The Sun. — London, England, 1847-05-18 00:00:00

A St. David's) would answer, that those who had fully con sidered the question, and who well knew the nature of t l. l branch of industry, declared that this was a ~ s exagg: ration, and that the estimate of the evils Prehended had no foundation whatever in fact. Not only the most intelligent of the working population, but nanny of the greatest manufacturers of the country had raet these objections, and shown that they were falla• eious and unsound. Though it had been said that this would be a perilous experiment, he contended that the peril was all on the side of the system the Bill sought to amend, and he therefore called on their Lordships to act fin the humane peinciple of the greatest happiness to the greatest number, and support the second reading of the Bill.—(Cheers.) be ware ASILBURTON called on their Lordships to } ,eware lest b y i n j ud i cious i nter f erence t h ey t oo k away the bread of a great body of the working population en gaged in factory labour. His objection to the present "Leasure was, that they were proceeding with most im perfect knowledge of its probable operation. He did not o!risider the working population referred to by the Right Reverend Prelate proper authorities to decide the question, and he, f or one , wou ld h ave b ee n glad if steps h ad been t a k en to inquire more fully into the feelings and sentiment s o f the master manufacturers. At the present time the man u fa c t u ring producer of this country _ had to submit t o t h e k eenes t com p e tition in all the markets of the world, and they ought therefore to pause ere the eo , t Y aggravated that state of things . Had the Bill P tuned a cl ause f or e l even h ours , h e wo uld have sup -I,orted it, but as it did no t con t a i n suc h a clause, he must ote for the amendment of the Noble and Learned Lord. theTrhee appeared .For the second reading of the Bill, Contents Against the Bill Their Majority f o r th e s e cond reading —42 Twelve o ' Lordships then adjourned at a Quarter past clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS. May 17. The () clock. SPEAK ER t oo k th e Ch a ir shortly before Four REPORTS. B The reports on the following Bills were brought up: — ridge House Estates Debt. DCommercial Gas-light and Coke Company. üblin and Belfast Junction and Navan Branch Railway. ""'in and Drogheda Railway (Purchase of Navan „ularanch, &c.) 14..ndalk and Enniskillen Railway. erife erol tar ine Waterworks. -e' e rn Counties Railway (Mahlon, Witham, and Eastern Counties Railway Extension (Cambridge to Bedford, &.) .ta!t Liucolnshire Railway (Deflation at Boston, and tsr anch to Great Grimsby and Sheffield Junction Rail , , n ,y at Grimsby). . 4111 burgh and Glasgow Monkland and Kirkintilloch, B sa a t i e loe o hn ay and Slamannan , Railways Amalgamation, reifi e l d 0 Leas e- Falmouth Edmonton Railway Extension. Gi Waterworks. GlusgoW, Barrhead, and Neilston Direct Railway. pr y, D umfries, and Carlisle Railway, and Glasgow, Glasgow l, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway (No. 1). eot, Kilrcarnock, and Ardrossan Railway (Amend m as 0 Deviations, and Branches) ci P a g rs w th a P s a g i o 'l w eY ): and Greenock Railway (Branches at ani e rs w ' P aisley, and Greenock Railway (Amendment and siranches to the Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, th e (1 4 ,Yr , the Glasgow, Barrhead, and Neilston, and and - , -11 ,..‘g°w, Strathaven, and Lesmahagow Railways, Gifts . 0 elaugh Pits) Gl ae r w ' P aisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway (No 2). AyVshirPe4i'leY Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway, and Gr eat Ind . and Bridge of Weir Railway (No. 3). Great Soultreri:ienaiin d sula Railway. arti o to . Western Railway Extension (Port- L owe _ g nto lullamore). ha 4 ). ft Railway and Harbour (Alteration near Reed- Manchester and Birmingham and North Staffordshire i‘T o t ' une tion Railway. Rorrfolt Railway (Yarmouth Extension). t tai lway (Branch from Wymondham to the Norwich railway of the Ipswich and Bury St. Ed- Reedili3 Railway and the proposed Thetford and pai ar e Railway near Diss.) Il a ,! l ,e e Y , and Renfrew Railway (Sale and Improvement). p_ y " n t , Ilarrhead, and Hurlet Railway. I);Lynie a I atents Assignment. Ross and Tavistoek Road (No. 2). Ru e ' mcmn artY, and Part of Nairn District Roads. s ce corn ea„ . s_zon Walden Rates. Is? eke and Amman Junction Railway. at BZakefield Market. arrington Gas. antlodadi:ittleriCk Railway. l ia e ter f f P o r r d Yorxkflrd Free Bridge. The ilproveraent, Lendal Bridge and Approaches. sideeed and on the following Bills were further con- Belfast IPe d ,.. a greed to:_ -•. uuhn Cons "" ttarbour. Duffry n Li tim ers Gas. * Railw and Perth Cawl and Lynvi Valley Glasgowa,d Irs`'thal.garnation. gow, ;',lll3efries, and Carlisle Railway, and Giu lio/id Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway (No. 4). °n Sear a I . l4 Le e , ds_Chemical Manure R yd 8 (Dalkeith Glebe) Estate. shmte improvement. - "eid Markets (Amendments to be proposed). THIRD READINGS. The following Bills were read a third time and eased : Ziirlienhead Dock Company and Herculaneum Dock Company Amalgamation. British Commercial Insurance Company (No. 2). Caledonian Railway (Glasgow, Garnkirk, and Coat bridge Railway, Branch to Glasgow Station). Cork, uork and Bandon Railway. Blackrock, and Passage Railway. D unfermline and Cupar Court Houses. ''astern Union and Ipswich and Bury St. Edmund's Rail ways A ma l gamat i on. So uthampton and Dorchester Railway (Weymouth Branch). REPORTS OF RAILWAY COMMITTEES. _ t Mr. FITZROY moved that it is expedient to suspend °r the remainder of this session the standing order r ,, i ell precludes Committees on Railway Groups from t asoing their reports to the House until the reports on 1,,, t several lines comprised in the Group have been laid them by the Railway Commissioners. ssir. STRU FT said that it was not possible that the r eport s of the Railway Commissioners could be more ably bl ade out; no expense ' nor trouble was spared, and their zeothority was very great, and he therefore could ins t think that they were valueless. They had Ns e L e i llt , e ,d a great many evils from occurring, and, In4 e -a ,"Y, they had prevented railway companies from If a sing their capital to an unlimited amount. a les :* SHA.W said that he was not about to deny that th e 'ePorts were valuable ;it was to the working of sYsteea that he objected. The Committee were s O L ed to hear everhin , and then read the Commis- Watt for report, fur which they were often obliged to exp ense a long time, and thus occasion an enormous to the parties. tr a few words from Mr. CRIPPS, which did not rea ch the - gallery Sir E th a •• ELLICE said that no person lamented more 6 ea did the diffi cu lty which had been exrienced in phtrYing out th e reso l u tions which he bade entured to ° Pose, and he must again say, in his own defence, air t this matter o f diffi cu lty s h ou ld no t h ave b een F of a wed to remain in the hands of an individual Member that Rouse. What had fallen from his Right Hon. rr i t i end the Chi e f C omm i ss i oner o f t h e R a il wa y B oar d 4 1 1 " Y bore out his statement, in which he recommended e House to come to this decision. He would not repeat Wh at his Right Hon. Friend had said, but there were tbmany of the Bills which had been prepared during .' 3 present sess i on so many conflicting propositions With respect to the powers for raising capita l and for raising loans, and for a malgamating and uniting compa tlies—many of which had be en so preposterous—that ~e parties themse lves u pon the first attempts at examination before the Board, Ela had had been ashamed of their own propositions, and withdrawn them. Many of them had, quite contrary to all principle, and in de fiance of the standing orders ftte i of the House, gone before different Committees o House to ask for powers which they knew could not be granted. He certainly thought this was not a fit state of things to continue, and s omething, in his opinion, ought to be done to effect an amend ment . The whole question of railways was one which Parliament ought to take up, in order to provide a remedy for the evils which were complained of in the debate of last Friday. He should recommend his Hon. Friend to put up with the inconvenience, in order to have the examinations which had been taken in that Committee, which the Government had deemed was necessary for the public safety. Mr. HUDSON said that the Committee might have waited very long before they would have got the . R t stv;aY Commissioners' reports, and had the original ip en " °ll been carried out, not one of the Committees 1 1 i 3 w sitting would have got on with their bin t e a s k s e l: s aid, therefore, that this investigation should is e l ee ,i . a. use by clause; but . . there would, , according to his be esion, be a very injurious delay, which would pr n a ccompanied by an enormous expense. The o p of his Hon. Friend was, he thought, ex hreeilleelY simple, and he hoped that the Noble Lord at the t f o -a g of the Cs' overnment would make an explicit statnen , fo r the want of it had been attended with very consi er n4l,-7 eonvenience. He sincerely trusted that the pro p which his Hon. Friend had suggested, whatever "'i tn L e ght take place, would, by the consent of the Govern -4,1t, be put before the House. he h a . CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said th a t u lt was a universally agreed proposition by de e i in' a use, that no Committee should come to a at a l l s ` ll before they received the report of the orj..vay Commissioners. This was the unanimous ti 7_ lo ion of the House. Nothing had been found to affect . ti. e character of the report of the Railway Counits(-) ;: h ers, and yet the object of the Hon. Member was . n g about a decision for the preamble before the Com te.luittees received that report. There had been nothing t i ; PnPeach the report of the Railway Commissioner; .he _,not see any reason for the alteration. He had in :_lliuced to give notice, in compliance e ith the reasons 7 .h had been adduced that he should move for the appointment of a Select Committee, and ho did accord tng!er give that notice now. 134e,r‘fter a few words from Mr. HODGSON and Mr. W. _T r Ell. who supported the motion, _ 04 3 1 . BAILEY said the resolution was not only an in cartv.enienee to the Members of that House, but to all tarries who came before the Committees, and it ought, therefore to be rescinded. ' F ' SBRING trusteA that the House would not THE SUN, LONDON', TUESDAY_ EVENING, MAY 18, 1847. • abandon the resolution which it had passed at a former TRANSPORTATION. period of the session...