The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-04 00:00:00

MONTHLY MILIVARY OBITUARY.

Grnerill James Orde, 12eddiugton.
Major Ganeral Sir James Sutherland, East India
Company's Service, London.
Lieulenant-Colonels—G. D. Young, C. 8., 10th Foot,
Witz?erubsd, Bengal; Dods, half-pay, Ist Foot, Glasgow.
Captsins—llandfield, 29th Foot, Meerut, Bengal;
Mord trint, half-pay, 6 I st Foot, Verdun, France; Passley,
ietircd foil pay, 82d Foot, London; Pyner, Unattached,
Yarmouth.
Lieutenants—Veit eh, 25th Foot, Bangalore; Balton,
84th Foot, Poonatnallee; Jennincr•s, half-pay lit Garri•
on Battalion, Guernxey; Sayers, Unattached, Youghal.
Quartermaster Pittard, half-pay Oxford Fearible Ca-
valry, Long View, Buyton.
Surgeons—Lawson, 7th Hussar* Cork; John Millar,
North Britain Recruiting District, Glasgow; Young,
half-pay, 16th Foot, Falmouth; Wehaarm, half pay,
Bluuswick Infantry; Kindel!, half-pay Staff.
.Assistant-Surgeon Dr. Grantham, 23d Foot (drowned
in Lake Erie).

A Malta correspondent says that Mrs. More
O'Ferrall was about to leave the island and to return to
England.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 3.
METROPOLITAN IN FEHMEN rb BILL.

Mr. WAKLEY presented a petition trom C9O of the
inhabitants ut Itlington against the Interments B►ll.
Mr. C. PEARSON presented a petition trom Lam-
beth, praying that that Bill might not pass without
alteration. _ _ _

Mr. COBDEN presented a petition from the parish of
St. Bride's, London, against the Bill.
Mr. T. DUNCUMLiE presented similar petitions
against the Bill from Poplar, the vestry of St. Luke's,
and other places iu the metropolis.
Mr. LA.CY presented a ietition from Mr. George
Lewis AnsPli, clerk to the London Cemetery Company,
against tt.e Bil!.
Mr. WILD presented a petition from Mile-end to the
same effect.

On the motion that the House go into Committee on
this Bill,
Mr. LACY moved that the BM be referred to a Select
Committee. He felt that as a Member from a distant
constituency he rtquired some excuse for interfering
in the question.—(llt-ar.) But the Bill involved such
great injustice—such a waste of money, and he felt so
strongly on the subject that he could not refrain from
making this motion. There were so many amendments
to be proposed, he did not think it was possible that
the Bill could get through Committee, and he thought
the best course would be to refer it to a Select Com-
mittee.

Lord DUDLEY STUART seconded the motion.
The Bill affected the interests and pockets of a large
class of the inhabitants of the metropolis ; and he could
not deny that a Bill on this subject was greatly wanted,
but not such a Bill as this, which was contrary to the
principles of political economy and constitutional freedom.
Was it necessary that a Biil of this description should
tax the people of the metropolis without their consent? for
that was really the object of the Bill. The distinguishing
feature of it was to empower the board to put its hand
into the pockets of the people, and to employ
the money so raised in what way they thought
proper. The most unusual powers were entrusted to
the board. They were to appoint a whole
army of paid officials, including, besides the mem-
bers •of the board, clerks, assistant-clerks,
wardens, sextons, and grave-diggers, who might
amount to hundreds and perhaps to thousands. They
had the power also of stating what graveyards and ce-
meteries should be closed up, and what new ones should
be openei, and also in what way the funerals should
be conducted. But the power to which he must
objected was that which allowed them to fix what
fees should be paid for burials. The House ought
to look at the measure, he thought, with the
greatest jealousy, and he would suggest that the best
mode of proceeding was to refer it to a Select Committee.
Why, he would ask, was the principle of the Bill not to be
carried out by parochial authorities ? They would be
much better able to do so than a Government
board, judging from the reckless mismanagement
which hart characterised the office of Woods and
Forests in regard to Crown lends.—(Hear, hear.)
Government boards were quite as apt to be extravagant,
quite as apt to be actuated by favour, as a parochial
board, and he for one could not consent to this viola-
tion of the principles of the Constitarion. Again,
the Bill interfere.' with the courze of trade. It proposed to
establish the rates at which funerals should be furnished,
which was a direct violation of the principles of political
economy. Before those principles should be departed from
an overwhelming ree,ssity must be shown for the step.
He did not think that necessity existed in this case, but if
it did the onus probandi rested with the Govern-
ment. In the absence of that proof no men.
sure of this sort ought to be adopted ; the
trade ought to be left to the ordinary opera-
tions of supply and demand. But it was said
undertakers had been extravagant in their charges.
Well so they might, but was the undertaker the
only tradesman who made extravagant charges?
Had they not had extravagant tailors, extravagant
butchers, and extravagant grocers? and if it was right
to interfere with the trade of the undertaker,
why not apply the same interference to those other
branches of industry ? The Bill was objectionable,
moreover, on the ground of the excessive compensation
which it proposed to give the:parties whose vested rights
were likely to be disturbed by it; and the
more he examined the Bill the more was be
satisfied that it was a measure which ought not to be hur-
riedly passed, but postponed till a future period in order.
that it might be considered by a Select Committee.
He thought if the 'Bill was referred to a Select Cum-
mittee every purpose would be answered, and that the
best results would ensue.

