The Sun.
London, England, 1847-05-21 00:00:00

se
against his chiefs—he would not hear ar gthing
that made against the Poor-law Commis goners.
He (Mr. Disraeli) thought, and he admitted ther e was a
great deal of truth in what the Noble Lord said on that
head. But could they then believe that such a man as
Mr. Chadwick was still at the board of the poor -law?—
(Loud and ironical cheers.) Though the Nob le Lord
(John Russell) nodded his head as insinuating tb at to be
the case, lie yet could not believe it.—(Renewed cheers,)
He hae heard a gentleman who had been a P, oor-law
Commissioner, and had a great distaste for family I ionours,
himself the father of a head Commissioner—(l- fear and
laughter)—say, that Mr. Chadwick was ad: sngerous
person—a most dangerous person to the Poor-I. ew Com-
missioners.—(lronical cheers.) Having heard IV ir. Chad-
wick denounced by one of the Commissioner s—(Hear
gad laughter)—by the father of a head Commit ;goner—
(lncreased laughter)—Sir Frankland Lewis ;, having
heard him denounced by the Noble Lord, but f 'or whom
they might not have had the Andover Union C ommittee
or this Bill, he could not believe that he was stall at the
board.—(Great cheering and laughter.) Ist state
secret was he the depositary of that be was stills :here re?—(Renewed ironical cheers.) If the Noble Lord bad
con-
descended to leave his red box, and gone to the green
table with a few plain men like himself, and there, with
pen aid paper, t eken close notes of evidence, he might
have come to a different conclusion. He had h eard that
gentleman make statements which hereceived as evidence.
But they had heard that gentleman characeerised as
po'soning the fountains of all truth. If a different spec-
tade had been presented that night. and if he had seen
the Noble Lord rise that night and say that he would
tyke upon himself the di. grace an,. the odium of one who,
to the extent of his abilities. had served him—if he had
done so, although at the moment of dissolution, and on
of a general election, he (Mr. Disraeli) would
theha eve v
e
admired the Noble Lord that night as one who
would not desert an old servant at the moment of attack.
_(Cheers.) But the Noble Lord was willing to benefit
by the services of a man whom he denounced. Yes, the
Noble Lord required a scape. goat and a victim; and, he
acid, I am obliged to make a Secretary of State with two
secretaries, on account of the underhand proceed-
ings of the secretary of the Poor-law Commis-
rimers. Yet that man remained at that moment secre-
tary at the Poor law Commissioners' board--(Cheers.)
He knew him but by his works—his works on the sana-
tory state of the country, and in treating of that subject,
the only places he appears to have passed were his own
office and the secret recesses of the Cabinet. The
House should remember that that Committee was called
under very peculiar circumstances. As regarded this
Bill, it was to be considered only as a Bill for the re-
construction of central control, to which they all agreed.
Let the House not forget the peculiar circumstances
under which this Bill was brought forward. When
these charges were made against the members of the
Andover Committee, he felt bound to remind the House
of the circunistanc .s under which that Committee
laboured. His Hon. Friend the Member for Peter-
bi rough had put into his hand a resolution which was
adopted with the joint approbation of the Committee,
and which, as it was very brief, he would take the liberty
of reading to the House. The Noble Lrd the chair-
man of that Committee had stated to him personally the
reason why he had voted against that resolution, namely
that he could not agree in the latter part. The resolu-
tion stated that the conduct of the Commissioners
Messrs. Parker and Day was not in accordance with the
statute under which they exercised their functions, and
was such as was calculated to shake public con-
fidence in the administration of the law. That
resolution was agreed to by a large majority.
As to their conduct being irregular and arbitrary, which
referred to a matter of fact. Now, of those Gentlemen
who had spoken that evening, not one pretended that
their proceedings was not irregular. Whether they were
arbitrary, was a matter for the consideration of the
Committee, who decided that they were. The Noble
Lord, to whom he had referred, agreed, in his opinion.
with the Committee on that point, but stated he could
not do so with respect to that part of the resolution
which asserted that they had not acted in conformity
with the statute. But by that statute they were bound to
keep records, and the evidence brought before the
Committee proved that they had not kept any records,
but that a person in his private room conducted the
whole business, who, in fact, was only scribbling his own
memoranda.—(Hear, bear.) To show that public con-
fidence was shaken by the administration of the Com-
missioners, was it necessary for him to bring any evi-
dence on that subject. That resolution was not, he
asserted, an intemperate, but on the contrary, a mode-
rate resolution, founded upon fact, after duly
weighing the evidence before the Committee. No
one entering upon that inquiry could help arriv-
ing at the same conclusion to which the Com-
mittee had arrived, and no one except by loose
as'ertion had challenged that conclusion, or challenged
that resolution. He would now say a few words with
respect to an individual because he had no friend in that
House except himself. That gentleman's name had
been brought forward in a most unnecessary and wanton
manner. He was not going to support Mr. Day because
he happened to be an intimate acquaintance of his. He
certainly knew him as a man of attainments and a good
scholar, and he knew nothing against him without it
was that he was a widower.—(Laughter.)
