The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-02 00:00:00

THE RAJA OF SAT rARA.

Mr. EVELYN DENISON wished to ask the Hon.
Member for Montrose whether the motion of which he
(Mr. Hume) had given notice, and which had been put
off several times, with respect to the Raja of Sattara,
would he again brought on by the Hon. Member.
Mr. HUME said that the notice stood for to•morrow
upon going into Committee of Supply, and it was his
intention to bring it forward then.
HEALTH OF TOWNS.

Lord AIORPETII presented a number of petitions
from various parts of the country in favour of the Health
of Towns' Bill.
NAVIGATION BILL.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the order of the day
for the second reading of the Navigation Bill for the
pnrpose of postponing it.
REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE.

Mr. E. DENISON said that there were several Bills at
present before the House relating to the representation of
the people—he had counted as many as five—one of which
had been introduced by the Noble Lord. The subject
of these Bills was one which was very interesting, espe-
cially at the present moment, and he wished to know
whether it was the intention of the Government to per-
severe with any of those Bills in the present session.
Lord J. RUSSELL stated that he was only enabled
to answer the question of the Hon. Member as regarded
the Bill which he (Lord J. Russell) had introduced. It
was a very important Bill, but at the same time, con-
sidering the late period of the session, he did not mean
to proceed with it at present. He wished to have the
Bill read a second time, in order that the House might
go into Committee pro forma upon it, and he thought
that no objection could be entertained to such a
course. With regard to the other Bills referred to
he was not answerable for them ; but, as the
Hon. Gentleman had asked his opinion, he would state
that at the present period of the session it was not de-
sirable to proceed with any Bills which would make
any alteration as regarded the representation of the
people.
COLLIERY EXPLOSION AT WIGAN.

Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE wished to ask the Right
Hon. Bart. the Secretary for the Home Department a
question, and also to call his attention to a subject
which required the prompt interference of her Ma-
jesty's Government. The Right Hon. Gentleman was
aware that an express had arrived only that afternoon
announcing a most calamitous explosion in a
colliery near Wigan, which took place on Tuesday
afternoon last. It was the wish of the parties that the
case should be represented to the Right Hon. Baronet,
and that a commission should be sent down to investi-
gate the case and the causes from which the accident
has arisen. According to the information he had re-
ceived the colliery was situated about two miles from
Wigan, and it appeared that for some time past
the men had been representing to the proprietor of this
colliery that it was not in a safe state, and so much so,
that on the very morning on which the explosion took
place the men went to the man at the bottom of the
shaft, and requested him to take them up, as the pit was
not safe. The man refused, and teld the men to go
back to their work, and in a few hours after the ex-
plosion took place. Two men were brought to the
mouth of the pit, and died instantly, and six or seven
others were brought up blinded and in such a state as
not to be expected to live. Six men were left in the pit,
and although the most experienced men offered to go
down and see if it were possible to rescue them, the
proprietir refused to allow them. He hoped that the
Government would take such cognizance of the case as
would render these horrible accidents less frequent.

Sir G. GREY was not acquainted with the facts, as
they had not come under his notice officially, but he
believed that an inquiry was in process of taking place
before the coroner, and he trusted that the coalowners
would be found to be blameless; but, in the meantime.
he could give no opinion. If the conduct of the coal-
owners should seem to require it, a strict investigation
would be commanded by the Government.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that no time ought to be
lost, for it was intolerable that six bodies should be
unaccounted for; and that although persons had volun-
teered to go down the pits, liberty to do so was refused,
because they might be afterwards examined before a
judicial tribunal.

COMMUTED PENSIONS.
Sir DE LACY EVANS wished to ask the Secretary-
at-War what decision had been come to respecting the
restoration of their pensions to the commuted pen-
sioners, so many of whose petitions have been laid before
the House at different times during this session; and re-
specting the arrears claimed by the petitioners, consist-
ing of the amount they would have received had the
warrant of 1834, authorising the restoration of these
pensions. been made known to them?
Mr. FOX MAULE said that he thought he had
stated formerly that in 1832 inducements had been held
out to the pensioners of settlements in America for four
year.' commutation of their allowance. The arrange-
ment was an unsatisfactory one, and many of the pen-
sioners were thrown destitute upon the colony. lle did
not think that the principle should be allowed that those
pensioners who had commuted their pensions should now
be permitted to resume them, and not only so, but to be
allowed also the arrears of their pensions from the date
of entering upon that agreement.
JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES' BILL.