Sir G. GREY opposed the motion for referring
the Bill to a Select Committee. When the Bill went
into a Committee of the whole House, he should
be prepared to discuss its details and to
remedy many of the evils complained of. The
amendment proposed would have the effect
of postponing the Bill for another session, which he
believed would be productive of the worst effects.
Mr. LUSHINGTOI.`7 was understood to state that he
should support the amendment. He protested against
the provisions of this Bill, which contemplated the burial
of some Christians in one part of the cemetery, and
others in another, instead of allowing them to meuider in
the same dust side by side.
Mr. B. OSBORNE said it was not his intention to at-
tack the principle of this Bill, for that a as laudable and
proper. No ono could read the report cf the Corn.
mittee, of which the Hon. Member for Lymington (Mr.
Mackinnon) was chairman, or the report of the Sanitary
Commission, without seeing that the comfort, the well-
being, the morals, and, what as as cf greater importance,
the. health—(A laugh)—of the people were at stake.
The Hon. Member for Bodwin had moved for a Se!' et
Committee on the Bill, and he would certainly give that
motion his support. The great object cf the measure
was to ups( t the whole of our parochial system, as re-
garded buriale, and to entrust Icon despotic powers to
the Board of Health, all Disseuters being excluded from
the management of the proposed cemeteries, while a
power of taxation to the extent of about 30,000/. would
be conferred upon the Board. The Government would
have done wiser if, instead of a Bill of 73 clauses like
the present, they had introduced a general Act prohi-

biting burial in towns, say within 15 miles of St. Paul's
in London, and some relative dislatai:e in other towns.
(Hear.) He gave credit to the Government for the prin-
ciple of the measure, Fut, he must objek t most if the
,details; end i.e wculd take the present of of
stating that there was one ma❑ who had been treated
most infamously in connexion with this rsatter—a man
who had devoted 15 years of his life and much of his
property to the promotion of the object aimed at in the
Bill—he meant Mr. Walker.—(Hear, hear.) Another
individual, Mr. Chadwick, got the whole credit, while
Mr. Walke, the original pioneer on this question, was
coolly thromn oaerboard.—(Eiear, hear.) lie would say,
however, that if they were to have a commission at all,
he did not see a man better fitted to serve upo❑ it than
Mr. Walker; but he (Mr. Osborne) was fortified in the
view he took of the Bill by the fact that that gentleman
regarded it as in many respects a very objectionable
saleasure.—(llear.) His opinion was, that they were
doing more to preudice the cause of sanitary retorm in
the eyes of the peop'e than if they had brought in no Bill
at all on the subject.—(dear.)
Sir DE L. EVANS complained that the Bill was going
into Cemtnittea when no opportunity had been given
them to dßcuss its principle. It was only on Friday
they, several important amendments had been made
known to the House, and as yet no time had been given
to their constituents to express any opinions regarding
1 then'.

