The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-07 00:00:00

tree signed by the occupier of such factory, or his agent,
of the intention to employ young persons and females
wooer this provision, spe2,ifyin fr the period, not being less
than one month, during whichs they are to be so em-
Ployed, shat be given to one of the inspectors of factories,
and
- s notice to the like effect, in such form as shall be
approved by one of such inspectors, and signed by such
cd"„ ?Pier or his age,t, shall be hung or fixed up, and
during the period specified in the notice shall be kept
z!cl. up in such factory; and during the period speci-
Lied In such notice young per and females above the
age of 18 years may be employed in such factory after
!I of the clock and not later than seven of the clock in
the evening of any day except Saturday; and during the
_rod specified in such notice (save to recover lost time
herein provided) no young person and no female above
the age of 18 years shall be employed in such factory
70 e seven of the clock in the morning of any day ex-
'ept Saturday; and the provisions hereinbefore kcon-
shall, as to every day except Saturday, during the
etiod specified in such notice, take effect as if seven of
the clock in the morning and seven of the clock in the
ievening viers throughout substituted for six of the clock
,
toe morning and six of the clock in the evening re-
aPectively."
„Ye- BANKES considered that the clause would ag-
gravate the evil it was intended to prevent.
124 G. GREY supported the clause, thinking it would
'we a beneficial effect.
After a short conversation the clause was agreed to.
Mr. BASS then moved the following clause, which
4! also agreed to:—" And whereas by the said secondly-
t
eetted Act, it was enacted, that any child above eleven
Tears of age, employed solely in the winding and throw-
1g Of raw silk, and who shall have obtained the surgical
acertificatei required by this Act, of his having completed
eleventh year, may work without any proof of having
o"44ended a school for any time not exceeding ten hours
el any working day, but not after half-past four of the '
Clock of the afternoon of any Saturday; and whereas it
Itiiierpedient that so much of the said recited Act should
repealed, be it therefore enacted, that so much of the
to
Act as is hereinbefore recited shall be and the same
for 107
repealed, and in lieu thereof, it shall be. lawful
16_107 child' employed solely in the winding and
l'ulving of raw silk, who shall have obtained the sur-
teal certificate required by the said secondly-recited
._°t of his having completed his eleventh year, to be
;111Ployed in all respects as young persons may be em-
"led under this Act."
toThe House then resumed, and the report was ordered
ue received on 'Monday next.
The
INTERMENTS BILL.
Ane House then went into Committee on this Bill.
On clause 12, which gives power to relatives to remove
dies to burial-grounds, upon payment of certain fees
.% fixed by the board,
te,,4Lr• STANFORD proposed to add the words " such
:!' or sums having been first submitted to and autho-
-
14 " by Parliament..
fSir GEORGE GREY opposed the amendment.
ees fixed by Parliament could only be fixed by Act
Parliament and as the clause would not be in
iterationi until after the session, it would be neces-
r.te suspend the operation of the Act until another
wht.iord DUDLEY STUART objected to the clause,
t—lch gave an irresponsible board the power of fixing
-yes.
sii!ir B. HALL suggested that a schedule of the fees
,Uld be appended to the Bill.
tokiord ASHLEY said that it would be more convenient
• pleuss the question of fees in the next clause.
• r. ROEBUCK said that a fee would have to be paid
the clergyman on the removal from the churchyard of
ekee'rse. He wished to know why such a reinoval
oroUldP depend on the payment of a fee kid the consent
the incumbent.
S• ir G. GREY said that both were in accordance with
qicapresent law.
144111% ROEBUCK thought that the maximum fee should
• stated in the clause.
Sthe It G. GREY said that at present it was difficult to fix
fir.
r. DUNCOMBE saw no reason for a fee at all.
m:4". ROEBUCK asked why, in addition to the pay-
at of the fee, should the consent of the incumbent be
• •:ssary?
Sir B. HALL put the case of a person paying the fee
his the incumbent, notwithstanding, obj ecting to give
I,oB.9nsent to the removal of he body, and asked in what
402,40 e would the party making the application be, in
2 a case?