Sir R. H. INGLIS said the Joint-stock Companies'
Bill stood on the list for to-night. It was a most im-
portant measure. It gave great power to joint-stock
companies, and repealed the provisions of all former
Acts relating to joint-stock companies. He trusted,
therefore, that it would not be brought forward for dis-
cussion at a late hour of the evening.
Mr- M. GIBSON was understood to assent to the re-
quest?Rfotshse Hon. Baronet, but denii d that the Bill
infringedro
ethe o
r letterth eort
purposehspirite of
f m making
iformerActs.
etimherr.
:Sttentid°aryni,ng.
expla-
nation on a personal matter. He had been represented
of
taol I
represent Irish. soc society. He
society
ie deniedty
a; having
being
that—( Ca
r spirit o' f‘ Oj
jobbing nhg
in the Times of that
the sort. What he said was, that it
pre-
vailedtwoa s havem tohsrto stateduugi,
hjuoosuftt
spirit.—(Hear, hear.)
ACCIDENTS IN COLLIERIES.
staaiindteadnywthitilinga'ny such spir!t.
Mr. BAILEY wished to know what power the ma-
gistrates had to interfere with regard to colliery explo-
sions. Scarcely six montlas passed without accidents
happening, and he thought it right that some inquiry
should take place with the view of ascertaining the case,
and of providing a remedy against them.
Sir G. GREY said that an inquiry could not take
place unless circumstances rendered it necessary.
Mr. HUME quite agreed in the opinion that an in-
quiry should take place when any of these accidents
occurred, and hoped that Government would also take
steps to inquire into the collision of vessels at sea, with
a view of adopting measures to prevent the great loss of
life which frequently occurred from them.
Mr. FORS I'ER complained of the imputations which
were cast upon the owners and masters of collieries with
regard to thesiy accidents.
Mr. DUNCOMBE said that he had this information
from Mr. Roberts, a solicitor, of Manchester, and he had
no doubt of the accuracy of the facts.
NAVIGATION (No. 2) BILL!
Lord JOHN RUSSELL postponed the second reading
of this Bill till twelve o'clock to-morrow.
HEALTH OF TO WNS' BILL.

Lord MORPE I'H moved the order of the day for
going into Committee upon the Health of Towns Bill.
Mr. G. rAlAgli said that, ill his opiaiou the climes

cf this measure upon which they were about to go into
Committee were most unconstitutional. The Bill in its
operation must necessarily deprive many corporate bodies
of powers and privileges which they had hitherto exercised
with great advantage to themselves and to the public. The
responsibility for the acts of the Commissioners who were
to put this Act into operation were to rest upon one Com-
missioner, who was to have a sea. in that House. They
all knew what was mea..t by that responsibility, and
how easily it was to be got rid ot. He objected to the
principle of any compulsory sale of property belonging
to public bodies► and private parties, not under the ope-
ration of a proper Act of Parliament, but at the discre-
tion of one individual who might never see the spot, or
know the detailed circumstances of the ease with which
he had to deal. He should resist this Bill upon prin-
ciple alone, and not from any other interested motive,
and he should therefore move that this Bill be committed
that day three months.
Colonel SIBTHORP said that he had paid some
attention to this Bill, and he did not think that all the
parties interested in this matter were thoroughly ac•
quainted with the dangerous power which it placed in
the hands of the Government. The Noble Lord who
bad proposed the Bill had in the first instance limited its
operation to four miles, but he had suddenly, and
without any reason, increased its operation to ten.
He was informed that there were sixteen metropolitan
Members in that House, and the fear of the opposition
of these sixteen Members he supposed had induced the
Government to exclude London from the operation of
the Bill. He had the honour to represent the important
city of Lincoln, and he had no doubt he should have the
same distinguished honour in the next Parliament ; and
he could tell the House that his constituents were
as clean as the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor
of London or the Common Council of the
city of London, and they did not require any super-
vision of this sort. They did not want a commissioner
to be continually coming down and telling them that they
had no right to do this, that, and the other. Local
government was the essence of the constitution, and he
could not consent to pass a Bill which proposed to strike
a blow at the foundation of all local governments
throughout the country. He condemned this partial le-
gislation, and unless the Government changed their sys-
tem of proceeding they would lose the support of all who
now voted with them.

