The Sun. — London, England, 1847-05-22 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 22, 1847. ifor a central beard. Well, they had tried such i a control with regard to the poor-law for , the last thirteen years, and it had failed ; but still, if they were to establish a central control for the protection of the rich rate-payer, why should net the poor have a judge to see that his rulers and superiors did him justice. He did not believe there would be any difficulty in establishing such a law. He was not afraid of the boards of guardians, but if the Noble Lord feared them, why . did he not reconstruct them ? The Noble Lord last night spoke of the Act of Elizabeth, and pointed out to them the manner in which that Act was abused, but in framing the Bill of 1834, what did the Noble Lord do with the magistrates who had abused it ? Why, he placed them over the board of guardians, thus rewarding them for their misconduct instead of visiting them with condemnation. But really and truly the constitutions of these boards of guardians ought to ba reformed. Their election at this moment was a perfect farce. Instead, however, of reforming the system, the existing commission was to be abolished, but all the defects and evils of the system remained. Under such circumstances the public have great reason to com plain of this Bill. The public expectation would be disappointed by it. No charge was to be made in the new poor-law, sod be very much feared that great and serious would be the disappointment of the people in that respect. All the evils with regard to out door relief were to be continued, and no honest, indus trious man in time of reed could procure relief without walking several miles for it. The present law in all respects was inconsistent with the principle of the Act of Elizabeth, and especially inconsistent with regard to the able-bodied pour. Upon this branch of the subject they had heard much from the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, but the Hon. and Learned Gentleman directed his attention only to the idler. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman forgot the honest and deserving workman, who had lived and whose only offence was that he could not procure work. Was he to be punished for the misdeeds of the idler? Under the operation of the Act of Elizabeth, relief was ad ministered to him without demur by the parish authori tiei, but under the new poor-law he had to walk many miles to get before a board of guardians, and then, perhaps, he would be refused relief, without being allowed an interview with the board.—(Hear, hear.) The Act of Elizabeth was one of the noblest statutes that ever was passed by the Legislature ; it gave secu rity to the property of the country, and it provided— very justly, in his opinion—that it was the duty of pro perty to protect and provide for die poor. The mainte nance of the poor, in tact, was - one of the conditions upon which property was held. In a state of savage life all property was in common, but one of the first processes of civilisation and the establishment of private property was to impose on it the maintaining, or, at least, the duty of assisting in maintaining the poor, who were willing to work and had no property of their own. That principle was acknowledged by the statute of Queen Elizabeth, but by the Act of 1834, it was almost abrogated. He firmly believed that the conduct the Government was pursuing in this case was most unfortunate--he said unfortunate, because he scarcely knew any other word he could more appro priately apply to it, and he felt strongly convinced that it would be attended with the most disastrous conse quences to the Government. But what was a far greater evil, and perhaps of far greater moment to the country, it would be most fallacious in its results and consequences with regard to the poor. Throughout the country, a feeling had arisen that this House was hostile to the interests of the poor ; and yet those who warned the House of this, were told by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath that he could point the finger to individuals who, while they advocated .the rights of the poor with regard to the poor-laws, were hypocritical in their sympathy for the poor because they did not support an extension of the franchise. Now in his opinion nothing cauld be more conducive to elevate the character of the people of this country, or more calculated to increase security to the property and institutions of the kingdom, than that the labouring population of the country should be repre sented in that House. He always found that the labour ing man gave the most independent votes, because he was not surrounded by circumstances that controlled his opinions, as those which influenced the conduct of those who held a higher position in society. He was, therefore, the more anxious to extend the franchise to them, and so far as he was concerned the remark of the Hon. and, Learned Member fur Bath was not applicable to . him., Now the labouring population and middle classes were opposed to the new poor-law, and if Government would take his advice. they would repeal it and return to the good old principles of the statute of Elizabeth,. rather than pass this Bill. Under the present system the workhouse was a gaol. It was true. the working man might leave it, but for what ? Why to starve ; for the whole des;gn of the workhouse system was to force the poor to abandon it, instead of provide them with ac commodation, and the result was the poor man was separated from his wife, and allowed to hold no conversation with her, though both should be on the verge of death. (flear, hear.) Nay, in cases where the poor man and his wife, seeking relief in the workhouse, were placed in the same apart ment they were under tha abominable new poor-law system precluded under very heavy penalties from hold ing conversation together. No wonder, then, that the industrious population were so much averse to—and no wonder that they should have viewed this Bill, which could only insure the most riged operation of the law, without relaxing its bad features—with additional alarm. Will the Noble Lord say what he thinks the conduct of the Commissioners should be with respect to those cases to which he (Mr. Wakley) had alluded in the Bromley Union and in the Margato Union, The Noble Lord must be aware that, under the Poor-law Act, it is pro- vided that old and infirm persons might receive relief if they obtained a certificate, signed by the magistrates to that effect. Mr. Waddington, a respectable medical practitioner, granted a certificate to a person of the name of Sotheran, as order was granted for his relief, and relief was ac cordinaly given. On the following week, however, the board refused to administer the relief. The old man applied again to the magistrates, and they told him that they could do nothing else in the matter, and that he must sue the board.—(Hear, hear.) A letter was writ ten to the Secretary of State upon the subject. The an swer returned was, that the letter was sent to the Poor-law Commission=rs and the Secretary of State could not interfere in the matter. Would the Noble Lord say how he expected his scheme to work in such a case as this. Would the magistrate's order be the go verning power over the Government? He thought the present measure a most unconstitutional and dangerous one to the country. He objected also to the measure on the ground of the enormous amount of patronage which it would place in the hands of the Government, There was no less that 5,000 persons already holding office under the Poor- law Commissioners. Believing as he did that the present was a most impolitic arrange ment and most disastrous to the poor, he should feel it his duty to oppose the Bill in its present stage, and should vote most cordially for the motion of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough (Mr. Ferrand), and upon every future stage of the Bill, if there should be a division, he should give his vote against the further progress of the Bill.—(Loud Chen - s.) Mr. VILLIERS felt bound to say that in the course of the four speeches which had been made, nothing had been proposed, nor anything agreed upon. The Hon. speakers seemed to differ in t very point, except one, that was t:iseontent with the commissioners, The Hon. Member for Evesham (Mr. P. Borthwick) thought that the old local system was perfection itself, and ho had the utmost confidence in the conduct of the working-etas , ce. He only wondered that since the Hon. Member had been in tho House he had never brought himself to give his vote in favour of increasing their power. The Hon Member also condemned in the strongest language the conduct of the commissioners. The Hen. Member for Sotnersetshire was a very inte resting character in this debate. That Hon. Gentleman came forward and stated that the power and authority of the central power should be confirmed and strengthened. The Hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. B. Escott) op posed altogether the existence of the board of commis.. sioners, and thought that the local systems were con• ducted in the best and wisest manner, and he referred to several places in which the local boards had acted with great niscretion. There was one thing which the Hon. Member complained of strikingly in contrast with the statements of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. That Hon. Gentleman complained of the paupers, getting fat, and living in a state of ease and plenty, while the poor out of the workhouse were miserably clad and ill-fed. The Hon. Member for Finsbury also spoke highly of the conduct of local. authorities. In a speech delivered in the year 1839, the Honourable Member complained very strongly, however, of the conduct of these local boards. The Honourable Member talked very loudly about the good old times of Elizabeth. He (Mr. Villiers) did not wish to make any rash assertion of ignorance with respect to any Hon. Member, but he certainly thought that those Hon. Members who talked so loudly of those palmy days of Elizabeth, were not aware of the harsh and tyrannical nature of the laws of that period. He saw in all those diversities of opinion, and the absence of any suggestions from Hon. Members on the subject—a most cogent argu ment for some central system of management for the pour. He thought that there had been a sort of field open to those persons who were willing to believe that the rich were always ready to oppress the poor. And he thought that the popularity so easily obtained would at once fall to the ground when all tl ose extravagant charges brought forward by some Hon. Members were met