The Sun.
London, England, 1839-08-08 00:00:00

fll4lna • ting their opponents. The Right Hon. Baronet ! Mr. WAKLE Y said the Bill presented a fine specimen
•M=ber for Tam worth had presented a petition from of Whig subtlety and Liberalism. It was the most subtle
fthis clique, which was not composed either of workingmen proposition that was ever thrown out to catch the House.
merchants, or manufacturers, but was a little exclusive set The Magitrates were to hear mid determine all cases upon,
—a Birmingham aristocracy, a sort of a political Almack's, their merits. Now, who were the Magistrates? Why,
who, however they might be beaten, would never acknow. the ex-officio guardians. So that it was the guardians
ledge they were in the wrong. Himself and his Hon. appealing to the guardians, the guardians deciding the
Colleague had contested their seats in opposition to this case, and the
issuing a distress warrant in their
clique, and notwithstanding they were returned by a large own case.
majority, still these persons contended that they Mr. TOWNLE Y PARKER defended the conduct of
alone were the town of Birmingham. They peti- the guardians, whom he contended had shown every dispo-
tioned this House on the ground that the town council did sition to carry the new Poor-law into effect with as much
not possess the confidence of the inhabitants of Birming- moderation as possible.
ham. Now what was the fact. The municipal franchise Mr. EWART thought the remedy proposed by
in Birmingham was a 161. franchise, and with this fran- the Noble Lord with regard to the first clause
chise the Tories had been defeated in every ward, even in met the difficulty, but wi re gar dto e
Ithe favourite ward in which the members of this aristocracy clause, which stated that thatth should be law ?which second
which the
resided. He believed whether as regarded their political Court of Queen's Bench had declared to be contrary
to
ior their moral character, there was no body of men more law, he considered so objectionable that he should n
i fit to have the superintendence of the police than the Committee move that clause be expunged. He should
I' Town Council of Birmingham. A deputation of these not oppose the House going into Committee.
Tories had waited on the Noble Lord just at the time that Mr. T. DUNCONIBE hoped the Noble Lord would
he adopted this sinister advice. The Noble Lord acted consent to the Bill merely going through Committee
upon the suggestions of the strangest advisers—at one pro forma, and let the returns be printed, so that the
minute taking the advice of the Right Hon. Baronet, the House might not legislate in the dark. It was impose
Member for Tamworth—at the next, adopting that of the sible to say that a Bill of this sort would work well when
Birmingham Tories, and sometimes acting upon the sus there was a Local Act and two Boards of Guardians.
gestions of Mr. Feargus O'Connor. If the Noble Lord The object of the Bill was to repeal the Local Act, and
adopted such advice as this he would beg to remind him of he hoped the amendment would be persevered 'with.
the words of the poet.--
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
So falls the land to sure and swift decay, divided, when there appeared—
Where folly guides, and madness points the way." The people of Birmingham had determined to oppose this
Bill by every means in their power, and if the introduction
For going into Committee
Against it...
Majority...... 5l
16
—35
of this police were persisted in, it would occasion an ex. The House thenwentinto-omimittee.
fleoshion odf
discussion,
in clause , with an amendment,
twhhicNhobnio
Lonerdcouldldcalet•ulateetheenagnituadineo.
was
agreed to.
