The Sun.
London, England, 1839-01-19 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, JANUARY 19, 1839

THE REV. MR. STEPHENS AND THE

POOR-LAW COMMISSIONERS.

" Preston, Jan. 10.
" have received from the Poor Law Commissioners official
copies of a Correspondence between their Secretary and tin Editor of
the Bury Post on the subject of a false statement affecting the character
of the Commissioners, which is reported to have been made by the Rev.
Mr. Stephens in one of his sermons at Ashton-under-Lyne. As coml.
derable publicity has been given to this statement by the Provincial as
wallas by the London Press, I have to request that you will assist nis in
the endeavour to make known, as widely as possible, the disavowal of
the Poor-law Commissioners contained in the annexed correspond-
ence. It has been snggested to me, that the imputation which has been
so indignantly repelled by the Poor-law Commissioners may attach to
the persons of the Assistant Commissioners unless also disavowed by
them. I beg therefore to state, on my own part, that T had no previous
knowledge of the existence of the publication which appears to have been
referred to by Mr. Stephens, and that I have not assisted in or counte-
nanced the circulation of that or any other work containing doctrines or
opinions in the slightest degree resembling those described by him.
Allow me to express my conviction, and upon this fact I willingly stake
the retention of the office I hold, that none of my colleagues, the As-
sistant Commissioners, have taken any part in suggesting or recommend-
ing the dreadful practices which Mr. Stephens states are about to be
adopted for the purpose of checking the population of the country.
" I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
" A. POWER,
" Assistant Poor-law Commissioner,"
On the subject of the correspondence alluded to, Mr. Stephens has for-
warded to you the following letter:—
TO THE EDITOR 0 E ME TIMES.
SIR,—My attention has been directed to an article in the Times of
of yesterday, headed " The New Poor-law," containing the " Copy of
Correspondence between the Poor-law Commissioners and the Editor
of the Bury Post," in which I have been made responsible for a " state
ment" said to have been publicly made by me, so utterly abhorrent to
the feelings of the Commissioners, and so " totally at variance with any
opinions ever held or expressed" by them, and apparently so " utterly"
and "totally fatal" to the future existence of the " Commission," if
true, that Mr. Chadwick has been instructed to avail himself of the op-
portunity of expressing their solemn denial of having any knowledge
whatever even of the existence of the " book," and their unqualified
abhorrence of the sentiments said to be set forth therein.
That the Poor.law Commissioners should manifest this more than
maiden modesty at the casual connexion of the work in question with
their names, refusing, even for a moment, to wear the unappropriate
honours of this moral wreath, placed by a too officious hand upon their
blushing brow—that they should betray a sensitiveness so extreme—an
earnestness so solemn—an indignation so intense, at the bare idea of
any association of such sentiments with the principles they profess offi-
cially to entertain, and Consider themselves bound, in justice to the poor,
to `carry out," and that they should be horrified at the premature dis.
closure to the people of this yet Christian country of the practical, busi-
ness-like, matter-of-fact results of the humane system of their idol Mal-
thus, when brought into full operation, will be a matter of wonder to no
one who has followed them in that career of benevolence and mercy
which has inspired the perishing thousands of our land with gratitude,
and brought the blessings of the widow and the fatherless upon their
honoured heads.

