The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-07-16 00:00:00

THE NEW POOR LAW AMENDMENT BILL.

We some time ago adverted to the clauses in this Bill
affecting the affilitation and support of illegitimate child-
ren, giving the substance of such of them as we con•
sidered, if passed into law, would in most cases, so far
from amending the present system, (defective as it is) be
found to operate—first, as a den•al of justice to the un-
fortunate female ; secondly, afford the generally better
conditioned seducer a ready means of escape from the
support of his progeny ; and thirdly—as a consequence
of both these effects—saddle the respective parishes
throughout the country with the maintenance of nearly
the whole of the illegitimate children, as well as induce
other collateral evils in social life. We had hoped that
what had been advanced on the subject by ourselves and
several of our contemporaries, (especially the London
Times—the unshrinking advocate.of the protection and
rights of the poor,) and also after the representations
made by numerous local authorities inagi,terial and pa-
rochial, (from this town brith personal and written), we
had hoped, we say, that the new bill wculd, in this point,
have been entirely re-modelled and rendered practicable
and protective of the community; but in this we have
been grievously disappointed, though certainly not greatly
surprised, for the freaks and quiddities of our modern
legislators are frequently such that, in our amazement at
their amateur and blundering dealings with matters of
which they exhibit a deplorable degree of ignorance and
headstrong repugnance to enlightenment, we are often
driven to exclaim—" What in the name of all that is con-
jectural, will they do next ?" The present Poor Law we
have ever considered as a cruel and unconstitutional sub-
stitute for the humane act of Elizabeth, which with some
few amendments and due administration of its provisions,
might have met all the requirements both of the poor and
ratepayers ; and it appears that each successive novelty
that is introduced is but calculated still further to grind
the former, and entail additional burthens upon the latter.
The clauses to which we have alluded have a!ready pas-
sed the Committee of the Hoese of Commons; one or
two of them modified for the better, hut the greater part
with all their original sins upon their heads."
In order to the better understanding of the kuhjs-et we
shall state the substance of the several clauses seriatim,
with such alterations as a few of them have undergone ;
and point out, as we proceed, what we consider in the
bulk of them to be still highly objectionable :
The Ist clause repeals former acts, and was of course
passed.