__ The. object of that.tesolutionwas_ _. Mr. EWART asked the Hon. Gentleman the Secre to draw the attention of the Committees to a matter of tary for the Colonies whether Government had any in very great finportarice. it was true there bad been some tnation of revising the pr ,, sent system of transportation, inconvenience resulting from the operation of this rose- with a view to all !, in the lays . ? lution, but then the business of the House 55as io make t Mr. HA WES said tot. ~t.tbject, would shortly come good and perfect laws. If every resolution were to be set under discussion in that House, when his Noble Friend aside, on the ground of delay, the House would find that the First Lord of the Treasury would be prepared to none of its salutary resolutions would be attended to. state fully what his intentions were. And it would be found that some of the companies, CORN RETURNS, which were exceedingly alive to everything affect- Mr. P. MILES said, in the early part of the session ing their interests, would postpone sending in their finan- he moved for certain corn returns in continuation of cial returns, in order to make out a case of grievance, those which had been annually laid before the House for such as that complained of in the first instance. In fact many years past. It was, however, communicated to it had been stated that the delay of completing some of him, that an addition he had made to the return would the reports had arisen from some of the companies not cause a delay in making the return, and he intimated to having sent in their returns. lie should most certainly the corn• inspector that he would not press for that part oppose the resolution. of the return. Still, the return was not forthcoming, After a few words from Mr. SHAW, wit! he therefore wished to adt the Hon. Gentleman Mr. EDWARD ELLICE, jun., thought that a part (the Vice-President of tilt- IlLird of Trade) whether of the difficulty might be obviated if an understanding the return would shortly be laid upon the table of the were come to between the Chairman of Select Committees House ? and the Chairman of the Commissioners of Railways. Mr. MILNER GIBSON said the order was made Mr. FITZROY said that the feeling of those who upon the Treasury, and not upon the Board of Trade ; were opposed to his motion might be got over if he in- but, nevertheless, he would make inquiry into the cause serted the words " Committees now sitting." His im- of the delay. pression was that his motion was necessary, and as he had heard no objection to it to warrant him to withdraw it, he would press it to a division. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, when the numbers were—. For the motion Against it Majority POLICE BILLS. Mr. GREENE said it would be in the recollection of the House that a short time ago the Police Clauses Con solidation B*l was referred to a Select Committee. Since then several Police Bills bad been referred to Committees, and ha wished to know from Government whether those Committees ought to proceed with their labours till the report of the Select Committee on the Police Clauses Consolidation Bill was before the House. Sir G. GREY thought that it was exceedingly de sirous—that such a suggestion was valuable, and it was desirable that the Committee should be instituted. POOR LAWS. On the order of the day being read for the second reading of the Poor-law Admi n i s t rat i on Bill , Mr. FERRAND asked the Chancellor of the Ex chequer whether the private defence of the Poor-law Commissioners to the charges brought against them before the Andover Union Committee (intitled, " Let ters addressed by the Poor-law Commissioners to the Secretary of State, respecting the transaction of the business of the Commission, &c., &c., &c.," embellished with the Royal Arms, and " printed by W. Clowes and Sons, Stamford-street, for her Majesty's Stationery Office)," has been printed and circulated with the sanc tion of her Majesty's Government ;—if printed and cir culated with the sanction of her Majesty's Government, whether he intends the expense to be defrayed out of the public purse ;--if printed and circulated at the pub lic expense, whether he will lay upon the table of the House a statement of the expense ? The defence, the Hon. Member asserted, contained most unjust calumnies and flagrant untruths, and had not only been circulated amongst Members of that House, but had been for warded to different tradesmen throughout the country. He held in his hand, for instance, a copy which had been sent to a tradesman in Oxford-street. Mr. GREENE brought up several reports, the titles of which, owing to the confusion and talk in the House, were inaudible. HEALTH OF TOWNS BILL. Lord DUNCAN gave notice that upon the motion for going into Committee on the Health of Towns Bill, he should move that it was inexpedient to proceed with the further consideration of that measure until full con sideration had been given to the unequal pressure of the window-tax on the dwellings of the poor. CONSUMPTION OF FLOUR IN COTTON WORKS. Mr. FERRAND gave notice that to-morrow he should ask a question of the Noble Lord at the head of the Government upon a most important subject ; it appeared that 183,120,000 pounds weight of best flour were used for the purpose of dressing warps to be woven into cloth ; and, also, in daubing cotton with flour paste, with the intention of defrauding the public. The question which he wished to put was, whether it was the intention of the Govern ment to bring in a Bill to prevent the use of flour to such purposes? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said. with regard to the first question, the Poor-law Commis sioners were called upon by his Right Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department to make a defence in answer to certain inquiries which he had caused to be instituted into their proceedings, and the Commissioners made what the Hnn. Gentleman called a private defence, which was comprised in certain letters which were laid upon the table of the House. He did not think, therefore, that the defence could be strictly called a private one. It was certainly true that the let ters had been published and circulated by the Commis sioners, and it had been done by the consent of the Go vernment. With regard to the second question, he cer tainly thout'ht the expense ought to be defrayed out of the public funds, because, in publishing the correspon dence, the Commissioners had only to act in conformity with their usual practice in such matters. POOR LAW IRELAND. RAILWAY FINANCE. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave notice that, to morrow, he should move for the appoint ment of a Select Committee, to inquire into the finan cial position of the various railways in the country, and the various points touched upon in the debate of this evening, with relation to railways. QUARANTINE LAWS. Dr BOWRING wished to ask a question of the Right Hon. Gentleman below him, the Vice-President of the Board of Trade. It was reported that a considerable change was to take place with regard to the quarantine laws. He wished, therefore, to know if any new regu • lations were contemplated, and what they were. Mr. MILNER GIBSON said that, with regard to vessels from Egypt and Syria, they were to be put under the same regulations as were applicable to vessels from Turkey, and they were to be admitted under free pra tique, provided they had clean bills of health, and were not laden with susceptible articles. There were further regulations under consideration. b BERINGTON'S KNAPSACK AND-GIRDLE. Mr. P. SCROPE desired to ask the Secretary for Ireland, whether he was prepared to lay upon the table of the House any statement as to the progress of the system of relief in Ireland under the Temporary Relief Act ? He also wished to know, whether there was any compulsory power to compel the Relief Com mittee to do their duty, and in cases where they would not do so, to discharge them and appoint fresh officers? The Honourable Member adverted to a charge made against Lord Berehaven, that there had been groat destitution on his estate, and that he only subscribed twenty shillings a month, and that he subsequently w.thdrew that relief altogether, confining himself for ten month:: to the inside of his demesne, the gates of which were stri, tly locked. Mr. LABOUCHERE said that there would be a report laid upon the table of the House which would give his Hon. Friend all the information he desired, he was anxious to say that it was no fault of Sir John Bur goyne that a great many evils had occurred, it was quite true there was great indisposition on the part of many Relief Commissioners to aid the Government, and the people themselves desired to return to the ancient system of road begging. In conclusion he would only say that from his knowledge of Lord Berehaven, he would not believe that he had bsen guilty of such inhumanity as that stated by the Hon. Member. That Noble Lord had expressed to him such a concern for the poor in his neighbourhood, that he could not come to any other eonclusion. Mr. SHAW said that he was quite sure that Lord Berehaven could perfectly clear himself of such a charge. And on the part of the Irish proprietors, he would say that the Member for Stroud took advantage in that House to say things which he could not jnstify out of it. Mr. B. OSBORNE said that it was rather hard to blame the Hon. Member for Stroud for his observations on the Irish landlords, for such a course was so popular, that it was not to be wondered at. WARNER'S EXPERIMENT. Lord INGESTRE said, with reference to an answer from a Member of the Government respecting Captain Warner's invention, he would say that he himself was a witness of the late experiment, and he wholly disagreed in the unfavourable opinion which was given of it. NEW POOR-LAW BILL. Mr. FERRAND, on the order of the day for the second reading of the New Poor Law Bill being read, asked the Law Officers of the Crown, by what authority Par liament is invested with the right to delegate to any person, or body of persons, the power of snaking rules and orders which shall be as binding and authoritative upon the