The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1819-12-22 00:00:00

_
• \ 'IA-. \
4N "./IX.
....A is.•. s , .

range PC notWitliatantling dl alai tad
been said of the dirturbed district.
, .
Mr. V. BLARE wishedlltat the Magistrates or
Scotland should be einpowrreil to repay any ad-
It'&• *low made for the relief of the poor, nut out
of existing, but of future tolls or apartments.
Mr. Wit.nanwoncs said, they were alt agreed,
lie milled, that some relief sl Id br given to the
pour or Sent hind. The nut I y question was, how it
I could be implied. The !louse ought to look at
t facts from the evidence of practical persons, rod
i then apply general principles to tbotie facts.

..
Mr. CALCRAFT said, that he had the utmost
sympathy for Ilse per.on• who were desscrilied in this
Petition; but still he thosight it necessary that some
distinction should he mode between the situation of
the two commies. In England a large portion of
the rents of estates were given to the relief of the
poor. In Scotland there was no such provision.
Why, tlien, call fur this general grant, when there
was no reciprocity of situation between the two
catintrics Scotland had now the Opportunity of
availiag herself of the pecuniary aid afforded by
Government, upon giving adequate local security.
lie thought the offer fair and liberal, and such as
the gentry of Scotland would avail themselves of.
With respect to the general principle of the Poor
I.,.virs„ he was one of those who would defend it,
stud who ilioni4lit that it was alone to the mis.
management of the principle that complaints of
elbows were directed.

Mr. WILBERFORCE explained.
Sir .1. 111ACKINTOSII complained, that the cue of
the Petitioners was not stated fairly at either side.
The ►.til question was, whether those who lid been
deprived of subsistence by a n►tetn which had
given tifilueoce to Inhere, should, in their turn,
receive aid from the inure fortunate part of the
community. He protested soloist the doctrine
that in the event of this application being attended
to, Scotland would he placed in a different situation
loon England. With respect to a repeal of the
Poor Laws, now that they had grown into the
existing state of society. he thought the nom must
be mail indeed who would venture to propose any
such► alteration. But the great evil of the Poor
Laws lay in their misapplication. Their original
principle was safe, but nothing was more impolitic
than she system of mixing them up with the wages
of labour. lie would ask, whether. under the ex-
perience of all the practical evils of the existing
system of Poor Laws in England, Scotland was to
be denied relief until she entailed upon herself the
same visitation ? lie loner' no such doctrine would
he propounded in that House.
Lord BINNING thought the Poor Laws worked
precut:silly • great evil, and one which lie could
never think of extending to Scotland.
Mr. PuiLurs thought the state of Scotland was
peculiar. Why, he would ask, was the rate of
wages lower in LanarkslOre than in Lancashire ?
That very circumstance established the necessity of
au inquiry into the situation of the poor.
Mr. FORBES thought that a voluntary contribu-
tion would be very beneficial to relieve the local
distresses of the poor.
Lord A. Muni oN denied, as a general propo-
sitions, that in eftvet share were no poor's rates in
Scotland ; on the contrary, he asserted that larger
contributionv were bestassetl on the poor in the par-
ticular district of Scotland, than if the gentry were
exposed to the actual visitation of Poor Laws, as
impoeed in this country. The Noble Lord then
alluded to the extra population which poured into
many parts of &Wood, particularly from Ireland.
In Glasgow there were often several thousands of
strangers—amid lie thought it but just and fair that
the country would, under the pressing exigencies
of the cur, gruot relief to a district burdened in
suclra manlier. In the last Session of Parliament,
the Kochi lion. Gentleman opposite (the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer) had brought in a Bill for
building new churches, and had lamented at the
time that iu s•auy parts or the empire persons were
prevented, by tire want of decent clothing, from at-
tt nding places of worship. How were they to im-
prove their situation if no means of bettering their
conditions were attended to ?
Mr. &emma' thought that some relief ought,
if posoibir, to be titionitd ; but he was of opinion
it ought to be given by those who, at other times,
derived the bent tit of the labour of the working
classes.
The Petition was laid on the table, and ordered
to he printed.
Lord A. HAMILTON preveoted • similar Petition
from the perish of fiutliven—which was also laid
o► the table, and ordered to be printed.
SCOTCH BURGHS.

