Mr. Courtenay wished it to be understood that his question was intended solely to elicit information, and he had no wish to cast any censure on his Majesty's Go

vernment.

Mr. Sadler maintained, that the chief intention of the Poor-laws was to relieve the poor man who was overcharged with children, as was evident from the very first clause of the celebrated Act of Elizabeth. That, too, was the opinion of men of the highest authority. The merciful consideration of the community ought always to be extended to an individual in that situation. Who could be more entitled to admiration and relief than the man with a large family who, after long struggling with difficulties, was at length compelled to fall recumbent on the charity of his country? Locke, however some hon. Gentlemen might smile at his name, was of a similar opinion. The Government of that day committed the consideration of the Poor-laws to him, and he came to the conclusion, that a poor man with more than a certain number of children was entitled, on grounds of policy as well as humanity, to relief. It was argued, that the perversion of the Poor-laws led to numerous and improvident marriages. Now, it would be found that in the northern counties, where such abuses were said not to exist, the marriages were more numerous in proportion to the population, than in the counties where the mal-administration of the Poor-laws was said to produce those effects. He had voluntarily engaged in the administration of the Poorlaws, and his experience enabled him to deny the justice of the censures cast upon the mode of administering them. He was of opinion with Sir Frederick Morton Eden, that although there might be occasional exceptions, the general administration of the Poor-laws in this country was liable to as few objections as the general administration of any other system of laws whatever.

Mr. Slaney said, he had never argued that a poor man with a large family ought not to receive assistance, but only that that assistance ought not to be rendered him in money, and Mr. Locke, whom his hon. friend had quoted, expressly said so. His object was, not to lower the condition of the poor, but to raise their wages.

Mr. Sadler had no intention of imputing to the hon. Member any designs inimical to the poor; to whom, on the contrary, he

was well aware that the hon. Gentleman was a sincere, genuine, and indefatigable friend; but he thought him wrong on one point.

Mr. Strickland supported the proposed measure, which he considered one of sound sense. No great change could be accomplished in the Poor-laws without time and caution. In his opinion Poorlaws ought to be introduced into Ireland; but that must be done with great care. He was sorry to say, that the evils which existed on this subject in the South of England were creeping into the north. One of those evils was that of a settlement being obtained by one year's service. Numerous devices were adopted to escape granting this settlement. Some farmers hired their servants only for fifty weeks. The most injurious plan was, to suspend hiring them for a month, which subjected the labourers to great want and distress. He thought that eventually there ought to be no settlement except by birth; but such an object must be aimed at with great deliberation and caution.

Mr. Paget stated, that in many parts of England the effect of the Poor-laws was an absolute confiscation of the lands. Could such a system go on? The national faith was dwelt upon with reference to some subjects. No one was more disposed to maintain it than he was; but he hoped the principle would be extended to every description of property. The present system of Poor-laws pressed heavily, not only on the once happy farmers and land proprietors of this once happy country, but also on the poor themselves, since it produced in every man a disposition to throw the burthen off from his own shoulders to those of his neighbour. The time was approaching when in many parishes the landed proprietors would be unable to give the poor subsistence. The pressure was at present unequally distributed. If it were spread over the whole country, it would be comparatively light; but at present, in many cases, it amounted to confiscation.

Mr. James said, that Mr. Sturges Bourne's Vestry Act had had a great effect upon the operation of the Poorlaws. Previous to the passing of that Act, the Magistrates possessed the power to order what relief they thought proper to be given to the poor; but that power was now, in many instances, exercised by the Select Vestries; and they very often neg

of his Majesty's Exchequer, on the subject of the remuneration that my services were thought to merit, upon my retiring from the post of First Secretary of the Admiralty.

66

During the chief period of a naval war, on the most extensive scale, the most arduous,

and attended with the most brilliant results of any recorded in the annals of the country (virtually terminating with the destruction of the combined fleets of France and Spain, in October, 1805), I laboured with the utmost assiduity and zeal in the performance of the duties of Second and First Secretary, under

seven different naval Administrations; when, feeling my constitution to be materially injured by the close and unremitting confinement which those duties demanded, I was under the necessity (at Midsummer, 1807), of applying for leave to retire; on which occasion a pension of 1,500l. per annum was granted to me under the King's Order in Council.

"This pension, together with the blessing of restored health, I have enjoyed for many years; and now, finding that the means I possess are adequate to furnishing me with all the comforts that belong to my period of life, I am sensible of the propriety of ceasing to trespass on the national liberality, and therefore trouble your Lordship with the intimation, that after the payment at Midsummer next, it is not my tention to apply, in the customary manner, at the Navy-office for its continuance. With the strongest impression of gratitude for the bounty I have hitherto experienced from the public, I have the honour to remain, my dear Lord, "Your Lordship's most faithful and "Obedient servant. "WILLIAM MARSDEN."

in

"The Viscount Althorp." Nothing which he could say would add to the admiration which all who heard him must feel at the conduct of this gentleman, and any expressions he could use would fall very short of the sentiments contained in this Letter, but he should not have done his duty if he had not given expression to the feelings which it had produced on his mind.

Resolutions agreed to.

EXEMPTION OF THE CROWN FROM TAXES.] On the Motion of Lord Duncannon, the House went into a Committee on the Buckingham House Garden-wall Bill.

