The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-03-12 00:00:00

seemed to contain a great deal of truth. Mr. Earle's opinion
then was, that we were to have the new poor-law because the
parish had opposed the corporation. He hoped the parish
would continue to defend their own rights and interests ; and
if they thought the interests of the corporation or the dock
trustees were in opposition to those of the parish, be trusted
that individuals of sufficient spirit would be found to defend
those rights. Mr. Earle had said that the new poor-law was
the law of the land and that the parishioners had nothing to
do but support it. He agreed with him that the commis-
sioners had power to inflict this law upon the parish, but
inasmuch as they had suspended its operation for seven years,
he thought there were good grounds that they should not
have introduced it at all, and that they had not been induced
to introduce it for the sake of the interests of the town or
the poor, but to enable a certatn political party to acquire
more influence. (Hear, hear.)
_ _

Chairman, I must be allowed to reply

Mr. EARLE
to this.
Mr. BUSHEL
to Mr. Earle.
Mr. Eau.LE.—Very well. But I think I ought to speak now
Mr. BuSHELL.-1 thought you would like to reply to both
at once. (Laughter.)
Mr. EARIAL—Yes. I like killing two birds with one stone.
Mr. BUSHELL then addressed the meeting. He had not
intended to have said a single word, but after what had fallen
from Mr. Earle he could not avoid thinking that the party
with whom Mr. Earle usually acted must feel much obliged
to him for coming there, inasmuch as be had made some
extraordinary statements, which perhaps, had he consulted
them would have been kept back. He (Mr. Bushell) thought
the vestry were nevertheless much obliged to Mr. arle for
having come, because, if he had not been there, they would
not have had half the fun which had been' amusing them for
the last half hour. With regard to the observation he had
made, he (Mr. Bushell) must say that Mr. Earle had stated
that the reason why the poor-law commissioners were bring-
ing the poor-law into operation here, was because the vestry
had had the misfortune to offend the council in oppposing a
certain bill. Now he thought that this would throw some
light upon the real reasons why the poor-law commissioners
were, after such a lapse of time, bringing the new law into
operation. He thought he saw the whole course and progress
of the matter. He thought that if the vestry and parishioners
at large had entertained similar opinions to the council and
the leading members of the opposite party, we should not
have heard a single word about the introduction of the bill
into Liverpool. He should not be surprised if the leaders of
Mr. Earle's party had not been very active indeed in inducing
the poor-law commissioners to put the act into operation,
simply because they were jealous of the power which the
parish possessed, and of that power being in the hands of those
whose political opinions were adverse to their own. (Hear,
hear.) He was satisfied that the Town-council of Liverpool,
or rather the majority in it, looked with a jealous eye upon
the power of the parishioners in vestry assembled. He did
not know whether Mr. Earle had before attended a vestry
meeting—
Mr. EARLE.—No. •

—But I have first something to say in reply

Mr. BUSHELL.-He did not think, then, that Mr. Earle
could have expected to have found such a conservative spirit
amongst the parishioners, not only with regard to general poli-
tics, but with regard to our ancient institutions, whether paro-
chial or general, as that which now existed. Could it be
supposed that if this act were brought in operation, it would
benefit the parish in a financial point of view ? (No, no.)
Could it be supposed that it would benefit the poor? (Con-
tinued cries of " No, no.") Then he would ask, for whose
benefit was it to be introduced?

A PARISHIONER.—For Sir Joshua Walmsley's. (Loud
laughter.)

