PUBLIC HEALTH ACT. (Hansard, 10 March 1853)

COLONEL HARCOURT

said, he rose to move for a Return of all cases in which either of the Superintending Inspectors of the General Board of Health have been employed as the engineers in carrying out the works which have been executed under the authority of the Public Health Ac!, 1848. In moving for these Returns he considered he was only doing that duty which fell to the lot of every Member of that House, namely, that of drawing attention to an abuse which had lately come to light. The way the abuse came to his knowledge was this: In 1851 Ryde was attempted to be brought within the operation of the Act, by the application of some anonymous parties against the wishes of the majority of the inhabitants. Mr. Ranger was thereupon sent down to ascertain if it were desirable and expedient that this Act should be applied to the district. A public meeting was called by advertisement, and notices were sent to the ratepayers to tell them such a meeting was to be held. The meeting took place, and there was a large majority against adopting the Act. This was not thought sufficient, and the ratepayers were appealed to in another form. The result was a majority of forty-one against the introduction of the Act. Mr. Ranger 1431 went down to Ryde to make further inquiries, and on another appeal being made to the inhabitants there was a majority of 355 against the Act. The inhabitants, in order to remedy the complaints against the supply of water, formed a company for that purpose. No sooner was this done than a second company was set on foot, and Mr. Ranger was actually appointed engineer, and paid for his services on behalf of this second company, he having reported in favour of the extension of the Act. Now, he thought it was a gross abuse that the officer who was sent down to conduct an inquiry, and report whether it was right the Act should be enforced, should make himself not only a party to the case, but should benefit by the nature of his Report. He was also informed that the people of Cowes applied to the Board of Health as to the value of their waterworks. Mr. Ranger came down to see them, and in a short time a bill of 80l was sent in. Now, considering that Mr. Ranger, while employed by the Board of Health, received 3l. 3s. per day, he thought such a system of charges was a gross abuse. Again, at Southampton, Mr. Ranger was employed to carry out the works he had reported necessary. Nothing, however, was done to ensure a good supply of water, except the purchase of a piece of land for experimentalising. He thought that the abuses which had arisen from the conduct of those who were employed to carry out this Act, ought to be brought under the notice of the House, with the view to their remedy. He admitted there were many very good provisions in the Act: it had been said, England likes not coalitions; but he said, England does not like that such extensive powers should be confided to irresponsible persons or authorities. He had only the public advantage in view in bringing forward this question; and he trusted that the right hon. Baronet would not allow himself to be led by the representations of interested parties, but would exercise his own high talents and judgment, and cause a full and impartial inquiry into the alleged abuses.