The Sun.
London, England, 1834-06-19 00:00:00

REGISTRY OF BIRTHS BILL.

In answer to a question from an HON. MEMBER,
Mr. W. BROUGHAM said that it was certainly
his determination to proceed with the bill for the re-
gistration of births and marriages as soon as the state
of the other business before the house would permit,
and he intended to carry this bill through this session.
But with respect to the Dissenters' Marriage Bill,
considering the advanced period of the session, which
he trusted was fast drawing to a close (" Hear, hear,"
and laughter), it was not his intention to proceed with
it farther than to take the sense of the house on the
principle, and leave the details of the bill to be consi-
dered by the dissenters themselves in the interval be-
tween this and the next session.
Mr. C A YL E Y moved for certain returns connected
with the Banks of England and Scotland and the pri-
vate banking establishments of both countries, but
owing to the noise in the house it was impossible to
hear the precise particulars of the hon. member's
motion.

POOR LAWS' AMENDMENT BILL.
The house having gone into a committee on the
Poor Laws' Amendment Bill, clause 69 was read by
the CHAIRMAN.
Mr. ROBIN SON rose to propose the rejection of
the clause altogether, and of the next following clauses
as far as clause 73. All the clauses related to the law
of bastardy, and were in his mind of greater import-
ance than any other parts of the bill. He would not
go the length of saying that the bastardy law as it at
present stood in this country did not require amend-
ment, but he was decidedly of opinion that this was
not the mode in which it ought to be amended. The
69th clause proposed to remove all liability to supp?rt
his offspring from the putative father, and to deprive
the mother of the remedy which the law at present
afforded her for the maintenance of the child with
which she might be pregnant. To this alteration
of the law he had a most decided objection, and he
should therefore take the sense of the house upon this
clause. The next clause went to establish an ex post
facto law, for it went to the extent of releasing from
prison all those who were now confined under the pre-
sent law for neglecting to support their illegitimate
offspring. The 71st clause followed up the same
principle, but carried it farther ; and he should be asto-
nished indeed if any set of men possessing the feel-
ings of Christians, and actuated by the principles of
mercy and justice, could be found to sanction a law
that went to cast on the mother the entire burden of
supporting her illegitimate child, while the more
guilty father was relieved altogether from responsi-
bility. The 72d clause went on still much farther
with the same objectionable principle, indeed Went to
establish the gross injustice, that in case the mother
should die or be unable to support her child, then
that her unfortunate father, if he had the means, and,
in failure of his ability, the poor aged grandfather,
should be held liable for its support. The wretched
female was to be made by this law the sole victim of
her imprudence, while the at least equally culpable
father was to escape altogether. Poor men were
obliged to send their daughters out to service, when
they would`be willing and desirous to keep them at
home, and to watch over their morals, if they could
afford to do it. Was the house prepared to agree to a
clause which would throw such an additional burden
upon a poor man ? Would they thus increase his
poverty still further? By the 73d clause it was pro-
vided that all sums of money to be levied on account
of bastardy were to be levied in the same manner as
other penalties. Would not this be a great hardship
upon a poor man, suffering, as he must be, under the
additional pain of his child's seduction ? The neces-
sary consequence of these clauses must be to impose
I a great additional burden vn the public. He under-

stood that about half a million was now paid by the
fathers of illegitimate children towards their main-
tenance. From this, as the bill now stood, they
would be entirely relieved ; and upon whom was the
charge to fall ? The bill said upon the mothers. Now
what was the situation of an unfortunate female who
for the first time fell into the situation of becoming a
mother? He admitted the present law of bastardy to
be bad; that it required amendment; but let them not
because the law was bad in one respect, run into the
very opposite extreme. Nineteen out of every twenty
women would be utterly unable to maintain themselves
and their child. - Where then would be the use of
making them liable ? These clauses must have been
formed by men who knew human nature only from
looking over the books in the closet, and not from ob-
servation of men. Such a proposition could never
have occurred to reasoning and experienced men. It
was said that the laws would operate as a check to fe-
male licentiousness. This certainly was a most im-
portant object, and a very fit subject for legislation,
but he doubted whether the end could be attained
in the way proposed. Upon some women the fear of
having thrown upon them the burden of supporting
their child might operate as a check ; but it was vain
to hope that it would operate to any great extent. They
who supposed it world could not know very much of
human nature. He feared it would have but very little
effect in checking licentiousness among females of the
humble classes, exposed to so much temptation as
they necessarily must be. But even admitting that it
might operate as a check upon the natural desires of
women, it was attended with this great evil, it was
holding out encouragement to every vicious and de-
praved man to seduce every woman whom he could
prevail - upon to yield to his arts and entreaties.
He should be glad to hear upon what principle
it was proposed to relieve the guilty man from all re-
sponsibility for the support of his bastard. He was
ready to admit that under the present law of bastardy
cases of injustice occurred, but they were not very
frequent. It seldom occurred that the person sworn
to as the father had not, at some time previously, had
intercourse with the female. The clause would have
no effect in relieving parishes from any part of their
present burdens, but the very contrary, unless, indeed
men were so foolish as to think that an act passed sud-
denly by that house must be equally sudden in check-
ing extensively the impulses of their common nature.
It was wrong to charge upon the poor laws the great
prevalence of bastardy in this country. It was as pre-
valent in France and in other countries, where there
were no poor laws. Another evil he apprehended
from the clause was, that it would greatly increase the
crime of concealing births and of infanticide. If a
woman should yield to temptation, and, in addition to
this misfortune —in addition to the shame and
disgrace of the situation, she was moreover to
be burdened with the maintenance of the child,
it was impossible that the temptation to infanti-
cide must not be greatly increased. If the noble
lord would consent to omit this clause for the present,
he would be very ready to listen to any suggestion for
the substitution of something less objectionable and
more likely to secure the end proposed. He was dis-
posed to remove the clause altogether. It was not
imperative on them to pass it this session. They might
go on with the other clauses now, and legislate next
session on the subject of bastardy, in a distinct and
separate bill. As the other sex had no representative
in that house, and as they were shut out from the elec-
tive franchise, it would not become them to legislate
harshly and unfairly in a matter which so nearly con-
cerned them. The hon. gentleman concluded by
moving the omission of the 69th clause.

