The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-13 00:00:00

for spititual instruction to paupers of the Roman Catholic

faith:

Colonel WOOD considered that the effect of the Bill
under consideration would be, eventually, to put an end
to all settlement but that of birth, and to entail on the
people of Scotland all the evils of the English poor-law.
By fixing seven years as the period for effecting a settle-
ment, the practical effect would be, that the great mass
of those not born in Scotland, but industriously engaged
there, would not be able to gain a settlement. It would
entail on the country all the evils of the 13th and 14th
Charles 11., and lead to a war between parishes, as to
which should be burdened with the maintenance of the
poor.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD said he wished to make a few
observations or. the Bill, which he would have looked upon
as a step towards laying the foundation of a substantial
system of relief for Scotland, had it not been proposed
that those who formerly were entrusted with the ad-
ministration of relief were still to have it continued in
their hands. It was his opinion that it could not be
placed in the hands of worse persons—(Hear, hear)— as
they had shown a most unpardonable neglect in the way
they had acted towards the poor of that country, What
was the condition of that country under the administra-
tion of relief ? It exhibited a system of extermination,
in which the people were cleared away, and the country
turned into extensive sheep-walks. Certain statements
had appeared in the Times newspaper, to which he would
call their attention. The Hon. Member then read ex-
tracts front the letters that have recently appeared in
that journal, illustrative of the clearance system in the
counties of Ross and Sutherland, especially in
the parishes of Ardgay and Glencarrie. He
would ask why the poor-law of Scotland had
not prevented this deplorable state of things ?
He wanted to know what the heritors and kirk
sessions had been doing to allow such proceedings
to go forward. This clearing system was not confined
to the district he had named, but extended itself over
the whole Sutherland estates, there being many instances
in which 30,000 acres of pasture were only inhabited by
a few shepherds, the land having been depopulated to
make sheep-walks. If a proper poor•law had existed
such a state of things could not have taken place, as the
poor would have had a settlement, and could not have
been driven out. It was a system which extended
mendicity and wretchedness among one class, and
rendered the wealthy hard-hearted and callous towards
the sufferings of their fellow creatures. These were
most material points to be considered when they spoke
of a poor-law for Scotland. Other parts of Scotland
were suffering very much from the want of an efficient
poor-law. In Glasgow it had been stated, upon
authentic grounds, that hundreds died annually
from the want of the commonest necessaries of life.
If they went into the description of what had lately
taken place in Sutherlandshire, they would find much to
shock them. There was no protection for the poor man,
and the whole country seemed in a state of desolation.
If the accounts in the newspapers were true, this state of
things should not be suffered to exist He would not
vouch for their truth—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear,"
from both sides of the :House)—he repeated, he would
not vouch for the truth of these statements, but
thought it right to mention them there, so that they
might be explained or contradicted by Scotch Members,
The law would, he thought, be most severe in its opera-
tion as regarded settlement, and he entirely objected to
the 17th clause of the Bill, which respected the removal
of English and Irish. This clause pressed with peculiar
hardship on the Irish, who had no settlement in Ireland
by the present law, and who, when thrown upon the
shores of that country, had no legal claim for assistance
in any particular parish. The 72d clause was a most
barbarous one, for if an Irishman who had been oncere-
moved again became chargeable to the same parish, he
was treated as a criminal.
Sir J. GRAHAM—It is the law of England.
Mr. CRAWFORD—Then it is disgraceful to England
or any other country, to keep such a law on the Statute-
book.

Mr. LOCH said he wished to say a few words about
a statement which had been made by the Hon. Member
for Rochdale, relative to the treatment of the tenantry of
Sutherlandshire. These accounts quoted by the Hon.
Member were not true.—(Hear, hear.) There were no
tenantry better treated than those of Sutherlandshire,
nor none more flourishing ; no pains that could be taken
by a landlord which had not been bestowed upon them,
and they were a most industrious well-disposed popula-
tion. They had frequently been forgiven their rent, and
60,000/. had been distributed among them by the land-
lords. Sutherlandshire had wonderfully improved since
1828, and one village there, Glencarrie, which, in 1813,
exported 3,500 barrels of herrings, last year prepared
37,000, employing no less than 3,900 people. Neither
was there an illegal still in all Sutherlandshire, a great
proof of the moral improvement of the population. The
Hon. Member concluded by saying that the reports in
the newspapers were grossly exaggerated, and that he
was willing to give the Hon. Member all the facilities in
his power to ascertain the fal ehood of these statements.
