The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1821-05-09 00:00:00

• I otaldem the authority of three or more Magistrates. !fir W. Groat. who woe one of the chief advocates of the Biller 1796, ockimertedged that he world not hinweeeeded to them lad they been brought for ward its a time •of peter. Admitting the benefits to be derived fram freedom of discussioo„ and mallow' liar the, probable necessity of withholding them, hoer diffetent 'vete** etroptosittiscrs of the two periods? These there woe a wild spirit of in. aeherdinstion which had' byst forth its the musk -.af liberty, and threatesetiFinsfeepose, of all the • countries of Europe. lit klinit theref was m; tu . malt, and not any disaffectiose(ssistwithstandiog the distresses of the coition), eimept..the discontent *hies bad been crested by a refessil s to Wen to, .• • the petitions iof the people,. and • she excitement which had been added try- the iststigatiims of the spire. He contended at.soine length that there was nothing like the urgency for grow n g the Bulls i.f 1819, ihet had existed in 1796 He thought it • vaiu for the (louse to seek security in *itch re *sources. The more secret the expression of public opinion became,. the note da n gerous. He remi n d- Jed the House of the ariertion made by Dee of the legal officers of the Crown, that hiliwas spite tired • of temporary expedients; and the Noble Nlarquis oppoaire"confined the enactinesits of the Bill to flee jeans, in order, at the end of the time, to make them mate effective. ..He trusted the good temper • , erlheedf by the pools under those lowa, would in. duce;Minerrirrs to alter their-relolutions, and relivJ • •a l uisli a system which had been iseised set st • ,:dopted under the iudtience of mistaken He referred to the evidence given OA Hunt's iZ i l k he :he iiroof of the fallacy of thinly drclerutiuita which s had been mole in that Hume with respert lathe pro. reeding* of the Manchester fleeting. IVhere were the sticks snit stoura and brick bits ? Where was the worthy Mugistrute to be found, except in the speeches of its Hon. Metnber of that House and the Noble Marquis, who had been trampled to death by the steruly mob ? What had become of the bloody dagger framed by the terrified imagination of one of the witnesses on the trial ? As soon as the Magistrate had played his 'tart in that House, be resuscitated and recovered from his catastrophe-. was alive and well, living with his family, and gaols* ready to he produced as .a witness against Mr. Iluntt He had only alluded to the circumstances of the Manchester meeting, because they would be soon brought before the consideration of the House, with all the odvasstager of the cominamling Isleuts end eloquence of the Honourable Member fur Westminster. if it could be shewn that there wie u fellacions case made out, and that the (louse, is passing those Acts, lied condemned the people to punishineat for a crime which had not been com mitted, the least that the House could do would be to reverse the uiteinder mood on the rights of the people. he had mentioited spies as a new sestets which had of late been called into confidential see. 'rice. He was aware that there was a system of espionage in 1796, but spiel, were.by no means in such general employment. They were always ob jeciiiniable, because they most of necessity be window's in mid • g the loyalty of the !wind*. and disseminating pea.ou and sedition. He did not mean to deny that there were in 1819 opiiiions hostile to the Ministry, and in favour of retrench inent and reform. That was beueticiel to the con stitution, end se to awry 'abuse of it, the .wierlum of ages had provided sufficient restraints for. He would ask, bad the new tonsures of restriction so. swered any end ? . He might be told that they had prevented the expression of public opinion within those wells•in a certain degree. And did the House infer obsolete security from a 'deuce which their own measures compelled? lie conceived that they lied left the public no choice bat unconstitutional submission or absolute resistance. If liberty was not conducive to strength and order, let them be told so openly, and with such arguments es would jrrove that it was injurious. He would then give up liberty fur the sake of securing strength and or der. He could not do better than refer to the language used by Mr. Fox in 1797, in moving foe the repeal of the Bills of 1796. If the period should ever arrive, sod it would certainly artier, in which the people should think it no longer worth while to petition that House for economy or reform, they were not to inasgiue that the people therefore had become satisfied with their coudnct, or that they did not believe the attsiumeut of those objects to be necessary. He believed that the mass of the people