HC Deb 02 April 1845 vol 78 cc1399-424
The Lord Advocate

rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill for the amendment and better administration of the laws relating to the Relief of the Poor in Scotland; and stated that he should, with the leave of the House, explain as briefly as possible the grounds on which he ventured to make the Motion, as well as the nature of the measure which, if permitted, he intended to propose for the adoption of the Legislature. It was known to the House, at least it was known to many Members of the House, that public attention had been for some time past a good deal directed to the state and condition of the poor in Scotland; and an impression existed that in some parts of that country, particularly in the great towns and some rural districts, the condition of the poor was not what it ought to be. He was not speaking now with reference to those occasional visitations of extraordinary distress which were so deplorable, and to which every country was more or less liable — commercial and manufacturing districts, from extraordinary depression and vicissitude of trade—agricultural districts, from extraordinary periods of sterility and vicissitude of season. Those were extraordinary occurrences. They overcame all ordinary precautions, and baffled all ordinary calculations, and must be met by extraordinary exertions befitting the occasion, calculated as much as possible to mitigate the sufferings which such occurrences always bring, and to repair the damage they create. But such a state of extraordinary exertion could not possibly be the constant condition of any system or of any permanent establishment for the relief of the poor. The impression to which he had alluded as existing in Scotland, and the measure he was about to submit, had reference, not to those extraordinary visitations of distress, but to the ordinary condition of the permanent poor. In reference to that condition, so far back as 1838, by desire, the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland had appointed a Committee to inquire, and a Report was made by that Committee to the House of Commons, which contained a great deal of valuable matter, both as to the condition of the poor, and as to the law and practice of Scotland in maintaining them. In 1842 Returns were moved for in the House of Commons (he believed by the hon. Member for St. Andrew's), with reference to the condition of the poor in all the parishes in Scotland. Those Returns were printed in 1843, and they also contained a great deal of valuable information. In January, 1843, a commission of inquiry into the state of the poor of Scotland was appointed. That Commission pursued its labours for nearly a year, and it was impossible to speak in too high terms of praise of those labours, or of the anxiety, industry, and judgment evinced by the noblemen and gentlemen by whom that inquiry was conducted. In May, 1844, they made their Report, and that Report was now on the Table of the House, together with the evidence col- lected by them in reference to the state of the poor and the administration of relief in every district in Scotland. That Report, and the evidence upon which it was based, established, he thought, beyond all doubt, that the feeling which had previously obtained as to the condition of the poor in many parts of Scotland was not without cause. In some parts of the country, especially in the large towns, a great deal of poverty and misery existed, and the application of means of relief was not what was to be wished. The same might be said of some of the rural districts. That was the conclusion come to by the Commissioners who had examined the evidence. He would take their words. They said,— That the funds raised for the relief of the poor, and the provision made for them out of the funds raised for their relief is, in many parishes throughout Scotland, insufficient. Then they say, There is undoubtedly abundant evidence to prove that the allowances are often inadequate, both in town and country parishes; and that the amount of relief given is frequently altogether insufficient to provide even the commonest necessaries of life. Throughout the Highland districts, and in some parts of the Lowlands also, where the funds consist solely of what may be raised by the Church collections, the amount is often inconsiderable. In many of these places, it will be seen that the quantum of relief given is not measured by the necessities of the pauper, but by the sum which the Kirk Session may happen to have in hand for distribution. Again:— In adverting to the inadequacy of the allowances, we must not, however, be understood to confine our statements to those parishes only in which no fund, except church collections, is raised for the poor either by voluntary contributions or by a legal assessment; as there are many of the assessed parishes to which the same remarks are almost equally applicable. We cannot cite a stronger instance than that of the city of Edinburgh, in which the Town Council have for years declined to increase the rate of assessment, notwithstanding applications made by the managers of the poor, and their representations that the necessities of the poor were increasing, and the funds raised insufficient. Now he was bound to say that, having weighed the whole of the evidence with the best attention in his power, and having no inconsiderable acquaintance with the parties examined, he had found himself obliged to come to the same conclusion, that the condition of the poor was not what it ought to be, and that some legislative interference was absolutely necessary. He should not detain the House by citing from these volumes the evidence which confirmed that conclusion; any citation would be easy; and it would be very easy, by means of a selection of passages, to excite the sympathies of hon. Gentlemen; but he thought there would be no use in that. He felt confident that the conclusion to which the Commissioners had come, and in which he concurred, would not be disputed by any one who took the trouble to peruse the evidence with attention; and in dealing with a matter of this kind, where the object desired was sound and permanent legislation, he would rather seek to obtain his end by addressing the dispassionate judgment of the House, than by endeavouring to excite any transient and temporary feeling, Now, if the fact were as the Commissioners reported, and if it was a just impression on the minds of many persons in Scotland that the poor were not sufficiently attended to, and that something must be done, he need not advance further in endeavouring to show the reason why he asked the House to interfere. He had sometimes been congratulated in this end of the island on the absence of Poor Law in Scotland, and he had been met by expressions of astonishment when he said that there did exist in that country a complete system of Poor Law. To Members of the Mouse of Commons it was of course known that there existed such a law, and to such of them as had read the Report of the Commissioners, it might not be necessary to explain what the law was; but he might be permitted to state, in a few words, the leading characters of the law, in order that the House might understand what were the defects of it, and what remedies it was proposed to apply. The substantial provisions of the Poor Law of Scotland were contained in a Statute passed