to its full extremity. He could assure the hon. and learned gentleman that if he did so, he would give him every assistance in his power. Indeed, the House was bound to give every assistance in its power to any gentleman who took the difficult subject of the poor-laws into his consideration, and ought to encourage in the outset any measure that was intro. duced to amend them. If he were compelled to give a vote upon this measure as it stood at present, he should cer

objected, that the unsettled poor were irregular in their habits. Now he, on the contrary, was prepared to maintain, that the fear of removal from friends and connexions operated as a great stimulus to industry amongst that class, which stimulus would be lost by the present bill. He contended that this bill was likely to produce one of the effects that his hon. and learned friend had most strongly deprecated, namely, to make the poor look upon that as a matter of right, which in point of fact was a mere matter of chari-tainly vote against it; but as he was table relief. Instead of checking, it would likewise considerably promote the expenses of litigation.

favourable to the principle of the bill, and thought that the objections which he had against its details might be remedied in a committee, he had no wish to object to the reading of it a second time.

Sir C. Burrell defended the habits of the poor in Sussex, and the disposition of the farmers of that county, to do all in their power to relieve their wants. The poor-laws required extensive amendment; and he thought the hon. and learned member entitled to great thanks for having bestowed so much attention on the subject.

The Marquis of Londonderry complimented the hon. and learned gentleman, who had just sat down, on the ability and knowledge which he had displayed on this interesting subject, and congratulated the House on the fact, that it was a subject which had never been discussed with any thing like party feeling. On the contrary, there had never been but one object in view, which was, to resolve the difficult problem of relieving the country from the evils attendant on the existing Mr. Chetwynd said, that as the present system. The present discussion tended system of poor-laws was one of the to show how unfair it was to call on his greatest curses under which the country majesty's government to embark in a laboured, its gratitude was due to every measure of this kind when it appeared gentleman who suggested the means of that even the hon. and learned author of amending them. After complimenting the bill, with all his legal knowledge and his hon. and learned friend on the exerresearch, found himself compelled to tions he had made upon this subject, he abandon two out of the three propositions proceeded to say, that though he would originally embraced in his bill, and expe- not go the whole length of abolishing the rienced great difficulty with respect to law of settlement, he was still aware that the details of the third. To the princi- some alteration in it was absolutely necesple of the bill, every man must be favour- sary. After pointing out several inconable. The only doubt was as to the veniencies which accrued from it, not only mode in which that principle could best to parishes but individuals, he proceeded be carried into effect. In the present to attack the present system of bastardy state of the bill it appeared to him that laws; and contended, that that system bands of paupers might traverse the was calculated to promote vice and imcountry, and obtain what would be very morality, inasmuch as a woman with three like a right of settlement wherever they or four bastards was enabled to live in might find themselves in especial want of ease and idleness from the allowance she aid. That was an evil which, in his opi- drew from the father of her children for nion, ought not to be permitted. With their maintenance; whilst a married out going further into the details of the woman, with the same family, was obliged new bill, he would simply state that it to work hard before she could obtain a appeared to him to be calculated to pro- similar relief from the parish in which she mote litigation to an unexampled extent, had a settlement. He should vote for the and to create great additional expense, second reading of the bill, as all the obinstead of furthering the cause of economy.jections he had to it might be removed He wished the hon. and learned gentle- in the committee. man to find out some plan to disarm his bill of the evils which it was certain to create, if the principle of it was pushed

Colonel Wood said, he should cordially vote for the second reading, and heartily thanked the learned gentleman for bring

ing forward a measure of so much importance. He was quite persuaded, that when the details of the bill came to be known in the country, the hon. and learned author of it would be hailed as a friend by every poor man in the country. Mr. P. Moore said, he concurred in the 'unanimous sentiments of his constituents in opposition to the bill.

Sir R. Wilson approved of the principle of the bill, but hoped it would receive some modifications in the committee.

Mr. Alderman Bridges opposed the bill, though he was in favour of some alteration in the system of the poor-laws.

Mr. Scarlett expressed his readiness to make such alterations in the committee, as he hoped would do away the different objections that had been urged against it. Mr. Denman objected to the principle altogether, and cautioned the House against favouring it so far as to permit it to be read a second time.

The House divided: For the second reading, 66. Against it 82. The second reading was consequently put off for six months.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, June 3.

be expected that the country would shut its eyes to these practices.

Mr. James rose to notice a mistake into which the petitioners had fallen. It was not to keep up the influence of the Crown that such lavish acts were committed, and he thought it almost high treason to say so. It was to maintain the unjust influence of the boroughmongers.

The Marquis of Londonderry said, that the tone of the petition was not only a tone of remonstrance but of insult, and he thought that the House, with a due regard to its own character, could not receive it.

