Sitting of 11 May 1849

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1° Sheep Stealers (Ireland); Grand Jury Cess (Ireland).
2° Land Improvement and Drainage (Ireland); Incumbered Estates (Ireland); Defects in Leases; Estates Leasing (Ireland).
Reported.—St. John's, Newfoundland, Rebuilding; Registering Births, &c. (Scotland).
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Mr. Heald, from Pinxton, Derbyshire, for the Clergy Relief Bill,—By Mr. Home Drummond, from the Synod of Perth and Stirling, against the Marriages Bill.—By Mr. Mackenzie, from Kirkcudbright, against the Marriage (Scotland) Bill.—By Mr. Cowan, from Greenock, against the Sunday Travelling on Railways Bill.—By Mr. Stafford, from Maxey, Northamptonshire, against the Alienation of Tithes.—By Mr. William Miles, from Shepton Mallet, Somerset, for Repeal of the Duty on Attorneys' Certificates.—By Mr. Hollond, from the Guardians of the Hastings Union, that Counties may be Exempted from the Expense of Constructing Gaols—By Mr. Philip Bennet, from a Number of Places in the Western Division of Suffolk, for Repeal of the Duty on Malt.—By Mr. Charteris, from the County of Haddington, against the Lunatics (Scotland) Bill.—By Mr. Feargus O'Connor, from Old Hill, Worcestershire, respecting Accidents in Mines.—By Mr. Fergus, from Dysart, for Reduction of the Public Expenditure.—By Mr. Plumptre, from a Number of Places in the Eastern Division of Kent, for Agricultural Relief.—By Captain Boldero, from the Pewsey Union, Wilts, for a Superannuation Fund for Poor Law Officers.—By Mr. Baines, from Kingston-upon-Hull, for the Punishment of the Promoters of Promiscuous Intercourse.—By Mr. Duncan M'Neill, from Inverary, against the Registering Births, &c. (Scotland) Bill.—By Mr. Hastings Russell, from Woburn, for an Alteration of the Sale of Beer Act.

THE MARRIAGES BILL.
MR. STUART WORTLEYsaid, he felt the difficulty experienced by hon. Members not connected with the Government in conducting Bills of great public interest through the House, and had appealed to the noble Lord at the head of the Government to assist him in fixing some day next week for the resumption of the adjourned debate on the Marriages Bill. He now renewed his appeal, and suggested Thursday next as a day that might he given for the discussion. The Poor Law (Ireland) Bill was put down for that day; but from what he had heard of the progress of the Committee upon that subject, he believed the noble Lord would not look with confidence to bringing on that Bill upon that day. If the adoption of this suggestion were declined, he would make another proposal to the House, but trusted the noble Lord would accede to this. He would also beg to remind the noble Lord that 2,700 of his own constituents had petitioned the House in favour of the measure.
LORD J. RUSSELLhoped the right hon. and learned Gentleman could suggest some other arrangement. It appeared to him (Lord J. Russell) that the adjourned debate might have been concluded on the second night, especially as it was a Friday; and he could not consent to put of Government Bills of great importance from the days for which they were fixed.
MR. WORTLEYhad had it suggested to him in a quarter entitled to the greatest respect from the House that Thursday, June 7, not being an Order day, and being a day too distant for any Motion to be yet fixed for it, the House might be disposed to consent in this special case to give precedence on that day to the adjourned debate. He would therefore move at the proper time that on Thursday, June 7, Orders of the Day have precedence of notices of Motion.
Subject dropped.

COMMITTEE OF SELECTION.
The following Report was presented from the Committee of Selection:—
"The Committee of Selection have to report to the House, under Standing Order, No. 91, that they have not received from Mr. Horsman, one of the Members nominated on the Select Committee on the Group No. 18 of Opposed Private Bills, appointed to meet on Monday next, at One o'clock, either the Declaration required by the Standing Order, No. 90, or any excuse in lieu thereof.

325
"Ordered—That Edward Horsman, esquire, do attend the Committee on Group No. 18 of Opposed Private Bills on Monday next, at One of the clock."
MR. HORSMAN (who shortly after entered the House)said, he was sorry he was not in his place when the report of the Committee of Selection was read, stating that he had not returned an answer to the summons which was sent to him. It had always been the custom to send to each Member notice from the clerk, begging to know in what period of the Session it would be most convenient to attend these Committees. Every year before this he had had such a notice, and he had replied to it, and this arrangement had been conducive to the convenience of all parties. In the present Session the practice had been given up. ["No, no!"] Then he could only say he had been an unfortunate exception. He had received no information of the kind. If he had received notice, he should have stated that the week beginning the 14th of May was one in which it was impossible for him to pledge himself to attend the Committee, It was not his wish to shrink from the duty imposed upon him; but he thought that for the convenience, not only of Members generally, but of the public, this arrangement should not be departed from. From the course which had been adopted in this particular instance, a hardship had been imposed upon him by being reported for not attending.

STEAM COMMUNICATION WITH AUSTRALIA.
MR. SCOTT, seeing the First Lord of the Admiralty in his place, asked whether the company which had engaged to manage the steam communication with Australia were likely to fulfil their engagements?
SIR F. T. BARINGsaid, that the company was about to be dissolved; but some parties who were in the company were prepared to go on with their contracts with certain modifications. That was under consideration, and the correspondence had not been entirely concluded.
MR. SCOTT: Would there be any objection to state the names of the parties likely to conduct the communication?
SIR F. T. BARINGsaid, that it was not in his power to state the particular names.
Subject at an end.

RUSSIAN INTERVENTION IN HUNGARY.
MR. B. OSBORNEasked the noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he and Her Majesty's Government had received any information of the advance of the Russian army into the free and independent kingdom of Hungary? ["Oh, oh!"] It was very evident that hon. Gentlemen were not conversant with the history of Hungary. Secondly, he asked if there was any treaty in existence by which this country was bound to permit the entrance of the Russian troops into Hungary? and, lastly, whether Ministers had any intention to offer their mediation between the Emperor of Austria and the victorious people of Hungary?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTON, in reply to the first question, had to state that Her Majesty's Government had to-day received information from the Chargé d'Affaires at Vienna, that application for military assistance in a war between Austria and Hungary was sent by Austria to the Russian Government, and the application had been assented to, and was going to be complied with; and, although no Russian troops had as yet entered, a Russian force was expected. As to the second question, there was no treaty that he was aware of that bore at all upon the question of the military assistance afforded by Russia to the Austrian Government. As to the third question, he had to state that Her Majesty's Government had taken no steps to offer their mediation between Austria and Hungary, and the Austrian Government had intimated no desire for such mediation.
Subject at an end.

FRENCH EXPEDITION TO ROME.
MR. B. COCHRANEasked whether any communications had passed between the Foreign Office and the Government of the French Republic respecting the expedition to Rome? He might also ask whether it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to mediate?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: No official written communication has passed between this Government and the French Government on the subject. We have been made aware of the intentions of the French Government by verbal communications between the French Ambassador and myself.
Subject at an end.

PAUPERS (IRELAND).
SIR W. SOMERVILLE, in answer to

327
a question from Mr. STAFFORD, said he had made inquiry with respect to the steps alleged to have been adopted in Cork for the purpose of getting rid of paupers. It had been supposed that force had been resorted to, but that did not appear to be so. The report he had received stated that there had not been any subscription entered into by private individuals for the removal of paupers from that city, and that 100 l., granted by the corporation, formed the only fund available for the purpose, and, at the expenditure of 7l. per week, would last for three months. The paupers were not removed on cars, but were kept continually moving in the streets, by which means many of them had been led to leave.
MR. E. B. DENISONasked for information on a question respecting which much difference of opinion prevailed—namely, as to the number of ablebodied men in the distressed unions now receiving outdoor relief, and the number of acres of land lately in cultivation, and now lying uncultivated.
SIR W. SOMERVILLEcould not give a satisfactory answer to either of the questions. By the returns he had, the total number receiving relief under the 2nd Section was 165,000, but in that would be included women and children. He would endeavour to procure the return as to ablebodied paupers. He had no means of informing his hon. Friend of the quantity of land lying waste.
Subject dropped.

NAPLES AND SICILY.
MR. URQUHARTasked the noble Lord at the head of the Government whether the Cabinet was aware that Admiral Parker had been sent for to Naples by the British Minister, when they stated to Parliament that he went there of his own accord. In answer to a question from himself in August last, and at the beginning of the Session, the noble Lord stated that Admiral Parker had taken the British fleet to Naples, not in reference to the transactions in Sicily, but in consequence of differences between Naples and England. But in the large blue book, just presented to Parliament, entituled, "Correspondence respecting the Affairs of Naples and Sicily," a statement the very reverse was made. It appeared, first, that there was no negotiation opened by Admiral Parker with the Government of Naples, and that Admiral Parker was sent
328
by the British Minister at Naples, by a special vessel, to bring the squadron to Naples. Admiral Parker reported the receipt of the letter of Lord Napier—dated Naples, 9th of February—to the Admiralty on the 12th of February. He arrived at Naples with the squadron on the 21st, and from that time to the 11th of August, when he interfered in the affairs of Sicily, the squadron was continually engaged in transactions arising out of the insurrection. He, therefore, asked the noble Lord whether he was in possession of the real facts of the case when he stated that Admiral Parker went to Naples of his own accord?
LORD J. RUSSELLapprehended that the hon. Member was confounding two different transactions. The questions asked of him (Lord J. Russell) in August were—speaking now from recollection—whether Admiral Parker was at Naples in consequence of orders from his Government at home, and with the purpose of interfering with the expedition then supposed to be about to leave Naples for Messina; and his answer was, that Admiral Parker had not been sent by Her Majesty's Government—that he had gone of his own accord, in consequence of questions arising relating to British interests; one in reference to a forced loan, one in reference to certain persons being captured in the waters of Corfu; and he (Lord J. Russell) stated that a settlement had been made with regard to two of those questions; and as to a third a negotiation was pending. That, it appeared to him, was a satisfactory answer to questions directed, as he understood, to the purpose of inquiring whether the Government had sent Admiral Parker to Naples for the purpose of preventing the departure of the Neapolitan squadron. The hon. Member now referred to a request of Lord Napier, that Admiral Parker would go to Naples in February. When he (Lord J. Russell) answered the question, he certainly had not in his mind what had occurred in February. Admiral Parker had been at Naples, had left it, and gone to Palermo, and again returned to Naples; and he (Lord J. Russell) naturally supposed it was in consequence of his last appearance there that those questions were asked. The hon. Member would find in the blue book the reasons why, on the 29th of July, Admiral Parker was at Naples, and his statement in his letter to Lord Napier completely confirmed what he (Lord J. Rus-

329
sell) stated in August. With regard to any previous request of Lord Napier that Admiral Parker would go to Naples, he (Lord J. Russell) did not exactly recollect the circumstances that then occurred; but he well remembered that when the Earl of M into, who was at Rome, was informed that Admiral Parker had some intention of going to Naples, he asked the Neapolitan Minister whether it would be agreeable to the King of Naples that a British squadron should appear at Naples; and when the King of Naples said it was agreeable to him generally to see British ships at Naples, but that he did not think their appearance at that moment would be conducive to his interests, the Earl of Minto took care to inform Lord Napier that it was not desirable that the British squadron should go there at that time. The question put in August, he (Lord J. Russell) certainly understood to refer to transactions then recent, and not what occurred in February.
MR. B. COCHRANEwished to ask the noble Lord if he was aware of that passage in Sir W. Parker's letter of the 11th February, which said—
"By a Neapolitan steam vessel just arrived, I have received a letter from Lord Napier, dated Naples, February 9, 1848, who informs me that the presence of the squadron there will probably add weight to the negotiation which Lord Minto and himself have in hand."
No Other reason was assigned for the presence of the squadron at Naples, except that it would add weight to the negotiations that were going on.
LORD J. RUSSELL: I state again that, in August, I was referring to what had then recently occurred; and that Lord Napier had no power to direct Sir W. Parker to go to Naples at all. He might have stated it was desirable, but he had no power to direct the commander of the squadron to enter.

LAND IMPROVEMENT AND DRAINAGE (IRELAND) BILL.
On the question that the Land Improvement and Drainage (Ireland) Bill be read a Second Time,
MAJOR BLACKALLsaid, he was far from underrating the advantages that this Bill offered to the landlords of Ireland, with a view to the improvement of their estates. At the same time, he must say that he looked upon it as a great mistake to suppose that the landlords alone were the employers of the people, and to pass
330
over altogether the occupying tenants, who, by the receipt of assistance, might be made the great employers of the labouring poor of that country. If they wanted to find continuous and general labour for Ireland, they must do so by enabling those who were the occupiers of the soil to give money wages for labour—a result that could never be gained by merely giving grants of money to the proprietors. Owing to circumstances over which they had no control, the proprietors were not able to give assistance to their tenantry unless in a few exceptional cases; and he believed that in the poorer parts of Ireland—in those places where assistance was most required—the provisions of this Bill would be most inoperative. He did not see why power should not be given under this Bill to make advances in those cases where farms had been consolidated for the purpose of erecting farm buildings, of which they were generally destitute, and providing what was otherwise necessary to a proper working of those farms. The cultivation of flax was also a matter that ought to receive the serious attention of Government and the House. This might be made a most profitable department of farming in Ireland, but it was not grown to anything like the extent it ought to be, on account of the want of facilities for taking it to market. The Royal Agricultural Society of Ireland, under the patronage of Lord Clarendon, who had devoted a large sum of public money to assist the instructors in agriculture sent forth among the farmers, had energetically turned its attention to this subject; and if hon. Members would but read the reports of those instructors, they would be able to form some idea of the difficulties they experienced in carrying out their object. They found the farmers of Ireland so poor, that it was impossible by instruction alone to succeed in their views; for they could not without capital effect any of the improvements suggested to them. If the object of these practical instructors in agriculture could be gained, he believed that they would soon be able to get quit of those ablebodied paupers now so numerous all over the distressed districts; but without money the farmers could do nothing. It would be of the utmost importance, therefore, to devise some means by which the farmers could be assisted in carrying out their agricultural operations. He stated his belief that, if anything could be done to remedy this state of matters, they would do more for

331
Ireland than all their legislation had yet effected. The question of arterial drainage was one of the greatest importance, and he was glad that it had not been lost sight of by the Government. He thought it would be better, both for this country and for Ireland, if it was resolved at once to carry out all the works already commenced. Formerly these works were promoted to a certain degree by means of private capital, because it was obtained on the security of the lands that were improved. That system could not, however, be continued, in consequence of the value of landed property having become so much depreciated that the want of confidence thereby created prevented them getting the money. In 1838 the Marquess of Lansdowne stated that Government were pledged, by what had passed on the passing of the Irish Poor Law, to encourage the employment of the labouring poor of Ireland; and he added, that better security did not exist than was found in that country for sums advanced to promote that object. He (Major Blackall) thought that, after what had passed last year, they had a right to expect that liberal aid would be extended to Ireland. He could assure the House that, at present, the safety of Ireland depended on employment being given to the people; and that, instead of the landlords and farmers of that country being able to do so, their resources were rapidly decreasing.
MR. SHARMAN CRAWFORDwished to impress upon the House that this proposition of the Government would be wholly inadequate for the purpose of giving relief to Ireland. The right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had referred to some of the distressed districts as showing symptoms of prosperity. The reports of the last few days, however, had given an answer of a most unfavourable character to the anticipations of the right hon. Gentleman. From various unions the most disastrous accounts had been received, and he was more than ever convinced that the House would be acting under a delusion if they thought the Government proposition would be sufficient to relieve the distress of that country. The ejectments going on, in connexion with the starvation that prevailed, required some effectual remedy. What good effect resulted from the Bill of last year? It might give some amount of food to the poor ejected peasantry; but they were supplied with neither clothes nor lodging. If it had been intended to
332
depopulate Ireland by starvation, the course now taken would produce that very result; but he was sure it was not the intention of that House that the people of Ireland should be so dealt with. Why should the mass of the people be driven from the occupation of the soil? He thought the occupation of the soil in reasonably small holdings one of the best means that could be devised for benefiting Ireland. It was of no use to expect that the farmer would lay out capital to improve the soil, unless they gave him some security that he would receive the benefit of the outlay he had made. Government had promised that something should be done in this respect; but those promises were not kept, and now the soil was uncultivated, and consequently there was no employment for the people. There was no want of capital in Ireland. There was a great deal of capital in the hands of farmers; but it was not laid out in the cultivation of the land, and they were now carrying it away to foreign countries. If, however, security had been given for a fair return for the improvements made, this capital would have been expended on the soil. If he wanted additional proof of this matter, it was to be found in the admirable address which had just been published by the Society of Friends for the relief of destitution in Ireland, They stated in this address that whatever might have been the value of the enormous amount applied during the last three years by the Legislature and by private charity, in affording a temporary alleviation of wide-spread misery, it had produced scarcely any permanently useful results. They next referred to the extent of neglected land, while the strength of the country was standing by idle, anxiously seeking for work, to the frightful system of wholesale evictions, the progress of emigration, and the other symptoms of the deterioration of society in Ireland, and then observed that—
"We have long felt that the chief ground of hope, the main source of improvement, is the improved cultivation of the soil; and that the surest means of effecting this object is by affording security to the cultivator. That this security does not generally exist in Ireland, is admitted. On this point there is scarcely a second opinion among thinking men in this country. The laws which regulate the title to, and the conveyance of land, require to be changed, so as to give the utmost freedom to its sale and transfer—so as to pass those estates, whose proprietors are irretrievably ruined, into other hands—and to enable those who are partially encumbered to free themselves from their difficulties, by disposing of part

333
of their landed property. Until this be effected; until the soil of Ireland be held by a clear and marketable title; until the owners be enabled to sell the whole or any part of their property without the ruinous delays and the heavy costs which now prevent them; until the creditors of a landowner have those facilities for enforcing payment of their debts by the sale of his property, to which justice entitles them; we are compelled thus publicly to state our decided conviction, that it is in vain to hope that Ireland can raise itself from a state of poverty and degradation. The potato may grow again, and by its assistance our country may be enabled to escape from the immediate pressure of its difficulties; but without those changes of the laws relating to the tenure and conveyance of land, which shall open a free scope for the employment of its capital and its industry, and give ample security to the cultivators of the soil, we cannot hope for general and permanent improvement. An enormous amount of money has been raised to relieve us. It will be useless unless free scope is given to the energies of the country. The partial remedies which have been applied have served but to tighten the net which trammels the exertions of the great mass of the population. Measures of a much more decided character are necessary to produce any permanently useful effect. The situation of the country is daily becoming worse. There is no time to lose, if those now suffering are to be saved. Money must still be advanced for temporary purposes, during the interval which will elapse before efficient measures can be brought into general and active operation. But our paramount want is not money; it is the removal of those legal difficulties which prevent the capital of Ireland from being applied to the improved cultivation of its soil, and thus supporting its poor by the wages of honest and useful labour."
Such was the opinion of that excellent society. They contended that all the grants proposed by Government would be productive of no permanent benefit unless accompanied by other measures for giving security to the tenant farmers. There were large tracts of cultivatable land in Ireland now living waste. The Government should take them up, and give instant employment to the people, and not leave that duty to be discharged by the landlords. He would direct the attention of the Government also to the plan proposed by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, which he believed to be in many respects practicable. At all events, unless something were immediately done, thousands of the poor in Ireland would die, and the responsibility would fall upon the Government and the Legislature. They must, when dealing with Ireland, depart from those economical principles which might be applicable to England. Ireland was a country which required to be dealt with in a very different manner. He approved of the present proposition of the Government, and should give it his sup-
334
port; but he warned the House against considering it as excusing them from the adoption of other measures of improvement for Ireland.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERdid not think it advisable to enter upon the discussion as to whether some other mode of applying the public money for the improvement of Ireland might not be adopted. He thought it much more convenient to consider this additional advance to be made on the same terms, and applied to the same objects, to which the former grants had been made applicable. He would take this opportunity of referring to a statement which was made the other night by the hon. Member for Shropshire in reference to the expenditure for certain works performed on his estate in the country of Leitrim. The observation of the hon. Member on that occasion did not apply to either of the Bills under which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) proposed to make this additional advance. The works to which the hon. Member referred were done under what was called Mr. Labouchere's letter, which was a modification of the Relief Bill. According to the provisions of that Bill, the labourers were selected and paid by the relief committee, and the work was conducted under the superintendence either of the landlord (the hon. Gentleman himself in this instance) or his agent; and if they had taken part on the relief committee, in all probability the work would not have cost them more than had been expended on other works. It turned out that the overseer appointed by the relief committee was a small shopkeeper, and wholly incompetent to discharge the duty required of him. The inspector of the works remonstrated against his being employed; but the relief committee retained him until the officer of the Board of Works found that gentleman sitting down quietly under a hedge with all his labourers about him. If from the negligence and carelessness of the landed proprietors of Ireland these works were not efficiently and economically performed, the Board of Works could not be considered responsible, who had no power to control the relief committees, with whom rested the power to carry out the provisions of the Relief Bill.
MR. O. GOREsaid, the right hon. Gentleman was perfectly correct in saying that the work in question was done under Mr. Labouchere's letter, and was arranged altogether without the knowledge of his (Mr.-

335
O. Gore's) agent. No notice was given of the intention to work on the estate. The first intimation that the agent had of it, was a demand, on the part of the Government, for the sum of 200 l., being at the rate of 32 l. an acre for drainage. That was one case; hut he had now two other cases to mention. In the county of Westmeath 150 l. had been demanded for draining nine acres and a half of land; and since he had come down to the House he had received a letter from the county of Sligo, in which the writer mentioned a case where arterial drainage was attempted under Mr. Labouchere's letter, but was never finished, the subdrain never having been closed, and that if the work had been finished it would only have drained about three-quarters of an acre. The sum paid for this was about 24 l. The writer stated that it ought to have been done for 4l., or less. But—Quos Deus vult perdere prius dementat—the Whigs are determined to ruin Ireland. Drainage, the writer observed, was the first step to be taken in a country requiring improvement so much as Ireland did; but it should be done economically, and not, as it was now done, wastefully, by keeping in pay a horde of incapables. He (Mr. O. Gore) agreed with the writer when he said that there was plenty of money in Ireland. Doubtless, portions of Ireland were very much distressed, but there was plenty of money there; and, as the hon. Member for Rochdale had said, Ireland did not want the assistance of England if Parliament would only give them fair play. The writer went on to say, that the localities for arterial drainage by the Board of Works had often been ill selected and worse engineered. The estimate made of the cost for common drainage in the county of Westmeath would have been ample but for the mismanagement of the officers of the board. Although the drainage had not reached three-quarters of the distance it was intended to go, yet the landlords whose property it did not reach had been compelled to pay their proportion of the expense. Now, if the Government undertook to perform works of improvement in Ireland, they should consider themselves to be placed in the same position as a common contractor would be, and they should be bound to carry out their work or receive no pay.
MR. SHAFTO ADAIRhad had considerable experience of the operations per-formed under Mr. Labouchere's most admirable modification of the Labour Act;
336
and he, certainly, could not concur with the hon. Member for Shropshire in the censure which he had passed upon what had been done for the improvement of Ireland under that measure. He thought the country ought to feel exceedingly indebted to the Government for this additional grant. He believed it would be of the greatest possible use, by extending in Ireland a knowledge of the means of improving that country by introducing neat and correct work on the land.
MR. P. FRENCHcould not anticipate any real advantage from either of these measures. He also called attention to the fact, that in every instance the Board of Works had materially exceeded the sums which had been agreed by the parties should be expended in these works, and contended that some control should be placed on the Board, and that they should not be left, as they now were, both the planners and paymasters of the improvements carried out under the advance. He considered that, owing to the peculiar circumstance of the districts which this Bill was designed to assist, that it would be, so far as they were concerned, inoperative. In the eastern and northern districts the proprietors would, no doubt, be most anxious to obtain the advantages which it offered; but it would not be so in the southern and western districts, where the landlords would scarcely be willing to involve themselves still farther than they were already. He objected to the Bill, because it would neither meet present purposes nor lay the foundation of future improvement. He believed that no sum of money which might be necessary to raise the condition, of the people of Ireland to an equality with themselves, would be grudged by the English people. What was required in the southern and western districts was railways to convey their produce to the markets. An advance of a million would open up four main trunk lines; and while it would do more, perhaps, than anything else towards future prosperity, it might be advanced under the most perfect security for repayment. He hoped that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would turn his attention, still further than he had done, to the condition of Ireland. The evidence before the Lords' Committee showed that in Connaught alone, there were 50,000 acres of the best land lying waste, the value of the produce of which, if brought into cultivation, had been estimated at not less than 2,500,00 l This was a subject

337
which should not escape notice by Ministers, when considering measures for providing employment for the people, and for the future prosperity of the country.
MR. HORSMANobserved, that after the large sums which had been already advanced, it was probable that this extra half million would not do much harm to England, neither, seeing the large sums which had been wasted in Ireland, was it likely to do much good to that country. He concurred with the last speaker, that the Bill was not likely to be useful, either for present purposes or as laying the foundation of future improvement. But measures unimportant in themselves might be important in the principles involved in them; and in this case the House should consider whether this Bill was not the mere continuation of that blind, inconsistent, and ruinous system of tiding over difficulties for the moment, without caring for the future, which had been so long followed, or whether it was a part of a new and wiser system of policy. From the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer of the other night, he concluded that the Bill was of the former character. And that speech had gone far to confirm his fears that this new loan was of the same character, and would follow the same course as many others that had gone before it, and that it would go into that bottomless pit in which they had sunk. Ireland had larger claims probably on this country (suffering as she was at this time) than any efforts of ours could meet, And he believed that such was the feeling of the English people, that there were no efforts of humanity in their power which they were not prepared to make on behalf of their suffering fellow-subjects in the sister country. At the same time he could not admit that in considering this question, Parliament should throw over economical principles altogether. The system of loans began to be regarded in England as pernicious in principle and in its results, and as tending to create feelings of disaffection and alienation between the two countries. He did not conceive that the Chancellor of the Exchequer's arguments were at all satisfactory when compared with the facts as they stood. The right hon. Gentleman had said that having succeeded in arresting the progress of famine and preserving life by the former advance, now they should proceed to measures of permanent improvement. But if the measures of improvement were not to be more successful than those for the pre-
338
servation of life had been, neither Government nor the House would have much reason to congratulate themselves. Let them look to the accounts of the mortality in Ireland, as they appeared in the public papers and in private letters. It was true that no official returns had been presented to Parliament, showing the mortality and disease which prevailed in Ireland; but there was not an hon. Gentleman in that House who was ignorant of the fact that the most alarming and shocking state of things existed in that country. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, it was true, drew rather a cheering picture of Irish affairs. From his speech one would suppose that the worst had passed—that there were un-mistakeable signs of improvement—that mortality and disease had at least abated—that we had turned the corner there. But what were the facts? The very morning after the right hon. Gentleman made his speech, statements appeared in the London newspapers, which gave a most fearful picture of the state of the people in Connemara, Ballinrobe, and Ken-mare. [The hon. Member here read extracts from a letter in a London morning newspaper, which gave a frightful account of the condition of these districts.] And it appears that the mortality in the workhouse of Fermoy for the last four months has been as follows:—

1849, January, 31 days

208

deaths.

