The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-23 00:00:00

of certain Acts. Those employed in the administration '
of the poor-law should be placed more immediately
under the control of the House. Therefore he thought that
this board should be differently constructed. There should be
one officer who should be styled president, and who should be
en`itled to a seat in the House of Commons. He should not
have any more authority in that matter than his Right lion.
Friend the President of the Board of Control.—(Considerable
laughter. ) He should propose that there should be two
waluiedentbsehouutlbderbesbueunladbluetuit t;o
busitt
uitziertelliye
secretaries,
House
ufonCommons,eof
carry the ordinary law. Therefore it would be the case, that
one of the secretaries would be able to explain the conduct
of the different officers under the poor-law. He wished only
to state generally an outline of the plan which Government
desired to propose. With respect to the general regulations,
as they were called, he should propose that the rule adopted
by the present commission should still continue in force. Ile
proposed to make a different regulation altogether in the
administration of the law in Ireland from that of England.
The administration of the poor laws in England and Ireland
would therefore be separate. He did not think it necessary to
make any further observations with reference to the plan which
he proposed for the adoption of the House. The plan had
already been embodied in a Bill which had not, however, been
finally arranged ; at an early day it would be ready to be laid
upon the table of the House, and it it should receive its
sanction, he hoped that the admistration of the law
would be perfectly satisfactory to all parties. It was,
in his opinion, of great importance, that where
so much information as to the working of a law was desired
by Hon. Members, it was necessary that its administrators
should be always present in the House to give the required in-
formation. If any lion. M, tubers were prepared with any
motion, or suggestion upon the subject, he could assure them
that it would receive the most serious consideration of her
Majesty's Government.—(Cheers. )
The motion having been put,
Mr. BANKES said, that had he followed his own in-
clination, he should most certainly have proposed an
immediate repeal of the existing poor-laws. He felt
convinced that in consequence of the great feeling
which existed in the country against the poor-laws,
the best mode of settling the question, would be at once to re-
peal the laws.—(Hear, hear.) When, however, he recol-
lected that the present measure had been sanctioned by two
Attorney Generals, and two Solicitor Generals, and a number
of inflnential persons, he could hardly suppose that he should
be able to succeed in his motion for that object, and he should,
therefore, in his opinion, best secure the completion of his
wishes by supporting the proposition of her Majesty's Govern-
ment, more especially when he recollected that an instruction
would be given to the Committee to report upon the existing
law, as well as the recommendations of her Majesty's Govern-
ment.—(Hear, hear.) A great number of complaints had,
within these last few days, been forwarded to him upon the
subject of the poor-laws. One of those, and the principal
one, was from the constituents of the Noble Lord, at the
head of her Majesty's Government. It was a report from a
committee appointed by the guardians of the city of London
Union, to inquire and report upon the existing poor-law.
They stated in their report, that they found in the construction
of the Act the most opposite and conflicting opinions, which
had involved in the different parishes throughout the City the
greatest diversity, which was most detrimental to the interests of
the poor ; that many of the unions of parishes which had Feted
with feelings of liberality towards the poor, were taken advan
tage of, in consequence of the uncertainty of the Act, by
other parishes, who relieved themselves of their just burden
by casting their poor upon those parishes which, influenced by
humane feelings, allowed them to remain ; and they recom-
mended that those provisions should be continued which had
been previously granted to the poor, without putting them
to the necessity of proving their titles afresh, and that in order
to prevent the hardship which would befall the aged, the poor,
and the infirm, by a withdrawal of their pensions, the
Committee were prepared to recommead an increase in the
rates of the parish. That was a recommendation which did
the board of guardians of the city of London great credit.—
( Hear, hear.) With reference to the proposition of her 1114.
jesty's Government upon the proposed altered construction of
the central jurisdiction for the management of the poor-law, he
believed that the measure would give general satisfaction. He
thought it quite right that the poor should have their repre-
sentatives in Parliament, and the choice of those
representatives, which would fall upon her Majesty's
Government, he trusted, would be made with re-
ference to the most competent persons in all respects
as well in regard to their diligence. judgment, and effect.—
(" And mercy," from Mr. Ferrand.) If such persons were
appointed, he had no doubt that the country would be highly
satisfied with the proposal of her Majesty's Government.
