The Sun.
London, England, 1847-05-18 00:00:00

,rges
THE MOTT CASE.

Mr. FERRAND desired to ask the Secretary
of State for the Home Department whether the
appointment of Mr. Mott to the office of district
auditor received the sanction of the Poor-law
Commissioners after he had been dismissed from
the office of Assistant Poor-law Commissioner ? Who.
ther the Poor-law Commissioners allowed him to hold
the office of district auditor at the time that he was part
proprietor of the Haydock Lodge Lunatic Asylum, or
after the Commissioners in Lunacy declared, in their
report on the state of the Haydock Lodge Lunatic
Asylum, that Mr. Mott had failed to fulfil a positive
and solemn pledge which he had given to the justices of
Lancashire, and that he appeared quite unworthy of
the trust, and became most negligent and remiss in the
discharge of his functions? Whether they have al.
lowed him to hold the office of district auditor of Lanca-
shire, whilst living in the Isle of Man, out of the way of
his creditors; after he was seized by a sheriff's officer,
when on his read to audit the union accounts; during_
the time he was a prisoner in Lancaster Castle; and
after a public advertisement appeared intmhe moneyT
newspaper, warning the public not toiapa
al
pay hi
belonging to the proprietors of the Haydock doacbti
kaLdoondgede
Lunatic Asylum? Whether h
the discharge of his duties, ande
holding the office of district auditor?h
left England, ag
although
Sir G. GREY saidd t Mr.holidottthhea d
situation riotbeen
referred dismissed,
t
nor had he ceased
aelnedcitdeadt.es
Afotrthteheelescittuioantionana,
dfprobmy
There
whom
two had
habdeenho3on7 cs
the guardians there had been ten votes for Mr Gardiner
and fourteen for Mr. Mott. The Act of Parliament did
not require the sanction of the Poor•lavv Commissioners
to the election ; nor was it considered that his manage
went of the Haydock lodge Lunatic Asylum was a legal
diaojsffiu
justices
c. t e
seTo
hrhraaii
tnp
having
art
adneeifi
Glared
eugdaulehi fisi
mtci ao tuni
wch his
y referredoholding
his t
rtuo s ttthh
wee
further, the Poor-law Commissioners had no official in-
( formation of the allegations in the third part of the
question ; and with regard to the fourth, the Poor-law
Commissioners had received letters from Mr. Mott
upon official business, from Manchester, dated the 7th
May, where they believed him to bo at present re-
siding.
POOR-LAW ADMINISTRATION BILL.
The Order of the Day for the second reading of the
Poor-law Administration Bin being read,
Mr. BANKES presented a petition from a union in
Dorsetshire, complaining of the conduct of the auditor
for neglect of duty, and that they had received no re-
dress from the Poor-law Commissioners.
The petition was ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. FERRAND said he was thankful to his Right
Hon. Friend, the Attorney-General, for the manly man _
ner in which he had answered his question. Notwith-