14r G. GREY said the fee was generally paid to the
p wOent as an acknowledgment of freehold. If
tpaid to him it would have to be paid to some other
~eY.
'R
fro • OSBORNE believed that the removal of a body
Kite a vault at present cost about 12/. in fees. Why im-
il. en additional fee? He would suggest, f fr the sake
40 Public health, that no corpse should be removed
Lein in lead.
fotl,r• MACKINNON differed from the Hon. Member
eaheffield in the view which he took of that question.
thoteresent Bill had been called a centralising one, but
lati_aurt. and Learned Memb r's proposition to give so
s.„'" power to the Board of Health would make it a
lisinz measure indeed.
ve"
Ri WYLD thought every encouragement ought to be
tier to the removal of bodies from the metropolis, un-
,,,,Proper restriction.
V2e CHAIRMAN asked whether the Hon. Member
lißeading meant to. persevere with his amendment?
ttir• STANFORD said, as he perceived it referred to
az_2oth instead of the 19th clause, he would not then
'le a division.
r to- ROEBUCK asked whether the Right Hon. Ba-
t would agree to the proposition which he had
403 e, that the Board of Health should have power to
Sir
all matters with regard to the removal of bodies?
leth G. GREY said it would not be just to interfere
tp,,," the freehold rights of clergymen in consecrated
unti.
1.• ROEBUCK moved as an amendment in the
,1110sle the omission of the words " with the sanction of
recumbent."
IThe CHAIRMAN suggested that the words "of the
8o Mont" sufficient
ont" would be to omit, to carry out the
J. and Learned Member's views.
lilt'''. ROEBUCK then agreed to move the omission of
..6,llords ‘, of the incumbent:'
%it:: G. GREY said, that even if these words were
Rhil,'ea, there were words in another portion of the clause
cu said, " or of any party who should have charge of
iteoeh burial-ground," &e.
tivt• ROEBUCK then framed his amendment so as to
to authority to the Board of Health to the exclusion of
other partie3.
400 ucsultory discussion then ensued upon the proposi-
-40;111 which Mr. Aglionby, Mr. Mackinnon, Sir G.
' 14„.1) Mr. Stanford, Mr. Osborne, Mr. Sadleir, Mr.
114,1 Mr. T. D'Eyncourt, and other Hon. Members took
n •
14-1; beingsked whether he meant to take the sense
14; Committee on the question,
lII' ROEBUCK said he would.
e Committee then divided, when there appeared—
Dor the amendment ... ••• 48
Against it ... .88
Majority against the amendment —4O
%Use 19 was then agreed to.
kt,, clause 20, which relates to the fees to be paid on
totcents,
rd ASHLEY said some statement would probably
b
th:Pected as to the scale of fees to be allowed, as
'ltki7was no schedule attached to the Bill. This Bill
pott`ustinguished from cemetery Bills in this very im-
Nithaat*Particular, that the fees* would not be regulated
Cie 0y view to profit, but would be framed on such a
ate 1,8 to meet the necessary expenditure, and no more.
4trileld in his hand a statement which showed as
he 14 as possible the scale of fees which might be ex-
- /0 be taken—a scale which he hoped might be
Otieeeds and certainly not exceeded. The charge in ex-
', tled„,g. cemeteries for the burial of a pauper, which in-
. tei'7o. the religious service, the digging of the grave, and
ildifiTtithiiug, in short, except that part which belonged to
uertaker, was 95., while the amount proposed to be
under this Bill would be 7s. For an artisan the
lila lie Made by the cemeteries was 1/. 81.7c1., while under
iht ill it world be 1/. ss. Then came the private
!hi ',involving the purchase of the freehold. This, in
!iittinsting cemeteries, was 51. 7s. 6d. For this class
,7tre more
under the Bill was to be 41. Where there
:sore than one to be buried the amount would be
44p;,40ve that amount it would be very difficult to
eft_Maximum of fees, and for this reason: it very
calL
4"aPPened that a great demand existed for parti-
. et Positions and localities. Such had been the case
to4:4cteries and graveyards hitherto, and such no
,04would he the case in the new burial-grounds to be
ntse'l4 under this Bill. In such cases he proposed to
tO hl% discretion to the board with reference to the fees
e
'isaid• He thought it better to make these distinc-
su'ue subject of an extra charge, rather than to make
the Leh distinctions and allow the board to decide upon
f Post•
Tale,
tons, which' would expose them to the charge of
7‘14) or jobbing, or something of that kind. The
Would be submitted to the Secretary of. State every
'rye " by him laid before Parliament, which would
"
A• id annual opportunity for revision.