February, 28 days

352

deaths.

March, 31 days

315

deaths.

April, for 28 post days

350

deaths.

Total for four months

1,225

deaths.

The practical instructions sent out by the Agricultural Society, in accordance with Lord Clarendon's letter, give the following picture of a western county:—
"The country is in a most deplorable condition—farm-houses are everywhere deserted, the land attached to them has become waste, and a regular commonage enjoyed by those who have survived the dreadful ordeal of the last four years. The central and three auxiliary workhouses are overstocked, whilst many of the recipients of outdoor relief have located themselves in the now doorless and roofless habitations, and have become the nocturnal plunderers and terror of the country, disdaining to work for ordinary wages, so long as they receive public charity and relief."
From Galway West, Mr. M. Bole writes—
"I proceeded towards Spiddal, and found the farmers along the coast making great efforts to plant the potato. I asked many of them what they would do if the potato crop should fail this season; and the universal reply was—If the potatoes fail this year, we have nothing to do but to lie down and die,' "
The condition of the west is thus described in a newspaper of the present month:—
"In Ballinrobe workhouse the deaths for the week, have been one hundred and forty-six; and the Mayo Constitution states, that 'upwards of four hundred paupers have absconded, preferring to die by the way side to becoming victims of disease in that charnel house.' Cholera is on the increase in Ballinrobe and the surrounding villages. Outside the workhouses the deaths from starvation are increasing. The same Mayo paper complains of what it terms 'more pauper slaughter,' in the Westport union, owing to the alleged criminal negligence of some persons connected with the administration of outdoor relief. In one case of this description, after an inquest, the relieving officer has been committed to abide his trial.
"The Rev. James Anderson, Protestant rector of Ballinrobe, in another letter to Lord John Russell, describing the destitution of the peasantry, says, 'They are dropping into their graves in multitudes.' "
And those appalling statements were confirmed by the accounts they every day received. The hon. Member for Dorsetshire stated a few evenings ago, that a correspondent of his in Ireland wrote to him to say, that in travelling along the road he was obliged to stop his gig five times, so that the dead and dying might be removed. Now Government had asked Parliament to advance money, in order to preserve the lives of the people—the grants were assented to on that principle—had not Parliament a right to expect that the purposes of those grants would be accomplished? If they were insufficient, why did not the Government ask for more? If they were sufficient, how did it come to pass that the people were dying of starvation in the public highways? There must be either gross miscalculation or gross mismanagement. The people were dying of starvation, he repeated. On whom did this awful responsibility rest? Not upon the poor-law guardians or proprietors in Ireland, for they had been unceasing in making representations upon the subject—not upon the Parliament of England, because Parliament had assented to every request that had been made, and had been told that the grants would suffice for staving off the temporary distress; and if, because the Government had refrained from asking for sufficient funds in order to save themselves from the embarrassment which arose from doing so—if, in consequence of this, multitudes of the poor were being carried off by cruel and lingering deaths, and the rest were falling into a state which was shocking to humanity and disgraceful to civilisation and religion, the responsibility of these results must surely rest some-
340
where, and a more serious and grave responsibility he could scarcely imagine. He did not think, therefore, that the first duty of Government to save human life had been satisfactorily accomplished. One would have thought, to have heard the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer on Friday night, that Ireland had passed its worst, and that better times were close at hand. But unfortunately the evidence of Colonel Knox Gore, and the reports of Captain Hamilton, and even Mr. Bourke (whom the right hon. Gentleman had quoted on that occasion), were calculated to lead to a different conclusion. With respect to Ballina, it was stated that there was a debt of 68,000 l.; that no less than eighteen estates were in the hands of receivers; that there was not one landlord receiving rent: that a majority of them were ruined; that almost every magistrate had ceased to sit on the bench, and was either confined to his own house or in prison; that not a tenant could be got to take a farm; that no landlord would take a loan for improvement; and that it was impossible to have an improvement in that union without a change of proprietors. Now, these were all permanent, not temporary, causes of depression; and yet in these circumstances the House was invited to assent to a loan in order to assist proprietors who, as Captain Hamilton had said, would not take a loan, and that he himself had suffered from taking one on a previous occasion, because he could not get persons to take the land which he had reclaimed by means of it. He must say that, seeing that all these were not temporary but permanent causes of depression, it was idle for any one to write from Ireland, or to state in that House that there was any prospect of improvement for Ireland, while those causes were not only not removed, but were being aggravated from week to week. To do so was, in his opinion, to dwell upon a superficial and delusive prospect; and only showed that the real circumstances of Ireland had not been carefully considered, and that the real wants of Ireland were imperfectly understood. It appeared to him, that if the evils under which Ireland was suffering were not distinctly known, it was impossible that a remedy could be pointed out; and that it was their duty, whatever measure was proposed, to compare that measure with the evil which it professed to remedy, to examine the relation between the malady and the cure, and by that means to test every measure, whether it was

341
large or whether it was insignificant in its character. He asked, then, what, in the case before them, was the real evil to be cured? In the present circumstances of Ireland, they had to aim, in the first instance, at the immediate preservation of life; in the second place, at the restoration of healthful agricultural relations; and, in the third place, at the establishment of feelings of sympathy and confidence between the people of the two countries. He asked whether any of these objects could be at all achieved by the measure before them? Certainly, it could not affect the immediate preservation of life, because the object of the loans was to employ the able-bodied labourer, and not to support those who were reduced to destitution, and were almost in the last stage of existence. Neither would it establish healthful agricultural relations, because its effect must either be to give loans to the solvent proprietors, who were the few, and did not need them, or to the insolvent proprietors, whom it would be much better to compel to bring their estates into the market. It was equally incapable of establishing kindly feelings between the two countries, because the sense of the burden of taxation dissatisfied the one, and the sense of obligation irritated the other. He looked at the measures introduced by Government, and regretted to say that none of those measures had been carried out. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said that legislation could not give to the Irish people habits of industry, energy, or self-reliance. His reply was, that Government could not do all this, but it could do much to promote those qualities. They could not legislate to make men walk whose feet were tied, nor to make men eat who were unable to get food, but they could by legislation loosen the fetters of the one, and cheapen the food of the other. Ireland was an agricultural country, and measures ought to be at once taken to make the transfer of land easy, to simplify the complexity of tenure, and to give security to the capitalist for his investment. An amendment—a thorough and searching amendment—of the laws was much more needed than a system of loans, which perpetuated pauperism, diminished self-reliance, and were calculated to protract a system cumbersome, rotten, and delusive. He did not say a word against the amount of the grant; on the contrary, he would be ready to vote much more; but then it must be upon some clear principle, and in order to carry out some
342
well-defined and comprehensive scheme. He confessed he was deeply impressed with the condition of Ireland. The emergency was too great, and the opportunity too vast, to be neglected. They wanted another, a very different line of policy—they wanted a fresh system, not one of small measures, of makeshifts and expediency, but a system conceived in the spirit of a statesman, and carried out with earnestness and vigour. By the adoption of such measures, he believed Ireland might yet be saved; in the want of them, he saw nothing but continued misery and degradation to Ireland, and ultimate ruin to this country also.
SIR G. GREYsaid, that it was with considerable surprise he had listened to the speech of the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. And he was somewhat astonished to find, that whilst he said "those were the grounds upon which he opposed the Bill before the House," he had not concluded by moving as an Amendment that it be read a second time that day six months. He (Sir G. Grey) did not think it was a question which the House could treat with indifference. If he thought that the sum of 500,000 l., the loan of which would be authorised by the Bill, was to be thrown away, or wasted, he could not, as a representative of the people, sit there and not enter his protest against such a waste. But he should call attention to some of the facts stated by his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the House—facts which the hon. Gentleman had altogether overlooked. His right hon. Friend, in the statement which he had made as to the grounds upon which the Bill was founded, mentioned, and satisfied the House (although, as it appeared, he had not satisfied the hon. Gentleman) that the money already advanced by Parliament to England, Scotland, and Ireland, by way of loans, for the improvement of the soil of the country, had acted most beneficially in increasing its productiveness, in giving employment to many of the people who would otherwise have been unemployed, and in increasing the general wealth of the State, and that it was not money thrown away. It had proved beneficial to those upon whose estates it had been laid out, and its repayment had been secured; and although, from the 2,000,000 l. which had been advanced to England and Scotland the advantages expected to be derived had been already, to a great extent, realised, they had not yet seen the

343
whole of the results. But his right hon. Friend had also stated, that, under the advances made by Parliament, 20,000 able-bodied men, representing 100,000 families in Ireland, were now industriously exerting themselves for the support of their families, and these loans were secured by being charged upon the estates without any risk of loss to the State; he meant without risk of any important loss. He did not mean to say that a few pounds might not be lost; as, for instance, in reply to a question put the other night, his right hon. Friend had stated, that up to October last the only arrear remaining due from a former loan was a balance of 53 l. That was the only answer he should give to the sneers of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Cockermouth, about throwing money into a bottomless gulf. But the hon. Gentleman had spoken in great ignorance of the facts of the case. He went into considerations about the result of lending to solvent or insolvent proprietors, as if he thought that the security for the loan was to be personal security—the personal security of insolvents, instead of being a charge upon the land. But the real fact was, that the land was held responsible, and it would become forfeited if the loan were not repaid. So that they had the best possible security for the money, and one that would be perfectly available for the purposes of the Act. As to the observations of Captain Hamilton, they were merely founded upon a superficial view of the district. He (Sir G. Grey) did not know whether in the union of Ballina any proprietors had applied for loans under the Act; but he knew that in the west of Ireland there were several proprietors who had applied for loans for the purpose of improving their estates and employing the people. The object of the present Bill was to enable landed proprietors to obtain loans by which they could at once improve their estates and employ the people. The hon. Gentleman condemned the present measure and said that other means should be employed to meet the exigencies of the case. But other means had been employed, means which the hon. Gentleman ridiculed, in aid of the rates, in order that relief might he afforded to these poor people, and that the progress of poverty and destitution might be arrested. He would not follow the hon. Gentleman through his speech, or into any of the various subjects upon which he had assailed the measures of the Government. The hon. Gentleman seemed to be quite
344
unmindful or ignorant that by that speech he was delaying the progress of another measure belonging to the very class which he said ought to be introduced. He seemed not to know the nature of the next Bill upon the Orders of the Day, that was to come before the House, or that it was one for the better enabling people to dispose of incumbered estates. The hon. Gentleman was quite wrong in thinking that his right hon. Friend thought or said that legislation could do nothing for Ireland. What he said was, that legislation could not do everything. He said that the great work should be done by the resident proprietors themselves. He (Sir G. Grey) would not go any further into the subjects touched upon by the hon. Gentleman, as he did not wish to delay the House from the consideration of the next measure that was before them. Much of what the hon. Gentleman uttered against the Bill was not applicable to what his right hon. Friend had said, and it certainly did not redound very much to the hon. Gentleman's character for fairness. Utterly condemning, as he (Sir G. Grey) did, the want of fairness in the hon. Gentleman's speech, he could have wished that he had concluded it with an amendment, upon which the House might have had an opportunity of recording its opinion. He did not, however, regret his not having done so, as it would have occupied a good deal of time, and delayed them from the consideration of the Incumbered Estates Bill.
MR. HORSMANexplained. He had quoted from Captain Hamilton, because he was a Government inspector and a proprietor of land in the Ballina union. And he had said that he was unable to let one inch of the land he had reclaimed, and that he was convinced not one single proprietor in Ballina would take a sixpence of the Government loan.
Bill read a second time, and committed for Monday next.

INCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL.
The SOLICITOR GENERALmoved the Second Reading of this Bill.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, he highly approved of the measure now proposed. He thought all their legislation should be subsidiary to the passing of this Bill. He not only cordially supported it, but he thanked Her Majesty's Government for bringing it forward; and he entertained sanguine

345
hopes that it would effect all the advantages anticipated by its promoters.
MR. J. O'CONNELLcoincided in the views expressed by the hon. Member for Northamptonshire. The Government would accomplish a real benefit by having introduced the Bill, and the greatest good that could be conferred on Ireland would be to expedite its passage through the House.
MR. GROGANalso approved of the Bill, but it would be insufficient unless it were accompanied by an entire change in the poor-law system. There were already more estates in the market than could find purchasers. He knew of one estate that had been lately sold for between ten and eleven years' purchase, although the title was perfectly clear. But the fact was, they should ensure purchasers against the incalculable liabilities under the present poor-law.
SIR H. W. BARRONapproved of the Bill; but he should impress upon the House that more was necessary, and unless they went to the root of the evil, and altered the poor-law, so as to make the purchasers secure against their property being swallowed up by poor-rates, it would be useless to bring lands into the market. Within the last few days three estates had been offered for sale in Dublin: two could find no purchasers, and the third was sold at 60 per cent under what was considered by the best judges as its real value. He recommended the Government to weigh well the plan suggested by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth. Estates could not be sold at present in Ireland with the clearest titles; and unless some inducement were held out to purchasers, how did they expect that purchasers could be found by merely making the clearing of titles more easy?
COLONEL DUNNEcould not agree with those hon. Members for Ireland who had so highly praised the Bill. He thought it a very faulty measure, and one which was entirely abrogating the law of the land. He did not think it wise or prudent to send into the country a board of commissioners with inquisitorial powers to search into the condition of any man upon whose property a debt might be secured, and whose creditor came before the board to demand a sale. He thought the plan unwise which would send into the market a large quantity of land at a moment when it was extremely difficult to find purchasers; and, above all, he should like to know who the com-missioners were to be. Upon that would
346
depend much of his objection to the measure. For instance, he would not trust himself to such a commission if the hon. Member for Manchester were to be one of the commissioners, after the sentiments which that hon. Member had expressed. Any man, from motives of spite or political enmity, could force a sale of an estate under this Bill, by merely buying up some small debt upon it. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Tamworth had guarded his plan with an observation which had been unobserved by the Government, and the guard had been left out of the present Bill. The right hon. Baronet said, that owners of estates to be sold should receive the full value of them; hut no such reservation was made in the Government measure. An hon. Friend of his (Colonel Dunne) was about to introduce an important clause into it, which he trusted would be finally carried. Its object would be to compel the new purchasers of land to reside upon the estates they should purchase. At present about 6,000,000 l. a year was drawn out of Ireland by absentee proprietors; and as the difficulties of dealing with the subject hitherto had been very great, he hoped that this proposition would be found simple enough to provide at least for the prevention of future absenteeism. It was impossible but that such a constant drain must diminish the capital of a country. He was not one of those who believed that there were large masses of capital concealed in Ireland; and when the estates were brought into the market, he did not believe that many Irishmen would be found able to purchase them, even if they should be broken up into the smallest portions, to suit people of small capital. He thought the Irish estates would be bought up by speculators, and persons anxious to seize upon Irish property; and the result would be, unless some timely precautions were taken, that the land would get into the hands of non-residents, and the evils to the population would be increased. He hoped no hon. Member would vote for the Bill until Her Majesty's Ministers had declared who the commissioners were to be. He did not see why they should not at once declare that the Lord Chancellor of Ireland and the Master of the Rolls, who was one of the best equity lawyers in Ireland, should be two of the commissioners. There would then be some sort of security that the proceedings of the commission would be guided by some respect for the laws of the land.
SIR R. B. BROOKEapproved of the principle of the Bill, and thought that the Government deserved credit for its introduction. Nothing was more important to the future prosperity of Ireland than the existence of some means for facilitating the transfer of property from those who were but the nominal possessors of it, to those who could really improve the land and employ the people. He would recommend the addition of a clause compelling absentee landlords to provide in some way or other for the support and employment of the labourers upon their estates.
MR. TURNERassented to the principle of the Bill, but objected to some of its provisions, particularly to the powers given to the commissioners. He thought they ought to be instructed to have regard to the interests of the first mortgagee. As the Bill now stood, the owner of an incumbered estate might apply for a sale, and compel the mortgagee to go into the market at a most unfavourable time, and when his interest would be sacrificed. He did not mean to say that the mortgagee ought to be protected against public policy, but, as far as might be, consistently with public policy. The commissioners were empowered to call upon the mortgagees of every estate in Ireland to produce their title, and, if he understood the Bill rightly, to overrule the decisions of the courts of equity. They were not to be restrained in any manner in the execution of the extensive powers conferred on them. He thought there were cases in which an injunction ought to be granted, and the means afforded to the owner of retaining his estate, when it could be done with justice to the mortgagee. He threw out the suggestion for the consideration of the hon. and learned Solicitor General.
MR. SADLEIRsaid, that when the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Coventry objected to the Bill as interfering with the Court of Chancery in Ireland, he should remember that that court had already had ample opportunity of applying its machinery to the evil, and that it was because it had failed that this measure was introduced, having for its object an economical, speedy, facile, and advantageous sale of incumbered estates. Last year he moved for a return of the number of decrees pronounced by the courts of equity in Ireland within the last five years, with the view of seeing the amount of property decreed to be sold, and contrasting it with the amount actually sold;
348
and in that return he found that in the year ending the 9th of March, 1848, no less than 51 decrees had been pronounced by the Court of Chancery alone, and in the year ending March, 1849, no less than 69. Now, how far had the masters succeeded in selling the estates under those decrees? In Mr. Murphy's office, in the year ending April, 1848, only 15 sales had been effected; and in the year ending April, 1849, only six. In Mr. Brookes's office, in the year ending April, 1848, only seven sales had been effected; and in the year ending April, 1849, only one. Thus, while there had been a steadily increasing number of suits for the sale of incumbered estates, he found that in the offices of the Chief Remembrancer and the four Chancery Masters there had been a great decrease in the number of sales effected. This return alone sufficed to show the absolute necessity for some such measure as that before the House. But he hoped that no consideration would induce the Solicitor General to copy the Incumbered Estates Bill of last Session, under which every practical man knew it was impossible to sell incumbered estates. He hoped he would provide in this Bill for the repeal of that Act, reserving only those two or three valuable provisions contained in it. It was absurd to suppose that the proposed commission would expire in five, or even ten, years. They were now, for the first time, about to acknowledge the principle that purchasers of land should acquire a Parliamentary title, and it would be idle to suppose that any sales of estates could be effected except under the operation of that principle, and, therefore, through the commission; because, however good might be the title, there were always conditions which rendered it less clear or certain than the proposed Parliamentary title. In fact, it would be utterly impossible for the owners of estates for private sale to compete with persons selling under the operation of this Bill. As he read the Bill, the hon. and learned Solicitor General did not propose the sale of those short terminable interests held by middlemen, who formed so large a class in the south of Ireland. He thought it would be unjust to exclude them from the benefits of this measure; because if they offered them for sale in the ordinary method, they would be hampered by many conditions, which a Parliamentary title would supersede. They did not consider themselves proprietors or landlords of the

349
land; although they discharged many of the fiscal duties of landlords. He believed they were anxious to be denuded of the outward ostentation of being landlords, which in reality they were not, and that they felt that the tenant occupiers were getting more desirous every day of becoming the direct tenants of the owners. He thought, therefore, that some clause might be successfully introduced to enable the commissioners, where the owner in fee, and the parties holding the intermediate interests, were assenting parties, to extinguish those intermediate interests, and offer the property for sale in such a form as would be most likely to attract the English capitalist. He thought they might be commuted for some determinable rent charge. He was also of opinion that some provision ought to be made for partition in cases of coparcenary—2,000,000 acres of the land of Ireland being so held. He knew a case of property being held conjointly by three persons who had had a partition suit in the Court of Chancery for twenty-five years, without any immediate prospect of an arrangement. With regard to the powers of the commissioners, objected to by the hon. and learned Gentleman who spoke last, he thought they ought to be most extensive and summary powers, so as to enable them to enforce their orders with readiness, not only in Ireland, but in England and Scotland, where so many of the mortgagees resided. He was justified in urging the Government to render the Act such, that all parties connected with property in Ireland might be enabled to avail themselves of its provisions. It was possible that some incumbered proprietors, acting in conjunction with their creditors, and anxious to preserve their estates from coming within the Act, would be able to defeat it altogether, or, at all events, curtail the advantages expected to flow from the measure. He thought the power of putting the Act in operation should be given to other persons than those at present mentioned, otherwise the measure would be completely inoperative. If, for instance, there was a combination between the inheritor and the creditors, the Act might easily be defeated. Taking the Bill in conjunction with the Irish Poor Law Bill, lately introduced by the First Minister of the Crown, it might be assumed that it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to empower the sale of a portion of the land for payment of the arrears of poor-rates now due.
350
For his own part, he was entirely in favour of giving the most summary power for the recovery of arrears of poor-rates from the landlords. He meant those arrears due in respect of land, either in their own actual possession or in the occupation of such of their tenants whose rent did not exceed 4l. a year each. He knew there were many of his countrymen who considered it a great hardship that such extensive powers should be given for the recovery of poor-rates, and that landed proprietors should be held responsible at all for poor-rates. But it should be recollected that the vast sum of three millions sterling, collected last year for poor-rates and county cess, had been paid by the tenantry in actual occupation of the land, the majority of whom paid less than 15 l. a year rent. The landlords had no reason to complain, perhaps, when it was recollected that the most stringent and extensive powers were conferred upon poor-law guardians, to have the rates collected where the annual value was over 4l. The goods, chattels, and bodies of the tenantry were liable where the annual value exceeded that sum. There was the greatest anxiety to meet the demand shown by the tenantry in Ireland; and he thought it was only justice to see that that portion which was payable by the landlords was enforced, and that every facility should be given for its recovery. He feared, as the Bill was now framed, there was not a sufficiently distinct and summary mode given to compel payment of those rates by the proprietors of land. The poor-law guardians or commissioners should be at liberty to proceed, in the civil-bill courts, for the recovery of those rates, where their amount was within their jurisdiction, and when beyond it they should be empowered to bring actions in the superior courts; when the proprietors resided in England that they might be proceeded against here, and on judgments being recovered, that those judgments might be transferred to Ireland, where they could be made available as liens upon the land. As to landed proprietors who resided on the Continent, or who took up their residences perhaps at Brussels or Boulogne, it would be difficult to proceed against them effectively, and much expense would be incurred. The very best mode to avoid injustice to any one would be to extend the jurisdiction of the assistant barristers' courts, and empower them to adjudicate upon all cases relating to poor-rates due by landed proprietors—the decree of the as-

