§ MR. FRENCH rose to move according to notice for a Committee to inquire into the allegations of a petition from the county of Roscommon, as to the working of the Irish poor-law.
§ SIR GEORGE GREY suggested that the hon. Member should postpone his Motion to a future day.
§ MR. FRENCH could not accede to the request of his right hon. Friend for the withdrawal of his Motion. He felt that by frequent discussion alone could the attention of Parliament be drawn to the impolicy and great injustice of the manner in which the interests of Ireland were treated; and he regretted to gather from the request that had been made that Her Majesty's Government were about to meet 1313 this Motion in the same way they had, unfortunately for themselves and for Ireland, met that of the hon. Member for Portarlington, by refusing any inquiry into the working of a system, not alone vicious in itself, but rendered more objectionable by the arbitrary and offensive manner in which the Commissioners had exercised the unconstitutional powers vested in them. He assured them that this course would not tend to allay the discontent and dissatisfaction now universally prevalent in Ireland, or reconcile the people to English legislation. He, however, trusted, when the House would take into consideration the manner in which this law had been forced upon Ireland, the total neglect of all the pledges given by Government on its introduction, the ruinous effects that had followed from it, and the universal odium in which it was held, they would not consider the demand that he was about to make for inquiry an unreasonable one. Owing to the discontent and representations of the English Members on the immigration of Irish labourers into England, a Commission was appointed to inquire into the state of the poor in Ireland. The inquiry was intrusted to the Archbishop of Dublin, an Englishman, conversant with the working of the poor-law in this country; the Chief Remembrancer, Mr. Blake, a gentleman of great ability, possessing the confidence of Her Majesty's Government; the late Member for Kildare, Mr. O'Ferrall, resident all his life in Ireland—well acquainted with the condition of the people, who filled some of the most important situations under Her Majesty's present advisers. Their report was conclusive against the introduction of the English poor-law into Ireland. This, however, did not suit the preconceived views of Her Majesty's Government; and Mr. Nicholls was ordered to make his six weeks' tour to Ireland. On his hasty conclusions and inaccurate calculations, a Bill was introduced and passed through the House, in defiance of the majority of the Irish representatives—in defiance of the warning of one who knew Ireland and her interests well—the late Mr. O'Connell —who told them that his deliberate judgment was, that their Bill would not succeed in mitigating the evils to be found in the existing state of the poor in Ireland, but its tendency would be to aggravate them much. Mr. Nicholls stated that the expense of the workhouses, if fully occupied, and the support of the poor, would not ex- 1314 ceed 312,000l. a year. He says in the 64th page of his first report—
"Our experience of workhouse administration in England would warrant the adoption of the sum of 208,000l. a year; but to be safe and to approximate to the truth, say 260,000l."
§ The accuracy of this calculation may be tested by the fact, that in the last year a levy nearly to the amount of two millions sterling has been made for that purpose. This has been on property rated at thirteen millions, while in England there is but five millions levied on property rated at sixty-two millions. The noble Lord by whom the Bill was introduced estimated the number that would seek for relief under it at a hundred and twenty-one thousand. A hundred and forty odd thousand are now in the workhouses, and ten times that number are receiving outdoor relief. The noble Lord declared that this experimental operation of his could not have a successful result, without some collateral measures for easing the country of her superabundant population. He promised to assist immigration, and to afford means to employ the people. He said in his speech—
"As to the nature of the public works to be engaged in, that is a point I will not discuss now. It appears still to me there are various means open for the application of the labour of the poorer classes, which might lead to the happiest result. I think with care and attention we may find materials for public works of such a nature, that while they serve the temporary purpose of employing the indigent, may be the means of opening new sources of industry, and for the profitable investment of capital in Ireland—opening improved communication between different districts, for instance, the improvement of bogs, are questions well worthy the application of labour and investment of capital."
