RELIEF OF THE POOR IN IRELAND. (Hansard, 5 February 1846)

The EARL of CLANCARTY

said: My Lords, in rising to move for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the working of the laws relating to the relief of the destitute and of the sick 462 poor of Ireland, with a view to their being amended and rendered efficient for their purposes, I feel that the conduct of such an inquiry, embracing, as it must, the consideration of important principles, and of details scarcely less important, in reference to measures of very deep interest to the well-being of the Irish people, might better have devolved upon some one having the authority of official connexion with the Government of the country. When I, last Session, intimated the intention, which I am this evening to fulfil, of bringing forward this Motion, I at the same time expressed a hope that the duty—for such it is—would have been taken off my hands by some noble Lord more competent to perform it; and considering that my noble Friend (Lord Clanricarde), who, in 1843, moved for a Committee of Inquiry into the working of the Poor Law, as it then stood, and subsequently in the discussion upon the Amendment Act, which is now in operation, intimated an intention of renewing his Motion for inquiry—considering that he was, upon these accounts, as well as from the abilities he could bring to the task, the fittest person to carry such an inquiry to a satisfactory result, I requested him to undertake it. My noble Friend, however, having declined, it only remains for me to request your Lordships' indulgent attention, while I set forth as briefly as the subject will admit of the circumstances that warrant me in calling upon your Lordships to grant me the Committee, and the objects which it appears to me may be obtained from it. Looking, my Lords, at the actual condition of Ireland—the almost daily accounts of agrarian outrages and murders which are perpetrated, for the most part, in connection with a systematic resistance to the rights of property, and considering that this state of things, though referable, no doubt, to many other causes, is aggravated by an amount of suffering and destitution among the lower orders of the Irish people, that might almost alone account for it, but which is certainly an obstruction to the progress of civilisation and national improvement, it appears to me that an inquiry into the operation of any laws affecting the condition of the poor, and designed for their benefit, but which, from any concurrence of testimony, appear to be productive of discontent, and to have failed of fulfiling the purposes of the Legislature, would be at the present time of great value, as well as upon other accounts most desirable. 463 The subjects to which I am to call your Lordships' attention are strictly of this description—I mean the Irish Poor Law and medical charities—institutions which have lamentably failed of accomplishing the good designed by them. The Poor Law, efficient for its purposes, should be a relief, not to the destitute alone, but to those above destitution, and should exercise a beneficial influence over the whole social condition of the community. The medical charities, duly supported, impartially distributed, and under proper regulation, might save from ruin and suffering numbers who, now the victims of neglect, are compelled by physical debility to seek in the poor house a refuge among the destitute. The state of the law with respect to the medical relief of the poor, and the practice under it, would alone have induced me to come before your Lordships, even if it were not connected, as it is, with the more important question to which I shall presently call your attention. I need but refer your Lordships to the reports that are upon the Table, to show the necessity there exists for legislation on the subject of medical relief. Your Lordships have also before you the Report of a Committee of the House of Commons, which was laboriously engaged in 1843, for several weeks, with the consideration of this important subject. My noble Friend (Lord St. Germans), at that time a Member of the other House, and who served upon that Committee, will set me right if I should be in error in saying that that Committee were perfectly unanimous as to the necessity of legislation; but, unfortunately, they could neither agree upon the particular measure that had been referred to them, nor in the recommendation of any other. They separated, as it too often happens with an Irish jury empannelled to try an indictment for murder; they could not agree, and were, in consequence, discharged without having returned any verdict. The case is, therefore, again for trial, and I trust that, should a Committee of your Lordships be appointed to deal with it, your labours may be attended with a more satisfactory result. As the law now stands, it is the occasion of much suffering and injustice to the poor of Ireland, and a serious aggravation of the difficulties of the Poor Law, by the quantity of destitution it creates, and of sickness, disease, and infection it causes to be sent into the workhouses. A reference to Poor Law statistics will show that, from having been de- 464 signed as mere receptacles for the destitute, the workhouses have practically become hospitals for the treatment of chronic and other disorders, and boarding-schools for the children of those who are afflicted with them. It is necessary promptly to deal with this question; and the object of the Committee in reference to it should be, as I conceive, not to make any new exposure of abuses, which none deny, and for which none can be made responsible; but, from the evidence and opinions of those who are possessed of the best practical information, to determine and report upon the alterations and amendments of the law the most likely to prove permanent and satisfactory. As most of your Lordships must necessarily be uninformed upon the subject, I will, with your permission, give you a short sketch of the provisions at present by law made for the sick poor of Ireland. There are at present three kinds of institutions for giving medical relief—viz., infirmaries, fever hospitals, and dispensaries. The infirmaries, supported by county assessment, with the aid of private donations, qualifying the donors to act as governors, and of annual Parliamentary grants, of 100l. late Irish currency to each, under an Act of the Irish Parliament, are in general useful institutions, beneficial to a distance of ten or twelve miles within the counties to which they respectively belong, but beyond that circle of no use whatever: so that above two-thirds of the population taxed for their support can derive no benefit whatever from them. The fever hospitals, sometimes supported wholly by county presentments, but most commonly by private subscriptions, to which double the amount is added by the county, are not, as the returns show, available to the public beyond a radius of about five miles, and are so few, and capriciously located, that to most of the taxpayers they can only be known as an item of expense. Nevertheless, such is the importance of making provision for fever patients, that where private subscriptions cannot be obtained to originate such establishments, boards of guardians have availed themselves of a clause introduced into the Irish Poor Law Amendment Act, to build district fever hospitals, chargeable exclusively upon the poor rates of the Union—a charge, however, which