Mr. W. BROWNE said that this was the most im-
portant Bill which had been introduced during the ses-
sion. The state of Liverpool at the present moment
was most deplorable, for want of proper sanatory
regulations. There were not less than from six
thousand to seven thousand people ill of fever
at the present time in the hospitals of that town, and
unless some preventive measures were taken, the most
incalculable evils would be entailed upon society. A
medical gentleman told him that during last week no less
than 1604 had been spent in providing coffins for the
poor. . _ _

Mr. MACKINNON said that the principle of the Bill
was good, but there were some things omitted which he
believed were calculated to effect much good, and which
he would wish to see introduced into it. For the reason
which he had already given, he should give his cordial
support to the Bill.
After a few words in explanation from Mr. PALMER,
Mr. SPOONER wished to make some abservations
upon what tell from the Hon. Member for South Lanca-
shire. It had been stated that the borough of Liver-
pool was in a most distressing state, and that had been
urged in s'ipport of this Bill, Why did the Noble
Lord not come down and ask for a special Bill for this
special purpose, instead of applying a permanent Bill
to a temporary emergency? The Bill was one which
gave inquisitorial powers of the most unbounded nature
to the commissioners appointed by Government, to the
injury and detriment of public and private property.
Much had been said about excluding London from the
opk.ration of the measure. If it were a proper one why
exclude London from it, and if it- 'were such as could
not be applied to London itself, why apply it at all.
After a few words from Mr. BARNARD, which did
not reach the gallery,
Mr. NEW DEGATE (who rose amidst loud cries of
" Divide") wished to know why four miles, as the limits
of this Bill round a city or town, should have been in-
creased to ten miles, and why so many new clauses had
been added to it?

Mr. HUDSON rose amid loud cries for a division. He
assured the House that he had dined, and would not be
put down.—(Laughter.) He could not understand why
London was omitted from the Bill, and he objected to
the unlimited power given to the towns to fix rates.
This power he would give to no corporate body, as he
believed it would operate with the greatest injustice. He
also thought it extremely objectionable to establish so
expensive machinery, as was created by the Bill, and to
give the whole management of the towns under its ope-
ration into the hands of young gentlemen who might be
wholly incapable to discharge the trust, and would be
the nominees of the Minister of the day. He saw no
reason why London should be excluded, and be thought
there was no magic circle ~f 10 miles round St. Paul's any
more than there was round St. Peter's of York.—
(" Hear, hear." and laughter.) He hoped the House
would resist this attempt at centralisation. He had no
hesitation in saying that this commission was one of the
grossest jobs ever attempted by any Government. He
would use his best exertions to defeat the Bill in every
stage, and he hoped the House would join him in that
determination.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that the Hon. Gentleman
who had just sat down appealed to the metropolitan
Members, and hoped they would nOt vote for going into
Committee. He thought the circumstance of their being
connected with Ltaidon was a strong reason why they
should vote, and on that clause exempting London from
the operation of the Bill he would vote for its omission.
He believed the Bill would increase instead of diminish
the value of property, as drainage and cleanliness
would necessarily produce that effect. Whatever objec-
tion, however, there might be to its details, they could
be discussed in Committee, and he should, therefore,
support the motion.
Captain PECHELL was also in favour of going into
Committee, where the various amendments might be dis-
cussed, and the Bill made in accordance with the views
of the House.

