amount of taxes, ought not, during the rest of his life, to have any more imposed upon him. What regard has been paid to such a right, the experience of every British subject will wofully demonstrate. No doubt this right of withdrawing what has been once given ought to be exercised with tenderness and consideration. We should not even object to the full admission of the claims above-stated, were we not convinced that they would give rise to investigations so complica ted, and distinctions so invidious, as would wholly baffle the measure in tended. If, then, it is to be done at all, it must be done at once, at least it must be done without any respect or distinction of persons. The change, if it is thought eligible, may be made by gradual steps; but each step must be general. Any attempt to make it otherwise would lead, we repeat it, into inextricable difficulties, and would probably end in the final defeat of the whole scheme:

The subject of the poor laws was introduced into the Commons by Mr Curwen on the 21st February. This gentleman, in a clear and argumentative speech, took a comprehensive view of the poor laws, in their origin, progress, and present oppressive magnitude. These great evils were increasing, and would increase much more, unless some remedy were applied. We had, it was to be recollected, from an agricultural, become a commercial country. In 1776, the poor rates were stated at a million and a half; now, in the course of forty years, they might be taken altogether at eight millions and a half. This monstrous sum must excite the deepest regret, but it was not merely the amount that was to be deplored; the sum of happiness and consolation was not increased by it; but, on the contrary, there was an augmentation of human misery. He was well aware

that the amount was so great, that it was impossible to cut it down at once. We had, in the course of years, in fact, taken away the care of the people from themselves; and the result of this conduct unfortunately was, that they regarded the present time as every thing, and the future as nothing. It was now our interest and our duty to endeavour to rescue them from this condition, and to revive and elevate their minds by the operation of some other principle. If we did not, we should lend ourselves to the destruction of their industry, their virtue, and their happiness. A foreigner must look with astonishment at the enormous sum raised for the relief of the poor. Few foreign sovereigns had so great a revenue for all the purposes of their government. He could make his appeal to those gentlemen who were magistrates, to say, whether the poor were at present happy, contented, and grateful? No, they must answer, they were unhappy, dissatisfied, and ungrateful to those who afforded them temporary relief, without real comfort. They looked on every thing with a jaundiced eye and discontent of mind. Nothing, he was convinced, was so dangerous as pauperism; yet were there no less than two millions of British subjects in that degraded condition. Could the House require a stronger stimulus than this afflicting consideration to impel them to the application of an instant remedy? After ages of inconveniences had passed, the remedy could operate only by slow degrees, but still he must assume the possibility of its efficacy. It was not possible for the legislature to prevent premature and imprudent marriages; but it must be their object to inspire the poor with some foresight of the miseries that might come upon an offspring unprovided for. The great object of a proper committee would be, to find means of shewing to the people

their own interest and advantage, in taking their happiness into their own hands. He gave a melancholy picture of the demands in the shape of poorrates in the West Riding of Yorkshire, where one farmer, occupying 210 acres of land, was called upon to pay a guinea a-day, and in Sussex, Shropshire, and other counties, he mentioned assessments at 188. 20s. 24s. and 26s. and even higher. After stating a number of laborious calculations, to enforce and elucidate his arguments, he said that the plan of relief which he contemplated was not entirely new; as, in 1633, every inhabitant of a parish was rated in proportion to his visible ability; and, in 22d of Geo. I., in the parish of Clerkenwell, rates were made according to the land tax. In fact, it was a contradiction of the divine law, to say that only a particular description of persons were bound to relieve the poor. He thought that the burthen should be equalized; and with this view he proposed that the interest of the funded and unfunded debt, which amounted to 32,000,000l. should be rated at a proportion amounting to 1,250,000l., that the India Company's stock, which amounted to 6,000,000l. should be rated at 600,0097., that the South Sea Stock, amounting to 4,000,000l. should be rated at 150,000l., and the Bank Stock at 1,200,000., the whole amounting to 8,200,000l. This aggregate sum he would apply to the relief of those parishes which were most oppressed by the poor rates and least able to discharge them. He did not mean that this plan of relief should be permanent, but that it should be applied to as an extraordinary remedy for the present difficulties, and should be co-existent with them. The honourable gentleman proceeded to propose that the income of trade, which amounted to twenty millions, should be rated at 10 per cent. thus producing

about 1,600,000%., the whole amounting to 4,800,000l., and he rated the income upon labour, calculated at 150 millions, at 24 per cent., thus producing three millions and a quarter. The honourable member concluded, by moving for a committee to inquire into the state of the poor laws.

Lord Castlereagh was anxious to bestow the utmost possible attention on the subject. He admitted fully all the evils of the poor laws, and their injurious effects on the character of the inferior ranks. He thought that the lot of the lower orders in Ireland had been, to a certain extent, misrepresented, and their wretchedness very much exaggerated. The comfort in which they lived, when the sources from which it sprung were contemplated, might be advantageously compared with that of the same classes in this country. Their food might be, in some instances, of a coarser kind, and they might have less the appearance of ease and art; but they enjoyed health, and acquired strength from the food on which they lived, and the exertions to which they were inured. You could trace in them a cheerfulness of temper, and a dignity of character, which could not exist in a country where the qualities of the people were destroyed or broken down by dependence, and the degradation of applying for individual relief. There, where there was no legal provision for the support of indigence, every one depended on himself, or on the kindness of his friends or neighbours; their independence constituted their enjoyments; a general aspect of good humour and happiness was observable ; individual charity was awakened to relieve individual distress; and general benevolence and self-esteem rendered their character respectable. It would be highly desirable if, as in Scotland, charitable relief could be distributed without being claimed as a

