Sitting of 5 March 1849

MINUTES
PUBLIC BILLS.—1° Clergy Relief. 2° Spirits (Ireland).
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Mr. Brotherton, from the City of London Trade Protection Society, in favour of the Insolvent Members Bill—By Mr. Alexander Hope, from the Parish of Horsmonden, in the County of Kent, against the Parliamentary Oaths Bill.—From the Parish of St. Pancras, Middlesex, for the Adoption of Universal Suffrage—By Mr. Bouverie, from a Public Meeting held at Spa Fields Chapel, in the Parish of Clerkenwell, for an Alteration of the Law respecting the Church of England Clergy—By Mr. Alderman Humphery, from the Congregation of Baptists, of the Parish of Gamston, Notting ham, for the Discouragement of Idolatry in India—By Mr. Alexander Hope, from the Parish of Kemerton, Gloucester, against the Marriage Bill.—By Viscount Ebrington, from Members of the Plymouth Law Society, for a Repeal of the Duty on Attorneys' Certificates.—By Mr. Brotherton, from the Guardians of the Bury Union, Lancashire, respecting the Lancashire County Expenditure—By Mr. Meagher, from the Borough of Waterford, for the Abolition of Ministers' Money (Ireland).—By Mr. Wilcox, from the Reform Association of Southamp ton, for a Reduction of the Public Expenditure.—From the Taff Vale Railway Company, respecting the Tax on Railways.—By Mr. Baines, from the Guardians of the Wellington Union, in the Counties of Somerset and Devon, for Rating Owners, in lieu of Occupiers, of Tenements.—By Viscount Bernard, from the Parish of Kneckarilly, for Encouragement to Schools in Connexion with the Church Education Society (Ireland).—By Mr. Reynolds, from Inhabitants of the King's County, for an Alteration of the Law of Landlord and Tenant (Ire land)—By Mr. Gibson Craig, from the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, respecting Assistant Surgeons in the Navy,—By Colonel Lloyd Watkins, from the Board of Guardians of the Brecknock Union, for the Suppression of Mendicancy.—By Mr. William Fagan, from Merchants, and Others, interested in the Shipping in Cork Harbour, against the Proposed Measure, respecting the Merchant Seamen's Fund.—By Mr. Reynolds, from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of Dublin, for Extending to Ireland the Municipal Corporations Act—By Mr. Bouverie, from Shipbuilders and Others, of the Royal Burgh of Dumbarton, and by other Hon. Members, from a great number of Places, against the Navigation Bill.—By Mr. Ellis, from the Leicester Chamber of Commerce, for a Repeal of the Navigation Laws.—By Sir G. Strickland, from the Heard of Guardians of the Preston Union, for an Alteration of the Poor Law.—By Mr. Richard Fox, from the High Sheriff and Grand Jury of Longford, and by other Hon. Members from several Places, against the Proposed Rate in Aid (Ireland)—By Mr. St. George, from the Guardians of the Ballinasloe Union, for an Alteration of the Poor Law (Ireland).—By Mr. Blewitt, from the Borough of Monmouth, for the Suppression of Promiscuous Inter course—By Mr. W. Fanan, from Inhabitants of the City of Cork, and its Vicinity, for a Better Regulation of the Salmon Fisheries (Ireland).—By Mr. Reynolds, from the Depositors of the St. Peter's Parish Savings Bank, respecting the Savings Banks (Ireland).—By Mr. Grenville Berkeley, from the Inhabitants of Kingswood, near Bristol, and by other Hon. Members, from several Places, for Referring War Disputes to Arbitration.

HARBOUR AND LIGHT DUES.
MR. WAWN, in putting a question to the right hon. the President of the Board of Trade, observed, that since the admission of foreign vessels under reciprocity treaties into British ports on payment of the same dues as British vessels, the additional or double dues formerly charged bad been paid out of the Consolidated Fund. He wished to know whether in any contemplated change of the navigation laws those dues which had been guaranteed by

167
charter and Act of Parliament were to be abolished?
MR. LABOUCHEREreplied, that there was no intention on the part of the Government to confiscate those rights which were enjoyed, under Act of Parliament or charter, by certain corporations in respect to the dues which, previous to the reciprocity treaties, were paid by foreign vessels, and which were now paid out of the Consolidated Fund.

THE NAVIGATION LAWS AND THE UNITED STATES.
MR. ALDERMAS THOMPSONrose to put a question, of which he had given notice, He found in the correspondence with foreign States, which had been laid on the table, in reference to the proposed relaxation in our navigation laws, a letter from Mr. Crampton to Mr. Buchanan, the United States Minister, dated January 16 last, in which was the following paragraph:—
"Although the proposed Bill did not attempt to make the relaxations in the British law strictly dependent upon the legislation of other countries, yet the general policy of each State will be a matter of consideration when such relaxations are in question; and I am instructed to ascertain at the earliest possible period, whether the United States will be prepared to accept advances made on the part of Great Britain for placing the ships of the two countries on a footing of equality, with the single reservation of the coasting trade; or whether the United States Government would prefer to reserve any particular privileges or exemptions to their national vessels, on the understanding that they may there by render it impossible for this country to concede to the United States shipping the whole of the advantages which will, under the contemplated measure, attach to the shipping of such States as may place British and national vessels upon a footing of more perfect equality."
He now wished to know whether any answer to that letter had been received from the United States Minister; and, if so, in what spirit the offer had been met?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: No official communication has as yet been received in reply; at the same time, Her Majesty's Government have no reason to doubt that such official communication, when it does come, will be couched in the same friendly spirit, and marked by the same conciliatory disposition, as is expressed in Mr. Bancroft's communication.

THE WAR IN THE PUNJAUB.
MR. HUMEsaid: Seeing the noble Lord at the head of the Government in his place, I wish to ask him a question, but I
168
feel considerable difficulty in shaping it in such a way as to obtain sufficient information; but, Sir, after the statements which we have seen in the Gazette of Saturday last, and in the Gazette prior to that, relative to the affairs of India, the state of that country can no longer he a matter of indifference to every man who looks to the future. I should be sorry needlessly to prejudge any man, and particularly one who is not present to answer any statements that might be made; but certain facts which are developed in the despatches which were received throe or four weeks ago, without any relation to the late melancholy transactions that have taken place, authorise me in inquiring whether Her Majesty's Ministers have taken any measures to place the army in India under such command as shall obtain the confidence of the men, and secure all those advantages of art and science which we, as a civilised nation, possess for the purposes of warfare? It appears from the despatches, that in recent events those advantages were not used; and I do hope, therefore, that Her Majesty's Government will state what measures they have taken to ensure better success for the future.
LORD J. RUSSELLsaid: There can be no doubt that the state of our military operations in India must be a matter, not certainly of indifference, but of the deepest interest, to every Member of this House. I can, however, only state at present, that Her Majesty's Government, after considering the intelligence which has been received, have humbly offered to Her Majesty that advice which they think best calculated to meet the emergency which at present exists in that part of Her dominions. But I have not as yet received Her Majesty's reply to the advice which I have humbly tendered to Her Majesty; but as soon as that answer is received, and can be with propriety communicated to this House, I will lose no time in laying it before it.

NAPLES AND SICILY.
MR. URQUHARTinquired when the papers relative to the presence of Admiral Parker in the Bay of Naples would be ready?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, he had been asked on a previous occasion whether he had any objection to produce the correspondence which led to the appearance of Admiral Parker's fleet in the Bay of Naples last July? He should like to know with what view the hon. Member asked

169
the question. Would he state if there was any fair point he wanted to establish? If he merely wanted to establish the fact, ay or no, of the arrival of Admiral Parker's fleet in the bay, he (Viscount Palmerston) would have no objection to give short extracts of a despatch from Admiral Parker, showing that fact; but if he wished for the whole of the correspondence between Lord Napier and Admiral Parker in detail, it was, he feared, so much mixed up with the general correspondence on Sicilian affairs, that he must ask the House to allow the papers to be printed and presented all together; and no great time could elapse before he would present them.
MR. URQUHARTexplained that the object he had in view was to get at the real facts of the case, not only with respect to the mode of communication between Admiral Parker and the Neapolitan Government, but as to the cause of the presence of the British fleet in the Bay of Naples in last July.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONreplied, that he would lay on the table of the House extracts such as he had stated, showing the grounds on which Admiral Parker arrived in the Bay of Naples; and he thought that probably he should be able to produce an extract of another despatch, in which Admiral Parker stated that the negotiations had been satisfactorily concluded. [Mr. URQUHART: How soon?] In a very few days.
Subject at an end.

ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.
MR. HORSMANsaid, the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department had stated a few nights since that a measure was prepared with reference to the abuses of the Ecclesistical Courts. He wished to know whether it was in such a state as to enable the right hon. Gentleman to give a synopsis of its provisions to the House?
SIR G. GREYreplied, that his answer on a former night had not been correctly stated by the hon. Gentleman who had asked the question. His answer bad been, that a measure on the subject was in contemplation, but that it had not, as yet, been prepared; and, therefore, it would be premature on the present occasion to enter either into its principles or details. The Bill, however, was in an advanced state of preparation.
MR. HUMEsaid, that perhaps the right hon. Baronet would have no objection to
170
answer this question, Whether the Bill would have the effect of abolishing the Ecclesiastical Courts altogether? That was the point.
SIR G. GREYsaid, he should be setting a bad example were he to enter into any details.

OFFENCES (IRELAND) BILL—MR. BERWICK.
MR. J. O'CONNELLwished to mention that he had that morning received a letter from Mr. Berwick, with reference to the Offences (Ireland) Bill, which the hon. Baronet the Member for the city of Water-ford (Sir H. W. Barron) had introduced on Wednesday last. Mr. Berwick stated that he had communicated with the hon. Baronet, and requested him to correct a statement he had made on the day in question. He also stated that he had communicated with the hon. and learned Member for the University of Dublin (Mr. Napier), who possessed an intimate knowledge of the facts of the case. Mr. Berwick wished it to be distinctly understood by the House that he had not acted in the manner alleged in the course of the debate; and he not only thanked him (Mr. J. O'Connell) for what he had stated on Wednesday, but he bore him out in every particular.

POOR-LAWS (IRELAND)—RATE IN AID—ADJOURNED DEBATE.
The House went into Committee.
MR. B. OSBORNEbegan by saying, that whatever difference of opinion there might be as to the resolutions brought forward by the noble Lord at the head of the Government, he believed it would not be disputed that the case had been fairly put to the House by that noble Lord—or that, divested of all artifice and rhetorical verbiage, the simple fact was, that the poor-law had entirely broken down in the western districts in Ireland; and that the noble Lord now came down to the House to ask them to levy a contribution on the north and south of Ireland to support the poverty of the west. Now, if he could believe that the noble Lord and his hon. Colleagues entertained any clear conception, or possessed any general knowledge, of the great difficulties with which they were surrounded—if he thought that they had any grasp over the details of this measure, he should now refrain from making any observations upon what be thought must, at best, be considered a very objectionable measure.

171
He did not, however, believe them to be capable of grasping the tremendous difficulties with which they were surrounded; and as it appeared that there was no chance of the Government laying down any permanent foundation on which to establish a better state of society its the western districts of Ireland, and as they appeared to be administering a palliative, rather than attempting a cure, he thought it became the duty of the House to pause before it entered upon a course of policy which, whilst it would waste the energies of the southern and northern unions, would not confer any benefit on those of the west. Now, in the outset, he must protest against this system of levying rates for the mere purpose of giving eleemosynary aid to the unions of the west, or of any other part of Ireland. By shrinking from the difficulties which surrounded them, and by continuing this system of occasional doles to the people of Ireland, they would only bring on new and augmented difficulties. Before entering more minutely into these resolutions, he wished to say, however, that he could not sympathise with the opposition which had been offered to this measure by those hon. Members who were more immediately connected with the north of Ireland. It seemed to be altogether forgotten by those hon. Gentlemen, that there were provinces and counties in the south of Ireland whose loyalty, religion, and virtue were quite on a par with those of the north. In those counties might be found gentlemen who would not throw up their commissions, and tenants who would not take down their muskets. Such persons, he believed, might be found in the south of Ireland, whoso only request to the House was, that they would take an impartial view of their case, and pause before they overburdened them with fresh liabilities and taxation. When the noble Lord said, the other night, that there was no alternative but this measure, he (Mr. B. Osborne), in his private capacity, could not resist the force of such an appeal. The noble Lord said there was no alternative between a grant of money and the lives of the people of Ireland. Now, that was an announcement calculated to place a mere private Member of that House in a very painful position. The House, however, had other duties to perform, and would meet the case put by the noble Lord, who had no right to come down and ask "What else can be done?" It was for the House to say what the Government night have
172
done by providing proper precautions against this calamity. For how stood the case? The Government had been aware of the approaching crisis, and the wants of these Irish unions; but they had delayed calling Parliament together on the subject, contenting themselves with rushing to that refuge for the destitute, the Consolidated Fund, and asking for a vote of 50,000 l. He blamed the noble Lord for this delay. Other measures might have been taken; and the humanity or charity of that House ought not to be impugned, because they objected to the course proposed by the noble Lord. On the occasion of the last vote for 50,000 l., the right hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon, whom report had stated to have been in treaty with the Government with respect to a seat in the Cabinet—that right hon. Gentleman, with that judgment for which be was so remarkable, declared that in voting for the grant, he did so on the understanding that it should be the last. The right hon. Gentleman had also said, that he should like to hear from the Government some account of those comprehensive and remedial measures of which the country had heard so much during the last ten years, and when they would cease to run after the ignis fatuus they were now pursuing. But what had been the consequence of that vote? Why that the noble Lord suddenly came down to the House, and, without any intimation to the Irish Members, proposed this plan of counter-irritation, which was so comprehensive, that it created universal discontent in the north, and so remedial, that the hon. Baronet the Member for Radnorshire had declared that it would not keep the people alive for more than a few weeks longer. But he should like to know what other measures the noble Lord had in view for the permanent relief of these western districts. It was not sufficient that the people should be merely kept alive. What were those measures? The House, he thought, was entitled to a distinct and definite answer to this question. The present state of things must continue so long as the people in the west of Ireland remained in the state in which they now were—so long as you had only one set of men able to administer, or supposed to be able to administer the Executive in this country—so long as the opinion prevailed, that the Gentlemen of the Carlton Club could not succeed to those of Brookes's, so long-would the world see the Chancellor of the

173
Exchequer lamenting such a state of things, and crying date obolum Belisario—so long would noble Lords ask for Committees of Inquiry, and propose resolutions for rates in aid. He, for one, protested against the continuance of such a state of things. It was all very well for hon. Gentlemen to say that this money would be repaid; but no one who knew Ireland could say that there was any security on which to rest for the repayment. To make an honest confession, he would state that he did not expect the money would be repaid; and he thought hon. Members would do well to pause before they voted money to Ireland under such an impression. With respect to these resolutions, he thought it would be difficult to find a precedent for their introduction. Now, what was the case with respect to Ireland? The poor-law unions, people of all classes, of all creeds, of all politics, complained that the taxes engendered by this system of poor-laws were so intolerable and oppressive, that they had the fatal effect of throwing the greater part of the land out of cultivation. Petitions against that law had last year been presented from all parts of Ireland; and the hon. Member for Portarlington asked for a Committee of Inquiry into the working of the law. The Government refused the Committee; but now, after the malady had eaten into the vitals of the land, the Government were proposing the very same thing. But capital had gone, and the inquiry which the Government now volunteered was a mere inquest on the caput mortuum of Irish energy and capital. Now, what had been the course pursued by that Committee? The Committee met to institute an inquiry into the Irish Poor Law. The people were watching the result of their labours, when down came the noble Lord, and, without any previous intimation, proposed his string of resolutions, not to lighten the poor-rates, but to lay an additional load of taxation upon those unfortunate people, who already complained that they were broken down by the law. There was only one precedent for this proceeding, and that was to be found in the pages of Gil Blas. The noble Lord's treatment of Ireland might be compared to that of Dr. Sangrado. Ireland complained of an atrophy of pauperism, and the noble Lord, like the doctor, recommended depiction. The people, like the patient, wasted, and the noble Lord recommended more hot water and depletion. One word as to this rate in aid,
174
and its sufficiency to meet the object. Now, he found that the liabilities of the twenty-one unions were within a few pounds of 600,000 l., and that the money expected to be levied under this rate was not expected to be more than 252,000 l. Granting that this rate in aid would maintain the people for a few weeks, the noble Lord had said nothing as to the hundreds of other unions which would be thrown upon this resource. He, therefore, asked the Government, what other measures they had in contemplation for other unions as they should fall in? The hon. Member for Stroud, who had paid great attention to this subject, had made a curious calculation, showing that out of a population of 8,000,000, 6,000,000 subsisted on the potato. Of these, the same hon. Gentleman calculated that 2,500,000 were destitute and in want of employment. Now, taking the calculation of 1844, that the cost of maintenance was Is. 9d. per head, it would take 11,375,000 l. per annum to support this pauperism, the net rental not being more than 5,000,000 l. Could the noble Lord, therefore; when he came down to that House with his sixpenny rate in aid, have duly considered this question? Would this great sixpenny measure emancipate the people from their misery? Lord Hale, in speaking of the 43rd of Elizabeth, said "that the plaster was not so large as the sore." Now, in his opinion, the noble Lord's plaster was not so large as the sore. What did the noble Lord propose? Granting that the estates of the landlords were to be carved out for the support of the pauperism in the west, it could not be supposed that this source would last for ever. Those estates were not inexhaustible, but would soon be consumed. When this rate had been doled out to the people, when the landlords were unable to contribute any longer, did the noble Lord propose to fall hack again upon the people of this country? The rateable property in Ireland, supposing the potato to be grown, was 13,000,000 l.; the not rental of Ireland, under the same circumstances, was 6,000,000 l. But that rental could not be assumed now; he believed it was at present considerably under 5,000,000 l. These facts should be considered by the House, when they were going to vote a rate in aid. The noble Lord had said that Ireland should pay this rate because she was exempt from income tax. Now, he (Mr. Osborne) thought that question was quite distinct from the principle of these resolutions. The first canon of Adam Smith was, that a people should

