POOR LAW. (Hansard, 27 July 1838)

§ Mr. G. Palmer

in rising to bring forward the subject of which he had given notice, begged to assure the noble Lord opposite that he was actuated by no vexatious feeling on the present occasion. But he felt that the constitutional rights and liberties of the people of this country had been invaded, and would be invaded more and more every day, by the Poor-law commissioners, acting under the noble Lord, unless some means were taken to place a proper check on their proceedings; and therefore, he felt it his duty to the public at large to bring this matter forward. At the same time he begged to observe, that in any remarks he should have to offer nothing was further from his intention than to make any reflections on the private character of the commissioners; he spoke only of their public conduct. He knew he was treading on delicate ground in bringing forward this matter, when so 723 much excitement prevailed relative to the poor laws; but he would state explicitly, that whatever might have been his opinions of the Poor-law Amendment Act before it became the law of the land, he had now no desire to see it repealed; on the contrary, if its repeal were proposed, he should oppose it. But great amendments were necessary, in order to make it satisfactory to the people; for unless it were satisfactory it could not be effectual. In his opinion the erection of those vast buildings throughout the country would prove not only a most extravagant but a most useless expenditure of the public money. To say nothing of the cruelty to which their unfortunate inmates were subjected in the separation of parents from children, brother from sister, and husband from wife, if even they came to be used to the extent of their capacity, those workhouses would be found to be in every respect the pests of the country. He did not see why the poor of England should not have a protector as well as the unfortunate negroes, whose case had excited so much sympathy in this country. It appeared from a paragraph which he had read in a newspaper this morning, that in consequence of ordering roast beef and plum pudding on the day of the coronation to the poor of a certain workhouse, contrary to the instructions of the Poor-law commissioners, the master had been condemned to one month's imprisonment. The certain effect of the uncontrolled dictatorial powers with which the commissioners were invested would be to infringe upon the rights and liberties of every individual in the community, within and out of that House. He had felt considerable alarm two or three months ago on reading the' following statement which appeared at the time in the public papers:— An order has just been issued by the Poor-law commissioners which it is understood will be forwarded to all the unions in England, directing the guardians to appoint within a specified time persons to perform the duties enumerated in the first schedule below, such persons to be paid by an annual salary, and to find two sureties for the due performance of their duties. The duties to be performed by one person are to be specified by the Poor-law commissioners according to circumstances, and every person appointed to perform the duties stated in the first schedule shall undertake in case he be nominated and elected by the inhabitants in vestry of any parish or place within his district, and appointed thereto by any two justices of the peace to perform with- 724 out any additional remuneration any of the duties enumerated in the second schedule, or any other duties imposed by law upon overseers of the poor, and not enumerated in the first schedule; and every person appointed under the order shall have power to execute the duties assigned to him in like manner, and to all intents and purposes as an ordinary overseer of the poor; and any board of guardians may at any time suspend the performance of the duties of any assistant-overseer appointed in pursuance of the order, until such suspension be confirmed or taken off by the Poor-law commissioners; and if the suspension be confirmed by the Poor-law commissioners, but not otherwise, the remuneration of such assistant-overseer and his continuance in office shall, if the commissioners so direct, cease from the day of such suspension. No person shall be chosen to perform any of the duties unless he will undertake to devote the whole of his time to the employment, not following any trade, profession, or any other occupation whatever, except he be already a paid officer of the union, and except he be elected to perform the duties stated in the second schedule. Perhaps he was not entitled to call that an order of the commissioners, or even a proposed order; but he was entitled to say, that he himself had seen it in the minute-books in Somerset-house He had no doubt every one would agree with him in thinking it a most objectionable paper; indeed, he hardly thought the noble Lord himself would be found to approve of it. In the first instance, it attempted to take away from the parochial authorities every description of management of their own affairs; even the parish books were to be placed in the hands of a hired servant of the Commissioners, liable to be dismissed at a moment's notice. Then, in the most underhand manner, it interfered with that particular clause of the Reform Bill, which provided for the making out of the lists of voters for Members to serve in Parliament. He would ask, whether the centralization principle was not clearly manifested in every part of the last debate on the question of the Poor-law for Ireland; and whether that ought not to convince the people that, if they were not on their guard, they would speedily have but little left worth the caring for. What was the noble Lord's intention with respect to the police? He had heard, that it was intended to place the new police of the city of London under the authority of the noble Secretary for the Home Department. The establishment of a rural police, likewise, at the beck of the noble Lord, would, he supposed, soon 725 follow, and then the enthralment of the country would be complete. He should now proceed more immediately to the consideration of the question before the House. Early in March he had first given notice of the motion which he was about to move, and he had then no reason to think, that the papers he sought would have been refused. When he made the motion, however, the noble Lord objected to the production of the letter, stating, that it was not a final order determined upon by the Poor-law commissioners, but had only, as he thought the noble Lord said, been laid by them before some one or two persons in order to have the advice of those persons upon it; and then the noble Lord went on to suppose a case, and said, that if he, as Secretary of State, had thought proper to write a letter to his under-secretary, and desire him to make any suggestions upon it which might occur to him, the House of Commons would not think of calling for the production of a paper written under such circumstances. Be that as it might, this was his answer, and the noble Lord had thus the full advantage of his supposed case. Shortly after this, a public paper, friendly to the Government, said, that he had greatly mistaken the fact, in saying, that this letter had been sent through the country generally, for that the truth was, it had only been sent to Poole and (he thought) two other places. He wrote to Poole and received, through the medium of a noble Member of that House, the following answer from Mr. Parr, the clerk of the Poole union:— My Lord,—I much regret, that I have unavoidably been prevented answering your Lordship's favour with Mr. Palmer's enclosed before this. The order, with schedules Nos. 1 and 2, for appointing an assistant-overseer, was received from the Poor-law Commissioners on the 13th of January last. The Commissioners sent it to the guardians, and stated it to be an order, they would be prepared to sanction, if the guardians approved of it, and that I, as the clerk, should be instructed to fill it up, and return it to the Commissioners. The guardians were unanimous in their opinion, that the powers given to the assistant-overseer by such order ought not to have been given to any one individual, and the Commissioners were informed, that the guardians disapproved of such order. Subsequently—namely, on the 8th of February, another order was issued to appoint a collector of poor-rates, &c. Poole, April 24, 1838. "ROBERT H. PARR. To the right hon. Lord Ashley, M.P, 726 Of the effect of the circular of the 8th of February he could only judge from a document which he had seen, and which he found had been sent to the Chorlton-on-Medlock Union; and on speaking on this subject, he did feel, that the House ought to understand what kind of control they had over the Poor-law commissioners. But from the act of Parliament, if he understood it correctly, it appeared, that every order from the board of Poor-law commissioners ought to be understood as a general order, and was to be laid upon the Table of that House, in order, that such steps might be taken as should be thought necessary if it was disapproved. But he was told, at the office of the board at Somerset-house, that as long as the board only issued one or two at a time, they were not to be considered to be general orders; but not to dwell upon this part of the subject, he must express his hope, that the noble Lord would not on that occasion take shelter in pretexts of political expediency or diplomatic secrecy, and refuse the production of the letter for which he was about to move. The hon. Member concluded by moving "for the production of a copy of a letter dated the 8th of January, 1838, addressed by the Poor-law commissioners to the assistant commissioners, with which certain proposed orders for the appointment of assistant overseers were sent."