The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-08 00:00:00

A-otild it teduce the labourer? At the same time
that the practice would break down the inde-
pendence of the workman, it would also destroy
the hone,ty, and consequently the credit, of the Mas-
ter. it was no less mischievous to the retail dealers,
great numbers of whom had already been ruined, in
the neighbourhood of the manufactoriespaying in truck.
It would also be exceedingly injurious to our commerce
with foreign nations ; for the trade, to which the cheap-
ness of goods produced on the truck system gave rise, was
not a wholesome trade, but one which tended greatly to
destroy an advantageous commerce. At the same time lie
would not object to the workman's receiving goods as the
wages of his labour without the intervention of money, if
the truck could be carried on fairly. But he thought it
impossible that the facility' which it afforded to the master
to increase his profits infinitely, would not be taken ad-
vantage of. It might be ohj.cted that legisl itive inter-
ference on this subject was opposed to the principles of
political economy ; to which he replied, that, although he
had great respect for many persons who advocate tho e
principles, and he had himself some inclination to them, he
believed that there was no science so uncertain. Besides,
lie could see nothing contrary to political economy in say-
ing to the master, " Here is the current coin of the realm,
and in that the workman must be paid. Let him then
buy what he wants, either from your shop or where else he
pleases." Under the present system the men were not free
agents ; they were not at liberty to go elsewhere than
to the truck shop ; the master being the stronger party,
and having the power to entangle the workmen so as
to leave him no choice. Having stated the grounds on
which he proposed the Bills, he would give the House
some notion of their provisions. The object of the
first Bill was to repeal all the existing laws on the
subject. The second was an enacting Bill ; and as lie had
candidly announced to their Lordships, it was a measure
of security. It stated that where wages were paid in any
other way than in the current coin of the realm, the work-
men could claim in coin the whole amount of the wages
so paid, the master not being allowed to set off against
such demand goods received by the labourer an account of
wages. It further enacted, that the roaster should also
pay a penalty for the first offence not less than five pounds
nor more than ten pounds ; for the second offence not less
than ten pounds nor more than twenty pounds ; and that
the third offence should be a misdemeanour, and punished
accordingly. It afterwards excludes from those provi-
sions all domestic and agricultural servants. He would
now propose that the Bill should go to a Committee of the
whole House, so that such alterations might be made as,
upon examination, its details might be found to require.
One useful alteration had been pointed out by a Noble
Friend of his opposite (Lord Goderich, we believe) re-
specting those workmen, who, living a distance from the
place in which they worked, or being single men, found
it advantageous to have necessaries furnished by their em-
ployers, and deducted from their wages. To such altera-
tions lie would not object, but only to those which might
tend to defeat the whole measure.
The Bishop of ROCHESTER (as we understood) was
not opposed to the Bi I ; but, from his own experience,
he feared it would not be effectual. In the town of
Bromsgrove, in the county of Worcester, there were nearly
5,000 workmen paid by truck ; and when the masters
were remonstrated will, they declared that they had no
other choice—that without the use of that mode they
could not give the men employment.
Lord AUCKLAND was entirely in favour of the mea-
sure of his Noble Friend, and would give him every assis-
tance. He had received documents, petitions, and
memorials, front thousands of persons complaining of the
truck system, and pointing out circumstances of fraud,
extortion, and oppression, which would justify the inter-
ference of the Legislature ; but he had never seen one
petition in favour of that system. At the same time he
agreed with his Rev. Friend, the Right Rev. Prelate who
last addressed their Lordships, that it would he very diffi-
cult to remedy the evil. Ile, wished, however, to try the
experiment of this Bill. He knew that in some districts
the truck system was well directed, and was attended with
good results. He thought, therefore, that the House
should proceed with caution. In saying so, he had no
intention to throw impediments in the way of the Bill.—
He would take that opportunity of inquiring whether, by
the clause giving to the County Magistrates a concurrent
jurisdiction in cases under the Act, occurring in towns
within the county, it was intended to give the Magistrates
of Middlesex such a jurisdiction in the city of London.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE was happy to perceive the
concurrence of the House in the principle and objects of
this Bill. In the Committee lie would attend to the
suggestions of any of their Lordships, and willingly make
the alterations that might appear necessary. He moved
that the Bill be committed on Thursday fortnight. (The
Noble Lord's reply to Lord Auckland was not heard.)
Lord CARNARVON doubted the efficacy of the Bill,
but would not give it any active opposition.
Lord GODERICII, having given the subject much
examination, was of opinion that the well-being of thou-
sands was concerned in the enactment of sonic such mei-
sure as this Bill.
Earl GOWER expressed his satisfaction that the Bill
had been introduced.
Lord CALTIIORPE recommended inquiry, and said,

