HC Deb 13 April 1807 vol 9 cc424-5
Mr. Whitbread ,

in consequence of the business which was fixed for to-morrow, wished to postpone the re-committal of the bill which he had brought in on that subject, till Friday. He took that opportunity of stating, that in consequence of numerous communications which he had received, he had thought that it would be the best way to divide his original bill into three separate bills. The first of those bills would be with respect to the Poors' Fund; the second would be, for a better equalization of the county rates; and the third would contain all the remaining objects of his bill. In consequence, however, of suggestions and communications which he had received, he intended to leave out of his bill the clauses respecting the adjudication of settlements, and that for rating personal property.

Mr. Shaw Lefevre

said, that the subject was one which, perhaps, more than any other, called for a most deliberate consideration and calm discussion. After the threat that had been thrown out a few evenings ago, that parliament should be dissolved if they did not agree to this or that measure of the present administration, it was almost impossible to expect, that, in the course of the present session, or perhaps of the parliament, if that threat should be acted upon, there should be time for that serious and calm consideration which was necessary for a subject of such magnitude, importance, and difficulty. The case, as it now stood, was this: the statute of Elizabeth had been found not sufficient to produce the effects which it proposed. It therefore became necessary that some farther legislative provision should be made. He gave his hon. friend great credit for the attention he had bestowed to this subject, and hoped, that a great part of his bill would be productive of the best consequences; but he was sorry that the clause respecting the relaxation of the settlement laws was to be left out, as that appeared to him to be one of the best parts of the bill. For the reasons he had before mentioned, he should wish the consideration of the measure should be postponed to a much later period, perhaps to the next session.

Mr. Whitbread

said, it must be, indeed, a pusillanimous parliament that would suffer itself to be deterred from the prosecution of its public duties by such a threat, which was certainly as indecent, indiscreet, and unparliamentary, as could possibly have been thrown out. That threat, however, should have no influence upon his mind. He could not see any good consequences likely to result from protracting to a later period the discussion; nor did it appear to him, that that was the most likely mode to gain for the subject the fullest degree of attention and consideration. When a discussion was put off longer than was necessary, the attention of mankind was apt to relax; whereas, if it was brought on while the subject was warm in their minds, it was likely to command more attention, and to be as well considered. He had left out many parts of the bill, in consequence of communications received from a variety of quarters, and he was happy to acknowledge publicly, the great obligations he felt to those gentlemen who had thus assisted him with their observations. He had not given up that part which related to the relaxation of the law of settlements, but that part which respected the adjudication of settlements prior to the removal of a pauper. Although he had received some opinions favourable to his original idea in that respect, yet the balance of opinions was much against it. He hoped, by yielding to those opinions, the objections to his original bill would be done away, and that considerable good would be produced by it.

Mr. Shaw Lefevre

begged it to be understood that, in wishing to postpone the business, he acted under no impression whatever of the description alluded to; for no threats whatever should deter him from doing his duty as an independent member of parliament.—The bill was then committed pro formâ, and ordered to be recommitted on Friday.

Back to