Chapter II (3)

The commissioners accordingly in the first place directed their attention to agriculture, that being, they observe, the principal occupation of the Irish people. There was said to be much unreclaimed land which might be brought into cultivation, and throughout Ireland the land already in cultivation might be better worked, and thus the demand for labour be increased. The commissioners wish to ascertain the extent to which such statements are well founded, and whether the evil is attributable to want of capital or to want of skill; and “whether there are any circumstances which have deterred British capitalists from coming to Ireland, or have prevented the investment in agriculture of capital existing in Ireland, and to what extent those circumstances have proved injurious; and in case the evil arises from a deficiency of skill in the tenantry, to ascertain whether there are any means by which a superior knowledge of agriculture can be diffused.” By endeavouring to prevent the occurrence of destitution, they consider that they will more effectually fulfil their mission, than if they merely devised the means for its alleviation after it had arisen. They shall, they say, “feel deep pain should they be compelled to leave to any portion of the peasantry of Ireland, a continuation of distress on the one hand, or a mere offer of charity on the other—far more grateful (it is added) would be the office of recommending measures by which the industrious labourer might have the prospect of a constant field for his exertions, with a remuneration sufficient for his present demands, and admitting of a provision against those contingencies which attach to himself and to his family.” They declare it to be their anxious wish to do more than diminish the wretchedness of portions of the working classes, and that they are most solicitous to place the whole of those classes in the greatest state of comfort consistently with the good of the rest of society.

In answer to certain complaints which appear to have been made “within and out of parliament” of the time and money consumed in the present inquiry, the commissioners explain at some length the impossibility of proceeding more rapidly. They however admit that the time will exceed that occupied by several other inquiries, and particularly by that on the English Poor-law, to which they specially refer—“because the highest estimate has been formed of the manner in which it was conducted, both as regards diligence and accuracy, and because they feel that in measuring their labours, and the time they are likely to occupy by such a standard, they shall have taken the surest mode of showing that they have used the utmost diligence.”

The foregoing summary exhibits the general purport of the commissioners’ first Report, which it will be observed aims rather at explaining what ought to be and what is further intended to be done, than pointing out remedies or deducing practical conclusions from the “large body of evidence” which had been taken. It is impossible not to concur in the views and reasonings expressed by the commissioners with regard to the spirit in which the inquiry should be conducted, and also as to the objects sought to be attained: but nothing definite is proposed, nor any practical suggestion offered; and as the commissioners admit that they had been occupied a year and ten months in the inquiry, we can hardly wonder that some impatience should be manifested “both in and out of parliament” on the occasion. The evidence presented with the Report was no doubt important, and calculated to afford much valuable information on the several points to which it specifically referred;[59] but the mere collecting and grouping of such evidence, unaccompanied by any condensed summary of its import, or practical deduction from its details, could not be expected to be very satisfactory or very useful, either to the legislature or to the public generally.

-----

[59]

See the seven heads of inquiry set out, ante page 119.

-----

[Sidenote: 1836.
The commissioners’ second report.]

In the early part of the following year the commissioners made a second Report “on that part of the inquiry which respects the various institutions at present established by law for the relief of the poor.” These are said to be—medical institutions, lunatic asylums, houses of industry, and foundling hospitals; and although much of the information given respecting them has been anticipated by the Report of the select committee of 1830,[60] it will be convenient to insert in this place a short abstract of the Report on these institutions, the most numerous of which are the medical charities.

-----

[60]

Ante, pp. 95 to 108.

-----

[Sidenote: Infirmaries.]

To establish an infirmary, 500_l._ must be first raised by voluntary contributions, to which a grant not exceeding 1,500_l._ may be made by government, provided the distance be not less than ten miles from any existing infirmary. The funds for its support are provided by grand-jury presentments not exceeding 600_l._ in any one year, and a grant of 100_l._ by government towards the salary of the surgeon. The number of county infirmaries is stated to be 31, in addition to which there are 5 city and town infirmaries. Each is governed by a corporation, consisting of certain official persons, together with the donors of twenty guineas and upwards, and annual subscribers of three guineas. The corporation of governors appoint the medical officers, regulate the admission of patients, enact by-laws, and have the entire control of the institution.

[Sidenote: Dispensaries.]

Dispensaries were established for affording medical relief to those poor persons who are too distant to receive aid from an infirmary. They are governed by the same corporation, with the addition of subscribers of not less than one guinea annually, and are supported by such subscriptions, together with grand-jury presentments not exceeding a like amount. The number of separate dispensaries is 452, and there are 42 more united with fever hospitals.

[Sidenote: Fever hospitals.]

The great prevalence of fever in Ireland rendered hospitals for the special treatment of fever cases, absolutely essential to the general security; and for providing such hospitals, of which there are 28, grand juries may present sums equal to double the amount of voluntary subscriptions, and government may also make advances for the purpose, to be subsequently repaid by instalments. By the _58th Geo. 3rd, cap. 47_,[61] provision is made for the appointment of a board of health, with extensive powers, whenever fever occurs in a town or district; but it appears that this provision has been rarely acted upon.

-----

[61]

Ante, p. 77.

