Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

CHAPTER IV.

AFFAIRS OF IRELAND, Statement of Lord John Russell respecting Irish Distress, and the proposed mode of dealing with the distressed Unions and repayments of Advances-After some debate, the Ministerial Resolutions are agreed to-Bill founded thereon brought in and passed. ExTENSION OF THE IRISH PARLIAMENTARY FRANCHISE.-Origin and progress of the Measure-Bill brought in by the Secretary for IrelandIts general features-Debate on the Second Reading-Remarks of Mr. Napier, Mr. Hume, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. M. J. O'Connell, Mr Bright, and other Members-The Bill is read a Second Time nem. con,-It encounters a good deal of opposition in Committee-Various Amendments proposed, but, with slight exceptions, rejected—The proposition to reduce the Standard of Franchise according to rating from 8l. to 5l. is defeated by 142 to 90-On the Third Reading being moved, an animated opposition is manifested, but it is carried by 254 to 186-In the House of Lords the Earl of Desart proposes to raise the Standard of Franchise from 81. to 151.-Speeches of the Bishop of Down, Lords Stanley, Wharncliffe, Mountcashell, and Brougham, the Earls of Shrewsbury and Carlisle, Earl Fitzwilliam, and the Marquess of Lansdowne-The Amendment is carried against Ministers by 72 to 50-Lord Stanley then proposes and carries an Amendment affecting the Registration Clauses, by a majority of 16-On the Amendments coming down to the House of Commons for consideration, Lord John Russell moves the House to accede to a 121. Franchise as a compromise, and to reject the Registration Amendment-The House after a debate adopts that course-The Lords eventually consent to the alteration fixing the Franchise at 121. and to restore the Registration Clauses as before-The Bill passed. ABOLITION OF THE LORD LIEUTENANCY OF IRELAND.-Lord John Russell moves to introduce a Bill for that pur·pose-His Speech-Remarks of Mr. Grattan, Mr. Grogan, Mr. Fagan, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. B. Osborne, and other Members-Leave givenDebate on the Second Reading-Several Irish and other Members vehemently oppose the Bill-The Debate is adjourned, and important Speeches are delivered by Sir Robert Peel, Sir George Grey, Mr. Sheil, Mr. Disraeli, Sir R. Inglis, and other leading Members-The Second Reading is carried by a majority of 225, but the measure is ultimately thrown over to the following Session. CONFLICT AT CASTLE WELLAN.Lord Stanley brings forward a Motion in the House of Lords demanding an investigation into this affair, and arraigning the Irish Policy of the Government-His Speech -The Earl of Clarendon defends his own Administration at great length-Speeches of the Earl of Roden. Earl of Winchilsea, Lord Brougham, and other Peers-The Motion for Papers is acceded to without opposition.

IN

N the present chapter we propose to give a summary of the principal matters of discussion and legislation with respect to Ireland which engaged the attention of Parliament during this Session. They included the Ministerial proposition for advances for the relief of the distressed Unions, the Bill for the extension of the Elective Franchise in Counties and Boroughs, the proposed measure for the abolition of the Lord Lieutenancy, and the motion of Lord Stanley for an investigation of the circumstances attending the conflict at Dolly's Brae, of which an account has been given elsewhere. On the 16th of February the House of Commons, at the commencement of public business, having resolved itself into a committee upon the distressed Unions, and repayment of advances to Ireland,

Lord John Russell rose to state the general view taken by the Government of the existing state of Ireland, and their proposal with respect to the advances which had been made for its relief. After a few preliminary remarks upon the condition of Ireland during the last few years, and the important change now going on in its social state upon the disorganization arising from the anomalous position of the labouring classes subsisting upon potato-land instead of wages, which created a competition for land and provoked outrage and murder-this state of things, he observed, had nearly ceased. But, on the other hand, a great pressure had fallen on all who were connected with landed property in Ireland, and it was the duty of the Legislature to afford temporary aid in this transition from one state to another. In furnishing this aid the Legislature must steer between two

