HL Deb 11 July 1834 vol 25 cc9-21
The Marquess of Londonderry

, seeing a noble Earl (Earl Grey) in his place, wished to say a few words, with reference to what had passed yesterday, when he asked a question, which certainly had not been answered. In his opinion, when measures of great importance, such as that which was about to be brought forward that evening, were submitted to their Lordships' consideration, it was right that they should know who were the responsible advisers of the Crown, or whether the Crown had, in fact, any responsible advisers. The noble Lord on the Wool- sack, he believed, admitted that it was usual—nay, that it was proper—for Parliament to adjourn until a responsible Government was formed; and it appeared to him that, situated as they were, such was the course that ought to be taken on the present occasion. He asked their Lordships whether they would take that course, or, without a responsible Minister being present, proceed with the second reading of the Poor Laws' Bill? He had received various communications relative to that Bill from the county of Durham, and the Magistrates of that county declared, that it was one of the most injurious, one of the most pernicious Bills that could be possibly sanctioned by the Legislature. It seemed to him, that, under these peculiar circumstances, their Lordships ought seriously to consider whether, after the example of the other House of Parliament, which had thought fit, though important business was pending, to adjourn, in order to give time for the formation of a Government, he put it to their Lordships, whether they ought not, considering all the circumstances, to take the same course. It was not the intention of so humble an individual as he was, to press their Lordships to any expression of opinion. He had taken this course without consulting any of the noble Lords with whom he usually acted, and probably against the wishes of some of them. His feeling, however, was, and that perhaps was the general feeling of the country, that they ought not, at present, to proceed with any important measure.

Earl Grey

was very unwilling that a measure of so much importance should be postponed, unless circumstances rendered that postponement absolutely necessary; but whether he should or should not proceed with it, was entirely for their Lordships to decide. He had, on a former occasion, stated to their Lordships the reasons which induced him to except this Bill from several other measures that were before the House, and to offer his services in forwarding it. He had done so, because he viewed it as involving no party or political questions. It was a subject, indeed, which the Government had taken up, because they deemed it necessary; and, assuredly, it was a question on which they could not be supposed to be influenced by any party or personal motive, or by any feeling except an anxious desire to benefit their country. These precisely were the motives which led him to state that he was willing, however inconvenient to him it might be personally, to proceed with the Bill. If their Lordships thought that the incomplete state of the Government made it unadvisable to bring it before the House, he should at once bow to that decision. He must, however, say, that his course was quite clear, and it was for their Lordships to say whether the discussion should go on or not. If their Lordships should think, that the second reading of the Bill ought to take place, but that the Bill ought not to go into a Committee, he must say it would be much better that the Bill should be postponed until a more favourable opportunity presented itself of bringing it before their Lordships.

The Lord Chancellor

observed, that there was undoubtedly a great deal of sound sense in what had been said by his noble friend. He had stated most justly, that if their Lordships were only to take the second reading—to decide upon the principle—and then to postpone all further proceeding with the measure until that period to which all of them, and the country in general looked, when an Administration should be formed, they would gain nothing by adopting such a course. If they were to proceed thus, he could perceive no very great advantage that would be gained by imposing on his noble friend the labour of opening the Bill to their Lordships on this occasion. Every person must applaud the manner in which his noble friend had stood forward to take charge of this measure. But if the suggestion were acted on, that of proceeding with the Bill in this stage, and then stopping, he saw no good that could possibly result from it. When his noble friend had offered to take charge of the Bill, it was, as he understood, with the feeling that its progress should not be impeded—that it should go on regularly to the next stage. Why, he would ask, should it be stopped at the Committee? The same argument might be adduced for stopping it at the second reading—that stage where the principle of the Bill was debated. In such a case as this, he thought their Lordships might fairly be guided by the good sense and the well-considered opinion of his noble friend. They could not, he was confident, do better than to leave the matter, the course of proceeding, entirely to his noble friend's decision. His decided opinion was, that the greatest inconvenience, and the greatest mischief to the country, would be the result of the postponement either of the second reading or of the Committee. If he thought that this great, salutary, and most remedial measure was likely to be placed in jeopardy during the present Session by any proposition that might be made—if he thought that it was likely to be placed in jeopardy, even for a single day, he should not consult even the convenience of his noble friend in doing that which his duty would point out to him.