175
contribute to the revenue in proportion to their means. But even before the famine, the Irish people were unable to pay any proportion at all. The great question of inequality of taxation would be a very fair one for a Committee; but if the principle of hanging first and trying after were adopted, a Committee would not be of much use. It was no argument to say, that because Ireland did not pay income tax, that such a rate as this should be imposed on her. He was surprised the other night at the doctrine broached by some Irish capitalists in that House, of great wealth and extraordinary philosophy—Gentlemen who were bursting with philanthropy, and who said, "Give us this rate in aid! Tax the landlords; they are accustomed to it; they deserve no pity; but don't touch any other class." Those Gentlemen—the hon. Member for Cork included—did not reflect upon what those landlords had gone through, or how they had suffered. They did not reflect that those landlords were suffering for the faults of others. To those Gentlemen he would say, Nemo tam paruis quin prodigus exalieno. At present these landlords were not receiving one quarter of their rents; and yet one hon. Baronet, late a Member of that House, had paid as much as 5,000 l. last year 'in the shape of rates; and other Gentlemen were paying even larger sums. But hon. Gentlemen said, the landlords were used to it. The poor-law must be remodelled, and the entire property of Ireland made available. In the reign of Elizabeth, it might be very well to tax the land alone, because there were no other sources of income; but now capital—protected capital of every description—should be made to pay its quota towards these burdens. With respect to the present proposition, he thought the House should exact some guarantee that the money should not be spent simply in eleemosynary aid, but should be devoted in furtherance of home colonisation, accompanied by emigration. Let not the money be thrown, as it were, into a bottomless pit; let not the people be kept in idleness, and the country left un-tilled. Members for English constituencies ought, therefore, to pause before they imposed a rate upon the land alone in Ireland, or they would assuredly, at no very distant period, find, as the Commissioners had well expressed it, that the whole of Ireland would eventually be compelled to lean upon England for support. The right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer said,
176
the other night, that he did not believe that Ireland was over-populated. This was very true, taking its extent of square miles as compared with other countries; but it could not be doubted that, in many spots best adapted for the growth of the potato, too many people congregated together, and whenever the potato failed, they were deprived of all means of support. The evidence of one of the witnesses, in the Commissioners' report, bore out this view of the case. When asked what was the cause of the extreme poverty of a district of this hind, he replied, "From the incompetency of the land to afford so many persons the means of subsistence." [An Hon. MEMBER: A very foolish answer!] If the hon. Gentleman knew the sort of soil—half sand and half bog—in which the potato flourished, he would not think that a "foolish answer." From his own experience of these districts, he was confident they might go on for ever taking money from the north and south, to support the people in the west; but whilst such masses of population continued crowded in particular districts, they could never be supported by the produce of the land. What, then, was the duty of the Government? Why, if it was to levy additional taxation, home colonisation should be adopted, or the people should be assisted to emigrate to other parts. Mill, the great master of the political economists, recommended this very plan, in contemplating this state of things. He stated that the whole produce of the western unions, leaving nothing for rent, would not keep permanently in existence the whole of the population, and they would necessarily remain an annual charge upon the taxation of the empire, until they were reduced by emigration or by starvation to a state corresponding with the low state of industry among them, or until some means were found for rendering their industry more productive. Now, if the noble Ford's Government was worthy of the name, it was bound to come forward with some definite plan by which the people should not be supported by eleemosynary relief, but by which they might be placed in a situation where they would be a credit to themselves, and all these enormous sums of money should not be wasted upon them. It seemed a very fashionable doctrine to say that because they had given Ireland a poor-law, therefore, they had done their duty; but that law, so far from adding to, tended to diminish the resources of the country. He himself farmed in a small

177
way, in several electoral divisions; and last year he was obliged to pay 1,000 l. of poorrate; and the consequence was, he was compelled to discharge his labourers. The money was taken from the labourers; and yet the House and the country were told that a poor-law had been granted to Ireland, and that its property must support its pauperism. He maintained that that was a most dangerous doctrine; and they might talk as they liked about Louis Blanc-ism, or Poulett Scrope-ism; but what was this but manifestly a system of "legalised communism?" He knew he should be told, "These objections are all very well; but what have you to propose?" The Government went a begging for suggestions, and therefore he would volunteer to offer a few. The hon. Baronet the Member for Radnorshire had relied mainly, as a remedy, upon the reduction of the area of taxation, and doubtless that must he reduced, if they were to go on with the present system; but nobody would venture to affirm that reducing the area of taxation would materially benefit the population, or promote the well-being of the landlord. They must have other measures; and what were they? The noble Lord was bound, long ago, to have introduced a Bill to enforce the sale of lands that had not paid their proportion of the poor-rate. It was one of the grossest of fallacies to suppose that the poor-law would promote the sale of lands in Ireland. The fee of the land was not liable for the rate, but the produce was; and the noble Lord ought to have shown some of that boldness in legislating upon this question that characterised him as a speaker. But he would now offer another suggestion. The papers before the House showed that in all these unions, one of the reasons given for the non-collection of the rates was, that a great deal of the property was under the courts. Now there was upwards of one million of rental under the courts; and all that had been spent in improvements upon these properties that were under the receivers was not more than 2,000 l.—5s. per cent per annum. Again, upon a portion of rental, amounting to 100,000 l., not a single sixpence had ever been laid out upon improvements: and yet they were told that the rates upon these estates could not be collected. Let them thoroughly remodel the whole system with regard to property under receivers in Chancery, and then they might collect the rates without difficulty. The hon. Member for the city of Limerick had recommended a
178
discriminating rate between pasture and arable land; but the House would surely never think of going back to such an antediluvian scheme as that. Ireland had been truly called a country possessing aristocratic social institutions, and yet without any aristocracy. At page 29 of the report was a most forcible instance of this. It detailed the case of one of the largest landed proprietors of the union, who had been so reduced, that all he had to support himself and his family from was the milk of two cows. The cows were seized for debt, but were redeemed by a friend, out of compassion for the man's children, who were suffering from hunger. Still, however, the produce of the soil being all that could be obtained to satisfy the arrears of rates, the cows were afterwards taken by the collectors. What, then, was to be drawn from that fact? The country was so reduced that they could no longer maintain their laws of real property there. They must adopt the recommendation of the able work of Mr. Pym, and free the land from all restrictions, and make it an article of sale. The modes of transfer and titles must be simplified, and the consequence would be, that the land would fall into the hands of capitalists able to cultivate and improve, not for their own benefit only, but for the good of the country at large. Perhaps the noble Lord would think this too bold a measure, and would prefer the system of asking for these occasional doles; but he would tell him that it was only bold measures that were adequate to deal with the difficulties of so extreme an occasion. The noble Lord, the other night, had indulged in some brilliant anticipations about the future state of Ireland. He told them, at no distant period, he believed, she would become happy and prosperous. And what did he base his dream upon? Why, he had told the House that when the starving population should crawl, like famished rats, from a barren soil, new modes of cultivation would be introduced, and almost spontaneous harvests would be gathered in. [Lord J. RUSSELL: I said nothing like it.] He had drawn a comparison between the case of Ireland and the western districts of Scotland, where the article of kelp having failed, the people left the spot, and held out some consolatory hopes to the people of England that it was very likely many of the Irish people would transplant themselves to this country, and then all was to go "merry as a marriage bell." For his part, he had been driven to the cheerless

179
conviction that so long as the destinies of the empire were swayed by the present combination of parties, so long would Ireland have no other hope left her but in looking to the revival of that root which was the cause of her present destitution; and that England could effect no escape from the baneful results of that union which, at no very distant period, must instil the seeds of the sister country's pauperism and disease into her more healthy and less corrupted frame also. He must vote against this proposition at present, because it was a petty and mischievous expedient; but if the noble Lord would really come forward with some plan equal to the urgency of the occasion, no one would be more ready to give it his warmest support.
SIR R. PEEL: Sir, without one word of preface, I will address myself immediately to the two main questions now submitted to our consideration. The first of these is—in the present state of Ireland shall we leave the people to be supported exclusively by the resources of the union or electoral division in which they live?—the second, if we are of opinion that some extrinsic aid is necessary, from what source shall that aid be derived? Sir, I cannot reconcile myself to give a vote which shall throw the sustenance of the people of Ireland, in the present condition of that country, upon each individual union. I have read these papers. I have seen the exertions that have been made in many of these unions to provide for the support of their own poor; and I think a great injustice has been done in this country to the landed proprietors of Ireland. I find conclusive evidence that in many parts of Ireland, at least, most strenuous local exertions have been made—that there has been a willing submission to the law—and that if the whole amount of the rate has not been paid, it has been owing to the absolute impossibility of paying: and, therefore, to attempt to create a prejudice against the Irish proprietors, on the part of this country, is unfair and unjust. Not that I deny that in many cases there has been great impropriety of conduct, or that individuals have tried to escape from the burdens they ought to have borne; but the indiscriminate censure passed upon the landed proprietary of Ireland, after the strenuous exertions which the papers before this House show them to have made, is undeserved. I am satisfied by this evidence that if you do refuse all extrinsic aid to
180
the distressed unions, the consequence must be the loss of life by famine, and the spread of disease, cramping the energies of those who are endeavouring to support themselves. I cannot believe, whatever we may think of the results of our past policy, that the British House of Commons will consent to adopt that frightful alternative. I am quite willing to admit that the system of indiscriminate relief has the lamentable effect of destroying habits of self-reliance, and of discouraging industry—that the true lesson to teach a man who is able to work, and particularly an Irishman who is able to work, is that it is much better for him to rely upon his own exertions for his support, than to be dependent upon charity for the means of subsistence. But, granted that our policy has been unwise, what answer have we to make to the individual sufferers—to those whom we have taught to rely upon others, and not upon their own exertions? If our policy has been wrong, we are responsible for the error. Those who are now suffering from actual famine, are not the parties upon whom we can with any justice inflict the penalty. At the same time, Sir, when we speak of the impolicy of our past contributions for the maintenance of the Irish people, we must not forget that we have been placed in a position for the last three or four years that has no parallel in history. The subsistence upon which millions of the population rely has for three or four successive years, contrary to our hopes—perhaps unjustifiable and irrational hopes—been swept away; and you have had many millions of persons thrown upon your hands, not from idleness or unwillingness to work, but in consequence of the failure of that species of food upon which they exclusively depended; and, therefore, Sir, we may have been compelled hastily to adopt courses which, had there been opportunity for foresight, and for provident precautions, we should not have pursued. But the people have been taught to rely for their subsistence upon our benevolence and charity; and I, for one, cannot consent, from whatever source the aid may be derived—whatever may be the consequence of teaching the people continued reliance upon that aid instead of upon their own resources and industry—I, for one, cannot consent to adopt the dreadful alternative of leaving them exposed to death from starvation or disease. I therefore gave my vote for the 50,000 l.

181
grant; and I do not hesitate to say—whatever other measures I might advise for averting future evils and preventing future demands upon the national resources—that I would rather give another similar vote, than leave these persons to fall victims to disease and death. The second question is—from what source shall the aid required he given? The other parts of the empire have a right to call upon Ireland to make some strenuous effort to rescue herself from the present evils. I do not rest the demand upon Ireland for this strenuous effort upon the ground that taxation in Ireland is unequal, as compared with that of this country. If you rely upon the argument that Ireland, as compared with England, is unequally taxed, the conclusion that logically you must arrive at is—apply equal taxation to both. If Ireland ought to hear the assessed taxes, and the duties upon bricks and soap, or that she should be subject to the property tax, I, for one, will not consent to let Ireland escape from her obligations to contribute equally with England, by simply demanding from her a sixpenny rate in aid. If she is able to bear it, I should certainly claim from her the full amount to which she is justly liable. Why, in the case of equal ability, should we subject real property to a particular impost, but exempt personal property from that quota which, ex concesso, I am assuming it ought to bear? It is upon other grounds that Ireland ought to make a great effort to meet the tremendous evil connected with the present state of distress, and with the administration of the poor-law. In this country we adopt the principle, when a parish is manifestly unable to support the poor within it, of subjecting the vicinage to contribution for the purpose of relieving that distressed parish. We do not say to Ireland, "Here is a district in Cornwall or in Devonshire unable to support its own poor, and therefore we call upon you to contribute your share from the public revenue to meet this case of distress." No; we take the next parish, and require it to supply the deficiencies of its neighbour; and if the next neighbour cannot give any help, we extend the circle of compulsory contribution till relief be procured. Now, at first sight there is no great justice in this. Why should we, on the mere ground of vicinage, subject a district that maintains its own poor to the additional burden of supporting its neighbour, with whom it has no concern?
182
Now, in Ireland, were we to adopt the same course, there could be no just ground of complaint. It would be the application to Ireland of a principle on which we act ourselves; but the consequence, I am afraid, would be to go on extending the area of distress. A rate in aid extending at once over the whole of Ireland is therefore a more appropriate mode of relief, than a rate in aid commencing with the vicinage, and gradually spreading until relief can be had. There is another ground why we have a fair claim to call upon Ireland for a vigorous exertion. I wish to know on what principle Ireland refused to repay the loan for the construction of union workhouses? We advanced 1,200,000 l. for the erection of workhouses in Ireland. We consented, at the same time, to advance certain sums for the erection of union workhouses in this country. These advances so made to this country, were to be met, I believe, by the payment of 4 per cent by way of interest, and 2 per cent to form a sinking fund for the reduction of the principal. Now I have never heard of any case where an English board of guardians has said, "It is very inconvenient for us to repay the money, and therefore we won't do it." It is said that we cannot levy a rate of this kind in Ireland, excepting at the risk of a rebellion. When they remember the willing aid rendered by this country, both by private contributions and by public votes, I hardly believe any Irishman, certainly no Member of this House, would counsel his countrymen to resistance. But what has become of the repayment of this 1,200,000 l. advanced from the Imperial Exchequer to Ireland? It was a very great relief to the unions to have this advance taken out of the Consolidated Fund. It was advanced by Parliament, under the full conviction that it would be faithfully repaid. Well, I believe that the whole sum that has been repaid is about 36,000 l.; and, if I mistake not, there is a general suspension of payment at present—in fact, an actual repudiation of payment. I know there are some honourable exceptions—Newtownards is one; but, strange to say, many prosperous and solvent unions in the north make use of this argument, "What have you collected from the south? If you have collected nothing from the south, we in the north shall not pay." Now, if Ireland is content to make a vigorous effort—an effort to repay at once this debt that was allowed to be spread over eighteen or twenty years

183
—if she will say, "We acknowledge the debt, and are willing at once to pay it, rather than this rate in aid of 6d. in the pound"—if Ireland, I say, were to make such an offer, I am not quite sure whether this House would not do well to accept it. [Loud laughter.] Why, is not that laugh a decisive argument in my favour? I propose, instead of a new impost, to take the payment of a just debt, and I am met with an incredulous laugh, as if the proposal was manifestly absurd. But if Ireland repudiates the notion of repaying at once a debt that England willingly repays, I shall listen to the other mode—the payment of the sixpenny rate—with much less of unwillingness and hesitation than I might otherwise do. I say again, that if the Irish Members will guarantee the repayment of the 1,200,000 l. in three months, I will vote against the proposition of the Government. If not, I will vote for that proposition in the absence of any other practical suggestion for relieving, by Irish contribution, the urgent necessities of the poor of Ireland. I, however, wish to advert to matter of even greater importance than the present difficulty, arising out of the wretched condition of Ireland. I am anxious that the House should direct its attention to what may be the condition of Ireland for the future. Suppose the House should consent to impose a rate upon the whole of Ireland, in order to obtain the means of relieving distressed districts from their present difficulty, we shall not thereby be discharged from the obligation, in point of duty, of considering the future prospects of that country. I have read with painful attention the papers which have been laid upon the table in connexion with this subject; and, taking the case of a single union, which, after all, is a fair sample of the others, I will state briefly the unquestionable facts presented by these papers, given to us from the highest official sources, and then call upon the House to consider what are the prospects of Ireland after present relief shall be extended to that country. The union to which I propose referring, as an example, is that of Ballina, and I fix upon it because it is that to which the papers most recently presented refer. Mr. Bourke reports, that on the 27th of January, 1849, there were in the Ballina union 3,270 persons occupying the workhouses, and 18,879 receiving outdoor relief. Mr. Hamilton calculates that the number of persons likely to require relief
184
before next harvest will probably amount to 27,000, including in and outdoor relief; of this number 4,300 are ablebodied, and 14,000 dependants on the ablebodied. The lamentable state of this union cannot fairly he imputed to the proprietors. I ask those who think that the landlords have not made exertions to meet the calamity to read these papers. The amount of rate and arrears in the Ballina union is 17,000 l., and 12,000 l. have been collected—collected, as the two officers state, with little trouble, without the necessity for frequent legal proceedings, and without assistance from military or police. The evidence of landed proprietors connected with the union, shows the exertions they have made to meet the crisis, the number of persons for whom they have found employment, the reductions they have made in their domestic establishments, their willingness to do all in their power to mitigate the distress prevailing in the union. Great credit is due to them for their conduct. The officers employed by the Government state that the striking of another rate, under present circumstances, would extinguish the little hope which is still to be found in the union. One of these gentlemen says, "There are thousands of acres which were formerly occupied and cultivated, which have now more the appearance of having been devastated by an enemy than anything else I can compare them to." We are informed, by the same authority, that the "first failure of the potato crop brought to light the miserably rotten social state of this part of Ireland." Every sentence of their reports is pregnant with alarm:—"The poorer classes are saving potatoes for seed, and would as soon part with their lives as consume them." "The landlords are in dread of the undefined prospect of rates, and are doing as little as they possibly can." "It is very doubtful whether the future success of the potato crop would enable the landlords to pay fair wages for fair work." "If the potatoes succeed, the principal effect will be to raise the price of land, to bring about the old state of things notwithstanding the bitter experience of the last three years." How melancholy is the prospect here presented to us! and recollect, it is not attributable to the apathy or misconduct of the landlords, for they have made every effort in their power to alleviate the distress. There are two points deserving of serious consideration arising out of the state of things described in the papers to which I have been