351
sistant barrister to be registered in Dublin, and have the same effect as any judgment. That would put an end to the necessity or the opportunity of incurring costs in fruitless and harassing proceedings. With regard to the landlords' exemption from arrest for rates due by them, he had no wish to see them liable to be arrested. On the contrary he was satisfied to exchange their liability to arrest for the more rational modes of enforcing payment he had suggested. [The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER: To any amount?] Yes; and he assured the House, that if something like what he had suggested were not adopted, the whole project would be an utter failure. The Bill could never be made to work. The whole thing would break down for want of purchasers. It was in the power of the Government still to hold out inducements to parties to invest capital in the purchase of land in Ireland. There were many privileges and advantages that would operate as powerful inducements to capitalists to invest their money in land there, and those privileges might safely be entrusted to them. If proper inducements were given by the Government, Ireland would soon have the advantage of the investment of a large amount of that capital with which the city of London and this country generally was literally surcharged. If such alterations were made in the Bill as would render land an easily convertible security for parties willing to invest their capital in it, one of the results would be, that the resources of Ireland would soon become profitably developed, instead of rapidly retrograding to ruin, as they were at present.
MR. W. KEOGHwould have contented himself with the expression of opinion which he gave on a previous occasion, had it not been for the observations which had fallen from the hon. and learned Member for Coventry, observations calculated unnecessarily to alarm the English mortgagees, and thus assist in raising up a formidable opposition to the Bill. His own unbiassed and honest conviction was, that the Bill was calculated to confer the greatest possible advantage on all classes in Ireland; and if he was to select any particular class as likely to experience peculiar benefit, it would be that of the incumbered proprietor entirely disabled from discharging the duties or realising the advantages of his property. He did not think that the objections urged against the Bill by the hon. and learned Member for Coventry were
352
well founded. Every reasonable precaution was taken in the Bill to secure the interests of all parties. He was quite at a loss to understand why any objection should be made by any mortgagee to a cheap and advantageous mode of realising what was owing to him, looking at the difficulty which now existed on that point. Neither could he see why a Parliamentary title should not enhance the value of the property by four or five years' purchase, thus affording a chance that the proceeds would prove adequate to meet the claims both of the first and second mortgagee. The hon. and learned Gentleman stated that the Bill proposed to confer extraordinary discretionary powers upon the three commissioners to be appointed under it; now, in that respect, likewise, he had the misfortune of differing from the hon. and learned Member. As he (Mr. Keogh) read the Bill, the powers with which the commissioners were to be invested were reasonable enough. The directions given could not be more clear or specific. The ninth section required the commissioners to frame and circulate forms of application and directions, indicating the particulars of the information necessary to be furnished, on application to them. First, with reference to title; then, as to incumbrances, the special circumstances of the land, and such other information as in the judgment of the commissioners might assist them in forming an opinion on the application. The nineteenth section authorised the commissioners to direct notices to be given to, and to hear any parties interested in the land or lease; it further stated that they should investigate the title and the incumbrances affecting such lease and land, and the state and circumstances of the land, so as to enable them to determine whether it would be expedient that a sale of all or any part of it should be made; and if such a sale should be expedient, then that they should be empowered at their discretion to make an order for the sale of all or any part of such land, or of the land comprised in the lease. That was undoubtedly a very proper power to invest the commissioners with. Any person interested in the property might apply to the commissioners, and should be heard; specified notices to all persons concerned being given; and, after a strict investigation of all the circumstances, the commissioners exercised their discretion as to the expediency of a sale. There was not the least reason, therefore, for arriving at the conclusion that petty in-

353
cumbrancers, to the extent of a few pounds, might compel the sale of any property in Ireland. There was every possible guarantee that no such evil could arise, unless indeed hon. Members imagined that the most incompetent persons would be selected as commissioners. The hon. and gallant Member for Portarlington had adduced a very novel argument against the Bill. In comparing its provisions with the operation of the Court of Chancery, he stated that this court had fenced property by safeguards and protections which did not exist in the Bill before the House. So far, however, as he (Mr. Keogh) could understand the matter, the effect of these safeguards had been to prevent, by delay and expense, the realisation of those objects which the parties applying to the Court of Chancery had in view. He knew enough of the west of Ireland to induce him to say that, under the impression that Her Majesty's Ministers had no more comprehensive measure in contemplation than the present—and although he was far from saying that no other measure was needed—he was prepared to treat the question not as a legal question, but in a much broader view; and he trusted that no opposition would prevail against the Bill. The hon. and learned Gentleman then entered at some length into an explanation of the mode in which incumbered property was now managed through the instrumentality of the Court of Chancery. Not unfrequently receivers were appointed under a previous arrangement with solicitors, to throw as much as they could in their way in the shape of law costs. He had just been told, that in one union no fewer than nine estates were under the charge of receivers; and he was not surprised to hear that that union was one of the bankrupt ones. The hon. and learned Member for Coventry had spoken of the alarm which the proprietors of property felt at the consequences of the proposed Bill. Evidence, however, of a contrary feeling could be appealed to. He knew that the estates of the late Mr. Martin, in Connemara, extending to 196,000 Irish acres; the estates of Mr. O'Neil and others, amounting in all to 279,000 Irish acres, would be sold at the present moment if eligible purchasers could be found. He would appeal to those of his hon. and learned Friends who were best acquainted with the workings of the Court of Chancery, if they ever knew an instance of a proprietor who entered that court, coming out of it in a
354
solvent state? Looking at the miserable condition in which Ireland was placed, he, for one, would gladly concur in the adoption of any measures which tended to extricate her from that condition.
MR. HENLEYobserved, that they were all agreed in this—that it would be desirable to let loose the incumbered land in Ireland. The question was, how was that to be done with justice to all parties, and with little shock to the feelings of all parties. He thought the Irish Gentlemen had just reason to complain of the Government in this matter. In 1847, he knew that a representation had been made to the Government by persons in this country interested in Irish estates, and who then pointed out the advantage of giving to purchasers a Parliamentary title. That was very much pressed upon Government, and it was refused by Government. The great object of public policy in the present state of Ireland should be to let loose the land; but were they not by the Bill going beyond what was necessary to effect that object? An hon. and learned Gentleman who had addressed the House to-night stated, that decrees for sale were easy enough to be obtained, but the difficulty was to effect the sale. And how did they think that such a Bill as this would tend to induce persons to buy land in Ireland? After agreeing to give a man a Parliamentary title to an estate, see what a condition they placed him in, and if it would be an inducement to him to lay out his money in land in Ireland. The return of interest upon the investment of money in land was small; and the reason why persons were induced to lay it out in land was on account of the nature of the security. There was an idea that, owing to the law of England, a man could not be easily divested of his land; and that was one great reason why persons in buying land were contented with a less amount of return for their capital. But if they introduced into Ireland a new scheme for dealing with the land, as the hon. Member for Carlow had told them, they must extend it—they would not be able to stop here with this Bill—they must give it an almost permanent operation. It was in fact to be a kind of roving commission. Look at the mortgagee—see how they would treat him. The only security which he had was his parchments. They had been told that many of those parchment securities had gone out of the country; and how many more did they think would yet go out if this Bill were passed

355
into a law, and people were called upon to produce them? In his opinion, those persons would act wisely who placed them out of the reach of the court. He must say, therefore, going as he did fully with those who desired to let loose the land of Ireland, that the provisions of the Bill went beyond what was necessary to effect their own object; because all who had yet spoken in support of the measure agreed that there was a large quantity of land under decree for sale, and that purchasers could not be found. Was it necessary, then, to go beyond what they had power now to do? Let them give a Parliamentary title, and see if purchasers would come in and clear the land which was now for sale in the market. But if it were necessary to go beyond the law in the sale of an estate, in order to let loose the land, there could be no reason for taking the distribution of the fund from the ordinary tribunals of the country, unless they came to that conclusion to which he thought the Bill would fast bring the country—that the Court of Chancery must be swept away. He knew that, both in England and Ireland, there were many persons who thought that great reforms were necessary in that court; but if they took this great step, they must be prepared to go a step further, and either show the special grounds of exemption that were to take the distribution of the funds out of the ordinary tribunals of the country, or remodel those tribunals, or sweep them away. Another reason against the commission for distribution of the funds was this, that there would be a sort of ex parte inquiry by them before a sale was decreed, and it would be supposed by people that these commissioners had formed certain opinions of the rights of parties when they decreed a sale; and, therefore, would not come as an impartial tribunal to decide on conflicting interests in the distribution of the funds.
MR. S. MARTINadmitted there was a good deal of truth in what had fallen from the hon. Member for Oxfordshire, when he said the Bill seemed to give a sort of roving commission. He thought there were some points in which it could be improved for the practical carrying out of the objects it proposed, and for the benefit of the country. He would propose to confine the power of the commission to the sale of land merely, and to hand over to the Court of Common Pleas the distribution of the funds arising from the sale—a court which would give universal satisfaction. He thought it would be found expedient
356
to confer upon this commission power to inquire into all estates on petition being presented to them: first, into the value of the estate; and, secondly, into the amount of incumbrances upon it; and when these incumbrances should amount to a certain large proportion, that then, and not till then, should the commission have power to deal with that estate. The two functions proposed by the Bill to be conferred on the commission were—first, to effect a sale of the estate; and, secondly, to distribute the funds. The first was a function which might be discharged by many with great advantage to all parties interested in the estates in question; but the second, which was to decide upon the priority of charges, however simple it might seem to those acquainted with law, was yet one of the most intricate questions which could come before any tribunal. He proposed, therefore, that the three commissioners should be empowered effectually to discharge the first of these functions, so as to decree and complete the sale; and that the money, after deducting, say 3 per cent on the price, or 5 per cent, or whatever other rate was usually charged by a respectable auctioneer, for he would have the rate fixed for the expenses of the sale sent into the Court of Common Pleas in Ireland, where the distribution could be effectually and satisfactorily made. Another difficulty connected with this commission was this—that, while their powers should be defined and limited by the Bill, they might be found insufficient in certain cases, or in certain cases the commissioners might go beyond their powers. The consequence would be, that a prohibition would issue from the courts in Dublin to stay these proceedings; and that, once issued, would for ever paralyse their operations. To remedy that evil, he proposed to make the commission to all intents a court of record; and, that instead of any Parliamentary title being offered, their mere record, ordering and completing the sale of the estates, should be itself a protection against all previous charges. But, in his opinion, all this would operate only as a temporary relief, so long as they left the great source of most of the evils affecting landed property untouched. In Ireland the practice existed, and was universally pursued, of making a judgment a security for money given in loan. So different was the state of affairs in England, that, till the reign of Edward I., landed property was not subject to execu-

357
tion under the judgment of a court of common law; and from that time till the year 1838, only half an individual's estates were held liable to the effects of a judgment. In Ireland this was esteemed the most convenient kind of security, and accordingly these judgments were daily sued out without any intention of issuing execution; and these judgments affected the whole of the estates possessed by the proprietor, or that he may afterwards possess, and follow the estates into whatever hands they may fall. Hence, on purchasing estates, it was necessary to investigate, not merely what judgments might have existed against the last vendor, but every previous vendor might have judgments against him, and all things attaching to the property. The mortgage deed in England at once showed what lands, described by their boundaries and their locality, were subject to the charges; but in Ireland the securities he was talking of created a difficulty of investigation fiftyfold greater. He proposed, then, to meet this by enacting that judgments, unless levied in the course of one or two years, should cease to be of force. He hoped, with these provisions in operation, that Ireland would recover from her present adversity to a state of prosperity as great as was enjoyed by this country.
The SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, the hon. and learned Member for Coventry seemed to have misunderstood the objects of the Bill. It was intended by the Bill to empower the commission to sell incumbered estates; but in order that they might do so speedily, it was necessary to disencumber them of those fetters and forms of the Court of Chancery which had interfered with the course of justice. In regard to what had fallen from the hon. Member for Oxfordshire, as to the mortgages, he wished the House to bear in mind that the title-deeds of an estate, which in this country were looked upon as of the greatest importance, were, in Ireland, of next to none; and what was called the legal estate was of no importance whatever. Hence it came that a mortgagor would never show his deeds. But then, the commission would act upon decrees of the Court of Chancery, where all the deeds and muniments had been produced and examined before the decree was pronoueced. Now, in the present state of Ireland, it was open to a mortgagor either to sell the property or to foreclose his mortgage, or to enter into
358
possession; foreclosure, in fact, being but another way of entering into possession. Was it then desirable for him to enter into possession? A marketable title was a very scarce thing in Ireland, although a good holding title was more common. Would the mortgagor be benefited, then, if he were allowed to take one or other of the two courses he had mentioned? It was not desirable to take possession—it was little better to endeavour, in the present state of Ireland, to attempt to sell the estates with the deficient nature of their titles. One of the great difficulties in the way of a sale felt just now in Ireland was the difficulty of finding purchasers; but he believed their number would be greatly increased by the Bill before the House, which proposed to give the purchaser a Parliamentary title. He said it was intended to introduce several alterations and additions upon the Bill as it at present stood. It was intended to empower the commissioners to make a partition in the case of a sale of estates of undivided interest. It was further intended to give them the power of enforcing the contracts entered into for the purchase of estates, and also of rescinding these contracts under certain circumstances which might render that necessary. At the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, among other things, he proposed to enact that no prohibition should issue on mandamus against the commissioners out of any of the courts in Dublin. The commissioners would likewise have the power of making such rules and taking such measures as would be necessary to carry the object of the Bill into effect. The hon. and learned Member for Coventry would perceive a case perfectly analogous in that respect, in the case of the West India Commission, who had the utmost latitude in drawing up their own rules and regulations. The evils of the present system were owing to the practice with which the Court of Chancery, for its own sake, had circumscribed itself; and he would mention an illustration that had been sent to him a few days ago. An estate was placed in the court about twenty years since. Eight different suits were instituted for a sale, to which there were forty-five defendants. It was found that a good title could not be given under any one, and in 1843 a ninth was instituted, which, though an amicable one, had gone on for six years, and was not yet closed.

359
This evil arose from the mixture of the Chancery system with the peculiar tenure of land in Ireland, and unless the Legislature interfered with a strong hand, both owners and incumbrancers would be involved by it in one common ruin. A law analogous to that which he proposed had existed in Scotland for 200 years. Originally, under that law, estates were sold, after inquiry, into the incumbrances and their priority, but only with the consent of the owner. This, however, being found injurious, it was altered, so that estates could at once be sold, even though the owner objected; and all Scotch lawyers would say that it had worked admirably. No person would derive greater benefit from this Bill than mortgagees. Under the existing state of things they did not desire to obtain possession of the estates on which their money was secured; but whether they did or not, the measure would enable them to obtain more money and at a much earlier period than they otherwise would. It was an error to suppose that it would be in the power of an owner to suspend the proceedings under the commission—the very essence of the Bill being that the commissioners should proceed with the sale as speedily as they possibly could. The proposal of the hon. and learned Member for Pontefract for paying the money into the Court of Common Pleas could not be adopted without manifest injury; for the result of it would be, that the court having to administer Chancery law would adopt Chancery forms, and after a certain time it would fall into the same state of discredit as the Court of Chancery, because it would not be able to do justice to those persons who desired, through its agency, to obtain that to which they were justly entitled. With reference to judgments, a measure was in contemplation which would be introduced as soon as possible. No system of the description necessary to meet the evil could be complete which did not attack the law of judgments as one of its chief sources. With the hon. Member for Car-low, he desired to get rid as far as possible of the system of middlemen; and he thought the words in the 30th Clause of the Bill would be large enough to include them, but if not, they could be made adequate in Committee, so as to enable the purchasers of estates to come into immediate relation with the cultivating tenant. He agreed with the hon. Member for Carlow, that when "great and comprehensive
360
measures" were talked of for Ireland, it was difficult to tell what was wanted. He believed it was a series of measures, gradually introduced, analogous to that now before the House. But such measures were not very easy to frame. They required much care and attention. He did not pretend to say that if all those before the House were carried, or even those relative to judgments, a great deal would not have been done. A step would have been taken in the right direction; but much would remain to be done. By the present Bill a perfectly clear and free title would be given to a certain amount of land in the first instance, and it would be found, if two estates were to be sold—one under this Bill and the other not—that the one purchased under the Bill would bring a better price than the other. But it was manifest that when the land was once emancipated from encumbrances, a recurrence of them must be prevented in future. This, he was satisfied, would not be accomplished until there was a perfect system of registration for titles and incumbrances; and a great advantage was that such a system must be begun at once with the land sold under this Bill, because the whole of the previous register would be swept away. By such measures the people of Ireland would be taught to feel the advantages of law, and the benefits of a paternal government. All their interests would lie in supporting government and law; there would no longer be any talk about a repeal of the Union, and agitation would cease to exist. For himself, he claimed no merit whatever in the proposition of this or any other measure; but on the part of Her Majesty's Government he claimed for them the merit of having been desirous to receive suggestions from all quarters calculated to be of benefit to Ireland. He claimed for them the merit of carefully considering those suggestions, and of carrying them out, as far as they were practicable, with the sole view of securing the amelioration of the country, totally regardless of all questions of party or politics.
MR. NAPIERwould not oppose the Bill in that stage; on the contrary, he would endeavour in Committee to make it more perfect; but he reserved to himself the right of accepting or rejecting it as a whole upon the third reading. He concurred with the Solicitor General that the multiplication of judgments and the delay of justice were great evils; but he main-

361
tained that they were caused, not by the Court of Chancery of Ireland, hut by the Imperial Legislature. The multiplication of receivers by judgment creditors was a crying evil also; and another evil was, conferring on the judgment creditor the same power as if he had an equitable charge on the land. These things were not at all in the practice of the Court of Chancery, hut had been created by law. There were two classes of suits in the Courts of Chancery in Ireland, which it would be for the benefit of the country to have altered, namely, administration suits and creditor suits. They were serious evils to property in Ireland. If the Court of Chancery was rectified in these cases, there would be no occasion for a court of commission. The Bill gave a co-ordinate and even superior jurisdiction to a new court; and the House had not been shown that the Court of Chancery under such circumstances would not be sufficient to carry out its provisions. Unless that was done, the necessity for that new court was not proved. He (Mr. Napier) admitted that the Bill should be looked upon in a commonsense view as well as in a professional manner; hut it should also he looked upon as regarded the administration of justice and the benefit of Ireland.
Bill read a second time, and committed for Monday next.

DEFECTS IN LEASES BILL.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, said that it was one of considerable importance in cases where a lease was made under the exercise of a power given to any person having a limited interest given either by deed or will. There were two defects—one where the number of witnesses was not sufficient, and the other where the lease was executed under a power given by will and not by deed. In both of these cases the Court of Chancery supplied the omissions; but there were other defects to remedy, which the Court of Chancery was not in the habit of interfering with, and which were only taken advantage of for purposes that he might say were not honest ones. For instance, a person having certain property on the hanks of the Thames, the tenant for life, in connexion with the remainder-man, obtained an Act of Parliament to authorise the granting of building leases, with the usual proviso of the best rent being reserved in the leases. In the leases a peppercorn rent was reserved for
362
the first year, the rent in future years being proportionably higher, in consequence. But the peppercorn rent not coming under the term "best" rent in the Act of Parliament, the leases became invalid, and the tenants forfeited their capital expended in building. The present Act provided a remedy for that and other injustices; and another Bill which he intended asking the House to read a second time also, would extend even still greater facilities to the granting of such leases in Ireland.
Bill read a second time, and committed for Monday next.

GRANTS OF LAND (NEW SOUTH WALES) BILL.
On the Motion for going into Committee on this Bill,
MR. HAWESstated, in answer to a question from Mr. Scott, that the object of the Bill was to remove some doubts which existed respecting the validity of certain grants made some years ago in New South Wales.
MR. SCOTTwished to know if the Bill did not affect the validity of grants of land made in the Port Phillip district?
MR. HAWESsaid, that the Bill applied only to certain local grants, of which the titles had not been issued, and without the sanction which the present measure would give, the act of the local legislature, authorising the grants, was considered to run counter to the general act of the Imperial Legislature.
The House having gone into Committee,
MR. SCOTTexpressed his dissatisfaction at the explanation given, and said that his impression was, that in settling the doubts as to title in one part of the colony, the Bill would raise far greater and more serious doubts with regard to title in the Port Phillip district.
SIR G. GREYsaid, there was no occasion for the apprehensions expressed by the hon. Gentleman. The matter had arisen out of certain grants of land made by Governor Darling, with respect to which doubts had arisen whether or not these grants were valid. The Legislative Council had passed an Act for the purpose of removing those doubts, and confirming the grants; probably not reflecting that the power of doing so did not rest with them. When the Act came home for ratification, the legal advisers of the Crown gave their opinion that the act of Council was invalid, but that as the object was clearly a beneficial one, a Bill ought to be brought into

363
the Imperial Parliament to effect this object. That was the purpose of the present Bill, and it was impossible that any doubt could be thrown on the legality of other grants.
House resumed.

ATTACHMENTS, COURTS OF RECORD (IRELAND) BILL.
Report considered.
MR. GROGANrose to propose a clause, which was to give compensation for the loss of their offices to Mr. Butler, the Marshal of the Record Court, and three sergeants-at-mace, who had held their offices, the youngest for fourteen and the eldest for thirty-two years. They had all been duly, legally, and regularly elected by the corporation of Dublin, and therefore they were entitled to compensation. In proof of this, he was proceeding to cite the analogous cases provided for in the Counties Courts Act, when
MR. SPEAKERreminded the hon. Gentleman that a Motion for compensation could not be made when the Speaker was in the chair.
MR. GROGANthen moved that the Bill be recommitted for the purpose of proposing his clause.
MR. REYNOLDSsaid, he had been obliged to read the clause twice over before he could believe that his hon. Colleague was serious. It now appeared, however, that it was no joke, and with the leave of the House he would explain the matter. In 1841 the corporation of Dublin was reformed. Perhaps he ought scarcely to say that it was reformed, for many of the privileges originally in the Bill were curtailed, and many provisions were added which only tended to embarrass the corporation. Among these was this case of compensation. One of the present claimants, Mr. Judkin Butler, then filled the office of city marshal. He was dismissed by the new corporation—he would not state on what grounds, but it was certainly not for his good behaviour. He claimed compensation under the Act, and the city of Dublin awarded him a compensation of 250 l. a year. Mr. Butler was dissatisfied, and appealed to the Lords of the Treasury, his political friends being then in power, and they awarded him for the loss of his office the sum of 464 l. 7s. 4d. After Mr. Butler was dismissed from his office of marshal of the city, the Recorder conferred upon him the office of Marshal of the Record Court, at a salary of 400 l. a
364
year. It was an office over which the corporation had no control whatsoever; and the Bill, moreover, did not abolish the office at all. The Bill merely proposed to enact that, from and after the passing of the Act, the system of attachment out of the Record Court should cease, and the proceedings should be rendered analogous to proceedings in the Court of Queen's Bench, Exchequer, or Common Pleas. The system of attachment in the Record Courts of Ireland was infinitely worse than the Palace Court system in London. He would give an example. He held in his hand a writ with the return upon it. It was an attachment issued against a widow, named Catherine Brady, for a debt. Furniture valued at 36 l. was seized and sold. The costs were 4l. 6s. 10 d., and the return upon the back of the writ was, that the goods had been sold for 4l. 10 s. 9d., and that the marshal (Mr. Judkin Butler) had handed over to the plaintiff 3s. 11 d. For the sake of peace, he had consented to assist the hon. Gentleman the Member for Athlone in obtaining some compensation for those persons out of the Consolidated Fund. But when the Chancellor of the Exchequer declined to accede to the proposition, the hon. Gentleman tried to quarter them upon the citizens of Dublin. The improved feeling of society had done away with executions in Dublin, and it was rumoured that the hangman was going to claim compensation; and, after all, it would not be a more preposterous one than that of Mr. Butler. He had never heard of a more monstrous proposition than that the corporation of Dublin should have to compensate the officer of a court over which they had no control. He (Mr. Reynolds) would as soon give compensation to a parcel of highway robbers. He protested against the attempt to defraud the citizens of Dublin, by making them pay those cormorants of the Record Court.
MR. W. KEOGHsaid, that the hon. Member for Dublin had said, he would as soon give compensation to a parcel of highway robbers as to those cormorants of the Record Court, and at the same time he admitted that he had attempted to obtain compensation for them out of the Consolidated Fund. He had accompanied him (Mr. Keogh) to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to obtain compensation for them, yet he now called them cormorants of the Record Court, and said he would as soon think of giving compensation to a parcel of highway robbers. The former Member

365
for Dublin (Mr. O'Connell) was the very first man who supported in the House the giving of compensation to the officers of the old corporation. What were they to think of the present Member, who endeavoured to prevent compensation being given to men, the average of whose ages was 65 years, and one of whom was 73 years old?—and, not contented with doing so, he must also scatter slander upon their hitherto unimpeachable characters. On turning to the case of Mr. Judkin Butler, it appeared that that gentleman—and he was a gentleman by birth, education, and conduct—who was said by the hon. Member for Dublin to have been dismissed for no good conduct, had been removed, and Mr. Thomas Reynolds, brother of the hon. Member, appointed Marshal of Dublin in his place. So that he had been removed to make way for the hon. Member's brother.
After a few words in explanation from MR. REYNOLDS,
SIR W. SOMERVILLEopposed the clause. It was a claim upon the corporation of Dublin, of which due notice ought to have been given.
Debate adjourned till Friday, 25th May.
The House adjourned at a quarter before One o'clock, till Monday next.

