HC Deb 03 June 1875 vol 224 cc1359-65

Bill, as amended, considered.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

moved, in page 162, after line 9, to insert the following clause:— (Local board to be burial board in certain cases.) When a vestry of any parish comprised in a local government district resolves to appoint a burial board, the local board may at the option of the vestry be the burial board for such parish, and all expenses incurred by such burial board shall be defrayed out of a rate to be levied in such parish in the same manner as a general district rate: Provided, That if such parish has been declared a "ward for the election of members of the local board, such members shall form the burial board for the parish, and shall be deemed to be a burial board elected under the Burial Acts for the time being in force.

Clause agreed to.

Clause 50 (General powers for supplying district with water. P. H, s. 75. San. 1866, s. 11. P. H 1874, s. 33.).

MR. ALEXANDER BROWN

pro-posed to insert words which would give the Local Government Board power in cases where the local authorities neglected to provide a sufficient supply of water to take proceedings for the purpose of compelling them to do so.

Amendment proposed, in page 20, line 25, after the word "may," to insert the words "and when required by the Local Government Board shall."—(Mr. Alexander Brown.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, he believed the Amendment to be entirely unnecessary, because the Local Government Board had power under the Bill, when complaints were made of a want of supply of water, to compel the local authorities to provide it. The great difficulty, however, they would have to contend with was in cases where builders of houses neglected to provide sufficient accommodation.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 69 (Prohibition of occupying cellar dwellings. P. H., s. 67. San. 1866, s.42.).

MR. RATHBONE

moved the insertion of words to the effect that the provisions as to cellar dwellings should hold good, notwithstanding the provisions of the local Act to the contrary.

Amendment proposed, In page 26, line 34, after the word "Act," to insert the words "the foregoing provisions as to cellar dwellings shall apply, notwithstanding the provisions of any local Act to the contrary."—(Mr. Rathbone.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, he did not know how far this Amendment would carry them, or how many local Acts would be disturbed by adopting it. The Local Government Board, on the application of the local authorities, had now the power to alter the terms or vary the provisions of local Acts, and he should be ready to exercise that power if application were made to him. He, however, thought it would be dangerous to interfere with local Acts in the way now suggested.

MR. NEWDEGATE

suggested that it was desirable, in any Act relating to corporate property, that the recommendations of such bodies should be embodied in the Bill. He wished to know whether there was any security as to the period of the Session when a Bill embodying the Provisional Orders would be submitted to Parliament? He thought such a Bill should be laid on the Table of the House early in the Session, so that it might receive the due consideration of Members.

Mr. SCLATER-BOOTH

replied, that the only security which he was aware of was a Standing Order of the House of Lords, which provided that these Bills should not be introduced into that House after a certain day in June. He should only be misleading the House if he were to say that it would be practicable to have them all introduced at the beginning of the Session.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 89 (Definition of nuisances. N. B. 1855, s. 8. San. 1866, s. 19.).

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, he would not press an Amendment of which he had given Notice, the effect of which would be to give power to the authorities to deal with cases in which premises were in such a state as to be "either" a nuisance or injurious to health. If it was found necessary, the Amendment could be made when the Bill got into the House of Lords.

LORD ESLINGTON

objected to the matter being allowed to stand over until the Bill reached "another place," of which they knew little, and moved the insertion of the word "either," in accordance with the Amendment of which the President of the Local Government Board had given Notice.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

, in assenting to the Amendment, remarked that the point could still be dealt with in the House of Lords.

Amendment agreed to.

MR. GORST

moved, in line 23, to leave out "may," and insert "shall." It had been provided that in certain circumstances where the best materials had been employed and the furnaces properly constructed, and where complaint was made of "smoke nuisance," the magistrates might dismiss the complaint. The object of his Amendment was to guide the discretion of the tribunal before which a case of smoke nuisance was brought.

MR. MUNTZ

said, the Amendment of the hon. and learned Member was one of great importance. He (Mr. Muntz) had had great experience in matters of this kind, and he was aware of cases in which thousands of pounds had been expended in the vain endeavour to effect the consumption of smoke. To his knowledge, manufacturers had been periodically fined for not doing that which it was impossible to do. The Bill expressed the words, "as far as practicable;" but who was to be the judge of what was practicable? He should support the Amendment.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, he had no objection to accept the Amendment to the extent as applied to the Justices of substituting the words, "shall dismiss the complaint," instead of "may dismiss the complaint," in such cases as were described in the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 112 (Duty of urban authority to complain to justice of nuisance arising from offensive trade. N.R. 1855, s. 27. San. 1866, s.:18. N. R. 1855, s. 30.).

