★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
THE EXAMINER. 135-----
the authorities assisting at the demolition of churches, or destroying
monuments of art at the bidding of a tyrannical mob. They could not pay
too dearly for order at home and peace abroad; and although such a
military force as they were compelled to vote was an evil, still it was a
necessary evil.—Colonel Davies withdrew his motion.—Mr. Hunt,
however, divided the house on his amendment—
For the motion, 6 I Against it, 250 I Majority, 244.
Tuesday, Feb. 22.
EMIGRATION.
Lord Howick moved for leave to bring in a bill for the purpose of
facilitating voluntary emigration in his majesty's foreign possessions. It
was admitted that there existed in this country and in Ireland, a large
body of labourers for whose labour there was no demand, and that the
existence of such a body tended to materially injure the condition of the
employed labourers, whose wages were, by the effect of competition,
reduced to a very low amount. While in Great Britain and Ireland wages
were at the lowest possible rate, a labouring man, in the Australian colonies,
could get five shillings a day; and a useful mechanic, such as a
wheelwright, was paid no less than fifteen shillings a day. In Canada
the rate was not so high, but even there a farmer's servant received 3s. 9d.
a day in ordinary times, and 6s. 9d. during the harvest. In England
labourers were looked upon with jealousy and suspicion by their fellow
men, because employment was scarce in proportion to the number of
applicants; but in the colonies all those who contributed to the general
stock of labour were looked upon as the greatest benefactors to
society in general. The object of his bill was to enable the surplus
unemployed population in this country to seek a profitable market for their
labour in the colonies, by the appointment of a board of commissioners,
whose duty it would be to regulate voluntary emigration, and to secure
the emigrant the means of conveyance. In these arrangements, however,
it was not thought advisable that the public should be put to any expense.
The plan proposed was that parishes should meet the expense, and that
two-thirds of the rate-payers should empower the overseers to enter into
contracts with the commissioners to enable the labouring poor to emigrate,
the amount of charge not to be repaid till after the expiration of ten years.
The bill could not extend to Ireland, because no poor-rates existed in
that country. As it must be manifest that, with the advantages which the
colonies afforded to labourers, success entirely depended on their
perseverance and industry, he proposed that parties should forfeit all right to
parochial relief in the event of their returning to England. The expense
of sending out and establishing a family, consisting of a man and his wife
and two children, was 66l. The expense of maintaining the same family
in England estimated at 25l. per annum; so that with less than three
years purchase, parishes might be relieved from growing burthens of an
oppressive nature. Many persons in the Australian colonies had expressed
their readiness to defray part of the expense of taking emigrants out on
the condition that their services should be secured to them for a certain
stipulated time. The noble lord said, that the whole merit of the plan was
referable to Mr. Wilmot Horton, who, despite of neglect and ridicule,
had persevered to the very last in a measure which he considered to be of
the highest public utility.
Mr. Schonswar approved of the general principal of the measure.
Sir Geo. Murray also approved of the principle, but objected to a
board of commissioners resident in this country.
Mr. Tennant did not think that the expense of transporting paupers to
our colonies would be less than that of maintaining them at home.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer observed, that unless the house
removed the present pressure on the poor rates, he did not see how it
could improve upon the present administration of the poor laws.
Mr. Sadler said, that the bill would introduce a new species of national
debt into every parish. He denied that there was any surplus population
in this country. Did the noble lord know that there were 30,000,000 acres
of uncultivated land in England? Capital employed on that, would return
tenfold profit to our manufacturers. He objected to the scheme, as one
that would plunge the country in expense, wound the best feelings of our
nature, and fix upon the legislature the stigma of cruelty.
Mr. F. Baring supported the measure.—Mr. Warburton denied
that the happiness or wealth of the parent country would be secured by
any forced system of colonization. The agricultural population was
redundant. But unless such a number would emigrate as would increase
agricultural capital sufficiently to give employment to what remained, the
project would only do injury. To give any relief it was calculated that
200,000 must emigrate yearly. Now, hitherto the number was not more on
an average than 24,000. If one, two, or three years' subsistence must be
given, they would only increase and not diminish the misery, for want of
sufficient capital. But there were still more important objections against
home colonization. He believed the most effectual means of giving
employment to labour would be a commutation of tithes.
Mr. Baring and Mr. Slaney supported the measure.—Sir Edward
Sugden said, that this was a forced measure of emigration. It went to
force emigration, as you would force grapes in a hot-house. The expense
of transporting a family to Canada was 66l., and to that entire extent the
measure held out a premium to emigration. The scheme would never pay
a thousandth part of a shilling advanced, and whatever vacuum it made,
would soon be filled up again.—Mr. Hunt denied that there was any
redundancy of population. He said the time was gone by for a commutation
of tithes, and nothing but their abolition would do any good. He disapproved
alike of home and of foreign colonization. Men talked of colonizing
Hounslow-heath and Dartmoor Forest; but it was just as possible to
colonize the top of St. Paul's.
Lord Howick replied, he contrasted the course pursued by the hon.
member (Mr. Hunt) with that of the supporters of this measure. The hon.
member lamented that the poor should be employed at 1s. per day, but he
(Lord Howick) and the supporters of the bill wished to provide them the
means of earning 3s. 6d. per day with comfort.—Leave was given to bring
in the bill.
|
Identifier: | JB/004/070/007"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 4. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1831-02-27 |
|||
|
004 |
lord brougham displayed |
||
|
070 |
|||
|
007 |
the examiner / sunday, february 27, 1831 / no. 1204 |
||
|
printed material |
8 |
||
|
recto |
(130-144) |
||
|
[[notes_public::"john fonblanques eulogium on brougham" [note in bentham's hand]]] |
1991 |
||