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BIILS.—1a Small Debts (Scotland) Act Amendment.
2a Poor Laws (Ireland) Rate in Aid.
Received the Royal Assent.—Exchequer Bills; Outdoor Paupers; Distraining for Rates; Recovery of Wages (Ireland); Protection of Justices (Ireland); Spirits (Ireland); Petty Sessions; Prisoners' Removal (Ireland).
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Lord Redesdale, the Earl of Galloway" Marquess of Breadalbane, and Bishops of Oxford and Salisbury from a great Number of Places, for the Adoption of Measures for the Suppression of Seduction and Prostitution.—By the Earl of Roden, from Places in the North of Ireland, for an Alteration in the Distribution of the Grant in Aid of Public Education.—By the Earl of Lucan, from several Places in Ireland, against the Rate in Aid, and for an Alteration in the Irish Poor Law.—From Dublin, for the Adoption of Measures to remove every Restraint on the free Exercise of Religious Opinion.—By Lord Stanley, from Huddersfield and Cambridgeshire, against the Granting of any New Licenses to Beer Shops; also for the entire Suppression of the Slave Trade,—By Earl Fitzwilliam, from Harwich, and other Places, against the Navigation Bill—From Cork, to establish a complete System of Railway Communication throughout Ireland.—By Lord Wharncliffe, from Manchester, to postpone the further Progress of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Bill.—From Lower Heyford, for the Repeal of the Duty on Malt and Hops.—From Orkney, for a thorough Reformation of Parochial Schools in Scotland.

REPORTING IN THE HOUSE.
The EARL of GALLOWAY, after presenting a petition, said, he would take that opportunity, with their Lordships' permission, of complaining of a misrepresentation which he had seen in the Times newspaper of that day of what fell from him in the House yesterday. He was in the recollection of their Lordships, but for the information of any noble Lords who were not present on the occasion to which he referred, he begged leave to say that his complaint was, not that he had been reported, because for that he did not care one straw, but that he had been misreported; not that he complained of the things which he said not having been reported, but of things having been put into his mouth which he never said. He was also represented to have "addressed their Lordships with great fury." He did not know whether that was altogether a Parliamentary phrase. Had that appeared as an editorial remark, he should not have complained; but as it appeared in a regular account of what passed in their Lordships' House, he thought he
256
had some claim to throw himself upon their indulgence. He might have spoken with energy, but certainly it was without anger. Under a sense of injustice done, or under the influence of great excitement, a man might speak with warmth, but not with anger. He believed he spoke good humouredly. He intended to do so. If he failed—[Cheers]—he thanked their Lordships for that cheer—if he failed to express himself good-humouredly, he must apologise to their Lordships. This was another and a strong example of the misrepresentations which often took place in the reports of the proceedings of the House—misrepresentations tending to lower the character of the House, and the character of the Members of the House.
The EARL of MOUNTCASHELsaid, that he was in the same situation with the noble Earl who had just sat down. He did not often intrude himself upon the attention of their Lordships, but he sometimes did so on subjects connected with Ireland, He had frequently had to complain that false impressions had gone abroad of what he had said in that House. On various occasions he had endeavoured to set the public mind right, but had always found that what he had said was either not noticed at all or was misreported. He did not see why one noble Lord should enjoy the favour of the reporters, and another not; why one should be given at great length and with much accuracy, and another should be entirely cast aside and rejected. He was glad that this subject was to be brought under the notice of a Committee; and he hoped that the reporters would be placed under some better control, if they were to be continued as the organs of communicating their debates to the public, and that they would be taught to make their reports fair and full, sufficient and correct.
EARL GREYdid not concur in the general charges which had just been made by the two noble Earls; but he found that he stood in the same predicament, for there was a very important mistake in the report of what he said the other evening, which he was most anxious to correct. As far as he had read the report, it appeared to him to be exceedingly correct, but a noble Friend had called his attention to a passage which he thought was of some importance, and which was certainly given in a sense the very opposite to what he did say. The passage in the report was as follows:—

257
"But he was not prepared to say that that feeling would continue if so gross an act of injustice, as in their opinion it would be, should be committed as that of the rejection of this measure. He believed that if their Lordships should throw out this Bill, they would part with the last security for the attachment of those colonies to the British Crown. It was known to men who had watched well the current of political opinion and events in the world, that the connexion of these provinces with the mother country was drawing rapidly to a close, and that they would become an independent people at a very early day. If therefore this country should lose the present opportunity of doing with a feeling of good grace an act of favour to these colonies, which they could not hope long to preserve, they might eventually put it out of their power even to secure to themselves the benefits that would arise from the maintenance of friendly relations with them as an independent Power."
He should lament most exceedingly if it were to go out to Canada that he could have been thought to have said that he believed the connexion of that great province with this country was likely soon to be determined. The whole drift of his speech was the opposite. What he did say was, he believed the Canadians were at present loyal and attached to this country, and were becoming daily more so. He certainly added, that he did not know how far those feelings would be proof against the sense of injustice which would be created by the rejection of the Bill then under discussion. But the misconception was with reference to the future. What he really did state was, that whatever the decision of the House then might be, he was persuaded that the navigation laws, as they now existed, could not long continue—that they must inevitably be soon repealed; but that was an opportunity of repealing them with a good grace, and as an act of justice; and if they did so hereafter, it might be done with very different impressions and feelings. He was sure that those of their Lordships who were present on that occasion must be aware that that was the substance of his remarks; and that nothing fell from him implying any doubt as to the permanence of the connexion between this country and Canada, if Canada were treated with that justice which it had a right to demand.

LIGHTNING CONDUCTORS.
The EARL of WILTONhad moved for a return last Session of the number of ships struck by lightning, and the amount of damage which they had sustained, as also the ships fitted with the apparatus of Sir W. Snow Harris, and the other apparatus which had been invented for the
258
same object. He wished to know if there was any objection to grant such returns?
The EARL of MINTOsaid, there never had been or could be the slightest doubt of the value of the invention of Sir W. Snow Harris. It was desirable to obtain the relative merits of the two inventions.
The EARL of ST. GERMANShad moved for a Committee in the House of Commons, but on the suggestion of Sir R. Peel he had consented to a commission instead of a Committee. Since the report of that commission of scientific men, he believed no ships had been fitted with the other apparatus—the chain apparatus.

POOR LAWS (IRELAND)—RATE IN AID BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
The EARL of CARLISLErose to move the Second Reading of this Bill, and said that if, when he had the honour of addressing their Lordships on a previous occasion, he expressed a degree of apprehension, because he was under the necessity of opposing the feelings and opinions which many of their Lordships entertained, he ought to be impressed by a still greater feeling of discouragement in addressing them now, because the Bill which he had now to urge on their Lordships' acceptance had been prejudged and precondemned by the resolution of a Committee of their Lordships' House. He had, however, to state that Her Majesty's Ministers were not more insensible than the Members of either House of Parliament, or the witnesses which had appeared before their respective Committees, to the objections—many of them really valid, and all, perhaps, plausible—which could be urged against the principle of a rate in aid—objections which, if urged against the permanent application of such a measure, or the establishment of a general law of such a character, would probably be found insuperable. The responsibility which Her Majesty's Government had taken on themselves by introducing this Bill, to which, in spite of all the objections which had been urged, and all the opposition which had been excited, they still adhered, rested on the means which, in their judgment, were still open to them to meet an emergency of the most serious nature, but which they still hoped, partly from the experience of the past, but chiefly from their trust in the superintendence of Omnipotent mercy, was capable of being converted into per-

259
manent good. He would now state shortly the circumstances under which the present proposal was urged for their Lordships' acceptance. He need not trouble their Lordships with any formal history of what was already sufficiently well known. For the last three years the failure in Ireland of the usual crops had produced famine and misery in every quarter. This was attempted to be met by two successive Governments, but principally by the present Government, by a system of relief works; a system which every one admitted to have been conceived in the best intentions, but which proved in operation to be costly, cumbrous, and incapable of control, till it finally broke down under its own weight. The next system that was tried was the attempt to relieve destitution by means of food alone. This system was carried on upon a gigantic scale, and at one time no fewer than 3,000,000 persons were receiving relief in that form. This was evidently a system which was not calculated for permanent adoption, and when a temporary lull took place in October, 1848, it was brought to a close; and since that time relief had been administered, where it was absolutely requisite, through the agency of the poor-law unions. This relief was given in the greatest part of Ireland through the unions themselves; but in other parts of Ireland, and particularly in twenty-one distressed unions, the assistance which was necessary had been partly derived from the British Association, and partly from funds supplied by the British Treasury. It was stated in a Treasury Minute, of the 19th January, 1849, that from the 1st of October, 1847, to the 8th of July, 1848, a sum of 235,500 l. had been derived from the funds of the British Relief Association, and a further sum of 132,000 l. had been granted by Parliament, making in all a sum of 367,500 l. It appeared also, that in the province of Con-naught 182,759 l. had been collected from the poor-rate, while the total expenditure amounted to 399,208 s.; the excess of expenditure, therefore, over the amount collected being 216,449 l. After referring to these details, it was gratifying to find that, whatever might have been the sufferings and difficulties of the period, the Poor Law Commissioners had reported that, without this timely aid, no less than 200,000 persons would probably have perished in the distressed districts for want of food. Now, he was aware that the conduct of the Government had been exposed to criticism and
260
to censure. Of course it was not for him to say how far that censure was well deserved or not; but he knew that throughout this cycle of misfortune which had befallen Ireland during three successive years, one leading principle had pervaded their thoughts and their policy, and that was that, as far as they could help it, not one single individual should die of starvation. Their Lordships were necessarily aware, that when for three successive years the usual crops that formed the sustenance of the people of Ireland had almost wholly failed, it was quite impossible for any Government to save great numbers of persons from appalling suffering. They were aware, also, that in ordinary times it was not the province of a Government to provide for the subsistence of a people; but, under the extraordinary and exceptional circumstances which had occurred in Ireland, Her Majesty's Ministers were of opinion that certain districts were so situated, without the slightest prospect of relief being given from any other quarter, and when a great destruction of human life was likely to ensue, that it was necessary that assistance should be brought, food should be given, and life should be saved, by the Imperial Exchequer. It was stated in the Treasury Minute which he had cited, that as the produce of the potato crop was less in 1848 than it was in 1847, it must be expected that the charge for the relief of the poor in the distressed districts would again seriously affect the amount of the rates which were to be levied; and that as the funds of the unions were at present almost exhausted, it would be impossible to collect the amount. With this view, and under a sense of the same responsibility of providing, as far as they could, that the people should not perish by famine,. Her Majesty's Government, at the commencement of the present Session, proposed to Parliament an addition of 50,000 l. to the sums which had been previously defrayed from the public funds, in order to meet the necessary outlay which the Poor Law Commissioners were called on to administer. Well, that proposition was submitted to Parliament; but how was it received by the other House? Several Members who were connected with Ireland, persons of property and station there, were reported to have stated as their opinion, that the property of Ireland ought to contribute to the relief of the poverty of that country. He found it reported that a Gentleman, who tad always been distinguished

261
as an economical authority, had said that in many parts of England the rates were much higher than in parts of Ireland; that in the county of Norfolk the rates were 16 s. 6d. in the pound; and that there were many parishes, he might say counties, in which the rates were as high, or higher, than in any part of Ireland. It was reported also to have been said by another Member of the House, who, though not representing an Irish constituency, possessed considerable influence as a landed proprietor in Ireland, that every fresh grant only added to the misery and poverty of Ireland. Further, a Gentleman who held a most distinguished position in the late Government was represented to have stated that he did not hesitate to say that this vote of 50,000 l. must be the last vote of the kind. He said that Ireland had no property-tax, no assessed taxes, no excise taxes, and that even the tax on spirits was less than what was paid in Scotland, and that he must say that if any rates in aid were wanted, they must be raised in Ireland. This seemed to be the general feeling among all parties in the House of Commons. Now, he had stated that the Government was prepared, in order to meet an emergency which they considered as exceptional in its character as it was certainly appalling in its extent, to propose to Parliament to persevere in the course which had been hitherto pursued, by applying for aid to the Imperial Exchequer, under the strictest guarantees for its economical administration, until better times should arrive, and more permanent and substantial modes of relief should be devised. The Government, however, was unable to gain the acquiescence of Parliament in that course. It might be said that another alternative was open to them, and that they might have declared, as they had stated on a recent occasion, that they were prepared to abide by the consequences of defeat. But when they remembered that within the last two years there had been advanced by Parliament for the relief of Irish distress or for the employment of Irish industry, and that during a time of great pressure in this country, no less a sum than 10,095,000 l. from the Imperial Exchequer, from which, however, he ought in justice to Ireland to say that 318,000 l. had been already repaid—when it was borne in mind also that the private benevolence of this country had come forward in a way which would always be remembered with gratitude in all well-constituted minds,
262
and that the contributions from this source, including 300,000 l. from Ireland itself, amounted to 1,500,000 l., to say nothing of the heavy burdens imposed upon many towns in Great Britain by the influx of Irish paupers—taking all these circumstances into consideration, it appeared to the Government that there was a good deal in the suggestion which had been so very forcibly conveyed, that as soon as this grant had been afforded, no future application should be made to the Imperial Exchequer, unless, at least, for the purpose of meeting a special and exceptional case, until it had been seen whether a contribution for the relief of Irish distress, for a limited amount, and for a limited time, could not be raised from Ireland itself. It was accordingly determined to submit a proposal to Parliament to that effect. The question then was, in what form this proposal for the relief of Irish distress was to be made. Now they had been told that the proposal of a rate in aid was actually an insult to Ireland. At all events, however, it was not a novel one in Ireland; for he found, in the last of the propositions which were submitted to the Poor Law Commissioners from the delegates of the boards of guardians, at a meeting held in Dublin, in December, 1848, that this very proposition was made, coupled, however, with a proposition for what was termed the individualising of responsibility, or contracting the area of taxation, so as far as possible to make it conterminous with property. He had no disposition to put on the noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley), whose talents and connection with Ireland, in more ways than one, gave so much weight to what fell from him on such a subject, the obligation of supporting this measure; but the noble Lord certainly did, on the first night of the Session, suggest that a rate in aid should be one of the means adopted for relieving local distress in Ireland. He did not mean to lay any undue stress on the analogy of the law which existed in England and Scotland, because he admitted that there was no analogy between the circumstances of these countries and Ireland, and he wished to rest the case on the special and exceptional grounds which existed, and the temporary nature of the measure. But still, so far from a rate in aid being a thing in itself unheard of, it was provided by the statute 43 Eliz., that when a parish was unable to raise funds within itself for the support of its own poor, the justices in quarter-ses-

263
sions might strike a rate in aid upon the hundred. And in Scotland, also, there was a statute, the 53rd George III., by which a sum of 14,000 l. was ordered to he raised and levied upon the heritors and landowners for the support of the poor in certain places which could not support themselves by reason of the failure of the crop of corn in the year preceding. The actual provisions of the Bill which he had now the honour to introduce, were very concise. They authorised the Poor Law Commissioners to levy a rate in aid from all unions and electoral districts in Ireland, for the relief of such unions or electoral divisions which they conceived might stand in need of it. That rate was limited to the amount of 6d. in the pound on the poor-law valuation for the present year and year the immediately preceding. The treasurer of the county was authorised to impound half the amount of the rate till that amount had been collected from the union or electoral division. The amount which it was calculated this 6d. rate would produce, would be 323,000 l. This, coupled with the 50,000 l. already voted for the relief of Irish distress in the present year, would rather exceed the amount of contributions which it had been found necessary to apply from extrinsic sources in aid of the distress in Ireland for the past year. Of course it was manifest that in some unions no contributions could be levied. They were all, however, made liable by the Bill, as it was not possible beforehand to know the quota that would be required, or the range to which the insolvency of those unions might extend. If the entire sum raised under this Bill were not sufficient, the Government would still be permitted to supply the necessary funds for the actual preservation of life, upon the credit of the rate in aid which might be raised in the two successsive years. The power to levy the proposed rate in aid was limited to two years, and he hoped that beyond that period the necessity for extrinsic aid would not exist; but the Government disclaimed all intention of prolonging beyond that time an impost to which, in their judgment, such strong objection attached, when considered as a permanent and settled system, and not as a temporary and exceptional expedient. Now, what was the exact case with which they had to deal? There were in Ireland at this moment, in the whole of the district to the west of the Shannon at least—call them what they would, distressed, destitute, bankrupt, or
264
insolvent—unions which were unable to support the amount of pauperism which existed in them. Her Majesty's Government thought that support must be afforded; but they also thought that this amount of distress could not he supported from imperial resources, and, therefore, for the relief of those portions of Irish distress they had to look to Irish funds and to Irish resources. The unions from which it was impossible to expect any contribution amounted to twenty-one; there were ten or a dozen others which were trembling upon the very verge of the like destitution; and there were above a hundred in a state of greater or less incapacity to assist the others. If their Lordships would consult the returns laid before the House, they would find that the average amount per pound of the expenses during the last year upon the poor-law valuation for the whole province of Ulster was 1s. 9¼d.; for Munster, 3s. 7½d.; and for Leinster, no more than Is. 11½d. That their Lordships, however, might not think that the financial concerns of the English unions in every portion of this country were much more prosperous than those in Ireland, he would state that he found, by a return presented to the House of Commons in the present Session, that in twenty unions, in different parts of England, the average poor-rates was 4s. 1d.; that in twenty other parishes it was as high as 8s. 11¼d.; and that in four or five parishes the poor-rates stood as high as 12 s. 11 d. It was said that the dislike of the present measure did not apply so exclusively to the drain which it would make upon the better circumstanced districts of Ireland—not to the sum of 6d. in the pound—but to the whole principle of the impost. It was asked, and he would admit with some force, why the county of Antrim and the town of Belfast were more called upon to contribute to the relief of the county of Mayo and the town of Galway, than the county of Warwick and the town of Birmingham? They must not, in considering that argument, leave out of consideration the circumstance of the difference of taxation of the two countries. The people of Great Britain paid a property tax, assessed taxes, and land taxes, duties on hops, bricks, and other articles, amounting to upwards of 12,000,000 l. sterling annually, from which the people of Ireland were totally exempt. He would ask, then, whether there was any thing so unfair, so unjust, or so monstrous, in calling upon

265
the people of the more favoured portions of Ireland, who were not exposed to the same severity of distresses as their more suffering Irish fellow-subjects—who were not liable to the same amount of taxes as their English and Scotch fellow-subjects—to contribute a limited sum, for a limited time, in aid of distress so acute, so unparalleled, and so near their own doors? It was not among the least painful parts of the duty which Her Majesty's Government had to undergo in bringing forward this measure, and which they thought it both their duty and necessity to do—it was not the least unpleasant portion of their duties, that in doing so they should have arrayed against them the opposition of such a province as Ulster, and of its loyal, orderly, industrious, moral, and religious population. And certainly it did seem upon the surface something perverse that the same fine and admirable qualities which had excited their respect, should also be the self-same qualities which exposed them to an impost which they feel so onerous and unjust. It was quite plain, however, that if they were compelled to resort to the better-circumstanced districts of Ireland, Ulster could not be excepted. He felt that the chief objection to the measure which he had to propose was, that it mixed up with the ordinary operation of the poor-law this very distasteful impost; and he thought it was to be regretted, that when any unions should have succeeded in managing their affairs economically and carefully—and still more, perhaps, when, by dint of great exertions and prudence, they had managed to keep their heads above water—that it should be found necessary to mix up their ordinary and legitimate operations with this unwelcome and intrusive impost. He felt those to be great objections to the measure—such as could not be disregarded, if it were not for the alternative which they saw before them, of being unable otherwise to prevent a large number of the people from dying of starvation and destitution. Some of their Lordships might, perhaps, think that an income tax for Ireland would be a more preferable mode of taxation. He would not upon this occasion discuss the propriety of applying an income tax to Ireland; the time might possibly arrive when—at some future day—when that might form a subject of discussion with their Lordships, and when, like this rate in aid, it might become necessary to impose it upon Ireland. If, however, Her Majesty's
266
Government had found such a course would have been preferred by representatives of the people of Ireland, whose wishes upon such a subject he thought it not unbecoming to ascertain and consult, they would not have been averse to entertain that proposition. All he would say at present upon the subject was, that opportunities were given to those persons, both within and without the walls of Parliament, of notifying that preference, but that opportunity was not embraced by them. The original reasons which weighed with Her Majesty's Government for proposing the rate in aid instead of the income tax were, that it appeared to them that the reason which prevented Sir R. Peel from extending the income tax to Ireland, when he originally proposed it for England, on account of the difficulty and expensiveness of providing any adequate machinery, and the reason which induced Lord John Russell to refrain from extending the income tax to Ireland when he proposed to continue it to England, on account of the suffering and afflicted state of the country at that time—that these two combined reasons had not so far disappeared as to induce the Government to think that the present was a favourable period for introducing for the first time an income tax in Ireland. The rate in aid, whatever just objections might be made to it, did not require any additional machinery, or involve the necessity of any increased staff, or additional expense in collecting—the whole paraphernalia for the collection of the rate was at hand, and ready to be employed. It appeared, therefore, to the Government that that was the readiest, easiest, and most effectual method which they could command for meeting a demand which could not be resisted, and which could not be postponed; and they could not, however much they regret the necessity for proposing the rate, feel any compunction for the course which they had thought it their duty to pursue. One of the suggestions made before the Committee by some of the able and talented witnesses who had been examined before their Lordships, was that of appropriating, for the purpose of this relief, the remains of the debt still due upon account of advances for building workhouses. Such a plan would, however, have a very capricious operation in Ireland. He thought, moreover, that, if the Government had made such a proposal for the purpose of contributing to the relief of Irish distress, such a proposition

267
would have met with a very scant courtesy from the House of Commons. He owned that when successful endeavours were made to recover any portion of these advances, he would rather wish to see it reissued and re-lent to supply additional workhouses in Ireland, the want of which was so urgently admitted on all hands. The state of Ireland at present presented many suggestions to their minds—many matters which were charged with deep interest for future generations—many matters justly requisite as supplements even to the present measure. A Bill was now before the other House of Parliament for remedying certain of the operations of the poor-law. That measure would, probably, come before their Lordships shortly; and he would, therefore, say no more upon its provisions than simply that it would bring before them the subject of a maximum rating in Ireland—a subject intimately connected with the present measure. There was, also, another Bill upon the all-important subject of the mode of dealing with encumbered estates in Ireland. If he were asked why the present measure was brought forward alone and unattended, when there were two other important measures affecting Ireland before the other House, his answer would be, that Her Majesty's Government dare not wait: they were now every day advancing public money in Ireland without any authority whatever from Parliament, and they would be ashamed of themselves if they did not take upon themselves this responsibility.' Their Lordships must, however, feel how precarious and how hazardous this furtive charity was. They had already proposed that 100,000 l. should be issued upon the credit of this rate in aid, and this sum was most imperatively called for by the distress that existed in that country. Before concluding the observations with which he had thought it right to trouble their Lordships, he would beg their attention to a few extracts from some of the most recent statements which had been made to the Government on the subject of the distress in Ireland, in order to show that further delay was what they dare not run the risk of incurring. [His Lordship then read several extracts addressed to the Poor Law Commissioners of Ireland, showing the fearful state of distress which existed in several of the unions, and stating that in several of them the contractors for milk and breadstuff's, not having received any payment for a considerable time, had threatened,
268
unless some payments were made, to discontinue altogether the supply of provisions.] His Lordship then proceeded to say, that he did not deceive himself, and trusted that he formed a sufficiently low estimate of any weight or authority with which he could address their Lordships; but through his feeble and imperfect utterance he must declare that a mighty woe was in the presence of them all—such an one as, in intensity and duration, had perhaps hardly ever been known in the experience of their own or any other nation. It was true that from the many and varied vials of wrath which now seemed to be poured out over the nations of the earth, this country in mercy had been hitherto exempted. It was true that they had no cannon gathering in their streets, nor had they been afflicted by the glare of burning villages or towns throughout their land; but he questioned whether the last three years of famine, and its attendant consequences, in Ireland, had not presented forms of calamity as prolonged, as acute, and as crushing as had ever been exhibited in the annals of human suffering; and now, in their present stage, they had perhaps reached even their most cruel aggravation, because their sufferings had almost ceased to inspire either interest or pity among the mass of the community; and some matters connected with the mode in which the benevolence of this country had occasionally been treated, but into which he would not then enter, had gone far, in many instances, to deaden the feelings of the public. Their Lordships, however, would not be wanting to the sacred claims of charity and benevolence now put forward in behalf of the people of Ireland. It might be that the measure which Her Majesty's Government now proposed, and which they did not deny to be imperfect, might, without some supplementary measure, of some more deep-searching and far-reaching character, prove to be illusory. But what they had now to hear in mind was, that if the meal contractors and the milk contractors were not paid in hard money next week, the inmates of the workhouses would die by hundreds. It might be said that their measure was faulty and objectionable in its principle; but if their Lordships now only looked to the principle of the measure, without considering what might be its results, although it was calculated that outdoor relief, as now administered, was only at the rate of a penny per day for each pauper, yet if the single pound of meal

