The Sun.
London, England, 1837-02-28 00:00:00

enormous expenditure lessened ? His opinion was, that if
Hon. Gentlemen had attended the meetings at which petitions
werellget up, and had given themselves the tr.:AAA:I or ascer-
taining how this Bill had worked, they wonid have changed
their minds. In every single instance which had arose under
his observation, when a full inquiry was made, persons for-
merly against the Bill expressed themselves in favour of it,
and admitted they had no idea that it would work so well as
it had done. With respect to the union in which he resided,
no Bill could possibly work better. It had been maintained
that the medical attendance was in general insufficient. God
forbid that the poor when in illness
sould not have all the aid
necessary. He could only say that in that union in which he
lived, the poor, even in the most remote villages, were suf.
ciently attended. One of the provisions was, that no man in
health, however distressed in circumstances, should receive
relief except he went into the workhouse. That was a rule
which might occasionally be relaxed with advantage.
Colonel SII3TH ORP observed that the Hon. Member for
Cirencester contended that the operation of the Act had been
generally- beneficial to the poor. How was it, then, that the
poor so strongly objected to it ? It was not usual for a man
to quarrel with his bread and butter. If even in such an
union as that over which the Hon. Member for Cirencester
presided, it had been found necessary to aid the working of
the new system by voluntary contributions, and a relaxation of
some of the provisions of the Act, what must be the case in
unions not under such able superintendence ? The very
name of a Commissioner was discordant to his ears ; and
when he saw that the Commissioners appointed to carry the
act into execution cost the country 38,0001. or 39,0001. a-year,
he had a right to ask if it was not possible to do without
them ; and he, therefore, preferred the motion of the
Honourable Member for Berkshire to the amendment of
the Noble Lord, as the former would afford the means of a
fuller investigation of the subject. There seemed a disposi-
tion to shrink from inquiry: But if the principle of the Bill
were so good as it was maintained by its advocates to be, why
not go into an inquiry which would establish its excellence ?
The opposition to the inquiry proved that the measure was not
quite so good as it should be. Since this question had been
mooted he had made it his business to obtain much information
iii connection with it, and he had visited various places in
Search of information. In one county he had found the case
of an aged man, against whose conduct there existed no im-
putation whatever. This man was eighty-four years of age,
and he was receiving a weekly allowance—this man (observed
the Gallant Officer) " at the close of his life was receiving
is. 6d. per week, and two loaves weighing two pounds."
He found another in the same parish, aged 78 years, re-
ceiving the same weekly stipend. Another aged man, with
his wife, was receiving 3s. per week and four loaves.
Another man, aged 77, 2s. and four loaves. The Honour-
able and Gallant Officer proceeded (as we understood)
to argue that if the poor-rates were much reduced from the
amount which they had formerly been, the landlords would
raise their rents in a proportionate manner, because hitherto
the complaint had been that the occupiers paid perhaps 10s.
in the pound poor-rates. He should support the motion of his
Hon. Friend the Member for Berkshire.
Mr. ALSTON found the general results of that Act as ap-
plied to Hertfordshire decidedly opposed to the statements
made by the Hon. Member for Berks. He was confident that
in Hertfordshire the present law had proved to the poor the
source, and the only source, of the greatest possible improve-
talent that had ever fallen to the lot of the lower classes. In
the county of Hertford (he quoted that county particularly,
because if he was not greatly mistaken it was as dense in
point of acreage as any other countv)—in the county of
Hertford the results of the unions 'of parishes, &c., were
as follow :—ln the union of the town of Hertford, where
the usual average annual amount of expenditure, previous
to the new Poor-law Act coming into operation, was
(as we understood) 8,2021. That amount was now re-
uced to 3,054/. ss. 4 d. ; and he had the autho-
rity of a letter of Sir C. Smith (for he was sure that gentle-
man would not object to his name being mentioned) to
allow that whereas formerly no person could approach Hert-
ford without seeing a number of wandering, idle, unfed per-
sons, it was now scarcely possible to find any such persons.
He had been an active Magistrate in this county for some
Eve-and-twenty or thirty years ; and since this law had come
into operation not a single complaint had been made to him
from any pauper. Then, as to the union of Bishop Stort-
ford, which comprehended twenty parishes, he had a letter
from the Vice-Chairman of that union, in which he informed
him that the able-bodied paupers had completely disappeared,
as if by magic. There were now only seven men from the
twenty parishes comprehended in the union receiving relief
out of the house. In this parish of Stortford there had
been, on an average, fifty or sixty in the workhouse or re-
ceivingrelief ; that number, under the new system, was re-
duced to three. In the union of Watford, which included
seven parishes, an immense reduction of expenditure had also
taken place ; and no complaint whatever had been made. In
Royston, which was a very large union, the public could not
find labour sufficient to meet the demand. This Bill which
he had watched with the greatest possible attention, had
Worked well from its commencement ; no complaint haci been
made in Royston—no dissatisfaction was evinced—and the
rates bad been reduced more than one-third. The Honour-
able Gentleman, having expressed his conviction of the bene-
ficial results which had attended the operation of this Act,
bore the most flattering testimony to the unremitting exer-
tions of the Poor Law Commissioners.
Mr. ROBINSON had always held that his Majesty's
Ministers were entitled to the thanks of this country for grap-
pling with this important question. He admitted that there
ad been a great saving in the poor-rate, and a considerable
improvement in the condition of the labouring population
(Hear)—but it remained to be proved that all these happy re-
sults were fairly attributable to the operation of the new law.
