Sitting of 6 May 1847

MINUTES.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Captain Gladstone and other hon. Members, from several places, for Alteration of the Law of Marriage.—By Mr. H. Baillie, from Members of the Parochial Board of the United Parishes of Daviot and Dunlichity, and Mr. F. Dundas, from the Presbytery of Cairston. against the Marriage (Scotland) Bill.—By Mr. W. Denison, from Peckham, for Inquiry respecting the Rajah of Sattara.—By Mr. Bright, from Bridgewater, against the Use of Grain in Breweries and Distilleries.—By Mr. C. Berkeley and other hon. Members, from several places, for Regulating the Qualification of Chemists and Druggists.—By Mr. Bright, from several places, against, and Mr. Divert, from Members of the Exeter Reform Association, in favour of, the proposed Plan of Education.—By Sir W. Clay and other hon. Members, from several places, for and against the Health of Towns Bill.—By Mr. Forbes, from the County of Stirling, and Mr. Fox Maule, from Perth, in favour of the Heritable Securities
462
for Debt (Scotland); Burgage Tenure (Scotland); Transference of Land (Scotland); Service of Heirs (Scotland); and Crown Charters (Scotland) Bills.—By several hon. Members, from a great many places, in favour of the Medical Registration and Medical Law Amendment Bill—By Mr. Barclay, from Sunderland, against the Repeal of the Navigation Laws.—By Lord J. Russell, from Kingston-upon-Hull, for an Efficient Poor Law (Ireland).—By Mr. Lefroy, from Clergy of the Diocese of Ardagh, for Alteration of the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill.—By Mr. Goulburn, from Guardians of the Reigate Union, and Mr. Maunsell, from Guardians of the Brixworth Union, for Repeal or Alteration of the Poor Removal Act.—By Mr. F. Dundas and other hon. Members, from several places, against the Registering Births, &c. (Scotland) Bill; and Marriage (Scotland) Bill.—By Mr. Wodehouse, from Guardians of the Aylsham Union, for Alteration of the Law of Settlement.—By Sir F. Thesiger, from George Drew, of Bermondsey, for Inquiry respecting the Small Debts Act.—By Mr. E. Vivian, from Truro, against the Towns Improvement Clauses Bill.

MR. BUTT.
MR. FERRANDinquired of the right hon. Baronet (Sir G. Grey), whether it was the intention of the Government, or whether it would be in the power of the Government, to return to Mr. Butt the fine paid by him many years ago, under a prosecution, for having been concerned in spreading false news of the death of Napoleon Bonaparte?
SIR G. GREYsaid, the hon. Member having given him notice of the question, he had made inquiries on the subject, He found that some years ago Mr. Butt had applied to the then Secretary of State for a return of the fine, on the ground that Lord Cochrane had been restored to his rank and half-pay, but the Secretary of State had not thought fit to grant his request. He was afraid he could not hold out any hope of being able to return the fine.

SALE, &c, OF ARMS IN IRELAND.
SIR W. VERNERrose, pursuant to notice, to call the attention of Her Majesty's Ministers to the sale and importation of firearms in Ireland. He begged to remind the House, that when the noble Lord introduced his measures relative to Ireland, he had taken occasion to mention a circumstance which had created great alarm in Ireland; namely, the importation and unprecedented sale of firearms. He then mentioned one or two instances which had come under his own immediate knowledge, and for the accuracy of which he could vouch. The one was the sale of 1,000 stand of arms in one district in the county in which he (Sir W. Verner) resided. The other was the sale of 100,000lb. weight of ammunition in a single day (a market-day) in a small town near his resi-

463
dence, it being added, that had there been double the quantity it could have been easily disposed of. Another case that had been mentioned was that of a man who, having come to pay his rent, and having had 2l.. restored to him to purchase provisions with for his family, his observation was, that he could buy a very good gun with it. No notice had been taken by the Government of his statements; and he was anxious not to be supposed to have circulated without cause statements likely to create so much alarm. The matter bad, however, since assumed so serious a shape, that he felt himself, in his own defence, called on to bring before that House substantial proof that he was justified in the observations he had made. Before doing so, however, he desired to make one or two references to a measure which passed that House in 1843, called the Arms Bill. By that Act it was provided that no arms should be imported into Ireland, except under the license of the Lord Lieutenant, under a penalty of 50 l., and a like penalty was imposed on the manufacture of arms within the country. By another clause it was not only required that the arms should be registered, but also that they should be branded. That Bill was passed in consequence of most serious representations to the Government, and it was founded on a body of the most conclusive evidence as to its necessity. The letters of Colonel Macgregor, and the reports of the constabulary in Ireland, had induced the Government at the time to call on the House to agree to the Bill. The measure, however, met with very great opposition. There was scarcely any Bill on record that had met with more. No less than seven Members of that House declared their determination to oppose it at every stage. Some said they would oppose it clause by clause; and one Member said, he would oppose it even word by word. At every stage of the Bill this opposition was continued. The Bill was introduced early in the Session; it was not read a third time till the 9th of August, and it did not receive the Royal Assent till the 22nd, two days only before Parliament was prorogued. Thus it took from near the commencement of the Session to the very close to pass that Bill into a law. If the right hon. Gentleman (Sir R. Peel), in the face of the greatest opposition that perhaps a Bill ever received, felt it incumbent upon him to pass this measure, was not such a measure ten times more necessary at present? Was it wisdom on the
464
part of any Government to place arms in the hands of a starving people? Or would a people starve with arms in their hands? The people of Ireland were now becoming an armed population. A private letter which he had received from Queen's County, said—
"As I see you intend to bring the matter respecting arms before the House, I beg to take the liberty of stating, that the consequences will be most disastrous if the unlicensed sale of them be allowed any longer; and some means must be taken to prevent the assassin from using those already purchased by the peasantry. A most atrocious murder, I may say (as the victim is without hopes), was committed near Portarlington on Sunday night. John Wilson, Esq., of Killeen, had dined with a neighbouring gentleman (who lives only two fields from Mr. Wilson), and when a short distance from the house, going over a stile, a shot was fired at him, and three small bullets entered his breast, and were subsequently cut out behind the shoulder. Mr. Wilson is not a landlord or agent, but merely wished to prevent a path being made through his yard. On Thursday last a large quantity of arms was auctioned under the county inspector's lodgings, Tullamore, and every fellow is provided with some Birmingham manufacture. I myself saw a tall lad point out a long fusil to his comrade and say, 'There's a receipt for the hanging gale.'"
The county of Tipperary was one in which the greatest distress existed, and yet arms were sold to a greater extent than in any county in Ireland. The head constable of Clonmel, in a report submitted to the county inspector, said—
"I have to report that the under named persons have recently imported a large supply of guns, blunderbusses, and pistols, swords, and bayonets, which they are now disposing of to the public in this town at prices varying from 2s. 6d. to 30 s. Four of those dealers sell by public auction in the streets, on fair-days and market-days; and it appears that the manufacturers of arms in Birmingham are not able to meet the demands made on them by purchasers from this country; in consequence of which, most of the arms now offered for sale have been procured from the different pawn-offices in London, and are of a second-hand description. The persons who usually purchase from the vendors are generally the lowest class of country people and servant boys; and persons labouring on the public works have been known to buy pistols from their weekly earnings."
The Rev. Robert Carey, who described himself as a "consistent adherent of Whiggism," wrote as follows from his glebe in Clonmel, in February last:—
"It is quite customary here, of late, to see several fellows with their guns behind a ditch on the roadside, and you cannot guess whether they intend to shoot you or not, until perhaps you feel the effects of their lead. These lads are, you know, legally armed under such circumstances. The police are of little use in the country, except

465
to escort prisoners. The indiscriminate sale of firearms which has been permitted for so many months has filled with alarm every individual (no matter what his politics) with whom I have conversed. Could the magistracy of Ireland (particularly that branch who are necessarily in more immediate communication with Government) be induced to make a combined awakening representation to our rulers of the evils which, sooner or later, humanly speaking, must result from the facilities afforded to the lowest and most abandoned of society to arm themselves, such a representation would not be disregarded by the Government. The magistracy cannot but be alive to the dangers of our present position; and I am convinced they are far too independent and high-minded (when duty demands that they speak out) to be deterred from remonstrance by any apprehension of giving utterance to truth, unpalatable in any quarter, however high; that, in short, they are not composed of that plastic material that can accommodate its vision to the optics of the Minister of the day.
In The Times newspaper of the 13th of April he found an extract from an Irish newspaper, describing the alarm felt in King's County from the extensive purchases of arms made by the peasantry. Almost all the Judges at the last assizes addressed the grand juries on this subject. Mr. Justice Jackson, for many years a Member of that House, charged the grand jury as follows on opening the commission at Clonmel:—
"There are a number of persons charged with offences connected with the possession and use of firearms. To the latter subject I feel it my incumbent duty to draw your attention, as I conceive there are a large portion of magistrates upon the grand jury; for, although it appears there was no lack of arms before, there has been latterly an extraordinary influx of arms into the country, the possession and use of which are connected with crimes of the most heinous character. The officer in command of this garrison very properly called upon me on my arrival in town, and directed my attention to placards which have been extensively published and circulated here; and one of them is of so curious a nature, being so shaped as if it had emanated from the Executive of the country, that I conceive it to be my duty to call your attention particularly to it. It bears the Queen's arms at its head, and has all the appearance of a Government proclamation; and at the end is the word 'Castle' in large letters, with 'street' in smaller characters, so as to make the latter word invisible to the reader at a distance. I believe the matter to be one of the deepest importance to the peace and order of society; and I think that you should call the attention of the Executive to this subject."
Mr. Baron Lefroy, who had also been a Member of that House, in his charge to the grand jury of Leitrim at the last assizes, said—
"I have to remark upon this calendar as I have had to remark upon other calendars in Ireland
466
since I have been connected with the administration of the law—what a remarkable contrast it presents to any calendar you could look at in England. All the serious offences upon the face of this calendar—as upon most of the calendars in Ireland—are connected with the use of firearms, either wielded by large bodies of men or by an individual in the perpetration of the very serious offences which are most calculated to disturb the peace of society—to interfere with the enjoyment of property; in short, every offence calculated to break the bonds of civilized society is committed through the instrumentality of firearms. There must be a great laxity and detect in the law upon this subject. There is no doubt an excuse which is very plausible, and a very inviting one, that is—the privilege to use and possess firearms; but, if we find from experience that this privilege is abused, so as to interfere with the general good of the community, it is right that the law should be very stringent in its provisions with reference to the possession of firearms, which would conduce materially to the furtherance of civilization in the country, to the security of life, and the perfect enjoyment of property."
Mr. Baron Richards said at Ennis, county of Clare—
"I am sorry to observe that there are a great many in custody charged with taking firearms. This, undoubtedly, is an offence of a very serious nature and bad character; but, whether crimes of this description have been committed by the inhabitants of this county, or by parties from other districts, I do not know. However, as far as in us lies, we must endeavour to put down by the strong arm of the law offences of this nature."
Mr. Serjeant Howley, in his charge to the grand jury at the last assizes for Limerick, said—
"Lawful authority appears to be pushed aside. Threatening notices and the arms of the assassin govern, control, and punish every exercise of property, right, or duty. Those whom the blow has not reached know and feel, from the written threats they receive, that in their daily avocations they literally walk in the shadow of death. No courage, no precaution, no life, however blameless, saves the victim from his doom; and when the bloody deed is accomplished, it would appear as if it was the work of an invisible hand, for no trace is found, no information gleaned, no eye has seen the perpetrator of the crime. Amongst the more recent cases of murder were two officers of my civil court, Donohoe and Dwyer, both men of most exemplary character and conduct. Donohoe, in the immediate vicinity of this town, on his return home in the evening, was accosted in terms of civility on the public highway by three armed men, and the next moment was shot to death. Dwyer, in the town of Templemore, was rising on his knees after night prayer, and received, through the window of his humble chamber, the wounds that terminated his life."
A petition had been placed in his hands by a right hon. Gentleman (Mr. G. D. Damer), who had been compelled to leave town, and who had requested him (Sir W. Verner) to present it in his name, signed by eight

467
magistrates, three clergymen of the Established Church, two Roman Catholic clergymen, and all the respectable persons in and about the town of Roscrea, representing that on the 25th of March last, the fair-day of that town, they had been eyewitnesses to a sale by auction of firearms, which was attended by crowds of the lowest orders-of the population, who bought up guns and pistols as fast as they could be pot op for safe—some as low in price as 2s. for a case of pistols, and guns at equally low prices, The petitioners represented that the well-disposed persons of all classes in the district joined in expressing a hope that the Government would lose no time in taking this matter into their most serious Consideration, and in adopting some measures to prevent the continuance of so great an abuse by legislative enactment. He had received, too, a letter from the Earl of Glengall, from which he might read the following passages:—
"Why do the farmers buy arms?—Because every ruffian has a gun; if they had not, the farmers would not want them. Every villain in this country has arms; it's truly dreadful! Auctions are held at most of our markets regularly; we have numberless proofs of fellows in the public works having bought them and attacked houses."
A letter appeared in the Limerick Chronicle, of the 28th ult., signed by William Wilson, whose son had been attacked by some ruffians and dangerously wounded, in which, after stating that the magistrates and police were zealously tracing the perpetrators of the outrage, the writer proceeded:—
"They seem to be fully aware of the impending ruin that awaits the rural districts, for want of any coercive guard, owing to the general armament of the whole population of the lowest order in Ireland, when every man may walk the country at large, at all hours, with his gun primed and loaded. Spain was never worse than Ireland is now; you con get a man shot for half-a-crown. I do not jest, I am speaking seriously; a short time will tell."
He thought one of the greatest misfortunes that could befall Ireland would be its deprivation, at the present time, of the services of that noble Lord (the Lord Lieutenant) by whom the administration of the affairs of that country had been conducted under the present Government. It was stated that, when that noble Lord went to Ireland, he expressed his intention to govern that country without an Arms Act; and in consequence of that declaration some dealers in arms had not scrupled to make the assertion that they sold firearms under the authority of the Government. He might
468
read to the House a placard issued by one of these persons, which was surmounted by a representation of the Royal arms, and bore the appearance of an official proclamation:—
"Whereas many evil-disposed persons avail themselves of the present scarcity of food as a pretext to commit acts of violence against property, and otherwise disturbing the peace of the country, his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant is pleased to grant all Her Majesty's peaceable and loyal subjects, without distinction, the power lo have and to keep any description of firearms, for the protection of the public peace, and likewise their own homes and property, without any restriction, except an invoice or certificate of the person from whom the arms are purchased. Thomas M'Crade is privileged by his Excellency, and fully empowered by the honourable Board of Excise, to offer for sale by auction, to the peaceable inhabitants of this town, 500 double and single-barrelled guns of various sorts, and 1,000 pair of pistols, warranted all double Tower proof, 500,000 best percussion caps, a large quantity of powder-flasks, shot, hags and belts, wash rods, turnscrews, nipple wrenches, &c.
"THOMAS M'GRADE, Licensed Auctioneer,
4, Castle-street, Dublin."
The sale of arms still continued in Ireland, and he had received information from the county of Down that no less than 500 stand of arms had recently been sold in one portion of that county. He thought these circumstances deserved the attention of the Government; and he begged to move for returns of all applications made to the Government by grand juries, magistrates and others in Ireland, with reference to the unlimited sale of arms and ammunition in Ireland.
MR. GROGANseconded the Motion.
MR. LABOUCHERE: Sir, I can assure the hon. and gallant Baronet who has just eat down, that it is very far from my desire to express any surprise, much less to make any complaint of an Irish representative having thought fit, under the present circumstances of that country, to call the attention of the House to its internal condition, both as respects the security of life and property there, and as respects the effect produced by the determination of the Government and the House at the end of last Session to have the law in Ireland the same as it is in England, with regard to the sale and possession of firearms, and to do away with those Acts, which had been so long on the Statute-book, forbidding the sale and possession of firearms, except under certain restrictions. I can assure the House that the condition of Ireland during the calamitous winter which has just passed over our heads, both in this

