"That the law of settlement and removal is generally productive of hardship to the poor, and injurious to the working classes, by impeding the free circulation of labour. "That it is injurious to the employers of labour, and impedes the improvement of agriculture. "That it is injurious to the ratepayers by occasioning expense in litigation and removal of paupers." of these laws, in their seventh or eighth triennial the words "three or seven years." reports, agreed to the following Resolu- For it appeared by the operation of the tions:Non-removal Act that many parishes formerly or at present bearing the just charge of their own settled poor and their relative proportions of the establishment charges of the Union would on successive revaluations become exempt from both. He was aware the provision of the Bill to which he would call their Lordships' attention was one which would excite some opposition; but he felt he could not act upon the just principle that every description of property ought to contribute its quota without including in this Bill the liability of extra-parochial places. Formerly when those places were excluded from parochial charges, they were forests or parks, which required no labour for their cultivation, created no pauperism, and were but of little annual value. At the present time, This last statement was entirely corroborated by the facts he had already laid before their Lordships. The Committee went on to state, in their next Resolution "That the power of removing destitute poor persons from one parish to another in England and Wales be abolished: That, as the total abolition of the power of removing paupers within England and Wales would have the effect of greatly increasing the burdens of particular parishes, it is advisable that some change should at the same time be made in the distribution of the burden of relieving | however, the circumstances of the case the poor." He might also further allude to the opinion 66 were altered; forests had been grubbed, and now required as much labour as the land in the adjoining parishes. They had been rendered valuable by the labour of the poor-that poor, the exercise of whose healthy energies people were ready to take advantage of, but who, as soon as sickness and want assailed them, were then thrown upon their parishes. With regard to the evils of close parishes, they could never be removed, if the average payments of parishes were altered according to the residence of paupers during the antecedent period. The Norwich board of guardians had come to the following resolution : That the Poor Removal Act, passed in 1846, has aggravated the evils it was intended to remedy; has had the effect of creating unfriendly feelings plied to a great extent the litigation consequent between neighbouring unions and parishes, multi on the removal of paupers, and has increased to an alarming amount the local taxation of Norwich and other populous towns." He would not trouble the House with extracts from various Poor Law reports, which were all accessible to their Lordships, pointing out the individual hardships which were constantly arising from the operation of the close parishes. In order to discourage the system, it was enacted by the fourth clause of the Bill that no abatement should be made in the quota of any parish solely on the ground of the decrease of population and pauperism in that parish; but it was intended by the Bill, that, at the termination of a period to be named by the Committee, if any question of unfairness in the assessment arose in consequence of any material and permanent change in the exigencies, together with the value of the property of any parish within a union, it should be lawful for any parish aggrieved by the change in its quota to appeal to the quarter-sessions or Poor Law Board. The meeting of the ratepayers of London, who in March last had met and petitioned the House, declared that "This unequal distribution of a common charge is a burden of which they have just cause to complain, because it is not only injurious to the property they hold, but it is a total departure from the original intention of the Poor Laws, which, by the Act of Elizabeth, direct that every parish shall be rated in accordance with its capabilities, while by the present law the expense is levied on parishes in accordance with their disability, or, in other words, the poor-rate is converted into a tax upon poverty instead of a rate upon property." He now proposed to substitute a clause for a gradual approximation to an equal pound rate in each union, to be attained in seven or ten years. The Bill, therefore, provided to carry out the principle, and to make the relief of the poor a national and not a local burden. By the 8th Clause, the principle of repayment by the State was extended from medical relief and salaries of schoolmasters and mistresses to those establishment charges over which the guardians had no control, such as vaccination, registration fees to clergy, surveys, valuations, county rates, and jury lists, as well as charges for pauper lunatics, discharged soldiers, sailors, &c. A permanent officer might be employed to watch the charges of this kind in each parish; and provisions could be inserted to ensure local vigilance and economy, by making regulations for the transfer of the burden from the local to the national resources. No one could doubt the importance of the question. It affected the whole agricultural and manufacturing community. It appeared that 3,334,207 persons were directly engaged in agriculture, while 14,125,686 were dependent on it, so that this portion of our population amounted to 17,469,893 persons, while there were only 9,356,196 engaged in and dependent on manufactures. By the fourth annual report of the Poor Law Board for 1851, it appeared that the total amount levied for poor and county rates in England and Wales in 1833 was 8,606,5017., of which the land and dwelling-houses contributed 8,070,1471.; and in one, though a manufacturing county, out of 139,3031. levied in that year for the poor, not more than 7837. was contributed by mills and factories. He did not wish to raise any unpleasant feelings by reference to recent legislation, but he grounded his demands on the claims of justice alone. In moving the second reading of this Bill, he put himself into the hands of his noble Friends; and if they thought, from the statement that the Government had the intention to explain their views on the subject, that it would not be advantageous to press it, or if they had any assurance that the Government was prepared to bring forward any measure in accordance with its principle, he would be most happy to yield