one lcarpf

the chaplet being given to herself." He hoped that a
la:.cer day would bt.arn upon her, and that, fully ac-
knowledging her claims upon their sympathies, she
would be legida;ed for in a spiri", of true sincerity and
wistlum.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. NAPIER said he felt it unnecessary at that
moment to address the House at any great length on
this subject; but he was d, eply impressed with its im-
portance—the more so because it excited a considerable
degree of attention before the commencement of the ses-
sion. He thought also that it was only justice to the
Government that this question should be fully debated, in
order that they might be the better prepared, when in
Committee, to arrive at a conclusion conformable to each
other's views. In his own opinion this was an unjust
measure, and he objected to it mainly on the ground of
extending the area for all purposes of taxation to the
union at large, contrary to the spirit of the law of 1838.
The electoral divisions were taxed in the first in-
stance, and vi hest the rate amounted to the maximum
in the division, it was to be thrown upon the union at
large. The consequence was that a man, however indus-
trious and frugal he might be, would be compelled to
sink or swim according as the fortunes of his neighbour
fluctuated, though he himself had no check upon his ex-
penditure or conduct. There were two things which
ought to b 3 kept carefully distinct—the law and the ad-
ministration of the law. In his opinion the latter was
the more important, but under such a law as that now
proposed there could be no distinction between the in-
dustrious and the idle, the extravagant and the econo-
mical. In illustration of this point, he might quote the
accounts of the Dublin union, where a great expense was
gone to for wine, porter, whisky, sugar, and lemons, in
all which items debts had been contracted beyond the
power of control of the industrious and thriving popula-
tion of Ulster and Leinster. He would put it to them
therefore, whether it was just to subject to a general
taxation, under such circumstances, a laborious and de-
serving tenantry, and the proprietary discharging their
duties? The complaint against the injustice of
taxing a meritorious class of men bearing up
against difficulties of all kinds, would not be
regarded as a captious or unfounded one. A very
important case. which frequently arose, seemed to be
omitted, viz., where the tenants deserted the land, and
the; land became unoccupied. The House was aware
that the landlord wculd not enter, because if there were

arrears of poor-rates he would immediately become re-
sponsible for the amount. That case might be provided
for. In the case of jointures and rent charges an un-
just liability was imposed by the Bill, which a little con-
sideration, it might be supposed, would not have per-
mitted.
Dlr. CLEMENTS regretted that no Hon. Member
connected with Ireland had opposed the second reading
of this Bill. He was opposed to that feature of it which
imposed a union rating of 2s. in the pound. When they
went into Committee he would endeavour to reduce the
charges upon unions, and place them upon electoral
divisions.
Mr. MAURICE O'CONNELL reminded Hon. Mem-
bers that the people of Ireland were dying while they
were differing about the mode of feeding them. It was an
admitted fact that the old poor-law in Ireland was a
failure, and the proposed law was an improvement upon
it. That was his reason for supporting the present pro-
position. He had opposed the introduction of a poor-
law in Ireland, and he believed that ultimately it would
be the ruin of the country.
Sir H. W. BARRON was opposed to the 2s. rate in
aid, to be found in the second clause of the Bill. He
admitted there were some amendments in the Bill, and
on that ground he should support it, although he should
object to some of the clauses in the Committee. Until
they limited the area of taxation, they could never ex-
pect to establish a good poor-law in Ireland.
Mr. MONSELL said he would call the attention of

the House to some points in the Bill. He regretted that
no change was made in the principle of chargeability.
He thought limiting the law of chargeability and the
area of taxation would tend very materially to prevent
evictions. He suggested that the county cess and the
poor rate should be collected at the same time and by
the same collector. He also suggested that half the
county cess should be deducted by the tenant from
his rent.

Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD said the best means
to adopt would be to reduce the area of taxation, and
throw the responsibility upon the individual landlords.
Sir D. NORRRYS objected to a limitation of the area
of taxation, as tending to an increase of evictions.
Mr. STAFFORD said he was in favour of a limita-
tion of the area of taxation. In fact, the evictions arose
out of the fear of the area being limited, as then the
landlords would have to bear the entire support of the
paupers; while under the large area they only bore one-
third of the expense, and consequently a limitation of
the area would check evictions. While he did not op-
pose the second reading of the Bill, and while he did not
object to a certain maximum rate, yet he confessed, if it
were not extended to unions it would be a failure. Let
the boards of guardians have the power of making new
unions, if they pleased, but let them at the same time be
at liberty to raise money in any way they thought pro-
per. He would earnestly request the Noble Lord to say
whether any more changes were to be made during the
present session, for it was highly desirable that all such,
should be discussed together.
The Bill was then read a second time.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he would state on
Monday what day he proposed going into Committee
on the Bill.