Mr. HUME had heard with great satisfaction the announce-
ment of her Majesty's Government, that they were deter-
mined to change the rules of the poor-law.—( Cheers.) No
man was more anxious to support the system than he formerly
was, and when he was appointed as a member of the
Committee to inquire into the conduct of the Poor-law
Commissioners, he certainly had an opinion favour-
able to them ; but when he heard the evidence
that was then adduced, and the evidence of the
commissioners themselves, he could not but consider that they
were most seriously involved.—( Hoar, hear.) And there was
no wonder that so general a feeling of hostili.y to the adminis-
trators of that law should have been manifested throughout the
country, when it was known, as was the case, that each indivi-
dual member of the commission acted entirely upon their own
responsibility, while the Act directed that noshing should be
done without the consent of all.—( Hear, hear.) He had
given notice of an address to dismiss the commissioners
from their office ; but in consequence of the announce-
ment of her Majesty's Ministers, he would not now
press that motion. With reference to the persons to be
nominated, he would impress upon her Majesty's Govern-
ment the necessity of appointing persons who should possess
the confidence not only of that House but also of the people.
It would require noiordinary amount of prudence on the part
of the Noble Lord to select proper persons for the discharge of
that office. He was formerly of opinion that Members of the
Board, appointed to manage the affairs of the poor-law, ought
not to have a seat in the House of Commons. He was now,
however, of a different opinion. He thought that the Secre-
tary of State had too much business to attend to be able pro
perly to superintend the operations of the': law, and to give to Hon
Members the information which they might require, from time
to time, upon the various points that might be brought under
their consideration, either in consequence of their own obser-
vations or the representation of their constituents. Ile had no
doubt that many a time the late Secretary of State for the
Home Department had, if ihe: vvouldi admit the f--t.!
excuses and apoioß;... ....le. so atsguise his real ignorance,
r.nd which, had be been acquainted with the facts and the
of the case, he would not have made.—( Laughter. )
II should support the motion of her Majesty's Government.
Mr. VERNON SMITH regretted to find that not one
word had been said by the Noble Lord with regard to the law
of settlement. As the subject, however, was to come before
Ire Select Committee, it was not his intention then to say
ny thing. It was always with great pain that he differed with
the Noble Lord oa any public question, but he could not help
entertaining such a feeling when he heard the Noble Lord in-
timating his intention of proposing that the law of settlement
should be referred to a Select Committee. It was his opinion
that the Government should deal with that question, and not
a Select Committee. He could not understand why they
should refer it to a Select Committee, for there was nothing
which they might elicit in that inquiry that could in the least
guide them in coming to a decision. With this ques
tion every Member in the House was better acquainted
than with almost any other public question. At the close of
last session, before the Committee, appointed in the House of
Lords, to investigate the special burdens on land, evidence was
gone into at great length on this subject, and were it not for
the lateness of the hour, he would make some extracts from it.
The facts which were then stated, made it quite unnecessary,
in his opinion, to submit the matter now to a Select Committee.
And, if he recollected well, the Right Hon. Baronet, the
Secretary for the Home Office had, at the close of last session,
given a promise to the effect, that a measure on the subject
would be introduced by the Government. his own opinion
was, that union settlements were perhaps the best medium
they could obtain, if it would not be considered tsetter to abolish
settlements altogether. He believed that no greater
curse could be edtailed upon the country than the present
system of poor laws. There was another subject to which
he would refer before he sat down. He wished that the ques-
tion of rating should be also taken into consideration, along
with the law of settlement, for he considered that both subjects
were so intimately connected that they should go together. If
they did not take some determinate course with regard to both
he foresaw that they would protract the settlement of these
questions to an indefinite period, and every species of investi-
gation should afterwards arise, notwithstanding the resolutions
which might be come to by the present Committee. He com-
plained of the feebleness of the resolutions of the late Com-
mittee appointed to inquire into the conduct of the Poor-law
Commissioners ; and if some better result did not follow the
labours of the proposed Committee, little progress would be
made in the settlement of this important subject.
