The Sun.
London, England, 1834-05-27 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

, The SPEAKER resumed the chair at 25 minutes after
five o'clock.
A messenger from the Lords announced that the
United Kingdom Assurance Bill had been agreed to,
with amendments. _ _

Mr. HUME presented four petitions against in-
temperance.
Mr. L E FRO Y presented a petition from Mid-
dlesex, and two others to the same effect.
Lord GERMAINE presented a petition from Bury
St. Edmonds against drunkenness.
Sir A. AG NE W presented petitions from Edin-
burgh, Tiverton, and other places, against drunkenness.
Mr. WILK S presented four petitions against the
proposed plan on the subject of church rates, two
against drunkenness, and one for an alteration in the
laws affecting friendly societies.
Mr. E WING presented a petition from Glasgow
for a committee to inquire into the cause of drunken-
ness.
Lord G. SOMERSET presented a petition from
Christchurch, Monmouth, against dissenters.
Mr. G ILL ON presented several petitions from
Linlithgow against drunkenness.
Several other petitions of a similar nature were
also presented by different hon. members, but in
consequence of the excitement which prevailed in
the house, we were unable to catch the names either
of the members or the places.
ESTABLISHED CHURCH (IRELAND).
Mr. WARD said, in rising to bring forward the
resolutions of which he- had given notice relative to
the established church, he begged to assure the house
that he had not become the centre of the momentous
circle which the discussion wasu
reatlpie
ancientkarseet s uponloyw fif
claim
lrpri taeei
rworecti
nyhgtdipeico the
give
nro
great ee
groundsg
,
rise to, without a deep conviction of its importance.
Onahpi
s a theset
conscience
he
an
fir
groundsiniHeousysuatinnovation,
nioe should
a nda l
fodbtbneysheeupespaohhrpbeot
publicoluwi
shgri
ieanen dgdgfri vtttnohohe
manat
tttr
bringingd
a
shney deficiency
of the house, and he would not do hon. mem-
bershis part would induce them to treat the question with
attention at some length, in order to justify himself to
and that it would be productive of great practical good.
He would first prove the necessity that existed for this
change, and then he would show the justice of what
he proposed. For it was upon those bases alone the
policy or expediency of such important changes, and,
above all, those in which religious principles were
involved, should rest. He entirely concurred in the
observations of the right hon. Secretary for the Colo-
nies, who had said two years ago that the question
as to the maintenance of the connection which, in
Christian countries, had been established by the legis-
lature between the religion and the state, should not
be raised without deliberate consideration, and that it
would require the most imperative necessity to
justify any interference. He (Mr. Ward) entirely
concurred in the whole of those sentiments ; but
the question which he had to put to the house was,
whether, on the most deliberate consideration, so far,
at least, as Ireland was concerned, the case of impera-
tive necessity had not already arisen? whether that
house would not reject the evidence of necessity
that had accumulated upon it ; and whether, then,
it could refuse justly to apply the remedy
which the constitution had placed within their reach ?
This was a case in which, if be failed in establishing
it, the house would do no more than its duty in
on d
jetting it. Before he proceeded farther, haen
" tho
state what it was his intention to do,

reason!! of the change which he had made in the
hape of his resolution as it had originally ap-
peared. He hoped the house would do him the justice
to believe that he lead not sought to obtain by. that -
change any unfair advantage. He had been toll that
he must separate the question of principle from
details, and he had felt the necessity of this
the more, because many who would support the ques-
tion on principle might not support the details.
From want of local information a degree of obscurity
would, he feared, necessarily attend those details.
He had to ask the vote of hon. members on the prin-
ciple of deduction ; the details, provided the house
sanctioned the principle of the bill, he was desirous of
leaving for discussion for another occasion altogether.
He was most desirous not to trench on the
rights of others in any res.; eel,_ end if any more etre-
tual mode could be surge .ter, of carrying tl
plc he had to propose ire() exev,lri n, he ;co Id be one
of the first to accede to it._ 1-1, would coele Low to
the question of necessity, which was the lasi:
of
his present object and of the whole. (l el"'
The necessity—the imperious necessity of maii-04
a great and important change in the law affecting the
Protestant Church in Ireland was evident as the
shining of the sun, if hon. members desired to ton'
quillise that country, heal old wounds, and to identify
the interests of Ireland with the feelings of de
empire at large. (Much cheering.) In entering upn
this nothing could be further from his trilll
than to fatigue the house with details of the fruits
his own experience, but it might be essential on this.
occasion to prove that some f the wisest and greatest'
statesmen who ever adorned the British ParliSl.
ment had' always said the greatest causes that ever
disturbed that unfortunate country were rather rte"'-: is
gious than political. ( Hear, hear.) Indeed the qut,
tion of religion was so blended with our Irish poilv
that it was impossible to draw any line of de-
marcation between its religious and politi, al states.
Sir James Mackintosh had said that religion'
the church, and the whole administration of propertY
in that unhappy country, were so blended together
that any rumour raised in any one of them spread a al2_
most cordially concurred. TLis opinion ha
throughout the whole. In that sentiment out
peculiar to Sir James Mackintosh ; it
shared by nine out of ten who had ever been con
cerned in the management of Irish affairs, or_
paid any attention to them. Their opini9l s
mint have been modifieed as the proscliptions of In:
tolerance had disappeared, but still they could 11,0.:
fail to be entertained to the present moment. /I,r_
Canning, as early as the year 181, reprobated o_7.
principle of the policy which which affected Ire,.
land, forwarded, as it appeared to be, on the systent.°lol
of religion. lie asked one of his opponents, hill
boasting of the abolition of the penal law, whether he
thought it judicious that an impartial removal of Or,
chains which bound the Roman CVholies should
take place, and that a part should be left re. •
maining, as it were, for the purpose of re-
minding him that he had once been in chains.
The feeling against those laws, by which a compulsory
wdasb:l
provision was ground in the shape of tithes from the
pittance of the poor was not of modern date, it was
dated from the period of the relaxation of those penal
laws which gave, if he might be allowed to use the
term, to Catholics a legal existence. Lord Claremont'
in one of his earliest memorandums, stated that the
cause of the great misery in the south of Ireland must
be ascribed to the exaction of tithes. Mr. Gratt.r,
was of the same opinion ; and Mr. Pitt coincid.ei°,
in opinion with his great rival Fox. Mr. Pitt
that without some great reduction of the Protesta±,
establishment in Ireland, the uaioa with that coon 3i
could never be. completed. The experience ofthat
years had only given additional cause to deplore,e-0
the opinion then expressed by Mr. Pitt had not Pv_.er
acted upon. ( Hear, hear.) The union had ne;ie,
been completed ; the interests of the two °°llll
; a d
arte
hid never been identified. ( Cries of Hear,. !
It was one great argument with those wao the
the question of the Repeal of the. Unio", the allay
claims of Irish Church pressed most 1f
and; he need not inform the house that he
a
li-
repeal petitions were petitions for t. dih
oserof,
P tion of tithes. If this latter portion var.;
ts'wir h it.
the question of repeal would be disposed 0 ..sEd that
Sir John Newport in his motion in 18'.1 at the c:'
it was impossible to collect tithes except
of the
expense of the internal disquiet and misery
country. Upon the same occasion the right hen. geC
if there
tleman cpposite (Mr. S. Rice) exclaimed, that.
_as ,
was one thing more dangerous than discussion It 7,0
exclusive cause a the disorganizaation of Ireland, Yt '
despair, and added, that though tithes were not we
they were so intimately mixed, with it that it
would be futile to devise measures of relic'