in the reign of James VI. of that kingdom in 1579, and in two Proclamations of the Privy Council in the reign of William and Mary. This was all the law that existed for any compulsory provision whatever. That Statute and these Proclamations, with the explanatory decisions of the Court, and the consequent usage, might be said to constitute the Poor Law of Scotland. It was in a small compass, therefore, and was easily understood; and if the House would permit him to do so, he thought that he could, in a very few sentences, explain all that was necessary to be understood for the present purpose. In the first place, as to the persons who were the objects of the care of the Legislature, the substance of the law was, that provision should be made for the infirm and impotent poor. This related to persons labouring under bodily infirmity in consequence of age, or in consequence of non-age, or in consequence of disease or accident. All these persons, being unable to support themselves, were the objects of the law. It was not necessary, however, to entitle them to be recipients of the relief that they should be totally disabled—if they were partially disabled they might, under the law as it stood, have relief awarded to them in aid of what they could earn, so as to make up sufficient for their subsistence; but they must be either wholly or partially disabled, to bring them within the provisions of the law. If they could work at all, they must work to a certain extent. That being the state of the case as to the persons who were entitled to claim relief, he might now state, that when such persons fell into a situation of poverty, their claim for relief lay against the parish of their settlement. Settlement in Scotland was gained in four ways—by birth, parentage, residence, or marriage; and it was the law of Scotland that a settlement once acquired could not be lost except by acquiring another in another parish. Then as to the funds which existed for the maintenance of the poor: these consisted, in the first place, of contributions at the doors of the parish churches. Such contributions were made on Sabbath at every parish church, and produced no inconsiderable revenue. There were other voluntary contributions. It sometimes happened that the people of a particular district agreed to contribute on a scale which they settled for themselves; these sums were very considerable, and they were on the increase. There might also be sums "mortified" as it was called in Scotland, or bequeathed for the use of the poor. The remaining source was the fund raised by legal assessment. In Scotland there was full power by the Statute of 1579, and the Proclamations to which he had alluded, for the parochial authorities to assess for the maintenance of the poor, and that without any limit as to amount other than the necessities of the case. That had been the law since 1579; it was the law now, and in several parishes it was acted upon to a large extent. In landward parishes—that was, parishes which were not boroughs or towns—the proprietors or heritors of land paid one-half of the assessment, and the other half fell upon the inhabitants and householders. The former part of the assessments was laid on according to the value of the land; the latter was imposed, on the principle of the Property and Income Tax, according to the "means and substance" (as it was called) of the parties; and although he had heard complaints as to this mode of assessment being made arbitrarily, and without sufficient means of knowledge, he had never received any authentic information, or even an allegation, from any person that he had been assessed beyond his substance; but, if there were such a case made out, relief would be given. The law then made full provision for the support of the poor; and it put into the hands of those who had the administration of the law the power of assessing to any extent necessary for the purpose. He would now explain to whom the administration of the law was committed. In towns the administration of the law devolved nominally on the magistrates, who were responsible; but practically, it rested, in a great measure, with the kirk sessions,—that was, the minister and elders of the parish. In landward parishes the administration was with the proprietors or heritors and the kirk sessions. It was not prescribed by Statute that the relief should be in any particular form. The requisite was that the poor should have needful sustentation, and that might be given in clothes, food, money, house-rent, or any way most advantageous to them. The amount depended on the opinion and discretion, in the first place, of the administrators of the fund. Of course, that amount must depend on many circumstances, and would vary in different districts. Needful sustentation must depend on the other resources of the persons receiving relief, on the rate of living in the part of the country where they resided, and the style of living to which the labouring classes in the same district were accustomed; for it could scarcely be contended, nor could it be a salutary principle, that the support given to the poor should be greater than that which was earned by the labourer in full employment, supporting his family. A discretionary power thus existed as to the amount of relief to be given. But it might happen that a poor person was denied relief—the parish might refuse to consider his case or listen to his application. If that occurred, the Sheriff of the county, who in Scotland was a local judge appointed by the Crown, holding office for life, and therefore perfectly independent, had full power and authority under the law to require that the parochial authorities should meet and take the claim into consideration; and when, having so met and considered, if they should deny the right of the applicant to be admitted on the list of the poor of that particular parish, or if they should award him an amount of relief insufficient for his support, there was still a remedy for the pauper, by application to the Supreme Court, which had power and jurisdiction to compel the parochial authorities to receive the claim, and place the party on the roll amongst those who were receiving relief. The Supreme Court had also full power to compel the parochial authorities not to defeat the intentions of the Legislature by giving mere illusory relief, but to do their duty honestly and faithfully. From what he had now stated, it would be seen that in Scotland every impotent poor person has a statutory right to relief—that in every case there is some parish liable to him—generally the parish which has most recently had the benefit of his healthful labour and industry for a course of years, and in which poverty has overtaken him;—that in every parish there is an administrative body charged by law with the duty, and armed by law with the power, of giving relief and raising funds for that purpose; and finally, that if that body neglects or refuses to do its duty, the courts of law have power to compel it. There was then a right and an obligation; there were persons to perform that obligation; and there was the power to compel them to perform it. That being the state of the law, its general scope and provisions were sufficient for the attainment of the object in view. Now, it could not be said that the state of things which he had described, and the existence of which was proved by the Report to