by a firm awl convincing disproof. He should most certainly support the measure. Whether it was the best measure that could be suggested, he could not then stop to discuss. Ho thought that the central powers ought to be armed with more authority ; and he thought that, by the present measure, that power would be conferred on that board, and thus respect would be gained for its authority, and power which it did not now possess. As it existed before, an attack on the Commission formed an easy r an o eol a wf d af t ul o iltl f ty a l em assuredpeobpyn any la rtiht that the person wishing to obtain for him self The m e p e e s o u p r l e e of w this country were produced great and beneficial results t as o th emselves and d made agai n st convincedTh e everym ore one ee would subj ec t the country at I The centr al consi deredhweatshatthestatements Lord Aslttr the central authority were un aord had a great many abuses tfwooeuernoedredarect,tt,heantdime the h rpdefined what these duties commissioners were appointed. The first thing they had to-do to o as to r..,r a t b ve olish the system with several of of allowances; the next wat several other the power of giving out-door rat, duties of a different and a r d uous nature. had been admitted that the greatest Succes s had then, it t e nded their labours, what ground Was there litfhadoorogtahhtet accusations made against them. One_ party t h at the workhouse system could be carr i ed •o o ver the country. Another party said that no t one at all should be put into the workh ouse. The Honourable Member for Winchester, and the U. illethW fa Fi4bury sAid 53 ) 84t1 that every ee. Lord so full of confidence, but he (Mr. Wakley) had al eays remarked that the Noble Lord was never so bold as when be was wrong.—(Laughter.) He always ob served that he adhered with extraordinary pertinacity to his opinions when he was in error—(Continued laugh ter)—but that when he was right he entertained con siderable doubts. He was, therefore, greatly gratified that the Noble Lord had made such a speech oil the last night, because he answered himself by anticipation.— (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Wakley) heard the Noble Lord of 1864, speaking against the Noble Lord of 1847, and , he preferred the Noble Lord of the former period. —(" Hear," and laughter.) The Noble Lord felt very strongly on the subject of a Minister of the Crown being a Poor-law Commissioner, and in 1834 he (as him self informed the House last night) prevailed upon Lord Holland not to introduce the clause authorising such an office into the Bill. Last night the House had seen the Noble Lord (probably influenced by some sinister advice) make such a proposition. A proposition more unfortu nate was never submitted to the House ; it was one of the most unconstitutional which could be well conceived. What was it ? To give to a commissioner a legislative and executive power and functions.—(Hear, hear.) What could be more dangerous ? how would it work ? Why, eVeiy board of guardians in the kingdom would be political agents, and instruments set to work by design ingNv people, to accomplish some sinis ter object. . ha then was to becomeot the poor ? N othin g more unhappy could be conceived by any monster politician. tie was sure that it did not originate with the Noble Lord but he was sorry that he had not assigned his reasons for the change which had been induced. Now what did the Noble Lord expect would be the effect of this mea sure ? Were the Ministry jealous of the reputation of the Poor-law Commissioners ?—(Laughter.) Surely it was impossible that they could be envious of their peculiar popularity.—(Continued laughter.) Did the Right Hon. the Secretary for the Home Department expect that he was to re j oice in the name of Poor-l a w Commissioner.—(Roars of laughter.) He (Mr. Wakely) should certainly call him by no other name.—(Laughter in which Lord John Russell and Sir George Grey joined.) He should, certainly, on all questions relating to this subject, address the Right Hon. Gentleman as the Poor-law Commissioner sitting at the Home Office.— (Laughter.) What were the questions that would be most commonly asked, and which the Poor-law Com missioners would have to determine ? He (Mr. Wakley) did not think the subject had engaged the attention of the Government. He thought that the Noble Lord bad adopted, in 1847, the suggestions which were repulsive to his mind in 1834. Were Ministers aware of the questions they would have to determine? It would not do to shelve matters by saying, "we have referred them to the Poor-law Com missioners." That system was at an end. The com missioners of that time sat in Somerset House, and were not under the control of the Secretary of State. The Commissioners of this Bill sat in the House, and was bound to answer all inquiries. The comissionerers of that time could be the scape-goats of the Government no longer; they were already sent into the wilderness with not only their own sins, but the sins of the Govern ment to bear. But the Noble Lord, if he could read his speech of the other night aright, did not appeartob . e hold out with their conduc t. Did he mean to out as an example to Isis colleagues, the new commis sioners? If he did, the country would not be satisfied, and the House would probable see the spectacle of is dissolution in July, a meeting in October, and a new Government in the February following. What ques tions did they suppose they would be asked? They would be asked whether such and such changes of diet should take place at such and such unions, and questions of' a similar description. He would quote on spe cimen, for, in a matter of fact, one example was as good as a hundred, from a return laid upon the table of the House. In January, 1846, this letter was ad dressed to the Poor-law Commissioners by the clerk of the Bromley Union,—" Gentlemen,—l am directed by the Board of Guardians to inform you that they have agreed to resolutions at a meeting held yesterday to make the following alteration in the dietary of the union workhouse:—on the Wednesdays and Saturdays, for dinner, a pint and a half of soup and four ounces of bread, in lieu of seven ounces of bread, and on Thurs days, for children, meat-puddieg in lieu of bread and cheese. The Board of Guardians request that you will sanction this arrangement.—l have, &c." A copy from the medical officer of the union was subjoined. The first letter received by the union on the subject, and not a very prompt letter either, for while that of the poor law guardians was dated 17th January the reply was dated on the 31st. The letter said, "I am directed by the Poor-law Commissioners to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated the 17th. instant, respecting the pro wled alteration in the dietary in use in the Bromley workhouse. The Poor-law Commissioners request to be informed of the special reasons, if any, which led the board of guardians to entertain the proposition for alter ing the existing dietary." The Member for Tavistock says, " Hear, hear," as if this trifling request were to furnish matter for graver deliberation. The Hon. Member should recollect that the persons who preferred this request were themselves the rate-payers, and would, therefore, be obliged to heir the expence.—(Hear, hear.) The board of guardians addressed another letter to the Poor-law Commissioners, dated the Bth February. Ho trusted that lion. Members would give him their attention, it could well be done in that thin House. There were questions that would be continually asked of the Members of the Government, and he (Mr. Wakley) would certainly invite persons to make these applications.—(Laughter.) He would be ready o n every occasion to bring them forward—(Continued laughter)—anti it was just possible that, under such cir cumstances, they might bring on a crisis. The letter said, " Gentlemen,—l am directed by the board of guar dians to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 31st ult., requesting to be informed of the special reasons, if any, which led the poor-law guardians to entertain the proposition for altering the dietary in use in the workhouse. The board of guardians desire me to state that the proposal to alter the dietary was made in the first instance by a member of the board, who gave his reasons for the alteration. A committee was appointed to con sider the proposal. The committee's report was sub mitted to the board, negatived by them, and the re solution to alter the dietary as at first proposed was confirmed." There were two paragraphs annexed. One of these stated that all the expenses which would arise from the substitution of soup for bread twice a week for dinner m; ;ht be estimated at 501. per annum, taking the average of a hundred inmates. This sum the Committee were prepared to defray them selves, because they felt that they would not be justified in placing it upon the rate-payers until they had had practical experience of its working. But the Poor-law Commissioners were determined that th -y should not have that practical experience. Would it be believed that in this union it only took 501. 6s. 4d. for the maintenance of 140 persons ? On the 12th of February, 1846, a communication was received from Mr. Chadwick ; this intimated that a change was inexpedient, unless its relaxation was sanctioned by a medical practitioner.—(Hear, hear.) But it was said that the new Board would not act in this manner. He (Mr. Wakley) was glad to hear the Noble Lord at the head of the Government last night state that relief would he Lb erally given, he was delighted to hear this, but he would lake to know w hat they would do with such guar lions as those of the poor-law union. When they began to administ": the law they would find the difficulties insurenounta.lola.