The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1821-05-09 00:00:00

I

otaldem the authority of three or more Magistrates.
!fir W. Groat. who woe one of the chief advocates
of the Biller 1796, ockimertedged that he world not
hinweeeeded to them lad they been brought for-
ward its a time •of peter. Admitting the benefits
to be derived fram freedom of discussioo„ and
mallow' liar the, probable necessity of withholding
them, hoer diffetent 'vete** etroptosittiscrs of the
two periods? These there woe a wild spirit of in.
aeherdinstion which had' byst forth its the musk
-.af liberty, and threatesetiFinsfeepose, of all the
• countries of Europe. lit klinit theref was m; tu-
.
malt, and not any disaffectiose(ssistwithstandiog the
distresses of the coition), eimept..the discontent
*hies bad been crested by a refessils to Wen to,
.• • the petitions iof the people,. and • she excitement
which had been added try- the iststigatiims of
the spire. He contended at.soine length that there
was nothing like the urgency for
grown
g the Bulls
i.f 1819, ihet had existed in 1796 He thought it
• vaiu for the (louse to seek security in *itch re-
*sources. The more secret the expression of public
opinion became,. the note dangerous. He remind-
Jed the House of the ariertion made by Dee of the
legal officers of the Crown, that hiliwas spite tired
• of temporary expedients; and the Noble Nlarquis
oppoaire"confined the enactinesits of the Bill to
flee jeans, in order, at the end of the time, to make
them mate effective. ..He trusted the good temper
• , erlheedf by the pools under those lowa, would in.
duce;Minerrirrs to alter their-relolutions, and relivJ
• •aluisli a system which had been iseised set st
• ,:dopted under the iudtience of mistaken
He referred to the evidence given OA Hunt's iZilkhe
:he iiroof of the fallacy of thinly drclerutiuita which
shad been mole in that Hume with respert lathe pro.
reeding* of the Manchester fleeting. IVhere were
the sticks snit stoura and brick bits ? Where was
the worthy Mugistrute to be found, except in the
speeches of its Hon. Metnber of that House and
the Noble Marquis, who had been trampled to
death by the steruly mob ? What had become of
the bloody dagger framed by the terrified imagination
of one of the witnesses on the trial ? As soon as the
Magistrate had played his 'tart in that House, be
resuscitated and recovered from his catastrophe-.
was alive and well, living with his family, and gaols*
ready to he produced as .a witness against Mr. Iluntt
He had only alluded to the circumstances of the
Manchester meeting, because they would be soon
brought before the consideration of the House,
with all the odvasstager of the cominamling Isleuts
end eloquence of the Honourable Member fur
Westminster. if it could be shewn that there wie
u fellacions case made out, and that the (louse, is
passing those Acts, lied condemned the people to
punishineat for a crime which had not been com-
mitted, the least that the House could do would be
to reverse the uiteinder mood on the rights of the
people. he had mentioited spies as a new sestets
which had of late been called into confidential see.
'rice. He was aware that there was a system of
espionage in 1796, but spiel, were.by no means in
such general employment. They were always ob-
jeciiiniable, because they most of necessity be
window's in mid • g the loyalty of the !wind*.
and disseminating pea.ou and sedition. He did not
mean to deny that there were in 1819 opiiiions
