Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

of the legislature. Much might be effected by a plan of this nature susceptible of constant improvement. Such a plan would convert the relief granted to the poor into an encouragement to industry, instead of being, as it is by the present poor-laws, a premium to idleness, and a school for sloth. There were also, a number of subordinate circumstances to which it was necessary to attend. The law which prohibits giving relief where any visible property remains should be abolished. That degrading condition should be withdrawn. No temporary occasion should force a British subject to part with the last shilling of his little capital, and compel him to descend to a state of wretchedness from which he could never recover, merely that he might be entitled to a casual supply. Another mode also of materially assisting the industrious poor was, the advancing of small capitals, which might be repaid in two or three years, while the person who repaid it would probably have made an addition to his income. This might put him who received them in the way of acquiring what might place him in a situation to make permanent provision for himself. These were the general ideas which had occurred to him upon the subject; if they should be approved of by any gentleman in the House, they might perhaps appear at a future time in a more accurate shape than he could pretend to give them. He could not, however, let this opportunity slip without throwing them out. He was aware that they would require to be very maturely considered. He was aware also of a fundamental difficulty, that of insuring the diligent execution of any law that should be enacted. This could only be done by presenting to those who should be intrusted with the execution motives to emulation, and by a frequent inspection of their conduct as to diligence and fidelity. Were he to suggest an outline, it would be this. To provide some new mode of inspection by parishes, or by hundreds-to report to the magistrates at the petty sessions, with a liberty of appeal from them to the general quarter sessions, where the justice should be empowered to take cognizance of the conduct of the different commissioners, and to remedy whatever defects should be found to exist. That an annual report should be made to parliament, and that parliament should impose upon itself the duty of tracing the effect of its

system from year to year, till it should be fully matured. That there should be a standing order of the House for this purpose, and in a word, that there should be an annual budget opened, containing the details of the whole system of poorlaws, by which the legislature would show, that they had a constant and a watchful eye upon the interests of the poorest and most neglected part of the community.-He was not vain enough to imagine that these ideas were the result of his own investigations, but he was happy to say, that they arose from a careful examination of the subject, and an extensive survey of the opinions of others. He would only add, that it was a subject of the utmost importance, and that he would do every thing in his power to bring forward or promote such measures as would conduce to the interest of the country. He gave the hon. gentleman every possible credit for his humane and laudable motives, yet seeing the subject, in the light in which he did, he was compelled to give his negative to the mo

tion.

Mr. Lechmere said, that the bill was not only founded in humanity, but policy also. The late alarming scarcity ought to induce every man who wished to encourage the industrious poor, to promote every plan of relief for them at such a crisis. No agricultural labourer could at present support himself and his family with comfort; for a barley loaf was at the enormous price of 124d, while the whole of the labourer's daily wages amounted to no more than one shilling. "Haud ignara mali, miseris succurrere disco," was a noble sentiment; but he would rather have the labourer enjoy the honest fruits of his industry, than be obliged to receive his due as an eleemosynary gift. It appeared to him that the minimum of agricultural labour should be fixed.

Mr. Buxton said, that the bill did not appear likely to be of much service, for if the price of labour were to be fixed by the justices of peace, he feared many industrious people would be thrown out of employ, and become a burthen to their respective parishes. The people he alluded to were those who by sickness or old age were rendered incapable of doing so much as a common labourer, and who would consequently be rejected for persons of more strength and activity. He had consulted with various well-informed farmers and gentlemen in Norfolk who una‐

nimously concurred in opinions, that the bill would be injurious.

Mr. Vansittart commended the hon. gentleman who introduced the bill, for his bumane intentions, but he had no hesitation in voting against it, because he thought any arbitrary regulations of the justices of the peace, in the price of labour, would be a greater evil than that already complained of. The bill appeared to him unnecessary, as the law since the reign of James 1st, enabled the magistrate to fix the price of labour.

Mr. Burdon did not think that the industrious poor were in that wretched situation stated by some gentlemen. The industrious labourer, in many instances, was able to support his family, and lay up something for his old age. From the average price of labour for some years, the House must perceive, that the wages of the labourer were considerably increased. The friendly societies, if they continued to extend, would be productive of infinite good. As to the bill, he was convinced of its inadequacy to correct the abuses of which it complained. He recommended rather to repeal the act of Elizabeth than set it up as a precedent to act upon.