Sir B. HALL said, the metropolitan Members had -
been told by the R4-;ht Hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Grey)
that if they voted for the Bill going bi'fore a Select Coin
mite() they would perhaps throw over the Bill for the
session, and thus postpone for another year the great
principle they wore all so desirous to carry out; but.
would that be the fault of the metropolitan Members?
The 8.11 was mentioned in the Speech from the Throne,
was brought in on the 15th of April, and read a second
time on tee 221 of April, and now it was proposed to go
into Committee on the 3d of June. Were any of the
Meml:e:s of that Moues to blame for the delay which
had thus taken place ?—(Bear, hear.) He would tell
the Noble Lord why the Bill was not referred to a Sele..t
Committee. It was because it would have been neces-
sary to place on the Committee a great number of
the metropolitan Members, and there were not two
Out cf the sixteen who sat for the metropolis who would
have agreed to a measure of this kind.—(Hear, helr.)
It was a measure that went, in fact, to abolish the whole
of, the local self-government that now distinguished the
maropelitan parishes, so far as burial-places were con-
cerned.—(flear, hear.) There were two persons in the
metropolis of whom the inhabitants entertained great
suspicions, and these were the Bishop of London, as
regarded teclittstical matters, aid Mr. Chadwick, as
regarded sanitary measures.—(Hear, hoar.) Through
the one they were in danger of having fixed upon them
tees in perpetuity to pay the clergy, and the other was
establishing a board, of which he was the prime mover,
and of which terhaps he would hereafter be the head.
—(Hear, hear.) Ile would not now go into the details
of the Bill. It was his intention to support the pro-
posal for sending it before a Select Committee, and when
the time came for considering tl o details he hoped that
both as regarded the 'payment of fees in perpetuity,
and the board, they would be rejected by a majority of
that Rouse.—(Henr.)
Mr. MAS FERMAN regretted that he felt himself
compiled to oppose the Right Hoe. Baronet (Sir G.
Grey), but, as his he!ief was that the Bill would oe bet-
ter considered by a Se!cct Committee than by a Commit-
tee of the whole Howe, he had made up his mind to
vote for the tn,tion of the Hun. Member for Bodmin.

Mr. T. DUN COM BE (who was received with cheers
from ell parts ef the House, this being the first appear,
anco of the Hon. Gentleman since his indisposition) said
he was sorry he had not much voice to oppose the Bill,
but. he felt bound to say that with the excsption of one
single clause, that relating to the intramural burial of
the deed, involving a principle which they were all
auxioue to see cerried out, there e as nothing in the Bill
to which he could give his sanction. There was not
beyond that clause, if indeed such a clause really ex-
isted, one proposition in the Bili that deserved the sup•
port of the House.—(Hear, hear.) The ItTilt Hon.
Baronet (Sir G. Grey) told them that they would moire),
Lose time by sending the Bill to a Select Committee ;
but he thought, on the e intrary, that it would be a
means of saving tims. If it ware sent to a Committee
impartially cheeen, and one that would listen fairly and
attentively to all the arguments that would be urged
upon their consideration, he for one would abide by the
decision of the Conemitres, and give no further trouble
to the Howe on the subject of the Bill—(heer, hear.)
Seine gentherien attached great importance to the sub
jest of Sunday Must-ofilee labour, und that House was
led into a hasty vote in agreeing to address the Crown
on the sutject. Now, the petitions which had ..been
presented on that question were the result of as great
an amount of imposition as ever had been practised,
and he was satisfied that the public generally. were
opposed to the course which the House had
taken.— (Hear, bear.) But how different was the case
with reference to the petitions that had been presented
on the subject of the present Bill by those representing
the rnetropelizi? Where was the metropolitan Member
who had stood up in his place in favour of the Bill ?
Not one, he believed, would stand up and advocate any
measure so wild and contrary to the opinions of the
veiple of the metropolis. Toe Noble 'Lord (Lord J.
Russell) would probably be for the Bill, the whole Bib.
and nothing but the Bill; but the Common Council of
the city of London had resolved to' petition that House,
praying that the City might be exempted from the ope-
ration of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) One cf the results of
this measure would be, that it would become a model
Bill for the whole country, and when it passel country
gee tlemen would be urged to submit to it because the
metropolis bad done so.—(Hear, hear.) Let them,
therefore, take warning in time. He would not now go
into the details of the Bill, but hoped that the House
would consent to its being remitted to as Select Com-
mittee. When the public heard that Government re-
fused to refer it to a Committee, they would at once
conclude th,,t there was some good jobbing aud some
nice patronage to be obtained by the Blll.—(flear, hear.)
Mr. IYEYNCOURT regretted that Government
should oppose the Bill going before a Select Committee.
He highly approved the object of the Bill, but disap-
proved the mode in which it was proposed to carry it
out. He thought parishes should take the duty laid
down in the Bill upon themselves; it would be snore in
accordance with the spirit of our institutions, and opposed
to the centralising course 50 much pursued by the Govern-
ment. The arneedments in the Bill having only been
made known on Friday, he had not yet had an oppor-
tunity of learning the opinions of his constituents re-
garding them.—(Bear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL rejoiced to sea his Hon. Friend
the Member for Finsbury (Mr. Dunconsbe) again in his
place—(Hear, hear)—though he certainly found himself
under the necessity of not concurring with his Hon.
Friend in the conclusions to which he had come on the
present occasion. The question before them really was,
whether it was desirable to refer the Bill !or preventing
intramural interments to a Select Committee. His
Hon. Friend said that if they did so they would have
before them a number of witnesses, all of whom
would have plans to propose, and suggestions to make,
and objections to urge, and that after all those plans,
and suggestions, and objections had been made they
would have to be fully considered by the Committee. If
so, then they might consider themselves fortunate if
some time at the end of July that Committee should
make a report. The more likely result, however, would
Ve that the Committee would report that they hal found
it impossible to come to a decision, but that they hoped
they would be allowed to sit again next session.—([fear,
hear.) Then, with respect to the Bill, he would not
enter into its defence, for he had not heard one reason
urged why the House• was not able to give its considera-
tion to the clauses of the Bill as well as a Select COM-.