hostile to the Ministry, and in favour of retrench-
inent and reform. That was beueticiel to the con-
stitution, end se to awry 'abuse of it, the .wierlum of
ages had provided sufficient restraints for. He
would ask, bad the new tonsures of restriction so.
swered any end?. He might be told that they had
prevented the expression of public opinion within
those wells•in a certain degree. And did the House
infer obsolete security from a 'deuce which their
own measures compelled? lie conceived that they
lied left the public no choice bat unconstitutional
submission or absolute resistance. If liberty was
not conducive to strength and order, let them be
told so openly, and with such arguments es would
jrrove that it was injurious. He would then give
up liberty fur the sake of securing strength and or-
der. He could not do better than refer to the
language used by Mr. Fox in 1797, in moving foe
the repeal of the Bills of 1796. If the period should
ever arrive, sod it would certainly artier, in which
the people should think it no longer worth while
to petition that House for economy or reform, they
were not to inasgiue that the people therefore had
become satisfied with their coudnct, or that they
did not believe the attsiumeut of those objects to
be necessary. He believed that the mass of the
people cared now very little what was done in that
(louse ; they looked upon them to be sitting there
tosleriee measures for the extinction of the few re-
meining liberties left to the people. He knew no
means. wore likely to awaken the gratitude of the
country, or to revive the confidence of the people,
drooping under almost unbearable tosation, than the
repeal of the Acts of 1819. Huw could the people
confide iu the Constitutioa. if its safeguards were
to be removed in the hour of danger, whets alone
they could heuseful ? Could they ttust a second
time to that security which, after bring taught
toyed insni• a rock on the shore, they Intim] to
be unstable and shiftiug as the sands of the
deeert ? went on to the consideration of the
Libel Bill of 1819. for the repeal of which
also it was bias intention to move. After exptirin-
mg the sevetitits which it went to inflict on
Chet iusittiiiite class of offences called Wads, he re-
market' on the great power which was heft in the
discretton of the Judge by that statute. Judging
etc* from our own times, ited from very recent cir-
cumstences, it was trot too much to reckon oft,
that there might in future be some Judges ap-
pointed. whose anal prejudices might dies.
geolify their nfisids from giving pure judgments,
eito,e of them might be found who would probably
he. us corrupt, as servile, and as cruel, as any
Judges of Winer times. Let the House reflect oil
the character of that law which would leave
such Judges se ill-defiued a power of punish.
anent, As Mr. Fos bid well remarked, speuk-
ing of some such Judges in past ages, the
writings of Locke. might then have condemned
the Author to perpetual banishment. Supposing
such a 141,8 to have berm In force is the times
of Wilkes, could rimy one doubt but that he would
trove bad the full-losce viol egret of it ti.ited upon
likee. hit need not go err Fir for ruse. Suppose
...the Hun. 11!irulirt whit, had just escaped from the
eefrcts of uttering hiss, honest opinion on a particu.
her triatisect mu, should asset feel it to be his duty to
wirers his opinion upon another equally atrocious
. tote--suppose that by legal bursae he could egaio
be pat ea trial before a Leicestershire Jury,
•

