The Express.
London, England, 1863-06-20 00:00:00

POOR LAW RATLYG.

Upon the motion for going into committee of supply,
Mr. HUBBARD called attention to the state of the law
for rating to the relief of the poor, and moved for returns
is connexion with the lJnios Assessment Committee Act.
His object was to obtain returns from the various poor-
law unions, explaining the principle upon which deduc-
tions were now made, in order that some general laws might
be framed on this subject.
. . .

Mr. HENLEY remarked that the circumstances under
which deductions were mule varied in different localities,
and he thought it would be extremely difficult to come to
any general arrangement respecting it.
Mr. VILLIERS admitted that there were many anoma-
lies in the present system of rating, bat concurred with
Mr. Henley as to the difficulty of settling the principle upon
which deductions were to be made. It was desirable to
have the fullest information on the subject, but he doubled
if, when it was obtained, any satisfactory conclusion could
be arrived at. If possible. however, he would furnish the
returns moved for before the end of the session.
The motion was then withdrawn.
GREENWICH HOSPITAL.

Mr. LIDDELL rose to call attention to the report
of the Royal Commission upon Greenwich Hospital,
presented to parliament in May, 1860 ; and to inquire what
were the intentions of the government in respect to carrying
out further the recommendations of that commission, either
by a bill to amend the law relatiug to Greenwich Hospital,
cc by regulations of the Board of Admiralty.

Mr. STANSFELD rejoiced that the boo. member bad at
leogth found an opportunity of bringing this important sub-
fact before the house. He agreed that the report of the
commission of 1860 war a most valuable and suggestive
document. The government had already acted upon many
of its suggertioca, but he was not prepared to say on their
behalf that they could accept those suggestions in their
entirety or in their details ; for, referring to the questions
raised by the hoe. gentleman, there were two prelimmary
points on which be must say a few words. The first of these
had reference to the original intention of this great national in-
stitutiou, and how far tact intention bad been departed from.
The wooed preliminary question was as to the military
establishment of the hospital, as to which he would con-
sider how far it was true, as some bad supposed and said,
that the encroachment of this military establiehment,
more especially of late rears, bad diverted or perverted
the funds of the institution from their original objects.
(Hear, hear.) He had uo desire whatever to make out a
case against the case and the arguments of the hon, gentle-
man ; he even thought the facts he was about to allege
would somewhat strengthen his case. The first document
with which they had to deal was the charter of King
William 111. in 1694. Then came the statute of the 7 and
8 William 111. c. 21, for the increase and encouragement of
seamen. Under this act he did not dispute that all seamen,
including merchant seamen, were within the benefits of the
institution. Lastly came thestatute of Anne, placing the fund
I %Leder the control of the Lord High Admiral. And here
for the first and only time was mention made not only of
the wives and children of seamen, but of the widows of sea-
wen slain or drowned in the service of the crown, as par-
ticipators in the clarity. Thisl act was passed in 1703: the
hospital was not opened till 1705. New be would venture
to call this Act of Queen Aone the foundation deed of this
. .

great naval charity 3' and the true construction to be; pat
upon it be thought was this—that upon the eve of the
opening of this hospital it appeared to be desirable to
extend the scope of the institution, and leave it to the
discretion of the Lord High Admiral to decide how far, with
reference to the claims upon the institution and its funds,
within these extreme limits, its benefits might be practically
carried out. He now came to the second preliminary ques-
tion, that of the military character of the institution. This
was a question of facts and dates. The hospital was opened
in 1705. One yeer previously the office of governor was
CIPILied ; and the °thaw lieutenant govemoc, one captain,
and two lieutenant. were also filled up. In 1705 another
lieutenant was added, who had 100 pensioners ; and thus
six 081:4111 were upon the establishment. In 1728 there were
added or captain and one lieutenant, and thus they bad
8 oaken and 450 men. In 1748, two lieutenants were
added ; and the number of offieers was 10, and of pensioners
1.000. Is 1733 a captain was added, making 11 officers with
1,300 pensions,,. l• 1760 there were added two lien-
tare* making 1,783 Pensioners and 13 omen ; and in
17117 on. captain more was added. The number of pen-
down was 1,783, and of officers 14. From this date, 1787,
till 1840, no change en the establishment took place. Is
the latter year a commission at upon our naval and mili-
tary ho•pitala, of which the Duke of Wellington was a
member. That oninliliallloo reported that in their opinion
the commanders bad some just ground of complaint, that
they. were excluded from the benefits of the institution
and in 1840, the .stsbliahment was inareased to its maxi-
mum of 20 officers upon the military list. la the,
moat year, 1883, two lieutenaacies and one tom-