The Sun.
London, England, 1852-05-25 00:00:00

.i 2! ;'

1669,,

under which they had dismissed him. He thoseght the
vestry of S. Pancras would have beer itteified if they
had reused to give information to the Poor-law Board;
but in point of feet they had not refused, for no request
had been directly made to them. What took place was
thin—that on the 11th of March' when the Right Hon.
Baronet oppesite was in office. nletter was received from
his office intimating that the Beard would not allow the
vestry to dismiss the m o ter without carrying the case
by matelimmus to the C .urt of gicen'a Bench; but it the
vestry read any chergt to rue.ke against the master,
the Board was ready to listen and to report upon
it. Teat was the only manner in which imormation
was requested, and surely that could nut be called a
direct request. He hoped the motion which ho
row brought forward would not be resisted by the
Government. He would have made it though his politi-
cal friends had been in power, though he confessed with
far less hope than now, when the Treasury beech was i°,
occupied by Rieht H en. Gentlemen opposite, who, on
every occasion when the P,:-or-law 13i11 was breuebt be-
fore the House, had voted against it. In 1834. when the 4
Bill was fleet introduced; in 1839, in 1840, iu 1841, in 1842, ;- eF
and again in 1847, which was the last time this Bill was
brought before the iToum, the same opposition wus eivent...)
to it. In 1841 the present Chancellor of the Exchequer e
opposed the Bill on the ground that it terminated the old ,a,
parochial constitution of the country, and outraged the, , ,
manners of the people for a mere sordid -consideration, ,d',
In 1847 the present Judge-Advocate objected to the 04
power that was granted by the Bill to the Poor-law :.•'
Board. The President of the Board of Trade also he- ,:'7
' came actually impassioned in opposition to the Bill. He
declared that the poor would regard the powers that •
were given to the Po tr-law Commissioners es a hard-
ship, and that some day the system would end in a
way that they would all be sorry to see. The Noble
Lord tire President of the Board of Works used :
similar language. The Chancellor oS the Exchequer
Again opposed the powers that were vested iet the
Commissioners; and, still more important perhaps, the
present President of the Poor-law Board concurred in
the opposition of his colleagues, and opposed their going
into Committee on the Bill, because there was not a
tshinegylemieglha
that be had taken
re
i , , which officen,
Government
lho tnevseehi
sub-
ject; and
it with every respect; but it was only a few nights ago
he had heard the Chancellor of the Exchequer declare
goenrat
niehdttteyv
rreoof anobutiriedhetdeehtawei
accede
osnce:hsordepeteaop
tesoooteshnnihetl,
iid,soptnhou
life"
poor-
law. 0:
..:
rwndahntidiemedth the intention of carrying
outsup-
porthhe
Lionehoped
thetor
h,p
lehe,pdeopr
aroi
that
rnoh.
might
fsncer)oti
principles
whichilp'
tii
wharfs have' all
ol
conversion r approvede
e ety ed
wasa s
newionfc. e r l
.inters
light
etw
wee
nos
utlnd the
tr ea possible
law. Ho believed that under its operations the poor
were frequently exposed to great cruelty and oppressett
—that the system of medical relief was defective, and
did not attain its object—that the poor often sufferea
from the enormous size of the unions—and that the
aged poor were treated unnecessary harshness and
rigour. He must, therefore, press the motion which he
had proposed.
Sir. B. HALL seconded the motion.
Sir JOHN TROLLUPE said that the present ;Bill
was only for a continuance of the powers which the
Commissioners of the Poor-law Board already pos-
sessed for another year, and therefore he thong at it was
very inconvenient that the whole management of the
rpaoiesrinsgh,gougledestbieendeifsetuhsissedkinbyd. aHny Hon. Gentleman
e didnetoliekthl
law was so uecertain as the Noble Lord had
supposed, for there were several decisions of the courts
of law which established the right of the Poor-lavr
Board to interfere in parishes which were governed V
local Acts. It was true that a cese had arisen in the
parish of St. Pancras, to which the Noble Lord had he;
(erred, respecting the right to dismiss the master °f tuly
union, and that question was still in dependence. On!