i
this Bill ; if he did so he would peril the peace of the
On the second clause being
country, and perhaps ultimately the safety of the Crown proposed,
The A TTO RNEY.GENE R A L wished to make a few
.1 itself. The police would be very well under the manage_ remarks in explanation of the clause. By the 46th section
l meet of the Corporation, but he
could not consent to the of the Poor-law Amendment Act it was enacted, that the
introduction upon the terms proposed by the Bill. He Commissioners might give authority to the guardians to
would, therefore, move that it be read a second time this. elect certain officers, and as the guardians were elected by
day three months,
the rate-payers, these officers were in effect chosen by the
Mr. SCHOLE FIE LD seconded the amendment. He rate-payers, The 109th section (the Interpretation Clause)
, had been earnestly requested by his constituents to oppose amongst other officers mentioned "collectors." Now a
• this Bill. They did not object to the introduction of a collector was a mere tof .In the
police force, but they contended that it should be depend- collection of rates theresery had beenth ae greatoverseers waste of the
ent upon the Town Council, and would strenuously resist its public money. The benefit resulting from the appoint-
introduction in any other manner. It had been determined, meet of these Commissioners was that there might be a
after deliberation in the Town Council to resist this measure collector for a whole union, not appointed by those who
by every means in their power. When this Bill was pro. had any local interest, he having merely a reasonable
posed the other evening, he was so impressed with the compensation. When he collected the money he had to
necessity of having a police force in Birmingham that he pay it to a person who was accountable to the overseers, and
had voted for the introduction of this Bill. He regretted it remained in the hands of that person until n order
this exceedingly, because in so doing, be had forgotten one was given for its payment by
the overseers.a That
of the first principles which ought to actuate every public system had put down jobbing, and the rate had been more
man, to see what any measure would lead to before h e gave faithfully collected. An application was made to the
' it his support. Had he had any idea of the extent to which Court of Queen's Bench to set aside one of the orders
this Bill went, he would not have supported it. He had whereby the guardians had authority to appoint collectors,
authority for stating that at a meeting of the Common and the Court decided that the Commissioners had not the
(Council of the City of London this day, it had been deter- power to make that order. The object of the clause, now
mined to petition the House to leave the management of the under consideration, was to put a construction on the 45th
police force of Birmingham to the Corporation of that section, and to say that the Poor-law Commissioners should
town, and he had no doubt they would meet with the support have the power to authorise guardians to appoint a col_
of the other Corporations.
lector for a whole Union, who should be the servant of the
Sir EA RDLE Y WILMOT did not consider that this overseers and accountable to them. With this explanation
Bill permanently deprived the Corporation of Birmingham he trusted the House would agree to the clause.
of control over the police. But having applied for an Mr. EWART moved the omission of the clause.
, advance of money the lender was certainly entitled to make
I
There was a great difference between an election by a
4 terms. These terms, as he understood them, were body of persons themselves, and a second body interposed
not that the Secretary of State, but that a Commis_ between them and the person elected. The Guar-
sioner 'should be appointed to have the superintend- diens being here interposed between the collector and the
ence of the Birmingham Police, until such time as rate-payers might defeat the objects of their rate-payers.
the question relating to the validity of the Charter This clause was at variance with the spirit of the Poor-law
shall be determined, when the entire control would be Amendment Act, the given of which was that the ad-
to the Corporation of Birmingham--( Hear, hear.) ministration of the law onply should be in the hands of the
He bad never understood that the permanent control was Commissionors, and that taxation should be in the hands
to be vested in the Government.—( Hear, hear, from the of the rate-payers. It was also at variance with the law
Ministerial benches.) Did he imagine such to be the as administered in the highest Law Court of the kingdom.
case he would oppose the Bill, or he would do so if the the Court of Queen's Bench. He trusted the House
Hon. Member would assure the House that the Corpora- would not sanction such an anomaly in legislation.
tion were willing to take upon themselves the management
of the police without applying to the House for auy pe-
cuniary assistance.
I
Mr. HODG S ON HIND E was convinced that the
sense of the country was against the clause.
Mr. G RIM SDITC H said the Poor-law Commissioners
Mr. WA KL E Y thought the course taken by the Go- had assumed the power of fixing salaries, which hal not
vernment placed the Liberal party in a very humiliating been given to them by the Bill. He trusted the Noble
situation. The Noble Lord hed in first bringing forward Lord would withdraw the clause, which would be attended
1 this measure had said that tbe local authorities were to with vexatious consequences throughout the country.
