HC Deb 19 February 1821 vol 4 cc795-6
Mr. Sykes

said, that as much misconception prevailed on the subject of this bill, he would, in order to give time for the correction of that misconception, move, "That the bill be read a second time this day se'nnight."

Mr. Huskisson

felt himself bound to oppose the motion. A number of persons interested in the measure were waiting in town, and it would be to them a great inconvenience to postpone the second reading. He had the strongest objections to the bill; though it was introduced as a private bill, it yet involved important public questions, and principles which were quite new: and which would go to affect the general property of the country. It was agreed on all hands that the poor rates were an evil which ought to be repressed. The poor rates were a cancer which spread throughout the country; and it was not for parliament to encourage the growth of an evil so monstrous. The object of the bill was to subject a species of property to poor rates, which heretofore stood independent of that tax: what was this but an attempt to extend the evil? The bill was an attempt to introduce a tax in the port of Hull, which did not exist before. The tax was a most objectionable one, because it would go to affect ships which might be lying idle, as well as those which were employed. If the principle which the bill meant to establish was to have any operation at all, it ought to have a general operation; but a principle more fraught with danger he could not well imagine. He would move as an amendment, "That the bill be read a second time that day six months."

Mr. Sykes

said, that the principle of his bill was by no means new. Legislative measures, similar in principle, had been adopted in Sunderland. The same thing was done with respect to Scarborough, Whitby, and Poole.

Mr. Frankland Lewis

felt himself bound to oppose the extension of the poor rates to the shipping, and he did so, because it was the acknowledged tendency of the poor laws to swallow up all the property in the kingdom, and therefore it was necessary, by every possible means, to guard against their extension to any species of property not hitherto within their reach. There was no danger so certain, so inevitable, unless some remedy were shortly hit upon, as that the poor laws would, by degrees, swallow up every species of property that was liable to its operation. Would they, then, admit the dangerous principle of extending their effects by a measure of a private nature, which professed to confine its operation to a particular place, but which would establish a precedent for similar measures in every other port in the kingdom. One great misfortune in the system of poor-rates was, that it wore the appearance of humanity, whilst it produced real hardship and severity. He felt convinced that the poor-rates caused, in a great measure, the extent of public misery, at the same time, he did not mean to throw out the wild notion that the system could be entirely got rid of. The subject was one to be touched with gentleness; and so it had always been treated. The principle of the poor rates was this, that every parish should support its poor as long as it had the means; but the present bill went to subject to a tax property which was not now rated. He must therefore oppose the Bill.

After some further conversation, Mr. Huskisson consented to withdraw his amendment, and the bill was ordered to be read a second time on the 27th instant.