HL Deb 05 August 1844 vol 76 cc1753-74
Lord Wharncliffe

, in moving that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill, proceeded to explain the principal alterations made by it in the existing law. The first he should notice was that respecting bastardy—a subject which was one of the most difficult for legislation that could well be conceived. There was no doubt that the law as it stood at present on that subject was most unsatisfactory, and that the evils which it had given rise to, without, in point of fact, relieving the wants and distresses of those poor women who were the object of it, were so great and the proceedings on the part of the overseers often so shameful and disgusting, that some alteration was deemed to be absolutely necessary. He was one of those who had thought that if the evil of bastardy was to be corrected at all, it must be by improvement in the conduct and behaviour of the women, and for this purpose it was recommended by the Poor Law Commissioners, that the whole burthen of supporting the bastard child should fall upon the mother, under the idea that it would tend to enforce chastity upon the part of the woman. But in that he, and those who brought in the Bastardy Clauses of the present Act, were deceived; for, though in some parts of the country bastardy had decreased, it had on the whole increased. Some alteration was therefore necessary. Under the existing law a woman, after being delivered of a child, might apply to a Justice of the Peace, or rather upon her application to the parish for relief, the parish officer would take her to a Justice of the Peace, who was empowered to issue an order to summon the alleged father before him, and on his appearing might issue an order for the payment of a certain maintenance; but the power of enforcing him to pay a certain sum for that purpose was quite inoperative. If he refused to pay, there was no means of compelling him. Before that alteration was made the order could only be obtained at Quarter Sessions. The Clauses so enacting had been drawn by him; his impression at that time being that the fear and shame of being brought before the Quarter Sessions would be an incentive to women to take better care of themselves. He also inserted a provision that no man should be deemed to be the father of a child without coroborative evidence; because he had seen great abuses arise from the absence of such testimony. They at the same time could not conceal from themselves that there was a cruelty in not providing the woman with some effectual remedy, or with the means of supporting her child; and the question was how that remedy could be given without affecting the poor. They had accordingly come to the conclusion, that the best way to act would be to disconnect the matter entirely, to make it no longer a business of the overseers or persons connected with the Poor, but to give to the woman a summary means of obtaining from the putative father a certain amount of relief for the child. The present Bill enabled the woman to go before a Magistrate when pregnant, or after the delivery of the child, to swear to the circumstance, and to name the father. The Magistrate, upon being satisfied, not only, however, on the oath of the woman, but on other evidence, that the man named was the putative father of the child, could make an order against him for a sum not exceeding 5s. per week for the first six weeks after her confinement, and after that 2s. 6d. per week, the non-payment of which upon proper investigation would incur imprisonment. But the woman must herself go and make her complaint before the Magistrate, from whom, if she thought proper, she might obtain an order against the putative father for the payment of the money—the money to be paid to her, and not to the overseer. It was, in fact, not to go to the relief of the poor at all, nor was the mother herself to receive relief unless as a destitute person would in any other case. He thought that the effect of obliging the woman to go herself before the Magistrate was better than to have her led as heretofore by the overseer. If she did feel she had a right to receive something from the father of the child, she could go and complain, as in any other case, upon which a Magistrate would decide. The Bill also gave an appeal to the Court of Quarter Sessions, in which case also the woman must give not only her own evidence, but adduce corroborative evidence also. The next point related to apprenticeships, with which many evils were connected. By this Bill all compulsory apprenticeships were done away with. Then came several Clauses on the subject of voting for the Guardians of the Poor. That brought him to the 25th Clause, which provided for the relief of married women, in certain cases subject to the conditions on which it was to be granted to widows. The principle of the Bill was, that old and able-bodied persons might receive relief out of the workhouse. A proper understanding between the Boards of Guardians would prevent any abuse of this relaxation. If, in manufacturing and populous places, which were liable to great and sudden fluctuations in trade, they refused to apply the labour test, the people might starve—it was quite a mistake to say that people who were driven from one trade had only to turn to another; and the fact of the Commissioners being unable to enforce their order against outdoor relief in such cases showed it to be so. Some alteration was also required to correct the evil arising from the necessity of sending persons back to their own districts. In manufacturing counties the labourers were constantly changing, as from Lancashire into Yorkshire. He thought great advantage would arise from the relieving officers of the different Unions communicating with each other in reference to the parties seeking relief. The Clause relating to the burial of paupers was an improvement. He next came to the appointment of district auditors, which he thought a very great improvement. Experience had proved that when the matter of accounts was under the guidance of the overseers solely, the most improper practices pre- vailed. The introduction of auditors to audit accounts had had the best effect in producing regularity in accounts, and the saving of considerable sums of money to parishes. The new Clauses would establish what were called district auditors, so that instead of each Union having an auditor, a certain number of parishes would have them, and they would be spread over a greater space. A very important part of the Bill was the formation of district schools. An experiment had been made which showed in an extraordinary degree and satisfactory manner the advantages of such establishments. Not many years had passed since a district school consisting of children from a great number of parishes in London was established at Norwood; a very different kind of institution from those where children were farmed at so much per head, and where they were both ill-taught and ill-tended. He had never been so much pleased as he had been with his visit to the establishment at Norwood. Their Lordships might there have seen children whose very features seemed to indicate the miserable and vicious condition from which they had been removed, happy and desirous of receiving instruction; and they were instructed