§ Neither of these pledges have been redeemed; in place of which the Act, by the amendments of the late Parliament, has been rendered more oppressive and more destructive to the interests of Ireland. Its powers are now so arbitrary and so unconstitutional that a noble Lord, in another place, well declared that no Ministry that ever occupied the Treasury benches dared to propose such a measure for the people of England. Under it the property of the country has been confiscated without any effect on the destitution of the people, who are perishing daily by thousands. The mortality among the hundred and forty-six thousand confined in the workhouses is weekly equal to the mortality of this metropolis, with its two millions of inhabitants. Those objectionable powers were a conces- 1315 sion to English impatience at Irish immigration—they are not alone unjust, but insufficient. The tide of immigration proceeding from Irish wretchedness and Irish misery will continue to flow. As water finds its level, the current of human beings urged onward by the pressure of their physical wants, must ever rush towards the point where their wants will find alleviation. In place of checking that current of Irish destitution towards England, you have, by the destruction of property in Ireland, taken from us the means of employment at home, and materially increased the evil of which you complain. He (Mr. French), however, did not wish to be considered opposed to the principle of a poor-law. On the contrary, he was prepared to show that if Her Majesty's Ministers were disposed to take a manly and statesmanlike view of the case, in making the entire property of the country liable to the support of the poor, on the principle of an income-tax, they would have a fund not alone sufficient for that purpose, but available for the development of the resources of Ireland. Why should mortgagees, annuitants and fundholders be exempted? Why should the burden of supporting the poverty of Ireland be thrown on what was manifestly unequal to bear it—the land alone? According to the plan he proposed, twenty millions worth 4 property would be available for this rate, Which would not, in any case, exceed a shilling in the pound. Economy of administration could be secured by rendering each union liable to a separated rate for any excess of expenditure of the sum appropriated to them out of the general fund by the central authority. The present system could not be continued—the loss of life was frightful; but little relief was given to destitution; and, from one end of the country to the other, the cry was universal that they could not, and would not, bear this state of things any longer. The object of the law appeared to be to regulate paupers and not to remove pauperism. It might be applicable to a country where poverty was an exception; it was inapplicable to a country where poverty was the general rule. It was not essential that this law, in both countries, should be the same; the poor-law was one of a domestic character—it formed no part of a comprehensive scheme of imperial policy—it professed to be for the benefit of Ireland. The people of that country were universally opposed to it—neither the bayonets nor the wealth of England could secure its con- 1316 tinuance. The province of Connaught contained 4,392,000 acres; its rated value was 1,465,642l.; its population, 1,418,857; it was divided into 155,000 tenements, 100,000 of which were under five acres in extent: 90 per cent of the population lived in cabins of but one room: the rents were unpaid, the county rates could not be collected—there was a debt of between, 1,000,000l., and 2,000,000l. owing to Government for temporary advances. In several districts the land was untilled, and people who formerly possessed 100l. to 200l. a year seeking relief. Did Her Majesty's Government think that the poor-law could be upheld in this district? It would require double the value of the land to relieve the wretchedness of its population. The petition from the county of Roscommon was adopted at a public meeting: it was signed by all parties, from the Peer to the peasant, and it represented every shade of political opinion. If a Committee were granted, he would undertake to substantiate every allegation contained in it. The Government might possibly raise the objection that this Motion was but a repetition of one which had been previously made, and which had been resisted on the ground that the Government officers connected with the administration of the poor-law in Ireland would be taken away from their duties to give evidence before the Committee. He pledged him. self he would not bring over a single officer of the board—their opinions might be communicated to Government in blue books. Before he sat down, he would warn his noble and right hon. Friends below him that the people would not tamely submit to the destruction of life and confiscation of property that was going on. Strafford, by his attempts to confiscate the property of the west, by his inquiries into defective titles, brought about the bloody outbreak of 1641. Human nature is the same—similar causes will bring about similar effects. The hon. Member concluded by moving the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into and report on the allegations contained in the petition of the ceunty of Roscommon, as to the working of the Irish poor-law.
§ MR. GRACE seconded the Motion.
§ SIR GEORGE GREY was sorry that his hon. Friend had not listened to the appeal which had been made to him to postpone his Motion, and bring it forward on a future day, because it was impossible at that late hour of the night (nearly twelve 1317 o'clock) to bestow upon the question that consideration which it deserved. He confessed he had not thought it probable, looking at the place which his hon. Friend's Motion occupied on the Paper, that it could have been brought on at all that evening, but he was prepared to state in a few words the reasons why he could not advise the House to agree to the appointment of a Committee. It had been suggested that this was a renewal of the Motion of the hon. and gallant Member for Portarlington (Colonel Dunne), which was brought forward at an earlier period of the Session, and which was then fully discussed. He could not say, however, that he thought the present Motion was merely a repetition of the Motion of the hon. Member for Portarlington. He considered that the working of the Irish poor-law would be a very fit subject for inquiry when the witnesses could be brought over from Ireland to this country without interfering with the operation of those measures which had been under taken to relieve the distress which prevailed in the sister country. This Motion, however, was for a Committee to inquire into the allegations of a petition presented by the proprietors and occupiers of land in the county of Roscommon. There were very few allegations in the petition which would admit of inquiry by a Select Committee of that House. With respect to the area of electoral districts, a Commission had been already appointed, which was prosecuting its inquiries in the north of Ireland, and was about to extend its labours to the south and west. The most ample materials would be afforded for legislative enactment when that Commission reported; and would the hon. Member propose to nominate a Select Committee now to take the subject out of the hands of the Commission? The petitioners next adverted to the appointment of paid guardians, who had been nominated in a greater number of cases than he could have wished; but in no cases had they been appointed where the necessity did not fairly arise, or where the Commissioners were not bound to exercise the powers intrusted to them on that behalf. He hoped the paid guardians would be everywhere replaced by elected guardians before long, for he admitted that, as a matter of principle, the administration of the poor-law ought to be in the hands of those who were locally interested. The question of rating was a large one, into which he would not follow the hon. Member. The subject had been discussed 1318 at various times in that House; and it was not one on which it was necessary that a Select Committee should be appointed. Important amendments might probably be made in the working of the Irish poor-law; but he hoped the hon. Member would not persist in his Motion, and that the House would negative it if the hon. Member pressed the Motion to a division. The amount paid in poor-rates by the county of Roscommon was not so great as to justify the complaint of the petitioners; and he believed there were twenty or thirty unions in Ireland, Roscommon being one, in which the expenditure from the funds of the British Relief Association for the week ending the 5th of May last was 9,764l. The poor-law had been the means of relieving a mass of destitution in Ireland, and of saving the lives of many of the poor. He trusted, therefore, that the House would not listen to complaints of the heavy burden of the poor-rates from parties who were paying 1s. 6d. in the pound, or deprive the Irish poor of the benefit which they were now enjoying from the operation of the poor-law in that country.