MR. BOOED

moved, in page 39, lines 31, 33, and 34, to leave out "urban," and insert "local."

Amendment agreed to.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

moved in page 39, line 41, after "effluvia," to insert "which is a nuisance or."

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 153 (Power to regulate line of buildings. L. G., s. 35.)

MR. WHITWELL

, in reference to some shop fronts projecting beyond others in the line of street, and thus constituting a disfigurement, moved, in page 53, line 30, after the word "build- ing," to insert "or the front thereof." He said, that in numerous instances where the local authorities were desirous of setting back a street, the owners of houses had refused to pull down their shop fronts, although provision was made for compensation. They held out for exorbitant compensation.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, he thought the weight of authority was undoubtedly considerable on the point; but it seemed to him that the pulling down a shop front might prove so great an injury to the owner that nothing could compensate him for it. He acquiesced, not without considerable reluctance, in the Amendment; but he thought that some modification of it was required.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 179 (Regulations as to arbitration. P. H., ss. 123–128.).

MR. CAWLEY

said, the clause at present left the appointment of the umpire, when the arbitrators disagreed, to the Court of Quarter Sessions. To obviate the inconvenience which might arise through the necessary delay of three months between the sittings of the Court of Quarter Sessions, he moved, in page 65, line 40, to leave out "Court of Quarter Sessions," and insert "Local Government Board."

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

accepted the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 257 (Justices may act through members of local authority, or liable to contribute. P. H., s. 132. N. R. 1866, s. 2. 30 &31 Vict., c. 115.).

MR. GORST

moved, in line 30, to add the following Proviso:— That no justice of the peace who is also a member of the local authority shall act as such justice in any court of summary jurisdiction in any proceeding in which such local authority is complainant or defendant. The object of the Amendment, he said, was to provide a completely impartial tribunal, and to recognize the Common Law principle that no person should be a judge in a matter in which he was himself interested.

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, he could not accept the Amendment, and hoped it would not be pressed. The justices of the peace would not, so far as the purposes of the Bill were concerned, be "interested" in the sense of partizanship.

Amendment negatived.

Clause 268 (Appeal to Quarter Sessions. P. H., ss. 135, 136. N. R. 1855, s. 40.)

MR. GORST

moved, in line 25, to leave out the words— In any case in which the penalty imposed or the sum adjudged to he paid exceeds twenty shillings or in which imprisonment is awarded.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 285 (Districts may be united for appointing a medical officer of health).

MR. GOURLEY

moved an Amendment, to the effect that not only boroughs having separate Courts of Quarter Sessions, but also "other urban or rural districts containing a population of 25,000 and upwards," should not be included in any union of districts for the purpose of appointing a medical officer of health, without the consent of the local authority.

Amendment proposed, In page 111, line 8, after the word "sessions," to insert the words "or other urban or rural district containing a population of twenty-five thousand and upwards."—(Mr. Gourley.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

Amendment made to the said proposed Amendment, by leaving out the words "or rural."—(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)

Another Amendment proposed to the said proposed Amendment, to leave out the words "twenty-five thousand," in order to insert the words "ten thousand,"—(Mr. Tollemache.)—instead thereof.

Question, "That the words 'twenty-five thousand' stand part of the said proposed Amendment," put, and agreed to.

Amendment, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 296 (As to provisional orders made by Local Government Board. P. H., 1872, s. 45.).

MR. RATHBONE

moved, in page 116, after line 24, to insert— (9.) The foregoing provisions shall apply to any Provisional Order amending a local Act, although such Act may relate to a district or districts of several urban sanitary authorities, and such order may be made upon the application of any one or more of such, authorities.

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. SCLATER-BOOTH

said, he thought the proposal not unreasonable, but it was inconsistent with the spirit of the clause. He would consider, however, whether it could not be embodied in another part of the Bill.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Bill to be read the third time Tomorrow.