and withdraw his Motion; but, if not, he must move that the Bill be read a second time. He believed, though he was not able to lay the matter before their Lordships as clearly as could have been wished, that the discussion would lead to a good result. Moved That the Bill be now read 2a. LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY said, that he hoped the noble Lord would not then press the Bill to a second reading, as Her Majesty's Government would in the ensuing week state to the Legislature what were their views and intentions with respect to alterations in the law of settlement, and in the poor-laws generally. He ventured to press this upon the noble Lord with the more confidence, as he was afraid that this Bill was one which it was hopeless to attempt to pass through that House until after it had been discussed in the House of Commons. Every clause in it either imposed a fresh tax on some part of the community which had not hitherto contributed, or imposed upon the Consolidated Fund burdens which had hitherto been borne by the local rates. The clause rendering extra-parochial districts liable to rating came under the first of these heads, and it was certainly one which he thought the House of Commons would consider a breach of their privileges, if it emanated from the House of Lords. Passing over others, he came to the clause transferring the charges for vaccination, registration, &c., to the Consolidated Fund; and he must say he did not think that the House of Commons would be likely to assent to this provision originating in the Upper House. He did not intend to enter at all into the discussion of the provisions of this Bill, which embraced the whole law of settlement, because he felt that their Lordships' time would be wasted if they discussed it before it had undergone the ordeal of the other House. He hoped that, under these circumstances, the noble Lord would feel it consistent with his duty not to press the second reading that evening. LORD BERNERS said, he was in the hands of his noble Friends on that side of the House; and if they thought the Bill should be withdrawn, he would acquiesce. The EARL of DERBY observed, he could have no hesitation in saying, in answer to the appeal of his noble Friend, that as he had asked his advice on the subject, he would, in his opinion, best consult the interests of those concerned in this question if he would leave it in the hands of Government, for he was satisfied no other than Government was competent to deal with so important and difficult a subject. It had been under the consideration of the late Government, of which he was a Member, and they found the difficulty of dealing with it very great, for, though he could not but say it was easy to discover the inconvenience and manifold objections to the present system, he must admit it was not easy to find out the means of obviating those evils. He was sure his noble Friend would act wisely and prudently if, as Government had undertaken to grapple with this subject, he consented to leave it in their hands; and he sincerely hoped they would be able so to deal with the subject as to obviate present inconveniences without introducing others. LORD BERNERS expressed his willingness to postpone the second reading till he had heard the statement of Govern ment. LORD BEAUMONT objected to such a course, and said it would be inconvenient to have the Bill down for a second reading on the paper. He thought it should be withdrawn. His noble Friend had shown him the Bill, but he must say the task was too great to be performed by any private Member, and it was almost impossible not to arrive at the conclusion that the words of the various clauses did not convey the intention of the noble Lord. The DUKE of RICHMOND also recommended his noble Friend to withdraw the Bill, because doing so would not expose him to the least disadvantage. much good in the Bill, and if his noble There was Friend was not satisfied with the statement of Government, he had nothing to do but bring in an amended Bill. Bill, by leave of the House, withdrawn. CONSOLIDATED ANNUITIES (IRELAND) The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDE pre- considered solely upon its merits, and that the question with the Government would be whether it was, or was not, a fair, an equitable, a sound, and a wise course towards Ireland to remit part of these annuities. The state of the resources of Ireland was a matter utterly beside the question; for it was perfectly clear that whether these annuities ought to be obtained from Ireland or not, was a question which could have nothing to do with the financial arrangements of the Government. Those arrangements could not in any way affect the liability of Ireland to make those repayments. He did not wish to press the case upon the present Government too strongly, but it certainly had excited great attention, and he regretted that the matter had not been allowed to rest entirely upon the basis upon which he understood the Government had undertaken to consider it. Their Lord ships were aware that a Motion had been made recently in the House of Commons with a view to pledge the House to consider forthwith these Irish Consolidated Annuities, in order to alter the arrangements respecting them, and to make those arrangements more favourable to the Irish landlords. He did not at all wonder that that Motion should be refused, as it was very natural to expect that the decision of the Government upon the question, whatever it might be, would be promulgated upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer's making his financial statement. But, although he thought that no Budget could at all affect grounds upon which the Irish Consolidated Annuities were to be levied or remitted, yet it was perfectly clear those Consolidated Annuities might very seriously affect the Budget. It however appeared that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had since denied that any pledge or promise had been given or made to the deputation, and had stated that the question of the Consolidated Annuities was to be mixed up with other financial questions. He (the Marquess of Clanricarde) had now stated what was his distinct recollection of the interview. No doubt he would be entirely wrong to suppose that the Government had departed from the pledge he understood had been given. And he was certain no man who had considered the subject could deny that it was a question of honour, of equity, and of wise expediency, and one which was not connected with any other question whatever. The EARL of ABERDEEN said, that when the noble Marquess commenced his address to their Lordships, he did not know what it