Lord J. RUSSELL—What I said was that he had
not a freehold.
Mr. DISRAF.LI—Why, the Prime Minister had not
a freehold, but they had no means of removing him
without telling him the reason. The Noble Lord said
himself that no man ought to be dismissed unless he
conducted his business in such a manner as was unsatis-
factory to his employers. Why Mr. Day was dismissed
without any reason being assigned, and that not even
in an official mariner. The manner in which Mr. Day
was appointed was as follows:—He had not a public
friend in the world, but he published a pamphlet before
the reform of the old law was contemplated, and he
reformed his own parish on the principle of the 43d of
Elizabeth, he described the reforms which he effected
in that pamphlet. Having no public friend, it was the
last effort of a desperate man; for every one who ever
wrote a pamphlet must admit that no one ever read it.
In 1831, when the Government introduced their plan,
they were looking out for clever men, who, to use the
fashionable language of that Houe, could carry out their
syse m, a Noble Lord, resident in the county to which
Mr. Day belonged, said there is a distinguished country
magistrate who reformed his own parish see to him, he has
written a pamphlet. The pamphlet was sent to the
Minister, who read it. Mr. Day was sent for, was
offered the post, which he accepted, and he became a
zealous officer.(Hear hear.) He was sent to that
part of the kingdom which was declared wholly and the
most incapable of reform, South Wales.—(Hear, hear.)
He did reform it. Was it any wonder, however, that he
should have become unpopular ? In his labours, how-
ever, he broke his leg, and when he had recovered, he
wrote a note, to say that he was still prepared
to resume his labours. In reply to that communica-
tion, he received a letter, marked private, which
advised him as a friend to send in his resignation, Now
in all this there was a great deal of hardship and arbi-
trary conduct. Mr. Day had broken up his establish-
ment in his county, where, on a moderate income, he
supported a large family. He zealously conducted the
duties of his office, accomplished what was admitted to
be a most difficult task, and received a compound frac-
ture in the service of Government, yet this was his
reward, after all.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Day was
accused of unpopularity, which was hardly possible,
for him to be otherwise, but Mr. Day brought credentials
from every board of guardians which he had been
brought into connexion with, all expressing their condo-
lence with him, and their confidence in him. He (Mr.
Disraeli) could not refrain from mentioning these facts.
And now, with regard to the Bill itself, looking at it
merely in comparison with the present system of control,
he was not discos- d to say that it might not be an im-
provement, it might or it might not ; he, however, would
give the Government the advantages of believing that
on a vicious system it was an improvement.—(Hear,
hear.) And so far as that went, he might
be inclined to support it; but looking as he did on this
Bill as one meant to perpetuate the system of metropoli-
tan control, which he believed to be so fatal, so pernici.
ous, and which had brought all the evils on the country
which had been complained of, be would vote for the
amendment of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough.
Mr. P. BORTHWICK moved the adjournment of the
debate.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that he hoped they would
finish the debate that night.
Mr. FERRAND said, that after the speech which had
been made by the Noble Lord, it was most unfair of him
to press the measure. The Hon. Member for Finsbury
was determined to answer it, and he, for his part, was
determined to offer every opposition to her Majesty's
Government, iC they attempted so unconstitutionally to
press the second reading.—(Hear, and cries of" Oh.")
And now, as to a question personal to himself, he desired
that the Noble Lord would explain what statements of his
were unfounded which he made on Monday last; he al-
luded especially to those statements which he had made
in reference to the manufacturing districts. .He asked
the Noble Lord to stand up in his place and state what
was the statement he had made.
Mr. VILLIERS said he had stated that they took
peasants from the agricultural districts, and sold them
as slaves in the manufacturing districts. He said also,
that they murdered children in the workhouses. These
were two of his misstatements, and the House need wait
no longer.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said these two were state-
ments which he believed were unfounded, and did believe
them unfounded still
,s He made no attack on the
Honourable teentlem.a character. But when the
G.:lttleinates statements,ls
by passion, when were so characterised
the
represented that the
poor-law Commissioners deli tad in the murder of
chil lren—(Great laughtee)—A
was but justified in
saying they were unfounded.
Mr. FERRAND denied the statements attributed to
him. He did not say that the Com • i
in murdering children.—(Cries of e Divideel delighted
St rangers were or dered to withdraw, when
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, as some Hon. Members
wiele d still to speak, and if Hon. Members would not
postpone the debate over to-morrow night, he would
Consent to the debate being adjourned.
Tha debate was then adjourned.
HERRING FISHERY (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a second time.
HERITABLE SECURITIES FOR DEBT (SCOT.
LAND) BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
BURGAGE TENURE (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This Bill was also read a third time and passed.
CROWN CHARTERS (SCOTLAND) BILL
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
PASSENGERS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

Mr. HAWES moved that the House go into Com-
mittee on this Bill. It was a very important measure,
and should be pa.sed as soon as possible, as it was
mainly to protect passengers.
ThL Hojs, then went into Committee.
Upon Clause 1 being proposed,
Lord G. BENTINCK said that at the request of the