THE PRESENT TASK.
THB consentaneous move of the Irish landlords to abandon the Dublin meeting, is a confession that they at least had nothing in petto more effectual than Lord Besborough's assent to "repro- ductive labour,"—that is, the employment of public funds for their own private advantage. The more closely the conduct of the landlords is regarded throughout the present crisis, the leas is it found to warrant any confidence in their ability or motives to the regeneration of their country. The motive of general benevolence is not to be denied to them but it is evidently not sufficient to dictate any great self-sacrifices—not the sacrifices even of preconceived notions and predilections. Those who have waived a part of their rents to meet the overwhelming losses of the tenantry, are still the few much-vaunted exceptions, to be reckon- ed by units. Those who have spent their own money in the em- ployment of the people, are a more numerous but yet a more marked exception: the sums of money squeezed out in that way are moderate in the extreme. The money offered by the State is treated in a different manner; it is voted away without stint or measure. If there were doubts as to the prudence with which the State funds would be appropriated to public works how much greater must be the doubt now that Lord Besborough has sanctioned the application of the same money, by the same people, to their own private pro- perty! What pledge has he reserved that the objects of the aid— the employment of the people and the permanent improvement of the land—will be effectively fulfilled None. He depends upon the bona,fides and intelligence of the landowners. Now the cir- cumstances under whiclt they alleged the necessity of such aid deserve to be borne in mind.
They declared, that without that aid they could not employ their people, because their estates were so burdened as to cripple their resources. The Irish landlords, therefore, are a race gene- rally and continually prone to anticipate their resources, even to the extent of absorbing. their means and preventing the due cul- tivation of their lands ; they are always ready to "raise the wind" for present purposes, and to charge the repayment on the future—always "eating the calf in the cow's belly "; and they consent to plead the consequences of that habit as the excuse for the prevalent inability to fulfil the duties of property. That in- ability goes to such an extent, that although the paying crops of the Irish landlords are not injured, but only the cheapest and poorest sort of food used by the tenantry, the landlords cannot supply the deficiency without wholesale aid from the State. These facts are not merely- confessed, but roundly asserted on the part of the landlords : what do they signify, if not that those land- lords labour under a general and fatal deficiency in the sense of responsibility ? Yet to the class, so conducted, has Lord Bes- borough intrusted the administration of the relief funds, to be mixed up with the private accounts of the needy and shifty claim- ants; and he has reposed that trust without pledge or guarantee
for its fulfilment! .
Mr. O'Connell, who still insists upon the Dublin meeting, is right in reminding his fellow landlords that the difficulty will not cease with the present season, but will continue for months if not for years. Strange, that such an obvious Warning should first come from such a quarter I
This experience of the class under trial may convince those who have expected the regeneration of Ireland at the hands of the landlords. Striking instances there have been, no doubt, of intelligent and beneficent activity ; but the instances are excep- tional. In January last, an able writer on Ireland drew atten- tion to the almost "magical" " change effected by Mr. Wiggins -on the estate of Lord Headley in Kerry ; where the peasantry were redeemed from the wildest condition to one of prosperous industry solely by diligent guidance, pecuniary incentives and the cultivation of a feeling of security in their possession Of the land. But how many Lord Headleys are there in Ireland? The Times Commissioner described similar improvements by Lord George Hill: what effect has that example, thus blazoned with every advantage of the widest publicity and the most stimulating -praise, had in multiplying imitators ? Lord Palmerston, if we remember rightly, endeavoured to improve certain lands on his own estates by planting tussac grass to check the inroads of the sea-sand ; but his wise intentions were frustrated by the supine- ness of the landlords his neighbours, who neglected his example, ad suffered the sands to find-a passage across their fields. One uniform feature in the history of these exceptional cases is their failure to incite imitation. You cannot make Lord Headleys or Lord George Hills by act of Parliament ; and if you could, the way to do so is certainly not by a wholesale contrivance of State machinery- to " raise the wind " for the landlords without single pledge that they will carry out the purpose of landlords, subsidy. The State must interfere. Nobody has any hope without the interference of the State. Mere passive abstinence from inter.; vention would be the most alarming., the most " revolutionary " course that Government could adopt. Its immediate conse- quences would be hunger, starvation, and anarchy. Constituted authority cannot possibly have any hold over a people in a state of starvation : even the extreme penalty of the law" can have no terrors for a people who suffer the same penalty while ob- serving the law, and may snatch a chance of evading it by break- ing the law and seizing the bread they cannot buy. The case of reland presents peculiar features. It is not really that of a country stricken with dearth—Ireland is not barren of food : the food which fails is only that specially devoted to feed the 'Irish people, because it is the cheapest, as they are the poorest people in the civilized world : unless, therefore, they were helped, there would be a ridiculous theoretical nicety in their continuing to observe the "social compact "—to observe the law ; anarchy and a ravished Ceres would be the true wisdom for them—the really practical good sense. Had they been merely left alone, the landlord's homestead, the merchant's stores, would have been in- vaded; every thing available as food or as the purchase-money of food would have been seized ; it is not impossible that force might have been required to repel the hungry hordes pursuing to the shores of England the grain which we have imported, or seeking in our peaceful plains a lawless subsistence. Such things have happened in other times and lands: give similar barbarous cir- cumstances, and there is no reason why they should not happen in this age of civilized life. State intervention' therefore, was in : abstinence from intervention would have been com- plicity in revolution. The question of the day is' how to make the interference of the State effectual? A variety of plans are advanced, all remarkable, in spite of the remedy, for uniformly exhibiting one attribute. The Spectator gave publicity, some months ago, to what was then called a plan for the redemption of the lands of Ireland.* The main proposal of the plan was, that the State should purchase the lands of embarrassed owners, redeem the incumbrances, and let the lands on lease to public companies established in London and Dublin, charged with introducing English methods of culture and employment of the people at wages ; thus abolishing the cottier system without clearances. The writer in the Morning Chronicle to -whom we have referred thought 1hat proposition worth a lengthened notice; opposing it, but riot In a hostile spirit. He advanced as an alternative Lord Headley's plan of improvement. Subsequent experience has shown that the spontaneous activity of Irish landlords cannot be trusted as the alternative for State in- tervention. But opinion on the subject has made vast progress within the nine months.