269
was withheld, which now barely kept body and soul together, then there would be desponding, despairing, and dying thousands. In short, blame the Government if they would, condemn them if they, must; but let their Lordships not, for themselves, by rejecting this Bill, encounter a risk of which the responsibilities and memory would not be easily shaken off. His Lordship concluded by moving that the Bill be now read 2a.
The EARL of RODENsaid, that he felt, as an individual constantly residing in Ireland, and accustomed to mix in that country with all classes and denominations of the people, that there was perhaps none of their Lordships who were better acquainted with the real state of the people of Ireland, and he trusted, upon that account, that he should be excused from rising thus early to state the reasons why he intended to move as an Amendment on the Motion of the noble Earl who had just sat down, that the Bill be read a second time this day six months. He was perfectly willing to give Her Majesty's Government credit for a desire to meet the difficulties of Ireland, attendant upon the distress that unfortunately existed in that country, and which could not be exaggerated; but when he heard the noble Earl propose this rate in aid as a remedy for this distress, and as a means of meeting the difficulty; and when he heard the arguments brought forward in support of that measure by the noble Earl, and the answers which he gave to his own arguments, he really thought that the noble Earl would with very little inducement have been prevailed upon, believing as he did in the honesty of character which had always marked him, to support his Amendment, and that he would have felt that such was the force of his own arguments against his own measure, that he would have advised his noble Colleague to pause, even at this late period, and endeavour to find some other source from whence this peculiar relief might be derived, which would at all events have been just in character, and adequate for the purpose required. Prom the concluding portion of his speech, he feared, however, that the noble Earl was determined to persevere in what he must call a most unjust course. He regretted that the noble Earl did not go a little farther back in his address, to the cause which had produced the distressing state of things which now existed. In the year 1836, a Royal Commission was issued to inquire into the
270
circumstances of the poverty which then existed in Ireland to a very great degree. The commissioners nominated on that occasion proceeded without delay in the prosecution of their labours, and the report of that commission brought to light such an immense amount of wretchedness and misery that the Government thought it right to propose a measure for the enactment of a legal provision of the poor in Ireland—a measure which was not recommended in the report of that commission, but, on the contrary, the Bill was founded on the report of Mr. Nicholls, the Poor Law Com-missioner, who, after a sis weeks' tour in Ireland, came back and proposed this measure. His suggestion was acted upon, the Poor Law Bill was passed. He (the Earl of Roden) thought it his duty to take part in carrying out the measure which the Government then introduced. In the House he took exception to several parts of the Bill; but he returned home to endeavour, in the best manner he could, to assist in carrying out its provisions; and in the union with which he was connected, every exertion was made, and successfully, by the board of guardians in carrying them out. He must entreat their Lordships to remember that the landlord was placed in a different position with respect to the poor-law in Ireland, from that in which he was placed in England. In England the tenant and occupier paid the whole of the poor-rate, while in Ireland it was divided between the tenant and the landlord, one-half being paid by each; and in the case of tenants of 4l holdings, no rate whatever was paid. Besides that, the position of landlords in England and Ireland materially differed. He would give an instance to show the effect of that law; he knew the case of an Irish landlord, the nominal owner of two estates, one worth 10,000 l. a year, the other worth 2,000 l a year; he had two residences on those estates, and out of his income of 12,000 l. a year, he possessed, after paying the interest of mortgages and other charges, a clear revenue of 3,500 l a year; out of that sum he was forced to pay 800 l for poor-rates last year. In the year 1845, the people of Ireland had been visited with the calamity which had been so feelingly depicted by the noble Lord opposite. In that year the potato, the only food of the people, had been entirely swept away, and it therefore was thought necessary to alter the poor-law of 1837 for the purpose of giving power to the guardians to administer out-

271
door relief. The effect of such a change was nothing less than confiscation in some parts of the country. It was well known that in the year 1847 the difficulties of Ireland had reached to the highest pitch—public and private funds were exhausted in the attempts made to relieve the sufferings of the people. The noble Earl had referred to that circumstance, and he (the Earl of Roden) was most happy to refer to it also; and he hoped the obligations which the people of Ireland were under to their brethren in England and Scotland for the relief then afforded them, would never be forgotten. He trusted they would never forget the exertions and sacrifices that were made to assist them in their hour of necessity. It was not true that the Irish people were not grateful for such acts. ["Hear, hear!"] No doubt there were persons who, for worldly purposes, had made use of language highly discreditable to themselves; but as an individual acquainted with the people of Ireland of all classes and denominations, he ventured to assert in their Lordships' House, that there was no individual acquainted with Ireland who could for a moment doubt that from the peasant to the highest person in the land, no other sentiment than gratitude prevailed with reference to the aid afforded by this country during the prevalence of famine in Ireland. To come, however, to the subject more immediately before the House. The object of the Bill which the noble Lord had moved to be read a second time was, so far as he could understand, not only to enable Her Majesty's Ministers by Act of Parliament to carry on the poor-law, and to authorise general rates to be levied in all the unions for the relief of the poor, but it gave a power also to pay the debts of the unions, as well as to give relief to the paupers. Against such a proposition, he (the Earl of Roden) would most strongly protest.
The EARL of CARLISLEremarked that the Bill did not propose to do that.
The EARL of RODENthought it would be found, by reference to one of the clauses, that such a power was given. With respect to this measure for levying a rate in aid, he begged to call the attention of their Lordships to a pamphlet, recently published by Mr. Butt, and from which he begged to read an extract:—
"It is proposed that this rate should be imposed for two years, and should be limited to 6d. in the pound upon the rated value of property; but it must be felt that if it be once conceded
272
that the property of Ireland at large is the proper fund from which the deficiencies of any particular localities are to be made up, the proposed tax is indefinite, both in its duration and in its amount. Every reflecting man must see that the progress of legislation for this country affords no hope whatever that the pressure of poor-law taxation will diminish with the progress of time. On the contrary, we must expect that its pressure must increase in a rapidly accelerating ratio, as class after class is dragged down to pauperism. At the end of two years the aid demanded will be greater than it is now. The question, therefore, is a permanent one, and it involves the whole extent of the property of every man in Ireland, because to that full extent it is not only perfectly conceivable, but almost certain, that the demands of pauperism may proceed, if the present system be persevered in. If Parliamentary documents can be relied on, this is a matter of numerical demonstration. We must treat the Ministerial proposition as a proposal to provide for the poor, by a tax to be levied up to a certain amount on the district in which they happen to be relieved; beyond this amount, by a tax upon the entire property of the country—those funds to be applied according to the provisions of the poor-law of 1837 and 1846. Could we regard the proposition as, in truth, a temporary expedient to supply funds for a transitory purpose, it would resolve itself into a mere question of injustice to the districts of Ireland, whether in Ulster or Munster, on which it is proposed to levy the tax. Even in that case, I believe the tax ought to be resisted to the utmost, on the simple ground that it is unjust—perhaps more palpably and manifestly unjust if it be but an extortion of money from a particular class to meet a temporary exigency of the State. But let us ask of the proposers of this measure, upon what argument can they now justify their demand for the rate in aid, which will not justify a repetition of that demand at the end of two years if the same necessity exists? There is not a man in Ireland, not looking for a place, who is fool enough to believe that if the policy hitherto pursued be persevered in, the same necessity will not two years hence exist in a more aggravated form. Why, then, will not the rate in aid be levied again? What excuse can now be suggested that will not be available then? What difficulty exists now that will not he equally formidable then? What other fund will then be open to appeal to that does not exist now? Will the starvation of the people in the distressed unions be then less imminent than it is now? Will precedent weaken the force of the demand? No, my Lord; of all the pretences by which the insult of treating us as fools could be added to the injury of such a law, the most palpably absurd is the pretence that tells us that this is but an expedient to meet a temporary difficulty of finance."
He agreed most fully with Mr. Butt in his observations, but, at the same time, he was particularly anxious to guard himself from being misunderstood. He did not want to avoid taxation. He and those circumstanced as he was, were willing to submit to any taxation that was fair and right which the Government chose to put upon them. To any individual who sup-

273
posed it was the desire of the noble Lords who sat around him, or persons resident in Ireland, to avoid fair taxation, because they were opposed to what they conceived to be an unjust tax, he would only say it was an unworthy suspicion to enter into the mind of any man; and he believed that the man into whose mind it could enter, was only just expressing what would be his own conduct if he were concerned himself. It was not for them to say in what way they should be taxed, or what tax they would choose. The noble Earl had spoken of an income and of other taxes, but it appeared to him (the Earl of Roden) that it was for the Minister of the Crown, and not for individuals unconnected with the Government, to propose to that Government what tax they should put on them. He (the Earl of Roden) could not but think that the act of inviting a particular section of the House of Commons to consider this tax, was not a very constitutional mode of proceeding under such circumstances. He knew he was dealing with high authority when referring to the question of constitutionality in connexion with the conduct of the noble individual to whom he alluded; but still he felt it was the duty of the Government to propose their tax, and it was equally the duty of those who deemed it to be unjust, and who felt that it would not bear equally on the people, to enter their opposition to it. He objected also to this measure, because he conceived it would destroy the working of the poor-law. He (the Earl of Roden) was anxious for the honest working of the poor-law; and he believed whoever might be Members of the Government, they would ultimately be obliged to go back to the poor-law of 1837 to save the country from ruin. He objected also to this measure, because he thought it was the strongest argument they could give to those persevering men in Ireland who had for their object the destruction of the empire by the division of the two countries; it was the strongest argument they could give them for the repeal of the legislative Union. He begged again to read a passage from Mr. Butt's pamphlet:—
"The imposition of this tax is, in truth, to declare the Union a nullity. The moment you declare that you must make up the deficiency of the bankrupt unions from some source external to themselves, that moment you admit the purpose to be one to be supplied from the revenues of the State or the nation. What State?—what nation? If the imposition of your tax answers—Ireland! then you have no answer to the demand that the
274
Irish State and nation should have her separate legislature and her own exchequer. My Lord, one can scarcely help thinking that there is in the Castle some repealer in disguise, who wants, in the most malicious manner, to punish the Ulster men for the excessive readiness of their unionism last spring. Think with what inward glee such a personage would remember the loyal addresses in which the gentry and yeomanry of Ulster declared themselves ready to support the Union at all hazards, and vow in his heart that he will have revenge by making you pay the sixpenny rate in aid. It is quite evident that he means to teach you that if the Union means community of burdens, that does not mean that England shall share yours; and no doubt, my Lord, his malicious revenge would be complete if he could only get some of his clever suppprters to sneer at the loyalty of Ulster as a sixpenny loyalty. Whether there be such a repealer I know not; if there be, I am sure he could not take, in a small way, more complete or biting revenge."
It was unfortunate that this measure should bear particularly hard upon the people of Ulster, the very class to whom they should look, and in whom they should confide, to support the continuance of that Union which was the great mainstay of British independence and of British strength. He would not hold out idle threats as to what they would do—he had no doubt they would prove themselves loyal—but he feared that the measure might raise in the minds of some of them a feeling which would cause them to consider whether, with a nationality of their own, they would not obtain more justice than the British Parliament had given them in the passing of such a Bill. He had no doubt that they were placed in Ireland under such difficulties that it was their duty not to reject the consideration of any remedy that was suggested. He found that a plan had been proposed by a right hon. Gentleman which seemed to him to be impossible; but he felt that great evils required strong remedies, and he felt also that they were bound to reject nothing without consideration in the present day. He had much conversation with many individuals on the subject, and he had found it often favourably received; and surely the country should be grateful to the author for occupying his attention on their behalf. He had found that the greatest miseries attaching to their country had arisen from the constant change in the legislation of the country. There was scarcely a Session without some new measure being brought in to overturn old laws. It was often done by persons totally unacquainted with the circumstances of the country, who did considerable damage by such legislation. He

275
could not but think that it was much better to persevere in that which had proved to be useful. He (the Earl of Roden) felt the dangers which existed, and the difficulties with which Ireland was surrounded; but it was a consolation to think that there was One in whose hands the destinies of nations, as well as of individuals, was placed. He (the Earl of Roden) was sure that out of the miseries in which the country was involved, He would bring them to results the most wise and beneficent; and he did not fear that those who trusted in Him, would, acting justly and honestly to the best of their power, confidently leave the consequences to His guidance. In conclusion, he begged to move, as an Amendment, that the Bill should be read a second time that day six months.
The LORD CHANCELLORhaving put the Amendment,
The ARCHBISHOP of DUBLINsaid, that he would not trespass on their Lordships for a long time, but that he wished to say a few words on the subject before the House, having been one of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the state of Ireland in the year 1835. If he were ever so much disposed to adhere pertinaciously to the opinions expressed in the report of that commission—if he were ever so much disposed to find fault with any Government who did not follow the tracks they had marked out—if he were the most factious person within the walls of the House, instead of being, as their Lordships knew, attached to no party—he could not but wish, and he thought there could be no one so factious as not to wish, if possible, to support the Government, when they came forward with a proposal, which must be well meant, for the relief of such appalling distress as the noble Earl had described to them. But when he came to consider what were the chances and prospects of real and adequate relief, and of escaping an increase of evils, he was not altogether satisfied with what had been said in defence of this measure. He had bestowed more attention on this subject than many others. He had laboured assiduously, not only by personal contributions out of his own funds for the relief of distress, but for 17 or 18 years that he had been in Ireland he had bestowed more care and attention on the subject than ninety-nine out of a hundred of those who paid attention to and addressed their Lordships and the other House on the subject, and the result was, that he was disappointed,
276
for he found that there was no prospect of the hopes being realised that were held out. Before the establishment of the poor-law in Ireland, he had taken an active part both in person and in purse to ameliorate the condition of Ireland, but he had seen objections to every plan proposed, and had predicted the results which would take place. He foresaw on the first proposal for a poor-law to give relief to the able-bodied poor, that in the first period of distress—that was, in the first period of universal scarcity—there would be a general clamour for outdoor relief. His objectionn, when expressed, was met by the suggestion that in every case the workhouse test would be applied. Mr. Nicholls himself had said that it would be ruinous to establish the system of outdoor relief, and it was on the report of that very gentleman the workhouses were built. He (the right rev. Prelate) was convinced that the system of outdoor relief would prove most lamentable to the working of the law, and he had opposed it. It was a painful task to have done so, and to have exposed himself to the charge of being hardhearted or indifferent to the sufferings of the poor. This was the general argument resorted to when any opposition was made to such a scheme. It was always said, upon such occasions, that people were either hardhearted and cruel, or indifferent to the sufferings of their fellow-creatures. He did not, however care for any such imputations being made against him, for he was certain his motives were pure and singleminded. When it was proposed two years ago to extend outdoor relief, the proposition was at the time condemned, as tending to increase rather than to mitigate distress. He had set before their Lordships the results which would follow. He would have been rejoiced if his anticipation had not been realised; but, unfortunately, his predictions had been fulfilled. He should like to know whether, if he supported the present Bill, there would be any security that in the end the distress would not be aggravated rather than decreased. He was the last person who could with justice be charged with being insensible to the sufferings of the people of Ireland, or with entertaining any feeling of indifference for their position, because, owing to the circumstances in which he was placed, he had opportunities of witnessing more than others the sufferings of those above the very poorest in the community, and who had once been in easy circumstances. Many of the per-

277
sons to whom he had alluded were to be found among the ranks of the clergy. He had relieved many of those cases himself. He had known cases in which clergymen, who had once been in easy circumstances, were unable to obtain a sufficiency of the coarsest food for the maintenance of themselves and their families; cases of clergymen whose sons were withdrawn from their studies at college, and enlisted as common soldiers; cases of clergymen, whose sons were glad to be allowed to break stones on the road, in order to contribute some share towards the maintenance of the family; and cases of clergymen who were grateful for donations of old clothes to protect them from the severity of the weather. All these misfortunes had been brought on by the operation of the poor-law, and to the payment of rates in relief off distress was to be attributed the broken-down fortunes of those persons. The effect of the law was to reduce the middling and struggling classes to abject poverty. Their cattle and stock were distrained for rates to support pauperism, and then they became paupers themselves. He knew, himself, the case of a gentleman who had a large estate lying waste and profitless. The tenants all emigrated to America with the rent, and everything they could scrape together, and the owner of the land could not even let the land as pasture for cattle, lest the stock should be seized for payment of poor-rates. Such was the position of this gentleman, who was now dependent upon private charity for support. He believed that the working of the present law, as far as respected the mode of administering relief, and the circumstances under which it was given, operated as a penalty upon industry, and an impediment to the cultivation of the land. If they resorted to this rate-in-aid system to bolster up the poor-law, it would only tend to perpetuate and increase the distress. What they ought to consider was, whether they could introduce any measure which would relieve present distress without increasing it ultimately. They had been told, two years ago, that if relief were given to the ablebodied, the distress would be greatly aggravated, and he now inclined to the opinion that distress in Ireland would not be so general and alarming but for the adoption of the system of giving relief to the ablebodied. The practice destroyed the spirit of self-reliance, and broke down the means of employment. They were told that the rate in aid would only amount
278
to sixpence in the pound, and that its duration was to be for only two years, Now, although he knew nothing personally of the people of Ulster, or of the feeling in that province, he thought that they would not object to the infliction of a sixpenny rate, if the same argument could not be adduced in favour of a shilling rate, a five shilling rate, or a ten-shilling rate. The great Hampden went to prison rather than pay a few shillings ship money; but it was most probable that Hampden would not have objected to pay the few shillings if he were certain that the necessities of the King would not have ultimately required a further impost. The tax, however, was taken in a way by which no man could tell what was his own; because no man could tell when the necessities of the King might stop. It was ascertained that a great portion of land in Ireland was thrown out of cultivation; and where famine now existed in its most frightful shape, the distress would now be no greater than in former years, if it were not for that most unfortunate measure, to give relief to the able-bodied. The system preyed like an eating canker upon Ireland; and unless some better security could be given that the evil would be stopped and remedied, instead of aggravated and perpetuated, he could not reconcile it with his conscience to support this measure, however confident he felt of the good intentions of Her Majesty's Government, and however sensible he was of the great extent of the distress" and the necessity for strong measures to meet it.
LORD BEAUMONTfelt anxious to ex, plain to the House the view he took of the question, and the motives which induced him to record the vote he was about to give. He must own that the subject was surrounded with difficulties on all sides, and that, in the present distressed condition of Ireland, they had at best but a choice of evils. He did not think that the blame of such a position ought altogether to be laid to the Government, as the noble Earl who had moved the Amendment appeared to think it should, but that some blame ought, in justice, to be borne by the Irish Members of the other House of Parliament. They had an opportunity of suggesting their own plans, and they refused to avail themselves of it; they were asked advice, and they declined to give it; they were offered a choice, and they would not make it. After such conduct on the part of the Irish representatives, he could scarcely

279
find fault with Ministers for persisting in their original design. Neither did he blame the Government for the course they had pursued with reference to the Irish Members. Looking at the present condition of Ireland, bearing in mind the report which their Lordships' Committee had made, and remembering the strong opinion entertained on this subject out of doors, he thought it was only a fair and open course for the Government to call together the Irish Members, and to consult them as to the views they entertained upon a question affecting the taxpayers of Ireland alone. First of all, it was admitted on all hands that a grant of money must be made to Ireland, to prevent the people from starving. The position in which the Government was placed was such, that they must do something, and it was only the choice of that something which was to be decided upon. The Committee of their Lordships' House had pronounced against the proposal for a rate in aid, and the question what was to be the substitute then remained. As their Lordships' Committee had suggested a substitute, he did not see any reason why the Irish Members should not have been asked whether they preferred the proposition of the Government, or the substitute recommended by their Lordships, The Ministry acted right in calling the Irish Members together, and the Irish Members ought to have suggested something by which, in their opinion, the distress might have been alleviated. The Irish Members had not acted friendly or candidly in not suggesting to the Government when called upon to do so some means by which the emergency might be met, after having condemned the measures proposed by the Administration for the purpose: they, however, would suggest nothing of themselves, and opposed every proposition that was made connected with it. The obstinate silence of the Irish, in his (Lord Beaumont's) opinion, left the Government full liberty to act as they liked. There was no reason why they should not adopt the recommendation of the Lords' Committee, nor would there have been anything inconsistent in their abandoning the rate in aid. He thought, after what had passed in the House, and after the evidence which the Government themselves must have got from their agents in Ireland, that they must have been convinced of the superiority of the substitute recommended; and if they were so convinced, as he had no doubt they were, he thought it was their duty, happen
280
what would, to have come forward and proposed it. If the Government had done this, they would not have been in their present position, neither would they have had this House against them, or wanted proper support in the other. He blamed the Irish Members for not being candid, and the Government for their want of resolution. It was not too late to adopt the suggestion of the Committee, should an adverse vote be passed on the measure before them. He would, however, defer all consideration of the proposed substitute until they had fairly examined the plan proposed by the Government. But looking simply at the merits of the present proposition, he asked whether, in the first place, it would or would not meet the single object for which it was proposed, namely, the relief of those who were totally incapable of finding any support by their own means? This was the sole and simple object of all poor-laws, and ought not to be mixed up with the question of inducements to employ labour. The only desirable and wholesome stimulus that could be given to labour, was the interest of the party who employed it; and it could not be advantageous to seek to promote the employment of labour, unless that labour would afford an adequate return. But would this measure effect the simple object he had pointed out? He confessed he believed it would totally fail in accomplishing even that. He believed that a rate of 6d. in the pound as a national rate, instead of relieving all those persons who were unable to support themselves, and who could receive no relief from the exhausted treasuries of their own districts, would become an additional cause of Irish distress: first, by increasing the number of persons in that unfortunate situation; and, next, by decreasing the value of property, and diminishing the resources of those who would be called upon to contribute. It would thus act in a doubly disastrous way; it would increase the number of paupers, and decrease the means of those called upon to support them. He might point out several was in which this would be effected. In the first place, a national rate involved the destruction of local interest; for by it we should lose that cognisance of the expenditure, and that degree of interest which induced ratepayers to watch minutely and carefully the working of the poor-law; and we should lose also the chance of detecting imposition which resulted from local cognisance. Again, we should lose the great principle,

