More to the point were some of the remarks made by Lord Stanley, then in
opposition. With regard to the awful visitation which afflicted the
sister island from one end to the other, he said he believed that no
exaggeration could, in many instances, exceed the dreadful reality. He
was quite content, that for the prevention and palliation of the evil,
_for the purpose of rescuing the country from the guilt of permitting a
large portion of its people knowingly to_ STARVE, there is no sacrifice,
no efforts which her Majesty's Government can call upon the people of
this country to make, which will not be cheerfully responded to by the
members of your Lordships' house, and by the representatives of the
people, who will, in this case, represent the deliberate and cordial
sense of the whole country. The Labour-rate Act he pronounced "a great
blunder." With regard to the non-establishment of food depôts, he said
that if he could accuse the Government of an error on that head, they
were led into it by too rigid an adherence to the principles of
political economy--to the _abstract_ principles of political economy,
that were meant for the permanent improvement of the people; but the
question might arise as to the propriety of acting against such
principles, in order to meet an extraordinary emergency.
In the House of Commons, one of the earliest speakers on the address was
Smith O'Brien. He said, he thought he would be wanting in his duty to
his country if he did not, on that occasion, make an appeal to the House
on behalf of those whose sufferings could not be exaggerated--could not
be described. He was asked, by assenting to the address, if he was
prepared to say that the Government had been altogether guiltless of
having produced that frightful state of things; and if he were called
upon to affirm, that everything had been done by the Government, which
might have been done by them, he would answer, that _he believed it was
in their power, to prevent one single individual from dying of
starvation in Ireland_. He did not impute to them the wilful intention
of bringing about a state of things so disastrous, but it was his
opinion, and the opinion of others in Ireland, that they had not
introduced those measures which were suitable to the condition in which
Ireland was placed, and had thus brought about the state of things which
was now witnessed. "To the declaration of the Prime Minister, last
session, that there was to be no legislative interference with the price
of food, he believed they owed many of the disasters which had taken
place in Ireland." This sentiment was received with cheers. Mr. O'Brien
then made a point in favour of the Irish landlords. Was this, he asked,
to be considered as a local calamity, or was it to be considered as a
national calamity? If the Irish members were legislating in an Irish
parliament, it would be considered by them as a national calamity, and
all classes--the fund holder, the office holder, the mortgagee, the
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account