The LORD-ADVOCATE said he would commence
by adverting to statements which had appeared in the
newspapers, respecting what had taken place at Glen-
Carrie, in the north of Scotland. And first, be must say,
that he was by no means inclined either to approve of
or defend a system of wholesale ejectment. He
thought that if a landlord wished to diminish the num-
ber of tenantry on his property, if he found such a step
necessary, he (the Lord-Advocate) thought it should
not be done suddenly and at once, but gradually. But
respecting what had taken place at Glencarrie, he be-
lieved the reports to have been greatly exaggerated, and
his belief was founded upon inquiries which had been
instituted to ascertain the accuracy of these statements.
It was not a case of sudden ejection, for negotiations had
been going on for a period of two years between the
managers of the land and the tenantry. Arrange-
ments had, in fact, been concluded to the satis-
faction of the tenants who were to vacate those
lands, and who gave their consent to that
course. The lands were accordingly let to others,
but the tenantry afterwards changed their minds and
refused to go. To many of these tenants abatements
had been made. Some of them had received sums of
money and assistance towards emigrating, and they
were so far from being in the state of destitution de-
scribed, that several hundreds of pounds had been paid
to them, as the value of their stock. Notwithstanding
the observations of his Learned Friend the Member for
Leith, he thought there would be no difficulty in mak-
ing those alterations in Committee, which would render
the measure generally acceptable. He considered that
sufficient provision was made in the Bill for the protec-
tion of the pauper against the parochial boards. With
regard to the objection of his Learned Friend, that
there was not an uniform system of rating adopted in
Scotland, more particularly in means arid substance,
he had not found in the five volumes of evidence collected
by the Commissioners on that subject, anything against
the fairness and justice of that system of taxation. Since
the Bill had been circulated he had received various
communications approving of that part of the Bill ; and,
moreover, he believed that public opinion was generally
in favour of it. If the system was right, and had been
found to work well in Glasgow and other places, as he
could prove by the testimony of very high authorities,
he would ask if it was advisable to prevent the people
from resorting to this mode of assessment in preference
to any other ? Nevertheless power was given in the Bill
to adopt a different mode of assessment on property, for
instance, where it was thought proper to do so from
local and other causes. Parochial boards would, no
doubt, adopt a system best suited to the place. With
regard to the objection of his Learned Friend, as to the
extension of the period of residence from three to seven
years, he believed there was a general concurrence of
opinion that such an extension should take place—that
opinion was entertained by all who had turned
their attention to the condition of the poor in
Scotland, whether in towns or in the country—Dr. Alli-
son among the number.lllis Learned Friend, was strongly
opposed to the removal of paupers from England and
Ireland, and urged that their support was most oppres-
sive on the rate-payers of Scotland. Now, it did appear
to him (the Lord Advocate) that they could not deprive
an English or an Irish pauper of relief out of the poor
rates, because there was not sufficient provision in their
own country, though there ought to be, for a Scotch-
man was not entitled to relief out of the poor-rates of
Ireland. lie considered that the erection of poor-houses
should be left to the proper parties, and-to consider whe-
ther they would afford paupers relief in them or out of
them. A Noble Lord (Lord Arundel) suggested that
some provision should he made for the spiritual wants of
those who differed in their religious opinions from others
of the poor. There was nothing in the Bill to prevent
such persons from being attended by the pastor
of their own religion. He knew several parishes in
which no medical talker was employed, and in many of
them his services were rendered unnecessary by the
longevity of the inhabitants.--(A. laugh.) However,
power was given in the Bill to apply a portion of the
rates, in the shape of a subscription to hospitals, for
the benefit of the poor. The Bill provided that funds
should be provided for the relief of indigent persons
In sickness, as occasional poor. The Learned Lord
then referred to the general details of the Bill, and
concluded by stating that no objections had been urged,
or suggestious raised, which might not be adopted in Com-
mittee. He boped, therefore, the House would not ob-
ject to its going into Committee, as it would be of
great_ advantage to the poor of Scotland.—(llear.)
