It appears moreover that many wilful people having children, and being able to labour for the maintenance of themselves and their families, “do nevertheless run away out of their parishes, and leave their families upon the parish”—Wherefore it is enacted that all such persons so running away, shall be taken and deemed to be incorrigible rogues, and suffer accordingly—“and if either such man or woman, being able to work, shall threaten to run away and leave their families as aforesaid, the same being proved by two sufficient witnesses upon oath before two justices of peace, the person so threatening shall by the said justices be sent to the house of correction, there to be dealt with as a sturdy and wandering rogue, unless he or she can put in sufficient sureties for the discharge of the parish.” This enactment, and the recital by which it is introduced and justified, might be taken for a part of our late English poor-law system, so exactly does it accord with what was frequently practised in English parishes. Yet nothing like settlement, or a right to relief, or any organization for providing or affording relief, existed in Ireland. The great principle of parochial chargeability for relief of the destitute embodied in the _43rd of Elizabeth_, seems nevertheless to have been in some degree recognised, and was probably to some extent operative in Ireland, although without legal sanction; for unless such were the case, persons running away could not be said to leave their families a charge upon the parish, neither perhaps would their threatening to run away be so stringently dealt with as we here find it to be. The provisions of this Act are no doubt important, and the Act itself taken as a whole, throws considerable light upon the condition of Ireland at that time, and shows that the state of society there was gradually approximating to that which prevailed in England. The persons subjected to punishment as rogues and vagabonds, are identical with those described in the English Act _22nd Henry 8th, cap. 12_.[13] The provisions with respect to houses of correction, are similar to those directed by the English Acts _18th Elizabeth, cap. 3_,[13] and the _7th James 1st, cap. 4_;[13] and the privy search ordered to be made for apprehending vagrants &c. is the same as in the Act of James.[13] With such a similarity of enactments therefore, we can hardly doubt that there was a general similarity in the circumstances of the two countries, although those parts of Ireland which were latest brought under subjection, may still have been in a rude and backward state, as indeed it is known that they then were, and for a long time afterwards continued to be. ----- [13] See ‘History of the English Poor Law,’ vol. i. pp. 115, 171, 233 and 234. -----