—(l.lear, hoar.) He did not think they would be able to give effect to it, and he must say it was a course which he never expected the English Government to pursue. As he had already observed, the directors of the - Bromley union admitted cnly of 5 oz of meat to an able-bodied man, and three ounces to an able hedied woman in the same time. This was on Sunday, while on other days they were only allowed 7 oe. of bread and I cz. of cheese for dinner. %You'd the new board maintain such a dietary as this ? Yet this was one in which the Poor-law Commissioners refused to allow the least increase. He would now contrast the dietary of this union with that given to criminals in the Reuse of Correction. In the Bremley Union on Sun day the allowance for an able bodied man was, of meat, 5 oz., and for an able-bodied woman 3 oz. ; of bread a man 6 oz., a woman 5 oz. ; of gruel or milk porridge for supper, 1 pints. Oa Fridays and Tuesdays the allowance was, of suet pudding, for a male 16 oz , and for a female 10 oz. The supper on those days was 6 oz. of bread and a pint of gruel or porridge. After Sunday there was no meat, and on the other days which had not been mentioned the dinner was but 7 oz. of bread and one of cheese. Now, compare this with the diet of the criminals in the House of Correction, of which. however, he did not complain, as he held every man or woman, whether confined in a prison or a work house, ought to have sufficient food to keep them in a state of health. For breakfast, on Monday, the criminal allowance was, of cocoa, one pint, and bread, 6 oz.; there was here no distinction made between men and women. It was disgraceful to make such a distinction, and doubly disgraceful as had been done by the commis sioners, to make no addition to the woman who had an infant suckling at her breast. Of meat, the criminal had 6 oz. On Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, he had each day also 6 oz.; or meat four days in the week. This was the allowance of the criminal, while the poor woman who had broken no law was left to starve on 3 oz. of meat in a week.—(Hear, hear.) Was the Noble Lord aware of these facts ? And if so, it was impos s ibl e that he could be contented with this state of thi ngs . If he has his Poor law Commis sioners seated in that House, these questions must be forced on their_ x a u t N t v ention, and their explanations would be required. the safety of the he(Mr. Wakley) tithed, was it for countryiere that such su bj ec t s s h o uld b e continually mooted there ?. He knew where the b a lance of an evil would b e found. It be in th e b oar d o f would rule guardians, and th e y the Government. a id thati The poor, being weak, would go to the wall, being the case, what would be th e feelings poor of thi s country. It was his opinion th at such of sueh he a feeling of 135 to uenedanger the in dignation would arise amongst t h em, i nst it u tions of the country.—(H ear . v i n ,ed, too, that a more unconstitutional w.eacsounre could not be brought forward. Vag this sys tem of centralization to go on increasing, at ev ery step they toek, the power and influ ence of the Government. The Noble Lord at the head of the Government must he aware that the power of the Poor. law Commissioners with regard to the dismissal of officers, such as clerks of the board of guardians, masters of workhouses, school-masters, matrons, and others, was immense; and did the Noble Lord think the country was ignorant of all this? lie was astonished that the Noble Lord, who was an advocate for a free constitution, who bad always expressed himself jealous of increasing the powers of the Crown, should bring forward such a mea sure as this. The Miele Lord might be convinced that the existing Government would not abuse the powers it would give them. But was the Noble Lord prepared to trust them with another Government? The Noble Lord ought to look forward and to guard against futile() Go vermtollts Ll,vi!lg it in their power to increase their in fl .enee threu te liout the country. The Noble . Lord, in hie speech last night, completely failed to show the ne t:awry for this izieutite. The Noble Ltd . was • - one should receive relief who applied for it. (Mr. B. Est- cott said be never said so. The Hon. Member said so, but what he meant was another thing.—(Laughter.) He (Mr. Villiers) maintained that a test was necessary, otherwise the indolent and the profligate would be put upon the rates; He thought that the internal disorgan isati , n at Somerset-house, however discreditable it might appear to the parties who were mixed up in it, nas not accurately judged. He believed that Mr. Althorp, who appointed the commissioners in the first instance, appointed discreet men. He appointed Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lefevre, and Mr. Nicol, and it was not till Mr. Chadwick introduced a different mode of adminis tering the law from what they had sanctioned that con fusion arose which led to his dismissal. And he (Nlr.Vil liers) did not hesitate to say that ever since that time he had exerted himself to the utmost to discredit the system and to bring odium upon it. If the charge of having neglected their duty could be maintained against the commissioners it was a grievous charge,. but he denied that these charges were ever proved before the House, and the Law Officers of the Crown had fully acquitted them of the imputations. The case of the Andover workhouse had been frequently re ferred to in the debate, and all the abuses exposed in that workhouse had been generally attributed to the commissioners ; but he maintained that nothing was more unjust. With respect to all those disgraceful proceedings, there was not one tittle of evidence to show that the Commissioners were charge able with them. It was to the total disregard by which the Andover Board of Guardians of the rules laid down for their regulation, that all these abuses owe their origin. He appealed to the Committee who had inquired into the case of that workhouse, and who were the most hostile Committee of inquiry that ever sat in that House, whether the statement which he now made was not perfectly correct. When the Noble Lord, therefore said that he had no confidence in the re sults of that Committee, he only said what the justice of the case demanded. What did that Committee, that Select Committee do, when they commenced their labours? They threw open their doors to the public. And gave permission to the public press to be present at the proceedings. Now, if a report of the Committee was considered necessary, the proper course would have been to have taken an official report of all that had taken place. Instead of that, however, a garbled and partial report was allowed to be published to the world, which left it to out of the power of the public to form a correct judgment of the case. This matter was brought before the Committee, and a desire was expressed that they should report the proceedings to the House, de die in diem,-but they would not hear of such a thing, and contim:ed to permit the press to pursue the course they had commenced. Such was the conduct of this Select Committee.—(Hear, hear.) conciled to the new poor-law, and the centralised admi nistration of it, and were convinced now that the central control which those possessed who superintended the working of the law, was precisely that which was desir able, and which they could not consent should be want. ing. When he said that he spoke from the experience and knowledge which he had gained from the evidence of different witnesses examined before a Committee on which he had been now for three months. In that Com mittee, where witnesses of every shade of opinion had been examined, not a single word had been heard, not a single breath had been used against the Commissioners. All seemed to approve of the commission, all seemed to favour it, and all seemed to agree that much mischief had been produced by the great outcry which had been raised against it on occasion of the House intermeddling with the proceedings of it ; and that the first great amount of mischief was done when the number of com missioners was reduced from 18 to 9 in the se-sion of 1841. The measure, which was new before the House, proposed to give more power, and increased strength to that centralised administration of the new Poor law which had existed now for thirteen years, with great benefit to the country. As for the Commissioners themselves, he did not deny that they had committed errors ; but that they had been corrupt, that they had been callous, that they had been inhumane in the ad ministration of the law, or that they had done anything but such as the House might suppose any Commissioners liable to de, he did most positively deny. He would, when the time came, give the measure his cordial support. Lord JOHN MANNERS said the Member for Somersetshire (Mr. Bankes) said that night, that if Hon. Members had restricted themselves to the subject which was actually before the House, the debate would, in one or two nights, have been certainly terminated ; but he (Lord John Manners) must say, if such had been the case, the debate would have ended, and the arguments for the Bill before the House would have been recorded nil ; for throughout the discussion for the several nights through which it had run, they had heard of the abuses of the poor- law affecting the objects of charity, till it became disgusting, they had been led, throughout the proceedings of the Andover Committee, the charges upon the Commissioners, and the language of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough—almost everything but the Bill itself, and on the Bill itself, he had heard scarcely a single sentence. The Hon. Member who had just resumed his seat, had devoted, in the course of his long speech, just two sentences to the measure that stood for a second reading; but those two sentences, to which he would hereafter allude more fully, formed the - greatest condemnation of the Bill which be could have uttered. Reference had been made to the poor-law, and as to the, he did think it did not afford that relief to the industrious classes which they were entitled to receive. He thought, that considering the facilities which were offered in the gaols for the instruction, and information, and improvement of the iemates, and comparing those that were afforded, in the workhouses to the objects of charity, the state of the latter in that respect, as compared with the former, was a disgrace to a Christian country. He did think that the medical advice supplied to the poor was very insufficient, and placed en a tooting that was very in ferior. He spoke from experience, for he had been one of those who had sat with Lord Ashley, and the strong and universally prevailing impression which was deep in his own mind was that the provision for medical ad vice was very insufficient. He thought that the accusa tions against the administrators of the law were well founded. He might quote from a report by the chaplain of Uxbridge gaol to show what he had been saying. That no doubt stated that the day set apart by her Majesty for humiliation was kept most strictly—that ninety-eight prisoners had petitioned the governor that the principal portion of their meals might be kept from them during the day. Now, what must be the discipline which bore such fruit as that? Very much superior to that pursued in' the workhouses And, therefore, he recognised the propriety of the parallel drawn by the Honourable Member for North amptonshire, between the workhouse and the gaol. Well then, he would pass from the considsration of this general theme, and he would come to that which had oc cupied the attention of the House for the greater portion of the debate, namely, the conduct of the Poor-law Commissioners. The Hon. Gen tleman rested his defence of this Bill upon the defence of the Poor-law Commissioners ; and he must coneratulate them on having so able, so eloquent, and so determined an advocate ; but, like many too eager advocates, he proved rather too much, for if they had been so correct in every act of theirs—if they had violated no law, and if they acted up to the letter and spirit of the Act of Parliament, and if they had done full and ample justice, if, in short, they have been the " faultless monsters" which they have been represented to be, then the English people and the English House of Commons must be the most unjust, the most indiscriminate, and the most unfair legislative body, that the world ever saw.