The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-16 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, August 15.
PUBLIC HEALTH BILL.
Lord CAMPBELL moved the consideration of the
Lords' amendments of the Public Health Bill; and after
stating the amendments made by the Commons to their
Lordships' amendments, the Noble Lord said that it
was for their Lordships to choose whether they would
waive their amendments or throw out this Bill. There was
no alternative : it was hopeless to insist on their Lord-
ships' amendments. He trusted that their Lordships
would show an example of moderation and forbearance;
and, for the sake of the safety of the Bill, that they
would agree to what the Commons had proposed, and
would be satisfied with the amendments which they had
given, waiving those which they had rejected.
The Earl of ELLENBOROU Gil said that after what
had taken place in this House, their Lordships had a
right to expect that their amendments would have re-
ceived the support of a united Government in the other
House. He supported the propriety of the amendments,
' which, he said, had been adopted with the best inten-
tions. He objected to the amendments of the Commons,
as they might lead to jobbing in the local boards. He
deeply regretted what had passed as to this Bill, but at
the same time he would not, on his part, even if he had
the hope of inducing their Lordships to agree with him
in rejecting any of these amendments give the House
of Commons an excuse for rejecting this Bill. The Bill
, was not what it ought to be ; it was not what he trusted
i it would be, but it was still a great public good, and they
should not have, through him, the excuse of depriving
the public of it.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE, who was indis-
tinctly heard, agreed that it was necessary to waive their
Lordships' amendments, at the same time regretting that
the Commons had not acceded to them. He and his
Noble and Learned Friend had entertained a strong hope
that the House of Commons would have waived, as re-
garded this Bill, that portiun of their privileges which,
although sacred in many constitutional respects, were
impediments in mutters of this kind.

Lord REDESDALE thought that great ground of
complaint rested on her Majesty's Government in
striking out what was called the " smoke clause." This
clause had received the unanimous support of the Com-
mittee of that House. The excuse for striking out the
clause was groundless. It was alleged that this was a
mutter for general legislation, and should not
have been introduced in it as a distinct clause.
Now clauses fur such a purpose had been intro-
duced into Liverpool, Derby, and other large tow ns '
improvement Bills. The suppression of smoke would
be of material benefit to the poorer classes. For in-
stance, weavers in some towns were obliged to shut up
their houses, so as to prevent the entrance of smut, which
would spoil the fabrics they were manufacturing.
He trusted that her Majesty's Government would
consent to the re-insertion of the clause, as the ground
for its rejection by the Commons was directly the re-
verse of the fact. lie did not believe that there would
be the slightest risk to this measure if their Lordships
sent this clause back to the House of Commons. If the
Commons should again reject it, he certainly would not
press it, so as to endanger the success of this Bill.
Lord PORTMAN regretted, as much as his Noble
Friend, that these clauses had been rejected by the
Commons. lie thought, however, that it would be un-
wise to risk such a Bill, by pressing this clause at such
a lute period of the session. He trusted that at an
early period of the next session a Bill would be intro-
duced to remedy this evil, and which he hoped would
prove successful.
The Duke of ARGYLL entirely concurred in the
feelings of regret which bad been expressed, that the
Commons had rejected the amendments introduced by
their Lordships.
Lord CAMPBELL, in reply, said that he could as-
sure the House that the Government had used every
exertion to carry these amendments, but they had
been unsuccessful, tin consequence of the irregular
combination of parties against them. It was not until
the Government saw that there was no chance of suc-
cess that they were induced to abandon all hope of car-
rying these amendments. iie trusted, however, that they
would be carried into effect at some future period. Ile
was glad to find the unanimity which prevailed as to the
course to be pursued by their Lordships; and he trusted
that the Noble Lord (Lord Redesdale) would not per-
sist in his proposal, but take the judicious advice of the
Noble Earl (Lord Ellenborough). This Bill was not so
perfect or beneficial as it might be, still it contained
°
many beneficial enactments.
The Earl of DESART expressed a hope that some
arrangement would take place so as to put the privi-
leges of both Houses on a better footing than they now
were, as many of them were at present productive of
great inconvenience.
The Commons' amendments were then agreed to.
UNLAWFUL OATHS ACTS (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, that
this Bill be read a third time,
The Earl of RODEN said that he rose to suggest an
amendment, in the second clause, after the words " it
shall be lawful to seize all papers and writings, and all