right, without breaking down the feel. ings of individual esteem, or affecting the habits of industry. The opposite system was, however, now the law and the practice of this country; the feeling and the conviction was general among the people, that they could not suffer indigence without having a right to relief. This feeling was too general, and too deeply rooted, to be precipitately interfered with. Upon the maturest deliberation, he could not consent to shake a system that was so generally considered as founded in right as well as in law, especially at the present moment, when the poorer classes had established such a claim on the admiration and benevolence of the more affluent, by their patience, their fortitude, and resignation under those great sufferings and privations which arose out of the transition of the country from one state of social exertion to another, and from which he hoped the charitable and humane contributions of individuals, coming in aid of the law, would find them relief, till a change of circumstances, which might soon be expected. (Hear, hear!) However desirable it might be to make some change in the poor laws, the property of the country could not at once escape from this burden. He conceived that the extent of the abuse was in a great measure owing to the bad administration of the law. There were parishes where the law was well administered; but he was sure that he should be borne out by the experience of most members of the House, when he said, that in the general state of the country, over the great mass of parishes, its administration was extremely lax and injudicious; that it was carried into execution under the direction of incapable persons, persons who did not know how to act properly, but who were too active in what they conceived to be the line of their duty, or the exercise of their powers. (Hear, hear!)

He might appeal to other members for a confirmation of the assertion; but he need go no farther than the parish in which he himself sometimes resided, where the poor laws were administered by a woman. He agreed with Mr Curwen as to the propriety of distributing the rates over the different descriptions of property, but conceived that great difficulties attended the execution of such a plan, and could not hold out a hope of its being speedily realized. He gave his warmest support to the motion for a committee, and, if so fortunate as to be appointed one of its members, would lend it all the assistance in his power. The following committee was then appointed :Mr Curwen, Lord Castlereagh, Mr F. Lewis, Mr B. Bathurst, Mr Brand, Mr G. Rose, Sir F. Baring, Mr Huskisson, Mr Morton Pitt,

Mr L. Keck, Mr Dickinson, Lord Lascelles, Sir J. Shaw, Lord Stanley, Mr Robinson, Mr D. Gibert, Mr Holford, Sir T. Ackland. On the 4th July Mr Bourne submitted to the House the report of the committee. It is of great extent, and evidently drawn up with great care and industry. They begin with pointing out the manner in which the present system was originally established. While fully admitting the purity of the motives which prompted to it, they cannot forbear remarking, that it has had the effect of abating those exertions on the part of the labouring classes, on which their own welfare and happiness depend; that it is perpetually encouraging and increasing the misery it was designed to alleviate, creating at the same time an unlimit ed demand on funds which it cannot augment. At the same time, the rest of the community, including the most industrious class, are oppressed by the weight of these contributions, and are

no longer able to afford the same employment to the labourer. Hence wages are lowered, and the system is found to produce the very necessity which it was intended to relieve. It appears, that though complaints were long made of the increasing burden of the poor laws, no account of the actual expenditure was taken till the year 1776. It amounted then to L.1,720,316, of which L.1,556,804 was expended on the poor. In 1815, the sum raised was L.7,068,999, and the evidence shewed, that the amount had, since that time, greatly increased. Of this, only L.5,072,028 was expended on the poor, the rest being consumed in church rates, county rates, highway, and militia.

Urgent application had been made for a more equal distribution of the burden. The original intention of the act appears clearly to have been, to impose it upon every species of property; but the extreme difficulty of ascertaining the amount of any other except land and houses, has caused it, in the end, to fall exclusively on them. The funds seem the only one free from this difficulty; but the proposed attachment of them appears, in several respects, a breach of the national faith; besides that it would create a large class of contributors, who have no local concern in the system, and no means of controuling its expenditure. For the same reason, the committee justly reject any proposal of providing for the poor out of the public and national funds. A considerable loss appears to be sustained in large towns, from the impossibility of levying the rate from poor and shifting tenants, which they suppose might be obviated by levying the assessment on the landlord.

As a means of enforcing economy, the committee suggest the plan, which has been adopted in a number of instances, of fixing the rate at a certain

amount, which it was at no future time to exceed. We suspect that this is rather a coarse and undistinguishing remedy, making no provision for the actual preservation of the poor from starvation, and operating, besides, in a very unequal manner, according as time may change the circumstances and population of a parish. Another proposition, the expediency of which seems to us very dubious, is, that instead of an allowance being made to the parents according to the number of children, the children themselves should be educated and employed by the parish. As this proposition was recently submitted to parliament, an opportunity of estimating it will afterwards arise. As to adults, the committee justly point out the impossibility of furnishing them, according to the terms of the statute, with work, indefinitively as wanted. They seem to think, however, that, to a limited extent, it may be advantageously given, and even mention with some approbation the plan of parochial farms. To us it does not appear, if the giving of work be adopted at all, what limitations can be put to it, or how it can, in any case, be refused. The only thing, perhaps, that could be done with advantage, is to assist the infirm poor in obtaining such work as their impaired strength might render them qualified to perform. The committee bestow a sanction on the advantage and necessity of workhouses, which, for reasons already stated, we feel little inclined to concur in. They proceed to observe, with truth, that discrimination, as to the degree and objects of the bounty, has been the quality chiefly wanting, and in which the superiority of Scotland has chiefly manifested itself. As England does not possess the useful and respectable body of elders, an institution peculiar to presbytery, they suggest the formation of select vestries, and, in large towns,