and considering the temper which had bet
ou the occasion,. could_ any our doubt
would be con►icted of the second offence,
thus he subjected to the sentence of btu.
meat ? it had been truly said that the execath
of had laws must make bad Judges.—[Here the
Han. Member made some allusions to the case of
_■.f _ _

. ind

was fluted o•t his tleicooar.a. .
...gins of that Lturswil Judie who supported
him in that House could filed no precetieut fo►
.his cowl:set. 'He dreaded the establishment of
such prreetents : he feared the use which unglit
)e' made of such powers by Jadges who were
, bead•atroag instead of hart-strong—wbo would,
instead of doing dispastionsie owl impartial
justice, resemble more the twelve lions which sup-
ported the throne of Solomon. He 'maintained ihst
county meetings hid become more 'Come since the
pa•sptg °filer Bills.. lie knew there were ninny who
were puttered to a.►crt that there was nothisig taken
imat the people by the Bills of 1819, but what they
Mold be much► better without—that their liberties
iiere math better preserved by the measures of ■
wise governmeot than by any other means-
441.iberias nesqueas ;Tali& extat Tom sob reit pis."
He rewarmed against the absurdity of these notions.
lie would not oorilligize for having brought this sub-
ject forward. He might he defeated in his motion,
that would not alter his opiiiian, rind if the subject
were not taken up by abler hands, hr would bring
before the House the consideration of the Bills of
1819 in succession, with a view to their repeal. lie
moved far knee to bring in a 801 l for the repeal of
the 60th Gen. 111., epistler, '• An Act far the inure
eff-cittallo preventing Sed 'loos Meansgs and As-
semblies."
Mr. DENMAN seconded the motion.

