HC Deb 17 July 1840 vol 55 cc808-10

Lord John Russell moved the third reading of this bill.

Mr. W. Attwood

objected to proceeding with it at that late hour of the night.

Lord John Russell

thought that the House was generally of opinion that the bill ought to pass, and he knew no reason why they should refuse to proceed with it.

Mr. Hume

said, that in a former discussion on this bill, he had objected to the number of the poor-law assistant commissioners; and as the noble Lord had assured him that they would be dispensed with, he was inclined to go on with the bill.

Mr. W. Attwood

moved that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. Grimsditch

said, that he felt a strong objection to the commission being continued, and there was a vast number of his constituents who disliked the laws which emanated, not from the House of Commons, but from the Poor-law Commissioners at Somerset-House. As the noble Lord had abandoned his bill for the amendment of the Poor-law Act, he hoped he would consent to fix the third reading of the present bill for some early day next week.

Viscount Morpeth

said, that the hon. Gentleman had raised an objection against proceeding with the present measure, because Government had not gone on with the Poor-law Amendment Act; but the hon. Member would surely admit, when he considered the business which had hitherto occupied the House, that it would be impossible to carry such a measure through Parliament this Session. It being acknowledged, then, that it was necessary to continue the powers at present entrusted to the Poor-law Commissioners, he hoped there would be no further objection made to proceeding with the bill.

Mr. Wakley

thought it was time that business should make some progress in that House, and though he had no doubt of the sincerity of hon. Gentlemen in their opposition to this bill, he would yet like to know what they would gain by a delay of two or three weeks. He hoped hon. Gentlemen would withdraw their opposition to the present measure.

Mr. W. Attwood

would persist in his amendment, as the bill had not been brought on at a time of the evening when the House could properly discuss it.

The House divided on the question of adjournment:—Ayes 10; Noes 71: Majority 61.

List of the AYES.
Brotherton, J. Johnson, General
D'Israeli, B. Kelly, F.
Fielden, J. Maclean, D.
Ingestrie, Viscount Parker, R. T.
Perceval, Colonel Attwood, W.
Sibthorp, Colonel Grimsditch, T.
List of the NOES.
Adam, Admiral Morpeth, Viscount
Aglionby, H. A. Muskett, G. A.
Baines, E. Norreys, Sir D. J.
Baring, rt. hn. F. T. Palmerston, Viscount
Berkeley, hon. H. Pechell, Captain
Bernal, R. Pendarves, E.W. W.
Broadley, H. Pryme, G.
Bruges, W. H. L. Pusey, P.
Campbell, W. F. Rawdon, Col, J. D.
Clay, W. Rice, E. R.
Douglas, Sir C. E. Roche, W.
Duke, Sir J. Russell, Lord J.
Duncombe, T. Salwey, Colonel
Elliot, hon. J. E. Seymour, Lord
Ellis, J. Sheil, rt. hon. R. L.
Ferguson, Sir R. A. Slaney, R. A.
Gordon, R. Smith, R. V.
Gordon, hon. Capt. Somers, J. P.
Grey, rt. hon. Sir G. Steuart, R.
Hawes, B. Stock, Dr.
Hindley, C. Style, Sir C.
Hobhouse, rt. hn. Sir J. Troubridge, Sir E. T.
Hobhouse, T. B. Tufnell, H.
Hodgson, R. Vigors, N. A.
Hope, hon. C. Wakley, T.
Horsman, E. Warburton, H.
Hoskins, K. Ward, H. G.
Hughes, W. B. Williams, W.
Hume, J. Wilshere, W.
Hurt, F. Wood, G. W.
Labouchere, rt. hon. H. Wood, B.
Loch, J, Wrightson, W. B.
Lockhart, A. M. Wyse, T.
Macaulay, rt. hon. T. B. Young, J.
Martin, J. TELLERS.
Maule, hon. F. Stanley, E. J.
Melgund, Viscount Parker, J.

Question again put.

Mr. Fielden moved the adjournment of the debate,

Debate adjourned.