Mr. Calcraft could see nothing in the petition which was adverse to its being received. What it contained had often been repeated in that House, and doubtless would be again. Were they not accustomed to say that taxation was grievous? Was it not a fact that pensions and useless offices were kept up, by which many members were under the direct influence of the Crown? With regard to the standing army, he had always said that it was greater than was necessary for proper purposes; and it had been used, in some instances, under very suspicious circumstances. He thought his hon. friend had displayed a little too much zeal in moving for the rejection of the petition. Sir R. Wilson said, that the hon. gen

REFORM OF PARLIAMENT-REMON STRANCE AND PETITION FROM GREEN-tleman could not, as a man of honour, HOE.] Mr. Coke rose to present a petition deny that seats in that House were bought from the hundred of North Greenhoe in and sold, to his own knowledge. He the county of Norfolk, complaining of thought the petition ought to be received. agricultural distress, and praying for a Mr. Wynn had always considered that a Reform of Parliament. The petition set petition ought not to be rejected upon any forth, that taxation was the cause of their particular expressions or words which it distress, and that the enormous sums might contain, but upon the general spirit raised by it were lavished to increase the in which it was drawn up. If he looked influence of the Crown, by maintaining a at the general spirit of the present petition, corrupt majority in that House, and to he thought it was plainly intended to keep up a large standing army for no menace and insult the House. It was a other purpose than that of subduing the justification of rebellion, and if it was reconstitutional feelings of a justly indig- ceived, the House, could never after vennant people. It stated, that the majority ture to reject any other petition. of the House was always ready to support any administration, however corrupt and tyrannical. The hon. member expressed his concurrence in the prayer of the petition, and moved, that it do lie on the table.

Mr. Fremantle thought the language of the petition was most insulting to the House, and moved, that it be rejected.

Mr. Curwen said, the truth of some of the allegations in the petition could not be denied. It was notorious that seats in that House were bought and sold like cattle at Smithfield market. It could not

Sir J. Newport thought they were bound to open as far as possible the doors of the House to the petitions of the people. By so doing they would best consult the dignity of the House. To a large proportion of what was contained in the petition he gave his assent. There were some words in it which he regretted; but they ought not to be scrupulous about expressions in a time of distress like the present.

Mr. Secretary Peel said, there was a point of form which struck him as being

He

objectionable in the wording of the petition.
It was called a remonstrance. Now, if he
believed it was uniformly the custom to
call such applications petitions.
should not have considered this a sufficient
reason for rejecting the petition; but,
when he looked for the animus in which.
the whole had been drawn up, and found
this word "remonstrance," in conjunction
with the language therein used, he had no
difficulty in determining that it ought not
to be received. He was convinced that it
would form a rule that would lead to
future petitions of a still more objection-
able nature. If the language it contained
was not insulting to the House, he was at
à loss to know what would be so.

Mr. J. Smith did not believe many of the allegations contained in the petition, the one with regard to the army was altogether false. But he felt considerable difficulty in rejecting a petition of this kind; and he was determined not to do so by what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman who had lately accepted office. The right hon. gentleman had said, that before rejecting a petition they ought to be satisfied that there was an intended insult and this had not been made out in the present case. He believed there were

NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS.] On the order of the day," that the report of the committee on Naval and Military pensions be now brought up,"

Mr. Hume said, he did not blame the chancellor of the exchequer for touching the sinking fund, but he blamed him for talking one way and acting another. It was most inconsistent to buy and sell annuities at the same time. It was a roundabout way of doing that which might easily be simplified. It was better to proceed simply and honestly in the management of our finances, and to free them from complexity. He therefore moved as an amendment," that it is expedient to take from the Sinking Fund an annual sum equal to the amount of taxation to be remitted, towards relieving the distresses of the country instead of raising money by Loan, or Annuities, as is proposed to be done by the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the payment of Military and Naval

many persons who, thought every word Half-pay and Pensions."

this petition to be true. He, however, did not think so, and he knew the part which related to the army, to be grossly

false.

Mr. Grenfell said, that should the amendment be rejected he intended to propose a clause similar to that proposed in 1786 by Mr. Fox. It would be a clause empowering the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt to apply the monies in their hands to the purchase of these annuities.

Mr. Brougham said, that as light alteration of words would make the plan of the right hon. gentleman and that of his hon. friend precisely the same. The right hon. gentleman proposed two sets of commissioners; one for reducing the national debt and the other for increasing it. Why not save the trouble of bringing one set of them into existence? At present here was a set ready made to their hands, grown up and in full maturity. They were precisely of the same cast as that of the set proposed to be created. The present commissioners might sit on the same day and at the same place in their united capacity, and might be empowered to deal in the stock. The plan for double commissioners was a senseless, degrading mummery; and it was merely proposed to make it be thought that the right hon. gentleman was really not touching the sinking fund. He should therefore