— (Cheers.) The only charge brought against the Com missioners, he said, was a violation of the statue; but soon after he devoted a considerable portion of time in order to prove that the treatment of Mr. Day and Mr. Parker was not either arbitrary or unjust, however, after what had fallen from the _Honourable Member for Shrewsbury, it would require a vast amount of eloquence to prove that those gentlemen were not treated with a great deal of injustice. The Hon. Member was most indignant at the conduct of the An dover Ciinansittee; there was nothing which it did nol do; there was nothing which it said, or left unsaid, which he did not call to his aid, and upon which he did not commt.nt. He urged that they did not submit the , resolution of the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury, on the evidence taken by the House of Commons. Whose , fault was that? Which way did the Hon. Member him • self vote upon that occasion? Mr. VILLIERS —I never heard of it. _ _ Mr. WAKLEY said the evidence was reported to the House and printed. Mr. VILLIERS was bound to believe the Hon. Gentle • man's statement, but he had been led to believe that there was a disinclination on the part of the Committee, to have the evidence adduced before them repored to the House. The press, as he had stated, were allowed to be present ; charges of a personal nature were made against individuals, and reports, conveying them, went forth to the public, without the House being informed of the course the Committee were adopting. If the Committee was an open one, when the House had intended it to be select, a report to that effect should have been made to the House. There was a difference between Select and Secret Committees, although the Hon. Gentleman for Shrewsbury seemed to entertain a different opinion. In a Select Committee more Members of the House might be present, but Members of the House might be excluded from a Secret Committee-room ; but if the Members of either chose to throw open their doors, they were bound to come to the House and state what they had done. It was usual when Committees allowed their proceedings to be made public, that they should make reports to the House at the same time. When Hon. Members saw the evidence, as published by the House, they could scarcely believe that they were the same witnesses whose evidence had appeared in the newspapers.—(llear.) It was true the newspapers could not give verbatim reports. They could only give condensed and partial reports, coat lining as much information as they expected would be interest ing to the public. He (Mr. Villiers) had heard the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Finsbury (\ir. Duncolune) state that he regretted he had not been able to attend the Andover Committee as he could have wished, as he would not have consented to the Committee being open when personal charges were being made against persons, unless it was understood that the evidence should be reported to the House or that the parties calum niated should be present ; he only mentioned this to show the animus which existed in the minds of those who constituted the Committee. He could not help wondering at the absence of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Weymouth (Mr. Christie) last night and that evening who had been so loud in his demands for the dismissal of the Poor-law Commis sioners. He (Mr. Villiers) did not think that he ex amined the witnesses who were called before the Com mittee in a becoming manner, and many Members of the House had spoken of the improper way in which he examined the witnesses, who were his seniors in years, ,if not in everything, else. And yet the Hun. Gentleman took great honour to himself for his conduct as a member of the Committee. He did not scruple to inquire into the private affairs of witnesses and of the Assistant-Commissioners who had been formerly em ployed under the Poor-law Commissioners, and the room was constantly cleared in consequence of the impro priety of his conduct, and constant excitement was kept up during the investigation from the way in which the witnesses conducted themselves under his examination. When the witnesses were treated thus, was it any won der that they could scarcely trust what they stated. They were under the influence of fear, and everything was done to make 'them appear ridiculous. Thus, men who might have come forward and furnished valuable evidence, dreaded to do so, from the treatment which they would meet with at the hands of the Committee. The Hon. Gentleman the Member for Shrewsbury asked last night, with great triumph, how it happened that the secretary to the Commission, who was denounced by the Committee as an unscrupulous servant, was not dis missed ; but if Mr. Chadwick had been dismissed, how much time would have elapsed before there would have been another inquiry, another Andover, another Somerset house inquiry into the reason of his dismissal. When he and other witnesses were treated as culprits, how could they expect that the Poor-law Commissioners would dis miss them. Was he not right in stating that there was a strong feeling in the Committee against the commis sioners. He (Mr. Villiers) stated distinctly that no blame attached to the Poor-law Commissioners with respect to the Andover union. Then a most extraordi nary resolution was passed by the Committee with re spect to the dismissal of Mr. Parker.' The Hon. Gen tleman the Member for Shrewsbury succeeded in passing a resolution with respect to Mr. Parker. but they all knew that he was labouring under excitement during the whole session, and that he, in consequence, was not able to give that attention to the subject of the Andover inquiry which it merited. Mr DISRAELI said he was also a member of a rail way Committee. Mr. VILLIERS knew that his time was fully occu pied ; that ho was in muc'i excitement at the time the Committee sat-(Laughter) —his mind, no doubt, was occupied with other things.--(Laughter.) In a moment of excitement, however, he obtained the passing of a re solutien, expressive of the opinion of the Committee, that they had not acted acording to the Statute, and that they conducted their task in an arbitrary manner ; yet ;he (Mr. Villiers) repeated that no blame attached to the Commissioners f:r what took place in the Andover union, for it appeared that Mr. Parker reported that the union was going on favourably—(Hear, hear)--and they were bound to trust to their servants. He really was ignorant of the fact until it was pr,mulgated by the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge ; and let the House recollect that a report to this effect was made by Mr. Parker to the Commissioners, at the very time the proceedings in the Andover union case were going on. He was startled at the statement—so much so that he went up to the library the same evening the state ment was made, and searched out that passage in the proceedings of the Committee. But he met with something more startling, and which he thought would equally astonish the House. he found that that very fact was brought forward before the Committee in the shape of a resolution.—(Cheers.) They were called upon to furnish important information to the House with respect to the conduct of the com missioners and assistant commissioners towards that union, and he found that one of the Committee proposed the insertion of a clause in the report to the effect that Mr. Parker had reported that the union was going on favourably—(Cheers)—but would the House believe that that fact was rejected by the Cummittee?—(Hear.) The fact was reconsidered in the proceedings of the Commit tee, which were to be found in the library, where every Hon. Member might see that that important fact was struck out by a majority of two. The Members for An dover and Shrewsbury who were men of honour, ought not to have lent themselves to concealing so important a fact as this, when it was their duty to have acted without prejudice either one way or other. The Hon. Gentlemen the Member for Andover (Mr. Etwall) stated that he proposed a resolution in the Committee, that Mr. Par ker had conducted the inquiry with great par tiality, and that opinion was adopted by th e Committee; bat he ( Mr. Villiers) was at loss to know why it did not appear in their proceedings. He said that it was rather out of conaideration to him that the commissioners advised him to resign; and if he intended to bring his case before the House, or before the public, he was ill advised that he did not insist on the commissioners recording their votes against him. But he sent in his resignation. There was another case. He did not allude to it further than to show that he (Mr. Vil hers) was cognizant of it, he referred to the other assistant commissioner who was dismissed. He recollected that at an early part of last session the Right Hon. Member for Dorchester (Sir James Graham) referred to it in the House. He understood the Right Hon. Baronet to say-, that he had been dismissed on his recommendation. He might be mistaken—he might have misunderstood him, but he would say, that if the Home Secretary recom mended his dismissal, any blame attaching to it could not apply to the commissioners of the Poor-law. What he said, then, was, that in the report made by the An dover committee tl.ere was not a word against the New Poor-law Act itself, and all, upon conside ration of the evidence, must agree that no blame attached to the commissioners. Why, the Noble Chairman of that Committee, whom all had agreed to laud fur his upright and honourable conduct diving the sittings of that Committee, when he came to vote that r r e e s s o o l l u u ti ti o o n n s s . to be truth which was not truth, and that to be fact which was not fact, refused, and would not vote for the arTehneotNoablgeuiLdeordtommigeh;t Ihawverllsaid—thvse case upon its merits,' and my conclusion shall be accord iiinogw to s h independentm o i nemthbeers f necessity that uodfgmen havingt. that Commis sioners House the en I a Coin- , misliDu i its place P ; that the people were re. Lord J. MANNERS—WeII, the Hon. Gentleman comes down here and impugns the conduct of those gen tlemen who devoted their time to the inquiry, making the most violent charges against them. The Hon. Gentleman not, however, content with im peaching the conduct of the Andover Committee, objects that the evidence on which those resoletions were founded, was not worthy of credit, because, indeed, the witnesses were so worried by the Members for Shrews bury and Finsbury, that they did not know either what they were saying or what they were doing.