The Sun.
London, England, 1840-05-23 00:00:00

POOR-LAW.

Lord PORTM AN said he had given notice that he
would this evening put a question to his Noble Friend,
the Secretary for the Home Department, respecting the
circular issued by the Poor-law Commissioners for the
rating of stock in trade ; but he thought it would be more
convenient to move for a return of the paper itself, to
which his Noble Friend had no objection. In the case
of the Queen against Lumsley, the Court of Queen's
Bench had decided that stock in trade was liable to be rated.
That decision was a revival of the 43d Elizabeth, which
it had long been found impossible to carry into effect.
That Bill rendered not only stock in trade, but also every
inhabitant liable to be rated in proportion to his personal
means ; and the difficulties which it would occasion would
extend to the county rates and all other kinds of rate.
The only remedy proposed for these difficulties was the
clause which the Attorney-General had given notice he in-
tended to introduce into the Poor-law Amendment Act,
for the purpose of exempting stock in trade from being
rated. But there were two kinds of stock in trade—that
of shopkeepers and that of farmers. The shopkeeper had
not yet been rated, but the farmer had, and there was a
case proceeding, the Queen against Capel, for the pur-
pose of establishing the liability of the farmer. These
were some of the difficulties of the case as it at present
stood, but it seemed to him that the remedy was altoge-
ther inadequate. The Poor-law Amendment Act pro-
vided that the County rate should in future be paid by the
Board of Guardians to the Treasurer with the other rates,
but then the whole abuses of the collection and levying
and distribution of the rates were left as they at present
stood. It might be asked what suggestion he would make
to remedy these difficulties ? and he feared that in offering
any suggestion he would be only laying himself open to
the observations of other Noble Lords. What, however,
seemed to him the most judicious vnd practicable re-
medy was to bring in a separate and distinct measure
on the subject.—(Hear, hear, hear.) To repeal all the
laws which at present existed on the subject of the
assessment of property—to repeal all the laws which
gave exemption to particular descriptions of property, and
to embody in one statute a list of all the property to be
rated, and also all the articles which were to be exempted,
giving a plain and simple schedule to the rate-maker to
guide him in making it. He thought they should adopt,
as far as was possible, the precedent of the Irish Act,
which had been very carefully framed.—( Hear, hear.)
It appeared to him that the proper way would be to
meet
the difficulty in the face, premising that, in les opinion, it
would be better, before taking any steps upon the subject,
to wait the decision of the Courts of Law on the ease
which was then pending. The Noble Lord concluded by
moving for copies of certain correspondence that had taken
place with the Poor-law Commissioners.
The Marquis of NORMANBY had certainly no objec-
tion to the production of these papers, and he thought
he was speaking the sentiments of their Lordships when he
said they were much indebted to him for the clear and
accurate statement he had given of his views upon that
most important subject.—( Hear, hear.) He had not ex.
petted that the Noble Lord would have entered into so.
detailed a statement of the subject, and under these cir-
cumstances his Noble Friend must feel that it would be
premature in him to pronounce any opinion upon the sug-
gestion he had made, or to pledge himself as to what course
the Government might think proper to adopt. That was
not the place to enter into a discussion of the opinion of
the Judges, but he believed that it would be most de-
sirable that whatever remedy it was intended to
apply should be brought forward as speedily
as possible, as the position in which parties
stood at present was one of great inconvenience and un-
certainty.—( Hear, hear.) He did net say whether it
would be desirable to introduce a separate measure upon
the subject, and he could assure the Noble Lord that lie
would give his best attention to it.—( Hear.)
The Duke of RICHMOND was delighted his Noble
Friend had brought forward the subject, and that it had
met to a certain extent the views of the Noble Marquis at
the head of the Home Department. He trusted that fair
play would be given to all parties concerned, and although
he did not wish to see the shopkeepers rated, he hoped
it would be borne in mind that the land was also already
rated, and that it would be very hard if the farming-stock
was now rated.—( Hear, hear.)
Lord A S HB URTON hoped the question would be
dealt with in a satisfactory manner. The intention of the
, law was that the parties should be rated according to their

Admiral ADAM presented a petition from Kinross,
praying for the separation of Church and State, and that
no public money might be granted for Church Extension.
On the motion of Sir H. II A R DING E, the Launces-
ton Market and Improvement Bill was read a third time,
and passed.
Mr. MACAULAY presented a petition from Edin-
burgh, praying for protection to the Copyrights of De-
signs. Also three petitions, praying for the repeal of the
Corn-laws.

