The Sun.
London, England, 1838-07-28 00:00:00

POOR LAWS.

Mr. G. PALMER then rose to move for a copy of a letter,
dated the Sth of January, 183 S, addressed by the Poor_
law Commissioners to the Assistant Commissioners, with which
certain proposed orders for the appointment of Assistant
Overseers were sent. In doing this he was not influenced
by party spirit. The question was one which equally in.
terested every individual within or without that House.--Hear.)
He did not desire to see the repeal of the Poor Law, but he felt that
great amendments were necessary to allow it to continue the law of the
country ; and he trusted the Committee, which had been so long sitting,
would at last produce something effectual and satisfactory to the coun.
try. The erection of extensive buildings throughout the country
was not only an extravagant but useless expenditure of the public
money, to say nothing of the separation of families; and if they should
be used to any extent in that capacity, it would be found necessary to
have soldiers to keep the occupants in order. He would not now enter
into any details as to the management of the poor. He had a
higher principle in view. He looked to the effect which the dictatorial
power of the Commissioners must have on the rights of the community.
With this feeling it was his desire to bring this question for.
ward before the Irish Poor-law Bill passed into a law.
The lion. Member then referred to several statements which had ap-
peared in the public papers, for the purpose of making out his case.
The powers given to the Poor-law Commissioners were incompatible
with the liberties of the British subject, and were exercised in a most
unconstitutional manner. The liberties of the people were
never in such danger as when they themselves became supine.
If the people of England were not on their guard, they would ere long
have little to look for. He had had no reason to believe the paper
he wished for would have been objected to by the Noble Lord, or the
Right Honourable Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
and it was only when he had on a former occasion moved for its produc-
tion, that he found there was a determination to oppose its production.
He hoped the Noble Lord would not on this occasion shelter himself
behind any plan of expediency. The Hon. Member concluded by
moving his amendment.

Sir C. B. VERE seconded the amendment.
Lord J. RUSSELL had the same objection to the production of this
document as when it was before asked for.