standing, however, the high respect which he enter-
tained for the legal knowledge ut his Learned Fiend,
he would be enabled t produce much kigher authority
to bear out his own view of the case. He could not but
express his astonishment at the declaration made by
particularlyH
on. Baronet when,wthe Right Honourable Baronet, the Secretary for the
who
o hadit preceded hacl be Home Department, that Mr. Mott had not been dismissed
enihsetanteodmebys'
etchreetaßr)righint
that office, had declared that he had been dismissed, and
that the Hon. Member for Bolton knew the cause why
he had been removed. He would leave that between
them ; but he could not but observe that something
wrong had been said to one or the other of them. He
was ready to admit that the Right Hon. Baronet had
said what be believed to be true. At the close of last
session the present Secretary for the Home Department
had give a pledge that a Committee would be appointed
in the present session to inquire into the poor-laws.
Sir GEORGE GREY denied that he had given any
such pledge.
Mr. FERRAND said there could be no doubt that he
had been so reported in all the papers. The Noble Lord
the First Lord of the Treasury, had also declared that
he was prepared to defend the conduct of the Poorslaw
Commissioners. He would that night have an opportu-
nity of doing it. He hoped he would do so, and prove
that the new poor-law had obtained for the people the
blessings which were held out would follow in its train—
that it had been a blessing, and not a curse. He, at all
events, could prove it had failed in conferring any such
advantages, and that it was a complete failure,
and had crumbled into pieces. The people of this
country had been accustomed to boast that they
were never called upon to obey any law which
was not passed by both branches of the Legislature,
but notwithstanding, they had been obliged, now for
thirteen years, to obey the orders of the Poor-law Com-
missioners, as the law of the land. A Committee of that
House had been appointed to inquire into the operation
of that law, and after having sat for four months, they
came to the decision that the Poor-law Commissioners
had acted in a most arbitrary manner towards the As-
sistant Poor-law Commissioners. He thought it was
not sufficient that the Poor law Commissioners should
be dismissed, but that the law should be repealed. When
the law was first broached it was supported by men
whose object was to do away with poor-laws altogether,
and to punish poverty as a crime. The person who
first brought it forward was Lord Brougham, who, be-
fore he introduced it obtained a pledge from both the
political parties that they would net repeal what-
ever might be the extent of the opposition raised
against it. He would ask, who had been selected
to guide the Bill ? No other than Mr. Malthus, a
man whose opinions on the subject was odious
to the country.—(An lion. Member said he was dead.)
Well, then, he left his legacy behind him. Hew as Lord
Brougham's guide in this measure. He who had de-
" clared that he who was not provided with necessaries by
his parents, had no right to food ; that no place had
been provided for him at Nature's feast, and that he
had no right to be there. Lord Brougham defended
this gentleman, and stated that he had been
greatly misrepresented, and that he was a most humane
and amiable man. A Commission was then appointed
to inquire into the old poor-law, and evidence taken
by Assistant Poor-law Commissioners, who knew what
was required of them, and did what they were
ordered, as obedient servants. Then came forth the re-
port, that " dark document," which was so bad and
wicked, that the Duke of Wellington denied its existence.
It was opposed by a friend of his, now on a bed of sick-
ness (Mr. Walter), whose services would last for cen-
turies, when the Hogg Baronetcy would be buried in
oblivion.—(Partial murmurs.) That document had been
signed by two of the bishops of their church, the Bishops
of London and Chester. Lord Althorp introduced the
Bill into that House, which gave power to the Poor-
; law Commissioners to limit the amount of food,
but not to increase it, and also to lower wages. In the
correspondence of Messrs. Ashworth and Gregg, it
appeared that the guardians, in a case of a strike for
a ages, were authorised to refuse relief if they knew the
parties could earn wages upon which they could earn
a subsistence. As soon as the New Poor law Bill
passed, the Poor-law Commissioners employed persons
as Assistant-Commissioners, whom they sent to the
agricultural districts to induce the people to
leave their homes, assuring them that if they
did so, they should have abundant employment
in the manufacturing districts. They placarded
places with tables of wages, which they never
did, and it was never intended that they should
receive. One one of the blackest thing they did
was to send Dr. Kay down to Suffolk and Norfolk to
induce the labourers to go to Manchester, where they
sent them ticketed and labelled, like beasts to the slaugh-
ter. But, as his Right Hon. and Learned Friend (the
Attorney-General) seemed to smile, he thought it his
duty to reiterate what he had said : the labourers sent-
to Manchester were actually ticketed, packed in boats,
and without any places to go to, turned adrift in the
streets of Manchester in the middle of the night. But
they should now hear Dr. Kay's own description of this
town three years before. In describing it, he said that
the inhabitants had ceased to have a pride in the tip-
; pearance of their houses. They spent their lives in
squalid wretchedness—their domestic economy was
neglected—their houses were ill furnished and ill
ventilated their food meagre, and not nutri-
tious, and they frequently fell victims to drink.
Such was the description of Manchester, when the inha-
bitants of the southern districts of England were to be
absorbed into the workshops of the manufacturers. He
would detail to the House the cruelties inflicted upon
those agricultural labourers. Not content with calling
in the military, the Government sent down the Metro-
politan Police, and there, with drawn cutlasses they
sought to enforce those tyrannical laws. They
sold up thousands of the poor people. Immense
