The Sun.
London, England, 1841-03-20 00:00:00

SOUTH AUSTRALIA.

The House then went into committee on the South
Austraiii Acts.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
would be remembered that on a former occasion a vote had
been proposed which had for its object to relieve the dis-
tress now prevailing in South Australia. The vote in the
firm in vi hid, it was proposed was objected to. He now
proposed to advance out of the Consolidated Fund the sum
of 155,0001. for the purpose of effecting this object.
Sir W. MOLES WORTH said he cordially approved
of what had b2en proposed by the Hon. Gentleman, as the
only means of preventing cast distress in the colony. It ap-
peared to him that the proposal did not go far enough
to meet the exigencies of the case. Not only ought the
bills which had been drawn by the Governor of South
Australia to be provided for, but in his ( Sir W. Moles-
worth's) opinion the debt incurred by the Commissioners,
and due to the Emigration Fund, ought also to be paid. The
House was, perhaps, aware, that by art Act passed in 1834,
persons were induced to expend considerable sums of
money in waste lands. There were no funds now
available to the Emigration Fund, and the debt due to
those parties amounted to 56,0001. If they were board to
pay the bills which had besn drawn by the Governor of the
colony, they were equally bound to protect these individuals
from loss. One of the Colonisation Commissioners stated that
a great portion of the 56,0001. bad bcen paid for the purchase
of -land by country gentlemen, who were anxious to afford
the means of emigration to their surplus tenantry. He
entreated the consideration of the Right Hon. Gentleman
and the Committee to these circumst mccc, and recommended
that they would take a supplementary vote for that sum.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
the lion. Baronet did not appear to be aware of the nature
of the v,.t... It was not a tir'al settlement.--(hear.) It
merely provided for the rcli f of parties who were
placed in circumstances of great difficulty, while
other questions were pending. As the measure was
merely a temporary one he did not think it necessary to
press the question at the present moment.
The resolution was then agreed to. The House re-
sumed, and the Report was ordered to be received on
Monday.

POOR-LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL that the Order
of the Day for going into Committ..e on the Poor-law
Amendment BAt be read, a great number of petitions on
the subject were presented, among which were a petition
presented by
Mr. T. DUNCOME3E, from eleven hundred of the
rate-payers of the parish cf St. Andrew's, Holborn, and
other parishes in London, agairst extending the authority
of the Commissioners ; and in favour of greater powers
being given to the parochial officers.
Aiso a petition presented by Lord HOWICK from
Norfolk, pra) ing for sufficient discretion being given to the
Poor-law Guarutansto enable them :o atl,Jd out-door re-
lief in cares ‘Nhere it might be necessary.
Nlr. G. PALMER presented a petition from Brook-
dale, in Essex, against the Poor-laws.
Sir DE LACY EVANS pretested petitions from
parishes in Westminster, praying for modification of the
Poor-law s.
Mr. T. F. HOPE presented a petition from medical
practiLioncrs in Gloucester, praying for alteration as re-
spects the employment of medical practioners.
Mr. AINSWORTH presented a petition from Bolton,
against the New Poor-law Bill.
Mr. HAWES presented a petition from Lambeth to the
same effect.

Sir J. Y. BULLER presenteJ a petiiion from Ash-
burton to the same erect.

Colonel NVOOD presented a petition from the county
of 13. econ to the same effect.

Mr. B. WOOD presented a petition from the parish of
St. George, Southwark, praying for modifications in the
Bill.

Colonel T. WOOD presented a petition from Ken-
sington against the Bill.
Mr. L HODG ES presented a petition from Gravesend
to the same effect.

