The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-04 00:00:00

Mr. COLLET moved that the declaration be read

by the Clerk at the table.
This was met with cries of " No, no," and loud
hugbtcr, amid which the Hon. Member withdrew his
mxion.

Mr. DIVETT moved that Frederick Kettle, Thomas
Riker, and Joseph Ilumphry Grant, together with Mr.
Phillips, lya summoned to appear at the bar of the House
to-morrow.
Sir G. GREY suggested that Monday would be a
more convenient day.
Mr. DIVE TV having consented to adopt this reeom-
mewl Ition, the motion was passed without opposition.
POOIt•LAW AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL.
On the motion fur the committal of this Bill,
Mr. OSWALD stated that he had great objection to
this Bill. It appeared to him that the board to be con-
stituted by thi- Bill would ultimately resolve itself into
a paid commission. The board would not answer the
purpose for which it was intended. It would impede the
operation of the p 'or-law system, and greater difficulties
would be raised in the management of the poor than be-
fore existed. Believing that :Scotland had not had time
to make up ita mind on this important matter, and be-
lieving that there was no necessity for this Bill this ses-
sitm, he should move that the Bill be committed that day
three months. (The Hon. Gentleman was scarcely au-
dible in the gallery.)
Mr. SITEIL said he had a question to ask as.to—
The SPEAKER said that if the question the Right
Gentleman had to put had reference to the Bill
now under discussion, he might put it, but otherwise he
eot!ld not. . .

Mr. SIIEIL said it had not reference to the Bill, and
therefore he would not put it.
Mr. EDWARD ELLICE said he would make but a
fe v observations upon this measure. If the Hon. Mem-
ber who had brought forward this measure was unpre-
pared to sustain it by a long speech, so also was he (Mr.
Ellice) unprepared to give the measure his support. The
measure of last year was supposed to contain provisions
for relieving the state of the poor of Scotland ; it would,
on the contrary, make matters worse, or leave them as
they were, or at any rate it would afford no real relief
to the poor of Scotland. His opinion was, that the pro-
Tl- step would have been to improve the parochial
b:;ar Is. It was necessary that some new authority
should be introduced ; but this new Bill does not do that
sotizfactorily. An attempt had been made by this Bill
to constitute a new machinery for the management of
the poor of Scotland. The condition of the poor was
different in different localities. The poor in the great
towns might be managed under the authorities which
at present existed—the poor in the manufacturing and
rural districts must be managed on a principle wholly
d i ii.!rent, and the poor in the Highlands required a Fvuliar
systarn of their own. He thought his Right Hon. Friend
would have dome batter by providing for these cases.
He ought to have, as in this country, local grants for
th, wants of different localities. He did not approve of
that centralisation which this Bill promoted. 'Why could
not Glasgow, Edinburgh, Perth, and Dundee, be legis-
lated for by local Acts, and their large pauper popula-
tion thus provided for. The corporate authorities of
these towns and cities would, he felt assured, administer
to the wants of the poor in a proper manner ; but he
had no objection to their being restricted by any rules
an 'l regulations which might be deemed advisable. He
entreated the Right Hon. Baronet to be cautious in his
appointments through fear of creating jealousy by se-
looting incapable, indiscreet, or imprudent men. If that
course ba practised in Scotland, a set of things would
arise which would render the poor-law inoperative. He
Would ask him to postpone this measure, seeing that
there was an absolute want of some means of improving
if. The measure would only make the present confusion
in Scotland still more difficult.

Mr. S. CRAWFORD believed that it was necessary for
him to say a few words, in consequence of statements which
he made on a former night, and which were contradicted
by an Hon. Member on his side of the House. Since
that time be had had an opportunity of referring to the
evidence of the Scotch Commissioners, and of inquiring
Whether his statements were supported or not by that
evidence. It stated that there was an insufficiency of
relief in that country. The Hon. Gentleman then re-
ferred to the evidence of Mr. Duncan Ross, the Rev. A.
lvl`Pherson, Mr. M'Kenzie, and several others in sup-
port of his own statements. The paupers to whom the
small allowances were given were those who were de-
scribed as being disabled, and incapable of work. This
description was given by the steward of the Duke of
Sntherland. The poor in Scotland were provided for by
lying permitted to beg. Those who could not beg
themselves were supported by those who were capable
of going about the country seeking aim.. This system
W. 13 opposed by the Duke of Sutherland, as ap.
peared in the evidence taken on this subject.
The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to read extracts
from the minutes of evidence taken before the Poor-law
Commissioners with respect to the effects of the clear-
ance system. According to the evidence of Mr. Donald
M'Donald, of Lochinvar, who occupied 30,000 acres of
lind, that gentleman employed only eleven shepherds.
This, continued the lion. Gentleman, was one of many
similar cases which that report revealed, and which he
would show to the House by other and most unexcep-
tionable evidence. The Hon. Gentleman here read ex-
tracts from the evidence of several clergymen in Suther-
landshire, showing the general prevalence of the
sheep-walk system, and the deplorable effects which he
contended it had brought upon the whole population.
With regard to the fishing village of Helmsdale, of
which so much had been said, it had fallen off to a very