people of England and Wales as an Act of Parliament ? If Parliament is not thus authorised, by what statute can the people of England and Wales be treed to obey, as law, the rules and orders of the Poor law Commissioners ? If there be no statute, have not all persons committed to prison for disobeying the rules and orders of the Poor-law Commissioners been illegally hadT he an ATTORNEY it - t G o deprived of th e i r lib er t y ? E d e lE g l a t t A e L i ts s p a i o d w e th r a to t Parliament or persons in such a manner as should be binding upon the people. He mentioned courts of law, and other tribunals, as instances where this power had been exercised. Sir JOHN WALSH desired to ask the Member for Stroud whether he had communicated with Lard Bore haven relative to the charge he brought against him. Mr. P. SCROPE replied that he had not, and that it was objected to mention anonymous cases. He would be quite happy if Lord Berehaven was enabled through his means to justify himself, for the present was not the first time such charges had been made. THE MOTT CASE. Mr. WAKLEY wished to ask the Right Hon. Gen tleman the Secretary at 'War, what steps have bee', taken to investigate the merits of the knapsack and girdle invented by Mr. Berington. Mr. FOX MAULE recollected that the subject was brought under the consideration of the House when the army estimates were brought in last year, but he did not recollect that he had said anything which could induce the Hen. Gentleman to suppose that he would subject the knapsack to any inquiry. He himself, however, had looked at the knapsack, and he had no he sitation in saying that he did not think it deserved the encomiums which had been passed upon it. It was considered most inconvenient, and in the next place was thirteen ounces heavier than the knapsack at present in use, which was eight pounds in weight (as we understood). (" Hear," from Mr. Waklcy.) He had therefore not thought it advisable to advise the use of the knapsack of Mr. Berington. RIOTS AT TAUNTON. Mr. B. ESCOTT wished to ask a question of the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of state for the Home Department, which had reference to the preservation of the peace of the country. He perceived by the newspapers of this morning that considerable public violence had taken place in the west of England, particularly in Taunton, in consequence of the dealers in corn affixing what prices they chose to their commodities; he therefore wished to know whether the Right Hon. Gentleman was able to state whether the reports were founded in truth or not; whether there was reason to fear that the alarm which prevailed in the west of England would extend itself to other parts ; and whether he bad received any information on the subject, which, consistently with his duty, he thought proper to lay on the table of the House? _ _ _ Sir G. GREY said he hail received information from the civil authorities of Exeter, stating that disturbances had taken place on Friday and Saturday in the west of Cornwall and Exeter, and in one or two other places in consequence of the high price of provisions ; but al though he had seen accounts in the news papers of disturbances which had taken place from this cause in Taunton, he had not received any official information on the subject ; but in consequence of the prompt measures taken by the local authorities, order had been restored in those parts of the country to which he had referred, and he hoped there was no cause for alarm.—(Cheers.) FOREIGN IMPORT AND EXPORT DUTIES. Mr. NEWDEGATE wished to know from the Right Hon. Gentleman the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, when the returns he had moved for with respect to the export and import duties imposed by foreign countries, would be furnished? Mr. M. GIBSON regretted that so much delay had taken place in the furnishing of the returns which the Hon. Gentleman had moved for. He feared, however, that the Hon. Gentleman did not estimate the labour re quisite for completing such a return, or the one he had moved for, as the most detailed information was neces sary to render them complete. The Custom-house had furnished their portion of the return from time to time, but lie hoped, in the course of a few days, that they would be furnished to the Board of Trade, when they would be laid before the House. No unneccessary delay should take place. Mr. FERRAND desired to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the appointment of Mr. Mott to the office of district auditor received the sanction of the Poor-law Commissioners after he had been dismissed from the office of Assistant Poor-law Commissioner ? 'Whe ther the Poor-law Commissioners allowed him to hold the office of district auditor at the time that he was part proprietor of the Haydock Lodge Lunatic Asylum, or after the Commissioners in Lunacy declared, in their report on the state of the Haydock Lodge Lunatic Asylum, that Mr. Mott had failed to fulfil a positive and solemn pledge which he had given to the justices of Lancashire, and that he appeared quite unworthy of the trust, and became most negligent and remiss in the discharge of his functions? Whether they have al. lowed him to hold the office of district auditor of Lanca shire, whilst living is the Isle of Man, out of the way of his creditors; after he was seized by a sheriff's officer, when on his road to audit the union accounts; during the time he was a prisoner in Lancaster Castle; and after a public advertisement appeared in the Times i L h u e n d a i t s i c c hargeof newspaper, war n i ng th e pu bli c not to pay hi m money Asylum?his W d u h t i e e t s h , e n h d o l e h ft a s u n a g g n n d a b a a l n t h d o o u n g e h d belonging to th e p ropr i etors o f t h e ll ay d oe k L o d ge holding the office of district auditor? been a 7 e to and h i o d l a d te t s he for sit tr u h a e ti s o i n t u a r t e i f o e n r , r e f d r o t m a . Sir G. GREY sa id M r. M ott b a d not b een di sm i sse d , nor Thereh had d had he be e : whom two had been selected. At the election made by the guardians there had been ten votes for Mr Gardiner and fourteen for Mr. Mott. The Act of Parliament did not, require the sanction of the Poor-law Commissioners to the election ; nor was it considered that his manage ment of the Haydock lodge Lunatic Asylum was a legal disqualification to his holding the office. That part of the question which referred to the justices having de dared him unworthy of his tru t was not correct ; and further, the Poor-law Commissioners had no official in formation of the allegations in the third part of the question ; and with regard to the fourth, the Poor-law Commissioners had received letters from Mr. Mott, upon official business, from Manchester, dated the 7th May, where they believed him to be at present re siding. POOR-LAW ADMINISTRATION BILL. The Order of the Day for the second reading of the Poor-law Administration Bill being read, Mr. BANKES presented a petition from a union in Dorsetshire, complaining of the conduct of the auditor for neglect of duty, and that they had received no re dress from the Poor-law Commissioners. The petition was ordered to lie on the table. Mr. FERRAND said he was thankful to his Right Hon. Friend, the Attorney-General, for the manly man ner in which he had answered his question. Notwith standing, however, the high respect ‘‘ hick he enter tained for the legal knowledge of his Learned Friend, he would be enabled to produce much higher authority to bear out his own view of the case. He could not but express his astonishment at the declaration made by the Right Honourable Baronet, the Secretary for the Home Department, that Mr. Mott had not been dismissed particularly when it had been stated by the Right lion. Baronet who had preceded the Home Secretary in that office, had declared that he had been dismissed, and that the Hon. Member for Bolton knew the cause why he had been removed. He would leave that between them ; but he could not but observe that something wrong had been said to one or the other of them. He was ready to admit that the Right Hon. Baronet had said what he believed to be true. At the close of last session the present Secretary for the Home Department had give a pledge that a Committee would be appointed in the present session to inquire into the poor-laws. Sir GEORGE GREY denied that he had given any such pledge. Mr. FERRAND said there could be no doubt that he had been so reported in all the papers. The Noble Lord the First Lord of the Treasury, had also declared that he was prepared to defend the conduct of the Poor•law Commissioners. He would that night have an opportu nity of doing it. lie hoped he would do so, and prove that the new prior law had obtained for the people the blessings which were held out would follow in its train — that it had been a blessing, and not a curse. He, at all whenever any thing was said against the Poor-law Com missioners, the Noble Lord rose with great chivalry and defended them ; and when the late Secretary of State for the Home Department (Sir J. Graham) began to be ;itti; .:, - rieezeable with respect to the law, the Lord got up and protested against any alteration in law, and his sentiments were loudly cheered. " Unit, - mity of practice" was, no doubt, a grand principle ; but it was one which had been tested and had been found fallacious. Now he (11r. Ferrand) had seen the bodies of persons who had been starved to death by this law. He once attended a jury, who felt desirous to return a verdict of " wilful murder " against the relieving officer, and the coroner agreed with them, because it was well known to them that the man had refused to afford the woman who had died relief ; but when the man was taxed with this, he drew the printed instructions of the Poor-law Commissioners from his pocket and threw them on the table, and in the most insulting manner snapped his fingers at the jury. Sir GEORGE GREY—What was the nature of those instructions? events, could prove it had failed in conferring any such advantages, and that it was a complete failure, and had crumbled into pieces. The people of this country had been acelietomed to boast that they were never cane,: aeon so (Icy was not passed by both branches of the Legislature, but notwithstanding, they had been obliged, now for thirteen 3 ears, to obey the orders of the Poor-law Com missioners, as the law of the land. A Committee of that House had been appointed to inquire into the operation of that law, and after having sat for four months, they came to the decision that the Poor-law Commissioners had acted in a most arbitrary manner towards the As sistant Poor-law Commissioners. He thought it was not sufficient that the Poor law Commissioners should be dismissed, but that the law should be repealed. When the law was first broached it was supported by men whose object was to do away with poor-laws altogether, and to punish poverty as a crime. The person who first brought it forward was Lord Brougham, who, be fore he introduced it obtained a pledge from both the political parties that they would not repeal what ever might be the extent of the opposition raised against it. He would ask, who had been selected to guide the Bill ? No other than Mr. Malthus, a man whose opinions on the subject was odious to the country.