Mr. WAKLEY presented petitions from St. Mary,
Newington, Surrey ; from Leicestershire; from the
Tosser Liberty; from the vicar, guardians, and overse2r9
of a pariah i❑ Berkshire ; from a Poor-law guardian in
Chelsea, and a Poor-law guardian in Kensington, against
the passing of the Bill.
Petitions were also presented by Mr. Langdale,
from Hull, North Shields, Sommerton, Hereford, and
Taunton, praying that Roman Catholic paupers might be
allowed to attend their own religious worship on Sundays;
by Captain Nebel', from 4,980 inhabitants of Biigbton,
praying tlic management might be entrusted to local au-
thorities; and by Sir John Tyrrell, from Essex, against
the Bill. _ _

Mr. WAKLEY said, that when he gave notice of filo
motion on the paper, the lion. Member for Preston buld
not gilen notice of his amendment; and he understood if
his (Mr. Wakley's) amendment was negatived, it would
pi event thu amendmet.t of the Hon. Member for Preston
from being entcrt.ined. He wanted to hear the ()Onion
of the Spelker on that point.
The 6PE AK ER said the motion of the Hon. Member
for Finsbury did not in any way interfere with that of the
Hon. Member for Preston.

Mr. WAKLEY then rose to move that it bean instruc-

tion to the Committee to divide the Bill into two Bills.
His motion would be a test of the sincerity of the 11 olio
tNith respect to the Bill. With reference to the continu-
ance of the Commission, it was said by a great number
of Members that they would vote fcr its continuance for
five years, but no longer. Others said they objected
to the Commission altogether, but were in favour of cer-
tain clauses of the Bill ; and thus between this diversity
of feeling and opinion the majority cf the Hulse found
opportunities to vote on every occasion in favour of the
measure. Now, suppo-ing the Bill were divided into two
parts, the house would have an opportunity of expressing
its opinion upon each respectively. If they did desire
that the Commission should terminate at the end of five
years—if they would act like practical and sensible men
—if they desired to consult public feeling as became the
representatives of the people, they cou Id not object o
draw the Bill in such a form asahould have the effect of en-
abling them to work it when the Commission should
cease to exist. The present Bill would appear, from its
construction, to contemplate the permanent continuance
of the Commission. There was nothing in the present
Bill that could lead any man to suppose that it was in-
tended, at the end of five years, that the Commission should
cease.—( Hear.) There was not a word, a line, or a sen-
canoe in any one clause on which any friend of
the measure could place his finger and say, ~ Hers
is evidence that at the end of five years, it is our object
to terminate the Commission." This was net dealing
f.irly with the people. It was a most unfair, a most un.
just, and a most unphilosophical mode of proceeding.
With a people, like the English. they should say at once
what they intended to do. If they intended to make the
Commission permanent, they should frame the Bill ac-
cordingly; but it they intended it should cease, they should
come turward with a Bill suited to such a "nurse. And he
said, unless thin were done, the House was dealing, trea-
cherously with the English community. Was there a
feeling that the people would not endure the continuance
of the Commission ? Was the House afraid to brave the
public team, ? He was at a loss to understand how the
great landdatiste cracy of the country, who had such a
stoke at issue, could lend themselves, he bad almost said
meanly lend themselves, to promote a law of this nature.
Were they as are of what they were doing ? He was
ar
preteatingnitTahihentewayienasiallitzh
astonished that any person, who veted for thecontainnduance
of this law, could also encourage the
education
thsoa,t ebnu..-t
lightenment of the people. It Cr" impossiblen together. The
lightenment and this law could
people saw that it was the means of
of every feeling:'which
of the country at the P
caw:el:I:
had
dr 0 theytda taker
cn,d,
Te
re enied.-Chde:ail.
I,:utelm:i
distant
al life, and, enibp'ucun:Pato'hiseeir beings.
oef tat e s , insist
otillieghtartoistboecrraecsf,ectefdira.mtoehtizeiog
and, not only
on the sacrifica of human
i„ jeopardy. If circumstances such
placing their own i
etmh.peir\e:orkhAousurasttt
placewichin these few days in the metropolis
s of the Commissioners, what must
have the j
got to the
to
.1 un all the way to rea:hheits)tasttleieed
have taken place l ,
- called upon to act officially at Isle_
time since hc iwas
inquest on a child that
died there.
buried, and when the mother
the way
takenadt the ts
:l 1-
was informed that the child could not be
pox at al, and that it was a fabrication. The clergyman
eb4avaetw
i.a,a, nyr
warrant
no tri inquirytfiv[ifor
tacjvcia',l::Eutiarri ele:hlt:,:b:Vteo:arns' a(liun)hesslei luesiti:cl'ai
hadadn.,tddidii eon dg. ilitt,lfidi talati etii
ti
hsmallad
then stated that he should not inter the. child, but weseld
instituted, and wrote a
send it back to
aenheidld;besilriaca saunbjineegtu.esl-tl,e considered
i t letterhis (tioutiyi itno ( INi
issue
proved that when themother '.
oughtworkhouse,
to tet
weaned
had been five weaenkds it
tn
Bras
old, the surgeon said it
„, a year a.
and •
was taker,
ifrom her and placed in the nursery. It was
said she did not object, it
sent cn Tuesday. On the Monday following she made
an ordinary visit to it, and on entering the nursery the
child was so changed that she could not recognise it. The
mollies went to the Governor, and said she desired to leave
the house, for if she remained there another week it was
impossible the child could live. The Governor informed
her they had first some business to settle. (It was an ill,g-i_
tirnate child.) The doctor saw it at two o'clock, and
stated there was nothing serious the matter.. That was
on the Monday following the Tuesday on which she was
Sunday night,
at nine
admitted. On the following,
o'clock, the child was seized with convulsions,. and at a
it died. The nurse Informed the Go-
vernorginner to eleven
f the child's death came out in evidence,
(
that the mother was not informed of it until the next
morning, when she learned the fact from the women in
the
breakfast-room. Was the House prepared to sanc-
tion, uphold, and support such a system of legislation ?
0r we e gentlemen So foolish as to believe that under such
a system they would remain in safe possession of their
property? they taught parents to have no regard for
their children, would those parents have respect to pro..
perty? They might talk of Radicalism and Ra-
dicals, and destructine measures, but of all the
destructive laws that ever were invented—of all the
revolutionary laws that ever were des.igned—of all the
sangtuealy jawsr-laws having a sanguinary tendency-.