does not exempt the ratepayers from likewise having to pay for the county fever hospitals, which are of no use to them whatever. With respect to dispensaries supported by the voluntary contributions of subscribers, with an equal sum 465 raised off the counties, their usefulness, like that of the fever hospitals, rarely extends beyond an area or circle of five miles all around. Many of them are admirably conducted institutions, in the highest degree beneficial to the poor, and creditable to those by whom they are conducted. Others, on the contrary, for want of efficient inspection and control, are so ill administered as to render the charity of little use to any, and to leave the poor around it no better off than the major part of the population, who, though equally taxed, are wholly unprovided with medical relief of any kind. Such, my Lords, is the present unsatisfactory state of the medical charities of Ireland, for which a legislative remedy is required. Without wishing your Lordships to prejudge the question, I trust I may be permitted to show that its solution is not one of great difficulty. In fact, prejudices that once obstructed its settlement, I believe, do not now exist, or at least have no need to be called into conflict. If a more efficient system would cost rather more, it is to be observed that a better economy would make the same sum go farther; and that any additional expense would, probably, be more than made up by the contributions of those who, in the contemplation of the law, ought to contribute to it, but do not—by making all, in fact, pay in due proportion, according to the value at which their properties are respectively rated to the relief of the poor. The poor rate is, therefore, the resource from whence to draw the funds for the future support of the medical charities; it is the most equitable in the distribution of the burden, and the most analogous to the design of the existing laws. This point being settled, the next matter to be provided for is a proper distribution of medical relief; and for this purpose the Poor Law Union and the electoral divisions, in which already something of local self-government has grown up, present peculiar facilities. Regard being had, as much as possible, to maintaining existing dispensaries, particularly where they are well conducted, it appears to me that, for dispensary and fever hospital relief—the efficient application of which is rarely, if ever, operative beyond the same extent of area—the Poor Law Unions might be divided into districts, consisting of one or more electoral divisions, according to population and extent, which should be made chargeable with the entire expense of the medical relief there provided. The addition of a small hospital to every dispensary, 466 instead of the present county fever hospitals, would be a measure of great utility. At present, when a fever breaks out, for the want of such institutions the patients are treated in their cabins, where infection spreads, recovery is slow, and the doctor can give but imperfect attendance. By having a fever hospital within reach, to which the patient can be at once removed, recovery is hastened, the spread of infection is checked, and the valuable time of a professional man is saved. Such hospitals would thus certainly be numerous, but not more than are necessary; they would supersede the necessity of maintaining the county fever hospitals. No extra expense would be occasioned by them, beyond the renting of the most ordinary dwelling, while a most invaluable saving would arise from the diminution of disease. Provision being thus made for fever and ordinary dispensary cases, within a reasonable distance of every poor man, it remains to be considered how infirmary relief should be distributed; and here, again, the Poor Law affords a solution of the question. The evidence of medical men, confirmed by statistical returns, show that these institutions are very beneficial within a radius of ten or twelve miles, but not at all so beyond it. Now, ten miles is about the average distance of the centre of any Poor Law Union, from its boundary; the most central towns, therefore, in Poor Law Unions would be the proper places for the establishment of infirmaries, the accommodation of such hospitals being always in proportion to the population. Now, with respect to providing the requisite buildings: there are, at present, thirty-five Poor Law Unions supplied with infirmaries, built at the general expense of the counties for which they were respectively established. I would propose that they should be handed over to the exclusive use of the Unions in which they are severally situated, and be supported, as to the establishment expenses, henceforth solely out of the poor rates of these districts; and as the annual Parliamentary grants (amounting in all to 3,172l.), which are at present given in aid of the surgeons' salaries, could not in fairness be continued in those Unions, while the others had no such assistance, I would suggest that, in lieu of that annual sum, a single grant should be made of 90,000l. or 100,000l., as a fund in aid of building infirmaries in the Unions at present unprovided with them. I think what I have suggested would place the Poor Law dis- 467 tricts in general substantially upon an equality as to infirmary accommodation, and render complete and satisfactory the distribution of medical institutions. For the local government of dispensaries, I would constitute the twenty highest ratepayers of the district—associated with as many other persons as by a donation of 20l., or an annual subscription of 2l., desired to assist in the administration of the charity—a board with the same duties to perform as now attach to dispensary boards. To these I would confide the duty of electing the medical officer of inspection, of checking and superintending the fiscal business, and of recommending fit objects for medical relief. The highest ratepayers are, for the most part, the landlords—those who now are, in virtue of their voluntary contributions, governors of dispensaries; and there appears to be no reason for making any alteration of the law in this respect, because their contributions, now voluntary, will henceforth be made compulsory. None could have a greater interest in the welfare of the poor than their landlord—to none is it more important that cases of ill health among a tenantry should be known than to their landlord—and none could have a more obvious interest in the economical management of the charity than the highest ratepayers. For the government of the Union infirmaries, the establishment and expenses of which should be upon the Union at large, the board of guardians, as representing the property of the Union, would be the proper body; their duty might be to inspect, to check the accounts, and to elect the medical officers; but as no case which could be dealt with at a dispensary should be sent to an infirmary, patients should only be admitted on the recommendation of a dispensary doctor, and always with a full written statement of the nature of the case. The interim treatment of difficult medical or surgical cases at an institution where the medical men of the Union could meet and consult, would be at once advantageous to the patients, and tend to the promotion of medical science. The support of patients should be borne either by themselves, if in circumstances to afford it, or by the divisions of the Union