§ MR. HORSMANwished to ask the noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests a question connected with a subject which created much public interest—he meant the practice of burying the dead in the midst of crowded cities and towns, and in spaces that were necessarily restricted. Seeing that the subject had been deferred from year to year by successive Governments pledged to legislate on the subject, he wished to know what was the great difficulty, the great impediment which had forced different Administrations that had applied themselves to the subject with vigour and with zeal, not only to disappoint public expectations, but to violate the pledges they had given. These influences were unseen by the public, but they were not unfelt by the Government. He alluded not only to the present Government, but to other Governments. The right hon. Baronet who was in office before the present Administration, pledged himself at once, on his accession to power, to legislate on the subject. The pledge ended in an inquiry being instituted, and evidence of a nature which he would not now characterize, being collected. That was completed in the second year. In the third 1171 year, the hope and expectation of the right hon. Baronet was more faintly expressed; and in the fourth year, he frankly admitted that he was incapable of meeting the difficulties which presented themselves before him, and said that he should leave the subject to be dealt with by the public. The noble Lord, not having the experience of the right hon. Baronet as to these difficulties, also commenced his official career by promising to legislate on the subject. No one who knew the noble Lord's character could doubt his sincerity in giving that pledge; but he had been unable during the present Session to introduce any measure to meet the evil. It was clear there was a mystery hanging over the matter; and the common belief was, that the difficulty lay in the quarter where, on a subject of so much importance to the moral and physical improvement of the people, it was least to be expected—namely, in the clergy. He disregarded that rumour, more especially as he knew that twenty-five years ago, when the present Bishop of London was but a poor rector in the metropolis, he was among the first and loudest in complaining of the evil. If a traveller stated that he found in some savage nation a practice prevailing of burying the dead in localities often not larger than the courtyard of a private residence, to the number of many thousands annually, without the surface of the soil being raised an inch in the course of the year, they would be ready to start with horror, and to believe that no outrage so flagrant, so inhuman, and so scandalous as such a system appeared of necessity to imply, on the bodies of the dead, could possibly be committed. And yet this was what took place, down to the present time, in the very centre of the metropolis of what they regarded as the most Christian nation in the world. He was sure the noble Lord would not lose sight of the question. The question he wished to ask of him was, what was really the great difficulty in his way in legislating on the subject? and if the noble Lord once answered that question, he could assure him that the public would give him ample assistance in having it overcome.
§ MR. HUDSONsaid, before the noble Lord answered the question, he thought it right to state that a most numerously and respectably signed requisition had been presented to him in York the other day, asking him to convene a meeting on the subject of interment in towns. The subject was one which, he could assure the 1172 noble Lord, excited the greatest interest in that city.
§ VISCOUNT MORPETHI can only state, in reply to the hon. Gentleman, that as soon as I succeed in passing the Bill for improving the health of towns in respect to sewerage and drainage, I shall feel myself bound to mature, and introduce to the House, and I hope to carry, a Bill to prevent burials in towns. But I must say that I should despair of carrying such a measure, if the House will not now address itself to the subject before it.
§ MR. WAKLEYregretted that the noble Lord had given so brief a reply to a question so pertinent to the subject before the House—the health of towns. The hon. Gentleman wanted to know where the obstacle existed in legislating on this matter. Most probably the hon. Gentleman was himself well acquainted with the nature of that obstacle already; but he was desirous of having a statement from the noble Lord respecting it. Everybody knew that it was a money matter—that in this country they were in the habit of trading in the disposal of the dead. It was simply a question of pounds, shillings, and pence; and it was well known that the clergy were hostile to any interference with the existing system. Whenever a proposal was made for bringing in a Bill to establish a new cemetery in the vicinity of the metropolis, the vested interests were in commotion to oppose it. He should be glad to know whether any official communication had taken place with the Bishop of the diocese on the subject? The matter was one on which the public felt very strongly. That burials in towns wore injurious to the public health, no man of common sense could deny. When the noble Lord legislated on the subject, he trusted he would make such an arrangement as would prevent trading in the burials of the dead from continuing.
§ MR. HORSMANsaid, he should very humbly protest against the manner in which his question had been met by the noble Lord. If he had interposed in any uufriendly manner against the Government, he could scarcely have been open to so severe a rebuke. The noble Lord said, he should despair of carrying this or any other Bill, if Gentlemen got up and would not allow Government to proceed with the business. When he gave notice of his intention to ask the question, the day before, the noble Lord at the head of Her Majesty's Government was good enough to ask 1173 him, not in the most courteous tone, what this question had to do with the Bill before the House? [Lord JOHN RUSSELL: I did not ask that.] He thought the two questions most intimately connected, more especially as, when the hon. Member for Lymington (Mr. Mackinnon) brought in a Bill on the subject, he was told, he believed, that if he would withdraw it, the matter would be included in the Health of Towns Bill this Session. He thought the Government were bound, for the sake of their own characters, to come forward and explain why it was that they had not fulfilled their pledges on this subject. This subject was one of the most important branches of sanitary reform; for what was the use of draining and ventilation, so long-as these plague-spots were permitted to poison the densest parts of the population? Being of so much importance as to require a Bill by itself, he could not believe he had asked an irrelevant question; but he must say the answer had been given in a manner he did not expect.
§ VISCOUNT MORPETHassured his hon. Friend that he had not the slightest intention of speaking with anything like disrespect, cither towards himself personally, or of the question he had put. He had only alluded in general terms to the fact of three hours having been occupied in discussion before the Order of the Day had been read. He believed the Bishop of London was most anxious that some measure should be adopted of the nature referred to by his hon. Friend; but the question was undoubtedly one affecting vested interests which must receive the consideration of the House; and it was also connected with old associations and feelings, which, though not of parallel importance with the object in view, deserved to be met and treated with delicacy. The only reason, however, why a Bill had not been introduced this Session, was the conviction that it was not possible, considering the amount of other business, to proceed with it; but Her Majesty's Government would introduce a measure in the course of next Session.