(LEFT SPEAKING.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT-

then
ht aenneinp:
derhioraic.ev
Navin
ell aenndtgihde,:dh
HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 26. ,r.
Mr. P. SCRO PE rose and said that he had ci-be
tain amendments to move to the 48th clause, an( r..
would detain the house hut a very short time. 14°,1°d
son was more alive than himself to the evils to
the mal-administration of the poor laws ore s.
the necessity that existed for a reform of those abus._,
No person had laboured more perseveringly to VT.!.
those abuses before the Government and the Legis,`A
ctuornet,inbuuet
to ardentbe, rneoformperesroaaseehaeldhad e been, and
astonished
and and confounded than he was when he openrel
the bill then before the house. It appea c?,
member here referred to the clauses relative to.
ob,
law of settlement, and the law of bastardy, d; .
ntells'v-
stoionhshnwetoregaot muchvarivariance
reowfiatrb,
common
mt hoant
sense. many o f
The
its h
ep rhotoci;
served, that considering the bill made such ex _ent
alterations in the machinery of the law as it at pt
stood, he thought the house should 100%
pa
amssoedst
aeamrenaessat detailsrescruatisnoyebinbutopotanee.
society
involved the safety of all that large portion ° „co.
timr
imagined.
i do
hanngedosi
which was liable at any time, from the 1 danger
stances in which they were placed, to be i.l were $
of perishing. The poor laws of Elizabeti:ion
__. an
noble and glorious and god-like • institution
were
institution worthy of the age in which
.nth il,,rogriish
founded, and worthy of the brightest Pfsgheolse niell:b/
whom they were established, and worthy
history—worthy of the great names 0- t
of bel
logy Inl
considered for two centuries and half the g it hot
the ulive o
the honour of Great Britain. ( Hear, hear' )_.,0 of
been the guarantee of tranquillity,
our productive industry, the security of the euthe
the poor, and by consequence of the propertY__turies
a:rtei
ahtpeewtt
earsi
aoit.exceptionfnotchuemtbpbeoe
on
rtsoyl f:sit; smtsohy::
pit jo.
lita
si
ob
toe ire;
rich. It had been during the past two ee' few
abusessitfi andttuht
iaesd
wtbhabyasal
Elizabeth,
the last few years, the most pregnant and %wife'
source of the wealth and prosperity of the e_ta iv..
c 1
before it entered into any alteration of the tog.;0o, to ,
of that system with a view to adopt the Talbhteeefra°Tn-artee.-astartibuerle,
take care that
havingit
rndreidn:ihioicothf I oli,pieuoalffdt a.bney theoofth erw viiste !
ticoi
exi..t
so that lest with a view to arrange the Inin'ecifvh%le.
put not a stop to the vital principle oafitn
ir neiPl°
The house ought to know the r
upon which the poor law was
of vagrancy, which was the p
- ieace, happiness, an
He believed ilttihrztuwaaobedibtechtehhc, i n the
existed, and a fatality
the
poor trueia.s
_.
_el
nina,j
boo.
oy mu -t°II h To avoid tbig'
or'r
beth provided by a compuls
.:
the poor law of Elir
f the impotent poor, and ic:{
fund for the relief a
wou I d b e lass:lel' i tehtleu wherever
uhPePfrearere:ees rill °lll
matter of necessity, be and
otherwise would,
to beg,ans means of maintenance. A Ile
b wre
been
eehop
noi
crdht
wererd
of
ihv ifs
ep-
mass of al
perhaps, the bread of idleness, °:.'o,. in-
citingd, I_, li ddr by Edzabetb•
dtehiaseat tiles
et i
ino n
Ireland.and rebellion. e l l
Theio n .
hoTnhoiusr:bei:llentobethre
opulent condition of England and the wretenexistence.
been- 0.
of poor laws in the former country reco
that the workhouse system which badmissioileri
eu genera
had not been so successful as
hatinbsetances of pa:
syste.o',..
d tn.
'le ; an "ro -
of making the workhouse intolerao4 alive° te_ll;
fact had been, that the poor, inthu other Ploalietgl'
their parishes, bad
nsetthat should be 11,1:; tb°.
and were living
given by the bill v" or
extraordinary power - • - bate 0
to the support
commissioner., to declare n" ie t
the house to the
eared to them most advisabi; ho
regulations(4"P:the:vs. He objected `-., fa re
of the land. Upon th rotcler'
lbae"fore they went into committee to . yr' it
ese g osi
co ,„
byvt
Is ht
besthede
Ysca
• les of the poor laws. When this act had nil
op btal t
lie would ask what security had a pauper of ° 5? ,
relief in cases of extreme and urgent distregobe
appeared to him none whatever. In large P
ctohnltemtendiewoi
taoaahunt
eptl distinction
rbs
oitfusioonet, eride dr
it
al
io,bstnoy be T .
ee
de
giros'

