The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-26 00:00:00

Tr

•

be necessary for Parliament, or the Govern Vtozii.tiiii L—..---
~. 0.,,
len
their attention to those horrid dens. '2Avoliw;notyiztrii!.,. w
occupy their Lordships longer, and he hopEtd4bit '4liiiit.?l,4%;';;::::
fufficiently answered the charge made agairc--:,)! - • r-fs.s4
~
Lord COTTENHAM and Lord BROUGHAM riat,iii4-:,- -,r, ..; -,--;
iir
,--:7--0.-.4.,..........__t5„..
The report was then received. • 7 . I: -.
--"' i_.,,,,'
On the motion of the LORD CHANCEL *MAPIYII/04:...A.t... r.
Blau: es were struck out, v.lich could not pass in their "rtiV
Lordships' House, being money clauses. - . ;
A message from the Commons brought up the Duchy "
of Cornwall Lands Bill, and several other Bills, which.. [
were severally read a first time. r
The Sudbury Disfranchisement Bill was read a third : i
time and passed. , I
Their Lordships then adjourned at Half-past Elev tu. 1

-
HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 25.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Twelve o'clock.
THE CONVICT DALMAS.
Mr. EWART gave notice that he should to-morre vr
put a question to the Secretary of State for the Hone is
Department, with respect to the convict Mamas.
POOR-LAWS.
Sir J. GRAHAM then moved the further considerad
tion of the Poor-law Amendment Bill.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN postponed the following clausc, of
which he had given notice :—" Provided always, and b©
it further enacted, that whenever it shall appear to the
board of any district school that the space within such
school is more than sufficient for the accommodation of
poor children within the district for which such school
shall have been built, it shall and may be lawful fur such
board, subject to the approval of the Poor-law Commis-
sioners, to make order for the admission of so many
other children residing in the said district as shall seem
expedient to such board ; and the weekly provision for
the maintenance and education of such children shall bet
fixed by the board at such rate as shall in their judg-
ment be amply sufficient to cover every expense on ac-
count of such children."

Sir C. NAPIER then moved the following clauses :
And be it enacted, that it shall be lawful for the
guardians of the poor to give a higher rate of out-door
relief than that now given, at their discretion, to aged
people above sixty years of age, who have paid their poor
rates.—And be it enacted, that in the event of a married
couple, or a single man or woman, possessing a cottage
under the value of 51. annual value, and having paid
their poor rates, and being no longer able to work, they
be eligible for out-door relief at the discretion of this
guardians."
Sir JAMES GB MIAM admitted that nothing could
be more praiseworthy or generous than the object of the
Gallant Officer; but he did not think that the object ho
had in view would be gained by the House adopting.
these clauses. He decidedly objected to the first clause
as it was entirely superfluous, and as to the second
clause, the law as it at present stood enabled guardians
to give out-door relief to persons above 60 years of age.
Mr. R. YORKE said that if his Gallant Friend went
to a division upon the clauses he should have his sup-
port, but he thought he would exercise a wise and sound
discretion in withdrawing the clauses.
Mr. R. SPOONER thought some steps ought to be
taken to inform guardians of the state of the law. If this
Gallant Officer pressed the clauses he should give his
support to the second, but he could not adopt the first.
Lord ASHLEY would support the second clause if it
was pressed by his Gallant Friend.
Sir CHARLES NAPIER would withdraw the first
clause, but felt compelled to divide the House upon the

