The Sun.
London, England, 1829-05-08 00:00:00

or any other means, then would be the time to introduce
a modified system of poor laws. In proposing remedies
for the evils that afflicted the country, one man said remit
5,000,000/. of taxation ; another said alter the corn laws;
a third proposed to do away with sinecurists (he hardly
knew where they were to be found); all they, remedies
must necessarily be inoperative so long as the population
continued redundant. With respect to colonisation, he
considered it almost the only remedy that could be applied
with a prospect of success : it should be employed, not to
the suppression of other remedies, but conjointly with the
most promising of them : lie was convinced it ought to
receive a fair trial. In every point of view it merited at-,
tention ; and, for his own part, he believed it to be the
sole remedy. He should be most happy to hear that Go•,
vernment was willing to look into the subject with a view
to its adoption.—(The Right Hon. Gentleman Was
loudly cheered in the course and at the conclusion of
.his
speech.)

Mr. SADLER never meant to descend to personalities
in the observations which he had made, and to which the
Right Hon. Gentleman bad alluded. He had alluded to
the principle supported by the advocates of emigration,
and to its effects, which he maintained to be cruel and
disastrous, as a reference to the facts would show. It was
true he thought the Right Hon. Gentleman wrong in his
notions of population, but he approached the emigration
Committee with no feelings of dislike : indeed, he had
paid them a greater compliment than one man in a hun-
dred thousand ; for he had read the whole of their reports
(hear, and a laugh,) which although they had swelled into
the size of a family bible, were not of an equally sacred
character with that holy volume, and were therefore sus-
ceptible of objections. He had written the book referred
to in great haste; he regretted if any thing contained in
it had been the means of wounding the mind of a single
individual. He entertained the greatest respect for the
individual Members of the Emigration Committee, but he
would not be debarred from exercising his judgment on
the subject of their opinions. The Hon. Member pro-
ceeded to allude to the emigration which took place from
the south of Ireland to Canada, in 1825 (he afterwards
said 1823), under the direction of Mr. Peter Robinson,
who selected nearly 2,000 persons from a number amount-
ing to at least 50,000, with a view to the ages and cir-
cumstances most consistent with the utmost degree of
health and longevity. No doubt every care was taken is
the management of the emigrants. The zeal of Mr.
Robinson was recorded in the third report of the
Emigration Committee, in which the locations in question
were described at large, and their prosperity and happiness
alluded to. But if there were any truth in his authorities,
matters were directly the reverse with regard to these set-
tlers. Among 1,945 individuals (the number of the
settlers), there occurred in the space of about a year 131
deaths--( Hear)—and a considerable number were ill of va-
rious diseases. Thus, instead of there being one death in
69, as was the case in Wales, or 1 in 57, as in England,
in this prosperous and happy colony the deaths were in
the proportion of 1 in 14 of the population. (Hear,
hear.) Having such documents in his possession, was it
to be said he bad made use of any undue severity in his
remarks ? On the contrary, he thoughtthe Emigration
Committee somewhat indebted to him for suppressing the
facts of which he was in possession.
Mr. W. HORTON.—They are in the report itself.
Mr. SADLER (in continuation)—Well then, what be-
came of the statements put forth by the Committee as to
the prosperity of the settlement, when an account of these
deaths were contained in their own report? It was plain
they
.shad not examined the documents annexed to their
own reports. If they did, they might be led to believe
that he intended to bring an accusation of cruelty against
them ; but lie had made none, and did not mean to make
any. Having made out his case,—proved that there had
been a useless waste of human life,—he now contended that
emigration was not necessary. We had 30,000,000 acres
of uncultivated land in our European dominions, 15,000,000
of which were capable of profitable cultivation : it would
be better to employ our capital in reclaiming these exten-
sive tracts than in encouraging emigration. The Hon.
Member concluded by expressing his intention, in the
course of the present, or early in the next Session, to afford
the House an opportunity of putting his principles upon
this subject to the teat.
Mr. W. HORTON said the mortality in the case re-
ferred to was owing to want of management; the emigrants
were landed at an unhealthy season, in consequence of
which a great number of them were lost.
Mr. SADLER reiterated his former statement, and ob-
served, that notwithstanding the mortality, the location
was described as being in a happy and prosperous condition.