The question being put,
Lord AL THO RP must protest against having the
point discussed merely as a matter of feeling. ( Hear,
hear.) They ought to consider the clause, not in its
immediate effects, but as bearing ultimately upon the
class alluded to. He was prepared to say that, look-
ing at the question in this light, this provision of the
bill was calculated ultimately to benefit the woman.
What was the effect of the law as it now stood? Ex-
perience proved that it was productive of great evil to
the female part of the community by lessening the in-
ducements to chastity. One of the evils of the law as
it now stood way that it enabled and induced the female
to endeavour to procure a settlement by matrimony,
and thus increased her temptations to guilt and
deadened the moral feeling. Another evil of the pre-
sent law was that-allowance was given to the woman
whether she .was ,io....want of it or not. Inducements
were thus held out to perjury, which, he feared, was
very frequent in these cases. The, mother swore the
child to the person whom she thought most capable of
supporting it, and the magistrate directed payment
without further inquiry. Another evil was that a
woman, having two or three bastards, was in fact
better off than if she had been guilty of only one offence.
With respect to the effects attributed to the fear of dis-
grace by his hon. friend who spoke last, he much feared
-that the experience of country life, and a knowledge
of what took place among the labouring classes in the
country, would be sufficient to refute the position of
the hon. gentleman. The fear of shame, he regretted
to say, had but slight effect in repressing the licen-
tiousness of women in the low class of society. Hitherto
the law had applied all its checks to the man, and not
to the woman. They were applied, therefore, to the
sex on which, from nature, they were least likely to be
effectual. It was not merely from seeing the report
of the commissioners that he had come to this conclu-
sion, but for many years he felt convinced that the
bastardy law was bad as it now stood, and that the check
would be more effectual if applied to the woman, and
not, as now, to the man. He believed, however, that
the argument of the hon. member, though it rested
only on feeling, would at the present time have very
considerable effect, nor was it unnatural, without fur-
ther experience and from long established custom, that
such should be the case. At the same time, however
misplaced feeling might be, if it prevailed generally it
would not be wise to pass any law inconsistent with
that feeling. ( Hear, hear.) He was disposed,
therefore, to apply some check to men, but found it a
matter of extreme difficulty. Any payment of money,
however small, might operate as a very great hardship
upon a labouring man, and if he could not pay it he
must marry. If unable to pay and unwilling to marry,
he had no alternative but going to prison, and this was
a very great evil. The amendment of which the hon.
member for Somerset gave notice, would deprive the
woman of any advantage, for it gave no part of the
money to her unless she became chargeable • another
provision of the present law of bastardy was that it per-
mitted the child to be sworn before birth, and the im-
puted father must give security or go to gaol. This
ought to be altered. If the house should not be dis-
posed to agree to the clause in its present state, and if
it rejected the amendment of the hon. member for So.
merset, the only alternative that remained was to adopt
the proposition of the hon. gentleman, and postpone
the clauses to the next session, with an understanding
that the subject should be provided for in a separate
bill. For his own part, however, he thought it would
be better to take the whole bill together, as it now
stood, than to open up the question again next session.

Mr. LLOYD thought it would be desirable to post-
pone the clause for the present, though he felt confi-
dent that the object and the principle of it were most
beneficial.

Mr. E STC 0 U RT considered there ought to be
some moral punishment inflicted on the father of an
illegitimate child. Hithertothe father was not punished
for his immorality. He thought that as the subject
did not press for an immediate decision it would be
advantageous to postpone the clauses under discussion
until the next session or another, and combine them in
one bill.
Lord EBRINGT ON, though opposed generally to
the clauses as they at present stood, thought there
would be a lesser evil in passing them now than in de-
ferring them. He hoped the house would adopt the
proposal of his noble friend, and substitute the clauses
proposed for those that now stood in the bill.
Mr. E. BULL E R said that the present bastardy
laws were productive of a great amount of perjury, and
something should be done to prevent it. That might
be effected by making the allowance to women as small
as possible. With regard to the alteration proposed
by the present clauses, he thought it too great. It
would leave women without any protection, and award
no punishment to the men. It would not have the
effect of preventing incontinence, and would drive wo-
men to acts of violence and revenge. He had great
doubts as to the propriety of removing all punishment
from the men.
Mr. MILES read a document to show that the
money at present paid by the putative fathers of ille-
gitimate children was nearly sufficient to cover the
expense of bringing them up. According to his con-
ception the 69th, 70th, and 71st clauses might stand as
they were, and his amendment be placed as a clause
after the 71st ; or, if the noble lord thought it neces-
sary, his amendment might come after the 69th clause
of the bill. He would suggest another mode. Those
three clauses might be deferred to another stage of the
proceedings, but he earnestly hoped they would not be
postponed to another session. He hoped that the

bill would come out of committee, for if it were passed
he considered that it would do good generally.
Mr. BULTEEL should be sorry to see the bill in
anyway mutilated.
Mr. C. BULLER considered the present bastardy
laws a great evil, for they promoted perjury, inconti-
nence, and immorality. He thought some measure of
punishment ought to be directed towards the father,
but that was rather a secondary consideration. Great
advantages would result from directing measures of
punishment against the woman. Besides, there would
be no mistake, since you would be sure of not missing
your object. (A laugh.) The best way to prevent
the crime of infanticide would be to put an end to
the system that gave a premium for the production
of children.

Mr. AGLIONB Y considered it more advisable to
adopt the suggestion of his hon. and learned friend,
and separate those clauses from the present measure,
and make of them a distinct bill.