Mr. Poulett Scrope urges hie proposal to introduce a real poor- law into Ireland; and the plan, formerly treated by its opponents i
as a contemptible project, s now treated as a measure impending : the Irish landowners say that a real poor-law in Ireland would amount to a confiscation of the lands.
Mr. Osborne, determined opponent of a real poor-law, suggests other measures. He would make mortgagees furnish their quota towards the expense of improving the lands whence they derive their incomes ; and he would alter the laws of real property- " Out of a population of 8,000,000, there are scarcely 8,000 proprietors in fee, and there are few spots in Ireland (as I have been informed on competent author- ity) where the blighting influence of the law as relates to real property is not traceable; and unless greater facilities be given for the circulation of land by purchase, there can be no effectual improvement in Ireland. It is difficult of credence, but it is a fact, that scarcely one man in 100,000 lives in his own house; rent being paid for it in some shape or another. To buy a spot free from rent is most difficult: large estates may be purchased, but to sell an estate is an affair of enormous expense; and, owing to the defective nature of Irish titles, the puncher.* is a matter of risk and time. Would it not be in the power of Government to remedy this state of things without any eventual loss to the public, viz, by lending money at a moderate rate of interest (say three-and-a-half per cent) to landholders for the clearance of their properties from debt? The proprietors who were willing to avail themselves of such loans should be allowed to sur- render their properties to the Government; the loans thereon should be for any time not exceeding twenty-five years; there should be a final settlement at the end of this period; and if it should be necessary to sell a portion of the property, such portion should be sold, the purchaser receiving a title from the Govern-
ment. * • No entail under a new title should be allowed. Lessees in actual possession under a lease for ever should have the right (as Crown rents are bought up) to redeem all rent paid to head landlords."
What is this but one shape of the so much dreaded project, wholesale " confiscation "?
Mr. O'Connell has long since propounded a still more startling plan of general "confiscation"—what he calls "fixity of tenure"? which would convert the tenant of the land into a permanent oc- cupant, irremoveable by the landlord so long as he should pay rent. We do not stop to consider the probable effects of establish- ing a kind of feudal "base tenure" in Ireland, of which we are endeavouring to remove the last traces in England ; but merely note the projected transfer of title from landlord to tenant—the wholesale "confiscation," The measure, however, receives the adhesion of the Morning Chronicle ; so great is the progress made by the journalist since he opposed to the project described in the Spectator the example of Lord Headley's estate. The Chronicle says that this establish - • Supplement to the Sp:dater, 27th December 1845. ;pent of a peasant proprietary is "the secret for converting an in- dolent and reckless into a laborious provident, and careful peo- ple: it is a secret which never falls' .4 It is admitted that "the change would be a violent disturbance of legal rights, amounting almost to a social revolution, though not greater than that which has been effected in Prussia, amidst the applauses of Europe, by the edicts of an absolute sovereign." But, we may bear in mind, the change in Prussia was one from villeinage to that kind of copybold; whereas the proposed change in Ireland is retrograde. Pass that pint, however,—and any doubt as to the sole and "magical ' efficacy of a measure for creating a peasant proprie- tary,—and let us simply note here also the wholesale "con fis ca- tion"—really a "social revolution" without any " almost."
This is the attribute which we observe in all suggestions of any thorough remedy, put forth now. The exception is in the counsel of those who still have faith in the delusive humbug of "repro- ductive labour," employed on private estates and paid by Govern- ment. There is no exception as to the necessity for State inter- ference; on that point there is absolute unanimity. In sum, the general conclusion is, that the State must interfere, and must carry its interference to the extent of" social revolution "; noninterference also amounting to social revolution. A gigantic task is thrust by the juncture on the Government for the time being. But the opportunity is proportionate to the magnitude of the task. If Government is called upon to accom- plish an herculean labour in Ireland, it is allowed full scope for action : universal opinion warrants it in carrying its measures to the extent of social revolution. The words sound harsh and vio- lent, but they are no exaggerated expression of the fact ; and if the Government for the time being take fright at words, it will certainly lack the first requisite for accomplishing its task—cou- rage. It is true, indeed, that deliberation and inquiry, however rapid, come before action : but timidity has a foresight of its own —it may shrink even from free and searching inquiry, lest it lead to dreaded conclusions. In that way cowardice might blind sa- gacity. It is quite certain that those who cannot master the cir- cumstances will not long be suffered to fill the place of those who might. The statesman of our day who has shown the greatest boldness in venturing to carry forth his convictions into deeds is out of office : on Irish ground, he may be said not to have tried his powers ; though, as he left office, he showed some signs that on that ground he would not fear to tread. He lost the opportunity, i and t remains with his successors : let them not suffer him to recover it.
Previous page
