Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

which they were to operate; and lastly, the Committee should report on the effect which the system of Irish Poor-laws would have upon the population of Ireland. Nothing could be more plausible and specious than the first appearance of the proposal for assimilating the two countries, or extending the English Poor-law system to Ireland. It might appear that the poor had a natural claim to relief. By poor he meant those that were unable to provide for themselves; and great injustice arose practically from the existence of Poorlaws in one place and from their absence in another. The gallant General who seconded the Motion felt the inconvenience of the Poor-laws, and he wished to impose the same suffering on Ireland. He was like the fox who had lost his tail, and who wanted to persuade all other foxes that tails were an encumbrance. He would give the whole of the English system to Ireland. Many Gentlemen said -apply all the good of the English system of Poor-laws to Ireland, and without any of the evil. But even if this could be done, the question was, could they exclude the gradual growth of what was bad? There was an inevitable tendency, in any such a system, to grow into abuse; and if the poor had an acknowledged legal claim to relief, where could the limitation of that claim be fixed? If every man who could not support himself were to have an acknowledged legal claim upon the wealthy, the land of Ireland would be subject to an Agrarian law, and the present possessors of the soil would have to part with their property, and, what was more, without any material, and certainly without any permanent, diminution of the distress. If the right or claim be confined only to those who were diseased, that limitation would not be found much stricter than the other; for if a man were unable to procure employment, and especially if he had a family, the step from poverty to illness was very short. The hon. Member for Armagh had said"We won't have Poor-rates, but we will have a Labour-rate, and nothing shall be raised on the land except to provide for the employment of the poor." The hon. Member, by this principle, provided no relief for distress; he excluded the decrepit, and all who could not labour. Was this "Labour-rate " to be applied in the parish in which it was raised? What would this be but a subscription from the

rich, and a diminution of their means to employ the poor, and how would this increase the demand for labour? It would pro tanto diminish the means of the prosperous farmer, to be applied to a forced labour, which would not otherwise arise, or be actually necessary; the produce of which being less productive in amount, and in every respect of inferior benefit to the country than the labour the farmers would employ with that capital if it were left in their own hands, there would ultimately be less employment for the labourer, and diminished wages, than if no such Labour-rate was imposed. Before the House consented to the introduction of the Poor-laws, under the name of Labour Rate, let the House consider the practical operation of that system; and they would find in it no material distinction, either in principle or effect, from such a rate as was called the Poor-rate in England. His hon. friend, the Treasurer of the Navy, advocated the Scotch system, instead of the English. Now what was meant by the Scotch system? for in Scotland the system in the Highlands was perfectly different from that of the Lowlands and manufacturing districts. By the law, the system in every part of Scotland should be the same; but practically this was very different. He much doubted if, according to the decisions of the Scotch courts, there was not a legal claim for relief by every one of the poor who was unemployed. He doubted if the Scotch system were legal as it existed, or if any system of taxing parishes for the support of the poor could check the ultimate evil now felt in this country. It was impossible for him to discuss absenteeism at that time, although he felt all the inconvenience of it; but he would at once reject the doctrine which considered it proper that Parliament should attempt to interfere directly with absenteeism. It might be thought plausible to impose a tax upon absenteeism; but if any man did entertain such a notion, and wished to be converted, or was open to conviction, let him read the letter of Mr. Burke to Sir Charles Bingham. In 1774, when Ireland had an independent Parliament, a tax on absentees was proposed, and a very popular and prevailing impression existed in favour of the tax; but Mr. Burke's arguments were perfectly conclusive, and they had changed the opinions of many of those who were disposed to de

fortunes, who would not like to be subject
to the additional annoyance of the Poor-
laws. Although he thought it a danger-
ous experiment to introduce the English
Poor-laws into Ireland, yet the proposal
ought not to be rejected without the most
deliberate inquiry. The Committee, how-
ever, would only have to consider the
distress which existed among the labourers,
and the best means of providing them em-
ployment and relief. In that view of it
he gave his cordial assent to the Motion.

cide in favour of the measure. But at
present, when the public duties called the
Irish gentry away from their country, and
when so many possessed property in both
parts of the United Empire, how could it
be consistent with justice to impose such
a tax? The question was altogether be-
yond the direct interference of the legis-
lature. But the most material object to
be kept in view by the Committee would
be, to satisfy the people of England by its
inquiries. There was, unquestionably, a
great practical injustice in the working of
the Poor-laws at present. Although the
greatest abuses existed respecting the pas-
sage of Irish labourers into England, he
must confess that he felt averse to im-
posing any restriction on a free passage.
His hon. friend proposed imprisonment as
a check, he would probably confine all
the Irish labourers who came to Liver-introduced into Ireland.
pool in that town at the expense of the
corporation; but, of all checks to immigra-
tion, imprisonment would be the most use-
less and objectionable.

