The Sun.
London, England, 1842-05-12 00:00:00

dealing fairly by the public to propose to continue the
Commission for live years. It was evident that there
was Ho intention on the part of the Government to dis-
continue the Commission, and why did they not say so at i
once. It was eltar they liked the Poor-law Commission
so well that they intended to render it perpetual, and if
so it would be more manly to state it at once, in Order
that the public might know the monster they had to deal
with.--(Cheers.) What would the constituents of Hon.
Gentlemen opposite say?—(Cheers.) He should like to
see them facing their Constituents—(Loud cheers.) They
should recollect the language they had held at.the hus-
tings.— (Continued cheering.) They knew that it was
owing more to the Anti Poor-law cry than to any other
that so many of them had obtained seats in that House
—(Loud cheers)—and now there they sat as mute as
mice.—(Cheers and laughter.) He thought some of the
proposals of the Bill good, but he believed, with the ex-
ception of the alteration in the bastardy clause, that all
the proposals had been contained in the Bill of last year,
the progress of which had been obstructed so resolutely
by Hon. Gentlemen opposite.—(Cheers.) Ho should
propose, as an amendment, that the duration of the Com-
mission should be limited to two years only.—(Hear,
hear, hear.) Notwithstanding all that had been
said, he (Mr. Wakley) was convinced that it had
been stated in that House, when the Bill was
first introduced, that the Commission had been appointed
for the purpose of introducing uniformity of system.
They had now 400 unions, and while, in many of them,
they had issued an order prohibiting out of doer relief,
in upwards of 100 no such order had been issued. The
real object was, to deprive the .rate-payers of the power
over their own funds, and of forcing them to ap-
ply to Somerset House, for permission to appro-
priate their own funds. He said it was a com-
plete subversion of that principle of liberty which,
had been in existence in this country, that the manage-
ment of their own funds should not remain in the
hands of the people. The principle of the Bill was op-
posed to every principle of justice with regard to the go-
vernment of the poor. But if the people did not like the
Bill to be made perpetual, he hoped they would pour in
petitions, and make the Administration acquainted with
their feelings on the subject. , If the people were quies-
cent or indifferent on this occasion, the next step would
be, that at the end of five years the Bill would be made
binding. He protested against the Bill, and especially
against the continuance of the Commission, and would
oppose it at every stage.
Mr. SHAW wished to know whether the Bill was to
make any change in the • Com Mission with respect to
Ireland.

Sir J. GRAHAM said, that, it was not intended to
make an alteration with regard to England which would
not apply to Ireland.
Capt. PECHELL said that the Right Hon. Baronet
was very candid, and he would be equally candid. The
Right Hon. Baronet had denounced the Gilbert Unions,
and he should, therefore, oppose the Bill in every stage.
When the Gilbert Unions were once destroyed, those
unions which were under Local Act, would be next at-
tacked.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman was an
able General, and he was going to defeat them in detail.
—(Cheers and laughter.) Hon. Gentlemen might be sure
that they were mistaken, if they supposed that pro-
visions would not be introduced into the forthcoming
Bill to do away with the Local Acts.