not only in reading, writing, and so forth, but in industrial pursuits of several kinds. If their Lordships had not visited the Norwood school, he recommended them to do so, and then they would discover what good effects could be produced by small means. An object of this Bill was, that in populous districts not exceeding fifteen miles from one part to another, there should be established a school under a Board constituted for the purpose. He apprehended that this would lead to very great benefit to the poor themselves, and to their unfortunate children, many of whom, if left to themselves, must sink in ignorance and vice; but they would now have an opportunity of being properly educated and made good citizens. There were other clauses forming what were called district asylums. Their Lordships must have seen day after day in the newspapers statements that various persons had been found wandering about without any visible means of subsistence; these asylums were proposed as places in which such unfortunate people should be accommodated for a short time previous to their settlement being fixed in their respective parishes. There was another most important clause for making the unions smaller. He believed that a great mistake was at first committed under the New Poor Law in making the unions too large. This Bill gave permission to separate parishes from Unions without consent of Boards of Guardians. Such, generally, were the objects of the Bill—a Bill which he knew was much objected to, as indeed the amended Poor Law Act had been continually. The amended law had been the object of great vituperation on the part of certain persons in this country; but he could not help thinking that those persons had forgotten the evils of the old law. He thought also that they estimated too lightly the difficulty of dealing with this subject. In this country there were different classes of men among the lower orders; persons employed in a thousand different ways. In one part of the land there were manufacturers; in another, agriculturists; and in another, a mixture of both—it was most difficult indeed to suit all descriptions of persons, three or more, of which the mass of the population consisted. But the framers of the New Poor Law and its supporters had been charged with inhumanity. He must say from experience that under the new system the poor were infinitely better off than under the old law. Let their Lordships look only at the question of medical relief. It was stated that the medical officers under the new law were too ill-paid, and therefore they did not attend to the poor. He must say that the medical officers took much greater care than ever they did before—some one or two might be underpaid, and not take sufficient care of the poor, but under the Old Poor Law, if poor persons were suddenly attacked with illness they were left unattended; and if their constitutions were sufficiently strong to bring them through the attack they might get better. With respect to relief given under the new law, he must say that any one who had seen the effects of the system under the present relieving-officers must admit that the new law was better than the old, when it was always a sort of contest and argument between the poor and the overseer as to whether they were fit objects for relief or not; and the only resource was to go before a justice, who in point of fact knew nothing at all of the case, or whether or not it was a fit one for relief. Now, if the Board of Guardians ordered relief, the poor man was sure to get it. But how long did he wait under the old law? If once their Lordships consented to return to that state of things when the parishes themselves would manage their own poor, the same difficulties would be thrown in the way of obtaining relief. Now the relieving officer was compelled to go his rounds on a certain day, and the allowances were punctually delivered, and the poor were sure to receive them. That in itself was a great relief to the poor. A great deal had been said about relief for the aged. As far as his experience went, he believed that the aged were much better treated under the present law than under the old one. He had never seen in the Board of Guardians which he had attended, nor had he heard of, any indisposition to give relief to the really destitute poor, nor was there any disposition to drive them into the workhouse, unless the Guardians were convinced that it would be better for them to go there. A great deal had been made of the separation of a man from his wife and family; and that had been spoken of as a new regulation. Why, in all well regulated workhouses under the old law the same rule existed: indeed, it was utterly impossible that the inmates of a workhouse should not submit to some regulation of that kind. There might have been instances, and they would arise, in which he would not say cruelty, but at least improper conduct, towards the poor had taken place. But, generally speaking, the practice had been satisfactory as far as respected the old and the married. The first were far better off than under the old law; and the others were in no worse condition than if they had remained under the old law. A great deal had been said also upon the Board for the management of the law. Speaking on the authority of the best information, as well as his own experience, he must say that he was as fully convinced as that he stood before their Lordships, that the existence of a Board in London whose business it was to manage the Poor Law and to correct the improper conduct of the persons who executed that law, was the greatest security that the poor could have that they would be treated in a proper manner. He felt called upon to make these declarations in consequence of the constant attempts which were made to cry down a particular law, which he thought, so far from deserving the reproaches cast upon it, deserved the reverse. It was the duty of an honest man, and more particularly of any man in a public situation, feeling himself in any way responsible for the alterations made in the law, to come forward on such an occasion as the present, and to state his conviction that the present Poor Law, so far from having inflicted wrong and evil upon the poor, had in point of fact worked great good for them. If he was asked what was the best possible mode of managing the poor, his only answer was, that although ready to admit that there had been cases of hardship, every one of which was now sure to be known, yet he should be glad to know, for he had never yet heard, what other scheme was to be put in the place of the present one, by which the situation of the poor would be bettered? The new law was undoubtedly proposed upon the best information, after great care and attention, by some men, and supported by others of different politics, whose joint object was, undoubtedly, to make a law that should be such as not only to give satisfaction to the public in general, but which should be more suited to the condition of the people requiring relief. He thought it became him, in his situation, openly to state his opinions upon this subject, because he could not help seeing that there was a constant attempt to cry down those who supported the New Poor Law, and who were anxious to ameliorate the condition of the poor.