erroan ,SIDNEY said the Noble Lord was very
misinformed2lliti as to the scale of fees at present pre-
nee', In the different cemeteries. In the Islington
Zcalltr 1.148 the charge for the interment of an artisan
be 128. 4d., and in the Abney-park Cemetery 155.,
qp.P,,,the Nobe Lord proposed to fix the charge at
hliThe artisan would think very little of their libe-
Ne-', With regard to the third item, the cost in the
,1/414,11°` Private burial-grounds, which the Noble Lord
s ai!l6d., the charge universally made
"qt 3'4 to which must be added a fee of two guineas;
11814,1 ground once purchased might be opened
ktr. ik uout paying the same amount of fees.
14,,k% taken expressed his fears that unless care
the regulation of the fees might be made an
witlitßl jobb%
p"ICJI 17.1'4'440RD rose to move the amendment of
the be bad given notice. Profit not being the object
i•ent p„°4rd, did not in his' opinion constitute a suffi-
htttl<trantee against improvident expenditure and
• illteregdlnt charges, and of this the conduct of the
V the Noble
afforded a sufficient example. What
444ksable Lord mean by saying that Parliament
the board
controlling power over the proceedings
ter), y ? A report would be laid on the table
ear' and 110 tc can, Honourable Members might make
ta ,e.. Plaints, but the only substantial remedy would
;;ctetiatreal the Act itself. It was the duty of the
$41)14 an,lt, if they wanted the Bill to pass—and he
8e hopes as any person that it should pass this
ooped tilllove laced all these restrictiOns on the Bill.
b,endalen, at lion. Members would support him in the
;.,„Ne u_
e‘ which he now moved—namely, to add, in
3st!kliilio
.12 of the clause, these words:—"Such fees
at,„.ltain h$ 12
been first submitted to and authorised by
euv
aetiAlltm
wa% tie r AN having put the question,
iitit ALL had felt disappointment when the Bill
`",„„trodueed, that a table of fees was not then
74 IA 0.4110 Noble Lord said the charge for an inter-
n° it9o4d ohm mid be i 6 Gil NMI th 9

charge made in the burial-ground of St. John's-wood fur
an interment of that kind was 4s. 4i. to the rector,
2s. 6d. to the sexton, and Is. for the bell tolling, making
7s. 10(1. in the whole, and a difference of 18s. be-
tween the two amount?. Now, was there ever such
a farce as that they should be told that this was not
only a more sanitary, but a cheaper mode of burial ?
If the fees had been annexed to the Bill in the first
instance Members would have had an opportunity of con-
ferring with their constituents with rerpect to their pro-
priety. But would this difference cf IBs. be satisfactory
to the relatives of the working man? And again, what
was to be the mode of conveyance? Was the charge to
be defrayed out of the lees, or was it to come out of the
pockets of the deceased's relatives? Did the Govern-
ment intend that the body should be conveyed by rail-
road, or by a fuCeral steamer, of which they had recently
seen ass advertisement! He thought that any such pro-
posal for conveyance would be regarded with disgust by
the people. He regarded this clause as the most im-
portant one in the Bill. It enabled the Board of Burials
and Health to raise money, and he thought Parliament
ought to know what was the expenditure of that board,
and everything in connexion with its financial position.
With regard to the non-insertion of tables of fees in
cemetery Bills affording en example of what should be
done in this Bill, it should be remembered that the
powers with respect to cemeteries were optional, but
with regard to this Bill they were compulsory. If one
cemetery charged too much the public could go
to another; but this Bill was compulsory, from
the peer to the peasant. He certainly thought a sche-
dule of fees should have been originally inserted in order
to give an opportunity to Members to consult their con-
stituents on the subject.
