The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-12-15 00:00:00

THE POOR LAW BOARD AND THEIR POWERS.

PROPOSED ABOLITION OF THE BOARD,

MEETING IN MANCHESTER.

In the month of January last a Committee of Guardians
was appointed, for the purpose of taking what steps they deemed
most advisable, with the view of restricting the powers of the
Poor-Law Board. The committee was appointed at a 'public
meeting of deputations from Boards of Guardians, Sze. On
the 14th of November last the committee met, and having
taken into consideration the circumstance that the Poor-Law
Board will have to seek a renewal of their powers from parlia-
ment during the next session, came to a resolution to the
effect, that the several unions which had heretofore acted toge-
ther on this subject, and such guardians, ratepayers, and others,
as are disposed to co-operate, be requested to send deputations
to a meeting to be held at the Albion Hotel, for the purpose of
determiniing what steps, if any, should be taken during the
next session, either to liniit the powers of the Poor-Law Board,
or to attempt a more extensive interference therewith.
Accordingly a meeting of deputations from Poor-Law Guar-
dians and others was held yesterday afternoon in the Albion
Hotel, Piccadilly, Manchester, for the purpose of supporting
and maintaining a resolution passed at a similar meeting, held
at the Albion Hotel, in the month of last January, to the
effect " That parliament should withdraw from the Poor-Law
Board the unconstitutional power now exercised by it of making
laws, which only belongs to parliament itself, and this power
parliament has no right to delegate." The meeting was not
very numerously attended. Amongst the gentlemen present
were, John Holt, Eaq., (Stubbylee, near Bacup,) George Had-
field, Esq., M.P., J. M. Cobbett, Esq., M.P.. Jo-hua Fielden,
Esq., Stansfield Hall, Todmorden, and the Rev. Mr. Herford,
Todmorden. On the motion of Mr. Rankin, seconded by
Joshua Fielden, Esq., John Holt, Esq., was unanimously
called to the chair.
The CHAIRMAN said, in opening the meeting the best thing
he could do would he, in the first instance, to explain why and
wherefore they were assembled that day. It would be in the
recollection of many gentlemen present, that in January last a
meeting was held which appointed a committee, and that
committee appointed a deputation to go to London on seve-
ral subjects connected with the Poor. Law Board, and especially
with regard to the withdrawal of the last obnoxious general order.
After an interview with Mr. Baines, which followed an inter-
view with his predecessor, the deputation conferred with two
members of parliament, who did them the favour to give
them their advice at that juncture in the management of poor
law matters. He meant the honourable member for Notting-
ham (Mr. Walter), and his honourable and learned friend
near him, (Mr. J. M. Cobbett) to both of whom they were
much indebted for the pains they had taken in this matter,
and for the excellent advice they had given. (Hear, hear )
They advised the deputation, that inasmuch as the poor law board
would have to seek for an extension of its powers seat session,
that that would be the proper time to ask parliament to limit its
powers, or to abrogate its existence altogether. (Hear.) And
'herefore, they recommended the deputation to be on their
'are, and keep their powder dry till the end of the year, when
t .ry should meet again with deputations from Boards of
;uardians to consult as to what course should be adopted.
Accordingly, in April, the committee requested him to call
a public meeting some time previous to the assembling of
parliament for the next session, leaving sufficient time for the
agitation of the question, and the object of petitions, should it
be requisite to do so. Accordingly on the 14th of last month,
a meeting of the committee was held to appoint the day for
such meeting, and they fixed the present day, when they had
assembled; and it was for them to say what, under the
circumstances must be done. They would probably remember
that p•rliarneut must do something next session, as to the'
powers of the poor law board, or they would cease altogether.
He would leave the discussion of the subject to those who
were to follow him, but he might say that in his judgment,
it was *not competent for those gentlemen who were sent to
parliament to delegate their legislatorial functions on other and
i respansible parties. (Hear, hear.) And that was point
which affected the rights of the constituency. (Hear, hear.)
It had been said to him (the chairman) that morning, by one
of the members for North Lancashire, who had been there,
but because be could not support the views of the committee,
had gone away—that inasmuch that as Mr. Baines might be
safely trusted—that inasmuch as he had proceeded in the
discharge of his duties with commendable moderation, and
inasmuch as • the government did not propose to seek for
increased powers, that no opposition was called for at the
present juncture. He did not think that that opinion, however
high and respectable the authority, was entitled to much
weight. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Baines was not immortal ; and
Lord Aberdeen was not destined to be First Lord of the
l'reasury for ever; (hear,) and who could tell what measures
might he applied for respecting the administration of the poor
laws under some other government. (Hear, hear.) He
objected to centralisation, and contended that the administration
of local matters ought to be left to local authorities, and on
toc.rl responsibility. (dear, hear ) And if they were to
attain that desirable end, they must deserve it by perseverance,
energy, and determination. Unless they made a long pull, a
strong pull, and a pull altogether, they could not hope or expect
to be successful. (Hear, hear.) He had received numerous
letters, apologising for noci• attendance at the meeting ; among
others Mr. Wickham, Lord Goderich, M.P., and Mr.
Walters, M.P. The chairman, in conclusion, referred to
the recent order, respecting so much relief in kind,
.and so much in ru.niey, and said that he came from a district
(Bacup) where 10,000 or 12,000 persons were out of work,
and had been for the last six weeks, and where it was
consequently perfectly impossible to obey the fifth article of the
objectionable order. (Hear.) He had a number of letters
from boards of guardians, and, with the exception of West
Derby and Chorley unions, they all agreed in the object of the
meeting.