-----

The total expense of supporting these infirmaries, dispensaries and fever hospitals, in the year 1833 as stated in tables appended to the Report, was 109,054_l._—of which amount grand-jury presentments furnished 55,065_l._—subscriptions 37,562_l._—parliamentary grants 6,661_l._, and petty-sessions fees and miscellaneous funds 9,766_l._ The entire number of cases relieved in the same year, was 30,634 intern, and 1,243,314 extern.

[Sidenote: Lunatic asylums.]

The lord-lieutenant is empowered to direct as many lunatic asylums to be provided as he may think fit, and grand juries are required to present such sums as may be necessary for defraying the expense of erecting and supporting them. Eleven were completed, or in progress towards completion; and the total amount of expenditure on them in 1833 was 26,247_l._

With regard to these institutions the commissioners remark—“The medical relief at present afforded throughout Ireland is very unequally distributed. In the county of Dublin, containing exclusive of the city about 176,000 inhabitants, and about 375 square miles, there are 24 dispensaries, or one to every 7,333 inhabitants. In the county of Meath, containing about 176,800 inhabitants, and about 886 square miles, there are 19 dispensaries, or one for every 9,306 inhabitants. In the county of Mayo, containing 366,328 inhabitants, and about 2,100 square miles, there is only one dispensary supported at the public expense.” Such inequalities, it is observed, are the necessary consequence of a law which renders the establishment of a dispensary contingent upon voluntary contributions. In districts abounding in rich resident proprietors, a medical charity is least wanted, but subscriptions are there most easily obtained; whilst in districts where there are few or possibly no resident proprietors, the aid is most wanted, but there are no subscribers, and consequently there is no medical charity.

[Sidenote: Houses of industry.]

Houses of industry (or workhouses) are established and regulated under the provisions of the _11th and 12th Geo. 3rd, cap. 30_,[62] the _46th Geo. 3rd, cap. 95_,[62] and the _58th Geo. 3rd, cap. 47_.[62] There are nine of these institutions in Ireland, and of some of them a brief account is given; but it is said to be difficult to judge of the economy with which they are conducted. The total income of the houses of industry in the year 1833 derived from grand-jury presentments, subscriptions, and miscellaneous sources, and including a parliamentary grant of 20,000_l._ to the Dublin institution, was 32,967_l._, and the number of inmates on the books was 2,732.

-----

[62]

Ante, pp. 51, 74, and 77.

-----

[Sidenote: Foundling hospitals.]

There were two large foundling hospitals, one in Dublin, the other in Cork, and a small one in Galway. With the exception of one child under peculiar circumstances, there have been no admissions for some time into the Dublin house, and the establishment is only used for the occasional accommodation of such children as are still on the books; and as these are disposed of, will cease altogether. The Cork hospital is supported principally by a tax on coals: it is still open, and has 1,329 on the books. At Galway the number of children is only eight. These institutions, the commissioners remark, are now acknowledged to be in their nature utterly indefensible. The expense of the Cork and Galway establishments in 1833, derived from miscellaneous sources, was 6,628_l._ The parliamentary grant to the Dublin foundling hospital in 1828 was 34,000_l._ Supposing it to have been 30,000_l._ in 1833, it would make the entire charge of these institutions, in the latter year, amount to 36,628_l._

The total charge of the foregoing institutions as stated in the tables appended to the Report, is as follows:—

Infirmaries }
Dispensaries } £109,054
Fever hospitals }
Lunatic asylums 26,247
Houses of industry 32,967
Foundling hospitals 36,628
—-—-—
£204,896

Of this sum upwards of 50,000_l._ appears to have been furnished by parliamentary grants, the remainder being derived from grand-jury presentments, voluntary contributions, and other local sources.

The commissioners think that some provision ought to be made for poor persons discharged from hospitals in a state of convalescence, and also for persons suffering from chronic and incurable disease, neither being proper objects of ordinary hospital treatment. They are likewise of opinion that a public provision should be made for the deaf dumb and blind poor, such persons being, they consider, peculiarly deserving of assistance.

The impatience of the public was not likely to be satisfied by the appearance of this second Report, which contained no recommendations, and added nothing to what was previously known of the condition of the Irish poor. For a series of years inquiry after inquiry had been instituted by commissions and committees into that condition, with a view to devise means for its amelioration; but without leading to any satisfactory result. And now, after two years and a half had been spent in prosecuting like inquiries, and this moreover by men specially selected for the task, and standing deservedly high in public estimation for talent and acquirements, people began to fear that the result would be again the same, and that time labour and money would have been expended in vain. It was known, or at least generally surmised, that differences of opinion existed among the commissioners, as to the nature of the recommendations which should be made by them conjointly; some being in favour of the imposition of a general rate for the relief of the poor, and others advocating a system of voluntary contributions for that purpose. The latter pointed to Scotland as an example to be followed, and the former to England. Under these circumstances it is not surprising that the question should occupy a good deal of public attention, and that those who possessed, or were supposed to possess information on the subject, should be induced or invited to express their opinions with regard to it. Pamphlets were written, and speeches made, contrasting the advantages and disadvantages inherent in the compulsory and the voluntary systems of relief, as well generally, as with reference to the case of Ireland; and the entire subject became a matter of very general discussion, of which the proceedings under the amended Poor Law in England naturally formed a part, and thus gave additional interest to the question.

