The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-20 00:00:00

sible it might appear to some Honourable Gentletnene
that the agricultural labourer, having at present an ad-;
dition from the parochial funds to the amount °
wares paid by his employer (that addition being regu'
fated aceordin to the number of his family). the
effect of taking away that assistance would 011116'
it impossible for him to maintain himself and faingi'
He (Lord Althorp) did not think such would be the casef
for he believed, nay he felt eon fidenti that, as the labourer
regarded the parochial assistance now added to
the wages he received from his employer as inaltius
the total wages to which he was entitled for
industry, a very short time would elapse, after the re'
!novel of that assistance, before wages would rise 10 an
equivalent amount; and, as soon as that was the case,
tha
situation in which the labourer would be placed wote
be infinitely preferable to that in which he at present
stood:" that this Bill beproceeded with no further entil
it
be ascertained by inquiry of this House, that there hair heir,
since the Poor-law Amendment Act came into oPel's
tiun, a rise of the, wares of labour, increased contentrae
among the labouring people, and a tlimunitio» of crilue '
and also that if a rise in the rate of wages has. taken
place, it has been to such an extent as to give the abie;
bodied labouring man with a wife and family an equivalen
for the periodical assistance afforded to him before the'
passing of that Act ; that it is desirable that such inquif4
should be satisfactory and conclusive, and that it shoe
cemmand theconfidence of the country ; and that, therefetef
none but labourers and employers be examined. (The
Member in making this motion, spoke in so low a tte
of voice as to be wholly inaudible fur a lung time.) "1;i
objected under any circumstances to the continuance,,,ii
the powers of the Commissioners fur so long a peri°'
the Government proposed. as
General JOHNSON seconded the motion.' Ilet-0
sorry to find that the Government were determined on
persevering with the most objectionable dame itt;ll,o
Bill, that which had for its object the continuanec
unconstitutional powers of the Commissioners
years more.
Mr. GRIMSDITCH agreed with the Hon. and Galls 4
Member who had preceded him, that the most objeetier
able clause in the Bill was that which continued :
powers of the Commissioners. He was sure that it if°
most unwise of the Government to press • such a chi
and that the course they had taken on the subject wt,'tl.A
tend to shake the confidence which the country
hitherto reposed in them. But as the clause had hero
already passed, he saw no use in now Opposing t
motion for going into Committee.
Mr. AGLIONBY said that his objections to t,e
proposed duration of the powers of the Commissionel
remained as strong as ever. He thought it high tile
some calm and deliberate inquiry should take place
?Lt
the working of the Poor-law Act, and he thought t 7,,,
the result of that inquiry would be to prove that
working of it had been beneficial to the poor themsell4,o
He thought, however, that it was impossible to gu ,
the inquiry during the present session, and therefore ,
could not support the motion. If the Hon. ideilbeep
would, however, on the bringing up of the Report, or of
the third reading. move for shortening the duratiott.,„,
the Commission, he (Mr. Aglionby) would supportro
Mr. ESCOTT thought the Hon. Member for Olt%)
had better reserve his opposition until his (Mr. Esonre
motion on the subject of out-of-door relief should e 67,,
on. If that preposition should be carried, the COlOlO
sion would be found to be inoperative for evil -artd te°
operative for good than it had ever been.
Mr. REDHEAD YORKE urged the Hon. 310.11,
for Oldham not to press his proposition to a divisl°bis
He trusted the Hon. Member would not divide on l
point ; but under the extreme difficulties of the COuDttl!
if he did he felt bound to divide with him.
Sir J. GRAHAM in the main agreed with the °11:
Member for Oldham, that the effect of the present al;
sure was to make the workman dependent on his r,
player. The only question for the House now to m 74
mine was, whether there r hould be a CommissiaiA;
not. With respect to inquiry, he did not censiorroo
necessary, inasmuch as they had had long inquiriofor
the subject. Inquiry was not wanted ; but that was ,09
the House to decide. It was only out of respect tot
be
Hon. Member that he had not remained silent, but ,
could not agree to the motion.
Captain PECHELL said that the friends of the lifof
ple were determined to oppose the Bill to the bestee
their power, until the Right Hon. Gentleman grotto
the inquiry which they asked. Ile contended thatt.le
power granted to the Commissioners was too 'e'e
intrust to them. tb.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and
House divided ; the numbers were— •
For the motion
Against it 125
Majority
The House then resolved itself into Commatee,
GREENE in the Chair.
Clause 1 passed through Committee. ils
On clause 2 being proposed, Mr. T. DLINC(Ofore
proposed a proviso for allowing parties summoned be pd
the Poor-law Commissioners, to be heard by their age
or counsel.
_bad

Sir J. GRAHAM said, as the Hon. Gentlerosil4eig
not given notice of his motion, he (Sir J. Graho7lo
somewhat diffident of expressing his own opinion. eof
clause, as it now stood, was proposed for the pare o
allowing the Pour-law Commissioners to send' 0°,44
person conversant with the law of evidence, and OrtioJ
no connexion with the locality, to conduct an irnP,:oo
inquiry. As the proposition of the lion. Genti.t, S.
would lead to facilitate these inquiries, he ('l4tY
Graham) could see no objection to its aauption ; Poect,
same time, before giving a final opinion on the 011„'fiea
he should be glad if some further time could be all
hi
M for
D considlieration.
r. i 1317 said lie would advise the Hon.
accede - the P-