a •

The motion was then rejected without a division.
The House then went into a Committee of Supply.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER morel that a sum of
27,4691. should be granted for the support of the British Museum.
Sir R. PEEL said that the report on the table of the House furnished
most gratifying and ample information with respect to this establishment.
He had lately had an opportunity of visiting it, and he witnessed with
gratification the increased interest taken by the public in that establish-
ment. On the occasion to which he alluded he saw a great body of per-
sons indiscriminately admitted, and he was happy to say, that they con.
ducted themselves with the greatest propriety and decorum.—(Het r.)
Mr. S. O'BR lEN suggested that some arrangement should be entered
into with the Zoological Society, to enable the public to visit to Zoologi-
cal Gardens free on one day in the week.
!Ir. W A It BURTON took occasion to call the attention of the
Government to the fact that two most valuable geological collections
were now in the market, and it would be most desirable that some
arrangement should be made to secure these collections to the public.
Mr. HUME concurred in the satisfaction expressed by the Right
Hon. Varonet at the increased interest taken by the public in this esta-
blishment, and at the gratifying testimony borne by the Right Hon.
Baronet to the decorum and good conduct of its numerous visitors.
He thought it would be desirable that the Museum should be open to
the public one additional day in each week, and it would be a great
means of preventing the working classes from wasting their time in
public.houses on a Sunday afternoon, if they were affursied access to
the Museum on that de:a
Col. SIBTHORP thought some consideration ought to be had for the
officers and servants of the Establishment.
The CHANCELLOR. of the EXCHEQUER admitted the impor-
tance of acquiring the two collections alluded to, and he thought it
highly desirable to keep the public opinion in favour of grants of this
kind. He had the highest respect fir the names attached to the me-
morial, and should give the subject the consideration which it de-
served.—)Hear.)
Sir R. PEEL said with respect to the time of admission the Com.
mittee had made very liberal arrangements. They had opened the
Museum on Easter and Whitsun weeks, and had given the public great
additional facilities in other respects. The Museum was at present
open to the public during three days in each week. Now it should be
recollected that there were two objects to be kept in view; one was the
admission of the public, and the other to give scientific persons the op-
portunity of improving themselves free from the bustle which was inse-
parable from a crowded attendance. For this latter object two days
were set apart, namely, Tuesday and Thursday, and the remaining day,
Saturday, was set apart for the purposes of cleaning. With respect to an
additional day, and to appointing admission on Sundays, he had a strong
opinion on that subject. He would not disturb the unanimity that
prevailed by expressing that opinion ; but he thought as one reason
against that proposal that the officers of the establishment required that
day for rest. The Right lion. Baronet warmly concurred in the im-
portance of securing to the public the two collections alluded to, for if
the opportunity was lost it might never occur again. He hoped also
that the Right lion. Gentleman opposite ;the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer) would take into consideration the state of the buildings, and see
that it would be the best economy to bring them to a state of completion
as soon as possible.
After a short conversation, the vote was agreed to.
On the next vote being proposed,
Mr. C. LUSFIINGTON called the attention of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to a motion which he had intended to bring forward on going
into Committee of Supply. He wished to know when it would be com.
petent for him tobring forward that motion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it would be com-
petent for him to do so on bringing up the Report.
The following votes were then agreed to :-10,000/. for the payment
of Sheriffs, and to make good certain deficiencies and pay the salaries of
certain officers in the Court of Exchequer. 80,0001. to defray, for the
year 1838, certain charges which had hitherto been defrayed out of the
county rates.
The next item was 10,0001. to enable her Majesty to relieve the dis-
tressed Poles now in this country.
Lord SANDON wished to say a few words as to the amount of this
grant. It would be remembered that it was in 1836 it was first agreed
on to vote a sum of 10,0001. for the relief of the Poles. At that time
the number in this country was somewhere about four hundred, and it
was then intimated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the relief
should be granted only to such Poles as were in the country at that
time. Since that time the number of Poles in the country had, from
various causes, increased—a c insiderable portion had been let loose by a
neighbouring country on our shore, so that there were now two hundred
of those unfortunate individuals in the country who were totally ex.
eluded from Parliamentary relief. He thought it was unworthy of our
generosity to leave this small number excluded from the benefits of the
grant, which was not of sufficient amount to invite increased immigra-
tion. It was a remarkable fact, that in this the dearest country in
Europe, the grant had always been less than in France, at least to every
rank above that of a private soldier. Its Russia and Austria also the
Governments had been more liberal than ours. In fact, the English
scale was the lowest in Europe.—(Hear, hear.) While England gave
10,0001. what had France done ? To be sure, the Poles had, perhaps,
,
greater claims on France. France had given 100,000/.—once 160,0001.,
but never less than 100,0001., and even the small Canton of Berne had
given 4,000/ He maintained that our Government had not come for-
ward in the manner becoming our character and resources. The parti_
cular facts of the case he was now urging on the Right Hon. the Chancellor
of the Exchequer were these :-1300 men were now living from day
to. day on the precarious relief afforded by public charity; and it was
with deep regret he saw many honourable and high-minded men re.
duced to such a dependence for subsistence.—Hear, hear.) He did not
like to see senators, members of the Diet.men distinguished in the annals
of their native country for their conduct in the Council or in the field,
reduced to such a state as to become the subjects of puffing advertise.
merits, and obliged to resort the voluntary services of foreign singers
for existence. He would entreat his Right Honourable Friend to do
something for these poor men. They had made every effort to obtain
food by their labour, on railroads and public works. Colonels and
others of high rank might be found werking as common labourers, but
being strangers, speaking a strange language, and having few facilities of
obtaining employment, the great majority were left to wander starving
about the streets. In the Police reports accounts would be found of Poles
taken in the act of sleeping under our porticos and at,eur hall doors,
and such other places of shelter as chance threw in their way. There
was only one point more to which he would allude. Attempts had
teen made to prejudice the public mind against the Poles, by the fact
of twenty or thirty misguided men having published placards and in.
terfered at a late election. He did not mean to vindicate the conduct
of those individuals, which all must concur in thinking highly im-
proper—(l-fear, hear)—but surely that was no reason why two hundred
"lien, totally unconnected with that conduct, should be left to perish.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that if the Noble Lord had proposed a distinct
vote he (Mr. O'Connell) should have been exceed: ;isle anxious to
second him, but as that could not be done consistently with the usages
Of the House, he must only content himself with pressing OR the Chan.