Mr. Hume had looked over the Bill, and confessed he could not understand it. On whom would the tax fall now the clause was omitted which was contained in the former bill, and made the Crown liable to parish rates?

Lord Duncannon replied, that the Bill was the same as that introduced last Ses

Lord Duncannon.-By the clause which was introduced into the former bill, unknown to the authors of it, the right of the Crown not to pay taxes was, for the first time, controverted. The effect of this Bill would be, to throw the burthen on the parish.

Mr. Hume saw no reason why private property should be taxed, and that of the King not.

Lord Duncannon repeated, this was the first occasion in which an attempt to tax the Crown had been made. The clause proposed to be introduced was declined by the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the time being, without obtaining the consent of the Crown. He did not see how the proposed object could be better effected than by the Bill.

Mr. Spring Rice said, the clause now omitted was introduced by surprise. His hon. friend talked of the Crown not contributing to pay taxes. Why, to whom did the taxes go? To the Crown itself. But, passing that by, the clause was introduced without due notice, and contrary to the understanding between the parties. The Crown was taken by surprise, and so were those who were responsible for the Bill, for the obnoxious clause was introduced in the Committee without their knowledge; and it was for the purpose of guarding the Crown against that surprise that the present Bill was brought forward.

Mr. Hume fully agreed in the impropriety of taking any unfair advantage, stil! he thought this might be done without the assistance of the parish.

Lord Althorp said, his hon. friend was quite mistaken in his view of the subject; the taxes were paid to the King, and why should he pay them again? Would that be in accordance with the laws and constitution of the country.

Mr. Hume said, his noble friend did not exactly understand his objection. If the King's property was not to be taxed, well and good; but then the whole community should be equally taxed for this purpose, not the immediate neighbourhood.

Lord Duncannon said, parishes had always to pay this description of tax. This Bill would not have been brought in if the

his unwillingness to enter into the subject, because, in his situation, his explanation might be attributed to personal feelings. The same motive prevented him from going into particulars at present, and that motive was strengthened by the statement of the Lord Advocate, that the subject was undergoing legal investigation. It was a serious matter to impeach the conduct of the Sheriff, nevertheless he abstained from entering into details, because they would necessarily excite discussion on a subject on account of which misguided persons were under trial. The Hon. Baronet had objected to the military having been brought too near the town of Lanark, in reply to which he would observe, presuming the Sheriff had received such information as might render their presence necessary, common prudence required them to be much nearer than twenty-five miles, which was the distance of the place where they were usually quartered. With respect to the employment of the constabulary force, the Sheriff had publicly declared, that of about 300 persons sworn in, only twenty or thirty answered his call, when they were wanted. He hoped all further discussion would be stopped, for it appeared extremely improper to make an attack upon a public officer in an incidental conversation.

Captain Stewart felt it his duty to say a few words on the subject of the election for Lanark. He was anxious, that the House and the country should not be misled, and therefore he requested them to suspend their opinions until an authentic account of the whole transaction was laid before them. Proceedings were in progress by which public justice would be vindicated, and the conduct of the parties involved placed in its proper light. Having been present at the election, it was only justice to the people of Scotland to say, they had not been fairly and constitutionally dealt with on that occasion. He fully concurred with the observations of his hon. relative with respect to the constabulary force; had that been properly arranged, and had it performed its duty properly, it would have been quite sufficient to have preserved the public peace. He was aware of the difficulty and delicacy of the duties thrown upon the Sheriff, and was willing to make every allowance for that officer, but having been an eye-witness to his conduct, he could not exculpate him. Where the disturbances commenced, out of a body of 320 Constables, he had

only twenty at his disposal; the Sheriff's object was to disperse a crowd of 300 or 400 persons, including women and boys, who had surrounded four or five freeholders after the election was over. This might have been accomplished by fifty Constables and when that was the case, it could not be said that the civil force was overpowered which alone could justify calling in the military. He appealed to the House whether the conduct described was correct on the part of the Magistrate. Cedant arma toga was not the case on the present occasion. The Sheriff shewed his aptitude for both professions when he vaulted into the saddle and charged up the street with all the ease of a veteran soldier. He again intreated the House to listen to no partial statements, for he was persuaded that the result of the legal investigation would be the vindication of the character of the people, and that the conduct of a few miscreants would not be assumed to be a fair representation of the conduct of the whole nation.

Sir George Clerk wished the hon. Member had himself followed the advice he had given, and refrained from provoking discussion upon a subject under judicial investigation. He regretted the hon. Member had not followed the prudent course of his hon. relative, instead of expressing himself in rather unqualified terms on the conduct of the Sheriff of Lanarkshire. The hon. Member accused the Sheriff of having unnecessarily called in a party of Dragoons to disperse a crowd after the election had taken place, but he appeared to have forgotten that the disturbances had commenced during the election, by an attack on the houses of the candidates and those connected with them. With reference to the observations of the hon. Member on the constabulary force, he must beg him to recollect that they had been brought from a distance and had been on duty from an early hour in the morning. The consequence was, that after the unpopular candidates had quitted the town, the Constables thought they were no longer wanted, and most of them returned home. After that time a numerous body of persons surrounded the Inn to which some of the supporters of the unpopular candidates had retired. The friends of the unsuccessful candidates also dined at the same Inn, and they were cheered by the mob, but the supporters of the unpopular candidates were prevented from leaving