The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-13 00:00:00

IUNTY COURTS BILL.

Mr. S. WORTLEY wished to know from the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the ionic
Department, whether he would proceed with the County
Courts Bill this session.

Sir J. GRAHAM said the Bill had been delayed in
consequence of the Debtor and Creditors' Bill being de-
tained so long in the House of Lords. Seeing
on the order-book seven notices before going into Com-
mittee of Supply, and having regard also to measures of
great importance, which were still in progress, he con-
fessed that he felt obliged to abandon the measure for
the present session.
In reply to a question from Mr. BODKIN,
Sir J. GRAHAM said the Commissioners appointed
to inquire into the trust property of Queensborough
had completed their report, but in consequence of the
time for giving notice having expired, it would be im-
possible to legislate on the subject during the present
session.
Mr. AINSWORTII said he had that morning re-
ceived a report of the evidence taken before the coroner
at Bolton, in reference to the bursting of a steam-engine.
No blame whatever appeared to attach to Mr. John
Brooks, the owner of the mill, but there had been very
great neglect on the part of one of his servants, against
whom the jury had found a verdict of manslaughter.
The Sudbury Disfranchisement Bill was read a third
time.

NEW POOR-LAW.
The House then went into Committee on the Poor•law
Amendment Bill.

On clause 22 being proposed,
Captain BERNAL moved an amendment to the effect
that justices of the peace appointed under the Munici-
pal Act shall be, ex officio, members of the board of
guardians. The Hon. Member said he did not intend to
divide the House upon the subject if there was a strong
feeling against him. He threw his opinion out more as
a suggestion for consideration than with a desire to'
cause trouble.
Sir J. GRAHAM said he could not consent to adopt
the suggestion which had been thrown out.
After a few words from Captain Bernal, Mr. Christo-
pher, and Mr. Buck, the amendment was negatived with-
out a division.
Mr. BORTHWICK moved another amendment, to
the effect that every clergyman having the cure of souls
within the parish should be an ex officio guardian.
Sir J. GRAHAM objected to the amendment. Whea
he considered the various duties the clergy had to per-
form, he thought their appointment as guardians would
be inconsistent with their duties.
Mr. B. COCHItANE said that in Scotland the money
collected for the poor was distributed through the hands
of the clergy, and he, therefore, could not see why a
clergyman should not be an ex officio guardian. He
should, therefore, support the amendment.
- Sir WALTER JAMES thought the distinction drawn
by the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State was
a Just and sound one.
Mr. G. KNIGHT thought a great deal more harm
than good would be done by having the clergymen ex
officio guardians.
Mr. T. DUSCOMBE did not think any person more
suited to be ex officio guardians than clergymen, because
they were best acquainted with the condition of the
poor. He should vote fur the amendment.
Mr. AGLIONBY thought that a new light had come
over the lion. Gentleman.—(Hear.) If he (Mr.
Aglionby) was not mistaken, the Hon. Gentleman had
gone out with him and voted against the
appointment of any guardians of the poor
who were not elected by the people ; now he
thought that the clergy were the proper guardians
of the poor.—(Laughter.) Ile was anxious to see the
poor-law carried into effect humanely and considerately
to the poor He hailed this Bill as a great amendment of
tale existing law, but he was for amendment only, and not
for repeal. He never could agree, however, in the opi-
nion, that the clergy should be dragged into official
responsibility in connection with this Act, and he there-
fore must (rive his decided opposition to the amendment
which he had' proposed.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he was charged with not
giving a reason for desiring to see the clergy ex officio
guardians of the poor. His reason, then, was this, that
the clergyman of the parish was the best acquainted
with the wants of that parish, and that the clergy gene-
rally were amongst -the most lenient and consistent ad-
sninistrators of help to those who stood in need of it.
Lord JOHN MANNERS said though there might be
difficalties in Working out the suggestion embodied in
the amendthent of the lion. Member fur Evesham, still
it was one that ought net to be lightly disregarded.
Mr. REDHEAD YORKE had the highest opinion of
the qualifications and the humanity of the clergy, and of
their fitness fur the performance of the duties proposed,
but upon the whole he thought they had better be left,
as now, to the chances of selection from the general
body of their fellow-countrymen.
Mr. G. HEATIICOTE had exactly the same opinion
of the clergy as the Hon. Member who addressed the
House last; but his ground for opposing the amendment
would be the fear of making the ex officio guardians too
numerous and powerful.
After a f.-w words from Mr. Cripps, Mr. Palmer, and
rive Borthwiek, the amendment was withdrawn.
After a short discussion the clause was agreed to.
fin clause 23 being proposed,
Nr. HENLEY called the attention of the Right Hon.
Gentleman to the painful circumstances in which the
wives of convicts were placed in comparison with widows,
and suggested that they should be placed on the same
footing as that class of persons.
After a few words from Colonel WOOD,
;sir .JAMES GRAHAM said that the clause imposed
no new hardship on a woman who was deserted by her
husband. By the clause, she was to be treated as a
widow. The object of the clause was to prevent a
oroan, whose husband had been been convicted, or who
lasel deserted her, from deserting her children. It placed