[Sidenote: ‘Suggestions’ by the author, January 21, 1836.]

The author being at that time a member of the English Poor Law Commission, the subject was necessarily much pressed upon his notice; and having reason to believe that a statement of his views in reference to it would be acceptable, he prepared for the consideration of government, a series of suggestions founded upon a general view of social requirements, and upon his experience of the working of the English Poor Law. He did not pretend to any personal knowledge of the state of Ireland, but considered that the information furnished by the evidence appended to the commissioners’ first Report, showed that destitution and wretchedness prevailed to such an extent among the poorer classes in that country, that legislative interference could no longer be delayed without compromising the general security; and contrasting the state of the English poor with what existed in Ireland, he attempted to point out a remedy, or at least a palliative for the evils which prevailed there. This he was induced to do without waiting for the final report of the inquiry commissioners, as the mode of comparison pursued by him was different from the course which they would adopt, and likewise because the commissioners indicated their intention of taking the general circumstances of the country into consideration, whilst he proposed to limit his suggestions to one object, with a view to a single and specific remedy.

These ‘Suggestions’ were framed in considerable detail, and recommended the application of the amended system of English Poor Law to Ireland, with certain modifications, calculated to guard against the evils which had sprung from the old law in England, and at the same time be sufficient for the relief of a large portion of the destitute classes who stood most in need of it. The ‘Suggestions’ were presented to Lord John Russell in January, about the same time as the commissioners’ second Report; and on perusing them now, after so long an interval, and with all the experience since acquired, the author finds little to alter in what he then ventured to suggest.

[Sidenote: 1836.
The commissioners’ third report.]

The long-expected final Report was at length received, embodying all the recommendations for ameliorating the condition of the Irish poor, which after nearly three years of inquiry and deliberation, the commissioners felt themselves warranted in submitting to government. It commenced by stating, that the evidence annexed to the former Reports proves the existence of deep distress in all parts of Ireland. There is not, it is said, the division of labour which exists in Great Britain. The labouring class look to agriculture alone for support, whence the supply of agricultural labour greatly exceeds the demand for it; and small earnings, and widespread misery, are the consequence. Tables are given of the population of Great Britain and Ireland respectively, of the classes and occupations in each, the quantity of cultivated and uncultivated land, the proportions of agricultural produce, and the wages of agricultural labourers—from which, the commissioners say it appears—“that in Great Britain the agricultural families constitute little more than a fourth, while in Ireland they constitute about two-thirds of the whole population; that there were in Great Britain in 1831,—1,055,982 agricultural labourers, in Ireland 1,131,715,—although the cultivated land of Great Britain amounts to about 34,250,000 acres, and that of Ireland only to about 14,600,000.” So that there are in Ireland about five agricultural labourers for every two that there are for the same quantity of land in Great Britain. It further appears that the agricultural produce of Great Britain is more than four times that of Ireland; that agricultural wages vary from 6_d._ to 1_s._ a day; that the average of the country is about 8½_d._; and that the earnings of the labourers come on an average of the whole class, to from 2_s._ to 2_s._ 6_d._ a week, or thereabouts, for the year round.

Thus circumstanced, the commissioners observe, “it is impossible for the able-bodied, in general, to provide against sickness or the temporary absence of employment, or against old age, or the destitution of their widows and children in the contingent event of their own premature decease.” A great portion of them are, it is said, insufficiently provided with the commonest necessaries of life. “Their habitations are wretched hovels, several of a family sleep together upon straw, or upon the bare ground, sometimes with a blanket, sometimes even without so much to cover them; their food commonly consists of dry potatoes, and with these they are at times so scantily supplied, as to be obliged to stint themselves to one spare meal in the day. There are even instances of persons being driven by hunger to seek sustenance in wild herbs. They sometimes get a herring or a little milk, but they never get meat except at Christmas, Easter, and Shrovetide.[63] Some go in search of employment to Great Britain during the harvest, others wander through Ireland with the same view. The wives and children of many are occasionally obliged to beg, but they do so reluctantly and with shame, and in general go to a distance from home that they may not be known. Mendicity too is the sole resource of the aged and impotent of the poorer classes in general, when children or relatives are unable to support them. To it therefore crowds are driven for the means of existence, and the knowledge that such is the fact leads to an indiscriminate giving of alms, which encourages idleness, imposture and general crime.”

-----

[63]

To partake of meat at these seasons is enjoined upon all the members
of the Roman catholic church.

-----

Such is described as being the condition of the great body of the labouring classes in Ireland, and “with these facts before us (the commissioners say) we cannot hesitate to state, that we consider remedial measures requisite to ameliorate the condition of the Irish poor—What those measures should be is a question complicated, and involving considerations of the deepest importance to the whole body of the people, both in Ireland and Great Britain. Society is so constructed, its various parts are so connected, the interests of all who compose it are so interwoven, the rich are so dependent on the labour of the poor, and the poor upon the wealth of the rich, that any attempt to legislate partially, or with a view to the good of a portion only, without a due regard to the whole of the community, must prove in the end fallacious, fatal to its object, and injurious in general to a ruinous degree.”

