The Sun.
London, England, 1829-04-21 00:00:00

.~L'. '~:.~:.Li.~T;

:!'.4 •

obtained over a barbarous people by another scarcely
less barbarous, and of a race and language at once
distinct and dissimilar. Noss in that order of God's
providence by which even our wickedness is some-
times made to promote his purposes of good, it can-
not be denied that the ultimate consequences of con-
quests have been in many instances highly beneficial
to the conquered themselves; a better national cha-
racter has been produced by the intermixture of dif-
ferent races, and laws, commerce, and general civili-
zation have been communicated by the conquerors
to their subjects But where the
\wounds inflicted by the first conquest have never
been suffered to heal ; where the conquerors have
continued to form a distinct people, and the con-
quered have been regarded as an inferior race ;
where conquest, in short, has never been softened
into union, but retains all the harshness of its ori-
ginal features, aggravated by successive centuries of
irritation ; such a state of things is a perpe-
tual crime, and the original guilt of the
conquerors must for ever extend to their pos-
terity, so long as by neglecting to remedy or
palliate its evil consequences they make themselves
a party to it." But conquest is not the word to ex-
press the relation between England and Ireland.
The island unfortunately was not conquered till the
reigns of Elizabeth and James ; had it been con-
quered, an amalgamation between the conquerors
would probably have soon taken place. England
had just enough of the island to keep it in constant
disorder—the natives making incursions into the
pale and the English of the pale making incursions
into the countries of the natives. Since the conquest
of the whole island, the disproportionate power cf
fie larger island was for a long time employed in
dividing the Irish, and in supporting one party in
keeping down another. Had Ireland been newly
conquered, and the conqueror and conquered left to
themselves, the former would, for their own safety,
have been compelled to adopt a very different sys-
tem from that which has been pursued. In the
first place, unsupported by a British army, they
durst not have allowed themselves to be surrounded
by a population of eight millions of Helots, retained
by their competition fur land in a condition of
poverty which allows them to accumulate no
capital. Had they attempted, without support, to
continue this unnatural state of society, they would
long ago have been the victims of a servile insur-
rection. In all similar cases, the conquerors, for
their own security, are compelled to make slaves of
the conquered, charging themselves with the respon-
sibility of feeding them, and providing for them in
old age and sickness, and subjecting them to a ri-
gorous and vigilant police. This state of things is
only beginning. to disappear in extensive regions of
the North of Europe, where the population, how-
ever fertile the territory, is always scanty. Ireland
has, by the barbarous policy of England, been con-
demned to exhibit a phenomenon new in the world,
a population nearly a stranger to the arts of civilize- '1
tion, and yet as numerous as that of the most cis
vilized communities. To take an illustration from a
division of this island, far less favoured by nature
than Ireland—we mean Scotland. Its population
is not one-fourth of that of Ireland; but its popu-
lation living in towns is greater. With the finest
harbours in the world, Ireland is without navi-
gation ; Scotland has thrice the tonnage, and
thrice the number of seamen. Nothing but the
resources of Britain, employed in retaining Ire-
land in barbarism, could have preserved a social
system, in which there are none of the materials by
which society is held together. To say that a coun-
try in such a diseased state will thrive without the
application of strong remedies is ridiculous. Were
we to leave the Irish to themselves for a few years,
they would probably have recourse to the remedy of
the North American Indians. But as this is out of
the question—we are called on to devise means for
securing the Irish peasants against the ruinous corn-
petition for land, the consequence of their redun-
dancy, and by giving them a claim to their own
soil, thereby securing the labourers of England from
irruptions of necessitous persons from Ireland, which
prevents the towns of England from serving as
drains for the redundancy of the country districts.
At present, the Poor Laws of England are
defeated by immigrations from Ireland ; for it is
impossible to get rid of a pauper from Ireland,
where, on the other side of the water, there
is no parish on which he has a claim. The
Scotch Poor Law is also defective; and it will
be found necessary ere long, if we mistake not, to
alter materially the Law of Settlement in that
country. That the English Poor Laws, before the
Law of Settlement was tampered with at the re-
commendation of Mr. Pitt, were greatly superior to
those of Scotland, and still are superior, we could
easily prove. If we wish to raise the labouring
classes, we should raise as much as possible their
notions of what is necessary to comfortable sub-
sistence. Here the English Poor Laws act be-
neficially. The labourer spends his wages freely
and cheerfully, trusting to the general insurance for
age and infirmity held out by the Poor Laws; while
the Scotch labourer lives meanly, and accustoms
himself to an insufficient diet, having the terror of
destitution before his eyes. It is impossible that be
should save much, with all his economy, though
no doubt instances to the contrary are occasionally
found. We hare nowhere seen this subject more
happily explained, than in a volume entitled,
" Letters from Scotland, by an English Commer-
cial Traveller, written during a Journey to Scotland
in the Summer of 1815 ;" published in 1817.
" The poor (he observes) are not as well without as-
sistance as with it; because it is found that refusing
parish aid does not necessarily raise the real wages
of labour higher than the nominal wages when as-
sistance is allowed. The real wages of labour are
not higher in Scotland than the nominal wages in
England. So that the English poor are as well
paid in the first instance as the Scotch, and have
parish assistance besides, and of course must live
much more comfortably. This conclusion is sup-
ported by the fact, that the Scotch poor live ex-
ceedingly hard; and that from the fear of the in-
famy of accepting eleemosynary aid, they volunta-
rily expose themselves to privations inconceivable
to the affluent, the same pride which hinders an ap-
plication for assistance, influencing them also to
conceal their penury. The employer thus reaps
the advantage of the economy of the employed. I
am inclined to think, in opposition to general opinion,
that good living may be the cause, not the effect, of
good wages. In England animal food is considered a
necessary of life. The labourer does not think himself
sufficiently paid if he eannotoccasionally indulge him-
self in generous food, and the indulgence is allowed
him. In Scotland the poor are content with oat-
meal and potatoes. Animal food is a luxury they do
not demand; and as they show they can do without
it, it is placed out of their power to have it. In
Ireland, I understand, the poor are still worse paid
than in Scotland : they can live on potatoes alone.
In short, it appears to me that wherever the poor
voluntarily relinquish a comfort, their wages expe-
rience a correspondent reduction. In England we
expect the poor to perform the laborious work of
the community; but as we use them as we use
other hard-working animals, we feed them well—
The Scotch do not only get labour from them, at
the cheapest possible rate, but they force them to
deny themselves comforts in good times, that they
may not become burdensome in bad times." The
truth is, that the principle of population will always
supply labourers in abundance, whatever the allow-
ance; and the merit of the English system is, that
by raising the ideas of the common people of what
they ought to have, by rendering it unnecessary for
them to be economical, the people of property in
self-defence are compelled to keep down their num-
bers by throwing obstacles in the way of settlement,
&c., which prevents a redundancy of labourers.—
Wages in Scotland are always lower than in Eng-
land, and they would still be much lower from the
want of Settlement Laws, were it not for the con-
stant emigration of Scotchmen to England.—Morn-
ing Chronicle.
If it be the intention of his Majesty's Govern-
ment thoroughly to remodel the Police of the Me-
tropolis, one improvement we should suggest is to