Mr. W. WHITMORE always thought the clause
(69th it was understood) a most important one.
Hon. gentlemen who objected to it said that it had
been concocted by men in their closets. Now there
was no one principle in the poor laws of England
worse than that which this clause sought to remedy.
It appeared to him that if it was wished to make the
clause effectual it should not be separated from the
bill. The practice of giving public support to ille-
gitimate children was a cause of their increase. He
would quote America as a proof of that assertion.
In the towns of Boston, Salem, and Baltimore illegi-
timate children were not supported at the expense of
the public ; in the town of Philadelphia they were.
What was the consequence ? The illegitimate chil-
dren in one year in Philadelphia amounted to 272 ;
in Salem there was none, and only two in Boston and
two in Baltimore. It was clear, therefore, that the
practice of publicly bringing up illegitimate children
wcifdhtfp reende
eei
oroecdtr
toprmstpheelanyodii
oddnrtts
tchehelet to increase
certainly
deeshet.
aatrhatru iimecttTytheehclause.considern
ahvewtede emct immorality
hopedaea nut mts t
any
e yor
of
wouldht g
rahol
house
et
s y nahe t
oawgnb 0.
good
uodlincontinence.
would
perseveredw
gooumember
lt
would
fbaoerinHe
hoped
division..
eo rmi
veHer
dee
Mr. G R 0 TE requested
oasrsgfhertsoietetuahynitetdt
ah
anpessdyr
bastardy nes
atofoneebt ei
ettm trhl
haoaafsrlt
female
inwthcnaansoolduote
iwnhdt
virtues,
tt pt-
ponerrttheooueosonr
tuesdl
sl
only
prevailed were allowed by all hon. gentlemen, and
y
t
from the measure that was proposed. It was per-
;
but at any rate letorteihefvtliciasblcseehppassed without the modification
but also tended in an alarming degree to encourage
perjury.
Mr. E WART gave his cordial support to the clause
as it stood in the bill, and thought that it was one of
the most important and beneficial parts of the measure.
Mr. BE NE TT thought that hon. gentlemen had
taken an erroneous view of the subject when they
praised these clauses in the bill. It appeared to him
to be most extravagant to imagine that .poor women
would perjure themselves for the sake of a small sum
of perhaps not more than Is. a week, which was all
they could get for the maintenance of a bastard child.
( No, no.) He repeated, then, in his part of the
country ls. or Is. 3d. per week had been for some
years past the greatest allowance made to a poor
woman to maintain a bastard child. (Loud cries of
" No, no." An hon. member said, " At least 2s. or
2s. 6d. was allowed.") Hon. gentlemen said no, but
he repeated that such was the case in his neighbour-
hood ; but at any rate hon. gentlemen would admit
that these poor and unfortunate women would perjure
themselves for 2s. 6d. a week. He contended that
these poor and unfortunate creatures—honest women
be must call them—would not consent to perjure
themselves for the sake of 2s. 6d. a week. The law
only said that a sufficient allowance should be made to
maintain the child, but not more than a bare sufficiency,
although he was aware that magistrates in some districts
were accustomed to take into consideration the circum-
stances of the father of the child. Such magistrates,how-
ever, mistook their duty, as the only object of the law was
that the parish should be held harmless. The law was that
the child should not perish for want of the means of
subsistence, but they ought not to give more to the
mother of the bastard than was absolutely necessary.
He would venture to assert, that in more than thirty
years' practice as a magistrate he never knew an in-
stance of even suspicion of perjury on the part of one
of these poor and despised women. ( Cries of " Oh,
oh.") The present clauses, if adopted, would tend to
the promotion of crimes which did not now prevail
namely, to induce a poor woman to attempt to procure
abortion, or to conceal the birth, and destroy the child.
He wished that a separate bill should be brought in on
the subject next year. It would be a great and cruel
hardship on the women to lessen the restraints now
existing on the men.
Mr. COBBETT entirely agreed in the sentiments
delivered by the hon. member who had just sat down.
He was sure that these clauses would not lessen the
number of bastards, ,and at the same time they would
wholly remove the restraints now imposed on the con-
duct of the man. The truth was, that bastardy pro-
ceeded from poverty. Profligacy and almost all other
crimes proceeded from poverty, and until that was re-
moved the evil would still exist. Dr. Franklin said
that it was difficult to make an empty sack stand up.
( A laugh.) The meaning of that was, that it was
difficult to constrain a man with a hungry stomach.
He not only objected to the clause under consideration,
but to several others respecting bastardy. He (Mr.
Cobbett) thought the 70th clause most objectionable,
for by that a grandfather or grandmother was made
liable to maintain a bastard child. It would often
happen that a girl in service, far removed from the
control of her parents, was seduced, and it was proposed
that the charge of maintaining her illegitimate offspring
should be defrayed by her parents. A case might happen
in which a girl was put out to service in a farmhouse fifty
miles from the residence of her parents. This girl
might be the daughter of a poor man upwards of sixty
years of age, who had got together some little matter
to keep him in his old age, and yet he might be called
upon to sacrifice a large portion of it to maintain the
bastard of his daughter. Such a clause was most ab-
horrent to his feelings. The poor had repeatedly
been described in the course of the discussion on that
bill as degraded, and great complaints had been made
of the prevalence of bastardy amongst them ; but for
his (Mr. Cobbett's) part he wished that bastardy was
confined to the poor, and that the country was not
called upon to maintain the bastards of anybody else.
He wished inquiry was made as to whether there were
any bastards or not on the Pension List. The noble
lord had stated that the Pension List was kept up for
purposes of charity ; but he was most anxious to know
how much was paid out of it to bastards. Now they
maintainwere
sttlia
re
dpse opl
at
hteahrof
the
moment
oomf Englandebnatsttahretdos
house
of
seti
hdiee funds
v apsocoarll
oet
ndo
upon to throw the c
the women. He would not allude to other bastards
not then before the house, but, if these clauses were
pressed further, he pledged himself to put on the table
of the house the notice of a motion respecting those
bastards. Was it to be borne that honours were con-
ferred on bastards, ay, notorious bastards too, and
money was extorted from the labouring people for
their support, when clauses like these, which he would
not call cruel, because they never could be executed,
were endeavoured to be enforced on the poor ? While
clauses like the present were brought forward could
they hope that the people would shut their eyes to the
situation of these notorious bastards ?
Sir J. WR 0 TT E SLE Y felt great objections to
putting this subject over to the next session, but he
should not oppose the amendment of the hon. member
for Somersetshire.
Mr. HAWE S had cordially supported the bill, and
by so doing had incurred some degree of unpopularity.
He therefore urged the noble lord not to postpone the
present clauses. He thought that there never was a
great measure for which the public mind had been
better prepared than this bill. He was perfectly satis-
fied that the fears entertained by some that if the
charge of maintaining the bastard children was thrown
on the mother it would encourage infanticide was
perfectly illusory.
Mr. G. W. WOOD said that fears were entertained
in the county of Lancaster that these clauses would
throw a very heavy burden on the parishes. He there-
fore suggested that it would be desirable in such case
that the father should be called upon to contribute a
portion to the maintenance of the child.
Mr. STRIC KL AND was sure, however the evils
of the other parts of the present system of poor laws
were regarded, that the public looked with the greatest
alarm at the great increase of bastardy. The vicious
administration of the poor laws had mainly contributed
to the frightful increase of this evil. He thought that
the present clauses would be productive of great good.
He regretted that he did not see an effectual mode of
throwing some portion of the charge of maintaining
a bastard on the father without giving rise to great
abuses ; but that was not, in his opinion, a sufficient
rsulleocnt.for
the grossest per-
juriesto assert with perfect confidence that
by the mothers of
His
st
experiencea t onc eproceedinga
gti
sot
rlaetge i
were constantly committed selantaebleodn
him
me

