But the power given to the commissioners by the _17th and 18th sections_, to alter unions, and to dissolve boards of guardians and appoint paid officers to carry the law into execution, is by far the most important of the provisions of this Act, with the exception of those sanctioning out-relief. ----- [158] The necessity for adhering to the principle of indoor relief was fully recognised by this committee, whose inquiries were for the most part limited to that point, without going into the general question of the Poor Law. Any detailed account of the committee’s proceedings does not therefore appear to be called for at this time, as no new light was thrown upon the subject by its investigations. The same may be said of the commission for “inquiring into the state of the law and practice in respect to the occupation of land in Ireland,” (of which the Earl of Devon was chairman), and whose reports are exceedingly valuable; but they do not directly bear upon our subject, and have therefore not been noticed. I have indeed endeavoured to confine attention to the Poor-law itself, and to those matters immediately connected with it, and calculated to elucidate its working, these collectively presenting a field sufficiently extensive. ----- The second of the above Acts (_cap. 84_) is in fact a resumption of the vagrancy clauses which were intended to form part of the original Relief Act,[159] and which have now been rendered more necessary by the sanctioning of out-relief. The third of the above Acts (_cap. 90_) providing for the appointment of a separate commission for Ireland, may be regarded as a consequence of the unfortunate condition of that country, which was now said to require all the care and undivided attention of distinct functionaries. I have already stated that such was not my opinion, and after all that has passed I still am satisfied that the Poor Laws of England and Ireland might be administered under the superintendence of the same commission, as efficiently as under separate commissions; and that there would be a weight of authority influence and other advantages arising from the combination of the two, which would not be found in a separate commission. The example of Scotland was much relied upon as warranting the separation, but the cases are not similar, the Scottish Poor Law differing essentially from that of England, whereas the Irish law is directly founded upon it, and in its working must to a great degree be regulated by English experience. But the separation having taken place, it would be difficult to retrace the step, unless indeed there should be, as has on high authority been proposed, an entire amalgamation of the two governments by abolishing the office of lord lieutenant, in which case the Irish commission would naturally if not necessarily become merged in the English. It is bootless however to speculate upon these or other possible changes, and