Lord A. HAMILTON then moved for the re-ap.
pointinent of the Committee of bait Session, to irr.
quire into the state of Scotch Burghs. This Corn-
mittee was actually oreceorary, to develope and cur.
rest the %Abuses which had crept into the state of
popular representation in Scotland. It was neces-
sary to correct the inveterate cud flagitious abuses
which fro notosiouvly prevailed, sod adopt a system
huit.r calculated to sustain the reputation and he.
riour of the country. The uncontrolled self.elec-
film cf Corporationa was in itself a great evil. He
denied that parliamentary reform was the object he
had in view, iii propuaing the re.appointaient of the
Cuminttrte. His object was the correction of
alm.e., and though what was termed reform may
be the coliateral result, yet it could not be consi-
dered the immediate. The Noble Lord then al-
luded to the bade of Edinburgh, Aberdeen, and
lovernesa, and said, that the legality of the return
of the Alember fur Edinburgh had been doubted.
lie concluded by moving for the appointment of a
Committee, to take into consideration the Pettioas
resptcririg t!:e :tate of the Burghs iu Scotland.
Alr. J. P. GRANT seconded the motion.
Mr. WM. DUNDAS said, that when the Noble
Lord prosoottoeed an opinion upon the legality of
Ina (Ir. Duritlaa'r) return as Member fur Edin.
burgh, it looked or if the Noble Lord had grown
wanton, in consequence of the success of his motion
last year.—(A lungh.)—•The only irregularity
which had occurred io his election was, the abscise.
of one Magistrate, who was au elector. Bat there
was stashing else in any way to vitiate the validity
of the drown. He then denied that vane of the
scotch loughs were ill the state of pecuniary bank.
e uptcy Alluded. to.
Lord CASTLEREAGU NM no objection to the at.
appointment of the Conmittee. He woojd not .

V t a *)1 Vk

therefore enter into a discussion of the grinr.d
.ineption. • .
Mr. 3. P. GRANT said he refrained for the same
reason from touching upon the general topic.
Mr. FORMS, denied that Aberdeen was in the
state dercrib-d. It at present paid au interest ct
4 prr cent. upon its debt, and was considered as a
good security for the principal. The inhabitant.
would indeed be perfectly disappointed if the debt
were paid off. The Hon. Alensber reed an extract
from the Report of the Board of Directors of tin.
Manufactures of Scotland in support of his oi.inita.
After a few words from Lord A. Matti:fox. the
motion was agreed to, and the Committee re-ap-
pointed.
CHELSEA PENSIONERS.