185
referring: first, the danger of relying upon the potato for the future sustenance of the people; secondly, the circumstance that a large quantity of land is going out of cultivation in the Ballina union. Thousands of acres, we are told, appear as if they had been devastated by an enemy. Whilst we are taking means to provide present assistance to the distressed people, is it not incumbent on us to consider what measures can be adopted for meeting future calamity? There are, perhaps, no means by which such an abundant supply of sustenance for the people can be obtained under existing circumstances as by the cultivation of the potato; but nothing could be more unwise than to rely permanently upon that root as a staple article of food, after the experience of the last three years. In addition to the potato, the inhabitants of the Ballina union were formerly well supplied with fish. The total number of men formerly registered as employed in the fisheries was 2,989; of boats, 485; now, the number of men so employed is only 1,368; of boats, 224; and the boats and gear are described as being in very bad condition. Thus we have every reason to apprehend a diminished supply of food through the abandonment of cultivation. We have before us, also, the prospect that, unless vigorous efforts be made to improve both the moral and physical condition of the people, they will continue to rely upon that which experience has shown to be a most deceitful article of food. We have the prospect before us of a recurrence of that calamity which for anything we know may not be casual, but the result of some mysterious agency, permanent in its operation. It appears to me that the state of the Ballina union—and it is but the type of the rest—suggests matter for grave consideration. There are 27,000 persons to be provided for until the next harvest. It is not without hesitation I venture to offer any suggestion for diminishing the danger which I see in perspective—but I will communicate to the House what my impressions are. Almost the only measure from which I derive a hope of safety is the introduction of new proprietors who shall take possession of land in Ireland, freed from its present incumbrances, and enter upon its cultivation with adequate capital, with new feelings, and inspired by new hopes. I wish for no violation of the rights of property. Nothing can be more easy than to suggest remedies—if we choose to disregard those rights of
186
property—which it is the first duty of a British Legislature to uphold. But at the same time much property in Ireland is, in point of fact, of little value to the proprietors, on account of the encumbrances upon it; and it may be possible for the Government, with the sanction of the House, to devise means by which new capital may be introduced into the cultivation of the land in Ireland, and the existing proprietors rescued from the disappointment and despair in which they are involved. Suppose you were to raise a million in Ireland by the rate in aid—that England contributes another million—how do you mean to apply this money to rescue Ireland from her difficulties? Do you mean to let things go on in the present course? Do you mean to rely on the potato? Will you again run the risk of such reliance? Before doing so, is it not your duty to consider every means by which a better state of things may be introduced into Ireland? I revert to a period when a state of things existed in Ireland, with some resemblance to that which now exists there—I allude to the reign of James I., when the settlement of Ulster took place. At that time a large quantity of land was forfeited in six counties of Ireland, not so large a quantity probably as might now be obtained in the west of Ireland by amicable arrangement with the proprietors—an arrangement devoid of injustice, to which no objection would be made. The lands forfeited after the rebellion of Tyrone, in the counties of Donegal, Tyrone, Derry, Fermanagh, Cavan, and Armagh, amounted to 500,000 acres. The transaction is described in nearly the same manner by all contemporary historians, but I know no better account than that which is to be found in Carte's Life of Ormonde. That author says, that—
"These counties had suffered exceedingly in the war, and were reduced to a very desolate condition. The country was full of woods and fastnesses, which, on favourable junctures, would give encouragement to rebels, and at all times serve as a retreat to robbers. Great numbers of the inhabitants had perished by the sword—much greater by famine; the rest were reduced to so extreme a poverty that they were not able, if willing, to manure the ground; so that the lands laid waste in time of war were likely to continue so in time of peace."
This description, excepting that part which refers to woods and forests, affording shelter to robbers, is not inapplicable to the state of Connaught, and many parts of the west of Ireland. Sir Arthur Chichester

187
was the Lord Deputy at the period in question. He caused surveys to be made, and it was decided that the lands to be planted, as the term was, should be divided into allotments of 2,000, 1,500, and 1,000 English acres, respectively. These escheated lands were disposed of to 104 English and Scotch, 56 servitors, and 286 natives, all of whom gave bond to the Government for the performance of certain covenants. The Lord Deputy caused a parochial church to be erected, and a glebe set out, according to the size of the parish, for each incumbent. The plantation was extended to Leinster. In the course of these proceedings, through the misconduct of the agents employed, great injustice occasionally was done to individuals; but, says Carte—
"The grievances of particular persons did not prevent the general good intended to the kingdom by these plantations, in consequence of which lands were cultivated and greatly improved, towns and villages built, trade and commerce carried on and extended. The people in general, weaned gradually from their former idle and disorderly life, began to learn and practise civility, to apply themselves to business, to use labour and industry in their several stations, and to relish the sweets of peace."
If it be possible to make any new settlement similar to that of Ulster, my earnest advice—an advice in unison with the universal feelings of the House—would he, that no religious distinctions should be allowed to enter into the arrangement. It may, perhaps, be impossible to apply the principle of the arrangement to the extent to which it was carried in James I.'s time; but unless it be applied to some degree, there is little hope of the future improvement of Ireland. If, after raising a rate in aid, you leave matters exactly as you found them—if you rely exclusively on grants of public money, there is no hope of permanent escape from the calamity which afflicts us; but if, without violating the rights of property, you can place the land in possession of new proprietors, without distinction of religious profession, you will lay the foundation of the future prosperity of Ireland. An Act was passed last Session to give facilities to the sale of encumbered property in Ireland; but I fear that, in consequence of the alterations introduced into the measure in its later stages, its object—that of introducing new proprietors into Ireland—will be, in a great degree, defeated. I offer any suggestion with the utmost hesitation. I make every allowance for the
188
situation in which the Government is placed, by the failure for the last four or five year's of the crop upon which the people relied; but I feel this most strongly, that if we are content to vote money, or give a rate in aid extending over the whole of Ireland, and then to trust to the potato, and to the present distribution of property—of property so encumbered, in so hopeless a condition, that thousands of acres are thrown out of cultivation—then at the expiration of the two years for which this rate is to be granted, the state of Ireland will be no better than it is now. I much fear that, if you rely merely on individual sales and purchases, you will make no great advance. Perhaps it might be prudent to appoint a Commission for the purpose of considering the whole subject, and the possibility of encouraging, by their advice and intervention, that change in property which I believe to be indispensable to any great improvement of the country. If you choose to leave the present proprietors in possession of their property, entitled to a nominal rent, encumbered with debt, with every discouragement to exertion, with the land so overwhelmed with charges and arrears of rate that it is impossible to find either a purchaser or an occupant, then I see no hope for the salvation of Ireland. But if, through the Government or Parliament, you can establish some intermediate agent to get temporary possession, on equitable terms, of property in a hopeless state of encumbrance, and then can arrange for the redistribution of it, I should see some hope of improvement. If you do nothing of the kind, what will be our condition? I have given you an account of the Ballina union. I see no better hope for others. If reliance is to be placed on the potato, and you have a good crop, there may be a better state of things for a short time; but each union is acting independently, and unless some great attempt is made to rescue Ireland from the grievous calamity impending—unless you can, by some means consistent with justice and equity, introduce new capital, new views of improvement, new feelings, into that country, in place of the despair and poverty which now overwhelm it, there is but a faint hope of her future regeneration. I would do injustice to no man, but I would try the intervention of a competent authority, acting with the sanction of the Government, and in unison with the Government, taking a comprehensive view of the condition of the

189
whole of these unions, and attempting to suggest the means by which there should be that transfer of landed property which I believe to be the root of improvement in Ireland. Despair is overwhelming the proprietors. The sixpenny rate is merely to administer relief to some of the unions. I object to a pecuniary burden fixed upon the land, which would discourage the future occupant or purchaser. You see what was done in Ireland in the reign of James I. with 500,000 acres in Ulster, the refuge of robbers and assassins—through the division of property, the allotment into districts of 2,000, 1,500, and 1,000 acres. Unless you can give some guarantee as to the future amount of the poor-rate, you will have no purchaser. I have read the rules of the Court of Chancery—they may be very proper rules—but the very sight of them is enough to deter a purchaser from the investment of capital in land in Ireland. Cannot you assist by the intervention of a commission composed of men of the highest character, of men who would gratuitously devote their time to rescue Ireland from this calamity—who would be the medium between the proprietor and the purchaser? The condition of twenty of these unions is so wretched, that you find yourselves either unable to trust the local guardians, or that they are throwing up their appointments, and you are trusting to vice-guardians to administer the poor-law in those districts. Would it not be possible, by the intervention of some such commission as that I have spoken of to assist in solving the legal difficulties, to consider what arrangements should be made for the transfer of property, to suggest the mode in which it could be effected, giving hereafter a title that should not be liable to question, seeking the aid of Parliament for that purpose, for confirming the title in some shape or other, limiting the amount of charge on account of the poor-rates to which those lands should be subject, giving a guarantee, as far as you can, against any disturbance of peaceable possession by agrarian violence, and also against legal disturbance on account of flaws in the title? I, for one, should see with great satisfaction the Government interposing with the intention of redistributing that great estate which is on sale in Connemara—I mean the estate of Mr. Martin. What do I see now? The Government is supporting in idleness 4,000 ablebodied men in a single union. Fertile land is going out of cultivation because
190
the charge upon it is so heavy that no person, as occupant, will cultivate it. What is the prospect, then? The people are clinging to the potato, and, that failing them, there will be left only that most unsatisfactory remedy which the noble Lord offered—an incursion of Irish paupers into Scotland or England. But de-pond upon it that you will have the able-bodied coming here to interfere with the ablebodied labourers of this country, while all the women and children will be left on the land, demanding relief from the poor-rates. I doubt whether any person will purchase that property to which I have referred (Connemara), without the intervention of a third party, with the uncertainty of the amount of the poor-rate. What is the use of continuing it in the family? I have not the slightest doubt that the present proprietors, whoever they are, would be willing to do what they could for its improvement. They have not the means to improve. They offer the estate for sale. Suppose we had an intelligent commission by whose intervention that property might pass into the hands of proprietors who would employ the poor in the improvement of the estate—(and in the district of Connemara there are valleys as fertile as in any other part of Ireland)—who would open means of communication—who would, if you please, divide it, having a security that for ten or fourteen years to come the amount of poor-rates should not be exceeded—then we might hope to lay the foundation of future prosperity. We might thus infuse new blood into Ireland, new enterprise, and a new division of property; especially if you were to give a stimulus to industry by guaranteeing the future proprietor against being sunk and overwhelmed by an indefinite amount of poor-rate. I see no other mode than some measure of that kind that could be adopted to mitigate the present evil. I doubt whether, under the Bill of last Session, any amount of property has been sold—whether it will be sold, unless you have some intermediate authority between the present proprietors and the new purchasers. When James I. determined upon the settlement of Ulster, he asked the opinion of the highest authority. He consulted Lord Bacon, who, although he knew nothing from local experience about Ireland, wrote a treatise on the plantations in that country, which, on account of his prophetic sagacity, is well worth the consideration of the present race

191
of men, enlightened as they may be by stores of knowledge to which he had not access. James I. was dealing with the resettlement of 500,000 acres. Lord Bacon, consulted by James I., as to the best mode of effecting this settlement, wrote a treatise, in which, as might be expected, there are many most extravagant and fulsome compliments to the sagacity of James I.; but there are also many valuable suggestions. He says—and be might have been writing for the present time—"Of all things a commission is most necessary, both to direct and to appease controversies and the like." That is, he would not trust to the vice-guardians, as you do, acting in divided parishes, without concert, struggling against great difficulty, doing all they can, but still not enough. "The commissioners shall for certain times reside in some habitable town in Ireland, near to the country where the plantation shall be." He foresees that the Secretary of State, jealous of any new authority, would observe, "We need not have a commission for the purpose. There is a capital Privy Council in Ireland, and let it go to them." Lord Bacon, with the habitual sagacity of a man in office, foresaw that that answer might be made to him, and he anticipated it by observing, "When I speak of a council of plantation, I mean some persons chosen by way of reference, on whom the labour may rest. For, although your Majesty hath a grave and sufficient council in Ireland, yet that supplies not the purpose whereof I speak. It will give greater expedition and some better perfection in the directions and resolutions, if the matters may be considered aforehand by such as may have a continual care of the cause." So I advise you to select persons to meet this peculiar difficulty, who shall have "continual care of the cause,"—who shall survey the whole of these unions—devise the best means of effecting the transfer of property consistently with equity and justice—give the future proprietors of property a security against an unlimited demand on account of poor-rates—employ the ablebodied men in Ireland, so long as that necessity exists, in making roads through inaccessible districts, and in cultivating the land which is now thrown out of cultivation. In the present condition to which a great part of the west of Ireland is reduced, I see no other hope than that of the transfer of property to other bands, and I doubt whether that transfer will take place except through
192
the intervention of Government, or some Commission acting in concert with the Government. Now, I hear there are great objections to the proposal of the Government, and a great willingness to come forward, by some mode of contribution other than a rate in aid, for the purpose of relieving the distressed unions. I am very unwilling to exempt personal property from a liability to contribute; and if the representatives of Ireland should be favourable to a tax upon personal property as well as upon land, I shall be most willing to listen to the proposal which was made by an hon. Gentleman, whose suggestions are entitled to the utmost respect from his personal character, his knowledge of Ireland, and his attachment to her best interests—I allude to the hon. Gentleman the Member for the county of Limerick (Mr. Monsell)—most willing to listen to his proposal, and substitute a property tax payable by personal property as well as by land. If I had a property tax so levied in Ireland, I would consent to appropriate the whole of its proceeds to relieve her from her most painful position. If a property tax be imposed on Ireland, I hope it will be for a period sufficient to afford a prospect of extricating her from her difficulties. I look to the west of Ireland with perfect despair, if the present state of things is to continue. I care not whether you get 300,000 l. or 400,000 l. this year, and the same sum next year. Unless you make some more vigorous effort to rescue the country from the calamity under which she is now suffering, and the evils now impending over it, her condition at the expiration of the two years will be worse than it is now—her habits of self-dependence destroyed, her people overwhelmed with hopelessness and despair, and property will be more uncultivated and still more unsaleable and valueless. The west of Ireland affords opportunities for improvement which no other part of the world appears to give. I sec a great world growing up on the other side of the Atlantic; I see the facilities of communication by railways and by steam. I see every reason why Ireland, if her position in respect to tenure could be improved, should be most prosperous. I recollect some lines in one of the ballads that were published at the time of the unfortunate rebellion in 1798—when men of talent were directing their ability and efforts to propagate disloyalty and disaffection—which contain a spirited description of the

193
position and natural advantages of Ireland—
"When Erin first rose from the dark heaving flood,
God blessed the green island, and saw it was good,
In sun, and in soil, and in station thrice bless'd—
Her back turn'd to Britain—her face to the west."
Her face will still continue to be turned to the west; but let us try to turn her heart and grateful affections to this country. If you leave her as she lies, she is overwhelmed with poverty and despair. But now, by a vigorous effort, in which every part of the empire shall join, there are opportunities of materially improving her condition, and of extracting from her present calamity and wretchedness the means of future prosperity, of happiness for herself, and of strength to this united empire.
MAJOR BLACKALLreferred to the reasons that had been assigned by the Chancellor of the Exchequer for imposing the present rate in aid in Ireland, and observed that he had been one of the Committee appointed to inquire into the alterations and amendments that it might be desirable to introduce into the poor-law in Ireland. He had voted in favour of the grant of 50,000 l. to relieve the distress in that country, and having assented to the sum being taken from the Imperial Treasury, he did not feel himself satisfied in objecting to further aid being given merely because it came from Ireland itself. The first part of the resolution of the Government referred to the levy of the rate in aid, but it did not stipulate or imply that the sum of 6d. in the pound should be levied from every electoral division, but that it should be so levied that every union should contribute a sum equal to that amount. He believed that would be found to press most unfairly upon particular localities, and it would amount to much more than 6d. in some of the districts of the union with which he was connected. The great objection he had to it was that it was to be levied, and at least a portion of it paid by the tenant-farmers of Ireland, parties who were at the present moment suffering the greatest distress; and there was great danger arising from the fact that many of those parties were at the present moment totally unable to pay. He would remind the House that those parties would be exempt from the assessed taxes if they were levied in Ireland; and with regard to excise duties they were not liable to them, because they consumed neither hops nor
194
bricks, nor any of the matters upon which these duties were chargeable. The right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had no right, therefore, to urge that as a ground for imposing this additional burden upon the tenant-farmers. Then the landlords were to pay the other half; but was it fair to make the landlords pay upon the whole of their nominal income, without any deduction for mortgages, annuities, or anything else? Was it to be expected from the distressed districts in the south and west of Ireland, who were unable to pay the additional 6d.? and if they did not, the Government would not obtain the amount they anticipated from the rate. Now, unless the Government was certain to obtain the amount they anticipated, that fact was an argument against the levying of such a rate. The right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer said the tax was one that could be easily collected. He thought that a most unfair reason to ground the tax upon. It might be convenient to the right hon. Gentleman to get his money in that way, but he did not think it was quite equitable. Suppose five persons lent the right hon. Gentleman 100 l., and that he could easily recover it from one of the parties, it would not be very equitable to do so, instead of making each of them pay him 20 l. He wished to know why the salaried officers of the Government, and the judges and other functionaries, who had contributed nothing to the poor-rates of the country, should be exempted? It could not be denied that if such a tax was to be levied, it ought to be thrown equally upon all parties in a time of such distress as the present. He thought a great mistake had been made by applying the sums voted for the relief of distress in Ireland to the temporary assistance of those who were reduced by the repeated failures of the potato crop—it was a means of perpetuating the poverty and distress, instead of getting rid of it; and in the mode in which it had been expended, it was clearly shown that they did not know how to grapple with the great evil of that country. He would merely take the case of nine unions in the west of Ireland, and show them how it was that, notwithstanding the large sums expended in relieving the distress there, that at the end of the year they were actually in a worse state than at the commencement. There were the names of Ballina, Bantry, Clifden, Galway, Gort, Connemara, Scariff, Newport, and Westport; and in these nine