which he had referred, was, because the law was framed in a different condition of the country from the present—when it was in a less advanced or improved state. It could not be said that the country in its improvement had outgrown the law and its provisions; because (and he thought this would be conceded on all sides) the provisions of the law which he had stated were suited to any country; and it was also notorious that the operation of the law was most efficient and perfect in districts of the country that had advanced most in civilization and become the most improved. The improvement of the country, therefore, had not outgrown the law; but, on the contrary, the law had obtained strength and energy as improvement advanced. That law was very similar to the law established in England in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. But he had almost forgotten to mention that the law of Scotland went further—it also provided for the education of the poor; and in every parish there was a system of education supported by the parish funds, and the teachers were obliged to teach the children of the poor gratuitously. It might to some be surprising to observe, that while the contemporaneous enactments were so similar in the two countries, practically the results of them in the progress of time had been so materially different. Whether the balance of advantage was on one side or the other, he did not stop to inquire; but he thought there were two considerations which he might point out to the House, as perhaps the main causes of that difference. In the first place, it would be observed that the law of Scotland, in so far as regarded its compulsory enactments, was limited to cases of infirm poor, whether permanently or occasionally so, and did not embrace the case of the able-bodied. That limit amounted to a plain line of distinction as to the parties entitled to relief. The limitation operated in a double manner. Poverty alone was not enough; neither was infirmity alone enough. There must be poverty conjoined with infirmity, to entitle a party to relief. Poverty might be the result of mere idleness, drunkenness, or dissolute conduct, and there was, therefore, no limit or effectual check to it; but infirmity was not, generally speaking, under the power or control of parties to be extended at pleasure; non-age and old age would not come and go at the bidding of parties; and even infirmity from disease or accident was not likely to be purposely induced by many in conjunction with poverty. This condition of the law had the effect of materially limiting the numbers of the poor admitted to relief in the one country, as compared with the other, and perhaps it had also the effect of stimulating the able-bodied to greater exertion. In the second place, there was this other characteristic of the Scotch system, that the provision primarily depended on for the poor was the voluntary contributions of the parishioners of the different districts; and the power of the law had only been called in to aid those contributions where they proved insufficient. Accordingly, there was in many parts of Scotland a great reluctance to have recourse to the system of assessment, and also a reluctance on the part of the poor to receive relief in that shape; and there were not wanting at the present day able and eloquent and pious and benevolent advocates of the system of voluntary contributions as preferable to assessment, both as regards the physical and the moral condition of the people. These circumstances might account for the different state of matters now in the two countries, notwithstanding the apparent similarity of the contemporaneous enactments. But whatever might have been the cause of the difference, he ventured to say that no proposal could excite more alarm and dissatisfaction among the people of Scotland, than a proposal to introduce there a Poor Law system similar to that of England. Whatever might be the reason, undoubtedly that feeling prevailed. They had heard a good deal of the heavy burdens imposed upon those who were bound to pay, of the dissatisfaction amongst those who received, and of the frequent attempts, from time to time, made to alter the law; and, rightly or wrongly, they had come to the conclusion that the people of England had not yet arrived at a settlement of the matter satisfactory to themselves. They therefore desired to avoid anything that partook of the English system rather than of their own. He would now advert to the evils described in the Report of the Commissioners as at present existing in Scotland. Those evils did not arise from any want of charity, or from any unwillingness on the part of the people to relieve poverty; for in those parishes in which there was no legal assessment, as well as in those in which assessment was made, there was a gradual increase of the funds contributed for the use of the poor, more than proportionate to the gradual increase of the population. But in many districts the circumstances of the people had materially changed; and in others, perhaps, there was some indifference—or rather, he would say, a want of attentive observation—especially in towns where there had been a great influx from the country beyond the efflux from the towns to the country. In many districts, too, a great change of cir- cumstances had been occasioned by the alteration of the system of management of land. Small farms had been thrown into large farms, and the consequence was, that there were fewer people able to contribute for the relief of the poor now than formerly. Then, again, in some extensive localities along the coast, the entire annihilation of the kelp manufacture had thrown many persons out of employment; and while the means of the contributors had decreased, and the funds for relieving the poor had become lessened, the poverty and misery of the labouring classes had materially increased. The question then was, what was to be done to remedy the state of things as proved to exist, resulting, as it had done, not from the law as he had described it, but from various circumstances? In many parishes the poor did not receive sufficient in relief to support them. As to the actual amount received, that (as the House would be aware) was no test of the relief afforded, unless taken with reference to other circumstances, as the habits of life in the district, and the kind of subsistence the applicant would be enabled to obtain by his labour; and the aid of various kinds which he might derive from other sources. Upon that subject the Commissioners had reported as follows,— The amount of the money allowance made by the administrators of the poor funds gives, in most cases, but a very imperfect notion of a pauper's resources and actual means of livelihood. There are very few of those receiving relief in the country parishes who are not able in some way or other to earn a little towards their own subsistence; besides which, the standard of living varies so much in different parts of Scotland, that with 1s. a week in one parish, a pauper may be in fully as good a condition, as compared with the independent labourer, as he would be with 2s. a week in another. The condition of the able-bodied labourer when employed in his own district was a far better test or standard of comparison, than the condition of a person of the same class in another part of the kingdom. It was well known, too, that