EVENING EDITION:

tt ever were framed, he believed the equal of this law
-•,-as never designed or invented by any human being._
Hear.) He wished the House could see the jurymen
:vhen cases of this kind came before them, and !gar the
exnresl(ons which they applied to such violations of the
best feelings of human nature. What must have been
sear feelings in the case to which he had referred ? Same
persons considered that it was in the bi2hest degree useful
to have an efficient workheuse test. Would the Haute of
C.ammons declare that if a man had a high spirit which
would not suffer him to go into the workhouse, he should
2karve ?—(Hear.) From what he had seen of the two, if
had to choose between the workhouse and the Helve of
Correction, he would prefer to go into the latter ?
t Hear.) When this question was discuss:d bcfn•e, Men,-
:ers studiously abstained from alluding to the age 1,
'ne infirm, and the deserving. It %las unfo'rly as-
-owed that those only applied to be admitted who were
lie and disorderly persons, or persons ganerally of bad
laractor. They must all be awa-e thtt there we: ean
-Imense number of men who had maint,dned their families
respectabilil for twenty or thirty years, and were
on compelled by unforeseen mi,furtunes to apply for
::•% Were such men to be treated during the remainder
• t' their days in the same manner as the spendthrirt who
ilandered his earnings, as the man who had neglected his
'fe, and reduced his children to beggary end want
Lord did not hesitate to say that the Gui rdians
•d no right to make any distinction between merit and
?sera,; in short, that whether the destitution was un-
oidAble, or produced by re( klus3 extravagance, the same
e was to be applied. This was said in a reformed
use of Commc is.--( Hear, hear.) Yes, a ref, rmc a,
net an amended House of Commons.—(hear, hear.)
• ( Mr. Waldey) would prefer having the old borough-
;era :here._( Hear, hea-.) He firmly believed

it would be better for the iLtemsts of Ile
heir.) They would never have dared to
such a law to the or to have so roused the
;igna!ion of the people. Ilicau:e the House was elected
considerable n_asses of the people i was presumed t tit
strong enough to vto k out a course of iniquity of
description. The people ere not rep-e-ented by tho
;if they were such a could not exist. He was
thst he had ever taken part in product g such a
- —( Hear, hear, and Isugl.Lir.) It vas trtAiy irn-
si,,sible to reflect upon passing events without being
I -ed and alarmed. The people of England were not an
vices or a malignant people; they mere of a kindly and
.nerous disposition, and required nothing but kind
us. lie ei 1 not believe that, th^re existed on the face

