The Sun.
London, England, 1837-06-03 00:00:00

vneral principle of
to a proposition for affording 2._
to remain at their homes. It had been .

try and proved a failure. Even the mere sustel....
with idleness ‘vas.preferred to labour by persons who we.-
able but unwilling to work.
Mr. HAMILTON hoped the Hon. Member for Knares-
borough would not press his amendment.
The amendment was then negatived without a division.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD had a proviso to pro-
pose at the end of the clause—namely, that it should not
he lawful for Commissioners to build or enlarge a work-
liousft or. workhouses in any Union, or to purchase or hire
any land, without the approval of the Board of guardians,
and that no workhouses should be built unless it appeared
io the Board of guardians that such houses were necessary
to afford proper relief..
After a few words from Lord MO RPETII, which did
not reach us, the amendment was negatived, without a di-

vision.
. On the 35th clause being proposed,
Mr. LUCAS wished to know from the Noble Lord what
was to be understood by the following passage :—" And
the guardians of any union are hereby authorised and re-
quired to assess, raise, and levy such sum or sums of money
for the purposes hereinbefore specified as the Commissioners
shall from time to time direct as a poor-rate, in the manner
iiereinbefore provided?"
Lord MOR PETH said that, as far as the building was
concerned, the clause made it compulsory on the guardians
to raise the money.
The clause was agreed to, as were also the other clauses,
up to 40.
On the 41st clause being proposed, empowering the Com-
s4mers to re-sell workhouses on lend which might have
been piofthaacd,
Mr. LEN N AEI) said that the Commissioners might
purchase twelve acres of land in the middle of an estate,
which, if they were disposed to re-sell, they ought, having
fixed the lowest price, to give the preference to the person
from whom they had purchased.
Yr. VESEY concurred in that opinion.
Claus agreed to.
On clause 4:2 tieing proposed,
Mr. S. O'BRIEN :_noved, as an amendment, that out-
door relief should be afforciCd with the consent of the guar-

dians.
After some conversation on the wording of the clause,
Lord MORPETH could not agree to the amendment,
as it was contrary to the object of the Bill.
After a few words from Major Beauclerk, Mr. Finch,
Mr. P. Scrope, Mr. Wyse, and Mr. O'Connell, the amend-
ment was withdrawn.
Mr. W. S. O'BRIEN moved, as an addition to the
clause, that guardians should have a power of giving out-
door relief until workhouses were erected, or in cases of
emergency.
Mr. LYNCH was opposed to out-door relief.
Mr. WARD coincided with the Hon. Member in re-
gard to the evils of out-door relief in England ; but he did
not believe that Ireland was in such a state as to be affected
by it at present. While destitution was only accidental in
England, there it was certain and periodical. If the sum
total of the return of destitution made by the Irish Poor
Law Commissioners were reduced to one-fourth of what
they stated it—namely, eighty thousand persons—would
the workhouse system be sufficient to relieve it ? It was
perfectly impossible.
Lord CLEMENTS thought it would be necessary
hereafter to come to out-door relief ; but he thought it
wise to limit relief, in the first instance, to the workhouse.
Mr. WYSE objected to out-door relief altogether at the
present in Ireland, and he should vote against the amend-
ment of his Hon. Friend.
Major BEAUCLERK supported the amendment.
Mr. HUME hoped the Hon. and Gallant Member would
carry out the evidence on which he sustained his statement,
because he (Mr. Hume) was snre. if he did, it would show
that all the evils of pauperism in England arose from out-
door relief.
Mr. FINCH considered any system of Poor-laws as most
inhuman which did not extend to out-door relief.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD would support the amendment
of the Hon. Member for Limerick, because if the Bill were
to pass in its present state it would be the worst measure
that ever passed for Ireland.
Mr. P. SCROPE was favourable to out-door relief in
Ireland, because he was sure the infirm, the aged, the lu-
natic, and the infant parts of the population of that country
would be sufficiently numerous to fill the poorhouses, so that
out-door relief would become necessary.
After a few words from Mr. W. ROCHE, which were
inaudible,
Mr. WAKLEY would support the amendment, although
he did not think it went far enough.
Mr. SHELL for the present did not think that in-door
and out-door relief ought to be given, but that one mode of
relief only should be extended.
Lord J. RUSSELL said it should not be forgotten that
the law now proposed was altogether new in Ireland, and he
could not but think that the Board of Guardians would
never be able to exercise a sound discretion if out-door re-
lief were to be established under the present Bill. He
could not think that establishing the absolute right to relief
would tend to the peace or welfare of Ireland. If a poor
person could get work to support his family lie would not go
into the workhouse. Whereas if he could not get work he
would have the advantage of good clothing and food
within the poorhouse..
Mr. O'CONNELL must therefore vote in favour of the
amendment. He had heard no reason for adopting the
poorhouse system in Ireland, although it might be neces-
sary in England. No Irish Member had been consulted on
this Bill. Without this amendment the measure would
produce irritation in place of conciliating. Would it be
conciliatory to imprison the poor in workhouses ? If there'
was to be no out-door relief six hundred workhouses would
be necessary. One million was now expended in voluntary
charity. The whole of this would be withdrawn the mo-
ment the Bill passed.
After a fiw words from Mr. RICHARDS and Mr.
HAMILTON the Committee divided :--