Mr. Fox said, that no man was more against the idea of compulsion as to the price of labour than he was. The question now was, not on the general principle, but on that particular state of the law, which rendered some measure necessary to be adopted for the relief of the labouring poor, while the law, as it stood, was saddled with so many restrictions. He approved of the bill proposed by his hon. friend, as calculated to correct that which was bad in its present operation, and to secure at least to the labourer the means of partial relief. But if the House objected to the measure as improper, if they were of opinion that it was not the most judicious or desirable that might be applied, he hoped they would go to the root of the evil, and provide some remedy adequate to the extent of the grievance. If, therefore, they should give a negative to the second reading of the bill, he should consider that by so doing they pledged themselves to take the subject into their early and most serious consideration. If what his hon. friend had brought forward should induce the House to go into a full examination of the subject, and to provide a remedy commensurate to the evil, he would not only have accomplished

his own benevolent intentions, but would have done a much greater service to the country, than even if the bill which he had now brought forward were adopted.

Mr. Whitbread said:-I cannot but congratulate the House on the able and eloquent speech of the chancellor of the exchequer. At the same time I must remark, that if the poor laws were actually such, as the right hon. gentleman has stated they ought to be, it would not have been necessary for me to have brought forward any proposition: but I am afraid that facts and experience will be found undeniably to confirm my assertion, that the poor in this country are in a state scarcely consistent with the character of a civilized country. As to what the right hon. gentleman has stated, about the price of labour finding its own level, he does not recollect, that till that level be found, the industrious poor labour under the pressure of immediate suffering. If the expedients he has proposed should succeed, they are matter of future regulation, and not calculated to afford the relief which the exigencies of the times so imperiously demand. If it should be possible to a considerable degree to promote industry among the children of the poor, and to destroy the oppressive restrictions with respect to settlements, still it will be a considerable time before the price of labour will have found its level. Even if other more effectual regulations should afterwards be adopted, still this bill is eligible as a temporary re. lief. It does not compel the magistrates to act; it only empowers them to take measures according to the exigency of the times. It has been stated as an ob jection to the bill, that it goes to fix the price of labour; but gentlemen do not attend to the circumstance, that it does not go to determine what should be the general price of labour, but only what should be the least price of labour under particular circumstances. As to the particular case of labourers, who have to provide for a number of children, the wisest thing for government, instead of putting the relief afforded to such on the footing of a charity, supplied, perhaps, from a precarious fund, and dealt with a reluctant hand, would be at once to institute a liberal premium for the encouragement of large families. There is just one circumstance to which I shall advert, before I conclude, namely, the wretched manner in which the poor are lodged. It

is such as ought not to be suffered in a country like this, proud of its freedom, and boasting of the equal rights of all its subjects. The landlord, who lets the ground upon lease to the farmer, does not consider himself as bound to repair the cottages. The farmer, who has only a temporary interest in the property, feels no anxiety on the subject. The cottage, dismantled and mouldering to decay, affords neither warmth nor shelter to the poor inhabitant, who is left exposed to the fury of the elements and the incle mency of every season. If a negative should be put upon the second reading of the bill, I shall then move for leave to bring in a bill to repeal the statute of Elizabeth, and afterwards for a committee to take into consideration the state of the poor laws.

The motion was negatived. After which, the bill was ordered to be read a second time on that day three months.

Debate in the Commons on Mr. Grey's Motion respecting a Negotiation for Peace with France.] Feb. 15. Mr. Grey rose, to make his promised motion on the subject of Peace, and addressed the chair as follows:-In rising to bring this subject once more before the House, I cannot help expressing my sincere regret, that the circumstances of the country have been such as to render it necessary for me so earnestly to press it upon your at tention. I ardently hoped, that in the interval which has taken place since a communication upon this subject came from the throne, something would have been done, calculated to give effect to the promises which ministers held out; but I have been disappointed. I expected, that while Europe was bleeding at every pore, ministers would have done something to realize the fond hopes we were all led to indulge in. An interval of two months has elapsed, during which the most favourable opportunities for negociating have occurred, and we, at the present moment, appear not to be a single jot nearer the desired object than before. From every thing to be seen, we are led to conclude, that a contest, the uniform progress of which has been marked with disaster, is to be prosecuted to the utmost extremity. Ministers, have indeed, changed their language and their principles. It is no longer the preservation of social order, the safety of regular government, or the extirpation of doc.