to which they respectively belong, where the case might be duly certified to be that of a very poor man. For the general superintendence of all medical charities, for the confirming, or, for cause stated, negativing the appointment of medical officers of the several institutions—for 468 laying down regulations with respect to their particular duties—for inspection—for audit of medical accounts—for communicating and advising with the local boards, and for reporting annually, and as occasion may require, to the Government, I cannot conceive any more fitting body than the General Board of Health of Ireland. I know nothing of the constitution of the existing Board; but very certain I am, that, in so densely populated a country as Ireland, periodically visited with epidemic diseases, and whose sanatory condition should, at all times, be a subject of interest to the Government, such a board, to be of any real service, should have the superintendence of every public institution for affording medical relief. I do not see any necessity for, and I do see some objection against, casting this duty upon the Poor Law Commissioners. A certain scale of salaries once laid down for the medical officers, the economy of a medical institution could by none be so well understood as by medical men—their audit, therefore, of the accounts after they had been previously passed by the local boards, should be sufficient to justify their being included among the charges payable out of the poor rates. I have now, my Lords, without entering into any minute details, stated the outline of what would afford a complete remedy for the present defective state of the medical charities. The plan I have suggested is analogous to that which the law at present contemplates; for the charge is borne equally by the owner and occupier of the soil; and the local boards for governing the institutions would probably include all who at present interest themselves—as well as all who, in the contemplation of the existing laws, ought to assist in these charities. That which is further provided for, is distribution, inspection, central control, the advancement of medical science, and the union of the whole system with the Government of the country. Doubtless when the opinions of others have been heard, who, like myself, take a strong view of the evils and abuses to be corrected, and of the good that may be effected, other plans will be proposed—if not more eligible, certainly, from the quarters from whence they may come, better deserving of consideration. That the inquiry will be perfectly impartial, I can have no doubt; and seeing how important it may be in its results, both with reference to the domestic happiness and physical condition of the industrious poor, and with 469 reference also to the respectability of the medical profession, and the advancement of medical science, I trust that such noble Lords as may be appointed to serve upon the Committee, will not grudge giving the time and attention so necessary to elucidate facts and opinions so as to lay in their report the foundation of a permanent good. I have omitted all notice of lunatic asylums, as they are under a different law, and the interests of the lunatic poor are under much more able advocacy—that of the noble Lord opposite (Lord Monteagle). I do not concur in all that the noble Lord would recommend upon the subject; but I cordially join in that tribute of gratitude and respect which is due to the noble Lord for the reforms he has effected in the treatment of that unfortunate class; for having, in fact, rendered our asylums for the lunatic poor institutions of which, though yet capable of improvement, we have nationally no cause to be ashamed. In calling your Lordships' attention now to the Poor Law, I have much satisfaction in stating that, unpopular as it in general is, and strongly as disapprobation has been expressed against it in Ireland, there does not exist, that I can discover, any factious or reckless disposition to get rid of it. I have sought for and received from all parts of Ireland communications both public and private, containing suggestions, made with a view to its amendment, and many of them of great value, but none for its repeal. And, further, in confirmation of this important fact, I hold in my hand a statement, drawn up by the gentleman who acted as secretary at a large and influential meeting of landed proprietors and others, in the city of Lublin, under the presidency of the Duke of Leinster, in 1843, from which it appears that in seeking for a Parliamentary inquiry into the working of the Poor Law, they were willing and desirous, without calling its principle in question, to lend their aid in devising the means of rendering it efficient for its purposes. It will, therefore, not be necessary in that inquiry which I now, as I then did, think, should precede legislative amendment, to question the principle of the Act, to which, in fact, the country is now fully committed. One word, however, I would wish to take the present opportunity of saying, in reference to some adverse opinions that are not unfrequently expressed upon Poor Law legislation, which, wherever they harbour, must preclude the idea of anything being effected that could be satisfactory. The enactment of the 470 Poor Law is said to have dried up the sources of charity and benevolence, and that such must of necessity be the effect of any compulsory rate for the relief of the poor. This was referred to as a fact in the debate in 1843, by no less an authority than the Archbishop of Dublin; and he stated in corroboration of it, that the collections for the poor at churches have been materially impaired by it. I think the most rev. Prelate was wrong in the inference he drew from the circumstance. Wherever those church collections have been continued as formerly, by way of relief for the destitute, they have, no doubt, diminished in amount, in consequence of there being a better provision now made by law for such objects; but, in vindication of my Protestant fellow countrymen, I can say, from my own knowledge, that where these collections have been since directed to charitable purposes not otherwise provided for, they have rather increased than fallen off since the passing of the Poor Relief Act. Such an objection, however, I need hardly tell your Lordships, must strike at the very foundation of any legal provision for the relief of the poor; and I regret to say, that it has created in some quarters a strong prejudice, not against the Poor Law only, but also against that modification of the laws for the support of medical charities, which, in the present circumstances of Ireland, I believe can alone secure to the poorer classes the medical aid to which the Legislature has recognised their claim; I mean their being charged, as recommended in the Report of the Land Commissioners upon the Poor Rates. But, with respect to the relief of the destitute poor, I do not think that the most prejudiced person against compulsory assessments, if he dispassionately considers the cases of the orphan, the widow, the aged, and the helpless—the peculiar wants of each, and the impracticability of their being, in all cases, adequately supplied by private charity, would seriously advocate their being, on account of their destitution, made outcasts from society—mere subjects for the casual display of an almsgiving benevolence; objects, no doubt, to excite feelings of compassion, and the