—(Laughter.) Let them just imagine a gentleman like Mr. Lewis so incapable of answering the questions put to him, that he said things which he did not intend to say.—(Laughter.) And then, if that Mr. Chadwick was the Sinon which he was represented to be in an anonymous pamphlet written in defence of the commissioners, ever since he has been in office, he must be retained in office, not because they had the slightest confidence in him, but because he would institute an inquiry which they considered and knew they could not stand.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman also said that the commissioners were suffering uncle served odium, and that the iniquities of the guardians of the Andover Union were placed upon their shoulders; but was there ever a more unfounded statement. He defied him to bring forward any resolution which would bear such a construction. The president of the commission was to be superior to the president of the board of Council—to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and others. Could any one in his senses doubt that the Lord President would sanction whatever might be proposed by these high authorities, in spite of all that might be said to the contrary. That was the reason which principally induced him to vote against this Bill. He did not see that the condition of the poor would be at all amended by this measure, and, therefore, he opposed it.—(Cries of " Divine.") Sir J. GRAHAM said that he was not at all sur prised at the impatience of the House upon this subject. He had almost ventured to hope that he never should again:have found it necessary . to trespass upon the in dulgence of the House upon a Poor-law Bill ; but, con sidering the part it was his duty to take in the framing of this poor-law, and considering also the obloquy which he incurred in his endeavours to please, and considering also the official bias which he was supposed to have hitherto upon his mind in these discussions upon former occa. ions, and considering the independent station which he now occupied, he was glad to be able, calmly, dispas sionately, and deliberately, to review the policy of this measure, and he trusted that he should be pardoned if he ventured to address them shortly upon the subject under discussion. Though he did not see the Hon. Member for Finsbury in his place, he had great pleasure in agree ing with him in a sentiment which he uttered—viz., that it was the duty of property in this country to maintain the poor—(Hear)—and inasmuch as the poor were not represented in that House, it. certainly was one of the most important, and certainly one of the most bounden duties of the representatives of the people to take care that their interests were properly attended to. It was upon these grounds that he distinctly avowed himself unchanged in his opinion that the Poor-law Amendment Act was sound in principle, and in the main, conducive to the interests of the industrious poor, as contrrndistinguished to the idle poor. Before they consented to a great change in that measure, and they were that night debating what was a change, it was of importance to consider what was avowedly the principal object of the Act of 1834, and therefore, he would shortly allude to it. It had been said in the course of that debate that the measure had signally failed. He joined issue upon that statement, and he denied that the measure had failed, and he asserted that the objects contemplated by the framers of this Act" had been accom plished. First of all it was the deliberately considered intention of those who proposed this Bill, that an union administration of relief should be substi tutedwith ' hardly , an e for a parochial system and that syxceptio n,stem throughout England an d W a l es, now be stated t o b e esta bli s h e d . What was the second ? Whereas it was somet hi ng estrange d from the Act of Elizabeth. I t was i ntended to com p e l able-bodied per sons who co u ld not f i nd wor k f or themselves, or were unwilling to w or k, to l a b our a t the cost of the parish authorities und er arrangements made by those 1834 was to autho rities. The obj ect o f t h e Act ofmight assert the principle that i n eac h un i on t h ere should be established a workhouse, w h ere wor k an d f oo d should be provided for the able-bodied as the test of destitut ion, in each union of England; that test was consider ed to be a good one and i t was now un i versa lly a pplied. What was the next ? It was, t h at t h e paroc hial offi c ers should perform their d ut i es i n a prcper ma nner, and that the paid officers should be strictly controlled and watched. These paid officers now throughout England adm inistered relief. Ag a i n , w i t h respect to medical attendance to the poor, wh atever m i ght b e sa id with rr gard to the imperfection s i n t h e system o f medical relief , he would compare that medi ca l re li e f w ith the relief given in 1834. —(Hear, hear.) Contrast that with th eir recollection of the medical r e li e f as i t was g i v en before the Act with what it had be en s i nce t h e A ct o f 1834 up to the present time. Many ab uses h a d et pt in, but those were owin g to the thriftiness of the board of guardians, and the salaries o the medical officers were increased by the Commissioners, shoving the necessity of a central authority. There was another imperfection with regard to the parish aceouuts. There was formerly a single day appointed in each year for the audit of their accounts 1 pened that the number of placemen had been consider by the magistrates, and that audit was merely a matter ; ably diminished during the last few years. Reductions of form, and the grossest frauds crept in. The auditing ' had been made in the number of placemen in the Boards system was now placed under responsible parochial of Admiralty, Ordnance, and the Navy, while the only officers. Provision had been made for the education of addition that had been made was that of his Hon. Friend children in the workhouse, where no such provision the President of the Railway Board. It bad also been before existed. The education of the children, as given objected to this Bill that great power was given to the in the workhouses, was now better than that given in Poor-law Commissioners in the delegation of their au ordinary schools, and better masters and mistresses thority, but he did not see how that could be dispensed were taken from the normal schools. The old with. One of two things must be done, either that the system was vicious to the very core, and it House must enact some law for the general regulation of was of the last importance that the people of all the unions throughout the country, or else that this country should be freed from its operation. the Commissioners should have a power vested in The Hon. Member for Finsbury has said that the pre- them to frame such regulations as might be re sent proposition will degrade the House to the level of quired to meet the circumstances of each union. a parish vestry or a board of guardians. That they Of the two courses he was decidedly in favour of the would be occupied day by day with questions relating to last. Now, was it possible to escape from the necessity the quality of soup, or the quantity of gruel given to the of choosing the latter? No, it was not ; because the poor ; a hether it shall be made of one article operations of these general rules must always vary with in preference to another ; whether it contains too the fluctuations in the manieacturing industry of the muchmilk or too much water—all the tales and country. When trade varied and slackened the appli matters of this kind. The bills, too, will be cation of the prohibitory order of out-door relief in 100 brought under the notice of the House, if the out of 600 of the unions of this country must be suspended, present measure be agreed to. If the question—whether while from time to time, as circumstances ren this was the proper place to consider and discuss subjects dered it necessary, it must be stringently applied was before them, he would deprecate as much as any again. Jest consider, at this moment the coun one the introduction of such topics, to the exclusion of try was suffering under an infliction which tendered other important business. But these topics had been in certain articles of food comparatively dear, and it had troduced into the House relating to the administration of been deemed necessary, with reference to particular the iaw, they had been from time to time forced on counties, to alter the dietary in different unions, and, the attention of the Government, and great difficulty had . therefore, the circumstances being so liable to change, been experienced in the absence of those \N. ho were di- it was impossible to take away the power of making rectly and immediately responsible for the carrying out general rules. It appeared to him that it had been ad of the law. Nothing was more inconvenient than that mitted, that at the present moment Government parti the Secretary of State, who was not directly concerned cipated, to a certain extent, in the administration of the in the administration of the law, should be called to make poor-laws, but it had been connected with the adminis explanations on matters in which their information was tration of the law, without the power of command. It indirectly obtained. They had had an illustration that had been responsible—indirectly responsible—for the very night, in the question asked by the Hon. Member administration of the law without the supreme authority for Knaresborough in respect to the dismissal of Mr. of regulation or control ; and he was satisfied that the Mott. The Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secretary for time had arrived when that imperfection must be re. the Home Department used the expression " dismissed." moved. The mode to accomplish that end, it Now, in a technical sense, that was not so. Mr. Mott seemed to him, after much reflection upon the had not been dismissed. As he stated before, a subject, was to adopt the plan proposed by the Govern reduction was proposed in the number of the Poor-law ment. Upon the whole, considering the analogy the Commissioners. It was proposed to reduce the plan bears to the Board of Control and the Board of number from ten to nine, and Mr. Mott was Trade, he was of opinion that the Bill brought forward selected as the party who was to retire. He by the Government was an efficient proposal, and the retired-therefore from the Commission, and was not dis- beet calculated to meet the necessities of the cases. missed.