The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-19 00:00:00

Kyr'
Ica r 6,011
id to
of e'' 3o(
tt
, miler ell
boy

• p•
l• • h 41
fro on,
ei
NN `ho heitLll
3l'd f ite#
°(„414

in
hsj ojeci;
ole
of of

,rd C°('

,e 3leOber

those who were disposed to deny that it was a great misfortune
that so large a proportion of the property of Ireland was held
by persons who only occasionally resided there Ile trusted,
however, that this was an evil which would be gradually
amended ; and, he might say, that there were two measures,
one of which had been proposed to that House, and the other
had been announced by her Majesty's Government, as about to
be submitted to the consideration of the Legislature, which he
thought would be a fair and legitimate means
of counteracting the evils under which Ireland was
then suffering. One of these was the poor-law which
had been lately discussed. This law—and it was one of the
atrungest recommendations which, in his eyes, the measure
had—authorised property, whether it was held by absentee
landlords or resident proprietors, to contribute its fair share to
the relief of the distress in Ireland. He would acknowledge
to the Hon Member for Westmeath that, in the course of his
experience in Ireland, he had observed many and striking
cases of this kind, to which the Hon. Member had alluded,
where the exertions of the resident proprietors to meet the
distress which existed in their neighbourlsoods, we,e curbed
and rendered abortive by the refusal of those landlords who
were not present to witness the destitution which existed, to
accede to the schemes which were originated for the
purpose of alleviating that misery and that distress. It
would be no longer possible when this Bill
was passed, to refuse their assent to such measures as might be
cons dered necess.ry for the relief of the evils which sur-
rounded them. There was another measure to which he
attached equal force lie believe d that many of the evils
Under which Ireland was suffering were attributable to the fact,
not that property was in the hands of absentee proprietors, but
(Fat it was in the hands of persons so encuml ered that it was
impossible for them properly to perform those duties which
devolved upon them. lie did trust, therefore, that the Bill
which the Noble Lord at the head of the Government would
shortly off r to the Legislature would facilitate the sale of
encumbered estates, and thus benefit Ireland by placing
property in the herds of those persons who, having money
as well as the disposition to improve the soil, would perform
their duty to their destitute and poorer neighbours.—(Hear,
hear. ) While he agreed with the lion. Member for Limerick
that great evils arose `rom the system of absenteeism, he did
not think that the resolution he 'had brought forward would
have the effect of counteracting, or remedying the evils which
existed, but he could not concede to the lion. Member, that
those proprietors ought to he included among absentees,
who possessing property in Ireland and England, spent the
greater portion of their time in the latter country.
He never could eonsent to make any difference between the
proprietors of the two countries, and consider those as ab-
sentees who only had an occasional residence in Ireland, for he
believed that many men who held property both in Ireland and
England would feel it to be their duty to reside partly in one
country and partly in the other, and be could not therefore
consent to consider them both as absentee proprietors. In
considering both these countries then as portions of the
empire he had to look at their g, neral interests, and doing so
he could not agree to the proposition of the Hon. Member,
that because a landlord resided part of the year out of Ire-
land that he was to be considered as an absentee proprietor.
Yet while saying this he was not at the same time quite
assented to the truth that every one who drew has subsistence
from the soil ought to do their duty by the country, and
that it was not at all likely that those who were
absent from the country were able to relieve the distress which
they did not see, and with the details of which, of course, they
could not be acquainted 30 well as others who were upon the
spot, and who had seen them. He would now read a passage
from a pamphlet which was published about a hundred years
ago, and which produced a great sensation at the time it hap-
pened. The author was Sir Thomas Prior, some of whose
suggestions were very striking at the present moment. That
gentleman said that there were many gentlemen who drew
large sums of money from the country who never contributed
anything to the burdens of the State. Taking all these toge-
ther, he presumed that there were not less than from 200,000'.
to 300,0001. a year by these who spent their money in foreign
countries, who left their own without assistance, and who never
lived among the people during the whole of their lives. He
trusted that the Legislature would take those persons under their
consideration, and compel them to contribute to the burdens
of the country, and that, as soon as possible, some remedy
should be found. He then went on to state that. in his opinion,
an absentee tax ought to be laid upon the landed proprietors
who lived eut of the country, but that a tax on the land itself
would be still more important. Now, with this, under general
circumstances, he could not agree, although he quite agreed in
the necessity for making those who resided abroad do their duty
to their country, and he also quite agreed in the assertion, that
if the landlords were to be compelled, that a great change
would take place—such a change as would speedily make a ma-
nifest improvement in many parts of Ireland. But the Hon.