Mr. GEORGE HADFIELD M.P. read a letter from his
constituents at Sheffield, stating that they were prepared to
co-operate in any moment to crush the greatest curse this
couiltry ever had to contend with centralisation in regard to
the administration of th.e poor law. Had he (Mr. Hadfield)
had anything to do with the drawing up of the letter, he should
here recommend a moderation of the language, because he
thought the "water in mode as well as the fortiter in re was
desirable.
The Rev. Mr. BUTLER, of Nottingham, moved the first
resolution, which was as follows :—" That as the poor law
board will, during the ensuing session, have to apply to par-
liament for a renewal of the act under which they are
appointed, this meeting considers it a favorable opportunity
for boards of guardians and ratepayers to apply to parliament
for a limitation of their powers."
The centralisation system was clearly unpopular throughout
the country. The fact stated in the resolution, was one that
spoke for itself. He must say that he had never met with
anything discourteous from the poor law board ; but he had
met with a determination on their part, to act on their own
positive plan without taking any advice whatever from local
persons who, perhaps, could give the best that could be
rendered. He had resigned the chairmanship of the Not-
tingham guardians, because he did not want to be in hot
water all his life, and there was continual unpleasantness with
the poor law hoard. He thought they would all agree in this,
that this was a proper time to interfere with the unlimited
powers with which the poor law board were invested, with a
vicw to obtain a limitation of the same.

Mr. JOSHUA FIELDEIST, of Stansfield Hall, Todmorden, had
great pleasure in seconding the resolution, but he must state,
lest he should be misunderstood, that it did not by any means
go the length he wished it did. (Hear, hear.) He had merely
bowed to the opinion of the majority of the committee in second-
ing the motion as proposed, otherwise ho should have been in
favour of going to parliament for the total abolition of the Poor-
Law Board. (Hear, hear.) He had come to that conclusion
after a careful watching of the operation of the law, and con-

sidering. how it passed originally, and the unconstitutional

powers that had been. vested in the board in London, leading
.to the d.wial of that relief in cases in which it had been ad-
mitted by all who were acquainted with the constitution of this

country relief should be granted. (Hear, hear.) And thus
poverty was made a crime, and that led to the pun'shment of
hat was liable to come upon them all, and especially the
working classes. He was sure that those who wished to see the

warkinipeople honest, independent, upright, and hard-working
people, as they had: always wished to be, must be aware that

. _
the present was a cruel and most unjust law. (Hear, hear.)
It' was said that the new poor law, under the centralised admi-
nistration in London would lead to a diminution of expense.
What was the fact? That the expense of that administration

formed a large item in the expenses of the country. He con-
tended that the law had completely failed ; for since the passing
or it about forty acts had been passed to amend it. That
clearly showed that those who pretended to understand the

'principle ou which the poor should be relieved were totally
mistaken in their ideas. Then, again, the clause about bastardy
had been repealed completely,, and the old clause had been

substituted for it. (Hear.) Those who formed the law were
themselves not only at fault in their principles, but mistaken in
their views altogether. They had by their rules mistaken the
people Of England, upon whom they would look as dissolute,
idle, lazy Vagabonds, and that of itself would always make him
most violently opposed to the law. (Hear, hear.) Then, in
carrying out the law, the machinery employed was opposed to
the constitution of the country, and it struck a fatal blow to
self-government. Therefore some peculiar machinery was
wanted to carry it out. A central heard was wanted to enforce

the cruelty of the law, and to lay down rules which even though
death should he the result of carrying them out, were to be
carried out. (Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances, he
for one would have gone for the total abolition of the hoard.
(Applause.) He never should be. satisfied until . that board

as swept away—(hear, hear) because it was opposed to all
those principles under which we ti d risen up and grown to be
a great and powerful nation. Until we returned to the old

institutions which gave the ratepayers the whole controul over

the expenditure of the money and the treatment of the poor—
uritil we get that we should never get a thorough and beneficial
administration of the Poor-law. (Applause.)
In answer to a question from Mr. SMITH, of Bradford; the
'CIIAIRWAN said that the last return to parliament showed that
the expense of the establishment at Gwydyr House amounted
to X 260,000.

Mr. SMITH said, he could not at all understand why the
boards of guardians should be looked at as they were by the
poor law board. He thought it an extraordinary circumstance