• _ Mr. HUME thought that the objections had been
fairly met by the Learned Lord who 'had just sat down.
He could only say that the subject was full of difficulty. If they could steerthbeetween the two extremes it would. be well. From the
which
hmrnunicatioas he had received
from the boroughs
ts he represented, all differing in
the tenor of their contents, but all agreeing in the end at
which they arrived, thatn there great difficulty in the
question, and he thought thereforewae
that upon the whole
the safest plan would be to suffer
r the Bill to pass over
till the next session. All dithe great point as
to the amount of relief which shouldedon
be administered in
those cases where it was impossible to appeal to the
authorities, and he thought that it was somewhat unsafe
to leave it, as the Learned Lord (1;:o the enlarged
charity of the individuals in whiesolineesie
cases of immediate distress occurred. 4 neighbourhood those
therefore evidently full of difficulty, and he Zueghlasit
better therefore that the measure shouldllebe
mustsub-
?flitted to a Committee up stairs.
admit that the Learned Lord had very fairly
answered the objections of the Honourable
Member for Leith, but still he had not obviated tho evils
which had been pointed out in the previous speech. He
himself had been an advocate for the alteration of the
poor- law, but he must acknowledge that it had not alto-
Faber fulfilled the expectations which he had formed of
it. Little time would be lost by the delay, and as the
advantage of giving a perfect measure was exceedingly
great, he thought the better plan would be to defer the
measure : and as he was sure that every Scotch Mem-
ber would feel it his duty to bring, all the information
which he could obtain, there w6talf be grounds for deci-
sion far superior to any which they now possessed, and
he should therefore desire that the measure should be
postponed for one sear more.
Ur. COLQUIWUN felt, equally with the Ho. Aleut,

ber for Montrose (Mr. Hume), the difficulty of this ques-
tion, but he was compelled to differ with him as to the
result. It was true that there was great doubt as to the
measure of relief to be administered in cases of absolute
destitution ; but, when ho recollected that the board
of supervision, which this Bill proposed to insti-
tute, would bring any cases of flagrant abuse be-
fore Parliament, he thought that there was suffi-
cient security for th just exercise of its powers.
It should also be remembered that the kirk of session
also possessed the power of interference, and notwith-
standing the changes which had lately occurred in the
Church of Scotland, yet he believed that all parties would
work conscreaneously in carrying out the provisions of
this Bill. And if they did not, it should be recollected
that they were subject to the jurisdiction of the ecclesi-
astical courts. So that even from them there was a
security by no means contemptible. It would, there-
fore, in his opinion, be far better to come to a decision
than to hang up the measure even for another year.
The Hon. Member for Leith was desirous of a change in
the assessment, and he thought there was much in the
objection. When it was remembered, as had been stated
by that Hon. Member, that all the developments of
Scotland had taken place within the last 65 years, it was
evidently plain that the assessment ought to be thrown
more largely on houses in towns. In those cases of
emergency, where there was no opportunity of meeting
the distress by the ordinary means, they had no resource
but to apply to some extraordinary source. Such was
the case at Stockport a few years ago. There
the poor's-rate had proved entirely inadequate
to meet the ditress.—(Hear.) It was, indeed, only
intended to meet ordinary occasions from poverty, an I
when any great period of calamity, such as those which
the variations of commercial existence were sure to oc-
casion, they could only be met by some extraordinary
appeal to the public kindness and sympathy of human
nature. These occasions had been so met in Stockport,
Glasgow, and other places. But these were only extra-
ordinary occasions, and he thought that if there was to
be any permanent provision for the wants of the able-
bodied labourer, it would lead to a system of demora-
lizing tendency which would ultimately lead to a total
depravation of the popular mind. For these reasons,
agreeing with the Hon. Member for Montrose as to the
difficulty of the question, but disagreeing with him as to
the danger or benefit of delay, and believing that there
was an urgent necessity for interference, he should give
his cordial support to the Bill.
Mr. E. ELLICE quite agreed with the previous
speakers in the difficulty which surrounded the question;
but he thought that however great that difficulty, yet it
was a duty of the House to encounter and overcome it.