Sir JOHN PAKINGTON wished to express the great
satisfaction he felt at the alterations which were proposed to
be made in the constitution of the board of Poor-law Com-
missioners, and at the tone of the Noble Lord in bringing the
subject before the House. The evils of the old poor-law ren
tiered it necessary that some change should take place in the
central board. He agreed with the Noble Lord, that some
member of the commission should be a Member of that House,
and he believed that the proposition was one which would meet
with approbation.—(licar. ) He considered that the proceed-
ings which had taken place before the Andover Committee
had exercised a considerable influence in the House and the
country. lie himself was a member of that Committee, and
he was bound to state, that he agreed with the Noble Lord that
the Commissioners had acted with the best possible intentions,
and had exercised the soundest prudence in their proceedings.
He could nut concur in the regret expressed by the Hon. Mem-
ber for Northampton, that the question should be referred to a
Select Committee, as the law of settlement was a subject which
should be approached with the greatest possible caution and
consideration. Ilis own feeling on the subject, confidently, was
that the result of the labours of that Committee would be a mo-
dification of that law which, more than any other, pressed upon
the labouring classes. With regard to the Poor ltemoval Act
of last session, he did not concur in the een;ure passed upon it
by the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire, and the Hon. Member
for Northampton. He thought it a very good Act, and lie
hoped that the Committee, now proposed, would not depart
from the principles laid down in it, and would recognise an
industrial residence in a place as giving a claim to relief.
Sir G. GREY had thought that the Hon. Gentlemen had
had sufficient experience of Parliamentary experience to know
that no power, such as that'he assumed, would be delegated to
one person of the committee. If the House wished to place
him ( Sir George Grey) on the committee, he should but be
an individual member, and at that moment he could not say
what course he should adopt if he was so appointed. If the
House agreed to the motion, he should propose a motion to the
effect, that the committee should inquire into the working of
the Poor-law Removal Act, and to report especially
upon it to the House, as he thought it very necessary that
a committee of the House should have an opportu-
nity of making an inquiry. He confessed he was rather
led to entertain the opinion of the Hon. Member for Droit-
witch, although he admitted in some instances that the Act
seduced considerable hardship, and though its operation had
been contrary to the intentions of the Legislature. 'The
question of the Law of Settlement was not no easy to deal with
as many Hon. Members seemed to suppose. Tho Hon.
Gentleman opposite (Mr. Bankes) stated that the late Go-
vernment had adopted three Bills on the subject, arid that the
present Government ought to adopt some means to improve,
and to give more effect to those Acts. To him ( Sir G. Grey)
it appeared that the difficulties which stood in
were with regard to the Law of Settlement, and that
of the measure, hp
it, awl the
coursethe
of werelast
session far fromhadeasystattefd solution ;
his
se
opinions
niinigthues
when the House came tie pqnsider that part
plrieesceon:tilad
see his way through all the dlflielait'"'had presented
sphlaeutisldwbheicr
hieite
prreuapdoyset(oi
f(expr itrseshsethtiesro.
wpiu
which
s
Tne queetiop qf eating
fying the evils of the present systetfi.
Uestiqns wffich were coming
sees teseparahle Ito},} the othobel
Committee ; unless they
under the cognisance of t
themselves, and he hoped that the Committee
ns"ur4wpootul:ladt
considered this part of the subject, in
Bill to the House, which would go agrat
the vyho.e 41{, atttsr
.blen he heard the Right Hon.
Baronet
question of the lion. Member for iliontrcse this
the Scretary Stdatef fbori. th_e:th' ep. t
answer the
h It lt ost
the
IneurneoCepte:inen.t. Ise the late
it:r.! -Ile
rr
.f°ePcvi opinion,
•- deal
But
WI-01g? !e" a-.9r 'H t
131:rtoneotrouppose, or did the Noble Lord at the
Rightect iyo
on. baronet

head of the Government believe that the people of this
country would thank him or feel satisfied with the course
which they had marked out for them to pursue; or that the
member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) had done his duty to the
people by withdrawing the motion which he gave for the end
of last session, and that the people of this country would
allow the Government and its supporters to cealesce for the
purpose of rescuing the Poor-law Commissioners who had not
hesitated to cast the blame which they deserved upon their
servants during 1846 ? Did they suppose the people of Eneleed
had forgotten the treatment which Mr. Day and Mr. Parker ha.'