more painfully so, because exposed to the risk and cruel consequences of neglect. The field, my Lords, for the exercise of charity, in its ordinary acceptation, is quite wide enough without the walls of the workhouse; and so long as Christianity exists, its peculiar attribute of unostentatious liberality will always 471 find in Ireland, as well as here, abundant calls for its beneficial exercise, without the exhibition of a mendicant population, or debarring the State from making provision for the destitute. In a thinly populated country, indeed, where the inhabitants of any district would all be personally known to one another, and mutually dependent, as the members of one household or family, no Poor Law might be necessary; but in a country densely populated as Ireland now is, or where employment is deficient, in comparison to the numbers who have nothing but their manual labour to depend upon, or even in a country where manufactures abound, but where there is often no other direct tie between the workman and his employer than the contract to pay a stipulated sum for work done or for day's labour, in such a state of society there will be, from illnesses and other misfortunes that cause suspension of work, much of suffering and destitution not necessarily known to those who might have the means and disposition to relieve it, and probably more than could be adequately relieved from private resources. Again, it is objected that the idle should not be supported at the expense of the industrious, and that the able-bodied should be required to earn their own livelihood, and this would be perfectly true if employment could always be found for them; but, to my mind, the able-bodied man who seeks for, and can nowhere obtain, employment, and who may have a family, as well as himself, dependent upon his daily labour, is, to say the least of it, quite as much an object of compassion as any whose self-evident infirmities and helplessness are calculated to awaken sympathy and to command relief; for what alternative is there for the man to whom you deny both bread and the means of earning it? Let the objector to a Poor Law determine whether such a man is to starve, or to take by force or fraud what he connot otherwise obtain. The policy, therefore, as well as the humanity of making a State provision for the destitute, which has now been recognised in Ireland as well as in this country, is sufficiently manifest; and the only question for consideration properly was and is, in what manner can that provision be made with the best advantage for those who are the objects of it, and most consistently with the general well-being of the community? Of the evils of a system of outdoor relief, in food or money, the case of England—only now extricating herself from it—is a sufficient warning, and 472 happily Ireland is spared from the infliction of a system of outdoor relief, at once so ruinous to property, and so injurious to the poor themselves. A system of emigration may, indeed, partially relieve the country; but it can afford no relief to the helpless and infirm—and without it were a compulsory one, which it ought not to be, the attachment of the poor to their native land, whatever their privations, is such as would render it nearly inoperative even as regards the able-bodied. Public works cannot be relied upon as a permanent resource: they are useful in emergencies, and as such I am glad to see they are viewed by Her Majesty's Government; but they can only afford employment in the particular districts where they are required, and while they are actually carried on. It only then remains to consider what has been the success of the alternative that was adopted, of the workhouse system of relief—whether it has yet had a fair trial—whether it has been properly administered, and of what improvement it is susceptible? Experience has happily shown how groundless were the principal objections at first urged against it by the opponents of the Poor Law, some affirming that the destitute would rather starve than resort to a workhouse—others, that no extent of workhouse accommodation would be sufficient for the applicants for admission. Experience has also shown that the workhouse test is as applicable to Ireland as to England, and that workhouse regulations can be framed, securing the interests alike of the pauper and of the ratepayer—and I speak from my own observation when I say, that the workhouse affords a comfortable asylum to age and infirmity—that the education and training of pauper children are such as to fit them for an after-life of usefulness and independence—and that able-bodied men have found in time of their utmost need a refuge, from whence, as opportunity of employment offered, they could issue forth with renewed health and improved habits. To lay down the details of workhouse government, and to preserve uniformity of administration, the constitution of a central authority in the Poor Law Commission was necessary; and it is much to be regretted that having prepared a system so calculated to work great good, they have, in the exercise of the great powers confided to them, so failed of acquiring the confidence of the public, that their unpopularity is, in fact, such as materially to impair their usefulness. Whether the extraordinary powers 473 with which they are invested, and which are so much complained of, are strictly necessary, is a question which may now be determined with some degree of certainty; very competent witnesses can now be examined upon the point; and I do not conceive that either the Government or Parliament would be disposed to continue, nor the Commissioners themselves be desirous to retain, in their hands any powers beyond what are really necessary for the effectual fulfilment of their duties. With respect, however, to any improper exercise of those powers, if charges of this kind should be preferred before the Committee, as they often have been by petition and otherwise before the House, I think, their investigation would be of great service, by leading either to the correction of abuse, or the removal of an unjust impression. I am not here to impugn the conduct of the Poor Law Commissioners, nor am I prepared to undertake their defence. I believe they have sometimes laid themselves justly open to censure; I at the same time think that much allowance should be made for the difficulties that, for the most part strangers to the country, they have sometimes had to encounter, and for the impossibility of giving satisfaction to parties holding upon particular points the most opposite opinions; and with respect to Mr. Nicholls in particular, upon whom devolved the duty of introducing a system of Poor Laws into Ireland, without the full concurrence and even in opposition to the feelings of the majority of those upon whose co-operation he had to depend, many of whom might be more friendly to the Commissioners of Enquiry of 1836, his task was necessarily one of peculiar difficulty. His administration was certainly not faultless, and I have felt it my duty upon a former occasion to animadvert upon his proceedings; but I am bound to say that I think his withdrawal from Ireland was unfortunate—that he was, although an Englishman, upon every other ground the fittest person to superintend the carrying into effect of an experiment, upon the principle and details of which he alone had been consulted. But whatever difficulties he, or those who succeeded him, may