Man to to the proposition. Under
Amendment Act, parties had no power to be heard
.•
their agents before the Assistant Commissioners.
Sir J. GRAHAM said he cculd not consent that''',l
all cases parties should be heard.
Mr. BUCK complained that the Assistant Comnit
siouers had at present too much power.
Mr. B. WOOD did not see any objection to the
pointment of special Assistant Commissioners.
.01
wished to know whether the Right Hen. Gentletil: •
would do any thing with respect to the auditors ? so;
Sir J. GRAHAM said the state of the system of, ot
diting was very unsatisfactory. He did not intenut to
present to make any alteration in it. With -resPectil
inquiry by the Commissioners, he quite agreed wit
ought to be an open one.
Mr. AGLIONBY believed that even as an ext.4._,Ao
to the usual mode of proceeding, a secret inquiry wv,
be a mischievous mode. He did not think that it
be the ordinary practice, but even the power to unike
secret would be unadvisable.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said, his objection ooli,
plied to the inquiries before the new tribunal create"
the
Mrßill. tot;
. ESCOTT condemned the inquiry being. see ,or
and suggested that parties should be allowed to sProrf
before it by counsel or attorney. He thought,. hoce.'ol/
that if such a court was instituted at all, it cert'i is'
ought net to be composed of the Poor-law Colo,o
sioners. The Poor-law Commissioners for their °,1,6
sakes ought to be no parties to the appointment of
tribunal.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM thought, that if the C.O
missioners of Inquiry were authorised to inquireloor
the conduct of the Poor-law Commissioners, they net
law Commission would be rendered useless. He diet er
intend that the Commissioners of Inquiry should eV
cise any control over the Poor-law Commissioners,.,,ie
should merely inquire into cases of local mal-adrol"..
tra
L ird SANDON thought it would be a great ben ors
that in all complaints the inquiry should issue fr°'
Crown, and not from the Poor-law Commissioners. , 00l
Mr. R. YORKE said, though this inquiry would ti
operate against the Commissioners, it would against to
Assistant Commissioners, and he thought that to he v,
same thing. le
After a few words from Mr. AGLIONBY releti/e/
the appointment of the Commissioners, and the P°
which would be vested in their hands, io°
Sir J. GRAHAM said that the Poor-law Comn3i,ssie
was indeed supreme, with the exception of one stlitelt
check—the eye of the Executive Government- #
was always upon its
houghs actions. 10.5
Mr. B. WOOD ought that the guardians theins!„
should have the power of instituting initiatory inatt"..
they saw fit.
Mr. DARBY supported the clause.
Mr. GRIMSDITCH hoped the proviso woolti
withdrawn. 'O4
Sir ROBERT PEEL believed that his Hon. fri
was actuated by conscientious motives, but his oat);
was but a small encouragement to a Ministry to
duce any relaxation of the law. A clause was prerel
for appointing Commissions of Inquiry into any
cases of malversation, and the Hon. Gentleman oPP, an
it. The Poor-law Commissioners now appoinnirY
Assistant Poor-law Commissioner to conduct any ing ,vO5
that might be necessary. The present proposition o',
to give them the power of appointing CommissiolLefer" of
Inquiry, and at the same time to give the Seore'nent'
State for the Home Department a veto on that sPriisible
merit. ,Thus, the Secretary of State would be rosrairt
for the appointment of the Commissioners of -111iloved
whose qualifications were stated in the Bill. Heat'
that no alteration would be proposed in the clau olia
they would not make of the Commissionersthori'
the Secretary of State two conflicting ginstste,
ties. If they constituted the Secretary of the
a Court of Appeal, from the decision 0' their
Poor-law Commissioners, they would paralYsendopt
authority. He trusted the House would not frog'
course which would discourage the Government
proposing any future relaxation in the Poor-lavvs7,o
After a few words from General Johnson, i"
joie
Yorke, and Sir J. Graham, the Committee divided, ,
there appeared-
-59
For the proviso

Againstit
Majority in favour of the proviso .•
The clause was then agreed to.
On the next clause being proposed, 1
Mr. E. RICE suggested the propriety of 611 ge„ati';,ort,
rules being embodied in the Commissioners Ne,"l4e
submitted to the Secretary of State and laid be—
Parliament. 00
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that at the pr-the
moment no general orders could be issued without
st
sanction of the Secretary of Sta:e, and than 60' "le
be laid before Parliament. That was the law at
present moment, and the present clause laid considers
limitations limitations on the powers of the Commissioners
issuing_special rules.
•

Alr:E: RICE explained.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that under this cblu.s°
the abuse of special orders would be rendered impossible,
Mr. DARBY said the clause would deprive the Cory_
missioners of the power of making a relaxation 01
general order with leave of the Secretary of State.
Te case as thn agreed to.
Afterl au
feww wordse from Sir J. Graham and•CAPtll.in
Pechell, the clause was agreed to.
On clause 5 being proposed,