The Duke of Cumberland

thought, that their Lordships ought, at present, to postpone the Bill.

The Duke of Wellington

said, he had before stated, that he would not oppose the second reading of the Bill. But though he might approve of the principle, it by no means followed that he concurred in the details of the Bill. He could not agree with the proposition of his noble friend (the Earl of Malmesbury), that the Bill should be postponed till the next Session; because he thought that there was time enough in the present Session to go through with it. The most important part of this Bill, as it appeared to him, was the appointment of Commissioners. That part was certainly most liable to debate; and when the House came to that portion of the Bill, it was most desirable, before they came to a decision, that they should know who the persons were whom it was intended to place in these situations.

The Earl of Winchilsea

should certainly like to know in whose hands this enormous power was to be placed, and he should not be satisfied till he had received that information.

Lord Ellenborough

said, this difficulty could easily be surmounted by a very simple plan, and one that would be extremely satisfactory to the country—that of naming the Commissioners in the Bill. He would do full justice to the noble Earl opposite, to the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, and to his Majesty's late Government in general, for bringing forward this measure, particularly as they had founded it on the Report of a Commission. In doing so, they had run the risk of incurring great unpopularity, but they had run that risk, he believed, from a desire to benefit the country. Disclaiming, as he did, any concurrence in any of the acts of the late Government, it would not be fair for him to withhold from them his approbation for their conduct with respect to this measure. Whatever complexion their other acts might bear—whatever inferences might be drawn from them—he believed that this act, either for good or for evil, would have a greater effect with reference to the people of this country than any which they had introduced. The noble Earl stated, that he had placed himself in their Lordships' hands, and that being the case, their Lordships ought to act with a becoming spirit towards him. The other night a noble Earl (Malmesbury) had stated, that he should move the postponement of the second reading of this Bill till another Session. When the order for reading it on that night was discharged, the noble Earl might have taken that course, as he had himself admitted; and he confessed that he saw no reason why the noble Earl should not adopt the same proceeding now, without giving the noble Earl (Earl Grey) any trouble whatever in opening the measure to the House. Why should he not now at once move that the measure be postponed till the next Session? He thought that this postponement was of very great public importance under the present circumstances of the country, no matter whether the late Government was re-constructed, or a new Government formed. He repeated, that it was the interest of any Government that ruled in this country, under whatever circumstances it might be formed, that some amendment should be made in the principle of this Bill, and that as soon as possible. Under these circumstances, he was most anxious that the noble Earl (Earl Grey) should either state the grounds of his Motion, and that the question should be then postponed, or, on the other hand, that the noble Earl (Earl Malmesbury) should take the equally convenient course, that of laying before the House his reasons for putting off the second reading.

The Duke of Buckingham

said, this Bill was so very important, affecting as it did the rights and property, as well as the feelings of the landed proprietors of the country, that it ought not to be proceeded with till the formation of a responsible Administration. He hoped, therefore, that it would be postponed till a proper Administration was formed.

Earl Grey

said, he knew very well that a great difficulty existed in bringing forward a measure of this kind, which he admitted to be highly important, when there was no responsible Minister present. At the same time he must say, that no particular responsibility rested on him, any further than would rest upon any one of their Lordships who, in his individual capacity, might think proper to introduce a particular measure. He was now, after what had been said, very much inclined to assent to the proposition of the noble Marquess, that this discussion should be deferred till the Government was reformed. The noble Duke and the noble Earl opposite had stated, that the material part of this Bill related to the appointment of the Commissioners. That it was a most important part of the Bill, he admitted. To them must be committed powers of a very extensive and extraordinary kind, and on their proper execution of the duties confided to them under this Act a great degree of its success must depend. It was undoubtedly essential that the persons who would have the recommendation of the Commissioners should be those in whom Parliament and the country had the fullest confidence, that they should be influenced by no private motive whatever, but look only to the qualifications of the individuals, and their competence to discharge the most important trust to be committed to them. He felt the full weight of the observation which he made, that the country should know who those persons were that were to be selected; but as to the suggestion, that the names should, in the first instance, be introduced into the Bill, to that he felt very considerable objection, because he thought it would be rather invidious to discuss the merits of individuals in that House. In his opinion, the power of appointment should be vested in the Crown, on the responsibility of Ministers, and therefore he did not like that insertion of names which the noble Baron had proposed. Having said this much, he would not object to the discussion on the Bill being postponed, so far as the second reading was concerned; but he would suggest, that it would perhaps be better to decide the question, whether the second reading should be proceeded with or not on the proposition of the noble Earl opposite. If the discussion were not then to come on, the Question must be deferred till a new Administration should be formed.