Mr. A. WHITE presented a petition against Church
Extension.

Mr. MAUNSEL presented a petition from a place in
Northampton, praying for the exclusion of Roman Ca-
tholics from Parliament.

Mr. E WART presented a petition from the Disstnters
of Wigan against Church Extension ; also four praying
for the total extinction of Church-rates.

Captain JONES, seeing the Hon. Member for Carlow
in his place, begged to ask him if it was his intention to
move the second reading of the Loughs Foyle and Swilly
Bill, as his name appeared on the back of it.
Mr. A. YATES knew nothing of his name appearing
on the Bill.

Captain JONES, under these circumstancQs, would,
without stating any reasons, move that dm Bill be read a
second time that day six months. He was waiting
for that purpose, and no one was presen,t to move the Bill.
It stood in the paper and might be moved when he eras
not present.

Mr. F. FRENCH said that was an unusual mode for
any Hon. Member to take. The Member who had charge
of the Bill might be in his place in time to move it.
Captain JONES said both Hon. Members whose names
appeared on the Bill had been in the House within a very
few minutes. He would persist in his motion.
Mr. YATES would move the second reading of the
Bill. He was favourable to the Bill because it would give
employment to thousands of the poor of Ireland.
Captain JONES was about to give his reasons, when
Sir H. HARDINGE begged to ask whether the Bill
was on the table of the House?
Mr. YATES—Yea.

Captain JONES then said the present Bill had been
brought in without any communication being made to him,
although he had brought in a Bill himssif for that purpose.
The object was to recover certain lands which at that time
were overwhelmed by the sea. The perons living near
had each of them thereby acquired certain rights, such as
the use of the sea, and objected to being deprived of them
by a Joint-stock Company. They had consented to the
original Bill on condition that they should not have to deal
with such a Company, but with the undertakers only ; and
if Parliament consented to this Bill, it would be a-breach
of faith with them. He, therefore, moved the Bill should
be read a second time that day six months.
Mr. F. FRENCH intimated that in consequence of the
opposition to it the Bill would be withdrawn.---( Hear.)
Mr. ESTCOURT presented a petition from Lincoln-
shire against certain clauses of the Poor-law Act ; also two
petitions against any further grant to Maynooth College.
Mr. VIT.,LIERS presentcd petitions from Newry,
Dundee, from fifteen parishes in Stafford, and several
other places, for a repeal of the Corn-laws. Also peti-
tions from Warwickshire against Church Extension.
Lord TEIG NMOUTH presented a petition from
Marylebone, against any reduction of the duty on Foreign
Brandy.
Mr. HUME presented ten petitions from various dis-
tricts of London, against the Copyright Bill. The Hon.
Member was about to read one of them, when ho was
(tiled to order by the other side of the House, and he then
moved that all the petitions be read at length by the
Clerk at the table.-4 Cheers, and laughter.)
One of the petitions having been read by the clerk,
Mr. HUME said he would not trouble the House with
the reading of the others. He merely wished to show that
he had the right.--( Ironical cheers from the Opposition
benches.) The Hon. Member then presented a petition
from the workmen employed in the Burgh Iron-works at
the Galiowgate,iGlasgow, in favour of the Peoples' Charter,
and a petition from Lanarkshire, praying for Universal
Suffrage, Annual Parliaments, and Vote by Ballot. Also
a petition from Kilkenny in favour of inland bonding
warehouses.

Mr. V. SMITH presented a petition from Northamp-
ton, in favour the Chimney-sweepers' Bill.
Sir R. H. INGLIS presented a petition from the Uni-
versity of Oxford in favour of the Chimney-sweepers' Bill.
Colonel WOOD presented a petition from the West
Middlesex Water-works Company against the Grand
Junction Railway.
Mr. GROTE presented nino petitions from the Ward
of Farringdon Without, from Islington, Newington, avid
other places, praying► for a total repeal of the Corn-laws.