entirely filled with persons who gether. He objected to the workwere in a state of poverty, and yet house system, as prejudicial to the not so near the condition of desti. best habits and feelings of the tution that they would consent to Irish. With respect to the rates, any privation of personal liberty in he considered that no rate could be order to procure food. This he be- levied in Ireland which would not lieved to be the condition of the eventually fall upon the owner. great proportion of the Irish poor. Mr. Litton considered that the

Mr. Shaw said, that he felt that bill was at least worthy of the there was justice in many of Mr. attention of the House, if it should O'Connell's observations upon the be only found calculated to settle a impolicy of compulsory provision ; few important points. Mr. Barron but, notwithstanding these theore- and Mr. John Young fully suptical difficulties, he felt it to be their ported the bill. Mr. J. Gibson duty, as rational men, to consider and Sir F. Trench opposed it, the whether some step might not be tak- former being of opinion that no en towards the improvement of the poor-law was applicable to Irecondition of the poor and destitute land, and the latter expressing in Ireland. A state of abject destitu- strong objections to the workhouse tion led to turbulence, breaches of the system in general. peace, and depredation. Although, The House divided on the ori. however, he agreed with Lord John ginal motion. Ayes 277; Noes Russell in the principle of apply. 25. Majority against the amending the workhouse as a test, he ment 252. thought that it had been carried On the 12th of February, the too far. He feared that the work. House being in Committee on the houses would be inadequate to the bill, Lord Clements, while he gave demands upon their resources, and his thanks to Lord John Russell that the restraints imposed upon the for the measure, the main features inmates would not operate as a check of which had his approbation, in the manner supposed. Under stated, that its success must, in his all the circumstances, it occurred opinion, depend upon the mode to him, that the plan of giving in which the patronage created by relief to the aged, impotent, and it was disposed of. Many of his infirm, aided by emigration, and constituents objected to the powers public works, would be found, if of the poor-law commissioners. not sufficient, the least objection- Great care ought, he said, to be able plan. He was not afraid that used in their selection, and precaua compulsory system would dry up tions taken to secure proper perthe sources of private charity; all sons. He was afraid that no good such apprehensions he thought could be done without a very exchimerical

tensive system of out-door relief. Messrs. W. S. O'Brien, Lucas, And he thought that facilities and Redington, supported the bill, should be given to the clergy of though they felt, respectively, both persuasions for enabling them certain objections to many of its to bring about voluntary assessdetails.

ments in their respective parishes. Mr. O. Gore supported Mr. He was of opinion that the bill O'Connell's amendment, in the should be first introduced in the hope of getting rid of the bill alto- western districts, where, from the way in which land was managed, amendment to the 35th clause, great poverty prevailed ; unless it with a view to limiting the relief succeeded there, it would alto- afforded under the bill, to the lame, gether be a failure.

impotent, old and blind. Mr. Shaw In Sir E. Sugden's opinion, the said, he was aware the strongest proposed expenditure of a million argument against his proposition for workhouses, before it was known would resolve itself into this queshow the bill would work, was very tion. How can you refuse relief to improvident. He recommended a man who says I am able and that the experiment should, in the willing to work if I can find it? first instance, be made on a small He would answer that, by saying scale. He then expressed a strong he did not refuse to give such a objection to one clause in the bill, man relief, but he would give it in by which all the hospitals and another way. He would have reother charities for the relief of the course to the auxiliary means of poor now existing, would be placed either emigration or public works. under the absolute control of the The bill, as it stood, held out the commissioners, who were em- hope of relief to the mass of Irish powered to bring such funds in aid poor. This it was absolutely imof the general relief bill. This, possible could be afforded. he said, was not consistent with Lord Morpeth admitted, that it justice, and was, in his opinion, might be desirable that the practice, against law. It was, besides, im- under the bill, should be assimipolitic to interfere with these lated to what Mr. Shaw would funds, which would, if left alone, make the preremptory rule. But act as auxiliaries to the new he entreated the House to abstain scheme. He then noticed certain from fettering the discretion of the clauses which inflicted penalties on guardians, by putting it altogether persons for the non-maintenance of out of their power to administer their families, though the bill gave relief in particular cases of destithem no right to relief when desti- tution, which would be productive tute. And he pointed out other of the worst effects. objectionable features in this part Colonel Conolly deprecated the of the bill.

extensive system involved in the The first clause of the bill, which provisions of the bill, and supported brought the whole superintendence the amendment. of the system within the dominion Mr. Wrightson declared, that of the English poor-law commis- the bill could never be carried into sioners at Somerset House was effect. Mr. Nicholls had stated, then discussed, when, Mr. O'Con- as a principle, that the property of nell having proposed, by way of a district should find means to supamendment, that " the poor-law port its poor. Now apply that commissioners for Ireland be the principle to Mr. Martin's estate at commissioners to carry this act Connemara, or to Sir R. O'Doninto execution," a division took nell's, in the Isles of Arran, and place, and the original arrange- they would find that the destitument was carried by 117 to 23. tion would absorb the entire pro

On the 19th of February, the perty of those districts. Again, House being in committee, Mr. the population of Ireland was Shaw proposed important 8,000,000. The rental 6,000,000/.


