The Sun. — London, England, 1842-06-25 00:00:00

t) amend di.. t better light- ng into Com move that no , on spermaceti at present ou on going into move that the duty on other Imlay . next he he IN.orking of lluu 0,7 f: ould wove Oa t ion as well ould, on brp. i t y; i. Baronet 1v.% ..1 o f putout ,, . Secretor,' fer Mr. St. Gea . r' In. Friend the', uestion to tle:' ie lionoura • blis' The quest i ,,,k, ° : true, as ste , "l orge had be e ''., d some . r ef :. -."! sive lingneP,.. on an upplie e* . d that the pr,.t . improper,•e,fi: e him, fle;., He beliclcy• , Toble Lard °s : t the pal_: .s Hon. Frie • .ther had 15 " eti , inself justifie u +,• had been fee tie ' elle • jection t0...' i public offenc e ' on. GentletnsoJ, made the oth.lr;- St. George 0 2,; .etful lar2goS r • in cotiseque,'- ' ,: tight very PL : 'tenant w as Pr . ,. . to do 50,11 tter, or - w' ilt ig iiition Of- - I d .a , ivied so y of Gall Ch ance llor ig with fir. 7 apo l og y .or , i explazostiet e, he. tbee,Spi . or retractor rd he thought , r, tt in rest () y exprese . was no wi fr . mother Pbr; Clauricarcle *ce considerati.„ki ill political 95,t, himself .ie r j:‘ tcially after; A e (Lord 1 0 7 e House foga the samese: , that no Si tit. ,r of Irelan .....• hould mor e.' , .'"••• • i' BILL. :4 4, ,, ,use g?ing:;t, Bill being .:1 t to noticeolV tee, that •!`:, 1 :4 ; to two nyt [3lll what w°.gr. tight Hon.. the nitagi r . e i t o public bus' of mrtance el t o troduczd i ll i: felt that be I pursuing. A-id nber seete_rdotil uus opPP!; P. of \la,}',.eP t - i), the publie:4", Lion of the' tYom's session of ~ ,ti ses undernreli.' which the f .t it t which ef f& , ;4 affected_' 400,000,' - e Poor-11 0 '' t to thell li,i people of, • 1 r thu salt. e 4 ., orumunitYt , lik give a dee' -,, Ai ,: chat had a tv, :ver, the had. in. Membe' . o oo; the only roo d e ii ost cons "1 ke advanteg to obstrn.„, it to coin) 0 arts of .thee .m for tbe Baronet o i a . , ead to whiv-;: the ject, i o in publie'''.4, o ' d--" Thl e a'-g Iy requesi [nmittee tq , every 0ce,,40 1 . hich Pacl e :i4 )r its obj 00:. ners in e t , a f te r the In . 0 0 aifo , to the ~,, _l. befOre b-1100 his justil;oo and he % o f, ,sed to b i " - Or 1 out as •t ° ~ .0 lo certa in , his Colo ° , 0 0" )l which ()t 'ohms.% e t c Y", lut of te c 00E7 lad been eller ling of t h e! , s i t y 0 f APS g confess of sr, ,-orkinrcr... or 0 asceo'bf It ' ted or temple ~‘t ' o n the P - i ve he (Pl' e lf desir ik ecr ' 'h. ° and.*Ul brat, tl e otion !dime/It ifi r le i the h ro o cet P i e believe' tit t . and e ta, niniste, e , . ..re i r, itect V "' CP' .1,01 t Ori Poor ~ ieir per e ,.701:, 00 2 : an d . P o rtr, vorkieg,4 it toe ll It 0010 i• id n e t t ing. l e! d he- idt'.,,, , ‘ the duty Vi t o" is &M r ' - f tor' stat e ° fili oi,a 0 Al O !ty o ge.,.' tin gr 12 ,0 , ,ir%0. er ill • fae ll .ar ~.s itt o r , L ob a t e- k r , n ix ,it i•, 0 hieh ti,_, .1 , e nerr fe o' en h i f ite• v ,t this 0 , ,is .0 . - 5 - ;A 4 Cotner • C 4 '; 10 AO O ~ ,,,r - o r t .o,o l e i te ope o the st* it 4 t o ia 0.4 , 0 ,1 . 1 1 11 1 1 c1 % : h oe a ;tee ms te , . ;111" o prilit lefee c r o ot' A lt the ~ ,s ali , nii ai s u rit for , jp s b a iu , ok itteo Or" Ile -th e ice. .i in ~,, ' L ao. in teli. ol , iiiarr 0 of_ [er 1 " 011 c1 c r o 010 0 - ref no e of 63 , 1. h 0o ,!.. 1 1 . „ ' A bour e ' 09 1 ' , ty, h hu ' to 0; lie or ,;„0. qfi. ..fai..- . ~ , e t d e ' . or v 0° 'll hill" e „etie°,, ' it ,b s tr-- hp lau'ei-4 3' c the e foro ss , , us,e ba iin. it , c buc• ;0 10- r uc i 10 ! stai io , his o , lld Sr i eC Ch lei 5 --hiC- h 0 . e ct vi rio , obi vi bio 9— _, Went e j, OD i , A 01 fig h4tt,tpto vo i hitP.,7 ~ ” „ ' WO° ~--.•'---- THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JUNE 25, 1842. Zlx,ele PQilt,had o ft e n b een beforethe House, he wished 16- vrtly he should vote with the Government I nl that motion. lie thought it more expedient t hat et the 'Bill should be but one Bill, as it wou ld l en come better befere the public. They could monte or alter it in_ Committee, and they would have a more unanimous rote against the third reading-. Mr. FIELDEN expressed his determination to oppose fur in every stage. They were sent to that !louse it. the perpOse ur opposing it, What he wished was, to di spense with the Connnissioners, and to make the measure what it ought to be. 4. Sir U. W. B.A.IIIiON would vote sgainst the proposi tion of the Hon. Member for linaresborengli, because he was morally convinced that the Poor Law Bill, when prtiTerly eonsidered, wo u ld be tu mi d to be o n e the greatest benefits ever conferred by that use on the people of this country. N(.3 'Measure t% er yet b ro U g h t f orward conferred so inue'a advantage both Oil rich and p oor. On the prier, oceans° it would give them independent. feelings, a^.,l teach them to rely ta their own resources.—(llear, hear.) On the rich ee ause it Wfl.4. impossible that matters could go the in the same, state they were for '25 years before e , - ,: e l' as aing of ehe New Poor-law Act without a total j -- "ention of the property of the country, rind the pass pilag au egrarian law. But he was glad Hon. Gentle -lihe,ePposite redeemed the pledges they gave on the hustings reepecting the Poor-law, through the disgrace ful tt glteition of which many of them obtained their e tsS. But were the gentlemen on the front bench free t ; = ' that agitation ? They did not, it was true, par eiltPate in it, but they permitted it by their silence— ,llat's hear)—while their friends and supporters t h' i journals were proclaiming eternal war On Whigs who introduced the Poor-law.-- , o f r .) They obtained their majority by means egitation against the Poor-law, the Corn-law and the e e - .Z, tr ade principles of the Whigs. They talked tarts ag ,-„.°ll,_iteelreland.—(Cheers and laughter.) But the py e t)r f r,„ ° ° 7 (= obtained their majority by agitation on the i a w•—(Cries of " Question.") They obtained it lt gdation on the Poor-aw. That was fee question. v e felt it his duty to tell Hon. Members opposite what mas,tho`feeling of the people of England. Let them look vetrne Tinies,•the Morning Post, and the Herald ; those Althen some of the supporters of the Goverment.— t ot ugh he supported the Poor-law itself, he could s upport that dereliction from principle by which Hon. A nthers eppes i te had been b rought into power. f GIIIMSDITCH said it would have been better or lie lion. Gentleman who had just sat down to have I hse r Zved his warmth fur some subject connected with lie7Z tl . -- -(Loud cries of " Hear, healer from Sir 11. th • . L ' i ` rrfl n.) His only object appeared to be to have a w t i t'W at the Riht Hon.' Gentleman below (Sir R. Peel). sist th e r esPect to the motion, lie could see no advantage u ,could bederived from acceding to it, and as lie was te _ -thug to offer any factious obstruction to the passing Voor-law, lie could not give it his support. eleroheral ' JOHNSTONE said,.instead of dividing th e pitsa • into two part - s, ' he thought the best plan would be j oa a temp orar y miessure. Ile thought it would be bible to g o through all the clauses. ha:,,, t • LAWSON said as his proposal did not appear to p e , 44 .w, WI the concurrence of the House, he would not _it eoa division. ine motion was then withdrawn. de e DUNCOMBE then rose to move-4' That, coh:,i -ch,..23 the dist resse d state o f t h e commerc i a l an d i n d ustr i ous 7 4 . 3 of this country, together with the advanced period of the and the present state of public business, coupled with Litelaisain,tg month, that o the . Poor-law Commission expires o n th e 31 s t o f i h, it is the opinion of this House, that there is tiop s 'lfficient time to enable Parliament t o g i ve th a t atten the - att .. , 4 deliberatio n t o th e i m port a nt c h anges i n t h e l a . is f or 4, 4t Arlitini s t rat i on of relief to the poor which the measure el l e fe n ced by h er M a j esty ' s Mi n i s t ers i mperat i ve l y demands; o f t f at it would therefore be more expedient, that measures irteo b j n e ,P°rarY character should be adopted, to meet any ihg : "lenee which the expiring provisions of exist :rc4w.s for the relief of the poor may be deemed he t a llt e." In submitting his motion to the I - louse, thotiihc n 't actuated by any factious motive, though he eete ein , t hat faction, when every thing else had failed, was an e t , the fi7 useful r esource . Hi s o bj ec t i n su b m i tt i ng hi s mot i on abo ut fi e l 4 e was merely to save tim e . Th e H ouse h a d on l y tekt e l i . t e weeks to deliberate upon this important mea - ure, tur een Zo,tairied sixty-two cle.uses ; besides this there w ere be keed that and fifty notices s ta n di n g on th e p a p er . H e pre soenee.Se t was the ir,tention to allow the House of Lords sh oul Tolo to discuss the measure and the least time which they Wer e l a i liew the m was a fortnight or three weeks. If that time ,41.10:1:ah;_oowdeudeeato., t a e sete other House, the House of Commons st a , • .'"Xe °oh' three weeks to discuss the measure. The Bill year in the month of February, and the Ap t j j . 9 t "lng b een occupied in discussing it until th e s t h o f i s eri e preset,' - • s po t oned on account of public business until •E Session. After the anouncements which _had been it j, P ef a d e t erm i nat i on t o oppose the - Bill, he th oug ht or 'Prissible th it could go throu g h C omm i tte d , e the t erm i nat i on o f t h e C omm i ss i on. It rested entirely t e 'll the Opposition, whether the Bill should pass or not; and 14 Pet it to the Government, whether it would be worth while et Ptsiceed. The object of his motion was to induce the Go litiont to continue the Commission for a short period. tt, ° eßh he did no t thi n k the Commission a t a ll necessary, he l e 7ltht there cou ld be no difficulty in continui ng it for one e t ys i .lnriger. Now, what was the actual state of public bogie Zt• There were seventeen orders on the paper to-d a y. L ast gt th e Ri g ht Hors. Baronet introduced three Bill s , one o f 1.1 6 7/1 was upon the important subject of prison disci e4l7; What had become of the other measures - had been announced in the Queen's Speech— .for the amendment of the Bankruptcy Court, t heeitill for the amendment of, the Ecclesiastical Courts ? %.-latter Bill, it appeared, was to be brought in and thrown SlZ t h, table. '1 hey had, indeed been told that there was a t he , greater importance than that of registration; that ei•Y which had taken place in Ireland was unparallel e d. tatk;red, however, that the Bill. with respect to Ire attex,:;,te be postponed. He could not understand why the ~,- " `e t tli4tem be introduced at an early period of the Session, rant jo;' .ll 4ations the Noble Lord had made as to its pare olee.,tertance. W hat was proposed by the Poor-law bill? 13 li teGV,'"eontinuance of the Commission, but the abolition eotiti n - u e 't Corporations—the setting aside of all local Acts, and Veit ,„, ante of the proxy system of voting. It also established Zatei s e; e t . those itieerant nuisances, the Assistant-Poor-law f i v Ilass e r, t ers, Was it possible to believe that this Bill coal passes tip e '!"•eugh the House in three weeks? Were they to discussion the estimates that still remained to be .. 111• , ere t:t . t ho eight or nine hundred. thousand pounds that 4 7 14 ra a t ee "v aeerupriated to the China war, to the Canadian f e d Were all these public questions to he set aside, `lsti tui , e hjettionabl e Bill to be proceeded with? The pub- Zneht war; tint in a fit state to receive this Bill as it was at iira„ e e r essed on them. The opinion of every ninetyenine li fe t'l a hundred out of that House, was against the Z e the„ ",at was the opinion with regard to the Bill expressed zultoneeldion he had presented to the House, signed by three - e l e e f the people? They stated that in England, Ireland. stit - " , and Wales, thousands of people were dying of actual wree n s e,d that they looked with the greatest alarm on the de ttion u PPervi r ,.." the Government to continue the Poor-law Bill 47- * He should not now go further into the merits 11 "14,, t its of the Bill; he hoped the House would agree to e ed oa t , abd 1k :41 t v i l i e ostpt3n the discussion of the measure till an next °d cif e session. This would conciliate the • h," l the peopl e; b u t an y a 't em pt t o p us h th e measure 'wat t , - w as assured, would only end in defeat and disap ett, r l t .o th W e IIAeLLA. CE perfectly agreed with the Hon. Member tee, tif eesstty of postpor.ing the present measure, end he -ae ase utt her that if it were persevered in, the time of the 'stress orh ' *hi ought t o b e devoted to the consideration of the 4eadth 6 : the working classes throughout the length arid put the land, cou'ld not be applied to that eurpo.,e. it ee 5 i e : f e the country to which he belonged the distress was naily deeper and more gloomy ; nor was th ere aa y Rd `4 1 ,," of imp rovemen t i n t ra d e ; it seemed as if more 04 . 