to the measure, as it did not define the | hon. Friend. He should not endeavour to law of settlement; and he considered it define the meaning of the word resivery much calculated to bring over im- dence" in the Bill, as it would lead to ten mense numbers of Irish labourers, the re- times the confusion which might arise if sult of which would be that Ireland would there was no such explanation. He conget rid of their poor, and they and their ceived that the word residence was well children would become permanent burdens understood in the practice of the law, and upon this country. He thought it would it had been admitted in the courts, and he be much better to postpone the considera- thought that the common application of it tion of the question until next Session- as living forty days in a place was suffias that measure was only calculated to un- cient. If they took the common sense settle the law of settlement-and would view of the point, there would be no diffirelieve the rich parishes of their burdens culty experienced in carrying out the Bill. at the expense of the poor ones; and Again, with respect to a widow, it would therefore he considered it an unusual mode not require a residence of five years on of legislation. As it was intended to be her part, provided her husband had resided merely a temporary measure, and the ques- in the place. This would also apply to tion was to be again opened next year, he children of a person having an industrial thought it would be much more prudent to residence for the like period of five years. defer pressing forward this Bill at present. This was just, for the place had had the He was glad to observe the unanimity that benefit of his labour, and had enjoyed the existed in the opinions of hon. Members, benefit derivable for the expenditure of his that the present law of settlement and re- earnings. It was further provided in a moval was most unsatisfactory-which was clause, that it might happen that a husa step in the right direction; and he had band had not resided for five years in a no doubt that if the measure proposed place and died, and left a widow who had were postponed till next year, that the not acquired a settlement there, in which Government would introduce a Bill for the case for one year she could not be refinal settlement of the question. moved; so also with a child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, and also with a stepchild. Children, under sixteen years of age, about which period they were able to provide for themselves, were not to be removed without their father or mother, if they had any. He did not know whether he had made himself understood, but he should endeavour to carry out the provisions of the Bill in the spirit which he had described.

COLONEL WOOD hoped the Government would not yield to the request thus made to them; for if they prevented, by this Bill, the poor who had lived for five years from being removed, no alteration of the law of settlement could affect them. If hon. Gentlemen would only reflect on the ills to which the poor were liable by removal, they would not postpone this Bill; and as he thought the right hon. Gentleman was conferring a great boon on the poor, and he wished the Bill to pass, he would not press his own Amendment for reducing the term to three years, but consent to the period of five years. He was, however, very much disposed to support a clause to make widows irremovable; and he could not help thinking the day would come when the law of settlement would be abolished, to which Mr. Sturges Bourne's Committee of 1817 were inclined; and if it did come, the whole of the poor rates of this country would be reduced from 5s. to 6d. in the pound.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL said, that it was intended to strike out the first three clauses of the Bill; the fourth clause would therefore be the first. He should also propose to make certain alterations in the subsequent clauses, so as to admit of the application stated by his right|

MR. BICKHAM ESCOTT said, that there could be no difference of opinion as to the spirit in which the right hon. Gentleman meant to remodel the Bill; but, the question was, whether at that period of the Session, and under the peculiar circumstances, it was expedient to make such an alteration in the law of settlement as was proposed in the Bill, even in its altered form. He had listened to all that had been said, but he had not heard anything to convince him that the proposed alteration would be beneficial. He would not express a positive opinion as to the effects of this Bill; but in all the speeches in favour it, it had been assumed, rather than proved, that it would be a benefit to the poor of this country. It had been said, that there should be one system of Poor Laws for England, Scotland, and Ireland.

If there was to be one uniform

system, he was satisfied that there was the clause in the Bill relating to this subnot now a system in either of these coun-ject. He should be sorry to make any tries which should be adopted for that proposition which would hazard the success purpose. He was delighted to hear the of the Bill; but he could not be insensible noble Lord at the head of the Government to the force of those objections which led state, that an inquiry should be instituted the late Home Secretary, as it appeared to next Session into the whole system of the him, to have recourse to the doctrine of Poor Laws, and more especially as re- union settlements. Believing that the degarded the law of settlement. He be-struction of the parochial system would be lieved that the Poor Laws could not be satisfactorily administered until steps were taken to ensure their local administration by those who were interested on the spot. MR. P. BORTHWICK would support this Bill as an amendment of the law, although he did not say that the proposed improvement of the law was anything like perfect. They could not open the newspapers without seeing cases under the administration of the Poor Laws which must be most harassing to the feelings of all who read them. A case was stated in The Times of yesterday, or the day before, of a state of things in a large town connected with the administration of the Poor Law at Peckham, which was most revolting to the feelings of humanity. He should to-morrow put a question to the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department on this subject. It was impossible that such a state of things could be tolerated for a twelvemouth longer by any Government.

a grievous course, he thought a middle course might be taken, as embodied in the Amendment of which he had given notice. His suggestion was, that instead of altering the parochial subdivision, it should be provided that the relief given, in any parish forming part of a union, to persons who, under the provisions of the Bill, might become irremovable, should be chargeable on the common fund of the union. The expense, therefore, of relieving these persons during irremovability would be spread over the whole union, while the question of settlement would remain untouched. He trusted that the Government would take this suggestion into consideration.

