A history of the Irish poor law, in connexion with the condition of the people. Sir George Nicholls
and examining such evidence as was laid before them, came to the resolution—“that the adoption of a general system of provision for the poor of Ireland, by way of parish rate, as in England, or in any similar manner, would be highly injurious to the country, and would not produce any real or permanent advantage, even to the lower class of people who must be the objects of such support.” The committee further resolved, “that the Acts directing the establishment of a house of industry in every county and county of a city or town, have not been complied with, nor any presentment made by grand juries to assist in the support of such establishments for relief of the aged and infirm poor, and the punishment of vagrants and sturdy beggars, except in the counties of Cork, Waterford, Limerick, and Clare, and in the cities of Cork, Waterford, and Limerick.” But the committee remark, that the house of industry in Dublin is open to the admission of the poor from all parts of Ireland, which may have induced the other counties and cities to consider it sufficient, “and precluded the necessity of their making further provision for the poor.” The futility of this excuse must be sufficiently apparent, and coupled with the resolution against any systematic provision for the relief of the poor “by way of parish rate,” shows the kind of feeling which prevailed at the time in parliament on the subject. It appeared to the committee however, that the Acts directing the establishment of infirmaries or county hospitals, and granting a certain allowance from the Treasury for the salary to the surgeon or physician attending thereon, “have been carried into effect in almost all the counties;” whilst the provisions of the 57th George 3rd[30] “empowering grand juries to present the sums necessary for support of a ward for idiots and insane persons have not been complied with; and the committee consider that there is a great want of accommodation for idiotic and lunatic persons, and recommend the establishment of an asylum in each of the four provinces, to be erected and maintained either by grand-jury presentment or otherwise as may thereafter be determined.” The very important objects which had been referred to the committee require however, they say, more deliberation than the advanced period of the session permitted, and they therefore recommend that the investigation should be resumed in the ensuing session; but it does not appear that this was done, although the Acts passed in the two following years with regard to dispensaries infirmaries and hospitals, may very possibly have had their origin in the inquiries instituted by this committee.
Dublin house of industry.
The notice taken of the Dublin house of industry in the above Report, as well as the real importance of the institution, renders some account of it here necessary. The house of industry was established in 1772, by the 11th and 12th George 3rd, cap. 11,[31] under the provisions of which Act it was separated from the foundling hospital, of which it had before formed a part; and was thenceforward applied to the maintenance of such helpless men and helpless women as from age and infirmity were deemed fitting objects for admission, for the confinement of men who were committed as vagabonds or sturdy beggars, and for the punishment of such idle strolling and disorderly women as the magistrates might commit thither. Considerable additions were made to the building, and after a time some changes and modifications took place in the management, which ultimately led to the house of industry being used for the reception of poor aged and infirm men and women, idiots and incurable lunatics removed from the Richmond Lunatic Asylum, the sick poor and persons labouring under acute chronic and surgical complaints, for whom appropriate hospitals had been provided, and lastly strolling beggars thither committed by the magistrates of police. From the year 1773 to 1776 inclusive, the house of industry was supported by subscriptions, donations, and charity sermons, and afterwards by annual parliamentary grants, voluntary contributions, the profits (so called) arising from the labour of the poor, and a small sum of interest accruing on certain legacies. The voluntary contributions became less after aid was obtained from parliament, and as might be expected, soon ceased altogether. In 1776 the parliamentary grant to the institution was 3,000l.—In 1786 it was 8,600l.—In 1796 it was 14,500l.—In 1806 it was 22,177l.—In 1814 it was 49,113l.—In 1820 it was 26,474l., and in 1827 it was 23,000l.[32] At first the house of industry was managed and governed by the corporation for the relief of the poor in the county of the city of Dublin, under the provisions of the Act of 1772—afterwards by seven persons balloted for and appointed “acting governors of the house of industry,” in conformity with the 39th George 3rd, cap. 38. In 1800 the number of governors was reduced to five, and in 1820 the management was vested in a single governor, with a salary of 500l. a year. The number of admissions in 1803 was 4,468, and the average number in the house was 1,313. In 1807 the admissions were 5,900, and the average number in the house was 1862. In this latter year 271 of the admissions were by committal.
Dublin Foundling Hospital.
The foundling hospital originally formed part of the house of industry, the joint establishments being founded in 1704 under the 2nd Anne, cap. 19.[33] They remained so united until 1772, when the objects of the two institutions being deemed incompatible, they were as before stated placed under separate and distinct government by the 11th and 12th George 3rd, cap. 11.[33] The object of the institution is thenceforward said to be “the preservation of the lives of deserted or exposed infants, by their indiscriminate admission from all parts of Ireland;[34] putting them out to nurse in the country until they are of a proper age to be drafted into the hospital, and educating them there in such manner as to qualify them for being apprenticed to trades, or as servants, and thus rendering them useful members of society.”[35] Down to 1823 the institution was supported partly by a house-tax levied on the citizens of Dublin and its liberties and suburbs, amounting to between 7,000l. and 8,000l. annually, and partly by parliamentary grants, and the rent of a small property of 115l. per annum: but the citizens of Dublin were then relieved from the house-tax, and the sum of 5l. was required to be paid with every child on its admission to the hospital, by the overseers or the minister and churchwardens of the parish whence the infant was sent, no child being admissible whose age exceeded twelve months. The aggregate of these latter payments amounted to about 2,000l. annually, and the annual grants by parliament varied from 21,554l. in 1800, to 34,000l. in 1828. The number of admissions was 2,041 in 1800, 2,168 in 1806, and 2,359 in 1811, at which time the number of children remaining on the books of the institution was 6,498.
Report on the state of disease, and the condition of the labouring poor in Ireland.
In 1819 a select committee of the commons of which Sir John Newport was the chairman, was appointed to inquire into the state of disease, and also into the condition of the labouring poor in Ireland; and a Report on each of these subjects was presented to the house in course of the session, of which Reports the following is an abstract.
On the prevalence of fever.
With regard to the first point, although it is said not to be “the most essential or most difficult object of their investigation,” the committee consider the prevalence of contagious fever in Ireland a calamitous indication of general distress; and in order “to prevent the migration through the country of numerous bodies of mendicant poor, who pressed by want and seeking for relief, have fatally contributed to the general diffusion of disease,” they recommend that magistrates, churchwardens, or other appointed officers “be empowered to remove out of their respective parishes any persons found begging or wandering as vagabonds therein, or to confine such persons to hard labour for twenty-four hours in any bridewell or other public place of confinement, or to adopt both measures as the case may require; and also to cause the persons and clothes of such vagabond beggars to be washed and cleansed during the period of such confinement.” The committee consider that the Act of last session (58th George 3rd, cap. 47)[36] “enacted under circumstances of severe and calamitous visitation,” has on the whole been productive of good, and they think it of infinite moment that there should be a systematic local control established in all cities and great towns for the removal of nuisances which generate and increase disease; for which purpose they recommend that officers of health should be annually elected by the householders in places containing above 1,000 inhabitants, with power to direct the cleansing of streets &c., the removal of nuisances, the ventilation of houses, and the doing of all things necessary for the health and preservation of the inhabitants; and also that such country parishes as think proper may do the same, and that the expenses incurred in performance