r
c
,t
a

6

Le

ry
at
ep
Cr
e§
ea

,era
lisp

114 bill would not be found so inconvenient, bu
"1. agricultural parishes it wouli 'be diflicnltt
• get a sufficient nitinber of ree"ectable and
intelligent men to carry its provisions ink. effect. The
great principle of affording relief, and of empowering
magistrates to tax- parishes for the support of the
t„ ,r Would be fearfully infringed on by the present
Aut• Was that just ? Was it right policy ?
A short time ago, the house declared that they would
Preserve unalienable and sacred the claims of certain
Pensioners whose rights were rather questionable,
4ad, he would ask, were the claims of the poor,
Which had been established and confirmed by so
fly statutes, less important or valuable ? He did
!lot suppose that the noble lord was aware of the great
1,12)11ry which this bill would inflict upon the poor. He
did not want to throw any opposition in the way of the
btil— a.ll he asked was that some provison would be.
(rtoduced to preserve inviolate the right of the
Poor to relief in cases of urgent distress. He
should therefore move—
(` That it be an instruction to the committee to preserve
relieved
entirely the inalienable right wich every man has to be
when in a state of dehstitution by the parish in
which he is legally settled, and that every man is entitled
to receive immediate relief, when in the extremity of dis-
t""-% from the parish which he is in at the time, whether he
4e settled in that parish or not."
Above all things it was important that the poor should
"ow their rights would not be neglected—for on the
confidence of the poor that they would be relieved in
their necessities, the security of property mainly de-
Pended. If this were not done, he did not like to
141olge in prophecy-, but it would not bevery presump-
tuous
to foretell that it would either urge them to acts
violence and insurrection, or bring about such a
'fate of things as prevails in Ireland—large bands of
`tiroly unemployed labourers wandering about the
Country destroying the security of property, driving
513 ital out of the country, and putting an end to the
Peace, happiness, and prosperity of the kingdom.
The SPEAKER suggested to the hon. gentleman
that his propositions should be made in the committee,
rd not by way of instruction. Instructions to the
=
• nuttee were only usual when the committee had
11:t sufficient power to carry the propositions, which
rere the subject of the motion, into effect without in
:ruction. Unless, therefore, he meant to cast doubt
nd SUspieion on the committee, it would be more re-
"• Ar to introduce a clause as he suggested. ( Hear.)
After a few words from Mr. ROBINSON, who
811,1)Gorted Mr. P. Scrope's views, the amendment was