He thought that the suggestions of the Hon. Member for
Leith were well worthy of attention ; but at the same
time ho differed as to the way in which that suggestion
was to be carried out. The several parts of Scotland
totally differed from each other in character and condi-
tion, and to endeavour to apply one and the same remedy
to people in such very different circumstances,
and with such very different wants, must turn out
a total futility. The east and the west, and the north
and the south of Scotland, were all under very
different circumstances, and they were applying a mea-
sure which would act most unequally. To any
one who, like him, had seen the Highlands, it
would appear ridiculous to suppose that any
board in that district would assess themselves.
He believed that no one Bill could apply to all parts of
the country, and he conceived, therefore, that at would
be necessary to have one Bill for the Highlands of Scot-
land and another for the Lowlands. Scenes were at pre-
sent enacting in the north of Scotland which reflected
disgrace on any civilized country—(Hear, hear) —but
was there anything in this Bill to put a stop to
those proceedings ? He believed not. He did
not wish to mix himself up with the opinions of any
person or persons, but looking at the reports which were
now periodically sent from the Highlands, he could not
help expressing his gratitude to any person, or body of
persons, who were the means of bringing the state of the
Highland poor before the country. He thought that
the facts therein stated fifully proved that
unless parishes were compelled to give the poor com-
pulsory relief, certainly no voluntary assistance would
be sufficient for that purpose, and most decidedly he
thought that the poor ought to have some fixed system
of medical relief. Another plan, which would be greatly
calculated to ameliorate the condition of the poor in the
Highlands, would
.be to :teach the children the English
language. Why should property, he would ask, in
Scotland, be exempted from an assessment to which it
was liable in England and Ireland? He thought this
Bill a most ill-advised one, and he trusted the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite would re-consider it. He did
not think that they had evidence enough of the state
of that country, for certainly a body of evidence had
been supplied to the House by the Commissioners which
fully illustrated the state of the poor., yet he would again
earnestly entreat that the measure might be postponed
for the purpose of re-consideration.
Mr. R. SCOTT was strongly opposed to any post-
ponement of this question, for he was of opinion that
the longer they deferred legislating on the subject, so
long would the Scottish poor Jae kept in their present
miserable condition. An Hon. Member on the opposite
side had lamented that this Bill would place a greatly
extended power in the hands of the Kirk Session. He
did not think that power would be ill-bestowed, for
during every period the Kirk Session had proved them-
selves the friends of humanity and of religion. The
poor-law in Scotland was good, the principle of it was
excellent.—(Hear). He was glad to hear those cheers
from Scottish members. It was only the want of an
assessment that made the case of the poor so miserable.
If they took the ministers from the north of Scotland,
they would find every large proportion of them in favour
of a compulsory assessment. If they took the medical
men examined, they would find that 80 per cent, of them
were in favour of compulsory assessment. Most
of the sheriffs' substitutes, and in fact the
large proportion of all the influential witnesses
examined, were in favour of a compulscry assessment.
What ought to be the course, then, for Government to
pursue ? Why, simply to introduce into this measure a
power of compulsory assessment in parishes where it
might be required.
Mr. P. M. STEWART regretted that Government
seemed determined to force this Bill through the House
in the present session, because, considering its vast im-
portance to Scotland, and, indeed, considering its im-
portance to the whole country, and considering the pre-
sent state of public business, he thought it would have
been a fair concession to Hon. Members connected with
Scotland, and a relief to the Government themselves, if
they had acceded to the request of the Hon. Member for
Montrose, and referred the Bill to a Committee up
stairs. He denied that the Bill, in its present form,
would introduce any improvement into the present state
of the poor of Scotland, and he thought it must be
startling to every Scotch Member to find, that the mo-
ment the Kirk Session was discovered to be inoperative,
a measure of this hind was brought forward, which he
defied any Hon. Gentleman opposite, from the Learned Lord-
Advocate downwards, to prove to him would be productive
of any beneficial effect. Without detaining the House on the
minute details of the Bill, he wished to proceed at once to
what might be considered the great point of the measure,
namely, the two administrative bodies to act under the Bill.