I have the management of thee police, and the Liberal party Mr. WA KL E Y said, according to the doctrine of the
cheered him ; within
ten r:ays he makes an announcement Attorney. General it appeared that the Court of Queen'e
I 1 in direct 4
Government is to have
. tl-e management of the police, and he was anxious to make a new provision to remedy what
I the Liberals in the /ici,..ise again ceered him. No matter had been done by the Court. But would not the Court
what the Noble Lad might propose there was a party in put as wrong a construction on what the House was now
that House
i• alwr
themsel ays ready to cheer him—they might call doing, as on the 46th and 109th clauses of the Poor-law
s Loetrals. but he thought sycophants a more Amendment Act? How any one guided by common sense
lappropriate •.erm. In his opinion the Noble Lord was as could, reading these two sections, have come to any other
honest a '4inister as any this country ever possessed. conclusion than that the Poor-law Commissioners had the
( Hear, ',mar.) He stated his views honestly and candidly, power to do that which they had done, he was utterly at
but he, must have but a mean opinion of pporters', a loss to comprebend.—( Hear, hear.) The Court of
who, had adopted his views at first and then changed them Queen's Bench had said that the word cell
ector
without hesitation, though they had not such reason was not included in the 'Act, though not only the
to change their opinions as the Noble Lord had word collector was there, but •• all other per.
1 had. Hear, hear.) This change placed the Li- sons." Seeing then that the Court of Queen's Bench
beret party in a very humiliating position. The did not know the the law—seeing that the Commissioners
, Reform Bill which the Noble Lord had introduced to the were obliged to come to the House for a remedy, seeing
House had given Birmingham a Parliamentary franchise; that the rate-payers were likely to be robbed of a large
land this town had now two honest independent men in the amount if this provision were not introduced—seeing,
1 House, who had made a majority of two for the Noble moreover, that the Commissioners gained no new power
Lord on a former occasion, and who had supported him by it at all—that it was only as an indemnity for what they
1 i with their votes. But notwithstanding those Gentlemen, had done, although he had always been opposed to the
for themselves and their constituents, protested against new Poor Law Act, he considered he should be acting
ti the Bill, the Noble Lord preferred following the advice dishonestly if he resisted the clause any furtner.—( Hear,
G of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, hear, hear.)
;- and would have the police of Birmingham managed unaer Mr. G. PALMER said it had been stated in a most ex-
Ithe centralizing system. He (Mr. W.) believed the traordinary manner that the Commissioners bad exercised
Noble Lord to be sincere; but thinking the measure a this power of appointing collectors only at the express desire
1 most unfortunate measure, he (Mr. %V.) would oppose it of the parishes ;he had moved for a return of the appoint-
in every stage.—( Question, question.) ments by overseers ; but the Noble Lord had declined
The House then divided, when there appeared-
-7 4 Against it
tit for the ............... . ................. ... 20
Majy second reading... —54 The Bill was then read a second time, producin
For the motion-
g that return—doubtless because it would
-not
suit his pyrpose—(oh)—for if it had suited his purpose
of course he would have produced it. It appeared to him
that the Poor-law Commissioners bad no legal authority
under the Act for assuming this power of appointing collec-
Mr. C. BT-ILLER gave notice, that when the Bill was lectore,and,taking:in fact, the whole managment of the rates
in Committee he should move amendments which should into their hands, by nesting it in the Guardians, not more
leave the appointment' of the Chief Commissioner to the than one of whom, perhaps, out of thirty, belonged to the
Town Council instead of her Majesty, and should prevent parish affected, besides, transferring- the! power from the
the Provisions of the Metropolitan Police Act from extend. pariah officers, deprived the parishioners of the opportu-
nities of seeing that the rates were paid up regularly,
and of appealing against the succeeding rates—for which
Mr. O'CONNELL asked whether the Chancellor of appealing the fact of the last rate not having been collected
the Exchequer intended to proceed with the second read- would be sufficient ground. He considered that the pa_
ing of this Bill to- morrow (this day) ? He hoped the rishes ought to have the control over their own collectors,
Right Hon. Gentleman would postpone that stage of the and that it would be impossible for a man unacquainted
measure, as it would be only by to-morrow (to-day) that with the parish to do his duty so well as an overseer con-
'the public in Dublin would have have received the printed fleeted with the parish and accustomed to the duty. He
Bill,
should certainly vote against the clause.
The CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUE R stated Mr. HUME said his opinion had first been adverse to
his intention to proceed. The parties interested had had the clause; but finding that the Noble Lord did not wish
all the necessary information for three weeks. to alter the law, but to correct a decision of the Court of
Mr. O'CONNELL would then oppose the second Queen's Bench, who had put a different interpre-
reading of the Bill in every mariner the forms of the House tation on the law from what had been intended—he had
would permit.—( Hear, hear.)
changed his opinion, lit certainly was desirable to give the
The Hon. Members, after a little mutual suggestion, requisite powers for carrying on the Bill, and to prevent
agreed that the second reading of the Bill should go on litigation. Since the discussion had begun he found that
to-day, and that the discussion in Committee should take the 46th clause of the Poor-law Act expressly gave the
place on Wednesday.
ower to the Commissioners, ad tht in the pre ta-
POOR-LA W COMMISSION CONTINUANCE ton clause the very word "collectors" occurred.inter TheCme
BILL, missioners ought to have the power of carrying the Act into
The House then went into Committee on this Bill. execution as originally intended; and as the decision of
Mr. T. buncombe was about to propose a clause, the Court of Queen's Bench had led to great difficulties
but several Hon. Gentlemen objected to it, on the ground and litigation he should support the clauses which went to
that the preamble had been already proved, and that the correct the error of the Court, and he hoped that his Hon.
clause tendered b
y the Hon. Member for Finsbury could Friend the Member for Wigan would not divide the Com-
not be proposed.
mittee.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE would
introduce the clause Colonel WOOD said the clause went to give the Com-
h • • of
upon te b ringing up the Report.
missioners the power of appointment in parishes under
The Bill then went through Committee. The Report Local Acts, which was expressly reserved in the 21st
WAS agreed to and ordered to be brought up to-morrow, clause of the Poor-law Act. It was really, therefore,
POOR RATES COLLECTION BILL. Passing an ex post facto law.
On the motion for the House resolving itself into a Mr. HUME—If that is the case, there ought to be an
Committee on the Poor Rates Collection Bill, explanation.—(" It is not," from the Ministerial benches.)
Mr. G. PALMER opposed the motion, considering Lord J. RUSSELL wished to say a word or two on tho
that a measure containing the clauses which the presentßill operation of the practices which had been pursued by the
did, ought not to be allowed to pass. The Bill empowered Commissioners. As to the law he would not say abword,
word,
a seizure to be made on the property of Overseers after the able explanations of his Hon. and Learned
of the rates of the parish were not paid. He Friend the Attorney-General, supported as he had been
considered such a provision most arbitrary and unjust. by the Honourable Member for Finsbury.--( Hear, hear.)
He looked upon the Bill rather as one to indemnify One of the Assistant-Commissioners had stated that the
the Poor-law Commissioners for acts done by them than effect of the regulation in the Wigan Union had been this:
to effect any useful purpose. Under the existing law the —that three relieving officers and four overseers had been
overseer could be brought into the Court of Queen's Bench appointed; by the guardians, at salaries of 700/. ; and that
by mandamus, if the necessary rates were not supplied to they well performed the duties which had previously een
support the poor. In conclusion, the Hon. Member moved performed by thirty-four persons, at salaries amounting to
that the Bill should be taken into further consideration 8121.. so that there was a saving of 1121., exclusive of
that day three months.
travelling expenses; and the rates had been most diligently
Mr. HUME thought the Bill contained great inconsis- collected, and the accounts better kept, each assistant
tencies, and much that was unjust. It gave power to at- overseer paying over every week the money the
tach the property of overseers, and such being the case he guardians when they wanted money giving orders
should like to know from the Noble Lord what relief those signed by the unpaid overseers on the Treasurer to
officers were to have ? He believed that the Bill would do pay the amount, putting it to the credit of the guardians
great injury to the object it purported to have in view, of the respective districts. Nothing, therefore, was taken
K.Lerd JOHN RUSSELL said the Hon. Member for from the overseers, which they had any just title to retain,
ilkenny had mistaken the purport and object of the Bill, while a more. regular collection of the rates was secured.—
it was not intended by it to give greater powers over the (Hear, hear.)
