The Sun. — 1837-03-25 (London, England)

CARLOW, MARCH 21.—This day, Mr. Keogh, the High Sheriff, drew up his carriage to the Judge's lodgings (Doherty), and sent up the servant to say that he was in waiting to convey him to the Court-house. He sent him no message in return, but left him half an hour waiting ; when he came down stairs, he got into the coach, anti Mr. Keogh introduced himself to him, and was about to get into the coach when Doherty told him be should not go with him, as he wished to go by himself. Mr. Keogh toll him that, as it was his own carriage, he should ride in it to the court, and he did do so. The Judge told him he would fine him 5001. He, said Doherty, also, unsolicited, post. potted, I understand, the trial of an Orangeman, named Magrath, who is in custody on the charge of wilful murder of his brother, and who attempted to hang himself last night. IRISH POOR RELIEF an ably-reasoned article by the Freeman on this subject we find the fol.* ring remarks, which seem to us not undes r. inn of attentie n:— " With the proposition of half and half of the poor-rate, as between the owner and occupier, we are not quite satisfied. 'Tis the occupier gives value to the property by his labour and industry, and on him, therefore, the share of the burden should be lightest. We incline to think, with Mr. Smith O'Brien, and with the Irish Poor Inquiry Commissioners, that two-thirds on the owners and onethird on the occupiers would be a fairer adjustment. The reason Mr. Nicholls gives (paragraph 87) why " each should be called upon to pay half the rate" seems to us not only a bad one, but one that ought naturally to lead to the very opposite conclusion. Mr. Nicholls thinks that because at present " nearly the whole support of the destitute falls upon the tenantry," they ought not complain to have a full half of it legally imposed on them. Now, our conclusion would be, that, as up to the present, the landlords ,have had no share of the support of the destitute, in common equity the larger share of it,should be imposed on them now. As to that part of the clause exempting altogether those whose rent " shall not exceed five pounds," we incline to think that upon the whole, it may be as well to leave it out. The great mass of those persons are mere tenants at will, and if this part of the clause were to become the law, either of these inconveniences must result—they will be either turned out of their holdings forthwith, or else a nominal addition will be made to their rents, in order to make it exceed the specified amount ; and we conclude by repeating that what we are most dissatisfied with, and what we are most anxious to see amended, is the neglect of those economical considerations which, in the impoverished stag of the country, ought to be the first and strongest to suggest themselves. The relief that it gives is given for nothing, and produces nothing, whilst it could so easily adopt a system of relief in which there should be nothing for nothing, but in which what is given should be productive, and perpetually reproductive—the relief in the one. case being like the stream that buries itself in barren sands, but being in the other like that stream kept smiling in the face of day, subserving the purposes of man's industry, and fertilizing the soil that is to supply his wants."