HC Deb 02 March 1854 vol 131 cc195-200

Order for Second Reading read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, he felt it his duty to oppose this Bill. The measure had been introduced last Session to the House, had been referred by the House to a Select Committee, and, after every fair consideration, had been rejected. He believed that the parties who supported the Bill were little better than a body of speculators, and the mere object of the undertaking they were endeavouring to force upon the House was to make two large sewage drains upon either side of the river Thames. He held in his hand a copy of an opinion of Mr. Stephenson on the subject, who stated distinctly that to do what was contemplated by the promoters of the present Bill would be to commence at the wrong end. The noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department was about to bring before the notice of the House a measure to reorganise the Commission of Sewers, and, under present circumstances, he thought that it would be most impolitic to countenance such a scheme as the present. He therefore moved the postponement of the measure.

Amendment proposed— To leave out the word 'now,' and at the end of the Question to add the words, 'upon this day six months.'

MR. WARNER

said that, at a time when we were threatened with cholera, and when, in all probability, that disease, if it did come, would rage more seriously than ever, he thought the House incurred a very serious responsibility in refusing to hear parties desirous to suggest and carry out improvement in the drainage of the metropolis. He considered that this measure, like all measures of a like importance, ought to have a full and fair inquiry, and he thought that the hon. Member for Lambeth, in offering the opposition to the Bill which he did, was, in fact, doing little less than voting for the introduction of a pestilence which we all ought to be so anxious to ward off.

SIR BENJAMIN HALL

said, he opposed the Motion for the second reading of the Bill, on the ground, among others, that the parties who now stood forward as desirous of entering into the speculation of the drainage of London, an undertaking which would require an expenditure of 2,000,000l., had not at the present moment, he understood, 500l. to commence the works with. As a specimen of the clauses of the Bill, one of them was to have a guarantee of 3l. per cent out of the local rates. He never heard of such a measure, and it would be monstrous to let it pass, There never was such a Bill as the present introduced into Parliament; and at the present time, when the noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department had promised to bring in a Bill for the better management of the sewers, it would be a monstrous thing if that House were to permit a body of speculators to take upon themselves a task which they had no means of carrying out.

MR. DRUMMOND

said, that it appeared to him there was at least one body of men in the metropolis of considerably more importance in their own eyes than even the House of Commons itself, and that was the select vestry of Marylebone; and although such body did not issue blue books, yet they had put forth a document complaining of this Bill more grandiloquent in its phraseology than even the despatches of potentates and diplomatists contained in such books. The matter, however, before the House was simply this—that we had been threatened with cholera for the last seven or eight years, and we had as yet done absolutely nothing to check its advances. The hon. Gentleman who began the opposition to the measure stated that this Bill was rejected by the Select Committee of last Session. That statement required a little explanation. The promoters of this Bill proposed a plan which was admitted by all parties to be the best that had yet been proposed, and the reason that it was not adopted was because each parish in the metropolis could not or would not see a step beyond its own immediate interest, and would not incur the risk of a trifling rate. The select vestry of Marylebone—which had really no more interest in the matter than any other parish in the metropolis—had, as he had previously stated, issued a report upon the subject, denouncing the present scheme as a most unjust invasion of the independence of parishes. The present Bill, although rejected by the Select Committee last year, was not so rejected on the ground of the principle upon which the sewers were proposed to be constructed, but because the promoters sought to obtain a guarantee only in the case of their own dividends not coming up to three per cent. The very company which had formerly opposed the Bill had now adopted its principle. That principle was perfectly intelligible, for, as it was now clear that the Thames was getting dirtier every day, because the more water that was introduced into the dwellings of the poor the more filth was driven into the Thames, this company proposed to make two large tunnels, one on each side of the Thames, to carry off the sewage without letting it go into the river at all. The noble Lord the Home Secretary had, by a coup d'âtat, blown up the Commission of Sewers the other day, and now they were told that he was going to establish a new Commission, somehow or other based on the representative system. But he would ask what single thing had ever been done where that representative system had been tried? Was it not notorious that the people of Newcastle, under that râgime, had never succeeded in washing out one of their own dirty alleys? It was clear that if it were left to the parishes to counteract and thwart one another nothing would ever be done. This guarantee, which was so much talked of, only amounted to three farthings in the pound, after all; and because Marylebone would not give even three farthings in the pound, they were going to reject this most sensible proposition for the drainage of the metropolis.