The Duke of Richmond

said, he was anxious to offer some observations to their Lordships upon the present occasion, because he had been Chairman of a Board of Guardians from the first operation of the new Law, and he believed that no man had been more personally abused than he for taking that office. With regard to the numerous attacks against the Board of Guardians of which he was Chairman, he would only briefly say that every one published in the newspapers was untrue. They very often took up one particular part of a question,—a little truth,—and then argued upon it; they said frequently that the Guardians separated to a great extent, the inmates of the workhouse. He could declare that there was not a man of good character in that workhouse who had not an opportunity of seeing his wife and children three or four times every week if he wished. It had also been stated, that the old people were ordered to go into the house instead of having relief given to them out of it. He never knew an instance in which that had been done, except in one case; a very amiable and charitable lady applied to and canvassed the Board of Guardians to give out-door relief to an individual. The Board felt that if once they permitted a canvass such as that to take place, they would show to the paupers of the district that if they had friends with power and influence they would be better off than those who had none. Consequently the Board refused to give out-door relief in that case for a time, but afterwards, when the effect of the canvass had gone off, they gave out-door relief as before. With respect to the first Clause in the present Bill, proposing an alteration of the bastardy Clause, he confessed that he had thought the Clause in the new Act a good one; but he was not prepared to vote against this Amendment, because after reading the Return on their Lordships' Table he saw that in some districts, and more especially in the manufacturing districts, bastardy was on the increase. He was, therefore, willing to try whether this Amendment might not prevent such increase. He was not opposed to the Clause for affording relief to widows, for, even now, he knew that widows were relieved out of their unions. With a proper communication between the officers of different unions, the plan might work well, the object being, not to give relief to a person leading an immoral life or earning large wages. He agreed with his noble Friend that great advantage would arise from making the unions smaller. He had always thought that the Poor Law Commissioners had made the unions much too large in size; because, if he understood anything of the principle of the Poor Law Bill, he thought that every pauper should have it in his or her power to go before the Board of Guardians to make a complaint, which could hardly be possible if they had fifteen or sixteen miles to go to the Board, and the same distance to return home. He was happy to find, therefore, that the size of the unions was to be reduced; but he thought that the Poor Law Commissioners should give notice to the Boards of Guardians, before parishes were severed from unions. There were other points in the Bill to which he would not more minutely advert. But he thought that there ought to be some alteration with regard to the visitations of Assistant Commissioners. It was generally felt in the country that they visited unions for the purpose of screwing the law a little tighter. He wished to see a body of officers appointed who should visit the various workhouses, and see what accommodation they afforded, and how the inmates were treated, and report accordingly to the Government; and that they should make their visits without notice, and without the control or interference of the Guardians or the officers of the Union. He should prefer that those reports should be made without the knowledge of the Guardians. This he regarded as one of the most important features and one of the most important Amendments of the present law. There were, however, several other important things which he thought should be inserted in the present Law. He alluded in the first place to a case which was not unfrequently brought before the Magistrates at Quarter Sessions. At present, if a man, or a woman, or a boy ran away from the workhouse, that individual was charged with felony for taking away the clothes. Now, he denied when they ran away from the workhouse in that manner and took their clothing with them that that act was felony, even though it might be regarded in that light by the Law. Whoever heard of a deserter from Her Majesty's service, taking away his regimentals with him, being tried for stealing the Queen's jacket? The thing was absurd, yet he knew it was the Law. He wished to have it provided by the present Bill that that act should not be punishable as a felony, but that there should be some punishment attached to the offence of running away, which punishment should be applied. Another case of what appeared to him to be one of extreme hardship to the poor in an agricultural parish he would state to the House. Suppose a poor man—a woodcutter—in a parish was taken ill and became unable to work. It was impossible for such a one to pay 10s. or 12s. a-week for a surgeon; he must apply to the Board of Guardians for medical aid, and if he received it, the Law, as it at present stood, declared that medical aid was to be regarded as relief, and that the person receiving it was liable to be removed to the parish to which he belonged. That, in his (the Duke of Richmond's) opinion, was an injustice. He thought they should not, for having granted mere medical aid alone, remove the pauper the moment he recovered back to his own parish. He trusted that his noble Friend the President of the Council would have no objection to the insertion of a Clause in the Bill to abolish that principle in the existing law. There was yet another