The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-08 00:00:00

WELLINGTON STATUE.

Lord BROUGHAM said that on the 18th of June, 1
1337, a day for ever memorable in the history of the
world, as being the anniversary of the battle of Waterloo,
a number of persons feeling grateful to the Noble Duke,
and considering themselves bound to testify it, collected
money to the amount of thirteen thousand pounds, for
the purpose of making a testimonial to the Illustrious
Commander. What that testimonial should be was left
open for discussion, and when the committee went to his
late Majesty William represented that there was k
no precedent for erecting a memorial to a private indi- 1
iduul upon the palace property, he answered that they
should make one ; and her present Majesty, under the
advice of Lord Melbourne, confirmed that decision, and
was graciously pleased to authorise the erection of the
statue ugon the very arch which it now adorned. It
was on the distinct and express statement that the
Ftatue should be placed upon the arch that the
Committee again appealed to the public, and
12 000/. more was subscribed ; and if it was removed
there would be a direct breach of contract and faith with
the public. He understood that the more persons of
taste examined its situation, the more they were im-
pressed with the feeling that it was well placed in point
of beauty and effect. His opinion on a matter of taste
was valueless, and although he considered that the horse
was not like one of the Elgin marbles, and was
too real in its position, and not sufficiently ideal
yet he considered that the statue ought to remain where
it was. And he was the more impressed with this
opinion, when he was aware that it would give great and
deep offence to the Noble Duke to remove it. The Noble
Lord then went on to observe how justly such a compli-
ment was due, and observed that the statue was not the
property of the Government but of the subscribers ;
and concluded by saying, " And now, remove it if you
dare."—(Cheers.)
Lord LANSDOWNE—Am I to understand that the
Noble Lord makes a motion?
Lord BROUGHAM—Yes; I move for all the papers
and correspondence connected with the Wellington
statue.

Lard LANSDOWNE. said that he had reason to com-
plain of the line of conduct adopted by the Learned and
Noble Lord. He had not given notice of his motion,
and while be agreed to the motion, he could not but take
an opportunity of entering his protest against such a
courae.

[LEFT SITTING.]

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

WITHDRAWAL OF THE HEALTH OF TOWNS

BILL.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Mr. HUDSON referred to the statement read by the
Hon. Member for Finsbury the other night with respect
to the condition of York. He said that city was as
healthy as any other town in England, as the average
long vity was 32 years, whilst it was considerably less
in Liverpool, Birmingham, and other places. In
Salford the average duration of human life was
26, in Sheffield 22, in Huddersfield 27, and in
Dewsbury 23. If the Bill was necessary for
York, it was equally necessary for London.—(Hear.)
The statement he had read would show that White-
chapel and other districts of London were far more un-
healthy than York. Many rural districts were far more
unhealthy than towns, and the Bill should apply to these
districts as well as towns.
Mr. MACKINNON asked the Noble Lord if he
would give a pledge that he would bring forward the
Bill in the next session.
Mr. WAKLEY advised the Noble Lord to pay the
greatest attention to the statements of the Learned
lienteman (Mr. Stuart). The Han. Gentleman (Mr.
Mackinnon) had urged the Noble Lord to bring in
similar Bill next session. He could not join
him in i
that des
in.
mnre, as he
wished the Noble Lord would
bring
j'ist withdrawn, * creomprehensive measure than the one
be exclud,..d.._ol,l,
which the City of London_ would not
brought in r, hear.) Before the Noble Lord
inquiry,anet her Bat he advised him to institute a
preliminaryina:dbto consult the various paving,
lighting, and wate
great number in the metropolis, of which there were a
under-
stood, had been consutted.Nfs'hno"of whom,
with him,e
3 did
and thispa he
uecwh aas
cournr e..
he
h„2,, would carry the public w
com-
arehensiv© measure into a law. He
of Parliament
that the
which
judges put constructions upon
when they were passed were never dreamt ref.—(Hear.)ref.—(Hear.)lß this case they should not give the
judgestoo much
by the
power. It was true, if parties felt aggrieved
decision of the judges, they might carry
the Lord Chancellor, but he considered that appeal to
a
twelve men were alone competent to settle the majority
•ovf
of questions which came before the courts, but
espe-
cially in reference to sanatory regulations. To obviate
any differences of opinion they should so simplify the
Bill as to render misinterpretation impossible, so that a
child might understand it.
Mr. HUME urged that the new Bill should be brought
in early next session, and that they should simplify it as
much as possible. There was a great difference between
statute and judge-made law; and therefore they should
take care that the statute law in this case was so clear,
that the judges could not put a different construction
upee it from that put upon it by the House.
Mr. HENLEY deprecated the conduct of Government
in bringing in a Bill with so many clauses almost at the
crud of the session, and when the Noble Lord Inuit have
1s !:own that as he progressed with it at that late period,
to
would sink step by step as he proceeded as if he
mere in a bog. The Noble Lord had failed because he
had attempted too much—(lle.,r)—he would do far
more good if he were to proceed at a slower pace.-7
(I fear, hear.) He advised him, ther, fore, if he intended
to bring forward the Bill next session it
ed Fie
have his ma-
uery well defined and arranged. e thanked the
Noble Lord for his courteous conduct during a trouble-
sorne opposition.—(hear, hear.)
Lord NIORPETH said he had not consented to the
withdrawal of the measure without great regr, t both on
public aed private grounds—(Hear, hear)—but the pro-
gr,?ss made during the last two days, arid as but teO
clauses Were passed on Monday and on Tuesday:he felt
test it could not be passed through both Houses during