The Press.
London, England, 1854-07-15 00:00:00

LORD PALMERSTON AND THE GENERAL
BOARD OF HEALTH.
TO THE EDITOR OF "THE PRESS."
Sir,—The adversaries of the General Board of
Health allege that it interferes tyrannically, and
in a spirit of undue Centralisation, with Local sanitary
boards ; that its tendency is to supersede the English
principle of Self-government; that it is " crotchety "
and unpractical ; that it has promoted works of
drainage, water supply, &c., which have turned out
costly failures; that it is regarded with mistrust and
aversion throughout the country; and that the main
source of all these evils is Mr: Chadwick, who ought,
therefore, to be removed from his office.
I believe these allegations, one and all, to be un-
true; and I consider it my duty, at the present crisis,
to state publicly the grounds of my belief, in which
many of the Sanitary Reformers concur.
With respect to the alleged centralising tendency
of the General Board, and its " tyrannical inter-
ference " with local boards, it is to be observed that
the General Board can only " interfere " in localities'
which petition to be interfered with; and that two
hundred and eighty-four localities have so petitioned.
The people of Brighton, Plymouth, Weymouth, and
Burslem, being anxious for the redress of their own
sanitary grievances, yet jealous of their local privi-
leges, sent to inquire among these towns as to the
nature of the General Board's"interference," whether
"oppressive," &c., or otherwise. The following are
extracts from letters sent by the towns in reply to
these inquiries :
From Rugby:—" The General Board have assisted the Local
Board in every was, and do not cause any unnecessary ex-
pense."
From Tottenham:—" The powers of the General Board have
been exercised ably and beneficially, with a view to secure to
the ratepayers the greatest amount of benefit at the least pos-
sible cost."
From St. Th)mas's, Exeter:—" The powers of the General
Board have not been exercised to augment expenses; the con-
nection has proved in no respect a burden or au inoonvenience
to the Local Board; but, on the contrary, they and their officers
have to acknowledge the valuable assistance and counsel it has
enabled them to obtain in cases of doubt and difficulty. The in-
terference of the General Board, except when specially required
by the Local Board, has been limited to an occasional inspection,
by one of their officers, of the works while in progress."
From Barnard Castle:—" The General Board have always
been very kind and considerate, and rendered be great aid
throughout our proceedings. We have seen no oppression, and
believe their only wish is to aid the boards and forward public
improvements, in unision with the local government."
From Ottery St. Mary :—" No expenses have been oppressively
or obstructively incurred by the interference of the General
Board ; quite the contrary."
From Woolwich:—" The General Board of Health have in-
variably and cheerfully rendered the Local Board every assist-
ance when required, which materially prevents expenses."
From York :—" The General Board does not interfere unne-
cessarily with the Local Board, and our connection with them
has not tended to augment expenses."
From Gateshead:— There are no expenses incurred by the
employment of officers from the General Board. lam of opinion
that the application of the act is highly beneficial in a sanitary
and economical point of view. The General Board have never
interfered with us except at our request; and their interference
does not augment expenses."
From Leatnington. —" I do tilt consider the General
Board interfere unnecessarily with the Local Board ; on the
contrary, wo have not been able to obtain their assistance so
readily as we could have desired. We have, nevertheless, al-
ready found their aid and assistance most valuable, from the use-
ful information we have obtained from them. Instead of our
connection tending to augment expenses, I consider it has, in
all respects, quite a contrary effect."
From Dover, Derby, Wigan, Wolverhampton, and Penrith, si-
milar replies lust° the non-interference of the General Board were
returned by the chairmen or clerks to the Local Boards.
In point of fact, the General Board of Health, so
far from withdrawing from local communities the
management of their own affairs, has established in
many towns throughout the country, under the
admirable provisions of the Health Act, a system of
Local Self-government which ensures to provincial
ratepayers a far more effectual control over their
affairs than they ever possessed before.
Indeed, I venture to declare, on behalf of the
whole body of Sanitary Reformers, that we are not
less strenuous advocates of Local Self-government
than those who, for party purposes, raise against us
the anti-centralisation cry. The sole pretext for that
cry is that under the Health Act an end has been
put to much local jobbing, by means of a series of
administrative checks devised for the protection of
minorities, of absentees, and of the unrepresented
poor. True Local liberty and real Self-government
cannot, we maintain, be said to exist, save where the
whole mass of a local population enjoys immunity
from the abusive exercise of power, and from the
corrupt expenditure of local funds.
In reply to the charges the:. the Board of Health
is "crotchety and unpractical," and that the works
which it has promoted have turned out "costly
failures," I submit a table of the cost of drainage
works executed in fourteen towns on the new prin-
ciples (or " crotchets") of the General Board, in
contrast with the cost which would hose been in-
curred had these works been executed on the old
principle—now, thanks to Lord Palmerston, well-nigh
exploded