cared now very little what was done in that (louse ; they looked upon them to be sitting there tosleriee measures for the extinction of the few re meining liberties left to the people. He knew no means . wore likely to awaken the gratitude of the country, or to revive the confidence of the people, drooping under almost unbearable tosation, than the repeal of the Acts of 1819. Huw could the people confide iu the Constitutioa. if its safeguards were to be removed in the hour of danger, whets alone they could heuseful ? Could they ttust a second time to that security which, after bring taught toyed insni• a rock on the shore, they Intim] to be unstable and shiftiug as the sands of the deeert ? went on to the consideration of the Libel Bill of 1819. for the repeal of which also it was bias intention to move. After exptirin mg the sevetitits which it went to inflict on Chet iusittiiiite class of offences called Wads, he re market' on the great power which was heft in the discretton of the Judge by th at statute. J u d g i ng etc* from our own times, ited from very recent cir cumstences, it was trot too much to reckon oft, that there might in future be some Judges ap pointed. whose anal prejudices might dies. geolify their nfisids from giving pure judgments, eito,e of them might be found who would p ro b a bly he. us corrupt, as servile, and as cruel, as any Judges of Winer times. Let the House reflect oil the character of that law which would leave such Judges se ill-defiued a power of punish. anent, As Mr. Fos bid well remarked, speuk ing of some such Judges in past ages, the writings of Locke. might then have condemned the Author to perpetual banishment. Supposing such a 141 , 8 to have berm In force is the times of Wilkes, could rimy one doubt but that he would trove bad the full - losce viol egret of it ti.ited upon likee. hit need not go err Fir for ruse. Suppose ...the Hun. 11 ! irulirt whit, had just escaped from the eefrcts of uttering hiss , honest opinion on a particu. her triatisect mu, should asset feel it to be his duty to wirers his opinion upon another equally atrocious . tote--suppose that by legal bursae he could egaio be pat ea trial before a Leicestershire Jury, • and considering the temper which had bet ou the occasion,. could_ any our doubt would be con►icted of the second offence, thus he subjected to the sentence of btu. meat ? it had been truly said that the execath of had laws must make bad Judges.—[Here the Han. Member made some allusions to the case of _■.f _ _ . ind was fluted o• t his tleicooar. a . . ...gins of that Lturswil Judie who supported him in that House could filed no precetieut fo► .his cowl : set. 'He dreaded the establishment of such prreetents : he feared the use which unglit )e' made of such powers by Jadges who were , bead•atroag instead of hart-strong—wbo would, instead of doing dispastionsie owl impartial justice, resemble more the twelve lions which sup ported the throne of Solomon. He 'maintained ihst county meetings hid become more 'Come since the pa•sptg °filer Bills.. lie knew there were ninny who were puttered to a.►crt that there was nothisig taken imat the people by the Bills of 1819, but what they Mold be much► better without—that their liberties iiere math better preserved by the measures of ■ wise governmeot than by any other means 441.iberias nesqueas ;Tali& extat Tom sob reit pis." He rewarmed against the absurdity of these notions. lie would not oorilligize for having brought this sub ject forward. He might he defeated in his motion, that would not alter his opiiiian, rind if the subject were not taken up by abler hands, hr would bring before the House the consideration of the Bills of 1819 in succession, with a view to their repeal. lie moved far knee to bring in a 801 l for the repeal of the 60th Gen. 111., epistler, '• An Act far the inure eff-cittallo preventing Sed 'loos Meansgs and As semblies." Mr. DENMAN seconded the motion. Mr. Serjeant Oeshow conceived dint the Hon. .Member had laid no grounds for his motion. The inconvenience which might occur in the enforce ment of an Act of Parliament was no positive ob jection to the passing of it. He was sorry to have heard the conduct of a Learned Judge in the Court of King's Beach on a recent occasion egain called in question iu that House. If there were ally charges to be merle against that Leaned Judge, why were they not brought forward iii a constitu tional way ? He had knower that Judge from ins earliest professional life, and he could over that he silver knew a man of a more tender and merciful wind. Ile only lamented that the Learned Judge should have been moved to remit all the fines after lie bad imposed them on Davison. If Mr. Vox lied donbied in 1797, of his 'sewer to induce the House to repeal the Bills of 1796, he