illegitimate children by the law uit stood ; and ow.,
fore, on that and the other grounds he had stated, he
should vote for retaining the clauses in the bill with-
out any alteration.
Colonel TORRENS should give his vote for the
amendment proposed by his hon. friend the member
for Worcester, agreeing as he•did with him that these
clauses of the bill ought to be postponed.
Mr. M. PHILLIPS said that he should certainly
oppose any measure which would go the length of
removing from the father the responsibility of pro-
viding for the maintenance of his illegitimate children.
Mr. HARDY, although favourably disposed to-
wards the bill, still could not consent to the altera-
tion which it proposed effecting in the law of bas-
tardy. His experience in courts of quarter session,
where such matters were usually discussed, had con-
vinced him that the father was, generally speaking,
the more guilty party. In almost every case of a first
child that had come under his observation the guilt
attached to the man more particularly than to the
woman ; and, such being the result of his experience, i
he could not think that the alteration proposed to be
made in the law was either expedient or called for.
His hon. friend the member for Yorkshire said that
the present bastardy laws held out a premium for per-
jury ; but if that was the case, all he (Mr. Hardy)
could say was that the perjury was got up by the 'fa
thers against the unfortunate females whom they had
injured. (Hear, hear, hear.) These circumstances,
had satisfied him that the noble lord should enable'
parishes to compel fathers to support their illegitimate
children, for if he did not the consequence would be
an increase of bastardy to a frightful extent.
Mr. PETER should vote for retaining-the clauses
as they stood.
Lord HO WICK was willing to agree that, gene-
rally speaking, the male was more to blame in cases
of bastardy than the female,. but, although that was
the case, it was quite clear that the practical effect: of
the present system was in the highest -degree Mi3''
•chievous in more points of view than one. 13nt,to
point out one of the evils to which he alluded helad
only to refer to the infinite mischief which it caused
in the instance of compulsory marriages. ( Hear, hear.)
If the bill were modified so as to continue the liability
of the father to punishment that evil must still remain,
for could it be doubted that when a labouring man via 9
left the option of going to prison, or marrying a
woman whom in his, heart he despised, he would adopt
the latter alternative? The pecuniary burden that
might be imposed upon parishes in consequence of this
alteration of the law could not, he thought, be put in
competition with the mischief which was likelyto arise
to the labouring classes from that disregard of the
sacred tie of marriage which the present system incul-
cated. (Hear.) He would illustrate what he had
said by recalling to their remembrance a case which
occurred some four or five years back. They must all
recollect that about the period he had mentioned the
public were horrified and disgusted by the details of a
murder perpetrated in the neighbourhood of Brighton, i
and in which the body of the murdered woman was
cut up into fragments and buried in different places
in the hope of evading detection. When this case
was investigated the origin of the murder turned out
to be this :—The deceased was a notorious prostitute,
a woman of most abominable character, and being
with child, she swore it to a labouring man, who
at the time was desirous of marrying another per-
son. When it was stated to the man that he moo
either marry the woman or go to prison for a long Pe-
riod, he chose the former alternative as the lesser evil
ciot
in the
r ttthhwee i
int
ht
owstoth,euanfnoedom,maafi
oef trewt rahb
01l illy isnt
he
et
et
wo, gaheset
dhaeet
sr
il
rfoooourg
length,
shooimi marr-
ing, timecoi
committed the crime for which his life becalne
forfeited to the law. In this case they had the effects
of compulsory and ill-assorted marriages
this was not the
ob alterationviate
thisproposed
one
evi
lt,o
ibetma
oughtde
to
no tghoe
alhagiw w;'otaulnleddn
gimerelylength thein
recommending its adoption. But
fvorinonl
incye advantage dh ve thata
great
rt ea gaitte
wouldth
burdensa tw
:oguotl would
veaeyrr arise
sustained
fromr tot i
relievet
suecnoene-
th poor ;
of early and improvident marriages among
threaten
men with a prison unless they married them,
hoped that the clauses would be retained precisely as
for, if it were out of the power of women to hreoamteenn
iwthnhoodenuiy:l
cdsmrtoebetoemi
dombni
eontrrhte
for
nercautioustheybsiol lm,
ewa rneshderoet wst
hha
ietywh committedeo present.tidb
proposition
Hrejected. e :: il tewor
eafcftothroe:
1. 1
l lHe
oen
consequence

•1•

—Mr.PEASE, although giving his support to the
clauses as they stood would render him un
e popular,
wouldhis
duty.not on
He
ehat thoughtaccoun t
t shrink nekl a
ufrsoems
atshet`hdisyc
would do an important good, and therefore they should
have
ruh. r ie. si
i support.
oAa fnLldttchcieoon h
stooda rg o
of
uMbledarßts
inserted
rdtohtdonyu be thought
w lawsh
forgotten
rat
ghuf
ooas
clauses,
twse, ita
rnrwedtsohpua
sael
that the
t iatb ehn
respecting
i3tiioibetternb ic
tie
to strike those clauses out of the bill, and to bring the
m questioneMas
lord had already struck out the clauses relating to set-
tlementswhich
he (Mr. Halcomb) was entirely ignorant, in their
stead ; and that being the case, why should the noble
lord object to the motion of the hon. member for
Worcester? In his (Mr. Holcomb's) opinion it would
be monstrous to suffer the more guilty party to get off
scot free ; but, besides this objection, there was an-
other which had been wholly overlooked, and that was
the case of Irish labourers whose families became
chargeable to the parish, but who, in consequence of
their marriages being illegal, could not be compelled
to contribute towards the support of their children.
This was another reason why the consideration of this
subject should be deferred until next session.
Lord ALTHORP denied that be could be charged
with having taken the house by surprise, or that be
had rosed making any alteration in the clauses to
he thought the amendment of the hon.
saidwhich
that
theato
fhon.
the
ed
propositionslearne d
ha lhl ua
dd ed. lie a d
in g whether
urs
bastardy,poi
trriou ncnoetedwi it
onaungwdowut
with
ntdheorttebhfeoearl
Somersetshire the least objectionable. Neither had
the hon. member for Somersetshire taken the house
by surprise, because he had caused his proposition to
be printed. He (Lord Althorp) had stated ef
were three alterations, and he thought that one o_
them, namely, that relating to the postponement of
those clauses, had been disposed of. (Hear, hear.)
If he collected rightly the sense of the house on the
matter, it was, that they should go on with the clauses.
Of course they would have an opportunity of discuss
;
Pe alter
: committee.ettrhheetodelay
adoptelalauys e the
t
mbeeemnbemrfoe;
amendment of the hon. member for Somersetshire•
merely add to it, and therefore he could see no objec-
tionrTehlaattit
no
gptrhtoeopi
Mr. ROBINSON, in reply, said that there was no
pressing or immediate necessity for altering the law
%chick
ho sought would be productive of no injury, he should
press the committee to a division. They 'night be
wards take up the amendment of his hon.- *friend' dr
member for Somersetshire ; but he could not •be
observing upon the caution with which the noble lor
c!
had abstained from saying whether- or not he wot_ild
support that amendment. It was quite evident that
the noble lord, the Under Secretary of State for the
noble lord might have spared them the
krenowing as he
horrid story of the murder at Brighton t .
uld not opera e to inc
must that such a transaction co .
Home Department, was opposed to it ; butesituzieloyf tthhoot
fluence the deliberation of that house.
The committee then divided,.7.h..e.n..t.h..e. ........... were--

Noes ................ •
Majority —Bl
n"el°ufipon the bringing up '
lito° amend'r
e th e
• , all
tardy, to
the clauses inflicting penalties in cases of bas-n- months
rppmwi
t,
report.
sepe
vusmlcneotntaerfaddressing
Upon.
uditaarFsdrsneet.Aidsuhs
their7tynsoaiwthere-admission sacecghcstr.oaso'tinaudible.
punishmentth.cniiNlenai.oa'nugucN.dgd.o '50...............................................................
consentedpAiir e 3
:jo s,Tsis 0 ,
after the passing of the bill. (A laugh.),ted upon any
operation until
infh witted before
person, for an act which had been ccira
the law was passed.
Colonel PERCEVAL con
view of the hon. member as to the injustice
the penalties retrospective. inflicted no
Lord ALTHORP said that the clause ellcommittee
thatetn.
should be tee thought
strictly interpreted, t
nd after this clause 11l
receive relief for
their operation, herself,be still entitled to the same. fie
passed she would
iroend, penaltiesand
twh
rhci
wc hi
nwg 1 t
,b ea
make the alte-
certainly did not think
de notitshni
new
h e
mathtooneuctchlceuduserrs lawarwya .
tas. mostti
stilecy nefoue:
nlVfl
tyl isi
ttiiloaneokadt.i n:tgiedof
ration.
F. O'CONNOR said it was only fair to th°
call
'hvsnue:Jeaotpnrrteutsnohpifasehtet
mthsiheleentsi.hno childufil upon her was unques t i on lb :I, e
therefore woe to
proviso he had stated to each of the clauses relating
bastardy. that
Mr. ROBINSON said it could not be den