The Earl of Malmesbury

said, that his object was, to have moved an Amendment on the second reading of the Bill, and he did not see why he should be removed from the station he had intended to occupy. He had stated some days ago what his intention was, and he would say that every day during which their Lordships refrained from proceeding with this Bill added force to his original objection—namely, the shortness of the time allowed for carrying it. The proposition which he meant to move was, "That it is the opinion of this House that at this late period of the Session a measure so new in principle (he would not use a harsher expression), so deeply involving the interests of all classes of the community, and so voluminous and complicated with respect to its enactments, should be left to the consideration of the Legislature in the next Session of Parliament." It was not his intention, in submitting his proposition, to take the lead in the question; he did not see that he had any right to pursue such a course, and he had his own reasons for not doing so. He knew not why he should be brought forward merely to compel him to make a display of his opinions on this important subject. He should say a few words as an apology for having touched on the question at all. He might, and did feel, that some legislative alteration was necessary with respect to the Poor-laws; but was it necessary, because some alteration was called for, that such a wide, sweeping, unconstitutional measure as this should be introduced? He asserted that it was not. If he were ill in a common way, would he take some of those violent medicines extracted from poison, that destroyed oftener than they cured? Would he not resort to a more lenient mode of treatment, instead of adopting a supposed remedy which put him to a still greater risk than he was subjected to at the beginning of his distemper? Wise men never had recourse to such violent remedies. Many evils he admitted were to be found under the existing system, but they were not to be cured by appointing a number of Commissioners, who were to have the whole administration of the Poor-laws in their own hands. Besides, they ought to inquire whether such an Amendment had not taken place in the Administration of the Poor-laws as ought to make them pause at least before resorting to such a measure as this. He had himself presented four or five petitions that evening, stating that an amelioration had taken place in the administration of those laws, and a noble Lord near him had presented petitions stating the same thing. The petitioners deprecated the interference—the unconstitutional interference—of this prospective triumvirate, who were to have a power extending from the wealthiest parish of this great metropolis to the most humble hamlet in the kingdom. Surely such a power as this was unnecessary; and if there were a doubt about it, time ought to be taken to ascertain the fact. Now, a great many months could not pass between this and the next Session of Parliament, and in the mean time let every Member of that and the other House take counsel with his neighbours, rich, and poor, high and low, and hear their opinions on the subject. Let them do this, and then they would know what the real feeling of the country was. He would venture to say, that not one man in 100, even of those who had paid some attention to this measure, could say that he understood the Bill. An adjournment of the second reading was then necessary, in order that they might hear the opinions of every class of people throughout the country. They were not to take their opinion from the mere reports of overseers, but from highly respectable men, and there were many such in this town, who had studied the subject, who had practically studied it, and who best knew what alteration was wanted in the law. There were three parties concerned in the question, perhaps he should rather say two parties, for the third party, the Magistrates, who he would say had been most indecorously treated under the Bill, were less affected by the measures than the other two. The two great bodies affected by it were the landed proprietors and the poor. As the law now stood, the rate-payers raised their own money, and they had an opportunity either of laying it out themselves, or seeing how it was laid out. That was the right and just principle; but by this Bill that principle was overturned. The Commissioners in a very great measure superseded the functions which formerly were placed in the hands of parish officers. He thought this a most objectionable clause. He would not go into the details of the ques- tion, but, nevertheless, wished to state that his prime objection to the Bill was, that it provided no effectual mode of appeal of which the poor man could avail himself against the overseer for refusing to afford him relief. It could not be denied that there were such things in the world as harsh and grinding overseers. In the Report of the Poor-law Commissioners Mr. Chadwick stated, that he found four overseers in thirty-four to have acted harshly. What could the poor man do in the event of his falling into the hands of one of these cruel overseers? Formerly the poor man went to the neighbouring magistrates for relief, but now, under the Bill, he goes to Squire A for the purpose of being righted, and finds that the squire has no power to help him. He is told that he must go to the Commissioner, but the poor man would not know what a Commissioner meant, or where to find one. Even if he were more enlightened on this point, there were now so many commissions and commissioners on such a variety of matters, that the poor man could not tell which to go to. His present court of appeal was done away with—he was referred from authorities with which he was familiar, and in which he reposed confidence, to a strange tribunal. The whole power and authority was vested in a triumvirate, such as had never before existed in this country. He objected to the proposed system, and was therefore induced to contemplate the Resolution which he had read to the House as an Amendment on the Motion for the second reading of the Bill; however, as it was not intended to press the Order of the Day, he declined moving his Resolution in the present state of things. He wished to observe that he thought it quite too late in the Session to proceed with the Bill. To attempt to carry such a measure through at this period would be an impracticable task, and so their Lordships would find it, if they persevered. This was the 11th of July, and allowing a reasonable time for the formation of a Ministry, and an interval in the way of notice of the second reading, that stage could not be proceeded with till the end of the month, when it would be too late to enter upon the consideration of a measure so important. If he were in favour of the Bill, he would propose that it should be sent to a Committee up stairs, where the numerous clauses of so complicated a measure could be properly sifted and examined, and where their Lordships would have the advantage of the attendance and valuable suggestions of many Peers who were not in the habit of taking a prominent part in discussions in the House, but who could nevertheless afford most important assistance in a Committee above stairs. A measure like this could not be properly considered in a Committee of the whole House, which was little better than chaos. It would be impossible in such a Committee to discuss and shape the clauses of the Bill in a satisfactory manner, and it was too late to send the measure to a Committee up stairs. If this were the 11th of May, instead of the 1lth of July, it might be possible to send the Bill up stairs, but that could not be done now with any prospect of success. Were their Lordships prepared to continue sitting upon the Bill till the end of September? The House appeared disposed to wait till an Administration should have been formed, an event which, in the present state of things, was not likely to occur very speedily; here, then, was an indefinite postponement of the Bill—a delay, probably, of a full fortnight—and after the formation of a new Ministry notice must be given of the second reading. He contended, that tinder such circumstances it was impossible to proceed with this Bill to any good purpose; their Lordships could never get through it in the present Session, and therefore they had better postpone it ad Grœcas kalendas. However, as he had before said, he certainly should not now bring forward a resolution which he meant to propose as an amendment on the second reading of the Bill, which was to be postponed to an indefinite period. He had nothing further to add, having, in explaining why he could not consent to move his resolution, already trespassed on their Lordships' time longer than he intended.

