HL Deb 06 June 1878 vol 240 cc1240-2

(The Earl of Shaftesbury.)

(NO. 99.) SECOND READING.

Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.

THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY

said, that the object of the Bill, which had come up from the Commons, was to amend the 23rd Section of "The Divided Parishes and Poor Law Amendment Act, 1876," so far as related to Friendly and Benefit Societies. The Bill, which consisted of a single clause, proposed to enact that the provisions of that clause should not apply to monies which a pauper, or pauper lunatic, might be entitled to as a member of a Friendly or Benefit Society.

Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Earl of Shaftesbury.)

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY

said, that the Bill proposed to effect a considerable change in the existing law, of which he had great doubts as to the expediency. Hitherto, when a man came upon the poor rates, the Union authorities were entitled to take possession of any property he might have. The Bill proposed to exempt from that power any monies which the pauper might be entitled to receive as a member of any benefit or friendly society. It was provided, it was true, that the officers of the society should apply those monies to the maintenance of the wife and family of the pauper, if he had one; but if he had not, the Guardians were not entitled to receive the moneys, unless they had specially declared beforehand that the relief given to the pauper was by way of loan. He thought this proposal tended to destroy the spirit of independence and self-reliance, by teaching the working man that he was entitled to relief for himself, independent of the circumstances of his family.

EARL FORTESCUE

expressed his concurrence with the noble Earl, in the principle that a pauper was not entitled to relief until any property he might possess was exhausted; and there was no reason why monies in the friendly societies should be exempted more than any other kind of property. He remembered that when he was Secretary to the Poor Law Board, Mr. C. Buller and he passed a clause facilitating the recovery of the cost of relief given to paupers out of property which had subsequently either become or been discovered to be under their control. This Bill went on exactly the opposite principle.

THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON

acknowledged that the provisions of the Bill, as it now stood, were objectionable. The question, however, was one of considerable importance; and, though he was not prepared to say that the Bill should not be read a second time, he thought that the next stage should not be taken until some time had been allowed for consideration.

THE EARL OF REDESDALE

said, he could not see on what principle a man should be maintained by the parish, while his wife and family were to receive the proceeds of any savings he might have effected.

Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday the 24th instant.

Back to