On the question being again put,
Sir E. WILMOT said, he would take that oppor-
t4aity of saying a few words by way of suggestion to
the noble lord. By a report of a committee on which
'filbert's Act (as we understood, the 22d Geo. III.),
Y 4-5, founded, almost all the recommendations contained
In the present report were made, except that of the
central Board. This bill, with that exception, and
that it
Was voluntary and not compulsory, seemed
an. ost a counterpart of that bill. The noble lord,
1,,11 answer to a question, had said, that he intended to
propose no measure for the immediate relief of the
grieultural interest, but that he anticipated much re-
ef from the operation of this bill. Now it must be a con-
erable time before this new system was carried into
e4.eet, and the pressure on the agricultural interest was
t?l'a urgent to admit of delay. One great objection to
e present bill,was, that the persons who contributed
towards:
the fund for the relief of the poor had no con-
trol over the expenditure of that fund. It was also
;aid thattie great burden on the agriculturists arose
they local taxation. If, therefore, by any measure
t:teY could succeed in reducing local taxation, or en-
get rid of it, they would make this bill more
;14eient. He would suggest to the noble lord, there-
fore, that as the government had taken the manage-
mentd of the poor into their own hands, they could not
4,0 better than undertake the maintenance of the poor
ti'lBo, and the local taxation would entirely cease. He
eaght that all poor rates. should be entirely abo-
td,!h and that government should take the whole
„
ti;Yrnent of the poor into their hands, to be pr id out of
eneral taxation of the country. The pressure
eii.v(l4,
ti then be more equally divided and the country
-41eved from a great burthen. ( Hear, hear.)
thiN.lr• C B BETT always thought it would come to
n. th -• t he hon. baronet had to go but one step fur-
her, and after charging government with the mainte-
hrA ncie of the poor, charge it with the keep of us all.
Laugh.) The hon. baronet had not thought long
"'ugh on the subject to see how the farmer was
!f,fected by the poor rates. Would the poor rates be
der some
by the proposed bill ? On the contrary,
deßorne time, at least, they would be increased by the
it° essity of building Poor houses. He was surprised
hear that an hon. member had spoken of the allow-.
antes to those who were in distress as charity, as alms.
e (Mr. Cobbett) thought every one knew that in
tie
country it the right of a poor man, when he
to be relieved. That right was
lyt tdedon the principles of civil society. It was a
ablished by law. Could it be said they had a
4yht to eau upon the labouring man to serve in the
lititt, and to endanger life and limb for
-e protection of the State, but that, if a labouring
1,
fell into poverty, he had no right to demand relief
'etti the State ? The history of the present bill was
,c4rious. A noble and learned lord had pledged him-
;tlf, two or three years ago, to bring in a bill for the
Aendment of the Poor Laws. After the lapse of a
atai°n, however, that noble and learned lord obtained
e appointment of a commission to inquire into the
illject. Were the principles which that noble and
:}4iraed lord asserted on the subject of the Poor Laws
klt:,,rl,he was a member of the House of Commons
the„eu ? If not, would he say that the people, after
the i,v„sing of this bill, were entitied to no relief which
for did did not afford ? Would the noble and learned
r?Peat his own expression—‘. At Nature's board
?g. no seat for you ?" By the bye, it was rather
erndent to talk of Nature upon such a subject. If
tC.Poorer classes referred to Nature, they would use
tiir natural power—they would not ask relief from
Parish officer ; they would go and take it wherever
they could find it. ( A laugh.) Why even that was
,2 law of nature. If a man were in want of food and
„Ntrient, and in a ease of dire necessity could obtain
,ei•
ratans
in no other manner, he had a right to take the
e;t4l s of sustaining and cloathing himself wherever he
g„441 find them. Civilians stated that to be the case,
ladded that in England no such right existed, be-
toho Parish officers were always at ham' to afford relief
therefor to whom it was necessary. It was clear,
tll,:etcn., that if parish officers were not at hand,
the to tc, whom relief was necessary might take it
ih Selyes. ( A laugh.) He had alluded to serv-
litt'll the militia. If there were now no relief for a
Nering man in poverty, then, if under any circum-
ke, ees a labouring man were required to take a mus-
ket' ~ and either defend the state from invasion or put
114,7 a a riot, he might answer, " for what ? You
have
Et country ;
II own nothing ; I have no house ; I
41:e no land : have nothing ; I have no country ; I
that
be starved to death.', He was sure, therefore,
hon gentlemen would not place the labouring
I,,'dsse3 in. that situation ; the
,em, they might speak to them
might be irritated with
in anger, but they
,"ould never call upon men to defend them whom they
ere not prepared to relieve if in distress. No, they
h•rild not do that. It was a great objectionatlol
thethe
gtol that it took from all the nobility and
11-„,44Y all their natural influence over the labouring
fro-StS• Three unknown men—it might be
41- Scotland, or it might be from Hanover
tZitwere to be clapped up in London, and all the
to ell influence of the nobility and gentry was
bed transfererd to them. And how unlimited was to
he their power. All relief at his own dwelling was to
to denied to the labouring man, who was to be taken
liethe workhouse if he wanted it. He never could )e, -r
eeve that the house would pass such a bill.
would He nese
uld believe that the House of Lords pass
I.lcli a bill.
a r °
rid ALTi4
had ORP denied the position that the poor
right to seize upon the property of others to
zyty their wants. All the rights the poor now
ziessed were preserved to them by the present bill,
in-';`.the objections to the bill on that ground were un-
t'tded. The bill did not, as had been erroneously
__,
sht..,--enteo, go to the extent of saying that no relief
th-mtd be given out of the workhouse. The object of
tutlibill Was to bring the law back to what it was origi-
it and what it ought to be, upon this subject ; but
111
ut t
no means t wish of is Mjesty
• 14,r have the poorhe laws doneh away awith.'s Govern..
aeblp., ATTWO OD did not at all concur with the
lord that the poor laws were an evil, as the noble
the h'„ described them. He perfectly agreed with
and n' for Oldham that the laws of nature
flikritaws of England were identical, and that every
tihne,,--tt a right to live by the fruits of his honest
i
4Ppid* (Hear, hear, and laughter.) * The man who
Was ttm himself to honest labour, and by that means
fighte and willing to earn his bread, had a better
11108 he-Zan° PPort than- the noble lord bad to the hat on
t-the r the coat on his back. (Laughter.) It was
Give
Pressure of the poor laws that was so
was the

noble lord's- cursed currency bill (A laugh) which was
nothing leSs than a barefaced fraud upon the country.
The interest of the national debt was more than six
times a greater burden en the co!mt:-y than the poor
laws. For his part :.of hoard out of that
house a single complaint tee poor laws in his
life. ( A laugh, and cries " Oh, oh.") Ile would
repeat that he never had. In his own pad al. -
mingham, although he never interfered in p,,rish
matters, he knew that they came last year to a resolu-
tion to do away with the.workhouse altogether, as a
more expensive mode of providing for the support of
the poor than paying them out of doors. It was found
that half-a-crown given to afford out-of-door relief
went further than 4s. would go in the workhouse.
The whole of the noble lord's present bill he looked
upon as founded in error, and the details were so
monstrous that he was convinced the whole power of
that house would never he able to carry it into effect.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY thought 'there ought to
be some medium power established between the cen-
tral board and the lower classes of the people.
The house then went into committee on the bill.

