Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

19 articles on this Page

THREATENING LETTERS TO THE…

[No title]

HOUSE OF LORDS.—THURSDAY,…

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY,…

HOUSE OF LORDS.—FRIDAY, MARCH…

ARMISTICE BETWEEN AUSTFJA…

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY,…

NAVAL EXPENDITURE-EXCESS.

RATE-IN-AID (IRELAND) BILL.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—MONDAY, APRIL…

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY,…

THE IRISH CHURCH.

COLONIAL POLICY.

COLLECTION OF THE MALT-TAX.

RUSSIA AND TURKEY.

PUBLIC BUSINESS.

SUPPLY.

RATE-IN-AID (IRELAND) BILL.

News
Cite
Share

RATE-IN-AID (IRELAND) BILL. The adjourned debate on the second reading of this bill was then resumed. Mr. BltIGHT sad he had voted for a rate-in-aid in the committee and in the House, and he was prepared to justify that vote not only on the ground of a great emergency which must be met but chiefly Oil the ground that tha rest of the United Kingdom'had during the three last years, paid its own rate-m-aid for Ireland to a tar greater aniountthanthts rate would levy noon the rate- able property in Irelantl-tirst, from the general taxation of the i t, s empire; secondly, in the shape of large subscriptions from pri- vate sources and, thirdly, in very heavy local rates for the sup- port of pauperism which had cunningly escaped from Ireland to England. Tile Irlilladies of IreIard were not, howewr, to be cured by a Poor-law or a rate-in-aid. It the people could be set to work, they could support themselves if not, they must jjc sup- ported bytaxation,or left to starve. Land, labour, and capit. I were found m Ireland but the lalld was held under circumstances which required capital and labour, and con.equently that great raw material was bound up. Here was the great evil; what was the leiuedy ? 'I fie Government had proposed none. Sir K. Peel had suggested a p'an which, so far as he had developed u, ap(..erlnd rather vague and impracticable. The true remed es were, the re- moval by Parliament of every obstacle to the free sale and irmisfV r of land by prompt ard speedy process, a modification of ii,e landed tenures, and a judicious disposal of waste lands. The Maiquis of GUANBY opposed the measure, g between a Poor-rate as levied in England and one levied in Irp*- land, and showing the unequal operation of a rate-in-aid wltlluJt a lhw of settlement alld uuder a valuatiun so variable. Mr. C. KORTESCUE opposed the rate-in-aid because he preferred an Income-tax. This was a great national emergency, and every kind of property should contribute. Mr. DISRAELI said, he and his friends had always beeD rCIHIY to assist the Government in dealing with the Irish question, but they had required, as a primary condition, that they should come forward with some plan that would give an assurance to the coun- try that these temporary pruposals should not be continued fur ever. He addressed himself to the proposition before the llou e for what was called a national rate-in-aid. The first question was -is it an adequate proposition? It was avowedly inadequate. It was, moreover, impolitic, for it tended IO reduce capital in a country where capital was deficient, it lessened the stimulus-to selt-exi-rtion where self-exertion was essential, and it aggravatl d the unequal burdens under which lauded property was sinking. Besides oeing inadequate and impolitic, the measure as iilusoiy and essentially deceptive. He then criticised, in no favourable spirit, the revelations" of (Sir ltobert Peel, which he thought were not remarkable for novelty. He pointed out the fallacies which lurked under the scheme and the dangers which menaced it on every side, He then made a powerful attack upon the Irish Poor Law, which, as he showed, operated to prevent the outlay of capital upon the improvement of the land. He acknowledgt d that Ireland was bound to make an exertion on her own behalf, and lie was ready to support an income-tax, but in conjunction therewith, the workhouse test must be lesoited to, and the area of taxat,ulI under the Poor Law diminished. Lord J. Rossi LL, repeating that this was a temporary measure to cu.e an acute temporary evil, replied to the charge ofinjust.ee ob- jected to the rate by Mr. Lhsraeii, that it would not have been unju-t if the (jovermncnthad proposed to assimilate the taxation of Ireia d to that of England but it had appeared to then, that a rate of 6(i. on rateable property was the lighter buiden. If an income-tax were proposed, the Government would have no insuperable olree- tion to it. He vindicated the Government from back win d ness in br,nglllg forward remedial measures for Ireland, and by analogy with the cases-of Engiand in the (Uth century, and Scotland in 17th. he showed that. beneficial changes must be wrought, not by r any specific measures, but by giadually making men feel that itu'y were living in security, and by leading Ihein by easy and natural courses to seek their own prosperity. he described the depend state into which Ireland had been brought; and he jllstilied tJ; Poor Law as a step to improvement, it being a measure not only of humanity but of justice and he stated the changes he proposed to make in the law. He then approached the plan proposed by Sir R. Peel. A-commission, he observed, must either have compul- sory powers or be of a voluntary character. Sir Robert had re- ferred to (he Ulster plantation, but there was an obvious difference between the two cases. In the Ulster case, the land wa^ at the disposal of the Govet-iiiiiezit, iud people were not on the land in the presetil case, the land wits not in our power, and the were on the land. The noble lord entered at some length luCo an examination of the other parts of Sir Robert's plan, and with respect to the laws which encumbered the transfer of lauded property, he thought Parliament might deal with them but Uins must be done with due regard to the rights of propeity, or the measure would defeat its own object. Measures were in contem- plation for the relief of Ireland, but no general plan w ould satisiy those who asked lor "large and comprehensive measures," by which the evils of Ireland could be cuied. Many of ti.esc 'evils such as the cultivation of the potato in small patches, were beyond the reach of any Government; and he recommended the Ho lit*, with reference to this bill, to consider that the two kingdoms were' one united kingdom, aud not to forget that no nii,,f rlulle cvuid happen to one without being a deep calamity to the other. On the motion ot iir. J. O CONNELL, after some opposition, the debate was again adjounn d till Tuesday. The House adjourned at half-p^t twelve o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—TUESDAY, APRIL…