• .
• fi
the law as the clauses stood would have a severe ex of workhouses for improper conduct, was, after some i The house then divided on Mr. G. W, Woon's
'
post facto operation. verbal amendments, agreed to. motion, when there appeared,
35
1 Mr. PEASE contended that the clauses would not Clause 84, penalties on overseers and other officers For it
alter the law as to the case of the mother as it now and guardians, was gone through, the blanks filled up, Against it
stood. and agreed to. Majority
Mr. LLOYD said it was true it would not alter Clause 85, penalties for purloining goods, was gone On re-entering the gallery we found Lord ALTHORP
the law as it related to the mother's relief, but the through and agreed to. consenting to a motion that the chairman do report
overseers would not be able to obtain an order from
Clause 86, penalties on persons wilfully disobeying progress.
The house then resumed. The CHAIRMAN re-
' the magistrates upon the father as they now could, and the orders and regulations, was agreed to.
ro ess, and obtained leave to sit again on
gr
Clause 87, as to the parties to whom the penalties p therefore the situation of the mother would bmuch ported
Saturday. •
worse, under the bill should be paid, was agreed to.
PUNISHMENT OF DEATH BILL.
. Mr. C. BULLER suggested that, as the amend- Clause 88, empowering justices to proceed by sum-
Mr. LENNARD moved that this bill be commited.
ment proposed by the hon. member would apply to mons to enforce payment of penalties, was post-
the
On the question that the Speaker do leave the chair,
several clauses, it would be better to embody it in a I"ned•
Clause 89
to. Mr. RUTH VE N objected to it on account of the
distinct proviso. , as to satisfaction for special damage, was
lateness of the hour, and said he should divide the
Mr. F. O'CONNOR said he should adopt the agreed
euerestion. Clause 90 was agreed to. house on the question. The house then divided, when there appeared—
COBBETT said that in all cases in which Clause 91, as to limitation of action, being proposed,
50
the rich were concerned, if there were any alteration Mr. JERVIS objected to the commissioners being For going into Committee
'l7
of the law affecting their interests, it was always allowed to plead the general issue. Against it
Majority
deemed necessary to give them notice. This was a The ATTORNEY-GENERAL recommended Being re-admitted into the gallery we found the
Being
in committee, and
case affecting the poor, and it was to all intents and that the clause should be agreed to as it stood, and
purposes an ex post facto law, declaring that all young next session the branch of law questioned might be Lord HOWICK hoping tha • hon. gentlemen
women now in the family way should be punished for Lilly considered. would consent to an amendment he had to propose, in
an act clearly committed. After some conversation Mr. JERVIS proposed an
Mr. BENETT thought it would be too hard a case amendment to the effect he had suggested. order to shape the clause so as to make it agree with
the usual practice of the law. The amendment he
to hold persons to their securities, or to keep them in The gallery was then cleared for a division, when
had to to insert after the words " valuable
propose was
prison, where they had failed to provide securities the numbers were— security " these words " not any bodily harm to the
after the passing of such a law. For the amendment
Clause 70 was then agreed to. Against it ll2
Mr. LENNARD objected to the amendment, and
Clause 71 having been proposed, Majority
The clause was then agreed to.
doubted whether the country would be satisfied with it.•
Lord ALTHORP had an amendment to propose, Lord HOWICK said it would not be wise to carry
Clauses 92 and 93 were then agreed to.
the effect of which would be, that the settlement of the the principle of the bill so far as it would go without
child should follow the settlement of the mother. The Lord ALTHORP had then to propose the addition
effect of the present law, by which the child's settle- of several clauses to the bill. First, a clause to pre- his amendment.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he had not
ment was different, was one of great hardship upon the vent the commissioners from sitting in parliament ; made pp his mind on the subject, and hoped the house
mother. When in a state of pregnancy she was fre- secondly, a clause to limit the operation of the acts as would take farther time to consider the measure.
quently hunted out of the parish by the officers, and if to the appointment of commissioners to a period of Mr. E WART made a few observations in support
the child would have the same settlement wherever it five years ; thirdly, a clause requiring all general rules of the bill.
was born the inducements to this cruelty would be to be laid before parliament ; fourthly, a clause re- After a few words from Mr. FLEETWOOD, in
removed. (Hear.) . quiring all orders and regulations of the assistant cow-
( l
support of the bill,
missioners to be approved and sealed by the central After a few words from Mr. PRYME and Mr. AoLi- Sir R. INGLIS objected to discussing a subject
ONBY, the amendment and the clause were agreed to. board ; sixthly, a clause exempting all bonds and se- involving the lives of men at so late an hour, and
Clause 72 having been put,
cufree rities made personal by the act of George 111. thought rt i
t better that the Chairman should repo
Mr. ROBINSON wouldut it to the committee tobe
froth the stamp duty. He moved that the clauses
say whether they were prepared,severally brought up. progress.
after having thrown
the whole liability of supporting her offspring upon Clauses 1,3, 4,5, and 6 were agreed to without Mr. LLOYD opposed the adjournment.
discussion. After a short discussion, the house divided on Sir
the mother, to throw it also upon the grandfather and R. Inglis's motion that the Chairman do report pro-
grandmother on her side, in case of the mother not On the second clause (relating to the' limitation of e
gr se--
being able, from sickness or death, to do so. Now it the act as regards the appointment of the commis- For the motion
was impossible that the grandfather and grandmother sioners to a period of five years) being read, Against it 2B
could be held criminal in the act committed by their Mr. GROTE objected to it, as being by no means Majority
daughter, and in many cases it would be a dreadful an improvement in the general character of the bill. The house then resumed, and the Chairman report-
aggravation of sufferings already sufficiently great. Lord ALTHORP was quite disposed to admit that ed progress.
Supposing the case of a labourer with a large family, the clause made no improvement in the bill, but ne- Mr. LENNARD afterwards moved that the house
which he had with difficulty supported and brought up. vertheless could not think it would be any detriment to do now adjourn.
Be would be obliged to send out his daughters to ser- it. The clause was introduced to meet the objections The house divided, and forty members not being
vice or perhaps to a factory,-and if they should be se- of those who thought too great power was intrusted to present the house was counted out at a quarter to four
dnced, would it be fair to send back their children to the commissioners, and if it had that effect, and if, o'clock.
be supported by their parents ? (Hear.) He feared as he had reason to believe, it disarmed the country at —.....
that such a law would have the effect of demoralising large of a ground of opposition to the measure, with- LIST OF THE MINORITY
