TREATMENT OF THE POOR. (Hansard, 19 February 1833)

§ Mr. Harvey

observed that he could not allow this Bill to pass without making some remarks on several of its provisions. Mr. Whitbread had formerly called the attention of the House to the subject; and he was glad to see the hon. member for Weymouth (Mr. Buxton) in his place, who had done more than any man living for the emancipation of slaves. He hoped that he would continue his exertions, and would equally oppose a system which seemed to be growing up for making slaves of children, and others, who were dependent on parochial relief. The Bill proposed to give to the Guardians of the Poor of this institution the power of letting out the poor to hire to perform harvest-work, or any other species of labour. The wages of such labour was not to be appropriated to the benefit of the parties who performed it; but was to go to the general fund for the maintenance of the parish poor. He hoped that those hon. Members, who were favourable to the abolition of slavery, would pay some attention to this subject. There was another clause of the Bill which, in his opinion, was an infraction of the principles of justice. It proposed to enact, that any guardian who was found to have embezzled any property belonging to the institution, should be dismissed from his situation, and fined three times the amount of the property embezzled. Thus, in the case of the guardian, embezzle ment was made only the subject of a fine—a crime to be compromised by the payment of a sum of money. Now what was the case if a pauper were found to have committed a similar offence? Was he to be dismissed from the poor-house and mulcted? No. He was to be taken up and committed to the House of Correction at once. The superior was to be punished only civilly—the pauper was to be punished criminally. He made these remarks, in hopes that they might tend to direct attention to the matter, and to cause the points which he complained of to be corrected in the Committee.