ember, when the bill was read a first time. It was
proposed that the house should go into committee on the 9th of February,
on which day Mr. O'Connell moved, as an amendment, that it be committed
that day six months. When the bill was last year before the house, he
said he had addressed them at considerable length in opposition to it.
At the same time he had avowed that he had not moral courage to take the
course of direct opposition to the measure, although perfectly convinced
of its injurious tendency. Since then he had grown both older and
firmer; and he was now determined to take the sense of the house on the
committal of the bill. He was opposed to the introduction of poor-laws
into Ireland, at least so far as regarded able-bodied persons; it might
induce them to abandon their habitual industry and economy, and prevent
them from providing for the wants of age and supervening infirmity.
Any such plan was calculated to diminish self-reliance, to paralyse
industry, to decrease economy, and, above all, to damp and extinguish
the kindly and generous feelings of nature. He further objected to
the bill, because it taxed the occupiers of lands, and involved many
difficulties of apportionment between his landlord and himself: it would
be a constant source of litigation. Besides, he contended that the mode
in which the poor-law was proposed to be carried into effect, was not
calculated to benefit Ireland: and he enlarged on the poverty of the
people in general, in order to show that they ought not to be called
upon to endure taxation to the amount of another million. Messrs. Shaw,
W. S. O'Brien, Lucas, and Redington supported the bill, though they
all thought that many of its details were objectionable. Mr. O. Gore
supported Mr. O'Con-nell's amendment, he objecting to the workhouse
system as prejudicial to the best habits and feelings of the Irish.
Other members, as Messrs. Barron, Young, and Litton, supported the
measure; while others, as Mr. J. Gibson and Sir F. French, opposed
it. On a division the original motion was carried by a majority of two
hundred and seventy-seven against twenty-five.

The house went into committee on the 12th of February. The third reading
of the bill came on on the 30th of April, when Mr. O'Connell again
endeavoured to arrest its progress. His opposition, however, was
bootless: it passed the house of commons by a majority of two hundred
and thirty-four against fifty-nine.

MOTION FOR THE