I and brutalizing the people, and tend to pauperize those out at all injuring its general effect, he thought its Of 21 (Teller included), who voted on the 16th of June
who'would otherwise be industrious and independent, introduction most advantageous, and that he would be for a clause in the Poor Laws' Amendment Bill, that no
Lord ALTHORP said that this would be no de- fully justified in pressing it. money should be borrowed on the security of the poor-
parture from the principle of the act of Elizabeth. Mr. ROBINSON thought the noble lord acted rates for emigration purposes, until provision had been
By a former clause they had decided that all relief to most wisely and properly in introducing the clause, the made for the poor of Ireland.
Itatwucleric,Tl‘l. 'or Hodges,ct.b, .T. L.
the child should be considered as relief to the mother. alteration of which he was satisfied could not beat-Ruthven, E.
Szbelefield, J.
In that case the mother's parents were justly chargeable tended with the results anticipated by the hon. member Bellew,
Broe Blackstone,
ke hßu.tlN.vi
J.
s. , James,rKennedy, , NsV i.
rj
.11 . Talbot, C. R.
with the relief because the relief was to their own child. for the city of London. Tower, C. J.
Mr. ROBINSON said that such a principle was Mr. W. WHITMORE was of opinion, that the in- Cobbett. W. Richards, J. Waite, N. A.
troduction of the clause might endanger the operation
most unjust while the law gave the grandfather and Gully, J. Rider, T. Williams, Colonel
grandmother no advantage as relations. of the bill throughout the country. He, at all events, a-
i thought t would be better to limit the operation of the
Mr. G. F. YOUNG said that this punishment LIST OF THE MINORITY
could be with no semblance of justice applied to the act to a period of seven or ten, instead of five years. Of 18 (Teller included), who voted for Mr. Cobbett's
grandfather and grandmother. On the contrary, it The clause was agreed to, and ordered to stand part amendment to clause 73 of the Poor Laws' Amendment
would be the grossest perversion of justice, and he of the bill. Bill.
The Earl of DARLINGTON, in pursuance of no-. Blake, J. M. Gasket!, D. O'Connell, D.)
trusted that the house would not sanction it. Buckingham, J. S. Gully, J. O'Connell, M.
Mr. H. HUGHES said that such a clause as this tice, moved the introduction of a clause having for its Butler, Hon. P. S. (lodges, T. L. O'Connell, John
would create a difference in the law between the oor object to make the owners, and not the occupiers, of Cobbett, W. Heathcoat, J. O'Connor, F.
adopted
and the rich. If such a provision were in Fielden J
houses under the annual rent of 10/. chargeable for r• 'J.
.i.in, W. F. Maxwell, J.
O'Brien, C. Ruthven, if. S.
rhompsou, Ald.
this bill it should also be applied to the pension list, the poor rate assessments of such tenements. e._
by which the latter would be materially shortened. Mr. C. RUSSELL was opposed to the clause; LIST OF THE MINORITY
Mr. F. FPALMER said that the relationship of the because he was satisfied it would operate against the Of 33 (Teller included), who voted for expunging the
parties gave them a legal liability, and he did not see occupants of small tenements, and would tend to pre- 69th and three following clauses in the Poor Laws'
why they were not to be bound to support the offs eng Bill.
vent the poorer classes having comfortable houses in- Amendment
of their children if the latter were unable to do it.p 1
- stead of small rooms, in which they were now obliged Brothertol, J. Hardy, J. Rider, T.
Buckingham, J. S. Heatheoat, .1. Scholefield, J.
Mr. MILES was surprised to hear the assertion of to congregate. Buller C. Hodges, T. L. Shawe, H. N.
the hon. member for Reading. If the hon. member Mr. WA RBISR T ON said that this clause would Cobbett, W. Hughes H. Strutt, E.
Jacob, E. Stuart, Lord D. C.
inquired he would find that the law recognised no re- go to the virtual repeal of many local bills which now Davenport, rjt. 'J. Jervis, J. Tennyson, C.
lationship in the grandfather and grandmother for regulated the parishes of the metropolis. He should, Fielden, J. Lloyd, J. H. Torrent', Colonel
their advantage, and it would be most unjust to make therefore, oppose the clause. Finn, W. F.
Gully, J. O'Connor, F. Tyrell, l'.
O'Dwyer, C. A. vigor, N. A.
Mr. E WART thought this clause would create
them relations only for the purpose of sharing the pe- Holcomb, J. Ruthven, E. S. Walter, J.
nalties of their children's misconduct. In the classes many difficulties, and might interfere with the appli- Handley, H. Ruthven, E. Young, G. F.
above them the law gave protection to parents against cation of the Local Courts Bill, a measure which he _______
the seduction of their children ; but any one acquainted most devoutly wished might speedily be passed into a THE MARKETS—(THIS DAY.)
with the habits of the common orders of society would law. —ow--
know that when parents were deprived of their children An Hos. MEMBER, whose name we could, ot learn, HAY Ist Alt K ETs.---t Ai or Lo,d of 36 Trusses'.
by seduction they had no means of 10 to .E 3 15 appealing to the said a few words in support of the clause. CUMBERLAND.
.f 3
law for redress. It would be therefore cruel and un- The Earl of DARLINGTON, in explanation, Z3,,,`lihcra lowland Meadow Hay
4 ii 4 10
just to add to their privations the charge of maintaining differed altogether from the hon. member for Reading. useful Old intro 4 5 410
the offspring of their daughters, and he did hope the He considered that the description of property to which t,,
';O7Ny aand Meadow and ttye-grass Day ......
45 0
107
clause would not be persevered in. his clause alluded was that which was not properly Oat Straw £1 10 to £1 121 Wheat straw... 114 1 6
Lord ALTHORP said that after what had passed liable to the poor rates, and why should it not contri- SMITHFIELD.
he should not persevere in the clause, and it was ac- bute as well as any other? coarse heavy Lowland Meadow Hay ..(3 10 to £3 15
cordingly struck out. Lord ALTHORP did not differ from the principle i!ev•if„Nli=ollvitHtoay...... ...........
- ........
- 3
15
4 4
4 5 4 19
Clause 73 having been moved, of the clause which his noble friend had introduced, hue Upland Meadow and hye.erass flay ..... 415 5 o
Mr. COBBETT had to move •
a proviso which but he objected to the wording of it. He thought if Clover Hoyt fine)....£s 10 -Generally 4 0 5 5
id StrawXl P 2 to XI 141 Wheat straw 1 14 1 lr
would make the law do towards those who had become the provision were introduced, that all property of HUNGERFORD.
rich by the labour of the poor the same as it did to the every description should be assessed to the poor rates Coarse Meadow Hay £3 sto £3 10
Poor. It was certainly right that grandfathers or any that was under the value of 101., the clause ought to New Meadow Hay
Useful Old Ditto
other relations, if they had substance and means,should stop there. 4 0 4 5
Fine Upland Meadow and ltye grass Hay 4 15 5 0
Provide for their destitute kindred, and the law ought Lord S A NDON was opposed to the clause on the Clover Hay ,i 315 5 5
to compel them to do• so, and so ought all children for ground chiefly that it was calculated to draw a dis- Oat Straw £1 10 to Xll2 I Wheat Straw... 111 !16
--......-
their parents in like manner. There could be no ob- tinction between one description of property and ano-
C ISA L M A RK ET.-June 18.
jection to this, and this was what the clause provided ther. He was sure that the clause would not be Per Ton, s. 6. Per Ton. s. d
