The Express.
London, England, 1848-05-20 00:00:00

justice the owners of property ought to him so more bans
single vote just s the mere occupiers,
Sir W. CLAY was dissatisfied with the clause pro
posed, and could not understand why the MIN principle
which governed the elections In moan:lint corporations
should not be adopted in this measure, which was to rule
towns not incorporated. It was inconeistent to have • system
of single voting in the one, and of plurality of Yotas in the
other.
Lord DUNCAN elm supsported the proposition for single
voting, and remarked that in Bath the operation of Sturges
Bourne's Act had produced the greatest disestisfaction. If
this clause was adopted, the measure would no longer be •
poor man's bill, as dated.
Sir R. U. INGLIS supported the clause as proposed in
the bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL remarked that the noble lord the
member for Bath (Lord Duncan) teemed to think that the
bill, called n poor man's bill, should give franchise and pri-
vilege* to the poor man. If this was a political matter, ao
doubt such ought to he the case ; but this was not • bill re-
lating to political rights and privileges, but • measure to
Wert certain sanitary improvements fur the sake of the
health not only of the poor man, bat of every other member
rer
of the community. The question simply was, wheth
those improvements could be better secured by the system of
single voting or by the adoption of the principle of plurality
of votes. That principle had been adopted in 1817, in the
case of Sturges Bourne's act ; it had been further eisperi
in 1818 by the legislature, and on every review of the poor
laws, up to the last in 1814, the principle had been adhered
to. The act of 1844 contained • clause exactly in terms nor-
responding with the prevent clause, and therefore he did not
see that the principle a plural votes, so often recognised by
the legialature, ought now to be coodemned.
Mr. BILOTEFILION supported, and Mr.Wonre opposed, the
elastic as it stood in the bill.
Capt. PECHELL submitted that the clause had better be
postponed, in order that the government might reconsider
this point. especially as the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) had
fairly toil the committee that this was nut a poor man's bill.
Lord J. ItUSSELL —I said no such thing. (" Hear,"
and • laugh.)
Capt. PEC HELL had misunderstood the noble lord. lie
must observe that Sturges Bourne's act only gave plural
votes to occupiers, and not to owners, of property. He must
therefore oppose the clause.
GItANOEK said that, geeing the disposition of hon.
members around him, he would, with the permission of the
committee, withdraw his amendment.
The amendment having been, by leave, withdrawn,
Mr. HUM It again urged Isis former objection to the clause,
and called epos the committee not to stultify previous legs
re in respect of the Scotch Poor Law Bill by consenting
to the present proposition.
Sir J. GRAHAM said since he last had addressed the
committee he had looked at the Scotch Poor Law Act, and
he found that go far from the view taken of that measure by
the hon. member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) being correct, •
distinction was ossile between the burgbal and the rural
parishes. In the homer, every rate-payer, whatever the
value of his holding, hail a vote, bas' the owners of property
had votes in this scale: above the value of 201. two votes,
shove 401. three votes, above 601. four votes, and above 1001.
live votes; to that both as regarded England and Scotland
the legislature had been consistent, and wherever power was
given to a body to raise taxes, plurality of votes, to a err
tam amount, had been given. As the present clause was
drawn verbatim% from the English bill of 1844, he (Sir J.
Graham) should adhere to the principles so recently
adopted.
Mr. HUME said he had made hie statement on the
authority of the hon. member the Solicitortleneral for
Scotland, (A lough.)
Sir .1. GRAHAM wished to add to what he had already
stated that whatever was the principle of the Scotch poor
law, the hon. member (Mr. Hume) had himself admitted
that its operation gave the greatest satisfaction in Scot-
land. (Laughter.)
The LORD ADVOCATE, in the absence of his bon.
friend the Solicitor Genera for Scotland, must remark
that his opinion must have dependedupon the mode in which
the hon. member tor Muutrate had asked the question.
(Renewed laughter )
After • few words from Mr. letesrc and Mr. Farts! Yr,
the committee divided.
Fur the clause
Against it
Clauses 20 to 26 were then agreed to with very little
disciesioo.
On clause 27.
Mr. 11EN LEV moved to strike out te roviso rendering
the appointment of the surveyer subject to the approval no
the general hoard.
Mr. HUDSON supported the amendment.
Viacuunt hIORPE*III said he had given up many of the
pow. n which he bad proposed to vest in the general board,
and, willing to show as much confidence as possible in the
local boards, he would concede this point elm.
Mr. HUME regretted this concession, which would render
the surveyor the mere creature of the local board.
Mr. FLANEY believed that many of the corporations
were sincerely desirous to have larger sanitary powers ; and
he thought they would be anxious to exercise them in such
a way as would be beneficiel to the public.
The omission of the proviso was then agreed to.
Mr. RICE proposed another amendment in the same
clause, making the town clerks and treasurers ot corporate
boroughs, clerks and treasurers of the local boards.
Mr. Ald. SYDNEY supported this alteration.