281
that those who paid the rate should in some degree be represented by those who had the disposal of it. Now, they had re-presentation with taxation; but the 6d. in the pound would be carried to a distance, and administered by a board at a distance, and that principle—most necessary if we wished to secure economy in the expenditure, or willingness to pay the tax—would be lost. This would be the result in districts where they paid the tax; but in those where they received, the effect would be to increase pauperism, since, in proportion as the paupers increased in numbers, in that proportion would the money raised in the better-conditioned districts flow into the district aided. A rate in aid gave an actual and positive money inducement to increase pauperism, in order to obtain and attract this relief; and the necessary consequence would be, that the rate in aid would speedily increase the number of insolvent and diminish the number of solvent unions. There was nothing in the world to prevent unions from running up their rates to 5s. in the pound; and, indeed, if they approach that sum fairly, it is worth the while so running up the rate, because they then cease to be contributors, and become recipients; and this might be done, too, while the real amount collected need not exceed 3s. Because they must recollect that it was not necessary 5s. in the pound should be collected, but that the sum calculated for the maintenance of the poor for one year should exceed 5s., in order to entitle an electoral division to assistance; and all the commissioners had to require was, that due exertion had been made to collect the rate. How could they discover whether the utmost exertions had been made to get the money? They could only do it by distraining in every case; and if they tried that expedient, they would depopulate the whole district as far as occupation went, while it would at the same time be filled with paupers. To do this would, therefore, be a practical impossibility; and they would have in consequence, besides the twenty or twenty-one unions now insolvent, another twenty-one, or more than that, in the same predicament, and the whole would become recipients. It was, therefore, quite clear that the sum thus raised would never be sufficient for the purpose for which it was intended, namely, the support of persons really destitute. Then, he had heard the mode in which this rate in aid was to be levied, along with the ordinary poor-rate
282
of the district, compared with the mode of collecting the poor-rate in England, together with the county rate in England; but there was no analogy whatever between the two cases, because both the county rate and the poor-rate in this country were spent exclusively for the benefit of the locality who paid both; whereas the rate in aid would have to be paid by districts who derived no benefit from, and possessed no control over, its expenditure. But who were to pay this sixpence in the pound? In the first instance it fell upon the small occupiers above 4l., who would be most reluctant to pay, since they would feel that it was going to the support of those districts the pauperism in which was chiefly caused by the neglect of those whom they were about to assist to bear its burden. It would, moreover, be an injury to the existing poor-rate, if they were collected together as it was proposed. They would run the risk of losing what they now did get, and of increasing the danger and difficulty of collecting the present existing poor-rate. The ratepayers would confound the ordinary rate with the rate in aid, and condemn both. The injustice of the one would blind them to the justice of the other. Its operation, therefore, as far as the occupiers were concerned, would be to multiply the present evils attending the collection of rates, and promote hostility to any poor-law at all. A portion of the rate in aid would fall on the immediate lessors, who were persons in a higher position. It had been said that it was desirable to give this class separate and individual responsibility as much as possible; but every tendency of this measure was directly against that principle. Individual responsibility was an admirable principle; but why talk of that, and at the same time adopt a measure which would be its utter destruction? All parties were looking forward to a reduced area of taxation; but the only use of a reduced area of taxation was to increase individual responsibility; yet this benefit, which all agreed would be the greatest improvement in the poor-law, was to be neutralised in anticipation by the imposition of a national rate. The right rev. Prelate had ably shown that the result of this measure would be to throw the land out of cultivation, and to destroy the wealth of the landlords, and he would not, therefore, touch that point; but there was another of equal importance, to which he must allude. When they adopted a national rate, what

283
did they do with the capitalist "who invested his money in land in Ireland? Suppose he (Lord Beaumont) were a capitalist—and he was sorry to say he was not—and he inquired the price of an estate. He might he told that it was such a price; a very fair price if there were only the people to take care of who were then upon it. On the doctrine of individual responsibility, he might take it and cultivate it, and lay out large sums, and it might he a good and fair investment; but it would be a very different thing if, besides keeping the pauperism existing upon the land, the capitalist were to be taxed for the relief of the pauperism of other districts, over the causes of which he could have no control. What was worse than even that, was, that he was called upon to pay in exact proportion to the amount of money he laid out upon his purchase; so that if by the outlay of thousands of pounds the capitalist put his estate into a rich, productive, and flourishing condition, he would have to pay precisely in proportion to his success for the support of the poor in other parts of the country, to which he, at the same time, by that forced payment, was giving a motive to increase and perpetuate pauperism. Without going into the question of the rate in aid tending to bring about a separation between the two countries, which had also been ably stated by the right rev. Prelate, he must remind their Lordships that, if the connexion between taxation and representation were destroyed in Ireland, there was no reason why the whole empire should not be placed upon the same footing: this pauperism would then no longer be a local question, but would belong as much to England as to Ireland. The only reason for asserting that each country must take care of its own poor is, because each is supposed to have control over the causes of its own pauperism; but once adopt the principle of a rate in aid, and it became an imperial misfortune which the empire must bear. There was also the consideration that in proportion as persons objected to the rate, the more costly would be its collection; the less local control the more lavish the expenditure; and the whole management and matter being new, there must be new machinery—all productive of expenses over and above those of the present poor-law. There were many other reasons, most of which had been noticed by the right rev. Prelate; but those he had enumerated were alone sufficient to induce him to vote
284
against this measure. They were about to adopt a principle which would be used as a precedent in future legislation, although they were asked to provide only a temporary expedient. He did not imagine that the present state of Ireland could possibly be a permanent state; but he believed that a rate in aid would tend to prolong its present miseries. The present state of Ireland was one of transition. He saw every day signs of its progression towards another state. The ordeal it might have to undergo would be terrible; but the present evils were the necessary preliminary to a better state. They had heard of persons quitting their lands—of men not being-able to take their lands into their own hands—of an unwillingness to till and to sow the soil. All that was true, and must be felt heavily enough, but all that was necessary to put Ireland into a healthier state. Healthier she never could become until she got rid of her present occupants. The men who took small farms knew nothing of farming: they did not use, but abuse, the land—instead of making it productive, rendering it sterile: they knew nothing of the relations between landlord and tenant; if they had a lease, they broke the covenants. As long as the land was held by such occupiers, there could be no hope for improvement. It was necessary that the land should revert into the hands of its present owners. That was absolutely necessary to render the country fit for a healthier state of society. If the present proprietors had not the means—much as he should regret, and much as they would be pitied—they must bow to the circumstances of the times, withdraw from a position they were not able to fill, and resign the post of landlord—the duties of which they failed to perform—and make way for a new race of proprietors, more able to fulfil the duties and to bear the burdens to which property was subject. All other proposals seemed to him the most absurd and ridiculous that could possibly be. It was ridiculous and absurd in a purely agricultural district, with one man for every quarter of an acre, to talk of the land employing such a population. When he heard witnesses say, "Send us capital, and we will employ the whole of these people," he was certain they must be mad, or that they knew nothing of agriculture. If he had all the money in the world, and were to treat his estate in that manner, he should bring it to the same condition as that in

285
which these Irish estates were placed. If estates were to be cultivated profitably to the proprietor, and beneficially to the country, they must be cultivated economically. To do this they could only employ a certain number of men to a certain number of acres. Some of the richest farms he knew in England only employed five labourers to 100 acres. That was dependent, no doubt, upon the nature of the farm; but there were some where not more than three labourers to 100 acres were employed. It must be remembered, too, that in Ireland the very climate was against a large population. There was a great deal of moisture and very little sun, which made admirable grass farms; but grass farms naturally employed fewer persons than arable' farms. Of course, to some districts where mines were worked, or where were manufactures or fisheries, these observations could not apply; but in purely agricultural districts nothing like the present population could be maintained. A healthy state could not be restored where the land was so over-populated. These masses of population were like a flight of locusts, which destroyed the fruits of the soil; instead of increasing its richness and fruitfulness, they spread desolation on every side. The real cure for the ills of Ireland was emigration on a large scale. Without this all their grants were but a throwing of good money after bad. To allow the people to remain in that country in such disproportionate quantities, was only to feed pauperism. By emigration we should gain in two ways. We should get rid of the surplus population, and at the same time prevent their future increase in that country. The noble Earl who moved the Amendment had talked of an estate worth 12,000 l. a year, from which the proprietor derived only 3,000 l.; and he said there was an instance of how hardly the poor-law bore upon the proprietor. He (Lord Beaumont) could not admit any argument based upon mortgages. The poor-law guardian and parochial collector could know nothing of such burdens. In England nothing was known of them. An estate might be mortgaged to its full value, and the collector would never hear of it. He also denied that absenteeism had anything to do with the argument. There was as much absenteeism in England as in Ireland, but it never did any harm. These considerations ought not to be taken into account—they did not tell upon the argument in any way. As far as he could
286
see, the only argument for the rate in aid which had the slightest value was, that it was a mode of obtaining a security for the money advanced: that was to say, the necessities of Ireland demanded an immediate advance of money, and they were to consider what would be the best security for the repayment of the money, rather than the effect which the suggested security would have on the operation of the poor-law. That was not his (Lord Beaumont's) view of their duty as legislators for the whole empire. Being of opinion, however, that the proposal of the Government did not provide so good a security as the substitute suggested by their Lordships' Committee, and being opposed to the principle of a rate in aid, he felt bound to vote against the second reading of the Bill.
The EARL of ROSSEconcurred with the noble Lord who had just spoken in the objections which he made against the Bill. But the most important one of them all, was the objection upon principle, and he thought it would be better to pay four times the amount likely to be raised in some other form of taxation, rather than adopt this objectionable principle. He did not believe that any precedent existed for this rate in aid, and he thought that the mischievous consequences of it would be to diminish employment, and prevent the introduction of capital into the country. It was much to be regretted that timely efforts had not been made to avert the evil which had befallen Ireland. When, in 1847, a declaration had been got up by a distinguished prelate (the Archbishop of Dublin) recommending the imposition of an income tax, with a view of promoting emigration from Ireland, he (the Earl of Rosse) had attached his signature to it, and he regretted very much that the recommendations in that document had not been carried out. He was convinced that if a vigorous effort had been made to assist emigration at that time, they would have had a great proportion of ablebodied paupers now in America or some of the colonies, who would have taken out their families and relieved the country of much of the existing distress. For his part, he saw no reason why the taxation should not be equalised in every part of the kingdom; and he believed if that was done, much of the difficulty with regard to Ireland would cease to exist. The noble Earl who had introduced the present measure, appeared to labour under extreme misconception as to the

287
amount of the contribution of Ireland to the Exchequer of the United Kingdom, and the amount of its contributions for the support of its own poor. The noble Earl said that Ireland contributed but a small portion to the Exchequer of the United Kingdom, and an equally small portion to the support of the poor, in relation to the amount of its rental and capital. Now it appeared, according to the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the entire income of Great Britain was 250,000,000 l.; and the gross income of Ireland, estimated by Mr. John Steward in the statement made in his examination before their Lordships' Committee, was 20,000,000 l., being in the proportion of 12½ to 1. The average gross revenue of Great Britain and Ireland was 52,000,000 l. and dividing that in the proportion of 12½ to 1, it would give 47,840,000 l. to Great Britain, and 4,160,000 l. to Ireland. But the real amount which Ireland contributed to the revenue was 4,164,264 l. which was actually 4,264 l. over its fair proportion, besides duties to a very large amount paid in England and Scotland, for articles consumed in England, such as tea, tobacco, &c. The local taxation of England upon a rateable property of 105,000,00 l was 12,000,00 l per annum. It was so stated in the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The rateable property in Ireland, according to the Poor Law Commissioners' valuation, was 13,187,221 l., but according to the evidence of Mr. Griffiths it had depreciated, so that it was at present only 9,898,556 l. The amount of the poor-rates collected in 1848 was 1,855,841 l.; the county cess on an average of three years was (deducting the charge for the police) 1,142,302 l., and adding the sums in repayment of advances for the relief of distress, the total amount of local taxation was 4,224,315 l., being an average of 8s. 4d. in the pound, supposing the depreciation of Mr. Griffiths was correct, or of 6s. 2d. in the pound upon the Poor Law Commissioners' valuation. So that Ireland paid in one instance nearly four, and in the other nearly three, times the local taxation of England. Now, it had been charged against the Connaught landlords that they had brought all the distress upon themselves by the mismanagement of their estates. The fact was, that although political economists might blame them, and although persons acquainted with the improved mode of managing property in Eng-
288
land might blame them, yet they managed their estates in the way they were usually managed by those to whom the masses in Ireland looked up, and in the way that the late Mr. O'Connell himself recommended they should be managed. He believed that one cause of the peaceable state of the province of Connaught was, that the landlords did not interfere with the people, and allowed them to increase and pauperise their estates. But there was adjoining the province of Connaught a splendid example of the mode in which property was managed. This was the property of Colonel Wyndham, in the county of Clare: he had brought his estate into a most satisfactory condition; yet he was denounced by Mr. O'Connell, and he (the Earl of Rosse) was convinced that if Colonel Wyndham had not resided in England—if he had resided upon his estate in Clare, unless he had taken the most extraordinary precautions, he was convinced that his life would not have been safe. One word more as to the Connaught landlords. He perfectly agreed with the noble Lord who had spoken last, that it was a great mistake to suppose that the condition of Connaught was owing to the encumbered state of the property. No doubt there was a great evil in encumbered property, but he knew an instance in the county of Mayo of a property that was not encumbered—the property of Sir Roger Palmer. Now, Sir R. Palmer let his land at a third of the real value; yet upon his estate there was as much poverty, perhaps, as upon any other property in Mayo. He regretted that he must admit, to the fullest extent, the reasons assigned by the noble Lord who introduced the measure—reasons arising out of the unfortunate condition of the south and west of Ireland. He admitted, not only that there was great and increasing destitution in the west, but also in the south of Ireland, and he had no doubt that their Lordships must feel to some extent overpowered by the weight of the responsibility that weighed upon them. Their Lordships had heard, over and over again, that the population of Ireland was numerically redundant in proportion to the means of employment. He believed there was no well-informed person who doubted that fact. Others had gone farther, and maintained that the population of Ireland was redundant in proportion to the area of cultivation. Now, when it was known that the population engaged in agriculture was nearly three times as dense in England—when it was known

289
that in England, while the agricultural population averaged but ten to the hundred acres, in Mayo it averaged sixty-two to the hundred acres—it would be difficult to convince any one that the population was not redundant with regard to the area of cultivation. But he only wished to assume that the population was redundant with regard to the means of employment. It followed from that, that there were but two ways in which the evil could be remedied: one, by diminishing the population; and the other, by increasing the means of employment. Now, had the Government assisted emigration in any way? So far from that, anything that was done was in a contrary direction. There were regulations and restrictions which were perhaps necessary, but they impeded emigration to some extent. Then, as regards the means of employment, save and except some trifling loan, they have done nothing to increase the means of employment. He thought the first step that ought to be taken to remedy that state of things, was to make some improvements in the administration of the poor-law. He thought it exceedingly defective at present, and that the Poor Law Commissioners had failed in the discharge of their duty in not giving early instructions and advice to the boards of guardians as to the necessity of providing increased indoor accommodation. The boards of guardians were left in a state of total ignorance on that point; and on the first application they generally gave an order for outdoor relief, and they then found it exceedingly difficult to revert to indoor relief. The result had been that pauperism had been considerably increased. He thought they ought to get rid of the system of outdoor relief as speedily as possible, and to provide employment for those who obtained indoor relief. Nothing would tend more to give confidence to the boards of guardians than to separate the Poor Law Commission from the Irish Executive. Of course, it could not be otherwise than advantageous if the distinguished individual at the head of the Irish Government would take part in the administration of the law; but he believed that, in point of fact, the Chief and Under Secretary took no share whatever in it, as they could not afford the time; and it was, therefore, left to subordinates. If that had not been so, we should never have had that unfortunate circular respecting the quarter-acre clause. He would recommend a complete equalisation
290
of taxation throughout the whole country; and having done that, he would have Ireland treated like an English county; and he could not say that she had been hitherto so treated. He would also encourage emigration; and so strong were the ties of relationship that he believed that when some members of a family had emigrated, others would be sure to follow. He had no faith—however high the authority by which the scheme was propounded—in the plan that had been recommended for the plantation of Connaught; but he thought that emigration would be found one of the most efficient remedies for the evils of Ireland.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDEbegan by observing, that any observations uttered by the noble Earl who had just sat down, must always he listened to on either side of that House with the utmost respect; and even more especially so when those observations related to the poor-law, a subject to which he had devoted so much time and attention. But his remarks this evening, deserving as they were of the highest respect, appeared to apply more directly to the general administration of the established poor-law, than to the rate in aid under present consideration. It was to have been hoped that the noble Earl would have ended by suggesting some practical mode of relieving that horrible and appalling distress, into the details of which he (the Marquess of Clanricarde) would not now enter, but which was known to their Lordships to exist, and to meet which the Government had introduced the present Bill. The same remark would apply to the speech of the noble Earl who had moved the Amendment, and to that of the right rev. Prelate who had supported him; because, in fact, their observations would have been more justly reserved for the measure now in the other House of Parliament, for the Amendment of the poor-law, rather than to the measure now before their Lordships—a measure which the Government did not justify upon any principle of political economy, but which they had been driven to by the condition in which a part of Ireland was so unfortunately involved. The main objection stated by the noble Earl against the measure was, that it would be inadequate. Without entering into considerations of the exact amount which would be immediately realised under the Bill, or how soon the whole amount would be exhausted which it was intended to col-

291
lect, he would say, that inasmuch as this measure did impose upon the property of Ireland a portion of the amount of money necessary to be raised, the question of the efficacy of the sum so raised was not the real and essential point. There were two points to be considered: first, the amount of horrible distress which prevailed in a certain portion of the empire, which it was incumbent upon them to relieve; and, secondly, that it was the desire of Parliament and the feeling of the country that some exertion must be made by Irish property and Irish proprietors towards the relief of that suffering. In considering the circumstances under which this demand was to be made upon landowners in that country, he was not at all prepared to concur in those complaints of its unfairness and injustice which he had heard with some surprise from noble Lords opposite. For, how stood the facts in relation to the two countries, as to the respective share which each had hitherto borne of the burdens of the empire? That Ireland had enjoyed a great exemption from them compared with England. In other words, there could be no doubt that land, in Ireland, for many years past, had been exempt from taxes to a very largo amount, with which land in Great Britain had been charged. Now, the very fact that Ireland had had for so many years the benefit of such exemption, was the strongest reason why she should no longer leave the charge for the relief of Irish destitution to be entirely defrayed by Great Britain. The noble Earl said that it was unjust to impose this tax upon Ulster. He (the Marquess of Clanricarde) would not then contend for this taxation being particularly just; but he would say, that there was no more difficult question in all taxation than that of justice. There was hardly any tax that could be proposed that did not involve more or less of injustice. But the point was, whether Ireland, having been exempt from many taxes to which British subjects had been liable, could now turn round and deny her liability to separate taxation when the question was the relief of Irish poverty. He had a return of the rates paid in Ulster up to December, 1848, and found that the highest amount was 4s. 6½d., and the average rate upon the whole province was 1s. 11½d. He maintained that Ulster had no right to claim to be relieved from contributing to a rate of this kind on the ground that the distress was prevalent in other provinces;
292
nor could noble Lords connected with Ireland attribute the misery pervading any of the districts which had been alluded to, to the exhausting operation of the rate levied under the new poor-law. The noble Earl, indeed, in attempting to enforce this proposition, had asserted, that in some of the unions of Ireland the poor-rate had increased in a fourfold degree. No one who heard the noble Earl could doubt for a moment that noble Lord's conscientious conviction of the literal truth of the statement he was making. But he (the Marquess of Clanricarde) must confess that, to his mind, it was matter of the most extreme difficulty to connect the distress of certain districts to which allusion had been made, with the scale of the poor-rate levied upon them. He could not believe that in any case the ruin of landlord or farmer had been the consequence of the rates to which he was liable. He had moved for certain returns, and they had been recently laid upon their Lordships' table, which showed the highest, the lowest, and the average amounts of poor-rate levied on the various Irish unions. These returns came down to the month of September, 1848. The highest average rate charged on any union did not exceed 4s. 6½d.—the lowest did not exceed 1s. and a fraction in the pound, and the average was 1s. 11½d. in the pound. Was it possible that a district comprising from three to four hundred thousand souls could be converted into a region of starving paupers by any poor-rate of this description? The apprehension of the noble Earl seemed to be, that such a district had been brought down to this frightful condition by a poor-rate. But in order to come to a right conclusion on this point, it was necessary to look, not on what amount the farmer was liable to pay, according to the rating of the district in question, but what amount had actually been paid up under that rating. The returns would hardly show that there was no such sum levied as would account for anything like the misery experienced by the farmers of that section of Ireland. He would now proceed to mention the highest actual rating that had been made, as it appeared on the face of these returns; and it seemed that in March, 1848, it had reached so high a point as 11 s. 6d. in the pound. [Cries of "Hear!" and "Oh!"] Noble Lords would be pleased to recollect that he had already stated these returns came down only to the month of September.

293
For the three last months of the year they were not made up. The figures he had given were those of the highest and of the lowest average rating. He must again protest against the notion of exorbitant rates having produced that condition of misery, of desolation and destitution, in the great province of Ireland that had been so much alluded to—of the intensity and extent of which few men could have had better opportunities of judging by careful personal inspection than himself, in consequence of his connexion with property in that part of Ireland. This fearful condition, this accumulated distress, afflicting so vast a proportion of that island, was caused—not by rates, but by causes of far more searching and terrible operation—by the repeated failure of the crops—the famine consequent on that failure, and the awful visitations of disease with which it had pleased Providence—in one of those dispensations of its wisdom that we were not permitted to fathom—to afflict the country. He defied noble Lords to show how by legislation the ruin and misery of the small farmers and all others connected with the occupation of the land and its cultivation could have been lessened when they had naturally anticipated that the crops of the disastrous years they had passed through in 1847 and 1848, would be of the same average yield as usual. But it was the duty of Parliament to endeavour to apply some remedial measure to this existing distress; and it was with a view to mitigate its present pressure that Her Majesty's Government had felt themselves compelled to bring forward the present temporary measure; and Government had brought forward this measure, not professing that it was grounded on sound or permanent principles, but to accomplish, by immediate means, an immediate but indispensable object. It was felt by Her Majesty's Government that, whilst this distress must be alleviated, it was only equitable and proper that Irish property should be called on to contribute its fair quota to the relief of those immediately connected with it, before any further demand for such objects could be made on the already heavily taxed and industrious people of this country for the especial relief of Irish distress. They had, therefore, endeavoured, by the measures now recommended to their Lordships' adoption, to make such property in Ireland as could pay, contribute its fair proportion to the mitigation of Irish desti-
294
tution. A noble Friend of his, on the benches behind him, had submitted to the House his views of the principles upon which a poor-law for Ireland should be founded, and of the machinery by which it should be carried into effect. No doubt there was much of truth—much of the soundest reasoning—in the remarks of his noble Friend; but he (the Marquess of Clanricarde) might be pardoned for remarking that the observations in question were not very applicable to the Bill now before their Lordships. That noble Lord remarked that long experience had convinced him that the only channel which could be opened, as one capable of giving to the misery of Ireland relief on a large scale, was extensive emigration. He really thought his noble Friend could hardly have possessed himself of the statistics of all that had been done of late years in this channel of emigration. He was, himself, a decided friend to emigration, as one of the measures best calculated for the relief of Ireland; and he had had practical experience in the business of conducting the emigration of Irish labourers—in administering property wherein he was personally interested. He knew no money so well expended upon Irish property—so well and profitably—as upon emigration. A steady well-conducted emigration was an excellent thing; but under the present circumstances of the country, to attempt any thing like a deportation of the people to another land would be an undertaking which no people would endure, or any Government under-take. To what land were they to be deported? Where were they to be placed? In what manner were they to be deported? Besides, what was the emigration going on at this moment? At no period had emigration been so great from Ireland, at that season of the year, as in the first four months of 1847, when the number of emigrants, from the different ports, was 90,740. That was quite unprecedented. [A Noble LORD: From Ireland?] No, from the different ports. In the first four months of 1848 the numbers were only 74,929. Their Lordships would observe that these were not the number of emigrants during the whole of these years, but only during the first four months of them; and they would probably be surprised to learn that emigration had been raised during the first four months of the present year—1849—to 104,701. Looking to those large numbers, it could not be doubted that emigration was going on

295
steadily, and that there had been no impediment, no obstacle, opposed to the course of emigration from Ireland. But to ask Parliament for a large sum in order to deport the people from this country, would be one of the most unprecedented and irrational courses ever attempted by any Government. The relief commissioners and emigration officers state, that at least four-fifths of the emigration he had named went from the south and west coast of Ireland. The noble Marquess then quoted an extract from the report of the commissioners appointed at New York to inquire into immigration. From that document it appeared that a great number of the English and Scotch emigrants brought out with them considerable sums of money, whereas the majority of the Irish brought out with them little beyond the ability to work, and frequently required to be supported after being located by the public money in order to sustain existence. The noble Earl said that this state of things could not last. Of course it could not, for the people were on the verge of starvation; and, therefore, it was he said, if they did not pass this Bill the people would be starved. He believed if they did not pass it, that 10,000 men would be starved next week. He knew of no other mode of relief; and let them not reject this Bill unless they would provide some other means. He had already stated that nothing was more objectionable than a rate in aid. He declared now that this, as a permanent measure, would be most objectionable, and that it was founded on a principle that it was utterly wrong to establish for a system of poor relief. But that argument applied to all extraordinary and provisional legislation. If this rate in aid were granted, no money would be given except to unions whore the poor-law was administered by paid guardians and officers under the control of the Government; and the closest supervision would be exercised over the disbursements. He had not touched much upon the question of the general poor-law, for the measure in hand was simply an exceptional one. He had now only to repeat, that it depended upon their Lordships whether the Government of the country should have the legal power to relieve thousands from starvation; and he confidently relied upon their Lordships' decision.
EARL FITZWILLIAMsaid, that when the noble Earl who had moved the Amendment had sketched the deplorable condition
296
of Ireland, he (Earl Fitzwilliam) had hoped that nothing remained to be added to the horrors depicted in that statement. But the speech of the noble Marquess had unhappily succeeded in adding to its terrors by additional details that presented a most appalling spectacle indeed of wide-spread misery and accumulating distress. He could not help calling their Lordships' attention to the position in which they were placed. Here they were on the 11th of May, and his noble Friend who had just sat down threatened them—[Much cheering.] He might employ that term which had been so much animadverted upon the other night, and say that the independence of their Lordships' House had been in some degree "menaced" by the expression of his noble Friend, that their Lordships would have upon their heads the blood of thousands of their fellow-countrymen if they did not pass this Bill. He was himself in Ireland when the failure of the potato crop took place; and yet, although the Government were well aware of those scenes of destitution which had appalled Europe and the world, and knew what difficulties were before them, they had not suffered their Lordships to have the opportunity of debating this question till within one fortnight of the time when the lives of thousands would be in jeopardy. If this measure, now introduced as a temporary but indispensable measure of present relief, was really calculated to produce the effects anticipated from it, why had it not been brought in in October last? Her Majesty's Government not having given their Lordships an opportunity of expressing their opinion upon this measure till, as his noble Friend the Postmaster General informed them, within a fortnight of the period when the lives of thousands of the people of Ireland were placed in jeopardy, he was sorry to be obliged to come to the conclusion that they had not performed their duty to that House as they ought to have done. He would not, however, be deterred by any threat of that kind from doing what he believed to be his duty to the people of Ireland by voting for the Amendment of his noble Friend who moved the postponement of the measure. He entirely agreed with those who did not think the measure either just or adequate. The sum which it was estimated would be raised under the Bill was about 326,000 l. But this estimate was made upon fallacious data, for it was formed upon the valuation which existed previous to the failure of

