§ THE EARL OF DENBIGH, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, said its main object was to indemnify the Guardians of some Unions in Ireland against the consequences of having given outdoor relief, technically against the law, but with the sanction of the Local Government Board.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid that if he read the Bill rightly its scope was considerably beyond that which the noble Lord explained. The noble Lord said the Bill was required for the purpose of enabling certain liabilities which had been incurred by Boards of Guardians to be returned to them. That was provided by the second clause, and that he understood, but by the first clause there was to be a general power, up to a certain time, for the Local Government Board in Ireland to authorise that relief to be given. He did not quite understand what that relief was.
§ THE EARL OF DENBIGHsaid he was perhaps not quite correct in saying that the only object of the Bill was to indemnify Guardians. That was the main object, but the noble Earl was correct in saving that the Bill went slightly further, and he must remind the House that a very short time had been allowed for the operation of the Bill. It only extended until the 1st day of September, and it was intended to meet certain cases of extreme poverty and distress which the Irish Government thought it advisable to grant outdoor relief to.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYthought the Bill contained a most extraordinary provision. He could quite understand the necessity of the policy of outdoor relief, which had always been considerably limited in Ireland, but unless there was some specific distress in respect of which it was thought there should be special relief grants, it certainly seemed a curious proceeding to relax the whole system of outdoor poor relief in Ireland for two months in order to enable the Local Government Board in Ireland to authorise anywhere they pleased that which was contrary to the principles of the Irish Poor Law. He did not remember ever having seen such a Bill, and one of which there was apparently no explanation.
VISCOUNT CLIFDENsaid his objection to the Bill was that it enfranchised paupers in Ireland, an object which was not worthy their Lordships' House. One clause of the Bill, however, he considered important, and that was that which affected the enfranchisement of the pauper and gave him a vote the same as any other man. He was very much against that, as he had always been under the belief that taxation and representation ought to go together.
*THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (The Marquess of LANSDOWNE)said the Irish Government had, in view of the state of the country, considered that it was necessary and desirable that exceptional extension of the Poor Law system should be permitted during the present summer—that was, within the period ending the 1st of September. That was the general scope of the Bill, and under it, so far as those exceptional measures of relief had been extended before the passing of the Bill, it would be possible to indemnify those local authorities which had acted in that way, and who would otherwise be liable to be surcharged.
§ THE EARL OF DENBIGHreminded the noble Lord that the Bill had been drawn en almost the same lines as the Bill passed by Mr. Morley when he was Chief Secretary.
§ THE EARL OF DENBIGHYes.
§ THE EARL OF DENBIGHI think so.
Read 2a (according to Order), and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.