Ayes
Noes ...
Majority against the amendment —BB
On the return of strangers,
Mr. HINDLEY was on his legs, proposing a proviso in
the clause which went to. give out-door relief to the aged
and important poor (as we understood.)
Lord MORPETH said no out-door relief was contem-
plated by this Bill.
Mr. WARD recommended that the amendment should
not be pressed, as the Committee bed, in effect, just now
decided upon it.
' Mr. HINDLEY was determined to press his mien&
ment, that the public might see who were the fri,nds
the poor.
After a few words from Mr. LUCAS, Mr. O'CONNELL,
and Sir R. INGLis, the gallery was cleared for a division,
but none took place, and the clause as amended was or-
dered to stand part of the Bill.
The Chairman then reported progress, and asked- leave
to sit again.
REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND
MARRIAGES.
The House then went into Committee on the Registra-
tion of Births and Marriages' Amendment Act.
Clauses 1 to 14 were agreed to.
On the 15th clause having been proposed.
Mr. G. PALME It objected to the clause, on the
ground that sufficient publicity was not provided by it to
guard against contracting clandestine marriages.
After a discussion, in which Mr. Goulburn, the Solicitor-
General,
Mr. G. T. Young, Mr. Pease, Mr. Borthwick,
and some other Hen. Members took part,
--
Mr. G. PALMER declined to press his objection, and_
the clause was agreed to, as were the three successive

clauses.
Mr. NICHOLLS proposed, that as important amend-
ments to the other clauses were intended to be moved, the
Chairman should report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
Lord J. RUSSELL acquiesced, and the House resumed,
the Chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit
again on Monday.
The Secular Jurisdiction (York) Bill went through a
Committee, and was ordered to be printed.
The East India Officers Bill was read a third time, and
passed.
Colonel SEAL, after a brief discussion, obtained leave
to bring in a Bill to enable the Recorders of boroughs to
hold Courts of Requests for the recovery of small debts
amounting to five pounds.
KENT AND SUSSEX MILITARY CANAL.
Sir A. LEITH HAY obtained leave to bring in a Bill
to place the management of the military canal in Kent and
Sussex under the principal officers of his Majesty's Ordnance.
REGISTER OF ELECTORS.
111 r. ELPHINSTONE brought in a Bill to render tl.e
register of electors final, and to amend certain provisions in
the Reform Act, which was read a first time.
The other Orders were then disposed of, and the House
adjourned at a Quarter to Two o'Clock.

Thursday morning, between eight and nine o'clock,
the following accident occurred in the one-arch pond adjoining
the Serpentine river, which in a few minutes would have
proved of fatal consequence to a little girl nine years of age,
nareed Emma Payne, had it not been for the prompt and in-
trepid conduct of a poor man named Morgan, deaf and dumb,
a pauper belonging to Lambeth parish. At the imminent risk
of his life he plunged into the water, which is deep and parti-
cularly muddy, and by great exertions succeeded in rescuing
the tnic:7!!'nate child, who had accidentally fallen into the
water. With the :"41stanee of another man he tben ponvayed
her, apparently lifeless, to it.: recelvinkhouse of the Royal
Humane Society, where she was instantly
.placed in g hot
bath. The other usual means to resore pmmation were em-
ployed, and happily with success,

TB,

•
measure, He t'irbyle, not consent COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.
--lief, and itlkw the paupers I
4ried in this mAn-
^nee of life

Yesterday a Court w;s held for the despatch of a great
!lead of husincss. It wi.s attended by
.an unusual number
of Members.