—(liear, hear.) He said, therefore, that it was Without, therefore, at that late hour, wearying the not right that the Secretary of State should be called on House with minute inquiries, or what would be the to give explanations at second-hand, and in an unsatis- functions of the representatives of the new Board in factory manner. It was of no use concealing the real that House, he would content himself with simply state of the question. He maintained decidedly, from stating that he approved of the general principle of the his past experience, considering the large powers which Bill, and he should without hesitation give it his most were given to the Poor-law Commissioners, it was im• cordial support.—(Cheers.) portant that they should be directly responsible for their The House then divided, when there appeared— own acts, that the public and that House should be able For the second reading to place their fingers on those who might do any wrong in the administration of the law.—(Hear, hear.) ... The Noble Lord at the head of the Government has said that it was a question formerly in the Cabinet of Earl Grey, whether the responsibility should not be made direct. Lord Althorp, a high authority on this question, was strongly disposed to take the course now proposed, and of which he (Sir J. Graham) entirely approved. Lord Althorp consented to suspend his judgment in the matter at the time, and it was agreed to make the responsibility indirect instead of direct. Now, from Otis (Sir James Graham's) judgment of the working of the poor-law for the last ten years, and he was strongly convinced that the responsibility should be direct, and not indirect as before. Though it might do much to incommode the Government, still the step, in his opi nion, was one of great importance and value.—(Hear, hear.) He (Sir James Graham) further V%islar.d to ob serve, that the opinion of the Hon. Member for Fins bury appeared to be a different opinion now to what it formerly was. If his (Sir James Graham's) me mcry served him right, he was convinced that the lion. Gentleman's opinion hitherto on the subject till that night, was, that the boards of guardians, or local au thorities, were always seeking to cut down the supplies to the poor, and that the central authority had been re peatedly exercised in a salutary way to prevent this taking place.—(Hear, hear.) This brought him to the main question before the House, which was, first, was the central authority necessary ; and if so, had that authority been improperly exercised ? If it had been improperly exercised then the next question was, did the present measure supply the commission? With the regard to the first point, he thought it had been generally admitted, that central power was required. It had been admitted by the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire, in the course of the present debate, and several other Hon. Members. But the Hen. Member for Finsbury says that the • present system of control has operated injuriously. That by the existing. system of relief the poor have been confined in gaols, as he terms them, instead of being visited at their own homes. Now what was the Government's after course? So far from the poor being generally relieved in the workhouses, as he alleges, for the last three years but fifteen per cent. of the poor of England and Wales have been so relieved ; while eighty-five per cent. have been relieved at their own dwellings. In England and Wales last year but 185,000 were re lieved in the workhouse, while upwards of a million were relieved without.—(Cheers.) Talk of the hard ships of the poor after this, why a more unfounded charge was never brought against any party by any body of Englishmen. In the whole civilised world no country made such a noble effort as the people of Eng land to maintain the destitute by charity out of the public funds. In proportion to the population of 1834, the sum of eight millions was raised for the relief of the poor, but now the poor were relieved in a superior manner by five millions of money. And he begged to call the attention of the House to the fact that during last year, though there was not that distress which un fortunately now prevailed, two millions of their fellow countrymen received relief out of the parochial rates. One-eighth of the whole population of England and Wales were , thus relieved, and as he said before of these, no less. than eighty-five per cent. of them were relieved - out of the workhouse. Against it Majority for the second reading 42 -176 It would be in vain for them . in the history of the whole civilised world to match such an e ffort of humanity, so effective and unsparingly directed, and without, at the same time, degrading the characters of those who received the relief.—(Cheers.) Now it had been said, by the Hon. Member for Warwick, that the workhouse test had proved unsuccessful; and it was said by others, that they had too many assistant commissioners. In 1834, a wish was expressed to reduce the number, and he (Sir James Graham) thought that a reduction would take place. At another time it was stated, that the ❑umber was too low; and they were asked to increase them. At one time the rules and regulations of the commissioners were too stringent; at another time they were too relaxed—objections being continually made. But as he said before, the central control was very in effective, and it was on that account that he supported rie proposed change. He put it to any Member 11 , 1 W sitting on the Committee on the Law of Settleo..nt, as to the great importance of the question, and the difficulty of dealing with this branch of the poor-laws.—(l kar.) They had had brought before them thy• most intellient witnesses from all parts of England, men recommended as the most likely to throw on this difficult subject. ,Whatever might be the diflieu fcit. L. the Committee in coming to au unanimous agre,inent upon every point — difficulty so graphically painted by the Hon. and Learned Member for Liskeard—he was satisfied that he xprsssed the opinion of the Committee on this i,oint, and that of all the witnesses brought before the Committee, the four most competent and able and in telligent witnesses were poor law assistants, whose names he felt bound to mention. They were Mr. cuffnell, Mr. Gulston, Mr. Bigot, and Mr. Hull. Now, with respect to the commissioners them selves, he might be permitted to say very shortly what «•ere the facts which had taken place with espect to the commissioners when ho succeeded to office in 1841. He found that at that time one single commis sioner exercised the power delegated by the Act through out the whole of England and Wales. He was forced to confess that when Sir Frankland Lewis resigned office he was exceedingly sorry, because he did not think that his son could be qualified to succeed him. He would not in the presence of the Speaker say how much he felt when Mr. Lclevre resigned office, because, from his ad miration of that gentleman's high conduct and character, he might, perhaps, be thought to exaggerate the pain which that resignation had given. He did not know Sir . . The Bill was then read a second time. COPYHOLD COMMISSION BILL. The House then went into Committee on the Copy hold Commission Bill, and the several clauses were agreed to. TURNPIKE ACTS CONTINUANCE BILL. This Bill also went through Committee, and was or dered to be reported. LOAN SOCIETIES BILL. The clauses of this Bill were also agreed to in Com mittee, and the report ordered to be received. RAILWAYS IRELAND (Not 2) BILL. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER post poned till the 11th of June the second reading of this Bill. FISHERIES PIERS AND HARBOURS (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion of the CILaNCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER, the second reading of this Bill was post poned tilt the 70 of June. SEDUCTION AND PROSTITUTION SUPPRES SION BILL—ADJOURNED DEBATE. On the order of the day for resuming the debate on this Bill, Colonel SIBTHORP hoped the Hon. Member for Birmingham would postpone, till a future period, the further consideration of this Bill. He would suggest that he should postpone it for two months.—(Laughter.) Mr. SPOONER hoped the House would allow the Bill to be read a first time to-night, and he would propose that it should be read a second time on Wednesday., the 2d June, when the subject might be fully discussed. Lord JOHN RUSSELL suggested to the Hon. Gen tleman the propriety of postponing the first reading till Wednesday, the 2d June. After a short conversation, in which Sir George Grey took part, The gallery was then cleared for a division, but no division took place, and the Bill WhS read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on the 9th of June. LANDED PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS (IRE LAND) BILL. On the the order of the day being read for going into Committee. on this Bill, Mr. S. CRAWFORD said, as the Government in tended tu inteoduce a Bill on this subject, he begged to withdraw the above-mentionel Bill. The Bill was withdrawn accordingly. POOR REMOVAL AMENDMENT BILL. On the order of the day being read for the 2d read ing of this Bill, Mr. BANKES said he wished to postpone the second reading until a day when a discussion could be taken on the Bill, and trusted the Government would afford him ®n opportunity of doing so that day fortnight. Mr. HUDSON said the greatest anxiety prevailed in the country, with respect to the measure ; it was a great blot upon their legislation, and he trusted that no delay would take place in pas3ing.it into a law, in order that the detects of the present law might be amended. Sir G. GREY said the Hon. Gentleman had fixed the second reading for a Government night, when the Bill would not stand so much chance of receiving discussion as on another day. Mr. RICHARD YORKE suggested 'to the lion. Frankland Lewis's son ; and he, therefore, thought that the more prudent course would be not personally to court his acquaintance, but to watch his conduct in his high office, communicate with him officially, and form his opi nion by observing his performance of those duties ere he admitted him to familiar acquaintanceship. So mat ers went on for some three months. His pre dispositions were not favourable to Mi. Lewis, but it would be the height of injustice to that gentleman did he not say, that in all his acquaintanceship he had never seen or met a public man, so eminent for punc tuality and a happy power of overcoming by prompti tude the greatest difficulties. The able mariner in which he sustained his previous character, by promptly meet ing the difficulties of the year 1842, decided his (Sir J. Graham's) opinion. He was rejoiced to find that the good opinion he had begun to entertain was well founded, and from that period he termed an acquaintance with Mr. Lewis, which he had no reason to regret. With that gentleman he acted for five years, and the great efforts he made, and the prudence and decision he evinced un der the most trying circumstances ---efforts continued from day to day—confirmed more and more the good opinion he entertained of Mr. Lewis's qualities ; and now, in every place, and under any circumstances, he was prepared, from his knowledge of that gentleman's ;reat ability, and of his eminent straightforwardness, to defend that gentleman against any charge which [night be brought against him.