12th August 2024: digital purchasing is currently unavailable on Cambridge Core. Due to recent technical disruption affecting our publishing operation, we are experiencing some delays to publication. We are working hard to restore services as soon as possible and apologise for the inconvenience. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2016
In February 1849, the Whig prime minister Lord John Russell gave the first hint of what was to be the last of his special relief measures for famine-stricken Ireland. This was a national rate to be imposed on every poor-law union in the country in aid of twenty-three bankrupt unions, all of them, with the exception of Glenties (County Donegal), in the provinces of Connacht and Munster. The opposition of Ulster interests to the rate was so vehement that the matter came to be regarded in parliament as ‘the Ulster question’. Ulster opposition was stimulated by the widespread conviction among local boards of guardians that they had managed the famine crisis well, while boards in the west and south had mismanaged it badly. These local perceptions were shared — and publicly acknowledged — by the senior poor-law administrators in Ireland. The poor-law boundary commissioners of 1848–9 were similarly complimentary. Ulster members of parliament had no doubts about the superiority of their local guardians. Led by Viscount Castlereagh and William Sharman Crawford and helped by some Dublin Tories, they spread an Ulster propaganda within parliament whereby they conveyed the misleading impression that the rate would bear more heavily on Ulster than on any other province. The parliamentary campaign was supported by a vigorous programme of public meetings at home, although there is evidence to suggest that this programme was not as successful as had been hoped, because the ‘heads of society’ in the province failed to provide sufficiently vigorous leadership.
1 The phrase was the earl of Lincoln’s (Hansard 3, ciii, col. 295 (6 Mar. 1849)).
2 Copies or extracts of correspondence relating to the state of union workhouses in Ireland, second series, pp 7–13, H.C. 1847 (790), lv, 141.
3 P.R.O.I., Relief commission papers, passim.
4 Returns of poor employment under 9 Vic. c. 1 and 9 & 10 Vic. c. 107, p. 7, H.C. 1852 (169), xviii, 587.
5 Supplementary appendix to the seventh and last report of the relief commissioners, pp 23–81, H.C. 1847–8 (956), xxix, 121.
6 Belfast Newsletter, July to Sept. 1847, passim.
7 Reports from Mr Barron to the poor law commissioners and correspondence relative to the dismissal of the late board of guardians of the Lowtherstown poor law union, H.C. 1847–8 (207) liii, 401; Papers relating to proceedings for the relief of distress, and state of the unions and workhouses, in Ireland, fourth, fifth and sixth series, H.C. 1847–8 (896), liv, 29; (919), lv, 1; (955), lvi, 1.
8 First report from the select committee on poor laws (Ireland), H.C. 1849 (58), xv, pt I, 1; Second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth report from the same, together with the minutes of evidence, H.C. 1849 (93), (137), (170), (148), (194), (237), (259), (301), xv, pt I, 5, 75, 269, 325, 347, 415, 559, 647; Tenth report from the select committee on poor laws (Ireland), together with the minutes of evidence, H.C. 1849 (356), xv, pt II, 1; Fourteenth report from the same, H.C. 1849 (572), xv, pt II, 177; First report from the select committee of the house of lords on the operation of the Irish poor law, with minutes of evidence (hereafter Sel. cttee H.L. Irish poor law), H.C. 1849 (192), xvi, 1; First report of the commissioners for inquiring into the number and boundaries of poor law unions and electoral divisions in Ireland (hereafter 1st rep. boundary commrs), H.C. 1849 (1015), xxiii, 369.
9 1st rep. boundary commrs, pp 3–7, H.C. 1849 (1015), xxiii, 369.
10 The boundary commission acknowledged that electoral divisions in the north and east were smaller than in the south and west and also that they were ‘more nearly coterminous with property’. This generalisation was truer of Ulster than of Leinster. Gulson certainly thought so and his impression is supported by a parliamentary return of June 1848 of electoral divisions in Ireland which belonged to one or two persons only. Of 228 such divisions listed, all but 57 were in Ulster. (See 1st rep. boundary commrs, p. 6, H.C. 1849 (1015), xxiii, 369; Sel. cttee H.L. Irish poor law, q. 837, H.C. 1849 (192), xvi, 1; Return of the electoral divisions in Ireland which comprise the property of a single person, or of two proprietors only, showing the extent of population thereof, pp 1–5, H.C. 1847–8 (404), lvii, 197.