4.,, f Hof the people were being made destitute for the ;'`e h ' loi d 'ligeyment and wages. The . Right Hon. Baronet ev eo j,,`"re that he could . not give him . (Mr. Wallace) elle, • 1 to bring this important subject before the , t e 1)ow tndividual Members were now deprived of ll:esdae:er of bringing such motions before the House. Pers‘uad been given up for public business, until their shoe sham e teasures should have been disposed of. No sooner sealineeeea Measures over, than the Right Hon. Baronet had s t ride ',that for the remainder of the session the Tuesdays ,ii.'"tititt.tmedeinted to public business. Her Majesty's late ; 1 4 14Z had immediately acceded to the proposition, thus th t'eg o ear that the two great parties' did - hot wish to en euet th e discussion on the motions of individual Members— oaderlY Were desirous that public business only should be ‘ 17 . 4t They . had now . what he called a Poor-law Parlia el be ln Fang William-street, who were distributing P e e i ttit e . e , destitute in England and Scotland. He had en -I.2ett to discover by what authority these gentlemen re t4ll. 7, :and also upon what principle they distributed . W e r e had been unable to discover either. He believed bile i i :,aetuatedby sentiments of humanity, but still the e i i `t a right to know under what authority they col eerie Ik e tneney, and upon what principle they distributed it. ink te ` shut out from bringing on a discussion on the gene -47 of the country, he would avail himself of the rules of ;T I P, , 0 1 / 3 e order to force it on. He would move order after if k 44 to pre v ent the public business being carried on, teetit had Six Members would stand by him , he would go iteLPeop , e nad forged Parliament to attend to the distresses of rids He believed the Parliament ought to interfere be ieeeet-e People and starvation. If the people were to be 1, 41 te I tev t e starve, let the Parliament say so. And if there 1 114 :344,, 1• 0e from which they could be relieved, let the say so In this country, it was said, they had a t 1, , 2,,, 14.3 • " , that provided for the distressed poet-. Did it do so, c"a 04 44 ? In his country they had no such law, and the t.tliarnent would have been better occupied in peo nal oor-law f or S cot l an d, th an i n amending the Poor 41and. He should support the motion of his Hon. I t the b u tt adopt th e course t o w hi c h h e a ll u d e d w i t h regar d - I, l tth e „.7 llll sS of th e H ouse , if h o was supporte d b y any H on. h ee °it Jittp e ;pose e t ,,, eeS GRAHAM requested the attention of the eof v ery few moments. He found no reason to corn -144--sefeyalaeetoootion which they were then discussing ; and so "Ifee--" lonsinering it a factious motion, he looked upon it as A tli 494 foalth ne. !ie thought it fairly rsised' a most important by e deliberate attention of the House. He hoped hAnrityi which would that if the motion were negatived by . --uses would leave no doubt as to the opinions of jjels G„, ""nse gentle men who were opposed to her Ma _erement en the question would, es was usual in all de ;Let h ita ,!_es:mblies, feel themselves bound by such a decision. hj s ue fre vred to call the attention of the House to what te nee,...* l:loe • Geriflse ra up a ti a n_t a n d e m sa nte t c la t t he a n wa u s nd m er ea c t orte a r b a l t a ion to . lbortallboor-la "Ira" " e • in h that House upon such a subject as ee or w t .' Be (Sir James Graham) admitted the im .nat object; but he felt that such a consideration A r e t at re e 'd_ .to others of a still higher importance. big th e wi ?,fle,d be more deeply impressed than he was eOt ietr :nil spread distress among the working classes in h e , while he made that admission most unequivo ir p ewiti ..._ l _ that the question of the administration of relief to - It w w_aa , at this moment environed with peculiar difficul cee th e , e 7,..the i re . for e , his duty to consider carefully in what ,ate teotte hltieu ties could be met most safely and most ad ltter„ In c i the public. H e h a d some experience in the B r i n e itted th e ex i st i ng distress, that there were in :• tt. 1411 : 1 1 ,,, 1 11 ‘" 4 4 4d tiri-e*srt;el:V: as 1,200,000 per sons now rece i v i ng re li e f f rom Hear, hear.) There was riot the slightest . h th a e rge ex , t , e f i l t of the evil. Ile was speaking ld painful duty. They were a deli tetray---the great council of the nation, and he rust if Le did not speak to them frankly. lie `` salt l 2Mlntly that the distress was wide-spread. He had „ re m tho receipt of parish relief. He d,70 ssersons we • • hid ' e ,.21 3 4 11 hew should th,s difficulty best be met. He sl ep lar rl to long periods-of distress, uninfluenced by He a n that exorcised by the. Poor-law Commis "ii72%Mbtd experience of the contrary—of control t( 4 t h e n ; e ..e , tie advising the Crown , he should le t e and, of the present . moment were only ‘lll alfe lY met, loos m the adMlnllgratloll of relief, `se 7.511ee.... tilt) Poor-ls.w ;.:4111Iiiiionell in powers • • such as he asked to be extended td them by this Bill. He de rrecated a!togete.cr the 'hurt continuant c of !his power 001) for n single year. He was convinced that the Commissioner: could only encounter the Pifficultirs to be nvercome on th - s subject by the marked countenance of the Legislature. He wo.s convinced that the continuance of the Commission for only 12 months, would mark a want of decision in the Legislature with respect to the measure itself, and evince distrust in the persons in whom they ought to confide. It was his conviction that, so curtailed in power and so brianded with want of confi dence, the Commissioners could not, with advantage to the public, manage the ditlieulties they had to deal with. On the other hand by 'extending their power for the term proposed in that Bill, Ititi Commissioners would be enabled to deal with the thliculties of the present moment. The Hon. Gentleman Mkt) had just sat down had said that out of doors, there was a Mrong feeling against the continuance of the Commission, and that the Commissioners were itinerant nuisances. Now, as for the charge of their being itinerant nuisances, he must say the House via.: aware of the extent to which distress existed in the manufacturing districts, but in none was the dhtress felt more severely than in the district around Burnley. lie had stated on a former occasion that the Government and Poor-law Commissioners, viewing the peculiar distreas of that district, had sent down an Assistant Commissioner, of prat: ical experience and knowledge, to visit that district, and regulate the administration of relief to the poor. From great mismanagement, the admini stration of relief there was involved in great confusion. Sir J. Walsham, from his experience in the northern counties, was thought the fittest person to superint,nd the administration of relief, and lie was accordingly sent down. Instead of his being considered an itinerant nuisance, his mission, which was of temporary duration, lasting only for one month, was attended with the resteratien of order, where confusion had previously existed. lie had placed the distribution of relief to the poor upon such an improved footing, that, upon his withdrawal, a wish was generally expressed that some similar superintendence should be dontinued to be exerci,ed in the district. Under these circumstances, it was hard that gentlemen who were exe cuting a painful duty, should be exposed to such charges, espe cially when they had not an opportunity ofexplaining.—( Hear, hear.) He would again repeat, that he believed the continu ance of the central control was indispensable for five years; and he entreated and implored the House, under those eircum ttances, not to throw into irretrievable confusion the machinery by which so great a number of persons were relieved. lie therefore entreated the House not to decide the question on a single motion. If the House agreed with him upon the ne cessity of maintaining the Commission, he asked them by a decisive majority to negative the motion. Having done that, they would proceed to commit the Bill, and the first clause would raise the question of the continuance of the Commission; and when that was once decided, the remaining claures were all twit igations of the pre,ent system, except the 6th, which referred )to the abolition of the Gilbert Unions. Upon all those points he was quite prepared to enter upon the discussion of them in the most amicalye and conciliatory spirit, and to conciliate the support of those who interested themselves in favour of the pier, whose welfare he was sincerely and deeply dusirous to promote.—( Loud cheers.) But he did not think he would be acting with kindness towards the poor, or doin4 his duty. if he consented to forego any opportunity of pressing on the Legisla ture the paramount importance of the renewal of the Poor-law Commission not for one, but fur fine years.—( Cheers. ) Mr. HUME said that. when the Right lion. Gentleman told them that there were 1,200 000 receiving relief from parochial funds, and probably half that number who could not obtain it, a frightful picture was exhibited before them.—( Hear ' hear. ) For himself he had always s upp or t e d th e Bill an d t h e Central Commission as a measure essential to the well-being of the country, because of its tendency to promote a spirit of inde pendence, and habits of economy and prudence amongst the labouring classes.—( Hear, hear.) But after the trial they hail of the working of the Bill, he did not think they treated the working classes as they ought.—(Hear.) He thought they might continue the Commission for one year or for two, and commence early next session with the general Bill A docu ment was laid upon the table of the House—the Report of Mr. Mott upon the Keightley Union—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. Ferrand)—to which he entreated the attention of Hon. Gen - tlernm.—( Hear, hear.) He did not believe that such a state of things as was described in that Report ought to be suffered to continue, and an inquiry ought to be instituted into the facts. Ir.FE RR AND-1 hey are not true.—( Cries of " Order.") Mr. HUME—The Hon. Gentleman says they are not true ; but I believe the Commissioner rather than the Hon. Member. —( Loud cheers.) He (Mr. Hume) heard the Hon. Member make assertions which he did not support.—( Hear, hear.) Here was an officer making a Report in execution of his duty, arid could he ( Mr. Hume) doubt that Report ?—( Hear, hear. ) The Hon. Member would, therefore, excuse him, considering the interruption, for making the answer he did.—( Loud cries of " Oh, oh," and " Hear, hear, hear.") It was the first vote be ever gave against the Poor-law Commission, but when he saw the misery and destitution of the country, what could he do ? ( Hear, )iear. ) If the Hon. Baronet wished to remove the distress of the people let him remove the barriers of the importation of their food.----Oh, oh ) They might depend upon it the time would come wlien they would be obliged to do that without favour which they now refused. He had also a greater objection, which was that when they did open their ports it might be too late. In consequence of our rejecting the corn of other countries, they were led to adopt measures against us which might render them ultimately independent altogether. He should oppose the five years period of duration ; he had not altered his opinion as to the principles of the Pill, but he mistrusted its correctness. He would tell them that they never would be able to maintain the Poor-laws and the Corn laws together. There would soon be only two classes of persons in the country, the very rich and the very poor, and he would like to know what advantage they would then derive from their property. The prospects of the country had never been so gloomy as they were at present ; and there was no probability of a termination to the sufferings of the people unless they es established free trade in provisions. Away with charity. He wished to see the population of England assume a manly form, instead of requiring to be supported by begging letters. They might depend upon it that the rich as well as the poor Would ultimately. feel the distress. He called upon them in this crate of circumstances to deal out to others that justice which they would have dealt out to themrelves. Air. LIDDELL said he rose to submit a proposition to the House which he believed would, if acceded to, remove all the obstacles to the settlement of this question. The proposition which he had to make was, that her Majesty's Government, in consideration of the late period of the session, would consent to limit the Bill to the first five clauses. By that means the present law would be continued without compromising any one's opinions, and they might, in the next session, discuss all the clauses of the Bill. He thought that was a very fair propo sition. His propo■al was, that they should pass a temporary law, leaving the powers of the Commissioners dependent on the will of Parliament ; and they might afterwards consider the whole subject next session. He did not deny that great distress now prevailed in the manufacturing districts; but he could not agree with the Hon. Member for Montrose that a repeal of the Corn-laws would alleviate the evil. It was well knot-. it that. there was now little or no corn in the ports of northern Europe, so that the nostrum of the Hon. Member for Mentrose would produ -e no beneficial effects for the working classes, while it would disturb the great arrangements which had lately re ceived the sanction of the Legislature. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it was for the Government to consider what. course they would adopt with regard to the pro position of the Hon. Gentleman. Perhaps the most convenient course would be for the House to consider thefirst five clauses, and then V...ey would see what work was before them, and be able to see if the House would be disposed to agree to the remainder of the clauses. That, however, was a subject for the Right Hon. Gentleman to consider and to determine on. What he thought it essential that they should not do, was, that they should not merely renew the power of the Commissioners for a single year—such a course would tend to weaken the authority of the Commissioners. If the House in tended to support the Poor.law he hoped the House would agree to the clauses, and give the time proposed by the Bill, in order to give the Commissioners the authority neces sary fur the due execution of their duty. He would say no thing with regard to the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman, but he must give his opinion against the advice of the Hon. Member for Montrose, who said that they ought not to con tinue the authority of the Poor-law Commissioners. bnause he differed in opinion with the Government on the subject of the Corn-laws. He was sorry that the Hon. Member for Mont rose had introduced the question of the Corn-laws into the discussion, and he regretted still more that. the Hon. Gentle • matt opposite should have followed the example. He disagreed with the Hon. Gentleman opposite ; and certainly the speech of the Hon. Gentleman held out great temptation to reply ; he, however, would not yield to the temptation, but he could not agree, that because they had a system of Corn-laws, of which they did not approve, that therefore they should have a bad system of Poor-laws. He believed that if they had a good system of Corn-laws there would be fewer persons requiring relief; but he could not agree that because they had a system of Corn-laws of which he did not approve that therefore they were to have a system of Poor-law relief calculated to foster im prudence, and to give the labourer relief in the worst possible manner, by giving it in aid of wages. He thought no system of Corn-laws could make it expedient for the House to have a bad system of Poor-loss's. He admitted thit any system of poor laws would be rendered more difficult of administration on ac count of the distressed state of the country; but if they thought the present system of Poor-laws the best that under existing circumstancescould be adopted, they ought to support the mea sure. He should, therefore, oppose the motion of his Hon. Friend, and after the Bill' had passed through Committee the House would be able to see if there would be time during the short period the session was likely to last to consider the clauses which did not at proent form part of the Bill. Colonel WOOD should vote for the five first clauses as they stood, but he should wish the Act to be discussed next Session, and that the relief should be fixed by the Act, and not left to the Poor-law Commissioners. ....... .. e Mr. FERRAND rose for the purpose of informing the House that he believed the Poor-law Commissioners, as well as the Assistant Commissioners, were thoroughly prepared to vote black was white if they could only put the public money in their pockets. He also rose for the purpose of defending him self as a member and chairman iif the Keightley Board of Guardians, and he hoped he should do so to the satisfaction of the House, wet prove that the Report laid on the table by a paid (act r of the Government, was a most false and scandalous Report.—( Hear, heYr.) He was not going upon rumour, like the lion. Member for Bath.—( Hear, hear.) Ile should bring forward the evidence of Sir J. Wa!sham. He was there to speak the truth, and he cared not who he might offend by it. The Government of the country were indebted to the deep-rooted hatred which the poor people had for the Poor-law for its majority in that House.—( Hear, hear. ) What hurled the Whigs from power? The fact of standing by the New Poor-law. The opposing that law had given the Conservative candidates of the North of England their majority, arid he was there fearlessly to do his duty. (He then proceeded to read the extracts from Mr. Mott's Report, accusing the Board of Guardians of violating the instructions of the Commissioners. ) Mr. Mott, himself, said the Board of Guardians were acting in opposition to the crders of So merset House. He found that Sir John Walaham, in his Re port, by way of introduction to the Report of Mr. Mott, stated that the Settle poor had more than doubled since February, 1837. It would be in the recollection of the House that in a speech which he had made a short time ago, he took upon him self to defend the chairman of the Board of Guardians in his own neighbourhood, against the attack of Mr. Mott. It had been stated by Mr. Mo:t that he had introduced tens of thou sands of poor persons from the south of England into the parise of Bingley. The fact sv..s, that the surplus population of the comity of Lancashire was caused by thousands of the poor of the south of England b: ing turned off their parishes and sent to Lan eash ire,and this gentleman ern' loyed numbers of them in his mills. What said Mr. Mott? He begged the attention of the Hon. Member for Montrose. Ile said the guardians conducted their business in a very satisfactory mariner. Sir J. Walsh= said the guardians disposed of their business in a business-like manner ; but he was not inclined to argue in favour of the proceedings as regarded a more systematic disposition of out door relef. He ( Mr. Eerrand) had only received Mr. Mott's Report a esterday morning, and lie sent it down immediately be the last night's post, and he had every reason to believe that an extraordinary meeting would be held on Monday to refute the charges brought against the Board of Guardians in that Report. He (Mr. Ferrand) had given notice of a mo tion that evening, for the purpose of obtaining some informa tion as to certain proceedings whiei had taken place within the last ten days in Settle union workhouse. That was no party question. It was one of life or death—a question by which was to be decided the paint whether or not the working classes were to be united in decided hostility to the in titutions of the country. The people of England wet e not so forgetful of the principles; of their ancesters, as to render it necessary that Commissioners should be the dispensers of cha rity to their distressed fellow - countrymen. In the month of July, lai, the Right Hog. Ilexonet the Secretary of Otate for the Home Department, had made a sreech in which he seemed to censure the principle of refusing, under all circum stances, out-door relief ; bud the Right Hon. Baronet stated that the law, in that rest ect, had been capriciously applied. The Right llon. liar met also stated, on that occasion, that unless the Board of Guardians in Cumberland were to he left unfettered, he would nut answer for the consequences during the ensuing winter. Neither, unle,s his board of Guardians were left unfettered, would he (Mr. Ferrand) be responsible for the consequences cluing; the coming winter.— (Hear. ) He then read from a speech of Sir R. Peel in 1839, his opinion as to the propriety of continuing the Poor-law Bill, and the size of unions. It was public opinion that carried the Right Hon. Bayonet into power, and if he braved the public opinion of the North of England, he believed that his Nlinistry would not last two years. When it was first introduced it was said that it worked well ; but it worked well by saving the money of th.• rate-payers, and that was no test of the constitutional prin ciple. The whole Conservative press of the North, the oboe daily press of this Metropolis, and the weekly press through out the country, were taking a tone upon this law that must shake any man, however popular; and if the Right lion. Baronet pursued his present course, he would give him only two years to destroy the influence he had acquired. The Right Hon. Baronet. (the Secretary of State) had attacked him rather warmly for the exciting Character of his speeches ; but had not the Right Honourable Baronet himself been a member of the Reform Ministry, who did all in their power to influence the people ? The party he belonged to had never influenced the minds of the people—had never threatened the House of Peers—they took their stand upon constitutional principles.—( Sir Robert Peel here rose and quitted the House.) The Right Hon. Baronet had quitted the House a minute too soon.--(Laughter.) He could refer to more of the Right Hon. Baronet's opinions. The New Poor-law had dried up the springs of charity. It had taught the rich to forget their duty to the poor. The love of idleness was natural to man. '1 here was no man who would not live with out labour if he could ; and the reproach upon the poorer classes that they were idle would apply as well to those who crushed them in the dust.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Baronet might find persons to support him in pa,sing this bad law, although they had broken faith with their consti tuent', and foresworn the solemn promises they had made at the hustings. But a day of reckoning would come, old English feeling would revive, and when the agitation that commenced ten pars ago had subsided, the English people would pass a solemn judgment upon this measure and its promo:ms. Colonel T. WOOD sail the time had now come, when the House must decide whether this law was to be continued or not. He had thought it his duty to examine into the working of the law, and he had found that it was advantageous to all parties—to the poor, and to those who supported the poor; and, above all things, advantageous to the rising generation. He begged to bear his testimony to the practical good working of the preseut system. _ . _ _ Air. S. WORTLEY was not one of those who would offer any unfair opposition to the Bill, but he certainly should oppose it, and that decidedly and firmly. On the present occasion, he should feel it his duty to vote in favour of the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe). Mr. WA K LEY was surprised to hear the sentiments that fell from the Hon. and Gallant Member for Middlesex (Col. Wood). If it hail not been for the support which his Hon. Friend behind him (Mr. Hume) had given to this law, he would have been Member for the county of Middlesex. The Gallant Colonel would share that Hon. Gentleman's fate at the next election. With rc spect to the conduct of the Right Hon. Baronet in this matter, he saw the difficulty in which he was placed in this matter, and he ected like a cautious and a wise General accordingly. The Right Hon. Baronet thought that by the yotc the Government gave now they would be guided hereafter, and he was right ; but he warned the Right Hon Baronet against concluding that he wculd be able to carry out thelaw, although he might be hacked by a large majority of that House. 1 hay had starving thousands, they would soon have starving millions ; were they prepared to pass this Act of coercion for the poor—for it was an Act of coercion ? He asked the Right Honourable Baronet if he thought that if this law were enforced it would be calculated to ensure the peace and safety of the country ? He hoped the Right Hon. Baronet did not think so, for if such was the opinion of the Right lion. Baronet, then no man had ever formed more in correct or erroneous conclusions than the Right Hon. Baronet. What harm could be done by adopting the motion of his (Mr. Walley's) Hon. Colleague? He (Mr. Wakley) had been asked to take advantage of the forms of the House in opposing this Bill to the last, so that the Commission should die a natural death at the end of the month, but considering the present ass ful state of the country, the amount of distress existing and likely to exist, he now expressed himself ready to yield to the suggestion of his Hon. Colleague, and to consent to the con tinuance of the Commission for another year. He did not con sent to this arrangement without unwillingness, but still he would consent to it. The Right Hon. Baronet had spoken of a factious opposition. That was not a just remark on the part of the Right Hun. Baronet. The Government had no need to complain of the manner in which they had been treated in that House—( Hear, hear)—they had never experienced any thing but a perfectly fair and candid opposition, and on many occasions the Opposition had given the Government its support. The question was one of great ra tional importance, affecting as it did the safety and comforts of millions of the poor of this country ; and if it was in the power of the House to do anything calculated to conciliate the suffering people, it was their duty to take that course, instead of carrying out, their own theoretical principles to the uttermost. He hoped, therefore, that the Right Hon. Gentleman would take the proposition of his (Mr. IVakley's) lion. Colleague into his serious consideration. He almost hoped that they might not divide on the question to-night, in order that the Right Hon. Gentleman might have twenty-four hours more for consideration. The Right Hon. Baronet was little aware of the feeling in the House and of the still stronger feeling out of doors in regard to this most important subject.