that if, upon investigation, it should appear that the Bill
would lead to good effects, he should give it all his sup-
port. He moved that the Order of the Day be read,
which requires that no Bill relating to trade or commerce
should be read a second time, without having been refer-
red to a Select Committee.

Lord \VIIARNCLIFFE did not think that the Bill
came within the meaning of the order.
The LORD CHANCELLOR confirmed the view of
Lord Wharncliffe. The existing nuisance was of a great
and pressing character, and he certainly thought it de-
sirable to make an experiment, with a view to try to
remedy it. _ _

The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed on that day fortnight.

LABOURERS TN HUSBANDRY BILL.

The Earl of WINCHILSEA rose to move the second
reading of the above Bill. The Noble Earl said, that the
object of the Bill was to enable agricultural parishes to levy
a rate, to be called a labour rate, for the maintenance and
employment of labourers belonging to the parishes during
a certain period of the year. That period was the winter
months, commencing with November, and ending with
April. He proposed that the Bill should be in operation
during two years only. The Noble Earl observed that
some measure of the nature which he had proposed to
their Lordships was absolutely necessary, in order to check
the demoralizing system which had so long prevailed of
paying able.bodied labourers out of the poor-rates without
providing them with any employment. The continuance
of such a system could not fail to engender in the minds
of the labourers feelings of hostility against the owners
and occupiers of the soil.
Lord WYNFORD gave the Noble Earl credit for his
good intentions, but feared that be would fail to accomplish
the object which he had in view.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA said, that from all his ex-
perience, be was convinced that the small farmers and shop-
keepers in villages were the very class of persons who
would derive the most benefit from his Bill.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE felt the strongest ob-
jections to all the regulations of the Bill before their Lord-

ships, with the exception of that clause for enabling
parishes to lease a larger quantity of land than they could
at present, for the employment of the labouring poor ;
and he cautioned the House against giving its sanction to

a new system of poor rate. Tie present hill, he believed,
would tend to confirm all that was most mischievous in

the administra,ion of the poor laws as they at present
existed, because it gave to Magistrates the power of fixing
the rate at which the labouring poor should be employed.
—(Hear, hear.) He also considered the measure highly
objectionable, inasmuch as it interfered with the farmer in
the management of his estate, by dictating the exact quan-
tity of labourers he was to employ; moreover, by ex-
empting the farmer from the payment of the rate, on the
condition of his employing a certain number of labourers,
this Bill made it his interest to employ the cheapest and
worst set of workmen.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl
had stated that he did not intend this measure to be a
fixed one, but proposed that it should operate for two
years only. The House, however, must be aware of the
extreme difficulty of getting rid of a measure of this kind
after it had once been acted upon. He admitted that
the state of the labouring poor deserved the serious at-
tention of Parliament ; but it was their duty to ex-
amine most carefully the means proposed to remove the
existing evils ; for when once any measure was c irried
into operation, they could not at their pleasure get
rid of it so easily as of any other sort of legislative remedy.
(Hear.) There were circumstances, he confessed, in the
state of the labouring poor, which called for anxious con-
sideration on the part of every man who valued the peace
and happiness of the country ; and he thought it desirable
for some measure to be adopted, with a view to give the
labouring population employment. —(Hear.) He did not
think that the present measure ought to receive the sane •
tion of the House ; but he trusted that Parliament would
not separate without being induced, under the recommen-
dation of his Majesty's Government, to agree to the grant-
ing of certain sums of money to particular individuals, by
which a considerable excitement to labour might be created.
—(Hear.) In that way encouragement might be given to
individual, to embark in undertakings which would return