have had to contend with, it is most important for the interest and satisfaction of the public, that Parliament should exercise a jealous scrutiny over their proceedings, and that no power, not really necessary for the object of their appointment, should be left in their hands, I would now draw your Lordships' 474 attention to the difficulty that has attended the collection of the poor rate. Returns are upon the Table showing the number of cases in which the collection of the rate has been resisted, and force, sometimes even military force, required to protect the collectors in the execution of their duty. It appears, also, that in two or three Unions, although the houses are built, they have never been opened for the relief of the poor, in consequence of the poor rate not having been paid. The causes of this resistance to a legal charge upon the land for an object that would seem so much to appeal to the better feelings of Irishmen, will form a subject for inquiry that will probably show where amendment in the law is most needed. The dislike of a new impost is not alone sufficient to account for the unpopularity of the poor rate: dislike is inseparable from an impost that produces no corresponding benefit. The ratepayer may know that an asylum has been provided, of which the orphan, the widow, and the cripple thankfully avail themselves; but I have a right to expect too, for it is a main object of the Act, that the streets and highways should be freed from the disgraceful exhibition of mendicancy, with its attendant train of sores, diseases, and deformities, purposely exposed, and often feigned, for the purpose of imposing upon the charitable and humane. I have a right to expect, too, for it was also promised, that the industrious poor shall be relieved of the burden of housing and feeding the mendicant population, and from the demoralizing influence of such associates—and I was taught to look forward to an era of peace, harmony, and great national improvement, under the operation of a law constituting the wealthier classes the guardians of the poor. Need I tell your Lordships how far the law has come short of fulfilling what was intended—need I tell you that Ireland presents as disgraceful a picture of turbulence, disunion, suffering, and mendicancy as ever—that discontent is almost universal—and can it, in such a case, be wondered at that the poor rate is an unpopular tax, and that the Poor Relief Act should be represented as a failure? I do not, my Lords, think that the Act has had a fair trial. It might have been foreseen that, in Ireland, as well as in every other country, the suppression of vagrancy would require the aid of police regulations; for want of it the Poor Law has failed of accomplishing this important object. Nor has it been otherwise supported as it should 475 have been, for I regret to say that the Government, by seeming to halt between two opinions, whether to carry out the principle of the Act or to leave it to its fate—and sometimes disowning the responsibility of the Act, as one that was passed by their predecessors—have shaken public confidence in its soundness and stability, and stript it of that moral influence it might otherwise have acquired. Their acquiescence, however, in the appointment of this Committee will be an assurance that this question will now be settled; and I trust your Lordships will be enabled to derive from the Committee's labours full information as to the amendments of the law by which its success may best be secured. Let me recall to your Lordships the fact that it was mainly in consequence of the current of public opinion in favour of the introduction of Poor Laws into Ireland, and of the Irish petitions that were presented to Parliament, that those Commissions of Inquiry were appointed which resulted in the present Poor Law, and that the Bill for its enactment was discussed and agreed to in the House of Commons in two successive Parliaments, and eventually passed by a large majority in this House. With so great a concurrence of public opinion originally in its favour, I think it is but reasonable to attribute its present unpopularity mainly to its having disappointed expectation. There are, however, circumstances in the details and working of the measure which have undoubtedly added to the difficulties of its application to Ireland, and which require and can receive the amendments that experience suggests. The occupiers, especially the small holders of land, are weighed down with the multiplicity of exactions, legal and illegal. If undertenants, they have to pay the half-yearly gales of the head landlord's rent, and the profit rents of the immediate lesser or middleman: that makes four payments of rent within the year. Of the county cess there are at present two collections; then superadded to these, come, perhaps, two more collections of poor rates within the year. Now, as these have all to be paid in cash—for, if paid in kind, it must be at immense loss—it is very difficult for a poor man, whose earning depends upon the state of the markets, and who cannot afford to have money lying idle, to be ready for so many separate payments. It is not so much the aggregate amount of what he has to pay that he complains of, which necessarily must be proportioned in some de- 476 gree to the value of the property he holds. The fact that many have to pay, in addition to the charges I have mentioned, the Repeal rent, the O'Connell tribute, and other demands alike unauthorized by law, but all of which, under present circumstances, are just as compulsory as the legal charges upon the land, and that they yet have the means as well as the will to give welcome and food to those who ask it in the name of charity, shows that, in general, the humble occupiers of the soil have an interest in their holdings, which might be rendered valuable if duly secured to them. It is not, therefore, so much the total amount of what they are required to pay, as the frequency of the demand, that is harassing; and with respect to the poor rates, the uncertainty of their amount, and of the periods when they will be called for, are circumstances that render the tax additionally obnoxious. As a remedy for this, it appears to me, that if but one rate were to be made in the year, and to be collected at one fixed period in like manner, as it is recommended in the Report of the Land Commissioners that the grand jury cess should be collected, and perhaps along with it, such an arrangement would tend very much to the general satisfaction upon this point. The subject is one, however, upon which the Committee would, be able to obtain the opinions of the most practical men. Again, the rate is now payable in the first instance by the occupier, who stops from his immediate lessor half the poundage rate out of every pound sterling he pays for rent. No plan, certainly, could be more equitable in theory, or more likely to work well; but it is admitted by the Commissioners themselves that, in practice, it has unfortunately interfered with the proper working of the Act. It was intended to establish a common interest between landlord and tenant, and that the burden of the poor rate should be equally divided between them. It has had the very opposite effect, causing, through the interest which tenant farmers generally possess upon boards of guardians, the valuations to be made so much under the real value of property, that the rate is unduly shifted from the tenant