11 Sel. cttee H.L. Irish poor law, q. 839, H.C. 1849 (192), xvi, 1.
12 Ibid., appendix to the six reports, app. B, pp 18–19, H.C. 1849 (705, pt II), xxiii, 1020.
13 1st rep. boundary commrs, pp 16–23, H.C. 1849 (1015), xxiii, 369.
14 SirNicholls, George, A history of the Irish poor law (London, 1856, repr. New York, 1967), pp 362-3Google Scholar.
15 Sel. cttee H.L. Irish poor law, q. 1591, H.C. 1849 (192), xvi, 1.
16 Ibid., qq 952–4, 1026, 955, 926–7.
17 Ibid., q. 1619.
18 First annual report of the commissioners for administering the laws for the relief of the poor in Ireland; with appendices, p. 13, H.C. 1847–8 (963), xxxiii, 377; Second annual report …, p. 13, H.C. 1849 (1118), 87.
19 Sel. cttee H.L. Irish poor law, qq 15–18, H.C. 1849 (192), xvi, 1.
20 Ibid., qq 1496–1507; Minutes, Ballymoney Board of Guardians, 27 Sept. 1847 (P.R.O.N.I., BG V/A/4).
21 Second annual report of the commissioners for administering the laws for the relief of the poor in Ireland; with appendices, pp 15–16, H.C. 1849 (1118), xxv, 87.
22 Prest, John, Lord John Russell (London, 1972), pp 293-4Google Scholar.
23 Ibid., pp 294–5.
24 Hansard 3, cii, col. 165 (12 Feb. 1849); ciii, col. 110 (2 Mar. 1849).
25 First report of the select committee on the Irish poor law, p. iii, H.C. 1849 (58), xv, pt I, 1.
26 Hansard 3, ciii, col. 48 (1 Mar. 1849).
27 Ibid., cii, col. 634 (12 Feb. 1849).
28 By Osborne, Bernal (Middlesex), a persistent critic of Russell’s government (Northern Whig, 27 Feb. 1849)Google Scholar.
29 Hansard 3, ciii, cols 48–51 (1 Mar. 1849).
30 Walker, Brian M., Parliamentary election results in Ireland, 1801–1922 (Dublin, 1978), p. 79 Google Scholar.
31 Hansard 3, ciii, cols 61–6 (1 Mar. 1849).
32 Ibid., cols 78–9 (1 Mar. 1849).
33 Ibid., cols 204–5 (5 Mar. 1849, Verner); col. 255 (6 Mar. 1849, Grogan).
34 Ibid., col. 80 (5 Mar. 1849).
35 Ibid., col. 200 (5 Mar. 1849).
36 Ibid., cols 204–5 (5 Mar. 1849). Verner also criticised the ‘injustice’ of the rate in that it would fall on the already overburdened landed class, while the ‘monied interests’ would be exempt. It would also be ‘inequitable’ in its pressure on the landed interests because it made no distinction between good and bad landlords.
37 Ibid., col. 280 (6 Mar. 1849); Walker, Parl. election results, p. 80, noting Conolly’s election as 20 Feb. 1849.
38 Ibid., cols 150–51 (2 Mar. 1849).
39 Ibid., col. 171 (5 Mar. 1849).
40 Ibid., cols 199–200 (5 Mar. 1849).
41 Ibid., cols 223–4 (5 Mar. 1849).
42 Ibid., cols 234–5 (6 Mar. 1849).
43 Ibid., col. 295 (6 Mar. 1849). In a letter to the queen on the same day, Lord John Russell referred to Ulster as ‘the loyal but too favoured portion’ of Ireland (Prest, Russell, p. 295).
44 Appendix to the six reports of the select committee of the House of Lords on the operation of the Irish poor law, appendix B, pp 18–19, H.C. 1849 (705, pt II), xxiii, 1020. The bankrupt Munster unions were Bantry, Cahirciveen, Dingle, Ennistymon, Kenmare, Kilrush and Scariff. (For convenience of discussion here, the impact of the rate on unions is considered; in fact, each electoral division was separately rated.)