Mr. S. RICE resisted the introduction of poor laws
into Ireland, because they were vicious in system, inde-
fensible in practice, had failed in this country, must inflict
deep injury on the landholders, and were calculated to ag-
gravate the evils of the people instead of diminishing them.
It was erroneous to say that the poor were unprovided for
in Ireland : there were assessments for the promotion of
education, and for the maintenance of foundlings ; houses
of industry were supported by local rates—every county
in Ireland bad one or more county infirmaries. Thus pro-
vision was mane for the young, the sick, the old, the im-
potent, and also for the lunatic poor. It had been said
that the introduction of poor laws in Ireland would have
the effect of raising the wages of labour. In answer to
this it was only necessary to look at Sussex. There poor
rates were at the highest, and wages at the lowest. In
other 'counties, where the rates were moderate, wages were
proportionately better. He would have had no objection
to an inquiry into this subject, but he could not consent,
at this period of the session, to hold out a prospect to Ire-
land that Parliament would consent to the measure pro-
posed. Remedies might he devised for the relief of the
lower classes; he concurred in the opinion that emigra-
tion wee one of those remedies. Another remedy might
be found in public works, which might bring to light new
powers of production in Ireland. Any disposition on the
part of the House to entertain the proposed measure would,
he thought, be fatal to the peace of the country.
Mr. G. DAWSON was convinced that if once the
system of poor laws, as established in England, was ex-
tended to Ireland, no property would be worth possessing
there;—that it would extinguish industry, and produce
universal misery. The proposition of the Hon. Member
came at a peculiaely unfortunate time, when it was de-
sirable to allay all popular excitement. What the poor of
Ireland wanted was employment, not poor laws ; and if
English capitalists were encouraged to go there, the cheap-
ness of labour, and the numerous facilities of the country
in respect to internal trade, would soon produce employ-
ment. It was better, therefore, to wait, and not to throw
out a new subject of agitation anti unsettle men's minds.
The Hoe. Member here adverted to the pamphlet of the
lion. Member for Newark (Mr. Sadler), which had been
referred to, observing, that of all the publications be had
ever read on this subject, it appeared to him to the most
intelligent ; he was, indeed, astonished to see an English
gentleman display such a knowledge of the subject, and
such real liberality, except in his abuse of landlords. With
respect to the subject before the House, he did not bind
himself to any specific proposition : although a modifi-
cation of the poor laws, as they stood in the reign of
Elia rbeth, might be useful in Ireland, the adoption of
our present system, of maintaining able-bodied men by
contributions from estates, would occasion incalculable in-
jury to tire-country. _
Sir F. BURDETT thought that the measure of relief
should be combined with colonization or with emigration,
for they were perfectly distinct, though often confounded.
By colonization he meant the transpoitatiou of persons
from Ireland to our fine colonies, which would produce
the greatest possible benefit to the country, and was,
fact, the only remedy for the evils under which it laboured.
The greater part of the evils of the present system of
affairs in Ireland was attributable to the excessive and
abundant population of Ireland. Catholic emancipation
itself was of no import, compared with the employment of
the superfluous population of Ireland.—(llear. )—But here
his roust confess he felt the proposition of the lion, Member
for Newark was worse than futile; for who would con-
sent to cultivate, Emelt less to purchase for the sake of
cultivating, barren lands ? The distresses of Ireland arose
out of the unfortunate mismanagement of the people of
landed estates there. They were as rich often as English
proprietors, and had been treated with manifest indulgence
by the united legislature with respect to taxation. In the
great question of taxation on property, the Irish proprietary
bad been exempted altogether ; and no income tax had
been levied on the landed proprietors of Ireland. The law
of primogeniture was notoriously the cause of the excessive
wealth of England. The motion of the Hon. Member
for Waterford, in his mind, did him infinite honour, be-
cause its effect would be to tax himself largely for the in--
terests of the public. After such an example, he trusted.
Parliament would not break up without probing the sub-
ject to the bottom. It was high time that something
should be done, and with that view he should strenuously
support the motion of his llon. Friend.
Mr. JAMES GRATTAN considered the question as a
given up question altogether. The plans of the Right
Hun, Gentleman in 1821, and subsequently, were totally
unsuitable to Ireland. The proposed system of emigration
accompanied by a grant of public money, to the amount of
a million sterling, was erroneous in principle, and must be
defective in operation.
Mr. S. RICE explained.