Gentleman said that a tax should be laid on the absentee pro-
prietors. Now, he thought that the word tax was not a proper
term to be applied to such an imposition as that
which was now devised ; for if the imposition was to
be levied on the proprietors of land in Ireland, he
(Mr. Labouehcre) conceived that it ought to be laid
on all the property of the country, on all the land.—( Hear,
hear.) But if such a tax were to be levied, it ought to he such
an imposition as would compel the sale of the encumbered
estates ; for he thought that it was a most unwise, a most un-
just, a most constitutional principle to pass law upon, that
any man who possessed an estate in this country should be
compelled to reside upon it. And if such a principle was in-
:tlifilicable to this country, it was equally inapplicable to Ire-
land. Stich a principle would be as inconsistent with the
Political institutions of these two portions of the state, as it
swould be inconsistent with the social institutions of this coun-
try, and altogether inconsistent with the interests of the united
empire. lie did not know that he need detain the House
longer on this Bill. Ile quite agreed with the Hon. Gentle-
manin the opinion which he had expressed, that there
Was
theiradnumber of men at the present moment discharging
inlets to the country in a most admirable manner,
thlinkvtehe in
no way interested in the soil, but he slid not
in cense
orour, it was desirable that a tax should be laid upon pro-
cinuorder to compel them to discharge their duty which,
their Poor shoe of the possession of property, they owed to
which it svaaeitglhbours. This,
Men believed, was not a matter
done all that thee diitY
of the istry to settle, for they had
tating the sale of encumbered "uld
by introducing the measure for facili-
tating
asaertion of theellcunnbered estates. He could not assent to
Gentleman that such a Bill was ne-
cessary for the protection of property in Ireland; and, be-
lieving that it would be inconsistent alike with the interests
of this country
iny
and Ireland,
ebe.erltaandlifeothrieealgiaoist nn MiTber pushed it to a
division, he should
Sir A. BROKE thought that the amount of the tax ought
ti be expended on the property from whence the money was
derived. Two years ago when this measure was before the
House, he had recommended that a tax, not of Its, but of 15
or 20 per cent., shon:d be levied on the properties of absentee
proprietors, and spent in subsoiling, draining, fencing, build-
ing task houses and cottages for labourers, and other improve-
tents on the several estates, for the benefit of those who were
I°caled upon them. le hought that such a measure would
have been far be tter t Ihant that which the Government had
brought forward for the relief of the poor, anti if such a tax
were to be imposed he would readily vote for it : nor would he
be at all inclined to limit the amount.—( Hear, hear.) But
there was one thing that he could not agree with in one point
ef the speech cf the Hon. Member for Limerick, and that was,
that no gentleman should be :slowed to hold property in Eng-
land and Ireland at the same time, for such a rule would
14 effect amount to practical repeal of the union. Nor
could he assent to the assertion that all the English proprietors
`ere to be considered as absentees, for the Duke of Devonshire,
Marl Fitzwilliam, and Colonel Wyndham, who all possessed
large Properties in Ireland, went over constantly and expended
Re sums in the improvement of their estates. Such men lie
nevert could consent to consider as absentee proprietors. lint
Rho
were the exceptions, for he knew and could name several
rio drew large sums from the country who had never been
steer their estates for thirty to thirty-five years together. hut
°Pent their money on the Continent or in England, without
any thought of the duties which they had to discharge to the
Psantry who were resident in Ireland, Several of these in-
dividuals had been applied to in the present distress, and had
over 51. or something of that sort. But this was not to be
t undered at, for it was impossible for them to see, and therefore
I,,f,eels the distress and deatitution that now pervaded the
tab'''. Yet, after all, it was not the want of the money
I. at should be expended on the estates so much as the depriva-
'" of a resident gentry. That was a necessity which no
money could supply, especially the want of the influence which
f":„„111401Y to be exercised over the minds of all classes by the
eores of the higher classes. In Irelan,l, under the present
G 3 deity, he knew several instances where those who were
be'i(tent had distinguished themselves by their exertions in
sehalf of the poor, frequently to the loss of health, and in
name
cases to the loss of life itself. One instance he could
exertions
where a lady had fallen a sacrifice to the benevolent
hein behalf of her neighbours. Disapproving therefore
h he did of the principle of the Hon. Member for Limerick,
it; should yet, in the event of his dividing the House, vote for
Slot, as he said, because he agreed with him entirely, but
obi'u,se he believed that it would bring about something
4'l might be instrumental in the removal of a great evil.