On any othersubject, and with any other antagonists than those

now have to deal with it would have been thought only fair that the
correspondence in question should have been preceded by a communica-
' tints either from the Editor of the Bury Post or from the Poor.law Com-
missioners to myself, to ascertain, before they undertook to pronounce me
the utterer of the vehemently repudiated slander, whether I really had
made the statement of whin they so grieviously complain. What tight
have the Commissioners to affect all this astonishment and indignation
at an unwarranted and groundless charge, assumed to have been made
by Mr. Stephens upon them, when they themselves take the very same
liberty with him, a persecuted and defenceless individual--which he is
positively declared by Mr. Chadwick to have taken with them—the
high and mighty Commissioners of the Poor for England and Wales.
I should not have noticed this fresh instance of the inveterate malig•
nity of my enemies, were it not calculated, at this particular moment,
still further to prejudice the cause whose defender, and, it may be, martyr,
I am shortly to become, and did it not tend to show how perilous it is to
suspend the liberty, the life, or the character dearer than both, of a
British subject upon the oral testimony, or the anonymous reports of in-
competent persons, professing to give the words of a public speaker who
delivers a discourse of great length to a promiscuous assemblage of hearers
I have no wish to ascribe intentional error to the correspondent who
furnished the anonymous report of my sermon of the 30th ult. I did
not see it till the Saturday following in a Manchester paper, notorious
for Its uniform misrepresentation of every thing I have ever advanced
on the Factory question and the New Poor.law ; nor did I deem it
worthy of morel han that silent contempt with which I had always treated
the misrepresentations of that paper, until I found from The Sun of
Wednesday, and the Times of Thursday, that it had been intentionally
made to answer a purpose highly injurious to me in my present situation.
The vague generality of the report df the above.mentioned sermon will
be at once apparent, even to the writer hitnself, when I inform you that
sixteen lines of a hymn are printed in full, as having been given out by
me and sung by the assemblage, not one word of which was ever said or
sung on that occasion, unless by the reporter himself. The verse I gave
cut was from an altogether different hymn, of a different structure, and
a different tune to the one stated to have been used by myself and the
congregation. I might mention several other instances of gross inaccu-
racy, but this is more than sufficient to show into what kind of hands it
has been my good fortune to fall whenever I have preached or spoken on
the atheistical character of the Po .r law Amendment Act.
It is perfectly true that 'adverted to the Malthusian pamphlet, entitled
"The Possibility of Limiting Populousness, by Marcus. London. Jahn
Hill, Black Horse-court, Fleet-street, 1835." But it is not true that I
stated it to have been written by a Poor-law Commissioner. lam al-
ways exceedingly careful of what I say on these as well as on other matters.
It is well for me that I am so, or thesuggestions of one "Editor," that "it
is evidently necessary for the Government to do something more than
merely holding Mr. Stephens to bail to answer to a charge of using in-
flammatory language ;" or the " We say Bedlam " of another; or the
" Is it not high time to inquire whether this man is not a fit tenant for
a lunatic asylum" of a third; all taking their cue from the " Copy of
Correspondence," might suggest to theabsolute " Commission," a readier
and more successful way of silencing a dangerous opponent than a village
warrant for a simple misdemeanour seems likely to effect.
But seriously, Sir, why should these Commissioners, all threeof whom,
it appears, can upon occasion be present at Somerset-house, prepared at
once to confide to the public every literary secret of their lives, be so
very angry at being honoured with the authorship of this humane and
moral theory for limiting populousness within the means of subsistence,
in a country where the surplus population presses so dangerously upon