The Duke of Richmond

said, it was because there had been a report of the Poor-law Commissions, because there were a great many parishes where the recommendations contained in that report were beginning to be carried into effect, and because he felt the necessity of having an Act of Parliament to determine what ought, and what ought not to be done—it was for these reasons he was anxious to pass the present measure. In fact he was afraid unless they passed the Bill, that the overseers would on their own authority attempt to carry most of the suggestions into effect, and might, from wanting the authority of law, do a great deal of mischief. There were some clauses of the Bill which he did not approve of, nevertheless he was desirous of proceeding with it, because it would carry the indispensable alterations gradually into effect, while the overseers would, if they were left to themselves, precipitate matters. The noble Earl appeared to be afraid, that if the overseer refused relief, the pauper would have no opportunity of appeal or redress, but the noble Earl was mistaken in this; the guardians of the poor could place the pauper in the workhouse if they thought fit, and therefore the pauper need not seek the Commissioners in London, he could apply for redress to the guardians of the poor. Although the noble Earl would not make a motion for the postponement of the Bill, he had taken the opportunity of canvassing and censuring some of its details, which was hardly fair to its supporters, who could not regularly go into the subject. He was disposed to suggest that the Bill should be postponed for a certain time—say a week; and if an Administration should not be then formed, the House could take the subject into consideration. He objected, however, to a postponement of the measure till next Session, on account of the evils that must arise from delay.