was to which the noble Marquess more especially alluded, he (the Earl of Aberdeen) having no knowledge of the meeting to which the noble Marquess had referred, or of the statement which the noble Marquess said had been made by his (the Earl of Aberdeen's) right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He could not, therefore, say anything of the pledge supposed to have been given by his right hon. Friend. All he could say was this, that he felt perfectly satisfied whatever pledge his right hon. Friend might have given, or whatever promise he might have made, would be fully and strictly adhered to. LORD MONTEAGLE said, he was present at the meeting held by the deputation with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and could bear his testimony that the statement made by his noble Friend (the Marquess of Clanricarde) was perfectly correct. A communication had been made to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, by himself at the interview, in which he stated that the parties interested in this matter were not disposed to call upon the Government for any premature pledge or promise, but rather wished that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should take time to consider the whole question, and to form an independent opinion upon it for himself. He also pressed upon him the absolute necessity of keeping this question wholly distinct from the financial arrangements of the annual arrangement of the Budget. The application made to the Governmen was not upon lower ground than that o justice. The question, therefore, did not rest on a possible surplus or deficiency of revenue, or the repeal or the imposition of taxes. Nor was the recommendation of the Committee of their Lordships' House, on which the deputation acted, exaggerated or unreasonable. It was a conclusion to which a Committee consisting of a majority of Peers of England had unanimously come. These Consolidated Annuities consisted of five separate heads, all of which had been united into one charge. The deputation perfectly agreed with the Committee that there was no adequate case upon which they could ask the Government for a remission of any part of the debt, which had been incurred by the Irish landlords themselves, with their eyes open-which had been administered by them, and over which they had the entire control and disposition. It would be most unjust, after that expenditure had been incurred, that they should ask Parliament to make a remission of the money advanced to meet that expenditure. Therefore in respect to all but the charge for public works, they felt that the debt ought to be paid in full. But the Committee did feel with respect to the fifth head of the debt, that, as it had been forced upon them by the unfortunate state of the law and by the circumstance of the calamity which befell Ireland, which exceeded all that was apprehended at the time when the Act was passed under which the debt was created-the amount of that calamity was such as to defeat the good intentions of the Government that introduced the Bill, and neutralise the efficiency of the mechanism employed in its administration, the Committee did, under those circumstances, feel that they had irresistible ground, with respect to that part of the debt, for claiming a remission. The answer given to the deputation was most distinct. The principle advanced by the deputation was admitted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with whom they communicated, and they obtained the most distinct assurance that their application should not be mixed up with other considerations. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Friday, April 15, 1853. MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILL.-3° Jewish Disabilities. RAILWAY AMALGAMATION. MR. CARDWELL said, he would remind the House that at the beginning of the Session a Committee had been appointed to consider a subject not the least important, and perhaps the most difficult, that could be referred to a tribunal of that nature. The Resolutions he had now the honour to bring forward had met with the unanimous approval of the Select Committee on Railways. At the beginning of the Session the House had to deal with no less than 167 Railway Bills. Of those eighty-two involved combinations of interests between different companies. In order to understand the magnitude of those interests, he would quote only one or two examples. An arrangement was contemplated on the part of the London and North Western Railway Company, which involved a capital of 60,000,000l., and an annual revenue of 4,000,000l. It also involved the possession of 1,200 miles of railway, and the possession of the whole of the communication between all the towns north of the Thames. The case of the Great Western Railway Company was one involving the question of the different gauges, as well as many other important questions. In Scotland, again, among other questions raised, was one, whether the two lines which connected Edinburgh and Glasgow should be entrusted to different companies, or whether a combination of interests should be In Ireland a sanctioned by Parliament. propose Petition ordered to lie on the table. COLLEGE OF MAYNOOTH. The EARL of ABERDEEN said, that at the request of the noble Lord (Lord Beaumont) on the cross-benches, he now gave notice of the exact terms of the Amendment which he intended to on the Motion which now stood in the name of the noble Earl (the Earl of Winchilsea) for Monday next, respecting the College of Maynooth. The Amendment would be in these words-" That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that Her Majesty would be graciously pleased to issue a commission to inquire into the management and government of the College of Maynooth, and into the discipline and course of studies pursued therein; and also into the effect produced by the increased grant conferred on the said College of Maynooth by Parliament in the year 1845.' House adjourned to Monday next. question was raised whether the Great Midland Railway Company should become the purchasers of the great canals in that country, and, by being such, become possessed of all the inland water communication between the city of Dublin and the west of Ireland, as far as the Shannon. The House felt that it would be improper to refer questions of this nature to Select Committees on separate Railway Bills, from which conflicting decisions might not unnaturally be expected to flow, and therefore it appointed a Committee particularly to consider the whole subject, and recommend such a course of action as should to them appear advisable for the House to adopt. He had not the honour at that |