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

THE BOARD OF HEALTH.

The Earl of SHikFTESBURY in moving for papers
relating to the Board of Health, entered into a defence
of the members of the board in answer to what ho
termed the unjustifiable attack which had recently been
made upon them in another place, and which he con-
sidered could only be attributed either to extreme igno-
rance or malignity. It was asserted that the board had
by its conduct completely checked the progress of sani-
tary reform, and by its despotic and overbearing
behaviour had disgusted the whole country. (Hear,
hear.) In no case, he stated, had the act been
applied, but on the representation of a large body of
people in the locality assembled in public meetings. In
182 places the act had been put into operation ; in 168,
on the application of ratepayers by petition, and in 14,
after the representations of town councils and vestries,
and after a certain per tentage of mortality was
proved to take place annually among the population
The noble lord mentioned that since the attacks had
been made, the board had received a number of letters
from Manchester and other places in the country which
had been voluntarily sent, and the writers of which de-
clared that ;they believed the attacks were wholly un-
fotindell: The noble earl entered into a defence of the
board as to the charges, and concluded by saying that a
more diligent, active and zealous body of men, or dne
more desirous to do good, and to promote the interests
of the poor and working classes, could not be found.

The BISHOP of LONDON said that if the Board,of
Health had not been thwarted by the Government, every
poor dwelling in the metropolis would at this moment
have been supplied with pure water at a price so small
as not to be worth consideration. He then paid a high
tribute to the official merits of Mr. Chadwick and Dr.
Southwood Smith ; and expressed a hope that the Go-
vernment would feel it their duty to uphold those gentle-
men in the difficult position which they at present oc-
cupied.
The Earl of CARLISLE eulogised the long public
services of Mr. Chadwick and Dr. Southwood Smith,
and said it was difficult to account for the hostile feel-
ings which had lately been expressed towards them. He
trusted that these feelings would soon subside, and that
in the meantime the consciousness of having done right
would enable them to sustain the present trial.
Lord BROUGHAM also spoke highly of the merits
of Mr. Chadwick, and described his public services in
the establishment of the present poor-law system.
The motion was then agreed to.
BLEACHING WORKS BILL.

The Bleaching, &c., Works Bill was read a third time
and passed.
THE GOVERNOR OF NEW ZEALAND.,