The 13th clause having been read, which provides
that the power of affording relief to the poor shall be
placed in the hands of the commissioners,
Colonel TO RR EN S rose to bring forward an
amendment to that clause of which he had given no-
tice. He considered that the principle on which his
Majesty's government and that house would be disposed
to legislate on the subject at present under discussion
was, that the local authorities of the country should
have their powers as little infringed upon as possible.
The noble lord had admitted this, and had declared
that he was not disposed to give one iota more of
power to the commissioners than was absolutely ne-
cessary- to carry on the useful operations of the bill.
He should show that the commissioners ought not to
have the power to frame rules and regulations
without the consent of the parochial authorities,
or of the ratepayers of the parish ; and he was sure
that the amendment he was about to propose would
tend to increase rather than to diminish the efficacy of
the Central Board. There was nothing in the bill to
carry the executive part of it into effect, and this his
amendment would go to remedy in the most satisfac-
tory manner. If the commissioners, instead of being
nine in number, were multiplied to nine times nine, it
would be impossible for them to carry on the opera-
tions of the bill in all the parishes of the kingdom
without the aid of the local authorities ; and the only
way in which the cordial assistance of the local autho-
rities could be hoped for would be to give them the
power of co-operating with the commissioners in
making rules and regulations for the government of
their respective parishes. They would then be more
ready to give effect to the provisions of the bill than if
they were forced to agree to the arbitrary regulations
of the commissioners alone. In all those parishes
where the affairs were already well managed and good
regulations estal dished the commissioners would not be
disposed to act at all, or to extend their interference ;
but in those parishes where bad management was no-
torious, and where the rates had been increased, even
on the rack-rent, it must be admitted by all that
some interference was absolutely necessary, for
otherwise the whole property of those parishes
would be swallowed up by the poor rates at no
very distant time. The best way he thought of
correcting the evil of such mismanagement would
be to have all orders and regulations brought into
operation with the concurrence of the local authori-
ties and the voluntary act of the ratepayers themselves.
Thus only, in his judgment, could the law under the
bill be wisely and justly administered. The amend-
ment would further provide that in all the badly-re-
gulated parishes, if the local authorities refused for
twelve months to aid the commissioners in framing
new orders and rules, and thus obstructed the working
of the bill, it would be in the power of the commis-
sioners to apply to Parliament, on the petition of the
majority of the rate-payers of each parish, for a spe-
cific act to enforce the provisions of the bill. So that
in the end the result sought for would be the same ;
but this proceeding would have the satisfactory effect
of reconciling the minds of the people to the changes
made in the law. He also intended that the peti-
tioners should be heard by counsel, if they thought fit,
on any application to Parliament for an enforcing act,
so that no rules or regulations should be forced upon
them without a full hearing being given to their
objections against them. It might be urged as an
objection to part of his amendment that it went to the
possible enactment of 16,000 acts of parliament for all
the parishes of England. This was, however, an er-
roneous view of the case, for 8,000 parishes, half of the
list, must be struck out, and of the other half he did
not think that many would be found to resist pertina-
ciously the forming proper regulations for the manage-
ment of their affairs ; so that, in fact, very few acts
would, be found to be necessary ; and, moreover, if this
were found to be an inconvenience, it would be very
easy to lump several parishes into one act. But, even
supposing that some inconvenience were to arise, what
would that be as compared with the great advantage
of popularizing the bill, and framing it so as to work
with the aid and concurrence of the people for whom
it was intended ? A good system of local government
he looked upon to be the perfection of all government,
for if the various branches of the body politic were not
kept in a wholesome and well-regulated state it would
not be possible to preserve for any length of time the
vital principle unimpaired in the body politic itself.
As he was desirous, therefore, to interfere as little as
possible with the influence which the local authorities
of the country ought to possess, he should propose as
an amendment—

" That no rules or regulations framed by the commis-
sioners should be binding on any parish without the con-
currence of the majority of the ratepayers or of the landed
property of the parish, but that, where any parish resisted
the regulations of the Commissioners for twelvemonths, the
Commissioners might to apply to Parliament for an act to
enforce the regulations, the parishioners having a right to
be heard by counsel against such act if they pleased."
Sir S. W HAL LE Y said that he, for one, would
not give to any set of commissioners appointed by the
crown the power to make laws for any purpose upon
earth. He considered the present amendment to Le
one of great importance, and deserving of the best
consideration.

Mr. STRICKLAND said that he considered the
objections which the amendment went to establish
were not at all applicable, as the purpose of the bill
was to appoint commissioners and frame laws for the
relief of the poor.
After a few words from Mr. B. CARTER, which
were inaudible,
Lord SANDON said that it would seem as if all
powers were to be vested in the commissioners for the
regulation of the Poor Laws for the future. He
would suggest the propriety of striking out the clause
altogether, to prevent this construction being put upon
it, for it would by no means tend to render the act
popular to have the whole power which it conferred
given to one particular set of men. By striking out
this clause the other clauses of the bill would leave
specific and defined powers only in the hands of the
commissioners. He thought it most unjust that all
power should be made to pass by this measure from
the hands of those local authorities which had hitherto
held it to others who had no identity with the inter-
ests of the parishes which they would be placed over
to govern.

Mr. CARTWRIGHT thought it would be better
if the noble lord would consent to delay this measure,
than thus suddenly to take away all powers from the
hands of the parish officers. It would be attended
with the greatest inconvenience throughout the coun-
try,.e
would i b
f aemeasure like that were to be brought at once
t operation in all the parishes in the kingdom. This
particularly felt at the approaching harvest,
when probably there would be so much occasion to
pay particular attention to the state of the labouring
classes, and that could only be best done by the local
few words
autAh
fotreie.
rtias
quite inaudible in the fromgallery,Mr. HODGES, which were
Lord ALTHORP
Hodges)said
the bill would
oeuil)derbiod proposed by his
e tboeo t o
o distantshor;t
H per-ehhoapn
s. friendthat p
r(ol‘plers.e
din
would take the point into consideration. He thoughtprinciple,
it important in the outset to lay down.
the he
that the administration of the law was to be in
the
Central Board. It would be regulated by succeeding
clauses.
Mr. HODGES said it would give rise to much
inconvenience if the act was to come into operation
before the close of the parochial year.
Mr. PE ASE expressed himself favourable to the
suggestion of the member for Kent (Mr. Hodges.)
After a few words from Lord SANDON, who repeated
his amendment to leave out all the words in the clause
after the words " from and after the passing of this
Act,"

Mr. HITIVIE said it would be better to trust to the
discretion of the commissioners. (Cries of " Oh, oh-")
He saw no reason why the commissioners should not
1- e7,in to act immediately. There was no ground for
thinking that they wouldviolate any existing contracts.
Mr. GODSON said it was the more important this

clause should be understood as there aPpeared a differ-
ence of opTnicn in•the ilterpretation tt. If the cam,-
mission,-sr,3 should happen to the extent of
rower co :Served on tlmn there we ~o remedy, for tii:s
bill gt.ve.'n9 appeal to the j::,dges.,..,Lid, tile words (If.'
the clause mean-that the cOMmisf.zioners Wel'e'to admi-
nister the laws as they now good, 'or to administer
orders, rules, and regulations, to be made hereafter ?
An HON. MEMBER said this clause Merely asserted
a principle, and gave no power to administer the laws.
Mr. P. SCROPE- said the clause as it stood would
in his opinion-do away the-right, which the pauper now
had to appeal to the magistrates; in case the overseers
refused him relief. •

