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

TF{E SUN,

tie •
„sA'gn'a's by the occupies of each fectory, er his agent, • &largo made in the burial-ground of St. John's-wood fit
tr;o intr.etion to empley youiste persites and ferneleis an interment of that kteti was 43. 41. to the ri
_errer !hie provision, sse ;ifYieS" the Period, not beitic;lese , 6d. to the sextote anti Is. fur the bell tolling, making
.th!t u one month, timing which they are tit he so P22' 10,1. in the and a eitiereueo of 18s. -
111Yed, shall be eieen to one of the i"sta c. ors a •se een the two amitune. Now, was there ever such
and a . " . ,
notice to the like sheet, in such form as shell bit ' a farce as that tl.ey ehou'd be told teat this was not
a.sTroved by ono of such inspectors, and signed by such only a more sanitary, bet a cheaper mode 0/ burial ?
eecupier or his agent, shell be hung or fixed up, and If the fees had been annexed to the Bid in the first
e ~ttrinser the period specified in the notice shall be kept instance Members ve.,uid have had an opportunity of uou-
. texed up in such factory; and during the period specie I ferrng with their constituents with respect to their pro.
, fled in such notice young persons and females above the I priety. Butwould this difference of 'lBs. be satisfactory
age of 18 years may be employed in such factory after to the relatives of the working man? And again, what
tie of the clock and not later than seven of the clock in was to be the mode 01 conveyance? Was the charge to
the evening of any day except Saturday; and during the be defrayed out of the fees, or was it to come out of the
Period specified in such notice (save to recover lost time pockets of the deceased's relatives? Did the Govern-
: !is herein provided) no young person and no female above went intend that the body should be conveyed by rail-
the age of 18 years shall be employed in such factory road, or by a fuse; al steamer, of which they had recently
before
seven of the clock in the morning of any day ex- seen ae advertisement! lie thought that any such Fro-
,: !r)t Saturday; and the provisions hereinbefore con- posal for conveyance would be regarded with disgust by
i_setie I shall, as to every day except Saturday, during the 1 the people. He reearded this clause as the most inn-
R?tiod specified in such notice, take effect as if seven of ' portent one in the Bill. It enabled the Board of Burials
the clock in the morning and seven of the clock in the and Health to raise money, and he thought Parliament
;vening were throughout substituted for six of the clock ought to know what was the expenditure of that board,
° the morning and six of the clock in the evening re- and everything in connexion with its financial position.
sPeeti
ve y." I With regerd to the non-insertion of tables of fees in
Mr. BANKES considered that the clause would ag- cemetery Bills affording an example of what should be
gravate the evil it was intended to prevent. done in this Bill, it should be remembered that the
Sir SiGREY
e G. supported the clause, thinking it would posers with respect to cemeteries were optioeal. but
have a beneficial effect. with regard to this Bill they were compulsory. If one
After a short conversation the clause was agreed te. cemetery charged too much the public could go
Mr. BASS then moved the following clause, which to another; but this Bill was compulsory, from
was a/
so agreed to:—" And whereas by the said secondly- the peer to the peasant. He certainly thought a sche-
recited Act, it was enacted, that any child above eleven dub° of fees should have been originally inserted in order
Years of age, employed solely in the winding and throw- to give an opportunity to Members to consult their con-
-1114 of raw silk, and who shall have obtained the surgical stitueots on the subject-.
certificate required by this Act, of his having completed Sir GEORGE GREY said the Honourable Member
his eleventh year, may work withoat any proof of haring seemed to have discovered that extramural interments
°attended a school for any time not exceeding ten hours were more expensive than intramural ones. Toe whole
nany working day, but not after half-past four of the difficulty in peesine a measure of this kind arose from the
• °lak of the afternoon of any Saturday; and whereas it necessary expenses of making new cemeteries. With
is
expedient that so much of the said recited Act should regard to the expense of an artisan's funeral, it was oh-
be repealed, b
,
Bard Act as is hereinbefore recited shall be and the same a large margin must be allowed. Now, the Honourable
18 hereby repealed, and in lieu thereof, it shall be lawful Member took the maximum of the Noble Lord, and then
~
Jr any child employed solely in the winding and picked out a churchyard in London where the fees were
throwing of raw silk, who shall have obtained the sur- very low indeed, and not up to the mark of the gene-
Veal certificate required by the said secondly-recited rat scale.