469
and either respects, has occupied the most; anxious and constant solicitude of Her Majesty's Government, and that we did feel that the step which we took in recommending to the House to part with powers which former Administrations had exercised, only increased our responsibility to maintain the existing law and protect life and property; and, Sir, although we felt that this responsibility was also increased by the circumstances which a deficiency in the means of subsistence occasioned in the country, yet still we are sensible that those misfortunes have not been aggravated by the bad conduct of the people, and that the peace of the country has not been disturbed. I can assure the hon. Member that the Government is quite aware of the responsibility which it has contracted. If the Government undertook to administer the affairs of Ireland without having recourse to any extraordinary powers, whether in the shape of Coercion Bills, or Arms Bills, they, I think, having taken that determination, should not lightly depart from that course; and I think I can show the House that we did not rashly make that recommendation, nor do we repent having made it. Undoubtedly it has been the case, as was naturally to be supposed, that outrages have multiplied very greatly during the past year in Ireland. If we compare the number of outrages that have been committed in 1847, with those which were committed in 1846, a large increase in the number will be shown; but I believe the House will come to a very inaccurate conclusion, if they look only to that circumstance, without also taking into account the nature and character of those outrages which have been committed. This fact will strike every Gentleman who has looked at the returns on the Table of the House—namely, that while there has been an immense increase in the number of outrages directed against property, the number of outrages directed against life and the peace of society has been but slightly increased, and in the number of agrarian outrages there has actually been a diminution. I ventured on a former occasion to call the attention of the House to these remarkable circumstances. I allow that it is impossible to direct the attention of the House to this matter, without calling upon them to look at the manner in which, upon the whole, the law has been administered in Ireland; and I have the satisfaction of being able to state that for along time the law had not been curried into effect so
470
firmly and efficaciously as it has been daring the past year, I think, therefore, that the Government did well when they refused to resort to extraordinary expedients, since we find that they have been able, with the assistance of the law as it stands—not to prevent crime altogether, for that is not to be expected—but to punish offenders, to vindicate the law, and to prevent that impunity for crime which has been the most fearful feature in the social condition of Ireland. I shall be able to show that the way in which the law has been administered by the ordinary tribunals of the country is enough to make a Government pause before they entertain the proposition made by the hon. and gallant Baronet who has just sat down, and before they have recourse to—the hon. Baronet himself did not say what measure—any measure of an extraordinary and unconstitutional character. I have always thought that until the existing law has been tried and has failed in its object of giving due protection to life and property, no Government has a right to come down to the House and ask for extraordinary powers for that purpose; and I think it rests upon them to show that the power with which a Government is invested has been fully exerted for the vindication of the law and for the protection of society. With respect to the sale of arms, I am not prepared to say that there has not been a large importation of arms into Ireland, and a considerable sale of them recently; but I must say that I believe that there is very great exaggeration in the reports which have found their way into the newspapers. The hon. Baronet has quoted many letters from persons resident in Ireland to show the extensive sale which has taken place; but I cannot help thinking that the account which he gives as a general picture of the state of Ireland in this respect is exaggerated—at least it is very different from that which I have received from the most authoritative sources. I will read an extract from a letter which I received in the month of January, from a gentleman whose authority, from his personal character and official position, I hold to be the very highest in Ireland on this subject—I mean that excellent and distinguished officer, Colonel M'Gregor, who commands the constabulary in that country. At my request he sent me some information on the subject, and he accompanied that information with a letter, which I will now read to the House, and which contains a

471
very complete and accurate picture of the state of Ireland, both with regard to the number of outrages which have been committed, and to the sale of firearms:—
"Upon the whole, then, it would appear that the country was never more free from political excitement, nor from secret combination, nor (although this fact may, perhaps, be attributed to an apathy and indisposition towards the cultivation of the land) from outrage of a purely agrarian character, but that the increase of crime seems to spring almost entirely out of the prevailing scarcity; and, although many of the ringleaders in the plundering of provisions or of house attacks, or of attacks of persons on the highway for money or provisions, are not themselves in want, yet they are readily followed in the commission of crime by those who are in a state of sad destitution."
I believe this to be a most accurate and faithful representation of the condition of Ireland; and I will ask the House whether it is by Coercion Bills or Arms Bills that outrages arising under the circumstances described by Colonel M'Gregor are to be put down? I will now read an extract from Colonel M'Gregor's statement with regard to the sale and possession of arms:—
"By a reference to the returns respecting the increased desire of the people to procure firearms, it will be seen that the rumours on this subject have been exaggerated; in confirmation of which observation I may state, that out of about 1,550 of the worst description of crimes reported during the last seven weeks, only 450 appear to have been perpetrated by armed parties; and although it is undeniable that arms have lately fallen into the hands of people who will make the worst use of them, yet it is to be hoped that, from the prices paid for arms, as well as from the reports of the officers of the constabulary, that a very large proportion of the arms recently purchased have been procured by respectable farmers and their confidential dependants against the apprehended attacks of men driven to despair by want."
The truth is that no one who ever considered this subject at all could doubt that when we put an end to those laws which prevented the sale of firearms in Ireland, considerable abuses would spring up. Forbidden fruit is sweet, and for an Irish peasant to be in possession of a gun is a matter of pride to him. The hon. Baronet has passed his life among a peasantry who have always been in the possession of firearms. The English policy formerly was to arm the Orangemen of the north, and to forbid the use of arms to the rest of Ireland. It is natural, therefore, now that these restrictions have been taken off, that the Catholic peasantry of Ireland should run riot a little with such a new power; and we must not banish from our minds this consideration before we attach too
472
much importance to the great desire which, I do not deny, has shown itself to possess arms in the southern and western parts of Ireland. At the same time I must say that in some counties of Ireland, as the county of Kerry, and in Connaught generally, there has not been the same desire shown to possess arms as in other parts of Ireland. I have stated that the Government are quite aware of the responsibility which they contracted in undertaking to govern Ireland without an Arms Bill, and they have determined to put in force the law, and to prevent, as far as was in their power, the abuse of fire-arms being placed in improper hands; and I can assure the House that the existing law is by no means inefficient for objects of this kind. There is an Act well known in Ireland under the name of the Whiteboy Act, which inflicts most severe penalties on persons who appear in arms to the terror of their neighbours, without reasonable cause; and that statute has been applied firmly and vigorously, in order to prevent mischiefs arising from the improper use of firearms; and I am happy to say, that in the case of those persons who have been tried for offences under the Whiteboy Act, there has been no indisposition evinced on the part of witnesses to come forward, or on the part of juries to convict. Allusion has been made to the county of Tipperary—a county which, I am sorry to say, is commonly quoted in this House when outrage and disorder are the subject of discussion. But I will read to the House a letter which is dated the 28th of March, and which is written by a resident magistrate of that county:—
"I have the honour to report," the magistrate said, "that I went to attend at the assizes of Nenagh, on the 16th instant, where I had several cases for trial, and returned to my station on the 26th. With reference to my report of the 20th of November, wherein I suggested those persons appearing under arms to prevent the sale of corn at an auction should be prosecuted under the Whiteboy Act, I beg to state that the leaders of this party were convicted, and sentenced to imprisonment with hard labour, which, I trust, will prevent a recurrence of these assemblies. I beg further to state, that I have passed several other convictions for crime committed in my district, and that twenty-one of the misguided persons have been sentenced to seven and fourteen years' transportation."
This is only one out of a great number of letters, which I could read to the House to show that it is not true that the possession of firearms has led to all the evils which have been referred to. In endeavouring to prevent abuses from the possession of

473
arms, the Government has been backed by the good sense and good feeling of the country; and the ordinary tribunals have enforced the law in the best manner in which it can be carried into effect—namely, by the assistance of the community for whose benefit the Act was passed. If it were necessary, I could go into many details to prove the accuracy of what I have stated, both as to the manner in which the law has been carried into effect, and the number of convictions at the recent assizes in Ireland; and I could also point out to the House from the reports which he upon its Table, that the character of the outrages committed last year, bears out the statement which I have made with regard to the comparative increase in offences against property, and offences against the lives of individuals. Notwithstanding the increase which has undoubtedly taken place, nothing has occurred to induce the Government to depart from their determination to maintain the peace of the country without coming down to the House to ask for extraordinary and unconstitutional powers. The hon. Baronet who brought forward this question, has referred, in terms for which I sincerely thank him, to the noble person whose name I cannot pronounce without emotion, and whose fate it has been in times of unexampled difficulty and danger to administer the government of Ireland. I can truly say that the courage and sagacity of that noble person have had the most happy effect in animating the exertions of all those who came in contact with him, and who were anxious to co-operate with him in his endeavours to maintain the peace and to preserve the lives of the people of Ireland. I know how constant and unwearied his exertions have been; and I think that, considering the difficulties which have beset the Government, that these exertions have been attended with as much success as could be expected. The noble Lord has been supported most vigorously and most efficiently, in the first place, by that admirable force, the police force of Ireland, and by the officer in command of it, to whom I have already referred. And next, the noble Lord was supported by the army of Ireland, which had the most embarrassing and painful duties to perform, which they discharged with a degree of humanity and discipline that was most important to the preservation of the peace of the country. I must say, also, that the noble Lord received most valuable assistance from the
474
clergy of all denominations, both in relieving the existing distress and in preserving the peace of the country. The most trying times have now passed over; but every Gentleman who was in the country at the time must feel that when the riots began at Dungarvon, Youghal, and Waterford—and there was no knowing how far they would spread, if the clergy, both Protestant and Roman Catholic, had not preached submission to the law—all the efforts of the Government to maintain tranquillity might have been in vain. I do not know whether it be necessary to go farther into this subject. I can only assure the House that, as the attention of the Government has been anxiously directed for a long time past to this matter, it will also be anxiously directed to it for the future. All that I feel it necessary to say at present is, that I do not think that any case has been made out to justify the Government in coming to Parliament, and calling for extraordinary powers to prevent the sale of firearms. I believe there is great evil in departing from the ordinary course of the constitution when it is possible to avoid it. I do not blame former Governments for having done so, nor do I say that it may not be necessary for a Government to take that painful course. With these sentiments I must decline the introduction of some new Arms Bill. It is very easy for the hon. Baronet to say, "some Arms Bill." But is our experience of former Arms Bills so good as to justify us in saying they afford a safeguard against abuse, or prevent arms from getting into the hands of evil-disposed persons? We have heard of Arms Bill after Arms Bill. But did any one of these measures prevent rogues or ruffians obtaining possession of arms? All were lamentable failures in that respect. The hon. Baronet himself referred to the speech of the noble Lord who was Secretary for Ireland when the last Arms Bill was introduced, in which it was admitted that the then state of the law was a complete failure. I am sure the experience of the hon. Baronet, as a magistrate, must have convinced him that former Bills utterly failed in producing the results which were anticipated from them. I, for one, feel bound to hesitate before I recommend to the House a departure from the ordinary course of the constitution as a remedy for the evils of Ireland. The Government will continue, as they have done, vigorously and determinedly to exert the powers of the law to preserve the lives and properties of Her

475
Majesty's subjects in Ireland, being fully aware of the sacred obligation which they have incurred in that respect. I do not believe it would conduce to that end—that it would strengthen the hands of the Government—to introduce a measure of this description; and it is on that ground that I have felt compelled to express a contrary opinion to that urged by the hon. Baronet. With regard to the Motion of the hon. Baronet, I can have no objection to it, and I cheerfully agree to it.
MR. SHAWsaid, that as the right hon. Gentleman did not oppose the Motion of his hon. Friend (Sir W. Verner), it was not necessary for him to trespass at any length upon the House; but he could not let the opportunity pass without expressing his opinion that the law as regarded firearms in Ireland was in a very unsatisfactory condition, and inspired the well-disposed and peaceable inhabitants of that country with a feeling of general uneasiness and alarm. He must remind the right hon. Gentleman, that it was not a voluntary act on the part of the Government last Session dispensing with the aid of all extraordinary powers on the subject; for the Government had proposed to renew the Arms Act, but were driven from that course by the pressure of their general supporters. He, at the time, while he expressed the want of confidence he had before expressed in the additions that had been made to the Arms Act by the late Government, in, he believed, the Session of 1843, in respect of a vexatious mode of registration and branding, had still warned the present Government, that they would incur great responsibility if they consented to abandon all the provisions that for the last fifty years had invested the Executive Government of Ireland with a peculiar control over the manufacture and sale of arms and ammunition in that part of the United Kingdom. He thought the result had justified his predictions, and that the Government would find it necessary in some shape to renew that code of laws. He did not consider that the Whiteboy Acts were sufficient for the purpose, as they could not be applied generally, but only to particular parts of the country, under peculiar circumstances affecting the public peace; and he strongly recommended the whole question to the serious consideration of the Government. It was no party question, but one which essentially concerned the general interests of society. He could not sit down without assuring the right hon. Gen-
476
tleman, and the House, of his entire concurrence in what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman with reference to the distinguished nobleman then at the head of the Irish Government. He felt sincere and unaffected sorrow for his illness, and would declare in that House what he had frequently stated elsewhere—that without distinction of politics or party, that nobleman's present state of health had excited in every part of Ireland universal sympathy and regret.
Motion agreed to.