Mr. BUSHELL would not say who had taken an active part
in bringing the poor-law here, but he would say that it
could not have been introduced to benefit the parish in a
financial point of of view, for it could be proved, from a great
number of statements, that in places where it had been intro-
duced, that the amount of expenditure under it had been in-
creased fourfold—(hear, hear,)—and certainly it could not
be for the benefit of the poor, for we knew that under this
system the poor man had been more oppressed, and that
poverty and misery had been made a crime and punished as
such. His own opinion was, that it was impossible for this
act to work well in Liverpool. He did not think that it could
succeed with such an enormous pauper population as we had
from the sister country. How was it possible, he would re-
peat, that it could be brought into operation here ? Mr. Earle
had told the meeting that gentlemen who lived at a distance,
who were strangers io the town and who knew nothing of
our population, were much more competent to manage our
parochial affairs than we who were upon the spot! That
seemed to him a most extraordinary proposition for any gen-
tleman to make. If he (Mr. Bushell) wished to manage his
own affairs well, he was always upon the spot. He would cer-
tainly not send to London for a man to manage his business,
and if they would not adopt that rule in their own private
affairs, why should they in those of the parish ? (Hear, hear.)
He would not detain the meeting further, as most probably
they would be desirous to hear Mr. Earle's reply.
Mr. EARLE.—That was very good indeed. (Laughter.)
He never heard Mr. Bushell get up to make a speech in his
life but he began in the old way, that he did not intend to
speak, and he had never known him—when he had an oppor-
tunity to speak—keep silent. (Loud laughter.) Really, Mr.
Bushell's eloquence had almost made him (Mr. Earle) forget
what he was going to say. (Continued laughter.) He begged
distinctly to state upon his word and honour, that he knew
nothing whatever of any application being made to the poor
law commissioners for the introduction of the law.
Mr. BUSHELL.—I do not think you do.
Mr. EARLE had merely expressed his opinion that such
was the case ; and the opinions he had given as to the opera-
tions of the new law were those of a near and dear relative,
who was very far from thinking in politics as he thought,
and who he should be very glad to see a good radical. That
man had devoted the whole of his time, night and day for
four years, to the subject. He was his own brother. He
was not desirous of praising him, but of justifying himself;
and lie would refer those gentlemen who were sceptical on
certain points of the New Poor Law to him, and he would
afford them every information.
A PARISHIONER enquired whether this gentleman was
Mr. Charles Earle ?
Mr. EARLE said No. It was Mr. Richard Earle, his
brother ; Mr. Charles Earle was his cousin. He wished they
would consult Mr. Richard Earle upon certain points on
which certain persons in the meeting had laid down the law
so clearly, because it was just possible he whould upset
them. (Laughter).
Mr. THOMAS SMITH opposed the introduction of the law,
and said the real reason for it was the necessity fur the corn-
misAoners and assistant commissioners to do something for
their salaries. He was not a rate-payer certainly, but in the
election of guardians he should at least have half-a-dozen
votes.

Mr. BIGHAM contended that Mr. Smith had no right to
address the meeting, inasmuch as he was not a rate-payer.
Mr. SMITH appealed to the Chairman to confirm him in
the fact that in the Union in which they both resided, the
rates in all the townships bad not been increased.
Mr. BIGHAm then addressed the vestry at very consider-
able length in support of the law being introduced, and con-
tended that the Select Vestry had misappropriated the funds
of the parish by paving the expenses of three deputations to
London. He was -proceeding in this strain, when he was
stopped by the Chairman for irregularity.
The resolution was then put and carried with only two dis-
sentients.

Mr. SANDS moved the next resolution, and observed that
the meeting had heard quite enough to convince them that
if it were possible to induce the poor-law commissioners to
suspend their intention of introducing the law, it was most
desirable the attempt should be made. Mr.-Sands concluded
by moving the resolution to this effect, and which also ap-
pointed Messrs. Birkett and Tinne a deputation to proceed to
Somerset House.