her ;t1 the same situation as the father, and subjected
her, if' she deserted her children, to the same penalties.
After a few observations from Captain PECHELL,
tee clause mi.: agreed to.
On clause 24 Sing put,
Mr. DARBY obj,'eted to it, first, because he doubted
43 policy, and, secondise that, in carrying it out, there
was no security to the parties whose goods were taken.
He thought there ought, in the first instance, to be a
certificate by proper inquiry as to the lunacy of the party.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that the oreration of the clause
would lead to what he very much desired—namely, that
where parties were lunatic they should not remain in
the union, but in a lunatic asylum ; for though that
might he more costly, they would be better taken care
of. The necessity fur this provision arose from an over-
sight in the 9th of Geo. IV., c. 40, s. 41.
Mr. DARBY explained, and considered the Right
Hon. Baronet had not answered the principal objections
made by him to the clause.
Mr. B. COCHRANE opposed the clause, and objected
to the practice of keeping lunatics in workhouses on the
same footing as the other paupers, a practice which had
existed, to his own knowledge, for some years, and
which the present clause was calculated to perpetuate.
They should be sent to a lunatic asylum. •
Sir J. GRAHAM said, according to the present sta-
tute, the guardians could not keep a lunatic in a work-
house for more than fourteen days, without incurring a
penalty.
Lord EBRINGTON thought it exceedingly unwise
that the lunatic paupers should be kept in workhouses,
as it tended to confirm or increase their insanity.
Mr. P. BORTHWICK objected to the phrase " clan-
getous lunatic;" those lunatics who were confined in a
workhouse, though harmless at first, would speedily be-
come " dangerous," from the necessary absence of proper
treatment, whilst, had the same person been placed in a
lunatic asylum, his intellects would be probably restored.
Lord ASHLEY quoted, from an authorised report,
to ".;?ONV that several lunatic paupers were confined in the
workhouses in England and Wales. There were forty-
four in a workhouse in Penrose, several of whom were
dangerous lunatics, and there wereseventy-one persons of
thesame description in a workhouse in Manchester, many
of whom were subject to fits of raving madness. The
word "dangerous" in the Act had been interpreted in
three different ways. By some it was held to apply to
" persons," by others to " lunatics," and by others to
" idiots." In the workhouse there was neither a medi-
'cal supervision nor any remedial treatment whatever.
it was said lunatic paupers ought to be sent to the asy-
lum, but how could they be sent there, when there were
17,000 lunatic paupers in England and Wales, and the
lunatic asylums were only competent to contain 4,500?
—(!Wear, hear.) In England the lunatics were
generally disposed of in the workhouses, or in private or
Tesblic asylums, but in Wales these unfortunate creatures
were treated worse than cattle. They were placed in
stables and outhouses, and chained in dark rooms ; some
of them underground, and whereno man of feeling would
put his deg.--(Hear, hear.) If the cases of these unfor-
tunate lunatics were taken in hand during the first three
months of their illness they might be treated successfully,
but after the expiration of twelve months the lunacy
became confirmed, and cure became almost impossible.
Neither was it true ecorusrny to keep those creatures in
workhouses, for, as their disease became permanent, so
the expense of their mainteoance became certain and
constant.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said the remarks ofhis Noble
Friend the Member for Dorsetshire were entitled to the
gravest consideration. His Noble Friend had. indeed
Oren utterance to a startling fact, that thre were
• , an rasgland-17,000 pauper lunatics, and asylums capable
of accommodating only 4,500. uch a statement waS
4". well entitled to the consideration of Parliament. In con-
' sequence of the report of the Metropolitan Commis-
sioners of Lunacy, it had been the intention of the
Government to bring the whole subject under the con-
sideration of Parliament, which they would certainly do
in the ensuing session.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. WAKLEY said though the expense of maintain-
ing lunatic paupers in the workhouse was one-third less
than in a lunatic asylum, yet as the Noble Lord had
justly remarked, that that economy would be, most
short-sighted, as well as selfish, which should treat those
paor demented creatures on such a ground. He hoped
the whole subject would be brought under the revision
of Parliament at as early a period next session as was
possible. When workhouse authorities were desirous
of transmitting pauper lunatics to asylums, they were
told the asylums were full. So the poor creatures whose
disease had only commenced were subjected to the
+ordinary workhouse regulations, without care, or medical
:treatment, and thus their insanity increased. The Hon.
Gentleman lauded the manner in which the Middlesex
Aiwlum, Henwell, was ordered. He quite concurred in
the remarks of the Noble Lord, about the necessity of
placing cases of this description under proper medical
care at the earliest period of the disease, for which
he regretted there was SO little provision at present.
'These things ought to be guarded against. The Noble
-lA-rd (Ashley) had promised to bring the whole subject
before the House, and he must be spurred up to keep his
-promise, for no man was more competent to handle the
queetion.---(Hear, hear.) But he must not deal with a
part of it ehe 'must embrace the whole, or the public
mould nut be satisfied. The question involved the very
beet prieciplie of humanity, and, as. auch, he would not