Act of his having completed his eleventh year, to be Sir 13. HALL—The fee is only 2s. 6d. in the parish of
• employed in all respects as young persons may be em- St. Pancras.
. • Played under this Act." Sir G. GREY—The average was nearly 10s., and in
The House then resumed, and the report was ordered one churchyard the fee was as high as 60s.
t 1.0 be received on Monday next. Mr. B. OSBORNE did not know what fee was to be
• METROPOLITAN INTERMENTS BILL. exacted for removing the body of the Noble Lord the
The House then went into Committee on this Bill. Honourable Member for Bath from the Opposition to
'tob On clause 12, which gives power to relatives to remove the Treasury bench.—(Laughter.) [Lord Ashley, for
't°'l,ies to burial-grounds, upon payment of certain fees the convenience of discussion, was occupying a seat
dies
fixed by the board, amongst the Ministers.] He believed no f e had been
fees Mr. STANFORD proposed to add the words " such paid at present, but he had been told that a high fee was
or sums having been first submitted to and autho- to be paid for removing the body.—(Laughter, cheers,
rased by Parliament." and counter cheers.) The Right Honourable Baronet
Sir GEORGE GREY opposed the amendment. the Secretary of St its for the Home Department had
'sees fixed by Parliament could only be fixed by Act misunderstood the Hon. Baronet the Member for Maryle-
°,,f Parliament, and as the clause would not be in bone, fur that Hon. Baronet had very fairly adduced the
.yeration until after the session, it would be nem. cases of St. Pancras and St. Marylebone, two of the
"I to suspend the operation of the Act until another largest parishes which could be selected. The Noble
Year. Lord said there would be no profit accruing from the
Lord DUDLEY STUART objected to the clause, proposed arrangement, and he recommended the plan on
'hieh gave an irresponsible board the power of fixing the ground of its economy. Now, taking 700 acres to
fees.the square mile—(Langhter)--or taking 646 acres on
Sir B. HALL suggested that a schedule of the fees the average—(Laughter)—or taking the amount in
thould be appended to the Bill. round numbers.—(Laughter, in which Lord Ashley
Lord ASHLEY said that it would be more convenient joined-) The Noble Lord should not laugh; or, if he
to discuss the question of fees in the next clause. laughed, let him confute him in his figures. Now, he
, Mr. ROEBUCK said that a fee would have to be paid calculated that 604 au acre would cost 40
, 000/ . for a
`0 the clergyman on the removal from the churchyard of mile; and allowing:; six square yards for each grave, arid
corpse, He wished to know why such a removal 15s. for the interment, the amount realised would be
ti 4
ouid depend on the payment of a fee and the consent 375.0001. He should like to know into whose hands the
or the incumbent. pritfit was to go?
se Sir G. GREY said that both were in accordance with Lord ASHLEY said that the supposed profit would
'go present law, go to the public; and, should extra profit be realised, a
Mr. ROEBUCK thought that the maximum fee should reduction in the fees would be the consequence. The
" stated in the clause. Honourable Member (Alderman Sidney) had not ex-
, vsSir GREY said that at present it was difficult to fix actly stated the comparative amounts of lees, as in the
"(!niaximum. cases adduced by the Honourable Member he had not
bar. DUNCOMBE saw no reason for a fee at all. included the extras for religious services, &c., whereas he
•e„,'lr. ROEBUCK asked why, in addition to the pay- (Lord Ashley) had. Abney Park was unconsecrated
17e'enetisoafryth?e fee, should the consent of the incumbent be ground, and no religious services were performed unless
they were specifically demanded.
Iv Sir B. HALL put the case of a person paying the fee Sir DE LACY EVANS suggested that the charges
e°1(1 the incumbent, notwithstanding, objecting to give fixed by the clause should be limited to an existence cf
acs consent to the removal of he body, and asked in what a csetain numb-r of years. Say three.
o
sition would the party making the application be, in Mr. OSBORNE repeated his qtnstion as to what.
a case? would be done with the vast amount of fees that must
:.! in Sir G. GREY said the fee was generally paid to the accrue beyond the original purchase money of the land
• tioeutnbent as an ackrowledgment of freehold. If and the expenses?
t •
• Paid to him it would have to be paid to some other Lord ASHLEY said that he could only repeat the
Part
answer be had already given. The money would be the
• bar.