General Gascoyne: I said imprisonment and hard labour.

Mr. Peel continued: Then the passengers would never come again. But it would not be a cheap way of getting rid of Irish labourers, to build a jail and support them at the expense of the rest of the population. The best way would be to find an open market for the poor man's labour, his only commodity; and any laws to prevent the poor man from passing freely from one part of the country to another would be pregnant with injustice. As to large institutions in Ireland, to receive the poor who were unable to provide for themselves, he despaired of any effectual remedy from such a scheme. This was the worst system that could be introduced; for it was providing not only food but lodging, which ought not, he thought, to be done, except in cases of disease, or decrepitude from accident. He much doubted if the introduction of the English Poor-laws into Ireland would relieve the poor of England; for England did not suffer from Irish distress, but from the invasion of Irish labourers. The English farmer had the benefit of cheap labour, by the influx of Irish poor. The Poor-laws in Ireland would increase distress, as they would prevent the building of cottages, and have other injurious effects. They would probably banish from the country a number of persons of small

Mr. Slaney was sorry to observe, that the hon. Mover had taken too partial a view of this subject, his mind being evidently made up before he moved for the committee; and he lamented, too, that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) opposite seemed to think that almost no relief by a measure of this nature could be Sure he was,

that something must be done to raise the
moral character of the Irish peasantry.
He saw well the prudence of giving no
distinct pledge on this subject, until the
labours of the Committee should be con-
cluded. He would not detain the House
at that late hour, but reserve to another
opportunity the expression of his views.
He begged, however, to be allowed to ob-
serve, that unless something were done to
prevent the influx of Irish peasantry into this
country, our own peasantry would soon be
as badly off as the Irish.
In the last year
no less than 50,000 deck passengers came
over from Ireland into this country. The
injurious effects of this influx must be
obvious to every one. He was averse to
introduce the English system, with its
abuses, into Ireland, but he must say he
thought that something might be done by
a system like our own, but relieved of the
abuses which had grown up here. The
Committee, however, would be the place
for investigating this question.

Mr. A. Dawson said, that the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, assumed that these 50,000 persons from Ireland were paupers, and vagrants, and vagabonds. This was not the case; they paid for their passage to this country, and brought with them the gifts which nature had conferred upon them; their strength and their sinews. They asked for employment, and, if they obtained it, they gave, in their labour, a fair recompense for the money they received. He did not mean to say that vagrants and vagabonds did not come from Ireland, or

that the House might not legislate upon vagrants: but he did protest against the industrious Irish, who earned all they received from this country, being confounded with Irish vagabonds who came to ask English alms. Let him, however, tell the House that they could not, by legislative enactments, prevent labour from finding its level. As to relieving Ireland, and bettering the condition of the people, hon. Members speculated upon emigration and the Poor-laws, while an obvious mode, which presented itself to the view of every one, was passed over. He would say, give the Irish employment in Ireland, which might be easily done. There were in that country, 2,000,000 acres of bogs, which were a standing reproach to the Government. By the Reports of Commissioners, it appeared, that if these bogs were drained, they would, in ten years, be converted into fertile land, at a profit of 200 per cent.

Mr. Slaney said, that he had applied neither the term vagabond nor vagrant to the Irish who came over here. He had not wished to apply such terms to them, and if he had so wished, still, surrounded as he was by so many sensitive Members from the sister kingdom, his prudence. would have got the better of his wish.

Mr. Monck said, that at that late hour he should detain the House but for a very few moments. He did not think that the flux of the Irish was so great an evil as had been represented, in regard to its effects upon our own peasantry. For, in the first place, the influx was chiefly confined to London and the great towns. In the country it lasted only during harvesttime. Against this evil, however, such as it was, our Poor-laws were our security, and did not, as it had been supposed they did, increase the evil. For, if the Irish offered their labour at fifty per cent under our own labourers, the farmer would not accept the offer, because he knew that if he did, the English labourers would next day come upon him for relief as paupers.

Mr. O'Connell begged to notice an expression which had fallen from the hon. Member for Shrewsbury. The expression was calumnious; and although he was sure the hon. Member had not so intended it, yet he felt it necessary to notice and to correct the expression. The hon. Member had talked about raising the moral character of the Irish peasantry. Now he begged leave to tell the hon. Member,|

that, by the example of England, this could not be done. On the contrary, while crime was rapidly increasing in England, it was on the decrease in Ireland, With respect to the subject before the House, he would not detain it by any observations of his upon it. He would only remind the House, that the distress, which was on all hands admitted to exist in Ireland, prevailed among an industrious and numerous population, who were blest with a most fertile soil. Would it be said that no remedy could be applied to distress in such a country as that?

