The Sun.
London, England, 1842-06-25 00:00:00


increased at a constantly progressing ratio ever si
It was, then, their duty at once to take up the subject of the pre
sent condition of the country, and endeavour to apply a renu dy.
He believed that some Hon. Gentlemen were incredulous zit to
the accounts of the misery that prevailed in various d'istrirt.,
He would beg to call the attention of those gentlemen t o sonic
communications which he had rewired from the countrr. Ne
had written to Stockport to ascertain the amount of poor-rates
paid at present in Stockport. Hr Egad asked the names o(
a few of the principal rate-pay,rs, an order to know
how those rates pressed on individtril concerns% Many
thought that the manufacturers did not contribute, their just.
proportion to those rates ; but. let those learn -what yeas the re-
sult of his inquiries. The first of those concerns on the list
paid during nine months rates for the relief of the pow to the
amount of 343/. 18s. 4d. ; the second, during the. same period.
paid 476/. tls. 6d.; and the third paid '286/.
An HON. 3IEMBER.—What rent?

Mr. COBI)EN—That was an ii.portant question. Did
the like of Northumberland with his broad lands, or any
other landowner, pay as much in proportion to his wealth as
one of those manufacturers? One of ti;•ose milk rated at,
1,9041. paid 470 i. in rates from the 16th of June to thee
thith of February. The account went on tit we that distresi
went on increasing, so that if thins did non. change then
should be eaten up by the paupers. A letter from a gentleman.
of Leeds, Mr. Hamer Statistield, stated that 4.31.'0 families
ind ded at least 10,350 persons. In the county of Dorset. ()ut-
eri '25 fires that had taken place in three months two-thin& Were.
incendiary. Such was the state in shish distress placed the-
country. - He would then appeal to the Right Hon. Baronet,.
to tell the House whether it was his intention to bring the pre-
giving an appearance, that they
sent. Session to a close, without having first brought forward
the question—without at least
should have an opportunity of considering this impor-
tart question.
.11r. S. CRAWFORD said he could not let the question go-
to a division, without ,wing a few nerds on it. A Noble
Lord had spoken of the Irish Poor-law, as b,itg emi-
nently successful. How could that be the case, whet: that
country was in such a state as it now presented ? Ii
several large districts the people were starving without a possi-
bility of relief being administered to them ; for the Irish Poor-
law was of a more extreme character than our English law, in-
asmuch as it admitted of out-door relief under no circum-
stances. The Right Hon. Baronet had insinuated that he (Mr.
S. Crawford) had no right to take part in that debate, because
he was an Irish resident, but he knew the operation of
the experiment in Ireland. He thought that he was
best serving the interests of Ireland by opposing the English
Poor-late. Another reason given by the Right Hon. Baronet
that he (Mr. S. Crawford) was the representative of a town
into which the New Poor-law had not yet been introduced:
It was true the Poor-law had not yet been introduced into'
Rochdale, and the reason given by the Commissioners for Its
non-introduction was, that they were Liraid of the axe; &neat
and agitation it would occasion ; but the Poor-law hung ovoc
their heads like a sword suspended by a hair- and on their own
account, and on account of their neighboars, in whose affairs
they took an interest, their representative was entitled to take
a part in the discussion. He regretted to hear the Hon. Mem.
her for flath advocate a law which upset the rights of the people
and gave to three persons the right of imposing laws upon them.
The poor had a right to relief. No relief was permitted to be
administered by the Commissioners until destitution had taken
place. A well-reculated Poor-law would give relief betara
actual destitution had' occurred. He did not deny that there
had been evils under the old Poor-law, but they ought not on
that account to place in the hands of three individuals the
power of making laws for all the country.