—(An Hon. Member said he was dead.) Well, then, he left his legacy behind him. lie was Lord Brougham's guide in this measure. He who had de clared that he who was not provided with necessaries by his parents, had no right to food ; that no place had been provided for him at Nature's feast, and that he had no right to be there. Lord Brougham defended this gentleman, and stated that he had been greatly misrepresented, and that he was a most humane and amiable man. A Commission was then appointed to inquire into the old poor-law, and evidence taken by Assistant Poor-law Commissioners, who knew what was required of them, and did what they were ordered, as obedient servants. Then came forth the re port, that " dark document," which was so bad and wicked, that the Duke of Wellington denied its existence. It was opposed by a friend of his, now on a bed of sick ness (Mr. Walter), whose services would last for cen turies, when the Hogg Baronetcy would be buried in oblivion.—(Partial murmurs.) That document had been signed by two of the bishops of their church, the Bishops of London and Chester. Lord Althorp introduced the Bill into that House, which gave power to the Poor law Commissioners to limit the amount of food, but not to increase it, and also to lower se ages. In the correspondence of Messrs. Ashworth and Gregg, it appeared that the guardians, in a case of a strike for wages, were authorised to refuse relief if they knew the parties could earn wages upon which they could earn a subsistence. As soon as the New Poor-law Bill passed, the Poor-law Commissioners employed persons as .Assistant-Commissioners, whom they sent to the agricultural districts to induce the people to leave their homes, assuring them that if they did so, they should have abundant employment in the manufacturing districts. They placarded places with tables of wages, which they never did, and it was never intended that they should receive. One of the bleakest things they did was to send lir. Kay down to Suffolk and Norfolk to induce the labourers to go to Manchester, where they sent them ticketed and labelled, like beasts to the slaugh ter. But, as his Right Hon. and Learned Friend (the Attorney-General) seemed to smile, he thought it his duty to reiterate what he had said : the labourers sent to Manchester were actually ticketed, packed in boats, and without any places to go to, turned adrift, in the streets of Manchester in the middle of the night. But they should now hear Dr. Kay's own description of this town three years before. In describing it, he said that the inhabitants had ceased to have a pride in the ap pearance of their houses. They spent their lives in squalid wretchedness—their domestic economy was neglected—their houses were ill furnished and ill rentilated their food meagre, and not nutri tious, and they frequently fell victims to drink. Such was the description of Manchester, when the inha bitants of the southern districts of England were to be absorbed into the workshops of the manufacturers. He would detail to the House the cruelties inflicted upon those agricultural labourers. Not content with calling in the military, the Government sent down the Metro politan Police, and there, with drawn cutlasses they sought to enforce those tyrannical laws. Th e y sold up thousands of the poor people. Immense buildings were erected in the county as modern bastiles, where they were immured in cells, not allowed to go a place of worship, their diet tables were worse than those of felons, they were com pelled to wear a felon's dress, and they branded their clothes with the name of " the union workhouse" upon it, ,heir furniture was sold, husbands were separated from their wives, and children stolen from their parents at the point of the bayonet. The union workhouses were cleared, and its inmates sold to the manufacturers. He held in his hand as application of one of the manu facturers for these poor people to the guardians of the poor of the Llangollen Union, dated only twelve months since, in which the applicant stated that he had employment in his mills for twenty or thirty females, and also a number of boys, and stating that if there were any in the union fit for such employment, oue of the firm would come over to the union and bring those unfortunate creatures to the factory districts. And who were the parties who were chosen to look over those unfortunate creatures? Why, it was a well-known fact that if the Government could offer the office, a non-com missioned officer of the cavalry, whose previous occupa tion might be supposed to have inured him to wretched ness or made his heart callous, was the person whose services they were most glad to obtain. These unions were formed so large that the poor had to travel to the board of guardians ten, twenty, and even thirty miles, in o a trhd p i se o ,r o t r ht man oo order to obtain their paltry pittance. Such was tile distance they had to travel that it often occupied three whole days in going and returning from the union. He held in his hand a letter from a clergyman. in which he tufsh, milesGirht, neo a i al d sr a t evr e ene. r d ):ewtni t hynma h ee Atare:::nadi sanction blood-stained. :cni tet dni k eoosuk n nnium e moiet w no bhfpe law—forterNi : o vs p e rehier)aovs Poor - e leddeahiiNcoeviadf Commissionerstl wti a t re r so treatment.—(Hear , t rl m rtr ihe e bso n l es t. eb — (l effectsoas oonldifid sources enhaor had poor obwtahihnoa have ev a o intraveln sixpence.umb numbers aean died t been shed, and that too at the point of the bayonet, in the endeavours of the Government to enforce the cruelties of that law. his would read to 4he House the solemn pledges made by Lord Brougham when he pleaded in the House of L or d s f or the second reading of this ini quitous Bill. (The Hon. Member then t 'proceeded to pulse to property, and destroy_ read an extract from the speech of the Noble Lord, in which he stated that that measure would elevate the icneness country, character of the people of this give a new im bed (continued the Hon. Member) these pledges and and - vice.) How promises been realised ? The people had been robbed and plundered under th e operatio of that law for upwards of thirteen years. Was it to be supposed now that the curtain was allowed to descend quietly over those scenes of horror, of bl ood, and of cruelty ? If the GovernMent was prepared to take up on itself the responsibility of all these accumulated cruelties, ;,hey certainly possessed more courage and bravery than he had ever given them credit for p • ossessmg. Before the passing of this law the people were promised good wages ; neat, good, and comfortable houses. But what was the result, as appeared by the statements of the Hon. Member for Manchester some time since? He said that the people of Manchester were some of there living upon Id. per day ; that they were in the habit of eating dead h orses , and so poverty striken were great masses of the people, that they were in the habit of pawnin g, their day clothes in the evening in order to obtain their bed clothes from the pawnbroker's to cover them at night. He had thought it his duty to move some time since for a return of the mode in which the poor had been disposed of ; teed although that return had been ordered, still not the slightest notice had been taken of that order, and the reason given for it was that ao possible account coeeld be obtained, and no return had been made from that day to this. In the year 1843 the poor-law had been in operation nine years. Now, what was the effect of this law upon the morals, the condition, end the habits of the people ? That law ' which had been pledged to produce such beneficial results ? He begged t, ) read to the House a statement, made by ono of the pro - sent Cabinet Ministers. Lord Howick, when a ldeinh-ow of this House, stated that in Sunderland the poor-razes• had risen to 18s. in the pound. (The lion. Member th en proceeded to read at considerable length an extract from, a speech of Lord Howie's.) What a contrast (co n tinued the Hon. Member) did that statement present to the fair pledges and promises made by Lord Brougham, and others, when the measure was introduced. BA would, therefore, convict the Government of having been false prophets out of the mouth of one of the members of their own Cabinet. He would also read to the House a statement made by Lord Brougham in the year 1843, nine years after the passing of the Act, in order to show to the House in what manner the operation of the law had borne out the pledges and promises of its supportc;rs. The lion. Gentleman then read an extract from t Times of 1843, stating that a great number of the pool of Stourbridge were subsisting upon turnips alone, a n e that the farmers in the neighbourhood had had five se six tons a week stolen; but they were in such a deplor able state that the persons could not find it in thesis hearts to prosecute them. He held in his hand an account of proceedings which took place in the same ycsat at the Brentford Sessions, before the magistrates of t ht county of Middlesex. A poor man was brought u before them in the prison dress, and branded in the way l i e had mentione d. The ma g istrates, and five or :si x of all spoke with indignation the were present,mane let in which the p oor were treated under the sanction of the Poor-law Commissioners, and one of them, Mr. Ar ms t ro i ag stated that the co untr y was comin g bac k to the times" of feudal slavery, and ho was glad to find that the members of the Bench were unanimous in deprecating the conduct which the Commissioners