sound, but then unpopular view of the repeal of the Corn Laws, which was, that its immediate effect would be injurious to Ireland.  “He could not,” he told the House, “refrain from expressing his regret, that Government should think it necessary to couple the question of Ireland with the question of the Corn Laws.  These laws did not affect the description of food available for the people of Ireland ... he was one of those who differed from the great majority of the hon. members at his side of the House—­he meant with respect to measures to alter the Corn Law, which he had no doubt would be of service to this country, but would for some time be injurious to Ireland.”  He closed his speech by the declaration, that “he felt it his duty to throw the responsibility upon Government; and in his conscience he believed that, for whatever loss of life might arise from want of food, or from outbreaks, the result of want, ministers would be answerable."[90]

Meantime, the Irish liberal members grew heart-sick of the endless debate upon the Corn Laws, out of which they expected nothing would come to relieve their starving countrymen.  During its progress, O’Connell made a motion that the House would resolve itself into a committee, to take into consideration the state of Ireland, with a view to devise means to relieve the distress of the Irish people.  He called attention to the vast exports of food from Ireland; showed that while Poor Laws might mitigate distress in ordinary seasons, they were not capable of meeting a famine; and, speaking from the depths of his conviction, he declared that, in his conscience he believed, the result of neglect on the part of the House, in the present instance, would be deaths to an enormous amount.  “It may be said,” the Liberator continued, with a dignity worthy of him, “that I am here to ask money to succour Ireland in her distress:  No such thing, I scorn the thought; I am here to say, Ireland has resources of her own.”  The Home Secretary replied; admitted O’Connell’s facts, but begged of him “to leave the matter in the hands of the responsible advisers of the Crown.”  Lord John Russell counselled the withdrawal of the motion, as he considered the measures of the Government judicious.  It was accordingly withdrawn, and so the matter ended for that time.  But again, on the 9th of March, O’Connell asked the First Lord of the Treasury if he were prepared to lay before the House a statement of the measures taken by the Government, to obviate the impending famine and disease in Ireland.  Delay, he said, would be fatal, and the sums of money already voted would not be of the least avail.  He repeated, that the Irish people were not suing in forma pauperis; there were resources in the country, and some further measures should be adopted, to meet the exigencies of their case.  Sir Robert Peel replied, that “the statement did not fall much short of the impression first formed in his mind in October and November last,” and concluded thus:  “I again assure the honorable and learned member that every precaution that can be taken by Government has been taken, not within the last week, or fortnight, but long ago.”