point to which he wished to refer, and it was one which he approached with considerable delicacy. He regarded the medical officers of Unions as highly efficient, diligent, and respectable men. In his own Union he knew that they were very closely watched; and he knew, also, that they did their duty to the poor in such a manner as entitled them to the highest credit. It must be remembered, however, that the medical officers received a certain fixed sum annually for the performance of their duties, and that they received, in addition, a further sum for fractures and operations. Now, he (the Duke of Richmond) was far from imagining it for a moment, as he was sure any one of their Lordships would be—but might not the people suppose that operations might sometimes be performed, for the sake of the extra fee, which really were not required? He was of opinion that no operation should be performed in a workhouse without first calling in and obtaining the concurrence of another surgeon in the proceeding; and he thought, indeed, that no operation should be performed in a workhouse if there were a county hospital in which it could be undertaken. By the present law, however, parishes were not allowed by the Commissioners to subscribe to the county hospital. Any noble Lord or other person might individually subscribe and give orders for admission to the hospital, but from the parish that right was withheld. In his opinion that restriction upon parishes should be removed, or at all events, contracts should be made with the officers of the county hospital to take in cases which could be better attended to there than in the infirmary wards of the workhouse. That part of the proposed Bill which had reference to the apprenticeship of pauper children he looked upon as an improvement in the existing law; but it did not go far enough, for he was strongly of opinion that all settlement by apprenticeship should be done away with — that a boy should not gain a settlement by his apprenticeship. There was another enactment in the present law which he thought inflicted a great hardship upon the poor, and which he would illustrate by a case with which he was acquainted. A girl of 17, who was in service in Brighton, caught the scarlet fever. Her mistress sent to her mother to take her home. Her mother resided in Brighton, but belonged to a parish thirty miles off. She was afraid to take the girl into her house on account of the contagion. The girl went before the Guardians, who gave her a suspended order. She was taken to her parish in a cart, where the Guardians offered to take her into the workhouse, and to provide her with a place when she should recover. She replied that she was very much obliged to them, but that her mistress had kept her place open for her, and that she wished to go back to Brighton. The Guardians, however, had no means of sending her back to Brighton, so they entered into a subscription on her behalf, and the overseer was actually paid for taking her back. These unfortunately were not cases of very rare, but of very frequent occurrence, more especially in towns where Local Acts were in force; yet this Bill did not propose to get rid of Local Acts, or of Gilbert's Acts. He would not say much of Gilbert's Acts, but he did say that if they were better than this Act the whole of the country should be under Gilbert's Acts. If, on the contrary, this Act were superior to Gilbert's Acts, then let the whole of the country be put under it, despite the clamour of a few persons, whose end was to gain a short-lived popularity; and certainly such popularity could not be very lasting, for the people in the end would be sure to find out the motives which urged them to adopt such a course. By the present law, in case of any infectious disease breaking out in a workhouse, it was the duty of the Guardians to appoint a visiting Committee, who were to visit persons attacked with the malady. The Committee, no doubt, did usually perform their duties conscientiously, but it could not be denied that in some cases their duties were neglected; and he would put it to their Lordships whether it would not be far better, instead of constituting this visiting Committee, that they should appoint some consulting physician or experienced surgeon with whom the duty and the responsibility should rest? He wished also to call the attention of his noble Friend to a provision in the Bill which for the first time recognized a Petty Session as a Court. Two justices meeting and dining together formed a Petty Session, but had never been considered to form a Court. He merely alluded to this, in the hope that his noble Friend would reconsider the point. On the whole, he regarded the proposed Bill as a very great improvement upon the law as it now stood. He entirely concurred with his noble Friend that the present Poor Law had been a great amelioration of the old law, but he thought that the law might still require amendment. It had always appeared to him that the worst part of the old law was that it contained enactments which had never been acted on, and all he wished was that before long such further amendments might be introduced into the present law as would make it advantageous that it should be acted on to the very letter. To make it more stringent than it now was he was sure none of their Lordships wished; for himself, he felt that the Poor Law had been advantageous to the better class of poor, though he did not doubt that it gave dissatisfaction to those idle loose paupers who were wont to hang about the house of the overseer, forcing him to give them money to which they were not entitled. To such as those he doubted not that the present Bill had given great dissatisfaction; but he felt bound to say that the less palatable a measure of this character would be to them, the more beneficial it would likely be to the honest, sober, industrious, but unfortunate poor.