second.
Mr. DENISON said, if the House adopted the
second clause, it ought to be carefully guarded.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that it was no answer to st per-
son who was destitute and who applied for relief, for the
guardians to say that he had a cottage under the value
of Si. He would go further and say, that should death
ensue, the officer who had refused the relief would be
criminally responsible. Destitution was the cause for
relief, whatever it might arise from.
Mr. WODEHOUSE would support the clause. He
was happy to see the spirit with which the Right Hon.
Baronet was determined to carry out this measure, and.
he would advise him to ride the Poor-law Commissioners
with a curb instead of a snaffle, for, if he did so, he
would get the thanks of the country.
Captain PECHELL trusted the Gallant Commodore
would press this clause to a division.
Mr. B. ESCOTT had as much objection to the second
as to the first clause.
After a short discussion, the House divided, when
there appeared—
For the clause 2B
•
Against it 42
Majority against the clause —l4
The clause was consequently lost.
Col. SIBTHORP then moved the following", clauses :
—Be it enacted, that, from and after the 31st day of
March, 1845, the Commission appointed by an Act of 4
and 5 Win. 4, c. 76, intituled, "an Act for the amend- •
ment and better administration of the laws relating to •
the poor in England and Wales," shall cease and be
abolished, and the several unions and union workhouses •
that have been created or established for the mainten-
ance of the poor, under the aforesaid or any other Acts
relating to the relief of the poor in England and Wales,
shall be exclusively and solely under the management, •
power, and control of the several boards of guardians,
constituted and appointed for the management of each
separate union or union workhouse, without any inter-
ference, power, or control:of the aforesaid board of COW.
missioners. And be it also enacted, that at the period
eforesaid, if any dispute, complaint, or other matter re- .
lating to the management of any union or union work- -
house shall arise, the same shall be referred to and be
taken cognisance of by the justices of the peace as-
sembled at the next petty sessions within the district in
which such union or union workhouse is or shall be "
situate, and it shall be lawful to appeal from the deci-
sion of such justices to the justices of peace assembled ;
at the next general or quarter sessions of the peace fem.
the place or county, or division of county, in which such N.
union or union workhouse is or may be situate, ar.d
there finally adjudicated upon. Notwithstanding the
law had been in operation for ten years they still were
ignorant of what the law really was—guardians, magis-
trates, and overseers, were all in a mist, and the Com-
missioners were in a greater mist than any of them. He
protested against this system of centralisation, and
against handing over the management of the poor to,
persons who could possess no local knowledge. It was
an insult to the magistrates of every county to
suffer them to be interfered with as incompetent by
these Commissioners. These Commissioners were- -
now to act as schoolmasters, and to interfere with
clergymen in the management of their parishes. Per.
haps, in the present days of the march of intellect, the
knowledge of the clergyman might not be thought sufti-.,
cient,- and they might think it necessary to send down
an Assistant Poor-law Commissioner, to teach the pan-
pers the Polka.—(Laughter.) He wanted to know where
this centralisation was to end. It set a poor man against
his natural protector, and led to attacks upon property.
Hi; advice was to send the Commissioners out to grass
altogether—shoes off—harness off—let them be turned up,
be paid off, and got rid of altogether. He could not see
why they could not gradually go back to the old system
as they had gradually departed from it. If they would
do away with the whole of the Assistant-Commissioners
at once, he would consent to their retaining the throe
Commissioners for a year longer, for be did wish to do
the thing in a liberal way.
Sir J. GRAHAM said this question had, on more
than one occasion, come under the consideration of the
House during the present session. A great deal had'
been said of the expense of the Commissioners. The
number of Assistant-Commissioners had been reduced,'
nearly one-half. The expenses of the Commission was,
it was said, 50,0001. a-year, and he should be glad to'
know how 50,0001. a-year could be expended more eco-
nomically than in effecting a saving of two millions an..
nually. The House had invariably testified their confi.
elence in the Commissioners by enlarging their discree
tionary powers whenever the question was brought before
the House, and that had been done by the present mei-
sure. The carrying the motion of the Hon. and Gallant
Member would be equivalent to doing away entirely
with the present system of poor-laws. He partly agreed
with the Hon. Member for Lincoln that when the Com-
mission was first appointed, too much had been written
by them, and much of it had been written in a party
spirit. Since he had been in office that error had beari
corrected ; he had had no necessity to exert any inflte;
ence to bring about this effect, as the Commissioners
themselves had anticipated every wish on the ,subject:
When they were first appointed their position was a nee,
cne, and allowances ought to be made for it. The Come
missioners possessed his entire confidence, and, as he
believed, the confidence of Parliament, and he trusted
the House would not agree to the motion of his Hon.
and Gallant Friend.
Mr. BERNAL hoped his Hon. and Gallant Friend
would not press his motion.
Col. SIBTHORP certainly would.
Mr. BERNAL was sorry to hear such an announce.
ment. He believed the state of the law was little under-
stood in the country, more especially as regarded the
power of guardians to administer out-door relief. NOW,
that ought to be rectified, and the guardians fully in.
strutted on the point. A clear, brief statement of the
law, should be drawn up and circulated among boards of
of guardians throughout the country. This ignorance
caused the law to be unpopular, and took away all con•
fidence in the decisions of the boards of guardians, or
of the tribunal of Somerset House.
Mr. R. SPOONER supported the motion. He thought
the object to be gained by the motion was a very de-
sirable one, and that any difficulties which might arise
ought to be met, in order to gain it. The Right Hon.
Gentleman said the Commissioners possessed the confi-
dence of Parliament; but could he say they possessed
the confidence of the people ?—(Hear, hear.) He
had always objected to the delegation of such
extraordinary powers to this extraordinary Commission*
and, therefore, he supported the motion. The Commis.
stoners had introduced the workhouse test—the very worst
test that could be applied ; and he had the authority of
William Pitt for saying that all the difficulties with
which the question of poor-law relief was encumbered
arose from the departure from the provisions of the Act
of Elizabeth. He called upon them to return to the Old
constitutional provision of that law. The spirit of the
law was that every man who was able to work, and will.
ing to work, should have work supplied to him. Now.
the poor man out of work was called upon to break -bp
his cottage, separate himself from his wife, come
into the workhouse, and become a pauper for
life. The instructions of the Commissioners had
been framed with a covert design to go beyond the law,
and that was the reason of the ignorance existing viz
the subject of the law. He hoped that the Right Hots.
Baronet would adopt the suggestion of the Hon. Member
for Weymouth, and cause a short and clear account of
the law to be drawn up and circulated throughout the
country. He had always had a great feeling against the
continuance of the Commission, and the statement of
the Eight Hon. Baronet that they had power to interfere
with Local Acts, made him the more anxious to prevent
their continuance. He said this at the risk of being
charged with Radicalism. If there was any mistake it
was on the part of those who imagined that because,he