The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-16 00:00:00

ETON MONTEIL

Mr. JAMES wished to put a question to the Righ,
Hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary respecting the
practice called Eton Montem. This was a subjeci
which had recently excited considerable interest in the
public mind. The House was aware that the authorities
of Eton College had expressed their intention of abolish
ing the practice in consequence of its immoral tendency,
and its effect in relaxing the discipline o: the school.
It was evidently clear, and there was no doubt of it, that
the custom observed by the young gentlemen at Eton
Montem was illegal—(Laughter)—and that they were
' liable to be committed under the Vagrant Act.•—
(Laughter.) The question which he wished to ask was,
whether, in the event of the Provost and Head Master of
Eton agreeing to continue the Montem under the advice of
an illustrious personage, the Right Hon. Baronet intended
to bring in auy Bill to legalise the acts, which plainly
subjected those practising them to a charge of highway
robbery ?—(Great laughter.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said that, as he was a more proper
person to answer the question, he might state that when
tier Majesty asked his opinion as to giving effect to the
measures for the abolition of the. Menten, he had stated
that in the advice which he had given to her Majesty he
had thought it his duty to say that he conceived •the
Provost and Head Master to be the proper persons to
consider that question, and that it ought to be left in
their hands.

ANNUAL TAX.
Lord G. BENTINUK wished to ask a question of
his Noble Friend at the head of the Treasury. On the
20th of July last year, when the sugar duties were made
a permanent tax, instead of an annual tax, his Noble
Fiiend had stated that before the sth of July he would
state what great tax he would substitute for" those
duties, in order to give the constitutional protection the
voting of a great tax afforded.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that it was not the intention
of the Government to propose that any duties at present
permanent should be made annual. Several representa-
tions had been made to the Government complaining of
the great injury which trade and commerce sustained
by submttting duties annually to the consideration of
the nothe.

DRAINAGE OF LAND BILL.
On the order of the day for resuming the adjourned
debate on the Pour Relief (Irelan.l) Bill being read,
Mr. CAYLEY wished to direct the attention of the
House very briefly to the Drainage of Lted Bill,
which stood on the paper for the third reading that
night. He said he understood it to be a Bill to amend
a Bill that had been passed last session, by which a
grant of money fur the improvement of land was made
to Great Britain to the amount of 2,000,0004 and to
Ireland to the amoubt of 1,000,000 E But now it wa-
intended to make a grant to Ireland itself of 1,500,000/.
And, although there was a grant of 2,000,000/.
to Great Britain, he found there were applications for
3,000,0001., in consequence of which it had been
proposed on the Committee to limit the grants
to individual applicants to the sum of 10,000/.
But what ho thought singular was, that it
was intended to allow 1,500,0001. to Scotland, and only
500,0001. to England, although the object of thi
grant was to raise the character of agricul-
ture in England to a level with that of Scot-
land, and yet such was the ratio to be established
between the two in the matter of this grant
I lis object in rising was to ask his Noble Friend at the
head of the Woods and Forests, whether some means
could not be devised for a more equal distribution of the
money to be advanced so as to benefit the proprietors of
England as well as those of Scotland. He should be
glad to hear any intimation thrown out upon this
subject.
Sir G. GREY said that he would not then enter into
the merits of the Bill. lie thought that tee limitation
which had been made to the sum of 10,0001. removed
the only objection to the Bill. No application what-
ever had as yet been made from England.
THE CUSTOMS DUI'IES.
Lord G. BENTINCK wished to know when it was
the intention of the Government to bring forward the
Customs Duties Bill, and also to go on with the Rail-
ways Bill ?
The C lIANC LLLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
with regard to the Customs Duties Bill, it was the inten-
tion of the Government to have brought it forward on Fri-
day, but the length of the debate upon the Irish poor-law
had precluded them from doing so. The Bill a ould be
brought forward next Monday, and the Railways Pill
would be upon the orders for the same day.
Sir BENJAMIN HALL presented a petition from
the Mar) lebone Vestry, in favour of the Irish poor-law.
POOR RELIEF(IRELAND) BILL.—ADJOURNED
DEBATE.
On the moti.m that the Speaker do leave the Chair,
Sir W. CLAY said that the expediency of adminis-
tering out-door relief to the poor of Ireland was the
question which properly came under their consideration
upon that night; there were other questions, no doubt,
important ones of detail, but the proper place to discuss
them would be in Committee. The opponents of the
measure overlooked cne important consideration—they
ih.garded it us one which gave an immediate and
p,/st'dye right to relief to the able-bodied.—(Hear,
hear.) But it did not contain any such provision ;
it gave it through the intervention of thev e d
barge Poor-law
commissioners, and for that purpose it vested