195
unions the total number of paupers on the 31st January, 1848, was 69,303, and the number of paupers relieved on the 20th January, 1849, was 119,624, showing an increase of 50,321 paupers in the course of the year. The debt of these unions on the 31st January, 1848, was 34,842 l., and on the 31st January, 1849, the debt was increased to 83,188 l., showing an increase in the year of 48,346 l. in these nine unions. The probable expenditure up to the 3rd March, 1849, a period of five weeks, was estimated at 25,157 l., while the probable receipts in the same period were 6,380 l., so that the sum they would require over the receipts in the course of the five weeks would be 18,777 l. Now the amount granted in aid of the rates in the year 1848 was 131,360 l. to those nine unions; the amount of the rates collected was 54,352 l., so that they had expended 77,008 l. over and above the amount of the rates, and had increas ed their debt by the sum of 48,346 l., and had expended in the entire a sum of 234,098 l., and increased the number of those paupers by upwards of 50,000, and if they continued to expend all the money thus voted by Parliament, and collected in the shape of rates, for the temporary relief of the distress, they would never advance, and the people would be as far removed as ever from being enabled to support themselves. He complained that the Government seemed to look for a remedy for these evils upon one particular measure, instead of bringing forward a series of measures. The repeated failure of the potato crop had so exhausted the resources of the people of Ireland that they were, at the present moment, in actually a worse condition than they had hitherto been. It was not, therefore, one measure only that would relieve that country from its present distressed condition. He had supported the poor-law because he believed that that should be the basis of other improvements in the condition of the country; but it must be accompanied with other measures. One of these, alluded to by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tara worth, and in which he fully agreed with him, was greater facilities in the transfer of landed property. There were, at present, great difficulties and expenses attending the transfer of land in that country. Professor Hand-cock, in a lecture at the Dublin Institution upon that subject lately, had stated in reference to the legal impediments only,
196
that the vendor must produce a sixty years' title to every acre he sold, and gave instances of a property worth 1,200 l., costing to the vendor and purchaser no less than 200 l. to effect the transfer; a property worth 500 l., cost one party alone no less than 124 l.; and a property of 250 l. cost one of the parties 40 l.; and he went on with other instances to show that the smaller the amount of the purchase money, the greater in proportion were the costs of the sale. What was required, in order to carry out the Bill of last year, was to authorise the Court of Chancery, when satisfied that the property was brought honestly into the market, to give a legal right of sale, and a good title to the party purchasing, which could not afterwards be questioned. There could be no great injustice in that, as the Court of Chancery would be a sufficient security that no fraud would be attempted. That would induce parties to come forward and make purchases, which at present they were deterred from doing, He knew a case in which a property was bought with the assent of the Court of Chancery, and yet a lawsuit was brought upon it, although the title was perfectly clear. The noble Lord at the head of the Government alluded to the large amount of money which was expended in Ireland. It appeared, by the noble Lord's statement, that during the last two years there was expended upon public works the sum of 500,000 l. There was also advanced, under the Land Improvement Act, 360,000 l. for drainage, and 620,000 l. for railways. There was besides 1,000,000 l. still remaining to be drawn by those persons who pleased to apply for it, under the provisions of the Land Improvement Act. He could answer, from personal experience, that the drainage measure, under the Land Improvement Act, was one of the best and most advantageous measures that had ever been introduced into Ireland. But there had been drawbacks, from concomitant circumstances, which prevented the attainment of all those advantages that might be expected to flow from it. In many of the distressed parts of Ireland, persons who had obtained loans had afterwards declined to expend the money in the way originally intended, from the want of security for such outlay, and the consciousness of being exposed to a large amount of taxation, He thought, that the purposes to which the fund was applicable were too limited. A portion of the money might very advantageously be applied to the

197
building of farm-houses and of flax and scutching mills. If there was one measure more useful than another, it was one for the arterial drainage of the land of Ireland at this moment. When it was recollected that employment was so much wanted now, it was greatly to be regretted that arterial drainage should have been almost entirely abandoned this year. In his county alone there were 800 persons employed during the last year in such operations; but this year there was not one employed, and these 800 persons with their families were now recipients for relief. Out of 101 districts, where works of this kind had been commenced, 70 of them had suspended them from want of funds. Although 600,000 l. had been expended upon these works, it would require 800,000 l. to finish them. As an auxiliary to the poor-law, he thought that a measure of this kind was highly necessary, in order to give the poor-law a chance of working well. Besides these works, memorials had been lodged requiring 1,000,000 l. more for similar undertakings, whereby the land would of course be greatly enriched, and much employment would be given to the suffering poor. He would press this subject upon the attention of the Government, as well as that for the transfer of land in Ireland. In respect to the money advanced to railways, 500,000 l. went to one railway, and 120,000 l. to another, both running in about the same direction. The present Lord Lieutenant of Ireland stated in an address upon the 1st July, 1848, that so great were the benefits to be derived by Ireland from railway communication, to which she was peculiarly adapted, that he thought any well-wisher of the country must burn with impatience to see such works brought to a speedy conclusion; and although he would be content in England to leave these matters altogether to private enterprise, yet looking to the different circumstances under which Ireland was unfortunately placed, he owned himself, under certain limits and restrictions, an advocate for the employment of public aid to the formation of railways in Ireland. His Lordship further said, that being fully impressed with the low state of the finances, he knew this aid could not be given that year, but he hoped that when the Chancellor of the Exchequer was in a more prosperous state, this subject would not be overlooked. At all events, his Lordship added, whether he was in or out of office, he would advocate the advance of
198
public money for the promotion of railway communication in Ireland. Now, he (Major Blackall) would remind the House of the statement made by the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer this Session, to the effect that the finances of the country were in a much better condition than they had been in before. Under these circumstances he hoped that the Government would direct their attention to this important matter, which, if carried out, was so likely to advance the prosperity of Ireland. They had heard a great deal said upon the subject of tenant-right. Of what advantage would any measure of the kind be where people were deterred from taking laud from the fear of the large amount of rates that might be imposed upon them? The Church question, he admitted, was one, too, of the greatest importance. He would, however, tell the House that if they removed all the churchmen from Ireland, they would be removing a body of men who, during all the distress that had recently prevailed in the country, had contributed largely to the relief of the people. Many of the Protestant clergymen were the sole mainstay of the poor. In respect to the measure for the proposed enlargement of the franchise, he must observe that it was impossible it could have the effect of relieving the poverty of the country. The measures for the promotion of arterial drainage and railroads were stopped for want of capital. This capital could not be obtained unless the Government would come forward and guarantee a safe return to the parties who would be disposed to advance their money in such undertakings. He would now refer to the measure immediately before the House. He was of opinion that it should not be placed exclusively upon landed property in Ireland. He was, however, prepared to advocate and support a measure which would throw upon Ireland the burden of a tax necessary to support the poverty of the country. All he asked was, that it should be fairly apportioned, and that those who had already suffered the most should not be exposed to the whole burden. The hon. and gallant Member concluded by proposing the Amendment of which he had given notice.
Amendment proposed—
"To leave out from the words 'next two years' to the end of the Question, in order to add the words 'an auxiliary fund for the relief of the extraordinary distress in Ireland be raised, by a rate not exceeding sixpence in the pound, to be

199
levied upon all property and income in Ireland above the annual value of 150 l'"
MR. W. BROWNsaid: I will not detain the House long in the few observations I have to make; but I cannot refrain from expressing the pleasure I feel at the suggestions made by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, of the importance and advantage that would arise to Ireland from the transfer of property being made more easy, so that incumbered and other estates might find their way into the hands of those who had capital and skill to make the most of them. I entirely agree with the right hon. Baronet that it would be the best possible guarantee that could be given for the prosperity of that country. This is not a new view of this matter. Intelligent men out of doors have spoken and written their sentiments on this subject years ago; nor is it new to Parliament. Evidence was taken on it before the Lords; and it may be found in the library upstairs. It is there shown that the transfer of an estate may be made almost with as much facility as the transfer of a hogshead of sugar, or a bale of cotton. Mr. Banfield's evidence on this subject is most valuable. Indeed, I understand—strange as it may appear—that bankers in Frankfort hold part of their reserves in land; for, at an hour's notice, money may be obtained on it. I cannot help viewing the movement that is taking place in Ulster—in resisting the sixpenny rate in aid—as a most ungrateful return for the exertions that have been made in this country to relieve Irish distress. Millions have been paid from the public purse, aided by large private subscriptions; our humanity has over-ridden our judgment; yet when Ireland is called upon to aid us in this work of necessity and duty, Ulster deems it monstrous injustice. Is it greater injustice to call upon the whole of Ireland to assist their suffering fellow-countrymen, than to call upon the English labourer, artisan, and others, who have already made such honourable exertions to serve them, and who also support their own poor? Independent of this, we are suffering severely throughout the country from the Irish paupers being thrown in upon us in addition to our own. This has added 15,000 l. a year to the poor-rates of Liverpool; it has raised those in Birmingham to 5s. in the pound; in Leeds to 5s. 4d.; in Bolton to 6s.; and in Manchester to 6s. 8d. Yet all appears to be insufficient to satisfy them. Under such a state of things, it is
200
greatly to be regretted that statements have been made that England is really indebted to Ireland in the large sum of 600,000,000 l., and that all we do for her is only paying a debt that we owe. But how does the fact stand? In the year 1817 England assumed 130,000,000 l., the whole of the Irish debt. Now, by keeping a regular mercantile account with her, giving her credit for all she has paid, charging her with ail that has gone into the Irish Exchequer, calculating the interest account at three and a half per cent per annum, and taking the last two years, of which we have no returns, at the same amount as the two which precede them, it leaves a debt against the Irish Exchequer of 215,000,000 l. Add to this the principal, 130,000,000 l., then you have a sum of 345,000,000 l. But it is said that a large sum should be deducted from this for articles which have paid the duty in England, and are consumed in Ireland. I admit this; but when we consider that articles which pay a high duty—tobacco, spirits, wines, tea, sugar, &c.—are frequently sent to Ireland, in bond, to save the interest, I cannot estimate the sum that Ireland should have credit for on this account at more than 500,000 l. per annum; but suppose it is a million, it still leaves considerably more than 200,000,000 l. in favour of the Imperial Treasury, in place of 60,000,000 l. at our debit. If my statements are impugned, I would refer hon. Gentlemen to official returns which I called for in 1847, now before this House, as the basis of my calculations, and the accuracy of which I have no reason to question. I deeply deplore that statements should be made that in the slightest degree have a tendency to create a feeling of further dependence or claim on English benevolence. It is time that it should cease. I will, therefore, give my vote in favour of the rate in aid.
SIR E. MACNAGHTENthought the proposition of the noble Lord at the head of the Government impolitic, unjust, and ruinous to those parts of Ireland which were not steeped in such pauperism as the west. This was nothing more than the case of the five foolish virgins mentioned in the parable, who said to the more provident virgins, "Give us of your oil, for our lamps are gone out." He quoted from an authority which he trusted would ever be quoted with reverence in that House, in spite of the effort that was being made to introduce into it parties that might be disposed

201
to set that authority aside. He should like to know why the providence of Ulster and Leinster should pay for the improvidence and mismanagement of the other parts of Ireland. The potato had failed in Ulster as much as in Connaught. The people suffered in the one place as well as in the other by the distress that was brought about by this Act of Parliament; but the north was not in the same state of destitution as Sligo, Mayo, or Gal-way. The lands in Ulster were never so subdivided as they were in the west, nor were they so wholly dependent upon potato food, having also corn to rely upon. The proposition of the Government would have the effect of making the innocent pay for the guilty—of making the affluent pay for the support of the impoverished. This appeared to him most unreasonable. There was a measure at present before the House having reference to insolvent Members. Now, he did not see why a rate in aid might not upon the same principle be levied off persons in better circumstances, to be applied to the relief of such insolvent Members. A measure of this kind might save the Ministers a vast deal of trouble, and would no doubt prove most convenient to the needy Members of that House. It was unfair to make this rate general over Ireland. The practice had never been so in England, as the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth had just informed them. On the contrary, by the 43rd of Elizabeth, when one parish failed, the adjoining parish by the law of vicinage was called on to supply the funds necessary for the support of the poor; but in no case did the demand extend beyond the county. He should have no objection to the same law being made applicable to Ireland; but he was decidedly opposed to the present proposition.
MR. SCULLYobserved, that though he agreed with many of the propositions which had been advanced by the noble Lord at the head of the Government, in the course of his speech on Friday last, and particularly in his arguments with respect to the maximum rate of 7s. in the pound, and though he admired the humanity that characterised his arguments on the subject of the area of taxation—yet, when he came to the actual resolution before the House, he confessed he had a very different opinion as regarded that immediate part of the question. This was not a question of north and south—between the Protestants of the one, and the Catholics of the other—
202
but one by which the interests of the whole country were affected. It had been said that the opposition to this rate in aid was a landlords' movement; but it was no such thing, and he would not stand forward to defend it if it was. It was not a landlords' movement, but a movement of the farmers—a movement of the industrious occupiers of the land, and of the industrious shopkeepers in the towns. He objected to the proposition before the House on three grounds: first, because it was insufficient in its amount; next, because it was injurious in its application; and, thirdly, because it was unjust as regarded the mode of levying it. First, with regard to the insufficient of the amount; it appeared that—calculating from the contents of a report of the Commissioners on the poor-law in Ireland, published within the last few months—instead of 250,000 l. being likely to be the amount that would be required for the relief of these distressed unions for a year, no less a sum would be requisite than 587,403 l., and that, if they added to that sum the debts of these unions, it would amount to at least 700,000 l.—those debts having increased from 84,000 l. in 1847, to 126,000 l. in 1848. The unions were liable to them, and they must be paid; and why, therefore, should the Government and Parliament not at once grapple with the difficulty, and take measures to get rid of it? It was said, that this tax would only be a temporary tax. Now, he was glad to hear the other night that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer said he would not support it if it-was likely to be a permanent tax; but in the Times of the following day he had seen, it argued that 6d. would be the maximum to which Ireland would ever really be liable under the rate, and that the Imperial Treasury undertook all the rest. Instead of this being a temporary tax, he feared it would be a very long time before their unions would be in such a state as not to demand assistance—and not a very longtime before that House would be called upon to meet additional votes for those distressed localities. He thought, therefore, that the case of the insufficiency of the amount of the rate was amply made out. Then, with regard to the injurious mode of its application, he must protest against this injurious and demoralising system of doling out relief to a people. They were bolstering and tinkering up a bad law by continuing such a system, and relieving bad and defaulting landlords at a sacrifice of

203
the really honest and industrious portion of the community. Were the Government prepared to demand a return—for such a return they ought to have—from those impoverished districts, of the names of the defaulters? As to the unjust mode of levying the rate again, it appeared from the report of the Commissioners that, in September last, there were only forty-five of the unions in Ireland in which the money which was levied exceeded their debts, and now they were going to levy a fresh tax from those industrious localities—to raise from them a sum which they themselves calculated at 250,000 l. It was impossible, he contended, that they would ever get money from them. His third objection was that the mode of levying the rate was unjust. The annual income of Ireland was stated to be 36,000,000 l., of which 13,000,000 l. was rated to the poor-rate. The remaining 23,000,000 l. was totally untaxed for this purpose. As long as he had a vote in that House, he should oppose the adoption of the principle involved in the proposal of the noble Lord. The charge of a 6d. rate in the pound had been described as of a trumpery character; but was the House aware that if that rate was levied, it would amount in the county of Tipperary alone to 21,315 l.? There was not one union in that county which came under the principle of exemption by being rated at more than seven shillings in the pound. The consequence would be, that they would all have to pay the rate. The hon. Member then proceeded to read extracts from local papers, descriptive of the state of distress and destitution in Tipperary, and that so great had it been in some districts, that persons had been starved to death. Before the House proceeded to adopt this principle, it ought carefully to consider the condition of the various unions in Ireland. His own conviction was, that when the rate exceeded three shillings in the pound, that there should be no additional rating, for that extent of rating was quite sufficient, and as much as most of them could pay. Were hon. Gentlemen aware of the amount of capital lost in Ireland last year? He found it stated by a gentleman of eminence, who was formerly a Member of this House, and who had been in the employ of the Government, that the amount of capital lost last year in Ireland, and more especially as regarded agriculture, was upwards of ten millions. This sum, added to the losses arising from the distress of former years, was a sufficient indication that the
204
people of Ireland were utterly unable to bear further taxation. Why should this tax be levied on the land alone, while there were 23,000,000 l. of property in that country exempted from this burden? For instance, the mortgagees of property, who resided at Dublin or London, did not in any way contribute to the poor-rate. This was most unjust, for that class ought to be made to pay it. He agreed with much that had fallen from the right hon. Member for Tamworth, who had showed how capital might be introduced into Ireland for beneficial employment, and who had suggested the introduction of some measures for the purpose. If the Government had come down with some proposition of that hind, their rate in aid would have had some appearance of fairness. Measures should have been introduced for facilitating the transfer and sale of land, for the registration of deeds, for the formation and extension of railways, and others of a similar character. He did not ash for measures like those of last year, but well-digested and well-considered measures—prepared, not in London, but in Ireland. The hon. Gentleman, in conclusion, read an extract from a letter, written by the late Lord G. Bentinck to Mr. O'Reilly, of Clonmel, in which he strongly urged the development of the sources of wealth in Ireland, by the drainage of the 16,000,000 of acres of land now lying waste, and which were capable of the highest cultivation, and also the extension of railways, and by the improvement of the fisheries on the western coast of that country.
SIR W. VERNER: So much had been said during the debate with respect to the province of Ulster, and as the Bill under the consideration of the House would affect that province more than any other in Ireland, and as the representative of a county in that province, he trusted he would not be thought intrusive if he said a few words upon the subject. Much reference had been made by various hon. Members to the loyalty of the people of Ulster. In regard to loyalty, he was aware that many men differed. The men of Ulster were the strong advocates of the maintenance of the Union between the countries: in that he thought they were truly loyal. The hon. Member for the city of Limerick took a different view of the subject, He belonged to an association calling itself the "Loyal Repeal Association;" yet he supposed the hon. and learned Gentleman maintained that he also was a loyal subject.

