§ Order for Second Reading read,
§ COLONEL CHATTERTONmoved that the Bill be now read a Second Time.
§ MR. FORBES MACKENZIEconsidered that it would be better to postpone the Bill until some Minister was present, as it was much more of a public than a private measure.
MR. HENRY DRUMMONDtrusted the House would not consent to any postponement of the measure. No question of local or general interest was involved in this Bill, but the promoters, he should show, contemplated a direct fraud on the public. The prospectus put forth by them informed the public that they had already obtained 2,600 acres of land for the purposes of the Necropolis. Now, he could assure the House they had done no such thing. All they had done was to go to Lord Onslow and offer him 35,000l. for his manorial rights over the land in question; but they had consulted no one else who had any interest in the land. Their allegation, therefore, was not true. The prospectus, which he held in his hand, was full of tropes and figures. The promoters told us they had a soil well adapted for the purposes of interment. Now, his idea on the subject was, that any soil in the world in which a ditch could be dug was adapted for the purposes in question. ["No, no!"] At all events, he thought any would be as favourable as the "dry yellow sand" of Woking Common. In another part of the prospectus the ground was declared to be "favourable to the rapid and vigorous growth of appropriate vegetation"—cypresses and forget-me-nots he supposed; and the promoters seemed so fond of this sort of language, that they went and told the noble Lord who was late the head of 926 the Government the same story. The writer of the prospectus in another part declared that the situation of the proposed Necropolis was so delightful that "solitude herself might here find retirement;" that the land possessed "an undulating surface," which meant, of course, that there were little vales and little hills; and this was in order that "the head of the humble may be laid low in the glen," that "the ashes of the world's favoured ones may be mingled with the dust of the mound, and the sculptured marble on the height proclaim the end of earth's greatness." Then it was stated that "the footsteps of commerce would not cross the pathway to the tomb," or profane this hallowed spot. But this was the fraud of which he complained. The promoters intended to take powers to purchase 2,600 acres, while they themselves calculated that 400 would be necessary for the purposes of the cemetery; and they proposed to let on building leases the remaining 2,200 acres as a mere commercial speculation.
§ SIR JAMES DUKEwas not answerable for the language of the writer of the prospectus to which the hon. Member for West Surrey had alluded; but he knew that the hon. Member himself frequently indulged in such tropes and figures. The real question, however, was, whether this was a scheme deserving of public support? It seemed difficult, in this great metropolis, to find necessary burial grounds; and if a number of gentlemen were associated together, and obtained the grant of a large tract of land, which they proposed to devote to the purpose he had mentioned, without any compulsory clause whatever, he did think it was a scheme which was well deserving the favourable consideration of that House. He could assure the House that he had no interest whatever in the scheme; he had only been called upon in his official position as Member for the City of London to accompany the deputation which had waited on the Prime Minister; but if the hon. Member for West Surrey, or any other Gentleman, entertained objections to any of the clauses in the Bill, the promoters, he believed, would be quite ready to submit to any regulation which the Committee might lay down to carry out that object. He believed, also, that the promoters had no intention whatever to devote the ground in question to purposes of speculation; at all events, he trusted the House would take care not to allow anything of that kind; and he would willingly 927 agree to any postponement of the Bill, with a view to give hon. Members an opportunity of examining it, and of having their doubts removed.
MR. HENRY DRUMMONDsaid, that in the 11th clause of the Bill it was distinctly stated that it was proposed to devote the remainder of the ground purchased to purposes of building speculation.
§ MR. J. BELLsaid, when he saw the opportunity offered of removing the nuisance of intramural interment, he hoped the House would not hastily determine on discarding that opportunity. It was well known that the Metropolitan Interment Act had proved inoperative, and he trusted therefore that the House would not discourage private enterprise in this, as in other undertakings. He hoped that the second reading of the Bill would be affirmed, and that the company would be bound down by such clauses as would insure that public benefit which they declared would result from the scheme. The 11th clause of the Bill was one common to every railway or other Bill which had for its object the enclosure of land. He trusted that the House would lend its encouragement to a measure which had for its object the abatement of a great public nuisance.
§ VISCOUNT EBRINGTONwould object to any Bill of this sort for making the burial of the inhabitants of this Christian country a purely commercial speculation. What had been stated of this Bill would not lead the House to draw a very favourable conclusion with regard to it; and he appealed to such Members of the new Government as were present whether, in the absence of the higher and more responsible Ministers, it was right that they should be committed to support so large and important a Bill as this, which, in fact, reversed the policy already deliberately adopted by Parliament with regard to this question.