Mr. Serjeant Oeshow conceived dint the Hon.
.Member had laid no grounds for his motion. The
inconvenience which might occur in the enforce-
ment of an Act of Parliament was no positive ob-
jection to the passing of it. He was sorry to have
heard the conduct of a Learned Judge in the Court
of King's Beach on a recent occasion egain called
in question iu that House. If there were ally
charges to be merle against that Leaned Judge,
why were they not brought forward iii a constitu-
tional way ? He had knower that Judge from ins
earliest professional life, and he could over that he
silver knew a man of a more tender and merciful
wind. Ile only lamented that the Learned Judge
should have been moved to remit all the fines after
lie bad imposed them on Davison. If Mr. Vox lied
donbied in 1797, of his 'sewer to induce the House
to repeal the Bills of 1796, he did not believe thst
there was that ft 3.111 liviog who would induce the
House to repeal the Acts of 1819, at which time
there were circumstances to induce the House to
10481 those Acts, much more alarming than those of
1796.
Alr. DENMAN said the House seemed disposed
to use that opportunity which his Hon. Friend hod
furnished them with in plowing to the public that
whatever change had taken place in public recut*,
these was none in their deterinination to continue
those severities which had been reacted for the
preservation of the State. If she Constitution was
hot equal to its own defenre in this respect,
the fact must have been a secret to the
wisdom of our ancestors, and nothing but the
new lights of legislative knowledge which had lately
burin in could have strewn where the danger
lay. 'reeve was something actually providential in
the history of these Btlls. It was impossible to
issaintaio that the saute circumstances existed as at
the time of passing the Bills, and yet the Bills
hail 110 effect in bringing about u change. It
was supposed that the Manchester meeting had
made it necrsraiy to regulate public meetings ge-
nerally by new law., why, he did not know.—
What power would they have Magistrates to pos-
sess over public steeling' greater than that of dis-
persing them by the sword, when their leaders were
engaged, as Mr. Hunt had 'been, in restraining
them by his discourse from tumult of any kind ?
Wav that dispersion legal or not ? If out legal,
the (louse had strangely neglected its duty. If
legal, what was the use of the new Acts ? The
leaders of that meeting were tried, convicted, and
punished—but not under the new laws. A similar
meeting had been held at Manchester, where no
violeuee was used to disperse it. The leaders there
also were brought to conviction and punishment un-
der the common law of the land. It was singular
with respect to the Seditious Meetings Bill, and the
Blasphemous mid Seditious Libels Bill, that not
our conviction had taken place under either of them;
the method of meeting in departmentul divisions,
or'parish districts, as prescribed by these new-
fangled institutions, had never once been resorted
to. Had the agitators against whom the House
had thus pitched its wits to frustrate their designs,
it, any one case used this method of carrying on
their works or not ? It' they had, the [don would
have been useless ; if' they had not, there could have
been ho good reason for such enactments.—
With regard to blasphemuus libel, lie could tint
a ,gee with his I sun. used Learned Friend (Serjeant
dosloss) that it could be clearly and easily defined.
He thought it was impossible that ally.. thing more
difficult etiala be vubmived to the soutlenemsding
than to say what blasphemy was. One Jury roc-
quitted Mr. (lone of the very same offence of which
another person had been convicted by vs different
Jury, and he could by ne means concur in the in-
terpretation given of a seditious lilvel; namely, that
it was any writing that had a trintency to bring the
Government of the country into contempt. He
thought there were times when it became the bouu-
den duty of every man who loved his country to come
forward boldly and expose the abuses of Govern-
ment; and what could be snore indefi iii te and danger-
ous than this priuciple when applied to public meet-
ings ? Whenever an expression was made use of
that teuded to bring the Government into con-
tempt (and this, mark, in the opinion of the Sheriff),
he has it iii his power to dissolve that ineeting.-..
(Hear, /sear.)—Wlitt then is the object of meet-
lug, or how is it possible for the people to emit.
plain of their grievances ? The rely moment as
observietion of this kind is made, according to the
Seditious Meetiii,„es Bill, the inertia* may be dis-
pereed, treated like felons, or cut down by in
armed twee. And the-e are the laws that were.
•telettiltd maid suppurtvd by His Hon. and Learned
Friend (Seejeant Oasluw), the advocate of the
liberties ul Kogleilit !—(//ear, Kea..)—lie was
snare thut the tousitry was indebted to I ' fi., his
former atl. vim, bat he must say that lie hod for.