Sir J. S CARLE TT said the difficulty might be
removed by inserring the words " according to the
existing laws not repealed by this 'act." By leaving
the clause as it now stood endless litigation would be
occasioned. It should be recollected that there were
many places in which, by local acts of Parliament,
relief to the poor was administered by particular rules
and regulations. This was the case, for instance, in
Norwich. Now, were the commissioners to have the
power of repealing all sueh local acts ? If this was
intended by the clause it would give rise to many and
great difficulties. The bill gave to the commissioners
the power also of auditing accounts. Was the law as
it now stood relating to parish accounts to be also got
rid of ? At present an appeal lay in matters of ac-
count from the overseers to the justice, frcin the
justice to the quarter sessions, and then to the Court
of King's Bench. Was it meant that all this should
be superseded by the commissioners? The commis-
sioners, if the clause was not rendered more clear,
might conceive that they had these powers • and if
they should be in error there was no remedy,
there was no appeal ; there was no power given by the
bill to apply to the Court of King's Bench to rectify
any errors into which the commissioners might fall by
a writ of certiorari. That house would not be a fit
tribunal to apply to for the purpose. It would be a
dangerous thing to allow the House of Commons the
power of construing the laws. Was it, or was it not,
the intention to vest the commissioners with the power
of doing just as they pleased ? He should feel very
reluctant to give such •power to any commissioners,
and if it was not intended, that intention ought to be
declared.

Lord ALT H ORP said it was not intended' by this
bill to give the commissioners either the power of
making new laws or of altering the existing laws.
Sir S. WH ALL E Y—Then the whole of clause
thirty-five ought to be struck out.
Mr. BUL LER would ask, what inconvenience
could arise if the commissioners were empowered to
sweep away all the local rules and regulations by
which, under particular Acts of Parliament, different
parishes were managed ? If they were not swept
away the act would be quite inoperative. Did the
member for Norwich ( Sir J. Scarlett) seriously think
that the words of this clause gave to the commission-
ers the power of dispensing with the laws ? If there
was a doubt upon the point it ought to be removed.
The hon. member who said the clause gave this power
of dispensing with the laws might be a good lawyer,
but he did not understand the English language.
( Cries of " Oh !") Certainly ninety-nine out of every
hundred Chancery lawyers would understand the words
as giving only a power to administer•the existing laws.
The report of the commissioners showed that parishes
under select vestries and local laws were the most
grossly mismanaged.
Sir J. SC ARL ETT said he did not pretend to a
very critical or very extensive knowledge of languages.
The hon. gentleman might be a very great proficient
in the English,, but he seemed to be ignorant of the
law upon this point, and he would, therefore, tell him
what it was. A writ of certiorari was a writ which
the Court of King's Bench had the power of granting,
and the object of it was to keep within the laws those
functionaries who were entrusted with the administra-
tion of them. Suppose the commissioners were to
make a rule refusing relief to any class of persons, at
common law there was a remedy by application to the
Court of King's Bench for a writ of certiorari, and if
the rule was inconsistent with law the court would
quash it.
Mr. BULLER said that he did not mean to have
used such strong language, and he regretted having done
so. He thought it would be very mischievous to give
the Court of King's Bonch a power of deciding in all
such cases.

Colonel EVANS said he must complain of the con-
duct of the noble lord ( Althorp) in the management
of this bill. The noble lord said there was no inten-
tion of empowering the commissioners to interfere with
acts of Parliament so as to repeal or alter them. There
were, however, various clauses which gave them that
power, in at least one or two hundred different cases
of individual parishes. He wished the noble lord
would distinctly state what were the real powers which
it was meant by this act to confer on the commissioners,
Mr. B. CARTER understood the noble lord to say
that the existing laws were not to be interfered with.
Lord ALTHORP had already stated the way the'
commissioners we,re to interfere. The fact was that
the present bill would only give them the power of al-
tering at their discretion certain regulations mentioned
in the schedules of the act, and certain by-laws, made
in conformity with other acts of Parliament.
Mr. ROEBUCK made an observation which was
not understood in the gallery.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—If the commis-
sioners should repeal existing laws they would do it
without having any authority to do so. He contended
that there were provisions in the proposed act to pre-
vent the commissioners from violating existing laws.
Whatever they were about to do they would have pre-
viously to consult the Secretary of State for the Home
Department, and then they would be obliged to get
the sanction and authority of that house. So that all
precautions were taken by that house to prevent the
commissioners from violating the act. The object of
the clause was to give the commissioners an adminis-
trative power as to the relief of the poor, and to enable
them to carry that power into effect. There were
particular provisions in the act to prevent them from
possessing a general or absolute power. Where were
now the acts to authorise nine-tenths of what was done
by the parish authorities ? The great evil at present
was that the spirit of the laws was departed from. All
that the present act would do would be to give power
to persons who would be more responsible than the
actual local authorities.

Sir W. HORNE was decidedly of opinion that if
the act were intended to be useful to the public they
should be careful that the principle of the poor laws
should be set right and placed on a clearer and better
basis. (I-Lear.) The administration of those laws
should be placed on such a footing that no person
could plead as an excuse that they misunderstood
them. It could not be seriously contended that a le-
gislative power was was not given to the commis-
sioners. From the turn the debate took for the last
hour it was scarcely possible to well know what the
house wished to enact. He repeated that it was the
duty of the house to see that the language of the
clause should be so clear that no administrative power
or functionaries could plead ignorance as an excuse
for misinterpreting it. He would call the attention of
the house to the first part of the clause. A question
had been asked as to the administration of the laws for
the relief of the poor. No answer had been given to
that question, and that made him presume that it was
not convenient to give a specific answer to it. ( Hear,
hear.) His opinion was that the measure would be
imperfect unless all parties should understand whether
it gave or did not give a power beyond the laws.
Lord ALT HORP said that his hon. and learned
friend seemed to think that the clause was imperfectly
worded. Now from the words of it it could be easily
gathered that the administration of the laws for
the relief of the poor was to remain in the same bands
in which it was at present The principle of the bill
was, that the administration of the laws for the relief
of the poor should be under the control of the com-
missioners, but that they should not administer them
themselves. They were to have rather a judicial than
a legislative power. He had decided objections to the
amendment now proposed, and repeated that the prin-
ciple of the clause was that the administration for the
relief of the poor should be under the control of the
commissioners.