in Scotland people did not usually possess the same wealth as in this country, and it was equally true that the labourers did not live on the same fare. They were more frugal but not less hardy. Neither those who had to give, nor those who had to receive, were in the same condition in the two countries; and nothing could be more erroneous than to test the one country by the standard of the other—as gentlemen from this end of the island were apt to do, when they went down at a certain season of the year to occupy the mansions and sport over the manors of Scotch proprietors—forgetting that it was generally the poverty of the one and the wealth of the other, that enabled them so to enjoy themselves. But after making every allowance for the difference between the two countries, it could not be denied that evils existed which ought to be remedied; and the practical question was, what remedy ought to be applied? It appeared to him that two things were to be aimed at: 1st, To facilitate to the party entitled to relief the means of admission to the receipt of relief; and, 2dly, To secure due attention to his condition after his right was admitted. If these two things were accomplished, what more could be desired? As he had already explained, the power of assessment was already unlimited, and might be extended according to the wants of the poor: therefore, if it were effectually provided that relief should be given according to the condition of the parties requiring it, little more could be desired. It was essential that the means of obtaining relief should be easy; but to secure this there were obstacles to be removed, which he would state to the House. At present no parish was bound to relieve a pauper, except that in which he had a legal settlement; the result of that might be that a serious obstacle was opposed to him. The parish of his settlement might be at a great distance when he wanted the relief, and he might find it difficult, or perhaps impossible, to reach it; and even when he got there his claim might be disputed, and the result would be litigation, perhaps expensive litigation, to prove his right. Suppose that the parish authorities, after meeting to consider his case, should refuse positively to admit his claim, the pauper now had no redress except by going to the Supreme Court—a remedy distant and tedious. And even if these difficulties did not arise, there was still a want of persons whose duty it should be to examine into and look after the condition of the poor in their respective districts—of persons whose duty it should be to notice those who require relief, but were unwilling to come and demand it. Now he proposed that all such obstacles as he had described should be removed. He proposed, in the first place, to enact that every poor person should be entitled to obtain relief, in the first instance, in the parish in which he might happen to be when the necessity for that relief arose. He would remove from the pauper the onus of establishing his claim against any other parish. He would give the pauper a right against the parish in which he was found; and if that parish should seek to relieve itself from the burden, it must do so by ascertaining the parish of settlement against which the claim lies, and enforcing that claim. The pauper was not to be the party upon whom this duty should devolve. He should get relief from the parish in which he was found, until that parish should have established the liability of a different parish. Having so established that liability, then he proposed that the parish in which the pauper was found should have relief from the parish so found to be liable. This would get rid of all litigation as to the parish ostensibly liable. The arrangement he had to propose would be attended with other advantages; for in the next place he proposed that the pauper should not only get relief in the parish in which he was found, but that he should get it immediately. Supposing that the parish whose duty it was to give relief refused to do so, by the present law the remedy of the pauper lay in an appeal to the Supreme Court. But this means of redress was distant, tedious, expensive, and liable to other objections. In dealing with that point—namely, the right of the pauper to claim and obtain relief from the parish, which was a question partly of fact and partly of law, he proposed that, in the first instance, the local judge—the Sheriff of the county—should decide upon the question; and if the Sheriff decided in favour of the applicant, and the parish determined to appeal to a higher tribunal, that, nevertheless, in the meantime, the decision so pronounced by the Sheriff should be acted upon, and the pauper should receive relief. The amount of the relief would be fixed, in the first instance, at least, by the parochial authorities. Having thus secured the pauper's easy and speedy admission to the roll of persons entitled to relief, the next object was to secure due attention to his case and circumstances, to provide that he should obtain adequate relief. There was at present a want of local activity and constant attention as to this point; there was an evident need of some central power to keep the local authorities in motion, and the public had no opportunity of ascer- taining the conduct of those authorities in distant parts of the country. In order to remedy these evils, he proposed that in every parish a person should be appointed, whose duty it would be to attend to the condition of the poor, to keep a list of the persons entitled to relief, and to distribute the amount awarded to them; and he proposed further the appointment of a central authority to which the local authorities in each parish should make regular reports of their proceedings, and which should exercise a general supervision over all the parishes in the country. He intended that those reports should not only include the names of all persons in receipt of relief, and the amount of that relief, but also the names of all persons who had applied for relief. Then came the question—what was to be done in case any of the local authorities refused to grant a just and adequate amount of relief? This was said to be the great source of the existing evil, and the want of a proper corrective was said to be the chief defect of the present system; the only door open to the poor man for obtaining redress, if proper relief was withheld, was an appeal to the Supreme Court. He (the Lord Advocate) thought some authority ought to be constituted, or some means devised, which might afford speedy redress in these cases; and he believed such a measure—the known existence of such a power—would tend most effectually to check injustice wherever there was a disposition to exercise it. At present, although a poor man was entitled to sue in the Supreme Court in formâ pauperis, the remedy he might expect to obtain was at best distant, and while his case was pending he had no means of support. The existing system of appeal to the Supreme Court also imposed great hardship upon parishes in many cases; for it was in the power of any obstinate pauper, or speculative attorney, to drag a parish into Court, and compel them to expend in litigation the funds which ought to be devoted to the relief of the poor. It was undoubtedly the fact, that instances of this kind had recently occurred in different parts of Scotland, and parishes had been subjected