Viscount MORPETH resisted the amendment, which was
withdrawn; and the clause, as previously amended, was
agreed to, as was clause 29.
Oa clause 30, directing the appointment of an officer of
health,
Lord MORPHIA j roomed to insert the words, " &legally
qualified medical practitioner," in lieu of "a member of the
medical profession."
The alteration was agreed to.
A conversation followed as to the mode of appointment
and rimeri ration of this officer.
Mr. AN STEY thought he ought to be paid in the same
way as the inspector, out of a public Mod.
Viac,iuht MoItPKIM said the cases were not parallel.
The officer of health would be a local officer, employed in
the district; and consequently ought to be paid by the
district.
Mr. RICE suggested that the removal of the medical
officer should ire% with the local board.
Lord MORPETII said that as the medical offieer might
often have to tome into collision with the local board in the
discharge of his duties, it was better that his removal should
rest w,th the general board.
Aft, r a short co.,versation, the clause, as amended, was

agreed to.
On clause
thempeg the local board to send maps of
the sew. rs to general board, living proposed,
Mr. HENLEY thought that the clause would be useleas,
because the local board could send up plans which t ey
knew would be rejected by the general board. Ile thought
is would be better to leave out the clause altogether.
Lord MOKPETH consented to the introduction of words
which would not make it compulsory on the local bonds to
se..d plans.
The clause was then agreed to, as were the clause* up
to let
Os clause 39, requiring the report of the surveyor with
respect to the sewers when a new house is to be built, being
proposed.
Mr. GRAINGER thought it would create confusion to re-
quire the thirty to have the report of the surveyor atter his
plan had been approved of.
'I he ATTORNEY.GENER AL did not think they should
allow the party building the house to be the judge of the
sufficiency of the sewer.
Mr. HENLEY hoped that the surveyor was not to receive
mast tor making his report.
The ArfORNEY.GENERAL said that the local board
might discharge the surveyor if he made any charge.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 40 to 49 were agreed to, with verbal amendments.
On clause 30 (relating to smoke consumption),
Mr. FOLEY moved to exempt trout the operation of the
chose " mines and works for the manufacture of bricks and
other saheb sot clay."
Dr. BOW RI NG supported the amendment.
Mr. THORN LEY said it was also very important that
iron sulks should he excluded.
Capt. I'ECIIELL hoped public baths would he forced to
consume their own smoke.
Dlr. SLAM EY said that their object was to get rid of nui-
sances arising from smoke, but he hoped collieries would he
exempted from its operation, as in any other case the owners
would a. t their facts arinst the bill and impede its operation.
Lord monrEnt said he had had much doubt whether he
ougut w make say exemption front the operation of this
clause ; but as a general law was said by practical men not
to be practicable, he thought he bad better make some con-
cession 111.• could not, however, make any exemption in
cases of premises worked by steam-engines; but in the cue
of the mines and works alluded to be should be happy to
inert the hon. member's views.
After some conservation,
S.r J. WALNISLEY expressed his hope, that however
stringeet the clause might be made as regarded towns, it
would be more lenient as regarded rural districts. The noble
lord was not perhaps aware that a large quantity of coals
was consumed in what was called open burning, and if these
were operated upon by the clause a great quantity of
coals mu. tbe destroyed. lie (S,r J. Walmaley) had had
several communications from Staffordshire on the subject,
all deprecating the clause. lie trusted that the noble lord
would give it wine further coasictmation.
Mr. BAILEY thought that there world ba great diffi-
culty in carrying out the clause in many districts. Ile con-
bowed 1,100 tons of coals per day, and employed 10,000 men,
and he feared that these extensive transactions would be
greatly impeded by the shortniaa of the notice.
Mr. MUTT hoped that Sunderland would be exempted
from the op ration of the bill. In its present form the mea-
sure would wholly destroy the manufacture of coke.
Lord MORPETH entwined to postpone the clause, and
in the mean time would give the suggestions tit hon. mem-
bers the fullest consideration.
Clauses 51 to 36 inclusive were agreed to; upon which the
chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again
ou luonday.
LUNATIC ASYLUMS (SCOTLAND).
The LORD ADVOCATE moved that the select committee
on the Lunatic A .yhams (Scotland) Bill do consist of 21
members, and that the following members be the committee :
The Lord Ailvoc.ite, Lord Ashley, Sir J. Graham, the Secre-
tary at War, for. Train, Mr. Charteris, Mr. Solicitor General
for Scotland,' Ccl. Mare, Mr. J. Loch, Sir G. Clerk,Viscount
Nielgund, Mr. E. Eliice, Mr. S. Wortley, Mr. 0. Craig,
V ism.unt Drumlanrig, Mr. Bouvet* Mr. Home Drummond,
Mr. C. Howard, Mr. Fergus, Mr. Smollett, and Mr.Fordyce.
On tho motion of Mr. FORBES, Mr. M'Neill's name Wel
substituted ter that of the Solicitor General for Scotland, and
the motion agreid to in that form.
I'ne Louse saljourited at half-prat 12.