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

tants wherever such should be found, whether their
po-sessions on the spot or in the public funds,
their ships iu harbour or any other depository.
The appeals to the courts of law could not be
made but in the most unsatisfactory manner, and the
whole machinery for apportioning and working the
law in that respect was intricate and incomplete.
There was already a sufficient safeguard that the relief to
the poor would be administered upon a most economical
principle. It was the rate-payers, those who were
assessed, that held the check—to this he did not object.
He thought it in the main a good principle, but it
was all the more necessary to have an easy,
expeditious appeal to the courts of law. Good care
should be taken that this power of the rate-
payers should not be abused. What was the history
of the administration of the poor-law in Scotland. He
was not there to exaggerate, or to excite the passions
against this law, but they could not conceal from them-
selves that the Commissioners declared in their report that

tt+e present provision for the poor of Scotland was wholly
insufficient. He spoke of the permanently-disabled
poor. In some of those parishts the Cornmiz-
sioners stated (and, amongst other parishes,
those in the cities of Edinburgh and Glasgow) th.i
when representations had been made to the magis-
trates that the provision for the poor was insufficient,
those magistrates refused to increase the assess-
ment. He must therefore say that a cheap.
expeditious, and easy appeal to the courts of
law was above all things desirable. They had,
then, unquestionably, this state of things, that
by not giving to the poor an easy and expeditious
appeal to the law, they took away one of its most
necessary provisions, while, at the same time, the
provision it did contain involved an extravagant
expenditure of the funds intended to be applied for the
relief of the poor, thus operating in one way against the
poor, and in another against those who pay. for their
support. Looking, then, at the names of those who signed
that report (for every one of whom he had the most
unfeigned respect) let him ask the House to consider what
that report recommended. The Commissioners recom-
mended that the jurisdiction of the court of quarter
sessions should be abolished ; but they did not propose
that the sheriff, who, unlike the same officer in this coun-
try, was a judge of the land in Scotland, should have the
jurisdiction ; they did not propose that it should be
transferred to the central board ; no, they removed all
jurisdiction, and left to the poor applying for relief to seek
a r( medy at the hands of the parochial authorities,
and the board of supervision, who were to report to
the Secretary of State for the Home Department.
It had been suggested that the grounds on which the
scheme was founded were superficial, and his Hon. and
Learnt d Friend in laying the measure before the House
had defended these grounds. He knew how little
public opinion would influence the principle of the
measure as regarded the jurisdiction of the Court
of Session. He (Mr. Rutherford) thought it was
time that relief for complaints against inadequate
support should meet with some redress, and the poor
man ought to have an opportunity of bringing his case
before that Court with facility. He was about to draw
the attention of the House to one of the leading princi-
_

pies of the measure. It was proposed that a board of
supervision should be established. If a poor man
considered that the means of sustenance with which.

he was supplied were not adequate, he must first make
out a case before the board of supervision ; but that
board had no power, under the Bill, to give the
pour man ultimate relief. They could only say. to
him that he has liberty to refer his application
to the Court of Session. This restriction was

