The Express.
London, England, 1861-02-09 00:00:00

THE POOH LAWS.

Mr. VILLIERS moved for a select committee to icquire
into the admiabdratien of the relief of the poor coder the

orders, rules, and regrdations issued by the Poor-law Com-
missioners and the Poor-law Board, pursuant to the pro-
visions of the Poor-law Amendment Acts. He felt extremely
anxious that the subject should be thoroughly investigated.
If the committee went into an inquiry every assistance would
be given them, and he trusted some rational conclusion would
be come to on the subject of the administration of the
poor-laws, for the time had really arrived when something
should be settled by legislation with regard to the question.
Considering the enormous number of destitute people in
the country, it wu something unsatisfactory to hear that
funds were wasted, and that results, tended, Bowed
from the existing system. This was both cruelty to the
poor and unadidactory to those who paid the rates. He
therefore readily proposed an inquiry, sod hoped the can.
mitten would come to some definite conclusion, and place
the administration of the poor-law on a more satisfactory
footing than it was at present. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. JAMES said that when the Poor-law Board was
In jeopardy last session, and the house rather doubted
whether they should renew this board, the right hon. gentle-
man certainly stated his intention to move fora committee to
inquire into its system of administration, and now, in moving
theappointment of that committee, lie had pronounced rather
• glowing panegyric on the services of the department. He
believed, however, that no department had given more dia.
satidaction than the Poor-law Board, not only in the manu-
facturing but also in the rural districts. He must say he
differed with the right hon. gentleman with regard to the
disposal of alms by the parochial authorities. The real
troth was that the guardians were so much under the con-
trol of the Poor-law Board that they were frequently dis-
abled by its rules from giving relief. With regard to the
distribution of relief in the metropolis it was very
well known that but for the munificent bounty of
individuals, the poor, in many of the more
populous districts, would have starved. The
guardians complained that the very stringent and arbitrary
rules of the Poor-law Board allowed them no discretion,
and he believed those rules were very defective. He felt
perfectly certain, however, that this would be an impartial
inquiry, and he trusted it would give general satisfaction
throughout the country. . .

Loci R. CECIL imputed blame to the parochial *Mho.
titles of the metropolis, and read a variety of statements in
support of this charge. Re hoped the Poor•law Board
would have greater power of interfering summarily with the
management of workhouses.
_ . .

Mr. AYRTON expressed his great satisfaction at the
speech of the noble lord, as it was most desirable that the
administration of the poor-law in the metropolis should ho
brought under the notice of the house. Two or three
years ago he brought the same question before the house,
but unfortunately be was met by that opposition which
was generally given to any attempt to alter the
pow-laws, and his efforts were then a complete
failure. Many gentlemen were always ready to express their
sympathy for the poor, more especially in relation to the
administration of the poor law, but the moment the ques-
tion arose how that administration might he improved,
objections of one sort or another were invariably started,
and consequently nothing had been done daring the last
ZS year, to place the law on a proper end sound footing.
When they inquired into the cause, which prevented such an
alteration of the law as would make it more efficacious,they
were brought to the painful conclusion that the real reason
was that the change would seriously affect the interests
of the territorial aristocracy of the country. and also of the
wealthy and influential residents of the metropolis.
Ministers of the crown knew full well why they did not—
he was going to say dare not—strike at the root of the
matter. Having described the state of thing' before the
Poor-law Act was passed, when the administration of poor
relief was totally irresponsible, he said that measure sub-
stituted a responsible administration with a board of guar-
dians elected by the ratepayers. Its tendency was to in-
troduce a better class of persons as guardians, and to give
them the advantage of stipendiary officers to examine
rations for relief. But that was only one part of
the scope and intention of the act. Its main
object was to establish unions, to enlarge the area
for all the purposes of administration. and to have
an uniform rate ; but this part of the scheme was
left optional, and had Dot up to the potent time been fully
carried out. And when they talked of treating the poor more
liberally, the real question was, who was to pay for it
(Haar, hear.) It had been decided that a pauper was
entitled to relief when he had redileil in a parish five year!:
but though this was a beneficial provision for the poor, it
turned out to be au exercise of benevoleoco by one set of
ratepayers at the expense of another. For instance, if a
ebeco would
me
ass that
richassaalhadi
theanp
esootarte copen-te.rmiwoothis o wen
to
with li
paupers resided in the adjoining parish, and thus,
though he might have an income of 2,9001. 1
or 3,000 f. a year, be would not be liable
to pay anything for the maintenance the poor. With
regard, to the poor in Loudon, it was We to contend

