The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-11 00:00:00

RAILWAY.

A similar report was brought up respecting this under
taking, and leave was given to bring in the Bill.
THE NEWCASTLE AND BERWICK RAILWAY.
The Bill for this line was read a first time.
THE TEN HOURS' BILL.

Mr. BLACKBURNE presented a petition from th• inhabi
tants of Warrington, in favour of the Ten Hours' Bill.
Mr. HINDLEY presented a petition in favour of the Bill.
THE CORN-LAWS.

Lord HOTHAIII presented a numerously signed petitiel
against any alteration in the laws affecting the importatioi
of food.

➢lr. BULLER presented several petitions in favour of the
repeal of the corn-laws.
THE ➢LILITIA.

Mr. HI NDLEY presented several petitions against calling
out the militia.

SUPPLY.

On the motion for the House resolving itself into a Com-
mittee of Supply.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD rose to call the attention
of the Government to the question of which he had given
notice. It appeared to him to be one of great importance.
The Irish poor-law differed from the English and Scotch in
one most important particular. Under no circumstances
whatever could out-door relief be administered by either the
authority of the Commissioners or board of guardians in
Ireland. In England, in cases of urgent necessity, in
cases of accident, relief might be afforded, but no
such power was conferred by the Irish Act. The
reason he wished to call the particular attention of the
Right Hon. Secretary to the necessity of the measure arose
from a report returned of a number of persons, as many as
two hundred, being in an absolute state of distress in Chels ;
and, considering that these persons might have families,
there could not be less than ore thousand individuals in a
state of distress who could not be relieved, except by going
into the workhouse, which probably could not accom-
modate them. Now, that was what he particularly
wished to point out, for the Commissioners had
no power whatever to administer out-door relief. The Irish
poor-laws were unpopular, but how much more so would
they become if some alteration did not take place ? He,
therefore, called on the Right Hon. Baronet to consider what
was best to be done, and if it would not be well to empower
boards of guardians, under the eentrol of the Commissioners,
to administer external relief in cases where they might deem
it necessary.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM could assure the Honour-
able Gentleman that the present condition of Ire-
land had occupied the most serious attention and
anxious consideration of her Majesty's Government for some
time ; and he should add that he (Sir J. Graham) was not
one of those who underrated the existing difficulties and dis-
tresses of Ireland. The distress was evident ; and there-
fore, with a view to meet it, the Government had introduced
measures much calculated to increase the means of employ..
ment in that country. The Public Works Bill would be
brought in immediately, as also a Bill to enable grand juries
to expend a sum of 100,0001. immediately after the summer
assizes. There was also a Bill for the improvement of piers
and harbours on the Irish coast, and a Bill to promote employ-
ment by carrying out fully the provisions of the Drainage Act
With respect to the danger of approaching famine, he could
assure the Hon. Gentleman that the Poor-law Commissioners
had made full and ample arrangements; and, if unfortunately
that calamity should arise, they would not be taken by sur-
prise. If the necessities of Ireland should require her
Majesty's Government to take any extraordinary steps, they
would not shrink from doing so; but the Hon. Gentleman
asks to make great changes in the law with regard to the
poor of Ireland, when he proposes out-door relief to the able-
bodied, a measure which he was sure could not be
adopted by the Legislature. He (Sir James Graham)
was quite sure that he did not misrepresent the feelings
of the Government, when he said they could not sanction
such a proposition. But he could not see, under the present
temporary distress which exists in Ireland, any necessity
for such a measure. Now be (sir J. Graham) had expe-
rience in this country of the danger of admitting, even
under very severe circumstances, the claim of able-bodied
pep* to relief. That system had proved to be dangerous in
this nountry, and he (Sir J. Graham) could not entertain the
proposition. If he acted so on general principles, how
much leas inclined was he to change the existing law, under
the pr sent temporary distress; more particularly as the Go-