Sir T. FREMANTLE said he should like to know
why the right of certiorari should be taken away.
If it were left, his objection would be so far removed.
Lord H 0 WIC K said the mode of proceeding would
be simple. When relief was afforded to improper cha-
racters the Privy Council was to be petitioned. It was
no new thing for the Privy Council to exercise a con-
trol over new laws and regulations.
Mr. GOD SON said that in no part of the bill was
there any mention about petitioning the Privy Coun-
cil. He could not see why the noble lord could ob-
ject to the words " for relief," &c.
Lord HOWICK said that, according to the prin-
ciple of the act, it was clearly expressed that it was
left to the King in council to disapprove of rules either
before or 1 fter they came into operation.
Lord S AND 0 N said that the discussion had strayed
from the beginning to the end of the clause. He

would not, h,)Trerer, preen tho amendment he had
proposed. „ , .
St: e acts of Trarliament* and tbe
rigi.ts of remain. It was intended to
r.,!rflove. only T;; it had lately Crept into them.
J

The acne id; was fh..ni Withdraivn.

Sir J. SU A RLE TT proposed, as an amendment,
that after the fifteenth Hoe of the clause there should
be inserted the words--" According to the existing
laws, or such not repealed by this act."
Mr. LLOYD opposed the amendment, and said
that no persons who were now entitled to relief were
refused it. He saw no necessity at all for introducing
the words proposed in the amendment. 4
Mr. CL AY said that it would be highly satisfactory
to the public to learn that the commissmuers.were not
to have a legiSlative power, nor be enabled to abrogate
the existing laws.
Mr. HAL COMB contended that, with respect to
education, the new regulations would be binding on
the poor, and they would be obliged to submit to
them. For that reason he objected to the clause.
Mr. JERVIS made a few observations. the purport
of which we did not distinctly understand.
After a few words from the SOLICITOR-GENERAL
and Sir J. SCARLETT the amendment was rejected.

Mr. JERVIS proposed that after the word " con-
trol" (in line 25, -clause:l3) the words " under the
guidance of" should be left out:. - -
Sir S. 'WHALLEY said that the clause as it at
present stood would interfere in a most objectionable
manner with the appointment of the auditors of the
poor which existed in many parishes. " This," ex-
claimed the hon. member, " would be particularly the
case with those appointed under Sir John Hobhouse's
Act in the parishes in my borough." (Loud laughter,
with cries of " Hear, hear.") As it would interfere
materially with.the act he had alluded to he had no
doubt that the noble lord would consent to the amend-
ment.

Lord AL THORP admitted that the manner of ap-
pointing auditors of the poor was much better than it
formerly was; but he thought that if any better mode
could be adopted it was desirable that an alteration
should be made. In his opinion it would be much
better to leave the clause as it now stood.

The amendment was negatived.
Lord ALT H 0 RP stated that he intended to move
that the latter part of the clause be made a separate
clause.

The clause, as amended, was then agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN then read the latter part of the last
clause, as originally printed in the bill, as a separate
clause.

Mr. liAWES stated that the clause directed that
the rules and regulations, if objected to in a parish,
should not be enforced until they had been forty days
before the Secretary of State. He moved that the
parish should have forty days to consider of such rules,
zir.c. By this means the parishes would be able to re-
monstrate.

Lord ALTH 0 RP said that the parishes would
have the power of remonstrance after the rules were
brought into operation as well as before. He thought
that in some instances it might not be desirable that
the regulations of the commissioners should be pub-
lished before they came into operation.
The amendment was then negatived.,
Colonel TOR RE NS then moved, " That the rides,
orders, and regulations issued by the commissioners
shall not be binding upon any parish unless approved
by a majority of the owners of property and ratepayers
in such parish ; and that, in the event of a majority
of the owners of property and ratepayers disallowing
the rules, orders, and regulations proposed by the com-
missioners, the law officers of the Crown shall petition
Parliament for leave to bring in a. special or local bill
for enforcing the same, the dissenting parishes being
allowed to be heard by counsel in support of their ob-
jections."

Lord A LTHORP said that the adoption of the
words of the clause would make a very considerable
alteration in the principle of the bill, and would pre-
vent the putting a stop to a system now prevailing in
many parts of the south of England which it was one
of the main objects of the bill to get rid of. If they
took the course recommended by the hon. and gallant
officer, and declared that no alteration should be made
unless with the consent of the majority of the rate-
payers of the parish, the effect would be to leave the
parishes in the southern counties nearly in the state in
which they at present were. This would be the case,
because in many parishes the worst administration of
the poor laws was supported by the majority of the
rate-payers. He said, therefore, the effect of the first
part of the alteration proposed by his gallant friend
would be to destroy all the objects of the bill. With
respect.to the second part of the amendment he would
only observe, that he never heard of any act of Parlia-
ment containing a clause directing that a f iture Par-
liament should preserve a certain line of ce.idnct. He
of course, to be consistent, must say that future Par-
liaments must pass such bills. •He (Lord Althorp)
admitted that the amendment might possibly be
adopted with reference to the parishes of the north of
England.
Lord S AND ON objected to many parts of the
clause, but could not consent to the amendment of the
gallant officer, as it struck at the radical principle of
the bill. The bad management of the rate-payers in
many parts had brought about the present state of
things.