—(Hear, hear.) It was unworthy of a great aasembly like that to dwell on small faults, where the person scruti nised had other qualities of far higher moment. Surely it was far better that Mr. Lewis should be distinguished by promptitude than by lassitude ; and he was ready to take a portion of the blame upon himself in those matters which had called forth the most determined expressions of public disapprobation, for he was assured that nothing had been issued by Mr. Lewis or the other commissioners which had not received his previous inspection. When Lord Melbourne left office, there was a vacancy in the Poor-law Commission, and, upon the accession of his Right Hon. Friend the Member for Tamwortb, he (Sir Gentleman the 3d of June. Mr. BA NKES fixed on Wednesday, the 9th of June, which was accordingly appointed, for the second reading of the Bill.. PASSENGERS ACT AMENDMENT. On the bringing up of the Report, Lord G. BENTINCK rose to move the amendment which he hal intended to move last night. He said he wished to give passengers the same security which ,‘ as atforded under the regulations at Lloyd's to dry and p:rishable goods. By the rules of Lloyd's, no goods were entitled to be moved which were not carried in stxond-crass vess. ls. They did not permit their sol diers to be carried in interior vessels, nor did they allow their convicts to be carried out in vessels which were not sea worthy. Now it was unjust that the Irish .emigrant should not be similarly protected. The lion. Member the Secretary for the Colonies, considered that his measure which ca't the respousibiiity upon the emigration agents. would secure the chjeet, which ho (Lord G. Ben - nick) desired to obt:iiii-I,4mely, the perfect sea-worthiness of vessels carr yir o;4 passeng rs. No inspection of the vessels going out. was required, and unless some One raised a doubt, there was no security at all, us tar as Bri , ish ships all was right enough; for Lloyd's register c old bit them whether they were sea worthy or not—but they had no security for American vessels, which w (:re built of the frailest materials, for they were all constructed of tir, which would become perfectly rotten in three or four years. (Bear, he,r.) The Noble Lord then read a notice to shipowners from Lloyd's, respecting the carriage of possengers, and said he asked for Irish emigrants by foreign ships what the House afforded them by English ships, arid he thought the House would not deny him this request. It could not be expected surely, that ships which could not be trusted with dry and perishable goods or convicts should continue to carry emigrants, and yet three f , .urihs were carried by such ships. He begged to move the insertion of the clause. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER quite agreed with the object sought to be obtained by the Noble Lord, but thought the subject had better be post poned till the third reading. Time should be given, at least, for the consideration of the matter. his present. impression was, that the clause had better now stand as it did. Mr. V. SMITH supported the Bill as it stood. Mr. THORNELY could not consent to the clause, and considered the clause in the Bill, as it stood, would secure all that was required. Mr. LIDDELL supported the amendment. Sir R. H. INGLIS hoped that the Noll° Lord would not divide the House on the subject, but leave the matter in the hands of the Government. Lord INGESTRE suggested that Government should take care of the education of those in charge of emigrant ships, in order to decrease the chances of ship wrecks. Several Members risitur, to speak, and Mr. Brother ton having made several 'ineffectual attempts to shorten the &bate, The HoN. MEmisEn at last nnovcd, that the debate should be adjourned. Lord G. BENoTfi N e t C tin g his o r n i s d i doefr this o a r i m t yo, das, adohopte w d for the purpose ever, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had promised that K the s pirit' of his cla uses should be carried out in the Bill, he should withdraw his motion. The clauses were then withdrawn, and the report agreed to. J. Graham) filled up that vacancy by the ap pointment of Sir E. Head, who, from his previous conduct, without regard to his political feelings, for he was opposed in politics to the then Go vernment, had recommended himself to the favourable notice of the Government, and his subsequent conduct had proved that he was in every way worthy of the con fidence at first bestowed upon him. By the appoint ment of that gentleman to the office of Poor-law Com missioner, ho (Sir James Graham) believed that eor.siderable dissatisfaction had been given to Mr. Chadwick, who, from that moment, had not worked cordially with the Commissioners. With respect to this Bill, it had been objected that it wouid increase the number of pluetnen t i p the llouse. Now, it so hap- RAILWAYS. Mr. STRUTT obtained leave to bring in a Bill for regulating the proceedings of the Commissioners of Railways, and for amending the law relating to rail way s• POLICE (SCOTLAND.) The LORD ADVOCATE obtained leave to bring in a Bill to amend an Act to enable burghs in Scotland to establish a general system of police, and another Act for providing for the appointment and election of ma gistrates and councillors for certain burghs and towns of Scotland. The Bills were subsequently brought in and read a first time. The remaining orders of the day were then disposed of, and The House adjourned at llalf-past One o'clock. POISONING GAME.—A great quantity of game, principally pheasants, has been destroyed in the preserves of Lord Middleton, near this town, through the means 'of poisoned grain, which had been strewn about the neigh bourhood of the plantations. Nearly a hundred dead birds have been picked up ; and it is expected that more remain to be discovered in the woods.—Xottingham Review. FOOD RIOTS IN JERSEY. —Tile Jersey Correspondent of Thursday has the following :—Thursday morning, half past five o'clock. lip to ten o'clock last night, many Per s-ma were loitering about the Royal-square and the streets adjoining, but no appearance of disaffection was manifested. During the night all has remained *Met. The extra guards, however, have remained at their various posts, and au till further orders. The authorities have Teftried to bill the persons in custody charged with rioting. FIRE AT SEA, AND LOSS OF ELEVEN LIVES. (From the Inverness Courier of Tuesday.) Last night, between nine and ten o'clock, a party of three seamen and one woman came into the town by the Beauly Road, from Wick. Two of the former were in* deplorable state—their arms being very severely burned - —and the other having an arm broken and otherwise injured. On being taken, temporarily, to the station house they gave the following story :—They were part of the crew of the barque Swan of Baltimore (a vessel of 400 or 500 tuns burden), Captain Williamson, bound irom Valparaiso to Leith with tallow and hides. The crew, including the officers and stewardess, were fifteen in number, and there were three single cabin passengers. Fourteen or fifteen days ago, when off th e Western Islands, the steward went down to the s p irit-room between twelve and one A.M., to draw off some rum for portion of the watch below who were sick. W hile draw ing off the liquor, the candle which be carrie d fell upon a quantity of dry oakum, which immediately took fire, and before an alarm could be given the flame bad caught the spirits. So rapid was the progress of the fi re that scarcely nn effort could be made to check it before the whole ship was in a blaze; while the thick smoke was r powerful that, as is supposed, none of those who were'yl bed succeeded in reaching deck. In the meantime t_ll°. flames had shot up the shrouds and stays, firing these rr; su"orond and in endeavouring to cut them away the were dreadfully scorched. The ship had two boat s ; a m in about • a couple of hours after the first toil ..1 the long-boat was get over the side. The stewarnewso went into it, and the others were preparing to folio s ; when the captain and the mate (whose name t v , i i „ Johnston), made an effort and got into the al , h. th ey with the intention of saving the ship's palte"; had, however, either fallen through the burning nee" or been suffocated by the smoke, for they were net aga seen. Six seamen and the stewardess succeed ed in gem capable of little exertion, they managed to ting into the hot, and though so much injured es t° r the ship, the sea running at the time very high. The ship had now burned to the water-edge, and though there was another boat left, no hope can be entertained that 119' were saved by it. The survivors had with them only s ll _ or seven biscuits ; and after drifting about for two dor_ and nights, they were picked up about forty miles off tel Butt of Lewis, by the Greenock of Port Glasgow, botuln get clear 0 for Wick, at which port they were landed. Their nano ° ' are Margaret and William Mackenzie, or * Mi lian° sister and brothe; Zechariah Williams an d Along° Macdonald; John John Smith; Joseph Ford, and Win. .., 1 ;11 1 :. stone. The three last-mentioned have been left in their injuries being so severe as to unfit them forth v t ..., By this dreadful catastrophe eleven lives have bee tic the captain, mate, second mate (an Irishman known "" - 'A as Timothy), and steward ; the three passengers, a n d four of the crew. The seamen who have reet ro Inverness have been conveyed to the 1 4 ° 11 _ - o . Infirmary, where their wounds will be attendeu . th They have lost their all, having escaped l i e scarcely any clothes upon them. In Wick obtained some aid from the authorities,. es l a t e _ as a certificate, which the rain destroyed. Thf whole,_ crew were Americans, though the parents of Sh e f r o' kenzies ;were originally from the Isle of SW,sw ; which they had emigrated to St. John's, New Brun_A. Macdonald's father also belonged to this neighbourhe' RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS' LIVERPOOL, MAY 21. ma nife sted &was. ExenANGE.