! discretionary powers in that body, powers um's:
anipled in extent and somewhat unconstitutionaa
The House were about to give the Poor.lera
Corran.,sioaors 'a right to impose taxes an
rates to the amount of some Inillions upon the people'
The Noble Lord dissented; but he, after a diligeol
perusal of the Bills, had come to that opinion. Now, he
did not think any Government would ask such powee
if they did not believe that an urgent necessity 0/41
for them. He himself believed that such necessity yd
exist, and he according:), did not b!ame the Government:
Is was no longer doubtful that Ireland must have a rail
and efficient poor-law, similar in principle and sPirls
to the poor-law in England. The people of tlAis
try were prepared to make every sacrifice to ltle.
the existing distress, but they still felt that in the
A the
long run Ireland should support her own poor. ..'ll
poor of England was supported by the property of iff.'
land—as the poor of Scotland was supported by the
pr: party of Scotland—so ought the poor of Irelsanda.
to he supported by the property of Irel!'•,-
But was the condition of Ireland anything apprOaCIVI
to that ? On the contrary, the whole of the poPuut:ol
was in a far different position. For the greater Pr•
the year the labourers in Ireland work only for al
'to
during a part of the year, and only so long as reed
enable them to pay their rent. He quit' 4100
that it was necessary to introduce a paOr'
lieland, but if they consented to allow relief to ttewb_b-le;
bodied poor, they would be bringing in 5t the satTa
time a practice that would be highly injurious I° the
country, and the difficulty would arise as to isheilfsrsee
law should' be introduced so as to work only
county, or to be conducted according to the unions.
firmly believed, while expressing his opinion, ;lir
the poor-law as at present proposed would be addend
tered mischievously, and that the poor-law ef, 'rile and
must ultimately be assimilated with that of Engisn
Scotland. He believed that it was most erroneous to for
pose that a conviction of the necessity of a poor-I'l°ol
Ireland arose from the fact that the present distress d.
touched the pockets of the people of Eng!94lof
He felt assured that the conviction was one
too
slow, silent, and steady growth. It wassold
of surprise, not that the people of England St
that opinion now, but that they had not Olt°
of and acted upon it some years before. In Jr
the eternal disgrace of that country it had been Pe"saf
for human beings to perish from famine with°l3,' the
• human law to appeal to, in order to aver' tier
dread calamity. For many y' ars it bad been a 000,
of surprise that so many associations should 12/vLse,
isted in Ireland the Whiteboy, the fihariThel
n. and numerous others; and various measures boo
1 been adopted from time to time to suppress t get
secret societies, but the attempts had been all in.rs.sf
And why had they failed ? Because the conditi°7#l,
the Irish peasantry had been most shamefully neglects
Was it, therefore, surprising that they shc).67;slis
together and unite themselves to such. associa"s sse
He said they all well knew that Ireland was rich if
elements of wealth, and they did not need the auto,
able work of Professor Kane to tell them of her all'os
her fisheries, and the capabilities of her soil, ths'ost
possessed enough to maintain a population double be
which at present existed, and in prosperity. But *lief/
asked, was that wealth not developed ? Because tot
was no security for life and property lit ssit/
country ; and he believed there would be no see-y
without laws that should be respected by the Pe-rb;
and that respect for the laws could 001/ hes'
founded upon a well-confirmed belief that 011tbse
laws depended their own interest. That led set
naturally to a poor-law for Ireland. He was P
one of those who were hostile to Irish landlordsited
was therefore in no hostile spirit to them that helot
the enactment of a good poor-law, for be conswol
that. it would forward the welfare of the pe0P1...,.
also the prosperity and wealth of the landed proprleirar
An lion. Member had made a long and detaileVaio,
parisan between the counties of Norfolk and abe
when discussing the question the other night,,,o
(Sir W. Clay) differed from the conclusion to whisrstle.
lion. Gentleman had come. That Hon. sitle,4ollt
,nan ought to have' considered that in I'f,,
there was a security for life and Prlra orig
After thirteen s ears ( xperierce they had found IP.Lf its
of the whcle sum raised for the relief of the r-a is
England and Wales, two-thirds were expends
out-door relief; and, in his opinion, it was wisely s°,4 of
pended. Out-door relief was not only the best toell.pe
relief, but the most effectual mode in which it Os°
administered. In every country in Europe there Vita
a greater or less extent ,'s law for the relief of !h,e;110
--but in no country was it upon so large and l'"swoe
scale, as it was in this country, and in no counts,' big
they so completely carried out. Mr. Senior, Woe
interesting report, comparing the amount of wick
given in the Continental States with those .paid in
, hoar
land, says that the wages of the agricultural is%asse
in England nearly double the average 01 .soclif
in any of the Continental States, and ;toes
adds he, is the result of the En 1. -11 P(4' el
g te sass
He was not prepared to adopt the unmeasured 1/I'n to
which he had read in some newspapers with regi";ra,
the conduct of Irish proprietors, nor was shesilleA
oared to adopt the sentiments which had
sac la
rom the fI on. Member for Bath; but he saust,f'alkie
opposition to the articles in the Times and the we-
ihey might bring forward those of the Nation 'phis
paper; and against the polished sarcasal, °arra/
`riend the womb: r for Bath, they lisifu:t eon'
the
violent and immeasured language useu..._7oe*r.)
, s
iliation Hall for a long series of years „sferst°°d,
Prom what he had said it would be.easilyshould
that he was desirous that tire landlords of Ireland social
be made the instrument tor bringino•
reformation of the vople. Government- abouta nraisCd t
the h t
It
ourse, and although he had heardiafeessolifta,id-LidebaceltieLereir
found with their measure 4, he must col
e
no others a hich were: better calculated tot
great object in view. -He was sure Government vt°lllso
aractise every economy in carrying their measures iO.O
operation, and he did hope Ireland would do its best
secure their success. The success of the measure now
:sefore them depended in a very
high degree on the OW
duet of gentlemen oppsite.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS—CRIMINAL
LAW.
A message was brought from the
requesting the attendance of Mr. Law,
London, and Mr. Shaw, the Recorder for Dublin,
Committee of their Lordships on the subject s crim
law. litioleusiteecoof
rdLeorrtdho:

DEBATE RESUMED. . •Ans uP°ll
Captain JONES, in rising to state his °cal:" of tbs
its subject, could not but express his admilliZ would.
lon. Baronet who had just sat down. l'acialir.awtieori
it the same time, express his great
also for the conduct of the English people, ast tba
as for that of the Government for doted,
energetic proceedings which they had an°l37, 10
did not hesitate to say, that without ti.e. hod•
large portion of the Irish people would haveYeriswere
It appeared that on the 9th of January, 1847, there ~arft
101,189 persons in the wilt khouse,but the 9th ofJaL";764.
1845, the numbers in the workhouse were only. .t 5,
Now, it was clear that if 54d was the charge .111 gig
when there were only 43,764 persons in more
workhouse, it must of course be considerablY, of
For 101,189 persona. It was a simple rtrge
three question, and it would be found that the Ghee
upon property amounted to 14d., instead of 514 oral
charge for the maintenance of each pauper year
also considerably more in the present
.e'art
than in the year 1845, and previous fed
lle must say that the existing poor-law bed P-001
quite sufficient for Ireland up to the end of 1645 ; in „ ;he
of which he referred the House to the report °` the
Commissioners, where he found that in 18.1610 of
union.houses wore not half full. These were eleb;o4
containing 101,000 persons, but they actually conssP
ri bee.-
no more than 43,000. Allegations, however, had WO
made in that House to the effect that some of these un-as
had not been opened in sufficient time, and thet 111;611
persons had been sent away without 'relief. Plot
milted that there were some cases of the former tot-
l.
but, with a single exception, he did not know °I iiee
instances whatever of persons being refused ,rebeis•
He was not subject to the animadversions which had bid•
passed by the Noble Lord upon those gentlemen schfut the
signed the resolutions, for he he had not taken an/ pa!',
the
meetings in Palace-yard, or in Dublin. Yet he Iwo" -- tha
same time, say that he agreed with those gentlemen °r ow
,übiect of out-doer relief, but he found fault with theta old.
lutions more for what they did not contain than what they (R.
He was of opinion that they should have, in the first Pl!ce:0111
dared that the people were entitled to relief out of t°B,:plie-
they should then have showed how far a -law was sr the
able, instead of appearing to think, as th ey did,
Govenment should do everything, and the gentry 00""Witiof
( Hear, hear.) Long before the distress occurred, haur; took,
opinion that they should give relief to every, manW"eeolla
the workhouse test, and few would be found to come a • faP '
time if they could avoid it. He thought it safe to go thoisiof
but no further ;he was not willing to agree to out-doartro . •
indiscriminately, for they would not have a single fs:titteeteo
the whole of Ireland who would not expect that two
individuals would not receive some relief. They ought „enoyeri •
put the applicant upon a better footing than the reteZ,etlet
and his firm belief was they would do so if they ad.°Peeil
system a; proposed. If Government would alter their `'" bao
as to provide that there should he no out-door relief w.
there was room in the workhouse, he should have oo,°„Ter..
tion whatever to it. He would not detain the House '?""Df
but he, having had some experience in the administrals% to
the existing poor-laws in Ireland, had felt it to be his duty
say thus much upon the plan now before the House- that
Mr. VILLIERS STEWART said that he perceive'imh