Mr. RICHARD WILLDING BATESON seconded the reso-
lution. He said that he attended this meeting in order to
show that the commercial community felt an interest in
this question. That part of the community certainly felt that
the introduction of the new poor law would be an evil to this
parish. In seconding the resolution, he should endeavour to
confine himself to the question, for much, which was per-
fectly foreign to it, had been introduced. The meeting had
not been convened, as one gentleman had said, in that sacred
edifice, to have half an hour's fun, or to discuss the intended
dock bill, or to promote the warehouse interest ; but they
had met to consider whether it would be for the interest of
the parish to oppose the introduction of the new poor law—
whether sufficient ground could be shown to the commission-
ers to induce them to allow the parishioners to manage their
own affairs. ( Hear, hear.) Much had been said, from which
he differed, as to the operation of the law ; but before he
proceeded further, he would advert to the circumstances
which called it into existence. The meeting were aware that,
in passing through the legislature. it had the support of men
of all parties, including our leading statesmen, and that it
had been called into existence by abuses in the adminis-
tration of the old law, especially in the agricultural districts,
where a system so bad had got into operation, that the pay-
ment of wages was frequently made out of the poor rates.
(Hear, hear.) The bill, then, had been brought in as a mea-
sure of relief—(hear, hear) ;—and he differed with Mr. Wo-
therspoon inasmuch as he thought it bad worked well in
those districts ; but, at the same time, he was convinced it
would be an abuse in towns circumstanced as Liverpool was,
with so many various interests to conciliate. For a long
series of years our parochial affairs had been managed by a
select vestry, and he could not see how their management
was to be improved upon. Some portions of the bill might
probably be effective, but many others were decidedly wrong
—the workhorse system for instance. What a contrast
would the existing workhouse system afford to that under
the bill ! The relief of the distressed poor was another point
in which the bill would have a harsh operation here. The
question, however, for the consideration of the vestry was
this—could they make out a case strong enough to convince
the commissioners that the parish was under a better system
now than it would be under the new law? (Hear, hear.)
With these remarks he begged to second the motion.
Mr. RIEKETT, as his name had been proposed, altogether
unknown to him, as one of the deputation, begged to say he
wished some other parishioner had been selected, as he had
only just returned from London, where he had been laid upon
the bed of sickness. Independently of this, there was one
subject which he thought the vestry ought to look boldly in
the face—namely, that there were, at the present moment,
1900 paupers in the workhouse—(hear, hear)—and that to
accommodate the increased numbers some of the weaving
shops had been fitted up with beds. (Hear.) The select
vestry had power to give outdoor relief; and it had been a
question with the select vestry whether some consideration
should not be paid to those who contributed to the poor-
rates—in fact whether it would not be cheaper to allow out-
door relief, to a small amount, instead of driving the parties
to the workhouse. There were numbers of aged females who
would rather
accept Is. 6d. per week, and many aged men
with wives, who would be content with 2s. 6d. a week, rather
than enter the workhouse; but if the new system came into
operation they must all go there. (Hear, hear.) He should
like to know whether Mr. Bi,,,,ham and his friends would not
be amongst the first to complain if they were called upon to
pay an additional rate Che
ere levied for the purpose of building
a new workhouse? (es.) He was quite satisfied that
the poor would not be content, neither with the quantity nor
the quality of their food. _ (Cries of " query.") Query !
Why there was no man in the parish, from the rector down-
wards, who sat down to better food—though it might be
differently cooked—and there was no place in England where
the poor had so much or better food than they had under the
present system in Liverpool. They could only save money
by running down the poor, by refusing subscriptions to
public charities, or by increasing the assessment upon all
buildings in the parish not assessed. For instance, the Me-
chanics' Institution was not assessed—and no man could say
that was a conservative institution. But he had never yet
found any good done either by robbing the poor or by robbing
the church. (Cheers.) If he consented to be one of the
deputation it was solely because he thought it was due to the
great manifestation of feeling which had taken place that day,
—(cheers)—not only with regard to the poor, but also to the
handsome terms in which the gentlemen who had come for-
ward had exonerated the select vestry from the charges made
against them. (Hear.)
Mr. JAMES OWEN supported the resolution in an energetic
address, which was received throughout with much applause.
He remarked, that the enactment which it was proposed to
introduce was really
.a poor law and not a rich law. It took
away the power of givingout-door relief, and therein con-
sisted one part of the vil auy of it. The powers of the com-
missioners were about to expire, and the vestry might depend
that when those powers were renewed they would put on the
screw with more rigour than they had ever hitherto exhibited.
In conclusion, be contended that the inevitable tendency of
the new poor law was to increase chartism, to separate master
from man, and to destroy a 1 good feeling between the upper,
middle, and lower classes.
Mr. TZNNE disclaimed all party motives in signing the
requisition and also in consenting to act upon the deputation.
He should have not done either had he not been convinced

that the introduction of the law into Liverpool wu not M.
ceedingly ill advised.