purs' aeci towards the poor. He also had a number of extrr icts which he had culled from country newspapers during the years 1842 and 1843, which gave an account of the manlier in which large numbers of persons were sent ti prison f or merely disobeying th e orders of the Pt ear law Commissioners, but he would not take up the I ime of the House by rea di n g them, beyond stating that bey had especial reference to Sussex, Hampshire, E s Kee , Kent, Surrey, and London, and also with respect to the Andover, Redbridge, and Sevenoaks Unions. The t rt sat ment of the poor in the Blything Union so exaspera Led the working classes in that vicinity that they were ton their way to the union (which was protected by pol ice) with pickaxes in their hands, when they were met b ,3s clergyman, who said, addressing one, " Honest ma ii!" " Honest !" He replied, the law won't allow us tc be honest ; when we come poor we are treated like felo as." He, however, dissuaded them from their purpose. q 'his occurred as far back as in 1842. And her Majes t v's Government said, after all that had occurred, that tiw law worked well, and they sceened the Poor-law C .ont missioners against public inquiry and public indigna Lion, and aided and assisted theta iu oppressing the poor . ifctr Mr. FERRAND said he had not got a copy of them, but they were to the effect, that the man was not to go a yard out of his parish for the purpose of dispensing re lief. The woman lived on the other side of a brook, about ten yards out of the parish, but she had often re ceived relief from the same officer ; he, however, was only in the habit of visiting that part of his dis trict once a week. Then the auditors had caused the greatest dissatisfaction to the board of guardians, Every post brought him letters setting forth the evils which the auditors caused. Tho relieving officer of Dudley had brought an action against the guardians of the poor, for treating the inmates of the union to " plum-pudding" on Christmas-day. In 1845, the Hon Gentleman the Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley) same down to the House, and made a horrible and startling statement, that it was currently reported that the poor in the Andover Union Work house were so starved, that they were living on carrion, and fighting for the possession of the bones which they were employed in grinding for the purpose of manure. Ho now came to 1847—and where, he asked—where were the Poor-law Commissioners who had caused all this cruelty and misery ? The Government said that they were to be dismissed from their offices, but the Government were still prepared (in a state of despair) to defend them. Why did they do so ? Was it because they believed that the charges which had been made against them were untrue ? Could they deny the state of things which existed in the Andover Union, or the statements which he had made that night, could they believe that the voice of the people throughout the country would have been raised against them if they had not been guilty of all that had been imputed to them ? What did the Right Hon. Baronet say in introducing clip present Bill ? Did he say that they must adopt " uniformity of practice ? " No ; that the operation of of the measure must vary with the circumstances of the district of the country to which it was applied. Was uniformity of practice " still to be the principle of the measure ? of ten months, thirteen months, fourteen months, and eighteen months, and this was a state of things existing, and this was the conduct pursued by men in the receipt of public money to the amount of .' •v ell or fourteca s el as ear. -1 - I t:' C"la he se:„ to. i :l.e G were f, attempt to enforce the powers of this pour-law, they would have a rebellion in a week. They could not en force it against the rich, it was the poor alone whom they could so oppress. They should become the pro• tectors, instead of the oppressors of the poor, for there did not exist a more loyal, a more patient, a more obe dient, a more industrious class upon the face of the globe. And what they could have done to merit such treatment, neither he nor any man could fathom. They had borne their misery for thirteen years, let them depend upon it the day of reckoning was at hand. they had trampled upon them, they had deprived them of their dearest rights, and they could not now appeal to them with that generous confidence which they could have done before they inoculated the laws of England with the accursed principles of Malthus. They would have no right to appeal to them for allegiance when they refused them protection. He would conclude by moving that the Bill be read that day six months. Mr. WAKLEY seconded the motion. Mr. ROEBUCK—The Hon. Gentleman might do much mischief and effect little good. It was very easy to talk about the 43d of Elizabeth, the tyranny of the Poor law Commissioners, and inalienable rights, without under standing anything of the three subjects. It was quite evi dent the Hon. Gentleman had never read the 43d of Eliza beth; he was quite ignorant of it, so much so that he would lay anything that he had not ever opened the pages of the Act that contained it. Nothing was so easy as to rant about what one did not understand, and nothing so easy to obtain popularity by a sham affectation of a de votedness to the cause of the people. Now he should prove the ignorance of the Hon. Member. lie would prove that the 43d of Elizabeth had not been departed from. In the time of Elizabeth the convents were put down ; the Act to which he alluded sprung from the suppression of these religious houses, for they had been in the habit of maintaining a certain number of poor around them. They came to the door of the monastery, and they received relief proportioned to their wants ; and they might talk as they liked about the Reformation, and "no Popery," and all that sort of thing—they might do very well to he let off as cannon against one another —but they could not controvert the fact of the immense good which they conferred on the districts where they were founded. However, after their suppression, a number of sturdy beggars wandered over the country— such are the words of the Act—and for these it was necessary to provide. From hence sprung the 43d of Elizabeth, which enacted that churchwardens should be appointed, whose duty it would be to set to work such children as had been deserted by their parents, all also all such persons as were maimed or infirm, or who had no means to support themselves. They heard a great deal of the rights of the poor, but what he desired was the rights of the industrious poor against the lazy poor. h Th ese l atter braved the authorities of the parish, cameintwoathe frightenedv e stry,th e o y ut de o m f a h n is de vci d t r s elie h f oo , a a n o d se th i e f p t they r farmer he refused, hi s s t ac k s were fired, his cattle were houghed, and he himself stood in terror of his life. The local authorities were totally unable to deal with this growing mischief ; they said, let us unite a number of parishes, and let us put the authority at a distance from us. Let there be a central board in London, to whom an appeal can be made. And now what is the meaning of all this talk about inalienable right? He remembered reading a poem in his boyhood, " The Country Justice," he thought it was by Dyer, in which these petty feuds were happily painted, for the poet described a woman lying-in in a cart, while two parishes were fighting almost which of them should re ceive and maintain her.—(Hear, hear.) The advantage of this law then was the central authority—it was what all desired; but as soon as three men are selected, as soon as they enter Somerset-house they are marked out, and there is not a trading politician who does not point his finger at them in reproach ; and then the Hon. Member comes forward and talks of the people of England, much after the fashion of the three tailors in Tooley-street. Depend upon it they would never have heard of these evils were it not for the appointment of these three Commissioners. With one or two exceptions, those who spoke so loud about the poor-law were those who were most opposed to giving political rights. Some test was absolutely necessary in order to enable a distinction to be made between the idle and the industrious poor. This test was found in the poor house test, and nothing was easier than to find persons who were ready to find fault with this test, upon all such popularity-hunting opponents of that test he would put the stamp of canting hypocrites. It was considered by the law that that man who was con tent to come to the poor-house and receive relief was a man deserving of' relief. Now, a great deal had been said about the inalienable rights of the poor to relief conferred on them by the 43d of Elizabeth. The Hon. Member had quoted from Coke and Blackstone, but it was his (Mr. Roebuck's) opinion that the Hon. Member did not know which of those great writers first wrote upon the subject. Now, what was the meaning of in alienable rights? If they were defined, as the Hon. Member said, by an Act of Parliament, then those rights could be altered or removed by another Act, and the Act abolishing those inalienable rights would be the law of the land, as well as that which conferred this inalienable right. The inalienable right spoken of was a right to relief, but a relief to be given only by labour. It was his habit day after day to go into the habitations of his poorer countrymen, and it was his firm opinion that there were thousands of the people of this country worse clad, worse fed, and worse housed than those who were taken under the protection of the pour-law, not withstanding the Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley) had ventured to call the poor-houses a den. A poor man said that he was unable to support himself, he came to the state exchequer, and was told that if he came into the poor-house his wants would be provided for. But then came in the pathos of the novelist and the poet, who said what a hardship it was to separate the wife from the husband and the children. Why, that was a thing occurring every day in the life of the soldier and the sailor, and even the experience of Irish Members would add another chapter to the patriotic pathos of novelists, for in most cases they were compelled to leave their wives and children in Ireland, but no Hon. Members were in the habit of standing up in that House and in a burst of patriotic enthusiasm calling public attention to their distressing situation.