THE CULTIVATION OF COTTON IN INDIA.
MR. BRIGHT MR. BRIGHT, in moving for a Select Committee to inquire into the progress of the Cultivation of Cotton in India, said: I have presented a petition from the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester, as well as petitions from several other bodies, praying the House to grant an inquiry for which I am about to move; and I can say, with a perfect knowledge of the fact, that there is a strong wish that the inquiry should be granted, and that at this time some means should be taken to increase the supply of the raw material of the cotton manufacture. I should have felt confident at any time that permission to have this inquiry would be granted; but under the present circumstances of the manufacturing districts, I feel it to be more important than at any former period, and more strongly incumbent on the House to grant it. I do believe that what potatoes are to Ireland, cotton is to Lancashire; and that as you have in Ireland a calamity unparalleled in consequence of the failure of the staple food of the people, so if we could conceive the raw material of the cotton manufacture greatly to fail, we should see calamities overspread this country to equal if not exceed that which has overtaken the population of Ireland. And perhaps it may be necessary to refer to the progress and present condition of the cotton trade, in order to show that it is not a subject of ordinary importance I am submitting to the House. It is perhaps impossible to find in all the annals of human industry a parallel for the rise and extraordinary progress of the cotton manufacture. There are persons now living who were living when the whole annual value of our cotton manufacture was 200,000 l. That was the state of things at the accession of George III. But even so late as 1786 all our imports of cotton did not

477
reach 20,000,000 lbs. From that time to this, especially in latter years, the progress has been very rapid. In 1846, the Consumption reached 1,585,900 bales, or upwards of 614,000,000 lbs. It appears by a return that 316,000 persons are employed within cotton mills. I happen to know that estimate is below the truth. I have no doubt that 320,000 is below the actual number employed. It is a common estimate in the trade to allow 100 l. of capital for each person employed, and that will give a capital directly invested in the trade of 31,600,000 l. To give another proof of the importance of this trade, I may mention the fact that in 1844 the value of our exports in cotton yarn and goods was 25,805,000 l., being somewhat more than half of the whole of the exports of this country. Mr. M'Culloch, in 1832, estimated that 1,400,000 persons subsisted by the cotton trade. It must be evident that the supply of the raw material of such a trade must be of the greatest importance. The question is not confined to the inhabitants of Lancashire and Cheshire. The full and free supply of the raw material must be looked on as a national benefit, the effects of which are continually extended. This year we have witnessed some of the results of a short supply of cotton. I can give one or two facts as to the failure of the cotton crop. The stock of cotton in our ports at the end of 1844 was 902,400 bales, or 33 weeks' consumption; 1845, 1,060,000 bales, or 35 weeks' consumption; 1846, 545,000 bales, or 18 weeks' consumption. Thus we reduced 35 weeks' consumption down to 18 weeks' consumption. The result has been a rise of from 4d. to 7d. a lb., more than 75 per cent; and the effect of such a change can he easily accertained by observing the stoppage of some of our mills altogether, while the greater part work but two, three, or four days a week. This state of things has been brought about by the state of the crop in the United States, which shows the following results: In 1844, 2,400,000 bales; in 1845, 2,100,000 bales; and for 1846, 2,000,000 bales for the estimated crop. The result of a short supply is, that the price has risen enormously, and thus has been brought about a condition of distress and difficulty never known before since the first bale of cotton was imported into this country. The question naturally arises, whence did we draw our supply in past years, and what probability is there of an adequate supply for the future?
478
There was a time when the cotton consumed in this country came neither from the United States nor the East Indies. When in 1786 we consumed about 20,000,000 lbs., we drew our supplies from the following places: British West Indies, 5,800,000 lbs.; French and Spanish colonies, 5,500,000 lbs.; Dutch colonies. 1,600,000 lbs.; Portuguese colonies, 2,000,000 lbs.; Smyrna and Turkey, 5,000,000 lbs.; Total imports, 19,900,000 lbs. In 1789, cotton was first imported from India. In 1787, the United States first grew cotton. In 1792, the United States exported only 138,328 lbs.; but in 1793, the saw gin was invented, and the growth of cotton being consequently greatly increased, the United States in 1795 exported 5,276,306 lbs.; and this has greatly increased in subsequent years. But, coming down to a later period, it will be manifest how little progress India made as compared to the United States, by comparing the two periods of five years, ending in 1820 and in 1486:—

Countries

Ending 1820. Bales.

Ending 1846. Bales.

America

216,176

1,229,535

East Indies

122,142

184,979

Brazil

141,193

98,611

West Indies

41,529

14,866

Egyptian, none till 1823, when it was

5,623

51,762

Thus, American increase has been nearly 600 per cent; East Indian increase only 50 per cent, in the last twenty-six years. While such an enormous progress has been made by America, British India has made no progress at all, and is as stationary as possible with respect to its exports. In point of fact, in 1818 East India import was 247,659 bales; 1844, ditto, 237,596 bales, the highest of the last four years. In 1846, weekly consumption, 30,498 bales, of which American, 24,623 bales; East Indian, only 2,189. Not only has Indian cotton not increased in quantity, but it has not improved in quality. I have here short extracts from the letters of Liverpool brokers, which throw some light on this point. One says—
"The great bulk of the cotton from India, probably seven-eighths of it, is much the same as during the last twenty years; during the whole of which period, small parcels have occasionally been sent forward of improved quality, but the bulk remains much the same, and is still forwarded with a great deal of leaf, dirt, and seed, none of which is worth the freight. In some few cases the cotton

479
is cleaned without injury to the staple; but in many instances, when cleaned, the injury to the staple counterbalances all the advantages of increased cleanliness.
"Average freight from New Orleans, ⅝d. per lb.; ditto from Bombay, ½d. to ⅝d. per 1b.: being 50 per cent heavier, in proportion to the value, on East India cottons."
Another says—
"The cotton from Bombay is generally very dirty, and much discoloured, arising partly from a long land carriage, exposure to weather, and other difficulties of transit. The natives also mix with it dirt and seed, as they appear to have an interest in making the weight greater.
"East India cotton varies much in quality according to the season, but it is not a bit improved."
I think I have said enough to show, that the existing state of circumstances is by no means satisfactory; that the inquiry I ask for is necessary; and that I am justified in pressing it upon the attention of Parliament. I want to have it ascertained, first, can India grow a sufficient quantity of cotton to supply our manufactories? and if she can, what are the obstacles which prevent her doing so? That India has grown cotton for centuries, is absolutely notorious. Many persons believed that at one time the whole world was supplied from it, although I do not think that position sufficiently proved. But this is quite certain, that, surrounded by the Indus, the Himalaya Mountains, and the Indian Ocean, there is a population of 150,000,000—that this immense population has been clothed for centuries in cotton—and that that article has been applied in every shape in which cloth is used; and we have therefore every reason to believe that at this moment there is a larger amount of cotton annually produced in India than in any other country in the world. Major General Briggs, some years ago, wrote an excellent pamphlet, in which he pointed out the great advantages of the growth of cotton to the cultivator in India, and to the manufacturer at home. He stated there were 200,000 square miles suitable to the growth of cotton, in which there was every variety of soil and climate, and every advantage which could be found in any other country. Yet no supply of cotton for this country had been forthcoming. In 1818, India exported to England and China 140,000,000 lbs. If the progress in the growth of the article had borne any proportion to that of the United States, we might now look for as full a supply of the raw material from India as we were in the habit of receiving from the United
480
States. Now, I do not offer the House my opinions as positively conclusive on this question; bat I find them borne out by the reports of the East India Company. In 1836, the East India Company published reports of the proceedings which they had taken, and amongst them an immense amount of correspondence, all of which I have read. In 1822, the directors write to the Governor of Bombay—
"There is also considerable evidence afforded that no want will be experienced of a suitable soil and climate for raising this commodity to a large extent. The excellence of the quality seems to be established."
In 1829, they say—
"We are strongly impressed with the opinion, that nothing but attention and perseverance is required to make Indian cotton wool a productive article of export to Europe, and there is no commercial object connected with our Indian possessions of greater national importance."
Again—
"We have formerly received consignments of Surat cotton, which, in respect both of staple and cleanness, were greatly esteemed in the London market; and we now wish to procure a further supply of equal or superior goodness, which we are led to think might be obtained, if the processes of gathering and cleaning were conducted with sufficient care."
After alluding to New Orleans and Georgia cotton, they say—
"And we are further informed, which is exceedingly material in the present consideration, that the Bombay cottons, particularly those of the growth of the districts near Surat and Broach, are little or nothing inferior to the upland American descriptions above named, the item of cleanness alone excepted, and that such cotton might readily be brought into competition with the upland American."
In 1832 they write—
"It is, nevertheless, quite manifest that Indian cotton may be produced of fit quality and condition for the general purposes of the British manufactures."
And Mr. Martin, superintendent of the farm in Guzerat, expresses
—"a strong conviction that the quality of the staple might be essentially improved; and, perhaps, even enabled to compete with the New Orleans cotton in the English market."
In 1839, they say—
"From the best information we have obtained from your records, and from other sources, there appears no reason to doubt, although this great desideratum has not yet been attained, that under proper management and superintendence, India is capable of producing cotton in quantity to compete with the cotton from North America, which the best Bombay cotton (Surat), cleaned by the 'churka,' often rivals."
I find also it is stated in the annual re-

481
port of the Agricultural and Horticultural Society of England, in 1839—
"The more the society gives its consideration to the improvement of this important culture (cotton), the more it becomes convinced that capital and skill are alone required to raise the indigenous cotton of the country—the parent stock whence all other lands have been supplied—to a standard worthy of a comparison with the productions of the west."
Now I believe the East India Company hold these opinions quite honestly; for, during thirty years they have been making attempts to promote the cultivation of cotton. They met with many failures; but my belief is, that these arose from their having pursued the cultivation of cotton as amateurs, and not with the spirit and perseverance which private enterprise prompts. This was clearly proved by the fact of the inquiries sent to England as to how the saw-gin should be affixed. There were many accidents, and the machinery was burned by the carelessness of servants; but, making all these admissions, this fact remains, and cannot be refuted, that you have in India land calculated for the production of cotton; that you have a population the most docile, intelligent, and industrious, and labour far cheaper than you can by possibility have it in the United States. In point of fact, there is everything necessary except the possession of that capital by which improvements in cultivation can be carried on. The correspondence shows that some more general, more universal stimulus must be applied before the annual produce can be greatly increased. Now I have no wish—and I say so with the greatest sincerity—to bring any charges against the East India Company. I know the difficulties they have had to contend with in the management of the affairs of India. Their efforts have been honest, continuous, and meritorious, to a considerable extent with regard to this subject; they have spent 100,000 l. in experiments to promote the cultivation of cotton; but yet they have failed—and I want a Committee to ascertain how it is they have failed. I propose to call before it officers now employed in this country by the Company, and others who have lived in India for many years; and I hope to find out what obstacles the Indian Government have found in the cultivation of cotton, and, if there be such, if they are capable of being overcome, as well as to see if any available steps have been left unemployed in developing the resources of that country, and affording us a sufficient supply of
482
raw material. I hope the question will not become so imminent as to overwhelm us. If by any calamity our supplies were cut off. or greatly failed, it is impossible to paint too strongly the distress and difficulty which must overtake the most densely peopled portions of the kingdom. We have a large portion of our population dependent upon the supply of the raw material. A season may fail. It failed last year—it failed to some extent this year. But a frost coming too early, or a wind blowing from a particular point, too much wet or drought, or an undefinable worm, may produce the most disastrous effects. I will not speak of the danger of war; for the more we are bound together by commercial ties, the less danger is there of our committing the folly of going to war. But we ought not to forget that the whole of the cotton grown in America is produced by slave labour; and this, I think, all will admit, that no matter as to the period in which slavery may have existed, abolished it will ultimately be, either by peaceable or by violent means. Whether it comes to an end by peaceable means, or otherwise, there will, in all probability, be an interruption to the production of cotton; and the calamity which must in consequence fall on a part of the American Union, will be felt throughout the manufacturing districts of this country. I ask the House to grant this Committee for the sake of the trade dependent on the cultivation of cotton—for the sake of all the interests which are bound up with a free supply of the raw material of this article. The duty we owe to the manufacturing population, and a regard to our own safety, as well as our responsibility to that vast population of India which Providence has committed to our care, demand that we should use every means in our power to develop the resources of India, and to give prosperity and abundance to its vast population. I shall not enter further on a subject capable of much more development, but only say, that I am satisfied no hon. Member will oppose—as I am sure the Government will not—the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the cultivation of cotton in British India.
SIR J. HOBHOUSEcould assure the hon. Gentleman that it certainly was not the intention of the Government to oppose the appointment of this Committee; nor did he think that anything had been said by the hon. Member, bringing a sufficient charge against the East India Company,

483
either of ignorance, or neglect of duty, to make it necessary to enter into detail. At the same time, it was but fair to that body of men who had with such unparalleled success for so many years governed that great country, to state shortly what had been done by them to promote the cultivation of cotton. As the Committee was to be granted, it would not be necessary for him to go into the various topics urged by the hon. Gentleman; otherwise it might be shown that he rather over-estimated the effect it was possible for any inquiry to have, if he supposed it would make the people of India—in our time, at least—producers of cotton to the extent of the people of America. Such competition appeared quite out of the question. There was such a difference between the natives of America and of India, that even under circumstances of much greater facility of production in India than at present, he could not flatter himself that, give what encouragement we might, there would be such a cultivation of cotton in India as to make this country (to adopt the hon. Gentleman's phrase) safe from the want of cotton, supposing the import from America should fail. One of the reasons why the cultivation of cotton bad somewhat fallen off in India was, that we were there importers of cotton goods ourselves, and had destroyed, to a great degree, the great cotton manufactures of India. What had become of the Dacca fabrics, the beautiful piece goods, the gossamers, as they were called? Why, we were at this moment clothing the natives of India with our own manufactures, instead of allowing them to weave their own goods, and wear their own cottons. The hon. Member had fairly allowed that the Indian Governments had not slept at their post; ever since 1780, continual efforts had been made to get valuable information with respect to the cultivation of this valuable plant in India. There were folios upon folios, containing reports of the way in which the plant had been cultivated, and of the efforts made to attain additional success in that cultivation. But it was not till 1828 that the first effort was made to cultivate foreign cotton, and that was made at the instance of Lord Ellenborough; who, aided by the Court of Directors, attempted to introduce the cultivation of foreign cotton into certain parts of the Bombay presidency; and two or three experimental farms were there established, with some success, to cultivate the American cotton. It was not until 1839, when
484
Lord Auckland drew up a Minute which contained the whole history of the cultivation of the plant in India—perhaps one of the most valuable documents it was possible for any statesman to produce—that the attention of the Government was drawn to the best mode of cultivation. If the hon. Gentleman had waited for the production of the papers for which an hon. Baronet had moved, he would have seen that they embraced, not only Lord Auckland's Minute, but a series of most useful reports, which might almost have induced the hon. Gentleman to consider the appointment of the Committee superfluous. The Court of Directors took Lord Auckland's report into consideration; and it was determined that a gentleman connected with the East India Company—Captain Baylis, who was since dead—should be employed specially with a view to the introduction of cotton; and that not only American seed should be sent to India, but American planters, who might instruct the people in the most approved methods of cultivation. Captain Baylis, in 1840, proceeded to India with ten American planters, three of whom were stationed at Bombay and three at Madras; Captain Baylis accompanied the others to Bengal. The hon. Gentleman was somewhat mistaken as to the degree of success which attended the experiment. In the three presidencies it was certainly not uniform. The experiment failed in the north-western provinces, chiefly owing to two or three dry seasons, which rendered the soil unproductive, and discouraged the ryots; but in Marwa and other parts of India, the cultivation had succeeded; so that, whereas in 1842 there were only about 600 acres of American cotton grown, there were 15,000 acres in 1846. Last year, no less than 30,000 acres were under cultivation, and there were 200,000 acres now preparing for cotton, upon land, which, in some districts, would be let for a rent of 1s. an acre. Though the success of the experiment was admittedly not uniform—though in some parts of India the cultivation had not proceeded so rapidly as might have been anticipated, it was not correct to say that the experiment had not been attended with success. The specimens which he had seen of cotton produced in India, appeared to him—an uninstructed person, it was true—of superior quality; certainly some of them were very beautiful. Some cotton—the produce of the East Indies—had stood against New Orleans cotton last year, at

