HC Deb 10 May 1849 vol 105 cc252-5

Order for Second Reading read.

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


said, it was preposterous to think of proceeding with the discussion of the Bill at that late hour. If it was too late to proceed with an English Bill, it was too late, also, to discuss a Scotch one. He, therefore, begged to move that the House do now adjourn.

Whereupon Motion made, and Question put, "That this House do now adjourn."

The House divided:—Ayes 33; Noes 96: Majority 63.

List of the NOES.
Anstey, T. C. Lascelles, hon. W. E.
Arkwright, G. Lockhart, A. E.
Blackstone, W. S. Mundy, W.
Boldero, H. G. Napier, J.
Broadley, H. Oswald, A.
Brown, H. Plowden, W. H. C.
Buller, Sir J. Y. Plumptre, J. P.
Christy, S. Richards, E.
Clerk, rt. hon. Sir G. Scholefield, W.
Dodd, G. Sibthorp, Col.
Dunne, F. P. Smollett, A.
Gaskell, J. M. Sotheron, T. H. S.
Henley, J. W. Spooner, R.
Hodgson, W. N. Sullivan, M.
Hood, Sir A. Waddington, H. S.
Hope, Sir J. TELLERS.
Inglis, Sir R. H. Mackenzie, W. F.
Keogh, W. Drumlanrig, Visct.
List of the NOES.
Acland, Sir T. D. Hutt, W.
Aglionby, H. A. Kershaw, J.
Bagshaw, J. King, hon. P. J. L.
Baring, rt. hn. Sir F. T. Labouchere, rt. hon. H.
Bellew, R. M. Lewis, G. C.
Berkeley, C. L. G. Maitland, T.
Blackall, S. W. Martin, T.
Blake, M. J. Masterman, J.
Boyle, hon. Col. Melgund Visct.
Brackley, Visct. Milner, W. M. E.
Brand, T. Milnes, R. M.
Brotherton, J. Morris, D.
Bruce, Lord E. Mostyn, hon. E. M. L.
Bunbury, E. H. Mullings, J. R.
Carter, J. B. Mure, Col.
Cavendish, hon. C. C. Ogle, S. C. H.
Cockburn, A. J. E. Palmerston, Visct.
Colebrooke, Sir T. E. Parker, J.
Coles, H. B. Pearson, O.
Cowan, C. Pigott, F.
Cowper, hon. W. F. Pilkington, J.
Craig, W. G. Pryse, P.
Dalrymple, Capt. Raphael, A.
Denison, W. J. Ricardo, O.
Douglas, Sir C. E. Rice, E. R.
Duff, J. Russell, F. C. H.
Duncuft, J. Rutherford, A.
Dundas, Sir D. Salwey, Col.
Ebrington, Visct. Seymour, Lord
Ellice, E. Slaney, R. A.
Elliot, hon. J. E. Somerville, rt. hn. Sir W.
Evans, W. Stanton, W. H.
Ferguson, J. Stuart, Lord D.
Ferguson, Sir R. A. Talbot, C. R. M.
Filmer, Sir E. Talfourd, Serj.
Fordyce, A. D. Thicknesse, R. A.
Fortescue, hon. J. W. Thompson, Col.
Glyn, G. C. Thompson, G.
Grey, rt. hon. Sir G. Tollemache, hon. F. J.
Hallyburton, Ld J. F. G. Vane, Lord H.
Hastie, A. Wawn, J. T.
Hastie, A. Willoughby, Sir H.
Hawes, B. Wilson, J.
Hayter, rt. hon. W. G. Wood, W. P.
Heywood, J. Wortley, rt. hon. J. S.
Heyworth, L. Wyld, J.
Hobhouse, T. B.
Hodges, T. L. TELLERS.
Howard, Lord E. Tufnell, H.
Howard, hon. C. W. G. Hill, Lord M.

then said, that the object of the Bill was to apply to Scotland the provisions of the Bill passed last year with reference to England and Ireland. That measure, he believed, had been productive of very great advantages to the towns in which it had been put into operation. Scotland had been purposely exempted from that measure. He now proposed, however, that Scotland should experience its benefits, and he had, therefore, drawn up the present Bill, which was similar to that which had been passed for England and Ireland. This was not, however, a compulsory Bill, as was the measure which had been adopted for those two countries. He proposed that its provisions should be brought into operation in any district in Scotland in which one-tenth of the inhabitants might pray for he same, the tenth to consist of at least thirty of the said inhabitants., This Bill would be brought into operation under the superintendence of the Board of Health in England (for he did not think it necessary to establish a separate Board of Health in Scotland) and of the sheriffs of the counties. He proposed to appoint under this measure a resident secretary for Scotland, for the purpose of corresponding with the Board of Health in England. He might state that he had been requested to bring in this Bill by many parties in Scotland, and by none more urgently than the populous constituencies of hon. Gentlemen opposite, who appeared so anxious to oppose its progress.


was satisfied that the Lord Advocate would have met less opposition had he made the statement he had now made at an earlier stage. The large powers given to the commissioners of defining districts were objectionable.


objected to smuggling through important Bills at so late an hour.


said, that if the noble Lord admitted that such a measure as the present was imperatively demanded, it was asking nothing unreasonable to propose that the Bill should be advanced a stage at that hour.


would have preferred a board in Scotland. He likewise objected to the Bill because it ousted the county magistrates from jurisdiction, and conferred it exclusively upon the sheriff.


stated, that great jealousy prevailed in Scotland at the number of new offices created by the Bills which the Lord Advocate had introduced. At the present moment there were four Bills upon the table, each of which created four new offices. Those offices would entail an expense not only upon Scotland, but England, because the salaries would be paid out of the Treasury. If it were necessary to incur expense, in order to promote the health of the people of Scotland, let it be done, but the necessity should be made apparent.


expressed his full concurrence in the principle of the Bill.


referred to a report from the Edinburgh commissioners of police, to show the necessity for the Bill before the House. The people of Scotland were under great obligation to the Lord Advocate for bringing it forward.

Main Question put, and agreed to.

Bill read 2o, and committed for Monday 21st May.

The House adjourned at a quarter before One o'clock.