None will deny the truth of these propositions, which doubtless ought to be kept in view in legislating for the relief of the poor, or for any other matter of general interest or importance. Their enunciation does not however materially assist in discovering a remedy for the fearful amount of destitution and suffering shown to prevail in Ireland, the descriptions of which as given in the Report, are here brought together in one point of view, in order that the reader may have the extent of the evil laid open before him.

It has, the commissioners say, “been suggested to us to recommend a Poor Law for Ireland similar to that of England, but we are of opinion that the provision to be made for the poor in Ireland must vary essentially from that made in England.” The English law, it is said, requires that work and support should be found for all able-bodied persons who may be out of employment, and such work and support will now be provided for them only in a workhouse; so that if workhouses were to be established in Ireland as a means of relief, they must be sufficiently capacious for setting vast numbers of unemployed persons to work within them. The commissioners state that they “cannot estimate the number of persons in Ireland out of work and in distress during thirty weeks of the year, at less than 585,000, nor the number of persons dependent upon them at less than 1,800,000, making in the whole 2,385,000—This therefore (it is added) is about the number for which it would be necessary to provide accommodation in workhouses, if all who require relief were there to be relieved;” and they consider it impossible to provide for such a multitude, or even to attempt it with safety. The expense of erecting and fitting up the necessary buildings would, they say, “come to about 4,000,000_l._, and allowing for the maintenance of each person 2½_d._ only a day (that being the expense at the mendicity establishment of Dublin) the cost of supporting the whole 2,385,000 for thirty weeks would be something more than 5,000,000_l._ a year; whereas the gross rental of Ireland (exclusive of towns) is estimated at less than 10,000,000_l._ a year, the net income of the landlords at less than 6,000,000_l._, and the public revenue is only about 4,000,000_l._”

The commissioners do not however think that such an expense would actually be incurred. On the contrary they are convinced that the able-bodied and their families would endure any misery rather than make a workhouse their domicile; and they add—“now if we thought that employment could be had provided due efforts were made to procure it, the general repugnance to a workhouse would be a reason for recommending that mode of relief, for assistance could be afforded through it to the few that might from time to time fall into distress, and yet no temptation be afforded to idleness and improvidence; but we see that the labouring class are eager for work, that work there is not for them, and that they are therefore, and not from any fault of their own, in permanent want.” This, it is said, is just the state to which, on the authority of a passage quoted from the English Poor Law Commissioners,[64] the workhouse system is held not to be applicable; and if it were established in Ireland, would, the commissioners are persuaded, “be regarded by the bulk of the population as a stratagem for debarring them of that right to employment and support with which the law professed to invest them.” It is unnecessary, the commissioners add, to point out the feelings which must thus be created, or the consequences to which they might lead; and they conclude this section of their Report by saying—“We cannot therefore recommend the present workhouse system of England as at all suited to Ireland.”

-----

[64]

The entire of the paragraph quoted would not bear out the
interpretation here put upon it.

-----

Having thus rejected the workhouse, the commissioners next consider how far the objections applicable to a provision for enforcing in-door work, would be applicable to one for enforcing out-door employment; and they come to the conclusion, that having regard to the number of persons for whom work must be found, and the experience of the consequences to which out-door compulsory employment led in England, any attempt to introduce it into Ireland would be attended with most pernicious results. “If (it is said) the farmers were compelled to take more men than they chose or thought they wanted, they would of course reduce the wages of all to a minimum. If, on the other hand, magistrates or other local authorities were empowered to frame a scale of wages or allowances, so as to secure to each labourer a certain sum by the week, we do not think they could, with safety to their persons and property, fix a less sum than would be equal to the highest rate of wages pre-existing in the district for which they were required to act; nor would anything less enable the labourer to support himself and his family upon such food, with such clothing, and in such a dwelling, as any person undertaking to provide permanently for human beings in a civilized country could say they ought to be satisfied with. It would therefore (the commissioners think) be necessary to fix different scales of wages or allowances, which would average for the whole of Ireland about 4_s._ 6_d._ a week. This would be to double the present earnings of the body of labourers, and these appear to amount to about 6,800,000_l._ a year. The additional charge would therefore come to about that sum.”

The tenantry, the commissioners say, cannot be expected to bear this burden. They have not capital for it, and the charge must therefore fall upon the landlords. Rents would diminish, commerce would decay, and the demand for agricultural produce and all commodities save potatoes and coarse clothing would contract, while the number of persons out of employment and in need of support would increase, and general ruin ensue. The well-known case of “Cholesbury” is then cited, and held up as an example of what would follow in Ireland, “at the end of a year from the commencement of any system for charging the land indefinitely with the support of the whole labouring part of the community.”