OSBORNE believed that the removal of a body property of the public, and the House of Commons
ereul a vault at present cost about 12L in fees. Why im- could deal with it as they thought fit.
',40 an additional fee? He would suggest, for the sake Mr. Alderman SIDNEY said that the people would
ett.the public health, that no corpse should be removed never be satisfied with such enormous fees. The charge
`-'''l3t in lead. of seven shillings for pauper burials would exasperate
k.Mr. NIA.CKINNON differed from the Hon. Member the public.
.Tr Sheffield in the view which he took of that question. Mr. WAKLEY said that there was a very great re-
e, glhue present Bill had been called a centralising one, but sponsibility upon those Honourable Members for the me-
: "lon. and Learned Memb -es proposition to give so tropolis who should not oppose the further progress of
much pewer to the Board of Health would make it a the clause at the present time. If they did not do so,
eu‘.traiising measure indeed. they would be presently told that' the metropoliten
NI% WYLD thought every encouragement ought to be Members had supported a measure which would hies-este
‘,144 to the removal of bodies from the metropolis, un- by one moiety the cost of burials. He would suggest
,C,,,1" Proper restriction, that tie clause should be postponed until a
fThe CHAIRMAN asked whether the lion. Member schedule of fees could be properly prepared.
ur a Beading meant to persevere with his amendment? There was not sufficient information before the
Mr. the 20th
STANFORD said, as he perceived it referred to House to enable them to come to a proper
20th instead of the 19th clause, he would not then conclusion upon the amount of fees that ought to
press a division. be charged. At present in many .parishes the charges
bars ROEBUCK asked whether the Right Hon. Ba- did not amount to one-half of the proposed amount to
roust would agree to the proposition which he had be settled by the clause. And after all, the Noble Lord
14°,e, that the Board Of Health should have power to had only said that he hoped the cost would not exceed
Iti all matters with regard to the, removal of bodies? these charges. Then there wastbe cost of conveyance
in' G. GREY said it would not be just to interfere of the bodies to the place of intermsnt about which
tctthe freehold rights of clergymen in consecrated nothing had as yet been said. He should move that
ground.
the further consideration of the clause should be post-
et ,
4r. ROEBUCK moved as an amendment in the poned.
theincumbent."
the omission of the words " with the sanction of The CHAIRMAN said that the Hon. Member for
„incumbent." Reading had an amendment before the Committee, which
'1,:15,1-130 CHAIRMAN suggested that the words "of the should be disposed of before another could be put.
t/e-t'zbent" would be sufficient to omit, to carry out the Mr. ROEBUCK had no doubt that hereafter the ex-
`;,°.• and Learned Member's views. penes of funerals would be greatly reduced under the
,r• ROEBUCK then agreed to move the omission of operation of this Bill. The great expenses were the
Sir
"of the incumbent." undertaker's fees. On looking to another clause in the
ae'dr G. GREY said, that evea if these words were Bill, he was in hopes that under its operation burials
,e3,Tted, there were words in another portion of the clause would be very much cheapened; and if a cheaper mode
it eh said, "or of any party who should have charge of than the present with regard to burial fees and clergy-
. t such burial-ground," &c. men's fees could be obtained, he thought the public
aseiulr• ROEBUCK then framed his amendment so as to should be satisfied.
authority to the Board of Health to the exclusion of Sir B. HALL wished *to know if the 6s. 21, which
e. Other parties was the fixed fee for the clergyman upon each burial,
e ,
a, tie uestsltory discussion then ensued upon the proposi- was to be in addition to the charge mentioned by the
• qe, in which Mr. Aglionby, Mr. Mackinnon, Sir G. Noble Lord (Lord Ashley)?
112.,,e3., Mr. Stanford, Mr. Osborne, Sadleir, Mr. Sir G. GREY said that his Noble Friend had disa
ti Ye Mr. T. D'Eyncourt, and other Hon. Members took tinctly stated that the maximum charges which he
.11
• named were to include the clergymen's fees.