cellar of the Exchequer to accede to the enlargement of the vote. The
only objection that could be urged against the proposed increase was,
that it would be creating an inconvenient precedent for encouraging
the exiles from political opinions. Why, the last century afforded
several precedents of that kind, and was Poland—the land to which the
poet alluded in the beautiful lines—
" Sarmatia fell unwept without a crime,"
. . . _

and which lines, although poetical, were strictly true—Poland, that fell
a victim to the crimes and perfidy of others—was she to be excluded
from relief?—(Hear, hear.) Neither need they look to the past as
affording motives for making this grant. The future was pregnant with
prospects which made it expedient that we should have Poland and the
Poles on our side. From Gibraltar to the Persian Gulph events were
approaching which made the alliance of a brave people a thing not to
be despised.—(Hear, hear.) If we now refused this paltry sum of
5,0001. we should lose all the gratitude we had acquired by former grants.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that there never
was a more painful duty imposed on an individual Member than that of
bringing back the House from the impulses of generosity and com-
passion to the oonsiderations of right and of justice. He had, how-
ever, one cause of rejoicing, and that was, that he was not now called
on to defend the withholding of the grant altogether. The question,
he was happy to say, was not one of principle but of degree ; and he
was also rejoiced to say, that he now, for the fifth time, had had the
honour of proposing the grant. Now, the point to which he wished to
call the attention of the House, and which had been alluded to by his
Noble Friend, was, that when the grant was first solicited from Govern-
ment the gentlemen who consulted Earl Spencer on the subject un-
dertook that the extent of relief required should be for the Poles at that
period actually in the country. They not only consented to this stipu-
lation, but stated their determination themselves to resist any attempt
at infraction. He did not wish to press this point more than it de-
served ; but he had a right to make the House acquainted with
facts—facts which an Honourable Gentleman present could attest.
This was in the year 1834. Afterwards, in consequence of the events
at Cracow, new calamities overtook the Poles, and a new class
became exiles from their native land, and although they formed no part in
the stipulation, the Government overlooked the fact and relieved them.
From emigration ancLother causes the original number had greatly de-
creased. It was at first 485, but, in 1835, 116 emigrated. This, of
course, caused a great reduction, and the whole balance was applied to
the assistance of the rest. What was it they were now called upon to
do ? Were they prepared to commence an interminable system of
grants ? No matter what brought political exiles here. Were they to
pledge the country to provide for their wants ?—(Hear, hear.) It was
but justice, however, to say thatthe unfortunate men deserved our warmest
sympathy. No men could have acted with more prudence, more honesty,
or more resignation than they had done since their arrival in this coun-
try. Indeed, their value in the field was only exceeded by their good
conduct and resignation under misfortunes.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.)
Therefore, it was not any want of sympathy that induced him to oppose
the increase ; because he knew that if in 1828 they went beyond the
principle originally proposed, they would not know where to stop.—
(Hear.) In conclusion, he must say that, having consulted his colleagues
on the subject, it was his painful duty to rest contented with the grant as
it now stood.

Sir S. CANNING—After the eloquent manner in which the subject
had been treated by his Noble Friend, should not trouble the House
farther than by stating his concurrence in the sentiments of that Noble
Lord, and his satisfaction at hearing the tribute to the good conduct of
the Poles, which the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer had
so well expressed.