to the landlord; and thus that equality of interest in its economical management which it was so desirable to establish, is frustrated. This operates, however, with peculiar hardship upon the owners of tithe property; for, as the value of such property is, for the purposes of Poor Law taxation, determined by its actual gross amount, without any deductions or 477 allowances whatever, while all other rateable property is valued with large and capricious allowances by the ratepayers themselves, or their representatives, it follows, that in proportion as this valuation is lowered, the tax becomes heavier upon the tithe rent-charge. This is an injustice in the operation of the law which is calculated to create disgust, and which, certainly, ought to be redressed, although the sufferers being, for the most part, the clergy of the Established Church—who, are, perhaps, somewhat inured to injustice—the, outcry upon this point has not extended beyond the presentation of humble remonstrances, in the shape of petitions, to Parliament, which, although I have endeavoured to bring the prayer of them under your Lordships' notice, have met with no other attention than being ordered to lie upon the Table. The inconvenience, however, of undervaluing rateable property is not alone felt in the derangement it causes of the distribution of the burden; it necessarily has the effect of raising the nominal amount, and, consequently, the odium of the tax, making a rate of perhaps two shillings in the pound necessary upon the Poor Law valuation, when one shilling in the pound upon a true valuation would have been sufficient. It prevents the real interest and position of a ratepayer from being satisfactorily determined; and it goes directly to falsify the oaths of those who, to obtain the elective franchise, have sworn to the possession of a valuable interest in their holdings above the rent they have to pay, when by the Poor Law validation it would appear that they pay much beyond what the land is worth, and can, consequently, have no interest whatever. It would, I think, be for the better working of the Act, and do away with much of the temptation to undervalue rateable property, if in all cases of tenancy at will the rate were to be evenly divided between landlord and tenant, whatever amount of rent the tenant might agree to pay for his holding. If, however, it be an object with the Legislature, which I am far from saying it should not be, to discountenance the abuse of a landlord's power in letting his land at too high a rent, it should be no less an object to discountenance in tenants their taking land upon extravagant terms. Both these objects, I think, could be readily effected by requiring that, in every instance, where property is valued by the mutual agreement of landlord and tenant higher than by the Poor Law valuation, it should 478 be rated accordingly to the relief of the poor, and the rate equally divided between them. This is a subject upon which the opinions of practical men might be examined into with advantage; it appears to me, however, that the modification I have suggested in the system of valuation and rating would, besides lessening the inducements to undervalue rateable property, against which there is at present no countervailing check, exercise a beneficial influence upon the relations between landlord and tenant, and unite them in an equality of interest in preventing the spread of pauperism in the land. Much complaint has been made with respect to the elections of Poor Law guardians, and the unpopularity of the Poor Relief Act has been greatly increased among most respectable persons by the results which those elections have frequently exhibited, owing to the undue influence exercised by the Roman Catholic priests. I cannot, however, consider that it is a complaint that calls for, even if it could be remedied by, legislative interference. A priest has as good a right to exercise any influence he may possess as has any other person; and although it is to be lamented, if the holding of particular sectarian or party opinions arts made (and I am sorry to say that I have heard of frequent instances in which they have been so) a condition of being elected to fulfil the duties of a Poor Law guardian, or of holding office connected with the administration of relief to the poor, I would say that no amendment of the law, short of a disfranchisement of the lower orders, could prevent it. If is only by the progress of education among the poor, and by training the population, by degrees, to a just knowledge of their civil privileges, a right appreciation of free institutions—the gentry in the meantime assisting by their example to carry out the principles of representation in its true spirit—that this grievance—if grievance it can be called—though evil it undoubtedly is—can properly be removed. If some boards of guardians have in consequence been elected of a somewhat exclusive character, opposed in interest or feeling to the higher clauses of ratepayers, they are, it is to be remembered, always associated with a body of magistrates, guardians ex officio, whose influence and example, steadily directed, may, and will, no doubt, lead the boards with which they are connected to lend themselves to the true business of their appointment, and to an impartial and faithful discharge of their duties. And I will 479 add, that looking at the manifest importance of drawing into harmony the several classes of society, and of breaking down that barrier which the systematic agitation of the country has raised up between landlord, and tenant, between persons of different religious denominations, the consequences of which are now so painfully apparent in the scenes of bloodshed that desolate the land, it is incumbent upon the magistracy and gentry generally, whatever difficulties and discouragements they may meet with—and they are often very great—to interest and exert themselves in promoting the success, not of the Poor Law only, but of all that may tend to ameliorate the condition of the population. I must now draw your Lordships' attention to a very serious evil, however, and one for which a remedy is indispensable: it is the impression that exists upon the minds of Protestants in many of the Irish Unions, that a pauper professing the Protestant religion cannot be sent into the workhouse without danger of his faith being tampered with. This impression, I fear, is not altogether groundless, and has, no doubt, been strengthened by the preference given to Roman Catholic over Protestant clergymen in the appointments made of workhouse chaplains—an abuse of power on the part of the Poor Law Commissioners which I some years ago brought under your Lordships' notice. But strongly as I objected to the course then taken, and since pursued, and although I yet retain all the objections I then urged, I do not think that in any well-administered workhouse, to which a chaplain of the established religion has been appointed, there should be anything to apprehend on behalf of a Protestant pauper as to his free profession of Protestantism. To some workhouses, however, no Protestant chaplains have been appointed; and from others I have received accounts of children having been, without any parental sanction, arbitrarily handed over to the Church of Rome, after having been entered as Protestants. Not to mention any case not duly authenticated, I will only notice what I find in the Appendix to the