them a due proportion of profit ; but compelling a fu•met
to provide that which he could not with any regard to his
own interest would, he thought, be detrimental to the agri-
culture of the country, the prosperity of which, after al,
must be the foundation to which they must look for the
encouragement of labour and the relief of the labouring
classes.—(Hear, he:r.) The Noble Marquis concluded
by stating that he felt it his duty to oppose the Bill.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA said that no power was
Given to Magistrates to regulate the rate of wages. That
office was left entirely in the hands of the owners and pro-
prietors of land.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE found, on looking into
the Bill, that the power of levying the rate was not to be
exercised by the Magistrate, but by the vestry. That ar-
rangement, however, he considered still more objection-
able.—(Hear.)
The Bishop of LONDON was opposed to the measure,
which he thought would, if ever carried into operation, be
found to defeat its own purpose. He considered that it
would inflict an injury on the tithe-owner, and the occu-
pier of pasture land. The measure was a compulsory one,
because the majority of the parish were to have the power
of controuling the minority; and he thought that the
practical effect of the meaning would be to legitimatize
and perpetuate the evils which were now complained of. He
was of opinion that the cause of those evils was the oti-
ginal error of following the ancient division of pari-lies in
the assessment fur the poor-rates, without regard being
had to the proportion of population and property.
The Marquis of SALISBURY thought that there were
some things in the Bill worthy consideration.
The Duke of RICHMOND concurred in the observa-
tions which bad fallen from the Noble Marquis (L ors-
downe.) He thought that one of the had effects of this
Bill would be, to place the improvident man in as good a
situation as the industrious labourer.—(Hear.)
Lord ELLENBOROUGH did not mean to say that the
Bill would be found to be an efficient measure.
Lord MELBOURNE con-idered that the state of the
labouring poor deserved their Lordships' serious considera-
tion, but at the same time they must take care not to vio-
late sound and wholesome principles.--(Hear.) The pre-
amble of the Bill contained statements of the correctness of
which it was difficult, if not impossible, for their Lord-
ships to form a correct judgment without an inquiry into
each particular case to which they referred. For example,
it was stated that on certain portions of land only a certain
number of labourers were employed, and that on such land
more might be engaged. Flow were their Lordships to
decide such a case ? Were they to regulate the intoner in
which each individual should manage his land and the
number of labourers he should employ? The thing was
impossible. No man was more anxious than be was to do
every thing which could improve the condition of the la-
bouring classes in agriculture, but he did not think that
the proposed measure would have that effect. He was,
therefore, unwilling to vote for the second reading of this
Bill, and sending it to a Committee, which would have
the effect of creating a delusion in the public mind and
raising hopes as to the improvement of the condition of
the labouring classes, which, by this Bill, could never be
realized.

The Duke of WELLINGTON would vote for the se-
cond reading, in order to nee what might be done in the
Committee, as the practice which one part of the I3ill
proposed to introduce was already adopted, and with good
effect, by many counties in England. He also wished to
send the Bill to a Committee for this additional reason,—
that there was one part of it on which most of their
Lordships seemed to be agreed, and it might be a matter
of consideration whether it would not be advisable to di-
vide the Bill into two, arid to preserve that part in a sepa-
rate form on which so many of their Lordships seemed to
be agreed.
Earl GREY could not consent to the second reading of
a Bill in the principle of which he could not concur. It
he could agree in the principle, lie would have no objection
to go to a Committee to examine its details ; but when he
heard se many Noble Lords declare the principle vicious
and the details objectionable, he could not support the se- ,
cond reading. Ile admitted the distress which it was
sought to relieve, but it did not fellow that because they
admitted the distres, that they were therefore to adopt
• every measure which was proposed as a measure of relief.
This Bill would tend, he thought, to raise hopes which
could not be realized by it. As to going into the Committee
for the purpose of dividing the Bill, he thought the more
simple and easy course would be, if there were any part of
it that could be adopted, to introduce it in a separate form
to the House. He gave the fullest credit to the intentions
of the Noble Earl, but he did not think they could be
achieved by this Bill.
The Earl of CARNARVON suggested to his Noble
Friend that, as there were object►ons to parts of the
Bill which could net be well removed by any amendment,
the better way would lie to withdraw it for the present.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA said, that seeing no hope
of carrying the measure against the oppositirm offered by
the Noble Lords opposite, he would withdraw it ; but
after this he would leave the matter to he taken up by the
Government, satisfied that the subject was one which de-
served serious consideration, and which could not be looked
to too soon. It would be most impolitic to allow the
winter to approach and leave the condition of the labourer
as it was last winter, when such effects had been produced
from it.