giaat extent, and, at the present time, scarcely employed
any fishermen belonging to Sutherlandshire. They
nearly all came from the neighbouring counties. With
'regard to the rental of Sutherland, it had been asserted
that more than 60,0001. above the sum realised had bee❑

spent in improvements from 1811 to 1833. If this was
so, it seemed that there was no proof of the improvements
for the rental in 1815 was 33,874/. ; it was now only 35,5501.
It had been stated the morals of the people were im-
proved, and the proof ; iven was, that illicit distillation
had almost entirely ceased. But there might be other
reas )ns for this change, for if the country was one entire
pasture field, where were the opportunities for illicit
distillation ? He should like to see an industrious po-
pulation as the proof of the prosperity of a country, but
the evidence in this case showed that the country had

been almost depopulated. It was, in fact, inhabited only
by sheep and shepherds. In 1801 the population was
53,117, and now it was only 24 718, and this, be it re-
membered, in a country counting 1,120,000 square acres.
It used to be stated that the paupers were well attended
to, but this had been shown to be a delusion. He hoped
that the principle "there is no room for the poor man"
would be discouraged in the county of Sutherland.—
(flear, hear.) Would they then by this law place the
power of relieving the poor in the hands of the local
authorities there, or if they did place that power in
their hand=, should they not at least take care to place
them sufficiently under restriction ? He did not in these
remarks wish to cast the leirt reflection on the Duke of
S:itherland, for by all reports hiS Grace was the very
perion who would oppress the poor man. He would
conclude by supporting the motion of the lion. Member
fOr Gksgovv.

Mr. said that the view taken by the Hon.
th.utloroan related to the defects in the county of Suther-
lard in particular, !and in Scotland in general, and he

eeel.l at once admit, that no man could be more sensible
than he, that the poor-law, as at present administered,
wes mest defective. Having st tted this, he would at
once proceed to consider the allegations which had been
advance:l against those who administered affairs in the
c oanty of Stith. Hand—and first, it had been alleged that
the Duke of Sutherland only gave relief to the extent of
tit. per week in each parish. This was not the fact. He
(Mr. Loch) would maintain that his Grace, under the
present system, administered charity to the poor in as
g, eat, if not a greater degree, than any other proprietor.
Ile could state, with certainty, that no alteration had
taken place, with respect to the local settlements of the
men in Sutherland for the last twenty years. He, how-
ever, did not wish that this statement should he received
on his nnsepperted affirmation ; and he would therefore
re id extracts from the statistical accounts made
by the Reverend Mr. Kennedy, Minister of Dornoch.
The Hon. Member then read very considerable extracts
from the book in question to show, by the evidence of
the clergymen in the different parishes, that the do-
mestic habits of the people had been greatly improve 4,
• and that education had
,been greatly extended a.nong
them. He also read a letter from a gentleman of great
respectability in the county of Forfir, who, having
visited Sutherlandshire prejudiced against the manner in
which things were managed there, bad been compelled to
change his opinions, and to acknowledge that a decided
improvement had taken place in the condition of the poor
in that country. Having-read these extracts, he did not
think it would be necessary for him to add one word
more. lie would but advert to the endeavours made by
his Grace to extend education to the people there. It,
II Id been very difficult to get schools erected while they
were distributed in small townships, but as they were
new collected in larger masses, his'Grace had determityd
on building twrlve schools in connexion with the

ral Assembly, at a cost of 2001. each, and he
aln) add ,d 260/. in aid of the funds of the Ge-

nem' Assembly, and, thcrefnr;, takingvev:;Ything
in view, he contended that there was a foundation
laid in the county of Sutherland for improvement,
both in the moral and religious education of the people.
He might mention that in the year 1817, when there
was great destitution in the county, and when assistance
was given by his Grace, it was found that 408 families,
or 2,000 persorv, had settled down without leave being
ask sd, or rent paid ; but instead of turning them off the
land, they were assisted like the others, and the only
demand made was, that at the earliest opportunity they
should vacate the " crofts " of which they had thus
taken possession: The Duke of Sutherland kept his te-
nants under a nominal rent, in order that they might not.
be wanderers, and the intention was followed by the de-
sired result. He congratulated the Duke of Sutherland
on his being connected so closely with the moral and
physical improvement of his countrymen.
Sir J.. M"FEG GAN said that believing, as he did, that
at this late period of the session a Bill of this import.
anee could not obtain that consideration which he deemed
ntcosary, he should vote for the motion of the Hon
Member for Glasgow.
The LORD ADVOCATE trusted that they might be
allowed to go into Committee on this Bill. There were
a great many criticisms offered on it which would be
taken into consideration. He thought that they had had
plenty of time since the first of April, when the Bill was
introduced, to consider it.

SHEIL said, that the most important clause in
this Bill was one which, if carried into law, would have
a most pernicious and a most fatal operation on Ireland.
It was provided that no Irishman should obtain a settle-
ment by residence in Scotland. They might tell
hizl it was fair, because these hardships were imposed
upon Englishmen and the inhabitants of the Isle
of But; 'practically, Scotchmen did not re-
quire* settlement in Ireland, In Ireland no settlement
thvy might say was required by Scotchmen, therefore
Irishmen, Englishmen, or inhabitants of the Isle of
Man, should have no settlement in Scotland by resi-
deruF In Scotland, if an ItiAnnan had been residing