The Sun.
London, England, 1839-04-13 00:00:00

NECROPOLIS CEMETERY.

Mr. ELLIS moved the second reading of the Necro-
polis Cemetery
Mr. WAK LEY presented a petition from certain
inhabitants against it.
Sir BENJAMIN HALL would feel it his duty to
oppose the Bill. By one of the provisions of the
BM, power was given to the City of London
Waterworks Company to lay down pipes and
cut up the soil in that locality, which he thought
was a decided objection to the measure,
He thought that the fact of this Bill having been re-
jected by the House, and having been last Session re-
jected by this House, was a good ground of objection
to this Bill ; but the other reasons were quite suffi-
cient. The establishment of this Cemetery would be
a great nuisance to the inhabitants, as it would deprive
them of a place of resort on Sundays and holidays.
Mr. HA WES would oppose the Bill, principally
on the ground that it would deprive the public at large
of the most healthy spot in the neighbourhood for re-
' creation. He thought this was most objectionable,
and he should therefore support the opposition of his
Hon. Friend.

Mr. ELLIS thought it would have been but fair in
the Hon. Baronet to have stated that this Bill had
once passed the Commons and reached the House of
Lords, that it had been considered in Committee in that
House and then postponed, because the Committee
were of opinion that the compensation offered was
not sufficient. This point having been satisfac-
torily adjusted, the Committee were favourably
disposed towards the Bill, which would have passed had
it not been for the demise of the Crown. In 1838, the
Bill had been introduced into that House, read a second
time and referred to a Committee. He (Mr. Ellis) had
read the evidence that had been taken before that Com-
mittee, and he could assure the House that it went to
show the great want that there was of a public cemetery
in the parish of St. Pancras. The spot was applicable
for the purpose, and the establishment of this cemetery
by giving greater space for burial, would contribute most
essentially to the health of the inhabitants, by placing
them out of the danger of contagion and disease. The
Hon. Member had stated that footpaths would be
blocked up, but that was a contested point ; and it
should be recollected that this ground was the pro-
perty of Lord Southampton, who had the power at
any time to build upon it, or turn it into a pub-
lic cemetery. This Act was only rendered neces-
sary by the Statute of Mortmain, and there was a
provision in the Bill that no public footpath should
be interfered with. The Honourable Baronet had
alluded to the power possessed by the Water Company,
but that power extended all over the parish, and when
the ground was inclosed the power dropped. The Hon.
Gentleman who seconded the opposition had stated as
one great ground of his doing so that the proposed ce-
metery would interfere with the sports and amusements

of the people, but if ho had seen the evidence as to the
state of the burial grounds of the metropolis, he would have
been convinced that the establishment of public cemeteries
most essentially conduce to the health of the inhabitants.
It was only last year that two men met with their
deaths from breathing the effluvia exhaling from the
graves in the Aldgate burial ground.—(The Hon. Mem-
ber here read the report of the Coroner's inquest on the
men in question.) He would not trouble the House
further, but he could assure them that the burial grounds
of St. Pancras would soon be in such a state as materially
to affect thehealth ofthe inhabitants. Upon these grounds,
and because he thought no valid cause for opposition
had been shown, he should support the Bill.
Lord TEIGNMOUTH said that 400 acres of land
had recently, under the authority of Parliament, been
converted into a burial ground, in the north district of
St. Pancras, and all parties were united in their opposi-
tion against the present Bill. He could not tell
from whence the support of the present Bill
came, and he was persuaded there was not the least
ground for inflicting this additional nuisance on the in-
' habitants.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir R. INGLIS could inform the Noble Lord who
supported the present Bill, it was supported by a band
of speculators and jobbers, who would cut up the whole
country, for the purpose of forming railways and ceme-
teries.--(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) He should oppose
the Bill, because he believed it to be one of a series of
speculations which were entered into without the slight-
est view of benefiting any human being but themselves.
Mr. SHEPHERD opposed the Bill.
Mr. ELLIS said, that seeing the feeling of the
House was against the Bill, he would not trouble it
with dividing.—(Hear, hear.)
LONDON AND CROYDON RAILWAY.
Mr. HAWES presented a petition against the Lon-
don and Croydon Railway.