received from their hands ? Why he had told the Noble Lord
at the bead of the Government, that a rumour had been cir-
culated out of doors during the last few days, to the effect
that the Government had protected a solicitor of the Poor-law
Commission from that exposure which a Committee of that
House would bring upon both, not because they were men of
talent as the Hun. Member for Montrose had styled them—
but because they were connected with persons high in the
country, and he warned the Government that there were per-
sons, both within and without the doors of that House, who
would speak more plainly if the House neglected its duty,
were they to lay aside the resolutions of the Andover
committee, which pronounced those men guilty of
a great dereliction of duty, as having oppressed their
servants, as cell as having scandalously neglected their duties ;
and they now came to the Government, who had a majority at
their backs, to endeavour to rescue them. As the Hon. Gen. j
tleman, the Member for Montrose, had withdrawn his motion, I
he had given notice of a motion for Thursday next, to move j
for a Committee of the whole House to inquire into the whole
'bonduct of the Poor-law Commissioners in administering the
poor-law ; and, proceeded the Hon. Gentleman, I dare the
Government to oppose that inquiry ; it you do, you are afraid
to grant it, because you are aware of the exposure
which awaits those men.—(Cries of " hear, hear.") For
doing my best to crush that law, I have been maligned
in a way most disgraceful; and I hope the time is not far
distant when I shall meet them in a court of law, where I shall
have an opportunity of vindicating my character from the
aspersions which have been cast upon it. How many poor
have been sacrificed whilst they have been attempting to intro-
duce their Malthusian doctrians, and who have died of their
sufferings, rather than perish by the laws which they were
called 'pun to administer ; how many poor have had their
furniture taken from their cottages ; and how many villages
have been turned into desolate wildernesses; and is
nothing to be done, but to screen them in their
disgraceful conduct? Will the people of this country
be satisfied, and do you think that those who support this law
will meet their constituents at the next election ? They have
met with great obloquy, as you will find if you go into any
society in England. You will find but one feeling of disgust
at the conduct of the Commissioners. It is not my intention
non to address the House at any great length, as on Thursday
night I shall have an opportunity of doing so, but I hope the
House will allow me to state what treatment I have received
at the hands of the Commissioners during the last two
months. In August last the Committee of the Andover
Union inquiry published the evidence taken before
them. On reading that evidence I thought it my
duty to publish two letters in the 'fintes newspaper.
For doing so, Mr. Lewes, one of the Assistant Poor-law Com-
missioners, thought himself bound, in justice and honour, to
commence legal proceedings against me. When I wrote those
letters, I did so for the purpose of creating those legal proceed.
ings, and I find no fault with him for doing so. But on the
24th of November, the rule was made absolute—this day two
months ago. Three or four days after, I attended a public
meeting at Leeds, and there charged Mr. Lewes, and the late
Secretary of State for the home Department, to lose not one
hour in going before a jury and giving me an opportunity of
vindicating my character. I dared them—l challenged them
to that ordeal—but they have shrunk from it. But let me tell
the House what occurred this week. I considered it my duty, on
Wednesday last, to move for certain returns with respect to the
proceedings of the Poor-law Commissioners in Keightey Union,
which the Secretary of State for the Home Department has granted
in the handsomest manner. By those returns I intend to prove
that the Poor-lal Commissioners have been guilty of a gross
dereliction of duty, and have committed a fraud upon the
House. This day, at two o'clock. my solicitor placed in my
hands a letter from Mr. Lewis's solicitor, informing me that
they had this day filed a criminal information against me. I
look upon this as nothing less than an attempt to intimidate me
as a Member of this House. There has been time for these
parties to have brought this rule to an issue, but they have de-
layed the proceedings until they had found me within the
walls of this House, fearlessly to discharge my duty. Now,
what I have to say is this—l demand at the hands of those
parties who are mixed up in those proceedings against me, that
they do not lose one hour in bringing it before a jury.