mittec.—(Hear.) If the House found that the Board of
Health had by some clauses more powers than were, itb=
solutely necessary to carry into effect what all considered
necessary, let those clauses be altered or removed from
the Bill. If, on the contrary, it was found that those
clauses were necessary, they could be passed either with-
out aey al!eration, or with such alteration as might be
quired.—(llear, hear.) His Right Hon. Friend (Sir
G. Grey) had proposed some new clauses ; but he
thought is hard that, because they had listened to de-
putations and adopted recommendations which they had
wade, the House should, o❑ that account, be asked not
to go into Committee on the Bill.—(Hear.)
Mr Alderman SIDNEY sa'd, the Corporation of
London was unanimous in condemning the centralizing
clauses of the Bill, They felt a considerable amount of
gratitude to Government for undertaking the measure,
bat if they were asked whether they would undergo the
present evils of intramural interments, or the evils that
would spring from. the Bill, their answer was, that they
would prefer takins, the chance of undergoing the risk
personal to themselves of throwing out the Bill.—(Hear,
hear.) There were clauses in it which, as a municipality,
they never could be expected to agree to. As a corpo-
ration, they had always laid claim to the merit of mana-
ging their own affairs well, and they knew as well what
belonged to their social condition as any committee or
hoard whatever, whether sitting at Gwydyr-house or
Somerset-house.—(Hear, hear.) A Bill had already
been prepared which prohibited the burial of the dead
less than five miles from the metropolis, and it proposed
to do this without any charges being made upon the
public except those that were made for the decent inter-
ment of the dead. Then why should not a measure of
that kind be passed, instead of oee embracing the cen-
tralizing powers conferred by the Bill now before the
House? He could assure the House that the most deter-
mined opposition would be given to the measure by the
city of London.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir R. PEEL thought the argument of the Hon.
Gentleman who bad just spoken was ono ►which rather
showed the impolicy than t.tberwise of sending the Bill
to a Select Committee. The question of centralization
was no doubt a very important one. There were cer-
tain duties exercised by parochial authorities in the city
of London which it was proposed by the Bill should be
taken into the hands of Government; but surely that
was a question 30 important that it ought to be decided
by thi'y whole House.—(Hear, hear.) He had every re-
spect for the Corporation of the city of London; but at
the same time there were points of local management on
which some persons ventured to take a different opinion
from them.—(A laugh.) Take, fur example, the ques-
tion of the removal of Smithfield market.—(Hear, hear,
and laughter.) Speaking generally, the Corporation of
the city of. London must be presumed Lest qualified to
judge of local affairs; yet that was a point on which
many persons ventured to take a different opinion frown
theta.—(Hear, hear.) The Bill before the House had
b:•en read a second time, and the question now was,
whether they should go into Committee or scud it before
a Select Committee up stairs. If the Bill was sent to a
Select Committee everybody must admit that it would be
one of the most extraordinary cases of extramural inter-
ment ever heard of—(Great laughter)—and therefore he
thought it would be better to dispose of it rather within
than without the wall; of that House.—(Laughter.)
Mr. IiUNIE took great blame to Meisel fur not
having sooner read the Bill, as he would have mast ce:-
tainly opposed the second reading. He rPgardeci it as a '