LORD SEYMOUR

said, that that part of the scheme which proposed that there should be two tunnels—one on each side of the river—to carry off the drainage had been fully approved by the Committee which sat last year; but on the second part, which proposed to render the sewage applicable for agricultural purposes, the evidence had totally failed. The only similar case which was brought forward was that of a single prison, where it had only been tried to a limited extent; and it was considered one of the wildest schemes possible to expect to raise money on no other guarantee than that of the probable profit to he made by the conversion of sewage into manure. The only resource left for the promoters in this case, was to endeavour to obtain a guarantee of three per cent upon their expenditure, and to this the Committee were decidedly opposed. But, with respect to the drainage of the different districts of the metropolis, the proposed Bill would be perfectly inoperative, because it did not propose to construct any cross sewers whatever, but left all that to be done by the parishes; and the whole question, therefore, for the House to consider was, whether for the sake of two large drains, one on each side of the river, they would give a guarantee to this company of three per cent for ever. He recommended the House to reject the Bill, and not send it again before a Committee.

SIR JOHN SHELLEY

said that all the parishes of Westminster concurred with Marylebone in opposing this Bill. This was certainly a very inopportune time to bring it forward, when the Government had a new scheme of their own in contemplation.

LORD DUDLEY STUART

said, he must defend the Marylebone vestry from the imputations of the hon. Member for West Surrey, (Mr. Drummond). They opposed the Bill on principle, and, had the guarantee been only one farthing instead of three farthings in the pound, their opposition to it would have been just as strenuous.

MR. BOUVERIE

said, he thought the House ought to be very slow to reconsider the decision of a Committee before which the same scheme had been fully discussed. He would remark, also, that there was no guarantee that the company would actually proceed with the works, and it might turn out that they would only occupy the ground, and prevent other parties from actually carrying out an efficient system of drainage. For these two reasons he should advise the House to reject the Bill.

MR. APSLEY PELLATT

said, it was really intended to carry out the work, for 35,000l. had already been deposited as an earnest. He had heard no objection to the Bill from the south side of the river, and, so far as Southwark was concerned, all the inhabitants were extremely desirous of seeing any scheme carried out which would relieve them from the present direful state of things.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, that last year he had felt disposed to look favourably on this Bill, because he had thought that, if in the course of the ensuing twelve months the company could really accomplish any portion of the great drainage of the metropolis, it would be desirable that they should be allowed to put their scheme in practice. The Bill then failed, however, in consequence of the objection raised to the guarantee which was demanded by the company, and, in the present state of things, he must confess his opinion differed from that which he had entertained last year. He was about to reorganise the Commission of Sewers, and that Commission had lately matured a plan for the drainage of the metropolis which, upon full consideration, he believed to be a good one, and likely to effect the objects which the scheme now before the House was intended to effect. He thought there would be great advantage in the drainage of the metropolis being effected and managed by one central department in some degree connected with the local authorities. Moreover, if it should be possible to realise that which, according to this Bill, might be realised—namely, the connection of the drainage of the metropolis with some commercial advantages from the transformation of sewage into manure—that also ought to be in the hands of Commissioners, in order that any such profit might be applied for the public benefit, in diminution or relief of the rates raised for the construction of the sewers. He conceived that this Bill had no chance of passing through a Committee with the guarantee clause which it seemed the company still considered it ne- cessary to demand, and, therefore, all things considered, so far as he was concerned, he should be disposed to negative the second reading of the Bill.

LORD JOHN MANNERS

said, he had understood the noble Lord to say that the Commissioners of Sewers had projected a plan, but the public were under the impression that the noble Lord disapproved of the proceedings of the Commissioners of Sewers. Perhaps the noble Lord would explain whether the Commissioners were in a position to carry out their plan.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, the Commissioners of Sewers had matured a plan which he, upon full consideration, had thought might probably be adopted for the great arterial drainage of London in parallel lines, or at least in some relation to the course of the Thames, with a view of preventing the sewage of London from falling into the river. The points upon which he had differed from the Commissioners were with regard to the detailed manner of constructing the subordinate drainage. The noble Lord was, doubtless, well aware that there was a controversy going on as to the relative superiority of large sewers with room enough for a man to walk in them, and sewers of a circular form and smaller dimensions. There was no doubt that the last were the cheapest and most economical, and, if that system were found equally advantageous in other respects, it was quite clear that its adoption would save a great deal of expense which would otherwise have to be incurred in draining the whole of the metropolis.

Question, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question," put, and negatived: Words added.

Main Question, as amended, put, and agreed to.

Bill put off for six months.

Back to