Lord Yrici;s7rose to move, pursuant to ks
11Thee, for a Return of Men liable to be struck tit'
the Chelsea Pension List, by the Proclamation ui
the 28th of October. 1819, distinguishing those
who had enlisted far seven years, under the 46th of
the King. and who, when the time of their ser-
vice expired, became entitled under that Act to a
pension, in consideration of their wounds. The
Noble Lord said that his object in moving for
those papers was, to move fsa leave to bring in a
Bill to extend the provisions of the Act of the
46th of the King to the Chelsea pensioners, who
having being retitled to pen.ion., weir, under tl.e
proclamation, to he deprived of them. The pro.
demotion said, that if these persons did not com-
ply with its direction, they would be deprived of
their pensions ; but he could not see by what right
persons who had served the full period of time for
which they enlisted, should be der rived of their
pensions. If a soldier, who entered the service for
ss limited time, should leave the service at its ex-
piration, could lie be treated as a deserter ? cer-
tainly not; and the case was precisely the same
with the soldier who claiined his pension under the
Act of the 46th of the King. He entered for a
particular period, ender the faith that when tin
time expired he might leave the service, and if lie
received a wound, that lie would be entitled to a
pension. The Act was plant, and the regulations
founded on it could net admit of a different con-
structinn. The Noble Lord said, that not only the
Act, but the speeches made on all sides of the
House when the Bill was pandiug hi-fore their.
gave it that construe' ion. The Noble Lord (Cav-
tlereagli) and the Ittglit lion. Gentleman the Pre-
sident of the Board of Control, gave the Bill the
lime construction; they opposed the Bill, on the
ground that it would deprive the Crown of the
power to take away petitions at pleasure, and
tendril to make soldiers independent of the Crown.
Mr. Windham at the time argued strongly that the
faith of Parliament was the foundation of the service,
and when once pledged that it ought to be kept
inviolate. lis the Act there was not a word to give
power to the Crown to withdraw the pensions iit
case of the pensioner nut attending on fresh service,
excepting those peesioners who had enlisted for life,
pr fur a term of years which had not expired. The
Noble Lord said, it was not necessary for him to
enlarge on the sacred duty of keeping inviolate
the public frith with soldiers ; it was a profession
with which the point of honour should be most
especially observed, and with respect to which a
departure from the principle of good faith might •
he attended with the most fatal coLveilitenees.--
The wounded soldier had a high claim on the
tendering," and gratitude of his country. Ile hoped
the Noble Lord would not °wore the motion—
or if lie did so, that he was right in doing so under
• the law and the miliary regulations, as aril as by
the debates which took place when the l ry was
passed.
Lord PALMERSTON said, he had no hesitation to
sa:., that the late orders which had been issued were
borne oust by the military regulations. The Bill
of Mr. Windham gave certain peidiuns—sulisct,
however, to the subsequent regulations of the
Crown. The soldier, subject to those regulations,
had a legal right to his pension, but not an inde-
feasible right. The third section was the one on
which the question turned; that section stated, that
every soldier should be entitled to his discharge at
the expiration of his seivice, subject to the regula-
tions of his Majesty, leaving the King the power to
fix the time, and the nature of the wounds which
would entitle au individual to a peandor. 13-fure
the Act no MUD could receive his pension, what-
ever might be his claims, unless he produced :he
recommendation of his commanding, officer. The
ol:jvet of Mr. NVindhani's Act was to do away Ili,:
necessity of that recommendation, and to make
the claim of the soldier sufficient, independent of
the recommendation of his commatiding officer.
It remained to the Crown to decide what period of
service might entitle the soldier to his pension,
what rate of pension he should receive, and on what
terms the pension should be held. The authority
of Mr. ‘Viudhain went to prove that the Bill did
not intend to give to the soldier an indefeasible right
to his pension. The regulations which were drawn up
in the October following, by Gen. Fitzpatrick. did
not put it in that point of view. Ilere the Noble
Lord entered at some length into the military re-
gulations, from which be argued, that the pen-
sioner was bound to serve the full three periods,
amounting to twenty-one years; and that it was
clear, if be refused to serve when called on, he for-
feited his pension. Such, lie said, was the clear
meaning of the military regulations. It was, he
said. preposterous to suppose, that able men in the
prime of life. recrising pensions, should not be ha-
hie to serve their country when culled ou ; and as
for those who received pensions on the ground of
services, they had no claim on the gratitude of the
country ; with respect to them it was a case of bar-
gain and sale. There were 75,000 out- pensioneis,
many of whom were not tit for service, but many
of them were; and it was too monstruus to he
maintained, that they who were supported by the
resources of the cottony should not be liable to
fw thent,ore them.rrwdaius Ae deLnliTbo by the service. He said that similar Proclamations weie
th
made in 1809 and 1813, and no notice were taken
o
isielteua
tdeeLoitiir:de:
iplbauttbclatticussome
liaditiidep.rr,ehstaiLt
gotwhhaalepstos:Niaroig:7 that the question was lint
ing received wounds is the service, was not liable
to be called on after the expiration of the period fur
beliblrdars.tocf ibttw. as fair to give the soldier the
which he enlisted ; but if r doubt arose on the
words
Logo contended, that no per.
ofmt !eon
tst detu
blotter was entitled to his pension without being