205
He left it to the House to say who were the most loyal people—the advocates of the Union, or those who would separate the dominions of the Crown. Never had men been so tried as the brave men of Ulster; but they had always remained stedfast in their loyalty. The hon. Member for Dublin had said, in consequence of the opposition to the rate in Ulster, that the loyalty of the people of that province was only sixpenny loyalty. He totally denied that this was the case. They were opposed to this proposition because they conceived it was founded on injustice. He had been told—not merely once, twice, or three times, but on numerous occasions, by an individual, formerly a Member of that House, the late Mr. O'Connell—that if he (Sir W. Verner) would only join him in aiding to bring about repeal, that such was his influence in Ulster, that he would pledge his existence that twelve months would not elapse without their having a Parliament in College Green. He believed it was because the people of Ulster did not join in the cry for repeal, that the Irish Parliament was not then meeting in College Green. He thought that the imposition of this rate was a very poor return to the men of the north for the loyalty they had exhibited in uniformly resisting the overtures which were so repeatedly made to them to join in the agitation for a repeal of the Union. The men of the north had testified on a thousand different occasions their determination to preserve the Union inviolate; and he would again repeat, that the imposition of this rate was a very poor return for their stedfast and unswerving fidelity. There was but one feeling on the subject in the north of Ireland. He had himself presented petitions against the rate from Armagh and various other important localities in Ulster. The principle of such an imposition was essentially vicious, because the pressure of the tax would fall exclusively on one class—the landed interests, who were already overburdened; while the monied interests, and all other classes of the community, would be entirely exempt from its operation. When pestilence and famine overspread the land in 1816 and 1817, the monied and landed interests combined in an effort to mitigate the sufferings of the people, and their exertions were crowned with complete success. He did not see why there should not be a similar combination of classes in the present emergency. It was manifestly unjust that the onus should
206
fall only on one class in particular, and that of all others the least able to support it. But the rate would be inequitable and unequal even in its pressure on the landed interests. In the parish where he resided there were three electoral divisions, or, to speak more correctly, one and a portion of two others. In two of these divisions the rate did not amount to 1s. in the pound, in the third it was upwards of 4s. He had property in all of them. One portion of those divisions was the property of the resident landlords, who discouraged the practice of subletting; and the consequence was, that pauperism was unknown: the other half was in the hands of absentees, who permitted subletting ad infinitum; and the consequence was, that pauperism abounded there: and now, the portion which was in the possession of the good landlords was about to be called on ostensibly to support the poor of the had landlords, but, in reality, to give sanction and encouragement to a system which had been for years the bane and curse of Ireland. Thus no distinction was made between that pauperism which enriched the landlord, and that which the landlord was in no way instrumental in provoking, but which, on the contrary, he pauperised himself in his efforts to mitigate. For these reasons he should vote against the proposition of the Government.
MR. CLEMENTSremarked, that however tempting might be the field opened to them by the observations of the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, still he should endeavour to confine himself to that which was the question of vital importance at that moment before the House, and that was then submitted to them for consideration—namely, the tax that was proposed to be levied by the Government. It was admitted, on all hands, that some money was actually necessary for the relief of the distress that prevailed in twenty-one unions; and that it was shown by the feeling manifested by English Members, that the money so required must come from Irish sources. It was said that there were 11,000,000 l. or 12,000,000 l. paid in England, to which Ireland did not contribute; and though this was said, yet no one had contended that Ireland was not taxed in accordance with her means. By the Union this country bound itself by a compact, that Ireland should not be taxed beyond a certain proportion with England. If this were the case, then Ireland could not be justly

207
taxed with not paying her fair share of taxation. If any doubt existed on the subject, he thought a Committee ought to be appointed to investigate this subject, and he trusted that such a Committee would be moved for by some Member whoso position and experience would obtain for him the attention of the House. He wished hon. Members to bear in mind, that in Ireland what was objected to was not so much the 6d. in the pound, but the principle that was sought to be established in imposing the rate; that it was the Imperial Parliament imposing a peculiar tax upon Ireland for that which was regarded to be a general purpose; and that in imposing such a tax, though Irish Members might take part in the discussion, they could not influence the decision of the Imperial Parliament imposing such a tax; and that such a principle of taxation being once established, the Irish expected to see no end to it; that though it was now proposed to impose a tax of 6d. in the pound for two years, still any one acquainted with the circumstances of the country to be relieved by this tax must be aware that the sum required would not be sufficient to mitigate the evil now complained of. Hence it was feared that the principle once established would be extended indefinitely. The House had heard from the hon. and gallant Member for Longford what were the measures which he considered requisite in order to raise Ireland from her present prostrate condition. He agreed with that hon. and gallant Member that no single measure, whatever might be in its nature, would effect this object. There was an observation which fell from the light hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth last year, respecting the West Indies, which was quite applicable to, Ireland at the present moment. One single measure, said the right hon. Baronet, however good, would not suffice for the relief of the West Indian planters. It must be a combination of well-devised measures which alone will effect that purpose. Such was the case with respect to Ireland. The measures for her relief must be suited to her circumstances. They must, moreover, be measures in which the whole empire took an active part and interest. The observation made on a former evening by the hon. Member for Montrose, during the discussion on the grant of 50,000 l., was quite to the point. When it was proposed to add Mr. Bright's name to the Committee on the Irish Poor Law, the hon. Member for
208
Montrose said truly, that as the money came from the Imperial Treasury, so it was but fair that the hon. Member for Manchester should be on the Committee, as his constituents were interested in that inquiry as much as the Irish people themselves. A good deal had been said about the duties of Irish landlords in those localities of Ireland where distress was prevalent. He agreed that it was their duty to do all they could to alleviate the distress; but, as the right hon. Baronet opposite had shown, it was not in the power of the landlords to do much. If, however, the same doctrine were applied to the general condition of Ireland, it might be a question whether some steps might not be taken in that direction, and certainly any general improvement there would be attended with a correspondent improvement in the revenue. Now, although English Members would not consent to regard the question of a rate in aid in connexion with the improvement of the revenue of Ireland, they would not refuse to couple that rate with the question of the resources of Ireland. If there were any resources which it was more undesirable to have resort to than another, it was this of a rate in aid. The poor-law was a new measure in Ireland, and it was difficult to meet the demands which it caused to be made on the farmers there. The people of England were not aware of the struggles made by the occupiers of land to pay their poor-rates; and if they knew what they would suffer when called upon to pay this additional rate, the English nation would sympathise with the Irish farmers, and refuse to impose it. Another serious difficulty which presented itself was the machinery by which the rate was to be collected. It was not known whether the rate in aid was to be levied upon a special valuation, or whether it was to be raised according to the existing valuation in Ireland. The inequality that existed between the various parts of Ireland in the valuations to the poor-rates was as great as 50 per cent. That fact was proved by the evidence taken before the Poor Law Committee sitting upstairs only the other day. Any attempt to alter the valuations now would be too late. How, then, was the rate in aid to be levied? If according to the present poor-law valuation, what would be the feelings of those who would have to pay double the amount at which other unions were rated? Those unions also in which the poor-law was strictly carried out, would contribute 50

209
per cent more than others where it was not enforced. He very much feared that wherever this rate in aid should be rigorously levied, the farmers and occupiers of land possessed of substance would leave the country as fast as they could. English Members felt satisfied with the proposition of the noble Lord at the bead of the Government, because they would thereby he spared the necessity for granting more public money to Ireland. But he wished to know when the rate was to be levied, as it was wanted immediately. Was it to be levied at the harvest time? Did the Government propose to advance the amount required to relieve the distress out of the Exchequer, and to take the rate in aid as a security for such advances? He would recommend the noble Lord to wait until the harvest before he began to enforce it. There would then be time allowed for consulting the Irish Members, and taking their opinion as to the most equitable mode of levying the rate. The right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth had stated that evening that there was no difference between the rate in aid and a property tax. But he (Mr. Clements) asserted there was all the difference in the world between the two taxes, owing to the mode in which they were levied. The rate in aid must first come out of the farmers' pockets; and no one who knew what the sufferings of that class in Ireland had been during the last three years of famine and potato not, but was aware of the fact that the imposition of such a load as that last proposed on their backs would create universal despair. Such, at least, he feared would be the effects of this tax. If he understood the Government proposal rightly, it was to draw the amount of the rate in aid directly out of the unions according to their respective valuations. But, if this were done, the virtual effect would be to impose a ninepenny instead of a sixpenny rate upon many of the unions. It was unfair in the highest degree to impose such a burthen on the poor farmers of Ireland. For his own part, he would strongly advocate the substitution of an income tax for a rate in aid. The latter fell directly upon the tenantry, whereas the income tax was paid by the landlords. It might seem strange that the Irish landlords should prefer an income tax at 7d. to a rate in aid of 6d. in the pound. The right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth had said that the Government would get the rate in aid first, and take the income tax afterwards. But
210
in his opinion the former at 6d. would be a heavier burthen than an income tax at 7d. in the pound. He did, therefore, hope that if this money were to be levied on the resources of Ireland, the noble Lord would take into consideration the most acceptable mode by which such means might be raised.
MR. BOURKEsaid, the resolution before the House was one of the most difficult upon which an Irishman could address a legislative assembly. The importance of this question might not be obvious at first; but when they looked to the great interests which were bound up with this question, and the deep interest which it had excited in Ireland, and when Irish Members knew that by the speedy adoption of this law Ireland's better hopes were defeated, he might be excused for approaching this subject. The great disaster which had fallen upon Ireland, was first met by grants of public money, which, though they stifled the disease for the moment, tended rather to perpetuate the calamity. An endeavour was then made to remove the evil by the institution of public works; but after that expedient failed, the Government fell back on the poor-law. The previous system of gratuitous relief had, however, destroyed the self-reliance of the people. He did not wish it to be understood, however, when he alluded to this subject, that he refused to acknowledge the eternal gratitude which Ireland owed to England for the assistance she had offered her. There was, however, a feeling in Ireland that the immense funds which were subscribed in England might have been much more wisely expended if greater care and forethought had been exercised. He believed that in some unions the funds which it was intended should be applied to the relief of the poor had been expended in a most useless and unnecessary manner. It was not his intention, however, to discuss the Irish poor-law, which had been met by a large expenditure; it had merely kept the people alive, and had tended to perpetuate the calamity with which that country had been visited. To show how the law had worked in Ireland, he would state some circumstances which bad occurred in the county of Kildare, in connexion with which he should introduce the name of no loss an authority than that of the Hon. Mr. Lawless. A resolution having been moved at a public meeting—
"The Hon. Edward Lawless, in seconding the resolution, said, in an adjoining union to this—the union of Celbridge—there came down, about this

211
time twelve months, a sealed letter from the Poor Law Commissioners, directing the guardians to appoint relieving officers forthwith. The guardians, headed by his Grace the Duke of Leinster, who, they would all agree, was no enemy to the poor, protested strongly against this order, on the ground that it was unnecessary, and would only result in a waste of the public funds. The Commissioners continued inexorable, and the guardians were obliged to give way. Relieving officers were accordingly appointed, whoso salaries up to Christmas last amounted to 80 guineas—but what did the meeting think was the entire amount of money which those officers had to disburse?
"Mr. Dixon: 500 l. perhaps.
"The Hon. Mr. Lawless: The entire sum amounted to 1l. 15 s. 6d., and that sum had been expended in car hire, for bringing poor people who were found on the road to the county infirmary, which duty had hitherto been admirably performed by the local poor-law guardians, who were able to perform all those duties in connexion with the workhouse free of expense. He would next allude to an instance of mismanagement on the part of the Board of Works. In 1847—that year of misery and distress—when that unfortunate and disastrous measure, the labour-rate sessions, was instituted, there was a meeting called of the inhabitants of the barony of Newcastle in this county. That barony consisted of four electoral divisions, and be (Mr. Lawless) being the only magistrate residing in the electoral division of Newcastle, he took upon himself to call a meeting of the cess payers of that division. They assembled together, and, after a good deal of discussion, be induced them to employ every man then out of employment, and he succeeded in doing so by showing that it would be better for them in the end. They carried out the plan to the fullest extent, and there was not a penny of public money expended in the electoral division of Newcastle during the year 1847, nor was there an inhabitant of that district employed on any of the public works. When the presentment sessions was held he stated the fact that the division with which he was connected wanted no assistance, and that it would be better to proceed under Mr. Labouchcre's letter, which made it an electoral division charge. However, from some blunder or mismanagement, the ratepayers of Newcastle electoral division were now charged with a sum of 422 l. although they never received a penny of the public money. He had given instances of the manner in which the Poor Law Commissioners and the Board of Works acted separately. Perhaps the meeting would like to hear how they acted when they worked together, and formed a mixed commission according to Sir John Burgoyne's plan? Without consulting any one connected with the union of Celhridge, they sent down the same description of staff as they would have done to Skibbereen—their commissioners, inspectors, relieving officers, &c.—the guardians protesting ah the time that such a course of procedure was wholly unnecessary. At that time funds had been granted by Parliament in aid of rates. There was but one electoral division in the union which had not funds to its credit, and it borrowed a sum of 61 l. 10 s. That money was repaid back exactly six months from the day on which it had been borrowed. What did they think was the cost (as it appeared from the report of the Commissioners themselves), of looking after this sum of 61 l. 10 s.?
212
"A Voice: About 100 l.
"The Hon. Mr. Lawless said, he had examined the books about six weeks ago, and he was not prepared to state the exact figure, but it was 30 l. over or Tinder 1,100 l. [Loud cries of "Oh, oh!" and expressions of disapprobation.] He could assure the meeting that the statement he had made, however extraordinary it might appear, was strictly true; the entire amount advanced in aid of rates was 62 l.; it passed through his hands; it was repaid six months after it was received; and yet the cost of the arrangements connected with the borrowing of that small sum amounted to 1,100 l. Was not such a system monstrous?"
Having done away with gratuitous relief, the effect of the law Lad been to make the Irish people a nation of paupers; and having done this, the Parliament told them to go to the workhouses. He was not, however, unmindful of the generous spirit which had induced Englishmen to come forward both in their private capacity and as contributors to the British Association Fund, and to consent to enormous grants; but whilst Irishmen acknowledged the manner in which England had behaved, they could not but think that those sums which had been sent over to Ireland had put them in a worse position than they were before, whilst it had fostered the vice of the want of independence. He was opposed to this rate in aid, and he was opposed to the way in which it was proposed to levy it, which involved a direct breach of faith with Ireland, and was to a great degree highly impolitic. He maintained it was an infringement of the spirit of the Union, which assumed that the stronger should support the weaker. His constituents were able and willing to contribute as far as they could; but if they were weighed down by taxation they would be for ever rendered incapable of bearing their proper burden. But he would say, give to Ireland English industry, English prosperity, and English wealth, and the people of Ireland would be content to pay, not 7d. in the pound, but 1s. in the pound, income tax. This measure only showed the determination of the Government to bolster up a system which had failed. There was a time when a smaller coin than 6d. set Ireland in a flame; and though the author of the Drapier's Letters was not now among them, there still existed in Ireland a spirit of patriotism, love of justice, good sense, and determination, which would make them cry out against the invidious impost now attempted to be imposed upon them. He contended that they could never hope to promote the welfare of Ireland unless

213
they brought forward other and better measures than had yet been promulgated—unless they made important alterations in the poor-law, assimilated the area of taxation to the area of taxation in this country, encouraged emigration, and otherwise looked to the real interests of the people. He imputed no unworthy motives to Her Majesty's Ministers; he believed they were really anxious to confer true benefits upon Ireland; but he believed the only hope for Ireland was, that they would see their error before it was too late. He entreated them not to imagine that by any assistance they could render, they could ever maintain the present system of poor-laws in Ireland. Until they uprooted that system, which fostered mendicancy, which destroyed self-reliance, and which paralysed industry, they need never expect Ireland to improve. He begged it to be understood that he was not one of those who thought that legislation would do everything for Ireland. On the contrary, he believed that it would do comparatively little. He believed that legislation would foster, but not produce; that it would water, but not sow; and that it was to individual exertion, to the clear heads, the strong arms, and the hardy hearts of the people themselves, that they must look for the sources of real benefit to Ireland. But he opposed the resolution before the House, because he considered it was calculated to injure rather than benefit his country.
MR. ROCHEsaid, that neither of the hon. Gentlemen who had last spoken had given a practical answer to this practical question, how were thousands of people to be saved from utter and immediate starvation? Her Majesty's Government proposed that they should be saved from immediate starvation by means of this rate in aid; and the House was asked to come to this decision, would they have this rate in aid, ay or no? ["No, no!"] But as an Irish Member, what question had he to ask himself? Suppose he voted with hon. Members opposite, and by increasing their numbers succeeded in saying "No," what position was he in then? What practical measures did he get from hon. Gentlemen opposite for administering relief to the people? What would the hon. Member for Buckinghamshire do to feed the people of Connaught? He was a prudent man, and would say nothing, but button up his pocket. He turned then to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Northamptonshire; he, too, would button his pocket,
214
but he would say, "Read my speeches and assimilate your taxes." He (Mr. Roche) feared that, in order to avoid 6d. in the pound, they would have a tax of 1s. 6d. Was there an English Member who would give out of English funds 6d. for Ireland? Not one. Foiled by the English Members, he would turn to his fellow-countrymen who sat on the opposite side, and say, "Our people are still starving in hundreds, we can get nothing from England, what will you do to support them in Ireland? Will you abolish the grand-jury system?" Not they; every man was a grand juryman, and belonged to the parts for which grand juries had been instituted. He asserted that there was a Church in that country which was paid fourteen times too much—450,000 l. a year was paid to the Church which need not be paid. Would they join with him in appropriating the funds of the Church to the support of the poor? When he asked that question, he should be met by a cry of "No surrender!" and the Kentish fire. Neither from his own countrymen, nor from English Members, could he receive any answer to this practical question—namely, if you refuse this rate in aid, how will you stop starvation in Connaught? Then came the question of the rate in aid. The best thing about it was, that it was only temporary. Hon. Gentlemen had said that an income tax would be better; his answer was, the rate in aid is only temporary, the income tax will be a permanent tax. The hon. Member for Cork said, you put all the tax on the landlords, and no tax on the commercial classes and the capitalists in Ireland. He did not think that the tax ought to be put on the commercial class: there was no interest so essential to Ireland as the commercial interest. No one had ever said that commercial men had not done all that was necessary to advance the interests of the country. What would Ireland be if it were not for her commerce? Was he to tax the commercial interest and not tax the landlords? He refused to tax the only interest that had done its duty in Ireland. He came now to the speech of the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth; he dissented from his historical conclusions. He did not agree with him that the plantation of Ulster was a great benefit or boon conferred by England upon Ireland; he thought it was a great blot and stain on the English character that they should have made that plantation as they had made it. The right hon. Baronet gave a