Sof it being asked whether he meant to take the sense Mr. AGLIONBY supported Mr. Wakley's amend-
114Ziie Committee on the question, ment, but he thought the Government deserved great
111,i I n,4;e •.11,OE ROEBUCK said he would. credit for having brought in the Bill. It had been forced
1 esommittee then divided, when there appeared— , upon them by public opinion and feeling, and they fad
.„ For the amendment . • 48 earned deep thanks for the manner in which they had
Against it . • ••
• 88
114., •• • ••• brought it forward.
14 '64 • Majority against••• the amendment —4O
L N Mr..LACY said that the expenses of the proposed ce-
estlses- use 19 was then agreed to. watery were set down in the estimates of the Board of •
a clause 20, which relates to the fees to be paid on Health at 112,0001. per annum. There could not, there-
s,e ierlems fore, be such a large surplus as the Hon. Member for
ASHLEY said some statement would probably Middlesex had spoken of. He should, however, support
eoh42pected Ss to the scale of fees to be allowed, as the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, to post-
MIX e, Was no schedule attached to the Bill. This Bill pone the consideration of the clause.
tale-eiatinguished from cemetery Bills in this very im- Mr. STANFORD said that he would withdraw his
k:,,,a4trbtatit particular, that the fees would not be regulated amendment if an arrangement were made that the
teal i. 93), view to profit, but would be framed on such a clause should be postponed.
seleeeetcs to meet the necessary expenditure and no more. Sir GEORGE GREY wished the clause to be pro-
ti,;! held in his hand a statement which showed as ceeded with. He insisted upon the necessity of a large
ik,jY, as poseible the scale of fees which might be ex- margin being given to the discretion of the Board of
sd 9to be taken—a scale which he hoped might he Health. The expenses at first might be very consider-
"istisall
ced,.and certainly not exceeded. The charge in ex- able, but it was to be hoped that they would, after a
,Ilrt. •
Aa cemeteries for the burial of a pauper, which in- little while, be very much reduced..
41sWd the religious service, the digging of the grave, and Mr. OSBORNE said that as a good deal turned on
Vti,rY.thing, in short, except that part which belonged to the price of land, ho would wish to know whereabouts'
kltttee un.
tee was 95., while the amount proposed to be the Board of Health proposed to luuk for land to pure
h'u.uader this Bill would .be 70. For an artisan the chase for the cemetery ?
Inadeby the,coneteries was 1/. Said., while under Lord ASHLEY replied that they had no power as
t?sill it would be 1/. ss. Then came the private yet to make any selection; but .they were to be em-
4N5 itivolving the purchase of the freehold. This, in powered to select such place or. places (for they might
cxhcemeteries, was 64 7's. 6d. For this class find it necessary to select more than one) as they might
7ld seats.tindeathe Bill was to be 41. Where there deem best suited for the purpose, But be had no doubt
''4,ltiest,eore than one to be buried the ,amount would- be that for some mouths to come they would be obliged to
':ileiS'a•,l2bOve that amount it would be very difficult
,to make use of the existing cemeteries. .
qte- a maximum of fees, and for this reason: it very Mr. I'. S. DUNCOMBE wished to know if the Noble
'sett' happened that a great demand for parti- Lord had never heard of the Abbey land, or of Erith
existed •
',3111.„...' Positions and localities. Such had been the case having been mentioned by the Board of Health as suit-
I'o\aeteries and, graveyards hitherto, and such no able sites for the proposed cemeteries? If he had not,
''
'''-setse:e'velild he the case in the new burial-grounds to be then the public had been misled semenh‘t by reports
under this Bill. In such cases he proposed to that had got into i irculation. But it he had, then his
,el' discretion to the board with reference to the fees answer was rather uncaudid.
%tie Paid. He thought it better to make these distinc. Lord ASHLEY said that it was perfectly true the
:1' 4th •
10411 a sub subject of au extra charge, rather than to make Board of Health had thought both of the Abbey land
.A distinctions, and allow the board to decide upon and of Erith, but nothing had . been er could be decided
• 's wince. would expose them to the charge of as yet. .