Mr. BRISCOE ;nil he mourned for the decision to which the Right
Hon. Gentleman had come, because he thought the reputation of the
country was involved in it. This was no party or political question, but
one of need and destitution—a destitution of the extent of which the
House was most probably not aware. He had taken some pains to
ascertain the facts, and he found the actual number excluded from par-
ticipation in the grant to be 189. Of these 17 were field officers—
(Hear)-1'26 officers, and 36 soldiers, and 10 the wives and children of
soldiers.—(,Hear, bear. This was the exact number of persons who
were depending on the casual bounty of the public, and of these some
hail been many days without food. The increase asked was a mere
trifle. He would rather see the 5,0001. deducted from the expense of
the Coronation than refused on such an occasion as the present.
Mr. W. J. DENNISON hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would
see the propriety of acceding to the proposition.
Sir F. BURDETT would not do justice to his own feelings if be did
not cordially suplsort the increase of this grant.
Mr. WALLACE said he merely rose to add his testimony to the ex-
pression of sympathy so generally expressed, and to add his conviction,
that the other inhabitants of that hitherto unconquered country to
which he belonged, would one and all cheerfully acquiesce in the addi-
tional grant sought fur a portion of a brave nation who had the mis-
fortune of being conquered.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said that when the smallness of the sum was taken
into consideration, and when he saw that alt those who differed so widely
upon other subjects were almost unanimous upon this, he did not think
the additional grant would be refused.
Mr. HUME was of opinion that the increase of the grant would meet
the general concurrence of the country.
Mr. O'CONNELL would merely ask two questions of the Chancellor
of the Exchequer. The first was, whether he did not perceive that the
wish for the increase of the vote was unanimous ; and next, whether,
that being so, it was not worth his further consideration?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER admitted that the
sympathy of the House was in favour of the vote, and it was a sympathy
which he would by no means endeavour to suppress. What he feared,
however, in yielding to the influence of such sympathy was, that there
might be in future an indefinite increase made in votes of this nature.
With respect to the opinion of his Ilon.Friend the Member for Kilkenny,
the Hon. Gentleman should remember that he himself, when this
question was on a former occasion brought forward by Lord Dudley
Stuart, objected to too great an outlay of public money.—(Hear, hear.)
Ile (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would by no means say anything
calculated to prejudice the cause of the Polish refugees, and he felt that
the general unanimity of the House was a matter for the serious con-
sideration of the public.—(Hear, hear.) In pursuing the course which
he did pursue he was but discharging an arduous and painful duty.—
(Hear, hear.) He hoped the House would give him credit for tine mo-
tives with which he acted, for he felt in his position that in tine disposal
of the public money he ought not to be actuated by any feeling as to the
popularity of the claim, but whether the disposal of it in a particular
way was or wa, not Pap the benefit of the public.—(Hear,hear.)
Mr. P. HOVs Alt D supported the increase of the grant.
Lord SANDON said that, after what had fallen from the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, and tine promise given that the matter should be
taken into consideration, Joe should withdraw his amendment.
Mr. WYSE hoped the generally-expressed opinion of the House
would he attended to, and that British economy would never interfere
with the claims of humanity, when seconded by the voice of freedom.
Mr. T. ATTWOOD represented a large community, and was sure
that not a pauper inn Birmingham would oppose the increase of the grant.
The original vote was agreed to.
The sum of 6001. was granted to the Trustees of the British Museum,
for the purchase of additional antiquities.

50,0001. was voted to defray the expenses of the Steam Navigation
Company to India, by way of the Bed Sea.
9.,0781. was voted for the Civil Establishment of the Bahama Islands.
4,4401. I 3s. 4d. was granted for defraying the Civil List of the
Bermuc:as.

3,0701. was agreed to for the expenses of the Civil List of Prince
Edward's Island.

9,930/. 13s. 10d. was voted for the Civil Establishment on the Western
Coast of Africa.

11,7901. IkAs. fid..was granted for defraying the expen:es of the Eccle.
siastical Establishment in the British North American provinces.

Mr. PAKINGTON objected to the amount as totally insufficient for
its purposes. If the Revenue of the late Bishop were divided, it would
allow 1,500/. for each Bishop (Montreal and Quebec), ai:d this arrange.
ment would, he had no doubt, give general satisfaction to the Canadian
people. Canada had strong claims upon England, and he hoped that
in the most important of all concerns, that Colony would not be neglected.
Lord HOWICK said the manlier in which the Clergy of Canada
were formerly paid was founded in error. They had received their re-
muneration from the sum which was voted for the army extraordinary
expenses, and this was of course without the cognizance of Parliament.
The Government had long given attention to the subject. Her Majesty's
Government, considering the state of matters in Canada, did not think it
expedient that this country should pay fur the religious instruction of
the inhabitants of that Colony. Canada seas untaxed—it was a rich and
flourishing community —and therefore it was unfair that the heavily
taxed people of England should bear such a burthen as the Hon. Mem.
tier's motion would impose on them.
Sir A. DALRYMPLE supported the motion.
Mr. WALLACE said the Church of England had been the curse of
Ireland, and would be the curse of the Canadas, if established there.
Mr. GLADSTONE made a few observations, which were inaudible
in the gallery ; but they were believed to b!, in animadversion on the

observation of the Hon. Member for Greenock.
Mr. HUME had never heard so much nonsense as he did in the
speech of the Honourable Member who mooted the question on the
subject of destitution in Canada. Ile should oppose the motion.
Mr. GOULBURN thought that there was a solemn obligation on
the country to see that good and sufficient religious instruction was pro_
vided for her Colonies : and where religious establishments were in their
infancy, we were bound to succour and uphold them until they attained
strength and maturity.
Mr. BAINES opposed the motion.
Mr. ELLICE deprecated the observation made use of by the Hon.