297
the last three years. But did any one really believe that the immense mass of persons who had to be relieved in Ireland could be relieved under 500,000 l. at least? The funds proposed to be raised under the Bill, even if realised—which he did not think would be the case—would not be adequate to meet the emergency. But a greater objection than the inadequacy of the measure was its injustice, He had been anxious, he had been curious, to find any person in this country who approved of it. He could not find one. He doubted very much whether any of his noble Friends who proposed it would say that it was a just measure. His noble Friend who had just sat down had said everything with regard to it, except that it was just. Why was it unjust? There were about 2,500 electoral divisions in Ireland. These electoral divisions had done everything they could to maintain the paupers which they contained. Having performed this duty, on what principle of justice should the electoral division of Antrim or Wexford be taxed over again to supply the deficiency of Galway or Mayo? They might with as much justice call upon the parishes of Kent or Northumberland to supply the deficiency. It was equally just in the one case as the other. Ireland was no longer a financial community. She contributed her share to the imperial treasury. Persons supposed that Ireland was very lightly taxed because she did not pay assessed taxes or an income tax. That was a great mistake. Ireland was not lightly taxed; but supposing that the fact was so, why was she lightly taxed? Ireland was highly taxed, as every person who had the misfortune of being old enough must know, because the revenue of Ireland broke down some 30 years ago. Why did her revenue break down? Why, from that cause which broke down all revenues—that was to say, the taxation of Ireland was too high. It was the custom to say that Ireland did not contribute her share to the general exigencies of the State. The fact was, that during the war, Ireland contributed more than her share in every respect. She contributed more men in proportion to her population, and more taxation in proportion to her resources. Did noble Lords know how much was the taxation on an Irish jaunting car during the war? It was no less than 6l. 10 s., though the original cost of such a vehicle might not be more than 3l. The taxation of Ireland was more than she could bear, and she
298
broke down under it as a natural consequence. They had no right, then, to plead the low taxation of Ireland in justification of this measure, and yet it was the only justification alleged. On what plea could they tax the electoral divisions of Antrim or Wexford, and not tax the parishes of England? Did they mean to repeal the Union? Did they mean to say that Ireland was a nation? Did they mean that the edict of the Hungarian Diet should be copied, by which they separated themselves from Austria? Did they intend that the proclamation of M. Kossuth should be copied and repeated in Dublin, and that Ireland should exist as a nation, separated from the British empire? He could not believe that such was the intention of the Government; but he begged to tell them that such was the legitimate consequence of the mode in which they were proceeding. Her Majesty's Government told them—it threatened them, it menaced them—that if they did not pass the measure they would have the lives of thousands to answer for. He did not believe that the noble colleagues of his noble friends in the other House of Parliament were such craven Ministers as not to issue 100,00 l for the safety of men's lives in the province of Connaught, under the paltry pretence that they would be impeached. If they were such cowards, he would defend them against their own accusation. Surely they would not talk such constitutional twaddle as to say that they could not do so. He had more confidence in their courage than they had themselves. Sometimes people affected to have courage which they had not; but his noble friends affected to have fears which they had not. He had, however, no faith in their fears upon this subject, and their Lordships might depend upon it that even if this Bill were thrown out, the 100,000 l. would still find its way to the people of Connaught, in some way or other. He, for one, would not entertain a worse opinion of his noble friends on that account, nor would he pay so bad a compliment to the House of Commons, as to believe that it contained any one man who would propose to attack them for their conduct in that respect. He believed that if the House of Commons had the whole case put before them fairly and openly in the first instance, they would have voted a much larger sum than the 50,000 l which the Government had asked of them, as easily as they had voted the smaller sum. He had said that this mea-

299
sure was inadequate and unjust; but the greatest objection that he bad against it was, that it had nothing about it of what he should call an executory principle. One of the great arts of the science of legislation, was to make laws execute themselves—that is to say, that they should be framed in such a manner that the different parts should ensure the execution one of another. Now this Bill contained no executory principle, because it did not invest any party with either an interest or with the power to see that it was properly executed. The unions of Ulster which were to be taxed for the deficiency of Connaught had no control whatever over the administration of the funds—the unions of Antrim or Wexford would have no means whatever of checking the extravagance or diminishing the pauperism of Clare or Roscommon. For this reason he would prefer to see the income tax imposed in Ireland. He believed that Ireland bore her fair share of taxation; but as that was not the opinion in England, he should so far defer to that opinion as to consent to the imposition of the income tax in Ireland, because he considered that the man who possessed 150 l. or 1,000 l. a year in Ireland was as fit a subject for taxation as the person in this country who possessed the same amount. But then he should propose that the distress in Ireland should be relieved, in the first instance, out of the proceeds of the income tax, and the surplus should be paid into the imperial exchequer, which would hold out a strong inducement to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to see that the funds for the relief of the poor were economically administered. This was a point of importance not merely to Ireland, but to England also, because he was sure that the people of this country would soon understand what they now were beginning to feel, namely, that the calamity which befel Ireland was no passing summer shower, but a storm of a much more extensive and enduring character, affecting all parts of the empire. The number of Irish paupers driven over to this country by distress, interfered very materially with the prospects of the English labourer, whose cause he would then plead, and than whom no person had a stronger claim upon the sympathies of the Legislature. He had a proof of that in the union of which he was the chairman, where, in the course of three weeks, not fewer than seventy Irish vagrants passed through the workhouse. This was one of the reasons why he desired
300
to see this country adopt different measures than it had hitherto done to uproot pauperism in Ireland; for this reason, also, he felt that he was pleading the cause of the English labourer in recommending the Legislature to adopt a different line of policy towards Ireland. Their Lordships had a great task to perform towards that country—one which they had as yet scarcely begun to undertake, but certainly not performed, because, at the present moment, Ireland was more distressed than she ever had been; her condition was far more threatening to the finances, aye, and far more threatening to the political relations between the two countries, than it ever had been. This country supposed that because there was a good crop of potatoes in 1847, there was an end of the distress; but that was a great mistake. The failure of 1848 aggravated the difficulties of Ireland, and there was more real distress in that country at the present moment than in May, 1847, because the resources of the middle and higher classes were much more reduced now, after three years of distress, than in 1847. It was true they did not hear so much of that distress now as they did in 1847; a famine was then something new, but now its novelty had worn off. Neither the country nor the Parliament was then callous to the distress of Ireland. But he regretted to say that the feeling seemed altered now. He trusted for himself that he was not included in the category of those to whom that excellent officer (Mr. Twisleton) spoke in the following language—language which it was impossible to read without humiliation and pain, and which he would not venture to quote if he did not find it in a public document. Mr. Twisleton was asked the following question by Mr. Cornewall Lewis:—
"Have you heard this opinion expressed, that it is desirable to allow things to take their natural course; not to assist the people in their sufferings, but to permit disease and want to go to their natural termination; and is that an opinion in which you concur?"
Mr. Twisleton answered—
"No. I have heard that opinion stated either explicitly or implicitly; I think it is one of the greatest misfortunes that that opinion should gain ground or be maintained. It is particularly unfortunate that it should be so, because it has what you may call a philosophical colour, and many individuals, even of superior minds, who seemed to have steeled their hearts to the sufferings of the people of Ireland, justify it to themselves by thinking it would be going contrary to the provision of nature to render assistance to the destitute of that country."

301
He would fain hope that there was no foundation for that opinion, but he could not believe that a man of Mr. Twisleton's high honour would give circulation to an opinion before a Committee of Parliament which he was not justified in forming from conversations and other modes of coming to such a conclusion. It was most unfortunate that such an opinion should be entertained. He thought it unfortunate that the question should have have been asked, and that it should have given occasion to such a reply. He would, however, defend the Government from their own admissions. He did not think they ran any such risks as they contemplated, and it was because he did not consider that one more human being in Ireland would be subjected to the risk of starvation or want in Ireland by the rejection of the present Bill, that he would vote for the Amendment of the noble Earl opposite.
The EARL of ST. GERMANSsaid, that having attended the Committees on the Irish poor-law, and paid a great deal of attention to the subject, he was free to admit that the opinion he had formed of this particular measure did not differ widely from the opinion expressed in the report of the Committee of their Lordships' House; and he therefore regretted that he had not withdrawn this measure, and substituted for it one founded on that report. That, however, was not now the question before the House: the question was whether or not they should support the present measure. What were the circumstances under which they were called upon to pass this measure? It appeared that in some twenty or thirty unions of Ireland, the most appalling distress prevailed, and that disease and famine were making the most awful inroads upon the population; the resources of these districts were exhausted, and extraneous assistance was required; but the people of this country declared, through their representatives, that they could not make any further grants in aid of Irish distress. He knew that they had made great exertions for the relief of Irish distress, and he could not forget the large sums of money which they had expended for the relief of the suffering people of Ireland; but he could not admit that the sums which had from time to time been advanced fully acquitted this country of its responsibility to Ireland—he could not forget that for a long period of time Ireland had formed an integral part of the British empire. It was a wise policy in England, suffering
302
as she was herself at the present moment, to succour Ireland in her existing and greater need. It was absolutely necessary, if they would rescue Ireland from famine, and her people from starvation, to devise immediate means of relief; and, partial and inadequate as the present measure was, it would still do something. In about three months the 50,000 l. voted by Parliament would be expended, and there was no reason to expect that a less amount would be required for the next three months. The amount required in all would be from 400,000 l. to 500,000 l. to preserve the people in the distressed unions from death by famine, and the produce of this rate in aid was estimated at from 300,000 l. to 350,000 l. He saw no alternative save in supporting the present measure, and he did so because Parliament, by adopting this Bill, did enter, in his view of the case, into a contract with the people of Ireland, and gave a pledge, that if the people of Ireland raised the amount estimated as the produce of the rate in aid, the Imperial Parliament would vote whatever sum might be deficient for the relief of the existing distress. Therefore, not approving of the present measure, he would yet not take upon himself the responsibility of giving a negative to the Bill before their Lordships.
LORD MONTEAGLE: My Lords, before I proceed to consider the enactments of the present Bill, I must take the liberty of calling your attention to some characteristics which distinguish it from any measure of similar importance which, in my recollection,' has been introduced into Parliament. I ask your Lordships who have listened to the debate, and I ask you fearlessly, what authority has been cited in its justification, and what Peer has ventured to undertake its defence? The impressive, elaborate, and finished oration of my noble Friend, the mover (the Earl of Carlisle), was a practical condemnation of his own proposition. He stood self-refuted. He reminded me of a classical actor who when preparing for the stage, and proposing to equip himself in the Grecian robe or the Roman toga, should feel, to his dismay, that his graceful form was encumbered with the poisoned shirt of Nessus. Prom that garment my noble Friend will never be able to disengage himself; and if the present Ministers have any enemies, the most malignant among them could not desire a more severe punishment than to see them cursed with success on the

303
present occasion. No advocate has had courage enough to venture on their defence. Never was a Ministerial measure so utterly left without supporters. It should be remembered, too, that this question is not an immaterial one, or brought accidentally under discussion. Announced in the Queen's Speech, it has been submitted to the consideration of Committees of both Houses at the suggestion of the Government itself. The Members of those Committees have been selected by the Ministry. Evidence has been taken, and opinions formed. In both Houses a majority of the Committees are decidedly adverse to the measure, which nevertheless the House is now required, rather than invited, to pass. In an early stage of the discussion, the Secretary of State for the Colonies expressed his wish that the Peers by whose votes reports were carried in Committee, might be as publicly made known to the world in this as in the other House of Parliament. I join in that wish; and as far as our report is concerned, which so unequivocally condemns the principle of a rate in aid, I feel that there can be no impropriety in stating the exact truth respecting our division, and the names of the individuals who voted. Against the rate in aid, fourteen Peers voted, English as well as Irish. For the proposition, there were given the votes of six Peers only; and who, let me ask you, composed the six? The President of the Council (Lord Lansdowne), the Colonial Secretary (Lord Grey), the Privy Seal (Lord Minto), the Postmaster General (Lord Clanricarde), the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests (Lord Carlisle), and the Master of the Buck Hounds (Lord Besborough). Against the independent votes of fourteen Peers of every party, there appeared but five Cabinet Ministers, the framers of the measure, supported by one Member of the Household. The weight of evidence was still more preponderating. I will not fatigue your Lordships, at this hour of the night, with quoting or even referring to the blue books which are before me. However the witnesses might differ on other points, all condemned the proposal of a rate in aid. Inspectors, assistant commissioners, and guardians—every public officer called, united in this sentence. Their evidence was all one way; they were all opposed to this fatal measure. If the small official majority of Peers I have named, or any one among them, can refer us to a single sentence of
304
approval which had fallen from the lips of any one witness, I entreat them to refer your Lordships to what might be some excuse for the vote they have given; and some palliation for the vote they were about to repeat. But men's acts are even more convincing than their words. I therefore refer your Lordships, as the most conclusive confirmation of these facts, not to the evidence only, but to the conduct of Mr. Twisleton, the late Chief Poor Law Commissioner in Ireland. No sooner did that gentleman find that there was a probability of the passing of the present Bill, and that he should become responsible for the administration of a measure which, in his conscience, he condemned as dangerous and pernicious—than, with a spirit and an independence which did him the highest honour, he resigned his situation at once, in total disregard of all private interest. I can confidently speak for my countrymen, that by this one act Mr. Twisleton has secured for ever the esteem and gratitude of a people for whose benefit he had so long laboured. They will never forget the noble sacrifice he has made—they ought not.
I am also entitled to refer to the petitions which have been presented from Ireland, and which, with scarcely an exception, pray that this unfortunate measure should not be permitted to pass into a law. Counties, cities, and towns; sheriffs, magistrates, and boards of guardians, have addressed you with an unprecedented unanimity. I believe that on no one occasion, except perhaps where agitation has excited popular feeling, have so many Irish petitions been presented. Armagh, Antrim, Belfast, Cavan, Carlow, Donegal, the metropolitan county of Dublin, Fermanagh, Galway, Kildare, Limerick, Longford, Louth, Londonderry, Meath, Mayo, Queen's County, Roscommon, Sligo, Tipperary, Tyrone, have all petitioned—the probable receivers, who are many, as well as the payers of the rate, who may be but few. If the evidence of petitions is objected to, I can refer to what must constitutionally be admitted as decisive—I mean the votes of the Irish Members. I find that out of the 105 representatives of Ireland, 81 have marked their disapproval of this Bill—Whigs, Tories, Repealers, Roman Catholics and Protestants. Not more than 15 Irish Members of the House of Commons untrammelled by office have voted in its favour. Would the Irish

305
people believe—ought they indeed to believe—that justice is done them, if your Lordships pass this measure, condemned not only by your Committees and by every witness examined, but by so overwhelming a number of the Irish Members? Taxation without representation has been called tyranny; but taxation against representation is still more intolerable. On this subject England has been herself peculiarly sensitive. When, in a state of equal balance of parties, the scale has been occasionally turned by the votes of the Irish Members—how loud have been the complaints, how angry the denunciations!—and that, too, in cases where the question was a general one, and where the two islands were equally concerned. How then are we to justify, or even to account for, a decision on a purely Irish case, pronounced by a British despotic majority, against evidence, against the petitions of the Irish people, and against the votes of the Irish representatives? Let me ask you, my Lords, if, in the memorable debates which preceded the Union, Mr. Grattan on the one side of the House, and Mr. Foster on the other, had warned their countrymen not to resign their independence, lest their voices might hereafter be overpowered on questions in which their local interests were exclusively involved, by the unreasoning and imperfectly informed votes of British Members; would not Lord Castlereagh and his friends have treated this supposition with scorn, as a suggestion made contrary to all probability, and with a view to excite alarm and prejudice? Yet what would have been most reasonably considered as an impossibility in 1800, has become a formidable reality in 1849!
My Lords, no man, either in your Lordships' House or elsewhere, has been more attached to the Union than I have been. No one has been more ready at all risks and sacrifices to fight that battle out against all odds, and against all opponents. But I pray your Lordships to furnish me with an answer to the arguments which I well know will be, and must be, raised should this Bill pass into a law under the circumstances I have described. I know not where such argument is to be sought; I despair of finding it.
My noble Friend the Postmaster General (Lord Clanricarde) has stated that he considered the adequacy or inadequacy of the funds raised under this Bill to be a matter wholly immaterial. A more extraordinary
306
or unintelligible proposition I have never yet heard. Surely it might as justly be said that the adequacy or inadequacy of the food to be provided for hungry men was immaterial, as that the amount of the money that was to be levied for the purchase of that food was unimportant. It is the essential point: my noble Friend has seemed to hint that, if Ireland performs its part in bearing the burden of this Bill, Parliament may be expected to supply any deficiency: is this his meaning? If it is, why is it not clearly expressed and so explained, more especially in that place where money votes must originate? Are we to be asked for our support in the House of Lords on the suggestion that supplemental funds may be provided by Parliament; and is the House of Commons to be induced to pass the Bill on the ground that Parliamentary funds will be unnecessary, as this Act will extract from Ireland a sum sufficient to meet Irish distress? Is this conduct quite ingenuous? But, above all, does it afford us any real security? My Lords, we read in classical mythology of those sacred gardens where the trees bear fruits of gold, but where the entrance is watched by some ever-waking guardian. Does my noble Friend think that by casting this Bill like a honey cake before the economical dragon, the Government will be able to command a portion of the treasure hereafter? I doubt it. I feel, however, confident of the wise generosity of the House of Commons, if a case is only made out, and a measure proposed, to justify that generosity. The Government have defended this miserable Bill, by stating the unwillingness manifested in the House of Commons to grant 50,000 l., and the declaration made in that House that no more would be granted. My Lords, I respectfully differ both from the statement of fact and the inference. God forbid that the House of Commons should ever be careless or indifferent to a grant of public money—whether of 50,000 l., or of a lesser sum! But I believe that the objection lay rather to the appropriation, than to the amount. It may be unpardonable extravagance to waste 50,000 l., without producing any permanent good; and it may be a wise economy to expend ten times that amount for a noble and definite purpose. I doubt whether there is any conceivable amount which Parliament might be asked to grant, which would not be cheerfully given, provided the responsible Ministers could but

307
prove that such expenditure would raise Ireland from her present misery, and render her a source of prosperity to the empire at large. But if the hopes held out by my noble Friend the Postmaster General really mean that further advances will be made, and that Ireland may be enabled to run in debt still further, and that we are to do this well knowing that such debt cannot be repaid, I must be forgiven if I decline to sanction by my vote a step ending in disappointment, and enabling new and unjust complaints to be raised against the good faith and honesty of my country. I see that by the Bill an advance of 100,000 l. is sanctioned and authorised. My Lords, you will be greatly disappointed if you expect that sum to be repaid. As you propose to expend it on a false principle, so you are about to advance it on a false security. I give you this public notice of what you have to expect, and I at least will thus protect myself from any possible imputation of bad faith hereafter. I tell you not to trust to this miserable rate in aid, but to pass fitting measures, and to look the calamities of Ireland fairly in the face. Lift up your thoughts to the magnitude of the evil, and to the magnitude of the danger which lies before you, and be ready to meet it like men.
But we have been told, as some weeks back in the Committee I ventured to predict, that the people are starving, that we cannot amend this Bill, and that to reject it is to pronounce sentence of death on thousands. My Lords, I shall not weaken the force of the argument of a noble Friend (Lord Fitzwilliam) who has preceded me. If his statement be correct, who is truly responsible? Not we, who are now called on in the middle of May to discuss this question, but they who so long delayed proposing measures of relief. Why were we not called together in November, when we might have acted and deliberated more freely? But, again, even if the statement be true, it only proves that the Government are once more prepared to make another sacrifice, and that the worst of all sacrifices, the sacrifice of principle, on the altar of the most stern and implacable of all divinities—Necessity, real or imaginary. I believe the argument to be alike unfair and disingenuous. It is not out of funds provided under this Bill, that the Treasury pittances are now doled not. They are advanced from civil contingencies. The same system might be pursued if the pre-
308
sent Bill were either rejected or withdrawn so as to enable the Government to introduce a better. I stop not to ask what Bill. Any change must be an improvement. If I am asked, as I have been for my alternative—if I am pressed by the question quid melius? my answer is ready, and I ask in return quid pejus?
I am sorry that this argument of necessity should have swayed the mind and will influence the vote of my noble Friend (the Earl of St. Germans) who spoke last. He was at the same time too candid and too intelligent not to condemn the Bill. Let me point out to him the danger of admitting the false principle to which he is reluctantly disposed to yield. It amounts to an admission that he is bound, as a legislator, to adopt any measure submitted to him, however objectionable, if it is suggested that the alternative of rejecting it is the suffering of the people. This proves too much, and would deprive him of the use of his own clear understanding. Let me suppose that the Irish Parliament were now existing, and the Union repealed. Let me further assume the existence of a scarcity of food like the present. Suppose an Irish House of Commons, acting under democratic influence, to send up a Bill to the Irish House of Lords, proposing to meet this calamity by a confiscation of the estates of all absentees and of all English mortgagees. What would my noble Friend think of a Minister who should say in that House of Lords, "Pass this Bill, it is only seizing the estates of the Duke of A, or the Marquess of B, whom you never see, and whom you care nothing about; pass this Bill, or make yourself responsible for the deaths of millions." Or suppose, my Lords, that the Reform Act had produced the disastrous consequences some of its opponents predicted. Suppose a desolating famine or want of employment to afflict your mining or manufacturing districts. Assume that, as a mode of re-moving this calamity, a Bill was sent up to the Lords empowering the Government to seize and sell the 3,000,000 l. rental of the Church; should you think it just to be called on to commit an act of undisguised spoliation, or as an alternative to be held up to odium as the murderers of your fellow-countrymen? You would resist the argument as an indignity; and would reject the measure as a wrong.
I must now take leave to call your Lordships' attention to the estimate on your table which the Government have produced

