SECOND READING. (Hansard, 20 March 1871)

§ MR. STANSFELD
said, that this measure dealt with two of the classes giving the greatest trouble in workhouses. It proposed that paupers frequenting work- 324 houses so constantly as to give rise to the belief that they belonged to the class of habitual paupers, merely using these institutions for their own convenience, should not in future be allowed to leave immediately, or at their own discretion, but should only be able to discharge themselves after the expiration of certain fixed period of notice. As to casuals, a very general opinion was entertained by those most competent to give an opinion upon the subject, that uniformity of diet and of work ought to be imposed, and Clause 6 accordingly took power to make regulations with a view to enforce this uniformity. The present state of the law as to the detention of casuals was that they could only be kept until they had performed the task which was supposed to pay for their board and lodging at night, if they performed it in less than four hours, or for a maximum period of four hours during which this task was supposed to be performed. It was now proposed to take power to detain them for four hours, and in any case until their task had been performed. The hon. Gentleman concluded by moving that the Bill be now read a second time.

§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTH
was far from contending that additional power ought not to be placed in the hands of masters of workhouses; but the change now proposed was something entirely new in the history of the Poor Law. For the first time during the 40 years that the Poor Law had existed, a power of imprisonment within the workhouse was about to be conferred on the Guardians. The only power of that kind at present existing was one inserted in the Act of 1867, passed under his own charge, providing that in the case of contagious disease a power should exist of detaining the person so affected upon a proper medical certificate. The extension of the principle of detention contained in the present Bill ought not to be adopted without full recognition of its importance; and he hoped the Government would not bring on the Committee upon the Bill at an hour when it would be impossible to discuss the details of the measure properly. The first paragraph of the 4th clause would require revision, as it appeared to extend to all classes of pauper inmates without distinction.

§ MR. STANSFELD
undertook that full notice should be given of the next stage 325 of the Bill, and further, promised to give his attention to the clause referred to by his right hon. Friend.

MR. GATHORNE HARDY
said, that in consequence of the postponement of the Army Estimates this matter had come suddenly and unexpectedly under the notice of the House. He did not wish to stop the second reading of the Bill, but felt bound to say that the Government proposed to act upon the old principle, which was, probably, the right one, of making vagrants not subject to the Poor Law, but criminals; but the jurisdiction was to be vested in the Guardians, and not in the magistrates, as was formerly the case. This was a very serious change indeed, and he feared the right hon. Gentleman had opened a question, the limits of which he, perhaps, did not perceive.