Mr. BROWNLOW could not agree in some of the points
laid down by the lion. Member to? Londonderry. He
could not help fearing for the conselueneea attendant on

severing the poor of Ireland from its soil, which would, in
his mind, be an unavoidable consequence of the system
which had been so plausibly recommended to the House.
From the reports before the Legislature, it was clear that
nothing in Europe, perhaps is the world, could surpass
the deprivation and absolute wretchedness of the Irish
I peasant. To relieve this, no adequate effoit Was made on
the part of the landed proprietary of thi country ; inso-
much so, that in a district wLere distress and sickness
strongly appealed to the feeling of the proprietors of the
soil who collected a rental of 80,0001., only SO/. could be
procured, despite the piercing cries of wretchedness which
so loudly challenged the sympathies of the wealthy and the
exempt absentee. He trusted that his Majesty's Ministers
would direct their attention to this subject, and that by
the next Session the Right Hen. Gent. opposite (Mr.
Peel) would be prepared to bring forward some measure of
this description calculated to meet the case of Ireland, and
to remedy the evils which existed there. He (Mr. B.)
would not be for stopping here. He would carry the poor
laws in Ireland further ; he would extend them further,
and introduce what he believed to be the true Elizabeth
system of the English poor laws into Ireland.--(Hear.).—
He believed that labour was the foundation, the true origi-
nal principle of the Act of Elizabeth ; and all the prac-
tical evils and abuses which might have subsequently crept
into the administration of that system of laws in England,
could be easily avoided in Ireland. He would make la-
bour, he would make employment, the basis of such a
system on introducing it into Ireland. But it was said,
that if the poor laws were introduced into Ireland, the ren-
tals of the landlords would be completely eaten up by
them. Even if that should turn out to be the case, he
would say that it would be better than that a whole people,
a whole nation, should be left in a state of starvation. It
was to the rental of the country, he was ready to avow,
that he would attach the poor-rates in Ireland.—(Hear.)
—Notwithstanding the speeches of his Hon. Friends, the
Members for Wicklow and Limerick, he (Mr. Brownlow)
would say, that rent was excessively and cruelly high in
Ireland.—(Hear, hear.)—He only asserted a fact, which
every writer upon the statistics of Ireland, from the
time of Spenser to Mr. Wakefield, and Mr. Curwen,
the late Member for Cumberland, acknowledged, when
he saw that the rents in Ireland were excessively
high, and that the last penny was screwed out of the
unfortunate people of Ireland.—(An Hon. Member in
the seat behind Mr. Brownlow cried " Name, name.")
Mr. Brownlow said he should decline to perform the in-
vidious task which his Hon. Friend wished to cast upon
him.—(Cheers.)—He would decline to name particular
individuals, or to state particular instances, but he would
assure the House that the fact was so as he had stated it.—
(Hear. )—He knew well, that as long as the landlords could
get their rents they would not burden themselves with the
support of the poor. The fact was, that Hon. Members
must get their hands into the pockets of these men, for
they would not put them there themselves—(Cheers and a
laugh)—and force them to contribute to the maintenance
of the poor of the country. They must bring back
the absentees to Ireland by making their property sub-
ject to assessment for the support of the poor there.—
They would be induced to return if a system of poor
laws were introduced there, fur the purpose of look-
ing after the affairs of their parishes, attending at the
vestries, seeing how the rates were assessed and collected,
and taking a part in the management of the parochial affairs.
By making the rental of the country contribute to the sup-
port of the poor, the landlord, as he had just said, would
rather employ the labourers who might be out of employ-
ment on his own estate, than have them employed at the
expense of the parish. The demand for labour would
thsrefi,re increase, and wages would rise in proportion to
that demand. He would give his zealous support to the
application of such a system as he had described to the
condition of Ireland. He was sure that such a measure
would meet with the almost unanimous support of the
English Members of that House, when they reflected upon
the inequality of the rate of wages in the two countries—a
labourer receiving sd. a day in Ireland, who was paid at
the rate of Is. 6d. in England ; and when they knew that
this inequality must sooner or later end in reducing the
rate of wages in both countries to one common level, ruin-
ously prejudicial to the English labourer and peasant.
Englishmen were proverbial for their generosity to Ira
land. In the .year of the great distress there, upwards of
300,0001. was transmitted from this country to support
her starving- population; and in the same year provisions
to the amount of 4,000,0001. in value were exported from
Ireland to England. He was sure that Englishmen, both
in this House and in fhe country generally, would be just
as well as generous.—(Hear, hear.)