buildings were erected in the county as modern
bastiles, where they were immured in cells, not
allowed to go a place of worship, their diet
tables were worse than those of felons, they were com-
pelled to wear a felon's dress, and they branded their
clothes with the name of " the union workhouse" upon it,
their furniture was sold, husbands were separated from
their wives, and children stolen from their parents at the
point of the bayonet. The union workhouses were
cleared, and its inmates sold to the manufacturers.
He held in his hand an application of one of the manu-
facturers for these poor people to the guardians of the
poor of the Llangollen Union, dated only twelve
months since, in which the applicant stated that he
had employment in his mills for twenty or thirty
females, and also a number of boys, and stating that if
there were any in the union fit for such employment,
one of the firm would come over to the union and bring
those unfortunate creatures to the factory districts. And
who ware the parties who were chosen to look over those
unfortunate creatures? Why, it was a well-known fact
that if the Government could offer the office, a non-com-
missioned officer of the cavalry, whose previous occupa-
tion might be supposed to have inured him to wretched-
ness or made his heart callous, was the person whose
services they were most glad to obtain. These unions
were formed so large that the poor had to travel to the
board of guardians ten, twenty, and even thirty miles, in
order to obtain their paltry pittance. Such was the
distance they had to travel that it often occupied three
whole days in going and returning from the union. lie
held in his hand a letter from a clergyman, in which he
stated that he knew a poor man who had to travel 24
miles every week in order to obtain even a sixpence.
Then, in addition to this, the poor have died in numbers
from want and improper medical treatment.—(Hear,
hear.) Aye, numbers have died from those sources
under the sanction of the Poor-law Commissioners and the
Government. Sueh were some of the horrible effects of
this blood-stained law—for such it was. Yes, blood had
been shed, and that too at the point of the bayonet, in.
the endeavours of the Government to enforce the cruelties
of that law. He would read to the House the solemn
pledges made by Lord Brougham when he pleaded in
the House of Lords for the second reading of this ini-
quitous Bill.
(The Hon. Member then proceeded to
read an extract from the speech of the Noble Lord, in
which he stated that that measure would elevate the
character of the people of this country, give a new im-
pulse to property, and destroy idleness and vice.) How
had (continued the Hon. Member) these pledges and
promises been realised ? The people had been robbed
and plundered under the operation of that law for
upwards of thirteen years. Was it to h e supposed
now that the curtain wa ; allowed to descend quietly over
those scenes of horror, of blood, and of cruelty ? If
the Government was prepared to take upot i itself the
responsibility of all these accumulated ere elties, they
certainly possessed more courage and brae cry than he
had ever given them credit fur possessing. Before the
passing of this taw the people were pro wised good
wages ; neat, good, and comfortable houses. But what
was the result, as appeared by the stet-clients of Cride
H in. Member for Manchester some time 811..32? He said
fiat the people of Manchester were some ereofin thethm
living upon Id. per day ; that they
habit of eating dead t
horses, s st pover y-
striken were great masses of the people,
clothes
that they
were in the habit of pawning their. day the
obtain their bed clot hes from the.
evening in order to
pawnbroker's m to cover them at night. !sad thought
it his duty to move some time since for a -return of the
mode in which the poor bad been dispo s ed of ; and
although that return had been ordered., swill not the
slightest notice had been taken of that ordcr, and the
reason given for it was that Ao possible account could
be obtained. and no return had been enade from that day
to this. In the year 1843 the 'poor-law had been in
peration nine years. Now, what was the effect
or this law upon the • •
morals, the condition, and
the habits of the people ? Teat law, which bad been
pledged to produce such bensericial results ? He I 'egged to
read to the House a stetereent, made by wee of the pre •
sent Cabinet Ministers. Lord Howick, when. a, Member
of this House, stated that in Sunderland the po<ir-rates
had risen to 18s. in the pound. (The lion. Mem her then
proceeded to read ae considerable length au extr act from
a speech of Lord. Howick.) What a contra st (con-
tinued the Hon. iliember) did that statement p resent to
the fair pledges and promises made by Lord It: •ougham,
and others, w hen the measure was introduc ,ed. He
would, therefore, convict the Government or f having.
been false prophets out of the mouth of on e of the
members, of their own Cabinet. He would else read to
the House a statement made by Lord arollglisst a in the
year 1843, nine years after the passinr, of t. he Act,
in order to show to the House in -
what . manner
the, operation of the law a
wad born ;0 out
the pledges and promises of its
sup. porters.
The Hon. Gentleman then read an extr act fr om the
Times of 1843, stating that a great numb( -e of fese poor
of Stourbridge were subsisting upon turnip atone, and
that the farmers in the neighbourhood had bad five, or
six tons a week stolen; but they were in s uch a dea."":
able state that the persons could not
-id it in their
hearts to prosecute them. He held in bier band an
account of proceedings which took place in a same year
at the Brentford Sessions, before the magi rates esf thee
county of Middlesex. A poor man war 4 brow4ht u. 9
before them in the prison dress, and brand ed in I'l,
yl
he had mentioned. The magistrates, a Lid five or via

~ 4~'
/'

MAY 18, 1847.

fwerr—c- .cs• ‘••••••••,
were present, all spoke with indignati
in which the poor wt-re treated under
Poor-law Commissioners,and one of th 4
stated that the country was coming
of feudal slavery, and he was glad
members of the I3,nch were unanimc
the conduct which the Comm
tnwarrlq the Door. He also had a