r• BELLEW could not agree in the supposition that the
abSenteeism was the main cause of the evils to which Ireland
f° now subject, for the misery was suffered not from the want
thaat resident gentry—though he was very far from underrating
the benefit—but it was the want of confidence in the expendi-
of capital, and in the consequent want of enterprise in that
oo„
onontrYs This, he thought, would he relieved by the introdue-
,,,,tto and enforcement of a I roper poor-law, for such alone
and have the effect of causing the sale of encumbered estates,
would occasion a greater distribution of property than any
vg
['tell now prevailed, and. the whole benefit of which would
altirnat .1
y wane to the tillers of the soil. Something of this
find had been formerly attempted, but it had failed, from the
seculiar circumstances under which the country laboured.
here was the agent, the middle-man, the farmer, and the
ers?ttters all demanding subsistence from the roil, anti
~""e consequence was, that there was a continued
drain upon the land, of which no one got any-
thing like an adequate benefit. By the sale of estates,
which a poor-law would oblige, the whole of this evil would be
done away with. But far as he was therefore from ascribing
the present miseries to this one mischief of absenteeism, or
Supposing that any single remedy would suffice to place Ireland
'l' it state of prosperity, for he believed that it would require a
Series of measures for that purpose, he yet was by no means
inclined to screen those who in this time of distress had re-
frained from doing their duty to their tenants. Unfortunately
he knew personally of several instances where individuals
drawing several thousand pounds a year had sent such a paltry
the towards the subscriptions raised for the distressed poor,
their
the committees hail been inclined to threaten to publish
letter; and their names. If an absentee tax were to be
sonl„l:°Osed it ought not, he should say, to be limited to
'
it h,r fifteen, or even twenty per cent., for in his opinions
tram
''uld he at least be fifty per cent. of the amounts drawn
that e estates in Ireland, none of which were ever spent in
deismy But he would rpeat, that it was not absen.
dee that was at the root of thee evil, but the want of confi-
-ee in enterprise, and, until that was removed, none of the
Prlielti which Ireland produced would be spent for its ins-
,..lement. The Hon. Gentleman then read an extract from
2,030°1k of Dr. Taylor's, to show that an aggregate of
l, 'OW. was annually drawn from Ireland to be invested in
tuba
an Funds. While such an evil as this continued, no
tionat'l absentee proprietors could ever occasion a propor-
Mr
"Ittp • O'CONNELL raid the real cause of the present
It hail Ireland was the want of a resident landed proprietary.