He would go at once to the Supervisional Board, which had
already been demolished by his Hon. and Learned Friend the
Member for Leith. Now, the whole constitution of that
board was indefensible, and he took it to be a matter
of one of those very points which would have to
be settled when they went into Committee on the
Bill. There were to be nine members of that Board,
part of them to be nominated by the Kirk, pert by the Sheriff,
anal the remainder by the Crown ; but the only two members
who would be favoured with the confidence of the people, would
be the two provosts of Edinburgh and Glasgow. Such would
be the constitution of the Board, which it was proposed to
entrust with powers which appeared to him to be most anoma•
lons—powers which, instead of tending to relieve, threw ob-
stacles in the way of the poor obtaining their just rights, while,
at the same time, they gave undue and unnecessary protection ,
to the parish,authorities. This appeared to,him to be most uniast,
for if one party ought to have been favoured at all, he t:eoue'' t
that party ought to have been the poor and not Pe,: sist4
was said the Bill was to correct the mad-admini:stration of a'good
law, but, in his opinion, the poor were in e'oetter state now than
they would be under the Bill. AU these points, however,
were to be settled, altered, or
. imer.ort'A in Committee ; but,'
considering the advanced period Dt. 'the session, and considering
that the Bill contained as
as eighty clauses, he thought
it would be more becotia':;ig in Government if they were to put
off the Bill till next session. They were going to apply ma-
chinery which Was constitutionally wrong, which could not
worsi-, and which would increase instead of abate the abuses
':under which his country was suffering. He said, then, that
the Bill, unless it were amended throughout almost to affect its
principle, it would be impossible for any Scotch Member to
give his vote in support of the measure. But of this he was
quite sure, that if they passed it now, his Learned Friend the
Lord Advocate would have to bring in a Bill
next session to amend it ; and how much
better, and how much more creditable would it be for them to
obviate this necessity, and postpone the Bill for a short time
with a view to its amendment. The poor would suffer no hard-
ship from this course, because the Bill contained no one re-
deeming quality, so far as the poor:man was concerned. A
distinguished writer, he believed it was Bailey, had said that
i legislation ought to be for the poor, because the rich could take
care of themselves ; but the Bill, though professing to assist
and care for the poor of Scotland, was decidedly against their
interest. It was a Bill to protect the interest of the lairds
and heritors of Scotland, and not to better the condition of the
poor ; and if Government persisted in pushing it forward, he
should give them his most determined opposition.
Sir J. GRAHAM was surprised that the Hon. Gentleman
who had just sat down, after entering so strong a protest
against the Bill, had .not concluded by making some motion
which would have brought his opinion in a substantial shape
before the House, because, if this Bill be not calculated to pro_
vide for the wants and abate the hardships under which the poor
of Scotland labour, he did think the Hon. Gentleman, being a
Scotch county Member, had failed in his duty in not moving
its rejection.—( Hear, hear.) He would now trespass for a
few moments upon the attention of the House while he adverted
to a few of the objections which had been made to the Bill in
the course of the evening. And, in the first place, he would
call to the recollection of the Hon. and Learned Member for
Leith, who had taken so creditable and active a part to bring
under the notice of the public and the House the distresses
of the poor of Scotland, that so far back as two years
ago,this subject was first brought under the consideration of
the Government. He held in his hand the report of a commission
which
.was issued by the Crown in January 1842, and it was
ipriaswoihoopinrocthsrsooltfbriees to dissemble the fact, that the issuing of that com-
mission had raised in a great degree the expectations of the
Scotland.—(Hear, t Icommissiona labouredu a-
under( l
hade a r , s
ohm:
eaer .
td)oo:ThTbteh
but notwithstanding
asn oHon.ttwoi
t the
hsl lt Member
gur
conclusion
adverse opinion, he thethouehteo
with him that with
,respect
that the inquiry Hon. Member would admit
could
to facts, it was utterly impossible
hear.) All the facts have been carried further.—( Hear,
been fairly elicited, and that
he could
possibly. be discovered had
afraid the doubts of the Hon.
Member. for Montrose couldwrast be removed by carrying the
atthilenHfuourtsehe,rt,haantdthhee I:tigedhto remind the lion. Mem-
:rived when it would
astnidg
worthy
be an absolute desertion of their dirty
applywe ifa Government
did did not make some attempt to
some sort. He did think then it
w
of the House to institute a further inquiry, forasthenot
obtaining time, nor did he think it worthy to deterttiPelof
by sending it up stairs. It was to be dealt with by and in tilit
House and immediately ; and if the proposition of her Ms...
jesty's Government were erroneous as well in principle as in
detail, as the Hon. Member for Leith had represented it to be,

it was their duty to deal at once with the question.—(Cheers.)