its resources, that an unconstitutional and unchristian act was impera-
tively required, in order to save the estates of such exemplary, profound,
and pious statesmen as Lords Brougham, Althorp, and Russell, from
immediate annihilation ? For the life of me I cannot divine.
After nearly five years of the reign of grace and mercy under the So-
merset-house dynasty, we surely needed no such impressive reiteration
of the " feelings" and " opinions," (as to the right to life, and the liberty
to increase and multiply of the people of England) of the three Commis-
sioners, by whose " Rules. orders, and regulations," bastiles have covered
the land, and classification of " men" and " females," has been carried to
so physiologically-scrupulous an extent; to say nothing of all the deaths
by starvation, mental derangement, and that now most common of all
diseases, a broken heart ; the premature deaths occasioned by
the compulsory migration of the south country labourers, the uncontra-
dieted accounts of which were furnished to the Ponr.law Commissioners
by my friend Mr. Oastler—all the arrangements for the transportation
of children, plucked from the mother's breast through the agency of the
" Children's Friend Society," and the murders committed by wretched
mothers, whom the "bastardy clauses" have elevated into Poor-law
chastity and virtue. Nor will I dare to lift the veil that hides the still
darker horrors . . . alluded to by Mr. Fielden in a recent
speech, also uncobtradicted. That the authors and enactors of the
thousand and cne schemes for keeping population down should affect to
shudder at the plan proposed by Marcus, will astonish none when the
workings of their demon decree, in Suffolk and the neighbouring counties,
where they have had it all their own way—where there has been no" re.
sistance," no " agitation," no " firebrand incendiary," no" inflammatory_
frenzied demagogue" like Stephens, have only ended in preparing the
people, on the testimony of Johnson Gedge, Esq., their trusty and well.
beloved " Editor," to credit anything, however" absurd," said to emanate
from or to be done by these dispensers of Christian charity to a Christian
people. So imperative was the call upon them for an instant " denial,"
that Mr. Gedge could not wait another post to communicate first with.
me, ant) so conscious was he of the untruth of what he had stated, that he
prepared his readers for my denial, but not until he had made all tbe use
he wanted of the "Copy of Correspondence."
Were I compelled to choose between the moral responsibility of the
plans carried into effect by tt e 9 rules, orders, and regulations" of these
" Commissioners" or the simpler, milder, and more impartial plans pro-
posed by Marcus, I should unhesitatingly prefer the latter, If the poor
have a right to life, and to liberty—if they have a right to the domestic
joys of virtuous and faithful wedlock, and if there be no other limit to
their "populousness" save the blessed will of that kind Providence
who has made all of one blood, and fixed the bounds of our habitation
that we might worship and adore Him by loving one another—then is
the " New Poor Act" an awful blasphemy against. God—a cannibal in.
vasion of the defenceless hearths and homes of our weaker brethren ;
and. as such, a measure of pure tyranny, to be resisted by all good men,
and for the murderous effect which it must inevitably produce the Com-
missioners, and all others its eiders and abettors, are alone responsible.
But if, on the other hand, there be too many mouths and too little
food, if "population press against the means of subsistence" to an
extent rendering it necessary to invent " tests," to adopt " checks,"
and to " carry out stringent measures"—if " being horn," give
no valid title to the subsistence, and " being poor" subject us
at once to classifying and separating rules and regulations—then is the
plan recommended by Marcus mercy itself compared with the piece.
meal, inch-by-inch inflictions of bodily and mental torture upon the
poor, who have been suffered to survive the period at which a milder
Deity than Chadwick would interpose between them and misery, and
end at once their unhappy existence and their suffering by a scientifically
conducted process of " painless extinction."