Peno,`,‘ suPpressed her manufactures, and made her people de-
try "t upon agriculture. When that branch of indus-
wes _
IVith it, a the landed interest became depressed
?ser s and induced them to resort to a system ot
ist b Polating their land, in which they' had been encouraged
ta„yothat House. Manufacturies would revive in Ireland if
event"ad rich and wealthy customers to support them. It
.was
in want of capital, because of that there was sufficient
(bat the present depressed state of the country. But were
stn z.eal'ital to be embarked in manufactures there would be
that urn for it. This was self-evident, for how was it possible
Ireixoolsh manufactories could compete with English. Give
there ", however, a resident landed proprietary, and then
slow i...woukl be customers and inducements for capitalists, who
ties, r,ted their money io Government and othere securi-
!eon"' revive manufactories. With regard, therefore, to the
shell of his Hon. Friend, the Member for Limerick, he was
U,to support it. Ireland was a country which had most
tins suffered from the evils of absenteeism. The word
ia.til.totitee,tsm itself had its origin, as adopted in the English
own ~;,traith Ireland. It existed even when Ireland had its
it.,,,iliament, and why did it so exist ? Why. because
!,:eigottlio,i
_Parliament was held in great subjection by
'actores" arid all measures for the improvement of Irish menu-
evert Overe overuled by the sense power. Gradually, how-
in were
times, these restrictions were removed from Irish

commerce, and the Parliament of the country became more
free and unshackled. No cisuntry in the world more flourished than
did Ireland durinis the short existence of that freedom of trade
and freedom of Parliament. lier trade and manufacture. increas
absenteeism diminished, and the whole condition cf the people
showed man.fest symptoms of improvement. This gratifying
state of things lasted up to the time of the union, but after
that act was consummated, trade began to decline. Manufac-
tures gradually dropped, until they became almost extinct, and
by slow degress the country became miserably impoverished,
and her population reduced to a state of almost hopeless star-
vation. All this was owing to the absenteeism produced by the
union, and in this state would Ireland remain until Parliament
took steps to diminish that evil. English capitalists did not ob-
ject to investing their money in some of the most disturbed parts
of South America, but nothing would induce them to send it
to Ireland, and the reason why they would not was
simple and just. They knew very well that it was im-
possible to compete with English manufactures in England,
and where was the use of their starting works and establish-
ments in Ireland when there were no customers to buy the
goods they might manufacture ? These were positive facts,
and any attempts of the manufacturers in that country, which
had been made, hail failed in consequence of the powerful op-
position of English houses. Those persons were able to give
credit to their customers, and the Irish manufacturers having
no capital to fall hack upon, nor any house market to take off
their produce, bad not, of course, been able to compete with
them in the markets. It was to meet these circumstances that
the lion. Member foe Limerick hail brought forward his motion
for taxing Irish absentees. It had, however, been said that
these Irish absentees were good and excellent landlords.
Why, then, if they were such good landlords, that was a strong
reason who they should go over to Ireland to reside, it could
not be supposed that by their going over to that country they
would become .bad landlords, or that they would change sky
and sun by going there. The lion. Member then went on to
repeat the statements which he had made en a previous even-
ing respecting the revenue of Ireland, and proceeded to show,
front the details of various returns made to the House, that
the remittances from the Irish to the British Exchequer, ex•
seeded, by upwards of 9,000,0001. per annum, the
amount reniitted from the British to the Irish Exchequer
and called upon the Holm to insist upon those persons who
were drawing their rents from Irish property to return to
Ireland, at least, to spend a portion of their incomes in that
couatrv, and by so doing tend to ameliorate the condition of
the people, and draw forth the resources of that impoverished
country.
Lord CASTLEREAGH thought that at all events no
charge could be brought against the Irish Members for an
unwillingness to make sacrifices, in order to meet the present.
distressing emergency of Ireland, but, at the same time, as an
Irish Member, he must protest against any precedent being set
by a legislative measure of imposing conditions upon the
possession of property, such as would be imposed if the
motion of the Hon. Alember for Limerick were acceeded to.
Should the proposed poor-law measure be carried into opera-
' tion, there would be no doubt but that all the property in
Ireland would bear its portion to the support of the country,
but he did not think it would be fair, if, in addition to the
charges which would be laid upon property by that measure,
another tax were to be levied upon the absentees themselves.
There seemed to be a very general feeling in that House against
Irish landlords as a body, which he did not think they
deserved, the Right Hon. Member for Marylebone had
exerted all the stores of his eloquence against that body,
He (Lord Castlereagh) was happy to see that the Right Hon.
Member had received the reward of his exertion?, in the shape
of a vote of thanks from the parochial vestry of Marylebone,
and he had no doubt that the Right Hon. Baronet would be
pretty secure at the ensuing election.— (Laughter. )
Colonel RAWDON thought that this motion did not go
far enough. He thought that the resolution of the lion.