After a few words from the Duke of RICHMOND, the
Bill was withdrawn.

LORDS LIEUTENANT OF COUNTIES' (IRE-
LAND) BILL.

The Earl of WICKLOW said, that before going into
the Committee on this Bill, he was anxious to make a
few remarks as to its object.. The Bid was to create
Lords• Lieutenant for the several counties in Ireland, on
the principle that there should be some certain medium of
communication between the Government of Ireland and
tie Magistracy of the several counties. That such a me-
dium should exist he admitted, but he thought, that the
custodes rotulorum of the counties were the persons
through whom such communication might be very well
made; and if there were any non-resident, a Bill
could be introduced transferring the authority to others.
It might be said that these officers had not hitherto per-
f firmed their duties, but if they had not done so, it did not
follow that they were unable to perform them. In the
state of party feeling which ha -1 so long existed in Ireland,
he thought it would he unwise and impolitic to give such
power as would he placed in the hands of individuals un-
der this Bill ; and he cautioned the Government against a
• measure which would be looked upon by so many as done
for the purpose of increasing their patronage. If it were
necessary, they ought to assimilate the law in the two
countries. It would, he contended, he a great hardship
on the custodes rotulorum to be deprived of the influence
they had hitherto had ; and as they were to be discon-
tinued, it might occasion a collision of authority between
them and the Lords Lieutenant of counties, which might
be detrimental to the public service.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY concurred i❑ what
had fallen from the Noble Earl, as to the impolicy of
taking away in effect the power which belonged to the
custos rohaorum in each county in Ireland. It was in-
justice to them to place over their heads a Lord Lieutenant

n each county, and that, too, without any imputation on
:heir conduct.
Viscount MELBOURNE said there was no wish on
the part of Isis Majesty's Government to press the mea-
sure with undue haste. In point of fact this was nothing
more than an attempt to assimilate the -I+ isis system to that
of England. He had no doubt that the Bill would be
found extremely beneficial when it came into operation.
The Duke of WELLINGTON thought it would be im-
posing a difficult and unpleasant duty on the Lord Lieute-
nant of Ireland to call upon him to say that the existing
custodes rotulorum should have the recommendation of
Magistrates, particularly as many of the individuals referred
to were absentees, or disabled by age or infirmity. The
natural course would be to place the power of recommend-
ing or nominating Magistrates in the hands of persons
selected by the Government. He did not object to the
Bill generally, but thought that the Lieutenants should be
persons resident in the counties, and that it would be well
if a clause were inserted compelling residence.
Earl GREY thanked the Noble Duke for his observa-
tions, and hoped that residence would be enforced as much
as possible, but thought that it would not be expedient to
give the Lord Lieutenant a power to prevent Lieutenants of
counties leaving the country. In conclusion the Noble
Earl stated that he supported the Bill, because he believed
that it would prove beneficial to Ireland,
After a few words from Lord PLUNK-Err, the House re-
solved itself into a Committee on the Bill.

Some verbal amendments were agreed to, and the report
was ordered to be received to-morrow.—Adjourned.

SIR RALPH LOPES.—Yesterday a double
blunder was made with the name of this gentleman. In
the debate be is called Sir Ralph Frunco, and in the
Parliamentary summary he is called Sir Franco Lopez,
instead of Sir RALPH LorEs, which is the name he now
bears.

COURT OF CHANCERY.—In the course of
yesterday morning Mr. TANcitEn, Mr. P. WILLIAMS, and
Air. HOLT, were called within the bar as King's Counsel, 11
in the usual form.