Earl Fortescue

would not at so late an hour of the evening detain their Lordships with any lengthened observations; but he was anxious to express the entire concurrence which he felt in all that had been said by the noble Duke who had just sat down, as well as by his noble Friend the President of the Council, with reference to the good effects which had generally resulted from the operation of the Poor Law as it at present stood. He was quite satisfied that whilst it had removed from relief out of the poor-rates a vast number of the idle and undeserving who extorted from the fears of the overseers that to which they were not justly entitled, it had given a more liberal amount of relief to all those objects who were truly deserving of charity and aid. He was happy also to state that he considered all the alterations proposed in the present law, with a few exceptions, to be improvements. If he could not express much confidence with respect to the Bastardy Clause, yet he must admit that the law, as it now stood, had not produced that good effect which he, in common with many others, had expected from it. He was not, therefore, disposed to oppose the proposed change in that Clause, he only hoped it might prove in its working to be a real improvement upon the existing law. To the 26th Clause, which gave the power of granting permanent relief to widows out of the Union to which they belonged, he felt a greater objection than had yet been urged to it. It appeared to him to be the establishment of a new principle in the law to compel Guardians to give relief to persons at a distance from their Union, and over whom they had no surveillance whatever. It was a painful thing to oppose any relaxation of the law, more especially when he felt satisfied that it was brought forward with the kindest and most humane motives; but believing, as he did, that the present law had worked beneficially, and that in all cases of great hardship, the Commissioners were willing to exercise the power which they had of granting relief, he should wish so to modify the Clause, limiting the relief to be granted to widows to twelve months alter their widowhood. He would not take up the time of the House by pressing this recommendation unless he found that there was a pretty general concurrence in his views; but if there should be such concurrence, he should be very willing, on going into Committee, to introduce such a provision as he referred to. He could not conclude without expressing his entire concurrence in the praise which had been bestowed by the noble Lord, the President of the Council, and by the noble Duke who had preceded him, upon the constitution of the Board of Commissioners at Somerset-house. He must say, that he considered the Gentlemen who composed that Board to be entitled, by the ability, temper, and humanity which they had shown in the discharge of their duties, to the gratitude of the poor and to the confidence of the public at large. He was the more anxious to say thus much in their favour, knowing how universally they had been made the subject of attack out of doors, whilst they had not been so stoutly defended within as they deserved.