Member for Limerick did not go far enough, for the evil of
absenteeism was not confined to the non•expenditure of
money. The absence of that moral influence which the
presence of the landed proprietary would have in improving
the social and moral condition of the people was one of its worst
consequences. lie thought that the House had a perfect
right to task those who had so greatly abandoned these duties.
A great moral influence would be exercised by the landed pro-
prietors of Ireland if they were in that country to give their
advice and assistance as grand jurors, and to fulfil the various
other duties which devolved upon them. Their presence would
also have the effect of greatly mitigating the horrors of the
distress which at present existed, and from a letter which he
lately received from Armagh, he feared the statement that had
been made with reference to the small holdings in that county
were very erroneous.
Mr. FITZGERALD thought that instead of a tax of 10 per
cent., a tax of 50 per cent. would not be too much to impose.
on those who had so greatly abandoned their duty. lie was
very much surprised at the Hon. Member below him ( Alder-
man Ilutnphery ) stating that the absentee proprietors spent
more money in Ireland in proportion to their rental than the
resident proprietors; but with all deference to the Hon. Gen-
tleman, he very much doubted the correctness of that assertion.
He had no doubt from the statement so eloquently made by
the Hon. Gentleman that the London Society had expended a
large amount of money on their property, hut he did not think
that that could be said of many other absentee proprietors.
Mr. R. YORKE rose amidst cries of " Divide." Ile said
he should be exceedingly brief in what he had to say. lie
wished to ask the House two questions; first, how, in pressing
this question of absenteeism, would they define? and, se-
condly, how, in pressing such a tax would they reconcile it
with the great constitutional question of an invasion upon per-
sonal liberty ? If they would answer these questions as shortly
as he hail put them, he should vote for the motion.—(Cheers
and laughter. )
Mr. NV. V. SWAP T did not think that a lo'. per cent.
tax would be sufficient to induce the owners of property to re-
side in Ireland. He should, however, vote for the motion.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD agreed in the general principles
brought forward by the Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Kilkenny (Mr. J. O'Connell), but found great difficulty in
saying that he should vote for the motion before
the }Louse. He ciinsidered that whatever legislation
they took on the subject should not he confined solely to Ire-
land, but should apply to the whole nation.—( Hear.) If they
taxed Irish proprietors who did not reside in their country,
they must decide, on the same principle, that an English
landlord, who spent his income in Ireland should be taxed
likewise. He, therefore, felt great difficulty in giving his sup •
port to a proposition which proposed lo lay a tax upon the pro-
prietors of land in one country which was not to be levied
on proprietors in this country, who resided off their property or
out of the country. The evidence which had been adduced on
the subject of absenteeism proved that many of the
absentee landlord:. of Ireland utterly neglected their estates;
but he was acquain'ed with instances in which the estates of
non-resident proprietors were well cultivated, well managed,
anti on which the poor found employment, hut no man ought
to neglect his duty in Ireland, and reside in a distant part of it,
as well as in England. lie was in favour of the landlords of
Ireland being compelled to support their own poor, but he was
afraid the proposition would not have that effect ; and besides,
would be fraught with evil. He hoped, therefore his lion.
Friend would not press the motion to a division.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN explained, that what he stated respecting
the estates of the Irish Society was not derived from personal
inspection, but from the evidence which had been published
with respect to them. He believed, however, that their estates
were well managed. In mentioning the nacre of Lord Port-
arlington and other proprietors of Ireland, he disclaimed hav-
ing introduced them for the purpose of drawing any invidious
distinctions between them and other proprietors. He felt it
his duty to take the sense of the House on the motion which he
had proposed.
The House then divided, when there appeared,
so

Fer the motion .. PJ
Against it
Majority.
SMITHFIELD MARKET.
Mr. 0. GORE moved for a Select Committee to inquire
into the necessity for the removal of Smithfield Market, as a
nuisance, in the centre of the British metropolis, to sonic ap-
propriate site. comprising an arra of not le,s than Li acres,
and the establishment of abbatoirs in the vicinity of London.
He had obtained the consent of all the persona whose interest
would be affected.