Hear.) Whilst he admitted that there had been a consider-
able saving in the poor-rates since that measure passed into a
law, he totally denied that the whole reduction of 2,400,000/.
Was to be attributed to its operation ; because, as he could show
from papers he held in his hand, there had continued to be a
considerable diminution in the amount of poor-rates ever since
1818. He believed the truth to be between the two extremes
Pointed out on the one hand by the Hon. Member for Berk-
Shire, and by the Noble Lord the Home Secretary on the
Other, Much of the good it had wrought ought, in his opinion,
to be attributed to the peculiar prosperity of the times in which
it was brought into operation. Whenever a change took place,
4" difficult times ensued, he feared, if carried out to its utmost
rigour, it would be found to operate with great hardship on the
tool*---( Hear.) As regarded the question immediately before
House, he could not help viewing it as a misfortune that
the Noble Lord should have moved an amendment to a motion
which he declared did not substantially differ from that which
vrished to see carried. He feared that the effect of the
Noble Lord's amendment would be to fetter the inquiry, and
to prevent a full and fair inquiry into every part of the subject.
*---( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord said, " you may have an
Belt but I will not allow you to touch the principle of the
• ,
Why, if half the statements made that night and on
the former evening when the same subject was under discus-
lion were true, there would, ho apprehended, be no possibility
"inducing the Committee to touch the principle of the Bill.
--(t-leer.) He objected to much of the workhouse discipline,
t4",te many of the provisions of the Bill, especially to the has-
aruy clause, which he could never regard without feelings of
~orror and disgust.—(Heax.) He trusted that the Hon.
fletnber for Berkshire and the Noble Lord the Home Secre-
tary
would find some common terms for a resolution in which
t-eY could mutually agree, rather than allow the House to go
° a division on a question on which it was stated there was no
substantial difference of opinion. Unless some arrangement
Hhe kind were made he should feel bound to vote with the
on. Member for Berkshire.—( Hear.)
t Mr. EDWARD BULLER quoted a number of instances
o show the beneficial op eration of the Bill. At Stoke-upon-
Trent the system had not been introduced untilit was found
to be impracticable to go on upon the old system, in cense-
litterice of the disputes continually arising amongst the parish
Officers, the vestry,-
Minand the rate-payers. The disputes deter-
ed the parish to apply to the Poor-law Commissioners to
intercede wish the then authority, and the affairs of the parish
proceeded with advantage to all parties. The Honourable and
Learned Member for Southwark had said that although it
might be true the Commissioners bad saved two millions of
money in the expeediture of the Poor-rates, yet it had been
wrung from the patriarch, the matron, and the infirm. They
had forced them to surrender 25 per cent. of their pittance.
Was the Hon. and Learned Member for Southwark so utterly
unacquainted with the transactions in the towns and cities ?
Had he passed the whole of his days in some peaceful valley,
or in some Arcadian shade, that he knew nothing of the job-
bing of parish officers ?—that he knew nothing of the for-
tunes. that sere realised by the distribution of the parochial
runes e •
thesle_ .—( Hear.) Had lie known nothing of men once filling
e offices haying been put in nomination to be sheriffs of
pe chief city of the empire ?—( Hear, hear. )—lt was because
tho Commissioners had put an end to these jobbines that a
great portion of the opposition to the new law had arisen.
Before the Bill was brought into operation, the greater part
;7the labourers throughout the southern counties were
liers. In twelve parishes in East Kent the able-bodied
vyers, before the operation of the Bill, were no less than
e7ro--the number was now reduced to five.—( Hear, hear,
7e4 ;) In Sussex, before the Bill, 6,100 able-bodied paupers
v:wed parish relief; the number was now reduced to 124.
tv,,±Lar, hear, hear.) The question issue simply was this—
the three Commissioners atSomersethouse, and the
Boards Commissioners throughout England, had the
g%t, as of Guardians in the different unions combined to-
ee to üblish in their reports a collection of falsehoods
be.—falsehoods so gross and palpable, that they must have
e° Immediately detected ; or had they given to the House
tit 11
lqei country a statement of facts—had they, in short, told
the,,l try
a ?—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")-11 they had,
to
the
if ever there was a measure fraught with advantage
country—if ever there was a measure which was
eialeulatecl to raise the condition of the labouring popula-
eoumne—if ever therb was a measure adapted to increase their
Ara tort', or improve their character, it was the Bill for the
N7ndment of the Poor-laws.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.)
away BE AUCLERK said, while he was anxious to do
to dy with the abuses of the old law, he was equally anxious
ts_St,op short of that part of the amended law which violated
il'ieptTst feelingg of humanity. The principle of the amended
tlo.,'„,hon Conceived to be to give assistance to those who were
oloilaul to work, and to those who, being able, had not the
thmeans of reciting it. But if in giving ast.i-tanee they forced
criTl iiltoor into theb workhouses, they did neither more nor less,
what they Would would, than force them into prison-houses. Ile
Principle tr.s.to the Committee, then, to carry out the salutary
raeatris of., giving assistance to the poor, nitliout rendering it
essential° °PPression. . A full and fair inquiry was absolutely
Sir STRATFORD CANNING thought this was not the
proper time for dismissing the merits of the new Poor-law.
en. the one
resulted fromthee it was evident that a vast deal of good had
ration; but 0 new law during the time it had been in ope-
n the other side it seemed to be apprehended that