CAPTAIN PECHELL was glad to hear that the Attorney General was going to remodel some of the clauses of the Bill, which appeared to him to be unintelligible; but, considering the number of Amendments likely to be proposed, there did not appear much probability of the Bill being carried at that period of the Session. Before the Bill came into operation they ought to consider who were to be the parties to carry it into execution. The Poor Law Commissioners were at present undergoing a severe trial; and he trusted that the principle of irremovability was not to extend to them. He trusted that some provision would be speedily made for removing them from the places they at present occupied. The country would not be satisfied until a different set of persons were placed in the Commission connected with the administration of the laws for the pelief of the poor.

MR. BODKIN was content to take the Bill in the shape proposed by the Government, qualified by a suggestion of his own, which he had drawn up in the shape of an Amendment, and which he would presently advert to. He did not anticipate any complicated litigation on the question of residence, nor did he wish the period of residence to be reduced. He attached very great importance to that clause of the Bill which had reference to persons becoming chargeable on account of illness. What was the present oppressive state of the law with respect to them? A man with his family, who might have been living in a parish for twenty years without asking MR. R. PALMER asked if it would not assistance from it, became suddenly ill, be advisable, at the period of the Session and his resources being dried up, he was at which this measure was brought forobliged to ask aid from the parish. When ward, to postpone the consideration of the he got well, the parish were obliged, in subject until next Session, when the noble order to get their expenses reimbursed, to Lord at the head of Her Majesty's Governremove him and his family from the parish ment had announced his intention to move where they were resident to the parish for a Committee to take the whole queswhere they were settled. This was a monstrous evil, and was often productive of grievous hardships to poor families, and therefore he attached great importance to

tion of settlement into consideration. They could not, he contended, separate this question from the question of settlement. He knew that by enacting that a person

2 R

House went into Committee on the Bill pro forma, and resumed. Bill brought up.

printed.

Amendments to be

House adjourned at half-past Eleven o'clock.

land).

HOUSE OF LORDS,

Friday, July 17, 1846.

MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.-1. Service of Heirs (Scot 3. and passed. Coroners (Ireland); Viscount Hardinge's Annuity; Lord Gough's Annuity; Ropemakers; Spitalfields New Street.

who resided in a parish for a certain period | sideration; and he could not but express should not be removable, did not, techni- his delight that the measure was to be cally speaking, give him a settlement, but proceeded with. in point of practice it was the same thing; for what was settlement in point of practice but the irremovability from that parish? Some of his hon. Friends on that side of the House seemed to think that this question was exceedingly simple in itself, and expressed some surprise that any hon. Member should have suggested the existence of any sort of difficulty; but if he (Mr. Palmer) were not mistaken, the late Secretary for the Home Department was aware of the difficulties that attended this question. He (Mr. Palmer) was not at all sure that the measure would not give rise to a number of appeals in cases where persons in a particular parish thought fit to resist; and it was a question if hon. Members had sufficiently considered all the bearings of the case, and how it would affect certain parishes. It was said by an hon. Member that the great object of the measure was to benefit the poor; but they should take care that in seeking to do so they did not do an act of great injustice to some particular parishes. It was said, also, that this measure was proposed as a sort of recompense to the agricultural interest for the loss they might be supposed to have sustained by the passing of the Corn Law Act; but he did not look upon it as such; and at all events he did not think they should take compensation to themselves at the cost of other parties. He conceived it would be wise and prudent on the part of the right hon. Baronet to postpone further proceeding with this Bill until the report of the Committee for which the noble Lord had proposed to move.

MR. WODEHOUSE also wished the Bill postponed. The circumstances of different parts of the kingdom so much varied, that what was right in one was injurious in another; in the part of the country with which he was connected the injury would be so extensive that he must protest against the measure. The question ought not to be blinked, but it ought to be viewed in all its bearings, and this was a crude measure.