I rejoice, Sir, that this filthiest and beastliest of all the Malthusian
projects is now dragged before the people of England. The necessity
fur " limiting populousness" is the acknowledged groundwork of the
New Poor-law. This pamphlet breathes its spirit, and proposes an-
other diabolical measure. If we are to have it, let us have it at once,
and in the best and mild.•st way. But the question is now fairly mooted.
The Commissioners know this, and feel their throne totter beneath
them. They believe their power is well nigh ended, and they tremble.
The denial given by Mr. Chadwick as to Mr. Nicholls, Mr. Lewis,
Mr. Lefevre, not being the author of the " book," is too palpable a
put-off to deceive a child. There are other Commissioners, a score
or two, besides these three; and then there is Mr. Chadwick him-
self, and his patron, Lord Brougham, and his bosom friend, Mr.
Francis Place, and their " female assistant" Miss Martineau. The
public are beginning to say there must be something in it, or why
so very solemn and reiterated a denial from gentlemen by courtesy and
despots by usurpation ? Why tell us what they had each written
and what they had not written, and what it all was not about ?
Why fasten the "statement" at once upon Mr. Stephens, espe-
cially as he is now situated, without even writing to him to know
whether he had charged them with the authorship or not, and a
great deal more to the same purpose.
. . .

Ido not make my "statements" in that way. Woe be to me if I
did. But what I have said is enough. The "Bloody Book" is now
opened, and "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth"
will satisfy the people of England. Let the Press do its duty—let the
Pulpit sound the alarm—let the platform arouse a betrayed and out-
raged nation—and we shall .yet have the history of the conspiracy
against our mothers, our sisters, and our daughters brought to light.
Marcus' "Book" is only a part of the plot. There are many in " high
places" who can, and must reveal a little more than is generally known.
I can refresh the memory of some of them, and then you, Sir, will have a
further" copy of correrpondence," that will unravel the whole mystery of
the New Poor-law, and for ever put an end to the long-projected and too
far already accomplished purposes of wicked men against the poor
of England and the God who made all that is and declared to be
very good.

ihad written thus far, when a circular letter, signed by Mr. A. Power,
Assistant Poor-law Commissioner, on the subject now under considera-
tion, was put into my hands. In this letter Mr. Power takes upon him-
self to pronounce this " statement" to be " false." How Mr. Powcr
could possibly know anything at all tout it in the present stage of this
extraordinary correspondenee, will perhaps astonish thOse who are not
privy to the ways and means by which a matter of this kind is made to
answer the end the " Commissioners': evidently have in view. It is
a
amusing to mark the gradations in this scale of slander, as it descmds
"reported" to
only
sworn denial of
pfrhoemea is themeehtanv,gpedoliswtituhth, making a statement but at Preston, e. provinces. At . - le rs:t-house, Mr. Ste-
lthihat
etvl
have
t nearerhmtaedee
C this
af
samekci
m Commissioners, l da,ws
owl, Mr. Stephens
disclosure.
enthe
Th
remarks of the press

already made upon it, obliges Mr. Power, as an " Assistant Com-
missioner," to be still more valiant than they. Will you believe
it, Sir ? Mr. Power is constrained to say, " Allow me also to express
my conviction, and Upon this fact I willingly stake the retention of the
office which I hold, that none of my colleagues, the Assistant Com-
missioners, have taken any part in suggesting or recommending the
dreadful practices which Mr. Stephens states are about to be adopted far
the perpose of checking the population of the country." Misgiving,
consternation, and dismay have seized the whole band. Let us go on
a while longer, and we shall know it all. It ought not to be overlooked
In this " untoward event," that the public purse, and the whole power
esf the Ministerial Poor.law press, are not spared in the fell attempt to
accomplish my destruction. lam poor—l stand almost alone; but the
truth in my hands is more and mightier than all my enemies combined.
God will speed the right.
Before I conclude this letter, it is needful in justice to myself and to
the Poor.law Commissioners, that I call the attention of the people of
England to this one fact. I, a minister of religion—a poor man--have
been arraigned by them (official functionaries of the state), whilst a pro.
secution is hanging over me at their instance, with the public purse at
their command. I have been charged with uttering words I have never
spoken ; but never mind, truth is strong even in the hands of poverty,
o'id I am prepared to prove that falsehood is weak though defended by
the public purse, backed by metropolitan police, infantry, cavalry, artil.
lacy, and rocket brigade, and flanked by such " editors" as he of the
Bury Post. The Poor.law Commissioners have dared me to a corres.
Pondence. They know that I am held to bail in an amount which
at once repeals our beasted Magna Chat-Ea. But, as 1 said above,
never mind, Sir; even before my trial, With the unconstituticnal
bail hanging over my head, I know that I am a match for tnem.
Foro not say--I never did say—l never gave them so much credit
i. courage as to suppose, that they were bold enough to pub.
sh the " book" of Marcus; but Ido say this—and as they have
entered into a public controversy on this point—l am prepared
t.) meet them. They have given me the challenge; I hereby accept it.
If they do not approve of the system of Marcus to reduce the popu.
lation of England, then, in the face of all the wives, and mothers, and
sheers of England, I hereby declare them to be more unmerciful than
Marcus himself. When they have rejoined, lam ready with my argu.
ments and proofs. Let me not be misunderstood. These men affect
to be "astonished" at Marcus, fur projecting the destruction of all
children above three in a family, and say, that such a project is "utterly
abhorrent to their feelings." Now. Sir, lam prepared to prove, that
the very principles on which they have accepted their commission, and
receive their salaries, require that they should approve of the plans of
Marcus. When they pretend to be " ignorant" of such a publication,
they suppose the public to believe that they are ignorant of the acts of
their own friends, and are unacquainted with the nature rf their own
duties. They have defied me. They have challenged me. I accept
their challenge; asd upon this fact I willingly stake the verdict of the
Jury which will hereafter have to try me

I remain, Sir, your obliged and obedient servant,
JOSEPH RAYNER STEPHENS.
Dukinfie!d, Ashton-under-Lyne, Jan. 11.

