The Sun.
London, England, 1841-03-27 00:00:00

Mr. FIE LDE N then vviihdrew his amendment, and

Clause 2 was agreed to.
On clause 3 being proposed,
Mr. H. HIND E begged the attention of the House for
a few moments, chile he submitted an amendment of con-
siderable importance to this clause.
Mr. WARLEY rose tonr"de-. Be intended to "move
►het the clause be postponed altogether, and therefore he
apprehended that his motion had priority to any amend-
ment of this clause.

The CHAIRMAN replied in the affirmative, and
Mr. WAKLEY proceeded. He believed from what
the Noble Lord had said the other night it was his inten-
ton bona fide not to interfere with the parishes which
were under the government of Local Acts. He believed
the House had understood the lasguage of the N: Ole
Lord to that effect, and certainly it had been so under-
stood out of doors, and he had been one of those who said
the statement of the Noble Lord would give satiLfiction.
Since that time clause 3 had been examined by various
local authorities connected with parishes which were
under systems of kcal government, and in several of these
parishes a fear existed that the Poor-law Commissioners
would be enabled to interfere with their goverarneat, if
not under this clause, at. least under the Peer-law Amend-
ment Act itself. A great number of these parishes had
not only I.al great apprehensions on the subject, but had
been put to considerable expense in consequence cf legal
proceedings having been instituted against them by the
Commissioners. Now he was anxious to learn from the
Noble Lord whether the local boards were s;illto exercise
the powers they had exercised, or whether the pots cr., of
the Poor-law Act were to be strained age last them. He
was the more anxious for this statement on account of the
contradictory opinions of the Courts of Law. He did not
know what legal gentlemen called contradictory, but when
two things were opposite, he ( Mr. Wakley) called them
contradictory, and thus it was with the opinions of the
Courts of Law. Legal proceedings had been instituted
against the parish of S. Pancras with respect to the
government cf that parish, which ended in the go-
vernment of the parish under the Local Act heir g
confirmed ; but proceedings were institmed against
other parishes, and it appeared that the law was laid down
in this manner—that although the Commissioners could
not interfere where the guardians were elected in a single
pariah under a local Act, yet if the parish became united
with other parishes, and a union was formed, then the Com-
missioners could interpose their authority. There were
proceedings pending at this moment on the subject ; arid
te, therefore, hoped the Noble Lord would not object to
postpone this clause for the purpose of introducing another
of a timilar description ; and also a declaratory clause, in-
timating to all these parishes that tney were to be secured
• in their system of local government, and that the Poor-
law Commissioners had not power to interfere with the
local Act.. If the Noble Lord had heard from the Com-
missioners, or others, that the power they derived under
the Poor-law Amendment Act was suffisieet to introduce
the Commissioners into parishes under local government,
of what use was this clause ? The lion. Gentlernau then
read the clause, and said that its words partook of the sub-
tlety which distinguished every thing that came from So-
merset-house. He believed the Noble Lord was deceived
by the words of this clause. The Hon. Member then
moved that clause 3 be postponed.
Si, FREDERICK POLLOCK rose to make some
observations relative to a case which came under his own
observation. It related to the parish of St. Pancras, re.
specting which, the Court cf Qrseorr's Bench decided that
in the district in which there was a local act, it was not
proper for the Poo:-law Commissioners to introduce a
board of guardians under an amendment of the Act as
distinguished from the guardians under the Local act.
Thus, it was that the parish of St. Pancras escaped from
the Commissioners. 11 the Noble Lord bona fide intended
that the Poor-law Commissioners should not have the
power of repealing Acts of Parliament, he must do so by
different language from thst used in clause 3. He, there-
fore, joined with the Hon. Member for Finsbury, in de-
siring the postponement of the clause.
Sir A. DALRYMPLE said the effect of the clause
would be to place the large parishes at present under
Local acts in the power of the Commissioners, and at any
time they might bring them within the provisions of the
present Bill.
After a few words from Sir S. CANNING,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL understood that parties had
complained that under the present Bill local Acts were
more interfered with than under the Poor-law Amendment
Act. Therefore, to put an end to the alarm that existed
on that point in the public mind, he had proposed to intro-
duce a clause to say, that so far as that Act was concerned,
no further interference than was at present authorised by
law should take place. That was what was intended by
the clause. There did not appear to him to be the
slightest ambiguity in the clause. He certainly could not
agree with the proposition of the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber fur Huntingdon to introduce a declaratory clause on the
subject, because if places under local Acts were to be alto-
gether exempted from the operation of the law it would be
attended with great inconvenience.

Sir ROBEIZT PEEL said it could not be denied that
the power proposed to be granted to the Commissioners
ovlr parishes governed by local- Acts was of a very un-
satisfactory nature; because the Commissioners might
evade the law by including two or three parishes and form-
ing a union, and so set aside the exemption of a paiLh
governed by a local Act. The parties interested, there-
fore, could not feel any security. Although the Commis-
sioners could not attack a parish so situated individually,
they might include it with two or three othres, and thereby
deprive it of its exemption. lie should strongly ad-
vise the Noble Lord, and he did not offer the sug_
geetion for the purpose of d. lay, to postpone the
clause, under the convietiln that i.e could not on
&,ti-facte;--Oy pr.--u the n1,1;::,,t7.
He would strongly
recommend the Noble Lord to post-
pone this clause, in order that the House, might be fur-