The 2d, relating to the application of the mother for an
order against the alleged father for the maintenance of the
child, originally allowed only six months' after the birth
for that purpose. This being too short, Mr. T. Dunconibe
obtained an extension to twelve months ; and Mr. .1. S.
Wortley having stated that, as the father might pay the
woman hush-money even for that time, and thus rid him-
self of further liability, an addition should be introduced,
leaving the father responsible thereafter, provided he bad
admitted himself to be the father. Sir James Graham
finally proposed, with the general assent, that the father
should be liable to summons at any time, on proof bring
given that he had paid money for the maintenance of the
child within twelve months after its birth—this being
to be taken as an admission of paternity on his part.—
But still, the father might have been' a sailor, (captain,
mate, carpenter, or sailmaker,) on a distant voyage to
China, Africa, South America, India, &c., and may be
absent eighteen months or two years ; and there is no pro-
vision for such a case. And how is the woman to pay the
expense of the summons, getting up her witnesses, &c.,
she being already chargeable to the parish, and they pre-
cluded from assisting her (as will be seen below)? She
might also keep her child for a year or two, and then be-
come a pauper, without his paying anything, in which
case, too, her claim would fall to the ground.
The 3d clause (of the original bill—for this is the 2d)
allowed justices, on proof that the summons was duly
served " personally," to make an order on the father for
4s. a week for the support of the child, or be committed
for three months. In the present bill the allowance of 4s.
was altered by Sir J. Graham to the paltry and inadequate
sum of 2s. 6d., and has been agreed to. It was, however,
agreed that the summons would be duly served if left at
the man's place of abode, in place of " personally,"—cer-
tainly an advantage to the woman.
By clause 4, justices might adjourn the case for forty
days, and the man might give notice of appeal to the next
quarter sessions, and the court order costs to be paid by
either party. On this clause much discussion arose. Mr.
Denison pointedly remarked they might as well burn
the bill at once as retain it, as it would render the whole
inoperative. The appeal would throw upon the woman !
the whole onus and costs of defending herself. What
chance bad a poor woman, with a child, friendless, and in
the presence of strange magistrates, against a father,
backed by a sharp-cutting attorney, or counsel, ready to
take every advantage? Few women would, or could,
venture upon such a process; and he recommended that
the adjudication should be by three magistrates in place`
of two (in the first instance), and their decision to be
final. Several members concurred in the objection to the
appeal; and Mr. Wakley urged the extension of appeal to
the woman as well as the man, and said that the distress
of females who were left to support their illegitiMate
children was a frequent cause of infanticide, which, to his
knowledge, occurred to a frightful extent.—We may
here state that the appeal of the woman to the ses-
sions, if she were refused an order by the justice, would
be of no avail, for she could not go into court ; and, we
may add, that in nine cases out of ten the appeal would
defeat the order, and the child (and mother too) be
eventually thrown upon the parish, although the father
might be well able to maintain it. The parish, cannot,
by the bill, interfere for an order.—On a division, the ap-
peal was retained to the man, and to the woman (a quite
inadequate counterpoise) the right of renewing her ap-
plication to the justices, on producing fresh evidence. By
this clause the rich man would always be able to throw
the poor woman overboard.
The sth clause is to the effect that all money payable
under any order must be paid by the man to the woman,
or, if she be incapacitated (being of unsound mind, or in
gaol), to a person to be appointed by the justices, but not
to any parish officer. The child must not be chargeable,
and the order to remain in force for 13 years. This clause
(with the exception of the 13 years, which appears to be a
proper time,—the present law giving only 7,) is highly
objectionable, and was well combatted by Mr. Borthwick
and others, but was carried. It will operate as an in-
centive to new and gross immorality; for, if the woman
-go to the man for her money, what more likely than a
further illegitimate offspring! In the case of a servant
who wished to keep her place and redeem her character,
it will be worse than the present law. If the man re-
fuses her the money, she must apply for a warrant, and
follow up the process by again and again appearing in
court, to the inevitable loss of her situation. The clause
will also cause constant breaches of the peace. A case in
point recently occurred in this town. An order was ob-
tained from the magistrate by a female on the father of
her child, and she went to him with her sister, and asked
him why he refused to pay. He forcibly ejected her, and
then seizing the sister threw her down into the street with
such violence that,' her head coming in contact with the
edge of the footwalk, her jaw-bone was broken, and her
life was for some time despaired of. He was committed
to -the sessions for this savage assault, but the case
dropped for want of a witness, and the injured woman
will remain an object for life !
By the 6th clause, every woman neglecting to maintain
her child, if able wholly or in part to do so, whereby it
becomes chargeable, shall be punished as an idle and dis-
orderly person ; and every woman deserting her child, so
that it becomes chargeable, shall be punished as a rogue
and vagabond.—Thus she is to be punished because she is
unable to support her child or proceed against the father;
for being destitute she cannot obtain an order against the
man, and the parish must not assist her. With regard to
the second part of the clause, will not the operation of the
first conduce to the very offence of desertion ?
The 7th clause is equally impolitic: No parish officer
is to have the custody of any illegitimate child, or to re-
ceive any money under an order on the father, or in any
way to interfere in an application, cr to procure evidence
in support of it, under a penalty of 40s„ except after the
mother's death, and the child become chargeable, when
(generous concession !) he may apply. (The penalty
stated was, in the present bill, extended by Sir J. Graham,
in like manner, to the magistrate's clerk and the con-
stable.) By this clause, though the woman be confined
in the workhouse, and remain there with her child, no
matter how long, the overseers are to have no remedy
against the father, and the mother being destitute can
have none! The father, thus shielded, may go on in his
iniquity in other quarters, and, in like cases, with like im-
punity. If this be not a premium on libertinism, we
know not what is. And why exclude parish officers from
interfering in the woman's behalf, in justice both to her-
self and the parish ? Surely (with reference to this and a
former clause) they are more competent to apply for and
receive the money than the.woman, or any acquaintance
she might employ ; and, if she received it from their hands,
is it likely it would be made a worse use of under their
surveillance than if she received it from her own para-
mour, who might pay her off with one half of it, which, in
her necessities, she might be induced to receive,—he
claiming credit for the whole. ? It maybe added, as bear-
ing on this clause, that we findt on making inquiry, that
exclusively of the great number of women receiving out-
door relief during confinement of bastard children, up-
wards of one hundred were sent to our Workhouse, and
there confined from the Ist January to 31st December last
Sear.
Such are the principal 'clauses of the bastardy portion
of the ' new bill; and if most of them be not greatly al-
tered, or abrogated, in the Lords, they will press most
unjustly 'on the unfortunate mothers; afford indemnity to
many profligate fathers; annoy magistrates by the recur-
rence of numerous cases of broils and assaults ;. and,
finally, greatly increase the parish burthens. They were
passed in the Commons, notwithstanding the clearest
explanations and the most urgent remonstrances on the
part of the authorities here and elsewhere; and afford
another lamentable specimen of reckless legislation for
the poor, which must be deprecated by all men of right
feeling and practical views of the subject.

THE MANCHESTER.—By a letter received at Lloyd's
from their agent at Hamburgh it appears, that the wreck
of the above vessel has entirely disappeared in the sands,
and that no further salvage could take place. The goods
saved along the coast have been sold for about X 1,500.