Lord LYTTLETON said he could not concur in the
opinion that the defence of the Governor of New Zea-
land by her Majesty's Government was quite satisfac-
tory. He was well aware how utterly uninteresting
the question was, and he had no pleasure in bringing
charges against any public man. The colonial goyernors
had a fair claim to have their conduct fairly considered
at home ; and he admitted that Sir George Grey had
been a good and efficient governor in some respects, and
that financiallrhe had been so, but he was quite unfit
for the introduction of a constitutional system for the
English people, and he thought it a misfortune that it
had been entrusted to his hands. The noble duke oppo-
site was aware that it was conceived that the main
grounds of complaint were, and he proposed to confine
himself to those proceedings under the Constitutional
Act for New Zealand, the dealing with the Price of
crown lands, and the delay in summoning and assem-
bling the House of Representatives. He had always
thought that the late Government, whatever might be
their merits or demerits, were entitled to lasting honour
for the Constitutional Act of New Zealand.. The
great question was not what the colonists themselves
asked for, but what powers and what duties they ought
to be called on to exercise. He did not doubt that
what Sir George Grey had done with land was exceed-
ingly agreeable to many persons in the colony, includ-
ing land sharks and speculators in land, and those also who
honestly thought that land ought to be cheaper He need
not remind the house of the distinguishing feature of
the New Zealand Act, that for the first time the colonists
had conceded to them the unreserved control over their
own lands ! and he had alWays cOnsidered that that
was a wise, and that it was undoubtedly a great con-
cession. That was granted to the colonists themselves,
and the simple charge against Sir George Grey was, that
he took on himself to exercise that great authority that
had been given not to him, but to the colonists, and he
issued a proclamation making the most sweeping changes
in the price of land, and lowering the price in many cage.
half, and in others three quarters. No doubt he might
have done worse, but what was objected to was the
principle of what be did. The first clause of the act
said that it should be lawful for the General Assembly
to make laws for the disposal of the waste lands of the
Crown. The-justification was said to be founded on
the 79th clause, which said that it should be lawful for
her Majesty, by letters patent, or by a document under
the sign manual, to delegate to the governor any of the
powers reserved to her Majesty as to the sale of waste
lands. One question was, whether this power had been
delegated to the governor, and they were informed that
such instructions were not to be found, though it was
said broadly in reply that the power had been legitimately
exercise& He quite admitted that the late Government
and some members of the present Government, and the
noble duke most of all, were to blame for allowing the
slightest ambiguity, for so alive had he been to this
matter, that in another act it was at his instance that
words were put in distinctly providing that governors
should not have the power to lower the price of land.
But what had been said was not literally correct,
for no such instructions could be found. He was almost
bound to believe that there were such instructions, for
he was told so by the highest authority—(hear)—and he
was bound to think that there must be some confusion of
memory, and that the document referred to was the one
which they had before them. There were despatches on
the 16th and 21st of July, and the second of them did
einrrnoonleoonuiai
for thaterroneous,
for tell theig(tivleernwoarstltioathat power
it in to
virtue
ot, withdesp these
lands, despatch
hiesoef
„
that no -nth instruction, had Keen received
newspapers
the 16th,oafv.eTunloy
such; l)u tptohlla,
et
sHe foundundoubtedly
s
could have br,n sPut, ""ld not conceit „„ie ,
since 1s:,O. He „0,04 not lion Ally such iiiTiftt:t.hl(Btt,i,ti.n:
Instructions could -n beyond the art it.eit. ti t
accordance with
in reference to waste laud ; but only is
claur c confined the
the law, and this wholesale lowering of the p ice of land
WYNN' z in the a7',:ciiibly to make laws
was in direct conflict with the previous act, The in-
and there was a very strong presumption that the power
structions ought to have been under the sign manual,
had not been so delegated, for they would find that Sir
John Pakington did delegate powers to deal with lands
in Canterbury colony without any document under
the sign manual, and therefore he was incredulous
of any sign manual existing in this case. It might
have been necessary in individual cases, or in dealing
with the natives, that the governor should have some
such power, but it should be exercised with the ut-
most care. On the next point he had to inform the
house, what would be startling news to those who
took an interest in this subject, that the views he had
taken had been taken in the colony and submitted to
the Supreme Court, and twice over, on argument, the
the Court had adopted them, and a solemn injunction
had been issuey by that court, restraining all parties
from acting in the matter, and yet the governor took no
more notice than if the injunction had been waste paper,
and the Supieme Court a nullity. He should like to
know what the Queen's Bench under its present head,
D
horaysetildlomneoreunudnedrerthit late
head, L
circumstances
oesor?ci
Ivehnymeavne,rwyopudelr.
son connected with the matter would have been sent to
prison. He must advert in a few words to the answers
notto thesebeen
a charges.
question
Hwehwetashermt
suchsu re
injunction
had
eehadbeen
issued, but the fact was notorious. It was said that the
governor did not know it ;. but he was bound to know
it, for the matter had been pending for two months, and
there was, in fact, evidence that he had been told of it.
There was two letters informing him of it, and one of
them from a gentleman, who ased what he was to do
in consequence of the conflict between the proclamation
and the injunction. But it was said that Chief Justice
Martin had reviewed and reversed the injunction. But
he had no power to review it. Then it was said that
the governor was told that this injunction was not to
be acted on ; but the injunction was there, and ought
to have been acted on. On another part of this matter
he might state that the act arrived in the colony on the
22e1 December, 1852, and the General Assembly was
not to meet until 17 months afterwards. It was said
that the governors used all possible expedition, but that
was not so ; and be bad seen a letter of a gentleman,
an opponent of the governor, in which every possible
reason was suggested, but this one was not mentioned,
He had taken the full time to the last minute before he
issued the writs to return members ; and when he issued
them, he did not appear to have named any time for the
return of those writs. There were other arguments upon
this point which lie would only just take notice of. It
was said that the governor could not call together the
General Aseembly till the returns had been notified. It
might as well be said that lie should have known the
electors before he issued the writs. The consequences
of the delay in the calling together of the General As-
sembly, were an illegal appropriation for several months
of the whole of the revenues of New Zealand. It was
said that the governor was in an inevitable dilemma.
Bin if the governor found a difficulty in calling the as-
sembly together, he ought to have continued the old
council in their functions till the General Assembly was
formed. It was said that he acted in the complete spirit
of the act. But he issued of his own authority an ukase
by which he transferred two-thirds of the revenue to
the provincial council, and kept one-third for general