to, and in other cases threatened with, tedious and expensive litigation. The system of appeal to the Supreme Court, as it now existed, was therefore objectionable as regarded the interests both of the pauper and of the parish. What then was to be done? The Commissioners had stated that, upon a consideration of these evils, they were "inclined to suggest" the abolition of the right of appeal to the Supreme Court, and they had not proposed to substitute anything in its place. That course, however, would take away all power of control over the local authorities; and when he (the Lord Advocate) found it necessary to come to the House, and ask for an amendment of the law, because full justice was not done by the local authorities, he could not concur in the propriety of such a course. The Commissioners expressed their conviction, that if proper supervision was exercised over the local authorities, and publicity was given to their proceedings, public opinion would have so strong an influence, that the parochial authorities would, in a short time, do ample justice to the poor. He (the Lord Advocate) believed that opinion to be well founded; but a considerable time must elapse before such an object could be attained, and the paupers of the present day could not be fed with the mere hope that future generations of paupers would be in a better condition than that in which they were placed. Holding, then, that some power of control ought to exist; holding, also, that the system of appeal to the Court of Session, as now in use, was liable to serious objections, as regarded the interests both of the pauper and of the parish, the question came to be, whether some other control was to be substituted for the Court of Session, or whether the appeal to the Court of Session should be so regulated as to remove the chief objections to it? The Commissioners, who had bestowed great attention on the subject, had been unable to suggest any other safe tribunal in place of the Court of Session. They had considered whether it would be advisable to leave the determination of the amount of relief to the sheriffs or the local magistrates; and their opinion was decidedly adverse to such a course. The opinion expressed by them on that point was more clear and decided than perhaps on any other point noticed in the Report; and the reasons in support of that opinion were also fully given. They say,— The evils attendant on an appeal to the local magistracy as to the proper amount of aliment, are, we think, so great, that we have no hesitation in stating our opinion to be decidedly adverse to such an innovation. It is obvious that the opinions of individual judges or magistrates may vary so materially on the question of what ought to be the proper amount of relief, that cases of the same description might be differently decided according to the feeling and prejudices of the parties appealed to. Then, after citing proofs in support of that opinion, they proceed,— These examples are sufficient to show how little reliance can be placed on the opinion of any one person as to the proper quantum of allowance. He concurred in the opinion so decidedly expressed by the Commissioners, against leaving the determination of the amount of the allowance to the mere discretion of any one person. The difficulty of finding a new tribunal would be so great, and the objections to adopting such a course so strong, that, in his opinion, they must have recourse to the other alternative, and endeavour to regulate the appeal to the Court of Session so as to obviate the objections stated to it. He hoped, indeed, that they would be able to place the appeal to the Supreme Court under such regulation as would effectually accomplish the objects which they had in view. He would now state how he proposed to attempt this. He had already stated his belief, that some central authority was wanting. The Commissioners had suggested that there should be established a board of supervision in Edinburgh. He agreed with this suggestion; and he thought, too, that the Board should have considerable power, both as to superintending, and in some degree interfering, when necessary, with the proceedings of the parochial authorities. This Central Board, to be safely invested with such powers, must be carefully constructed. It should be a Board, some of the members of which would have a clear inducement to attend to their functions—while others should be selected from those who from inclination and disposition would be most likely to be willing to devote some portion of their time and labour to the duties imposed upon them. It should consist, too, of some persons of legal knowledge, and of others not necessarily possessing such knowledge; but men well acquainted in general with the state of society in Scotland, and the wants and claims of the poor. The Board, to be efficient, should be composed of men who would bring into it a combination of all these requisites. He proposed, then, that the number of its members should be nine. Of these, he proposed that three should be appointed by the Crown; one of them to be paid for the performance of the duty to be devolved upon him, and who, along with the Secretary, should give constant attendance to the duties. The other two to be selected from among those who might be expected to take an interest in the management and welfare of the poor. Besides these three, he proposed that there should be six ex officio members of the Board. As two of those ex officio members he proposed the Lord Provost of Edinburgh, and the Lord Provost of Glasgow, for the time being. The distance from Glasgow to Edinburgh was considerable; but the communication between these cities was now rendered comparatively easy by railroad; and he was sure that any individual who occupied the high station of Lord Provost of Glasgow would willingly devote some portion of his time to a matter of such great importance, especially to that city. He proposed, also, that the Solicitor General of Scotland, for the time being, should be another ex officio member of the Board. Then, for the remaining three members, he proposed to take the Sheriffs, for the time being, of three of the most important Scotch counties—proposing, also, in the case of these three latter gentlemen, to reward their services by a small addition to their regular salaries. He proposed to take first the Sheriff of Perthshire—a county called the Yorkshire of Scotland—of great extent, and varied character; partly highland and partly lowland, partly agricultural, partly pastoral, partly manufacturing. Another of the sheriffs he proposed to find in the Sheriff of a large Highland county, in which great destitution was stated at present to prevail—he meant the county of Ross. As the third member of this department of the Board, he would propose the Sheriff of Renfrewshire—a manufacturing, a mineral, and an agricultural county—containing, amongst others, the towns of Paisley, Renfrew, Port Glasgow, Greenock, and Kilbarchan. The Sheriffs of these counties were all resident in Edinburgh. They were all gentlemen of high legal acquirements; and were also obliged, at stated periods, to repair to their counties; and they mixed generally with society there. The nature of the causes that came before them in their courts was also calculated to give them knowledge as to the condition of the humbler classes. They would, with these