f an illegitimate
child liable for its support. The bill by which these principles were
to be carried into effect having been brought in, the second reading was
opposed by Colonel Evans, one of the members for Westminster, and Sir
S. Whalley, one of the members for Marylebone. The latter moved an
amendment, that the bill should be read a second time that day six
months. It was his opinion, he said, that the bastardy clause, which
threw all the burden on the mother, on whom the odium rested already,
thus held out a premium to immorality and an inducement to infanticide;
and the clauses which effected the law of settlement would of themselves
justify the house in throwing out the bill. His great objection,
however, was to the board of commissioners. The board was unnecessary,
for the principal existing defect consisted in the ratepayers not having
sufficient control over the expenditure. If they were only vested with
complete control over the poor-law management, the evils of the present
system would soon disappear. He doubted whether the house had authority
to give powers of the description proposed to any set of men--at all
events it was impolitic. The bashaws whom the bill proposed to start
into life would be omnipotent; they might do as they pleased, and
account for their acts by merely stating it was their pleasure. There
were to be no less than thirty-six discretionary powers vested in the
commissioners; a degree of authority entrusted to three men of which
the country afforded no parallel. Government ought to wait before they
undertook any poor-law reform: the report of the commissioners had
already led to the correction of many abuses, and time only was
required to secure a trial to the greater part, if not all, of the
recommendations that report contained. The amendment was seconded by
Alderman Wood, and supported by Mr. Walter, a reforming representative
of Berkshire. Messrs. Grote and Hume, and Sirs J. Scarlett and Francis
Burdett, with other members who spoke on the occasion, all agreed that
there was no good reason against the second reading of the bill, though
none of them approved it as a whole. The chancellor of the exchequer
argued in reply, that nothing had been stated which could be regarded
as an ostensible reason for not going into committee; and that when
in committee all matters which had been noticed would be open to
consideration. The second reading was carried by a majority of three
hundred and ni