did not believe thst there was that ft 3.111 liviog who would induce the House to repeal the Acts of 1819, at which time there were circumstances to induce the House to 10481 those Acts, much more alarming than those of 1796. Alr. DENMAN said the House seemed disposed to use that opportunity which his Hon. Friend hod furnished them with in plowing to the public that whatever change had taken place in public recut*, these was none in their deterinination to continue those severities which had been reacted for the preservation of the State. If she Constitution was hot equal to its own defenre in this respect, the fact must have been a secret to the wisdom of our ancestors, and nothing but the new lights of legislative knowledge which had lately burin in could have strewn where the danger lay. 'reeve was something actually providential in the history of these Btlls. It was impossible to issaintaio that the saute circumstances existed as at the time of passing the Bills, and yet the Bills hail 110 effect in bringing about u change. It was supposed that the Manchester meeting had made it necrsraiy to regulate public meetings ge nerally by new law., why, he did not know.— What power would they have Magistrates to pos sess over public steeling' greater than that of dis persing them by the sword, when their leaders were engaged, as Mr. Hunt had 'been, in restraining them by his discourse from tumult of any kind ? Wav that dispersion legal or not ? If out legal, the (louse had strangely neglected its duty. If legal, what was the use of the new Acts ? The leaders of that meeting were tried, convicted, and punished—but not under the new laws. A similar meeting had been held at Manchester, where no violeuee was used to disperse it. The leaders there also were brought to conviction and punishment un der the common law of the land. It was singular with respect to the Seditious Meetings Bill, and the Blasphemous mid Seditious Libels Bill, that not our conviction had taken place under either of them; the method of meeting in departmentul divisions, or'parish districts, as prescribed by these new fangled institutions, had never once been resorted to. Had the agitators against whom the House had thus pitched its wits to frustrate their designs, it, any one case used this method of carrying on their works or not ? It' they had, the [don would have been useless ; if' they had not, there could have been ho good reason for such enactments.— With regard to blasphemuus libel, lie could tint a , gee with his I su n . use d L earne d F r i en d (Serjeant dosloss) that it could b e c l ear ly an d eas il y defined. He thought it was impossible that ally.. thing more difficult etiala be vubmived to the soutlenemsding than to say w h at blasphemy was. One Jury roc quitted Mr. (lone of the very same offence of which another person had been convicted by vs different Jury, and he could by ne means concur in the in terpretation given of a seditious lilvel; namely, that it was any writing that had a trintency to bring the Government of the country into contempt. He thought there were times when it became the bouu den duty of every man who loved his country to come forward boldly and expose the abuses of Govern ment; and what could be snore indefi iii te and danger ous than this priuciple when applied to public meet ings ? Whenever an expression was made use of that teuded to bring the Government into con tempt (and this, mark, in the opinion of the Sheriff), he has it iii his power to dissolve that ineeting.-.. (Hear, /sear.)—Wlitt then is the object of meet lug, or how is it possible for the people to emit. plain of their grievances ? The rely moment as observietion of this kind is made, according to the Seditious Meetiii,„es Bill, the inertia* may be dis pereed, treated like felons, or cut down by in armed twee. And the-e are the laws that were . •telettiltd maid suppurtvd by His Hon. and Learned Friend (Seejeant Oasluw), the advocate of the liberties ul Kogleilit !—(//ear, Kea..)—lie was snare thut the tousitry was indebted to I ' fi., his former atl . vim, bat he must say that lie hod for. Mr. Seri felted a great portion at lemt.gof .IYlr.liemiame, grail tade,byput him ! elf forever& no lisitwegaiou, in defence. of these °theme and unjwa lettige-lawit which were framed on halm awl fraudulent pre. truces Hear —aud for which no necerwty exit,- rd, even according to the 'hewing of Ins lion. and Learned Friend-- -‘ at bid that necessity did exist. • Mr. DINMAIII retained. lie should wish this necessity had rested upon something swore then the mere iierenthetserl assertion of his Hun. and Learned Friend. but he denied the existence of city real necessity of them laws ; they appeared to him to savour very strongly of that mischievous spirit* which had crowded their table with more sta tists, daring the lain reign, than since Magna Chnria had been obtained, lie had to 6 1 191 00 6 e to the House—(Hear, hear)—for occupying their attention so long.