— ( Hear, hear.) Allusion had been made to the Report of Mr. Mott, and although arimiting the statements made by Mr. Mott to be exactly true, he thought some censure might on some points attach to the guardians of the Keightley Union ; yet he saw infinitely more to censure in the spirit in which the Report had been drawn up than in anything that had been done by the Board of Guardians. Were they legislating, he would ask, with an understanding that the destitute poor had a right to relief ?—(Cheers.) Had the destitute poor a right to relief ?—( Cheers. ) Mr. ROEBUCK—No. Mr. WA KLEY—The Hon. and Learned Member for Bath denied their right. Now he (Mr. Wakley) would say, that every man who denied that right, however fit he might be to be a legislator in that. House was unfit to carry out the Poor law—( Hear, hear)—because it showed that his mind was so constructed that he was incapable of carrying it out in a proper spirit.—( Hear.) Now what did Mr. Commissioner Mott say on this point. What said this perambulating luminary, who wan dered up anti down the country, for the purpose of instructing Boards of Guardians in their duty of informing Magistrates how wrong they were in ordering relief—of showing Noble Lords that they knew nothing of their duties to the poor? The aristocracy d the kingdom was sinking itself to the lowest state of degradation and infamy by consenting, in order to effect a seeming saving of a few pence, to be insulted by the hired tools of the Government in every union in England. Relief, he said, was generally confined to the payment of rent to an alarming extent. This ntight, or might not be true. If true, he (Mr. Wakley) did not approve of the i ractice. In the Report was this—" The paupers insolently claim relief as a right." Now that was the statement of one of the Poor-law Commissioners, and put upon the table by a Minister of the Crown, the Minister for the Home Department. A Poor-law Commissioner said that the paupers insolently demanded relief as a right? Had they that right under the Act of Elizabeth? For nearly 250 years they had that right, and did they take that right from them by the Poor-law Amendment Act?—( Hear.) If not, upon what principle was it that they acted? If the paupers had no right to be relieved, too man was accountable for starving them. (Hear, hear.) If they had no right to relief, who was re sponsible in law for starving them ? The paupers insolently claimed relief as a right I Was that man to be continued in the Commission? He (Mr. Wakley), for one, if the Poor. law Commission was to be continued, and the agent cf that Commission, who had dared to make that statement and submit it to the House of Commons —said, if there were no other ground for refusing so continue the Commission for a period of six yearn, that was sufficient, unless such a man was dismissed. lie, for one, would offer his unflinching opposition to its con tinuance, for he could conceive nothing more monstrous and unjust--nothing, in fact, more guilty—than for a hired agent of the Government to dare to say that the poor man had inso lently demanded relief as a right. Now, what did he find in the last part of the Report ? He would read the whole of it : —" Two Magistrates afterwards attended the meeting of the Board of Guardians, Messrs. Ellice and Greenwood, to whom I stated the complaints made." In the preceding paragraph he stated that the relieving officer had been repeatedly summoned for refusing relief in several cases. In the last paragraph the relieving of ficer was stated to complain of being summoned. I f lie with held relief was he not to be summoned? He complained of the grievance, and Mr. Mott seemed to interfere for the purpose of preventing the Magistrates granting the summons. Now let them look to this. Could any one conceive a more monstrous course of proceeding? Mr. Mott said, " two Magistrates at tended the meeting of guardians, to whom I stated that com plaints had been made by the relieving officer of his being sum moned. They said that the clerk had granted summonses, but they always told the relieving officer that relief rested with the Board of Guardians." The Magistrates told the relieving officer, therefore, " You have nothing to fear from ua." This, too, was in a district where the law was as little understood by the Magistrates as the guardians. This was the Report that was laid with so much eclat on the table of the House of Gam mons. If there was anything to stamp the Commission with disgrace it was this. The very parties who carried out this law were obnoxious to any Poor-law, and their only object was to get rid of giving relief to the destitute. If the poor man claimed relief he was called insolent. This stamped, in his (Mr. W.'s) opinion, more odiously the character of Mr. Mott than anything which had been thrown out against the Keightley Union. He could discover nothing which related to the Board of Guardians so bad as this. Now if that was the spirit in which the law was carried, out the Right non. Baronet might depend upon it that the screw might be turned too tight upon a hungry man, There was more distress in the country at this moment than any man could imagine. He (Mr. Wakley) was daily in the habit of meeting tradesmen, farmers, and all classes of persons, and since he had been in public life he had never heard anything to equal the statements of the public distress. Every man was complaining of want of business. There were people travers ing the country, seeking employment, willing to wet k at am wages they would give them. He had himself a small farm few miles from town, about ten miles from London, at which there had teen a scene more painful than it was possible to de scribe. The poor people came across the country, seeking for work, without a farthing in their pockets. They had not been at work in the field half an hour before they asked for money to buy bread; they were utterly incapable of working without sustenance as they went on. They slept in the barns and out houses, and some of them did not take their clothes off for days together. But the statement they made was, that they would rather die than go into a union workhouse.—( Hear,. hear. ) Now he said that they had made by their Poor-law the work houses houses of torture. As he had already stated, he had no desire to go into the general question at that moment, but he hoped the Right Hon. Baronet would adopt the proposal of his Hon. Colleague for continuing the Commission one year longer.' He was exceedingly hostile to the proposition, as he expected the Commission would have died a natural death next month. It was a physical impossibility for the Right Hon. Baronet to get the Bill through by the end of next month, therefore he hoped he would take the proposition to renew the Commission for one year. If the country considered that the measure was a good one and salutary he would express his deep regret, but he would offer no hostility to the measure. In resuming his ' seat he entreated the Right Hon. Baronet to reflect on the proposition of his Hon. Colleague. He thought it was one of the most rational under all the circumstances, and the most reasonable to submit to the Huse.—( Hear.) He earnestly implored the Government to reconsider it, and not adhere to the determination expressed by the Right Hon. Gentleman ; and he bored that he would in the course of the evening state his willingness to accede to the proposition. Mr. COCHRANE said he should not have risen to address the House if he did not think it incumbent upon him to give a public explanation of the course he intended to adopt with re spect to this Bill. Ile was surprised that lion. Gentlemen had confined themselves to observations upon certain districts, and had not entered into the discussion of the question, as it co n c e rneeedts _ the on p e people e f i , n s p g e e e n d e y ral Everypoor-law ual; bu t should the other, h have :we ohjnot the least important, seemed to him to be that relief should be offered in such a manner as to call forth the generous gratitude of the poor. It appeared to him that relief of that kind blessed boar - the giver and the receiver. Now he would grant, for the sake of argument, that the first condition had been fulfilled lu . soite of the working of the system of cehtralisation, that; notwithstanding that the relief had been speedy and effectual ; but, be would ask, how was it received by the people ? He would wish to know whether they looked upon the measure as a pro tection to them. He really thought that such was not the case. It appeared to him that the nearer they approached to volun tary contributions, the more they relieved the rich, and granted more relief to the poor. The new system of Poor-laws in Scotland was under voluntary contributions. The Act of James VI., in some respect, resembled the Act of Elizabeth ; yet. notwiths!anding there were assessments, the working of the system was by voluntary contributions. He took the liberty of making these few observations ; he would not go fur ther into the question, and upon these considerations be should appsse those clauses which he considered objectionable. Mr. ROEBUCK, who spoke in so low a tone of voice as to be scarcely audible, said that the objection to this Poor low Bill appeared to him to rise out of party conflict, and not from its being a dangerous experiment; not because the object of those who brought it forward was mischievous, or the cir cumstances attending it were mischievous, or that the ma chinery was altogether improper and wrong, but because the !tatty, or the Administration who brought that Bill forward, were ti . e parties opposed to gen:lemen opposite, and therefore the attempt was to get up a vulgar prejudice against them. the Administration, he said, at that time—he was not tete at all inclined to favour or praise it —brought lot ward its boldest, its wisest, and most humane act, when it brought. that Bill into the House. lie thought this measure was a retribution on the gentlemen opposite fur the manner in wl ish they dealt with the party who brought in this Bill.— ( Hear.) They might say " hear, hear," but he was not to find molt with the conduct of the Right lion. Baronet; he said that at the time at which the Bill was brought into that House, here was a spirit of irritation which had told upon those who "the H n. on A . len were sitting in the places of those who brought in the Bill. He asked whether, during the recent election, if that cry was not a sed, h? and Ile more knewespcia Baronetber fo opposite, r K hor when called upon, always stated that. this was a humane, a judi cious,and statesman-like act of the Administration who brought it in. He was certain that that was the opinion then in his mind, and the mind of every well thinking man of the party who supported him. He knew it was not the opinion of the Hon. Member lor Knaresborough.—(Laught e r.) But he said that the Right Hon. Baronet had always expressed his determina tion of making to the labouring population the declaration he had ; and he (Mr. Roebuck) only regretted that. that declara tion, was rather late. But he was well aware of the feeling that was prev alent round about and behind; h e must h ave b een we ll aware of the feeling expressed by !gentlemen opposite ; he must have been well aware of the vulgar outcry, and it was only on that genre that he would wish to recal to the recollec tion of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite that it was a seri ous arid great lesson for any man in the State holding a respon sible situation not to tamper in the least degree with a vital question like the present. He did not say that the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, or those who supported him, refused the expression of their sentiments when called upon; but what he complained of was the party behind him who had taken advantage of that vulgar outcry, and who made use of it for the purpose of taking power from those who then possessed it. The retribution was then coming upon them, arid however insignificant the instrument it had commenced with the infliction of a two hours"speech that even ine.--( Hear, hear, and laughter.) Now he would ask the House, which was called to the consideration of that subject by the Hon. Member for Finsbury, what was the principle of that Bill? He asked them, what then was in it to give rise to that. furious outcry of destroying a constitutional principle, by which they were assailed continually on this subject? The Hon. Member for Finsbury said the poor had a right to be maintained. Now, he (Mr. Roebuck) was not going to quar rel about words, or as to what he meant by the word right, bet he was about to say this, that the law gave the poor at this present moment that right. That right was the offspring of the law —it was regulated by the law for the benefit of the community. It was for the benefit of the whole community that the poor and the destitute should be provided for. They were to die. cover a means by which the destitute should so receive re lief that industry should be fostered and idleness put down. —( Hear, hear.) The aged, under the present law, were provided for.—( Hear, hear.) And he would defy Hon. alembers who were thus declaiming upon the matter,—and he spoke advisedly, knowing, something more of the law, erhaps, than some Hon. Gentlemen opposite—he would defy them to say that the aged poor were not provided for by the law. He wanted them to put their finger upon that part of the New Poor-law which altered the relief which should be administered to the aged poor. The aged poor, according to the provisions of the present law , were p ro vided for, and ° the guardians would receive the approbation of the Commission— he slid not altogether approve of that Commission--( Hear)-- if they granted relief to the aged poor, out of the workhouse. —( Hear, hear.) That was the spirit—that was the principle— An Hole. MEMBER—What is the practice ? Mr. ROEBUCK—Aye, and the practice.