§ Sir J. Graham,in rising to move the second reading of the Poor Law Amendment Bill, said, he had an apology to make to the hon. and gallant Member for Brighton. On the occasion of moving for leave to bring in this Bill, the hon. and gallant Officer had asked him whether there was anything in it affecting Local Acts, and he had inadvertently answered in the negative; whereas, the fact was, that the Bill contained two clauses, the one of which, in some respects, limited the operation of Local Acts; and the other extended it. As this Bill was chiefly a measure of detail, not trenching materially on the principle of the existing Poor Law, he thought the House would probably permit it to pass its second reading without opposition. Any objections which were entertained against it might be made at the next stage. If there were no opposition to the course which he intended to take, he would move the Order of the Day for the second reading of the Poor Law Amendment Bill.
§ Captain Pechellsaid, that the 56th Clause of the Bill, in connection with the 17th Clause, had created considerable alarm in some parts of the country. He hoped the right hon. Baronet would not interfere with those who had conducted the affairs connected with the maintenance of the poor with advantage to all parties. There were many ameliorations and concessions to public feeling, he would admit, in the Bill. He hoped the right hon. Baronet would not pass any measure which would interfere with the Gilbert Unions.
§ Mr. T. Duncombehad no objection to the second reading of the Bill, though he thought that some amendments might be made in it with advantage, but those amendments could be made in Committee. He wished to ask the right hon. Baronet if it was his intention to grant a Committee to inquire into the operation of the Gilbert Unions, and, if such were his intention, when he proposed to move it?
§ Sir James Grahamwould take care that sufficient notice should be given when he was about to move for it.
§ Bill read a second time, and to be committed.