trines hostile to our tranquillity. They are forced to recur to the expedient of deluding the people with the hopes of peace while they are determined to persevere in the system of warfare; and while they had professions of peace in their mouths, a new campaign was to be enterprised; while they are flattering us with promises, they hurry us into all the expenses and calamities attendant upon war. Under such circumstances, I feel it my indispensable duty once more to call the attention of the House to the subject. Before we had plunged into a war which has been marked by one continued series of misery and misfortune, it fell to my lot to support a proposition of an hon. gentleman, which was calculated to explain and make intelligible, the principle upon which ministers thought it necessary to disturb the peace and tranquillity of the nation. Our efforts were not crowned with success. We at last embarked in the war, without understanding the principle on which we ourselves acted, or even that of our allies, without seeing our way; having, in fact, nothing to hope, and every thing to fear. The consequences were those we had reason to expect. A confederacy without having the same view of the object to be attained, each studying its separate interest, could not be successful. The first campaign ended with the defeat sustained by the allies at Dunkirk and at Maubeuge. Propositions were again brought forward, to induce ministers to take measures for the re-establishment and preservation of peace. Force did not seem to promise success. The moment was upon the whole, extremely favourable to views of pacification, but all ideas of negotiation were rejected. Then came the unfortunate campaign of 1794. From the moment we were obliged to retreat from Landrecy, it was but an unremitting series of defeat and disgrace. Holland, the taking of which was held out to be incompatible with the safety of this country, or of Europe at large was overrun. Again, in 1795, a proposition was made to the same purpose, but still every idea of negotiation was rejected. What followed? Prussia made a separate peace. Spain followed the example. Then appeared the pacific declaration of the Germanic Body, with the exception of the elector of Hanover, who, however, in that capacity, soon afterwards acted a different part. The Emperor, at the

same time, was indulged with a loan. But have renounced these wild ideas, and have why should I repeat these things? It is no objection to consider them as a repubnot for the sake of triumph, but to show, lic, one and indivisible, founded on the that whatever blame might have been in- basis of liberty, equality, fraternity, and curred, the fault is not to be attached the rights of man. We have not now to to my friends or to myself. Let me call discuss the nature of the French governto the recollection of the House, what ment, nor the state of their finances: but passed in the course of last year. Minis- to inquire if ministers have done someters came forward with smooth phrases, thing more than they appear to have and pleasant expressions. They were done, and which, consistently with their afraid to shock the ears of the people honour they were bound to do. I shall with the harsh and discordant sounds of be asked, no doubt, what I have to exwar. They used general words, which, it pect? Why should I intrude myself into seems, meant nothing. For what have the councils of the ministers, and perthey hitherto done? Deserted by one ally haps throw obstacles in the way of atafter another, they continue obstinately taining the object I so anxiously look for? to persist in war; and the only hope now I may be asked, what more can be done? seems to be, that we shall soon have the I do not presume to point out the partiwhole weight of the war upon our own shoul- cular mode, or to dictate the terms; but ders. I was again about to present myself to I wish that we may no longer be deluded your notice on this subject, when minis- by general declaration and vague expresters on the 8th of December last an- sions. I say, that if ministers are sincere nounced a message from his majesty, and in their desire of peace, direct proposals from that high authority we were informed, ought to come from this country. They that the long-looked for order of things may perhaps say, that this would be proshad taken place; that the crisis had come to trating Great Britain at the feet of France. a favourable issue; and that negotiation No! Sir, it never can be humiliating for was at last practicable. I had even gi- the greatest nation to come forward with ven notice of my motion, but I thought the offer of peace. I mean not to say, proper to suspend it, because, finding that we ought to sue for it. When his that we were no longer to hear of the present majesty, in a speech from the French government being incompetent to throne, in 1760, informed the parliament, maintain the relations of peace and amity, that he had made overtures of peace, but I firmly expected on the meeting of par- that those overtures not having produced liament after the recess, to hear that a suitable return, he was bound to consomething satisfactory had been done.tinue the war was such a conduct on Has any such thing been heard? No. Can ministers state any thing satisfactory on the subject? Can they tell us that their readiness to negociate has been followed up by actual negotiation? Had any satisfactory explanation been given, I would have abstained from making the present motion. Yet nothing of this kind is understood, and hitherto all our expectations have proved to be vain. Peace in their mouths, while they make preparations for war. Another campaign is about to take place, and, it is said, another loan is to be granted to the Emperor. I find it, therefore, again necessary to bring the subject before the House. The question is, however, disencumbered of many topics which were for merly matters of dispute. I am relieved from the necessity of arguing on the competency of the French to treat. We no longer hear of them as the avowed enemies of God and man, of virtue, social order, happiness and humanity.