The Earl of Winchilsea

agreed with the noble Duke as to the evils that would result from postponing the Bill till next Session, and complained of the unwarrantable efforts of the press to prejudice the public mind by false statements of the principle and effects of the measure,— efforts which he was sorry to see backed by individuals in other quarters who ought to have known better. He was prepared to support the second reading of the Bill, without pledging himself to all its enactments. He thought that, in justice to the labouring classes, such a measure was required: as to its effect in diminishing the pressure of the present burthen on the land, that was altogether a secondary consideration with him: the welfare and happiness of the humbler ranks was the main thing. He thought that many parts of the Bill, such as those which threw open the market for labour, and did not confine men to the parishes of their birth, ought to be passed for the sake of the labourers themselves. It was mainly owing to the mistaken views and conduct of those interested with the administration of the Poor-laws that a system founded upon principles of Christian charity and benevolence had been converted into a curse, instead of a benefit to the people. A distinction ought to be drawn between the honest and industrious labourer suffering under the pressure of accidental difficulties, and the idle and improvident, who were the authors of their own misfortunes. When this was not done, could it be matter of surprise that the independent spirit which formerly existed among the peasantry should be destroyed? The idle and industrious, the profligate and the provident, were treated alike under the present system. Where then was the advantage or encouragement held out to industry, good conduct, and independence? This was a question of the greatest consequence, as concerning the welfare and happiness of the people; it deserved to be entertained without reference to party views or clamour; and he trusted their Lordships would enter into the discussion solely with a view to what might be most consistent with justice and most advantageous to the country.

The Marquess of Salisbury

must say that, in his opinion, the Bill would require very considerable amendment. He thought, however, that in the event of the Bill reaching the Committee, it might not be impossible to adopt such amendments as would soften down its harsh parts, while they retained all that was good. He wished to proceed with the measure at once, and trusted that the noble Earl would recall his intention of postponing the discussion.

The Earl of Harewood

fully concurred in what had been said as to the importance of this measure, and regretted that circumstances had occurred to render it necessary to delay it. At the same time while he admitted the importance of pushing the matter as much forward as possible, he could not agree with the noble Duke (Duke of Richmond) in the opinion that a delay of a few months could possibly make such a difference as he appeared to suppose, more particularly as instead of abuses in the management of the Poor-laws being now on the increase, it was acknowledged that they had actually diminished. Therefore he did not feel an immediate pressure in refer- ence to the subject, and could see no danger in delay. He would not advocate a postponement of the Bill, were it not for the occurrence of particular circumstances, which, as appeared to him, would prevent it from receiving clue consideration. An Administration could not be changed, particularly under circumstances like the present, without the minds of individuals being in a very great degree occupied with what was passing in relation to that matter. People's minds would not be in that state which was desirable in dealing with a measure such as this. At the present period of the Session, the Bill, it proceeded with, would be left in the hands of a few Peers in Committee, which could not fail to be attended with serious disadvantage. If called on to vote on the principle of the Bill, he should have no hesitation in opposing it, because it was not confined to an amendment of the Poor-laws simply, but professed to be an Amendment of the Poor-laws under the control of Commissioners. With regard to other enactments of the Bill, there were many that might be attended with advantage, but though he believed the plan might be more complete if placed in the hands of Commissioners appointed by the Crown (he meant more complete in point of power), he thought such a system exposed to objections of a serious nature, and could not vote for that principle of the Bill, which went to administer the Poor-laws by Commissioners. Under all the circumstances of the case, he was favourable to a postponement of the Bill till the next Session, not thinking that there was sufficient time or a favourable opportunity for considering it in the present.

The Order of the Day for the second reading of the Bill was discharged, and the Bill postponed.