Atrt SLANEY would support the introduction of a sys-
tem into Ireland, which, avoiding the unsound portions of
the poor laws of this country, adopted the sound principle
of maintaining the aged, the infirm, and the impotent, and
which supplied employnient to unemployed able-bodied
labourers.

General GASCOYNE suggested the propriety of ad-
journing the debate on this question till to-morrow.
Mr. PEEL said, that if there were not a number of
other gentlemen anxious to deliver their sentiments on
this question, it would be as well not to adjourn the debate.
General GASCOYNE proceeded to address the House
in support of the motion of the Hon. Member for Water-
ford. He contended that it was absolutely necessary that
some modified system of poor laws should be introduced
into Ireland ; and he expressed a hope that a measure of
that description would be introduced next session by his
Majesty's Ministers. He should certainly vote for the
motion of the Hon. Member for Waterford, if it went to a
division.

Mr. PEEL, in voting for the previous question, wished
not to be understood as expressing any decided opinion as
to the principle or the merits of the proposition which had
been advocated by the Hon. Member for Waterford. He
voted for the previous question, as he much doubted the
Policy of the House of Commons pledging itself in one
session to pursue any particular course in the next session
of Parliament. He denied that he had during the last
session expressed an opinion favourable to the application
of the poor laws to Ireland : on the contrary, be then
said that he saw great difficulty in the way of introducing
the English system of poor laws into Ireland. He was
certain that if they introduced the system as it at present
existed in England into Ireland,—if they established there
overseers, parochial vestries, and select vestries,—that all
this machinery would be only converted into a complete
system of local jobbing. His Hon. Friend the Member
for Liverpool had misunderstood what had fallen from him
last session respecting the expediency of introducing sonic
system of poor laws into Ireland. What he said on that
occasion he would then repeat,—namely, that he thought
due deliberation and caution should be used in applying
the machinery of the English parochial relief system to a
country situated like Ireland. Without offering any bind-
ing opinion, er pledging himself to any specific proposi-
tion in relation to the poor laws in Ireland, be would say,
that he feared that in the present circumstances of that
country the right of parish relief to every able-bodied la-
bourer who could not procure employment, would absord
its entire rental, and make general its pauperism. The
question was still open to inquiry, but was one that should
not be too hastily decided upon, and on which he repeated
he would not pledge himself, but would vote for the pre-
vioust-gnestioes.
' -Mr. tuskrssoicr with his Right Hon. Friend
that it would then be premature to decide on the merits of
the Hon. Member for Waterford's propositions, and that
the more prudent course was to obtain full information of
its peculiar bearings on the condition of Ireland. That
soing system of relief for the poor of that country, he was
;aiWsvas, or, if not, soon would be, the general convic-
tion of the House ; but he agreed with the Hon. Member
for Newark that to be beneficial it should be brought for-
ward by the Government, after mature deliberation.
rslr. TRANT thought that Ireland required some sys-
tem of poor laws, and hoped that such would be the opi-
nion ol the Legislature before next Session.
Lord MILTON doubted very much the policy of intro-
ducing any system of poor laws into Ireland at all analogous
to that force in England, and trusted that if any should be
introduced, it would be free from the manifold abuses of
the lauded English system.

Lord PALMERSTON also doubted. r, rather, had
no doubt of the impolicy—very much whether the adop-
tion of the Hon. Member for Waterford's proposition
would not aggravate the evil it was intended to remedy.
Mr. VAN HOMRIGH defended the Irish landlords as
an indulgent and liberal body of men.
Mr. V. STUART, as he understood the subject would be
taken into serious consideration by his Majesty's Govern-
ment, would not press his motion further.
Mr. PEEL hoped it would be understood that he had
given no pledge whatever as to the intention of Govern-
ment to introduce any measure on this subject. He ad-
mitted that the condition of the poor of Ireland required
serious consideration ; but he had not pledged Goverr.-
meat to the recognition of any particular system for their
relief.
mr. V. STUART observed, that he understood the
tenonr of the Right Hon. Gentleman's remarks to be pre-
cisely as he had now stated.
The motion was then withdrawn.
SILK BILL.
Mr. V. FITZGERALD moved the third reading of the
above Bill. He hoped that the urgency of the occasion
would be received as a justification for making this motion
at so late an hour, To his oval certain knowledge, several