The Sun.
London, England, 1849-03-06 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 5.
POOR LAW (IRELAND) BILL—ADJOURNED

DEBATE.
(Continued from our Third Edition of last night.)
Mr. B. OSBORNE proceeded—Some Hon. Gentle•
man remarked, " And a foolish answer it was;"
hut if that Honourable Gentleman would take the
trouble to Is fleet that the land bad become too
impoverished to grow anything else but potatoes, he
would sae at once that it was quite reasonable to sup-
pose that it could not produce food enough
to support the people upon it.—(Hear, hear.)
If the Noble Lord's Government deservs d the name of
one it ought nut to throw itself on the charity ot the
House, but ought to come forward with some definite plats
which would do away with eleemosynary relief, and place
the people of Ireland in a situation to maintain
themselves, alai by which those enormous
sums of money which had been wasted by the
House might be saved to this country.
The poor•laws did:not add to the resources or the capital
of the cuuutry, but tended rather to diminish them.
He had himself been obliged to discharge a
number of labourers in consequence of having
been obliged to pay last year 1,000/. for poor-rates, and
yet they were told the property of Ireland must support
the poor population. That was a most dangerous doctrine
to promulgate, anti they might talk of Louis Blancism;
and, speaking of that gentleman, he would do him the
justice to say that he did dot support the
ateliers nationaux ; and they might talk of
Youlett Scropisie— (Laughter)—but he would say that
the doctrine that property was responsible for poverty
was nothing but a system of legalized communism.
—(Loud cries of Hear, hear.) There must be other
measures besides a poor-law, and be would ask the
Government what were they to be ? The Noble
Lord was bound to introduce a Bill to enforce the
sale of those lands which did not pay their
portion of the poor-rates.—(Hear.) There seemed to be
an idea in the House that the poor-law would promote
the sale of estates in Ireland, but that was one of the
greatest fallacies in the world. The produce was
liable, but not so the fee of the land. The Noble Lord
ought to have shown some of the legislative boldness
which we. said to be his characteristic, and proposed
such a measure as that now suggested. One reason as-
signed for the non. coil( c:ion of rates was that the pro-
perties were under the management of the Court of
Chancery. The rental of property under such manage-
ment was upwards of 1,000,000/., and not more than
2,000/., or es. per cent. per annum, was laid out on the
improvement of those properties. As regarded a portion
of rent amounting to 100,0001, not one single sixpence
was laid out on improvements. The Hon. Member for
Limerick, who was a Repealer, and therefore more likely
to be asked his opinion than an independent Member,
recommended an indiscriminate rate between pasture
and arable land. He (Mr. Osborne). would .ti,c,e...tsftPt
eansantediluvian system as =should compel sasestan
to put a piece of land in grass. Ireland had been
described as a country with aristocratic institutions,
but without an aristocracy. In the printed papers
a case eas mentioned of a large landed proprietor
in the west of Ireland who had been reduced to
support his family on the milk of two cows. They were
Seized for debt, but, having been redeemed by a friend
and restored to him, they were seized again for poor-
rates. If matters were come to such a pass, the Govern'
ment ought to afford facilities for making land an article
ot sale, should simplify the process, and reduce the ex-
pense of transferring it from one holder to another. The
cons( quence would be, that the land would fall into the
hands of those-who-would turn it to the best advantage,
not only for themselves, but for the country. These
measures might be too bold for the Noble Lord, who
might rather be disposed to content himself with coming
to Parliament for an occasional dole; but it was for the
House to adopt measures which would be adequate to
meet the circumstances of the case. He knew not what
effect the Noble Lord's dream of the future might have
on the minds of Hon. Gentlemen. The Noble Lord had
said he had no doubt that Ireland was in a state of tran-
sition; and that at no distant period she would be pros'
perous. The Noble Lord told the House that, when the
starving people should crawl like famished rats on the
barren soil, new modes of cultivation would be intro'
duced, and spontaneous harvests would follow.
Lord J. RUSSELL—I said nothing like it.
Mr. OSBORNE continued—He had come to the
cheerless conviction that, as long as the destinies of this
empire were swayed by the present combination of p?l''
ties, so long would Ireland have no hope but in looking
to the root which had caused her present destitution,
and England would have no protection from the painful
effects of that union which infused the in'ection of pall-
purism into her more healthy and less corrupted frame.
lie should vote against the proposition on the present
occasion, though if the Noble Lord had come forward
with some plan suited to the urgency of the occasion,
no man would have been more ready to give it his
support.