485
from 5¾d. to 6½d. per lb. In cleaning and packing, indeed, the natives of India had not succeeded. But the hon. Gentleman knew what a change was made in the production of cotton by the introduction of Whitney's saw-gin, which had done as much for America as the steam-engine of Watt had for this country. It created that cultivation of cotton which had produced such vast results, and made a population which before knew little or nothing on the subject, the greatest cultivators of cotton in the world. As to the diminished imports of Indian cotton, it must be mentioned that the American cotton commanded the market to such an extent, that it was not worth while for the speculators in Indian cotton to bring it home under the circumstances which attended the state of the cotton market during the period to which the hon. Gentleman had alluded. It was true that there was a diminution last year, from various causes, of 23 per cent in the imports of Indian cotton to this country, and a diminution of 12½ per cent in the imports of Indian cotton to China; but he would remark, that although there was a slight duty of nine annas to the maund in China on that cotton, yet that importation had not fallen off more than one-half what the importation to this country had been diminished. Amongst the causes which might be assigned for the decrease in the importation, he would mention the extensive speculations in opium which had taken place recently, and which must necessarily have lessened the sum of money to be applied by the speculators to the export of cotton. The exports of opium from Bombay to China last year, were 1,094,178lbs. more than the year before; and it was quite clear that with such a quantity of opium exported, there could not be the same amount of money in the hands of the speculators in cotton in India. Then, the speculations in railways tended to decrease the capital applied to the importation of cotton; and, lastly, the number of freights taken up by the vessels which engaged in the import of breadstuff's had diminished the means of sending homo cotton from India. These were four causes which very materially tended to lessen the import of cotton this year. The hon. Gentleman, while he rather overrated the power of the Indian Government in this matter, had shadowed out what he supposed to be one means of promoting the cultivation of cotton in the East. He seemed to think that the mode in which the land was rented
486
was such as did not tend to encourage that cultivation. But the hon. Gentleman was mistaken. The land assessment bad nothing to do with the cultivation of cotton or of anything else. Mr. Mill, the historian, had most completely shown that the land assessment was only of the nature of rent. It was proposed in 1839, that the Government should give a bonus to promote cotton cultivation. But the Indian Government of the day as well as the home authorities scouted the idea; they resolved to give such cultivation fair play, and no more. The hon. Gentleman had stated truly that the Indian Government had made great sacrifices to promote the production of cotton; they had spent within a short period 100,000 l. on the experiments. They continued their exertions; and scarcely a mail went out without some communication in reference to what would be a great means of encouraging the cultivation of cotton in India, namely, the formation of railroads and canals. For of what use were districts for the production of cotton if it could not without great difficulty be sent down to the coast? This he thought the best mode of fostering the cultivation of cotton; he could not agree in the opinion that prizes ought to be given. [Mr. BRIGHT: I said that prizes had been. I rather deprecated the idea.] The Indian Government were now making roads and canals in districts where the cotton cultivation promised to be most successful. The hon. Gentleman, the late chairman of the Board of Directors (Sir J. W. Hogg), had intended to speak on the present occasion; but the hon. Gentleman, he was sorry to say, was prevented by a domestic calamity. He had no objection to the Committee, though he did not augur any great results; but every facility would be afforded for conducting the inquiry, and, perhaps, he could not conclude more appropriately than by reading the substance of a conversation which had taken place between Mr. Aspinall Turner, the chairman of the Manchester Commercial Association and Sir J. W. Hogg. After some discussion the conference closed as follows:—
"Sir James Hogg then said, ' As this matter will come before Parliament, have I your permission to state that you, and the Manchester gentlemen whom you represent, are satisfied with what the Company have done?' To which they replied, ' You may state, in as strong terms as you like, that we are not only satisfied, but very grateful to the Company for their recent measures. We have no wish to interfere, and we leave the further prosecution of the cotton experiments, in full confidence that you will do all that can be done.'"

487
The extract now read corroborated the statement he had already made, that the East India Company would not shrink from their duty; neither would they shrink from inquiry into a system of cultivation calculated, in their opinion, to promote the welfare of that empire which he contended they governed with credit to themselves and for the benefit of the country.
LORD G. BENTINCK: I am rather more sanguine than my right hon. Friend as to the good which may be derived from a full and entire investigation of this matter. My right hon. Friend despairs of our East Indian possessions ever being able to compete with the growth of cotton in America. But, Sir, a high authority, sitting in the old House of Commons in the place which corresponded with that now occupied by the hon. Member for Durham—I mean Mr. Huskisson—stated, that if they would take the course of affording due protection to the growth of cotton in our Indian possessions, that would happen with regard to cotton which had in earlier times happened in regard to indigo—that with due protection our Indian possessions would produce sufficient cotton to supply the demands not only of Great Britain, but of all the world besides; just as in former times all our indigo had been received from Guatemala; but, in consequence of protection being extended to it, the growth of the East Indies had supplanted that of Guatemala. And Mr. Huskisson said to this House, in addition—
"And recollect that every bale of cotton imported from our East Indian possessions is necessarily imported into this country in British bottoms."
With such authority as that of Mr. Huskisson, then, I think that we need not despair, if sufficient encouragement be given, of seeing our East Indian possessions supply a large portion of cotton for the use of our manufactures in this country; but when the hon. Member for Durham told you that it was only in 1786 that the first pod of cotton was gathered in the United States of America he forgot to tell you also that the growth of cotton in America was fostered by protection—a duty of, I think, 1½d. a pound on all foreign cotton imported into the United States of America existed up to the very last year. Now, what are we doing? Whilst the land in India is subject to a tax—I care not what you call it, land-tax or Government rent—and is paying for the support of the Government either an assessment or a rent amounting
488
in some places to 1¾d. per pound, and generally to more than 1d. per pound, on the average growth of cotton, you take off five-sixteenths of a penny per pound from the duty on American cotton, which up to 1845 it had paid. It cannot be denied the growth of cotton in our Indian possessions is put on a most unfair basis; and I hope that this point, altogether overlooked by the two free-traders who have preceded me in the discussion, will not be entirely forgotten in the Committee; and I still hope to see a fair protection given to the growth of cotton in our Indian possessions. India is, I think, entitled to that protection, and for this reason—the quantity of cotton imported from America in 1846, at the rate of 6d. per pound, will give an amount of no less than 15,000,000 l. sterling, which we pay to the United States of America, now untaxed. At the same time we exported cotton manufactures to an amount little exceeding 1,000,000 l. sterling—I think 1,056,000 l.; but how stands the matter with respect to India? To our East Indian possessions and to Ceylon, in 1846, we exported cotton manufactures to an amount in value of above 4,500,000 l. sterling; and I say, therefore, that our East Indian subjects, taking out cotton goods in return for their raw cotton, have some claim upon us to encourage the growth of raw cotton in that country. It is quite true, as the right hon. Gentleman has stated, that one reason why the cultivation of cotton has so much fallen off in our East Indian possessions, is, that we have supplanted the manufacture of cotton goods by the Hindoos; but if so, is not that in itself a strong claim, and one to be listened to—calling upon us, in return, to encourage the growth by them of the raw cotton. But there is another point which I hope the Committee will also be instructed to inquire into, and that is, the encouragement which the promotion of railways in the East Indies would give to the growth of cotton. My right hon. Friend touched upon this point; but he stated, I think, that he had in contemplation the antediluvian improvement of canals. The day, I should think, is gone by when anybody would dream of encouraging the construction of canals. [Sir J. HOBHOUSE: They are also useful for irrigation.] But my right hon. Friend hardly, if at all, alluded to the utility of railways; and I find it stated in the Economist, and other authorities, that the cost and mode of conveyance have much to say with regard to the

489
cultivation of this plant. The mode in which the cotton is at present conveyed in the places where the greatest improvements have been introduced, is in carts, drawn by two bullocks together, at a rate of about twelve miles a day, each cart containing six bales of cotton of 120lbs. each; but the more ordinary course is for them to be carried in packs on the backs of the bullocks, each bullock carrying 240lbs. eight miles a day. These bullocks go together in large herds, each one splashing the other with mud. At night they he down in the roads, sometimes with the packs on their backs; or if not, then the packs are put on the dirty ground, and thus the cotton is so injured, so filled with mud and dirt, as to be almost useless. All that may be remedied by the Indian Government, supported by the Government at home, encouraging the construction of railways; and I hope that that part of the subject will not be overlooked in this Committee. Lord Hardinge, in a letter recently addressed to the East India Company, or to the Government at home, expressed his opinion that the construction of one particular railway in India would he equal to the saving of four regiments of infantry, the expense of which he set at the lowest at 50,000 l. a year, or the interest of 1,000,000 l., which would be enough to construct the railway in question; but Lord Hardinge added also that it must sufficiently appear to all, that in India the existence or non-existence of railways would frequently determine the question of peace or war. I therefore hope that in considering this question of the culture of cotton the value of improved modes of communication will be one of the first matters brought under the notice of the Committee. There is also one other question which I may venture now to mention, with a hope of being listened to, although last year if I had attempted to do so I should have been almost coughed down by the free-traders in this House. The matter is this—if we can be supplied by India with raw cotton for our manufactures, we shall be able to pay for it in our own manufactured goods, and although it was felt last year to be a matter of no consequence whatever whether we traded with a country which was disposed to take our manufactures, or with countries having high tariffs—although it was treated then as if it did not matter at all whether we were to pay in gold or in goods, and we were told that if we had to pay in gold
490
in the long run it must come back, I venture to think that that is not the opinion at present entertained on 'Change in London, or Manchester, or Liverpool. It was, I recollect, about this time last year that, in answer to me, the then First Minister of the Crown, addressing me, uttered this memorable declaration—it was on the 4th of May, and this is The Times report:—
"The noble Lord said, that if we got the corn of France and the timber of Prussia, the great consideration was, what we should get them to take in return. Why, suppose they took nothing in return, what should we suffer from that? [Cheers and counter-cheers from the Protectionists.] On what principles does the noble Lord think foreign commerce is carried on? When we buy the brandies of France, they are not given to us—something is given in exchange for them. We cannot take the silks of France, the timber of Prussia, and the corn of Prussia, without paying for them—there is no mode of making purchases but by giving an equivalent for them. Well, but you say we shall send out gold for them: but, do you send out gold to those countries now? I have not seen any diminution in the gold of the Bank of England that could be attributed to this cause. If there has been a decrease in gold, it has been from our internal concerns. I have not seen that any great quantities of it have gone to Prussia. What will astonish you still more perhaps is, that I wish it had. [Cheers.] This country would be able to command a sufficient quantity of gold if it were required in the steady and legitimate course of trade. When a regular commerce is carried on, there can be no drain of gold; and even if they take nothing but gold, we can only procure that by transmitting our manufactures for that gold, and then purchasing corn and timber with it. I should not he alarmed, therefore, if there should be an export of gold from this country, knowing that we shall obtain that gold by exchanging our manufactures for it. No such export can take place as will derange our internal affairs, or derange the stability of our commerce."
Now, Sir, the free-traders have got their will—the silks and the brandies of France, the timber and the corn of Russia, and more especially of America, have to be paid for; and the wish of the right hon. Gentleman is realized with a vengeance—for the United States of America have determined to take gold, and nothing but gold, in return for their corn; but I venture to say that the most rabid free-trader either on the Exchange of the city of London or on the Corn Exchange of Manchester or Liverpool would not now propound the doctrine that he wished it might he that foreign countries should take our gold in exchange for their corn. This, also, is a matter which ought, I think, to be considered by the Committee, with a view to ascertain whether, by restoring the duty on American cotton imported into this country, and

491
by reducing the land-tax, or Government rent, imposed on the cotton lands in India, we might not obtain our cotton from a country satisfied to take payment in the cotton and other manufactures of this country, amounting in the year 1846 to the declared value of 4,500,000 l. instead of giving a virtual monopoly of the supply of cotton to Great Britain to a country, insisting upon being paid, as the United States insists upon being paid, in gold only, and I believe in sovereigns of the last coinage, that there may be no loss in the weight, and maintaining in all things a high tariff against the produce and manufactures of the British nation.
On the noble Lord resuming his seat, the House was counted; and forty Members not being present, immediately adjourned, at a quarter past Eight o'clock.

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—2a Lunatic Asylums.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. From Edinburgh, for the Abolition of the System of Entails, or for a Moderation of its Evils.—From Lincoln, against the proposed Government Plan of Education.—From Drogheda, in favour of the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill.—From Factory Workers of Farrington and Preston, in favour of the Factories Bill.—From Guardians of the Headington Union, for Alteration of the Law of Settlement.—From Guardians of the Cheadle Union, for Alteration of the Poor Law Amendment Act.—From Cork and several other places, against any Clause being inserted in the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill which would throw the Responsibility of Supporting the Poor upon the Occupying Tenant.

THE MONETARY CRISIS.
LORD BROUGHAMinquired whether the noble Marquess or the Government had received any report of a meeting of merchants and bankers of the city of London on the distressing state of the money market? Yesterday it was very bad, and it was still worse the day before; and the worst accounts were received from Lancashire and Yorkshire. It appeared that numerous orders had been received from America for woollens in the West Riding, and for cottons in Lancashire; yet the manufacturers could not execute these orders, and were even obliged to stop their mills. Now, as by the visitation of the season we had been compelled to send, day by day, for fresh supplies of food from America, the happy circumstance of these

425
orders would have enabled us to get this food without the payment of bullion; but as these orders could not be executed, it had become necessary to send bullion. His belief was, that the great remedy would be found in both Houses of Parliament not allowing any Railway Bill to pass in future without a clause extending over a longer period the time of payment of instalments. With the old railways they could not interfere, because to do so would be breaking contract; but in future it ought to be a principle that not above a certain amount of instalments should be required to be paid up within the year. The noble and learned Lord proceeded to say, that, to his certain knowledge, the best paper in the city of London was refused at the end of last week and the beginning of this at 12 and 13 per cent discount. In a very short time, the instalments would be called for under the new Railway Acts: and there was such a necessity for avoiding forfeiture, that Parliament might make what terms they pleased. This suggestion came from him backed by a very high authority in the money market and the city.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEwas understood to say, that within the course of a few hours the noble Lord at the head of the Treasury had been in communication on this subject with a very respectable portion of the merchants and others in the city; but he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) was not prepared to state what was the result of that communication.
LORD ASHBURTONwas understood to observe, that any disorganization of the monetary interest in the city affected the country generally, and that the whole of the difficulty arose from the restrictions on its issues imposed on the Bank in 1844. A sudden stoppage of accommodation, on the part of the Bank, had taken place, with something like 10,000,000 l. of bullion in the coffers of the Bank. It had hardly ever been known that there was so large an accumulation of bullion. The whole of the confusion had arisen from the restrictions, which had left the country in the predicament of having only 2,500,000 l. in the Bank disposable, while there were 10,000,000 l. of bullion in its coffers. The whole scheme rested on a mistaken theory, in his opinion, though the Act, no doubt, had the sanction of the late Government, as well as of the Members of the present Government, besides some of the highest authorities on the subject in the country. In 1844, he had stated to their Lordships
426
that the measure would work pretty much as it was now working. It was a great mistake to suppose that any additional accommodation given to the country must be shown in an additional issue of bank notes. The amount of notes had varied but little; it had been sometimes at 20,000,000 l., sometimes 20,400,000 l., and sometimes 20,500,000 l.; but it had never reached 21,000,000 l.; but the private securities had varied from 12,000,000 l. up to 18,000,000 l. On the 29th of August, 1846, the public accommodation was 12,000,000 l.; in April, 1847, it was 18,000,000 l.; but the whole amount of notes issued, instead of increasing, had decreased in that period. Any apprehension of the issue of notes increasing in proportion to the amount of the accommodation given by the Bank, was incorrect. He thought it impossible that the Government should sit down with things as they were at present, when, for the first time in the memory of most of their Lordships, Exchequer-bills had been at a discount for weeks and months together. The question was one of much importance; and if it had not been for fear of occupying too much of their Lordships' time, he should have been sorry to pass it over in so slight a manner as he had done.
EARL FITZWILLIAMthought the Government were exceedingly indebted to the noble Lord for turning the attention of the House to this subject in rather a different point of view from that which had been taken by the noble and learned Lord. He thought nothing could be worse for the country than that it should take for granted that the present state of things arose from one simple cause, and that cause the railways.
LORD BROUGHAMhad said that was one cause only.
EARL FITZWILLIAMhad great doubt on the point. The same cause had existed in the last Session of Parliament; but not being accompanied by certain other causes now in operation, had not produced the effects that were now observed. His hon. Friend had said, that the Bank Act of 1844 had the concurrence of both the leading parties in Parliament, and of many other parties of high authority in such matters; but he (Earl Fitzwilliam) thought he had observed that Parliament never legislated worse than when the two leading parties in the State, by accident, concurred in any particular opinion.
LORD BROUGHAMobserved, that what

427
he had said that night was in continuation of what he had said on a former night on the same subject.
LORD WHARNCLIFFErose simply to state his view to be, that the causes which his noble Friend near him (Lord Ashburton) had assigned, were really not those which had led to the present unfortunate state of the money market. In his opinion, the Act of 1844 was founded on sound and just principles. If there had been no such regulation of our monetary system, it was his belief, and that of very well-informed parties who had communicated with him, that the country would have been in a very much worse position than at present. The amount of liabilities in the banking department in August last had been reduced by April very considerably. Looking at what had passed within the last eight months—considering the vast sums invested in railways—and the high price of grain, owing to the great demand in consequence of the famine in Ireland—it was to him a matter of surprise that the country was not in a worse condition than that in which it now was placed. He believed that but for the security afforded by the Act of 1844, the pressure would have been greatly aggravated.
LORD ASHBURTONspoke in explanation, and was understood to complain of the conditions imposed upon the Bank by the Charter of 1844. With a reserve of more than 10,000,000 l. of bullion, the Bank was restricted in affording accommodation to the commercial world, so as greatly to embarrass the trade of the country. By its charter, the Bank was compelled to adopt the same course under every possible variety of circumstances; it adopted the principle of Le Sage's Doctor Sangrado, and applied the same remedy to every disease.

POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE moved that the House resolve itself into Committee, when
The EARL of RODENsaid, that in a question so deeply affecting the interests of the country in which he resided, he felt that it would be wrong if he were altogether to remain silent. He had listened with very great attention to the speech of the noble Marquess opposite by whom this measure had been introduced; and he had heard with great satisfaction the clear, candid, and eloquent statement which the noble Marquess had made on that occasion.
428
He had also heard with considerable satisfaction the expressions made use of by the noble Marquess in enforcing what he might term the great feature of this Bill, which he at one time feared would prove detrimental to the best interests of his country; but he heard with great satisfaction the statements of the noble Marquess, that the provisions for giving relief to the destitute poor did not give a right to any man to claim relief under the provisions of this Bill, but that they were intended by the Government to confer a power upon the Commissioners of the Poor Law and the guardians to give out-door relief under the most cautious circumstances, whenever it should be found necessary. He felt great satisfaction when he heard the noble Marquess make this statement; and he confessed it had relieved him from many serious apprehensions he had previously entertained as to this part of the Bill. He had listened also with great attention to the speech of the learned Lord, and to the speeches of other noble Lords who had addressed the House with great eloquence and power upon this subject. But there was one circumstance which characterized all their speeches—that it did not appear to him that any of them were agreed as to any other measure which might be proposed as a substitute for this Bill which was now before their Lordships. At the same time he believed there was no one who would undertake to say what would be the effects of the working of this measure in Ireland. He believed that even the noble Marquess would not hesitate to admit that for good or for evil it must be attended with very serious consequences. But the circumstances in which the country were placed, the events which were passing before their eyes every day, seemed to be the grounds on which the noble Marquess founded his justification for introducing this Bill. It was indeed impossible for any man who had been thirty years resident in Ireland, as he had been, and who had consequently become well acquainted with the circumstances and the peculiar siuation of the country, not to have long foreseen that there were evils existing there which must sooner or later have brought matters to a crisis; and that the evils existing in that country, though they might for a time lie hid, would ultimately burst out as they had now done. He knew he was addressing many noble Lords who were unacquainted with the circumstances of Ireland, though

429
they, with the generous feelings of their countrymen, had shown the deepest interest and sympathy with their sufferings, and had given the strongest possible proof of this that they could give, by subscribing largely to its relief. Still he could not but remember that Ireland was a part of the British empire, as much so as York or Lincoln; and as in the body human so in the body politic, it was impossible for one member to suffer without all the members suffering with it. He considered it was fortunate for the interests of Ireland that there was at the head of the Government during the present crisis a noble Lord whose courage, whose determination, and whose single-mindedness prompted him to take immediate and decided measures, whether right or wrong, for the relief of that distress. And he could not but think that in no case had that noble Lord shown his wisdom in dealing with the affairs of Ireland more than in appointing the present illustrious individual to the office of Lord Lieutenant; and he wished to take this opportunity to bear his humble testimony to the government of Lord Besborough, who, by his knowledge of the country, by his anxiety for its welfare, and his attention to everything that was likely to forward its interests, had gained the affections of all classes of the people. He (the Earl of Roden) had been opposed to that noble Lord for a great length of time, on many occasions and on a great variety of subjects; yet in spite of that opposition he had always found the noble Lord ready to listen to whatever suggestions he (the Earl of Roden) presumed to offer. He feared that the career of the noble Lord was too nearly run, and that it would not be long till his country would lose him. Yet he was the more anxious to make this statement, because he felt that one of the greatest evils connected with Ireland was, that persons were sent from England, whether as Lords Lieutenant or as Secretaries, men of intelligence they might be, men of worth, but yet totally unacquainted with the condition of Ireland, altogether ignorant of its circumstances, having so much to learn and so much to unlearn, that by the time they began to see their way, and to act for the true interests of the country, they were in the course of things recalled. So much was this the case, that it was very common for an individual after six or seven months' residence to fancy that he knew all about the country, and to propose measures which his situation gave authority to, but
430
which were found to be deeply injurious to the true interests of the country. This also gave rise to a constant reference to the Home Office, never thoroughly done away with, except by the illustrious individual to whom he had referred, on points where there the head of the Home Office, however able in other respects he might be, was totally unfit to advise. This had been the cause of much misery and much evil in the sister country; and he, therefore, trusted that the noble Lord at the head of the Government would follow up his first appointment, should it unhappily be necessary to do so, by appointing a successor well acquainted with the circumstances of Ireland, and able, without reference to other quarters, to administer the laws and government of the country. With regard to the measure now before them, he agreed with a noble Earl, who, on a former occasion, recommended that it should be limited in its duration to a period of three or four years, so that if it were found to work injuriously it might be revised. Having thanked their Lordships for the patience with which they had heard him, he would not further detain them.
House in Committee.
LORD MONTEAGLE LORD MONTEAGLE moved as an Amendment the insertion of words limiting the Bill to the 1st of August, 1848, and to the end of the then next Session of Parliament. He said that he brought forward the Amendment for the purpose of raising the important question whether this Bill should be made a permanent or a temporary enactment. He would not for the present enter upon the consideration of whether one, two, three, four, or five years' limitation was to be preferred, as the issue on which he wished to take their Lordships' opinion was rather on the general question whether there ought to be any limitation to the duration of the Bill, or whether it should be of a permanent character. He would proceed to explain why he thought it necessary to raise this question on the first clause; the period would be more properly discussed when the clauses came before the Committee. It was because this was the first time that the principle of granting out-door relief to the able-bodied, as well as to the aged and infirm, had been applied to Ireland. If he had proposed to suspend the whole of the Bill, he should be recommending the suspension of the provisions respecting emigration, workhouses, ex-officio guardians, and other parts of the Bill to which he had no ob-

431
jction, considering them amendments of the permanent law already in existence. The only clauses he proposed to make temporary were those which introduced for the first time a new principle of relief. In order to show that it was desirable to make the Bill temporary, he need only refer to the speech of his noble Friend in introducing it to their Lordships' notice on the second reading. His noble Friend on that occasion, with the candour which always characterized him, admitted the experiment to be a perilous one. That was an admission in which there were few who would not concur; and in fact he might ask whether there was one noble Lord on either side of their Lordships' House who could say that he felt no doubt or hesitation with respect to the future working of this measure. Was not this, then, an argument for making it temporary in its duration in the first instance? He would ask those who were most friendly to the Bill to consider the mode in which it had been discussed, the circumstances attending its introduction, and the time at which it had been brought forward. Objections had been already raised, and were admitted to be well founded, as to the danger of permanent legislation in a time of great and unusual danger and distress. He was himself in a position to call their Lordships' attention to some few facts, showing the danger that might attend any attempt to make an experiment such as they were called upon to sanction, of a permanent character. As to the amount of charge under this Bill, much had already been said; but though he was disposed to regard the amount of the charge or burden which would be inflicted on the country under its provisions a secondary consideration, he thought it at the same time a point which was by means to be overlooked. He had seen it put forward in a most able public journal, that this Bill was to be regarded as a sort of new confiscation of the landed property of Ireland. If that was so, it was very different from all former confiscations; because, on former occasions, what was taken from one man was given to another, whereas if the character given to this Bill were a good one, property was to be taken from one party, not to be given to another, but to be treated in a manner which would totally destroy the whole basis of property in that country. If the probable charge under this Bill was to bear any proportion to that under the Temporary Relief Act at
432
present in operation, some idea of the extent to which it might be expected to reach could be formed from the burdens to which property in Ireland was now subjected. From the province of Munster, with which he was more immediately connected, he had seen a return, in which the estimate made for the support of the poor for three months was 11 s. in the pound on the three months' rating, which would make the amount of the charge on the annual rating, supposing the same expenditure to continue, no less than 44 s. in the pound. Even in the province of Leinster, which was a more favoured part of Ireland, the result of the working of the Temporary Relief Act was such as ought to open their Lordships' eyes. In many districts in that province, the rate for the three months was said to be 10 s. in the pound, or 40 s. in the pound for the year. One of his correspondents stated in a letter to him on this subject—"One gentleman whom I have just met, says that the rate is 10 s. in his district, which is in the county of Dublin and in the immediate neighbourhood of the metropolis;" and he added—"But, considering the Irish character, is there room to anticipate lighter rates in future, after they have begun to expect to be fed without work?" He would beg to direct their Lordships' attention more particularly to that latter sentence. It was possible that property might recover from the effects of such a pressure upon it; but no such hope could be entertained as to the injury done to the character of the people. The evil thus done would be permanent; and need he say how ruinous would be the consequences of a permanent degradation of the character of the people? A gentleman writing to him from Tipperary said, in reference to his efforts to revise the labour lists, that "from the enormous extent to which they reach, it is almost impossible to arrive at the truth. All are most anxious to enrol their names for a share of what is going. They have no shame, no self-respect—the demoralisation seems complete. The writer proceeded to refer to the terror which prevailed as to the consequences of turning off the people employed, and said that the Roman Catholic priests with whom he was acting were unable to step the torrent. Under such a state of society, he did not venture to propose to their Lordships the rejection of this Bill; but he would ask them to pause before they made it permanent. He would ask the Government, who

433
of all others must be certain that this was a perilous experiment, and must feel anxious as to its results, not to persevere in seeking to put it on the Statute-book in a permanent form. It might, however, be asked, where was the difference between enacting a permanent and a temporary law? It might be said, that surely Parliament had it in its own discretion to repeal the law at any time, if it found it to be attended with bad effects. He could not agree in the propriety of viewing the question in that light. In the first place, the principle of enacting a law by way of experiment, when its operation was not sure, was not at all a new principle; and on this point he might observe, that he trusted they would hear from Her Majesty's Government what was the duration which was proposed to be introduced in the modification of the new Poor Law Commission, to which they were entrusting a power of unexampled extent over the property of the people. He wished to know if it was not intended that that Commission should be temporary? The original Poor Law was passed, if he was not much mistaken, as a temporary measure. But as regarded the Bill before them, were there not, he would ask, peculiar reasons why it should be passed as a temporary Bill? Such measures as that before them were not to be considered merely within the definite bounds of their provisions. They were to be considered in reference to the expectations which they would create in the country, quite as much as in reference to the actual enactments which they contained; and their Lordships should, therefore, bear in mind that by passing this Bill as a permanent measure, they held out to the whole people of Ireland the expectation that they were to be entitled permanently to relief. In submitting his Amendment for the decision of their Lordships, he would remind them that in supporting it no noble Lord pledged himself against the principle of the Bill. As to the other Amendments on the Paper of a like tendency, he would not refer at present to them, as he thought the great question to have decided was, not whether the Bill should be limited to two years or to three years, but whether it ought to be passed as a permanent or as a temporary enactment.
LORD ABINGERsaid, that he felt very deeply on this question. He agreed with the noble Lord (Lord Monteagle) that if the present Bill were suffered to pass into law, the whole available resources of Ire-
434
land would be spent, not in improving but in deteriorating the condition of the people of that country. How hard had it been found, even in this country, where it might be said there was continued commercial prosperity, to endure a Poor Law, and how many changes and modifications had they not been obliged to adopt? In England, besides, there was a substantial class of yeomanry and tenantry, standing between the landlord and the labourer, and anxious to keep down the rates and to discourage pauperism; but in Ireland the reverse of all these circumstances might be said to exist. If the proposition of his noble Friend did not receive the assent of the House, he would propose another Amendment which he thought would be serviceable, namely, to enact that after the passing of this Bill no person who entered into the state of matrimony should have any right for themselves or their dependants to outdoor relief. Those who heard him seemed surprised; but really he knew no other proviso which was likely to be so effective or so successful. If their Lordships had the courage to adopt that proposition, he thought it would be found most useful, and the enactment would not take away a right at present possessed from any one. The noble Lord was further understood to say that the Roman Catholic clergymen were at present interested in promoting marriages, in consequence of the fees they received for marriages being their principal means of support; and a great deal of the misery which occurred among the lower classes in Ireland, even before the present crisis, was owing to the habit of imprudent marriages by the peasantry. He would not further detain their Lordships.
The EARL of WICKLOWwas aware that the noble Lord (Lord Monteagle) had a perfect right to bring forward the Amendment which he had proposed for rendering the present a temporary measure; but, when it was considered that there were on the Paper a number of Amendments to be brought under the notice of the House, it appeared to him that it would be more judicious and expedient if their Lordships were to defer coming to any decision as to the permanency of the Bill till they had enjoyed the advantage of hearing the discussions and knowing the amendments which might be made upon the measure. The principal argument employed against the permanency of the Bill by the noble Lord, was founded on the proposal to give out-door relief; yet the very next Amend-