—(Hear, bear.) He would defy them to show otherwise. They should re lieve the poor so as to maintain industrious habits whilst they did not foster idle ones. The aged poor, who had gone through the toils of life, could not be accused of idleness, and they were only fulfilling the laws of nature, by giving them support for what the, had done. That he did say was the principle of the New Poor-law. Let them point out to him how, and where, that was not done. It is a breachof the law if it was not done, and the great benefit of this law was, that they could call beiore the public, which they c o uld not do before, each breach of that great principle.—( Hear.) He wanted to bring gentlemen to particulars. He denied distinctly, positively, totally, that there arose out of the New Poor-law any single enactment which militated against that relief to the aged poor. Now he wanted proof. Being a lawyer he wanted proof. He did not want any common vulgar assertion ; he had had so much of that, that he was sick of it.—(Hear, hear.) Now comes the great, the difficult problem, which every states man—and they were all staternen in their several posi tions—must see. How were they to provide for that great destitution which was liable to fall on certain classes of our fellow-countrymen ? How in providing for them, whilst preventing the evils which arose from the want of the necessaries of life, they should prevent those habits of idle ness which were so detrimental to society. An Hon. Member the other night proposed for that purpose a grant of a million of money. The Right lion. Baronet very properly said that that would be impossible, because he, acting as a statesman, foresaw that if that plan were admitted as a practice once, it would he followed generally. Therefore, if they enacted a Ire for the relief of the poor, they must consider what would be the effect of that law if carried into effect generally. What were they then to do with the able-bodied poor, who fell into actual distress. There was a Bill. passed in the reign of Elizabeth, which arose in the following way :—A great body of charitable institutions were suddenly suppressed, and a large number of able-bodied paupers was thrown upon the country. What was to be. done ? They were to be set to work and pro. wiled for, not, however, by religious houses, but by the country generally. Ile was not one who thought highly of the wisdom of our ancestors. The necessity of the moment created a re medy, and that remedy was the Act cf Elizabeth. That Act was for relieving, not the poor, but those who contributed honestly and fairly to their support. A great many evil consequences resulted frem it, and it was necessary to amend it. The con sequence was, that one of the first acts of the Reformed Par liament was to meet that Act boldly in the face, and he (Mr. Roebuck) was prepared to say, despite any unpopularity which might attach to him in consequence, that the framers of the amended Act were entitled to the highest renown, both for the humanity of the conception and the wisdom of the performance. Ile did, therefore, hope that those who led public parties on one side or the other, would not give in to those vulgar opinions which had been raised against the New Poor-law. —( Hear, hear.) He was quite sure that those Right Hon. Gentlemen oppositefelt stronger than he did the great benefits t. be derived from that legislation. They never raised the cry against that law ; feeling now pressing on their shoulder the government of this kingdom, they found it necessary to continue the law. In this country, he would ask, how they could best provide for the destitute poor, at the same time not foster the mischievous and criminal idleness of the man who might live next door to the industrious one?—( Hear, hear.) How were they to solve that problem.—( Hear, hear.) It was very easy to coins forward to talk about the misery in the workhouses.—(Hear.) He knew nothing more easy. Here was a father of a large family, honest, industrious, suddenly called away, and thrown out of work. It was natural to say, in such a case, " We will immediately relieve him, and give him every support in our power." His text door neighbour, an idle dissolute vagabond, says, " Aye, aye, now I see what I'll do."-(A laugh.) Aye, it had been done ; he took advantage of our nature, and said he would get the relief intended for the industrious poor, and would lead a life of idleness and misery. These were things which he (Mr. Roebuck) never would sanction.—( Hear, hear.) Aye, how was it to be done? That problem had to be solved. They were not to meet him with the cry that he was working against the constitutional privileges of Englishmen. Re lief must be given, in .the way that the interests of the commonly demanded, and they must give relief, because the interests of the country required it. That was his view, and he was not to be put out of it. Then he was met by something from the Hon. Member for Knaresborough, about the three kings of Somerset House, who, having made a Report which did not please the Hon. Member, the Hon. Member, like a wise legislator, said, he should oppose the Bill.—( Hear, and laughter.) Having determined the mode in which relief should be administered, the question was, how get to machinery to enforce its administration best. They found that a Board of Guardians was liable to certain mischievous influences, and that was fully demonstrated in 1829 and le3o. it was then determined that a central power, the term " centralization " might be gratifying to the ears of Gentlemen opposite—that they should have a central• power, which should be uninfluenced by local circumstances, and which should act independently of party. He (Jr. Roebuck) thought it would have been better placed in other hands.—(Hear, hear.) His notion was, that it would have been better placed in.the hands of the Secretary of State=(Hear, hear)—but was be, on that ground, to quarrel with the principle itself ? Not at all ; and he believed that the three gentlemen were by far , the hest provision which hati , yet been mado for the due adminis tration of that laic. Nis (Mr. RoebuCk's) idea was only a speculative one, and he was not at all certain of its results ; but he slid know that great advantages had arisen from the Poor-law Commission, and however great the outcry against them, he thought more advantage had been done to:the labouring population by their clear understanding than by any other three men in that kingdom. However much libelled they might- be —however furious the denunciations against them—however fierce the outcry, he would say, that no one roan—no three men—no dozen men in that House, or out of it. had ever done so mush for the honest, industrious man, as those three men. Ile wanted some answer to that, if they could give him one. It wig desirable to grant relief to the destitute poor, not simply with regard to the demands of th e poor themselves, but also with rega rd to the interests of the commu nity generally. And how c ould that be better accomplished than by imposing some restriction on the granti ng o f that relief which would render it not mor e agreeable than the returns of honest industry, but which should at the same time l en d to the destitute the means of relief—( Hear, hear)—always at the same time recollecting that the labouring aged Poor, being out of the sphere of temptation to idleness, should have a generous, careful, and ever watchful support with regard to their feelings and comfort? That did not in any way militate against the prin ciple of the New Poor-law. That being his view of the New Poor-law, that being his view of the institution of the Commission it was not for him to vote for deferring its permanent este b!i.diment, and the only quarrel he had with the late Govern ment, was their putting it off from year to year, and not firmly establishing it. He (Mr. Roebuck) would have perilled his Ministerial existence on that law, and he would have left to the Right Hon. Baronet, if he would have taken it, the odium of opposing the resolution of making that law the permanent, fixed law of the land. The outcry which had been raised against the law had not been ra ised by the industrious poor, but by others, for party purposes. Certain parties in the parishes had been disappointed by the New Poor -law, and they easily found organs to express those opinions. Those being his (Mr. Roebuck's) sentiments, whatever was the feeling out of doors, he was prepared to take, his share of the responsi bility, and to vote for the continuance of a genuine and humane measure.—( Loud cheers.) Sir R. PEEL, in rising, said --He should first address him elf the appeal which had been made to him by the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Finsbury, in the course of which he expressed a hope that her Majesty's Government would, in the course of that debate, signify their intention of acquiescing in the motion wade by the other side of the House with re spect to that past of the Bill which r e l ate d to its renewal. He begged to intimate to the House tbat it was not in his power, in the part of her Majesty's Government, to hold out the slightest hope that they would acquiesce in it.— (Hear, hear.) 'They held out that measure which they believed to be best for the public interests, and they asked the House fairly to coneider st end to give. whet olii s pioe on it ttlikeY gliellat proper. T 04.44 course be must strictly adhere. lie admitted that the oppo sition with which her Majesty's Government had been met du v ring the p resen t sess i on i n propos i ng i mportant measures affecting most extensive 'rite, ests, had been a fair opposition. He made no complaint of it whatever.—(llear, hear. ) He had a confidence founded on experience, that notwithstand ing the declarations which hail been made, no factious opposi tion would be given to the progress of the Bill. —( Hear. ) If the sense of the House was decidedly manifested as to the in convenience that would arise from the postponement of the on asure from year to year, then he believed that the miaority 'would be content. to acquiesce in the decision of the ma- Inrity, and would not adopt a course that must necessarily in tertere w i t h t h at t i me w hi c h was devoted to the publicybusi ne,s, and which, if unduly persevered in, would be at variance o ith the functions of a legislative assembly.—( Hear, hear. ) Ile spoke with perfect sincerity. He knew that menaces were often thrown out in the course of debate which were not after wards carried into effect. The Right Hon. Gentleman wished for time to have the opinions of the country expressed on the subject. But was not the continuation of the Commission proposed last year for five years ; and had not the country a lull year to declare themselves on the subject?—( Hear.) The sure language was used on the subject of the Income-tax, but he had that confidence in the people, and in their percep tions of the necessity of that measure, that he prophesied no de cided opposition would be manitested against it, and the event proved he was right. It had been distinctly declared by the leading political men in the House that they were disposed to acquiesce in the measure for the continuance of the Poor-Jaw Commissioners for live years, and it being perfectly notorious to the country that a similar proposition would be made in the course of the present Session, he found that only 1(18 petitions, wnh 25,000 signatures attached, were presented on the subject.—( Hear, hear.) lie referred to those petitions, which had express reference to the continuation of the Poor law Cummissern, and if the deliberate opinion, or even the pre judices of the country, had been against the present system, he could not help thinking that a greater number of petitions would ' have been psesented to the House, after full notification that the measure would be brought forward. But the Hon, and Learned Msmber for Bath contrasted his recent with his former conduct, anti said that he (Sir R. ['eel) was now suffering the penalty in the infliction of the eloquence of the lion. Member— ( Laughter)—on account of his forbearance to declare his posi tive opinion on the subject. That infliction was unmerited by him—(Laughter)—because he was satisfied that no person had a right to misrepresent him, or say that he concealed his opinions. —(Cheers.) But the Hon. Gentleman said, " Why du you not compel all your party ?"—( Laughter.) That was excessively difficult.—(Laughter.) He had not such influence as to be able to drill the gentlemen of England into implicit acquiescence.—(llear, hear, and laughter.) During the time that he had the honour of leading the Conservative party, he had received tolerably strong proof of their acquescence iu the advice he gave them, but he could not say that he ever ex pected, or could expect, to exercise the sort of censorship which the Hon. Gentleman alluded to, over every person's opinions with regard to the Poor-law ; nor ought it to be expected that if persons expressed a different opinion from his with regard to the Poor-law, he should remonstrate with them on the opinions they entertained,—( Lear, hear. ) He did not think the Noble Lord opposite had been more successful in the situation he held with so much ability, in obtaining an acquiescence in his opinions—(Lau,ghter)—and, notwithstanding the ability of the hon. and Learned Gentleman, and his attempts to force his opinions on the House, he did not think he was more sue cesstul.