The Earl of Hardwicke

thought it could not be denied that their Lordships were a very fitting assembly to discuss this matter, for he believed that there were to be found amongst their Lordships not less than eighty-three Chairmen of Boards of Guardians. The knowledge which they must bring to bear upon the subject—the deep feeling which they must have for the poor, and for those who lived about them, must render them more peculiarly fitting than perhaps any other body in the country to legislate upon this important subject. Unquestionably, he should have liked to make some remarks upon the opinions which had been promulgated with respect to this law for some years past. All he would now say, however, was, that spite of the most powerful resistance from a certain portion of the press,—spite of the excitement which had been attempted to be got up in some parts of the country for political purposes—spite of all that—and despite, too, the assemblies of people got up on various occasions in the county in which he lived, by those who were anxious to oppose the law by every means in their power, yet he would say, that from the humbler classes of society in the agricultural districts he had never heard a word which had not clearly evinced to him, that there was upon their part a confident feeling that this was a law which would work for their ultimate benefit, and which would tend to place them in a better position than they had ever been in before. He contended, that it had done this—that the poor of this country were in a better condition than they had ever been in since the commencement of this country as a country, or since their existence as a people. When he had heard statements as to the olden times in England, and the happiness which the poor man then enjoyed, he set about to discover and to find out what really was the fact upon that subject, and he spoke to aged persons, and asked them to compare their present state and condition with their more youthful days, and to tell him whether they were happier now than then. When he had taken occasion to propose such a question to aged people, the invariable reply which he had met with was, that they considered they had great reason to congratulate themselves upon their present state and condition. Such was shortly the result of his opinion with regard to this law; and he must say that to the general practical working of it he had never heard any other language held among the poor, but that it tended to ameliorate their condition, and would tend to their ultimate relief and benefit. He held in his hand a Report of the state and condition of the labouring classes, made some years ago before this law was passed. Every noble Lord must remember the state and condition of his own part of the country at that time, the discontent which existed between the farmer and the labourer, the allowances made to the poor, and the wages paid out of the rates; all these things tended to produce a state and condition of the people of the most alarming character. He could only say, that when he first became possessed of property, just as this law was being introduced, he was asked by the farmers and gentlemen of his neighbourhood, "What are we to do? We are in an alarming condition." This law came into operation, and things were totally changed; the poor, contrary to what they had done, respected the middle classes. How came that about? There must have been some good reason for it. It had been asserted, and with great power and force, too, that the state of the law as it now existed had a tendency to grind and oppress the poor, and to lower the rate of wages. He felt bound to say that if this law were worked in that way it would have that effect. If bad people would work it in that way, there was no Poor Law that could be passed, but might be made to grind the poor and hurt their feelings; but was such the disposition of the people of England? One of the modes of grinding the poor that he had heard of was this:—A labourer came to a Board of Guardians and said he was in want; it was the custom of some Boards of Guardians, and of the Board over which he presided, to inquire of the labourer, "Have you tried to get work?"—"Yes." "Very well; if so, you must prove it. You must test that fact; here, take this paper, and get it signed by the farmers that you have applied to them for work, to enable you to show us that you have tried to get work." He admitted that that practice might have been made a very great evil—that that instrument might be used in this way—that the labourer might go from farmer to farmer and be refused work until he came to one who would offer him work at a very low price. But that man might come to the Board and say, he had been refused work except by Mr. So-and-so, who had offered him work at such a low price, that he could not take it; and, he would ask their Lordships, would the Board refuse relief in such a case? If it would, that would be a grinding law. But if the labourer would enter into the spirit of the law, he would know that at the Board of Guardians was his surest protection. He might state that he had refused wages at such an amount, and he (the Earl of Hardwicke) contended that that Board of Guardians, if it did not consider that man in a state and condition to be taken out of the labour market altogether, and throw his support on the parish would not do its duty. He (the Earl of Hardwicke) contended that the law was a humane one; and that if the labourer when in necessity would go with his family into the workhouse for a short period, he would find that the parishes would be unable to support any system of low wages which forced him into the workhouse, and the law would thus be the means of raising the wages of the labouring class. He would not proceed further on this subject at that time of night, but must address himself to one or two Clauses of the Bill. He had no objection to the Amendments generally; they unquestionably were Amendments of the Law. He concurred in all the Bastardy Clauses except one—the fifth—the one which made money payable to the mother of the bastard. That was a very serious question, and on discussing it formerly they had considered this very point as fatal in itself;—that the practice of paying the mother encouraged the offence and begot more bastards, till the mother was enabled to support herself on the price of her own prostitution. He was borne out in this view by a very valuable paper written by Sir Edmund Head on this subject. He said, Whatever the enactment be which is most effective in checking bastardy, to that we must look as checking infanticide.…On the other hand, the law which holds out to a woman the prospect of maintenance for her bastard, or holds out the hope of a tardy marriage from compulsion not from affection, that law may be said to promote bastardy, and among its consequences, infanticide. The old law held out to a woman having a bastard this encouragement— Your oath shall compel any man to relieve you of your burthen, and while it gives you the privileges of a wife, it may do more—it may get you a husband. He did hope that this principle would not be re-established. It would be much better, in his opinion, to make the money payable to the parish from the father, and that the parish upon the application of the mother should support her. The only other Clause to which he objected was with regard to district schools. Certainly his noble Friend (Lord Wharncliffe) had been very much pleased with Norwood; he had no doubt that school was admirably conducted, but these district schools required some consideration, for in many parts of this country the whole of the schools were maintained by the landlords themselves. If they made any system of relief or education so excellent and expensive, they would have a falling off in charity. People would not pay at both ends, and they would have a falling off in their charitable institutions. The Poor Law Bill should not have that effect at all, it should rather be a disagreeable bill than an agreeable one; and they ought only to take care that relief was given to parties in distress, and not interfere with charitable institutions; for the moment they did so those institutions would break down. He had a strong objection to the taxing of the people by the Poor Law Commissioners for carrying out their own views. He thought that a great evil. They would create an odium against the Poor Law altogether, if they allowed the Poor Law Commissioners to come down and tax the people where they had an interest in doing so. But he would put this case:—Suppose a pauper who had five children sent them to the asylum or to the district school, and went into the workhouse himself. The pauper would probably find work or would say that he had done so, and would quit the workhouse, leaving his children in the district school. They might have some difficulty in finding the father, and what in that case was to become of the children? According to the principle that had been laid down, the father must support his family if he was able do so, and the children ought therefore to be no longer retained in the school. They must recollect that the maintenance of the children in the school would be attended with great expense to the parish, It was not his intention to propose any Amendment; but he must say that he thought they ought to have had more time allowed for the consideration of this Bill. He wished it had been possible to refer the Bill to a Select Committee, in order that its enactments might have been carefully considered and digested. He would not, at this late period of the evening, trespass further upon their Lordships' time, and he begged to thank them for the patience with which they had listened to the few observations he had addressed to them.