if the Noble Lord should succeed in his present ntetil;
there would be an end of the question; but, then, 0° t of
' other hand, there would be au end to all uniforreitY id
law with regard to the relief of the poor; there erode
be one mode of relief to the north, and another ,hl3°or,
of relief to the south of Oxiord.streete•—(lae,-b;
hear.) The Noble Lord supposes that ell 'eff
parishes having lee ii Acts were anxious to elieo ;44
the control of the. Cemtnissioners, but it happened ewe
' , the very first deputation he had the honour to recee'te
after accepting offic-, irons a metropolitan parish; es ''';',7,
for advice how they might relieve themselves for tett
operation of a local Act. It was plain, therefore, thbp.
' parishes were not so unanimous on this subject as
or
Noble Lord supposed. It was true there were 'eel
petitions in favour of the Noble Lord's motion; but lrepr,
, whom did these petitions come? Nut from the r'%h
payers, but from the vestrymen—she parochial digel,4
ries who did not like to be controlled by the Poor-lete
Commissioners. And if the Noble Lord's motion tell,.
carried, it would exempt about (me-eighth of the pePthe,
tion and one-ninth of the poor-law expenditure from the
supervision of the Commissioners, and give rise 100,
the abuses which the Act of 1843 had pat an end 'l,
It must not be supposed that these abuses existed 00,/,_
in rural districts—there were also malversions in tclti'ol
anti expenditure for eating and drinking which us s•
be greatly complained of. He found that even tbe vra,,,
try men of St. Mart lebene did not give entire ea felon
lion; for only the other week a successful oppesihho
had been raised to the further continuance in o'e ;
sever o
of last year's vestrymen. As a resident for nese
years in that parish, he could himselt bear ev""tbst
to the dissatisfaction that was generally felt faro 6
point; and he held in his hand a lett"r - its
genti,man who had long been resident PhYsicis oog
the workhouse, complaining of several delects"—rafeeell
' others, that the workhouse, which could only P';',.;otsie
accommodate 1,500, was sometimes forced to eetifior
from 1,900 to 2.200; that there was no proper cleshse t 0
tion of the inmates; that the boys' school was eh% one
the men's ward, and the girls' school to the W°73 the
ward, and that communication-took place betwee, the
children and the adults, to the manifest injury c't, has
former; that the atmosphere of the establishreerjaate
' prejudicial to infant life, so that about seventy ' bet et
died annually in the establishment; while the nutetenat
inmates under medical treatment averaged 600, or
!...1 g b t
one-third of the whole. He (Sir J. Trollope) font.°
state that in 1843 a lengthened inquiry took place Ll 3 the
two medical gentlemen as to the rate of mortality 1100
Marylebone workhouse, and they made a reVrtharieg'
gave very great offence to the Marylebone etigiotion
file Right Hon. Baronet then read a conareenboatie
' from Dr. Boyd, now connected with a pauPere,eeltsP'
asylum at Wells, and who formerly held a nee , the
nee
pointment under the Marylebone vestry,
shobone
wi i
hard lot of the little girls brought up in the Mse,obweet
workhouse, after they lett that estaTeiffleople,
• to go to service among the small truuehrpeete°
and shopkeepers in the parish, eeh°,s_ theugli
them to do the work of experienced serreP": There
it was not-at all suited to their years or statl .00 two
was no reproach on the character of either' had read'
' medical gentlemen whose communications e geehleborte
Since dissolving their connexion with the
svemot ol
vestry they had both been appointed to theLhrovideel
pauper lunatic asylums, and he thought t a isbts o
was unimpeachable. He contended that the Ipar
Marylebone and St. Pancras—the former with 0
al'cir; too
tion of 200 000 and the latter 160,000—were al rePerif
large to admit of the wants of the poor being P
eastrf
attended to by local boards. `
e 1 . :
Di The I er
)0
a, Marylebone ' tee
from the circumstance of its being Blau
the wrongs of r°
was occasionally termed the
into an arena for the discussion
to,.
as
owto,
lot oeutiem
ers
eeeis,reriatoli
and of Hungary, and such. questions as the wind h tbeid
and the relief of :their own poor. But baud
did not neglecte
say that in those great parishes there were inapeopf
perhaps they had a rig act, provided° cii
grievous faults of management which it was in the r hof
eris f
of the local hoards to remeli For instance, the p coe.