—(Laughter.) He was quite aware that this workhouse test was a very unpopular term, and then just at the close of the seventh session of Parliament it was a very enticing subject to lay hold of. He knew well the risk which attended the course he was taking upon this subject, but as he had commenced his political career so he intended to con tinue it in spite of all opposition to the contrary. It was a matter of absolute necessity that a test should be ' provided for the able-bodied poor. Now, with respect to the Poor-law Commissioners, he must say with regret that they had not acted according to the law. They had quailed before another power. The Times newspaper was the great point of all the opposition to this measure, and the Honourable Member for Knares borough was but a faint shadow, a sort of will o'- the-wisp, of that journal—(Laughter)—and every thump upon that red box, every parenthesis, every accent in the speech of the Hon. Member was nothing but a bad imitation of the Times newspaper. The arti cles of the Times newspaper were, however, written by a gentleman conversant with the subject upon which he wrote, and acute enough to see that the Commissioners were not adapted to carry out the provisions of a good and wholesome law. And this was the real cause of the bad working of the measure—the Government had chosen persons to carry out the measure who were unfit for the task. Then the 43d of Elizabeth stated that work should be provided for the able-bodied poor; but it had been said that bones were given to the paupers to crush. Now was there not in the different classes of society many persons employed in trades and callings which, if they were set to by the Commissioners, would have raised such a storm as nothing could have crushed? What was the trade of a nightman ?—(Laughter)—or the type-founder, whose -life was destroyed by the small the painter, filings which entered into his syst em,—or ainter, afflicted as he was with disease consequent upon the pursuit of his calling,—or the collier, working many fathoms under ground in about two feet of space, in obtaining the coals which made the cheerful Christmas fire ? What were all Sir G. GREY—I did not say so. Mr. FERRAND—Then is it now to vary? But did the Government think that men had not the same love for their wives and children in one part of the county as in another, that concessions were to be made in favour ,if the northern part of that ceunty, in consequence of the violence which they had manifested towards the rueasnre. He called upon them, therefore, to say how the measure was to vary ? They had no right to pass such a law ; and, what was more, the people of this country would not tolerate a varying law under which the greatest tyranny might be inflicted upon them. In some parts of the county they said that no relief was to be given except in the workhouse, but he had heard a Secretary of State state that the p ople might have relief out of the workhouse. There tore, he said, let them have a law clearly defined, in order that the poor might know how they would be affected, and what cruelties they might anticipate would be practised upon them, instead of leaving the matter in the hands of an irresponsible board. He had read the defence which had• been made of the Poor-law Com missioners, but it did not deserve the name which had been applied to it, as it was nothing more than an exparfe statement: it amounted to this, that after thirteen years of oppression of the poor they had been enabled to save 1,000,0001. a year, of which the poor had been robbed, in order that the commissioners might be enabled to make this boast. They might have saved the rates in the south of England, where incen diarism was rife, and in those districts from which the poor had been driven, to the manu facturing districts, to equalise wages, or to escape persecution by becoming inmates of the gaols, but in the north of England the very converse had oc curred. The guardians of Wakefield, thinking that it would be no use to petition the House on the subject of the poor-law, as Parliament had delegated its powers to three Commissioners, petitioned the board, and urged that the Wakefield Union should be abolished, as it had been productive of the greatest evil, as the poor rates had increased 10,3061. in three years.—(Hear.) That was the way they diminished the expenditure.— ( Hear, hear.) We had also returns from the unions in his part of the country, but it was sufficient to state that they had increased, and were increasing.—(Hear.) Then what was the other cost of this unconstitutional measure during the last 13 years ? First, they had had the re bellion in Wales, fearful outbreaks in the north of Eng land, incendiarism rife in the south, and a fearful amount of concealments of childbirth, in order that they might escape the treatment which they could not fail to expe rience in the unions. They had had to establish rural police in different parts of the country, to call out 10,000 pensioners, to have gaols enlarged and new ones erected ; the sessions in the north of England were held every seven weeks, instead of every twelre weeks, and winter sessions were obliged to be held, which was rather an unusual occurrence, and Mr. Justice Coleridge had stated at the last York assizes that crime was rapidly in creasing over the whole country. Then they were going to build barracks in Birmingham, in order that they might be enabled to dispatch the military to any part at a short notice in order to keep the people in a state of despotism. Consideration had caused this? Why, the tyranny practised upon the people by the Poor-law Commissioner, for they had the people discontented in the north, in the south, and east districts ; and the peace was only main tained by the presence of the military and police. Work houses had been erected under the protection of a mili tary guard, and they had greater distress in this country than they bad had since the time of the French Revolution. These were the penalties they were called upon to pay. And how long did they think the people would submit to this state of things? they were going to let the Poor-law Commissioners " down easily," but did they think that the people were not sufficiently aware that this would be a great question at the next general ection ? The Whigs had stood pretty firmly to the declarations made by them at the last general election. But what was the conduct of the tate Government ? What was their conduct with Cam bridge when the poor-law was made the rallying cry, and when they came to the House and betrayed them ? Lie could name a borough where two candidates took it in turns to do the pathetic on the new poor-law—one .vas returned to the House, and continued his opposition to the poor-law, and the other was rejected, but he sub sequently obtained a seat in that House, and now sup ported the law.—(hear, hear.) He challenged any one to ,ay that the law had not only proved a great failure, but a bitter curse upon the country, and the remedy was the same cruel and unconstitutional system under another form. In the first clause four Cabinet Ministers were to be pledged to maintain this law against all opposition ; and in the sixth clause two commissioners and the president were empowered to use any powers vested in the whole body. By the eleventh they were empowered to summon witnesses, and also to make rules, and to alter them. But was the Right Hon. Baronet inclined to sign an order to separate a man from his wife, and his children from their parents? Was he going to sanction all the tyranny which had been practised during the past 13 years? If so, what right had he to do so ? A poor man had as inalienable a right to relief as the Right Hon. Baronet had to his own property. Lord Brougham had admitted that this was so. Was he pre pared to test the measure upon those who were near and dear to him ? If not, what right had he to inflict its tortures upon the poor man ? And let him tell the Right Hon. Baronet that a poor man was just as fond of his wife and children as the Right Hon. Baronet was of his. But what must be the position of a Cabi net Minister who was compelled to act thus towards the poor man, for no other crime than that he was poor and unable to obtain work. Then they threw the responsibility upon her Majesty. By the 20th clause the Queen, by the advice of the Privy Council, was em powered to alter the rules ; but the four Cabinet Ministers were Members of the Privy Council. The Ministers were, therefore, responsible. Then they were to appoint inspectors. From that tyranny to whom were they to appeal ? Their appeals might be kept each from the Sovereign. He contended that the House had no right to pass the present Bill. Locke, and a num ber of high authorities, were opposed to the principle which was here contended for. LordWinford thought that powers which were here given to the Poor-law Commis sioners were such as could not be exercised by even the Sovereign. Lord Abinger had also strongly expressed himself upon this question. It was their bounden duty to set the present matter at rest. He would read a letter which he had received from a working man. (The Hon. Member here read the letter in question, which strongly deprecated the working of the poor-law.) Cooke and Blackston agreed with him on this subject. Judge Haines was also of the opinion which he expressed, and even Lord Brougham himself admitted this right of the poor to relief. And they had no right to impose upon them a vassalage. The Poor law Commissioners themselves said that the pre sent crime, which was the result of destitution, was repugnant to the feelings of human nature. The Hon. Member for Bath was constrained to state that for Ireland it was necessary to go back to the 43d of Elizabeth. As many Members of Parliament would, no doubt, refer to the col duct of the poor-law guardians, h e would not dwe ll upon their conduct. He would, however, allude to the Long To ( wn union—llear, hear.) The lion. Member deprecated the state of that union. And these were the foundations on which reports were used against him in 1842 for the purpose of crushing him, reports to which he had not further alluded to than to state that Sir John Walsingham, in his report upon the same union, showed that 49 inmates were sleeping in thirteen or fourteen beds, and when he laid similar facts before the House, the Home