t which they had a right to
expect. He said, the more the real condition of Ireland was examined,
the more tremendous would their difficulties be found. He believed the
great majority of the House was disposed to treat Ireland with a
becoming and proper spirit, and that no one contended that Ireland was
to be considered a mendicant applying for alms to the Imperial
Legislature. He thought the relief should be granted as a matter of
justice, and that the relation between the two countries should be
considered as the relation between the members of a family, whose one
member had been afflicted by some great and sudden and tremendous
distress; and that just as the other members of the family would be
bound, in a spirit of humanity and justice, to come to the relief of the
starving member, so it was incumbent on the Imperial Legislature to come
forward and relieve the starving members of the United Kingdom, at the
present moment. These sentiments were received with marked approbation.
He defended the non-interference of the Government in the supply of
provisions for Ireland: and in dealing with this, not easy question, he
reasoned thus: "We have been blamed," he said, "amongst other things, by
honorable members, who have said to us, 'When you had the corn in the
country, why did you not sell it under the cost price--why did you not
allow the Relief Committees to dispose of it at less than its own
cost--it would have been so much better.' His answer was, because the
Government thought it of infinite consequence to foster, in every
manner, the retail trade of Ireland." There is a confounding of two
important questions here by Mr. Labouchere, which should be kept quite
distinct, and it even looks like an intentional confounding of them.
What certain members of Parliament may have privately said to Mr.
Labouchere, we have no means of ascertaining except from the information
he here gives; but he was Irish Secretary, and he ought to have
known--was bound to know--that the country asked two questions about the
supply of food, instead of one: 1. The first was, "Why did the
Government allow the corn crop of Ireland to be taken out of the country
to feed others, and await their chance of getting Indian meal from a
distance of three thousand miles, to save from starving (which they
failed to do) the people who raised that crop?" The Secretary's answer
to his own-made question, is no answer to that. 2. The second question
asked by the