the earth a more honest hearted or a batter disposed
: ;;'e. They eught not then to be treated harshly. I:
been said that this law would hav; the effect of

ing wages. The law had been in operation six
tiers, and where was the increase ? They were
eectly enjoined by their superiors net to come upon their
eperty on pain of being punished. Every one knew that
great mass of the poor had no desire to do s 7. He
j not know what might be the exalt s' a e of things in
rural districts at the present time, but when he was a
oey, there was scarcely a place about a farm house that was
secured. Nobody thought of a thief—it was the last thing
Chet ever entered into the mind. Every farmer and every
gentleman considered that he was surrounded by friends and
supporters on every side. What was the state of things
row ? He did not find the people so f'iendly to the landed
proprietors as they formerly were. Laws had been made
to prevent them encroaching on the property of the gentry,
and then they were turned round on and told they must
tither take whatever wages was offered them, or go into
the workhouses. That had not the effect of raising wages,
but the contrary. He held in his hand a letter from a Dis-
senting clergyman of Oafnrdshire, in which he had stated
ghat an industrious poor man, with a family of five children,
;tied declared to hint that he would rather take five shillings
reek than go the workhouse. Ile need not remind the
house of the case of the unfortunate man who, a short
time since, was found dea3 from starvation, although he
bad an order for tho Kensington Union in his pocket. It
would appear that the Commissioners had all the power
and authority in their own hands, and that the gentlemen
of England, who were once so proud and haughty,
were obliged to submit- to them in every instance.
oppose a law was passed to prevent the gentry from
g'.ving their dogs food 1/1070 than once a week—would
they submit to it ? No ; their dignity would rise at once,
and the yeomanry cavalry would be out in a week with
their swords glittering on the hills. —( A laugh.) But
when they were told that they would riot be allowed to
feed the poor as they liked, then they truckled to the
Government agents, and they say to the unfortunate
Feeeple—'t Wo would relieve you if we could, but the
:kr-Jr-law Commissioners think you have got quite enough
le eat." Respecting as he did the institutions of the
hasuntry, valuing its peace, and desi:ing to see content-
Anent, concord, and good feeling between the people and
their natural protect-its-1:e, from the bottom of his bent,
c.%-elorei the existence of the present law, and the apathy
e.i the once proud and high-minded gentry of England.
"Ile should move, therefore, that the 1111 be divided into
Veo Bills—that there be oae Bill for the Commissioners,
czel that the other be so framed an to work without tl:e
t`e:ommiseioners, and he believed if the latter Bill was so
flied it would give general satisfaction.—( Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said the Hoe. Gentleman had
oposed to divide the Bill into two, and he had keen de-
e -Tut to bear the arguments that might be urged on that
eeeint, but the Hon. Gentleman had given none whatever.
—e(llear, bear.) On the contrary, he had addressed
la-,,mself to thora inflammatory topics urged against the
Poor-law Amendment Bill, and had included in his attack
upon that measure various other topics. Among other
rFaestions he bad alluded to tite mecum and the working of
Vhf.! Reform Bill. There certainly had been a great deal
c7l discussion as to its merits when it was before that House
%:_d one point had been very much discussed, namely, the
e:opriety of giving representatives to certain metropolitan
a i3trict;.—(Hcar, hear, and a laugh.) It was admitted
fiat the large and populous towns of Birmingham and
Isianehester and these places might have representatives,
it was said that if the metropolitan districts were to
oletain representatives they would send into that House a
act of mischievous demagogues—(Great cheering and
latighter)—hiving no regard for tine general interests of
the people—that they might bo lawyer?, and if they hap-
pened to sit in Courts of Justice they would turn them ieto
az 'nas for political discussion—(Cheering and laughter)—
if they happened to hold any office connected with the ad-
ministration of justice, they would pervert the powers
conferred on them to their own primate and personal pur-
peses, and that whatever might be the merits of the other
ets of the Bill, as regarded ennferring Members on
t se large towns, if the metropolitan districts obtained
pitvilcge, they would see in that House men who
er should have been entrusted with the power of rei-
t aQsenting the people.—(Hear, and cheers.) Among
ester arguments which the Hon. Gentleman used on the
prevent, as upon other occasions, was his representing that
ti Peer-law Amendment Act had a tendency to increase
the value of property—that it gave inc eased security to
the rich. He ( Lord J. Russell) did not deny that it
might have that effect—the Poor law Amendment Act
mieht have the effect of diminishing excessive charges, aid
the waste that formerly took plane, and might thereby
tend to improve the general prop- ty of the country. But
if the law was in its results teeeficial to the country, if it
raised the character of the labourer, and drew the dis-
tinction which ought to be drawn between e ante and the
relief of the poor, he ( Lord J. Russell) submitted that
was by no moans a conclusive argument against such an
.tweet. The Honourable Gentleman narrated in Li; usual