Sir GEORGE GREY said the Honourable Member
seemed to have discovered that extramural interments
were more expensive than intramural ones. The whole
difficulty in passing a measure of this kind arose from the
necessary expenses of making new cemeteries. With
regard to the expense of an artisan's funeral, it was ob-
vious that if a maximum amount of fees had been named,
a large margin must be allowed. Now, the Honourable
Member took the maximum of the Noble Lord, and then
picked out a churchyard in London where the fees were
very low indeed, and not up to the mark of the gene-
ral scale.
Sir B. HALL—The fee is only 2s. 6d. in the parish of
St. Pancras.
Sir G. GREY—The average was nearly 10s., and in
one churchyard the fee was as high as 60s.
Mr. B. OSBORNE did not know what fee was to be
exacted for removing the body of the Noble Lord the
Honourable Member for Bath from the Opposition to
the Treasury bench.—(Laughter.) [Lord Ashley, for
the convenience of discussion, was occupying a seat
amongst the Ministers.] He believed no fr-e had been
paid at present, but he had been told that a high fee was
to be paid for removing the body.—(Laughter' cheers,
and counter cheers.) The Right Honourable Baronet
the Secretary of Sties for the Home Department had
misunderstood the Hon. Baronet the Member for Maryle-
bone, for that Hon. Baronet had very fairly adduced the
cases of St. Prncras and St. Marylebone, two of the
largest parishes which could be selected. The Noble
Lord said there would be no profit accruing from the
proposed arrangement, and he recommended the plan on
the ground of its economy. Now, taking 700 acres to
the square mile—(Langhter)—or taking 646 acres on
the average—(Laughter)—or taking the amount in
round numbers.—(Laughter, in which Lord Ashley
joined.) The Noble Lord should not laugh; or, if he
laughed, let him confute him in his figures. Now, he
calculated that 601. an acre would cost 40,0001. for a
mile; and allowing six square yards fur each grave, and
15s. for the interment, the amount realised would be
375,0001. He should like to know into whose hands the
profit was to go?
Lord ASHLEY said that the supposed profit would
go to the public; and, should extra profit be realised, a
reduction in the fees would be the consequence. The
Honourable Member (Alderman Sidney) had not ex-
actly stated the comparative amounts of fees, as in the
cases adduced by the Honourable Member he had not
included the extras for religious services, &c., whereas he
(Lord Ashley) had. Abney Park was unconsecrated
ground, and no religious services were performed unless
they were specifically demanded.
Sir DE LACY EVANS suggested that the charges
fixed by the clause should be limited to an existence of
a certain numb-r of years. Say three.
Mr. OSBORNE repeated his question as to what
would be done with the vast amount of fee: that must
accrue beyond the original purchase money of the land
and the expenses?
Lord ASHLEY said that he could only repeat the
answer he had already given. The money would be the
property of the public, and the House of Commons
could deal with it as they thought fit.
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY said that the people would
never be satisfied with such enormous tees. The charge
of seven shillings for pauper burials would exasperate
the public.
Mr. WAKLEY said that there was a very great re-
sponsibility upon those Honourable Members for the me-
tropolis who should not oppose the further progress of
the clause at the present time. If they did not do so,
they would be presently told that the metropolitan
Members had supported a measure which would thereat)
by one moiety the cost of burials. He would suggest
that the clause should be postponed until a
schedule of fees could be properly prepared.
There was not sufficient information before the
House to enable them to come to a proper
conclusion upon the amount of fees that ought to
be charged. At present in many parishes the charges
did not amount to one-half of the proposed amount to
be settled by the clause. And after all, the Noble Lord
had only said that he hoped the cost would not exceed
these charges. Then there was the cost of conveyance
of the bodies to the place of interment about which
nothing had as yet been said. He should move that
the further consideration of the clause should be post-
poned.
The CHAIRMAN said that the Hon. Member for
Reading had an amendment before the Committee, which
should be disposed of before another could be put.