215
quotation of an Irish ballad of 1798; but when he boasted about the plantation of Ulster and the benefit it conferred on Ireland, it was well to quote a stanza of an Irish ballad issued by those who were planted in Ulster two centuries after the plantation. ["Hear, hear!"] Every man was liable to a slip of the tongue, and perhaps it might be somewhat the propensity of his countrymen; but even in that he did not mean to deny his country. Here was a song. [An Hon. MEMBER: A song of sixpence; sing it.] He begged leave to say that he could not sing without music, and there was no music in the hon. Member's interruption. This was The Battle of the Diamond. [The hon. Member read the following verses amidst much laughter.]
"The Battle of the Diamond (Far let the watchword fly),
Where craven Papist rebels crouched, Upon the earth to die.
Slain by devoted men and true, Who fought with heart and blade,
And slaughtered in their ambush vile, By swords they had betrayed."
He did not think that much good had resulted from that same plantation of Ulster. But the right hon. Baronet proposed, not only to plant Connaught, but that Government should purchase a great portion of Connaught, and work it too. The right hon. Baronet said he would appoint a commission. How many commissions had we had upon Irish subjects? The hon. and learned Member for the University of Dublin had told them how futile all these commissions were. Perhaps, for exception's sake, this commission would be effective. What was it to do? The commission was to intervene between the present proprietors and somebody that was to buy these properties. He did not see that the right hon. Baronet would do good in that way; but if he purchased the estates in Connaught, and sold them, and got a small independent yeomanry, he would be doing some good for Ireland. He would not do good if he bought out the present proprietors, who had neglected their duties, and put in their place another set of men, without security against their committing precisely the same faults. The right hon. Baronet went on to say, that he did not see any reason why Government should not purchase the Connemara property. He thought, that if they did attempt to work it as practical men or farmers, they would not find it a profitable concern. He did not think that King William's Town
216
was a good or profitable speculation. The right hon. Baronet had talked very ably about the great crisis in which Ireland was at the present moment; but how could the purchase of some estates in Connaught benefit all Ireland, which was now suffering from that crisis? The proposition of the right hon. Baronet was certainly a very bold one; but would he go a step further? Would he grapple with the question of tenure in Ireland? Would he unfetter the springs of industry, by giving encouragement to the yeomanry of Ireland to cultivate land which, in consequence of the present unsatisfactory state of the law, was allowed to lie idle? The right hon. Baronet might depend upon it that it would be found utterly impossible to effect a great and national regeneration unless some bold and practical measure were adopted for the improvement of the law of tenure. If the right hon. Baronet should apply his great talents to that question, he might confer great benefits upon the country at large, and add considerably to his honour and reputation. In conclusion, he (Mr. Roche) wished to know from those hon. Gentlemen on the Opposition benches, who so energetically opposed this proposition of the Government, what plan they had to propound for saving the lives of those unfortunate people, who were admitted to be dying by hundreds in Connaught and other parts of Ireland? Surely those hon. Gentlemen were not content to let them die off the face of the earth without the slightest attempt on their part to afford them succour? In the absence of any information or proposal from the other side, he should support the Motion of the noble Lord the Prime Minister, because it was a temporary proposal for meeting a temporary want: he supported it, because he thought it was due to the English people, who had made so many and so great sacrifices for the support and relief of distress in Ireland, that they should make some struggle to support the poverty of Ireland out of the property of Ireland; and he supported it also because, from the tenor and language of the noble Lord's speech, he thought he would carry out this law, if passed, with forbearance; that he would not force it immediately on the people, but would wait before he levied a 6d. until the harvest in Ireland was collected.
SIR A. BROOKEthought that this-proposition of the Government was impolitic and mischievous. Why should the burden

217
of supporting the poverty of Connaught and other distressed portions of Ireland fall upon people who were not in any way responsible for the existence of that poverty? The present destitution in Ireland arose, in the first place, from the misrule, not altogether of the present Government, for Ireland had been misgoverned for centuries; in the next place, he attributed a great deal of that poverty to the misconduct of the Irish landed proprietors; and, thirdly, he attributed much of the misery of Ireland to absenteeism. With regard to the misgovernment of Ireland, it was obvious, that if Ireland had had a paternal Government, the miseries which had been accumulating upon her for years would have been averted by the precautionary measures of that Government, which must have seen their gradual approach. And, then, as to the misconduct of the Irish landlords, notwithstanding the splendid efforts of some of them on behalf of those by whom they were surrounded in Ireland, he could truly assert that two-thirds of them at least had neglected their duties to their tenants; they did not even reside in Ireland. And now, those excellent landlords who had made such generous struggles to save the perishing poor on their estates, were to be called upon to pay for the neglect of those landlords. Why did not the Government bring forward a proposition to impose an additional tax upon absentees for the support of the poor of Ireland? Absentees ought to be made to pay at least double poor-rates. He had some small estates in Ireland, on which he could not reside; but he was perfectly willing to pay double rates in respect of them, if it should be found that he did not give employment to a sufficient number of labourers. The absentee was bound to provide for the poor on his estate. There were 2,000,000 acres of reclaimable land in Ireland on which not a single atom of labour had ever been expended. Why did not the Government take possession of them for the purpose of affording employment to the people? He could assure the Government that their present proposition had disheartened the landed proprietors of Ulster, who, what with poor-rates, voluntary contributions, and employment of the people, had lately paid 15 s. in the pound for the support of the poor. Lord Farnham had paid upwards of 4,000 l. in poor-rates during the last twelve months, in addition to which he had voluntarily given employment to immense numbers of
218
the distressed people of his district. He (Sir A. Brooke) thought, that with the view of encouraging agriculture in Ireland, all improvements of the land should be exempted from poor-rates for a certain number of years. A measure of that nature ought to be immediately passed, because the absence of land improvement was one of the principal evils of Ireland. Should the measure become law, he, at all events, begged the noble Lord to pay some attention to the question of valuation, for nothing could be more unfair than the present rating under the poor-law valuation. His own property was rated over the value he set on it to the extent of 1,100 l.
SIR G. GREYsaid, that several important admissions had been made in the course of the discussion, which he was happy to say, tended to narrow the limits of the question at issue. The first of these admissions, in which there was a general unanimity, was that there existed in some of the western unions of Ireland an amount of distress which rendered it absolutely impossible that it could be wholly relieved by local resources, and rendered it indispensably necessary that some extraneous aid should be afforded in order to avert scenes of starvation and misery on which the House was not prepared to look without providing some remedy. It would be unnecessary for him to read the papers which detailed the condition of those unions, because he had not heard it controverted by any one. He had been sorry indeed to hear the hon. Member for Tipperary state he conceived the object of the present measure was not to relieve the pauper but the landlord. He could assure the hon. Member such was not the case, and that the measure was intended, not for the relief of the landlord but for those who had been reduced to the lowest state of destitution. Whilst he was speaking of landlords, he could not but observe that the hon. Member who had just sat down (Sir A. Brooke), and whose opinions were entitled to the greatest weight in the House from the admirable manner in which he discharged his duty, had made some observations with respect to the conduct of a portion of the landlords in certain parts of Ireland, in which he (Sir G. Grey) entirely concurred. The hon. Member said that the destitution proceeded partly from centuries of bad government, and partly from the conduct of the landlords themselves, speaking, as he (Sir G. Grey)

219
supposed, not exclusively of the present, but also of the former possessors of the soil. He had not understood the hon. Baronet to say that every exertion should not be made to aid that distress and destitution; so far from doing so, he had made a proposition the purpose of which was, that a tax was to be laid on certain classes of the people, the funds to be collected from which would be applicable for their relief. With respect to the conduct of the landlords, he must say that, while he agreed in much which had been said as to the manner in which the great body of the landlords in particular districts had, to the utmost of their ability, paid their rates and endeavoured to relieve the distress, yet, if they went into the causes of that distress, the owners of property would not be found free from blame—he did not mean the existing landlords, who had inherited their property, in many instances, so encumbered with mortgages and charges, and so subdivided as to render it impossible for them to do all that might be expected from them, whatever might be their intentions, but those who had gone before them. The hon. Member for Fermanagh spoke of the system which had been so long pursued of letting out the land in small patches for the purpose of growing potatoes, which, being a food capable of maintaining a very large number of persons, enabled the occupier to pay an enormously high rent. That system, in the end, produced a pauper tenantry living on the land, who, when they paid their rents, were left without a shilling in their pockets, and who were without capital and without skill to improve the soil. The result was, that as these estates descended to the present owners, settlements were made on a rental which was merely nominal, and which it was impossible to maintain when the potato crop failed. The very extract which had been read containing the statement of Captain Hamilton with respect to the Ballina union, proved that the distress was not attributable to the poor-law, but that the primary cause of that distress was the failure of the potato crop, which had revealed the rotten state of society, and had brought matters to a crisis. If thousands, however, were found to be on the verge of starvation, the real question was, how were they to be provided for? Another admission had been made, not so universally, indeed, but still it had been generally and, at the same time, fairly and candidly made, and that by men whose opinions
220
were entitled to the greatest weight, who were most conversant with the country, and who had discharged their duties as owners of property in a manner which entitled them to every credit, that the time had come when a stop must be put to the continued demands on the Imperial Parliament for grants in aid of distress. [Cheers.] The question, therefore, appeared to him to be whether, if aid were indispensably necessary, it was to come not from the Imperial Treasury, but from a source within Ireland itself; and if so, whether the proposal made by Her Majesty's Government to impose a rate limited to 6d. in the pound—limited not only in amount but in duration to a period of two years—was not the least objectionable mode in which the means required to aid in the relief of the poor in Ireland could be raised? In dealing with that question there were many objections to be considered which had been taken to that proposal. He would glance at that taken by the hon. Member for Middlesex, that the proposal had been brought forward suddenly, without any intimation that any such plan was in contemplation. If the hon. Gentleman was as well acquainted with the proceedings in that House, as he seemed to be with the proceedings of the Committee on the Irish Poor Law, he would have known that his noble Friend had stated at an early period that as soon as the Committee should meet, he would lay before it the propositions he was prepared to make. He did lay them before the Committee, and, in so doing, redeemed his pledge. He stated his views generally in that Committee, and those views were embodied in resolutions which the Committee had the opportunity of considering. One of the objections with which it would be necessary to deal had been made in the House; and there were others made out of the House to which he should also refer. There was a considerable variety and inconsistency in those objections, which rendered it difficult to deal with them in detail. The hon. Member for Northamptonshire had led the van of the opposition to this measure in the House; but he had hardly redeemed his promise to point out its injustice, impracticability, and impolicy, for although he had occupied a considerable portion of time in proving its injustice, he had said nothing on the other two subjects. He seemed to have lost himself upon the question of the area of taxation. The hon. Gentleman had commenced by saying, that

221
Parliamentary grants were altogether objectionable, and in this he was consistent, for he had voted against the grant of 50,000 l. upon the ground of extraneous aid being destructive of that self-reliance, the existence of which he held to be essential to the renovation of Ireland. Now, as to self-reliance, no one could feel more deeply than he (Sir G. Grey) did, that it was of the utmost importance that that spirit should be most carefully and sedulously fostered and developed, and Government had been anxious to make every possible effort to induce the inhabitants of the distressed districts to exert themselves for their own support, before it had felt itself justified in applying towards their relief the money placed at its disposal by Parliament. But when the hon. Gentleman talked of self-reliance in the present emergency, when starvation was imminent, he forgot that self-reliance must necessarily be of slow growth in Ireland; and however valuable the principle might he, this was not the moment for trusting exclusively to its influence. But the hon. Gentleman stated that he was prepared to advocate a scheme of equal taxation with respect to Ireland. Now the hon. Gentleman stated the amount of taxes paid exclusively by this country, and none of which fell upon Ireland, as about 11,000,000 l.; and he proposed as a remedy for the present state of things that the taxation in both countries should be equalised, in order, he presumed, to entitle Ireland, when so taxed, to Parliamentary grants for the relief of Irish distress. But how was this scheme consistent with the hon. Gentleman's favourite principle of self-reliance? If Ireland were to be equally taxed, for the purpose of the produce being first paid into the Treasury, and then granted back again to the distressed unions, the principle of self-reliance was gone at once. Such a system of taxation, too, would fall upon Ulster, Leinster, and Munster just as exclusively as the rate in aid now proposed. But, besides, the proposal of the hon. Gentleman appeared to him to answer itself; for while the hon. Gentleman enlarged upon the great evils produced by the constant expectation of indefinite assistance from the Treasury, his plan would cause the continuance of that expectation which it was one of the great objects of the present Bill to put an end to. The noble Viscount the Member for Bandon, indeed, appeared to object to this scheme, and to advocate the continuance of relief
222
from imperial funds; but as that was not generally insisted on, he need not farther advert to it. He now came to the speech of the hon. Member for the county of Limerick, whom he never listened to without instruction and profit, as his opinions were expressed with evident sincerity, and were always of a practical nature. That hon. Member contended that the funds ought indeed to be drawn from Ireland, but he would prefer that they should be raised by means of an income tax, levied on all descriptions of property. That proposition was also embodied in the Amendment moved that night by the hon. Member for Longford—an Amendment which proposed the imposition of an income tax. The hon. Member for Limerick, however, had coupled his proposition with the condition that the produce of his income tax should be applied exclusively to Irish purposes. Now what, after all, was the difference in principle between the proposition of the hon. Gentleman and that now before the House? It was said that the rate in aid involved a new principle; but an income tax for local purposes was distinctly a rate in aid, the only difference being that it applied to all descriptions of property. The question, then, to consider was, whether that tax would be more acceptable to the Irish people generally than a rate in aid. He was not prepared, on the part of the Government, to argue against the income tax being imposed on Ireland; and if the Irish Members were anxious to have an income tax in Ireland rather than a rate in aid, there would be a strong reason why their preference should be consulted. ["No, no!"] He confessed that he was not surprised, although he was somewhat disappointed, at those signs of dissent; but really, looking to the language which had been held upon the subject, both in and out of the House, he did believe that if the Government had proposed an income tax, the opposition to it would have been much stronger than it was to the present measure. With regard to emigration, as one of the objects to which the produce of such a tax ought to be applied, he supposed that the hon. Gentleman who had recommended it alluded to emigration from the western unions, as a means of relief to those unions. If the hon. Gentleman alluded to general emigration, he must see that such a system could be of little or no benefit to the western unions. Emigration certainly might be one mode of

223
relief, and as such it was not excluded by the resolution before the House, while, whether it could be so managed as to afford that immediate relief which was necessary, was a question which could advantageously be discussed on a future stage of the Bill. But, as regarded the objection to the present measure as involving a new principle, he must say that an income tax applied to local purposes only was in principle a measure of a much more novel nature. To what did Ulster object? Was their objection to the 6d. in the pound, collected as a rate in aid, or to any taxation imposed on Ireland for the purposes of Irish distress? The principle to which the people of Ulster seemed to object, was the only principle on which it was admitted that the House could proceed—namely, to draw upon Ireland, and not upon the Imperial Treasury, for the relief of Irish distress. A meeting bad been held in the county of Tyrone, where the strongest disapprobation had been expressed of the conduct of a noble Lord the Member for that county (Lord C. Hamilton), because he had said that the people of Ireland should bear their fair share of the national taxation. They denounced the proposal of an income tax as monstrous and unjust. He (Sir G. Grey) would not dwell on what was reported to have been said at that meeting, as expressions might have been used hastily; but the resolutions they passed deliberately expressed the same sentiments. They said—
"That a tax imposed upon a small part of Ireland to meet an imperial calamity is unjust and vexatious, and ought to be resisted by every constitutional means."
Now that meeting seemed to labour under some delusion with respect to the principle on which this tax was to be levied. Ulster was not alone to be taxed for the relief of Connaught. The tax would be a general one over the whole of Ireland. It would have been unjust to have selected Ulster as the only area of taxation for this purpose, and that had not been done. The petitioners at that meeting went on to say that they—
"Have heard with astonishment that it was proposed to tax the industry of Ulster for the support of the pauper population of Connaught and Munster, while the English farmer, whose harvests would rot upon the Held, and the English capitalist, whose machinery would rust in idleness, if deprived of the supply of labourers afforded by these provinces, are to be free from all contribution towards their support when visited by destitution."
224
Now, in reading these resolutions it would seem that an opinion prevailed that this was the first occasion on which relief for Irish distress had been asked; the grants and loans in aid of Irish distress had seemed to be forgotten. Whatever might be the poor-rates of Ulster, hon. Gentlemen would admit that Ulster paid no income tax or assessed taxes, because Ulster formed part of Ireland and not of England; and on the same ground she was called upon to pay her share of this rate. He considered, therefore, the opposition to this rate in aid. on the part of Ulster unreasonable. In the last paragraph of the resolutions to which he had referred, it was stated that the English farmer was exempt from all contributions towards the support of the Irish people when visited by destitution. To confute that assertion, he might refer to the increase of the burdens on this country, consequent upon the recent relief of Irish distress. A return was moved for last Session by the noble Lord the Member for Marylebone, of the number of Irish poor that had, between the 31st of December, 1846, and the 31st of December, 1847, received relief out of the poor-rates of the city of London, of Marylebone, Westminster, Lambeth, Southwark, the Tower Hamlets, Finsbury, Liverpool, and Glasgow respectively. This return was necessarily imperfect, because in some of the largest parishes included in the London union no separate accounts were kept of the Irish paupers. It excluded the parish of St. Luke's and two parishes in Glasgow; but even by the limited return thus made, it appeared that no less than 159,000 Irish had been relieved at a cost of between 75,000 l. and 76,000 l. Such a return, however, exhibited only a small portion of the pressure upon the ratepayers of this country for the relief of Irish distress. By a return he had received from Liverpool, it appeared that during the last fourteen weeks no less than 51,000 deck passengers were landed at that port from Ireland—the majority, he was happy to say, being emigrants, of which the people of Liverpool could not complain; but deducting these and others termed jobbers, the number of absolute paupers thrown upon the rates was 15,000, or more than 1,000 a week. Large amounts of money for Irish paupers were also paid by Manchester and other large towns; and in the general report of the Poor Law Commissioners for 1848, they stated that the poor-