qualifications, he trusted, be able to render the most efficient assistance to the Board; and, by making the addition he proposed to their salaries, he would have considerable claims upon their attention. Having described the constitution of the Board, he would now state what was the remedy he proposed, by means of it, to apply to the evils which he had already alluded to as encompassing the present system of appeal to the Court of Session. He proposed that a certain control over the power of appeal should rest in this Board. He proposed that if the parochial authorities should have given to a poor person an amount of aliment which he considered insufficient, that he should be empowered to state his complaint to the Board of Supervision; that it should be the duty of the Board of Supervision to inquire into the circumstances of the case; and considering that the Board would be in communication with every parish in Scotland, would be cognizant of the different habits of each district, and would have within its reach easy means of obtaining any information it might require, he thought that an investigation so conducted would most probably prove a satisfactory one. If the Board of Supervision, constituted as he described, and possessing all these means of information, should concur with the parochial board in thinking that no injustice had been done—that the complaint was an unreasonable or a speculative one, then he thought it might safely be held that justice had been done; and he proposed that the judgment of the Board of Supervision, confirming the judgment of the parochial authorities, should be conclusive in the matter. If, however, on the contrary, the Central Board should be of opinion that injustice had been done, that the complaint was not unreasonable, and if the cause of the complaint was not removed—then he proposed that the enunciation of that opinion by the Central Board should be sufficient to entitle the pauper to maintain an action in formâ pauperis; and he proposed further, that in such a case the Central Board should have power to determine what they considered a reasonable amount of relief, and to order the pauper to receive that relief until the decision of the Court appealed to should be known—if, after the expressed opinion of the Central Board, the parish chose to carry the matter to the Supreme Court. It would be observed that this plan of procedure, while it gave immediate relief to the pauper, would prevent any accumulation of speculative or ill-founded actions in the Supreme Court, brought against parishes, and which might involve them in tedious and expensive litigation. It would substantially remove the evils to which the pauper was at present exposed, and it would also substantially remove the evils to which the parish was exposed. He proposed, too, that the Board should have the power of inquiring and investigating, generally, into all matters connected with the administration of the Poor Law in all the districts of Scotland. As to local or parochial Boards, he proposed that in regard to landward parishes, when such parishes resolved to raise the funds for relief of the poor by assessment, that, in addition to the heritors and Kirk Session, there should be associated with them in the management of the poor, a certain number of representatives chosen by the ratepayers. The local Board would thus be composed of the heritors, the Kirk Session, and representatives chosen by the ratepayers. He was now speaking in regard to parishes which were of a purely landward character. But there were some parishes of a mixed character, partly landward, and partly burghal. By the law as it at present stood, and especially since a decision pronounced some years ago in the House of Lords, considerable difficulty was found to exist, in regard to the administration of the law in such parishes. He would propose that all parishes which were now partly burghal, that was to say, every parish in which there was a royal burgh, should henceforward be dealt with as a burghal parish, and that the same principle should also apply to every parish in which there was what is called a parliamentary burgh or town sending, or contributing to send, a Representative to Parliament. All these parishes would be treated as town parishes. At present the administration of the law, in regard to the poor in towns, was vested nominally and responsibly in the magistrates, but practically it devolved in many towns on the Kirk Sessions. He would propose that in every town an administrative body or local Board should be constituted, partly of members of the Kirk Sessions, and partly of persons elected by the ratepayers. But that was not the most important change which he intended to propose in the town parishes. He need scarcely remind the House, that it was the practice of poor persons living in towns frequently to change their residences; and a change, though only from street to street, might often be a change from one parish to another; and thus, though living for many years in the same town, they frequently resided too short a time in any one parish to acquire a settlement by residence. He considered this to be a hardship, and in order to obviate it, he would suggest that all the parishes in any town, or extending into the parliamentary district of any town, should be formed into a combination of parishes, and should be considered as one, so that a settlement obtained in the district thus formed, would be a settlement in the place. Another advantage to be derived from this arrangement, would be that of uniting the poorer with the richer portions of each town—thus effecting a more perfect equalization of the burden of pauperism than existed at present. It would be said, however, that there existed generally a considerable influx from the country into towns, and that as he proposed to afford new facilities for settlement in towns, there might be cause to apprehend an inconvenient accumulation of pauperism in towns. To prevent such a result, he thought it would be proper to extend the period at present sufficient for the attainment of settlement. That period was a residence of three years. He proposed to extend it to seven years. With respect to the providing of funds, it had been suggested that it should be made compulsory on all parishes to impose an assessment. He did not think it requisite to make it compulsory upon all parishes to assess themselves. If the funds were provided, if the poor did receive sufficient relief—it was a matter of no general importance in what manner they were so provided. The parties interested ought to be allowed to raise the necessary funds in the manner most agreeable to themselves. In many cases there might be good reasons why a parish would not choose to resort to an assessment. [He then quoted, from the Report of the General Assembly, a statement as to the relative expense of management in parishes assessed and parishes not assessed.] In cases, however, in which an assessment should be resolved upon, he proposed to give the authorities power to classify property for that purpose, and to allow them to impose different rates of assessment on the different classes of property, provided that all property of the same class should be assessed at the same rate. He also proposed to allow them to take the value of property, or of the occupancy of it, as a criterion for assessment on means and substance, if