Eighth Annual Report of the Poor Law Commissioners, where there is a correspondence showing that the practice had been very common in the South Dublin Union workhouse. The following extract from the uncontradicted statement of the Protestant chaplain to the Commissioners exhibits a toleration of abuse that calls for inquiry, and merits, if true, the greatest censure;— 480 The responsibility which devolves upon me, as Protestant chaplain to the South Dublin Union Poorhouse, will, I trust, justify me in soliciting your attention to the following resolution, adopted by the board of guardians on Thursday last:—'Resolved—That Edward, John, and Arthur Murray be allowed to carry their desire into effect, and be tranferred from the care of the Protestant to the Roman Catholic chaplain, and that the registry be altered accordingly.' This resolution appears to me most arbitrary. I am not aware that the Poor Law Act empowers the board of guardians to transfer Protestant children to the Roman Catholic chaplain, nor is this resolution the first of the kind. There are now several children who were so transferred in attendance upon Roman Catholic instruction, notwithstanding remonstrances which have been made by me. I have heard of cases of the same kind occurring in other Unions; but that facts might be duly authenticated in reference to a subject where there is so much danger of exaggeration, I made application for an official return, which might have afforded information to be relied upon. Her Majesty's Government, however, upon, as I think, a mistaken view of the subject, did not comply with my request, leaving it for the Committee, if they should think proper, to call for the information. Had the return been granted, it might, perhaps, have appeared that the abuse has not been all on one side; but I am sure your Lordships will agree with me, that such conversions of children, of very tender years, incapable of forming a judgment upon a religious question, whatever be the change of religion, are far from being creditable to those by whom they are brought about, or by whom they are sanctioned, and that they are a gross abuse that ought not to be tolerated. It is, moreover, utterly at variance with the enactments of the Poor Law, and most inconsistent with the spirit in which it ought to be administered. The evil effects of the proceedings I have alluded to are painfully apparent in the South Dublin Union workhouse, in all other respects a most admirably conducted establishment; the classification that has there taken place of the Roman Catholics apart from the Protestants, is a circumstance that must be viewed as in the highest degree detrimental to the feelings of the paupers. One great object in the law should be to cultivate harmony and kindly feelings among the poor, as well as among the rich, of every religious denomination, and to secure liberty of religion to all; and it is difficult to conceive how any greater security could have been provided for the religious liberty of the paupers of every communion, than the responsibility in the first 481 place of the clergymen appointed as chaplains—then that of the board of guardians—then that of the Poor Law Commissioners—and, lastly, that of Parliament. Experience, however, has shown that this is not enough. It should be imperative upon the Commissioners to appoint a Protestant, as they have a Roman Catholic, chaplain to every workhouse. From the workhouses to which no Protestant chaplains have been appointed, the Protestant poor must feel themselves excluded; though few in number, they are entitled to equal privileges with the Roman Catholics, and, I regret to add, have need of greater protection. The duty of guardians also should be more clearly set forth, as regards the religious instruction of orphan or deserted children. It should be obligatory upon them not only to take care that while in the workhouse such children be properly instructed, but that they he retained in the profession of that form of doctrine for which their godfathers have undertaken, until they have reached an age at which the responsibility of a godfather may be held to cease, and they are capable of showing that they fully understand the nature and ground of their faith. It will, however, be desirable for the Committee to inquire into the practice I have alluded to of proselytism, and to recommend such steps as may be necessary to prevent any improper interference with the faith of pauper children, of whatever religious denomination, or their abandonment, without the consent of parents or godfathers, of the faith into which they have been baptized, before that period of life in which they might be deemed fit for the rite, common to the churches of Rome and of England, of confirmation. The next matter that calls for consideration in amending the Poor Law, is the necessity of providing for the better nursing of foundlings and deserted children. The law cannot be made too strong against the mother who deserts her infant child; hut, on the other hand, to preserve the life of the infant, the workhouse is not a good resource. I am under the impression—having lately read a report of Mr. Assistant-Commissioner Hall, and an able statistical work of Dr. Willis upon the subject—that there has been some exaggeration of the extent and of the causes of the mortality among that unfortunate class; but I am still of opinion that many an infant has been lost owing to the want of a mother's care, or of that care which it might be the interest of a poor person to bestow upon it if it were put out 482 to nurse. The pauper inmates of a workhouse, when appointed to take charge of infants not their own, and commonly very delicate, owing to the hardships they may have undergone from exposure, cannot be made to bestow, without reward, the requisite care; and it is, therefore, always easy in the infant ward of a workhouse to distinguish the children who are nursed by their mothers from the rest. Under the grand jury laws, it is the practice to give foundling children out to nurse for twelve years, at 4l. a year, which is about, or rather under, what they would cost if reared in a poorhouse. To leave them so long as twelve years, as out-pensioners, would be to debar the unfortunate objects of the advantages of education which the workhouses afford; but I conceive that if they were nursed out for only two or three years, an existing evil of outdoor relief by county presentments might be abated; the lives of many would be saved, the cause of humanity served, and a just ground of complaint against the Poor Law removed. The subject is one upon which I have received many representations, and which I conceive to be well deserving of an attentive inquiry. I pass over some minor points, to hasten to the consideration of the last and most important question in reference to the Poor Law; one, which I was sorry last Session to be informed that the Government Mere not prepared to take up—I mean the carrying out of the objects of the Poor Relief Act, by giving it efficacy as a measure for the suppression of mendicancy. As far back as the year 1841, this defect in the law had been strongly noticed by public bodies, and representations upon the subject were made by no less than forty boards of guardians. The Commissioners, too, have repeatedly insisted upon its importance to the success of the measure, and the Government of the day even brought in a Bill upon the subject, the passing of