Lord Lyttelton

concurred with the noble Earl who had just sat down, in regretting that this Bill had not been brought before the House at an earlier period of the Session. They had not had time afforded them to give due consideration to the measure, still less to consider the Amendments which had been suggested by some noble Lords. There was one point to which the noble Lord had called attention, on which he (Lord Lyttelton) wished to correct him, as to the Board of Guardians not being allowed to subscribe to charities or hospitals. He believed that in many cases that was done. He agreed in many of the observations made by the noble Earl who had just sat down, as to the general question, and especially in his remarks on the subject of district schools. That was one of the points which, in his (Lord Lyttelton's) opinion, required most careful attention and deliberation. He might observe, that the noble Lord who had introduced this Bill had stated that those schools were to be established only in the most populous districts; and that, he believed, was the general understanding. At this late period of the Session, and especially at this late hour of the night, he would not occupy their Lordships' time by any lengthened observations on this subject; but he could not but feel some regret that any necessity had existed for introducing a Bill of this nature, for the "relaxation," as it was called of the existing law. He was not disposed to deny that some necessity might exist for the introduction of this measure, and rather than the people should be subjected to sufferings which might be relieved by this Bill, it was, undoubtedly, advisable that recourse should be had to such a measure. At the same time he believed that the tendency of the existing law was, unquestionably, to remove from the minds of the poor the idea that the poor's rate was the proper and legitimate source to which they ought to look for support and maintenance. He was not prepared to oppose the present Bill, though it was his intention to propose some few amendments in Committee.

The Earl of Stradbroke

said, that since the adoption of the present Poor Law Act in 1834, he had been Chairman of a Board of Guardians, and he could state with the utmost confidence, that that Act had had a most beneficial effect in all the Unions that had come under his observation. The principal Clauses in the present Bill, were those relating to bastardy. It had been correctly stated by the noble Lord, the President of the Council (Lord Wharncliffe) that, previously to the adoption of the New Poor Law Act in 1834, the gaols of this country were filled with men who had been committed by Magistrates for non-payment of bastardy orders. Under the present Bill the reputed fathers of bastard children were liable to the same misfortune—to the penalty of three months' imprisonment. In fact, they were now going back to the old Saw, and this he thought a valid reason for opposing the present Bill. He understood that this Clause was introduced under the supposition that bastardy was extending. He had taken some pains to inquire into this subject in the neighbourhood in which he resided, and he could assure their Lordships, that since the adoption of the present Poor Law, bastardy had greatly decreased; but, if their Lordships agreed to this Bill, which allowed the payment of money to the mothers of bastard children, for the maintenance of such children, its certain effect would be to increase bastardy. It was already known that a Bill of this nature was likely to be adopted, and he could assure their Lordships, from information he had received from different parts of the country, that there had been great rejoicing among a certain class of people in anticipation of receiving what they called their pay. He could state—and he was sure that many noble Lords, who were Chairmen of the Board of Guardians, could confirm his assertion—that, since the adoption of the New Poor Law, a great stimulus had been given to employment. Considerable objection had been urged to the separation of husband and wife, which was enforced under the present law; but, if noble Lords would read the Reports which had been made on the subject of the Poor Law, they would find that in workhouses under the operation of Gilbert's Act, and of Local Acts, where no such separation took place, the greatest vice and immorality existed. Had time allowed, there were several other points to which he wished to have adverted; but he would not trespass farther upon their Lordships' attention.

The Bishop of Exeter

moved that the debate be now adjourned.

