The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-05 00:00:00

no doubt that the allotment system would pay itself. A
notion seemed to exist, and it would probably be
strengthened by the Settlement Bill of tho Right Hon.
Gentleman, that the parish had nothing to do with the
relief of the poor, that it was a union and not a parochial
matter. Now, why should not the augmentation of the
parish system be taken advantage of, to give assistance to
the independent labourer, and to enable him to lii e more
comfortably and securely.—(Hear, hear.) It was not
necessary that he should say anything generally in sup-
port of the allotment system, for experience seemed now
to have paced the merits of that system beyond
cavil or doubt. He had never heard any ob-
jection whatever drawn from practical experience.
Nobody who had tried the allotment system had ever,
he believed, found any harm arising from it, even if no
good resulted from its operation; and, he believed, that
under proper regulations no complaints would ever lee
made. The objections made were rather of a theoretical
and sp-culative than of a practical character. One ob-
jection was that it was opposed to sound economic views
of labour, that a man should work for himself as well as
his master. A satisfactory answer to that would be
that the labouring man should be enabled to obtain
higher wages, and then lie would not need such a re-
source. Unfortunately, however, the wages of the la-
bouring eaises in the agricultural districts were
; not sufficient to allow them to live as comfortably us

could be desired, and that the system in
question was necessary to assist them in obtaining a
livelihood. He did not admit, however, in an economic
view, that it was undesirable that the labourer should
employ his leisure hours in tilling a garden. 'There
was no more profitable way of tilling ground than by a
spade, particularly when wielded by a man who was
titling his own ground. The produce of allotment-
ground must, too, be much greater than that of ground
tilled under any other circumstances. If a labouring
man chose to employ his leisure hours in this manner,
it must be of the utmost advantage, not only to himself,
but to the country at large ; what it produced being the
means of increasing the whole amount of food in the
country. He was not aware that any man had ever become
idle under this system during the hours employed in
working for his master, in order that he might be more
active in labouring for himself. On the contrary, he
beleved it had generally been found that the allotment
labourers were the most industrious portion of that class.
Not only were they the most moral—not only was their
general character the best, but they actually exerted
inure power of sinew in their master's service than la-
bourers who did not employ their leisure hours in the
same manner as themselves. Another objection to the
allotment system was, that it tended to impede the cir-
culation of a free system of labour. If this ob-
jection were valid it did not apply to the allotment
of gardens in particular, but to everything that
had a tendency to improve the condition of the labour-
ing man.—(ilear, hear.) It applied to every act of
kindness, to every thing, in fact, that made the la-
bourer's situation more endurable than it was before.
If those who made this objection were consistent, they
should hold that the labouring man should be driven to
leave his parish, through his situation in it being made
unendurable. Though it might be very desirable in
many cases that labourers should go abroad, or remove
to another part of their own country, yet he did not
think they would be justified in refusing to a&rd
him those advantages which would render his condition
a more endurable one.—(Hear, hear.) It was
all very well for a man of capital to leave his country
and go elsewhere ; but when a labouring man did so,
starvation often stared him and his family in the face.
He did not think, that if the main object of the Bill
were approved, there would be anything in the details
on account of which it would be rejected by the House;
and if adopted, he believed it would confer very great
benefit. morally and physically, on the working classes.
With these observations he would leave the subject in
the hands of the House, and would move that leave be
granted to bring in the Bill.
Mr. MILES seconded the motion.
Mr. HUME said he approved of the Hon. Member's
proposition, if it could be carried out ; but he
very much feared that it never could, and therefore
there was no use in holding out expectations to the
country people that never could be realised. The Hon.
Member's proposition was in effect the proposal of an
enactment by which the allotment system should be con-
tinued and encouraged, though that was the very great
grievances which was so much complained of in Ireland.
At least, he (Mr. Hume) had been led to understand
that in Ireland there was nothing that caused so great an
outcry, or had been looked upon as a greater grievance
than this allotmnt system, However, if gentlemen did
wish to let their lands in this way, he did think it would
be very easy to do so without any Act of Parliament.
Mr. ESCOTT said he could not see the necessity of
legislative interference upon the question at all, fur if
landlords were inclined to let their lands in this way,
they could do so without any Act of Parliament. His
opinion was, that if a poor man got a cottage and a
small lot of ground, he would be just as well inclined to
make the most of it without any allotment at all. The
only means by which to prevent want amongst those
classes was to extend the demand for labour.
Lord J. MANNERS fully concurred in the observa-
tions of his Hon. Friend, and if they should be carried,
he did not think the working classes could ever be too
grwe ful for them.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD would not have
risen to speak upon this subject, but that he bad heard
some allusion to his native country. In Ireland much
of the agrarian distress that prevailed had been owing
to this very system of allotment which then was called
the con-acre system, or half-acre, for which it was well
known as high as eight guineas an acre was paid.
Therefore he would caution the House against being
precipitate in legislating upon the subject.