Now he must state that the Hon. Member for Montrose did his
Hon. and Learned Friend the Lord Advoeato justice, and no
more than justice, when he stated that the Learned Lord had
fairly grappled with all the objections which had been urged
against it ; and so far as the Hen. Member was concerned, it
appeared to him the answer of hi Learned Friend was satisfac-
tory. The Hon. Member who had just sat down had cor-
rectly stated that the poor-law of Scotland was sound in prin-
ciple, and humane in its policy, and effectual as far as a matter
of lew, but defective only from mal-aministration. Now it was
precisely with, defects in the administration of the law that
Government were dealing and endeavouring to apply a remedy.
He could not agree with the Hon. Member, whose knowledge
and connexion with Scotland were certainly mere extensive
than his own, that the parochial board, from its very nature,
was unconstitutional and defective. For of what was that body
composed? It was composed, first, of heritors, or those who
contributed in the largest degree to the poors' rates, and, in
the next place, it was composed of ministers of the parish. If
assessment became general, the present Bill introduced a most
important change, by giving all the rate-payers in the parish a
voice in making that assessment. But there were authorities
of a high character opposed to the principle of assessment al-
together. Amongst them were Dr. Chalmers, and (as we un•
derstood) Lord Dalmeny. Bu: he thought that matters had
now arrived when assessment was necessary. (Hear.)
Still he thought it was desirable to leave assessment volun-
tary. He did not think it would be wise to make assessment
compulsory in the first instance. It was true that the appeal
given by the present poor-law of Scotland appeared to recog-
nise a more impartial tribunal than the English pauper had to
appeal to. But, in point of fact the appeal in Scotland
was altogether illusory.—(Hear, hear.) He had great objec-
tions to any delay of this measure, and the arguments of
the Honourable Member for Montrose had not con-
vinced him that delay would be productive of any good.
The legal authorities in Scotland, who had paid-the greatest at-
tention to this subject, were in favour of the Bill. The Solicitor-
General for Scotland wws in favour of it. The three Sheriffs
who had been consulted en the subject, and who had the best
means of judging of its merits—that is to say, the Sheriffs of
Renfrew, Perth, and Forfar, were in favour of it. He did not
think that if more time were given, there could be contrived a
better tribunal than that which was proposed in the Bill. In
Scotland the poor had a right of appeal, which the poor in Eng-
land had not—( Hear)—and as that right was to be confirmed,
he did not imagine that any wrong could be done to the poor,
if the decision of the local authorities was borne out by the de-
cision of the ultimate reference. The 67th clause gave an ap-
peal to the Sheriff, whose decision, if in favour of the appellant,
would be conclusive, and without expense ; hut it was not to
preclude the pauper from a further appeal if the decision
were against him. The Bill would also establish in
every parish an inspector of the poor, who would have the
power of reporting on, and in some cases of revising, the de-
cisions of the parochial board. He was quite open to receive
arguments which would alter his own preconceived opinions,
and to alter the constitution of the boards of supervision. But
he was astonished at the objection which was made to the pub-
licity of all the proceedings of those boards. What could tend
more to the cure of those terrible hardships of the poor in
Scotland than the publicity of the proceedings of the parochial
boards, and the agency of a controlling power? Much had
been said as to the right of the able-bodied poor to relief. The
law of Scotland did not give them relief ; and as to the occa-
sional poor, the 62d clause gave them a claim to relief.—
(Hear, hear.) That clause would meet all the exigencies of
cases which might reasonably be expected to arise, in the case
of the able-bodied poor, occasionally and unavoidably
brought down. With respect to the distinction between
burghed and rural parishes, all that the Bill did
was to maintain and to regulate the existing law.