MR. TATTON EGERTON was a witness of the misery resulting in the year 1842, in the manufacturing districts, from the removal of the poor. He did not think that any objection should be taken to this measure because a Committtee was to be appointed next Session for the purpose of taking the law of settlement into con

PETITIONS PRESENTED. From Broadwater, and several other places, for Repeal of Lunatics Act and Lunatic Asylums and Pauper Lunatics Act.-From Railway Passengers on the Bristol and Birmingham Line, against the Break of Gauge, and praying that the Recommendations of Her Majesty's Commissioners for Establishing a National Uniformity of Gauge may be adopted.-By the Duke of Richmond, from Chichester, against the proposed Measure for Altering the Law of Settlement.-By the Bishop of London, from Thirsk and Bury, for the Better Observance of the Sabbath, and against the Sale of Intoxicating Liquors on that Day; and from the Rector, Churchwardens, and others, of the Parish of Saint Clement Danes, for the Establishment of Public Baths and Washhouses.-From Natives of the Principality of Wales resident in London, praying that Means may be provided for Extending Education to the Poorer Classes in Wales. From Provincial Synod of Caithness and Sutherland, for the Repeal of all Religious Tests on Admission to Offices in Scotch Universities and Parochial Schools. -From Ayr and Girvan, for Abolishing or Modifying the present Law of Strict Entail (Scotland).

THE PROTEST AGAINST THE CORN

IMPORTATION BILL. LORD REDESDALE wished to call attention to the subject which had last evening been discussed, and to the statement which had been made by a noble Lord, that it was incompetent to a Peer to protest against a vote at the taking of which he had not been present. He was aware that there was an impression abroad that this was an irregular proceeding, which impression was founded upon the course that was taken in 1823, when the Duke of Somerset had signed a protest against an Amendment to the Address, he not having been present when the question was put. Having that morning taken down three volumes at random, he (Lord Redesdale) had found the record of three different occasions, in 1678, in 1720, and in 1781, when Peers had done the same thing. It was, therefore, clear that, whether regular or irregular, the practice complained of was no novelty. The Standing Order on this subject was to this effect :

"Ordered-That such Lords as shall make pro

testation, or enter their dissents to any votes of this House, as they have a right to do without asking leave of the House, either with or without their reasons, shall cause their protestations or dissents to be entered into the clerk's books the next sitting day of this House, before the hour of two o'clock; otherwise the same shall not be entered, and shall sign the same before the rising of the House the same day."

And there was here not a single word to imply the necessity of a Peer being present when a vote was taken, if intending to make protestation or enter dissent.

LORD CAMPBELL said, that the impression on his mind was, that the right to make a protest only appertained to a Peer who had been present during the debate. He conceived it to be the protest of a Peer who conceived that his opinion had been improperly overruled. He thought that some decided rule should be laid down.

LORD BROUGHAM had thought that it was essential that Peers present only could enter a protest, and was not aware of the cases stated that night until they had been mentioned by his noble Friend. He thought that they should settle something like a definite rule on this subject.

ing; but he must say that that decision was anything but satisfactory to him. He thought it was establishing a dangerous precedent, and he also thought that the ground that the proposition was opposed elsewhere was not tenable. He did not see why officers of the army were not to be rewarded quite in the same way as civilians. There was one matter connected with this subject which, he owned, had given him considerable regret, and that was, that more notice had not been taken of the splendid services of Sir Charles Napier.

He considered that that indi

He

vidual had shown as much military knowledge, bravery, and gallantry as any officer that had served in that country. He fought two great battles, and entirely conquered Scinde; and he had not only conquered Scinde, but had brought into subjection those tribes which it had been thought impossible to dislodge from their fastnesses. After a great deal of hard work and privation, he had succeeded in subjecting them; and then he had displayed his efficiency as a civil governor by bringing them down, and making them cultivate the land. The EARL of RADNOR had always had induced them to give up their predathought that it was imperative that a Peer tory habits, and they were now useful should have been present at the debate. members of society. He (the Duke of He was sure that not one-third of the num-Richmond) did not know the reason why ber of Peers who signed the protest against some notice had not been taken of the the third reading of the Corn Law Bill had services of this officer, who had shown been present at that stage of the Bill. himself to be so gallant, who had conciliated the affections of the whole of the soldiery under his command, and who was, he believed, beloved even by the people whom he had conquered. He thought that individual should have received greater

LORD LYNDHURST said, that if the noble Lords when absent from the House had the right of voting by proxy, he did not see what objection there could be to them entering a protest against a measure. After some further conversation the sub-marks of their approbation of his conduct ject dropped.

THE OREGON TREATY.

The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE had very great satisfaction in laying on the Table, by command of Her Majesty, the Treaty concluded between Her Majesty and the United States. He had also the satisfaction of acquainting their Lordships that the ratification between the two countries had been exchanged.