Secretarhisybreast, , Sir James Graham, turne d up his ey The d report stated, that from such things co uld occur. the day the law was enforce , in 1838, to the time in which it was made a resident poor law, commissioners had never entered it. On hearing this, the late terMi said, high time for the Government to interfere, yet what was the case ? When did they enter the House again ? not for four years—not till Ma y , 1846—not until he himself came down to the House, and asked the Government to insist that an Assistant Poor-law Com missioner should visit Bingley. Now, let them see what were the next visits paid. They were made at intervals these but as different species of that labour which was the common lot of humanity, and by which man was to obtain his livelihood. Yet what a cry had been raised about the employment of the poor at Andover, while all the great mass of the enjoyments of society in general had been overlooked. Was it to be said for a moment that the idle vagabond at the gate of the industrious man should be entitled to say " Give me of your substance, for you are rich ?" The industrious man would have a right to say "I have a wife and children, I support my family honestly; and why should John Thomas, the idle vagabond,: be entitled to claim my hard-earned money?" But how was this John Thomas, the idle vagabond, to be distinguished from John Smith, the in dustrious man? Why, what more natural, than to give him work? Then it had been said, they were set to work in a shed, open to all the windows of heaven. Not so. however, the buildings were well built and well ventilated. Ah but, then, said the Hon. Member for Finsbury, it was a gaol, and the dress was a prison dress. Well, be it, or be it not, a prison dress, all he could say was, that the dress, such as it was,f the w as much better and much warmer than the dress o honest man out of doors ; but because it a dr b u r s o s. wn Norogwrowyhectoleoouurldanbdeumniofrmroeeb, etuhredu h t a w n a s t o a'N have 'pars isooa a r question depending upon the colour or cut of a coat. For so red and the this question dress really uniform,was,then it would for fthe colour not had been be nowe poor t h o e f r E e a u l g q l a u n e d s n l , s Let the c w a h l laetd was a p r t i o s o b n e d d r o e n s s e . for l3 t u h t Hon. Members for Knaresborough and Finsbury bring forward some measure upon the subject themselves. Only fancy a Bill drawn up by the lion. Member for Knaresborough. What would he (Mr. Roebuck) give to see an Act for the poor drawn up by the Hon. Member for Knareshorough. If that lion. Member would kind enough (for there was no dionubhtieath)attohe only be some spark of kindly feeling into route such a h measure, im and hishe Bill(Mr. Roebuck) thebring had out o r u i l n d a un v d er e y r , ta fe k w e specimen of legislative confusion had arisen minutes. A lately in all the hurly burly of a dovbo' Committee appointed to inquire into the Law of Settlement. Mr. P. BORTHWICK—The law of settlement has nothing to do with the poor-law. Mr. ROEBUCK —That was now one of the bad effects of speaking on a subject upon which the person was unacquainted, and showed the rashness with which " Fools rushed in where angels dared to tread." lie believed, in saying this, that he was speaking the senti ments of the people of this country. The rational part of the people, and the rational part of the labouring population. agree d wer with him. He did not maintain the argum'nt that m en e could equally entitled entitled to relief, whether honest or dishonest: they told a man that he might obtain relief— a t he h considered nand it, whether able or unable to obtain w ork , forwhon h SCHOOLS OF DESIGN. Mr. IVAKl.lisaidttiere was a second question, and he hoped he should have a more satisfactory answer than to the first. It was with reference to the school of design, and he wished to know when the evidence taken before a Special Committee of the council of the School of Design, as to the state and management of the school, is to be presented to the House? Mr. M. GIBSON said that ho regretted that such delay had taken place, but he thought that in ten days at furthest he might be able to furnish these returns. Mr. 11. BAILLIE said that he had asked the Govern ment the other night, whether it was their intention to restrict the amount of grain in distilleries until the pre sent crisis should be past? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the Government did not think it politic o❑ their part to interfere with the commerce of the country, by placing any restriction upon one of its most important channels. He found that the distillers had stated to the Government, that they were about to use a large quan tity of sugar for the purposes of distillation, and had requested that several of the preliminary inve,tigations might be dispensed with. Under his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) direction, it had been notified that all the obstacles that could be dispensed with should be re moved, for he considered it exceedingly desirable. Mr. HUME said that this day week he would put a question to the Noble Lord at the head of the Govern ment, as to whether it was his intention to take any measures for reducing the prices of tea, coffee, and other articles of similar nature? If so, whether there was to be any reduction of the duty? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the Government had received notice that a consi derable quantity of molasses was required for tion ; but there had been a consideration of other arti cles, with a view to ascertain whether they should re duce the duties on other articles mentioned in the Cus toms Duties Act, and they had found that although the importation of the articles had increased, the prices had not been raised. Among those especially were the arti cles of sugar and tea. ENLISTMENT OF MARINES. Captain LAYARD moved for returns connected with the enlistment of marines during the last five years. Mr. EWART w i s h e d t o know whether the Noble Lord at the head of the Government had any objection to lay upon the table of the House the address of the board of winegrowers, presented a short time back ? Lord J. RUSSELL replied that there would be no objection whatever. COLONIAL GOVERNMENTS. Mr. HUME said he wished to ask the Under-Secre• tary for the Colonies a question, of which he had given notice. It would be remembered that last session he presented a petition from Van Diemen's Land, signed by 6,000 persons, praying the House to apply the repre sentative system of government to that island. Now the question he wished to ask was, whether Government had been maturing any plan for extending the privilege and rights of representative bodies to that island and the other colonies ? Mr. HAWES said, in answer to the question of his Hononourable Friend, he had to state that the subject to which he had referred had net been lost sight of. There was a measure in contemplation—hemight say, in preparation—with the view to give the benefits of the British Constitution to the Australian colonies, which had generally included Van Diemen's L an d. H e did not think, however, that the measure could be intro duced in the present session. S Lr that the glory of this country would depart; but whentold 's him that It was the last resource of an honest man, whe fi-1 .4 V he -, was wholly una bl e to support himself, that it was aid in the season of teheed ,a u n n d ia o n n k l i v n o d n . that . occasion n th w e e y re w i o n ul a d e s n a d n i d ti as n t lor d s to say, " I ask, and you ' " o , a dienifiari popu lation, they ssoulu have era Vin subservient, subjected popu lation—a mis era bl e race of cringing i - sl,ves, instead ' of a race of upright adnudtyhoofntehset men—(Hear)—because to ear)—because he b e li eve d it was maintain such a character among our people, and, the re f ore, he asked ( esev thm o to , t m h a at in t t n ai w n h t i h e is h poor,great anmdenaosutrteo giveot toreltiheef, undeserving g r i vi e n t the thatb ee s n te thetn deserving they were not entitled. Those w h o h ad h thpecior rtoentrusteddfases with the carrying out of the law, h a d not hads of mind which was necessary for the proper c • law ; and, therefore, he entrusted the Nohaierryzorgdout of the personal feeling- enter into :a matter whi c h affected to let no number of the industrious classes, and to them a so vas t a commis sion free from, and, consequently, above, all susp i c i on. Mr. BANKES was rather surprised that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman should treat the opinions of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough (Mr. Ferrand), so lightly, when he himself was no great authority upon p : lic matters of this kind; but when he taunted the Hon. Gentleman wished not to bring in a Bill as expres sive of his views; he merely repeated the taunt which the Noble Lord at the head of the Government had thrown out at the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the other night.—(A laugh.) The only difference in the new Commission would be, that it would be the same as of old, with the addition of more honour to those who would comprise the body, inasmuch as its members would have seats in that House ; but this must be viewed in a constitutional light, and it was well to do so at the outset. He feared the Noble Lord, who he admitted was op pressed by business, had not had time to look into this Bill and into others which had been recently introduced with the sanction of the Government. For instance, the Health of Towns Bill and other Bills, which would create a number of new offices, but the Health of Towns Bill had been proved to be an useless measure, and that it would in terfere with private rights and private property, and the Noble Lord had not been able to dine with his constituents until he had told them that the city of London would be exempted from the operation of the Bill, and subsequently he had ex cluded other metropolitan districts.—( Hear, hear.) The new Prison Bill, which was of this kind of measure, would create a number of new officers who would supersede those who had been entrusted with the government of the poor in their respec tive localities for many years.