Sir C. Cole said, that with his experience as a magistrate of the mischiefs of the Poor-laws in this country, he could never think of advocating the extension of those laws to the sister kingdom.

Mr. Slaney, in explanation, said, that he had not used the words "moral charac-. ter," in the sense in which the hon. Member for Clare had understood them.

Motion agreed to, and Committee appointed.

Mr. Trant moved, "That it be an instruction to the Committee, to inquire how far the 43rd of Elizabeth might be made applicable to the poor of Ireland."

The Speaker said, that the Committee, from the wording of the Motion, had already power to extend their inquiries to that point; and it was unusual to give an instruction to it to do that which it already had the power to do.

Mr. Hume said, that if there were no objection, he would move that Mr. Trant's name be added to the Committee, and he might submit his own views to it.

Lord F. L. Gower could have no personal objection to the hon. Member's name being added to the Committee; but, on general principles, he objected to the proposition, because other hon. Members might make similar ones, and so extend the Committee to the whole House.

SCOTCH JUDICATURE.] The Lord Advocate rose for the purpose of bringing forward his Motion regarding the Trial by Jury in Civil Causes, &c. in Scotland.

Mr. Hume and Sir George Warrender pressed the postponement of the important subject at so late an hour.

The Lord Advocate consented to defer the subject till to-morrow, taking the chance of being then able to bring it forward.

Mr. R. Gordon wished to hear from the

only Cabinet Minister present, whether the hon. Baronet (the Member for Newcasprojected judicial reforms in Scotland tle), that the Coal-owners at the Tyne, would produce an increase of salary to the would meet the inquiry in the same fair Judges of Scotland. He could not. but spirit. recollect the attempt of the kind last Session.

Mr. Herries replied, that as the subject was postponed, any statement like that now called for would be premature.

Mr. R. Gordon added, that last year the Chancellor of the Exchequer had also refused to answer, and his reason was very soon discovered. He wished to augment the salaries of the judges.

COAL TRADE.] Mr. Alderman Wood said, it would ill become him, at that late hour of the night, to take up the time of the House. He would therefore merely state, that the corporation of London were anxious for an inquiry on this subject, as well for other reasons as to see if another method of selling coals,-namely, by weight instead of measure-might not be resorted to with advantage to the public. He begged to move that "A Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the state of the Coal Trade at the Port of London,-into the delivery of Coals in London, Westminster, the liberties thereof, and in certain parts of Middlesex, Surrey, Kent and Essex,-and into the prices of Coals in the Port of London, and in the ports of shipment, with the view of determining whether any and what restrictions should be attached to the supply of Coals."

Sir M. W. Ridley rose to second the Motion. He assured the House that the Coal-owners were extremely anxious that this inquiry should be instituted, and that they would be happy to render all the assistance, and to give all the information in their power to the Committee.

Mr. Rumbold proposed, as an Amendment, to add to the Motion, after the words "Port of London," the words, "and other ports."

Mr. S. Wortley said, that nothing was more accordant with the wishes of the Coal-owners of the North, than to meet the inquiry in the same spirit in which it was proposed. He hoped his hon. friend would not press his Amendment. The subject it embraced was one of much interest, and an inquiry into it would no doubt be hereafter instituted, but it would extend the labours of the present Committee too much. It would be of sufficient importance to form the subject of a separate inquiry, and he hoped it would be gone into hereafter.

Mr. Rumbold said, he had now no wish to press his Amendment.

Mr. Liddell assured the House that the Coal-owners of the North desired earnestly to advance the objects for which the Committee had been moved.

Sir T. D. Acland gave his support to the Motion. He was glad that inquiry was about to be instituted, and he hoped it would lead to the total repeal of the unequal and very unjust tax which was levied on Coals.

Mr. Holdsworth expressed a hope that the other parts of the inquiry would be taken up at a future time.

Motion agreed to, and Committee appointed.

Mr. Herries was much gratified at the appointment of a Committee of Inquiry upon that subject, and equally so at the selection made.

Mr. Hume observed, that in the Committee the Coal-owners were represented; the City of London was represented; the owners of the ports were represented. He wished to know what names were put on the Committee on behalf of the public? He therefore proposed the addition of Sir T. D. Acland's name.

Mr. Herries said, the name of a MemMr. F. Lewis suggested that the Motion ber from each of the counties near Lonalready carried the inquiries of the Com-don, and one of the Members for Westmittee far enough, by including the Port of London and the ports of shipment.

minster, would be extremely desirable. He thought this selection extremely good. Sir T. D. Acland's name was added to the Committee.

