POOR LAWS. (Hansard, 22 May 1828)

Mr. Slaney

said, that, as, on a former occasion, he had treated this subject at considerable length, he would not detain the House many minutes now. He had shown the consequence of the abuses of that branch of the Poor-laws which related to the employment and relief of able-bodied persons: and he thought it would be conceded to him, that those abuses ought to be removed. He would now merely state, that these abuses were different in different parts of the country, though the laws were, of course, the same. In the southern counties these abuses prevailed, and the peasantry were poor and degraded: in the northern counties there were no such abuses, and they were well paid and happy. They must also recollect the burthens which agriculture was subject to, in consequence of these abuses. In the county of Cumberland, where these abuses did not prevail, the poor-rates were only 1s. 7d. in the pound on rack rental; in the county of Sussex, where they prevailed to a great extent, the poor-rates were 7s. in the pound on rack rental. To show that he had not acted unfairly in taking two counties, he would state that, in eight northern counties, the poor-rates amounted to 750,000l., while in eight southern counties the poor-rates were exactly double that sum. To show that these abuses were extending their baneful influence to other parts of the country, he would state, that in 1800 the persons relieved by the poor-rates were as one in nine; and that in 1826 they were as one in seven. He would merely add, that his opinions on this subject were not founded on idle surmise, that his statements were borne out by returns on the table of the House, and that rive committees had declared these abuses to be the source of the poverty which prevailed in the southern districts of the kingdom. The hon. member then moved for a select committee "to consider that part of the Poor-laws relating to the employment and relief of able-bodied persons from the poor-rates, and the abuses arising therefrom."