§ MR. MOWATTsaid, the subject could not be disposed of in this offhand manner. Every one agreed that there was an absolute necessity for making provision for interments without this great city. The late Government had announced that their Bill was a failure; but yet the noble Lord who had just spoken seemed to think it a shocking idea to leave burials in the hands of private individuals. Were we, then, to leave the dead to bury the dead? It was all very well to condemn the present plan; but the noble Lord ought to have stated what better one he proposed. With regard 928 to the noble Lord's objection to making the interment of the dead a matter of commercial speculation, he would like to ask him when was it, or how could it be otherwise? What was the profession of an undertaker? He was sorry to say that clergymen had made the dead a matter of speculation, and there was not a cemetery in the metropolis where a clergyman did not claim a fee for interment. In the absence of any more rational objections than he had hitherto heard, he should vote for this Bill on principle, without knowing its particular merits, trusting that they would be fully gone into.
§ MR. MANGLESsaid, he did not object, and the people of Woking did not object, to a moderate portion of the common land being taken for the purpose of this Necropolis; but this Bill proposed to take every acre of common land, and either convert it into a cemetery or to private purposes. He never saw such a clause in his life as the 11th clause of this Bill, which rendered it lawful for the company to dispose of either by public auction or private arrangement, in fee-simple or on lease, all or any part of this land not required for the purposes of the company; and, wanting only 400 acres of land for their cemetery they yet applied for power to purchase 2,600 acres, in order that they might speculate with the surplus. The opponents of this Bill were the small freeholders and copyholders of Woking living around the common; and it was futile to suppose that men in such humble circumstances could incur the cost of opposing this Bill in Committee. The fact was, the scheme was a great job, and he should move 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.'"
§ Question proposed, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."
§ COLONEL CHATTERTONdefended the promoters of the Bill, who, he said, were guided by the most liberal principles. All the metropolitan Members were, he believed, favourable to the scheme, together with several of the parishes. He therefore hoped the measure would not be rejected.
§ MR. BETHELLsaid, the House had now ascertained the reason of the course which had been taken by the copyholders. They had readily assented to the principle of the measure, and had never commenced 929 any opposition until the bargain which they had attempted to make had failed; but surely it would be a matter of deep regret if the House permitted parties to come there and oppose the second reading of so important a Bill, simply because they had been baffled in making a bargain. Allusion had been made to a silly prospectus which certain persons had issued; but, really, what had that to do with the matter? Then, again, as to the rights of the copyholders; the fact was, there was no one with whom a contract could be made, except the lord of the manor. He was the only proprietor, and the rights of the copyholders were only a subject for compensation. Exceptions had been taken to the clause enabling the company to re-sell any portion of the land they had taken but which they did not require for the purposes for which they were established; but there was not a single Railway Act, nor a single Act for purposes similar to those contemplated by this Bill, which did not contain a similar enactment. Indeed, without such a clause it would he impossible to dispose of a single particle of land which the company had bought, but which they might not want.
§ SIR DE LACY EVANShoped the House, when they recollected the dreadful evils which arose from intramural interment in the metropolis, would not prevent the Bill from going into Committee.
§ LORD ROBERT GROSVENORsaid, his constituents were deeply interested in the question of providing fit and proper places for the interment of such persons as died in the metropolis; and he should be very sorry if he appeared to oppose a measure that promised to remedy, to a certain extent, the evils of the present system. At the same time he thought that on a measure of such importance they should wait until some responsible Minister was in the House. They ought surely to know what were the views of the Government, and therefore he trusted the hon. Gentleman would consent to postpone the second reading for a fortnight, when they would be able to learn if the Government were prepared to propose any measure dealing with the whole subject. At the same time he must inform the hon. Gentleman who had said that the whole of the copyholders were opposed to the Bill, that that was not the case. He (Lord R. Grosvenor) had had a correspondence with some of them, and they stated that their only objection was that they had not been 930 promised sufficient compensation. He begged, therefore, to move that the debate be adjourned.
§ Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."
§ MR. HUMEwould remind the House of the pressing necessity that existed for the measure, there being no fewer than 58,000 human beings who required interment in the metropolis every year. Last Session the Government, in opposition to the opinion entertained by him (Mr. Hume) and many other hon. Gentlemen, who would have preferred leaving the matter to private enterprise, had taken the subject into their own hands. They had failed, and now that a Bill was once more brought in, he would not consent to refer the matter again to the Government. As to the compensation due to the copyholders, that was a matter for the Committee.
MR. HENRY DRUMMONDsaid, that if this was merely a question of making a cemetery, there would be no dispute or difficulty about the matter. When the hon. and learned Gentleman near him (Mr. Bethell) gave an opinion of law, it would ill become him (Mr. H. Drummond) to dissent from him; but when the hon. and learned Gentleman favoured the House with a fact, he should like to examine that fact a little. He should like him (Mr. Bethell) to quote a single instance amongst all the railways, where they took 2,600 acres, and only intended to use 400. He asserted it was not a cemetery company. They meant to make their money by their building leases, and it was in fact a building society under the mask of a Necropolis.
§ Question put.
§ The House divided:—Ayes 92; Noes 104: Majority 12.
§ Question again proposed, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Main Question put, and agreed to.
§ Bill read 2°, and committed, and referred to the Committee of Selection.