property of the overseers of the poor•than at present ex- Mr. E WART said be did not object to the adminis-
isted ; its chief object was to amend the law, which was at tive facility of the proposed clauses, but on principle
present defective.
objected to the appointment of the collectors being with
The ATTORNEY. GENERAL said at present the the guardians, and objecting, as he did, on the authority
guardians had no other means of enforcing their demands of Lord Althorn. As to the Wigan District, he could
uPott the overseers then by application to the Court of assure the Noble Lord that great dissatisfaction
Queen's Bench for a ?rani tmus. The Overseers make a prevailed on account of this regulation.—( Hear.) He
return to it, and their application has again to be really must confess that the learned arguments
moue to set aside that return, on the ground of of his Hon. Friend the Member for Kilkenny did not in-
ns being against the law. is
That invariablydone
fluence him, counteracted as it was by the decision of the
and then a
which must Court of Queen's Bench.--A laugh.) He had not taken
Peremptory order is made,
be obeyed,
the objection but on mature deliberation,and
saw no rea-
or the overseer -t to gaol. In the parish
mu. go
of St. Andrew, Holborn, n to withdraw it.
had been taken three so
or four times--_
ont. n, that course
Mr. KEMBLE did not consider there was any neces-
rn ha Were spent in litigation, and the . .
poor were starving all the time Both • in sity to interfere with a judicial decision.
parties the mean-time were attempting to saddle the rate- The A TTORNE Y. GENERAL said there was no
payers. Some such enactme t costs upon the.
such intention ; it was admitted that the Court had the
Bill were decidedly ne n s as those contained in the
cessary ; nor wa it harsh, jurisdiction; he bad bowed respectfully to their decision
ing to the proposal of his Noble Fre 5
Committee then divided. The numhe-r-i-iv;
was to be summoned before a manistirend, for the overseer The . .
47
For the clause
cause why he did not pay the monevate. and there show
would hear and determine the case u yhe Magistrate Against it 5
pon its merits. Majority —42
Mr. CR IMSDITCH was astonished to '
Learned Attorney-General say that the guardia hear the Mr. HODGES moved a clause, providing that nothing
other means of enforcing their order th interfere • h the power of ' -
, ns had no in the Act should with
.vestries to
an oy mandamu • d. • as to the custody of parish books, &c.
for by the 95th section of the Poor-law Amendment Act give directions i
they had the power of summoning the overseer before a The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said thehc Ruse was
Magistrate, and punishing hint fora neglect of duty by a fine unnecessary, but he did not object. int it ; tcrewasno
of SL, which if not paid was to be levied upon his good,, intention to interfere with the vestriesany such respect.
He did not object to making the overseer perform his duty, Mr. AGLIONBY doubted if it were quite unne-
but he thought the law at present was stringent enough cesairy.—Clause agreed to.
for that. That Bill would greatly add to the enormous Mr. HUME moved a clause providing that when the
powers already possessed by the Poor. law Commissioners, majority of the guardiansguardians thought proper their meetings
which were already viewed with much jealousy. He hoped might be public.
the House was not prepared to increase those powers, and Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it would not enter
he must divide the House against the proposition. ):ia•operly into the objects of the Bill. Matters were often
Mr.CL Ai- hoped the Hon. Member would withdraw his discussedbeub
lishltd the meetings of guardians quite improper to
opposition, at all events if he divided the House hs
individualsp on ails,' ampp-cting the propriety of relieving
(Mr. Clay) could not vote with him. His constituents,n_w which might arise questions as to the cir-
but cum ta ces of relative 1.
had two strong objections fef the first Bill,
I'
see•—( Hear. hear.) But he
could understand how there • '
they had been obviated by the collection of the rates being
might be guardians some-
times opposed to the P
left with the usual officers, and the clause enabling a Alt- oor-law, and, anxious to make
long speeches to the i
gistrate to hear and determine upon all eases upon a nterruption of business--desirous of
having the public admitted that th •
summons.