45 Hansard 3, ciii, cols 320–22 (6 Mar. 1849).
46 Northern Whig, 10 Mar. 1849.
47 Col. Rawdon (Armagh City) abstained because he had no direction from his constituency.
48 Hansard 3, ciii, cols 198–9 (5 Mar. 1849); cols 314–16 (6 Mar. 1849).
49 Ibid., col. 51 (1 Mar. 1849, Crawford); col. 1309 (26 Mar. 1849, Hamilton).
50 Ibid., col. 1344 (26 Mar. 1849).
51 Ibid., cols 181–2 (5 Mar. 1849); Prest, Russell, p. 295.
52 Ibid., col. 225 (5 Mar. 1849).
53 Ibid., col. 200 (5 Mar. 1849).
54 Ibid., cols 1313–14 (26 Mar. 1849).
55 Third report of the select committee of the House of Lords on the operation of the Irish poor law, pp 3–5, H.C. 1849 (209), xvi, 537.
56 Hansard 3, ciii, col. 256 (6 Mar. 1849).
57 Sel. cttee H.L. Irish poor law, qq 774, 827, H.C. 1849 (192), xvi, 1.
58 Ibid., qq 1139–40.
59 Ibid., q. 1646. Several boards of guardians in Senior’s district passed resolutions complimenting him on his evidence to both parliamentary committees. (See Northern Whig, 22, 24 May 1849.)
60 Fifth report of the select committee of the House of Lords on the operation of the Irish poor law, qq 4171–8, H.C. 1849 (148), xvi, pt I, 927.
61 Third report of the select committee of the House of Lords on the operation of the Irish poor law, pp 3–5, H.C. 1849 (209), xvi, 537.
62 Hansard 3, cv, cols 322–3; see Northern Whig, 22 May 1849, for Londonderry’s remark.
63 Prest, Russell, p. 295.
64 Northern Whig, 1 Mar. 1849.
65 Ibid., 30 Jan. 1849.
66 Ibid., 15 Feb. 1849. A later editorial (31 March) carried the headline: ‘Ulster and Leinster taxed for the new settlers in Connaught’.
67 Ibid., 22 Feb. 1849.
68 Ibid., 3 Mar. 1849.
69 Ibid.
70 Ibid.
71 Ibid., 10 Mar. 1849.
72 Ibid., 3 Mar. 1849.
73 Ibid., 13 Mar. 1849. The Northern Whig devoted more than three columns to its report of the meeting.
74 Ibid.
75 Ibid., 24 May 1849.
76 Ibid., 13 Mar. 1849.
77 Ibid., 10 Mar. 1849.
78 Ibid., 17 Mar. 1849. The Times’s jibe is reminiscent of one of the few parliamentary taunts on the rate in aid from the caustic Dublin Repealer, John Reynolds, in claiming that ‘the loyalty of the people of Ulster was, after all, conditional loyalty. It was £.s.d. loyalty. It was sixpenny loyalty.’ (Hansard 3, ciii, col. 81 (1 Mar. 1849)).
79 Prest, Russell, p. 295.
80 The words were Twistleton’s. See Fifth report of the select committee of the House of Lords on the operation of the Irish poor law, qq 4177–8, H.C. 1849 (148), xv, pt I, 325.
81 Hansard 3, ciii, cols 223–4 (5 Mar. 1849). (Author’s emphasis.)
82 Accounts showing the total sum assessed as ‘rate in aid’ in Ireland under the act 12 Vict, c. 24, under each of the orders of the commissioners for administering the laws for the relief of the poor in Ireland, bearing date the 13th day of June 1849 and the 23rd day of December 1850, respectively, pp 1–7, H.C. 1852 (87), xlvi, 125.
83 Northern Whig, 24 May 1849.
84 The others were Armagh, Bailieborough, Ballyshannon, Castleblayney, Glenties (which had been lightly assessed and gained net from the rate), Gortin, Larne, Letterkenny, Lisburn, Londonderry, Lurgan, Monaghan and Newtownlimavady.