The Earl of Radnor

said, he would not detain their Lordships many minutes. He entirely agreed in the observation of his noble Friend, who had spoken early in this debate, with respect to the working of the present Poor Law, and he considered that great praise was due to the Commissioners for the manner in which they had carried the measure into operation. He thought, when such warm eulogies had been passed upon the present law, some praise was also due to those persons by whom that law was introduced. A noble Friend of his, who, he regretted to say, seldom attended in that House, and also a noble and learned Friend of his not now present, were, he conceived entitled to the gratitude of their Lordships for their advocacy and support of the existing law. He had not obtruded himself upon their Lordships for the mere sake of making this declaration, but because he wished to protest most strongly against the bastardy Clauses in the Bill now before the House. He believed that the original Poor Law Amendment Bill, as it came from the House of Commons, contained no bastardy Clause; and in that respect it was conformable with the Report of the Commissioners, on whose recommendation that Act was founded. He thought it was most prudent to leave that matter untouched—to leave to women the preservation of their own virtue, without any legislative enactment on the subject. He thought so at the time, and he still continued to think so. The only part of the New Poor Law which had not acted well had been the bastardy Clauses; all the other parts of that measure had worked satisfactorily, the bastardy Clauses alone had not done so. They had been altered once or twice in the interval, and they were about to undergo a fresh change. The first mode in which they were carried into effect was, by suffering the woman to swear her child before she was delivered; then she was suffered to receive money in person from the father; and, lastly, resort was had to imprisonment in gaol if the money was not paid. All those conditions having been abolished were again to be revived; women were to be allowed to swear to the father whilst yet pregnant; she was also to be suffered to receive money of him directly, and he was to be sent to goal if he did not pay. Those were all of them admitted grievances of the Old Poor Law, and yet they were about to put the present law into the state in which it formerly was. He should not be able to attend the Committee on the Bill; but, if he had been able to be present, he should have said "Non Content" to every one of the Bastardy Clauses, and have voted for leaving the law in that respect exactly as it was at present.

The Marquess of Normanby

could not allow the question of adjournment to be put without giving his cordial assent to the assertion of the noble Lord on the opposite side, who had stated that it was a positive injustice to their Lordships' House to bring in a Bill of the magnitude and important character of the measure on the Table, and expect it to be passed in three or four days. He would not say more at that moment, as he had already given notice of his intention at the meet- ing of the House to-morrow (this day) to call their Lordships' attention to the state of public business; at the same time, he must say, that he had much rather the right rev. Prelate had postponed his Motion, as a little more time would thereby have been afforded for the discussion, at the same time, being of the same opinion with the right rev. Prelate, he could not but say "Content" to his Motion.

Motion for Adjournment of debate put.

Lord Wharncliffe

hoped, that the right rev. Prelate would not persevere in his Motion for an adjournment of the debate, as rather than postpone the present Bill until another Session he would consent that the sitting of the House should be prolonged—their Lordships might sit on Wednesday, and even on Saturday, or, if necessary, into next week, in order to give the Bill the consideration they might deem needful. The Bill was of very great importance, and he trusted that it would be suffered to proceed that evening.

A noble Lord

Why not go into Committee pro formâ?

Lord Wharncliffe

With respect to the observation that the Bill had been introduced at a very late period of the Session, he regretted that circumstance as much as any of their Lordships, and could only attribute it to the pressure of business, occasioned by the numerous Bills demanding the attention of the other House wherein it originated, and also to the measure itself having taken up so much time during the discussions upon it in the Lower House. If their Lordships took the Bill into consideration, the alterations deemed necessary might be made, and it would be then passed this Session, and he begged to recall to the recollection of the House the fact that the present was the third or fourth Session that the question of amending the Poor Law Bill had been before Parliament.

Lord Campbell

could not understand why the Bill had not been brought into that House first, as if it had begun there, the eighty-three of their Lordships, who sat as Chairmen of Boards of Guardians could then have taken care of the interests of the poor, and have introduced such modifications of the present law as would have answered all the objects effected by the present Bill. He repeated he could not comprehend why the Bill had not been begun in their Lordships' House.

Lord Wharnciffe

suggested that the Bill contained several money Clauses, which their Lordships were not competent to originate.

Lord Campbell

Then why not omit the money Clauses, which were in no respect essential to the Amendments and alterations effected by the Bill.

The Earl of Shaftesbury

again put the question of adjournment, and declared the Contents to have it.

Lord Wharncliffe

The Non-contents have it. We want the Bill to go into Committee. I shall divide.

The Motion, for adjournment was however, withdrawn (by leave of the House) and the House went into Committee.

Lord Wharncliffe

suggested to the Bishop of Exeter that they might go through the unobjectionable Clauses.

The Bishop of Exeter's

objection to proceeding was simply this, that he had no time to consider the measure at all. He would not undertake to say which Clauses of the Bill were objectionable or which were not; but this he would say, that there were few of the Clauses which did not require consideration, and that a New Poor Law Amendment Bill ought to have proceeded upon a very different principle from that which formed the basis of the Bill now under discussion. At the same time, he would not say that the measure was not one to which he ought to give his support. All he said was, that he required more time to consider it.

The Preamble of the Bill was then postponed, and the House resumed.

House adjourned.