Lords Sitting of 29 June 1866

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILL—First Reading—Land Tax Commissioners' Names*(179).

THE MINISTERIAL CRISIS.
EARL RUSSELL: My Lords, I have to communicate to your Lordships that since the last meeting of the House Her Majesty has been pleased to send for the Earl of Derby, and has requested him to undertake the formation of a Ministry. In accordance with the suggestion which the noble Earl has made to me, that it would not be convenient to propose a shorter postponement of the public business, I have to suggest to your Lordships that no public business be transacted before Thursday next.
LORD BROUGHAM: I certainly do not rise to oppose the Motion of my noble Friend. On the contrary, I quite concur in it. In the ignorance—there is universal ignorance—in which all the country is involved of the grounds on which the late Ministers have felt it necessary to resign, the people know nothing more than this—that it arose from some point of honour, raised by the conduct of their own supporters in the House of Commons. In this universal ignorance I am equally involved, and I share in the general—but not universal—regret which is felt that such a step should have been taken. Concurring in the general regret, and sharing the universal ignorance, I approve the Motion of my noble Friend.

GAS LIGHT AND COKE COMPANY BILL.
Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."
EARL NELSONsaid, he desired to draw attention to the number of petitions presented by residents in the neighbourhood whose interests it was stated would be injuriously affected. He would remind their Lordships that the greater number of those who would be affected by the Bill were not persons in a condition to appear by Counsel before a Parliamentary Committee against the wealthy company who promoted it. Past legislation had forced large numbers of working men, with their families, to dwell in the outskirts of London, and many were resident in the smaller streets on the outskirts of the Victoria Park, which

707
had proved an immense boon to the crowded population around; and he contended that anything that would damage that place of resort ought to be prevented. The Committee in the other House to which the present Bill and other Gas Bills had been referred had drawn up a very able Report upon the whole question of the supply of gas to the metropolis; and he understood that the Government had undertaken to bring in next Session a Bill founded on many of the recommendations of that Report. But he could not conceive how it was that the House of Commons, with this document before it, should have been induced to pass the present Bill; for, by allowing the amalgamation or grouping together of a number of companies, the question was prejudged. Having himself visited Victoria Park, he was convinced of the impropriety of permitting the erection of the proposed works on the site contemplated. He found that on the Eastern side of the Park the vegetation was flourishing luxuriantly, while on the other the trees were beginning to wither away, being injuriously affected by the smoke from a number of large chimneys about half a mile distant. This being the case, it was evident that the erection of extensive gas works not more than 650 yards from the Park would materially damage the trees and shrubs. He trusted that their Lordships, who refused last year to sanction a scheme of the same nature in Chelsea, would be equally considerate of the health and comfort of the thousands of poor people who lived near the Victoria Park. He had received a letter from the Rev. Septimus Hansard, a clergyman, who had resided in the neighbourhood in question since the time of the great Chartist riot, which showed that the health of the population had been greatly benefited, while their moral character had much improved—a circumstance which he attributed in no small degree to the opening of the Victoria Park, whereby they were enabled not only on holidays, but at all times, to obtain innocent and healthy recreation, instead of being driven to public-houses. He trusted the House would not turn a deaf ear to the appeal now made on behalf of the working men of the East End of London; and he moved that the Bill be read a second time that day three months.
An Amendment moved, to leave out ("now") and insert ("this Day Three Months.")—(The Earl Nelson.)
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that some papers had been circulated amongst the Members of the House on the subject of the Bill, and he knew nothing of the merits of the subject beyond what they contained. His first sympathies were entirely with the noble Earl, because if the effect of the construction of the proposed works would be to do injury to the Victoria Park it ought not to be allowed to pass. It appeared, however, that the entire subject had been fully and carefully considered by a Committee of the House of Commons, whose opinion was that no such injury would arise. The works would in the first place be half a mile from the Park, and in an uninhabited district, and if the Bill passed the works of two or three companies, which were now situated in thickly-populated districts, would be removed there. Under all the circumstances, the reasonable course would be to send the Bill for inquiry to a Committee of their Lordships' House.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he thought the petitions from the working men in the East of London should have their due weight; and he trusted that nothing would be done that would be detrimental to a place of so much importance to the health and moral character of the people.
LORD RAVENSWORTHsaid, that if the noble Earl should persevere with his Motion he was very much disposed to give it his support, in the hope that there would be future and more careful legislation in regard to the gas supply of the metropolis.
LORD CHELMSFORDsaid, he should vote against the Amendment. The only question raised was as to whether the gas works would be injurious to the Victoria Park. The House of Commons had considered the matter, and had passed the Bill; it would, therefore, certainly not be right for their Lordships summarily to reject it. The proposed site for the works was at no point nearer to the Park than 633 yards; and the question was simply whether they would at that distance injure the trees of the Park. As the House of Commons, after careful inquiry, had negatived the notice of inquiry he thought their Lordships should send the Bill to a Select Committee.
LORD TEYNHAMsaid, that the investigation before the Committee of the House of Commons had not removed or allayed the fears of the inhabitants, and it was probable that an inquiry by their Lordships would be equally ineffectual to produce

709
such a result. Mischief might be done by passing the Bill, but no harm could result from its rejection.
THE EARL OF CAITHNESSsaid, that a Bill which proposed to remove three large gas works from a thickly-populated district in the centre of London deserved consideration.
EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid, he could not attach much importance to the decision of the House of Commons respecting the matter, as the inhabitants had no opportunity of supporting their views before the Committee.
THE BISHOP OF LONDONthought it was most inexpedient that the inhabitants of Victoria Park should be saddled with a nuisance for the relief of another district, especially as a site thinly-populated and otherwise advantageous could be obtained. To say that trees at a distance of 600 yards from gas works would be out of harm's way was contrary altogether to his experience—especially when the wind happened to set that way.
LORD OVERSTONEthought it unadvisable to reject the Bill at its present stage without further inquiry, and advocated its reference to a Select Committee.
THE MARQUESS TOWNSHENDsaid, he could not see any reason for referring the matter to a Select Committee, as there were already sufficient facts before the House to warrant its deciding upon the subject.
LORD REDESDALEsaid, the real question was whether there was anything objectionable in the Bill, and that was a question which could be settled properly only by a Select Committee. He did not believe the opposition to the Bill was one which was likely to be overlooked, for he found among those who had petitioned against the Bill, the corporation of London, the Metropolitan Board of Works, and the Hackney District Board of Works—so that there could be no doubt that the investigation would be a very searching one. There were very few cases in which a Bill should be rejected at its present stage, and as far as he was concerned he should vote for the second reading.
THE EARL OF CARNARVONdesired to know whether the petitions presented were against the whole of the Bill or against some particular clauses. If the whole of the Bill was to be inquired into, it might be advisable to refer it to a Select Committee; but otherwise the balance of
710
evidence appeared to be rather against than in favour of the Bill.
LORD REDESDALEsaid, he knew only the fact that the petitions were presented, but did not know their contents. He imagined, however, that the Metropolitan Board of Works was scarcely likely to allow anything detrimental to the public interests to pass unnoticed.
On Question, that ("now") stand Part of the Motion? their Lordships divided:Contents 26; Not-Contents 27: Majority 1.
Resolved in the Negative; and Bill to be read 2a this Day Three Months.
House adjourned at Six o'clock, to Monday next, Eleven o'clock.