-An improved feeling has de. itself in our share market to-day, there being a bet ter mend than of late. It was publicly announced at the Exchange that the directors of the Manchester and L e the the Manchester and Sheffield, the Great Western, a nd Midland Counties had a ll a nnounced their determination to, stop all their works that were not indispens abl y Dec and consequently not to press for calls. The s ales area ,O. Ambergate, Nottingham, Boston, and Eastern Julit% vi .. • Bs. 9d. dis.-Birmingham and Oxford, 6 p.-Ea' t is. , shire New (scrip), 1, 4 dis.--Leeds and Thirsk, Preference,doo 3 an d d . d N is. o - rth L . i ly ve e r a p t t rn l, , Cl 6 o s sb i , a ro n i d tto S , ou N th ew por Q t , ua l te P r Zplp ves . -- • Manchester and Leeds, 321. Shares, % dis.-Ditto, - ~,c os (late Liverpool and Bury), I,‘ dis.-Ditto. Fifths Oat!' : 0 1 0 , Riding Union), % dis-Blanchester, Sheffield, and Lteareat Eighths, 1/. lls. 3d. dis.-Ditto, Quarters Oet e f 0L....• Grimsby and She ffi eld), 24 ; dis.-Midland Stock, 1 .,,t' 1 1b, Ditto, 40/. Shares. 2 1 4 p.-Ditto, New, 11,4 p.-North Dr' „ v . New Quarters (scrip), 3s. 9d. p.-North Staffordshire, ..I_7l p.-North-Western, 2 dis.-Shrewsbury and Chester St: N.W M.), New, 1% p.-South-Eastern and Dover, WS Ditto, No. 4, Thirds, Bs. 9d. dis. MANCHESTER, MAY 21. STOCK EXCIIANGE.-The sales are-Ambergate, &c., bAs. ham, and Boston, 1 1 4 ( 2 dis.- Blackburn, Clitheroe, Ditto, dis.-East Lancashire (late B. and P.), New, 214 is.-:. _,„, New (scrip), 7s. dis.-Fleetwood, Preston. and West !ig l i n u t s , 1 1 / 2 c. dis.-Huddersfield and Manchester RailweY and Bit -1 dis.-London and North-Western (Manchetstreanr and Leeds, , mingham), Quarters (C), 4 15-16 p.--blar' hes ° Fif t hs (late Ditto, 32/. Shares ( late Extension), ii difi.- Oldham A 3A ll d ia is n . c_e, w 7 L -l a 6 rfd d a i i s. e W. H. U.), 1,4 dis.-North Staffordshir e, • 1 7.16 p•-'Oldham Ncottinj; -- (l S a ° te ut N h o i r LEEDS, MAY 21. STOCK EXCHANGE.-The sales ar ham, and Boston, 31s. 3d. dis.-East Lancashire. New (scrip), 4s. 6d. dis.-East and West Yorkshire, 38s. 9d. dis.-Gresit -tohrlshasirtee,rnD;lnxcasdteis.r, and uoolet Northern, l'A dis.-HUddersfield and Manchester, 10s. die:* e-Ambergate, Notting- Ditto, Thirds, 55. die:-Leeds and Bradford, 43% p.-Lcedi and Thirsk, New, 5 1 4 dis.-Ditto, Preference, ss. dis.-Leeds," Wakefield, and Midland, 19s. dis.-London, Brighton, and South Coast, 5114 -London and Portsmouth, 200. dis.-- Maltoa and Driffield Junction, 1 1 / 2 dis.-Manchester And Leeds (late Hud. and Sheff.), par-Ditto, 321. Shares (late Extensions), 12s. 61. dis.-Ditto, West Riding Union, I 0 dis.-Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland, 12s. be' dis.-Newcastle and Berwick, New, 1% s. p.-North British, T s t h a i ff rel a s r , da 2 h s i s r . e, p l .- % D n i . t p to . ,_E x x o t r e t n h s . ion .wes ( t s e e r r n i t p 2 ), d l is s :_ 6(l o p y .--Nrt ston o an h a Hitchin, 2s. 6d. p. HULL, MAY 21. STOCK EXCHANGE.-The sales are-Blackburn_ ti are-Blackburn , roe, &c,, Preference, % p.-Great Northern, 378.---Mencue°. ter and Leeds (West Riding Union), / 2 di3.-N or th Brish , Extension (scrip), Is. 6d. p. . SHEFFIELD, MAY 21. STOCK EXCHANGE.-The sales are--Ambergate, Notting.: ham, and Boston, 31s. dis. - Manches ter and Leeds (We ° Riding Union), 9s. dis. - Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincoln- shire (Grimsby and Sheffield), 12/. 10s. Shares, 21 c. dis . 4 Newcastle and Berwick, 4% p.-North-Western, 2 York and North Midland,Extension, 15 1 4 p. GLASGOW, MAY 20. Bath STOCK EXCHANGE. -The sales are-Airdrie and gate, 725. 6d. - Cly desdale Junction, 42/.-Dundee and erth, 30 1 4 -Ditto, Quarters , 525. 6d.-Edinbur g P h and Perth (New Co.), 303 -Glasgow, Barrhead, and Neilston Direct, IVA-Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ayr, 1161.-Glasgow end Greenock, 17L-Ditto, Halves, 8 1 h -Manchester and South ampton 10s. 6d.-North B ritish, Thirds, 465.-Scottish Cen tral, 23 1 / 2 . --...................... such a promise for fruit for many meshTr s h a e s r e t h has er is nottthis i sb:eean. tree, fro son. Every kind of fruit i THE PROSPECT FOR FRUIT. apple and pear, is covered wt r . . This is the case with cherries, 7 e gooseberry to the wall-fruit of all kinds, which gooseberries, apricots, and with the fruit is already well set. injury from the frost. h bloom, and on several kinds seems to have escaped any serious 'sle'ltiteiid,ga,masnendsp, promise i l s v e hic to h mthiiksecuoupnft,r)yr thi trees, pear trees, year. vi'ithin the last few days, the apple _„d and 11Iorell , cherries have all burst into full blossom, a" render even . orchard and garden fragrant and Liverpool Times. s e s o total famous, fai lu r e o arel alal rtTBED A tiAD BREAST OF SEVEN YEARS' STANDING -- , Dv llottowAy's PILLS AND OINTMENT.—Mrs. Davis, residing n,'" - T ;lie barracks at Cardiff, bad a bad breast, which, seven years AO 0 ,1 a bruise), commenced swelling, and ultimately five abscesses fortne,,: discharging large quantities of humour, which no treatment coal.. cure. She was much debilitated in her health, indeed her const lia . i t , i e o l i g i h szn u i r e , , t t h o o b , e .a b s re us t i k n i g ng i u lo p ll . o , w ry a - y i ,s as p t. ills ß a y m c i ha o l in iee tni sh e b n e e s a r u a n ti n s fl'e l d w" advised her to try them, which she did, and the result was t1ia.•,,, 0 244, c ,ku Strand, vE a L T o it i s n E to 3 t nine weeks her breast became as well as ever it was in her life. fob he had of al Druggists, and at Professor Holloway's Establish nle° ;ENT.] -TELESCOPES, RACE AND oro GLASSES.—SENT INTO TILE COUNTRY FREE UPON APPROB,"".Ss.-- e h : course Glasses with extraordinary great powers; a 39, Albemarle-street, Piccadilly. Newly-invented Opera and 14 je c ct can be distinctly - seen at the distance of from ten to twelve ;Meat These valuable newly-invented Glasses may be termed conyai ~ tor Telescopes for both eyes, and have now become gene. rho carriage and out-door purposes. Achromatic Telescoocst ~ -, bru most powerful ever made, with Lenses of clear transpstrcn _,.,.er every or.. liancy which possess such great powers as to supersede _, so kind for the waistcoat pocket, shooting, military. a nd se asi da purposes, Bze.; naval officers, sportsmen, tourists, _ c., ___. an d visitors, should not be without one of those valuableckTe I,,! i casin;:ortlY Glasses. Also, a curious very small Waistcoat ro s a t t . t h e dis the size of a Walnut, to discern minute objet ivoite d spec minute %%la. tance of from four to five miles. ICewlY" effect vision, before imP once tacles. Immediately they are placed b . s is at re that mist and dullness which appear before the e3e h most aged el's , is brought to its moved, every object becomes clear and distinct' t e fective sight becomes bright and brilliant, land.,3 and all kinds or youthful, natural, and original state. Invsibl CautioMessrs. S. and B. Solomons, Opticians, are not in. neigh inimodiate nected with a person of the callus name in their Acoustic Instruments, for relief of extreme deafn_ness_..ly way con . bourhood. York II ote 1 • be had at 39, streetAlbernarle- ~ Piccadilly opposite the To prevent mistakes, be cautious and observe, o n ly t° BIRTHS. On the 19th inst.. at Torrington-square, the lady of R. B. Grantham, Esq., of a daughter. On the 19th inst., at Clapham New-park, the wife of f Banbury, Esq., of a son. On the 19th inst., Mrs. W. 11. Carlin, of Ludgate-street , of a son. On the 19th inst., at Larkhall-lane, Clapham, Mrs. JO l3O G. Perkins, of a son. On the 15th inst., at Iluntley Hall, near Cheadle , the 0116 of the Rev. George Mather, of a daughter. On the 17th inst., at Beauchamp- square, Leamington, tbe lady of S. Blyth, Esq., of a son. - - On the 18th inst., at Yate Rectory, Gloucestershire, the lady of the Rev. G. L. llarvey, of a son. On the 18th inst., at Sutherland-street, Wa l wor th, Mrs . George Shadbolt, jun., of a daughter. On the 19th inst., at Hanger - lane, Stamford -hill, Mrs. J. Jerram, of a eon. MARRIED. On the 18th inst., at Ripley, L. Upple b y , Esq., of 'not" ton House, Lincolnshire, to Eliza Roberta, daughter of the ' late Rear-Admiral Sir Robert Barrie, K.C.B. and K.C. 11., of Swarthdale, Lancashire. On the 18th inst at Ripley, Yorkshir e, Edward Boodle, Esq. ! of Lincoln's "Inn, barrister -at-law, to Julia, eldest daughter of the late Rear-Admiral Sir Robert Barrie, K.C.8.1 and K. 11., of Swarthdale, Lancashire. On the 18th inst., at Cowes, Isle of Wight, John Maskeirt Esq., o f F e nny Stratford, Bucks, to Julia Caroline, youngest daughter of ]tear-Admiral Itatsey. On the 18th inst., at St. Martin's, Canterbury, Capfltio Henry Buckley Jenner wynyard, to Ann, youngest daughter of the Rev. J. Townley, Vicar ot Steeple .----"---.3lllnPstead'E"ex. DIED. hiß On the 15th ult., at Edinburgh, in the 49th year of age, John Munro, Egg , s econd son of the late George Munn Esq., of Culrain, in the county of Ross. On the 19th inst., Harriet Frances Hazel , youngest dragh" ter of Mr. George Hazel, surgeon, London. On the 2d inst. , at Caen, in Normandy, Victorine, the wife of Ludwig Rosenth al, Esq., of London. On the 10th inst. , at Dresden, Mrs. Elizabeth Webster 'Rode, relict of the late C. J. F. Thode, Esq., aged 79. er, On the 18th inst. , at Brighton, the Rev. Robert Bit. Vicar of St. John's, Kil k e nn y , aged 52. On the 13th inst., at Canonbury-square, Islington, Willi4l:4 Moule, Esq., of Lloyd's. „ s London: Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No. • Strand, Prhiter, at The Sun Ofilee, No. 112, Strand, in the Preduc, of the savor, In MO Cona 4 y SAturdar, gai Li VT. ts, bk ; Mei Prof. bit ?1.6* 1 1 • wit lAA f eh ter,