§ Mr. Bennetsaid, he held in his hand, a petition to which he begged leave to call the attention of the House. It was signed by the rector, the church-wardens, by the overseers of the poor, and a number of other respectable inhabitants of Ilchester. The series of grievances detailed in the petition were, he believed, founded in fact. Ilchester, as was well known, returned two members to parliament. It was patronized, and, if he might say so, it was the property of a particular individual (sir William Manners.) After the last election, a number of houses in the town were pulled down by the proprietor. The consequence of this was, upwards of a hundred families were forced out of the houses which they occupied, and placed in a species of poor-house, hired by the town from the same individual. About eighteen or twenty of those who were so turned out, were paupers, the rest were persons who earned their livelihood. But notice was given by that individual, that, in consequence of the continued political dissentions which prevailed in the town, he was resolved to take from them the house in question, so that those poor persons whose houses had been pulled down, were deprived of this last resource of a poor-house. They were accordingly all turned out: 163 men, women, and children, from one month old, to upwards of 80 years, were all turned out into the street, without knowing of a place to shelter themselves at a most inclement season of the year [Hear, hear!]. Some of them were able to get together some straw in the town-hall. Some of them betook themselves to the fields. Among the people so turned out, there were several pregnant women, and one woman daily expected the pangs of child-birth. It was stated that a mode, which in other cases had sometimes been resorted to, was here adopted for driving the people out of their houses. The upper stories were filled with dung, which, by oozing through the floors, rendered the lower parts uninhabitable. With respect to the petition, it was quite clear that this was 1354 a very great grievance. As to these 163 individuals, whether they had any legal remedy or not, he knew not. The petitioners, however, naturally looked to the House for protection. His intention at one time was to move that it be referred to the committee on the poor-laws. Indeed, he hardly well knew what course to pursue. He trusted the House would not refuse that inquiry into the case, which the petitioners wished for.
§ Mr. Merestsaid, he hoped the House would consider the delicate situation in which he stood as member for Ilchester. As member for that borough, it was his duty to present any petition from his constituents; but as the individual alluded to, had questioned his election for the borough, he felt a delicacy in presenting a petition reflecting on his conduct, and had therefore declined to present the petition. At the same time, he could bear testimony not only to the great respectability of the petitioners, but to the truth of every allegation contained in the petition. If cruelties, like those complained of, were tolerated in this country, he knew not what acts might not be committed.
Mr. Wynnsaid, he knew not what the House could do in this case. It was a case on which the House could not enter. The charges in the petition highly affected the moral character of the individual against whom they were made. Yet still there was nothing in them illegal; for a man could do what he pleased with his own property. If the House could not afford relief in such cases, he did not see how they could receive any petition; for if they received it, he knew not where they were to stop. Supposing any great proprietor in this metropolis, lord Grosvenor or the duke of Bedford, for instance, who had a number of tenants from year to year, gave notice to all these tenants to remove, as they preferred to have large streets—this measure might be extremely oppressive to a number of individuals; but still he did not see how the House could afford redress.
§ Mr. Dickinson, said he happened a few days ago to see some gentlemen from the neighbourhood of Ilchester, who confirmed to him the reports of what had taken place there. He could hardly believe at first in the possibility. It was, however, but justice to say, that before the severe process was resorted to, the individuals forced out of their houses had had regular 1355 notice to quit them. When the people were turned out, the neighbouring magistrates did all that they could do on the occasion. They ordered each man and woman to receive 1s. and to have their lodging paid. But the town of Ilchester was so situated, unfortunately, that no lodging could he found for them. They were therefore obliged to betake themselves to the neighbouring villages.
Lord Castlereaghsaid, that whatever powers parliament might possess, they were in no degree applicable to the case in question. As the hon. gentleman had not stated a ground for the interference of the House, and as there could be no expectation of any remedy from the House, he suggested the propriety of withdrawing the petition. The case was one which excited a strong degree of commiseration for the sufferers; but the House as a body, could not act on a principle of humanity alone.
§ Sir J. Newportthought that ordering this petition to be printed, and entering the proceeding on the journals would be a species of exposure and publicity which might produce a salutary effect on the individual concerned.
§ Mr. Bennetthen withdrew the petition.