not be
there--its squalidness and filth are all that strike you. Poverty, to
be picturesque, should be rural. Suburban misery is as hideous as it
is pitiable.

Again, see that big house, with such pretensions to comfort, and
even elegance,--with its neat slated roof, brass knocker on the
door, verandahs to the large sashed windows, and iron railing before
the front. Its very grandeur is much more striking, that from each
gable-end hangs another cabin, the same as those we have above
described. It is true that an entrance for horses, cars, and
carriages has been constructed, as it were through one end of
the house itself; otherwise the mansion is but one house in the
continuous street.

Here lives Mr. Cassidy, the agent; a fat, good-natured, easy man,
with an active grown up son. Every one says that Mr. Cassidy is
a good man, as good to the poor as he can be. But he is not the
landlord, he is only the agent. What can he do more than he does? Is
the landlord then so hard a man? so regardless of those who depend on
him in all their wants and miseries? No, indeed; Lord Birmingham is
also a kind, good man, a most charitable man! Look at his name on
all the lists of gifts for unfortunates of every description. Is he
not the presiding genius of the company for relieving the Poles? a
vice-presiding genius for relieving destitute authors, destitute
actors, destitute clergymen's widows, destitute half-pay officers'
widows? Is he not patron of the Mendicity Society, patron of the
Lying-in, Small Pox, Lock, and Fever Hospitals? Is his name not down
for large amounts in aid of funds of every description for lessening
human wants and pangs? How conspicuous and eager a part too he took
in giving the poor Blacks their liberty! was not his aid strongly and
gratefully felt by the friends of Catholic emancipation? In short,
is not every one aware that Lord Birmingham has spent a long and
brilliant life in acts of public and private philanthropy? 'Tis true
he lives in England, was rarely in his life in Ireland, never in
Mohill. Could he be blamed for this? Could he live in two countries
at once? or would the world have been benefited had he left the
Parliament and the Cabinet, to whitewash Irish cabins, and assist in
the distribution of meal?

This would be his own excuse, and does it not seem a valid one? Yet
shall no one be blamed for the misery which belonged to him; for the
squalid sources of the wealth with which Poles were fed,