So that if the principle were to be unfrequent remark at the time, followed out, the whole rental that on this question alone it had would not give more than a trifle been found possible to secure the to each individual.

unanimous opinion of that divided Mr. O'Connell supported Mr. nation. Men of every faction, Shaw's amendment, in some obser- and of either religion, were comvations which were based on very bined for once in hostility to sound principles. He thought, the details of the ministerial however, it did not go far enough. measure. And, be the merits of But he was willing to make the that scheme what they may, it was experiment on the plan proposed surely a hazardous enterprise to by that gentleman.

advance its execution in defiance Lord John Russell said, Mr. of the people upon whom it was Shaw's proposition, while it sub- imposed. This union of parties jected the people of Ireland to

was exemplified in the House of three fourths of the burthen, would Commons by the circumstance, that not give them a participation of the tellers for the noes were Lord more than one fourth of the bene- Castlereagh and Mr.M.J. O'Confits, provided by the bill.

nell. It is an equally significant fact, The amendment was rejected :- as expressing the opinions of the ayes 75; noes 134 ; majority 59. people out of doors, that while

The bill came on for the third petitions against the measure were reading on the 30th of April, flowing in from all quarters, only when Mr. O'Connell made his last four were presented in its favour. effort to arrest its progress. It Mr. O'Connell therefore might well certainly was a remarkable thing ask, whether “ English Gentlemen to find this gentleman, who is in would force upon the country a general more conspicuous for the measure which the people rejected?" loose and exuberant impetuosity Nevertheless, it passed the House of of his tongue, than for the scien- Commons by a large majority. Ayes tific accuracy of his reasonings, 234; Noes 59. Majority 175) prompt, upon this occasion, to ap- Lord John Russell, on the 27th ply the rigid demonstrations of the of March, opened the negotiations economists, and to press to an before adverted to, by asking Sir extremity the principles of that Robert Peel, in his place in Paraustere school. And whatever la. liament, whether it was the intentitude we may, in other instances, tion of any member of the Ophave allowed ourselves in the con- position “to move an instruction struction of the motives of his to the Committee on the Irish conduct, it is but fair to re- Municipal Corporations Bill, aumark, that in the present case, thorising the total abolition of the his conduct seemed to be beyond municipal corporations of that imputation. His opposition to the country?" bill was boldly based on the most Sir Robert Peel on the other unpopular of all grounds; and he hand, met this inquiry by another, was, moreover, supported in his and demanded to know or what views by a very large portion of course government meant to pursuch of his fellow-Irishmen as were sue with respect to the Irish Tithe competent to form an opinion upon Bill and the interests of the Irish the subject. It was, indeed, no church?” He then read from the VOL. LXXX.


journals of the House the resolu. basis of an adjustment, and prevent tions which embodied the appro- the ill consequences of perpetuat. priation clause, and inquired whe- ing the conflicting, views enterther it was Lord John Russell's tained on this exciting subject.” intention to bring forward a mea. His lordship concluded by reading sure which would involve the ten resolutions as the ground-work principle contained in those resolu- of the intended measure. tions?

In his reply to this appeal, Sir Lord John Russell, in reply, Robert Peel stated, that he, for after enumerating the various at one, entertained a strong wish that tempts made by ministers, during it might be possible to come to a the last four years, to effect a set- settlement with respect to the tlement of the Irish Tithe question, Irish Corporations Bill, and the proceeded to say, that he did not bill relating to the Irish church; think it wise, whether with re- but he said he felt himself bound ference to the interests of legisla- to declare, what, indeed, he had tion, or to the respect due to the always declared upon this question, different branches of the legisla- that security for the Irish church ture, or to the interests of the must be an essential condition of parties concerned, that this fruit, any such settlement. less contest should be prolonged. It will be seen how far ministers It was, therefore, the wish of her were enabled to take advantage Majesty's government to place the of this concession on the part of question " on a ground altogether their opponent, and, at the same new," which, he hoped, might be time, to satisfy the important reconsidered “worthy to form the quisition which acoumpanied it.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]


Dinner given to Sir Robert Peel by the Conservative Members of the

House of Commons-His Speech, describing his policy as a leader of Opposition-Sir Thomas Acland's Motion for the Repeal of the Appropriation Clause-Lord John Russell opposes it--Ministerial Plan for settling the Tithe Question-Lord Sianley Lord Morpeth -Adjourned debate-Mr. Ward - Mr. Shaw - Mr. O'Connell Disorder occasioned by his speech-Sir Robert Peel-Sir Thomas Acland's motion negalived on a division-Sir Robert Peel declares his intentions with respect to the Irish Questions-Lord John Russell

House in Committee upon the Irish Municipal Bill Debate on the inode of taking the value of the qualification - Meeting of the Whig party at the Foreign Office Division on the franchise clause -- Divi. sion on the third reading-Debates in the House of Lords on the Bill -Lord Lyndhurst's amendment to the franchise clause - Bill read a third time as amended- Amendments altered in the House of Commons-Conference between the two Houses-Lords Amendments finally rejecled by the CommonsThe Bishop of Exeler's three resolutions on the subject of Irish Education-Duike of Wellington's opinion on the subject--Debate and Division-Sir Samuel Whalley, the Member for Marylebone, unseated for want of qualification-Four candidates -Lord Nugent retires— Rivalry beiween Colonel Thompson und Mr. Ewart-Lord Teignmouth returned.

O man, it is probable, ever powerful faculties, the temperate than Sir Robert Peel of his. They tactic and address of their leader owe, indeed, very much to the in the House of Commons, they constitutional truth of the position, could scarcely, it may be thought, (so to speak) into which their have recovered with such steady Whig adversaries, in their eager- rapidity, and with so few reverses, ness for office, impelled them from the prostration in which the much to the errors, the divisions, revolutionary struggle of 1831 and the growing disrepute of those 1832 had left them. adversaries, and something to Mr. In the session which immediO'Connell ; but unassisted by the ately ensued upon the Reform Bill,

« ForrigeFortsett »