The Bill contained provisions which were calculated to give
aid to the poor in their respective localities. An Hon. Gentle-
man made a reference to the necessity of the assistance of me-
dical gentlemen in the Highlands of Scotland, which was quite
impracticable and inconsistent. The establishment of medical
men in such districts would be, in his opinion, quite at variance
with reason. Then with respect to the prolongation of indus-
trial residence from three years to seven. He did not say that
seven years was the right period, but there were reasons why
the time should be prolonged in that country. The
migratory character of those who laboured in the manufacturing
districts rendered it indispensably necessary. It was not ex-
pedient to postpone legislation on this matter, for this was the
time to legislate. In principle there was no objection to this
measure, but there might be objections in detail, which could
be remedied in Committee ; the law itself was already sanc-
tioned by the feelings of the community at large. That House
was the only place to discuss the question, and not in Com-
mittee upstairs, from which the people of Scotland would
hear nothing. And he challenged the Gentlemen opposite to
discuss this matter fairly with him. He hoped that the
Gentleman opposite would not make the proposition which
he intended, and if he did make it, he hoped earnestly that the
House would resist it.
Mr. FOX MAULE said that Hon. Members opposite
could not suppose that he had any other object in view than
to provide for the difficulties, the extent of which he was ready
to admit, but when he looked at this Bill, and read the provi-
visions of it, he could see no prospect whatever of bringing it
into operation, if it were to be only discussed before a Com-
mittee of the whole House ; on the other hand, if the Bill
should be committed to a Committee upstairs, he denied that
it could be called a hole or corner meeting ; on the contrary,
his opinion was, that the discussion on its merits could be car-
ried on much more beneficially to the measure, and more satis-
factorily to those to whose care it should be committed ; and if
he did not think so he would be the last man to make such a
proposition. His object was to have this Bill examined care-
fully, and have all its propositions put properly before the
public when it should be brought down to the House. This
was no unusual course, for it was one that had been adopted
upon another Bill affecting Scotland in that House. He had
heard the objections of the Right Hon. Baronet, and in answer
to them he would say that if he were to regard them merely as
a private landed propretor, he would let the matter pass quietly;
but regarding this measure as he did, he could not help saying
that the Bill appeared to him to be one which afforded pro-
tection to the rich only. He would not detain the House by going
into the details of the provisions as to the remedies at law given
by the Bill ; but this he would say, that before a poor man
could take his case before the Court of Session he would be
materially intercepted. He next objected to the presence of
the minister at the parochial board, because the funds collected
at the doors of the church were not added to the poor funds,
while those who had the management of them were to be mem-
bers of the parochial board. The Bill also proposed the dis-
qualification of a class of personal called heritors, to which he
would also object ; because those who would have the best
right to vote would be disqualified, while a landed proprietor
might have the power of conferring a number of votes. This
was, in other words, what was called a plurality of votes, than
which nothing could be more objectionable. He had to object
likewise to what was called the Superior Board, as well as to
what was called the combination of parishes ; but all these were
topics which could only be fairly discussed in Committee up stairs.
If they did not deal with the measure with a view to a perma-
nent arrangement, it were far better they did not interfere at
all, for they would be doing more harm than good. He,
therefore, considered that it should not be referred to a Com-
mittee of the whole House. By referring it to a Committee
up stairs, as he had proposed, they would gather the opinions
of all parties, and would be better able to form a judgment as
to the course they should adopt. He should, therefore, feel it
his duty, if his suggestions were not adopted, to take the sense
of the House, that the whole question be referred to a Select
Committee.
Mr. P. BORTHWICK thouglat that the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman who spoke last, and the Hon. Member for Renfrew_
shire, wore the last two Members in the House who should
oppose the present measure. He did not hear a single argu-
ment advanced why the present Bill should be referred to a
Committee up stairs. A committee of the whole House was,
he considered, quite competent to deal with the measure,
though it did consist of eighty clauses.
Mr. ELLIS felt it his duty to say a few words, before the
House came to a decision on the second reading of the
Bill. He entertained a somewhat different opinion from most
of the Members who had spaken on the measure.—( Hear.)
He was not one of those who were very much in favour of
centralization. He agreed so very much in the objection
which had been made to this measure by his Hon. Friend the
Member for Leith, that he could have wished that his Right
Hon. Friend had sent this Bill to a Select Committee up at's.rs.