Colonel T 0 RREN S said that the noble lord as-
serted that the adoption of the principle of the amend-
ment would altogether mutilate the bill, at the same
time he admitted that the administration of the poor
laws was not so defective in the north of England as
it was in the south. He ( Colonel Torrens) would only
in say reply, that, if the ratepayers in the south of
England could be shown that the adoption of good
rules and regulations would reduce the poor rates,
they would, on the principle of self-interest, resort to
them. He approved of the principle of the bill, and
he was satisfied that if his amendment was adopted it
would get rid of a great deal of that jealousy and op-
position which would otherwise exist against it. Such
a regulation would make the bill popular, and remove
the objections of many now opposed to it.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, but
none took place.
Some blanks having been filled up in the clause,
and some verbal amendments having been agreed to,
Sir J. SCARLETT objected to that part of it
which limited the appeal against any rule or regulation
made by the commissioners, and which might be con-
trary to the law of the land. In such a case he
thought neither the Privy Council nor that house the
best tribunals to afford redress. The power of deciding
in such cases was usually in the Court of King's Bench,
which thus operated as a Court of Cassation ;
and wherever the authority of the Court bad been
taken away by Acts of Parliament the greatest incon-
venience had arisen. The parties upon whom these
rules and regulations were to be imposed ought to
have the right, as in other cases, of protecting them-
selves by the right of taking any disputed 'legal point
into the King's Bench by certiorari. He moved that
the words of the clause prohibiting the appeal be left
out.

Lord ALT HOR P, agreeing in the general advan-
tage of an appeal to the Court of King's Bench,
thought in this particular case, if it were made so,
there would be scarcely any general rule but what
some parish or other would object to and litigate. For
this reason he should wish, as at present advised, not
to leave out the words of the clause.
Sir T. FREMANTLE said that if the general
rules were to be such that each of them would cause
some parish or other to move a writ of certiorari
against it, then it was the more necessary to give to
parisnes the right which all the analogies of the law of
the land warranted.

After some conversation upon the point Lord AL-
THORP was understood to say that he would take the
suggestion of his learned friend into consideration.
He would also state that, in the succeeding clause, he
meant to move a provision that in the case of all ge-
neral rules issued by the Commissioners out of the
Session of Parliament they should be submitted within
one week after the commencement of the subsequent
Session to both Houses of Parliament or to one of his
Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State.
After a further Ihort conversation, the clause, with
its amendments, were agreed to.
The committee then proceeded to clause 14.
Mr. HAWE S moved to fill up the blank for the
timo allowed for the circulation of rules in parishes
before being put in operation with one month,"
which was agreed to.
After a few words from Mr. PEA SE and Lord
ALTHO RP, the 14th clause was agreed to.
On the 15th clause being proposed,
Sir S. WHALLEY objected to the multitudinous
powers given to the commissioners and their assistants.
Why were they to be entitled to attend vestries, and
take part in discussions ?
Lord A L THORP contended, that it was extremely
desirable that the commissioners should have an oppor-
tunity of persuading the vestries.
After some further conversation, the clause was
agreed to.

The 16th clam wft agreed 0.
The 17th clause was proposed, and after sonic 66 n-
ver.o.tlcin vreed to.
On clause 18, gurhorisit% building vTollitouses,
81:- T. VIIEMANTLL pointed out the great pres-
sure 00.t.11c agricultural parishes, rind suggested that. a
vote of public money on the principle of the education
.zrant should be made to assi.it the a.s.riculturalparishes.
Lord ALTHORP said that parish could be
ea -opened to build a Workhouse:
The clause was agreed to.
On clause 19 being proposed, giving p..:wer to the
commissioners to enlarge .workhouses, with or without
the consent of the parishes, being proposed,
Sir S. WHALLEY protested against the clattse
altogether.
Lord ALTHORP said his Ottleet Was merely to
enable the commissioners to make slight alt.,..ations.
He, therefore, proposed to limit the outlay in any tint
case to 501.

The clause having been amended to that effect,
after some conversation, was agreed to.
The 20th clause, after some conversation, and after
undergoing some verbal amendments, was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN then obtained leave to report pro
gress, and to sit again on Friday next.
The house then resumed.
The other orders of the day were then proceeded
upon.

MERCHANT SEAMEN'S WIDOWS BILL.

On the motion for the third reading of the Mer-
chant Seamen's Widows Bill,
Sir J. GRAHAM said that after the vote which
the house had come to on a preceding night he had
consulted his colleagues, and they had come to a reso-
lution, not to offer any further opposition to the bill ;
but it would be necessary that the deficiency of
22,0001. a year should be made up to Greenwich
Hospital out of the consolidated fund, and he hoped the
hon. member for London would consent to postpone
the third reading of the bill to Friday, in order that
provision might be made for supplying the deficiency
out of the consolidated fund.

The third reading of the bill was then postponed.

CIVIL LIST PENSION BILL.

On the motion for the third reading of the Civil
List Pension Bill being read,
Sir H. HARDINGE wished to know whether it
was the intention of ministers to make any alteration
in the 10th clause of the bill?
Sir J. GRAHAM said that it was the intention of
ministers so to alter the 10th clause as to give the
treasury the power of fixing pensions according to the
merits of the parties.
The bill was then postponed to Friday next.
JEWS' DISABILITIES BILL.

On the motion for the house resolving itself into a
committee of the whole house upon the Jews' Disa-
bilities Bill.

Mr. C. BRUCE said he would divide the house
upon every stage of the bill.
The house then divided
For the Committee
Against it

Majority 56
The bill then went through a committee without
further opposition.
The Chimneysweepers' Regulation. Bill was read a
third time and passed.
Mr. LANGDALE obtained leave to bring in a
bill to legalize marriages celebrated by Roman Ca-
tholic clergymen in England and Wales.