§ MR. E. DENISONwished to put a question to the Secretary for Ireland relating to the relief works now going on in that country. On the 19th of January, that right hon. Gentleman informed the House that the numbers employed on the relief works were 450,000. We were now at the 4th of March, and the time for putting the seed in the ground was fast passing away. He wished to ask what progress had been made in discharging this large army, and attaching them to the cultivation of the ground; what the numbers now employed on the public works were; and if the right hon. Gentleman had any objection to give to the House a return weekly of the numbers employed on those works?
§ MR. LABOUCHEREhad not the least objection to give the information required, viz., a weekly return of the persons employed on the public works. As to the number of men now employed on those works, he regretted to say that it had been found impossible to prevent a very great increase of that number since the time when he stated them at 450,000. The hon. Gentleman must recollect, however, that in point of fact the Bill that was to provide a substitute for these public works, had not yet come into operation, and therefore it was impossible to draw off the numbers of men which had been anticipated. As a proof that the distress of Ireland had been greatly increased since he made his former statement, according to the returns he held in his hand, the numbers employed on the relief works for the week ending 835 the 20th of February, amounted to no less than 668,000.
§ LORD G. BENTINCKasked the right hon. Gentleman if he was in a position to be able to inform him how much of the 50,000l. to be given for seed had been granted for that purpose?
§ MR. LABOUCHEREwas not able to answer the question. All he could say was, that it had been referred to the Lord Lieutenant to carry into effect the intentions of the Government in the manner which he thought most advisable. He knew that the Lord Lieutenant had come to a resolution not to give the sum away in money, but by advancing seed, to be repaid a short time hence, to parties who applied for it. By the last letters he had received, he found that the applications had not been very numerous, but he was unable to state the exact number. He might state that the Lord Lieutenant had come to the resolution, in advancing seed, to give seed for green crops only, and not corn seed. He was satisfied that he should be doing more harm by giving corn seed, than would be compensated for by any partial advantage which would be gained, on account of the interference which it would create with the supply of grain in the market.
§ MR. W. COLLETTasked if it was understood that these 668,000 men were to be employed on productive works only till the Bill to which the right hon. Gentleman referred came into operation?
§ MR. LABOUCHEREthought the hon. Gentleman must have mistaken him. The men to whom he had referred were those employed on what were called relief works. Some of these works, no doubt, were not of a productive character, but some of them were useful; and not a few were employed on railways. All he would say was, that it was the intention, as soon as practicable, to draw off the men so far as was consistent with the public safety.
§ LORD G. BENTINCKasked if the right hon. Gentleman would object to give to the House a statement distinguishing the different occupations of the 668,000 persons employed on the relief works?
§ MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, the monthly report of the Board of Works would be laid on the Table of the House, and the noble Lord would get the information he desired there; but in the weekly returns no such distinctions were made. There was, however, in the monthly return a distinction between those employed on the re- 836 lief works, and those employed, for example, on the Shannon and other public works.
§ LORD G. BENTINCKhad asked if there was any objection to a return distinguishing the different professions or occupations of those employed? He wished to know from the right hon. Gentleman if he had any objection, whether this return was in the monthly report or not, to give it to the House?
§ MR. LABOUCHEREwas afraid that if he were required to lay on the Table of the House the professions of those employed, it would take a very long time to make it out; but he would give the noble Lord the character of the works on which they were employed. He had no doubt such information could be given; and if it was not included in the monthly report, he would undertake that it was supplied to the House.
§ LORD G. BENTINCKwanted the original occupations of the parties employed. He would undertake to say that in one week such a return could be made—nothing could be more simple.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREhad every wish to give the fullest information to the House. If he had misunderstood the noble Lord, he was sorry. Did the noble Lord wish to know, for example, how many of them were simply labourers, and how many were farmers, and to distinguish those who were labourers and farmers from those who were mechanics? [Lord G. BENTINCK: Yes.] Then he was afraid it would take a long time to make out such a return; but he would endeavour to meet the wishes of the noble Lord.
§ MAJOR MACNAMARAwished to know whether the Secretary for Ireland had got any account of the papers moved for by his Colleague (Mr. C. O'Brien)?
§ MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, the hon. Gentleman was, no doubt, anxious to get the information he desired; there were, however, 3,000 or 4,000 names, and it would take a long time to obtain such a return. He had a letter stating that the Board of Works was very anxious to give the information as soon as possible; and the hon. Gentleman might rest assured there was no disposition on the part of the Board of Works to withhold any information that might be required.
§ MR. R. COLLETTinquired what return they were to have with reference to the number of men employed on public works in Ireland—whether of the number 837 employed on reproductive and the number on unproductive works? He considered it a matter of great importance what return they were to have—whether the numbers were to be classed, those employed on reproductive works being distinguished from those employed on unproductive works, or they were to have only the sum total? There could be no objection to a return of their trades or occupations; and he wished to know whether there would be any objection to give the occupation or profession of the 11,000 overseers?
§ MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, that the return which he meant to lay on the Table, in consequence of the Motion of the hon. Member for Mallow, would be the weekly return received by the Treasury of the number of men employed on the whole of the relief works in Ireland, stating in every county the number employed in that county. If any further information should reach the Government, there would be every disposition on their part to lay it before the House.