Mr. P. BORTHWICK thought it was a very strange
and suspicious circumstance, that all who were to be ex-
empted from the operation of the Bill were in its favour,
and all who were brought under its provisions were
against it. He thought the omission of London was ex-
tremely objectionable, and though he gave her Majesty's
Government credit fur good intention, he considered
the measure ould not effect the good which they an-
ticipated. Believing that it was a crude, ill-digested, and
imperfect measure, and not sufficiently comprehensive in
its character, he would vote against going into
Committee. _ _ _

Mr. F. BERKELEY was connected with a very large
city—the City of Bristol—which was in favour of the
measure, and the inhabitants of it thought it very
strange that so large a city as London should be opposed
to it.—(Cries *if "Divide, divide.")
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For going into Committee ll7
Against it
—9l

Majority

On our return to the gallery we found
Lord MORPETH explaining that be intended to re-
duce the commissioners from five to four—one of whom
only was to be a paid commissioners.

The House then resolved itself into Committee on
clause 1.

Mr. HENLEY said that the Bill would only create
patronage, and he would put it to the Government
whether it would not be better to have ono general Bill
for sanatory regulation, and to omit altogether all those
clauses which relattd to the appointment of commis-
sioners and secretaries. He concluded by moving the
omission of the clause

Lord W. PO WLETT did not object to the principle of
the Bill, but objected to many of the clauses. He con-
sidered that sanatory regulations could only be properly
carried out under the management of a central com-
mission.

An HoN. MEMBER did not think that the intervention
of commissioners was necessary for the purpose of pro-
moting the health of towns ; he should, therefore, sup-
port the amendment. _ _

Csl. SIBTH OR? wished to know the salary of the
paid commissioner and the probable expense of the
central office. As the Noble Lord had reduced the
number of commissioners, perhaps he would think
proper to reduce the number of inspectors. The House
ought to have the fullest information on the sub;ect. It
seemed to him, however, that the Bill would create a
number of new offices which the country could do well
without. He should offer all the opposition in his power
to the Bill passing into a law.

Mr. SP6ONER also wished to know the salary of the
paid commissioner, and deprecated any secrecy ou the
subject. Surely the Noble Lord had not come down to the
House to seek the passing of a Bill which would entail
great expense upon the country, but of the amount of
which he was ignorant.

Mr. MACKINNON supported the clause as it stood.
He defied them to bring the Bill into operation without
the aid of a central board. The Noble Lord had stated
tho expense of the commission.

Col. SIBTIIORP—But he had not stated the salary
of the commissioner.

Mr. MACKINNON—WouId they prevent the sana-
tory of improvement of the country if it could be effected
by giving the commissioner a salary of 1,5001.?
Sir W. CLAY said the word "centralisation" in this
country had almost gained the signification it obtained
during the time of the French Revolution; but if cen-
tralisation meant the diffusion of information on the sub-
ject of sanatory reform, and the collection and arrange-
ment of information, he considered that a body of this
kind was necessary.
Mr. HUDSON said the Bill would give the com-
missioners enormous powers—such as sending down
surveyors at great expense to make plans, which would
not be paid by the metropolitan members—(Laughter)—
but by the rate-payers. He considered that the sanatory
government of towns should be left in the hands of local
boards, over whom the inhabitants exercised direct con-
trol. In the city of York, the sanatory condition of the
town was entrusted to a board, who had the entire con-
fidence of the inhabitants, because they discharged their
duties properly and economically. Although he did not
materially object to the Bill, he considered that it would
be well to leave the manacement of towns to local
boards. He could riot understand why London was to
be exempt.—(Hear, hear.) The Government might,
by their majorities pass the Bill ; but they would ulti-
mately regret its adoption.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped
that they would remodel the Bill, and extend it to all
t ov
EhTli hear.)
Lord said the sums necessary to carry
‘nosr.d Tt
o iatrp,
out the Bill would be voted by the House; but he might
state that the Government did not intend to propose
that the paid commissioner should receive a higher sa-
lary than 1,0001. a year.—(Hear, hear.) Centralisation
was either good or bad ; in this case he conceived that
it would be most beneficial. The central authority was
not intended to paralyse local exertions, but to promote
their desultory and straggling efforts, and to stimulate