for, Rut it did not provide for another thing. They satisfactory to the landed proprietors. Bensham Main .....-- 16 9 Walls End Newinareh...... 18 0
ought to have a trifling addition to the clause, and he Mr. G. F. YOUNG did not doubt but the clause I..).,,e,atni't Ir'cri,mrose -........ 17
15 0 I4rattiz; Northumberland li„utmarlowtri land.: 17
1; .f9l
meant to move it. It ran thus— would be beneficial. He knew that the principle on Hebburn }Alain 18 0 Walls End rerkin5..........' 17 9
" Provided always, and in manner aforesaid, that the which it was founded had worked well in some parishes ELilywell ...-. -17 9 Walls End Riddell's ........ 19 3
father and grandfather, the mother and grandmother,child with which he was himself acquainted. Ord's Redhugh ....-......... 16 0 Walls End Helton ......... 20 3 i
Canfield* l9 9 Walls End Lainbton „,.- 20 3
or children, of any person on the pension list, the sinecure Colonel TORRE NS opposed the clause. west Hartley ....-..... 17 6 Walls End Stewart'.,- 20 0
list, the list of retired allowances, the widows' pension list, Mr. G. W. WOOD was favourable to the clause, Wylam ..-......................... 18 3 Walls End Adelaide ......... 18 6 i
the compensation list, or upon all or any other lists of but not as it was worded in th H. '
e bill. is view was Walls Walls End Bewicke& Co. J 9 3 Blythe -.-...- 14 6
End Brown's..... 17 9 Hartley.... 17 6 '
pensions received without services rendered to the public, that all property ought either to lie liable to assess- W.E.41.1r1e anil c, ........ 17 0 Stlkstone 5imp50n............ 16 0 1
or in any other way receiving money out of the taxes raised Wail, End G05f0rth....... 19 0 Silkstone Field and C 0.... 17 0
ment or ought to be exempt. upon the poor, shall, if such father or grandfather, mother Waits Fed Hilda-- 18 0 Walls End E1gin............- 17 9 .
or grandmother, child or children, be persons of substance, Mr.
INGHAM opposed the clause. Walls End Killingworth 18 3 Shipcote Trader--,.... 16 3 I
be liable and compellable to yield relief to their relations Mr. PRYME said that so important a clause as this Ships arrived since ast market-day' 22. 1
under all the penalties and forfeitures provided by the Act should not be discussed at so advanced an hour of the ---.8.-- i
COUNTRY CORN MARKETS DURING THE WEEK. i
of Elizabeth, and that all such pensions and allowances night, and he should therefore move that the Chair-
shall cease to be paid." man report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
That was his proposition, and he thought the house (" No, no," "Go on.") He was decidedly opposed Per Quarter. a. to s. s. to s. s. to B. r. to s I
could not deny its propriety and reasonableness. A to the principle of the clause, which he thought would Abingd0n,........... 54 60 30 34 22 30 38 -. 1
short time ago, when the hon. member for Colchester operate injuriously, not only in large towns, but also as And0vert,............... 48 55
.26 31 28 __ - 33 - ,
moved merely for an inquiry into the several claims respected small tenements in the agricultural districts. rit-ridrpoll'ain.'--. 56 58
32 364 16 )(2-. —_ 1„8, i
under the pension list he was told that no person with Mr. BROTHERTON supported the clause. Crencester ...-.. 44 52 26 18 25 - 37 1
any gentlemanly feelings could entertain such a pro- The ATTORNEY-GENERAL proposed as an Gaurillgotin ‘'-'''-.
54, 748 36
32'` L" 34
-•
4"
I
position. He was told that he was no gentleman. amendment on the amendment of the noble lord (Dar- Henley--= 54 83 35 31 20 30 ---- ,41?) I
( Hear, h hear.)
ear,Now, the present bill for the lington) that where the rent was under 10/. the owner Hereford
~;,wo Fr— %3 62
~,, 2
L, eg V - 44
amendmentddis of the poor laws went to deprive the poor and the occupier should be chargeable. He would take Maidenhead (56 68 34 44 22 341 3-6 ,14. ,
anha tressed man of the means of support which he care to introduce a proviso which would prevent stoomoutn.....--.. 62 64 30 32 30 32 - 53 (
Readtint ...--..... 40 66 22 36 14 26 - 41 g
denjoyed under the sanction of acts of
Parliament voters under the Reform Bill from being affected. Salisbury 42 50 20 2:1 22 25 36 40 ;
for three centuries. When this -
bill had been passed Mr. R. PALMER opposed the amendment, as it Southampton -. 54 58 33 40 28 32 - 51 `
into a law, as soon as a poor lab •
miring man happened would have the effect of an ex post facto law. It •
Stroud 64 78 37 38 22 32 52 C
to want relief he would be d Tewkesbury . 4.3 -34 -30 38 -7. 42 i
ragged from his home, ought to be made the subject of a separate bill. This Uxbridge
~..--. 48 74 26 34 20 26 _ 45
and separated from his wife and children, to be the
would add to the objections already felt to measure. sa antage...--. 58 80 27 3'2 17 23 34 44
in a workhouse, where he would have to endurelodged.Warminster 45 52 25 32 22 24 34 45 t
hopeless period of captivity. It had been
said a All property was already rateable bylaw. This clause Wind50r............... 59 - - - 21 02 - 3.-1 t
that would operate as a great hardship. Worcester-....... 48 52 32 36 24 26 - 46
the paupers of England had no shame in j 1
hi for reliefof the parish. He would ask g - Mr. BOLLING supported the clause. He had
whether himself LEWES MARKET.-June 17 .
an interest of 1,500/. a year in this kind of White Wheat (per quarter) £2 Soto£2 12 0 1
th e•fine gentlemen and ladies who lived in idleness Red ditto... .2 4 o 27 0
proyerrty, and he wished it to be taxed. (Hear, hear.)
Ulkui pensions raised by taxation from the hard-earned 8ar1ey......,. .. IIO '0 11 0 v
M• F. PALMER opposed the clause. He had Oats,New ....... 10 0 I 3 0 p
'lttMs of those very paupers had any sense of shame ? good reason to know that this kind of property did not Pease --. 116 0 00 0 v
lie Would not say this subjectat
more upon
but conclude by simply moving the proviso which he Mr. ESTCOURT
could not understand why such CHELTENHAM MA RKET.-June 17. v
alreadyhadread•committee, which he should a number
to the
unless they l'er Bushel s. d. to s. d l'es lb. d. to d.
certainly press to a division. (The hon. member then paid more than the •Wheat
ordinary interest of 4L per cent. Barley 3 0 3 9 Mutton
read the proviso.) In one case it was proved that an individual • d titts
receive 2 6 3 3 Veal
Lord ALTHORP would not detain the committee 2,0001. a year from this s •of Beans'
4 6 5 0 Pork
with any discussion generalmerits of the contributing to the rates. upon the
They were the persons who Hay
31, les 0
to 3/ Laud).
I 7 ss. Od, net ton. 0 7 a
_ 1;
question. He begged simply to remind hon. members introduced a pauper population.
that, inHULL. MA RKET.-June 17 P
_vi so refusing to admit the introduction of the pro- An HON. MEMBER opposed the clause, on the ground wi,eat, Old -s, 425. 48' Nuw -s. 46t. 50g. 1
- Foreign -a. 50s. 545. ln bond... -s. -s -t.
.vis moved by the hon, member for Oldham to the that it would render the bill more u uj
npep ar. present clause, they•be expressing any Mr. G. W. WOOD proposed as an amendment Oats, Poland -5....3. 255. Old —s.-a.-s. C
would not
opinion in support- Small or Feed.... -s. 21s. 23' -s. -s. -11. h
to which the lio of the claims under the pension list that the owner should compound only for half the rate. Foreign -a, 16s. 18s s s.*-11. 4*,
n• member had also alluded. The Earl of DARLINGTON withdrew his clause, Barley, Norf. & Slit ...-s 28s. 30s. Line. & %Vold . 26s 30s. "
The committee then •
d•ivided_ the Attorney
on the understanding that -General was --- Foreign
Ayes . ..........
~. _ -1....,,n ne n eillNCtitlltP_ Beans "lihe 144 Via- Fore). n -II s --. Ti

