The Sun. — 1838-04-10 (London, England)

POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL. Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the report on this Bill be brought up. Mr. GOULBURN wished, previous to the question being put, to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer at what time he expected to be able to bring the Budget forward? Mr. RICE had not yet determined on the exact period, but hoped it would be in the course of a month. Sir ROBERT BATE SON wished to know from the Noble Lord the Secretary for Ireland whether he had received any official information of two horrible murders which had been recently committed in Tipperary ? Lord NIORPETH had received official information of a dreadful murder in Tipperary. He believed that only one life was lost. He had also received a statement of the causes which led to the act, but wished to refrain from any premature discussion on the subject which might interfere with the ends of justice. Mr. GOULBURN wished to know whether the Bill for the registration of voters in Ireland would be, brought on before the holidays? Lord JOHN RUSSELL could not say whether the Bill would be brought on before the holidays.. Mr. LUCAS presented a petition from Monaghan, praying that relief under the proposed Poor-law should be confined to the infirm poor. Sir IL BATESON presented one with a similar prayer from Donegal. • 1. The questionwas then put, " That the report be now brought *" •• :# Mr. P. SCROPE moved the addition of a clause giving to the Board of Guardians power, without the sanction of the Commissioners, to employ a portion of the funds in the employment of the able-bodied destitute poor on public works or otherwise.  Mr. S. O'BRIEN seconded the motion. Lord JOHN RUSSELL would object to the clause on the grounds he had before stated. He considered that it would be carrying into effect a plan of out-door relief. He thought it far safer that the House should not sanction a plan of outdoor relief, as he knew how that s)stem had been abused in England, and he feared that in Ireland the abuse would be much greater. He thought the principle most dangerous, and that it would be exceedingly unsafe to introduce it. Colonel CONOLLY was decidedly opposed to the introduction of the clause. Mr. ROCHE thought that employing the paupers would only tend to keep down those who were struggling to keep out of the workhouse.—( Hear.) The question was then put, and the clause negatived. Mr. RE DINGTON proposed a clause in lieu of clause 15, providing for the simultaneous operation of the Poor-law in all parts of Ireland. Lord MORPETH would oppose the introduction of this clause. His wish was that the operation of the Bill should be as simultaneous 113 possible, but he thought a power should be left with the Commissioners to select districts with which to commence.  This clause was also lost. Mr. REDINGTON then proposed the following clause :4, And be it enacted, that every person begging or gathering alms, or placing .himself for the purpose of receiving or gathering alms, or setting any child so to do, within any union in which the Commissioners shall have declared a workhouse to be fit for the reception of the destitute poor, shall, on conviction thereof before any justice of the peace at Petty Sessions, in open Court, either by confession of such offender, or by the (Ti lence on oath of one or more credible witnesses, be committed to the common gaol or house of correction, there to be kept to hard labour for any time not exceeding a fortnight for the first offence, and not exceeding- one calendar month for the second offence : Provided always that no person shall be liable to be so convicted who shall have applied to be admitted to the workhouse of such union and been refused admittance thereto by the guardians or other officer of such union workhouse, by reason of their inability to accommodate such person or child, and provided also that Co person shall be committed to such gaol or house of correction (if it should be the first offence), who, not having applied for admission to the