—(Laughter and cheers.) But such was always the fate of public men.—(Laughter.) He could not be respon sible for the opinions which individuals held, and he was afraid that it he attempted to force his own convictions on them, they would revolt against him—( Hear, hear)—and though it might be inconvenient on certain occasions he did not think that the credit of Englishmen would be promoted by any such ac qwesence.—(Cheers.) On all proper occasions he had ex• pressed his own opinions with respect to this measure. In 1834, when the Poor-law Bill was brought forward, the Duke of Welliegton in the House of Lords, and he himself in the House of Commons, geve the measure their most cordial sup port. Ile supported it at a time when it would have been easy to raise a public clamour against the measure. He thought the then Government acted an honest and manly part in bringing for ward that measure, and he gave them his assistance. —(Hear, hear, hear.) With regard to the elections if he had availed himself of the prejudices on the subject of the Pour-law at that time for the purpose of acquiring political power, he should be ashamed of the advantages he had so ob tained. In the year 1837, there was another general election, and his election took place at an early period, and he was asked his opinions on the hustings with regard to the Poor-law, and why he supported that measure in 1834. He would read to the House the answer he then gave in the face of his constis tueney, and he would ask whether it was possible for any public mar,, at a critical time too, to have made a more explicit declaration on the subject than he had? He was asked did he not support the Poor-law, and in reply 'mme said frankly and explicitly that he supported the Poor-law, and that his opinions were not enanged. He dirt not support it for the purpose of making ' a reduction in the amount of the rates, which was one of the smallest advantages derived from the law ; but he supported it because he saw the moral condition of the labouring man gradually lowered, and he wanted by an improved system to elevate their character, and improve their comforts. He supported the measure from real friendship to the poor, since that it would be for their real advantage. These were the sentiments be uttered in 1837, in the face of his constituents, and he asked was it not a decided opinion?—(Hear, hear., In the course o f l as t y ear h e spo k e and vote d i n favour of th) second reading of the Bill. It was true that he said thee continuance of the Commission for five years was better than for ten years, and he also said something respecting the burial of the poor, but he gave his cordial support to the Bill ; and he explicitly stated his opinion on that occasion. —( Hear.) On every occasion he had supported th e l aw ; in 1534, in 1837 he expressed his decided opinions with regard to the law ; and in 1841 he gave his support to the Government upon a division, and it was not his fault if lion. Gentlemen wished to excite hopes amongst their constituencies as to the course he should adopt with respect to the measure. As to the Bill itself he was surprised at the degree of forgetful ness—he would not call it forgetfulness—manifested by the up ponents of that Bill respecting the enactments of the Poor-law. They had talked of the preseat Bill as if it deprived the poor of the privilege they derived from the enactment of Elizabeth. Such statements were made in ignorance of that statute. Ile heard persons speak of the present Bill as being a violent departure from the statute of Elizabeth. He heard them speak of the statute as the bread-charter of the poor ; and unfavourable contrasts were made between that enactment anti the present. What was that enactment, and in what slid it differ from, or correspond with the present law ?—( Hear, hear, from Mr. Wakley.) The lion. Gentleman said " Hear, hear." He must, then, be unaware of the similarity between the 43d of Elizabeth and the present law. Let hint (Sir R. Peel) then appeal to his reason. By the 43d of Elizabeth, time churchwardens and overseers were empowered to raise funds, by a tax on wool, flax, &c., to assist the poor in getting work. Here there iris no absolute right of the poor to relief, unless he worked. Let him take three classes—the able-bodied poor, the children, and the impotent—and let him compare the enactments of each statute. First, as to the able-bodied poor, there was no statutable enactment recognising a right on the part of the able-bodied men to re ceive parochial relief without work. The able-bodied poor had no right to receive relief unless he was prepared to give his labour in return ; and there would be no stability for society if a different law were recognised. Not only would property not exist, but it would undermine it in a manner most adverse to the moral habits of the country if a different law were enacted. The statute of Elizabeth then empowered the churchwardeps to levy competent sums of money towards the necessary relief of the lame, impotent, old, and blind, and such other men, being poor and not able to work. With regard to children, that sta tute empowered the churchwardens to take charge of arid put them out to apprenticeships at a mile distant, there to remain —the boys until they were 24, the females until they were 21. That was the enactment with regard to apprenticeships. So little disposed were those who framed that law to recognise an indefeasible right in the poor, that they demanded from them labour in return for their support--from the boys until they were 24, and from the females until they were 21 years of age, with a power on their part to dissolve the engagements entered into by the overseers of the poor. With regard to the impo , tent, the churchwardens were empowered, with the consent of the Lord of the Manor, to build habitations for them in waste ' grounds, in which one or more families might be placed, and there continue, while unable to work. Poor-houses were pro vided, but out-door relief was not precisely given by the Act. But observe a singular and conclusive proof as to the intention of the statute with regard to the claim for relief on the part of the noor ; for it was enacted that fathers and grandfathers, anti'motl;ers and grandmothers, and children, and lame, blind, and impote n t persons, and others not able to work, who should receive relief, were to forfeit 20s. every month.—( Hear. ) lie had, on a former occasion, stated the grounds of his vote in favour of the existing law, and that the existence of the Commission would operate as a check on local abuses, and would be a guarantee against those which prevailed under the former system.—( Hear, hear.) If proof of that were wanting, he might refer to the Report of the Keightley Union. —( Hear.) He had listened to the eloquent parts of the lion. Gentleman's speech—(Laughter)—in which he described the poor man as traversing the green lanes, and reposing in the heat of the day on the hill side in the neighbourhood of Keightley. He ( Sir Hubert Peel) found it was ornamented by a certain building for the reception of the poor. If the poor-house—for workhouse it was not—was placed on the h;11 side, he dare say that one temptation for reposing on it was that they might be in sight of the poor-house--( Hear.) The building was a mile distant from the town, and was not very easy of access. On immediately getting into it, there ' was a low room—he was now quoting from the Report of 11r. Elliott-24 feet by 17, which served both for a dining room and sleeping-room. It contained dirty beds, occupied by fourteen individuals, one occupied by an old man and his wife, another occupied in a similar manner, and the other oc cupied by met, and boys.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") That was the manner in which the hill was occupied.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," and cheers.) Another room had nine beds, which were occupied by twenty-four male children, and one of which was occupied by a woman with her baby, who was still ill, and had to share her bed with another.—( Hear, hear.) Would it be safe to return to such a system? But it was said there was no necessity for returning to the old law. It was said, trust the rate-payers—they know the character of the poor, and will be ready to afford them relief ; trust the people of England, and all that trash.—(Cheers.) It was to avoid such scenes as he had read that he was an advocate for the untie control. Now, with regard to education, what a difference existed between the system as administered in those unions under the operation of the Poor-law Commissioners and those that were not. The Right Hon. Baronet then read a further extract from the Report of Mr. Mott, in which it was stated that " a wretched hovel adjoining the dung was used as a school-rcom ; the schoolmaster was an old pauper, and there was present in the school only one boy ; there was an adjoin ing gaol, to which there was an entrance let through the poor house yard; in one room there were two beds occupied by four women, and in one bed was an old woman evidently dying. He had also been informed that it was not an unusual thing, when a pauper died, to leave the dead the companions of the living.—(Hear, hear.) Now, that was the state of things which prevailed under the superintendence of local guardians— :llr. FERR AND said (as we understood) that that had happened at a time when the workhotee test was about to be , enforced. Sir R. PEEL—But the workhouse test had not yet been applied. Now, his would ask whether, under the superintend. ence of the Commissioners, inch observations could have oc• curred ? What was there in these facts to show him that he could trust to mere local superintendence, from which the pos sibility of inquiry could be shut out, when he remembered the scenes which had thus taken place? And how long, he would ask, might not those things have gone on, if there had been no change in the system ? He believed that the Commissioners had brought to light a thousand abuses which remained covered in oblivion in fru mei- times; and the reason why they could nut properly compare the abuses cf the old law with the griev ances of the new, was, that in the one case the evils were silently endured, tamely acquiesced in ; while under the present law there was an active vigilance and superintendence, abuses were brought to light, they were invidiously dwelt upon in the public press, public indignation was kept alive, and a security ovas thus afforded against the frequent repetition of such scenes as had formerly taken place. The present system provoked in. quiry ; and his helief was that it had by this means materially contributed to check the recurrence of abuse. lie should tell th..: Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Kuaresborough, that if, instead of indulging in descriptions of the hills of Keightlev, if, instead of dabbling with green fields, he had employed his time in investigating the abuses to which he It. Peel) had referred, in making an earnest reprgienta , • . tion to the Poor law Commissioners upon the subject, or in inviting the attendant c of the Assistant Commmissioners for the purpose of aiding the Keightley Guardians—if the Honourable Gentleman had taken such a course he (Sir Robert Pet]) could not. help thinking that, upon the whole, he would have done mere to advance the interests, and to promote the comforts of the poor, than he was likely to (1J by offering so vigorous an opposition to the progress of tie new law. lie could not but believe, from the declarations of the Hon. Gentleman, from the earnestness of his manner, that he must be a humane and considerate man; but he could not held thinking, at the same time, that those facts must have escaned his notice, although he was himself the Chairman of the Board of Guardians of die Union. He could not help thinking that the lion. Gentleman who made such earnest appeals to Christian charity, and who hail so earnestly exhorted them to respect the rights of the Ivor, must have been ignorant of those abominations which had taken place under the old law. The abuses which had been brought to light, suggested to him the possibility that similar occurrences had taken place in other unions, and he could not help thinking that many Hon. Gentle men were ignorant of the real state of the case ; and that the vi gilance and superintendence of the Commissioners were required for the present, at least, in order to take cognizance of such facts as lie had adduced. These were the grounds upon which he gave his support to the r eve law. He did so, as he had already said, in the year 1837, not from considerationa of the expense which it saved, although he should say at the same time that to take from the , indiettious the means of supporting the idle was an act of grievous oppression, injurious its every respect, tending to pre judice him who contributed to the poor rate, and creating in him who received an unprofitable and improvident relief, habits of idleness, and destroying that feeling of self•dependere e, which after all, and in spite of all their enactments, must be the great security to the working-classes against abject poverty and dis tress.