clear and able style:aparticular instance, from which -he
&cot references which were not justifiable. The particular
facts of the case were, that the child was subjec; t ; a
di.ease exceedingly common among children, water on the
brain, attended with convulaions. The persona att,mdirg
uticn the child stated, that whenever the mother ap-
pi-naebed it the ceuvuhions became great, r, end the tem-
r;',"f the child more irritated. For that :coon, the
1,.,,v7 thcrwatart directed by the surgeon not to come near it.
i::. the country.
C 550 might occur in any of the richest families
With regard
to one patticuiar fact men-
s: by the Hon
a child oecurred, Gentleman, that when the death cf
!,;--.;..t blame was onk notice was given to the coroner ;
be ( Lord J. Ru'asenll)osatt, attributable to the officers, but
totly could have, no lawoubyd sayth.t they had cr pre-
-1.1,:,:e5, such as th,t referred which they could pre; eat
rinight be excited. c a to,o whereby great inc:igi,a-ion
city a who went done
Qotfy, a case way stated bynic'in'et of Commissioners of In-
tl Bristol, P.nd found in that
in
ay %prarson that was fir
taofiThwhich was
ee7.:.,r141 r.:ars insane, confinewdas
in
he
mkosr
rv.--,cr cleare ). The person
ler many years no person had attended to the ym'ati.n ald
,411;ch he was treated. Now there were, no d , ne: .n
cunt, per-
or.,t-ts very much to !Aura for that treatment, but he ( Lord
..%;,lin Russell) would not impute it to the Act of Eliza-
-1)10. The e were cases which they ought to do their heat
to, prevent, but wllich, he thou4ht, were far leas
Iti•:.ely to occur under the present than under the
Pfkrner 'systom. Under the f:Tater system
cvic•rYactpc2if-
eas; hail a separ Ito government, and
if
anyabuse or
but it
V ' elty took place it might Ferhaps he remedied;
41; i ;lit In the pre-
also bo totally unknown or forgotten. ~
ins
*l-at system thee-0 r;er.) Poor-law Unictc,, and Guardi
et thoso I.lnbrs meeting from time to time, and if there
w,ao subjects of complaint those complaints were rnen-
.W.-raeol in all the newspTers of the day; rcpresentat oos
:.tee made of them to that House. There were a certain
au.trnher of preens who thought these matters of complaint
to
;he such not against parish officers, but against the Corn-
4'!esioners sitting in Someriet House, or against the Go.
ttnnment of the due. Therefore he would say that there
I: ra far greater security under the present than under the
et rmer law. He did not say that they had perfect security
- -%IC did not tell them that such cases as were adveit:rd to
t"-It night • did not occur, or might not occur again ; he
'3ubted whether they could have a I•tw that would give
*hat security—but he did say that it was not in consequence
uF the present law that such cases had occu:te3. The
t ' ”. Gentleman
. _, complained that there were rules issued
C, the Commissioners under which they might prevent
-.e.,t by the guardians,-rtain articles of food being given
cited what would Gentlemen Say
ii th ey were not allowed
tn feed their hounds as they chose? Now it was to be
considered !lilt in crder to g•. ve certain articles of food tote
iuirdians were not to put their hands into their own
r,,kets, but the taxes which were levied on the poor and
L'3ouring daises should be increased. If there could bu
ley means adopted by which labour ougbt at all to be re-
,c-.-:eted, let them, if it was necessary, aid if they tended
tc the welfare of the whole community—let them make ;
sash restrictions, hat let those who make them take cre. '
that they du not enhance tl:e food of the labourer, and thereby
create a necessity for higher wages, in order to enable
him to live, and thus inflict a serious injury on the labourer.
What they ought to do was to secure to the labourer far
‘vages and fair field for his industry and exertions, aril if
they did that he did not doubt but that on such a stage the
it; oglish labourer would be well prsvided for —( Cht e;-8. )
I ut they should take care that by a Poor-law system they
di.l not intercept the labourer's They should take
yam that the labourer was wages.
not paid partly by wages and
_partly by Poor-law relief remunerated
by receiving wages only a-that he was not
by being forced durin during one part of the year, and
Board to receive rnoney;
an.,:idl.Tr part to go to a public
,proposed, the labourer were forcedthe Hon. Gentiemro
`proposed,
to receive charitable to go to that public
relief, and that Board ' o
rind to inquire into his character for
prudence
,e antho-
&ace, not on tlio questiou as to whether he or imPru'
should De

