HL Deb 05 March 1841 vol 56 cc1344-6
The Earl of Glengall

rose, pursuant to notice, to move for copies of correspondence between the Poor-law commissioners and landowners at Clonmel. For the last forty years no measure of greater importance had passed than the act which gave Poor-laws to Ireland, and it was of the utmost consequence that those laws should be administered with impartiality. He wished he could believe, that such had been the line of conduct pursued by the commissioners, but he thought he should be able to prove that such was not the case. The subject comprised two parts—one, the conduct of the commissioners with respect to the appointment of the returning officer; the other, the result which ensued from that conduct. On neither of these points did he think the commissioners had acted with impartiality. He thought the commissioners had neglected their duty in the appointment of a violent political partisan, and in refusing all inquiry, by means of which heavy legal expenses had been saddled upon the Clonmel union. The noble Earl concluded by moving for certain papers connected with the subject, including the correspondence that had taken place between the Poor-law commissioners in Ireland, and the guardians and landowners of the Clonmel union.

The Marquess of Normanby

regretted that his noble Friend had given no notice of his intention to bring the subject before their Lordships. A few days would have enabled him to communicate with the Poor-law commissioners. He was per- fectly ready to listen to any suggestion for the appointment of a better class of returning-officers, and he had no objection to the production of the papers when they should be necessary for the public service.

The Duke of Wellington

said, that, considering all that had passed upon the subject of the Poor-law, and the confidence expressed by many of their Lordships that the commissioners would fairly and honourably exercise the powers intrusted to them, he thought that those officers would have properly fulfilled their duty. He would now give notice that on Monday he would submit a motion to their Lordships for an exact copy of the minutes of the Poor-law commissioners, under the particular clause of the Act of Parliament under which, he said, all the correspondence ought to be recorded. He thought it necessary that their Lordships, should be furnished with an exact copy of those minutes in order to show how these mistakes had arisen. Such matters required explanation. He had supported the measure, and many noble Lords had done the same, in the full confidence that it would be fairly and properly carried into execution. He, for one, had been greatly disappointed with the working of the measure, and he felt certain that it was owing to the Poor-law commissioners not having performed their duty. With that he charged them, and he should make his motion on Monday, in order to show their Lordships how one clause of the act had been carried into execution, and that their Lordships might be able to trace every act of the commissioners to its origin.

The Marquess of Normanby

Would the noble Duke have any objection to postpone his motion until Thursday, for the purpose of allowing time to communicate with the Poor-law commissioners.

The Duke of Wellington

Thursday be it.

Lord Ellenborough

said, it appeared to him, upon looking over the papers handed to him by his noble Friend (the Earl of Glengall), to be doubtful whether their Lordships ought to be satisfied with an explanation proceeding from the noble Marquess. It appeared that a gross breach of privilege had been committed, deserving the severest punishment. There was an official letter, of which a copy had not been given in the return, and a letter was inserted in the return which had never been sent.

The Marquess of Normanby

admitted that a primâ facie case for explanation had been made out. If a satisfactory explanation should not arrive, it would be for their Lordships to decide what ulterior steps should be taken.

The Earl of Glengall

said, with regard to due notice not having been given, their Lordships would remember that last year the case of the Clonmel union had been entered into twice at considerable length, and then no satisfactory explanation had been given.

Motion agreed to.

Adjourned.