—( Hear, hear.) With these feelings he could not ac quiesce in the proposal for a further delay of a final settlement of the question. lie believed that the . sense of the House was favour of the measure introduced by her Majesty's Govern ment. To the sense of the House her Majesty's Government would look for support ; they would steadily adhere to the proposal they had made.—( Hear, hear.) lie would repeat the hope with which he had commenced that, after the feelings of the majority of the House should be de clared or a divisasn in favour of the law, the minority would take the course which, in his humble judgment, it was always the duty of a minority to pursue--that while they protested against the decision, they would be ready to acknowledge that submission to it was the only course which it was open for them to adopt. —( Cheers. ) Air. FERRAND wished to explain in reference to the ex tracts relative to the Union of Keightley, read by the Right lion. Baronet, that since the New Poor-law hail been passed, be (Dlr. Ferranti) had ceased to take the slightest interest in the carrying out of that law. lie had neven taken any part in the operation of the measure, unless when he happened to be requested by the poor persons to interfere in their behalf. He had further to state, that he believed there were many errors in the report of Mr. Alott, arid he trusted that the Guardians of Keightley would be able to clear themselves from the asper sions thrown out against them in the Report. Lord HOWICK said that he had heard with great satisfac tion the speech of the Right lion. Baronet at the head of the Government, as well as that made by the Right Hon. Gentle ' man, the Secretary fur the Home Department, at an earlier part of the evening. The time was come, in his opinion, w hen the House should decide whether or not they would continue the powers of the Commissioners. He believed that those powers were indispensably necessary for duly carrying out the law ; and he agreed with the Right lion. Baronet (the Secre tary fur the Hume Department), that the necessity for the superintendence of the Commissioners was greater than ever, at a time like the present, w hen such general distress prevailed throughout the country. The arguments which had beers used in favour of a relaxation of the present law might be urged at all times when employment was scarce, and the price of provi sions high. He agreed with those who contended that a great re,iet would he felt from an ample relaxation of the Corn-laws, but lie was still of opinion that no modification of the Poor laws could effect any gt eat improvement in the condition of the poor. He wished to ask, however, whether funds, to which the Right. Hon. Baronet himself had been a contributor—he spore of the Right Hon. Baronet, the First Lord of the Trea sury—he asked it that Right lion. Baronet had not contributed largely to funds for the support of candidates who made it the greatest ground of their claim to popular support that they were opposed to the New Poor-law ? The Right Hon. Baronet, the Seeretary for the home Department.--( Loud cries of " Ques sion, question," and" Divide, divide.") lie would riot take the trouble of following the Right Hen. Baronet through all Ins speeches. He would not follow the followers of the Right lion. Baronet into all the details of the Bill before the House. lie would remain satisfied with the declaration of the Govern ment that they would maintain the existing law, and he would give them all the support in his power.—(Loud cries of " Di vide, divide." Sir E. KNATBIIBULL should not have detained the House had he not been almost compelled to do so by the speech that had been addressed to it. It had been stated that he formerly opposed the measure, and lie was reproached with being a Member of the Government who promoted it. This was ass error ; he approved of the principles of the Bill, and in the discussion of the details he had acted independently ; gene rally, many voted in support of them, except on the clause of out-door relief. It was clear the Noble Lord had not risen for the purpose of discussing the question, but had introduced fresh topics that had no reference to it. Such topics he had better have avoided, and he regretted the course he had taken. He had always given his opinion in favour of the general principles of the measure.—(" Divide, divide.") Air. DARBY addressed the House amid much confu sion and cries of " Divide." He had been accused of ceasing to speak on this subject. lie had done so, frosts wishing to see what the Government would propose; the Noble Lord had better look to his own side of the House, and see whether there was not agitation on this subject there.— (Divide, question.) He had always said that as the House had sanctioned the principle of the Bill, they must maintain it, or the whole system would be left in contusion. The only dif ficulty he had was with respect to applying the out-door test to labourers thrown out of employ, and when a slight modifi r at ion of it was proposed, he had at once accepted it.—(Divide, divide.) Ile should do as he had always done, vote for the ILA, and reserve himself as to the modifications of details that might be required. Captain POLHILL would vote against the motion. The principle having been sanctioned, any unnecessary delay vas unjust to the House, and, to the country. There would be plenty of opportunities of discussing the objectionable parts in Committee, but he thought the sooner they gut into Committee the belt( r. Air. O'CONNELL said when the Hon. Alember for Roch dale proposed his motion for postponing the Poor-law Bill for six months, lie was taunted by the Right lion. Baronet, as if, being an Irishman, he had done something not exactly correct in taking so strong a part in opposition to it. He (Alr. O'C.) was liable to the same reproach, and still snore strongly titan the Hon. Member, for he represented an Irish constituency, and what was still worse, the argument he was going to advance to the House was entirely drawn from Ireland. It might, perhaps, not be very persuasive with the House, but the justification he should use fur the course he was about to adopt. lie should support the motion, because the Poor-law in Ireland was an experiment ; that law was not recommended by any abuses in a pre-existing law in that country, as it was introduced there for the first time. He had then opposed it, and stood almost alone in his opposition. But when it was once passed he had endeavoured to give it every assistance by his co-operation ; he had ventured to prophesy that it was a law not suited to the situation of Ireland, and he feared that his prediction would be unfortunately verified. He really felt bound to say that he looked with great apprehension to the future in that country from the operation of the law. The moment they taxed the peasantry of Ireland and made them pay in advance for their landlords, from that moment he Was convinced that they would see the spirit of resistance awakened stronger than ever they had yet seen in This might seem exaggerated; but from his knowledge of the country he apprehended an insurrectionary movement more violent in its character than any that had yet occurred. Having this feeling, he naturally wished that the Bill should be postponed for an other Dear, as by that time the experiment in Ireland would be completed. They would then have the interest of England bound up with the interest of Ireland on this subject, and a more attentive consideration would then be given to the Irish law, and the claims of Ireland, than it HOW re ceived. The experiment in Ireland had not beets satisfactorily made ; he felt dissatisfied nith the Poor-law Commission in that country. Their duty was to preserve the strictest neu trality between the various divided interests and differences, political anti religious. The impression on his mind was, that that neutrality had not been preserved. Even if his uttering that expression here should act as a caution hereafter, he should have done some good by giving that caution thus publicly. It was on the ground of his anxiety that. Ireland should have the advantage of the discussion on the English law, to come in aid of that on the Irish law, which must come on next year, that he wished this measure to be deferred. Many per sons had taunted him with his opposition to the Irish law ; if he had supported the principle that every destitute person in Ireland was entitled to support, he believed that he should have raised a much greater storm ; but he had not taken that posi tion. Those who were most violent against him for opposing that measure at the time, had joined with him now, amid had expressed their 'egret for the manner in which they had treated him on account of his opposition. They now agreed with his that nothing could be more unhappy than that an opinion should get abroad of the want of perfect neutrality on the part of the Poor-law Commissioners in Ireland ; and with this feeling he should vote for the motion of the lien. Gen tleman. Captain PECHELL said he wished to say a few words in explanation. The Hon. Gentleman opposite had alluded to what he (Captain Peehell) had said on a former occasion. He made the charge that the paymasters of the forces were against the commission. In support of that, he mentioned the circum stance, which he took from the "Westminster Review," that in 1837 when it was proposed to extend the Bill to 1843 or to 1846, they voted for the shorter period. He thought that was some justification of his statement. Lord ELIOT said he felt bound to protest against the very unfair attack which the Right lion. and Learned Gentleman oppo,ite (Mr. O'Connell) had made upon the Poor-law Com mission in Ireland. The experiment, so far as it had been tried, had in fact been eminently successful. It was predicted that as soon as the workhoeses were opened, they would be crowded with aisle-bodied labourers. Now the fact was precisely the reverse. There were few of the able-bodied , but a vast number of the aged and infirm. One hun dred workhouses were already completed, and the whole number, one hundred and thirty, would be completed in the course of the ensuing year. He gave full credit to the Hight Hon. Gentleman for not having shown a desire to defeat the Poor-law. Instead of opposing the law, he had used all his influence in the contrary direction, and he hoped that that influence would still be exerted for the purpose of affording it a fair trial. _ _ Lord SANDON supported the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. He thought it was very desirable that the powers of the Commissioners should be continued for the pre sent under the control of public opinion. It was highly de sirable that that they should have another year's experience of the working of the system before they extonded the Commis sion to five years. Mr. COB - DEN said he thought the House had rather lost sight of the Hon. Gentleman's motion. The Hon. Gentleman had alluded to the state of the country. Now he (Mr. C.) wished to call the attention of the House to the fact, that, though they had been sitting nearly six months, they had not thought proper to devote one evening to the consideration of the distresses of the people, with a view of findi n g a spe c ific r emedy. He would ask Hon.i Gentlemen, even in their most reckless moods, whether they thought there was either safety or policy in such a course.—(Cries of " Oh, oh.") The Right lion. Baronet took office with a distinct promise that he should find a remedy for the distresses of the country.—(Expressions of dissent.) He supposed those expressions were intended as a denial. The Right lion. Baronet distinctly promised that he would prescrib e w h en h e h a d got hi s fee.—(Cries of " Que' - tion, question.") It was tine question. The Right Hon. Baronet took office with a promise that when he had time to con sider the distresses of the country, he would prescribe remedial ariff.) measures for them. Had he done so?—( Cries of " t "Question.") Question. ) in which would benefit the poor ?—( Loud crie s d no How many articles were there out of the 7.50 the reduction He could assure Hon. Gentlemen that he h l!a himself concerned it dress the House, but as far as he was s any ri!sir . c to ad dress those noises. would be utterly useless to assail him Y artairs of the country, but It might be thought that a victory argument or debate would settle w ith gained in that House in it was far otherwise. He received h a t the distress which existed w ac counts daily from all parts of the country, stating ,that h when namingjilt°office had presentCrovernma t were increased at a constantly progressing ratio ever si It was, then, their duty at once to take up the subject of the pre sent condition of the country, and endeavour to apply a renu dy. He believed that some Hon. Gentlemen were incredulous zit to the accounts of the misery that prevailed in various d'istrirt., He would beg to call the attention of those gentlemen t o sonic communications which he had rewired from the countrr. Ne had written to Stockport to ascertain the amount of poor -rates paid at present in Stockport. Hr Egad asked the names o( a few of the principal rate-pay , rs, an order to know how those rates pressed on individtril concerns% Many thought that the manufacturers did not contribute , their just. proportion to those rates ; but. let those learn - what yeas the re sult of his inquiries. The first of those concerns on the list paid during nine months rates for the relief of the pow to the amount of 343/. 