ANNUITIES TO VISCOUNT HARDINGE

AND LORD GOUGH.

than the thanks of Parliament which had been voted to him.

LORD BROUGHAM observed, that having already expressed most unreservedly his concurrence in the views of the noble Duke (the Duke of Richmond) with respect to the annuities proposed to be given to Lord Hardinge and Lord Gough, it was unnecessary that he should say more on the subject at present; but he could not avoid offering a remark in reference to the observation which had just fallen from the same noble Duke respecting that illustrious man Sir Charles Napier. He believed that

The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE moved neither in this nor any other country did the Third Reading of these Bills.

the history of war present to the notice of The DUKE of RICHMOND did not rise men a more gallant soldier or a more able to oppose this Bill being read a third commander than Sir Charles Napier. Not time, after the decision to which their even in India, the land of battles, had galLordships had come on the preceding even-lantry more dauntless or military skill more

admirable been displayed than were ex- namely, the question of the gauge on which hibited at the battles of Meanee and railways were formed; and the object of Hydrabad. His noble Friend, the noble the resolutions was to determine the gauge Duke who now usually sat on the cross on which existing railways should be perbenches (the Duke of Wellington), had mitted to remain, and to establish some rehimself borne testimony to this fact; and gulation with respect to the gauge on which he admitted that never in any engagement railways at present in the course of conhad any general been more prodigal of his struction, or to be hereafter constructed, person than Sir Charles Napier in the en- should be made. He would take that opgagements in question. Not only had he portunity of observing that the 4 feet 81 shown himself a soldier of the most un-inch gauge, on which the great majority of daunted personal heroism, but he had our railways had been constructed, had not achieved higher glory still, by displaying been originally adopted upon any fixed talents of generalship which it would be principle, or from any proofs of its supedifficult to parallel, and a degree of strate-riority, but solely from the accidental cirgetical skill which challenged the warmest cumstance that that was the usual width of admiration. It would be in vain to search the waggons which ran on tram roads at our history, brilliant though it was in glo- the period when railways were first introrious exploits, for actions of military skill duced. At the end of the year 1844 there to transcend, he had almost said to match, were in this country about 1,900 miles of those of Sir Charles Napier. No doubt it railway on the narrow gauge system, and was a delicate matter to offer an observa- about 300 miles on the broad gauge systion on, but he must say he could not well tem. But the question of the break of derstand why services such as those of Sir gauge had not up to that time arisen. At Charles Napier should have been passed the commencement of the year 1845, howover with so little notice. ever, when the enormous number of about 250 Railway Bills came before Parliament, the question had been raised, and especially with two lines-namely, the line from Oxford to Rugby, and the line from Oxford to Worcester and Wolverhampton. Commissioners were subsequently appointed to inquire into the gauge question. Very strong attacks had been made on the report of these Commissioners, and their judgment and impartiality had been severely impugned. But, after having inquired into the observations made in their report, and the objections urged against it, he felt bound to state, in justice to those Gentlemen, that he entertained the highest opinion not only of the ability and the industry with which they had discharged the dif ficult task intrusted to them, but of their entire fairness and impartiality. The Commissioners had come to the conclusion that a break of gauge was a very serious evil; and further, that there were no mechanical means of mitigating that evil. They were of opinion, therefore, that a uniformity of gauge was most desirable, and they afterwards proceeded to consider how it might be attained. After having read several extracts from the evidence given before the Commissioners, the noble Earl proceeded to observe that the Report which they had made on this subject had been referred to the department of the late Government to which the consideration of such matters was usually left; and the Board of Trade

The DUKE of GRAFTON admitted the high claims which these great generals possessed on the gratitude of the Legislature and the public; but it was to be regretted that the nation did not appear to be sufficiently sensible of the depth and magnitude of the acknowledgments which were due to Divine Providence, to whose interposition all successes were to be attributed.

Bills read 3a. and passed.

THE QUESTION OF THE GAUGES. The EARL of DALHOUSIE rose to bring forward the Resolutions with respect to the Gauge question, of which he had formerly given notice. The noble Earl said that he should have brought them forward at an earlier period, had it not been for the late change in the Government; and he then undertook the task in consequence solely of a request to that effect from his noble Friend the President of the Board of Trade (the Earl of Clarendon). As the grounds of those resolutions were very fully stated in the Minute of the Board of Trade presented to that and to the other House of Parliament, and as they were founded on the Report of the Gauge Commissioners, he did not feel it necessary to occupy their Lordships' time at any great length on that occasion. Those resolutions did not refer to the railway system generally, but related exclusively to one point