Marylebone had not followed the example of unte9.loo
metropolitan parishes, and removed their pauper 031 Euro
out of the precincts of the workhouse. lie was
orb'
that no man who understood the management of e eiteil
hohse would say it was right to keep 400 children ,W. ,t 0
the walls of such an establishment.—(Hear, bean' lorlie
, that they had done in Marylebone was to remove esti;
sixty or seventy of the children to a sea-batbieg ,oh 01
bliebmeut at Margate. On the other hand, the Pa-r'ettl
St. George, Hanover-square, among others that teolgpie 0
c
named, and than which there was no better eN6 hearee
a
good local man4gement,had removed their theypauP `red
to a healthy, dry, airy spot at Chelsea, where erhei
' oo
out of the way of contamination, and where eve oor I/
was done for their proper accommodation. 134abarte. 1,,
with that great metropolitan parish, Marrehe eore
confined 400 children within the walls of its 0:100 co,'
house, subject to all the contamination. theyetwei're 004 a
ceive from the admixture of classes. He migehh, taeh
in the Queen's Bench for a mandamus again.st_col`,o,:;
tiler ca,e. On the 22d of April last a motion 7%, fe.',
trytnen of Sr. Alary's, blington, to compel he_ otel,o
the provisions of their own local act, to make 9 0 too
.1
Latertyl
raid the object to be aloes A
the application
defendantso v
was "to comtnand the.
to cause ho,
the relief of the poor. The Learned Counsel We
Easter Tuesday lasre,
the meeting of the vestry o
held for the- purpose off eta
raining time a meeting was
haiht,enensdumanneecsetismsaartye tooft.etehreamtiseouneoir ti;s
meeting to be assembled,
nahs by adjournment
fi
On h t 0/
rraeilutaifngetwtehteatpoor in the present year. t a eas ,
bad assembled under the local act which 'l' tie'
vestry
force in the parish,
would wase uired for the maintenance of the P° tP
iis pi
the year duly presented, but the rate to ra-,e,
money was not at that moment agreed to, beeitioheih
the locul act, other machinery was to be pet in c t f
before the rate was actually made. The local alotire
the sth George IV., c. 125, which repealed seeertbeePo
acts passed for a similar purpose. The fact!' of nei I
were these :—On Easter Tuesday last thereate lv;#
tneetintz, after due notice given, and an oti°3- be 'eh,
duly presented, declaring the sum required teoooeo
instead
for the relief of the poor amounted t L, 0 0
instead of 29;0001, as in 1850, and 27,00° oltoue
1851. A motien was made that • this estimate joster
be received and adopted, and entered on the 113 tlje•
ll filf '1
It was objected that if it was adopted a_ fore
eh
discussion would be precluded, atict thou tiles,
was moved that it should only be entered 01:::0 tee`ofh
metes. This was done. An amendment was t or l'a'tch
that the sum necessary for the relief of the po 105
11,e
Penny. Tee motion was seconded, but was :hoc' ie.
withdrawn; but in the end the meeting neg
het 0,00,'
proposed estimate. The poor were, teerefteTheat,-0, f'i
out provision, extrpt theca eh the means ' ansbich t°
the
aPtioo seeooo,
rich and eharit,t,le Wivi.inal. among
had advanced. The object of this aPPIi! ot ibd 00,
compel the defendaets, ui.der the provision:
..ti, ati_cior
local Act, to complete what bad been bgb`hh toe, td,
only to enter the estimate on the minute',
What dithro
the- estimate and to make a rate." Now, tee fillsOe
court do iu this case? Tho court granted tee c es, °,
tem, and, on the suggestion of Mr7Pashle3h has 00'
who made the application, that the mattfat pep!,
pre-sing ree,ssity, the ceort ordered tbueing (11'4 eh
should issue at once, instead of thee 0 Bee('
toe`
show cause. So that the Court of Queett,,, 0
absolutely to overrule the law of the
fu tb
relief under the cireumitances. 14°v1