his name was attached to the resolution eons.e t° blt to b°
Members against the Government Bill, but he wished .1 being
understood that he had never given any authority Or. It poor'
placed there. It has been agreed in that House that tne ',wets

!aw Guardians had not beeli anxious to carr out the P°;:bis
intrusted to them. He would not, as fary as it lailieen
power, countenance a charge against guardians. It hlu &sit
asserted in many places, the guardiana had refused to or
the poor until compelled by a mandamus. It might aPPula
extraordinary to an English Member, that such thing. ""that
be, but a very little inquiry would satisfy hin3ndnet
the occurrence was the consequence of the "Theft
of the Commissioners towards the guardians in the execs
of the great powers intrusted to them. There had 4rownetr,
a bad feeling between the guardians and the Gonunissioe
and instances of harsh treatment on the one side, and rem
strance and complaints on the other, had come under
servation. Many Members were aware that there was a PI",
liar feeling in the Irish character, and that was, that vtle,„.
man had a potato to share he would share it with his neigh."
rather than allow him to go into the workhouse. The I—.
themselves had a strong objection to enter the workhouse_.,
The poor-law was never much to the taste of the Irish. It
against their habits, and the people would rather endure 111
privation than go into a building where they would bo bare.l
supported by charity, and subjected to disgrace by entering!,
He had troub!ed the House with these observations princiPl
for the sake of clearing the guardians from any charges brll#
against them. He was in favour of producing some measure which
afford out-door relief, and take away the necessity for to!.
poor entering a workhouse for the purpose of receiving en-
relief
He believed, also, that a system of emigration must be
couraged, for in many cases it would be ruinous to property
support all the poor that might become chargeable upon
from want of means to remove themselves to those counttr_
where they would obtain more, and better employment. ir
heartily supported the measure introduced by the Governmelr
Mr. HAIIIILTON was anxious to make a few observa
• f
tuns before going into the question of oat-door rolle

pt. l4Retf.
rs- 1 ttui tk
ge 4,4