309
to justify their proposal, and to show the amount which, as they anticipate, may be collected under this Bill. My Lords, I may, without presumption, claim some practical knowledge of such documents. When I knew the estimate was printed, I opened the paper with curiosity. Your Lordships will remember the oriental fable which describes the cat who had been changed into a beautiful princess, but who in her metamorphosis still retained so much of her feline nature, that on her bridal night, and even at the moment of the most earnest tenderness, she escaped from her husband's arms to pursue a mouse that had come within her reach. It is in the same way that a transformed Chancellor of the Exchequer like myself may be supposed to be attracted by his love for a revenue estimate. But I must confess that an estimate like the present I have never seen, nor could I have ever anticipated. In the annals of Parliament, I venture to say, there is not one to be found so uncandid, so indefensible, and so delusive. It is formed to mislead. The principle on which it is framed has indeed the merit of being simple, though not very truthful. It merely sets forth the full valuation of the four provinces of Ireland, amounting to 13,076,299 l.; it calculates a 2½ per cent poundage on that amount, and thus infers 326,907 l. as the future produce of the rate in aid. Now this mode of proceeding involves two monstrous and patent fallacies, either of which would be sufficient to lead your Lordships to conclusions wholly deceptive. It has been given in evidence, that so far is this rental (made as it was before the potato failure) from being applicable to the present time, that in certain districts it exceeds the real value by one third or one fourth. Next, the Government estimate includes the whole of the bankrupt unions of the west and south, from which no rate in aid can by possibility be collected. It would be manifestly absurd that the same districts should receive a rate in aid, and should contribute towards it. Therefore to receive 326,000 l. from the rate in aid is impossible, and in proportion as the tax is reduced in amount, it must cease to be a security for the Treasury advances.
I must also object to the unconstitutional power of raising as well as of appropriating the funds which it is proposed to levy. I fearlessly ask the Peers of the United Kingdom, well acquainted as they are with the spirit of independence, as
310
well as the strict obligations of responsibility, which govern the institutions of this country, whether England would for one moment tolerate a system which vested in public officers named by the Crown, or by Commissioners, themselves the nominees of the Crown, an unrestrained power of taxation? This Bill goes still further, and an additional tax of 2½ per cent on all rateable property being imposed, the unfettered and unrestrained expenditure of this sum is left to the Commissioners, who may refuse one application, and may grant another, without assigning any reason, other than their own will and pleasure. A new Commissioner appointed hereafter to fill up Mr. Twisleton's vacancy, and not being quite so conscientious as his predecessor, would thus have an unlimited power of granting or of refusing relief at his pleasure, and subject to no responsibility whatever to the ratepayers. Nor is this all. I presume that no one is desirous to compel the unpaid guardians of the poor to withdraw from their most laborious and painful duties, where those duties are well performed. Yet this Bill must have that operation. Wherever assistance from a rate in aid is required, it is made imperative to appoint vice-guardians, under whoso control the whole administration of relief will be brought. What will be the consequence of this in cases where the unions are still maintaining a manly struggle against pauperism? Take, as an example, the unions of Ballinasloe and of Parsons-town, where, under the advice and direction of two noble friends of mine, now present, the evils of outdoor relief to the ablebodied have been hitherto averted. Let them not rely too much on their fortunate exemption from evil. They cannot expect that their districts, like Gideon's fleece, shall continue unwatered by the rains of heaven. And when the moment of trial comes, for which this Bill proposes to make a provision, however delusive and inadequate, whenever assistance is sought for, we shall be required as a condition precedent to obtaining it, to substitute for the Earls of Rosse and Clancarty some inexperienced stripling, taken, rather than selected, in the lottery of patronage, where the blanks are more numerous than the prizes. But I shall now proceed to demonstrate to your Lordships, that even assuming the principle of the Bill to be sound—assuming too that it is sanctioned by English experience and authority, and that it comes recommended by the Parliamentary Commit-

311
tees —that it is supported by the testimony of impartial witnesses—that it is petitioned for by the people of Ireland, and recommended by the votes of the Irish Members—it is still our duty to reject this Bill as being illusory and deceptive, leading to disappointment, and therefore to danger, and unworthy of being passed into a law. We have had before us since the month of February, accounts showing the state of eight distressed unions in the west. The statistics of this exhausted and bankrupt district is as follows:—

Population

540,000

Expense of maintenance of poor for 12 months to 29th September, 1848

£219,000

Amount of rates collected in the same 12 months

£46,000

Amount contributed by the Government and British Associations

£157,000

In addition to this, the support of thousands of children in the district has been defrayed out of charitable funds; and there was also the unexampled beneficence of the Society of Friends. Add these extra funds together, which no longer exist, and believing as I do that the pressure in the present year will be still greater than in the last, and the resources of the district less, my conviction is, that these eight unions will exhaust the whole amount that can possibly be collected under the rate in aid. If noble Lords controvert this reasoning, I ask them to accompany me one step further. I ask them to extend their views from 8 to 21 unions in the west and south—21 unions it should be remembered out of 130. The debt on these unions has augmented in a single year from 84,000 l. to 123,000 l, or 50 per cent; the rate collected was but 199,000 l. to meet a current expenditure (without including debt), of 468,101 l.; the aid granted by the Government and the British Association was 237,000 l., and this without including, as I have already stated, either the maintenance of the children, or the paupers relieved by the charity of the Quakers, To meet this year's expenditure, and the debt, 592,086 l. is required. Even assuming that the rates of last year's collection can he realised, there will be a palpable deficiency of more than 400,000 l., a sum which will exceed, by more than the double, the whole proceeds of the rate in aid. It is, therefore, impossible to believe that the present measure can meet, indeed it can hardly be expected to mitigate, the present famine. If there exists
312
one danger greater than another, it will be found in exciting the hopes of the people of Ireland that Parliament had provided means for relieving their distress, when followed by the grievous disappointment which the subsequent inadequacy of those means cannot fail to produce. Here, the Bill may be justified as founded on mistake, or on an excusable delusion; in Ireland, it will be considered a downright fraud, and will be treated as such. It will be stated that under colour of giving relief, Parliament were making themselves responsible for protracted suffering, and a more cruel agony.
But in addition to the perils of disappointment, we shall also have to encounter the perils of discontent. Though I have hitherto designedly forborne referring to the blue books, I must yet be permitted on this part of the question, in order to protect myself from misrepresentation, to allude to the evidence of Mr. Gulson and of Mr. E. Senior, two public officers well acquainted with the condition, and the feelings, of the north of Ireland. Mr. Senior states that in the north-eastern districts the poor-law is now admirably administered, "the arrears of rate are considerably under five per cent, being considerably less than in England" (Q. 1606–1638), but that he fears that the imposition of a national rate "will lead at once to a passive resistance to the rate, in some districts, and that a passive resistance may, or may not, lead to an active resistance" (1642). He adds, "that it would be impossible to disentangle the ordinary rate from the national rate in aid, and that all the difficulties of the case would be increased." (See Q. 1643,1644.) Mr. Gulson's expression is still stronger—he says (Q. 1149), "if I know anything of the people of the North, they would rebel against contributing by any rate in aid towards the poverty of the South." Mr. Twisleton apprehends the resignation or supercession of the ordinary boards of guardians, and the necessary substitution of paid guardians throughout considerable parts of Ulster—these being the districts where the law is now satisfactorily and successfully carried into effect. This fatal Bill, therefore, disorganises the future poor-law administration, causing an irreparable injury to the inhabitants of the best and most industrious parts of Ireland. I entreat your Lordships to believe that this does not arise from a mere selfish desire to escape the mere pecuniary pressure

313
of the proposed tax. It arises from a repugnance to its principle—from a sense of its injustice—from the fear of its extension and perpetuation. But whilst it is more than doubtful what amount the rate in aid will produce, let us inquire what is the amount of Christian charity which it may suppress? In the last year the inhabitants of Belfast alone, nobly and generously, raised a subscription for the relief of their starving fellow-countrymen amounting to 21,000 l.—this was cheerfully given. You now propose to impose in the same district a tax of 2½ per cent, which, if paid at all, will be paid grudgingly and in a spirit of discontent, and which is only estimated to produce 4,500 l. A very intelligent witness, a merchant of Belfast, whom I examined before the Committee this morning, was asked, if a compulsory rate in aid had existed last year, how much of the voluntary 21,000 l. would have been collected? Mr. Holden made the decisive and animated reply, "Not one farthing of it." In addition to this, it should be remembered that the exercise of this voluntary charity had tended to promote and encourage the Christian feelings of benevolence and good will; whereas I venture to predict, that with this compulsory tax we shall see revived in its most dangerous shape that sectarian rancour and animosity which it has been the desire of all friends of Ireland to banish and to extirpate. The inhabitants of the North, it should be remembered, are a determined as well as an intelligent race. They preserve many of the characteristics of the race from which they sprung. It was, therefore, foreseen by the Government that they might probably decline paying the rate in aid, if it were to be collected separately. What I suppose is considered to be a very ingenious and cunning device has been resorted to to meet this danger. I can hardly attribute this contrivance to statesmen, it seems more closely to resemble the art of a low attorney. It is proposed by the Bill to blend the two rates, and by thus mixing the bitter and the sweet to make the draught palatable. But this will fail. The effect will be to make the collection of the ordinary rate difficult, rather than to render the collection of the rate in aid possible.
I can further demonstrate the inherent injustice of this tax by referring to the existing state of the valuations. To make one uniform poundage just, the valuation should obviously be uniform through-
314
out. But the Irish unions vary their valuation to the extent of 10, 20, 30, and 40 per cent. This is proved on the high authority of Mr. Griffith. The tax will, therefore, vary in the same degree, and where it amounts to but 2½ per cent in some cases, it may exceed double that amount in others. The burden will fall with the heaviest pressure where the valuation is highest, that is, in Ulster and Leinster. Is this just? Will it he endurable?
But is the apprehension of the men of Ulster respecting the future increase of this tax unreasonable? Is it not equally felt by your Lordships and by the whole public? The Ulster men are too shrewd to be hoodwinked, or to believe that the tax will only last for two years, and will not exceed 6d. in the pound. What has been the history of the property tax in this country? Alas! no lover's promises are half so fragile as Ministerial and Parliamentary pledges, limiting the duration of taxes! My noble Friend the President of the Council (Lord Lansdowne) condemned outdoor relief in 1846. He described it as a "system of a vicious character, and as one which, if adopted, must lead to the complete confiscation of the property of Ireland." Yet, in 1847, my noble Friend himself introduced, and most unfortunately prevailed on your Lordships to pass, a perpetual Bill for the administration of outdoor relief. If this has been the case with one whose character is all honour and truthfulness, where is our trust to be placed? Accordingly, the people of Ulster feel no confidence in the pledge tendered, and, as I am informed, the property of the tenants there, well known to your Lordships under the name of tenant-right, is no longer saleable. It is now scarcely considered an existing title, as few will become purchasers of tenant-right.
I cannot hut consider this Bill to he founded on principles laid down by a distinguished Member of your Lordships' House in the middle ages, then Earl of Huntingdon, though better known under the romantic name of Robin Hood. That principle is one more conformable to the outlaw's costume of Lincoln-green, than to the pure ermine of the House of Lords. Robin Hood was doubtless a man of a most generous character. His practice was to rob the rich for the benefit of the poor. I doubt whether the men of Ulster will be reconciled in our less poetical times to this

315
system, whether introduced by the forester, or by his first aide-de-camp, whose name* will readily suggest itself to your Lordships on the present occasion.
But to he serious. I fear that when the people of Ireland see that Parliament is taking a course that is at once unjust and illusory, that they may believe themselves justified in evading and resisting the tax. This I should consider to be a fatal and unpardonable error. The tax is proposed for a period of two years, and it is to he levied only with the next rate. Suppose that, before the Bill receives the Royal Assent, any union or number of unions should strike a rate calculated for the whole period of two years. To that levy it is clear the rate in aid will not attach, and the powers of the Act will expire in two years. How then can it be levied at all? I only give this as an example, showing how possible it is that the rate in aid may be defeated.
With respect to emigration, I have heard with surprise and dismay the manner in which the existing system of non-interference, or voluntary emigration, as it is called, has been vindicated by my noble Friend the Postmaster General. When the fitting time comes, I shall be prepared to prove that the emigration now going on, that on which my noble Friend relies, is an emigration of capital, public spirit, industry, and enterprise. It is an emigration of the very class most required in Ireland, and which every well-wisher to his country would wish to retain.
If time permitted, I might undertake to show how rapidly the fertile lands of Ireland are going out of cultivation; how, as in Clifden, more than half the valued rental now consists of a waste, and how surely this desolation, exceeding, as Mr. Richard Bourke informs us, "the ruin committed by a devastating foreign enemy," must inevitably extend over the adjacent districts. I do not set much store upon the hopes of bringing under cultivation the bog and mountain lands; but I do feel certain that if Parliament perseveres in its present course, not only will those mountain tracts be condemned to perpetual unproductiveness, but arable lands will be thrown up, capable as they are of providing food for our teeming population, and on which, even a free-trader like myself, must greatly prefer to rely for food, rather than on the produce of the wide fields of Poland, or of the boundless prairies of the United States.
* Little John.
I earnestly desire that the rich and fertile lands of Ireland may he brought under improved husbandry. But if a state of law is allowed to exist, and a pressure of local burdens is created, which renders all cultivation unprofitable, how can any investment of now capital be expected to take place? If the present local burdens are such as to prevent the race of existing farmers from tilling their lands to a profit, we may pass Encumbered Estates Bills, we may call for British capitalists, "but will they come when we do call for them?"
I must remind your Lordships that I do not vote against this Bill without having marked and recorded my willingness to find and support a substitute for the rate in aid. I voted in Committee for the substitution of a property tax to meet the present exigency. I did so, although I felt that such a proposition could only originate successfully, or justly, from Her Majesty's Government. Still, when the recommendation was made by my noble Friend (Earl Fitzwilliam), I supported him; and it is to be further remembered that the only Cabinet Minister then present, who voted at all (the Earl of Carlisle), gave his vote against that recommendation.
My Lords, I conclude. It is because I believe this Bill will augment, extend, and perpetuate the miseries of Ireland, that I oppose it. If the Government, in place of an ineffectual attempt to perform the lower and more mechanical duty of sustaining pauperism, will come forward with a largo and statesmanlike measure striking at the roots and causes of pauperism, they will receive—for they will deserve—support. I am sure that Parliament will not hesitate to do that which is generous and beneficent, when assured that it is also wise and just.
The EARL of GLENGALLaddressed a few words to the House, hut was quite inaudible.
LORD AUDLEYwas understood to say, that one reason why he should feel it to he his duty to support this measure was, that he perceived a disposition on the part of all classes in Ireland to throw off the burden which it would impose upon them from their own shoulders on to those of others. He could assure noble Lords that no mere question of expediency should induce him to vote for a Bill of this nature; but, considering all the circumstances which had been stated by many noble Lords that evening, and not having heard anything suggested of a more practical nature than

317
this measure by any of those who had addressed themselves to the subject, he must give his vote in favour of it; and, in doing so, he must, at the same time, say, that he saw no reason why, under the circumstances, the men of the north should not receive it in a generous spirit. As a landlord in the most miserable part of Ireland (the south-west) he had long experienced the greatest difficulties. It was desirable that the inhabitants of that densely populated district should be rendered less dependent on the soil; and any measure tending to make them so would be well worthy of the attention of the Legislature. This measure should not be regarded by itself, but in connexion with others, which were, he trusted, to follow.
The EARL of WICKLOWregretted that the noble Lord who had last addressed the House had not previously given some attention to the subject. He was sorry to find that the noble Lord had charged the landlords of Ireland with a disposition to shift the burden from their own shoulders. He knew not upon what authority the noble Lord made that accusation; because, although he had listened to the whole of the debate, he was glad to say that not one of their Lordships, who had addressed the House, had shown the slightest disposition to bring such an accusation against the landlords of Ireland. He believed, that in every part of the country, they had shown the greatest readiness to submit to taxation for such a purpose. The ground of objection to the present measure, was, that it was based upon erroneous views and calculations, and they also objected to the mode in which it was proposed to raise the money under the provisions of the Bill. It was unnecessary to urge any objections against the rate in aid, as they had been furnished by the supporters of the measures themselves. Not a single Minister who had addressed the House, and not a single witness who had attended the Committee upstairs, who had not deprecated the measure. The noble Lord the Secretary of the Colonies supported it merely on the ground of expediency; and the noble Lord the President of the Council had declared that no considerations would have induced him to support so objectionable a measure if he did not believe it to be limited in point of time and in point of amount. But what security had they that the amount would be so limited? As the case now stood, they had Her Majesty's Ministers denouncing the measure in the strongest
318
language, and declaring that they could not support it if it had not been limited in amount. But if the measure was once passed into a law, it was clear that it could not be limited either in time or amount. It had been stated that this measure was proposed because an unanimity of opinion could not be procured from the representatives from Ireland on the subject of remedial measures for that country. But the case had not been fairly put by the noble Lord the First Minister of the Crown to the deputation of Irish Members whom he had called to meet him. The Irish Members were asked whether they would have this rate in aid or an income tax, accompanied by other taxes. Now, the Government, to have acted fairly, should have stated what those measures were. Under all the circumstances, he should give his cordial support to the Amendment of his noble Friend, as he thought the Government had produced no satisfactory reasons for adopting so extreme a measure. It was urged that the measure was one of imperative necessity, as it was the only means of keeping hundreds of the Irish peasantry from starving; but there was nothing to prevent the Government continuing the aid in the form in which it had been previously given. The Session was not so far advanced as that a substitute might not be provided before any urgent necessity arose; and he was satisfied that it would pass the other House without the slightest opposition, and would come into operation, and would afford aid, as well as security, for the money now to be advanced, much more quickly than from the proposed rate in aid, which could not be collected without difficulty, such as would not attend the substitute proposed by their Lordships' Committee. It was a matter of astonishment to him, seeing the opposition that it had met with from 80 out of 105 of the representatives of Ireland, that the Government would still persevere in attempting to pass it, instead of adopting the more judicious alternative of proposing an equalisation of taxation with that existing in England.
LORD AUDLEYexplained.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEsaid, that he wished to say a few words, not in consequence of the appeals which had been made, on the ground that the Bill had not been sufficiently justified by those whose special duty it was to bring it forward, for he needed only to refer to the eloquent speech of his noble Friend who opened the discussion, and the just observations of his

319
noble Friend the Postmaster General, both in Her Majesty's Councils, but rather because circumstances had occurred while this proposition had been agitated in this and the other House of Parliament, which rendered it necessary that he should explain distinctly the grounds on which he was induced to give his vote for the Bill, and that he should state what it was that he did, and what he did not, expect. If he thought he was affirming the principle of a rate in aid as a permanent mode of providing for the wants of Ireland, or of any country, he should be far from saying that he would not be prepared to join in the reflections which might be made on such a measure, because he felt, if it were understood to be so introduced, it would be a measure most liable to be attended with danger, and most pregnant with mischief. But it was one thing to adopt under circumstances of an extraordinary character a measure as an immediate and temporary remedy, and another to admit that remedy permanently into the system and law of the country. Let them consider the circumstances under which this measure had been proposed. It had been said that this measure had been unnecessarily brought forward by Her Majesty's Government; but he held on the contrary, that there was every reason why it should have been brought forward. At the very commencement of the present Session, a proposition was made in the other House of Parliament to provide by grant from the imperial exchequer means to meet the extreme destitution then prevailing, and which had since assumed a more and more marked character in the west and south of Ireland. Did not the reception of that proposition justify the Government in coming to the conclusion that—for reasons, whether justified or not, whether adopted on account of that unfortunate disposition manifested in Ireland by persons who assumed, though he believed them not to be, organs of public opinion, contemptuously to depreciate the assistance derived from the people of the united kingdom, or on account of the pressure on the public finances of England itself—there did exist in the other House something like a determination not to add further to the grants hitherto made to Ireland? From that moment, then, it became the duty of the Government to consider how the necessary means to alleviate the distress in Ireland were to be obtained; knowing the opinion that prevailed that Ireland had no disposition to make some
320
exertion to help itself, and knowing that the resources of Ireland were not taxed, he thought wisely not taxed, to the same amount as the resources of Great Britain, the Government came to the conclusion that some effort ought to be made in Ireland to meet the distress. The most rev. Prelate, in whose general opinions on the subject of the poor-law and the abuses connected with it, he concurred, omitted in his speech any reference to that which was the immediate cause of the present Bill—the extraordinary infliction of the potato famine—and all those considerations adverted to by the most rev. Prelate ceased to operate with the entire cessation of all ordinary circumstances. The most rev. Prelate had said, "Why not teach these persons to depend on their own exertions and efforts?" But what could be the exertions and efforts of a population deprived of all food, and having neither capital, stock, nor means, nor even strength to make them? It had been argued by some of their Lordships, that this state of Ireland connected with the potato famine was a state of transition which must be submitted to; but he would remind the House that the period of transition was a transition from life to death with respect to a great part of the population in Ireland; and though he humbly submitted to the decrees of Providence, yet he could not admit that while that transition was going on, it was not their duty to legislate as far as possible to mitigate the evils bearing on that unfortunate country. Let them legislate as they would, or be as liberal as possible, they could not do away with all the effects of that transition. Those effects in uncivilised and barbarous countries were permitted to take their course, and the result was that whole populations were swept away—if not unpitied yet unassisted; but in a civilised and Christian country it was felt to be a duty to endeavour at least to mitigate the evil. It was because the Government had recognised this duty; because they had seen in the other House a disposition not to assist further by grants of money unless a disposition was perceived on the part of Ireland itself to make some effort, that the present measure was brought forward, with all its inconveniences and objections, for their Lordships' adoption. A noble Lord on the bench above him had indeed a very easy mode of dealing with the question; and, according to his argument it appeared, that the expression of hesitation on the part of any Minister to take on himself during

321
the sitting of Parliament, expending the public money was nothing but "constitutional twaddle;" although since the commencement of constitutional practice in this country no Ministers could act otherwise but at the peril of their heads. A noble Lord had asked why recourse had not been had to the income tax; and, though the noble Lord was justified in putting that question, he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) conceived that the Ministers were justified in imposing that particular burden which would be the least objectionable to the parties bearing it. With respect to the income tax, though at one time there appeared a sort of unanimity of feeling among the Irish representatives in its favour, yet from the moment of the report of their Lordships' Committee recommending the imposition of that tax, and from the moment that the imposition of that tax thus acquired a more serious aspect of probability, somehow or other the supporters of the proposition fell off one by one, and became suddenly silent on the subject. Even the necessity of the case might not have justified him (the Marquess of Lansdowne) in proposing as a permanent system of relief that which he had admitted to be one pregnant with mischiefs; but there was security that it should be limited—the security of the Bill itself, and the declarations made in the other House; and he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) felt himself authorised to state the opinion of Her Majesty's Government collectively, that beyond the period assigned for its operation in this Bill, under no circumstances was it their intention to propose a continuation of this measure; but that if, unhappily, circumstances, now assumed to be temporary, should acquire more than a temporary character, endeavours to meet the deficiency and to remedy the evil, must be founded upon a broader and more equitable principle. With regard to the other expedients suggested, that of calling in monies advanced on account of workhouses had been already explained to be a measure which would operate much more unjustly and partially, and distribute the burden more unequally over Ireland than the plan proposed. Emigration, if applied in the wholesale way that would be necessary, would require an amount of machinery and expense which would present quite as great a difficulty as the present measure, or even a greater; and it would have such effects in other countries as to produce absolute resistance to their being
322
surfeited with a mass of paupers; to say nothing of its effect upon the future progress of a sound system of emigration. The estimate which had been asked for and furnished, had not been dealt quite fairly with during the debate; it was stated by the Government, when the estimate was called for, that it might turn out fallacious, as it must be founded upon the existing valuation. It was hardly fair, after obtaining with that warning all the information that could be given, to complain that the information was fallacious, and did not allow for depreciations which the Government had no more the means of estimating than they had of penetrating beforehand the inscrutable designs of Providence. They were compelled by the circumstances of the case to act in the dark. They had to deal with a portentous, uncertain, and mysterious evil. To it they could apply no satisfactory, certain, positive remedy. But they were not therefore relieved in the eyes of God or man from the duty of endeavouring to mitigate its pressure, and adopting such means as were before them; those which offered the greatest facility for the immediate levying of the money required, guarding their proceeding by every declaration that could be made, that as a permanent principle it would be fatal to the country. But for the time he asked their Lordships to agree to this Bill.
On Question, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Motion,"
House divided:—Contents 48; Not-Contents 46: Majority 2.

List of the CONTENTS.

Lord Chancellor

Stafford

DUKE.

Bruce

Devonshire

VISCOUNTS.

MARQUESSES.

Strangford

Lansdowne

Ponsonby

Clanricarde

BISHOPS.

Breadalbane

Durham

Westminster

Ripon

EARLS.

Worcester

Devon

St. Asaph

Carlisle

Manchester

Scarborough

Hereford

Cowper

LORDS.

Spencer

Audley

Fortescue

Camoys

Bessborough

Saye and Sele

Grey

Teynham

Minto

Byron

Craven

Elphinstone

St. Germans

Montfort

Burlington

Foley

Granville

Carrington

Effingham

Cremorne

Yarborough

Erskine

323

Howden

Colborne

Mostyn

Campbell

Leigh

Eddisbury

List of the NON-CONTENTS

Archbishop.

Stradbroke

Dublin

Ranfurly

DUKE.

VISCOUNTS.

Manchester

Hawarden

MARQUESSES.

Lorton

Abercorn

Combermere

Downshire

BISHOP.

Drogheda

Cashel

Sligo

LORDS.

Ely

De Ros

Londonderry

Beaumont

EARLS.

Rollo

Winchilsea

Polwarth

Waldegrave

Boston

Fitzwilliam

Bolton

Egmont

Blayney

Roden

Crofton

Mountcashel

Clarina

Enniskillen

Redesdale

Desart

Castlemaine

Wicklow

Downes

Lucan

Wharncliffe

Caledon

Templemore

Romney

Abinger

Rosse

Ashburton

Harrowby

Monteagle of Brandon

Glengall

Proxies were not called.
House adjourned to Monday next.