Mr. Alderman Thompson, in supporting the Motion said, that the chief object of the City of London, in wishing for this Committee was, to relieve Coals brought to the Port of London from any unneces sary charge, and he hoped, indeed he had MINUTES.] Petitions were presented praying for the Openreason to believe, from what fell from the

HOUSE OF LORDS. Friday, March 12.

ing of the Trade to India :-against the Truck System:-and

for the Repeal of the Duty on Coals carried coast-wise. The Transfer of Aids Bill, and the Exchequer Bills Bill were read a second time.

IRISH POOR.] The Earl of Darnley said, that he had had an opportunity of ascertaining, by the votes on their Lordships' Table that a proposition exactly similar to one their Lordships had frequently rejected when he had submitted it to them, had been agreed to the night before by the other House of Parliament. That proposition was for a Select Committee to inquire into the condition of the Irish Poor. It was not his intention then to say any thing on the subject, but he would now give notice, that on Tuesday next he would call the attention of the House to the condition of the Irish Poor, in order to know what were the intentions of Ministers upon the subject.

to be brought in to enable the officers of the Ordnance to sue by their official names.

Returns were ordered, on the Motion of Sir JOHN NEWPORT, of the names and places of residence of the nominees in the Irish Tontines:-on the motion of Mr. HUME, of number of Midshipmen promoted to be Lieutenants in the Navy between Jan. 1st. 1827, and Jan. 1st. 1850; of the number of Lieutenants, promoted to be Commanders during the same period; of the number of Commanders promoted to be Post Captains during the same period; of the whole number of officers in the Royal Navy during the same period, distinguishing those serving afloat; of the number of persons who have received first commissions in the Marines during the same period; of the number of officers on full and half pay, and of the number who have been brought from haif pay to full pay, or allowed to dispose of their commissions; of the number of Pursers in the Royal Navy during the same period; and the number of Clerks promoted to be Pursers; of the number of Masters; and of the number of Surgeons, with an account of the Surgeons' mates promoted:-of the total number of officers and clerks employed in the Commissariat Establishment since 1822:-and of the number of Distributors of stamps and the rate of per centage allowed them in the United Kingdom;-on the motion of Mr. G. DAWSON, of the quantity of Corn, Meat and Flour, exported from Ireland to Great Britain between Jan. 5, 1828 and Jan. 5 1830:-on the motion of Mr. Moore of the amount of the Excise duties on leather in Ireland and the convictions for offences against the acts composing those dutiess ince 1821:-of the persons summoned to serve on Grand Juries in Dublin since 1823.

Returns were presented of the sums of money expended for the Relief of the Poor in each county of England and Wales, in 1828-1829.

EAST INDIA CHARTER.] The Marquis of Lansdown said, he held in his hand a Petition which, he believed, was the first of that nature that had as yet been decided upon by all the merchants METROPOLIS TURNPIKE ROADS.] Mr. of London engaged in the private trade Byng presented a Petition from several to India. Many of these individuals had inhabitants of the hamlets and places expressed their opinions upon the subject adjoining Kensington, complaining of the separately, upon various occasions, but New Tolls which had been levied on them this was the first time that they had con-under the New Act for Consolidating the jointly sent forth in a public manner their Turnpike Trusts in the neighbourhood of views and sentiments. It had been stated the metropolis. By the new regulations that the merchants trading privately to a toll was levied on vehicles every time India from the Port of London differed in they passed; and as the short stages, with their opinions upon the subject, from the many descriptions of coal and market merchants who were engaged in a similar carts went through these gates several traffic at the out-ports of the United times a day, these new regulations had Kingdom. He was, therefore, requested added considerably to the expenses. The to state, that the petitioners gave it as toll had also been raised on other coaches, their opinion, that it was highly desirable that some alteration should be made in from all coach proprietors, reducing their so as to increase very much the sums taken the Company's Charter. In this opinion profits very much. He should, on some he concurred and recommended the Peti- future day, move that the petition be retion to their Lordships' consideration. ferred to a committee, to inquire into the facts of the case, unless he learnt in the mean time, that the commissioners appointed to carry the Act into execution had given the petitioners relief.

The Petition was read and referred to the Committee upon the East-India trade.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 12.

MINUTES.] Petitions were presented praying against the
Return of the Member for Rye:--for the reduction of the
duties on Malt and Beer:--for an alteration in the Tythe
Laws:-against the renewal of the East India Company's

Charter :-complaining of Distress; and praying for relief.

The Mutiny Bill was read a third time. A bill was ordered
VOL. XXIII.

Lord Lowther said, that he had very little doubt but that there was some mistake on the subject. It had, however, been settled in a Committee of that House, after hearing much evidence on the subject from many different sorts of persons, that to levy a toll every time a vehicle passed through the gates, would be the

I

« AnteriorContinuar »