Mr. Seri

felted a great portion at lemt.gof .IYlr.liemiame,
grail tade,byput him!elf forever& no lisitwegaiou,
in defence. of these °theme and unjwa lettige-lawit
which were framed on halm awl fraudulent pre.
truces Hear —aud for which no necerwty exit,-
rd, even according to the 'hewing of Ins lion. and
Learned Friend--

-‘ at

bid

that necessity did exist. •
Mr. DINMAIII retained. lie should wish this
necessity had rested upon something swore then
the mere iierenthetserl assertion of his Hun. and
Learned Friend. but he denied the existence of
city real necessity of them laws ; they appeared
to him to savour very strongly of that mischievous
spirit* which had crowded their table with more sta-
tists, daring the lain reign, than since Magna
Chnria had been obtained, lie had to 61191006 e
to the House—(Hear, hear)—for occupying their
attention so long.—( /Icor, hear.)—lndevd he had
not intended to do so. He was, however, anxious
to preserve his consistency, and to declare that no
infringement of the liberties of the subject should
be fur one moment endured. and he hoped that
matty would be still found in that House, ready
and anxious to record their opinions in favour of
the liberties of their country.—(Hear, hear.)
The Hon. C. HUTCIHNSON could not conceive
what the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Serjeant
°intim) meant by slating his cute/swims of the
necessity of these laws. Dove he meats that, in
times like the present, if the fli 'sister of the Crowu
came down to the House and proposed these odious.
disgraceful, and abominable measures, that lie
should support them ? What wits the statement
mole at the time there Bills were enacted 1 It was
said that an oricanixed body were arrayed in oppo-
sition to the Government—that several thousand
inert, With chiefs at their head, and provided with
arms, were parading through the country, fur the
purpose of intimidating the officers of the Goren'.
snent—th it meetings, for treasonable objects, had
been held all through the country—that families
had left their tonnes and fled into the large towns,
and called ou Government for protection. This was
the state ;tent of the Minister who introsluced these
B Ils, which was supported and borne nut by various
Members out both rides. Bitt limiting could be more
dissimilsr then the situation of the present times ; and
whatever might have been thegioundst of justificaliou
at that period,he saw none whatever at present.
What he principally rose for was to to 'kr a few ob..
servationv on the country he had the honour of repre-
senting. When these Bills were introduced, the
Noble MPliqUill (1•011410ildkrry ) expressed los sots-
facti 11l , as an Irishman, at the tranquillity that
prevailed in ['Overt, and it was quite manifest it
never was intended these Bills should have included
Ireland, for the flame of belied was never intio-
dued into them. However, it was said dm some
jealousy existed in consequence of excluding Ire-
land from the effect* of the new hies, and ex-
tending their operative' to parts of England in a
stale of equal tranquillity, and is order to re-
move these painful feelings Ireland was included.
Nothing, however, cont.l be more unju•t than (hi..
In his memory there had not been a single posse-co-
tton frir seditious filial/. sold he must say, that he
thought, under these circumstances, one of the
greutevt outrages that ever was committed on pub-
Ire justice or the libiraties of a free people was ex-
tending these laws tolrelenid.--(Hear.f—He should
not detain the Howie lotiger, but be never should
lose an opportunity of recording his execration of
these measures, and he should give the motion of
his Honourable Friend his most cordial support.—
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. MaxweLL wished to state briefly the reasons
that had induced him to support these Bills whets
they were introduced to the House. Ctoisiderable
disturbsnce had at that, period prevailed in that
part of Scotland which he had the honour to re-
present, and in compliance milli the wishes
of at least nint.tenths of Isis constituents, aud
to preserve them from a similar disaster to
that which had occurred at Manchester, lie was
induced to support it measure in his comprehension
unconstitutional. At that period he had stated his
motives, and he was given to understand by the
Noble Marquis (Londosiderry) that these measures
were to be !needy tempora:y, and under these cir-
cumstances it might appear a breach of faith if he
now voted ngsinit them until the period of their ter-
mination had expired. He was not, however, pledg-
ed to support the Seditious Libels Bill, and should
therefore vote fur its repeal.
Mr. MIRRCRONSY said, he was one of the few
on that side sr the House-who had voted for passing
these Bills into a law, and if the same circum.
stances now existed lie should give the same sole
with the most perfect and conscientious satisfaction;
for he thought the circumstances then presented
to the face of the country were more unfavourable
to the right of' petition than laws that had been
since passed. He was certainly of opinion that
the meeting at Nlauchester was illegal, and the
proceedinga tit York hal since corroborated his
opinion, although many Gentlemen of the wood-
est understanding', whose opinions lie respected,
thought differeatileV. llot although he supported
the swertwireo then, he war of opinion that the ne-
cessity did not now exist. Since these laws have
been passed, we hate had undoubtedly some to-
sleuth in which Sheriffs have acted with the
greatest fairness and independence ; but we have
also had others, in which the Sheriff seemed to
act from mere caprice, and to treat the pub-
lic meeting. in a manlier that had in its operation
a tendency to put the people in a state of hostility
against the laws. These circumstances have all
occurred since the passing of these laws, for which
reason he should vote fur their repeal.
Mr. LENNARD replied. He certainly did not
entertain any great hopes of success; but lie
thought something was due to public justice, and .
that some effort shook! be made to restore the
People to their hirth.rights.—( Hear, hear.)—F men
the conduct of Mieirtersaisice he hull been iii Par-
liament, lie saw little reason to be sanguine in his
expectations, that they would •eiiiciliate or synina.
thize with the people—so far from that, indeed,
they did nut seem to think it worth while to give
an answer; lie should, however. feel it his duty to
take the sense of the House upon it.
Sir .10104 NEWPORT said. as po case had been
made out ou the opposite side. in support of their
contintiaoce, lie 'hookd yule for the repeal sit' these
bliss
Strength *lee then ordered to withdraw for a