Sir It' )BERT PEEL—Sir, without one word Of
preiace, I shall address myself immediately to the
two main questions submitted to our consideration—.
in the present state of Ireland shall we leave the people
to be supported exclusively by the resources of the
union or electoral division within which they live?
and, secondly, it we are of opinion that some exe
trinsic aid is necessary, from what source shall that aid
be derived? Sir, I cannot reconcile myself to give e,
vote which shall throw the sustenance of the people o'
Ireland, in the present condition of that country, epos
the individual unions. I have read these papers—l have
seen the exertions that have been made in many of those
unions to contribute to the support of the poor. I think
great injustice has been done in this country to the
landed proprietors in many parts of Ireland.—(Rear,
hear.) I find conclusive evidence that, at least in marl
pins of Ireland, the most strenuous local exertions have
been made; speaking of many unions there has been a
willing submission to the law; and if the whole amount
of rate has not been levied it has been from a physical
impossibility.—(Hear, hear.) Therefore I think the
attempt to create a prejudice against Irish proprietors
on the part of this country is most unjust. Not that
am prepared to deny that in many cases there has heel
great impropriety, and that individuals have tried
escape from a burden they ought to have borne. I sal
s
nut a word in respect to the system of eviction, which
is utterly impossible in many cases to prevent. But
must say anything like indiscriminate censure of the
landlords of Ireland and the strenuous exertions which
have been made in many parts would be most unjust--"
(Hear, hear.) lam satisfied by this evidence that if yeo
do refuse any extrinsic aid the consequence must be the
loss of life by famine, and by the spread of disease nriPi
piing the energies f those who escape from eau*
tarvation.—(Hear, hear.) I cannot believe, whatevet
I may think of our past policy, that a British House of
Commons will consent to adopt that painful alternative.
—(Cheers.) I may be quite willing to admit that the
system of indiscriminate relief has the lamentable effect
of destroying the habits of self-reliance, of preventing
the exertion of industry, of teaching men able
to work, and particularly Irishmen able to work, that
it is much better to rely on charity than on strenuous
and continuous ex-rtions for their own maintenance'
Bat, granted that our policy in this respect has been
wrong, what answer have we to make to the individual
sufferers ?—what answer have we to make to tilt
whom we have taught to rely on charity and not on their
own exertions ? If the policy be wrong we are respon-
sible. Those who are now suffering from actual famine
are not parties on whom we can with any justice Ala
the penalty which belongs to our own policy. At the
same time when we speak of the impolicy of our pos.
contributions for the maintenance of the poor, we mu
never forget that the country has been placed in a eell.
dition during the last three or four years to which there
is no parallel in the history of Europe.—(Hear, heart)
The subsistence on which millions of people relied 10
for three or four successive years, contrary to hopes'
perhaps unwise hopes, contrary to rational expectations'
been swept away. You have had millions thrown
y our hands, not from idleness, not from unwillingnes;
to work, but in consequence of the failure of that
speci,s of food upon which they had exclusively
relied ; and therefore we have been compelled S.,°
adopt a course which, had there been the opportuelt!
of exercising a deliberate judgment, we should stud"
ousiy have avoided. But then the people are taught bie
our past example and our past conduct to rely for ,het
sur,sisielice upon our benevolence and charity; and I far
one never can consent, from whatever source aid 0391
be derived, and whatever the ultimate cansequence to
teaching ccaltinuid reliance upon it, instead of on tb!
resources of industry—l fur one never can consent iv
adopt the horrible alternative of exposing those peePle„
to death by famine.--(Cheers.) I therefore voted le'
the 50,0001., and if there were no other means of pr°.
viding aid, whatever other measures I might advise to he,,
adopted for the purpose of mitigating the future cell'
and preventing such demands on the national resource*
I don't hesitate to say I should give another vote rather
than leave those people to disease and starveti°ll.
Upon that ground, under the present extraordi;
nary circumstances in which Ireland is placed,
shall give my vote for continuing some asiistamco for,.
other sources than the property of the union
those who administer relief to the poor in that country
—(Hear.) The second question is, from what soul
shall that aid be derived? Now, I must say franklh
think other parts of the empire have a fair right to es
on Ireland for a strenuous effort to rescue us from the
present difficulty.—(Loud Cheers.) I don't rest my cle;
wand upon Ireland for this strenuous effort on account
of the poor upon the ground that taxation in Ireland is
unequal as compared with this country.—(iieer, hearq
If you rely upon the argument that Ireland as compared
with England is unequally taxed, the conclusion wbich
logically you must adopt is—apply equal taxation t,u,
both.—(Hear, hear.) It is' impossible to deny that!:
the fair result. If lam satisfied that Ireland ought tO
bear the assessed taxes, and the duty on bricks and soap'
or ought to be subject to the property-tax, I will nt
consent to let Ireland off from her obligation to contrite
bate equally with England to the public necessities by tti
rate of 6d. in the pound charged on a certain descriptl°.
of property. I think that Ireland ought to in die a go!:
effort to meet the tremendous evils arising out of tc,e!
present distressed condition of that country. In thisrt
country when a union is manifestly unable to support
the poor within it we adopt the principle of subjeet?s
the vicinage to the burden of contributin tf,
to that object. We do not, in such a case, say 4
Ireland " Distress prevails in some of the unions
Devonshire and Cornwall, they cannot support tbt
poor, Alad therefore we cAll upon you, the people of Ire