they thought that desirable. It was important that the manner of assessment should be left as optional as possible. What was suitable or convenient in the circumstances of one parish might not be so in another. Whenever recourse was had to compulsory assessment, it was desirable that it should be laid on in the manner that was least burdensome or distasteful. It was therefore desirable that the system should not be a rigid and inflexible one, suited to an average or majority of cases, but should be an expansive and flexible system, which admitted of being accommodated to every case. He had now stated most of the principal provisions of the Bill he proposed to introduce. By means of these provisions, he hoped to be able to compel a particular and constant attention to the condition of the poor—to afford to the pauper in cases of injustice a speedy and efficient redress against wrongful refusal of relief—to compel relief to the pauper from the parish in which relief first became necessary, without putting the applicant to unreasonable and unnecessary expense. [An Hon. Member asked what would be the course proposed to be adopted in cases of removal.] As to removal, he proposed that when the parish of settlement should be ascertained, the parish in which the pauper was resident at the time might give notice to the parish of settlement, and make it responsible for the sum advanced after the date of ascertainment; and unless the parish of settlement should remove the pauper immediately, or enter into some arrangement for his regular support, that then the parish in which he was resident should be entitled to pass him to the parish in which he had a legal settlement, at the expense of that latter parish. He proposed also that settlement by residence should not be prospectively acquired by any persons who had not been themselves born in Scotland, or whose father had not been a Scotchman domiciled in Scotland at the time of their birth. He likewise intended that the funds raised for the relief of the regular parish poor should be applicable to the relief of occasional poor, and that medical relief should be provided from such funds in cases of sickness or accident, and that there should be a power to apply part of the funds to the education of the poor. Further, he proposed to give to towns power of erecting poor-houses for the accommodation of their pauper population. He did not propose, however, to make the erection of such buildings compulsory. He thought that it was by far the most advisable course to leave their construction optional to the parties interested. In cases, however, where they should be established, the rules and regulations to be observed by the inmates would be placed under the superintendence of the Board of Supervision, as well as the plans for the construction of the buildings. He now came to the case of lunatics. He did not mean to deal generally with the laws relating to lunatics in Scotland, though he did not think they were altogether satisfactory; yet this was not the proper occasion for reforming them. With regard to pauper-lunatics, he proposed that they should be sent to an asylum of some kind, unless the Board of Supervision should dispense with such removal in any particular case. There were some cases in which such a removal would be cruel, as it would deprive the harmless lunatic of the benefit of moving about in good air, and of the care of his relations. The learned Lord then referred to a paper by Dr. Hutchinson, of Glasgow, relative to lunatics in the Island of Arran, which had been printed in the Appendix to the Report of the Commissioners. That paper had been noticed in the House last July by the hon. Member for Lambeth, when he (the Lord Advocate) was necessarily absent from town. He hoped he might now be allowed to say a few words in reference to that paper, which certainly, on mere perusal by a person unacquainted with the facts, was calculated to produce the impression it had made on the hon. Member. The paper by Dr. Hutchinson bore no date, and the Report of the Commissioners, in which it appeared, was dated in May, and printed in June or July, 1844. About a year before then, it had been discovered that a number of pauper lunatics had been privately sent to Arran, contrary to law, from various parts of Scotland, probably from motives of economy. He had in July 1843, in conjunction with the Sheriff of the county, resolved to take measures to have these lunatics removed, and to put a stop to the system; and in August, 1843, sixty-eight lunatics were removed from there. The moment attention was called to the state of matters, active steps were taken to remedy the abuse, and, by the prompt and judicious arrangements of the Sheriff, most of these lunatics were removed in one day; threats of prosecutions for penalties were held out to those who sent them there, and they were compelled to pay the expenses incurred. On seeing the notice on this subject by the hon. Member for Lambeth, he had thought it right to make further inquiry, and had addressed a letter to the Sheriff of the county with that object, and the answer returned was exceedingly satisfactory. [He then read several queries he had addressed to the Sheriffs, and stated the answers returned.] The Sheriff had gone to the island, accompanied by a medical gentleman from Edinburgh, and had examined into every case mentioned by Dr. Hutchison. There was reason to believe that some of the persons who had been represented to Dr. Hutchison as lunatics, were really not so, but were residing in Arran in consequence of delicate health, or being addicted to habits which rendered a certain degree of seclusion necessary. Those who were lunatics had been removed, or placed under the provisions of the law. [Mr. Hawes: Where were they sent?] Fifty-nine were sent to Glasgow, and other places—nine to Paisley. [Mr. Ellice, jun.: To what asylum?] They were supported at the expense of their own different parishes. There was no provision for their being sent to an asylum under the present law, unless they were dangerous. He believed he had now stated the chief details of the measure he proposed to introduce. The leading benefits which it was calculated to confer on the poor were, 1st. Compelling periodical and constant attention to their condition, and preserving a record of what had been done, or refused to be done. 2d. Giving speedy and effectual redress against wrongous refusal of relief. 3rd. Also, against illusory or inadequate compliance with the right to relief. 4th. Requiring relief to be given in the parish where the pauper was found, leaving to the parish, not to the pauper, to find out the liability of another parish. 5th. Authorising the poor funds to be applied for procuring medical relief. 6th. And for the education of poor children. 7th. And for relief of occasional claims. 8th. Facilitating compulsory assessments for all those purposes. 9th. Authorising assessments for the erection of poor-houses. 10th. Uniting burghal parishes so that settlement by residence shall not be interrupted by removal from one parish to another in the same town, and other advantages will be gained. 11th. Requiring that insane paupers shall be sent to asylums, except in special cases. He should conclude with moving for leave to bring in a Bill for the amendment and better administration of the laws relating to the relief of the poor in Scotland.