Mr.''E.ARLE being anxious both for Mr. Tinne's and Mr
Birkett's pocket, would venture to ask how their expenses,
as the deputation, were to be paid: -
from the parish funds he was sure there would be an enquiry
Mr. WOTHERSPOON said he would answer the question
The expenses would be paid by subscription.
Mr. SMITH was understood to contend that as the parish
was not yet under the operation of the new poor-law, the
expences might be paid from the funds of the rate payers.
The CHAIRMAN remarked that upon whom the expenses
would fall seemed to be a disputed point.
Mr. EARLE.—If I was appointed I would not go before I
knew of a certainty who was to pay me.
BIRKETT.—I shall never stay to enquire who is to
pay my expenses. I will go and stand up for the interests of
the town again. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. EARLE.—WeII, I would not do any such thing.
Mr. TINNE.—The consideration of who shall pay the ex-
penses, shall not deter me from going to London. (Cheers.)
Mr. EARLE.—I never intended to put the question to
you. I put it to a legal character, not to you. (Hear.)
The CHAIRMAN then put the resolution to the vote, and
it was unanimously carried.

If they were to come

Mr. ISAAC Horatza, in moving the next resolution said,
there could not be a question, that the intended introduction
of the poor-law was owing to the instigation of some party.
Mr. Earle said it was not so. Perhaps the question might
not have been discussed at the Angel, but it was quite pos-
sible it had been debated at some other place. (Hear.) Cer-
tainly there had been a strange argument used in favour of
it, namely, that the affairs of the town could be best admi-
nistered by those who really knew nothing about its interest.
Of all the arguments ever used, that surely was one of the
most ridiculous—that persons should have the management of
the affairs of so great and important a place as Liverpool, and
actually know nothing of its interests ! Should such indivi-
duals as Mr. Harbord or Mr. Birkett, wbo paid such large
proportions to the parish rates, have no longer that controul
to which they were justly entitled ? (Hear.) Yet such
would be the case. Mr. Holmes, after a few remarks upon
the debate upon the drainage bill-in the council, expressed
his regret that the meeting had not been called upon to apply
to parliament—(hear)—for an act exempting Liverpool from
the operation of the new poor law. He declared his convic-
tion that the attempt to introduce it had been made with the
sole view of obtaining the controul in the select vestry. Mr.
Holmes concluded by moving the resolution, which was to,
the effect that the deputation be also instructed to represent
to the members for the borough the great dissatisfaction
which the introduction of the bill had created, and to induce
them to use their influence to procure a clause in the bill
now before parliament to exempt Liverpool from its opera-
tion. (Cheers.)

Mr. COOPER seconded the motion
said-

Mr. Earle had.

Mr. EARLE.—Do let me alone. (Laughter.)
Mr. COOPER then entered into some details with regard to,
the operation of the act in the West Derby Union, shewing-
that the expenditure of all the townships comprised in it had
been increased, and that poverty was in reality treated as a
crime.

Mr. RAMPLING supported the resolution, and denounced
the poor-law act as one of the most diabolical and tyrannical
measures ever concocted to oppress the poor.
The resolution was then passed unanimously.

A RATE-PAYER, whose name we could not ascertain, said,
a question had been brought forward with regard to medical
relief. He had practised for a long time in Gloucestershire,
and had been appointed medical officer to a union in that
county. He was obliged to enter into a contract to supply
the medicines and attend the paupers, for which he received
the sum of £75 a year. He had to visit five parishes, and
during the period of twelve months he attended between.
500 and GOO individuals. He frequently had to ride, at the
dictates of Mr. Assistant Commissioner Weale, ten or a.
dozen miles ; he had to furnish medicines and medical attend-
ance, to attend the board of guardians every week, and to
keep a book of all the cases. At the expiration of the year
he told the commissioner he should no longer serve; but he
insisted that he should. He (the rate-payer) had thus
acquired a great deal of experience of the working of the
new poor. law. He had to attend the workhouse twice a
week, or whenever he was called upon ; he had to supply the
workhouse with medicine, and at the end of the year he found
he had lost about £l3O during the twelve months. Such
was his experience of the new poor-law. (Cheers.)
The thanks of the meeting were then voted to the church-
wardens and overseers, for having called the meeting, and
also to the Rev. Mr. Brooks, for presiding, and at three
o'clock the meeting separated.