“With such feelings,” the commissioners observe, “and considering the redundancy of labour which now exists in Ireland, how earnings are kept down by it, what misery is thus produced, and what insecurity of liberty property and life ensues, we are satisfied that enactments calculated to promote the improvement of the country, and so to extend the demand for free and profitable labour, should make essential parts of any law for ameliorating the condition of the poor. And for the same reasons, while we feel that relief should be provided for the impotent, we consider it due to the whole community, and to the labouring class in particular, that such of the able-bodied as may still be unable to find free and profitable employment in Ireland, should be secured support only through emigration, or as preliminary to it—those who desire to emigrate should be furnished with the means of doing so in safety, and with intermediate support when they stand in need of it at emigrant depôts. It is thus, and thus only, that the market of labour in Ireland can be relieved from the weight that is now upon it, or the labourer be raised from his present prostrate state.” Long quotations are then given from the several Reports of the assistant-commissioners, showing that, “the feelings of the suffering labourers in Ireland are also decidedly in favour of emigration.” They do not desire workhouses, it is said, but they do desire a free passage to a colony where they may have the means of living by their own industry.

The commissioners conclude this section of their Report by saying, that they do not look to emigration as an object to be permanently pursued upon an extensive scale, nor as the chief means of relief for the evils of Ireland, but “as an auxiliary essential to a commencing course of amelioration.” They then “proceed to submit a series of provisions for the improvement of Ireland, and the relief of the poor therein, including in the latter means of emigration.”

The recommendations extend from section 5 to 15 inclusive, and are all more or less connected with agriculture, which is said to be the only pursuit for which the body of the people of Ireland are qualified by habit, and that it is chiefly through it that any general improvement in their condition can be effected. It is recommended—

1st. That a board constituted on the principle of the Bedford Level
Corporation should be established, for carrying into effect a
system of national improvement in Ireland, having a president and
vice-president with suitable salaries, and who together with two
of the judges to be appointed for the purpose, are to form a court
of review and record, with power to hear and determine all matters
connected with such improvements.

2nd. The “Board of Improvement” is to be authorized to appoint
commissioners, who are to be armed with the usual powers given to
commissioners under Enclosure Acts, and are from time to time to
make surveys and valuations, and partitions of waste lands, the
Board of Works making such main drains and roads as may be
required, and taking, in consideration thereof, an allotment of a
certain part of each waste in trust for the public, in proportion
to the expense incurred in making the survey, partition, drainage,
and roads.

3rd. With regard to land under cultivation, it is recommended that
both draining and fencing should be enforced by law, and that the
“Board of Improvement” should be empowered to appoint local
commissioners for the purpose, for any district they may think
proper. If the outlay to be incurred should exceed what the
landlords or occupiers may be able to pay, 5 per cent. on the
amount may be annually assessed and made payable to the Board of
Works, which in consideration thereof is to advance the requisite
sum—the funds placed at its disposal being proportionally
increased.

4th. The “Board of Improvement” to be enabled to cause cabins which
may be nuisances to be taken down, and to require the landlords to
contribute towards the expense of removing the occupants and
providing for them.

5th. The “Board of Improvement” to establish an agricultural model
school, with four or five acres of land attached, in so many
parishes or districts as may be thought necessary, the master to
undergo due examination, and to give instruction in letters and in
agriculture.

6th. Tenants for life, with the approval of the “Board of
Improvement,” to be empowered to grant leases for thirty-one
years, and to charge the property with the amount expended in
effecting permanent improvements.

7th. A fiscal board to be established in every county, with the powers
to make presentments for public works now vested in grand juries,
and to be required to present such sums as may be appointed by the
Improvement Board.

8th. The Board of Works to be authorized to undertake any public works
“such as roads, bridges, deepening rivers, or removing
obstructions in them, and so forth,” that within certain
limitations may be approved by the “Board of Improvement.”

A dissertation is then introduced on the effect of Irish immigrants on the labour-market of England, and ending with this quotation from Burke—“England and Ireland may flourish together. The world is large enough for us both. Let it be our care not to make ourselves too little for it.” The commissioners say it was their intention “to inquire relative to trade and manufactures, to the fisheries, and to mining; but that it has been found impossible to go into those matters through want of time.”

The foregoing summary of the commissioners’ recommendations can hardly be said to come within the province of poor-law legislation, but it has been thought right to insert them here, in order that the reader may see what were the commissioners’ views with regard to the state of Ireland, and especially with regard to its wants, which apparently consist in a want of capital, and a want of skill. The first is proposed to be furnished by government through the Board of Works, the last it is proposed to supply by constituting a “Board of Improvement.”

The 16th section of the Report commences with the declaration “_We now come to measures of direct relief for the poor_.” After adverting to the Poor Laws of England and Scotland, the one carried into universal effect by local assessments, and the other “in general supported by voluntary contributions administered by officers known to the law and responsible to it”—the commissioners say “they have shown by their second Report that the institutions existing in Ireland for the relief of the poor are houses of industry, infirmaries, fever hospitals, lunatic asylums, and dispensaries; that the establishment of these, except as to lunatic asylums, is not compulsory, but dependent upon private subscriptions, or the will of grand juries; that there are but nine houses of industry in the whole country; that while the provision made for the sick poor in some places is extensive, it is in other places utterly inadequate; and that there is no general provision made for the aged, the impotent, or the destitute.” Much, it is added, is certainly given in Ireland in private charity, “but it is not given upon any organised system of relief, and the abundant alms which are bestowed, in particular by the poorer classes, unfortunately tend to encourage mendicancy with its attendant evils.”