engaged as a labourer to receive wages, but as to whether
he should participate in a public charity, then he (Lord
John Russell) would contend that such a state of things
would be degrading to the chara-ter of the labourer,
would make him dependent, and would lo er his
feelings by forcing him, instead of erste: ng into
a fair contract for wages in re tern fcr labour, go as a men-
dicant to a public board for charity, which might be r:-
fu e 1 or granted according to caprice. The Hn. Gen-
tleman supposed that the conduct of such a board would
be fair ; he (Lord John Russell) doubted if it would be so.
A farmer might, out of ca rice, say—" I do net like that
man." A country gentleman might say—" I suspect that
fellow snared a hare last week."—(Cheere.) And thus
every mln would undergo that scrutiny as to whether cr
not he should be permitted to receive this charity. It
would indeed degrade the labourer into a state of cil-
leinage.—(Cheers.) That was his opinion, and he would
not shrink from the expression of it. The teat of destitu-
tion was liable to noire cf those evils. The lion. Gentle-
man had given instances of the repugnance of the poor to
go into the workhouse. lie admitted that repugnance,
and he thought the poor were ill advised. It was for the i--
wrest of the pcor to sny—" Here we are, willing to work for
fair wages ; if you will not g:ve us that, thee we ask to be
admitted to the house, and to be furnishe 1 with f rod and
shelter." If that plan were adopted, he thought that the
prospect of employment at fair wages would be much mere
likely to be realised.—(Cheers.) But, instead of that, it
had been attempted to instil ire() the minds 'of the poor,
that any, e7ea the lowest wages, were better than the
wenkhouse. The workhouse had been described as a
prison by those who arrogated to thernsely s the titles of
the benefactsrs of the poor, but who were, in fact, their
worst enemies.—( Loud cheers.) He was sorry he
had been agein led into the dereace of the general princi-
ple of the B!Il. Bat he had been led to do so by the mo-
tion of the Hon. Gentleman for dividing the Bill into two
parts, and whatever might lie asserted as to the eff.tct of he
Bill, in protecting property, or as to its operation in low-
ering or raising wages, be would assert that the great
merits of its principle was that it led to the raising of the
character and improving the condition and the well.being
f t':e poo-, and that, if persisted in, it would raise to the
highest pitch of former times the independence of the Eng-
lish labourers.—( Loud cheers.)
Mr. FIEL DEN rose to express kis tatter abhorrence of
the principles laid down by the Noble Lora, who would
be judged by the people f.n. what he bad said that night.
Lard GRANVILLE SOMERSET disapproved of the
powers given to the Poor-law Commissioners, and of many
clauses- in the Bill, but he could not vote for the d;vi-
sion of because he thought that such dieision would
have the effect cf preventing any amendment. If th et
divi-i were made, the Noble Lord, hiving carried his
13j1 for continuing the Poet. law Commissioners, might
say, after two or three nights' discussion on the amend-
ment, that the attempt was hopeless to carry the Bill
during the prcssent Session, and thus the carrying of those
amendments, which all were anxious to introduce into the
present system, might be endangered.
Colonel SIBTHORP said he had high authority
for saying there was great joy over one sinner that re-
peated, and this he applied to the Hon. Member for Fins-
bury ( Wakley): who now regretted that he had sup-
ported Ali Reform Big. A more dangerous and destruc-
tive meastn'e than that was never passed. With respect to the
present Bill, let Hon. Members read the eaeses which the
Noble Lord called amendments. He knew what Dr. Johnson
defined an amendment to be, but he hal never before
known what was meant by an amended Act of Parliament.
Ho was opposed to all Commissions, but especially to this
one, because it was impossible that the Commissioners
sitting in Somerset House could know how this law ope-
rated throughout the kingdom. He believed it was most
partial and unjust in its operation. Ho would ask the
N able Lord whether they could spend too much time ore
insestigaeions of so much importance. How much time
was wasted in that House on matters of mere party inte-
rest, and yet here was a measure affecting the interests of
thousands, and time was refused for its consideration and
discussion. Reserving himself for a future occasion, he
should now only say, that at every stage, and on every
occasion, this Bill should have his most strenuous opposi-
tion.—(Hcar, hear.)