'stkek iltisna, or jobbing, or something of that kind. The. Lord ROBERT GROSVENOR could not understand
would be subMitted to the Secretary of State every, the meaning of all the jealousy that had been exhibited
4.e•al,st'itid, by him laid before Parliament, which would upon this subject. Would they, be content to wait for
41.(1 an annual opportunity for revision.. - the Extramural Interment Bill until a schedule of fees
'e' eitnati ,SIDNEY said. the Noble Lord was very. should have been prepared?—(Hear, hear.) He for one
'e.iti• • isinfortned as to the scale of fees at present pre- would not be disposed to wait for it. He entirely agreed
bee„g in the different cemeteries. In the Islington with the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir G. Grey) that the
`44rda the charge for the interment of an artisan Board of Health should be allowed a margin, and that
Niit'll4 be' 123
we;; . . 4d., end in the Abney-park Cemetery 155., they should try the experiment as to what scale of fees
,<5.? "„,the Noble Lord proposed to fix the charge at would be sufficient to cover the expenses.. No good
mjt•uhe artisan would think very little of their Jibe-. result could arise from a schedule of fees being attached
tstfe't), With regard to the third item, the cost in the to the Bill. They would be obliged to state a very
iitte‘ek,o4: Private burial-grounds, which the Noble Lord high average, in order to make sure that there would be
atd, bo 51. 7s. 6d., the charge ueiversally made no loss.. •
Atit-the'lle to which must be added a fee of two guineas; Lord. DUDLEY C STUART supported Mr. Walt-
-14
4ealtgeist With e ground once purchased might be opened ley's proposition. He said they did not even know who
iillas.,out paying the same amount of fees. .the members of the Board of Health were. He wished
i".°EBITCK expressed his fears that unless care to know of whom did the board consist? The esti-
-I,,,,apalettkin the regulation of the fees might be .made an mates of the cost of carrying on the cemetery were not
s.,°f ebbing. , to be depended on any more than other estimates, and
wlc .4T4NFORD rose to move the amendment of he did not think the Board of Health should be per-
14'Illetn, be had eiVen notice. Profit not being the object mitted to choose what charges they would rmake for
tit',,atiPard, did not in his opinion constitute a suffi- burials.
araiitee againit improvident expenditure and Lord Js RUSSELL considered the proposal of the
.I,,:l4loialant charges, and' of this the conduct of the Hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley) to.mean that
eimi4Ostao,:rramission afforded a sufficient example. What we should remain contented with the present system of
14,310,,ea1d11e' Lord mean by saving that Parliament interment and allow it to go on; otherwise there could
liss4'the ri"a controlling 'power over the proceedings be no reason for postponing the clause. The Committee
boardi,e, ? A report would be laid on the table might reject the clause as being wrong in principle, and
eti'ni4ri, and Honourable Members might . make then fraine.a better ono; but a wish to delay the clause
til plaints, but the only substantial remedy would could only arise from a desire that the new system should
weeernrlo3eeal the Act itself. It was the duty of the not be adopted. If we were to rest contented with the
"5,„1,4t1 ai if they wanted the Bill to pass—and he existing mode of burial, very small fes might he neces-
lsol!isiea (loiss as any person that it should pass this) sary • but if we were determined to put an end to that
).) e have placed all these restrictions on the Bill, sys'te'se, and have cemeteries established at some distance
!Ittti ,°Ped that W-
-441: Ildluent a on. Members would support him in the from town, there must bo some mode of paying the ex-
ti j, ~Re lel which he now moved—namely, to add, in I penses of these interments, The Board of Health believed
~titlf auarl.ks, el 2 of the clause, these words;—" Such fees that some reduction of expense tonight .be effected in some
Navindot g been first submitted to and authorised by respects by renderieg funerals less costly than they now
ant."
esee ere
get:orally are; but still the new system must be attended
ktz ,-.141-RMAN having put the question, with considerable expense, from the large pieces of ground
741 'IALL had felt 'tt ttfi' 4* ies' disappointment when the Bill , necessary to be bought. One mode of raising the neces-
keeited. „!•,cduced, that table of fees was not then ' sary funds was by large votes of' Parliament; but that was
°tit ~•10 Noble Lord said the charge for an inters I a mode which nobody seriously entertained. Another
the second chum would be 1L ss. Now, the mode was by imposing considerable rates on the metro-