—( /Icor, hear.)—lndevd he had not intended to do so. He was, however, anxious to preserve his consistency, and to declare that no infringement of the liberties of the subject should be fur one moment endured. and he hoped that matty would be still found in that House, ready and anxious to record their opinions in favour of the liberties of their country.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. C. HUTCIHNSON could not conceive what the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Serjeant °intim) meant by slating his cute/swims of the necessity of these laws. Dove he meats that, in times like the present, if the fli 'sister of the Crowu came down to the House and proposed these odious. disgraceful, and abominable measures, that lie should support them ? What wits the statement mole at the t i me there Bills were enacted 1 It was said that an or i canixed body were arrayed in oppo sition to the Government—that several thousand inert, With chiefs at their head, and provided with arms, were parading through the country, fur the purpose of intimidating the officers of the Goren'. snent—th it meetings, for treasonable objects, had been held all through the country—that families had left their tonnes and fled into the large towns, and called ou Government for protection. This was the state ;tent of the Minister who introsluced these B Ils, which was supported and borne nut by various Members out both rides. Bitt limiting could be more dissimilsr then the situation of the present times ; and whatever might have been thegioundst of justificaliou at that period,he saw none whatever at present. What he principally rose for was to to 'kr a few ob.. servationv on the country he had the honour of repre senting. When these Bills were introduced, the Noble MPliqUill (1•011410ildkrry ) expressed los sots facti 11l , as an Irishman, at the tranquillity that prevailed in ['Overt, and it was quite manifest it never was intended these Bills should have included Ireland, for the flame of belied was never intio dued into them. However, it was said dm some jealousy existed in consequence of excluding Ire land from the effect* of the new hies, and ex tending their operative' to parts of England in a stale of equal tranquillity, and is order to re move these painful feelings Ireland was included. Nothing, however, cont.l be more unju•t than (hi.. In his memory there had not been a single posse-co tton frir seditious filial/. sold he must say, that he thought, under these circumstances, one of the greutevt outrages that ever was committed on pub- Ire justice or the libiraties of a free people was ex tending these laws tolrelenid.--( Hear.f—He should not detain the Howie lotiger, but be never should lose an opportunity of recording his execration of these measures, and he should give the motion of his Honourable Friend his most cordial support. — (Hear, hear.) Mr. MaxweLL wished to state briefly the reasons that had induced him to support these Bills whets they were introduced to the House. Ctoisiderable disturbsnce had at that, period prevailed in that part of Scotland which he had the honour to re present, and in compliance milli the wishes of at least nint.tenths of Isis constituents, aud to preserve them from a similar disaster to that which had occurred at Manchester, lie was induced to support it measure in his comprehension unconstitutional. At that period he had stated his motives, and he was given to understand by the Noble Marquis (Londosiderry) that these measures were to be !needy tempora:y, and under these cir cumstances it might appear a breach of faith if he now voted ngsinit them until the period of their ter mination had expired. He was not, however, pledg ed to support the Seditious Libels Bill, and should therefore vote fur its repeal. Mr. MIRRCRONSY said, he was one of the few on that side sr the House-who had voted for passing these Bills into a law, and if the same circum. stances now existed lie should give the same sole with the most perfect and conscientious satisfaction; for he thought the circumstances then presented to the face of the country were more unfavourable to the right of' petition than laws that had been since passed. He was certainly of opinion that the meeting at Nlauchester was illegal, and the proceedinga tit York hal since corroborated his opinion, although many Gentlemen of the wood est understanding', whose opinions lie respected, thought differeatileV . llot although he supported the swertwireo then, he war of opinion that the ne cessity did not now exist. Since these laws have been passed, we hate had undoubtedly some to sleuth in which Sheriffs have acted with the greatest fairness and independence ; but we have also had others, in which the Sheriff seemed to act from mere caprice, and to treat the pub lic meeting. in a manlier that had in its operation a tendency to put the people in a state of hostility against the laws. These circumstances have all occurred since the passing of these laws, for which reason he should vote fur their repeal. Mr. LENNARD replied. He certainly did not entertain any great hopes of success; but lie thought something was due to public justice, and . that some effort shook! be made to restore the People to their hirth.rights.