division On the SoditiOns Meetings Bill. The Dam-
bens were—
For As repeal
Apulia it
- Majority For Nisisters 3l
Os see readmission to the gellery we found
—llle—Diyiiimis, los legs. lee w,s addressing
ihe U.uss on the Seditious Libels Bill. lie hoped
there never would be

so ►land uiv in defence of ill; bbertiea of Ilse people.
The titivation, in fact, resolved itself into this, whe.
titer the Howe should ecmsent that a barbornus and
cruel punivliment should be inflicted on • man for
selling in Ins shop a hook which a jury may evil
",tending to bring the Government into contempt."
The Howe then divided on tote Seditious Libels
Bill—
the repeal .....
Agtitist it..

Majority for the euotionattoo of the Bill 22
POOR LAWS.
On our rendmission to the gallery some convey.
lotion oro.e between Mr. Warman and the liflar%,
quilt of Louts°!insane as the pootpoliernent of this
question to smite other night.
Mr. Sc* at.err expressed himself willing to com-
ply. with the wishes of the House.
The co ins of ,` Go on ! go 04 ' then became
pretty general—upois which
Mr. SCARIALTT then row. He said, as it seemed
to be the desire of the House that he should ptrste
ceed, he should endeavour to state, as briefly as
possible, the grounds which induced him to intro.
duce the present Bill. Perhaps in the whole range
of the questions that are brought before the cola-
sitlrration of Parliament, there is nut one of more
importance than the nate lie had the honour of sub-
mitting to them ; and it might be necessary to opt,.
logirut, that so humble an individual as he was:
should have undertaken it. He must, however,
throw himself upon the tutlulgeoce of that liberal
and enlightened audieitce.—(Hear, hear )—lf he
could have hoped that the Ministers of the Crown
were likely to sanction or introduce such a plea-
sure, he should have been the last mau to bring
it (inward. He was fully erlllll'n le that no-
thing lie could say could add to its impost.
mice ; he hail paid particular and anxious atten-
tion to the subject. Ile had not seen the Report
of the Committee until after he had prepared the
Bill ; but these was no view he had taken of the
question that was Lot coutomed in their Report,
and it gave him the greatest satisfaction that his
opistions should meet the concurrence of such able
and well-informed gentlemen. The nature of the
law as it stands at present is, that there should be
" unlimited provision for the poor." Now he pray-
ed particular attention to the word unlimited.
Arguing d priori, the consequence of this must
be that it would operate as premium for poverty,
and consequently fur vice and immorality. The
condition of Ronnie is labour, that we should " earn
our bread by the sweat of our brow," and any thing
th,it tends to deatioy this original precept must tend
to loosen the bonds of society, and by making man
dependant on others, dew ude biotin his watt opinion.
If some remedy were not adopted, the time must
come when the whole products of industry would
not suffice for the maintenauce of the pauper pops-
lotion. Already in some parishes in Englund it
Was net worth while to cultivate the land, op ac.
cotiot of the pressure of the pooe's rates. These.
laws were calculated to produce that effect, suit
the mode of executing them was equally open to
objection. At present the worst possible effect
was produced on the ;loot themselves; and as the
alms were bestowed without charity, an they were
received without gratitude. They dissolved the
bond which ought to exist between the poor
and the rich, by cutting off the connecting links
of charity and benevolence. It was a remarkable
fact, that on exa ttt i tt ing the revoke which had
arisen from this law fur the unlimited relief of the
poor, it would be found going nu with such rapi-
dity as would soon swallow up the whole capital
of the country. It would be found that in 1750,
the rives amounted to 669,8911.; in 1776, they
were 1,540,8041. being au increase of nearly a
million in 26 years. In seven years after there was
an increase of 500,0001.; in 1803 they amounted
to 407,9631. being an increase in 20 years of
2,200,000/. ; and in 1813, the amount was
6029.8141. From a progression like this, it
might with safety be predicted, that unless some
preventive measures were adopted, the period
must arrive when every parish in England would
be unable to maintain its poor. From a Re-
port of the House of Lords in 1816, it appeared
that iu the parish of Namptwich, in Cheshire, the
overseers in an address to the inhabitant., after
pointing out the increase of the poor, sod the
iminber of bastard children, at a time when the
wages of labour were very high as compared with
the price of corn, concluded that the practical re-
sult of the poor loss was, to cause a relaxation of
the industry, and a depreciatiou of the moral cha-
racter of the poor. It oppeared that sonurthiog
must be douse to stop the progress of this evil,
and it seemed that the cause being known,
the obvious remedy would be to remove it,
if no objection existed to reuder the removal pre-
judicial. The injury being caused by the unlimited
relief, the remedy would be to limit the provision.
His first proposal, therefore, would b:! the enactment
of a law to fix II maximum to the Poor's Rater,
the maximum to be the amount of last year's rates.
That was not a year at which the collection was the
highest, hut he considered the most proper, as it
was the year is which the system had 'teddy its full
raperetion, which by many Gentlemen was sup.
posed to have changed, and which also fixed the
' value of money. What lie should propose would
be, that it should not be• lawful for arty rates
fur the relief of the pour to be levied iii
future, exceeding the amount levied in the
year ending March es, 1821. If the Hussite went
along with him in that, the next question would be
by what means a different aqsteui of r therninderitig
the law could be enforced. The o.sgiuod
of the ststute of Elizabeth was nut to give a pre.
minus to idleness. but a relief to those who could
not work : but in every parish it had ilegroesated
into aii abuse of giving relief to thrive who lied work,
but
-had latuilies to runintein. A hilentroug umai,
therefore, thought, as u toaster of course. that
if hr had two children, the secured was to lie
suwrr-
tained by the parish. Now he should be glad
to know why the labourer should be exempted