not just or proper, when compared with the power which
the parish possessed, of going at once without any inter-
ference to the board of supervision, to contradict what
the poor man Might avouch with regard to his treatment.
Now, in reference to this part of th subject, he thought
it was worth while to consider what was the machinery
employed in this measure. What was the board of
supervision ? How was it constituted ? It was a
board consisting of a number of members, in
whice one was paid, with one paid secretary, and
it had the power of ordering their own mem-
bers to any part of the country, or to employ
others to make inquiries as they might think necessary.
Ile wished to know whether the report made by the
Commissioners to inquire into the Poor-laws (Scotland),
a report which filled a most bulky volume, did
not contain sufficient evidence to enable them
to decide upon this question. Could they want more in-
formation on the subject of the poor-laws than that which
had been furnished them during last year? Certainly not.
He should have expected that in bringing forward an
efficient Poor-law for Scotland the mode of rating
would have been clearly stated. As the Bill
now stood. the mole of rating was derived from
the 'Act of 1779, in which the forms employed might
be very well suited to those days, but was altogether un-
suited to the present time. He wantid to know what
the Government had done to ensure a correct sys-
tem of taking the value of rateable property —what
measure was to be adopted to regulate the rating
on rental, tenantcy, land, and profit in business. He
considered some clear and definite plan would
have been suggested on the way in which this
important part of the scheme would have been met.
He thomeht it was not equitable to assess the rural
parishes to the support of the poor in the burghs. Was
anything ever heard of so unjust as to leave it in the
power of the board of supervision to assess one
rural parish to a burden from which other parishes
similarly situated were exempt ? In making the rural
parishes liable to such an assessment of the towns they
would relieve the proprietors of all participa-
tion in the burden of sustaining the poor.
The Bill provided among other anomalies, that the
parochial board should have the power of di-
viding property into different classes and
assign different ratings to different parishes. Thus
in the parish A this parochial board should inflict upon
certain properties situate therein a high rate of assess-
ment, perhaps six per cent., and in the adjoining parish
B a low and insufficient amount was levied, and thus a
different rate would be established, and a different classi-
fication adopted in every parish in the country. Surely
these were matters of grave consideration, and made it
imperative on the House, before dealing finally with the
measure, to look into the anomalies and objections ex-
posed in it. In the sixteenth century the principle of
rating and assessment was first introduced into Scotland,
and the present prosperity of that country was mainly
attributable to the amendments adopted in those original
provisions ebout sixty years ago, it being in the year
1780, just alter the American war, that alterations in the
previous principle were suggested and effected. The
measure, in his opinion, required much more considera-
tion and many alterations, or it would inflict injustice on
some portion of the people of Scotland, and be generally
productive of litigation and legal difficulty. He had
great doubts about the expediency of extending the
settlement to seven years. If they were to extend the
time from three to seven years they would render it so
difficult to ascertain the settlement of paupers, that they
%wed have to repeal that portion of the law, and return
to the old period of three years. He considered that
greater time ought to be allowed for the consideration of
this important point. Then there was not sufficient
protection afforded to parishes against the influx of
paupers from England and Ireland, who are bound to
maintain them until their settlements could be discovered
which was often a very difficult task. This was ex-
tremely hard upon parishes such as Greenock and Glas-
gow, where ships of indigent parsons came. These were
his objections to the Bill, and he approved of its prin-
ciple, and thought the object it had in view a good one,
but he must again express his decided objection to the
capricious Parliamentary line of boundary, which would
in many cases be most unfair and unequal in its applica-
tion. They had not the least conception of
the extent of the injury which it would in-
flict on private individuals by this capricious line.
He had already mentioned the case of Edinburgh and
Leidt, and there were many other cases where unequal
pressure of this law was felt in a similar manner. The
parish in which a poor man wets found, was to be liable
in the first instance for his maintenance. To this he
had not the slightest objection, but the proposition
already existed as a law, and whatever the practice
might be in particular parishes, the law was that when-
ever a pauper was found, the parish in which he was,
was hound to support him. His Hon. and Leamned
Friend was too well acquainted with the fact to doubt
it. The law, however, was not always carried out.
At times considerable litigation arose amongst parishes
as to the proper settkinent of a pauper. Of his own
knoe ledge he woe in-cite:need with a case of pauperism,
which had been litigated in the Court of Sessi,n during
the List four or live years, and which, in ell probability,
would continue for as many years longer without any
definite conclusion being Derived at. The influences he
had drawn Irons the objections he had raised were so
numerous, and so strong, that he was satisfied the pro-
visions of the Bill, as at present constituted, were most
imperfect, and totally inadequate to meet the require-
ments of the country fur which it was specially in-
tended. He would recommend . the . House to
pause before conceding this Bill, and let. it be
sent down into the country, in order that they
might have the opinions of partiesthere to guide them
in coming to a just and proper appreciation of the sub-
ject. The population in many parishes was thinly scat-
tered, and the provisions of the Bill were such, that it
would be extremely difficult to supply the urgent de-
mands for medical relief which such districts required.
Over such an extent of country, with such a thinly dis-
tributed population, it would be impossible for a medical
man to travel, so as to supply the demands made upon
his skill. There was nothing the parishes in Scotland
were so much in want of as medical attendance to the
poor, and he did not care how it was applied, whether by
a single parish, or a union of parishes, so long as it was
done. Another point to which he would refer was that
of r.lief to able-bodied labourers. There had been
much discussion on this subject during the
last forty years, and a deciliiiin had been ob-
tained in a court of law, affirming the principle of re-
lief to able-bodied paupers, though he was of a contrary
opinion. It was, however, necessary that this quest on
should be fairly settled. A system of relief of thrskind should
only be applied under a workhouse system. There
might be cases in which relief should be extended to
the able-bodied poor—such as in cases of great national
distress, or when epidemic diseases prevailed. There
ought to be a provision so meet eases of this kind—a
provision of a temporary character—whereby a rate
might be raised from the inhabitants of parishes ; but he
held it ought not to be of a permanent character. He
would not say that the Bill ought not to be read a se-
cond time, for it might be considerably amended either
in Committee of the whole House. or in a Select Com-
mittee up stairs ; but entertaining strong objections to it
in its present shape, he thought it was a duty which he
owed to the country to state the grounds on which
those objections rested.
Lord ARUNDEL referred to a meeting held in Edin-
burgh, in 1842, under the presidency of the then Lord
Provost (Sir James Forrest), respecting the admission
of Roman Catholic priests into workhouses, and ex-
pressed a hope that, in the measure before the House, a
tolerant spirit_ would be exhibited, by giving facilities