435
ment on the Paper was one by his noble Friend to remove that proposal from the Bill. Now, it might happen that this or any of the other amendments, if agreed to, would alter the opinion which their Lordships entertained on the question of permanency; and hence the propriety of these being disposed of first. He (the Earl of Wicklow) meant to propose that the Bill should last for three years; but his reasons were very different from those given by his noble Friend, who wished to limit it to a year and a half only. His belief was, that whether they passed it for one year or for three, this must be a permanent measure; and his object was to ensure at the end of three years a full discussion of the subject before Parliament. If it was then found to have defects, these could be removed; and if it proved a beneficial measure, then there would be good grounds for renewing it. He would suggest to his noble Friend that he should now withdraw his Amendment, and let the Bill pass through Committee, after which he could have an opportunity of taking the sense of the House upon his proposal.
LORD BROUGHAM, seeing the noble Earl (the Earl of Wicklow) had tendered an advice to the noble Lord who had moved this Amendment, he would give his advice also to the noble Lord, and it would be, not to adopt the advice which had on this occasion been given him. He thought that instead of being an injudiciously contrived Amendment, it was the most judicious that in the circumstances could have been brought forward. If he were a friend to the Bill, no doubt he would strenuously object to such an Amendment. He would be committing the most blundering thing in the world if, being in favour of the Bill, he were to support this Amendment; but, not being friendly to the Bill, he thought the Amendment of the noble Lord ought to be passed. The noble Earl (the Earl of Wicklow) said, that if this measure passed at all, it must be a permanent one; and yet his own Amendment was, that it should be passed for three years. He was disposed to approve of the Amendment before the House, because it would mitigate the pressure of an impolitic measure, and because, at the end of the time specified, it would give Parliament an opportunity of reconsidering that measure. He was decidedly opposed to the passing of any permanent measure under the pressure of a temporary necessity. In 1834, when they passed the Poor Law Amendment Act,
436
they did not avow that it was more than an experimental measure, though it was based on the best and soundest principles. The question now before their Lordships was simply "permanent" or "temporary;" and in that view of the question ought the decision of every Member of the House to be given.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEwas very glad that he had had an opportunity of hearing the sentiments of the noble Lord (lord Brougham) before he rose to deliver the very few words which he was now about to address to the House. In the first place, however, he would say that he thought his noble Friend (Lord Monteagle) who proposed this Amendment was perfectly justified in doing so at the time he had selected; but at the same time it could not be denied by any one that it was an inconvenient course to pronounce an opinion as to whether a Bill should be permanent or temporary, without knowing what the Bill really was. The noble Lord (Lord Brougham) had stated that he supported the Amendment, because it would injure the Bill, which he thought a bad measure. In other words, he was calling upon the House to form a deliberate judgment without having the means of forming that judgment laid before them. His noble and learned Friend announced that he took the course of supporting the Amendment because he thought it would defeat the Bill.
LORD BROUGHAMhad said "limit." He said it would limit the operation of the Bill.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE: "Limit!" Yes; but his noble Friend said he would support the Amendment because he was opposed altogether to the Bill. Now it was not so with his noble Friend on the bench below (Lord Monteagle) for he approved of a part of it. He had heard his noble Friend more than once state, that to one part of the Bill he offered no opposition whatever, and that the most prominent, in its character, of the whole Bill, being the clause which provided that out-door relief should be given to the sick and disabled, and to all those who were specified in the clause. Now, it could not be assumed by that House, before they came to the end of the Bill, that the Bill might not be reduced to that one clause; and if it were so, the effect of the noble Lord's Amendment would be to prevent that becoming a permanent measure. He agreed with the proposal of the noble

437
Earl (the Earl of Wicklow) that the House should see in what shape they framed the Bill before they decided whether it ought to be permanent or temporary. The objection he made to the Amendment was in perfect consistency with the opinion he entertained, that it was advantageous to give the measure the form of a permanent Bill. He contended, that in a measure of such importance, requiring new machinery in Ireland, and the concurrence and support of the people of that country, the very circumstance of its being held out that it was only to be temporary, was in itself calculated to deprive them of that which was essential for the carrying out of the measure. To give a temporary character to the Bill, would be to insure its defeat when it came to be put in force in Ireland. He, therefore, asked their Lordships not to hold out to the public of Ireland the idea that this was only to be a temporary measure, and thereby do that which would naturally tend to defeat its object.
LORD STANLEY: My Lords, this question lies within the smallest possible compass; but I cannot abstain from expressing the strong opinion that I feel upon it. The noble Marquess, in the observations which he has just addressed to your Lordships, has failed to answer the ground on which my noble Friend opposite has made his Amendment. In point of fact, my Lords, the noble Marquess has not denied that which is the groundwork of my noble Friend's proposition. He has not denied that this is in itself a very hazardous measure. He has not denied that this measure does introduce a class of relief different from any given before; and that a different class of persons, subjected to very different authorities and under different control and management, to an extent hitherto unknown in Ireland, will be entitled to relief; and that it will impose upon the resources of Ireland a burden which it will be almost impossible for those resources to bear. What, then, under these circumstances, does my noble Friend propose? I am sure that I shall expose myself to the attacks of my noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham), whose movements are so rapid that I can hardly take notice of them. I shall, I say, no doubt expose myself to the charge of blundering by my noble and learned Friend, in supporting the Amendment of my noble Friend opposite. Now, my Lords, I am not hostile to this Bill. I have supported the second reading of this Bill. I think
438
that the circumstances of Ireland are so critical, and the danger of non-interference is so great, that I think Her Majesty's Government have done rightly in advising your Lordships to take this measure into your serious and calm consideration. But, my Lords, it is not inconsistent to support the principle of the Bill, and at the same time to assent to the proposition of my noble Friend opposite. The noble Marquess admitted that this Bill is an experiment; but he also said, that if they dealt with it as an experiment they would counteract the efficiency of the measure. I, my Lords, do not concur in that view. I think, on the contrary, that the very knowledge of the measure not being a permanent one, the knowledge that every subject in connexion with it will be scrutinized by the Legislature with the utmost strictness—that the knowledge that the manner in which it shall be carried out will be watched with the greatest attention, will induce the landed proprietors of Ireland to work out its provisions with greater circumspection and energy than would be exhibited if they deemed its measures essentially permanent, and that they had only the chance of errors and defects in the administration being detected and remedied by future legislation. My Lords, I think, on the other hand, that if it be passed merely as a temporary measure in the first instance, the circumstances under which it will be carried into operation will be far more favourable than if it be carried as it now stands. My Lords, I certainly do not very well understand the principles which are contended for by the noble Earl (the Earl of Wicklow) on the back benches, who has given notice himself of an Amendment for limiting the operation of the Bill to a year and a half. [The Earl of WICKLOW: No, no; for three years.] I do not see why he should oppose the Motion of my noble Friend, which says that the operation of the Bill ought to be limited to some definite period, in consequence of the very hazardous nature of the measure. [The Earl of WICKLOW: I did not say I should oppose his Motion; I support it.] Of course I beg the noble Earl's pardon for having misunderstood him. I was judging from the character of his speech. I am very happy to see that it is not the noble Earl's intention to oppose the Amendment, which I hope my noble Friend intends to press to a division. For my own part, I certainly will cordially support that Amendment, although, as I have already told your Lordships, not in any

439
spirit of hostility to this measure—not with any desire to prevent its being tried, and not with the least desire to prevent its being safely worked as an experiment—but because I firmly believe that if it is at once to be adopted as a permanent measure, Parliament by so doing will materially impede its being effectually carried out. If, after a certain period, it shall prove to be a desirable measure, but requires to be perfected, we can then, if possible, attempt to perfect it, and then, when all its hazards are removed, I believe that it will work a deal of no inconsiderable benefit to Ireland.
The ARCHBISHOP of DUBLINwould state the grounds on which he intended to support the Motion made by the noble Lord. He wished it to be understood that he did not consider the vote he proposed giving ought to imply any hostility to the measure. It was very true that he did not entertain so much hope as, and that he did not entertain much greater fears than, many noble Lords respecting the working of this Bill; but he begged to state, most solemnly, that had he entertained much greater hope and felt much less fear than he did, he, nevertheless, should have supported the very same Amendment. He would support the Amendment, inasmuch as it had been admitted by all parties, even by the promoters of the Bill, that this was a hazardous experiment; and not only was it not denied that it was a difficult and dangerous experiment—that they would have to steer their way through rocks, and shoals, and over quicksands, but it was granted also, that the occasion of bringing forward this measure was a very great and pressing emergency—one likely to confuse men's judgments and lead them to rash conclusions. It was also universally conceded, that the Bill was of a character which could not insure success, as the noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley) had remarked, without a very zealous and cordial co-operation by many different persons, in different situations, of different classes and descriptions, in Ireland; and unless there was among all these zeal, uprightness, and public spirit. He confessed, as he had taken the liberty of observing a few nights ago, he felt great apprehension—more, perhaps, than some noble Lords did—as to the successful working of the machinery by which this Bill was to be carried into operation. It was admitted that there were required a number of registers
440
which as yet they had no proof existed, and of which, if they did exist, they had made no kind of trial. Had, however, all these facilities of which they were in want been at hand, still he did protest most solemnly that he should have advised caution in so hazardous and important an experiment, and should have supported such an Amendment as that put forth by the noble Lord. He was told, that predicting there would be such and such abuses, was not to be considered as offering arguments against the proper use of the measure, because the intention of the promoters of the Bill was to avoid all such abuses. He was aware of this; he gave the House and Her Majesty's Government credit for the best intentions and designs, and he readily admitted that such and such were abuses, and were not to be considered as anything else; and that every maladministration of a law was not to be confounded with the principle of the law. At the same time, the probability was not to be forgotten; and, in considering the administration of the law, they ought not to lose sight of the liability to abuse. When, therefore, they had so momentous an experiment to try, and so heavy a responsibility on them, and when there was so much uncertainty respecting the machinery by which this Bill would work, it did behove them to keep clear of all suspicion, and not rashly to pass, as a permanent measure, that of which they had not yet had a trial, and of which they could not be adequate to judge without having made trial.
The EARL of ROSSEsupported the Amendment. Many and great as had been the complaints of the people of Liverpool of the hardships to which they were subjected by the vast immigration of Irish poor, they knew very well that the establishment of that Poor Law in Ireland would not prevent the Irish labourers from coming over to seek employment. In Glasgow the inhabitants suffered still more than the people of Liverpool from the immigration of Irish poor; and he had presented a petition from the inhabitants of Glasgow a short time since, complaining of the hardships they were suffering from the influx of Irish paupers; but whilst they prayed the House to establish a provision in Ireland for the aged and infirm poor, they expressed a strong opinion that it would not be well to introduce a provision for the relief of the able-bodied.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDEwas satisfied that no Poor Law, however wisely

441
formed, could have been effectual under the present calamity which prevailed in Ireland. There was no doubt that many landlords had done much for the relief of the distress; but still much more was requisite than depending upon that description of relief; therefore, some measure like the present was absolutely necessary. Entertaining this opinion, he felt that whether the Bill was for good or for evil, it would be infinitely aggravated by the adoption of the Amendment. Nothing would do more to disarrange the machinery of this measure than holding it out to the people of Ireland that this Bill was only to be of a temporary nature. The Bill was not one, as had been described by the most reverend Prelate, for the establishment of indiscriminate out-door relief; for it was intended that such relief was only to be given at the discretion of the boards of guardians: to make it temporary might raise an impression that out-door relief must be given under it, while they ought to be led to consider it as the steady, regular law of the land. No doubt the present temporary emergency had something to do with the bringing forward this measure; but they were also called upon to legislate for a permanent object. There would always be a number of cases of destitution for which accommodation could not be afforded in the workhouses for want of room; and if there was no out-door relief, such persons would be exposed to starvation. It was for this class that outdoor relief was chiefly intended. Was it to be said, that, at the end of three years, they would return to the lamentable state of things which had that night been so painfully described, and again leave the poor on the brink of starvation? If this was only to be regarded as a temporary measure, neither the landowners nor the tenantry would zealously address themselves to carry it into effective operation. If they adopted the Amendment, they might very reasonably be told that they were about to pass such a bad measure that they feared to make it permanent.
The MARQUESS of WESTMEATHfelt called upon to support the Amendment, as he considered the Bill to be only an experiment.
The EARL of HADDINGTONwas satisfied that that portion of the measure having reference to out-door relief should only be temporary, as it was desirable to see how the principle would work.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, that his ob-
442
ject was to make only that part of the Bill which referred to out-door relief temporary, and he thought that it would be better to limit its operation to a year and a half, rather than three years. What he wished to secure by his Amendment was, that at the end of a certain period the Bill should be open to revision. If a Bill was brought in which would affect England, as he and others believed this measure would affect Ireland, he was satisfied there would be no hesitation on the part of the Government or the Legislature to take it as an experiment, and enact it only for a limited period.
EARL GREYwas surprised that this Amendment was treated as a matter of comparatively small importance. The noble Lord said, that his object was to make the principle of out-door relief temporary; and while other parts of the Bill were to be made of a permanent character, that portion of it relating to out-door relief was only to be enacted for a limited period.
LORD MONTEAGLEexplained, that he had given notice of two Amendments; the second of them was the omission of the clauses authorizing out-door relief to the able-bodied poor. But when he came to consider the provisions of the Act, he found they contained two series of legislative measures; one consisted of a number of clauses amending the present Poor Law Bill, very advisable to be adopted; the other included the relief clauses, creating a system of relieving officers, and authorizing the giving of money and relief out of doors. His proposition was to make all these relief clauses subject to revision at the end of one, two, or three years, leaving the other portions of the Bill permanent.
EARL GREYthought the noble Lord had exactly confirmed his argument. The noble Lord had proposed to leave one portion of the Bill permanent; but that part which extended the administration of relief to classes to which it had not been hitherto given, he proposed should only be temporary. And what had the noble Lord also told them? That, if he could, he would induce their Lordships to reject the principle of out-door relief altogether. But, despairing of prevailing in that, against the almost unanimous sense of this country, he called on their Lordships to accomplish by a side-wind and indirectly what he could not do directly. If he dared not altogether reject the extension of relief in Ireland, he would damage and injure the administration of that relief to the utmost extent.

443
That was the view he took of the noble Lord's Amendment, which the noble Lord (Lord Brougham) had truly said, it would be a gross blunder in any friend of the Bill to vote for. The effect of the Amendment would be this, to compel the trial of a great experiment under every possible disadvantage. What could be gained by it? If Parliament should have reason to think it had committed an error, it was perfectly in its power to retrace its steps. But, if they adopted the Amendment, they would try the experiment under a legislative confession that they had no confidence in its success—under a Parliamentary declaration that they expected it to fail. They were aware of the state of opinion in Ireland on this subject. It was impossible to deny there was in that country a great indisposition to grant relief—that boards of guardians had sometimes to be compelled to do their duty—and that they did not discharge their duties like boards of guardians in England. It would be in vain to attempt to deceive themselves. With those feelings existing, they must not alter the law in such a manner as to declare it, in the opinion of Parliament, to be a dangerous and inefficient one. He knew it was said there were precedents—that the English Poor Law was only passed for a limited time; but it was only the most unimportant part of that Bill which was made temporary. The more dangerous and critical was this experiment, the more firmly he was persuaded of the impolicy of not trying it under every possible advantage; but the great principle they were about to employ was not one of experiment or doubt; it was one on which his opinion was entirely made up; it was the principle that property should be compelled in one shape or another to provide a subsistence for the distressed classes of the community. That great principle had been recognised for 300 years in England; and he was prepared to recognise it, not for three years only, but permanently, in Ireland. The noble Lord mistook the opinion of the people of England on the subject. It was the opinion of the people of England—and he conceived it to be a just one—that the right of an Irish pauper to out-door relief ought not to commence when he landed at Liverpool. What was the state of things now existing? An Irish pauper when he landed at Liverpool was legally entitled, under the description of a casual poor person, to be relieved out of the workhouse if relief could not be afforded within the workhouse. The
444
people of Liverpool, and the people of England generally, thought it was very hard that the legal obligation to maintain the poor of Ireland should commence only when they landed in this country. Whilst they remained in Ireland, and the workhouses continued full, they had no legal claim to relief. It was desirable that all parts of the empire should be placed on the same footing as regarded the maintenance of the poor. It was impossible to leave the law in its present state, and at the same time permit unrestricted intercourse between Ireland and England.
EARL FITZWILLIAMsaid, that his noble Friend who had just addressed their Lordships had favoured them with a gallant and hearty defence of the measure; he certainly seemed to be troubled with none of the doubts and fears which characterized the address of the noble President of the Council on a former occasion, and induced him to describe it as being a perilous experiment. His noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies appeared to be determined to pass the Bill as it stood, whatever might be the consequences. He admired his noble Friend's courage and heartiness; but he would advise him to deal with so momentous a measure as that under consideration in a spirit of prudence and moderation, rather than of zeal and inflexibility. He dissented from the correctness of his noble Friend's statement, that the Bill would establish in Ireland a state of things which had for three centuries existed in England. The Statute of the 43rd of Elizabeth did not bear out the proposition, for it merely enacted that the inhabitants of parishes should set their poor to work, and levy a rate for the payment of their wages. He positively denied that it was the intention of those who framed the 43rd of Elizabeth, that the burden of maintaining the poor should fall upon the land; it was intended that each inhabitant of a parish should contribute the burden according to his means, whatever they might consist of. Now, it was very well known that whatever burdens were placed upon the inhabitants of the different districts in Ireland, they would all fall ultimately upon the land itself. He thought that his noble Friend had done right in moving the Amendment that was then under their consideration—and he had done right in placing that Amendment in the front of the battle. The simple object of the Amendment was this: that Parliament should not bind it-