Member for Greenock in regard to the Church of England.--;Hear,
hear.) He also denied the truth of the assertion of the Hon. Member
for Kilkenny, that there was no spiritual destitution in Canada. The
Hon. Member concluded by supporting the motion.
Mr. HOBHOUSE said, that never until to-night had religious discord
been mixed up with the grievances of Canada ; and that it would net
be too much to suppose that from henceforward it would, as in Ireland,
form an element of local strife.

Sir H. INGLIS denied that the present pecuniary arrangements for
the maintainance of the Church in Canada were sufficient for its
effective support, and appealed to the number of petitions presented
from that country advocating a better provision ; the necessity of which
he contended for as essential to the peace, good order, and harmony of
the social edifice in that colony.
Mr. O'CONNELL objected to the disparity which existed between
the allowances to Roman Catholic Bishops in Canada : one, whom he
did not know, the Bishop of Ouebec, had 1,0001. a year; the other he
did know, the Bishop of Newfoundland, who had 73/. He passed a high
eulogium on the latter, whose zeal for the spread of religion seemed to
exist in the inverse proportion to the payment. The Bishop of Quebec
might be a very good man, but giving him 1,0001. a year was just the
way to corrupt one; and if they added the salaries of some deaconries
and archdeaconries, it would only serve to make him worse. They
ought to leave the Canadian Protestant and Catholic clergy to their
own resources, and let them starve if they did not do their duty to their
flocks. Endowments were the root of all evil in churches, and the
sooner thoy were dispensed with the better If the House would join
him in reducing tho Protestant establishment in Canada, he would
vote against the 1,0001. to the Catholic Bishop. He had no respect for
establishments founded on Acts of Parliaments, and had very little re-
spect for Acts of Parliament themselves.
Lord SANDON complained of the inconsistency of the Hon. Gentle-

man, who not long since advocated the propriety of giving glebe lands
to the Roman Catholic Priesthood of Ireland. The same perverse

spirit was displayed by all classes of Dissenters who urged the argument
of the voluntary principle against the Church of England, yet were
always ready to seize on any fund or grant or gift they could obtain for
their own sects. It well became him now to endeavour to throw con-
tempt on the laws established by Act of Parliament, for that had been
his constant occupation out of doors.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that the Noble Lord had misrepresented him.
He never said that the Roman Catholic Clergy of Ireland should be
given glebe lands.

Lord SANDOX—I heard you, anti I read it in your letter.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that a portion of his letter had been taken
and used very unfairly. He had wished that the Roman Catholic
Clergy should he permitted to purchase glebe lands for themselves.—
(Cries of " Oh.") He wished that they should be permitted to follow
the example of the Roman Catholic Bishop of Clogher in that respect.
He had merely stated that proposition in accordance with the views of
some Roman Catholic Bishops then in London. As for himself he
hated such an endowment—he abhorred it—he had no hopes of the
slightest good from it, and he should strenuously oppose such a gra.
tuitous endowment of the Irish Roman Catholic Clergy to the day of
his death.—(Laughter.)
Sir G. GREY said that all discussion on the subject was at present
premature.
ature They should wait till Lord Durham had time to mature
his measures, and he implored the House not to disturb the existing ar.
rangernents. In any new arrangement it would be only just to include
a provision for the members of the Scottish churches in that colony. He
deprecated any intermeddling with the endowments of the Roman
Catholic
Clergy in
Lower Canada, which was at present very consis-
,%; ai.ip!iett fur'hc•fince of tho objects of that Church ; hut, ,file
it was maintained in such atnuence, the Yrotcstant and Presbyterian
Churches would expect corresponding consideration.