General JOHNSON said the Act of Elizabeth never con-
ferred on any set few the power of committing persons to prism,
because they were pour. He objected to the size of the unions,
and thought there ought to be some appeal from the Board 44f
Guardians in cases where they refused relief. He should vote
for the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury.
Mr. FIELDEN rose amidst load cries of " Question t (Ines.
lion !"—" Divide ! divide !" to move the adjournment of the
debate.
Sir C. NAPIER seconded the motion. _ _

Mr.I4;II.RAND honed the Honourable Member would not
press his motien. By the course he was pursuing he was
injuring the cause they both had at heart. Several would
not vote for the Hon. Member for Finsbury because they
thought. it was factious. He (Mr. Ferrand) thought
was a perfectly fair motion ; but if the lion. Member perse-
vered in his motion for adjournment, did he think drat the same
number of Members would vote against the different gauges of
the Bill as would if he did not do so? He trusted the Member
for Oldham would withdraw his motion. for they were oely
losing their time—(Loud cheers)--by such a course of pro-
ceeding.
Colonel SIBTHORP thought the proposition was ineen-
sistent with the character of that House. He thought it would
do more harm to the cause than it would do good. He would
never subscribe to anything but a fair and manly opposition.
Captain FITZROY said that he had voted against the
second reading of the Bill, but he could not vote for the propo-
sition of the Hon. Member for Oldham ; and if their factious
opposition were persevered in, he should absent himself from tho
House during the debate.
Mr. WAK LEY said that Hon. Gentlemen must take the
course they thought best, but to say that the coarse of tbe.llon.
Gentleman was factious, merely because he moved the adjourn-
ment of the debate that he might have an opportunity of ad-
dressing the House, was too much. He ( Mr. Wakley) would
never, form any factious opposition to any party or proposition.
—( Oh, oh, and laughter.) Why—he would be very muck
obliged if Hon. Gentlemen would not judge him by them-
selves—he had never none so, and he never would. He defied
any lion. Member to refer to a period in which he had
done it. With reference to the Poor-law, he said, that after
the speeches of the Right Hon. 13arenet, the Member for
Tainwortla and the Member for Bath, he did think the debate
ought not to end without these speeches being answered, for he
never heard such staring fallacies as his Hon. and Learned
Friend, the Member fur Bath, uttered. He was sorry he was
not in the House, but he hoped to tell him on Monday night,
that he knew uothing of the New Poor-law BilL He never
heard a greater amount of ignorance with reference to the law
than he had beard from him that evening. He hoped and trusted
that the Hon. Member for Oldham would have an oppottnnity
of addressing the House.
Mr. FIELDEN said it appeared to him that the House
did not. understand his rea,otis for moving the adjournment.
He rose to address the House to answer the speeches of the
Hon. Member for Bath, aed the Right Hon. Baronet, but
he was met with loud cries. Under these circumstances and at
that time of night, the debate having lasted six hours, he asked
whether it was unreasonable 'to more the adjournment ? The
speech of the Hon. Member for Bath, would most
likely be quoted by the Secretary for the Home Deparmenti
as a speech of remarkable ability. Why lie (Mr. Fielder)
could tear it all to pieces.—( Laughter. ) lie won:d go through
it although lie was no lawyer. The Hon. Member conk not
have accomplished a better thing if he had received a high fre.
—( I aught er. ) No man could deny this who was sot as
ignorant as an ass.—( Roars of laughter.)
Then House then divided, the numbers were
For the Adjournment of the debate
Against it
Majority against the Adjournment —26B

On the question being put,
Sir C. IS APIEIt said he had no wish to give any factiens
opposition to the Bill, but when the Hon. Gentleman (Mr,
Fielden)got up to speak he was interrupted by persons who
had only just come into the House. He thought such a course
was an improper one, and that the lion. Gentleman was right
in moving the adjournment. He should now move the ad-
journment.
Mr. WA KLEY seconded the motion.