—( Hear, hear.)—F men the conduct of Mieirtersaisice he hull been iii Par liament, lie saw little reason to be sanguine in his expectations, that they would •eiiiciliate or synina. thize with the people—so far from that, indeed, they did nut seem to think it worth while to give an answer; lie should, however. feel it his duty to take the sense of the House upon it. Sir .10104 NEWPORT said. as po case had been made out ou the opposite side. in support of their contintiaoce, lie 'hookd yule for the repeal sit' these bliss Strength *lee then ordered to withdraw for a division On the SoditiOns Meetings Bill. The Dam bens were— For As repeal Apulia it - Majority For Nisisters 3l Os see readmission to the gellery we found —llle—Diyiiimis, los legs. lee w,s addressing ihe U.uss on the Seditious Libels Bill. lie hoped there never would be so ►land uiv in defence of ill; bbertiea of Ilse people. The titivation, in fact, resolved itself into this, whe. titer the Howe should ecmsent that a barbornus and cruel punivliment should be inflicted on • man for selling in Ins shop a hook which a jury may evil " , tending to bring the Government into contempt." The Howe then divided on tote Seditious Libels Bill— the repeal ..... Agtitist it.. Majority for the euotionattoo of the Bill 22 POOR LAWS. On our rendmission to the gallery some convey. lotion oro.e between Mr. Warman and the liflar%, quilt of Louts°!insane as the pootpoliernent of this question to smite other night. Mr. Sc* at.err expressed himself willing to com ply. with the wishes of the House. The co ins of ,` Go on ! go 04 ' then became pretty general—upois which Mr. SCARIALTT then row. He said, as it seemed to be the desire of the House that he should ptrste ceed, he should endeavour to state, as briefly as possible, the grounds which induced him to intro. duce the present Bill. Perhaps in the whole range of the questions that are brought before the cola sitlrration of Parliament, there is nut one of more importance than the nate lie had the honour of sub mitting to them ; and it might be necessary to opt,. logirut, that so humble an individual as he was: should have undertaken it. He must, however, throw himself upon the tutlulgeoce of that liberal and enlightened audieitce.—(Hear, hear )—lf he could have hoped that the Ministers of the Crown were likely to sanction or introduce such a plea sure, he should have been the last mau to bring it (inward. He was fully erlllll'n le that no- thing lie could say could add to its impost. mice ; he hail paid particular and anxious atten tion to the subject. Ile had not seen the Report of the Committee until after he had prepared the Bill ; but these was no view he had taken of the question that was Lot coutomed in their Report, and it gave him the greatest satisfaction that his opistions should meet the concurrence of such able and well-informed gentlemen. The nature of the law as it stands at present is, that there should be " unlimited provision for the poor." Now he pray ed particular attention to the word unlimited. Arguing d priori, the consequence of this must be that it would operate as premium for poverty, and consequently fur vice and immorality. The condition of Ronnie is labour, that we should " earn our bread by the sweat of our brow," and any thing th,it tends to deatioy this original precept must tend to loosen the bonds of society, and by making man dependant on others, dew ude biotin his watt opinion. If some remedy were not adopted, the time must come when the whole products of industry would not suffice for the maintenauce of the pauper pops lotion. Already in some parishes in Englund it Was net worth while to cultivate the land, op ac. cotiot of the pressure of the pooe's rates. These. laws were calculated to produce that effect, suit the mode of executing them was equally open to objection. At present the worst possible effect was produced on the ;loot themselves; and as the alms were bestowed without charity, an they were received without gratitude. They dissolved the bond which ought to exist between the poor and the rich, by cutting off the connecting links of