The Sun.
London, England, 1819-05-11 00:00:00

POOR SETTLEMENT BILL.

On the motion vi Mr. STURGES Bountee, the
Report of the Poor Settlement Bill was ordered
to be taken into further consideration.
General GASCOIGNE moved its recommittal as
an amendment. He thonglit the period for en-
titling a person to a right of settlement, should
be extended from three years to five to a native,
and to a foreigner claiming settlement, to seven
years.
Mr. Mum,'Ay seconded the amendment, but
argued strongly against the principle of the Bill.

Air. PHILIPS opposed the principle of the Bill,
but wished the Gallant General to withdraw the
amendment, in order to move that the Report
should be taken into consideration that day six
months.

Mr. F. Law's supported the motion, and con.
tended that the system, as it exists at present,
produced ten times more hardship to paupers, and
injustice to those who were charged with their
support, than the measure now under consi-
deration.
Mr. ALLAN objected to the Bill, principally on
the ground of its tendency to increase parochial
burdens.

Colonel Woob-contended, that the Bill, instead
of diminishing, would increase the existing evil.
The only way of escaping from our difficulties
was to re-tread our .steps and get rid of settle-
ments altogether. Let the lower orders of peo-
ple be set at liberty, and let the poor man carry
his only property—labour, to the best market.

Mr. HUSKISSON could not see how the law of
settlement could be got rid of without getting rid
of the whole system of the Poor Laws. He de-
fended the present Bill, as introducing material
gmendments in the present law of settlements.
The whole question was but a choice of evils; the
Bill before the House appeared to him to be the
least that could be adopted. Perseverance in the
present system not only would continue the bur-
dens imposed on parishes, hut, which was of more
importance, would hasten the moral degradation
of the lower classes of the community.

Mr. G. LAMB opposed the Bill.
Lord MILTON supported it, as an approxima-
tion to petting rid of the Law of Settlements, on
the propriety of getting rid of which altogether
he had not, however, made up his mind. Advert.
ing to the enormous Poors' Rates levied in va-
rious parts of the country, he attributed them to
an erroneous execution of the law, rather than to
any defect in the provisions of the law itself.

Sir G. CLERK suggested to his Gallant Friend
who had moved the atnendment, to withdraw it,
and allow the Bill to go through another stage.
General GASCOIGNE expressed his unwilling-
ness to do so.

Mr. CAN ritNce supported the Bill. Ile thought,
however, that the period of three years would
not be ton short for rural and agricultural pa-
rishes, while it might be insufficient for such
tocyns as that which he had the honour to re-
present. The Ilouse ought to receive with indul-
gence the first fruits of a Committee who had la-
bpured under the greatest difficulties, and who
had received many more remonstrances than lug-
gestions. Ile would, however, Tote for the re.

bt
commitment of the Bill, in order that it 11114
receive the alteration to which he had alluded.
Mr. A. WRIGHT opposed the Bill.
Mr. S. BOURNE replied, iast
tbs
p.
Mr. W. SMITH said he should vote a
re-cot-11mill al.—The House then divided—.
For the re-commitment 64
Against it 44

Majority 30
The Report was then ordered to be' taken
info
further consideration this day six months.
Mr. Alderman HEYGATE presented a petitioa
from Sudburyagainst the Roman Catholic alial';
I:he Scotch Jury Courts Bill went through
Committee.—Report to be received to-day.

FOREIGN SERVICE.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL gave notice,
(11°,1
Thursday next he shou!d move for leave to brili;
in a Bill to pent his Majesty's subjects IT
enlisting in any Foreign Service, without his Alla
jesty's license.—Adjourned at Two o'Clock.