Sir H. VERNE Y supported the Commission, and said
tbst since that law came into operation, the wages of the
poor had considerably increaved.
Mr. NV AKL EY said that as hii motion did not appear
to meet with the sanction of the House, he would not
trouble the House to divide upon it, especially ai there was
another motion to be brought forward which had the same
object.
Mr. TOWNLEY- PARKED rose to move that the

House should resolve itself into Committon on the Bill
that day six months. The Hon. Gentleman said he would
oppose the Bill in every stage, believing that it would be
highly pernicious to the interests of the country. By the
10th clone he found that there was an intention on the
part of the Poor-law Commissioners to direct that certain
Borth of Management should be appointed fer divers
purposes:, and he could not help concluding that the object
was to frame Boards which, consisting of fewer persons,
should be more subservient and pliant than the guardians.
He confessed that he was alarmed at the ambitious spiv it
manifested by the Commissioners wherever their power
could be made to extend. He had read a statement in a
public journal, which, from private information, be be..
licved to be true, illustrating this spirit. The statement, was
th'st at Barnstaple, after a public meeting held for the free
expression of public opinion, they had the audacity to send
down an Assistant Commissioner, who summoned before
him a gentleman, a Magistrate, who had taken part in that
meeting, and examined bias as to the language which he
had used on the occasion in reference to this subject.
The name of the Commissioner was Gilbert, that of the
Magistrate White. He mentioned this to give the Under-
Secretary of State, whore attention he perceived was drawn
to the statement, an opportunity of denial or explanation.
The Hon. Member then went on to refer to the 38th and
39th clauses, by which ho said power was conferred upon
the Commissioners to alter the number of Guardians, if
they thought it desirable to do so, in a particular parish.
lie strongly objected to such a provision. The Poor-law
Commissioners had represented the system as producing
great economy, a diminution of pauper:, and an im-
provement in the moral character of the people.
He denied that such was the case. Admit.
ting that that which was the fundamental principle
of the Bill, namely, the workhouse test, was in some
respects beneficial, it could never be brought into opera-
tion in large and populous town;. He objected to the in-
terference of the Commissioners in matters which hal
always been considered parochial. The Hoe. Gentleman
then proceeded to speak of the ambiguity of the Bill, when
be was interrupted by cries of " Question." He would
recommend those Gentlemen who cried " Question" to
leave the House if they did not approve of the line of ar-
gument he was taking. In 1839 and 1840 the Commis-
sioners had succeeded in uniting 24 parishes, which was a
proof that the opera' ion of the new law was beginning to
be looked upon with distrust by the people. In 1839 the
Commissioners levied a sum of 4,865,600/ , and in the fol-
lowing year they levied a sum of 5,213,898/., show-
ing an excess in the latter year cf 348,000 L, and
he stated that fact in order to rh )w that they
had failed in ffectirg the large saving in the Poor-
rates which they bad so confidently anticipated. He held
in Ida hand the returns of the amount of poor-rates levied
in various di tricts f,r the last few sears, and he found
bat they had gone on increasing to an alarming extent.
Much of that might certainly be attributed to the great
di tress that existed among the labouring classes, but he
feat od that much of it also arose from mismanagement, nod
the expensive nature of the system under which the new
law was administered. Under these circumstances, be
thought the Bill must be censidered extremely unpopular
throughout the country, and he begged to ask the Noble
Lord oppo'-ite how he could insult the peoide by re-enact-