charity and benevolence. It was a remarkable fact, that on exa ttt i tt ing the revoke which had arisen from this law fur the unlimited relief of the poor, it would be found going nu with such rapi dity as would soon swallow up the whole capital of the country. It would be found that in 1750, the rives amounted to 669,8911.; in 1776, they were 1,540,8041. being au increase of nearly a million in 26 years. In seven years after there was an increase of 500,0001.; in 1803 they amounted to 407,9631. being an increase in 20 years of 2,200,000/. ; and in 1813, the amount was 6029.8141. From a progression like this, it might with safety be predicted, that unless some preventive measures were adopted, the period must arrive when every parish in England would be unable to maintain its poor. From a Re port of the House of Lords in 1816, it appeared that iu the parish of Namptwich, in Cheshire, the overseers in an address to the inhabitant., after pointing out the increase of the poor, sod the iminber of bastard children, at a time when the wages of labour were very high as compared with the price of corn, concluded that the practical re sult of the poor loss was, to cause a relaxation of the industry, and a depreciatiou of the moral cha racter of the poor. It oppeared that sonurthiog must be douse to stop the progress of this evil, and it seemed that the cause being known, the obvious remedy would be to remove it, if no objection existed to reuder the removal pre judicial. The injury being caused by the unlimited relief, the remedy would be to limit the provision. His first proposal, therefore, would b:! the enactment of a law to fix II maximum to the Poor's Rater, the maximum to be the amount of last year's rates. That was not a year at which the collection was the highest, hut he considered the most proper, as it was the year is which the system had 'teddy its full raperetion, which by many Gentlemen was sup. posed to have changed, and which also fixed the ' value of money. What lie should propose would be, that it should not be• lawful for arty rates fur the relief of the pour to be levied iii future, exceeding the amount levied in the year ending March es, 1821. If the Hussite went along with him in that, the next question would be by what means a different aqsteui of r therninderitig the law could be enforced. The o.sgiuod of the ststute of Elizabeth was nut to give a pre. minus to idleness. but a relief to those who could not work : but in every parish it had ilegroesated into aii abuse of giving relief to thrive who lied work, but -had latuilies to runintein. A hilentroug umai, therefore, thought, as u toaster of course. that if hr had two children, the secured was to lie suwrr tained by the parish. Now he should be glad to know why the labourer should be exempted from that regard lo ecnnomy which every other class was obliged to exert. The second therefore, which he should propose to the House would be, that it should not be lawful for any over seer of the poor to give, or soy justice of the peace to order relief to be given to any person who, at the time.of. patatotaliist Act, should be uss•aavried e ex. cept they were incapacitated by infirmity of body or by old age. That would, he thonght, bring back prospectively the statute of &imbeds to eta proper operation ; et present it was calculated to shake the virtue of the industrious poor at who, when he saw a portion of his twenty pittance torn from hint for the support of the idle, would natu rally at last begin to think flint he too might as well form one of the indolent class. The third mensure which he should prepare was one on which, probably. there might be some difference of opi nion, though, fur himself, be confessed he had long entertained certain notions which he del not think could be shaken by any arguments that coul‘l brought against them. The House were aware that it wert.part of the system of the poor lams that per sons becoming chargeable, or likely to become chargeable. might be removed from the place where they then were to their own parish. The effect of the statutes of 13th and 14th of Charles the Second. Ives obviously to restrict the free circula tion of labour. It imposed on the labourer, in case lie could not get his bread at the place , where he their was, by sickness or any ether ac cident—it imposed on him the necessity of being sent to a distant parish, where his father or himself were born, and where no demised for his labour existed, and where he was sore to become a pauper. A more oppressive law (making poverty a crime, sod punishing it by exile anal banishment) never ex isted i►. the statute book of any country. He would suppose a Member of that House were now to get up and propose to enact a law, that whereas .poverty sod sickness' were great crimes, be it therefore enacted, that any industrious man found guilty of them should be banished to a dis tant parish. What would the House say to mach a proposition ? They would say the man was not only inhuman, but mad. Yet that was the low at present, though under soother name. The statute of Charles 11. was soon felt to be highly oppressive, end instead of repealing it, other laws were oblige° to be enacted 40 mitigate its operation, and venous artificial exceptions were introduced : fur instance, the rioting.