—( Hear, hear.) Is it just, is it manly, is it honour-
able, to deal out oppressive proceedings piecemeal ?
Let them meet now face to 'face, like men, in a court of law,
and if I do not come out of that ordeal with honour, I will re-
sign my seat within these walls, and if these parties do not re-
tire with the same honour that I intend to do, they will stand
convicted in the eyes of the country.
Mr. ET WALL said that it was his intention to have brought
the question of the Andover union under the consideration of
the House, especially as it rela-ed to the conduct of the Poor
law Commissioners; but now that he perceived what course
the Government were about to adopt, he would take an oppor-
tunity of bringing the subject before the country.
Colonel sna HORP said that he considered the Poor-law
Commissioners were a most useless, expensive, and tyrannical
body, which he would be very glad to see completely done
away with.
Captain PECHELL considered that some disappointment
would ensue when it was known that the Noble Lord did not
intend to take any summary mode of proceeding against the
Poor-law Commissioners, founded on the report of the
Andover Committee. Could it even be possible that any man
who had read the evidence, would be satisfied, when they un-
derstood that the Noble Lord was prepared to shelter a body of
men who had acted after such a manner towards
their own subordinates. Without wishing to follow
the speech of the Honourable Member for Knaresborough,
who had no doubt some personal feelings upon the subject, he
could not help expressing his opinion that it would not be
satisfactory to the country, in general, if the Poor law Com-
missioners were allowed to leave Somerset-house, without any
censure, dying away as it were like the flame of a candle. The
Government had insisted on carrying the law of ettlement,
acting on the advice of those whom they considered the best
informed. He hoped that it would be a lesson to that and
future Governments.—(Hear,hear.)
Sir W. JOLLIFFE ga'd at*. ~etuornent had done
out introduce contusion. Let them took at the opera-
tion of the taw of settlement in Hackney Union. He had in
his possession an official letter, a c spy of which had been laid
before the board of guardians of that union, and it would give
at once a positive answer as to the course of the method of relief.
It said, " Of course we must give relief, and we are obliged to
do so, in some instances, to hundreds of cases which do not
belong to us in the present state of confusion anti uncertainty
arising front the late glorious act of Parliament." That was
a clear sample of several letters written from and to many
unions. He could assure the Right Hon. Gentleman of
his belief, that in bringing this Bill under the consideration
of the Committee it would not effect the object desired. He
ought immediately to repeal the law, or to make such extensive
alterations as would totally alter its nature. The inefficiency was
sufficiently proved by the formation of a Committee to delibe-
rate on it, and he was persuaded that the system of rating
unions would lead to a much better management.
Mr. RICE said that the Act produced the greatest injury
to the poor, and injustice to the rate payers. In his own
neighbourhood many sudden and unexpected burdens had
been thrown upon the parishes. It was not as he
thought necessary altogether to repeal the Act of last
session, for it was certainly a humane Act, but such alterations
might be made as would make it operate kindly to the poor,
and justly to the rich. A proper alteration of the law
of settlement should be made. There was no longer a
parochial system, but such a system as would, so he was
told, do away with the parochial system entirely. As
far as his belief went, nothing could tend more to
improve the character of the industrious poor than the old
parochial system. He was told that it would destroy
all good feeling between master and servant. Would not a
better feeling exist between master and servant when •they
were bound by ties of mutual interest? lie hoped that the
matter would be entered upon at once, so that an early report
might be received from the Committee, and they might be
enabled to legislate upon it. before Easter, and some more effi-
cient measure be adopted by the House.
After a few remarks from Mr. FIELDEN, which did not
reach the gallery,
Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE said that no doubt the labours
of the Committee about to inquire into the law of settlement
would be most valuable, but it appeared to him that any in-
quiry into the law of settlement involved the question of the
law of removal. He was told that the Bill passed last year
had a most humane object in view on the part of the House,
and for which he for one most strenuously advocated it, as it
worked all for the poor. He believed that it worked well for
them in some instances, but only in instances where those whose
duty it was to administer the law thought proper to administer
it honestly.— (Cheers and laughter.) He had found that in
Yorkshire the magistrates disliktd the Bill, but when the Bill
was passed it was done with the view of relieving the mautt•
facturing population more than the agricultural population,
It was intended for the manufacturing towns—for those indivi-
duals who spent their life and strength in manufacturing em-
ployment, and according to the returns which he had had laid
on the table of the House, some who had spent 10 years, and
15-20, and even :35—in this manner, were still liable to re-
moval, and had been removed in some places. The people
generally were much in favour of it in the coentry, although
it was opposed by the gentlemen repreeentieg the rural districts.