a

great dangers: one, of allowing the people to perish by famine; the other, of imposing burdens upon the land which it was unable to sustain. As evidence that there was a cheering hope that a beneficial change was taking place, Lord John referred to official reports from Ireland, which bore testimony to the facts of a growing desire to cultivate the land, of the adoption of better modes of culture, and of the satisfactory state of the fisheries on the coast. But the most remarkable change was perceived in the very great diminution of the pressure of the poorrates, the decrease of expenditure for the poor between 1848-9 and 1849-50 being no less than 180,000. The decrease in the amount of outdoor relief was more remarkable still. This diminution was attributable partly to the cheapness of food, and partly to increased vigilance in watching cases of imposture, and the determination of Boards of Guardians to restrict relief to the really destitute. It was, however, a prevailing opinion amongst official persons in Ireland that the loans of former years imposed a heavy burden upon the proprietors of land; that although they might bear the rates for the relief of the poor, they would be unable to sustain, in addition, the charge necessary for repayment of the loans. His Lordship then read an account of the advances made to Ireland, from the workhouse loan in 1839 (of which 1,130,000l. remained unpaid), the grand total of debt for unliquidated advances in the ten years being 4,483,0001. The Government proposed to consolidate all these various debts, and to extend the period of repayment to forty years, subject to the same conditions of interest or no

interest as at present. Some of the Unions in Ireland had incurred incumbrances, which prevented further efforts on their part, through their exertions in providing workhouse accommodation, and debts due to contractors for supplies of .food, which were not paid owing to the impoverished condition of these Unions. In no less than ten their effects had been seized under execution in consequence of these debts. It appeared to the Government that these difficulties were mainly owing to the famine of former years, and that if these Unions were relieved from these incumbrances they could begin afresh, and would be able to diminish their expenditure by providing means for applying the workhouse test. They proposed, therefore, to make an additional advance for the discharge of these debts, to be repayable by instalments within forty years, bearing interest. At the end of December last the amount which these distressed Unions had to pay was 270,000l.; and it was proposed to advance 300,000l., which would make the whole amount repayable by Ireland 4,783,000l. The noble Lord then proceded to state what had been done with respect to the rate in aid, out of which (the whole being calculated to produce 320,000.) 150,000l. of the 250,000l. advanced under sanction of the Legislature, on the security of the rate in aid, had been paid. Recapitulating his propositions, Lord John concluded by observing that he should not be justified in making them if he did not believe that there was now a prospect, if her burdens were light ened, of Ireland being able to recover from her late depression, VOL. XCII.

and to enter upon a new and better state of existence.

Mr. French expressed an unfavourable opinion of the liberality of the propositions, of which Mr. Monsell took a different view, considering that the Government had made an advance towards the improvement of the country.

The Earl of Arundel, Colonel Sibthorpe, Mr. P. Scrope, and other Members, having made a few remarks upon the Government propositions,

Mr. Bright called the attention of the Government to the fact he alleged, that in certain parts of Ireland the rates were exacted from occupiers whilst owners were suffered to be in arrear. He did not object to the advance of money, but he did object to rates being uncollected from owners of land, and he thought the poor-law authorities ought to have power to seize the lands of proprietors refusing to pay the rates.

Mr. Herbert repelled the attack made by Mr. Bright, upon anonymous authority, upon the landlords of Ireland, and called upon him to give up the names of the parties and his authority, otherwise he should stigmatize the statement as a calumny, and the most cowardly of all calumnies, an anonymous calumny.

After a few words in condemnatian of the measure,

Sir W. Somerville reminded Mr. Bright that there was a difference between arrears and uncollected rates, and stated that, although the whole amount of rate was upwards of 7,000,000l., there had been collected and actually lodged in the treasurer's hands (as he afterwards explained) 94 per cent. of that amount, and of the remain[H]

ing 6 per cent. only 2 per cent. would be irrecoverable.

Mr. Grogan and Sir W. Barron denounced the charge brought against the landlords of Ireland, the latter descanting upon the disastrous effects produced in that country by late legislation.

Mr. Bright explained that he had merely asserted that in certain Unions (which he named) the largest portion of the arrears of rate appeared from the books of the Unions to be due from owners of land; but he declined to give their names, for the reasons he assigned.

This subject, thus incidentally introduced, led to a good deal of discussion. Upon the main question,

Mr. Muntz refused to vote for this"grant," as he considered it, for the money would never be repaid. The industrious people of England asked how long the effects of famine were to last? It was his full impression that next year there would be another grant. The money ought to be raised in Ireland.