from that regard lo ecnnomy which every other
class was obliged to exert. The second
therefore, which he should propose to the House
would be, that it should not be lawful for any over-
seer of the poor to give, or soy justice of the peace
to order relief to be given to any person who, at the
time.of. patatotaliist Act, should be uss•aavriedeex.
cept they were incapacitated by infirmity of body
or by old age. That would, he thonght, bring
back prospectively the statute of &imbeds to eta
proper operation ; et present it was calculated to
shake the virtue of the industrious poor at who,
when he saw a portion of his twenty pittance torn
from hint for the support of the idle, would natu-
rally at last begin to think flint he too might as
well form one of the indolent class. The third
mensure which he should prepare was one on which,
probably. there might be some difference of opi-
nion, though, fur himself, be confessed he had long
entertained certain notions which he del not think
could be shaken by any arguments that coul‘l
brought against them. The House were aware that
it wert.part of the system of the poor lams that per-
sons becoming chargeable, or likely to become
chargeable. might be removed from the place
where they then were to their own parish. The
effect of the statutes of 13th and 14th of Charles the
Second. Ives obviously to restrict the free circula-
tion of labour. It imposed on the labourer, in
case lie could not get his bread at the place,
where he their was, by sickness or any ether ac-
cident—it imposed on him the necessity of being
sent to a distant parish, where his father or himself
were born, and where no demised for his labour
existed, and where he was sore to become a pauper.
A more oppressive law (making poverty a crime, sod
punishing it by exile anal banishment) never ex-
isted i►. the statute book of any country. He
would suppose a Member of that House were
now to get up and propose to enact a law, that
whereas .poverty sod sickness' were great crimes,
be it therefore enacted, that any industrious man
found guilty of them should be banished to a dis-
tant parish. What would the House say to mach a
proposition ? They would say the man was not
only inhuman, but mad. Yet that was the low at
present, though under soother name. The statute
of Charles 11. was soon felt to be highly oppressive,
end instead of repealing it, other laws were oblige°
to be enacted 40 mitigate its operation, and venous
artificial exceptions were introduced : fur instance,
the rioting.* tenement of 101. a year. having served
• parish-office, and others of the like nature. Dr.
Burn said, on this law there had been • greater.
number of decisions than on any other; and he
would venture to say of it, that no law ever en-
acted had furnished so many subjects of lisigatiao.
The whole system was artificial. A law was made.
that was absurd in principle ; and instead of re-
peeling it when the evil was discovered, it was per-
petuated by expedients equally productive of li-
tigation and expense. It was part of his abj►ct
to declare it unlawful to remove any man from the
place where he was settled to the place of his
birth, or that of his father. He was aware it
might be objected, that manufacturing towns could
nut beso dealt with. He would take Manchester, for
example, and see the probable effect of thee law.
There the labouring classes were very numerous, and
on • want of Work, the practrce was to scatter theta
over the country to their !reactive parishes; not-
withstanding this expense, the poor's rates therp arts
less than in any agricultural parish in England. It
never nosatune at Manchester than Sa. 6d. in the
pound, and that only daring the great distress in
the year 1816, and now it was reduced to as. 6d.
in the pound, while many of the parishes in midland
counties were paying 20r. in the pound. This arose
partly from the removal of the labourers, who had
contributed to enrich Manchester (or any other ma.-
nufacturing town), to a poor parish, whichfied not
received any benefit front their labour. Without ad-
verting to the injury sustained by the poor them-
selves from the law as it at present stood, the pass-
ing of this Act would, lie was persuaded, be a rest
motive to economy in the poor's rates. The Hon.
and Learned Gentleman then compared the ex•
pens. incurred by Manchester in the years 1815
and 1816 for poor belonging to other townships
(which amounted to 2,3321.) with the poor be-
longing to Manchester, but keut by other town-
ships, which amounted to 2,5871. The dif-
ference against Manchester was only 195/. which
was really not very cousidera.ble ; and 111 the aext
quarter*. being a time of great distress, it only
amounted to 6004 But if the rates of Munches-
ter or other manufacturing place• were increased
by it 10,0001. the poor ought, if maintained tit
all by a rate, to be maintained by that dis-
trict which had been enriched by their labour.
He did not mean to touch the law respecting
the removal of paupers not English, but he
would just notice the operatiota of the law as
it affected Manchester in that respect, the
impediments thrown in the way of en Euglislt
labourer obtaining a settlement not applying to the
Irish or the Scotch, there were • resit seettassilaa
non of labourers of those countries in Manchester,

though to the booour of the latter ha seem .observe,
that, in 1815, ouly four Scotch had applied fur
Paii‘h restael, while at the none period *bore I,OOBL
was distributed to the. Irish poor, end in 131.6
and 1817, when the distress was gresiet the sows
sa►ouuted to 9.008/. If under the operation of
the law which he proposed, the nuuthee of .poor
should at any: time exceed the relief provided,
as that could only arise Irons casualties nest
likely to be permanent, it might be safely left
to the benevolence of the wesilthirr elosaes, which liv
was sstielied would be sufficteert fur the purpa•..
The Hon. end Learned Member concluded by
noising for leave to bring in a Bill to ausend the
Levs relating to the Relief of the...Peer.to Esitelsud.
The Marquis of LoNoonDiLaltif returned hiss
thanks to the Honourable and Learioni•©eetleman
for the measure which Ire had so ably istirodoced to
the House, and de►ired not to be eunsidered as dr.
ticieni in zeal for the objects which the Hon►. end
Learticd Geollesnais bad so view, loccause he ititht
po•lpuue giviog any %mutton sot the toe amore at
present.
Sir Itoncre 11'it.son said 1i should oppose ■ny
Rlrystire which went to deny the right Otitis the
poor had to the relief they at present received,
Mr. CALCSAFT that in. the materna:nut and
reasonnies of his Hon, cud Learned Friend. the
reason of the increase of the poor'a rote of late year•
was entirely left out of aught bit whoever would
trace the progeeve tosolov, sod observe the

1,,