445
self to the permanent establishment of the principle involved in the measure of the Government. It was in that spirit he was acting, when he was supporting the Amendment; and he contended that there could he no danger in legislating in that spirit. The noble Earl the Secretary for the Colonies, in opposing the Motion of his noble Friend, asked them whether Parliament would be deprived of the power of legislating at any future time, if they found the measure imperfect? Of course, Parliament had at all times the power of retracing their steps, or of taking cognizance of this measure; but there was a very great difference between the repealing of the Act, and the continuance of it. If they passed this Bill as a permanent measure, they would, in a great measure, be putting it out of their power of effectually legislating upon the subject at a future time.
The EARL of DEVONobserved, that it appeared from reports on the subject, and finally from the report of the Commission with which he had been connected, that a large portion of the population of Ireland were, for a considerable portion of the year, exposed to the greatest wretchedness and misery, depending for their subsistence merely upon temporary and casual relief. That subsistence, miserable and uncertain as it was, had depended hitherto upon the cheapest food that could possibly be procured. The case of these unhappy beings was, however, now aggravated to a most frightful extent by the loss of the potato; and they could not maintain their subsistence unless they purchased food of a much dearer quality. The means of procuring this food could only be obtained by affording the people adequate employment. It was stated as an argument against affording out-door relief, that it would teach the people to rely upon eleemosynary assistance; but he would ask, was it possible for the peasant in Ireland to obtain by his own efforts in many parts of the country the subsistence necessary for his support? It was only possible by every person who could give employment exerting himself to afford it. He considered the measure would be useful that was likely to induce the landlords and occupiers to unite together and give that employment to the people; and if this Bill passed, in case they did not give employment to the people, they must maintain them in a state of idleness. As the law now stood, the person requiring relief could only claim to be relieved in the workhouse. Now, suppose
446
there were ten persons who were unable to procure employment, and that it became absolutely necessary for them to apply for relief; and suppose five only of them could be admitted into the workhouse, and the other five were told that the workhouse being full, they could not, under the law, get relief, he did not think that was a satisfactory mode of proceeding. It was said that this would be a fearful experiment; but it was to be apprehended that much more danger would result from not making it permanent, and that the danger would be greater if, after giving the people of Ireland the right to claim out-door relief for three years, they then turned about and said, "This cannot be, we must repeal that law, and not give out-door relief." He believed the measure to be one of justice and necessity, and supported the Bill.
The EARL of RIPONobserved, that on that occasion, however willing he might be under other circumstances, he would not enter into a discussion of the main principle of the Relief Bill. From the actually acknowledged condition in which Ireland was and had been for years, he should say that he considered the permanent out-door relief clause a most essential part of the measure; and therefore it would not be possible for him to consent to the proposition of the noble Lord (Lord Monteagle). If that part of the Bill were so essential, it necessarily would lose all its value by the limitation of its operation for two or three years; and the administration of legalized relief would be thrown into such a state of confusion that the measure itself, which was one of great magnitude, could never be fairly tried. Under these circumstances, and without going into a consideration of the details of the measure, or examining the proposed mode of administering outdoor relief, or even the nature of that relief, he should feel it to be his duty to vote against the Amendment.
The EARL of SHREWSBURYsaid, that after what had fallen from the noble Marquess on the Ministerial benches, as well as what had fallen from the noble Earl the Secretary for the Colonies, he should infer that the Bill under consideration gave the right of out-door relief to all destitute persons in Ireland. Now, he begged to ask, in the first instance, whether the Bill proposed to give that right to relief in every case of destitution? because, if it did, he feared that for the next two or three years—for thirty weeks in each year—so many cases of dire necessity

447
would present themselves, the operation of the Bill would be found to extend to half the population of the country, in which case it would impose burdens on the land which it neither could nor ought to bear. If, on the other hand, the Bill did not give the right to relief, for what purpose was it brought forward and sought to be enacted but with the view of provoking persons to say that it was a Bill to legalize the destruction of the people? In England the law gave the right to relief in every case of destitution; the overseer, in the first instance, and the magistrates in case of their refusal, were empowered to dispense it; that right was imperative, and not conditional or discretionary. Why, then, subject this measure for Ireland to conditions? Why say that in England no man could legally die of starvation, but that in Ireland the claim of the destitute must be subjected to the discretion of the relieving officers and of the guardians? As the Government had not proposed any other measures, but as they had even withdrawn one of the promised measures that were to accompany the Poor Relief Bill, and as he had not heard more of those measures which were to follow, it appeared to him there was no other alternative but to adopt the Bill with all its imperfections on its head, than which none, in his opinion, could be greater than an uncertainty of interpretation. There-fore it was that he begged to ask if the Bill proposed to give the right of relief in every case of destitution? If he were told that it did not, then he should observe that it seemed to him a most extraordinary code of legislation. Christianity left the poor to the charity of the rich; but by the Bill before their Lordships, as he understood it, they promised the poor man relief—they left him under the feeling that they gave him relief by law, but at the same time they refused him the right to that relief. Under these circumstances and those difficulties, he thought, on the whole, that he would be more inclined to vote for the Motion of the noble Lord below him.
House divided:—For the Amendment 61; Against it 50: Majority in favour of the Amendment 11.

List of the CONTENTS.

DUKES.

Headfort

Buckingham

Westmeath

Cleveland

EARLS.

Montrose

Rosse

Richmond

Enniskillen

MARQUESSES.

Roden

Abercorn

Eglintoun

448

Dartmouth

Strangford

Limerick

Hereford

Sheffield

Somers

ARCHBISHOP.

Clancarty

Dublin

Hardwicke

BISHOP.

Leven and Melville

Exeter

Orford

Eldon

BARONS.

Haddington

Monteagle of Brandon

Warwick

Stanley

Nelson

Saltoun

Stradbrooke

Gage

Desart

Northwich

Digby

Blaney

Erne

Downes

Malmesbury

Templemore

Lucan

De Ros

Fitzwilliam

Redesdale

Stanhope

Abinger

Delawarr

Middleton (V. Brodrick)

Shrewsbury

Colchester

Clare

Rayleigh

Lovelace

Castlemaine

Radnor

Boston

Wilton

Tenterden

VISCOUNTS.

Bolton

Combermere

Ashburton

List of the NOT-CONTENTS.

DUKES.

Morley

Norfolk

Ripon

St. Alban's

Harewood

MARQUESSES.

Craven

Lansdowne

Uxbridge

Clanricarde

VISCOUNT.

Westminster

Clifden

Conyngham

BISHOPS.

EARLS.

Durham

Galloway

Hereford

Clanwilliam

St. David's

St. Germans

BARONS.

Grey

Campbell

Shaftesbury

Cottenham

Minto

Erskine

Clarendon

Strafford

Auckland

Colborne

Devon

Lilford

Fortescue

Dacre

Ilchester

Foley

Yarborough

Montfort

Cowper

Beaumont

Granville

Hatherton

Fingall

Carington

Essex

Camoys

Waldegrave

Kenyon

Ellesmere

Kinnaird

Verulam

Wharncliffe

Paired off.

Earl of Lonsdale

Earl of Zetland

Lord Grantley

Lord Arundel

Earl of Charleville

Duke of Bedford

Marquess of Exeter

Earl Spencer

Duke of Beaufort

Marquess of Anglesey

Lord Wynford

Lord Bruce

Lord Willoughby de Eresby

Earl of Effingham

Earl Tankerville

Lord Vivian

Marquess of Ailsa

Viscount Falkland

Viscount Beresford

Earl Roseberry

Earl of Munster

Lord Portman

449

Lord Southampton

Duke of Roxburgh

Earl of Orkney

Lord Byron

Duke of Newcastle

Lord Beauvale

Lord Sondes

Lord Sudely

Earl of Sandwich

Karl of Camperdown

Duke of Manchester

Earl Ducie

Lord De Lisle

Lord Crewe

Lord Colville

Lord Langdale

Earl of Cardigan

Lord Leigh

Lord Brougham

Viscount Sydney

Lord Feversham

Lord Glenelg

On Clause 2,
The EARL of ELLENBOROUGHurged on their Lordships the propriety of acceding to an Amendment, the object of which was, that all classes of destitute females should be admitted to relief, as well those having illegitimate as those having legitimate children. He had not thought it necessary to give notice of his intention to bring forward this Amendment, because it was one which appeared to him to be dictated by considerations of common humanity, and which therefore demanded but little deliberation. The punishment of death, which was the just reward of crimes of the greatest atrocity, had already been abolished except in the case of one offence, and yet the operation of the present Bill, as it now stood, would be to make death the punishment of a woman's incontinence. He would strongly recommend their Lordships to introduce into the Bill a provision qualifying destitute females with illegitimate children to be recipients of relief as well as females having legitimate children.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEreplied, but his answer was perfectly inaudible.
The EARL of WICKLOWcontended that there was no one who was acquainted with the stale of society in Ireland who would not object to give relief under such a measure as the present to the class of persons alluded to by the noble Earl.
The BISHOP of EXETERwas of opinion that the effect of the noble Earl's Amendment would be to release the profligate father altogether.
The DUKE of RICHMONDthought that a distinction should be taken between the children of false marriages and children avowedly illegitimate. A provision should be introduced into the Bill in favour of the former class. If a woman imagined that she had been validly married, or had been tricked into a false marriage, it would be cruel to debar her and her children.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDEexplained that the supposititious case put by the noble Duke was already provided for in
450
the discretionary power vested in the guardians.
The EARL of CLANCARTYobjected to the principle of out-door relief. There was little or no difference between destitution and poverty in Ireland; and the effect of the out-door system would be to place the recipients of relief in a better position than the independent labourers. The passing of any measure providing for out-door relief would prevent many poor families, who wore now supported by the labour of an individual member, or by the charity of their friends, who might not wish to see them have recourse to parochial assistance, from continuing to receive such aid.
The EARL of ELLENBOROUGHintimated his intention of withdrawing the Amendment for the present. He still adhered to the opinions he had already expressed, but thought it the more convenient course to propose the Amendment on the bringing up of the Report.
Amendment withdrawn.
The EARL of WICKLOWsuggested that in Clause 2, line 12, after the word "Commissioners," these words should be introduced—"with the sanction of the Lord Lieutenant."
EARL GREYsaid, that a Bill had been already introduced in the House of Commons, which was printed on the 26th of February. That Bill would create a new Board for the administration of the Poor Law in Ireland, consisting of the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant, the Under Secretary, and one paid Commissioner: that would place the administration of the Poor Law completely in the hands of the Irish Government, and he thought, therefore, it would not be expedient that any such Amendment as that of his noble Friend should now be pressed.
LORD MONTEAGLEobserved, that if such a Bill wore coming up from the Commons it would be better to postpone that part of the present Bill till the other reached the House of Lords.
Motion postponed.
The EARL of DESART,pursuant to notice, moved in Clause 2, after the words—
"'By order under their seal to authorize and empower the guardians of such union' be inserted to 'build or hire additional houses for the reception of such destitute persons, or to administer,' &c.; and after the words 'on the receipt by the guardians of the union of any such order authorizing' be inserted 'the erection or hiring of such houses, or relief,' &c.: also that after the words 'shall be given in food only' be inserted ' to be in all cases distributed from a store to be provided

451
by the guardians for that purpose, save as hereinafter,'" &c.
With regard to the first alteration proposed, the noble Earl admitted that the Bill as it stood allowed any sum not exceeding 400 l. to be appropriated for the purpose of building new workhouses where they were required; but that, he contended, was not sufficient. He rested his case on the Poor Law Commissioners' reports; and from the evidence there taken, he found that on the system of erection the report recommended, the cost of a building to accommodate ninety people would come to about 2l. per head; while the cost of the workhouse construction was 14 l. per head; one-seventh more than the provision he proposed to be made. He contended that increased provision for the application of the in-door test ought to be made, as there was great reason to dread evil from the maladministration of the new Poor Law, judging from the fact that the most flagrant abuses were committed by the administrators of the present system. The indoor test, whenever it was possible, ought to be applied; and to give the Commissioners greater means of applying that test, he would invest them with the power of ordering the guardians to build such houses as he had alluded to for that purpose. He wished to do this the more, because the relief of a proportion of the population of England and Wales that are annually recipients of relief both in-door and out-door, would involve a tax of 17 per cent on Irish property; while in England and Wales it only involved a tax of 5 per cent. Thus, while it was one-twentieth of the rental in England and Wales, in Ireland it was nearly one-sixth. This showed the entire impracticability of working the new Poor Law in Ireland as a remedy for the present state of things, unless it were accompanied by large and extensive measures, by which employment could be given to the population. With regard to stores, he wished the able-bodied paupers who were relieved out of doors to have to walk to the store daily for their relief, and not have it taken round and distributed at their houses. That would be a sort of test in those cases in which the workhouse test could not be applied. Those alterations did not invade the principle of the Bill. All he asked the Government to do was, to give the Commissioners the power to order these houses to be built. He did not think that would meet all the maladministration they might expect to find; but if it had
452
any tendency of that nature the Government ought to agree to it.
EARL GREYsaid, that the only objection he saw to the Amendments was, that they were wholly unnecessary, the Commissioners having full power under the Bill. It gave the Commissioners power, from time to time, to erect or hire additional workhouses, if the present were found insufficient; and, though they were restricted to not going beyond the former extent of 400 l. without the consent of the guardians, yet the clause as it stood authorized the Commissioners to empower the guardians to go beyond that amount. With respect to the second point, as to stores, it appeared to be carrying legislation beyond its legitimate point; and it had better be left to the discretion of the guardians.
LORD STANLEYsaid, that he entirely concurred in the Amendments proposed by his noble Friend. However, as the Bill already gave power to build to the amount of 400 l., and as their Lordships had just decided that the measure was to be only a temporary one, it might, perhaps, be as well to ascertain by experience whether the sum of 400 l. might not be sufficient. With regard to the latter part of the Amendment, he understood it to be levelled at the system of indiscriminate relief, and of sending round and distributing that relief at the doors of the recipients. His noble Friend said, let that relief be distributed at stores appointed by the board of guardians, and let the able-bodied who said they were in a state of destitution come daily for relief. If the able-bodied pauper found it was necessary to walk five or six miles to receive his day's supply and then to walk back—it was not intended to apply to sick or infirm-persons or women—he would think twice whether he could not obtain better employment, and with almost as little labour earn a larger pittance. Under circumstances which prevented their poor having a perfect test, his noble Friend wished to have this subsidiary or supplementary test, an inferior one, but still a sort of test. He hoped his noble Friend would not press the first part of his Amendment; but if the latter part were carried to a division, unless some cogent reason to the contrary was urged on the other side of the House, he (Lord Stanley) would vote for the Amendment.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEthought both parties had best be left to the discretion of guardians, as they Would be the best judges. He agreed that the