' Sir It. PEEL said the House would recollect itiat thongtt
the Hon. Member for Oldham rose for the. purpose of speaking,
and moved the adjournment on the professed grounds that due
attention was not paid to him, yet the House would bear in
mind that be said his intention was to avail himself of the forme
of the House to prevent the passing of the Cheers )
till the 31st of July. Therefore, if impatience was maniMted
by the House he must remind the House that the declaration
of the lion. Gentleman was seine justification.—( Hear.) He
was aware that time spent in adjournment was unprofitably
spent. And though he deeply regretted the course which'
had been taken, he knew it was in vain to contend against it_
He had hoped to be able to bring the tariff to its last stage ow
Monday ; and if the present course were persevered in, it would
delay the passing of that measure—(Hear, hear)—because, if
the debate were adjourned, he intended to postpone that mea-
sure, in order that the present one might have precedence, and
he should therefore propose that this debate be resumed on
Monday next. He hoped that the house would bear in mind
the declaration of the lion. Member for Oldham, and that
they would, at least, do all that they could to prevent a prece-
dent which must be so fatal to the charecter •f the • House—
( Loud cheers.)—sodestructive to the interests of the country, if
one or two gentlemen could avail themselves of the forms of the
Howe, for the purpose of obstructing tho progress of public.
measures.—( Cheers. )
)Ir. DUNCOMBE said that so far as he was concerned
he had hoped the House would have come to a decision that
evening upon the motion he had brought forward. 'With re-
gard to the interruption of the debate, he should remind the
, House, that when the lion. Member for Oldham rose at half-
past eleven o'clock, he was met by a most tremendous yell
from Hon. Gentlemen opposite.—(" Hear, hear," and "
no.") He thought, too, that the Right Hon. Baronet might
have put a more charitable construction upon the words that
sad fallen Irons the Honourable Member for Old-

ham. The Right Honourable Baronet, on the con-
trary, seemed to justify the interrnption which the
Hon. Member for Oldham had experieneed. It seemed, too,
that because the debate on the Poor-law was adjourned, fhe
country was to be punished by having a stop put to the' pro-
gress of the tariff. But the Government had stated on
former occasions their determination not to proceed with the
Poor-law until the tariff was disposed of, and he did not see
why that course should not still be taken.
Colonel WOOD (Nliddlesex) denied that the Hon. Mem-
ber for Oldham had met with any improper interruption, and it
was a libel on the character of the House to say that the Hon.
Gentleman had met with unusual marks of impatience.
Air. HAWES expressed a hope that after the debate on
Monday the House would proceed to a division an the question.
Sir it. PE.F.L hoped that was the course which the House
would pursue.

Mr. WAK LEY said that he was still decidedly oppooed to
the law. But if the House should decide by an overwhelming
majority, such as weuld rendes opposition fruitless, in favour
of the measure, he should not persevere in offering an oppo-
sition which could lead to no useful result.

Mr. FIELDEN said he would not flinch from the .duty
which he had undertaken of offering every impediment in kis
power to the progress of the Bill.
The debate was then adjourned to Monday.
BRITISH POSSESSIONS ABROAD BILL.
The British Possessions Abroad Bill went through Coil.
mittec.—Report on Monday.
RAILWAYS BILL.
On the Order of the Day for the third reading of the Rtil-
was s Bill,
Sir HENRY HA RDINGE tnoved the insertion of the fol-
lowing clause That whenever it shall be necessary to move
any of the officers or soldiers of her Majesty's forces of the
line, ordna, ce corps, marines, or the police form, by any rail.
way, the Directors thereof shall and are hereby required to
permit such forces respectively, with their' baggage. stores,
arms, ammunition, and other necessaries and things, to be con-
veyed, at the uqtal hours of starting, at the prices contracted
for by the Secretary at War for the conveyance of such forces,
on the production of a note signed by the proper authorities."
Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY opposed the clause, because
he had not been permitted to bring forward a clause which he
svis)ed to introduce.
Lora HOWICK. suggested the adjournment of the disouca
,ion for a fl,„. days, till the matter could receive more mature

consideration.
tlr. GLADScoTOuINdE objectedser nouseful purpose. and there were
te the postponement of the
f
measure, as it
urgent reasons for passing it as quickly as possible.
LABOL C !LIU. suggested that the Right Hon. and.
Gallant °Meer should, under the circumstances, withdraw the
clause.
Sir HENRY HARDINGE would agree to the suggestion,
and being in a separate Bill, if such were the feeling of the
House, although the delay that would accrue in consequence
would be of detriment to the public service.
Sir IL INGLIS hoped the House would let the clause psi*
Sir R. PEEL trusted that the House would permit the clause
to pass. A delay of 4 hours had already occurred in the oce-
veyance of troops to India for the want of such a clause.
Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY would, after these exp Lis-
a.
tons, withdraw his opposition to the clause.
The clba.yusNay y+ as
rid
clause wastheennairTeehe Billdto,a was the odorderediroitolit
be afitethae.d to
the
Ott the motto that the DA do pa*