0, to ,
most extraordinary mesoure, and as tent?ing gre'2 at,
promote the eentral.aing designs of the GOVerllsoY.r
and, therefore, be would give it his most decided oP
sition. . . a f t
Lord.R. GROSVENOR defended the principle eesete
Bill, in favour of which it had been his lot to Pr the
petitions, notwithstanding what had fallen frernoser
Honourable Member for Finsbury. The Hon. ALensrei
asked if there wes any baetropolite.n Member Prereet.
to defend the whole of the Bill. He would net sal e its
but he was prepared to say that he would OPidPel olr
being sent to a Select Committee. He bad pres b shot
thou; oils
meeting called to consider the Bill; and
meeting had terminated rather abruptly, 'to tb°
much was said against giving compensation gees-
clergy and to the sextons, there was no strong %obis
sion against the principle of the Bill. He theegceogi.
measure affected most particularly the vvorlaieg rosetei
of the metropolis, and that it would greet
to P osicb'
their benefit, though there were clauses in it
he was not prepared to give his support-0124,44
Mr. `VALLEY said he and his colleague 112'4". le
at great inconvenience, at the veriest of ale," Tbel
number of their constituents, to oppose the Billee. but
belh-ved the principle of the Bill to be unasssilavd-an:
in common with tee whole metropolis they irerej(licir"
to the details of the measure. The Noble Le: less;
R. Grosvenor) had spoken in favour of the prig dented
he shrank from entering upon the details, arld or se.;
that they could not be supported by princiPl? I,oed 7,
meat.—(Hear, hear.) Ho thought the Noble ee Or
the heart of tho Government had not acted victse re'
courtesy which he ought to have done toward' eull b°
presentatives of the millions of people wh° ffserOr
eiNted by this measure. The whole of the - were
Rau representatives, with one exception, ,soefe
against the measure. Under these debt, re'
I"
it was not too much to ask the 14°1)1(:e 60 rtr
(Lord J. Russell) to consent that the Bill shoul loose
terred to a Select Committee All the paroabiledoot I
rides asked was that such a Bin as this shee'ele, le
forced upon them. nitrate speculation, inge!i-ii sceri:,e
enterprise would set :such works in operation stOtle-
he confidently be:ioved, entitle the parochisl°ll
to the gratitude of the public. tea to Seoi
Sir W. CLAY said, that although he objeet hose,
verel of the provisions of the Bill, yet he had to o°l
any suffieieet reason why it should be referred well
lect Committee. On the contrary, all theteie Ac
been urged convinced him'that the proper Plse'eS r
the Bill could be discussed was the House itseihoePt
Mr. WYLD said, the question at issue was' tog °tie
the parochial authorities were capable of esrtteasee
this measure, or whether a board of consielbor
should supersede them—[Here the Hon. MelfDifiae'
interrupted by loud and incessant cries of ho the
which made it impossible for him to proceed]. ,ce
fare
moved that the debate be adjourned. ei ill%
Me. BRIGHT protested against the mode -rticsef)
matters of this kind were managed at that Pfl'clec"
hour of the evening. (A quarter past seven
eer, 00;
It was in the recollection of the House that oh 0001
Members were speaking about the same heurssY ibe'd
question cf Post- office transmission on the Sen efal,
were actually hooted down by Gentlemen 011 of shed
going to their dinner to discussing a etlestre'°,l blere,o
importance.—(CriesDivide, divide.") 1.::e "e'to
that at the lower benches of the House tiet j'-rt.
several members of her Majesty's Goverhe„en'il
appeared ready to vote for the Bill, e bell'
bid, rather than hear its merits discussed• goi tC.;,'Ol
certainly vote for the Bill being le fermi to a "),; ercoqie !
mittee; but he must prolet against the iii"ird °he' 0
that Hon. Members were offering at this Pert6geehie
evening to tie observations which other ID% a'aflrre
felt it their duty to make.—(Cries of " Quese°thes-t
