POSTSCRIPT.
Mr. ROEBUCK called attention to an opinion by Mr. M. D. Hill (pub- lished in the Times yesterday morning) on the acts of the Poor-law Com- missioners. In that document, Mr. Hill pronounced that certain instru- ments signed by two Poor-law Commissioners severally, though the statute requires their signature jointly, were not valid instruments, and that per- tOns acting under them might, with certain limitations, institute proceed- ings at law against the Commissioners for damages. The Poor-law Corn- imasion, observed Mr. Roebuck, is about to be renewed, with extended ope- ration in Ireland: were Ministers going to do so without previous inquiry into that systematic violation of the statute by the Commissioners through which the whole fabric of the Poor-law had broken down?
Sir GEORGE GREY explained. On receiving the report of the Andover Committee, he had obtained from the Poor-law Commissioners a detailed ifistory of their mode of doing business; this he had committed to the Law- officers of the Crown; and the opinion which they gave upon it was not such as to lead the Government to doubt the validity or sufficiency of the law for the purposes for which it was intended, or of the propriety of the con- duct of the Commissioners under it. Sir George deprecated delay of the Irish measures.
Subsequently, Lord JOHN Rossett said, that he was not prepared on the dictum of Mr. Will—who founded it upon an anonymous case, and *he seemed to take a good deal upon himself—to allow that the opinion of the Law-officers of the Crown was incorrect. The delay in producing his reVlieure for the future administration of the Poor-law had been caused by the necessity for pushing forward the Irish measures. Sir WALTER JAMES asked, whether the Government intended to intro- duce; this session, any measure for the relief of the casual poor in the Me- tropolis? Sir GEORGE GREY replied in the negative. 'Mr. ROEBUCK asked whether the explanation of the Commissioners could te produced? Lord Joax RUSSELL believed that there would be no objection. In the course of this discussion, Mr. STAFFORD O'Burew advised that the English Poor-lini, with its administration, should be extended to Ire- land-, letter for letter; Ireland being treated simply 118 an English county.
Mr- Joule O'Comareer. "called the attention of the Government, for a short time, to the condition of Ireland, and to the necessity of providing some additional measures for its relief besides those Which it had already taken." He urged Government to supply solid as well as liquid food, as soup produces dysentery and other diseases. If an extension of the Poor- law were deemed necessary, the Irish Members would not resist the ex- periment. Mr. John further descanted on the cold-blooded inhumanity of certain political economists in England, who refused to relieve the dis- tresses of his suffering countrymen, in order to reduce their numbers to a level with the food now in the country. Mr. LABOUCHERE agreed that such a doctrine would be horrible, but had never heard a word of it in any quarter. Government had deeply con- sidered the best mode of supplying solid as well as liquid food. The mere fact that the First Lord of the Treasury was now engaged in negotiating a loan of 8,000,000/. for the service of Ireland, was a proof of the national desire to mitigate the sufferings of the Irish population. He hoped that the landlords and other proprietors of Ireland would cooperate.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD moved an address to the Queen, praying that ships of the Navy might be employed in the transport of corn from foreign countries. In the United States there is 1,700,000 quarters ready for ex- portation; and Ireland requires 1,500;000 quarters. Lord Joan RUSSELL replied, that forty-seven vessels are already employed, as coasters and depot-ships. For the purpose mentioned by Mr. Crawford, the ships must be temporarily altered, at a cost of 900,000/. They could then, only carry 50,000 quarters; and he doubted the existence of the alleged 1,700,000 in the United States. Government had determined to pay the freight of a vessel laden with corn which the Society of Friends had subscribed in the United States. The motion was, by consent, withdrawn. Sir CHARLES NAPIER delivered his annual criticism on the bad construc- tion of the Admiralty Beard, and its bad administration. Mr. Hume fol- lowed. Mr. CORRY defended the late Administration; Admiral DEANS DUNDAS, the present. The House went into Committee of Supply-; and Mr. WARD brought forward the Navy Estimates.
They exhibit a gross increase of about 77,0001.; an increase necessary to pre- serve to the maritime strength of England its relative preeminence. Taking the packet-service, the Army mid Ordnance transport-service, and the convict-service, separately, the expenditure in those three items alone would be 1,564,9481. The remainder of the-total sum required, 5,996,000E, would be the amount voted for the defence of the empire; only exceeding the French estimates of the year for the same purpose by 857,000E, to say nothing of the immense expenditure of France in fortifying her coasts and capital, with her enormous army, and her million of National Guards. The work of putting our ports and harbours in a proper state of defence, and of developing the steam-marine--hitherto impeded by a miserable parsimony—bas only been begun, and only within the last five months. Mr. Ward detailed some improvements already introduced. A plan toreador more efficient, and to elevate, the class of engineers; bills for limited enlistment in the Marines, and for secondary punishments in the Navy; a mode of pre- venting the disruption of crews on landing, by "paying off "—a practice now dis- continued; better inspection with systematic promotion for merit in the Dock- yards, and total abolition of the corrupt patronage hitherto so flagrant on the occasion of elections; increase of wages for artificers, clerks, &c., in various cases'. A plan for increasing the pay of seamen in the Navy has been under considera- tion, but cannot be produced this year. In other respects economy has been studied, especially a reduction of 70,0001. or 80,000/. for iron steamers.
Admiral BOWLES and several other professional Members signified ap- proval. Sir JAMES GRAHAM and Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT expressed doubts as to the policy of increasing the pay. Sir James and Mr. Fitemem Be+ RING expressed alarm at the increase of the Estimates; which Lord JOHN RUSSELL defended, on the score of national policy.
Various votes were agreed to, and the House resumed.
On the motion of Mr. PS DREW, the order of the day for the Committee on the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill was discharged; and he obtained leave to bring in a bill entitled the Poor Relief Supervision (Ireland) Bill. It was afterwards read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Monday eenrdght.
In the House of Lords, the Royal assent was given, by Commission, te the Destitute Persons (Ireland) Bill.
There was also some catechizing and explanation. Inter a/ia, Lord STAN. LEY complained of the little work found for their Lordships since the meet- ing of Parliament; and Lord LANSDOWNE showed that they had passed more bills than has been usual within the same period. Lord STAAH.EY called for explanation why five new Councillors had been appointed for the Dutchy of Lancaster. Lord Campbell, the Chancellor of the Dutc.hy, labours under no disability—he is not an infant, a femme couverte, or a lunatic; and one of the new Councillors declared to Lord Stanley that he had no conception what his own duties were to be. Why, then, the innova. tion? Lord CAMPBELL replied, that there was no innovation: there always had been a Council; which recently consisted of the Vice-Chancellor, (Mt Horace Twiss,) the Auditor, (Mr. Lockhart, the eminent writer,) the Re- ceiver-General, (General Fox,) and the Attorney-General, (Mr.-Ellis, a bar- rister); but all those gentlemen, and the Chancellor himself, though labour- ing under none of the disabilities mentioned by Lord Stanley, were ignore* of the value of land for purposes of letting, and of other matters hr the management of landed property: like Lotcl Brougham at Holkham, he did not know a field of wheat from a field of lavender. Hence the recent addition to the Council. Lord Bilocronem gave a different version of the Holkham story. Unlearned in the way to plough the land, Lord Camp- bell had called to his aid two gallant naval officers, perhaps because they were practised in ploughing the seal
The House adjourned early.
Previous page