CORRESPONDENCE

THE NEW POOR LAW

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

Stu.,—l am gratified beyond measure to find that the in-
utbitants of our good old town are beginning to rouse from
,he lethargy in which they have too long indulged with refe-
•ence to the introduction of the new poor law into Liverpool.
Permit me to offer a few words ou the subject, with a view
:o rouse the ratepayers generally to a sense of the importance
)f carrying out the objects of the meeting with energy and
lerseverance.

The new poor law is an enactment totally at variance with
the constitutional principles of English government, and to-
tally subversive of the humane bearing and purpose of the
old act of Queen Elizabeth. The principal or propulsory
machinery in this new engine for the grinding of the poor
consists of three grand commissioners, most exorbitantly
paid, who reside in the metropolis, and arrogate to them-
selves a knowledge of the poor in the multitudinous localities
throughout the kingdom, superior to that of those amongst
whom they reside, and from whose pockets they are relieved.
These commissioners are paramount to all guardians that
may be appointed under the act, and even to parliament it-
self, and can play their " fantastic tricks" ad libitum. The
guardians, indeed, have a most thankless office, and are in

reality mere nonentities. The three bashaws may refuse to
sanction any of their proceedings, repudiate any of their re-
commendations, and even act in positive contravention of
anything they may do. They also set aside the powers of
the local magistracy, who have only the negative privilege left
of ordering a slight relief to the starving applicant for one
day, and that too only (as the act vulgarly expresses it) " in
kind,"—that is, in a morsel of bread, or a small quantity of
the coarsest food. This, too, extends to relief of the aged
and infirm only, and those unable to work. Was ever such
power before conferred on any man, or set of men, over the
destinies of, at all times, a large portion of our suffering popu-
lation, who of all others require most a kindly and humane
treatment ! Was ever such power given over an immense
fund, in the administration of which those who pay it are de-
prived of all control, by their representatives or otherwise!
The poor's affairs of this town have long been managed
with discretion and humanity, and perfectly to the satisfac-
tion of both the ratepayers and the poor. if there has been
any fault, it appears to me to have been a rather rigid adhe-
rence to parsimony in giving relief. Why, then, not let well
alone; and not introduce amongst us a system which, inde-
pendent of its cruelties, will entail upon us probably double
the present rates, and create heartburning and dissatisfaction
amongst both the succourers and the succoured ?
Several portions of the new act are, in my thinking, a.dis-
grace to those who passed it into law. Such is that clause
relating to outdoor relief. If a family of six or eight, some
of them able and willing to work, can make a living within
half-a-crown or three shillings a week, that small relief is
denied. They must either linger on in a half-famished state
until they drop one by one into their graves, or suffer the
degradation of becoming paupers—en famine The clause
that separates the aged pauper from his wife—the companion
and solace of his afflictions—is equally heartless and unchris-
tian. A poorhouse, to the support of which all classes con-
tribute more or less, should be an asylum for wretchedness
or casual misfortune, not a place of punishment and impri-
sonment. True, destitution often arises from improvidence,
want of domestic economy, reprehensible idleness, or still
more reprehensible sensual indulgence ; but we are all chil-
dren of Adam, prone to fall into evil, and though means
should be taken to redeem the character of the dissolute
(which is a holy duty), and though a stricter line of disci-
pline might properly be pursued towards these delinquents,
it is manifestly unjust to treat the whole pauper population
as outcasts unworthy of the sympathies of their fellow-men,
and (as is the whole tendency of this accursed act) to consi-
der poverty as a crime.
The bastardy clauses are equally reprehensible. The Scrip-
tures truly consider the female the " weaker vessel," and as
such, in cases of seduction, she is, generally, the party " more
sinned against than sinning." The old law was mischievous
on this point, by presenting facilities for perjury in affiliations.
The new law repudiates Scripture, and errs more grossly on the
other side. By throwing the whole onus of the support of the
offspring, and the whole shame of exposure upon the wo-
man, (except in remote and scarcely tangible cases,) it holds
forth a bonus to the seducer. It, in fact, gives him a carte
blanche—a roving commission, to roam abroad with impu-
nity, " seeking whom he may devour." It is a mere mock-
ery to tell the poor man, whose daughter has been basely
polluted, that he may have his redress in an action " for the
loss of her services." The cost of his admission through
the gates of the civil courts amounts, to him, to an absolute
denial of justice.
The old poor law, if but slightly amended, and duly admi-
nistered, would meet all the wants of existing society. If in
some of the agricultural districts the parties appointed to
work it either could not or would not follow up its provisions
in accordance with its spirit and intent, let them for Heaven's
sake adopt the new ; but forbid its compulsory introduction
amongst dense communities to whom it is not applicable ! In
a town such as Liverpool, the fluctuations of trade, the great
influx of needy strangers in search of work, or in transitu to
other places, necessarily entail upon us the support or casual
relief of a vast number of men, women, and children. We
are willing to do this—to do, indeed, more than our legiti-
mate share—in consideration of the commercial advantages
we enjoy, and we ask no assistance from others in effecting
it. But we protest against a new system which will entail
additional cost upon us, and at the same time prevent us
from meeting the wants of the necessitous in the effectual
and humane, yet economical, manner we have hitherto been
enabled to pursue.
The new poor law is, in fine, an abortion of a vicious and
imbecile and heartless whig administration ; and I hope and
trust that the coming meeting will, by its numbers and its
influence in wealth and respectability, give such expression
to their sentiments on the subject, as shall induce an abro-
gation of the order of government sent down, and leave us
to the management of our own affairs.
I am, sir, respectfully,
A FRIEND TO THE UNFORTUNATE POOR,
BUT AN ENEMY TO IMPOSITION.
Liverpool, March Bth, 1841.