225
rates had exceeded the amount of the preceding year by 800,000 l.; and that great part of that was on account of Irish pauperism. It could not, therefore, be said that English farmers and others did not bear a fair share of the burden of poor-rates even for Irish poor. He trusted that Ulster would not forget this fact, or forget that England bore her full share of the burdens of Ireland. He also held in his hand another series of resolutions passed on Friday last at a meeting in Belfast, in which the strongest feeling was expressed against any system of poor-laws, except for the sick and aged. The resolutions at that meeting were to the effect, that the imposition of a rate over which the ratepayers had no control, was a violation of the rights of the subject, was dangerous to public liberty, and should be opposed. [Viscount CASTLEREAGH: Read the last paragraph, referring to the influx of Irish paupers into Belfast.] He had read the only extracts in his possession. The Belfast meeting objected to the imposition of any tax for the relief of Irish distress. With respect to the principle of this rate in aid, it had been truly said, that this principle was not a new one. The principle was recognised by the law of England. It was not confined even to neighbouring parishes, but extended to the whole county. If a part of Yorkshire were in distress, any other parish in the county might be legally required to contribute towards the relief of that part. The amount of relief would be limited only by the necessities of the prevailing poverty. The whole county might have to come to the aid of one of its sick members. To show that the principle was not new, of providing for local distress not from imperial resources but from the property in the vicinity, he might refer to a return not long since moved for, of relief afforded to the people of Scotland in the year 1783. The distress which prevailed in that year was the subject of investigation before a Committee of the House of Commons; and it appeared that it extended over sixteen counties. The Committee, in determining the mode of relief which should be administered, resolved, and Parliament enacted, that the committee of supply of these counties should raise the funds requisite for the relief of the distress by a tax on the land. This was done. On that occasion, he believed, not one shilling had been taken from the public exchequer. He could not understand why inequality of valuation
226
was adduced as a reason against I the imposition of this rate in aid. If it were conclusive against the rate in aid, it must of necessity be equally conclusive against any rate whatsoever. It would be conclusive against the county rate, as great inequalities existed in the valuation of different parts of counties. He could show the hon. Gentleman the Member for the county of Limerick, that in England, Scotland, and Ireland, there were numerous proofs that the condition of equal valuation had not been required as a condition of taxation. The valuation was, generally, very unequal. And were they to wait until the slow progress of equalising the valuation should have been gone through, and abstain in the meanwhile from all local taxation? For they must do so, if the hon. Gentleman's argument held good. Upon that subject, he could not but admit the inequality of the valuation, and the importance, as far as possible, of remedying it. He begged to state one striking instance of inequality in England; it was the case of the district of the metropolitan police. That district included portions of five counties—Middlesex, Surrey, Hertford, Essex, and Kent. The Government were engaged in attempting to remedy the great inequalities that existed in that instance. But so great were they at present, that the hon. Gentleman, to be consistent to his doctrine, should follow it up by stating, that no metropolitan police rate should be levied until the valuations were placed upon an equal footing. In Essex, the property-tax valuation had been taken as a standard of the county valuation. The difference between the valuation in Middlesex and Essex was not very great, it being only about 5½ per cent. In Surrey and Hertford the difference was 14 and 14½ per cent; whilst in Kent the difference was no less than between 44 and 45 per cent. He was now endeavouring to remedy this inequality; but some thought of postponing the collection of the rate till this was effected. He had now stated the general grounds upon which he thought it was desirable to adhere to the plan proposed; and the reasons for which he thought that the proposed mode of raising the money was, at all events, not more objectionable than any other that could be suggested. He assumed that it was not more objectionable, because he found every other plan that had been suggested met with

227
more opposition and less support. His right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated, the other night, the objection to the income tax as a mode of affording immediate relief, on account of the necessity of preparing the necessary machinery, whilst there would not he one shilling of expense incurred in the collection of this rate. But he (Sir G. Grey) was anxious to state that he most entirely concurred with those hon. Gentlemen who said that whilst the present was a temporary measure—one that might be looked upon merely as a temporary expedient—intended to meet a temporary emergency; yet the Government would not be justified in proposing it if they were not prepared to propose also other modifications of the poor-law. The Government would, at a later period, propose those modifications of the poor-law which they believed to be necessary, and which, he hoped, would tend to remedy some of the evils in the existing state of things. He would not go into the question of the areas of taxation then. Probably there would not be found, upon discussion, any very great difference between some hon. Gentlemen opposite and himself upon the subject; but no measure could be brought forward upon it until the preliminary inquiry, which was absolutely indispensable, had been completed. One word with regard to the suggestion made by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth. No hon. Gentleman, however he might differ with the right hon. Baronet upon other matters, could differ with him in the opinion that they were bound to look beyond the present moment—that they were bound not only to relieve the present destitution in the western unions, but to look forward to the means by which that part of Ireland might be placed in a position to maintain itself. Now, he (Sir G. Grey) had stated what he believed to be the cause of the distress in those unions; and although he was not sanguine as to the possibility of Parliament or of Government applying a complete remedy, yet he concurred with the right hon. Baronet in the opinion that the remedy was to be sought in the transfer of the great bulk of the property from the hands in which it was at present to other proprietors. He would not say from the hands of bankrupt landlords, because he would not use a word that might give offence; but from the hands of those who, received it oppressed with burdens, and overwhelmed with mortgages,
228
and who were therefore unable to discharge the duties attached to its possession, to the hands of men possessed of capital, and able to provide employment for the people, and to secure the cultivation of the soil. But as to the means to be employed in facilitating those transfers, it was only by slow degrees, and after much experience, that gentlemen accustomed to the forms of law and equity could be brought to dispense with forms long cherished and long considered to be essential. The right hon. Baronet said, he would transfer those estates with the strictest regard to the rights of property. But it was, no doubt, in order to ensure a strict regard to the rights of property, that the rules referred to by the right hon. Gentleman had been prescribed by the Court of Chancery with respect to the Act for the sale of encumbered estates, and which the Court was not very likely to dispense with for the purpose of facilitating the transfer of lands. He thought, however, that they should so modify some portions of the poor-law, as to induce purchasers to enter the market and compete when estates were put up for sale. Whether a Commission recommended by the right hon. Baronet might tend to accelerate the transfer of property or not, was a matter for consideration; but if the Gentlemen composing it were to act with strict regard to the right of property, and to have power to decide all the questions that might be raised about the titles to property, it would be necessary that they should be lawyers; and if so, the parties, he feared, would find themselves in much the same state as if the Court of Chancery were still to be appealed to. At the same time, he should be sorry to express a hostile opinion to a proposal of that kind, without its being presented in more detail. He believed that the Connemara estate, to which allusion had been made, was, in fact, the property of one of the great insurance companies in London, by whom it was to be sold either together or in lots. The right hon. Baronet had spoken of selling it in small lots of one or two thousand acres. Probably he was not rightly informed of the nature of the property, a great portion of it being of that description that it could not be so divided. But the breaking up into suitable lots of that and other estates, and the transfer of them into other hands, must be a slow and gradual process. [An Hon. MEMBER: Time!] An hon. Gentleman

229
reminded him that he had exceeded the time within which it was thought advisable that the speeches of hon. Members should be kept; he should, therefore, conclude by saying, that the Government would be glad to listen to any proposition which would tend to insure the object they had in view, of providing for the relief of the existing destitution, and the promotion of the future prosperity, of Ireland.
VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGH VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGH moved that the Chairman should report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
LORD J. RUSSELLhoped that, after three nights' debate, they could have come to a decision that night upon the question. He thought they might have come to a resolution in Committee after such a length of debate, and, therefore, he should take the sense of the House on the question.
VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGHsaid, that he wished to address a few words to the House before the debate closed.
SIR J. WALSHasked whether money to be paid by the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not involved in the question then before the House?
LORD J. RUSSELLsaid, the hon. Baronet was mistaken. If any money were to be voted by Parliament founded upon the resolution then before the Committee, the Chancellor of the Exchequer should make a distinct proposition on the subject.
MR. J. O'CONNELLsaid, he was anxious to address the House on the present occasion; but after the small degree of attention which they had bestowed on the right hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, he could not hope for a very patient hearing at that hour.
VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGHwould take the sense of the House on the question of the adjournment. He did not think there was an Irishman on that side of the House who would not speak on the question, as it was one that affected the whole property of Ireland. He moved that the Chairman report progress.
Whereupon Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do now report progress, and ask leave to sit again." The Committee divided:—Ayes 104; Noes 251: Majority 147.

List of the AYES.

Adair, H. E.

Bagge, W.

Alexander, N.

Bankes, G.

Archdall, Capt. M.

Barron, Sir H. W.

Arkwright, G.

Bennet, P.

230

Beresford, W.

Lopes, Sir R.

Bernard, Visct.

Mackenzie, W. F.

Blackall, S. W.

Macnaghten, Sir E.

Blake, M. J.

Macnamara, Maj.

Boldero, H. G.

M'Cullagh, W. T.

Bourke, R. S.

Mandeville, Visct.

Bremridge, R.

March, Earl of

Brooke, Lord

Maxwell, hon. J. P.

Brooke, Sir A. B.

Miles, P. W. S.

Browne, R. D.

Miles, W.

Buck, L. W.

Monsell, W.

Buller, Sir J. Y.

Morgan, O.

Bunbury, W. M.

Napier, J.

Callaghan, D.

Neeld, J.

Chichester, Lord J. L.

Newdegate, C. N.

Clements, hon. C. S.

Newport, Visct.

Cobbold, J. C.

Newry and Mornc, Visct.

Cole, hon. H. A.

Noel, hon. G. J.

Coles, H. B.

Nugent, Sir P.

Conolly, T.

O'Brien, Sir L.

Corry, rt. hon. H. L.

O'Connell, M. J.

Cotton, hon. W. H. S.

O'Connor, F.

Dick, Q.

O'Flaherty, A.

Dod, J. W.

Pakington, Sir J.

Dodd, G.

Plumptre, J. P.

Dunne, F. P.

Repton, G. W. J.

Edwards, H.

Richards, R.

Fagan, W.

Rufford, F.

Ferguson, Sir R. A.

St. George, C.

FitzPatrick, rt. hon. J.

Shirley, E. J.

Forbes, W.

Simeon, J.

Forester, hon. G. C. W.

Somerset, Capt.

Fortescue, C.

Spooner, R.

Fox, R. M.

Stafford, A.

Godson, R.

Sullivan, M.

Gore, W. R. O.

Taylor, T. E.

Grace, O. D. J.

Tennent, R. J.

Greene, J.

Thompson, Ald.

Halford, Sir H.

Tyrell, Sir J. T.

Hamilton, J. H.

Verner, Sir W.

Hayes, Sir E.

Vesey, hon. T.

Herbert, H. A.

Vyse, R. H. R. H.

Hill, Lord E.

Waddington, H. S.

Hood, Sir A.

Walsh, Sir J. B.

Hornby, J.

Wawn, J. T.

Jocelyn, Visct.

Wortley, rt. hon. J. S.

Jones, Capt.

TELLERS.

Keating, R.

Castlereagh, Visct.

Ker, R.

Grogan, E.

List of the NOES.

Abdy, T. N.

Bright, J.

Adare, Visct.

Brisco, M.

Anson, hon. Col.

Brockman, E. D.

Anson, Visct.

Brotherton, J.

Armstrong, Sir A.

Brown, W.

Armstrong, R. B.

Bulkeley, Sir R. B. W.

Arundel and Surrey, Earl of

Bunbury, E. H.

Burghley, Lord

Ashley, Lord

Butler, P. S.

Bagshaw, J.

Campbell, hon. W. F.

Baines, M. T.

Cardwell, E.

Baring, rt. hn. Sir F. T.

Carew, W. H. P.

Bass, M. T.

Caulfeild, J. M.

Bellow, R. M.

Cavendish, hon. C. C.

Berkeley, hon. Capt.

Cavendish, hon. G. H

Berkeley, hon. H. F.

Cayley, E. S.

Berkeley, C. L. G.

Chandos, Marq. of

Birch, Sir T. B.

Chaplin, W. J.

Bouverie, hon. E. P.

Charteris, hon. F.

Boyle, hon. Col.

Childers, J. W.

Brackley, Visct.

Clay, J.

Bramston, T. W.

Clay, Sir W.

231

Clerk, rt. hon. Sir G.

Keppel, hon. G. T.

Clive, H. B.

Kershaw, J.

Cobden, R.

Kildare, Marq. of

Cockburn, A. J. E.

Labouchere, rt. hon. H.

Cocks, T. S.

Langston, J. H.

Cowper, hon. W. F.

Lascelles, hon. W. S.

Craig, W. G.

Lemon, Sir C.

Crowder, R. B.

Lennox, Lord H. G.

Davie, Sir H. R. F.

Leslie, C. P.

Dawson, hon. T. V.

Lewis, rt. hon. Sir T. F.

Divett, H.

Lewis, G. C.

Douro, Marq. of

Lincoln, Earl of

Drummond, H.

Lindsay, hon. Col.

Duckworth, Sir J. T. B.

Loch, J.

Duke, Sir J.

Locke, J.

Duncan, Visct.

Lockhart, A. E.

Duncan, G.

Lockhart, W.

Dundas, Adm.

Lushington, C.

Dundas, Sir D.

Mackinnon, W. A.

Dundas, G.

M'Gregor, J.

Du Pre, C. G.

Mahon, The O'Gorman

Ebrington, Visct.

Maitland, T.

Ellice, rt. hon. E.

Mangles, R. D.

Ellice, E.

Marshall, W.

Ellis, J.

Martin, C. W.

Elliot, hon. J. E.

Matheson, A.

Emlyn, Visct.

Matheson, Col.

Enfield, Visct.

Maule, rt. hon. F.

Euston, Earl of

Melgund, Visct.

Evans, W.

Milner, W. M. E.

Ewart, W.

Milnes, It. M.

Fergus, J.

Milton, Visct.

Ferguson, Col.

Mitchell, T. A.

Foley, J. H. H.

Moffatt, G.

Fordyce, A. D.

Moore, G. H.

Forster, M.

Morris, D.

Fox, W. J.

Mowatt, F.

Freestun, Col.

Mulgrave, Earl of

Fuller, A. E.

Mure, Col.

Gibson, rt. hon. T. M.

Norreys, Lord

Glyn, G. C.

Norreys, Sir D. J.

Goddard, A. L.

Ogle, S. C. H.

Greene, T.

Ord, W.

Grenfell, C. P.

Oswald, A.

Grenfell, C. W.

Owen, Sir J.

Grey, rt. hon. Sir G.

Packe, C. W.

Grey, R. W.

Paget, Lord A.

Grosvenor, Earl

Paget, Lord C.

Guest, Sir J.

Paget, Lord G

Hallyburton, Lord J. F.

Palmer, R.

Hastie, A.

Palmerston, Visct.

Hawes, B.

Parker, J.

Hay, Lord J.

Patten, J. W.

Hayter, rt. hon. W. G.

Pearson, C.

Headlam, T. E.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Heneage, G. H. W.

Peel, F.

Henley, J. W.

Perfect, R.

Henry, A.

Peto, S. M.

Hervey, Lord A.

Philips, Sir G. R.

Heyworth, L.

Pigott, F.

Hobhouse, rt. hon. Sir J.

Pilkington, J.

Hobhouse, T. B.

Pinney, W.

Hodges, T. T.

Plowden, W. H. C.

Hogg, Sir J. W.

Power, N.

Hollond, R.

Price, Sir R.

Hope, Sir J.

Pryse, P.

Howard, Lord E.

Pusey, P.

Howard, hon. C. W. G.

Ricardo, O.

Howard, hon. E. G. G.

Rice, E. R.

Howard, P. H.

Rich, H.

Hume, J.

Robartes, T. J. A.

Jervis, Sir J.

Roche, E. B.

Johnstone, Sir J.

Romilly, Sir J.

232

Rumbold, C. E.

Towneley, J.

Russell, Lord J.

Townley, R. G.

Russell, F. C. H.

Townshend, Capt.

Rutherford, A.

Traill, G.

Sandars, G.

Trelawny, J. S.

Sandars, J.

Trevor, hon. G. R.

Scholefield, W.

Turner, G. J.

Seymer, H. K.

Tynte, Col. C. J. K.

Seymour, Lord

Vane, Lord H.

Shafto, R. D.

Villiers, hon. C.

Sheil, rt. hon. R. L.

Villiers, hon. F. W. C.

Sheridan, R. B.

Walmsley, Sir J.

Sibthorp, Col.

Walpole, S. H.

Sidney, Ald.

Ward, H. G.

Smith, rt. hon. R, V.

Watkins, Col. L.

Smith, J. A.

Wellesley, Lord C.

Smith, M. T.

West, F. R.

Smith, J. B.

Westhead, J. P.

Somerville, rt. hon. Sir W.

Willcox, B. M.

Spearman, H. J.

Williams, J.

Stansfield, W. R. C.

Willyams, H.

Stanton, W. H.

Williamson, Sir H.

Staunton, Sir G. T.

Wilson, J.

Stuart, Lord D.

Wilson, M.

Stuart, H.

Wood, rt. hon. Sir C.

Talbot, C. R. M.

Wood, W. P.

Tancred, H. W.

Wyld, J.

Thesiger, Sir F.

Wynn, rt. hn. C. W. W.

Thicknesse, R. A.

Young, Sir J.

Thompson, Col.

Thompson, G.

TELLERS.

Thornely, T.

Tufnell, H.

Tollemache, hon. F. J.

Hill, Lord M.

VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGHthen moved the adjournment of the debate.
LORD J. RUSSELLsaid, that considering the largeness of the minority, he should not further oppose the Motion.
Committee report progress.

BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS.
SIR J. PAKINGTON SIR J. PAKINGTON moved the appointment of the Select Committee on the Bribery at Elections Bill.
COLONEL SIBTHORPobjected to the nomination of so important a Committee at that late hour. He hoped the hon. Baronet would postpone his Motion to another day.
SIR J. PAKINGTONsaid, he would have yielded to the request of the hon. and gallant Colonel, if he had assigned a sufficient reason for his doing so; but the only reason of the hon. and gallant Gentleman was, that he wished for more time to consider the names proposed. He (Sir J. Pakington) had given notice of the Committee on Thursday last, and postponed it on Friday at the desire of the hon. Member for Northampton.
COLONEL SIBTHORP: Then I shall move that the House do now adjourn.
MR. SPEAKERsaid, that as the hon. and gallant Gentleman had resumed his

233
seat without making a Motion, he could not now propose it.
SIR H. WILLOUGHBYobjected to the practice of appointing hon. Members to sit upon more than one Committee in the same Session of Parliament. He could point to one or two Members who were placed upon no less than twelve Committees in the last Session. He wished to see a more equal distribution of public business to the Committees. At present, also, there was the greatest irregularity in the mode of conducting business by the Committees, and he could point at Committees where examinations had been conducted without a quorum being present, and in some cases solely by the Chairman. In this instance, he had no objection to the names upon the Committee, though he observed that the hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Bouverie) was already upon one Committee, and he did not see why some other hon. Gentleman should not he appointed.
MR. WILSON PATTENsaid, the abuse to which the hon. Baronet had alluded was one that deserved the attention of the House. It happened on some occasions that the Chairman was the only Member of Committee that was left to examine witnesses, without there being another Member to cross-examine, or to bring out the proper bearing of the answers. To remedy this evil, he thought it would be desirable that the clerk of a public Committee should adopt the practice in private Committees, of calling the Chairman's attention to the fact, wherever there was not a quorum present, and that all business should then cease till five Members had again assembled.
The names of Sir John Pakington, Lord Ashley, Sir Frederic Thesiger, Mr. Bouverie, Viscount Mahon. Mr. Brotherton, Mr. Walpole, and Mr. Legh, were agreed to.
On the Motion that Sir John Hanmer be one of the Committee, Colonel Sibthorp opposed the Motion, and said he should divide the House.
Motion made, and Question put, "That Sir John Hanmer be one other Member of the said Committee." The House divided:—Ayes 31; Noes 3: Majority 28.

List of the AYES.

Bramston, T. W.

Goddard, A.

Brotherton, J.

Greene, T.

Campbell, hon. W. F.

Hawes, B.

Duckworth, Sir J. T. B.

Howard, Lord E.

Ebrington, Visct.

Lockhart, W.

Evans, W.

Moffatt, G.

234

Nugent, Lord

Talbot, C. R. M.

Parker, J.

Thompson, Col.

Patten, J. W.

Thornely, T.

Pearson, C.

Tufnell, H.

Pigott, F.

Willyams, H.

Pilkington, J.

Williamson, Sir H.

Price, Sir R.

Willoughby, Sir H.

Rice, E. R.

Wilson, J.

Sandars, G.

TELLERS.

Spooner, R.

Pakington, Sir J.

Sullivan, M.

Hill, Lord M.

List of the NOES.

Buller, Sir J. Y.

TELLERS.

Henley, J. W.

Sibthorp, Col.

Waddington, H. S.

Mackenzie, W. F.

House adjourned at One o'clock.

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—Outdoor Paupers.
2a Commons Inclosure; Vice-Guardians of Unions (Ireland); Relief of Distress (Ireland); Buckingham Summer Assizes.
Reported.—Larceny Acts Amendment.
3a Marriage (Scotland); Registering Births, &c. (Scotland).
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By the Duke of Richmond, the Earl of Eglintoun, and the Earl of Aberdeen, from Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, and a number of other Places, against the Marriage (Scotland) Bill; also from the same Places, against the Registering Births, &c. (Scotland) Bill.—From Carrickmacross and Nenagh, against the Imposition of a Rate in Aid of certain Distressed Unions in Ireland.—From Rothesay, against the Repeal of the Navigation Laws.—From Trowbridge, for the Adoption of Measures for the Suppression of Seduction and Prostitution.

MARRIAGE (SCOTLAND) BILL.
LORD CAMPBELL LORD CAMPBELL moved the Third Reading of this Bill.
The EARL of ABERDEENsaid, that the noble and learned Lord, without making
158
any observations, had now moved the third reading of this Bill. As he (the Earl of Aberdeen) had already addressed the House on the subject, it was not his intention to trespass on the attention of their Lordships at any length on the present occasion. He must, however, state, that he had received many letters from various parts of Scotland, complaining of the haste with which this Bill, and that for the Registering Births, had been pressed through the House, and expressing the desire of the writers that an opportunity should be afforded them of petitioning against them. He was rather surprised at this desire, seeing the entire neglect and inattention with which, for the last two years, the petitions on this subject had been received by the House. He would admit that, of late years, the right of petitioning had been so much abused that it was not wonderful that their Lordships should not receive these petitions with all that respect and interest which they would otherwise command. But this was no party question. It was one affecting the social condition of the people of Scotland, and one on which a great unanimity of opinion had been expressed, and still existed at this moment in that country. The more he considered the two Bills introduced by the noble and learned Lord, particularly the Marriages Bill, the more he was at a loss to ascertain the grounds on which it was introduced. He could discover no reason for it, and He could only consider it an attempt to make more perfect a general system of registration, without considering the evils which the alteration would inevitably produce. The alteration was supported by the most flimsy and wretched arguments. They were told that there was a system of registration of marriages provided for England, and therefore it was fitting that there should be a similar system established for Scotland. But those who urged these arguments, entirely forgot that there was no resemblance between the circumstances of the two countries. In England the system of registration and of marriages before the registrar was established in consequence of the numerous petitions which were presented by Dissenters, who formerly were obliged to go to the Established Church to be married, and against which they entertained conscientious scruples. Nothing of the kind was the case in Scotland. There was no compulsion there to go to the Established Church. Each party was married by

159
the minister of the sect to which he belonged; and on this head, therefore, there was no practical grievance whatever. When he looked at the evils to the morals of the country that were likely to arise from the measure, he thought the present subject was one which deserved the most serious consideration of the House. They did not propose to interfere with the principle of the marriage law of Scotland. Under the present Act, marriage was still to be a civil contract, perfected by the consent of the parties. Although, fortunately, irregular marriages were not very frequent in Scotland, yet, when they did take place, their validity was unquestionable. A written promise given by the party, followed by cohabitation, was a valid marriage. He maintained that this was just. He said, that when a man gave a written promise, and thereby effected the ruin of a woman, it was only a matter of common justice that such a contract should be considered a binding one. This rule prevailed in every country of Europe; it was the law of Scotland at the present moment, and had been so for ages; and perhaps it would be quite as well if it prevailed in England. Now, this alteration would have the effect of holding out an indemnity and encouragement for seduction; for he believed he might take it for granted that seduction was generally effected by moans of some such promise. It generally appeared so in cases of actions for seductions in England. Let them look at any circuit in England. The cases of seduction in one circuit in England were often more in number than those which occurred in Scotland in the course of fifty years; and now, in spite of that which had been the law in Scotland time out of mind, Parliament was to say, that such a promise, followed by cohabitation, was no longer to be binding. Such a course would lead to an incalculable amount of guilt and misery. When he saw the institutions of his country overthrown, without the slightest show of reason, and contrary to the wishes of the people, he must say, that the feelings with which he viewed such an attempt were those of indignation. If their Lordships now wished to alter the law, they should appoint a Committee of Inquiry—they should call evidence, and see what the evils and advantages of the existing law were—they should inquire deliberately into the subject before they ventured to interfere with a matter which affected the welfare
160
of the people of Scotland in the highest degree. But the system proposed to be established by the present measure was quite new, and had never yet been attempted. His noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) some years ago introduced a Bill on this subject; but what was the nature of that measure? That measure was one in which the noble and learned Lord attempted to remedy the evils which arose in consequence of the difference between the English and Scotch laws on the subject of marriage. His noble and learned Friend on that occasion stated truly, that the people of Scotland were exceedingly attached to this portion of their jurisprudence; and that, for his part, he had no intention of interfering with it; and he added, that one system might be advantageous in Scotland, and another in England, yet that was no reason why the people of this country should take advantage of the Scotch law to evade the provisions of their own law. On that occasion he (the Earl of Aberdeen) expressed his concurrence in the views of; his noble and learned Friend; but now it appeared that a change had come over him, and that he was prepared to sweep away, without hesitation, that law which he said before he had no intention whatever of interfering with. On this subject, he could only appeal to Philip sober. The law of marriage in Scotland had been frequently referred to in both Houses of Parliament during the debates on Lord Hardwicke's Act, but no one thought of proposing any alteration in it. He had heard Lord Eldon and Lord Stowell on the subject of the Scotch marriage law, and they had never suggested any alteration in this respect, however much they might desire to correct the evils arising from the evasion of the law of England. Neither Lord Hardwicke nor anybody else had ever hinted at the propriety of altering the law. Dr. Lushington had spoken of this law with respect, and had never intimated the slightest idea of any such alteration. He might be permitted to say, that a measure of such importance as to its objects, and the extent to which it might be carried, deserved to be approached with much more caution than had hitherto been shown, seeing that there could not be the least necessity for it, except to complete, and to render somewhat more perfect, a general system of registration. He had expressed himself strongly, because he felt deeply on the subject; and finding that it would be vain for him to contend against the domination

161
to which he was exposed, he should merely add, that he never valued more highly than he now did the privilege which every Peer possessed of recording in a protest his opinion of any measure which he considered inexpedient and unjust.
LORD CAMPBELLwas surprised at the complaint made by the noble Earl against these Bills. The present was the third Session during which they had been before the House; and both in principle and in detail they had been most deliberately discussed. It was on account of the very condition of the law of marriage in Scotland, described by the noble Earl, that he (Lord Campbell) bad introduced the Marriage Bill as an attempt to remedy its evils. Its object was to register those promises of which the noble Earl had spoken, in order that the marriages might be legalised and declared, for the sake of the wife and the offspring, so that if the marriage were ever questioned, the promise could be shown to have been made. No one could enter into a bargain for the sale of goods or lands without a written contract; and if his noble Friend would not part with any of his numerous estates without having a contract in writing, how could he object to a written contract of marriage between persons—involving so deeply as it did the peace and character of females and their families, the morality of the people, and the possession of property—being made so publicly as to render any denial of it impossible? The mode of marriage required to be carefully attended to. It was peculiar to Scotland, and the power of declaration or concealment lay with the parties themselves. They might live together for years as man and wife, and finally either declare their marriage, and legalise their children, or say they were never married, and so illegitimise their offspring. The noble Earl had referred to the custom of other countries, and had stated that no country in Europe refused to recognise a written promise of marriage otherwise than as a good marriage. He would venture to contradict the noble Lord, and to state that in no Christian country in Europe did a written promise of marriage constitute a marriage. In France, and every part of Christendom where the Council of Trent prevailed, no marriage was lawful unless it were entered into in the presence either of the parish clergyman or the officer appointed by law for the purpose. It was the object of the present Bill to assimilate the law of Scotland
162
in this respect to that of every other Christian country, and to put an end to f. state of doubt as to what was, and what was not, a legal marriage.
Bill read 3a and passed; as was also the REGISTERING BIRTHS, &c., (SCOTLAND) BILL.

VICE-GUARDIANS OF UNIONS (IRELAND) BILL.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE moved that this Bill be now read 2a.
LORD STANLEYsaid, he was glad to find that this Bill was to be of only temporary duration, and, under the circumstances, he should not offer any opposition to its passing. At the same time, he thought the subject was one which required considerable attention on the part of Her Majesty's Government, whether the Poor Law Commissioners should not be required to specify the grounds of their proceedings in each case where they appointed vice-guardians. The two systems of elected guardians and of paid guardians were liable to separate evils—either they had local knowledge with local prejudices, or, in the other case, there was an absence of local prejudice, but, at the same time, an absence of local knowledge, which frequently resulted in the expenditure of a large and an unnecessary sum of money. He suggested that a remedy might be found in the vice-guardians calling to their assistance some of the more intelligent of the elected guardians.
The EARL of WICKLOWsaid, the suggestions of the noble Lord were no doubt of considerable weight; but he thought there were reasons on the opposite side which considerably outweighed them. He contended that responsibility ought to rest exclusively either upon one class or the other. He deplored any system which would divide the responsibility between the vice-guardians and the elected guardians. Both systems might be liable to peculiar evils and abuses; but he was sure that those abuses would be greatly augmented by a union of the two systems.
LORD MONTEAGLEfelt it Ins duty to support the present Bill; but, at the same time, he thought the system of paid guardians was peculiarly liable to abuse; and, while several excellent appointments had been made, he knew cases, on the other hand, where parties were appointed that were utterly incompetent to discharge the duties of their situation.
The BISHOP of CASHELrose to bear

163
his testimony in favour of paid guardians, 'instead of that class of guardians which generally composed an elected board, where it was too often the case that politics were: introduced as subjects of debate, instead of attending to the wants of the poor, He could state, that in the district of country with which he was acquainted, the ratepayers were thankful for the substitution of paid guardians; and the poor, to his own knowledge, were twice as well taken care of as they were under the old system. As to the expense, it was a fact with which he was acquainted, that in one union the paid guardians had made such arrangements that, unless a sudden scarcity of food should take place, such as was not at all anticipated, there would be a saving of 6,000 l. or 7,000 l a year. He believed, if there was a uniform and permanent system of paid guardians, both the ratepayers and the poor would be better satisfied.
The EARL of LUCANsaid, he would acquiesce in the measure without at all giving an opinion upon the point which had been referred to by the right rev. Prelate. A suggestion had been made, that, before the Poor Law Commissioners dismissed a board of guardians, application should be made to the Court of Queen's Bench to proceed by mandamus; and he was not sure that great advantages might not result from such a practice. He had had some experience, in the working of the system of paid guardians. In the county with which he was connected there were four unions under the management of paid guardians, and great complaints had been made of the mischief they had done from their want of local knowledge.
Bill read 2a.

RELIEF OF DISTRESS (IRELAND) BILL.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE moved the Second Reading of the Relief of Distress (Ireland) Bill.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he did not mean to oppose the Bill. He feared the necessity was so great that it was impossible they could do otherwise than accede to it. Indeed, he feared it was too late to resist the grant, because the money was actually in the course of being paid away in relief—dum loquimur fagerit. At the same time, he must suggest to his noble Friends in the Government that it was grievous to have these applications made to Parliament for grants of money from time to time, the Irish living, as it were, from hand to mouth, to provide for what
164
he feared was a permanent evil. The present grant was at once too little and too much—too little to do any permanent good, and too much to avoid the infringement of a great principle. There was one thing to which he would fain call their Lordships' consideration, and that was, to think how I they could most avoid accustoming the Irish—or rather, he feared he should now say, how they should most avoid continuing to accustom them—to look for a remedy of this sort at all, in which they were accumstomed to rely upon such loans as these—more or less scanty, more or less precarious—in which they were accustomed to rely upon any one supply for their hard I necessities, other than the natural and wholesome and legitimate supply which their own exertions, through their own industry, ought to furnish, and alone ought to furnish. They might rely upon it that country was in a false position—that people was in an unhappy state—that national polity was in a most diseased condition—in which reliance was systematically placed for any other supplies of the peoples wants than the exercise of the people's industry. It had, unhappily, become the case—he did not mean to blame the Government—he did not mean to blame even the system—he did not impute it to the conduct of the landowners—he did not impute it to the conduct of the peasantry—God forbid that he should impute it to the national character, for which he had the greatest affection and respect: but it had happened from one thing or another—be it from the system—he it from a long abuse of the powers of the law—he it from the tardy rendering of justice by an equality of rights—be it from the conduct of the landowners—be it from the ignorance or the indolence of the peasantry—be it from the system of middlemen—one thing or another had produced that unhappy state of things in the sister kingdom, that they were, less than any other people we know, in the habit of relying upon their own exertions, and, more possessed of the kindred habit which naturally arose in the absence of the other, of looking elsewhere than to their own exertions for a supply of food. How this was to be remedied—whether by carefully adopted improvements in the polity of the country, by giving every facility to labour, by removing all impediments to the traffic in land—at the same time by giving as little encouragement as possible, or rather by giving as little additional stimulus as possible, to that diseased craving for the possession

165
of pieces and patches of land—for he looked upon that as the curse of Ireland, and he knew it was not confined to Ireland, for he was acquainted with a part of the Continent where there was the same inordinate desire for specks of land, which was ruining agriculture, and which would ruin the people too, if they increased in anything like the rapid progress they did in Ireland—whichever of these might be the true remedy, or whether all of them combined, he would not now discuss; but he thought every effort should be made to withdraw them from a desire for the possession of these specks of land; for while that was in the minds of the people, they knew, by sad experience, that one of the results would be a low estimate of competence. Now, the higher the idea the people had of what constituted a competence, the happier that people would be—the more comfortable they would be—the more industrious they would be—and the more productive in the fruits of industry they would be. But if men were to indulge in the feeling that they could keep soul and body together by boiling a few roots, and sprinkling a little salt over them, what they would come to would be this: in the first place, they would live miserably; in the second place, they would live indolently, for they would labour no more than what served to cultivate those roots; in the third place, their numbers would increase, not according to the resources of the country, but according to other rules, to which he would not advert there; and, lastly, they would live in a diseased as well as a degraded state, as long as they had that low estimate of competence in their minds. How these alterations were to be made, though the subject had occupied his mind for long years, he would not then discuss; but be could not avoid expressing his hope that this would be the last application of the sort made to Parliament, and that before a second application became necessary, other and better sources of supply might be pointed out.
After a few words of explanation from the Marquess of LANSDOWNE and the Earl of WICKLOW,
Bill read 2a.
House adjourned till To-morrow.