After a few further observations from Lord John Russell and from Mr. M. O'Connell, the resolutions were agreed to, and a Bill founded upon them was subsequently brought in and passed without any material opposition.

A measure for the extension of the elective franchise in the counties and boroughs of Ireland was the next subject connected with the sister country which occupied the consideration of Parliament. The great reduction in numbers which had taken place in these constituencies by reason of the impoverished state of the tenantry and other causes, had suggested the expe

diency of this measure, which having been for several Sessions entertained and constantly postponed, was at length this year carried into effect without any very strenuous opposition, although in its progress through the two Houses the original proposition of the Government underwent considerable modification. Sir Wm. Somerville, the Secretary for Ireland, in a brief and unpretending speech, moved for leave to bring in the Bill, stating that it did not differ in principle from that which had been introduced last year, and which did not encounter any material objection. The main feature of the Bill was the extension of the franchise to all occupiers of land to the amount of 8. per an num, adopting the rating as the ultimate standard of value.

Mr. Stafford regretted that instead of such a measure as this, of a political character, some means of alleviating the distress in the famine stricken districts of the West of Ireland had not been devised by the Government. The introduction of the Bill, however, was not opposed, and leave was at the same time given for a Bill to shorten the duration of elections in Ireland. Upon the second reading of the Franchise Bill, however, being proposed,

Mr. Napier objected to the measure, as an attempt to introduce a vital change in the elective franchise in Ireland, whilst that of England remained unaltered; and he urged various reasons against the change, as inexpedient, unjust, and liable to abuse.

Mr. Hume objected to the Bill upon a different ground: although ostensibly enlarging the franchise in Ireland, it placed it upon a nar

rower basis than that of the Cape of Good Hope, and Irishmen should be treated as liberally as Hottentots.

Mr. Reynolds likewise condemned the measure as niggardly; the Bill had greatly disappointed him, and would disappoint the people of Ireland. If the constituency had dwindled (which was the pretext for the measure), so had property, and it was a dangerous remedy so to extend the suffrage as to strengthen the democratic element.

Mr. M. J. O'Connell was prepared to accept gratefully that part of the Bill which related to the county franchise; but he thought it would grievously diminish the leasehold suffrage.

Captain Taylor admitted that some points of the Bill were good, but many were objectionable.

Colonel Rawdon accepted the Bill as a very great improvement of the present defective state of the representation of Ireland, without affording any ground for apprehension.

Sir J. Young spoke in favour of the Bill generally, and obviated some of the objections of Mr. Napier.

Mr. F. O'Connor was thankful for the measure, small as the instalment was, and though a measure of policy rather than of principle on the part of the Govern

ment.

Lord C. Hamilton suggested some objections to the Bill in matters of detail; and

Mr. Bright pointed out faults in it as respected both the county and the borough franchise. It was, however, he confessed, a great improvement; but a measure would soon be indispensable for altering the franchise and improving the

representation of England, and it would be better now to make such a change in Ireland as would harmonize with the new general sys

tem.

The further discussion, which embraced points of detail and questions connected with the machinery of the Bill, diversified by an unsuccessful attempt by Sir John Tyrell to read a statement made before the Poor Law Committee, but not received as evidence, was shared amongst Mr. Grogan, Mr. W. Fagan, Lord Castlereagh, Mr. Monsell, Mr. Sadleir, Mr. O'Flaherty, and Mr. Keogh.

Sir W. Somerville replied to the objections offered to the principle and policy of the measure, which, he was satisfied, the more it was considered, would appear more just and fair. Any proposal for amending its details would be attended to by the Government.

The Bill was read a second time. The Bill having been committed, several attempts were made to alter the clause which fixed the amount of qualification. Mr. G. A. Hamilton proposed an amendment, reserving the existing kinds of franchise, to which the Government assented. Another was moved by Mr. Henley, with the object of making the franchise dependent on the validity of the occupant's tenure, instead of making occupancy de facto confer the right to vote. This proposition after some debate was rejected. Mr. G. A. Hamilton then proposed to substitute a rating of 15. instead of 81. as the qualifi. cation. This amendment, which was opposed by Lord Castlereagh, was negatived by 213 to 144, and several other propositions for altering the first clause shared the same fate. Clause 2, giving a vote to each joint occupant where the total

« AnteriorContinuar »