It was due to the manufacturing tewns generally, to say that
there had not been one complaint from any of 'hem with re-
ference to the Bill. All these complainta, with urn) exception,
came from the small rural districts. They would find it was
so with the magistrates in the of the Hon.
Member fur Knaresborough. The rural magistrates, generally,
could not understand the law. The intellects of rural pole-
men were sometimes very obtuse when their pockets were con-
cerned. This was the case in a great number of instances.
The Hon. Member for Brighton said, that there were 1,4.50
persons supported by the ratepayers, and there were other pour
supported in distant parishes. No doubt these intlividuele ;old
resided five years at Brighton, and it was suite t 1 alt thvy
should support these individuals. He wished that: the Qqyvvv,•
ment would alio,' the Committee ty go ;it once ig Tee,
and say, it the law of settlers:met shorild be continued or not.
They had discussed the nther day the question respecting the
poor-law guardians refusing relief, aid the blame was thrown
upon the auditors. Now he believed the smell fare-sees, who
were guardians, were more to blame thee aey gee, that they
generally took advantage of every epratonity of grinding the
poor.—( Hear, hear.) There were, no doubt, some humane
guardians, bet they were generally e r qficio guardians, Who
looked after the small farmers, and saw that they 441 their
duty to the poor. It was usual, esitee the
guar-
dians were c mplained against' tq throw the blame
on the auditors, though the Llama was moregenerally
with the former, it was then said that the i;l
were elected, he complained that. the notfreeceisegeelleUrsdliS
extensive enough. It ought, to he Nff•Vii: tie would' •
the poor a rig, th
appeal nem the ueerniatis to the petty give
Ile \Noel(' alt.) give the e• sts-
sions.—( Hear, hoer; ei
rne, lane tett appeal against th auditors to the quarter sessions
split measures would considerab!y• increase the tsteoirage4-e:filltrhee-
Crown. They had already a paid Pei '-
that House, and they were liav;a's 11131800 r-law Proeisleet,
Commissioner ie
with this secretary, fee the purpose only, as far es he could
see, of Wei; Ladgered.—( Hear.)
was to get for the badgering What stelairy the president
did eppear.—(Laughtee,
this was to be the case; tliey as well have the 4tyerin-
tentlents of the thee`
and thel l
other
Ptie departments, as man Excise, We officers of
sionally be made of ther, elieftsl inquiries might occa-
he Saw or he 4rd or thekiaa, e hear.) For himself-i eAeA
petisiVP pan ieetticient job. --(
Heane must look sese is ee eee
era. THOMAS ACLAND r.)
ces
statement of the Noille w.ttiy leratiried at the
ductive of great gccd, t 4pci thsught it would be pro-
leisislatien t point that wanted immediate
s, etc the present law in regard
ikJ4att4l was now going forward in to settletreirtiote
flits
every parrel • 4S
was not the intention of the f • '441"(
were the facts of the case. raeteess es 1,
tqic aw, but such
inquire into the clg 'seped' the Committee would
ytyle euestion and that
;',Tssesii!se ititeaciticed to meet a Bill would be
• 111 e: GIUNISD all objections.
ITCH said, that in
refusing to enter the workhouses, consegneneo tbio pour
meeej k had greatly in-
creased, and the pnaiLrons ma not adoptedetoi;eo uit,a.a,lileorY of Somerset House had
Seas clad find that thls board was now
t retnedying the evil. Pei
to be abelishee., and HA
was glad to due that lhe authority
of the Crown. He would not, then, trespass faither on the at-
tention of the House but ld'r
House?iVOtt reserve any observations he