" Divide.") The Noble Led at the bead e' gele"e
vernment ought to rebuke those insuborclineteetee)er
for their unseemly conduct.—(Cheers and laeg'etti(Fe.
Mr. OS BORNE would ask his Hoe. iftsse eaht/
Wyld) to withdraw d
his motion for an adjourl'o, at'
lieving, as he did, that if they were now to i'l-e
r
main qaestien they would get a majority. iete di
Mr. FITZROY thought the lion. Gent'(;" alheesi
Wylo) had to thank himself for the interruP'°,neeir
enperienced. by nut having confined himself t° ' )0
Lion before t e House. Inll4'
ill
Sir DE LACY EVANS considered the r.' , cl.,
Hon. Gentleman to have been perfectly undeeeere'oe'
hoped for the sake of the respectability Ind - Per ii'
their proce: dings, that his 1-lon. Friend vvouo . ,i,
his motion for an adjournment of the debate'
es esna s
Lord D. STUAR I' also advised his Hoe. .ers the
to withdraw his motion. If the House was 11,010tir
a temper to discuss a question of such irert orts'
would be better to postpone it to ahetherettOtir)'
tunity, when Hon. Gentlemen would be P.e;tl/6
listen with patience to the arguments that MI, le
dressed to them. reed,' Pisl
Lord J. RUSSELL did not think the re- for 00
scribed by the Hon. Member for Manchesterdeo
venting the noise arising from conversation in blifete,
would be effectual. There might be one or tweestle!fi
belonging to the Government sitting at the esOrot
the House who might have joined in the e%P id))
the general impatience, but he (Lord J. lit/eseflewos'
belied that if those Hon. Members had h,eerh'
silent and completely dumb the impatience c'' "e gli
would have been manifested to almost oeite,riti ii„.l
deg) ee.— (Laughter.) He had not percetve'Ve Ifni,
east been on this Bill any extraordinary '- d! 6/
eviucel, or what was more than usual wbe° .11,00,7
was expected at that particular hour of the "irl0„)1'
(Hear, hoar.) It was not for him to say 1:01
reason could be.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) , fr",
a division was expected, whatever reighevc o'clp,
question, between half-past seven and eig".* ger
there certa;nly was a sort of impatience sbotityle
Members which was not usual at any °there t. 1161,
the evening. After this explanation, he bort,
'Oft
Gentleman (Mr. Wyld) would go on with ":"tiiio9
When the question under discussion was Vec:"ollel'eto
interment of the dead of the metropolis, it 4.‘„" 1 sw
be creditable, at that hour of the evenings '''' ea 4
the debate. e t/ ?eft
Sir B. HALL declared that, during the twee*" 4,.'d°
he had been a Member of that House, be ';l,lp V,
witnessed more impatience than had been sVeere
House that night. It would be much better 400
tions of this importance were to be discussed'' 0(14
should always be brought forward after (lino' mono
After a few words from Mr. LACY, the de
adjourning the debate was withdrawn, and , lie!' p'S
Mr. WYLD proceeded shortly to address 1, iii r,
He said that the principle of the Bill was °he hi
sses
on the second reading. In a communicatioe 01 4:
had with the S. cretary of the Home Delsretije 14
Right Hon. Gentlemen begged him to Pes,rni-reiliiati
position he might have to the Bill till the hic's-eir.'c'a'e
was upon that distinct understanding that l" (air.
!el
abstained from offering his opposition to I." .0 I. 0
stage. He now objected to the measure beeie'verfilillf
to establish a Government, board of coratel99l°b/e°°‘
it was a fact that all Government commissions ,V,
and entirely failed. But in this instance ther ac e
f necessity for commissioners—as the parochial° of?
was already in existence. He should vole °l.
the Bill to a Select Committee. el'
The House then divided, when there orPar :il
For Mr. Lacy's amendment ... "' 141101 0
Against it ... ... ... ''' .1-001"
Majority ... ... ea: 1 11'. 4
The House then went into Committee, x" '''
si°l4°
the Chair. „cosi' A 1,
Clause 1, which enacted that London, ",;oit" 41