MR. STEPHENS'S SERMON AT

ASHTON.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

Gentlemen,—As the London Times of Tuesday last contains a long
article from the pen cf Mr. Stephens, part of which is in Ihe way of
stricture and complaint on the incorrectness of the report of his sermon
delivered at Ashton on Sunday evening, the 30th of December last, and
which report appeared is your Paper of the sth of January, permit,
therefore, a short explanation on one or two points, to which Mr. Ste_

phens's communication particularly directs the public attention The
Rev. Gentleman then says, "the vague generality of the report of the
above, will be at once apparent, even to the writer himself, when I
inform you that sixteen lines of a hymn, and printed in full, as having
been given out by me and sung by the assemblage, not one word of
which was either said er sung on that occasion' unless by the Reporter
himself." He goes on to say, " I might mention several other instances
of gross inaccuracy, hut this is sufficient to show into what hands it has
been my lot to fall," &c. Now with regard to the hymn, I have merely
to say in explanation, that the first hymn was given out by a Mr. John-
son, of Hooley hill (so at least I was told) at the chapel„ but at which
place Mr. Stephens did not make his appearance at all on that evening ;
for as the Rev. Gent. stated before he commenced his sermon," in coming
down Stamford-street I was met by many, who informed me that the
chapel would not hold thepeople, and that I was to preach in the Market-
place," &c, From this it will appear that the hymn might have been
sung, and that Mr. Stephens also might not have heard it; further, as
it was fully half-past six before Mr. Stephens appeared even in the Mar-
ket-place, I began to fancy that the proposed adjournment might be a
ruse to empty the chapel of part of the congregation, and that when this
was effected that the doors would be closed and service still conducted
there; and with this impression, after waiting fifteen or twenty minutes
in the Mat ket.place, I leisurely paced my way back to the chapel, and
whilst so doing service, it would seem, was begun in the Market. place,
and as I understood with the hymn as given. From this explan
tion, I trust, it will appear ihat the " gross inaccuracy" on which
' Mr. Stephens seems mainly to rely, may in some 'measure be ac-
counted for, As to the next assertion of Mr. Stephens, that he
never asserted' that the book was the production of a Poor-law
Commissioner, I hardly know what to do with it, except by
stating that he did make the assertion, and thus leave it
with the public. In the way of conclusion allow me to say
that I entertain no hostile feeling to Mr. Stephens (what my ideas are
of his occasional language is another ma'ter), being as touch opposed to
some of the clauses of the New PooiLlaw Bill as is Mr. Stephens himself.
I hate the bastardy clauses—l detest the separation clauses—l have no
s:•mpathy for the men who can and do ruthlessly, and unnecessarily, I
think, separate infants from mothers —my object in making the coremu-
nicationwas this, and this alone, that if the Poor-law Commissioners
had had no part.cipation in writing or circulating such abomina-
tions, that they ought forthwith to contradict the statement; and as this
has been done I am satisfied. I should feel more than happy if, by as-
sisting Mr. Stephens, our united exertions should be rewarded by the
discovery of the real author.
NO ADMIRER OF THE NEW POOR-LAW.
P.S.—As it was impossible to take notes of the sermon In the dark,
it must be evident, that to have attempted more than to state the gist of
his remarks would have been folly, and Mr. S. appears to the writer,
rather unreasonable to expect it ; but that there is any substantial in.
justice done to Mr. S. in the report I positively deny.
[The communication from Mr. Stephens, and which appeared in the
Times of Tuesday, calls for a little explanation, which is herewith af-
forded. If any other "gross inaccuracy," as Mr. S says the report
:hounds with, be pointed out, I have no doubt but that I shall be able
to explain as satisfactorily as in the present instance.—THE REPORTER.]