The commissioners then declare that upon the best consideration they have been able to give to the whole subject, they think that a legal provision should be made, and rates levied, “for the relief and support of incurable as well as curable lunatics, of idiots, epileptic persons, cripples, deaf and dumb and blind poor, and all who labour under permanent bodily infirmities—such relief and support to be afforded within the walls of public institutions; also for the relief of the sick poor in hospitals, infirmaries, and convalescent establishments, or by extern attendance and a supply of food as well as medicine where the persons to be relieved are not in a state to be removed from home; also for the purpose of emigration, for the support of penitentiaries to which vagrants may be sent, and for the maintenance of deserted children; also towards the relief of aged and infirm persons, of orphans, of helpless widows with young children, of the families of sick persons, and of casual destitution.”

For effecting these several purposes, it is recommended that powers should be vested in Poor Law Commissioners as in England, “for carrying into execution all such provisions as shall be made by law for the relief of the poor in Ireland, and that they shall be authorized to appoint assistant-commissioners to act under their directions.” It is proposed that the commissioners should divide the country into relief districts, and cause the lands of each to be surveyed and valued, with the names of all proprietors of houses or lands and of all lessees and occupiers thereof, and the annual value of such houses and lands respectively, the same to be lodged at such place within the district as the commissioners shall appoint, and public notice thereof to be given.

It is also recommended that a board of guardians should be elected for each district by the ratepayers, consisting of proprietors, lessees, and occupiers, a certain number of the board to go out each year and others to be elected in their stead. The board of guardians to have the direction of all the institutions for the relief of the poor within the district which are supported by local rates, and to cause them to be duly upheld and maintained. If any district refuse or neglect to appoint guardians, or when appointed if the guardians refuse or neglect to act, the Poor Law Commissioners to be empowered to appoint assistant-commissioners for such district with suitable salaries, who are to exercise all the powers of the board of guardians. The salaries to be paid by a rate on the district.

It is likewise proposed that there should be so many asylums in Ireland for the relief and support of lunatics and idiots, and for the support and instruction of the deaf and dumb and blind poor, so many depôts for receiving persons willing to emigrate, and so many penitentiaries for vagrants, as the Poor Law Commissioners shall appoint—that these several establishments should be national, and that for maintaining them &c. the commissioners should be empowered to rate the whole of Ireland, and to require the boards of guardians to raise a proportional share thereof in each district, according to the annual value of its property. It is moreover recommended that there should be in each district an institution for the support and relief of cripples, and persons afflicted with epilepsy or other permanent disease; also an infirmary, hospital and convalescent establishment, and such number of dispensaries as may be necessary, the whole to be provided for by local assessment. A loan fund administered according to regulations approved by the commissioners, is likewise recommended to be established in every district.

With regard to emigration, as the whole United Kingdom will, it is said, “be benefited in a very great degree, and particularly in point of revenue, by the improvement which extensive emigration coming in aid of a general course of amelioration cannot fail to produce in Ireland, one-half of the expense should, the commissioners submit, be borne by the general funds of the empire.” And considering the particular benefit which Ireland will derive from it, and especially those landlords whose estates may thus be relieved from a starving population, it is proposed that in rural districts the other half should be defrayed partly by the national rate, and partly by the owners of the lands from which the emigrants remove, or from which they may have been ejected within the preceding twelve months. It is further proposed that all the necessary arrangements for carrying on emigration, should be made between the Poor Law Commissioners and the Colonial Office; “and that all poor persons whose circumstances require it, shall be furnished with a free passage and with the means of settling themselves in an approved British colony;” and likewise—“that the means of emigration shall be provided for the destitute of every class and description who are fit subjects for emigration; that depôts shall be established, where all who desire to emigrate may be received; that those who are fit for emigration be there selected for the purpose, and that those who are not shall be provided for under the directions of the Poor Law Commissioners;” who will moreover be authorized to borrow moneys from the Exchequer Bill Loan Commissioners for the purposes of emigration, or for defraying the cost of any buildings they may think necessary, and also “to secure the repayment thereof by a charge upon the national rate.”

The commissioners likewise propose that the laws with respect to vagrancy should be altered. “At present,” they say, “persons convicted of vagrancy may be transported for seven years—our recommendation is that penitentiaries shall be established to which vagrants when taken up shall be sent; that they be charged with the vagrancy before the next quarter sessions, and if convicted shall be removed as free labourers to such colony, not penal, as shall be appointed for them by the Colonial Department.” But the wages earned in the colony are to be attached until the expense of their passage be defrayed; and it is added by way of summary, that by such provisions as are now suggested, “all poor persons who cannot find means of support at home, and who are willing to live by their labour abroad, will be furnished with the means of doing so, and with intermediate support, if fit to emigrate; and if not, will be otherwise provided for, while the idle who would rather beg than labour, will be taken up, and the evil of vagrancy suppressed.”