He thought that some inquiries ought to have been rnsLe as to
the propriety of establishing the boundaries
and unions in
Scotland which this Bill proposed to fix. was it possible
that this measure could be fully aanside:ed in a Committee of
the whole House, looking to the stat:d of public business at pre-
sent. He trusted that no atte:.,pt would be made to alter the
existing system of assessme:-..r._(Hear, hear.) The d:fficulthe
surrounding this subis:‘,, werees
Mr. great, and he trusted that they
would fully and w
',ally be considered before this measure was
proceeded wiO4.
.M.OLES could not allow this Bill to pass without ten-
derin',',' his thanks to the Government for having brought the
al:astir() forward. He thought that they would have been
buttcllmmfamene
tt
ths
eueer
‘puipiesmes
tdba
eiarrts
ft
ohreHpee
p-etiecting their duty if they had not done so. He could not
fret
lhtog propositionfresaetnsdouifnrpgtlritie;eh
ißsaitguhtihtuis7toloonao.ksi
looking
gleenteo-t
the existing state of public business. He deprecated delay,
and he trusted that they would all unite in their endeavours to
make this Bill as perfect in itself as possible.
Mr. HASTIE did not think that this Bill would carry re-
lief to the Scotch poor. So far from that, there would be more
difficulty in carrying such a law as this into effect, than there
was now experienced in carrying out the existing law. With
regard to the mode of assessment ho considered it highly ob-
jectionable, inasmuch as it did not sufficiently define the dis-
tinctions to be adopted in the various kinds of proporty, while
it was sufficiently explicit to create differences between the
landal and urbal proprietary. In a word, so far from regarding
the Bill as one calculated to gire relief, he believed it would
be but a further mode of depriving the population of Scotland of
those remedial measures which other districts had been ac-
corded.-7( Hear. )

Mr. AGLIONBY (amid loud cries of " Divide, divide,")
merely wished to satisfy the country, that on both sides of the
House an anxious desire existed to afford relief to the Scotch
community, and he thought the greatest credit was due to the
Government for having introduced a measure with that in-
tention. On the commencement of the discussion he had
thought it would be better to send the Bill to a Committee up
stairs, but after the fair and unreserved explanation of the
Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department,
an explanation which removed every difficulty, and answered
every objection, he should rather prefer entrusting it to the
consideration of a Committee of the whole House.
Mr. COLLETT (who from the repeated cries of "divide"
was almost inaudible in the gallery) was understood to ask
wherein the appointment of commissioners of assessment—five
of whom ho thought would be virtually required by the Bill—
would be vested, and what their salaries would amount to.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM replied that the officers would be
appointed and paid by the Treasury, but as to the probable
amount of salary he could at present give no idea.
Mr. FOX M A ULE did not consider that the question
raised by the Hon. Member affected the principle of the
Bill, which he sti:l regarded as unsound and prejudicial.
On the question being put,
Mr. CUMMING BRUCE (amid continued cries of " di-
vide" from every quarter of the House), suggested that if infal-
libility should be the result of this measure, it would meet with
a success which but few Bills carried in that House could lay
claim to or expect.
Mr. HU'slE, after having heard the speech of his Right
Hon. Friend the Member for Leith, and the reply of the
Secretary for the Home Department, than which a more satis-
factory or fair explanation could not have been afforded.
thought that it would not be consistent with the interests of
those he and his friends consulted to 'divide on the present
occasion. While in Committee the Bill could receive altera-
tions or amendments, and he hoped any propositions contem-
plated for the improvement of the measure would be reserved
for that stage of its discussion.—(Hear, hear. )
Sir J. GRAHAM would wish, in accordance with the con-
venience of the House, to fix Monday sen'night for going into
Committee on the Bill ; and on Thursday next the Member
for Somerset, and others desirous of proposing alterations,
mill lay their amendments on the table of the House. Con-
sidering the spirit evinced during the latter part of the discus-
sion, he would promise to give all the suggestions mooted the
fullest investigation, and as extensively as possible would admit
them into the provisions of the Bill.
Mr. P. STEWART, being the first that had led the forlorn
hope, would concur in the suggestion of withdrawing- all further
opposition for the present.
Mr. FOX MAULE would not press his opposition.
mettftera: few words from Mr. RUTHERFORD, the amend-
withdrawn, and the Bill was read a second time, and
orde was
to be committed.