Noes ............ : .... 17..........................
-....Maj0rity.............. 112

-y against
agreed ...... —95
Clause 74, as amended, was then to.'
On clause 75 being proposed,
Mr. JERVIS proposed some verbal amendments
in respect to the proceedings of appellant and re-
sPondent parishes in disputed settlements.
Lord ALTHORP objected to the alteration as un-
necessary, and likely to impede the principle of the bill.
After a short conversation, in which Mr. LLOYD,
Mr- Ittitov. and others took part;
IVr• ILL ho ed the noble lord would consent to
postpone this
which he ( e„,llll3.use. From considerable experience
"41) had enjoyed in these matters h
was warranted in assuring the noble lord that the pre-
sent clause woul
object to obtain.
cl not have the effect which it was his
Lord ALTHORp •
Stud
The clause was the a few words in explanation.
n agr
Clauses 76, 7 7,tteed to.
agreed to.
7. ' 7 79, 80, and 81, were next
1 he blanks in cladse 82 were filled up, and the clause
as amended was agreed to.
Clause 83, providing for the punishment of masters

Mr. R. PALMER opposed the amendment, as it
would have the effect of an ex post facto law. It
ought to be made the subject of a separate bill. This
would add to the objections already felt to the measure.
All property was already rateable by law. This clause
would operate as a great hardship.
Mr. BOLLING supported the clause. He had
himself an interest of 1,500/. a year in this kind of
property, and he wished it to be taxed. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. P. PALMER opposed the clause. He had
good reason to know that this kind of property did not
pay more than 41. per cent.
Mr. ESTCO U RT could not understand why such
palnanidounmebceasr of cottages
more
ethitanwasthperoovrsdehdionuatlridiyatibneatenreerisentcdtoievfdid,4uiu.anlplreeerscsectiehvneetdy.
2,0001. a year from this species of property, without
contributing to the rates. They were the persons who
introduced a pauper population.
An HON. MEMBER opposed the clause, on the ground
that it would render the bill more unpopular.
Mr. G. W. WOOD proposed as an amendment
that the owner should compound only for half the rate.
The Earl of DARLINGTON withdrew his clause,
on the understanding that the Attorney-General was
to proposeaßcß u
lausßeTasoa
interested
Nsuobpsptiotusetd the clause on 'the
e.
Mr. w A
ground that the parties had no opportunity
of considering the subject.
After a few words from Lord ALTHORP and Lord
DARLINGTON in explanation,
MM
rr OF: 110 E,
cI LoLNYN oopßp oss
ue
pd
ptohr
t clause. e
ed
it
.

Wheat, Old
—s. 425.48• Nuw —s. 465. 508.
Foreign —s. 50s. 545. ln bond... —s. —s —s.
Oats, Poland —s. M. 254. Old —.B. —B. —s.
Small or Feed.... —s. 21s. 234 _is. ..4. —s.
Foreign —s. 16s. lBs s —s.'—g•
Barley, Norf. & Sot ... —s. 28s. 30s. Line. & Wold —s. 268 30s.
---- Foreign —s. - - a. --r.
Beans 308 34s ntii Foreign —s —5• —4.
Pease, White....... —s. 26s 40; Grey —s. 305. 34 .
Taros s. —s. —s. Foreign —s. —4. "'".
Rapeseed. in isond none. Free, per last 29. 20'. Os.

The house divided—
For the clause, as amended by the Attorney-
General
Against it
Majority
On our re-admission to the gallery we found the
committee occupied on the proviso of Mr. G. W.
Woon, making the owner chargeable with only one-
half the rate.
The proviso proposed by Mr. G. W. WOOD gave
rise to a long conversation, in which it was contended
that the clause as agreed to would involve the house in
considerable difficulty. It was contended on the one
hand that this proviso would derange many local acts
already entered into with landlords, and on the other
hand that the proviso was necessary to a clause of this
description.

. 69

MEETINGS OF CREDITORS
AT THE COURT, BASINGIIALL-STREET.

(From 0 e London Gazette.)
R.
G. Penton, cattle-dale-MORROW Croydon, JUNE 20 M 1 1
J. Bennett, herbalist, Covent-garden
-market ° ell
J. H. Popplewell, coal-tnerchant, Milbank street .... ****** 12
1
2 1
W. Mawbey, corn dealer, Edgware, Middlesex 2 •0
I.
. S. Pearson, linen-draT
' Leeds
W. Wookey, victualler, pper St. Martin's lane 2 11

Yesterday a Court of Directors was held at
the East India House, when the Right Hon. Robert
Grant was appointed Governor of Bombay.
Mrs. Fletcher, better known as Miss Jews-
bury, or as the " M. J. J." of some of the periodicals,
died of cholera in October last, in India, whither she
had, but a few months previously, accompanied her
husband, who held some ecclesiastical appointment in
that country. Mrs. Fletcher was the daughter of Mr.
T. Jewsbury, of Manchester,