§ (Mr. Goschen, Mr. Arthur Peel.)
§ Bill considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ On Question, "That the Preamble be postponed,"
§ After short conversation, Question put.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 2; Noes 53: Majority 51.
§ Clause 1 (Maintenance of in-door poor to be a charge upon the Metropolitan Common Poor Fund).
§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS BEACH
said, he thought that some increase in the staff of the Poor Law Board would be rendered necessary by this clause, which placed a large proportion of the in-door relief, estimated by the right hon. Gentleman at £250,000 a year on the Common Fund. To check this in some degree, he proposed that 4d. instead of 6d. be taken from the Common Fund for the maintenance of the in-door poor. He begged to move in Clause 1, sub-section 3, line 30, to leave out "sixpence," and insert fourpence.
§ MR. GOSCHEN
said, he would consent to an Amendment making the charge 5d., which would put upon the Common Fund £168,000, while £117,000 would remain on the parishes.
§ MR. SAMUDA
said, he also was of opinion that some check should be placed on the disposition to use the Common Fund too freely.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ MR. T. CHAMBERS
said, he proposed to omit that part of the clause which authorized the levying of fines upon parishes for not carrying out the orders and regulations of the Poor Law Board.
§ MR. W. M. TORRENS
said, the clause tended to the suppression of outdoor relief, and, therefore, he should support the Motion for its omission.
§ MR. GOSCHEN
said, that if the Boards of Guardians were to draw upon a Common Fund, some authority should exist for the purpose of keeping them up to a common standard. By the end of next year, there would be 11,000 more beds in the metropolis, which he hoped would prevent overcrowding; and it was not the object of this sub-section to give further powers to the Poor Law Board with regard to the enlargement of workhouses, but simply to avoid those dead-locks which sometimes occurred. There were as yet social dangers in a system of out-door relief as in that of in-door relief.
§ MR. LIDDELL
said, he regarded this provision as a blow at out-door relief, and as conferring powers utterly unheard-of before, and he, therefore, thought the matter ought to be discussed in a fuller House.
§ MR. AYRTON
said, the provision did not propose anything new; it only said that when a Board of Guardians neglected to carry out an Order issued under an Act of Parliament, the Board should lose the advantage they enjoyed under that Act.
§ Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 38; Noes 14: Majority 24.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 2 struck out.
§ Remaining clauses agreed to.
§ Bill reported; as amended, to be considered upon Monday next.