Lord Dalmeny

congratulated the Government and the country on the fact that they (the Ministers) had not only turned their attention to the question of the Scotch poor, but grappled with the difficulties that beset it. He was not prepared to say that the measure just introduced would be effectual for the purpose in view. He was not then in a condition to pronounce a positive opinion on its provisions. There were several opinions broached by the learned Lord which admitted of controversy, and he should reserve for the second reading the suggestion of such Amendments as he thought desirable.

Mr. Edward Ellice

, jun. said, he unfortunately was not present during the early part of the learned Lord's Address, and must reserve any distinct opinion on the Bill until the second reading. He might be permitted to say, from what he heard of its provisions, that though he gave credit like his noble Friend to the Government, for grappling with so difficult, and to the people of Scotland, so important a question; still he doubted whether the measure was sufficiently comprehensive in its details to meet the case. From personal attention to the condition of the poor in a considerable district, he doubted whether any but compulsory assessment would be effectual, which should, in his opinion, be levied under the superintendence of persons not locally interested. There could be no doubt of the distress of the population, or of the necessity of some comprehensive measure of relief. That part of the learned Lord's speech which related to lunatics was not quite clear. Every one knew that the present system was a disgrace to a civilized community. The manner of taking care, or rather no care, of persons so afflicted, was as disgraceful as the old prison discipline before the system was amended. He understood the learned Lord to propose that pauper lunatics should be confined in asylums. If, however, he supposed that parishes would voluntarily assess themselves for the erection of such buildings, he begged to tell him that such an idea was not to be entertained for a moment.

Mr. Hume

had listened with attention to the very clear and distinct statement of the learned Lord. He did not concur in the opinion that assessment should be compulsory. If the learned Lord was correct in saying that the law as it existed gave the power to assess adequately in Scotland as in England, he thought the Government right in not going beyond the existing law. The only thing that remained for legislation was to see that those who had such powers did their duty. If once the compulsory system were adopted, it would be hard to recede. He hoped adequate means would be provided for the care of lunatics; and he was disposed to think that the Bill made a cautious beginning.

Mr. Hawes

thanked the learned Lord for the manner in which he had taken up the inquiry into the state of the lunatics in the Isle of Arran, and he was sure, when the learned Lord's attention was promised, that it would be effectually done. He must say, also, that a more comprehensive or luminous speech, or one more calculated to carry conviction throughout the country, he had never heard delivered in that House. The main difficulties of this question had been grappled with with great caution, and the noble Lord was introducing a new system under the most favourable auspices. Reference had been made to the necessity for a compulsory assessment; now, as he understood the present proposal, it did contain the germ of a compulsory assessment. He did not say this to prejudice the measure; but, as he understood it, supposing inadequate relief were given, the party had an appeal to the Board of Supervision, and on hearing they were fully authorized to order a sufficient allowance, and when a few such cases were determined there would be a general standard of allowance; and as funds must be raised, the present proposal came to the compulsory assessment by the most moderate, most unexceptionable, and the safest way. Speaking generally, the Government deserved great thanks for this Bill; and, so far as those who were free from the great interests of property involved in the proposal, could give the Government their support, they ought to give it freely, being assured that if there were any details requiring amendment which would be proposed, and if they were backed by reasons, they would not find unwilling attention, With regard to lunatics, in particular, he hoped the learned Lord would see the necessity for some provision. Although the learned Lord stated that the lunatics, who had been illegally confined in the Isle of Arran, had been released, he was not satisfied that they were much better off now; and unless they provided public asylums, or compelled the parishes to furnish proper medical aid at an early period of the disease, they would not have taken all the means in their power to mitigate this greatest of all calamities. One of the enormous burdens which pressed upon England, and which was likely to go on increasing, arose from the number of persons who were permanently lunatic; he believed that many of these cases, if they had received medical treatment at an early stage, would not now be burdens: if, therefore, the learned Lord would suggest the means of providing public asylums, he believed it might in the end be found the most economical plan. It was known that there was a tenacity of life amongst confirmed lunatics; and he thought that if public lunatic asylums, under proper medical direction, were provided early, they would be the means of lessening the great burden now felt.

Mr. Fitzstephen French

only wished that Her Majesty's Government would act towards Ireland as they were acting towards Scotland; but the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in answer to a question put to him by the hon. Member for Mallow, had refused even to inquire into the Poor Law system in Ireland. With respect to the nine years' residence proposed before a party not born in Scotland could be entitled to relief, he doubted whether many persons deserving aid, especially from Ireland, would not be excluded.

Sir J. Graham

said, that the hon. Gentleman laboured under a mistake as to the answer he was supposed to have given to the hon. Member for Mallow. He had said, that it was not the intention of Her Majesty's Government to institute any inquiry into the Poor Law as connected with Ireland; but he had not said, that if any hon. Gentleman on the other side of the House, or on that side, should make such a Motion, and if it should receive the general concurrence of the House, that the Government was not prepared to consent to such an inquiry. He must observe, that Her Majesty's present Government were not responsible for the application of the Poor Law to Ireland; and he had himself expressed great doubts, when it was introduced, whether it would be found to answer; but now having to administer the law as he found it, he had done his best to make it work well, and he did not despair of its being rendered progressively more conducive to the interests of the country. The hon. Gentleman had expressed surprise that an industrial residence in Scotland for a short time should not give a settlement to the Irish; but the hon. Gentleman must bear in mind that if an unfortunate Scotchman were resident in Belfast, he might labour for forty years without obtaining a settlement, however productive his industry might have been. This was no argument indeed why an Irishman should not obtain a settlement in Scotland; but there must be some reciprocity, and the hon. Gentleman must consider that an Irishman in the manufacturing districts of Scotland, would obtain a settlement, whereas a Scotchman in Ireland would be entitled to no relief; and he must not be surprised that a country which did possess an equality of burdens, should not wish to increase them. He could not sit down without cordially thanking the hon. Member for Lambeth for the frank and generous support he had given to the measure, stated with so much ability by his learned Friend, the learned Lord—a more able statement had never been presented to an intelligent people by any officer. He was persuaded that his learned Friend, who well knew the habits and feelings of his country, by giving his aid to the Government, and his talents in preparing this measure, had rendered a valuable service to the people of that country of whose bar he was a distinguished ornament, and that no measure could be introduced upon any authority to which the people of Scotland, without distinction of party, would give a more favourable consideration.

Leave given. Bill brought in and read a first time.

House adjourned at eleven o'clock.