which, I believe, was only prevented by the political changes that then took place. In one of Mr. Nicholls's three Reports, which were, in fact, the foundation of the Poor Law, he observes with great truth, that— Unless the great mass of the Irish population be protected from the effects of destitution, no great or lasting improvement in their social condition can be expected: and any one at all acquainted with Ireland must be sensible what an obstacle to national improvement—what a clog upon the industry of the lower classes, is the 483 outdoor support of the numerous professional beggars that infest the country. The Poor Law, my Lords, is now in general operation, and the workhouses are all completed, the want of which, as I gathered from the noble Duke's speech, in answer to my noble Friend's Motion for a Committee of Inquiry in the year 1843, alone prevented Her Majesty's Government at that time from dealing with the question of the suppression of mendicancy. That measure can now be considered free from the objection that the mendicant has no other resource but begging. The same alternative as in this country is now presented to the mendicant in every quarter of Ireland. The workhouses are everywhere available; and it is but fair that those who have paid for them, and are taxed for upholding them, should derive the benefit they were designed to confer. It should be recollected that when the Poor Law was passed without the clauses against vagrancy, an expectation was held out that the mere existence of receptacles for the poor, and the expense of maintaining them, would have had the effect of discouraging, perhaps altogether putting a stop to the practice of alms giving and street begging. The operation of the law has been the very reverse. Mendicity institutions, previously established expressly for the purpose of suppressing mendicancy, were closed to make way for the more comprehensive experiment of the Poor Law undertaken by the Government; and the consequence was, that as the moral influence of a great publie combination was removed, street begging, with all its demoralizing effects, returned in full vigour. It is now eight years since the enactment of the Poor Law; and all that the citizen-sees in return for very heavy assessment to which he has been subjected from the beginning, is the unavailing machinery of a vast and comprehensive undertaking, the failure of a great scheme of legislative wisdom, which, as such, is viewed by a large portion of the Irish people as evidence of the incompetency of a British Parliament to legislate for Ireland, and by Irishmen in general with the same growing feelings of impatience and dissatisfaction, which so many circumstances connected with the government of Ireland have, more particularly of late, awakened. The step of framing an Act for the suppression of mendicancy—now that the machinery is provided—does not appear a matter of any great difficulty; it may be done in the most gradual man- 484 ner. Were clauses for the purpose, analogous to those in the original Poor Law Bill enacted, with a proviso, however, that they should only be of force in Poor Law districts, where the boards of guardians applied for them, and after due notification; I am strongly of opinion that the beneficial operation of the law would be so sensibly felt, wherever it was called for, that it would speedily be proclaimed in every Union in Ireland. In order, however, thus to carry out the objects of the Poor Laws, a new classification of the pauper inmates of the workhouses would be necessary; that among the adults of both sects separation should be made of those whose destitution might be the consequence of vice, from paupers of irreproachable character. Such a step would be at once a protection to morals, and a material improvement of workhouse discipline. Among the destitute are to be found persons of the most abandoned characters, whose association with the better conducted members of the lower classes, is one of the evils under which Ireland, for want of an effective Poor Law, has so long laboured. By many boards of guardians, it is felt that it would be an injustice, and a practical denial of relief to the unfortunate but deserving poor, to say to them that they shall only be admitted to the workhouse on the terms of being associated with every depraved character whom hunger, want, or disease, may bring to the workhouse door. It is, however, no less practically a denial of the claims of destitution, that a due consideration for the well-conducted forbids, except in extreme cases, the admission of men or women of bad character; thereby throwing them back as dependents upon public compassion, or upon the wages of profligacy or crime. An additional class on each side of every workhouse would, I conceive, remove this inconvenience, and be attended with the greatest moral benefit to the paupers in general, securing the good from the contamination of evil associates, and creating among the latter a salutary desire, as well as an opening for acquiring a new character, and being reinstated in a way of earning an honest livelihood. The present extent of workhouse accommodation would probably be sufficient for the purpose. The houses, during the past year, having been in general more than two-third parts empty, notwithstanding the want of a proper system of outdoor medical relief, I see no reason to apprehend that the workhouse test of destitution being applied to those 485 who infest the highways in the mendicant character, the numbers to be relieved would, upon the whole, exceed what Mr. Nicholls in his reports suggested, and what the Legislature contemplated in passing the Poor Relief Act—viz., one per cent. upon the population of Ireland, or somewhat less than what the workhouses are capable of accommodating. Without thus carrying out the experiment of the Poor Laws, no certain knowledge can ever be arrived at of the real extent of destitution in Ireland, of the number of the helpless who must necessarily be a burden to the country, and of the number of the able-bodied of both sexes, who, having no resources at home, might be, with advantage to themselves, and to the interests of the Empire, located elsewhere. The Poor Law, with the aid of a strong enactment against vagrancy, would add to present inducements to rate payers to give employment, but their means of doing so are very limited; it would behove the State, therefore, if the resources of industry which can be provided at home, in agriculture or manufactures, be found insufficient, with the concurrent operation of the Poor Law to provide subsistence for all, promptly; and before the evil be further increased, to take into consideration the difficulty that sooner or later must be dealt with of an over-abundant population. I am sensible, my Lords, that I have detained you a very long time—that I have unduly trespassed upon your attention—but, if I owe you an apology for having done so, I, on the other hand, should have been, perhaps, more inexcusable in bringing forward a Motion of this kind without showing upon what grounds I did so. I have only now to move— That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the Operation of the 1st and 2nd Vict., Cap. 56, and the other Laws relating to the Relief of the destitute Poor in Ireland; and also to inquire into the Operation of the Medical Charities in Ireland which are supported wholly or partially by Grants from the County Cess.