Sir WALTER JAMES, would have no objection to
support the motion, provided it were to be subsidiary to
wages ; if otherwise it would be found to be a dangerous
plan.
Mr. ROEBUCK did not rise for the purpose of enter-
ing upon the details of this proposition now ; but he
shoUld say his opinion was, that it this bill should pass
in its present shape, it would have the effect of altering
the whole system by which the labouring classes at pre-
sent were regulated. Therefore he hoped that when this
Bill went into a second reading it would receive the
fullest consideration.
Sir J. GRAHAM was unwilling to detain the House,
but after the appeal which had been made to him by the
Hon. Member for Bath, he thought it necessary to re-
mind the House that when the Bill was brought in last
year he fully expressed his opinions about it. The Bill
at that time contained a provision that the poor-rates
should be made security for the rent. To that he did
most decidedly object—(Hear)—but that objectionable
clause was not introduced in the present measure. He
agreed with his Noble Friend the Member for Newark
(Lord J. Manners), that if the landlords would come
forward voluntarily and give allotments to their labourers,
legislative interference would be unnecessary. But in some
parts of the country that might be impossible ; and he
understood that it was intended to make this Bill only a
permissive measure—and, so far, he was not prepared to
off. r it any opposition ; and, subject to that observation,
he was not prepared to object to its introduction. He
was, however, decidedly of opinion that an acre was too
much, and that ho should prefer to limit the allotment
to half an acre. But, upon the whole, he thought it was
generally to the honour of the Hon. Member for Hert-
ford that he had given great consideration to the sub-
ject, and the House ought not lightly to refuse per-
mission to bring in the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) The dis
tressed condition of the agricultural labourers was such
that it could not have escaped the attention of the House
—(Hear, hear)—and any measure having for its object
the improvement of that condition, demanded their bust
attention. For his own part he would gladly consent to
the motion—(Hear, hear)--and he would give it every
attention and assistance, with the hope of some good
result.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. MANGLES wished to say a word in reply to an
observation made bythe Hon Member for Worcestershire,
who spoke disparagingly of the allotment system, and
said that the sufficiency of labour was all that was wanted
for the labourers. But the Hon. Member did not say
how that sufficiency was to be obtained. This he (Mr.
Mangles) knew, that he lived in a purely agricultural
district, and during the winter many labourers were
wholly out of employment. With respect to the allot-
ment system, he had during the recess made many in-
quiries, and the result was that he could not find one in-
stance in which it had failed.—(Hear, hear.) He had
been informed by one lady, Mrs. Davies Gilbert, that
she had during the last eleven years had 400 allotment
tenants, and not one of them had ever failed in paying
the rent. On a recent occasion he (Mr. Manes)
attended at a meeting in West Surrey, and whilst
he and some other gentletion were discussing this sub-
ject, an intelligent man, who had for a long time been
listening in silence, at length broke in respectfully upon
their conversation, and assured them that the system
was a good one, for it had made a man of him.—(Bear,
and a laugh.) That man afterwaids took him to his
house and showed him that he had in the course of three
or four years risen to a state of comfort from that of a
mere labourer hardly able to keep his chin above water.
lie had a comfortable house, several pigs, and a large
clamp of potatoes.—(Hear.) He (Mr. M.) differed from
the Right Honourable Gentleman (Sir J. Graham) and
thought that an allotment of one acre was by no means
too mach. Ile would give his best support to the mea-
sure of the Hon. Member.
Mr. P. BORTHWICK expres:ed his satisfaction at
the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary
of State for the Home Department. The Hon. and
Learned Member for Bath had told tho House to be
cautious how they sanctioned a measure which would
produce so great a change in the condition of the agri-
cultural labourers. That was precisely the reason why
he supported it, for any change in the condition of that
stating,i
byls paN ileodni during
such the
Bills
were
depressed class must be fur the better.—(Hear.)
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
Mr. HUME moved for a return of the title of all
private
; l3
l
solicitors
sessiso(ndiociftePdaralina7l Parliament,
ob-
tained
also, the aggregate amount of their
bills of charges, under the separate heads for soliciting
and passing such Bills through Parliament ; stating,
also, how many of such bills have been taxed, and by
whom.
The Hort. MEMBER subsequently withdrew the mo-
tion, Mr. Cardwell expressing, on behalf of the Govern
ment, his desire that all fees and expenses connected
with the House should be as moderate as possible. The
Hon. Member observed that he did not think any pro-
cess of taxation would remedy the evils the Hon. Merate?
complained of.
After a few words from Mr. Ei000471
Mr. AGTAONBY reconenended the Hon. Merab<
for Montrose to move at once for a Select Committee to
inquire into the subject.
Mr. HUME declined to follow the suggestion, imme-
diately, but on a future occasion he might, perhape,
move for the Committee.
The motion was then withdrawn.
The other orders of the day were then cispcaed ufp
and the House ad,p \irrekcit at a Wavier to Twelve.
•