The _58th George 3rd, cap. 47_, and an Act of the following year (_cap. 41_)[65] amending the same, are then referred to, and the commissioners recommend that the powers given by these Acts to vestries should be transferred to the boards of guardians of each district, and that officers of health should be elected by them for every parish within their jurisdiction—such officers of health to grant tickets of admission to the next emigration depôt to any poor inhabitants of their parish who may, on behalf of themselves or their families, demand the same; and also, where necessary, to procure means for passing such persons to the depôt. The officers of health are moreover to pass all persons taken up under the provisions of the above Acts to a penitentiary, and also to cause all foundlings to be sent to nurse, “and when of a suitable age to cause them to be removed to an emigration depôt, from whence they may be sent to an institution in some British colony, which shall be appointed for receiving such children, and training and apprenticing them to useful trades or occupations.” The officers of health are also to provide in like manner for all orphan children,[66] and the funds for the several purposes are to be raised by local assessment in the district. Provision is likewise to be made at each depôt for receiving the persons sent thither by the officers of health, such persons to be there supported and set to work until the period for emigration arrives; and any persons who after entering an emigration depôt shall leave it, “without discharging such expenses as may have been incurred with respect to them, or who shall refuse to emigrate, shall be subjected to the provisions recommended with respect to vagrants.”

-----

[65]

Ante, pp. 77 and 78.

[66]

The duties here proposed to be performed by the officers of health,
are similar to what are required from the relieving officer under the
amended Poor Law in England.

-----

With respect to the relief of the aged and infirm, of orphans, helpless widows with young children, and destitute persons in general, it is stated that there is a difference of opinion—some of the commissioners “think the necessary funds should be provided in part by the public through a national rate, and in part by private associations, which, aided by the public, should be authorized to establish mendicity-houses and almshouses, and to administer relief to the indigent at their own dwellings, subject however to the superintendence and control of the Poor Law Commissioners; while others think the whole of the funds should be provided by the public, one portion by a national rate and another by a local rate, and should be administered as in England by the board of guardians of each district.” The majority are however of opinion, “that the plan of voluntary associations, aided by the public, should be tried in the first instance.” Recommendations are then made as to the mode of raising and apportioning the rate. The commissioners have, they say, “anxiously considered the practicability of making the rate payable out of property of every description; but the difficulty of reaching personal property in general by direct taxation, except through very inquisitorial proceedings, has obliged them to determine on recommending that the land should be the fund charged in the first instance with it.”

There being, the commissioners say, reason to believe that the landed property of Ireland is so deeply encumbered, that a rate might absorb the whole income of some of the nominal proprietors, the Masters of the Court of Chancery were consulted on the subject, and from the facts they stated, “it appears that the average rent of land is under 1_l._ 12_s._ 6_d._ the Irish acre, equal to about 14_s._ 2_d._ the English; that the gross landed rental of Ireland amounts to less than 10,000,000_l._; that the expenses and losses cannot be taken at less than ten per cent., nor the annuities and the interest of charges payable out of the land at less than 3,000,000_l._ a year; so that the total net income is less than 6,000,000_l._” The commissioners think therefore, that the encumbrancers should bear a share of the burden, and recommend “That persons paying any annual charge in respect of any beneficial interest in land, shall be authorised to deduct the same sum in the pound thereout, that he pays to the poor-rate.” They also recommend “that the original rate shall never be raised by more than one-fifth, unless for the purpose of emigration.”

As regards voluntary associations, it is proposed that the Poor Law Commissioners shall frame rules for their government, and that each association shall transmit to the commissioners an estimate of its probable expenditure and its funds for the year ensuing, and that they shall award such grant to it as they think proper. The commissioners to be also authorised “to advance to any voluntary association, out of the national rate, the whole sum which may be necessary for the building and outfit of a mendicity or alms house for any parish;” and if such mendicity or alms house be not afterwards duly maintained, the sum so advanced is to be repaid by the parish to the credit of the national rate.

Certain recommendations are then made with the view of promoting sobriety, and lessening “the inordinate use of ardent spirits”—also with reference to the Board of Charitable Bequests, whose functions may, it is suggested, be advantageously transferred to the Poor Law Commissioners—likewise the details of a plan for purchasing the tithe composition, and vesting it in the Poor Law Commissioners as a fund for the relief of the poor, by doing which, it is said, “there would be a surplus of 313,000_l._ a year applicable to the purposes of the national rate.” In conclusion, the commissioners express their belief, that upon the whole there is a rising spirit of improvement in Ireland, which however requires to be stimulated by sound legislation, “or it cannot speedily relieve the country from the lingering effects of the evil system of former times.” At present, it is observed, with a population nearly equal to half that of Great Britain, Ireland yields only about a twelfth of the revenue to the state that Great Britain does, nor can it yield more until it has more to yield. Increased means must precede increased contribution, and to supply Ireland with these is, the commissioners say, the great object of their recommendations.

Such was the commissioners’ final Report on the condition of the Irish poor and the means for its amelioration, the substance and general import of which I have endeavoured to give with the fulness and completeness the importance of the subject demanded. The Report was not however signed by all the commissioners. Three of their body withheld their signature, and recorded their “reasons for dissenting from the principle of raising funds for the relief of the poor by the voluntary system, as recommended in the Report.”[67] The ‘Reasons’ are set forth in thirteen propositions, the most material of which are the following.