453
carrying of the relief to the door of the recipient ought to be guarded against; but the remedy for that was in the hands of the Poor Law Commissioners, who had power to give directions how the relief should be distributed.
The EARL of ST. GERMANSsaid, ample powers were already given by the Bill to the Commissioners, to secure the object of the noble Earl in the second part of his Amendment.
The EARL of WICKLOWwould not consent to take from the guardians any power they now enjoyed, and therefore he opposed the Amendment. To establish stores, in the present state of the country, would be only to hold out temptations to plunder.
LORD MONTEAGLEdid not see how the distribution of food over so large an area could be provided for without some such powers as this Amendment gave.
EARL GREYsaid, there was ample power of establishing stores provided in a future clause of the Bill; but it would be a serious inconvenience never to give food except from a store established by a board of guardians. Cases might arise in which it would be more economical that a contractor should undertake to deliver stores at a certain point. He could not concur in the Amendment.
EARL FITZWILLIAMthought the Amendment would prevent jobbing in the management of stores.
After a few words from the MARQUESS of WESTMEATH,
The EARL of CLARENDONobjected to the clause, which would entail great expense on boards of guardians. A single family in one extremity of the union might require relief in food; but by this Amendment, before the board of guardians could give them relief for one week, it would be necessary to build a store and to till it. He thought the guardians, who had an interest in economizing the funds, might safely be left to make these arrangements for themselves.
The EARL of CLANCARTY, as the measure was only temporary in its operation, would recommend his noble Friend to withdraw the Amendment.
The EARL of DESARTsaid, that as it appeared to be the general wish of the House, he would withdraw his Amendment.
Amendment withdrawn.
Clause 3 agreed to without Amendment.
On Clause 4,
LORD STANLEYrose to propose an Amendment. He hoped their Lordships would not think him too severe against Ireland, if he said that it was incumbent upon them to take greater precautions against jobbing on the part of boards of guardians in that country than in England. There was no point upon which Irish boards of guardians were so likely to display personal favouritism as in the choice of very inefficient subordinate officers to perform the duties of the new law. Now, an immense power was proposed to be vested in the relieving officers of Ireland. A great disproportion existed in the size of the electoral divisions and unions in Ireland, as compared with those of England. He thought all their Lordships who were acquainted with the working of the Poor Law would admit that, if there was an error in respect to the size of unions in England, that error was not on the side of their being too small, but of their being inconveniently large. If that was the case in England, let them inquire what was the general average of unions in regard to size so as to show the proportion between the extent of acreage and the amount of population in the poor-law unions of England and Ireland respectively. In England the average population of each union, as appeared from returns upon their Lordships' Table, was 24,845 inhabitants; in Ireland the average population of each union, assuming the population of the whole country to be 8,500,000, which he thought was nearly the truth, would be no less than 65,384 persons. Then what was the area of the 620 and odd poor-law unions in England? In England there were only two unions above 200,000 acres in extent, and only forty-three above 100,000 acres; and below 100,000 acres there were 541 unions. Now in Ireland there were, he thought, 130 unions; of these there were above 200,000 acres no less than eighteen, instead of two as in England; above 100,000 acres, instead of forty-three in England, there were in Ireland 104. Below 100,000 acres, instead of 541 in England, there were in Ireland twenty-six only. This general average he thought a much better mode of bringing before their Lordships, the difference between the size of unions in England and Ireland, than by taking certain instances of great discrepancies; but he more especially noticed the fact for this purpose—to point out to their Lord-

455
ships, that if in England it was found to be exceedingly difficult to collect the members of the boards of guardians together at their weekly meetings, owing to the great distances that many of the guardians had to come; and if the consequence was, that the board of guardians had to devolve on the relieving officer attending the board much of the discretion and responsibility of giving and withholding relief, that difficulty and its consequences would be infinitely aggravated in Ireland where the unions were so much larger, and where it would be much more troublesome to collect the guardians at the weekly meetings of the board. Now in this Bill they were introducing for the first time the principle of granting out-door relief; and, from this difficulty of collecting the guardians at meetings of the board, in practice they were about to assign the administration of that out-door relief to the relieving officer. In doing so, he did not hesitate to say, they were about to throw on the relieving officer a duty which it was almost impossible for him to perform. Between the weekly meetings of the board of guardians, the relieving officer would have the discretion of granting relief in food to persons who pressed on him. Now, taking one of these unions, would their Lordships, who were acquainted with Ireland, believe that a relieving officer would have the firmness to refuse relief, or to give only that amount which it might be discreet to give to a person who pressed him, at a place, perhaps, where three or four roads met, such person being supported by a body of six, or eight, or ten able-bodied persons? If they wanted to give additional motives for corruption on the part of the relieving officer, to be winked at by the corruption of the board of guardians, they would give to that board, formed, as it mostly would be, of the small farmers of the district, the appointment of these relieving officers to act under them. It was well known to what an extent persons in Ireland canvassed and made interest for situations of a very inferior character; and if they gave to the guardians, constituted as they were in Ireland, the power of distributing this patronage, they would find selected for relieving officers, small farmers, the relations of the guardians themselves, and, in many cases, the close connexions, if not relations, of the very persons they would have to relieve. He was convinced that there was infinitely more chance of these duties being properly performed, if they gave the selection of the
456
relieving officers not to the guardians but to the Poor Law Commissioners. In the one case the relieving officers would be the servants and dependants of the boards of guardians; in the other case they would be the servants and dependants of the Crown; and in that case the board and the relieving officer would mostly be a check on one another. That, he thought, would be a very material amendment of the enactment, and therefore he moved as an Amendment on the 4th Clause, that the appointment of the relieving officers be vested in the Poor Law Commissioners.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEwas understood to submit to the noble Lord, whether the evil results he apprehended were not guarded against by the power given to the Poor Law Commissioners by another clause in the Bill, of dismissing at any time any relieving officer who did not do his duty to their satisfaction?
The EARL of RODENsupported most cordially the Amendment of the noble Lord.
The EARL of LUCANconsidered that the less patronage given to the Commissioners the better.
EARL GREYsaid, that the Amendment of the noble Lord was entirely opposed to the principle of local government, for its tendency was to throw the whole administration of the Poor Law in its details, not upon the boards of guardians, but upon the Commissioners, and through them upon the Government. If the boards of guardians were allowed to choose their own officers, and if these officers did not discharge their duties, then of course the guardians could not shelter themselves from responsibility by saying that things did not go on well because the Commissioners gave them bad officers. The noble Lord's proposal, if it were adopted, would hold out a positive inducement to the boards of guardians and the relieving officers to be constantly at variance with each other. The Commissioners had at present a power of dismissal for misconduct; but that power was only meant to be brought into exercise when the board of guardians failed to do their duty. They had in fact been already told that there had been bad relieving officers, bad masters of workhouses, and bad rate collectors; but that the fault of this was with the Commissioners, who had attempted to coerce the guardians in the performance of their duties. Now he would ask, if there was any statesman who had not remarked that one of the most crying evils

457
of Ireland during the last fifty years had been the disposition of the people to throw everything upon the Government—a disposition not to help themselves, but to have everything done for them by the Government authorities? What then was it most necessary to teach the Irish? Every statesman who had studied the condition of that people would admit that it was to teach the Irish people to manage their own affairs for themselves? Why was it that parochial affairs were managed well in this country? Simply because in England the whole detail of local matters was managed by the parties locally interested and concerned; and the Executive Government interfered very slightly and rarely. On the other hand, there had been in Ireland, unfortunately, a want of local organization—a want of the means by which the people could manage their own affairs. He had no doubt that the boards of guardians might in some cases appoint worse relieving officers than might be appointed for them by a board of commissioners; but even if this were the case, he considered it was most desirable that the power—and with the power the responsibility—of choosing their own officers should be thrown upon the boards of guardians in Ireland. He believed that no small proportion of the abuses complained of in that country arose from the circumstance that the parties had been spending money advanced to them by the Treasury, which he feared they had very little intention of ever repaying. He had no doubt that when they came to spend money raised by rate upon themselves, much more care and strictness would be displayed in its administration. He considered that their Lordships would make a most injudicious change in the provisions of this Bill, if they threw the appointment of relieving officers upon the Commissioners in Dublin, instead of upon the boards of guardians.
The EARL of CLANCARTYthought the noble Earl who had just spoken had made a most unjustifiable attack upon the boards of guardians in Ireland, in imputing to them the honesty of borrowing public money without any intention of repaying it. He agreed with the noble Earl that it was of the utmost importance to establish a system of local self-government in that country; but he thought the Government ought to give their Lordships some information as to the number of relieving officers it was intended to appoint, and the salaries it was proposed to give them.
The EARL of ELLENBOROUGHsaid, no one was more desirous than he was to see the internal government of Ireland conducted by local administration. But he felt satisfied that if their Lordships were to proceed on the supposition that they could import bodily into Ireland all the de-tails and principles of the Poor Law of England—on the supposition that the same law, working on a dissimilar state of society, would produce similar effects in Ireland as in England, then they would create for themselves innumerable inconveniences and dangers; and they would postpone for an indefinite period the realization of their hopes of seeing an effective Poor Law established in Ireland. He deeply regretted the necessity of this Amendment of the noble Lord; but he felt that it was necessary; for he was confident that it was impossible to apply the details of the English Poor Law to Ireland in the present condition of that country. He had read with the deepest pain, regret, and dismay, the accounts of the state of Ireland contained in the books now on their Lordships' Table. He saw more to apprehend from those books than even from the present state of destitution; and the impressions they made, upon him were such as almost to deprive him of all hope for the future regeneration of the country. He saw a spirit of intimidation pervading all classes, from the highest to the lowest; with a few, though certainly with some brilliant, exceptions. Therefore, in appointing a relieving officer, they must have a man who was devoid of all local influence; and a man, besides, who was not afraid to be shot at every day. In fact, the administration of relief was now confided to the officers of the Army and Navy, because in them only were to be found those qualities of firmness and courage which were so necessary for carrying the law into effect. If their Lordships were determined to leave the appointment in the hands of these guardians, who, generally speaking, would be constituted in an inferior manner to the relief committees, of which so many complaints were now made—if they asked them to administer this law, depending only upon the tardy justice and retribution of the Pool-Law Commissioners, then they might depend upon it the law would fail, and the country would become disgusted with its failure; attributing that to the law which was attributable not to the law, but to the instruments by which it was to be carried into effect. He knew nothing so ruinous

459
or so contemptible in legislation as to have an object which they were earnestly desirous to obtain, and yet to shrink from the means, where those means would be morally justified, which alone would ensure its attainment. If their object was to relieve the poor, let them look all the difficulties fairly in the face, and take all the means that might he necessary to secure their object. It might be that this Amendment involved a principle opposed to the system of self-government; but they must remember that Ireland was not England, and if they legislated for Ireland on data supplied by this country, they would only increase the dangers and the calamities of that unhappy country.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDEsaid, Government had looked the difficulties and the dangers of this measure fairly in the face, and they had not shrunk from proposing this measure as a means of relieving the poor, though well aware that it was to a certain extent a perilous measure. They had adopted it upon this principle—that if it were determined to relieve Ireland by means of the resources of Ireland, it must be done by the co-operation of the upper classes of Ireland; and it must be obvious to the noble Earl that Her Majesty's Government were determined to carry out this Bill in the spirit in which it had been proposed, namely, that of effectually relieving the necessities of the people of that country. The noble Earl who had just sat down had drawn a formidable picture of the duties and dangers of a relieving officer, and if these ideas prevailed generally, he did not wonder that noble Lords were alarmed at the probable expense of the rates; but his idea was, that the duties of the relieving officer would be light, particularly when he remembered that even at the present period of existing distress the workhouses were not filled. It might be satisfactory to noble Lords to know, that even by the provisions of the Bill as it now stood, no appointment of a relieving officer could be finally made without having received the approbation of the Commissioners; but the Amendment now proposed would take away the responsibility from those who now had the appointment, namely, the guardians, and would, in fact, render the Bill a perfect nullity.
The MARQUESS of WESTMEATH The MARQUESS of WESTMEATH, in a few words, supported the Amendment.
LORD MONTEAGLEsaid, the powers entrusted to the Commissioners should only by exercised in extreme cases. He pre-
460
ferred the Amendment to the Clause as it now stood, for the Commissioners had the power of making out-door relief compulsory. But his noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies seemed to think that the power of the Commissioners would be but rarely exercised, and that, in fact, there would be no occasion for it, because they had been comparatively so under the Poor Law which the Legislature first established in Ireland; but he would call the attention of the House to the stupendous fact, that in the South Dublin union, where the number of paupers receiving relief under the first Poor Law did not exceed, on an average, 2,000, yet, under the temporary system of out-door relief lately established, the number of applicants had increased to 40,000. Under these circumstances, it would be necessary to have a man of firmness for a relieving officer, and he preferred the Amendment to the Clause as it stood.
The EARL of HARDWICKEsupported the Amendment. He thought the powers vested in the boards of guardians by the clause of a nature rather calculated to injure than to serve the constitution of these boards. The relieving officers should be men not liable to be influenced by popular excitement. The Catholic priesthood had great influence over the guardians; and the relieving officers would, if their nomination was left with the boards of guardians, be, in many instances, the nominees of the Roman Catholic priests. Again, if the relieving officers were men selected in the neighbourhood in which they were to act, the ill-disposed there would seek, by threatening notices and other species of intimidation, to frighten them into their views; and, upon the whole, thinking this power would detract from the utility of the boards of guardians, he would vote against the clause in its present shape.
The EARL of WICKLOWsaid, that if the Amendment were adopted, and the appointment placed in the hands of the Commissioners, they would probably, in making the appointment in any union, apply to the chairman of the board of guardians, or to the gentlemen constituting the board. In this case, the appointment would really be with the board, though indirectly; and he thought it better to give the board the appointment directly, and thereby fix them with the responsibility of making a proper choice. He, therefore, trusted that the suggestion of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Lansdowne) would be adopted, and that the Committee would not divide.
The EARL of ROSSEsupported the Amendment, because he believed that it would be better to take the patronage as far as possible from the boards of guardians. The elections gave rise to a great deal of party feeling among the boards of guardians, and had militated much against the working of the Poor Law. The difficulty had been started, that if the boards of guardians did not appoint, the Commissioners would be ill fitted to do so from their want of local knowledge. The assistant poor-law commissioners, however, would have that responsibility resting upon them, and were well qualified to make the appointments.
The EARL of CLANCARTYwished for some more full and precise information on the subject of the payment of the relieving officers, and various other particulars connected with the appointments. Was their remuneration to be by salary, or otherwise? and would the Commissioners have the power of vetoing the appointments of the boards of guardians?
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEsaid, it was quite impossible to state all those particulars beforehand; but there was no doubt that the guardians and Commissioners must take care of the public interest in that respect. With regard to the clause, if it were carried, it was his intention to propose the insertion of the words "with the approbation of the Commissioners," which would give a security that no person would be so appointed of whom the Commissioners did not approve.
Committee divided:—For the Clause 59; for the Amendment 53: Majority 6.
House resumed.
House adjourned.