18s. 4d. ; the second, during the. same period. paid 476/. tls. 6d.; and the third paid '286/. An HON. 3IEMBER.—What rent? Mr. COBI)EN—That was an ii.portant question. Did the like of Northumberland with his broad lands, or any other landowner, pay as much in proportion to his wealth as one of those manufacturers? One of ti;•ose milk rated at, 1,9041. paid 470 i. in rates from the 16th of June to thee thith of February. The account went on tit we that distresi went on increasing, so that if thins did non. change then should be eaten up by the paupers. A letter from a gentleman. of Leeds, Mr. Hamer Statistield, stated that 4.31.'0 families ind ded at least 10,350 persons. In the county of Dorset. ()ut eri '25 fires that had taken place in three months two-thin& Were. incendiary. Such was the state in shish distress placed the country. - He would then appeal to the Right Hon. Baronet,. to tell the House whether it was his intention to bring the pre giving an appearance, t h at t h ey sent. Session to a close, witho u t having first brought f orwar d the question—without at least should have an opportunity of con s id er i ng t hi s impor tart question. .11r. S. CRAWFORD said he could not let the question go to a division, without ,wing a few nerds on it. A Noble Lord had spoken of the Irish Poor-law, as b,i tg emi nently successful. How could that be the case, whet: that country was in such a state as it now presented ? Ii several large districts the people were starving without a possi bility of relief being administered to them ; for the Irish Poor law was of a more extreme character than our English law, in asmuch as it admitted of out-door relief under no circum stances. The Right Hon. Baronet had insinuated that he (Mr. S. Crawford) had no right to take part in that debate, because he was an Irish resident, but he knew the operation of the experiment in Ireland. He thought that he was best serving the interests of Ireland by opposing the English Poor-late. Another reason given by the Right Hon. Baronet that he (Mr. S. Crawford) was the representative of a town into which the New Poor-law had not yet been introduced: It was true the Poor-law had not yet been introduced into' Rochdale, and the reason given by the Commissioners for Its non-introduction was, that they were Liraid of the axe; &neat and agitation it would occasion ; but the Poor-law hung ovoc their heads like a sword suspended by a hair- and on their own account, and on account of their neighboars, in whose affairs they took an interest, their representative was entitled to take a part in the discussion. He regretted to hear the Hon. Mem. her for flath advocate a law which upset the rights of the people and gave to three persons the right of imposing laws upon them. The poor had a right to relief. No relief was permitted to be administered by the Commissioners until destitution had taken place. A well-reculated Poor-law would give relief betara actual destitution had' occurred. He did not deny that there had been evils under the old Poor-law, but they ought not on that account to place in the hands of three individuals the power of making laws for all the country. General JOHNSON said the Act of Elizabeth never con ferred on any set few the power of committing persons to prism, because they were pour. He objected to the size of the unions, and thought there ought to be some appeal from the Board 44f Guardians in cases where they refused relief. He should vote for the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. Mr. FIELDEN rose amidst load cries of " Question t (Ines. lion !"—" Divide ! divide !" to move the adjournment of the debate. Sir C. NAPIER seconded the motion. _ _ Mr.I4;II.RAND honed the Honourable Member would not press his motien. By the course he was pursuing he was injuring the cause they both had at heart. Several would not vote for the Hon. Member for Finsbury because they thought. it was factious. He (Mr. Ferrand) thought was a perfectly fair motion ; but if the lion. Member perse vered in his motion for adjournment, did he think drat the same number of Members would vote against the different gauges of the Bill as would if he did not do so? He trusted the Member for Oldham would withdraw his motion. for they were oely losing their time—(Loud cheers)--by such a course of pro ceeding. Colonel SIBTHORP thought the proposition was ineen sistent with the character of that House. He thought it would do more harm to the cause than it would do good. He would never subscribe to anything but a fair and manly opposition. Captain FITZROY said that he had voted against the second reading of the Bill, but he could not vote for the propo sition of the Hon. Member for Oldham ; and if their factious opposition were persevered in, he should absent himself from tho House during the debate. Mr. WAK LEY said that Hon. Gentlemen must take the course they thought best, but to say that the coarse of tbe.llon. Gentleman was factious, merely because he moved the adjourn ment of the debate that he might have an opportunity of ad dressing the House, was too much. He ( Mr. Wakley) would never, form any factious opposition to any party or proposition. —( Oh, oh, and laughter.) Why—he would be very muck obliged if Hon. Gentlemen would not judge him by them selves—he had never none so, and he never would. He defied any lion. Member to refer to a period in which he had done it. With reference to the Poor-law, he said, that after the speeches of the Right Hon. 13arenet, the Member for Tainwortla and the Member for Bath, he did think the debate ought not to end without these speeches being answered, for he never heard such staring fallacies as his Hon. and Learned Friend, the Member fur Bath, uttered. He was sorry he was not in the House, but he hoped to tell him on Monday night, that he knew uothing of the New Poor-law BilL He never heard a greater amount of ignorance with reference to the law than he had beard from him that evening. He hoped and trusted that the Hon. Member for Oldham would have an oppottnnity of addressing the House. Mr. FIELDEN said it appeared to him that the House did not. understand his rea , otis for moving the adjournment. He rose to address the House to answer the speeches of the Hon. Member for Bath, aed the Right Hon. Baronet, but he was met with loud cries. Under these circumstances and at that time of night, the debate having lasted six hours, he asked whether it was unreasonable 'to more the adjournment ? The speech of the Hon. Member for Bath, would most likely be quoted by the Secretary for the Home Deparmenti as a speech of remarkable ability. Why lie (Mr. Fielder) could tear it all to pieces.—( Laughter. ) lie won:d go through it although lie was no lawyer. The Hon. Member conk not have accomplished a better thing if he had received a high fre. —( I aught er. ) No man could deny this who was sot as ignorant as an ass.—( Roars of laughter.) Then House then divided, the numbers were For the Adjournment of the debate Against it Majority against the Adjournment —26B On the question being put, Sir C. IS APIEIt said he had no wish to give any factiens opposition to the Bill, but when the Hon. Gentleman (Mr, Fielden)got up to speak he was interrupted by persons who had only just come into the House. He thought such a course was an improper one, and that the lion. Gentleman was right in moving the adjournment. He should now move the ad journment. Mr. WA KLEY seconded the motion. ' Sir It. PEEL said the House would recollect itiat thongtt the Hon. Member for Oldham rose for the. purpose of speaking, and moved the adjournment on the professed grounds that due attention was not paid to him, yet the House would bear in mind that be said his intention was to avail himself of the forme of the House to prevent the passing of the Cheers ) till the 31st of July. Therefore, if impatience was maniMted by the House he must remind the House that the declaration of the lion. Gentleman was seine justification.—( Hear.) He was aware that time spent in adjournment was unprofitably spent. And though he deeply regretted the course which' had been taken, he knew it was in vain to contend against it_ He had hoped to be able to bring the tariff to its last stage ow Monday ; and if the present course were persevered in, it would delay the passing of that measure—(Hear, hear)—because, if the debate were adjourned, he intended to postpone that mea sure, in order that the present one might have precedence, and he should therefore propose that this debate be resumed on Monday next. He hoped that the house would bear in mind the declaration of the lion. Member for Oldham, and that they would, at least, do all that they could to prevent a prece dent which must be so fatal to the charecter •f the • House— ( Loud cheers.)—sodestructive to the interests of the country, if one or two gentlemen could avail themselves of the forms of the Howe, for the purpose of obstructing tho progress of public. measures.—( Cheers. ) )Ir. DUNCOMBE said that so far as he was concerned he had hoped the House would have come to a decision that evening upon the motion he had brought forward. 'With re gard to the interruption of the debate, he should remind the , House, that when the lion. Member for Oldham rose at half past eleven o'clock, he was met by a most tremendous yell from Hon. Gentlemen opposite.—(" Hear, hear," and " no.") He thought, too, that the Right Hon. Baronet might have put a more charitable construction upon the words that sad fallen Irons the Honourable Member for Old- ham. The Right Honourable Baronet, on the con trary, seemed to justify the interrnption which the Hon. Member for Oldham had experieneed. It seemed, too, that because the debate on the Poor-law was adjourned, fhe country was to be punished by having a stop put to the' pro gress of the tariff. But the Government had stated on former occasions their determination not to proceed with the Poor-law until the tariff was disposed of, and he did not see why that course should not still be taken. Colonel WOOD (Nliddlesex) denied that the Hon. Mem ber for Oldham had met with any improper interruption, and it was a libel on the character of the House to say that the Hon. Gentleman had met with unusual marks of impatience. Air. HAWES expressed a hope that after the debate on Monday the House would proceed to a division an the question. Sir it. PE.F.L hoped that was the course which the House would pursue. Mr. WAK LEY said that he was still decidedly oppooed to the law. But if the House should decide by an overwhelming majority, such as weuld rendes opposition fruitless, in favour of the measure, he should not persevere in offering an oppo sition which could lead to no useful result. Mr. FIELDEN said he would not flinch from the .duty which he had undertaken of offering every impediment in kis power to the progress of the Bill. The debate was then adjourned to Monday. BRITISH POSSESSIONS ABROAD BILL. The British Possessions Abroad Bill went through Coil. mittec.—Report on Monday. RAILWAYS BILL. On the Order of the Day for the third reading of the Rtil was s Bill, Sir HENRY HA RDINGE tnoved the insertion of the fol lowing clause That whenever it shall be necessary to move any of the officers or soldiers of her Majesty's forces of the line, ordna, ce corps, marines, or the police form, by any rail. way, the Directors thereof shall and are hereby required to permit such forces respectively, with their' baggage. stores, arms, ammunition, and other necessaries and things, to be con veyed, at the uqtal hours of starting, at the prices contracted for by the Secretary at War for the conveyance of such forces, on the production of a note signed by the proper authorities." Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY opposed the clause, because he had not been permitted to bring forward a clause which he svis)ed to introduce. Lora HOWICK. suggested the adjournment of the disouca ,ion for a fl ,„. d a ys, till the matter could receive more mature c onsideration. tlr. GLADScoTOuINdE objectedser nouseful pu r p ose. an d there were te the p os t ponement of the f measu re, as it urgent reasons for passing it as q u i c kl y as possible. LABOL C !LIU. suggested that the Right Hon. and. Gallant °Meer should, under the circumstances, withdraw the clause. Sir HENRY HARDINGE would agree to the suggestion, and being in a separate Bill, if such were the feeling of the House, although the delay that would accrue in consequence would be of detriment to the public service. Sir IL INGLIS hoped the House would let the clause psi* Sir R. PEEL trusted that the House would permit the clause to pass. A delay of 4 hours had already occurred in the oce veyance of troops to India for the want of such a clause. Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY would, after these exp Lis a. tons, withdraw his opposition to the clause. The cl b a. y us Nay y+ as rid clause wastheennairTeehe Bill dto,a was the odorderediroitolit be afite thae. d to the Ott the motto that the DA do pa*