-----

[67]

These were Dr. Vignoles, J. W. S. Naper Esq., and Lord Killeen.

-----

“Because—in the lamentably distressed state of the Irish poor, any system of relief to be effectual must be comprehensive, uniform, and prompt; whilst the very constitution of voluntary associations proclaims that their operations must be tardy; and circumstanced as Ireland is in the distribution of her population, must be partial and precarious.

“Because—it is notorious that many contributions, in name voluntary, are frequently obligations of the severest character. The pressure of such a tax must be unequal. The class least removed from want, would furnish as it now does, the largest number of contributors, and to the greatest amount; whilst the wealthier classes, resident as well as absentee, would in a great measure be exempted from the liability of contributing in proportion to their wealth, or even from contributing at all.

“Because—viewing the peculiar state of society in Ireland, the extent to which religious zeal prevails, as well as the influence it must exercise, we consider the difficulties attendant on the raising of a voluntary fund in the first instance, and of an impartial distribution of relief in the next, all but insurmountable.

“Because—the mendicity institutions of Dublin, Limerick, Newry, Birr, Sligo, Waterford and Londonderry, as well as the voluntary poor’s fund established in some of the rural districts, afford strong proofs of the inefficiency of the support afforded to these institutions; for although they have not totally failed, yet their subscriptions are falling off, and they are by no means adequate to the relief of the objects they contemplate.

“Because—although we admit that there are districts in Ireland in which voluntary societies might be established, and which would afford means of constructing a local administration for the management of the poor’s fund—still we feel satisfied that in the present state of society, and under the existing distribution of the population, such a system cannot be either comprehensive or uniform. We are therefore of opinion that the fund should be obtained by an assessment, wholly and not partially compulsory; and that it will be most efficiently managed by elective boards of guardians as in England, directed by responsible public officers whose proceedings shall be subjected to the strictest public scrutiny.”

These are no doubt weighty reasons in favour of certain means being provided to meet a certainly recurring contingency. But reasons were also adduced on the opposite side of the question, the other eight commissioners having in a series of sixteen propositions likewise recorded their “reasons for recommending voluntary associations for the relief of the poor;”[68] of which ‘Reasons’ the following are the chief:—

“Because—there are and must necessarily be continually arising, many cases of real destitution which cannot be relieved by a compulsory assessment, without bringing claims upon it to an unlimited extent. The attempt was made in England to meet all cases of distress by a compulsory rate, and the consequence was, that in one year the rate amounted to the enormous sum of more than 7,800,000_l._ sterling; and besides the oppressive amount of the assessments, it did much evil in pauperising a large portion of the labouring population.

“Because—although such cases of distress might, and probably would be, relieved by spontaneous charity, yet the leaving of such cases of distress to be relieved by the operation of undirected benevolence, inevitably leads to an extensive vagrancy. This is now the state of Ireland. On the most moderate computation the amount of spontaneous alms given, chiefly by the smaller farmers and cottars, is from one to two millions sterling annually; but being given without system or without inquiry to the good and to the bad, the really destitute and the pretenders to destitution receive alike their maintenance out of the earnings of the industrious, to their great impoverishment, and to the great injury of the morals and good order of the kingdom.

“Because—the most direct and effectual, if not the only means of avoiding these two great evils, namely, an extensive and ruinous pauperism created by an attempt to make compulsory provision for all cases of destitution, and an extensive and equally ruinous vagrancy created by the want of public provision, is to endeavour to bring voluntary almsgiving under regulations and system, so as to direct it to the relief of real distress exclusively.

“Because—the best means of systematising and regulating voluntary almsgiving, is to hold out the offer of a measure of public aid for all voluntary associations, based on certain principles, and governed by fixed regulations approved by a central board.

“Because—while a fund thus founded upon voluntary contributions would provide effectual relief for those who are really destitute, the very nature of it would debar the poor from establishing legal claims upon it; since the contribution to a voluntary fund being wholly spontaneous, the contributors could at any time withhold them, if an attempt were made to compel an appropriation of the joint fund contrary to their instructions.

“Because—the example of an organised system of relief for the poor by voluntary contribution is afforded in Scotland, where it has been eminently successful.

“Because—although the system of providing for the poor by means of voluntary associations, aided by the public purse, and constructed upon well-digested principles, may not succeed at once in every part of the country—yet that, so far as it does succeed, it will tend to bring the population into a sound state with respect to the poor, and will we trust gradually work its way over the face of the island, and probably supersede in many places, as the Scottish system does so extensively, the necessity of a compulsory rate. Whereas we are convinced, that although a compulsory rate might be rendered general more rapidly, and be administered by artificial means, it would every day become more difficult to manage, and tend to bring the country into a worse state than our inquiry has found it.”

-----

[68]

The commissioners who signed this schedule of reasons are, the
Archbishop of Dublin, Dr. Murray the Roman catholic archbishop, Rev.
Mr. Carlisle, Mr. F. Hort, Mr. John Corrie, Mr. W. B. Wrightson, the
Right Hon. A. R. Blake, and Mr. J. J. Bicheno. The two latter had been
subsequently added to the original commission.

-----