* tenement of 101. a year. having served • parish-office, and others of the like nature. Dr. Burn said, on this law there had been • greater . number of decisions than on any other; and he would venture to say of it, that no law ever en acted had furnished so many subjects of lisigatiao. The whole system was artificial. A law was made . that was absurd in principle ; and instead of re peeling it when the evil was discovered, it was per petuated by expedients equally productive of li tigation and expense. It was part of his abj►ct to declare it unlawful to remove any man from the place where he was settled to the place of his birth, or that of his father. He was aware it might be objected, that manufacturing towns could nut beso dealt with. He would take Manchester, for example, and see the probable effect of thee law. There the labouring classes were very numerous, and on • want of Work, the practrce was to scatter theta over the country to their !reactive parishes; not withstanding this expense, the poor's rates therp arts less than in any agricultural parish in England. It never nosatune at Manchester than Sa. 6d. in the pound, and that only daring the great distress in the year 1816, and now it was reduced to as. 6d. in the pound, while many of the parishes in midland counties were paying 20r. in the pound. This arose partly from the removal of the labourers, who had contributed to enrich Manchester (or any other ma.- nufacturing town), to a poor parish, whichfied not received any benefit front their labour. Without ad verting to the injury sustained by the poor them selves from the law as it at present stood, the pass ing of this Act would, lie was persuaded, be a rest motive to economy in the poor's rates. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then compared the ex• pens. incurred by Manchester in the years 1815 and 1816 for poor belonging to other townships (which amounted to 2,3321.) with the poor be longing to Manchester, but keut by other town ships, which amounted to 2,5871. The dif ference against Manchester was only 195/. which was really not very cousidera.ble ; and 111 the aext quarter*. being a time of great distress, it only amounted to 6004 But if the rates of Munches ter or other manufacturing place• were increased by it 10,0001. the poor ought, if maintained tit all by a rate, to be maintained by that dis trict which had been enriched by their labour. He did not mean to touch the law respecting the removal of paupers not English, but he would just notice the operatiota of the law as it affected Manchester in that respect, the impediments thrown in the way of en Euglislt labourer obtaining a settlement not applying to the Irish or the Scotch, there were • resit seettassilaa non of labourers of those countries in Manchester, though to the booour of the latter ha seem .observe, that, in 1815, ouly four Scotch had applied fur Paii‘h restael, while at the none period *bore I,OOBL was distributed to the. Irish poor, end in 131.6 and 1817, when the distress was gresiet the sows sa►ouuted to 9.008/. If under the operation of the law which he proposed, the nuuthee of .poor should at any : time exceed the relief provided, as that could only arise Irons casualties nest likely to be permanent, it might be safely left to the benevolence of the wesilthirr elosaes, which liv was sstielied would be sufficteert fur the purpa•.. The Hon. end Learned Member concluded by noising for leave to bring in a Bill to ausend the Levs relating to the Relief of the...Peer.to Esitelsud. The Marquis of LoNoonDiLaltif returned hiss thanks to the Honourable and Learioni•©eetleman for the measure which Ire had so ably istirodoced to the House, and de►ired not to be eunsidered as dr. ticieni in zeal for the objects which the Hon►. end Learticd Geollesnais bad so view, loccause he ititht po•lpuue giviog any %mutton sot the toe amore at present. Sir Itoncre 11'it.son said 1i should oppose ■ny Rlrystire which went to deny the right Otitis the poor had to the relief they at present received, Mr. CALCSAFT that in. the materna:nut and reasonnies of his Hon, cud Learned Friend. the reason of the increase of the poor'a rote of late year• was entirely left out of aught bit whoever would trace the progeeve tosolo v , sod observe the 1,,