[TWOPENCE.

that they belonged to any particular street or pariah more
than to any other. The rich congregated in one quarter,
and the poor in another, and being divided by an arbitrary
hue sa regarded the levying of rata for the poor„lbe former
contributed but a small proportion to the maintenance of
their poorer neighbours. Indeed, in some districts there
were ratepayer', who bad to pledge their goods in order to
pay the rata, while the wealthy people at the West-end
had scarcely any rates to pay, except, perhapa, what they
spent in gratuitous extravagance. The root of the evil was the
capricious and arbitrary ware of the divisions .5f arm to
which the inequalities dates were attributable. , These ar-
bitrary divisions ought to be abolished, and there should
be a Competent board in London to which the entire
supervision of the poor ought to he entreated.
£lO long as the Poor-law Board remained, there never would
be a good poor-law. hie hoped the result of Bill inquiry
might be that the committee would come to the conclusion
that the administration of the law should be left to local
boards, and that the existence of a central board in London
wee quite unwomnly.
Par W. JOLLIFFE suggested that the committee should
be instructed to inquire into the operation of the law, as
well suits administration.

Mr. Alderman SIDNEY considered that the root of many
of the evils complained of in the present law was to be
found in the unequal ratability of different parishes to the
Mr.
Mr. BARROW hoped that the inquiry would extend to
the operation of the law.
Lord FERMOY defended the guardians, who ha thought
had been imfairly attacked by Lord R. Cecil. The inquiry
should, in his opinion,. be limited to the subyeetg admi-
nistration—whether the central authority carried out the
law to the best advantage to the poor and the ratepayers.
Mr. DEEDES enegested an addition to the tenon of re.
femme to the committee so as to embrace tle system as
well as the administration of the kw.
Sir G. LEWIS concurred, and moved to add, at the end
of the motion, " and into the operation of the law relating
do the relief of the poor."
After some further discussion, the motion as amended
was agreed to.
PARLIAMENTARY PRINTING.
Mr. DITETT moved that a standing committee of six-
teen members be appointed, to assist Mx Speaker in all
matters which relate to the printing executed ity order of
this horse, and for the purpose of selecting and arranging
for printing returns andin perimence of
motions made by memberep7:ll presentedome :—Sir John Peking.
too, Sir Francis Baring, Mr. Walpole, Mr. Henley, Mr.
Caravel]. Mr. &therm Fatoourt, Bonham-Carter, Mr.
Divett, Mr. Maskell, Sir Stafford Northeete, Mr: Greene,
Mr. Peel, and Mr. Hastings Russell three tq be the
quorum.
The motion was agreed to.
GLOUCESTER AND WAKEFIELD ELECTIONS.
Sir G. C. LIMBS moved that so motion for the issuing
of any new writ far the nit yof Glasosater or tha borough
of Wakefield be made without seven days' previous notice
thereof being given in the sots.
Toe motion tree agreedto..

CORRIIPLIELACTICRS AT ELECTIOIIS.
In reply to aet on by Lord R. CECIL,
fiir D. C. LEWlNsaid it elks the intention of Vie govern-
ment to istrodues shill respecting =rapt practices at elec-
tions, but whether it should have • retrospective effect or
not he should leave to the discretion of the house.
WINE LICENSEE AND REPRESRMINT HOUSES.
it Mr. AYRTON rellyed for a return of he number of
licensee granted under the acts Z 3 and 2 c.. e.. 27 and c.
107, distinguishing the number granted et each separate
bead of charge • and also the number fed to persons
Winged to sell beer: to be drunk on the premises, in each
city, borough, and county in England and Ireland.
The motion was agreed to.