ON BARBERS AND SHAVING

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD

SlR,—Having just risen from reading that excellent article
(i▪ n many respects) in your last number, called "A Chapter
on the Barberous," 1 must be allowed a small space in your
columns to deny, which I do most positively, that we are a
class of men the " most lightly esteemed," or that we are
lopked. upon "as beings of a proscribed race." I freely ad-
mit, sir, that we do not take that professional standing to
which we are so justly entitled ' • but I cannot on this account
consent to claim a false sympathy, which I consider the very
important station we do occupy in civilized society.
Is it nothing, sir, that we possess the privilege, which no
one else possesses, of taking by the nose the highest func-
ti▪
onaries in this country? Is it nothing, sir, that neither
peer nor commoner can nightly take his seat in parliament,
without first passing under the skilful hand of one of our
profession ? Is it nothing, sir, that many a fair one's head
has been placed under our daily care, and that the highest
medical practitioners have called us in to their aid ? Is it
nothing, sir, that our politics are quoted in parliament, the
late excellent Sir W. Curtis having observed—" I believe,
as that honest fellow Mazingry my barber once said," &c. ?
I trust, also, I am not far wrong in stating, that there is
much error abroad respecting a quotation from Shakspeare,
and that the following is correct :
To shave, or not to shave? That is the question.
Whether 'tis nobler on the chin to grow
A goodly and a bristly crop, or let
Some barber shave them ? To lather, shave,
And on the chin perchance to give a cut—
Ah ! there 's the rub !
Does not every man know the most notorious character
in all London some few years back was Barbarossa, whose
splendid whiskers were so extensive, that if he condescended
to take the place of not less hairy, though more ignoble cat-
tle, his projecting bushes would sweep the houses on each
side? Have you forgotten, sir, that splendid invention of
our profession, by which a deal
.box, if well saturated with
the liquid, would the next morning shew to the anxious ob-
server a most beautiful hair trunk? And is it nothing, sir,