Mr. ROEBUCK had no doubt that hereafter the ex-
penses of funerals would be greatly reduced under the
operation of this Bill. The great expenses were the
undertaker's fees. On looking to another clause in the
Bill, he was in hopes that under its operation burials
would be very much cheapened; and if a cheaper mode
than the present with regard to burial fees and clergy-
men's fees could be obtained, he thought the public
should be satisfied.
Sir B. HALL wished to know if the 6s. 2d., which
was the fixed fee for the clergyman upon each burial,
was to be in addition to the charge mentioned by the
Noble Lord (Lord Ashley)?
Sir G. GREY said that his Noble Friend had dis-
tinctly stated that the maximum charges which he
named were to include the clergymen's fees.
Mr. AGLIONBY supported Mr. Wakley's amend-
ment, but he thought the Government deserved great
credit for having brought in the Bill. It had been forced
upon them by public opinion and feeling, and they had
earned deep thanks for the manner in which they had
brought it forward.
Mr. LACY said that the expenses of the proposed ce-
metery were set down in the estimates of the Board of
Health at 112,0001. per annum. There could not, there-
fore, be such a large surplus as the Hon. Member for
Middlesex had spoken of. He should, however, support
the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, to post-
pone the consideration of the clause.
Mr. STANFORD said that he would withdraw his
amendment if an arrangement were made that the
clause should be postponed.
Sir GEORGE GREY wished the clause to be pro-
ceeded with. lie insisted upon the necessity of a large
margin being given to the discretion of the Board of
Health. The expenses at first might be very consider-
able, but it was to be hoped that they would, after a
little while, be very much reduced.
Mr. OSBORNE said that as a good deal turned on
the price of land, he would wish to know whereabouts
the Beard of Health proposed to look for land to pur-
chase for the cemetery?
Lord ASHLEY replied that they had no power as
yet to make any selection; but they were to be em-
powered to select such place or places (for they might
find it necessary to select more than one) as they might
deem best suited for the purpose. But be had no doubt
that for some months to come they would be obliged to
make use of the existing cemeteries.
Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE wished to know if the Noble
Lord had never heard of the Abbey land, or of Erith
having been mentioned by the Board of Health as suit-
able sites for the proposed cemeteries? If he had not,
then the public had been misled somewhat by reports
that had got into circulation. But if be had, then his
answer was rather uncandid.
Lord ASHLEY said that it was perfectly true the
Board of Health had thought both of the Abbey land
and of Erith, but nothing had been or could be decided
as yet.
Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR could not understand
the meaning of all the jealousy that had been exhibited
upon this subject. Would they be content to wait for
the Extramural Interment Bill until a schedule of fees
should have been prepared?—(Hear, hear.) He for one
would not be disposed to wait for it. He entirely agreed
with the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir G. Grey) that the
Build of Health should be allowed a margin, and that
they should try the experiment as to what scale of fees
would be sufficient to cover the expenses. No good
result could arise from a schedule of fees being attached
to the Bill. They would be obliged to state a very
high average, in order to make sure that there would be
no loss.
Lord DUDLEY C. STUART supported Mr. Wak-
ley's proposition. He said they did not even know who
the members of the Board of Health were. He wished
to know of whom did the board consist? The esti-
mates of the cost of carrying on the cemetery were not
to be depended on any more than other estimates, and
he did not think the Board of Health should be per-
mitted to choose what charges they would make for
burials.
Lord J. RUSSELL considered the proposal of the
Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley) to mean that
we should remain contented with the present system of
interment and allow it to go on • otherwise there could
be no reason for postponing the clause. The Committee
might reject the clause as being wrong in principle, and
then frame a better one; but a wish to delay the clause
could only arise from a desire that the new system should
not be adopted. If we were to rest contented with the
existing mode of burial, very small f,es might be neces-
sary; but if we were determined to put an end to that
system, and have cemeteries established at sense distance
from town, there must be some mode of paying the ex-
penses of these interments. The Board of Health believed
that some reduction'of expense might be effected in some
respects by rendering funerals less costly than they now
generally are; but still the new system must be attended
with considerable expense, from the large pieces of ground
necessary to be bought. One mode of raising the neces-
sary funds was by large votes of Parliament; but that was
a mode which nobody seriously entertained. Another
mode Wgif by imposing considerable rate. On the metro-