Lord MOR PET H said that there was room for great im-
provement, for he believed that there remained undeniable
gr,tunds of complaint. The safety of life was much endan-
gered, 84 was also the health of the inhabitants. He was
very glad that the interested parties did not oppose the inquiry,
and he could assure the Hon. Member that there was still a
less intention on the part of the Government to threw any ob-
stacle in his way. He hoped a disc weight would be given in
the Committee to the interest of the parties concerned.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN said he was very glad that his Hon.
Friend had pursued the course which he had done ; and as he
had not entered into the question, he would follow the example
set him. Ile only hoped that a fair Committee would be ap-
pointed.
Mr. WAKLEY was rejoiced that the Government did
not not oppose the motion, for he considered it most necessary
that some inquiry should be made. He was requested to op•
pose the motion, but after what bad been stated, he could not
think of doing so.
Mr. PROTHEROE said that some arrangement should be
made respecting the days upon which fairs were held. Under
the present system, the drovers were not able to attend re •
ligious worship upon Sundays, in consequence of the Mon-
day's fair.
Mr. HUMPHERYS said that if the market was removed,
the cattle, in future, would not be driven through London.
Mr. HENLEY wished the Government to take the matter
entirely into their own hands. If it was left in those of a private
Member they would have only some half and half measure.
Sir B. HALL thanked his Hon. Friend for bringing forward
the question, and he hoped the interest of the inhabitants
would be studied by the committee.
Mr. ORMSBY GORE said that he could assure the Noble
Lord that he would take the interests of all parties into con-
sideration when he was appointing the Committee.
Mr. GREENE proposed that the number of acres should be
omitted in the vv, rding of the resolution.
Mr. ORMSBY GORE objected, as less than twelve acres
would be wholly insufficient.
The motion was then agreed to.
THE CASE OF MR. MARA.

Lord LINCOLN said that soon after the commencement of
the present session he had brought under the notice of the
House the petition of Mr. Mara. He hoped that Hon.
Gentlemen had read that petition as it would save him much
trouble in explaining. In the course of last session a Bill
affecting friendly societies was brought in by the Hon.
Member for Finsbury. That Bill was afterwards amended
and sent up to the Upper House, where the mode ef appoint-,
ment for the Commissioners was altered, and vested in the
hands of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the
National Debt. A clause was introduced by the counsel
for the Home-office to confirm the present holders
of the offices in their situations, and to vest
t he
.National
enai
Debt appointmentt.Th
ien theß ill, a
hands d s
thusof the
amen,Commissionerst
hoef
the
House of the Lords on the t:ith of June, and on the 6th of July
the present Government entered upon their offices. On the
strength of being confirmed in the appointment which he
had.
held for four years, and in consequence of his increased dutind
es,
Mr. Mara rented an office for 501. per annum, a
engaged a clerk. The Treasury, for two months after
the passing of the Act, recognised Mr. Mara
as a registrar of these friendly societies. On the 11th of
August a letter was written from the Treasury to Mr.
Mara, containing instructions in reference to his office ; and
in two months
in after another letter was addressed to him, stat-
ing that an objection existed to his appointment being con-
firmed, consequence of the omission of the clause, which
was subsequently passed by the Lords, on the first passing of
the Bill in the Lower and Upper Houses. Another letter
informed hire that his office had been filled up
by a Mr. Cannel, a private friend of the Attorney -General
for Ireland. Ile should he able to prove, on reference to the
Act, that this appointment was most unjust and impolitic.
The words in the 10th clause, upon which Mr. Mara was
displaced, were rather equivocal, but it was evident from the
context that no ground whatever existed for his dismissal.
The Noble Lord then cited the opinion of Mr. Napier, the
barrister, as to the illegality of the removal of Mr. Mara,
which he further supported by the reading of several sections
from the Act. of Parliament bearing on the question. This
was the opinion, be said, which had been come to by a high
legal authority. Ile thought, therefore, that the removal of
Mr. Mara and the appointment of Mr. Connel was an illegal
act, or, if not illegal, a direct contravention of the intention of
tke Legislature, which was, that the removal of such officers
as these should no longer be made dependent on the change of
Government. It was not only a proceeding against the inten-
tion of Parliament, which was to obtain officers of experience and
ability, but it was inept, unjust in the present instance to the
individual who bad been removed. Having. thus much, ho