• Mr. FON. Ai.A.ULE said he must declahn all intention
of making any recriminatory remarks on this subject.
So far as he could at present judge, the statement of the
Right Hun. Gentleman was highly satisfactory. He
appeared to have studied the question with fairness and
calmness. The question, he thought, was not one which
at the present time ought to be met by any factious op-
position. The time was one of great distress, and if fac-
tion were allowed to enter into the debate, advantage
might be taken of it to excite ill feelings in the minds of
the poor.L(Hear.) He entirely approved of the amend
meats proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet. The edu-
cation clauses especially he viewed with great satisfac-
tion. Upon the whole, he felt perfectly satisfied with
the manner in which the Right Hon. Gentleman had
brought forward the question.
Mr. S. WORTLEY said he would not enter into the
different points of the speech of the Right Hon. Gentle-
man. One of his strongest motives for rising on that
occasion was to express the pleasure he felt at hearing
the argument against uniformity of practice. The Right
Hon. Baronet quoted passages from the orations of Lord
Brougham—orations of great ability and perspicuity. But
these were entirely inconsistent with his argument, and
as completely inconsistent with the principles upon which
the Poor-law Commission had acted for years past, as
could possibly be. It was impossible to administer the
law with uniformity in the various districts of the
country. lie thought the best way to administer the
law was to adapt it to circumstances. Unless this
were done his firm conviction was that it would never
work with advantage to the country. In the district
with which he was connected, the present system was
in operation, and it gave satisfaction to no one class
of the population. Neither rate-payer nor pauper was
satisfied with the system, and unless they placed the
Poor-law on a different footing, they never would achieve
the object they had in view.
Mr. FERRAND would not have risen to address
the House had it not been fur the taunt the Honourable
Member for Finsbury had thrown out against Hon.
Members on that (the Ministerial) side of the House,
The Honourable Member accused Honourable Mem-
bers on that side of the House with being de-
ceivers. He (Mr. Ferrand) was sure that Honourable
Gentlemen on his side the House had not changed their
opinions. He thought., therefore, it unfair for him to throw
out the taunt,and then take up his hat, and leave the House.
The Right lion. Baronet had said that the Local Acts.
were not to be interfered with. That was a great bles-
sing to those districts which possessed those Acts.--
(-Hear, hear.) Now he wished to ask the Right Hon.
Baronet whether he would allow to the numerous towns
and districts which did not possess thoSe blessings, an op-
portunity of attaining similar Acts to keep them out of
the power of the Commissioners ? •
Mr. GILL also put a question to the Right Holt Ba-
ronet as to whether he meant to confine the interference
of the Commissioners, in the case of Local Acts, to unions
pith a constituency under 20,000.
Sir J. GRAHAM again referred to, the decision of
Lord Denman, by which the Commissioners were pre-
cluded from interfering with parishes under Local Acts
only as respected the constitution- of the governing body.
Mr. BORTHWICK said that when the Right Hon.
Baronet had applied, some six or eight months ago, to
this House for time and confidence on this subject, he
(Mr. Borthwick) voted for granting the Right Hon.
Baronet that time and confidence, for it appeared to him
. that the Government were entitled to both. But., as far as
he could perceive every principle of the proposed measure
was the same as the principle of the present one. There
was the same centralization of power and the same inter-
ference of the local Magistracy in the administration of
relief. He should examine, carefully, the measure in its
progresS, and wherever he could he would give it his sup-
port, and wherever he should be obliged to oppose it, he.
trusted his opposition would be tempered with the spirit
of calmness whiCh the Right Hon. Baronet had exhi-
bited in introducing the subject.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD could not think of
letting the Bill be introduced without stating his opposi-
tion to the principle on which it was founded, which was
the same in effect as the principle of the former measure.
General JOHNSTONE asked at what time the second
reading of the Bill would take place, as that would be
the proper time, in his opinion, for urging any objection
to the measure.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the second reading
would bz. about Monday se'night, or Friday fortnight.
Mr. HARDY had always opposed the Poor-law
Amendment Act, which he considered oppressive in its
enactments; and he should feel it his duty to oppose the
measure of the Right lion. Baronet, which he thought
could not, and ought not, to give satisfaction to the
country.
Mr. GRIMSDITCH said that in his opinion the Nm-
missioners should be placed in the position of tenants
from year to year, in order that they might be more
completely under the control of Parliament. In the large
towns of the country, such as Liverpool and Manchester,
it would be impossible, in his opinion, to. carry out the
principle of centralization.
Mr. MUNTZ was confident that a good deal of injury
was created by the interference of the Commissioners in
towns which had local Acts.' He hoped the Right Hon.
Baronet would reconsider that part of the measure. He
was also of opinion that the paupers of the present day
were not as the paupers of former times, but were of a
totally different class. Ile hoped the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet would see the evil of interfering with the local
Acts.

Lord SANDON said, that in the larger towns the
business of the poor wai; best conducted by the local
guardians, and he, therefore, thought that it would he
unwise to interfere with them. He thought that some
modification of the Commission would be necessary, but
at present he was of opinion that it should be continued
for as short a period as possible.—(Cheers.)
Mr. TURNER suggested that the Government should
get the best information from the different overseers, so
that it would have a proper test as to the returns made
to the House.
_ _ _

Sir J. GRAHAM said that, in answer to the question
of the Hon. Member behind him, he thought that the
power should be left with the Commissioners, and not
in the hands of those who may have influence in the
large towns.
Afters few words from Mr.GRIMSDITCH, in expla-
nation, and Sir J. GRAHAM, leave was given to bring
in the Bill.

The Bill was afterwards read a first time, and ordered
to he read a second time on Monday se'nnight.
The Committee on the Designs Copyright Bill was
postponed till Monday week,
Mr. G. BANKES moved for a return of the net
amount of duty on stones not particularly enumerated
or described, nor otherwise charged with duty, for the
year 1841.—Agreed to.
Mr. C. BULLER gave notice that he should, to-
morrow, present a petition from Henry Warburton, Esq.,
praying for an inquiry into the circumstances attendiii
the election of the borough of Bridport, and the
alleged compromise relative to the return. He should
further give notice that, on Friday, he would make a
motion, in compliance with the prayer of the petition.
The other Orders of the Day were then' disposed of,
and the House adjourned at Eight &Clock.

MORLEY ERNSTEIN, MR. JAMES'S NEW NOVEL.—
We arc requested to state that Mr. James's new Novel,
" Morley Ernstein," is this day published by Messrs. Saunders
and Otley, Conduit-street, Hanover-square, of whom may be
had—the New Edition of Mr Lodge's " Peerage and Baro-
netage." Mr. Garston's new Work. on Greece. A new edition
of the " Language of Flowers," and the following new works
of fiction : " The Herberts," by the Author of "Elphinstone."
Major Michel's " Trevor Hastinges, or the Field of Tewkes-
bury" and " Softness,"- a Novel, .by the Author of " Hardness."
The Vigie de r (hest, a Saint-Malo journal, gives
a report current there of several English boats having been
captured near Granville, for oyster-dredging within the French
limits. The oysters taken by these boats are said to have been
sold for 4,000 f. for the benefit of the hospital,