ADDRLSES TO Till IR ROYAL HIGHNESSES THE DU..
^l' KENT AND THE PRINCESS VICTORIA.
CHESS - (1
./DUtt having read the answers of
'•
The Cletk of the
sses voted by the Court,
• •
their Royal Highnesses to the ...4':•re
m
Sir P. LAURIE regretted .to be e‘!.peled to stand forth
to complain of a flagrant violation pf the privileges of the
Corporation by one of its Members, who, when they went
to Kensington Palace with the Addresses, took occasion to
introduce a sealed letter to their Royal Highnesses, of
whi.l the Court bad no cognizance. What made the cir-
cumstance more deserving of consideration was, that the
person who had thus trespassed was the mover of the Ad-
dress, and that the act immediately followed that which
they had expressly gone up to perform. He had witnessed
the occurrenze with his own eyes. lie would ask the Lord
Mayor and the Recorder whether they had not cautioned
Mr. Edmund Wilson, who was the
Priftekiliti} ihicied tot
not to present the letter.
The LORD MAYOR said that before the Corporation
ii
were introduced to the presence of their Royal Highnesses,
it was rumoured that a letter was to be presented to the
Duchess of Kent. Upon hearing the report he intimated
to Mr. Wilson that he considered it would be improper in
presenting the addresses to present anything else, and Mr.
Wilson having been informed that the letter might be
handed to Sir John Conroy, did accordingly put it into
S:r John Conroy's hands immediately after he had himself
been presented to the pu,hcsg of Kent, Its the mover of
the addresses.

The RECORDER said that as far as he recollected, he
stated to Mr. Wilson that the Corporation would be com-
promised by the act contemplated by that gentleman, and
that if the letter were pregented at all, it should not form
a part of the proceedings of the Corporation,

. .
Sir PETER LAURIE glen moved a vote of censure upon
Mr. Edmund Wilson.

Alderman WINCHESTER seconded the motion.

Mr. BEDFORD never heard of anything so flagrait, ar.d
wished that the Court would express itself strongly on the
subject.
Alderman WOOD had upon many occasions w:tnered
the presentation of books and letters to the Lord in W.iit-
ing, by individual members, when the Corporatioa and other
pulic bodies had presented addresses, and he did not ste
unything improper in the proceeding.
Mr. SAVAGE briefly supported, and Mr. JOHNSON opposed
Sir Peter Laurie's motion.

- -
After a few words from Mr. Stevens, Mr. Fletcher, and
Mr. Jupp,
Mr. ANDERTON trusted that the Worthy Alderman
weli'd withdraw his motion, in order that another might be
substituted, which would express the opinion of the Court
of the impropriety of any Member attending with an ad-
dress to any branch of the Royal Family taking occasion
to present any book, letter, or other document, to those
Royal Personages themselves, or to any of their officers,
and the expression of that opinion of the Court might be
made in terms which would have the effect of an order
upon all futon) occasions, without conveyinc, any reflection
upon the Hon. Gentleman for what had. passed. Mr.
Anderton then read a resolution to that purport ; and Sir
Peter Laurie and the seconder of the original motion agreed
to withdraw it, for the purpose of substituting Mr. An.
derton's, _ _

Mr. WILSON declared that he would not consent to the
withdrawal of the original motion.
Sir PETER LAURIE—Then I shall not withdraw my
motion.
Mr. STACEY said that it was for the Court to decide the
question whether or not the motion should be withdrawn.
After a long discussion, in which several members joined,
the motion of Sir Peter Laurie was withdrawn.
Under-Sheriff WIRE considered both the original and
the substituted motion as uncalled for by the occasion, and
most unjust to Mr. Wilson. Upon the very last occasion
that the Court went up with an address to the Duke of
Sussex, at Kensington Palace, one of the most respectable
members of the Corporation, in his official costume, for-
mally presented his Royal Highness with a book published
by himself--(Hear)—and the Duke was pleased, with his
own bands, most graciously to receive it, and no person
had thought it necessary to comment upon the circum-
stance ; but if the present Resolutions were adopted, it
would involve that Hon. Member in the same censure.
Mr. R. L. JONES was of opinion that Sir Peter Laurie's
motion was too personal, and embraced topics which it
was unnecessary to introduce. He, however, thought that
the notice before the Court, as proposed by Mr. Anderton,
ought to receive their support.—( Hear, hear.)
The discussion was continued at great length, in which
Mr. Lawrence, Mr. Pritchard, and Mr. Norris took part,
opposing Mr. Anderton's motion ; and Mr. Williams, Mr.
Stacey, and other members supported it, and upon a di-
vision it was carried by a majority of 14, the numbers being
for the motion 56, against it, 42. The Court adjourned,
completely tired out with the affair.