§ COLONEL CONOLLY objected exceedingly to the administration of the poor-law in Ireland, which was both capricious and arbitrary. He did not attribute the fault to the Government, but to the persons who were under their authority. Still he did not go the length of desiring the subversion of the whole system, in the propriety of which he could not at all agree. He was not prepared at that moment to point out any very patent defect in the law; but that which was the evil of it arose out of the administration of the law by the Board of Commissioners in Dublin, in placing paid guardians in charge of it. By such a course they lost the confidence of the country; and in proportion to any increase in the numbers of those paid guardians would be the increase in the evils of the system.
§ SIR W. SOMERVILLE said, that the hon. and gallant Colonel the Member for Donegal (Colonel Conolly) seemed to think that it was the object of the Poor Law Commissioners to dissolve as many boards of guardians as possible; whereas, of all the duties devolved by law upon the Commission, that of taking the step in question was the most unpleasant and the most painful. The fact appeared, however, to be that the hon. and gallant Member was too apt to judge, from the state of matters in his own neighbourhood, of that existing 1319 generally over Ireland. He believed, indeed, that the hon. and gallant Colonel, in his remarks, had the Ballyshannon union in his eye. The fact was, that the Commissioners had interfered with the union in question, and had by doing so interfered with the system of economy urged by the hon. and gallant Gentleman, who wished to procure the services of a schoolmaster for six, and those of a porter for four pounds a year. In some of the unions, the guardians had refused to appoint relieving officers, although the law was quite clear and distinct on the subject. He hoped the Irish Members would not think the law was carried out in any harsh manner, and that the hon. Member would not insist on a division. From what he heard from the bon. Member, he thought he should not bring the Motion forward that night. [Mr. FRENCH: I scarcely could have thought that possible.] He could assure the hon. Gentleman it was the wish of the Government to carry out the law in the best manner possible, and with every regard to the feelings and wishes of the board of guardians.
§ COLONEL DUNNE objected to considering a subject of such great importance to Ireland at that late hour of the evening. It was impossible to give it due justice at such a period; and, for himself, he believed that half the Irish Members had neither read nor seen the Roscommon petition. This he could say, that an inquiry into the administration and effects of the poor-law was absolutely necessary for the tranquillity of Ireland. He was quite misrepresented when it was stated that he opposed the law. He could not agree with the right hon. Gentleman (Sir W. Somerville) that the dismissal of the board of guardians was just or necessary, or that they had been dismissed for any fault of their own, or for any corrupt practices. The fact was, that the constitution of these boards rendered it impossible for them to carry out the law. Let them look to the way in which the paid guardians had failed in executing those duties which devolved on them. In Castlebar and Mohill the paid guardians had been unable to carry out the law; and in the former union the effects at the workhouse had been sold at the suit of the creditors.
§ MR. F. FRENCH replied: He thought the right hon. Baronet (Sir W. Somerville) must have been quite mistaken if he thought he (Mr. French) had given him any promise not to bring the Motion for- 1320 ward. He considered that the way in which the poor-rate had been levied was most harsh. The potatoes bought for seed by the poor man, on the return of which he depended for the food of his family, had in many instances been seized and sold to defray the rates. He was aware of many such cases, and of one where the whole stock of the farm, consisting of but one animal, which was employed in the tillage of the land, had been seized and sold for the same purpose. Considering the severe method in which the poor-rate was collected, he was of opinion that a very considerable sum of money had been levied since the return which had been furnished to the House. He had no wish to divide the House, as he saw no prospect of a successful issue; so he would therefore place himself in the hands of the House.
§ Motion withdrawn.