en. speeches might be
r.....-••■•-...----.—...._........--.....-......ioa......—"""''

MAN, they naturally concluded tha. what was
p,rinitted was legal. Not to enforce the procla-
mation the day after it was issued, was to sanction
its violation, and admit its invalidity. All at
once, on the sth of July, after they had set the
proclamation at defiance 54 days, and the Magis-
trates had allowed them to do so, these said
Magistrates pounced on them, when doing that
which custom had sanctioned, attempted to seize
their leaden:, and in fact made open war
on the people without any previous declaration.
Now, such a circumstance justifies strong indigna-
tion ; and under that almost irresistible, and cer-
trinly very powerful, impulse to speak truth, which
' all men feel, the two Chartists were justified in
using very strong language. Such is the light in
which' the matter appears to us, and must have ap-
peared to the Chartists. It was impossible for the
ATTORNEY-GENERAL to be ignorant of that, and it
became him, as a public officer, to advert to it. He
preferred acting_ as a mere advocate, and took a
course better adapted to attain a conviction than
ensure that justice should be done.

Under this aspect, the objectionable phrase
" blood-thirsty police," which the ATTOR-
NEY-GENERAL represented as so revolting,
seems much mitigated. The Chartists saw

that force brought from a distance to com-
mit what they regarded as an outrage ; they
saw it brandishing bludgeons and frightening women
and children, and they applied to it a phrase, which
we readily admit to be in general undeserved, but
seems not inapplicable to those who lend themselves
in that way to be the servants of what the Chartists
must and do regard as an irresponsible tyranny. Such
an explanation robs that language of much of its
offensiveness; and that exirlanation, or one similar,
the ATTORNEY-GENERAL was bound, we think,
to lay before the Jury. He took a different course,
and having represented the conduct of the two
Chartists in the worst light possible, the Jury very
legally found them guilty, arid the Judge will very
legally sentence them to a severe punishment. A
just and honest man would have taken a different
course from a mere advocate, who is gratified by
success, however unworthily obtained.

What a disreputable—what a disgraceful figure
our chamber of hereditary legislators makes before
the eyes of an oppressed, insulted, and too patient
people ! If the men in whom our boasted Consti-
tution recognises the right of being born with the
wisdom which the rest of the species can acquire
oily by long experience and hard study, for the ex.
press purpose of making laws for the community,
could see themselves as others see them, they would
be shocked at the half-disgusting, half-contemptible
spectacle which they present. Let these grace-of-
God Legislators, just for a moment imagine them-
selves the spectators of their own doings last week,
and let them be supposed capable of forming
a rational opinion of the scene before them,
would they not be compelled to confess that the
only object which, tile actors could possibly have in
view, was to hold up the House of Lords to
public ridicule and scorn
If we were to say that the Lords resemble a
flock of sheep, which seampei and huddle after
the bell-wether, wherever he happens to lead the
way, we should be drawing a comparison far from
complimentary to the sheep, for although the
lordly animals, are to the full as silly as the woolly
ones they are by no means so harmless. On the
contrary, they are the most mischievous of all
God's creatures, and one main element in the
mischief is the gregarious propensity of the breed.
Look at the late proceedings of this oligarchical
rabble, and say whether such an assembly
is not a burlesque upon legislation. We need
not mention the mutilation of the Irish Corporation
Bill, now for the fourth time before them, which, in
obedience to the Duke of WELLINGTON'S com-
mand, they took into consideration, as he said, for
form's sake, and which, in equal subjection to the
" alien" chief, they have already most effectually
demolished—we say nothing of the strangling the
other day of the Register of Births Bill, a most
useful and necessary measure, and for that reason
alone rejected—we leave out a great many other
cases of infanticide, and come to that of the Portu
guese Slavery Bill, which will be held in everlas
ing remembrance as a specimen of legislative stu
fication.