We

to

the part of this country accounted humiliating? When a nation is successful in war; it is generous to offer peace the enemy. When the success is equal, overtures of peace are equally honourable on either side. If one be extremely unsuccessful humiliation may become a matter of necessity. I have several reasons to state why a proposal may with propriety come from this country. We have repeatedly refused to acknowledge the independence of the French republic. We have thrown upon them every sort of abuse, which language is capable of conveying. Have we retracted a word of all this? Is the king's message such as would induce the French to throw a veil over the past? The French themselves have in this respect shown the example. They at one time published propositions, which were perhaps justly accounted hostile to every sort of good government.

* See Vol. 15, p. 984.

These they have directly and unequivocally renounced. We, also, ought directly and unequivocally to acknowledge the French republic, and with that acknowledgment bring forward our proposals. Shall this be called humiliating? The same argument was used by ministers when we on this side formerly proposed what they have since done themselves. When we wished merely to state upon record that there existed in France a government competent to enter into a negotiation, it was called humiliating to make such a gratuitous acknowledgment. Yet this have ministers done. Contrary to all their bold assertions, they abandoned the great cause of social order, religion and humanity, and declared themselves disposed for peace. A desire of peace could not thereby fail to be excited in the country; but the hopes springing from this desire are stifled as soon as created, and we see the war renewed as if no such hope had existed. It would certainly be a fair and manly conduct to go one step farther in the endeavour to procure peace, and directly and openly to make those proposals which prudence and honour may suggest. If the pride or ambition of the enemy form an insurmountable bar to our wishes, war may still be necessary; and however strongly I might be impressed with the idea of the incapacity of ministers to carry it on; I should willingly yield to the necessity of its continuance; but before this dreadful alternative takes place, let us not neglect the means necessary for its prevention. A fair, open, and direct communication, Sir, is the step I propose, and I found it upon his majesty's message, and the declaration of his ministers. Let the country know what they have to trust to; let not their hopes of peace rest on a vague and unsubstantial foundation. Should I receive a single favourable assurance on the part of ministers, I would gladly withdraw my motion; so little am I disposed to fetter their operations, or to pry into their conduct. Mr. Grey then moved, "That an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, to state to his Majesty the desire of this House, that his Majesty may be pleased to take such steps, as to his royal wisdom shall appear most proper, for communicating directly to the executive government of the French republic, his Majesty's readiness to meet any disposition to negotiation on the part of that govern

ment, with an earnest desire to give it the fullest and speediest effect."

Mr. Pitt said:-Much as the hon. gentleman has introduced into his speech, connected with the origin and conduct of the war, from which I must decidedly dissent; much as I differ with him on many of the topics he has urged, and on many of the principles he has laid down as grounds for his motion; and firmly as I am persuaded that no mea sure could be more hostile to the true interests of this country than the line of conduct which he has proposed to be adopted; there is still one view of the subject on which I believe it impossible there can be any difference of opinion. If the state of the country, and the senti ments of a great majority of this House are such as I have reason to suppose, there cannot be any essential difference as to the general result. But if, after the explanation which I may be able to give with respect to the state of this country, and the position of the enemy, the hon.gentleman shall still choose to persevere in his motion, there are one or two consequences, which might otherwise be drawn from any declaration of mine on the present occasion, against which it may be necessary for me to guard. I must, therefore, guard against any imputations which may hereafter be brought forward, either as to the insincerity of any decla ration which I may express in favour of peace, or as to the inefficiency of the measures taken to facilitate its progress. However I may be disposed to favour that object which the motion seems principally to have in view, I can by no means concede the grounds on which it has been followed up;-I mean that from a view of our situation, and of the events of the war, we should discover such shameful humiliation, such hopeless despondency, as to abandon every thing for which we have formerly contended, and be disposed to prostrate ourselves at the feet of the enemy. If the necessity of our condition, if the sense of having been baffled, should operate so strongly as to induce us to make overtures of peace upon any terms; if every consideration of policy, and every feeling of decent and honourable pride must be sacrificed to the extreme pressure of our affairs, we must then indeed, be bound to receive the law of the conqueror. This situation of affairs the hon. gentleman has not indeed developed, but has pretty plainly insinuated

« ZurückWeiter »