Southwark, and the places in the schedule s'-- r
Ot°
the metropolitan district, was agreed to. eat s'' er
On clause 2 being read, which enacts tetetetierte
Board or' Health to execute the Act be ael)°`"-ee of
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he must pronece: 01 4
mation of this board to be a job, the exPl,l:t. tli'dfi,l4
would be thrown upon the people by au,—;:a:,iody
Lions on account of poor-rates. He conilheeed V )I
tnothe havingamend
amendments,
sa,ffoorieled himwhich
he
er
hpardepg-airvig
nao-toi
iraiiiii
Bill was only reprinted on Friday last; it Itcl °eel rot
disadvantage. therefore, that he now proeeee-,, 010,9
discussion of the subject. The whole of l'"" the,:i 0
tan parishes, the whole county of Middlesex' jcseolloh
London, and the whole of the counties ebeeeitll,"
Surrey, objected to an interference by 6. gofts4
hoard, and to have their powers of lees' jetre of 0
taken from them. Ile must say that the Oerf
districts had no confidence in the adalibeie-ofett)lflV
board that might be constituted by "'caw Pell',di
They wanted to job away the privilege of 's tegieref
to burying their dead where and with when:ll sftel re
If this amendment were carried he iv°P; rochis I.
move a clause to prevent the powers of E'beios it
tries for arranging to bury their own dolt' -.
to 41
fered with. ' nod
sl9
Mr. HUME said, no ono was more tal 13° fill
funerals properly conducted than be vass,7.4" soli ''o,
be prepared to give to the Board of Heal the Plies ,ill
to coerce parishes that refused to remove fled I;ee 101
that were complained of; but he was sei,:i eet3„e'et satl
parish with which he was connected woribis Pkr
indignation the propositions embodied -1' end - V
wished to know what would be the exPeose li ti
of the Commission? „iebold°: A:ill
Sir G. GREY said, the Commission -to bile j
during the coutinuance of the Board of 13 bps 56
Parliament, and in 1854 the subject Mig.hreee he'r-!f9
sidered. With respect to the arraeetheet;sed sc'so,fl
to the parishes themselves, if they r'eeeeess'of9
those arrangements an application to tile. 71; Or'ea'reif
for a mandamus to compel them roights;; "; sisal
two or three years might be lost in litigutesoiaele le
could be dove in the meantime as to the P Ag°lo °/
dead in those parishes ?--(llear, behr'„)eitl: °ate/
each parish to have a separate burial gr°- Pt-et /"0
tance from the metropolis. [An 111 aorr,sfoelill
" Nor] The Honourable Gentteinan to' 000,4 01
rishes were to be left to make voluntary ee atholf.,
Weeld 03Pryeeenvi
what security could there be they . ~,, to P ttv 1 AO,
was necessary, then, to take some step, 00.-1,0 -or
which disgraced this country---the only. „f of '1 ce
rope sod tsgraced—of mingling the roomer bor• pole
with the habitations of the living.—(lleej to th el or,
suppose the objections he had mentioned ,eliee
chial system did not exist, would the nr",P oesdbst ',;/
Hon. Gentleman meet the exigencies of t'eeoees hot .h'
who were conversant with the subject h teal 'pito
oe eso et
worst burial grounds were not the Pat op (ere
private grounds, and if those were s" soeVeate
parochial grounds be a sufficient substittin, eo
forte,
hear.) As to the original clauses of the P sore CFO
tioa had been made, and the Corninittecot golio; VI
competent to deal with the objection CI. bad ° 6.
Vernon as they would have been if '"- lioef. sir
amended by the insertion of additional OM' $ sea 0
T. Le reecolde ebb 0
After a low words from Mr. 1
Gaxr in explanation, r 103.1 100
co (MA rra. 1 blo. dGyi [NivSa°s dNessiariadach, asttiilfl ,bite dlrllet!-?ollipitiljr c;I:111°71
should be appointed by the Crown and. ne eoet,,st re,
no representative principle--a corporate hl'e but 00
the public expenditure and raieing of rates Too., 1,1
i
sponribie te the rsteesyers.—(llear, beat:cevoidoece
ciple could nut be defend.
Mr. isIACKINNON i dea
il, that eleout six le I
brought iu a Bill laying ti)wn the Pril3Pr -