—( Hear, hear.) Swift in his " Advice to Servants," said, " spend all your master's income, because the more you cause him to spend, the more he will be respected"—(Laughter)—and the Noble Lord seemed to act upon this principle, and to get rid of any surplus by creating new offices to spend it upon. Thus he had pre pared two new placemen in connexion with this Bill, shortly after the proposition to appoint a new railway commission had been submitted to the House.—(Hear.) He (Mr. Bankes) had always considered that the body which bad the manage ment of the poor should be represented by one member of the b o dy in that House; but do not let two of the present body be so elevated, because the nation was dissatisfied with them. Why not have two of the Lords of the Treasury, two of the Lords of the Admiralty, or two of the Board of Ordnance?— (Laughter.) He could not, therefore, for these reasons sup port the Bill. He objected to the making of laws by the Commissioners, in their own chambers, and considered that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners had failed to give satisfaction in this respect, notwithstanding the Attorney General had quoted that body as an instance of success in the forming of general rules. He saw no reason, therefore, why any alteration in the laws relating to the poor should not come under the revision of the House.—(Hear, hear.) He did not think it would be even approved of in this House to make measures without due consideration of the circum stances of these measures. The great benefit of this measure, asserted by the advocates of the measure was, that it would unite all classes ; but the present law, did not effect that object. The petition he presented was in conformity with these views. If they persisted they would render the measure most unpop u l ar . He would propose the second read ing of the Bill. Sir G. GREY said that he would trouble the House with a few observations on what had fallen from the Hon. Gentleman. The Hon. Gentleman said that his greatest difficulty was founded on the amount of new patronage which this Bill bestowed on the Government. His patriotism had drawn him away from the sanatory considerations attached to the Bill. But he could assure the Hon. Member that the patronage of the Crown would, in a pe cuniary, as well as official point of view, be dimi nished instead of any thing else, for several offices which had before existed, were now abolished, and of this he was anxious to inform the Hon. Member, in order to allay his anxieties ; because he seemed to think that we had better go on with filth and fever, rather than create a few new officers, who are to inspect the health of towns. The same objec tions, however, did not extend to the Prisons' Bill. Btt be was surprised that the Hon. Gentleman did not support the measure, seeing so few points of difference existed between them. He (Mr. Bankes) supported the Act of 1834. He was also in favour of a central authority, and considered that they should be represented in that House. Holding such opinions, he was surprised that he had not voted for the Govern ment, instead of for the Member for Knaresborough.-- ( Hear, hear.) Her Majesty's Government bad come to the opinion that it was better to have a responsible body re presented in that House, than have them suffer from the im perfect vindications of the officers of the Crown. They were also told that it was too late in the session to intro duce such a Bill. He was very happy to hear that it was late in the session; but he would ask, lookinisback on the mode in which the last three months had been spent, was it possible that it could have been introduced earlier ? however, the Hon. Gentleman had told them to withdraw the Bill, and that there was plenty of time to introduce another.—( Hear, hear.) But whether it be late or early his Noble Friend near him, had stated in the early part of the session, the principles on which the measure had been founded, so that there had been plenty of time for consideration. Colonel SIBTHORP said that if the Hon. Member for Knaresborough divided the House upon his amendment, he would be very happy to vote with him. The Bill did nothing more than change the names of parties, and they had no inti mation of what was to be the salary of the president or in spectors—whom he would rather call spies--nor even of their number. When once a Bill received the second reading in that House, it might be considered as booked—(Laughter.) A few Members attended the Committee This was known to every Member, even of one year's standing in the House; he, therefore, protested against the Bill, which was one got up at the latter end of the session ; it was an ad captandam measure, such as was the Health of Towns Bill, for the Government only desired to have the people say-. ,4 See what luminous fellows we are."—(Loud laughter.) He had seen so many strange things go on—( Laughter )—that he believed Government patronage was only intended for the purpose of giving rise to a bust of needy expectations— (Laughter.) He (Colonel Sibthorp) knew a good deal of life --(Great laughter)—he heard out of doors a great deal of hard times, and a scarcity of money, and, as an Hon. Friend re minded him, of Exchequer bills at a diseount.—(Hear, hear.) And they were to have a Commit sioner. Was he a guardian to sit down with a fellow—a Government inspector or spy— ( Great laughter)—who came down to see what they did— ( Roars of laughter)—a fellow who would talk to him— (Laughter)—and say, " I'm your inspector. If you disobey me, woe betide you." Me! what a fellow, sent down in Government pay—a fellow dressed in Government livery,— ( Roars of laughter.) Ho (Colonel Sibthorp) had a sort of honest pride—(Hear, hear,—that as a poor law guardian, and as a Member of that House, he was above the fellows that Government might send down to rule them. He considered that the Bill which the Government now attempted to bring before them, was another of a piece with the Health of Towns Bill, which exempted London and St. Giles's, and Marylebone ; but the Noble Lord at the head of the Government told them that to touch on London was dangerous ground.—( Laughter.) The Ministry dined there—(Continued laughter)—and therefore the city of London was holy ground. He should support the motion of his Hon. Friend Mr. Ferrand, because he was one of those persons much wanted in that House. He was an honest man. Mr. CHRISTIE moved the adjournment of the debate, which was agreed to. LOAN DISCOUNT BILL. Mr. SPOONER wished to know when the Government were prepared to take the Loan Discount Bill for the third reading. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER proposed to take it for Thursday next. Mr. WAIT LEY said that the country expected a very different poor-law from that which had been introduced, and he thought, therefore, that time should ,be given for an expression of feeling upon the subject. He considered that the Loan Discount Bill should be taken first, and the Poor-law Bill afterwards. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that with regard to the Loan the House Discount Bill, it was desirable to get it thro u gh before the Whitson holi days. He believed that no opposition was offered to the Bill on principle, however much might be objected to it in detail , and he should therefore wish to take it as early as possible. SCOTCH REGISTRATION BILL. In answer to a question from Mr. Oswald relative to the Registration (Scotland) Bill. The LORD ADVOCATE said that the Bill would be brought forward at an early period. Mr. LOCKHART regretted that in accordance with the universally expressed opinion of the Scottish people, the Bill was not given up altogether. Mr. FOX MAULE trusted it would not be given up, be cause when he recollected the Prisons Bill, which he had him self introduced, he feared that the only objection which existed was on account of a little expense. Mr. FORBES said that great opposition was manifested to the measure in the county which he represented. Mr. F. MACKENZIE regretted that it was the intention of Hon. Gentlemen opposite to go on with the Bill. He would not deny that the present system of legislation in Scotland was imperfect, but he did maintain that a far lesseo bersome, arid a far less expensive system could be dis covered. He should, therefore, move that this Bill be committed that day six months. The galleries were then cleared for a division, but none took place, and, on our return to the gallery, }principle of the Bill Mr. C. BRUCE: protesting this Bill had been broughtalight al ns t we found the as it at present stood. ri e t further discussion upon. un seasonable hour, and theur out at an it ought, therefore , to be postponed. Lord J. RUSSELL said he would consent to take the dis cussion upon the Bill on the 31 st of May, if there was time • after disposing of the Irish Poor-l aw , w hi c h for rusld doing so, then have come down from the Lords. Should it happen there would not be time, he would propose to take the discussion nn Monday following. Mr. FORBES MACKENZIE was glad the Noble Lord had made that concession, because it afforded a sufficient in ducement for him to withdraw his amendment. The Bill then went through Committee. The Burgage Tenure (Scotland) Bill and the Crown Char ters (Scotland) Bill went through Committee. The Drainage of Lands Bill was postponed till Friday. SEDUCTION AND PROSTITUTION SUPPRES SION BILL. Mr. SPOONER moved that this Bill be read a first time. Mr. C. BERKELEY objected to the Bill being proceeded with at that late hour of the night, and if the Hon. Member persisted in his motion, he would move as an amendment that the House do now adjourn. Colonel SIBTHORP suggested to his Noble Friend op posite, that the object of the Bill might be attained by the in troduction of a clause in the Health of Towns Bill. The House then divided, when the numbers were— For the amendment Against it Majority against adjournment Another division took plac e immediately after, OR the motion that this debate be now adjourned. For the amendment •.. Against it Majority for non- adjournment.. —5l When we were admitted we found Colonel SIBTHORP addressing the House. He asked what hindered the chief officers of the City of London from swee ping out the soil and impurity from the metropolis.. What aided that great Act, the Health of Towns' Bill. The, City must be pure —no doubt pure. He suggested that Ills, object of this Bill should be met by a clause in the Health of.' Towns' Bill. He thought it would be better in the hands of; the Government. He moved that the Bill should be read this.. day six months. On the question, • 11~~ N