ing the provisions cf so obnoxious a measure. He could
assure the Noble Lord that there was no or.e act of the
present Administration '7Lic': reedesed them so unpopular
with the people of the country. He entreated Honourable
Members on his, and the other, side of the House, to
pause before they g.ve their assent to such a measure. Ha
oil not anticipate any very large share of support in the
motion with which he was about to conclude, but he felt it
his duty to persevere in that motion—namely, that the
Bill be committed that day six months.
Mr. G RIM SDITCH seconded the amendment. He
feared the object of the Noble Lord was to render these
Commissioners perpetual. He believed there never was a
Bill which so fully justified the opposition of the repre-
seetatites of the iseiple in the House as the present. It
not oily perpetuated t!.e pots er of the Pot r-law Com-
missioners, but it ;eve them a ve:y extensile increase if
these powers with an almost unlimi'ed power of taxation.
—( Bear, hear.) lie did not deny that a central corerol
ways necessary in the first instance, but he contended that
.raving fulfilled these duties they v•" r no long neces-
sary, and ought tobe discontinued. It appcvr dto him
that the great exte
khe u e
of
of the unions gave scope for op.
pressiea and cruelty
.tyery description, and the
ti-
treatment and deathsrwhich
its
these union we frequently took place in
fully justified that assertion
Ile always considered
t'ice e should be ueiforreit great value in any law, th t
ofi,t,the exercise of it. Now, in
Cie Poor-law ArneridrnelYA
(Cheshire)
was no uni`orreity
what, v2r. In the county
%not the law
with which ho was
connected, what was the law in onr).
whilet ae another. In several unions theuynlined''
Commis-
sioners' order to enforce the workhouse test,
r- ms no such order existed. Ti.e most inteaseinfecteln -
iCe;
of Evlxiety and t:ircontent existed on ih-a subject of the i
densely popu,aeed district,. The w a
iw
ay n
iiynhiethietherno Poor-law was carried out, was, in his opinion,
scarcely justified by the
enactment of that law. The Hon
Poor-law Commissioners respectingth e punishment
to b' inflicted on paupers
Gentleman here read extracts from the orders made by the.
in workhouseF, to show
that the power of the Comm
issioners was excessive; that,
in fact, in their criers, they adopted the langu:ga of Par-
-1 lament. The CommisAenere had, he contended, a power
which they keem net hew to wield.
of the
They were wedded
to theories which were at variance with the feelings
people of the country, and they carried out th..se theories
in a nay which, sooner or Inter, would disturb aed destroy
the social system. They were iatroducing feelings be-
tween the rich and the pour which were calculated to
bring the greatest danger upon the atcicl system.
General JOHNSTON would support the amendment,
and he would state his reasons for so doing in a few words.
It was, in his min,/, a very g-eat error to put the n belt of
the labouring classes out if tler pale of the law, end put ,
them entirely in the hands of the Commiesior ers,
as the Poor. law Bill di 1. It must be allowed
on all bards that the: e never was a law which cre itcd more
dissension in the country than the law passed as the Pier-law
Amerehreat Act. If Hon. :Members vii,hed to entail upon
ihemselves the deadly hatred of the working clessee, they
end than
possibly pursue a better step to attain such an
the passing of such a law, which, among the
classes to whom it applied, went by thename of the Rich
Man's Law against Poor
the Man He could FCC no use
in maintainirg the Poor law Commissioners. in authority ;
there ought at least to ie some definite period fixed on
which their powers would CCASe All h t was wanting
was to cone:U.li° the people ; but t
t they never would be re- 1
r o;ciled to that law as long as the Commissioners in So-
niers et House put them out of the pale of the law.
Air, W. MILES could not but regret the time which
hal been waited that evening—(Hear, hettr)_y
es wasted,