§ Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
§ Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.
§ EARL DE LA WARRsaid, that some of the provisions of the measure would bear very hardly upon the owners of cottage property and others, which would entail unreasonable expense. He thought that careful inquiry into the details of its provisions was desirable, and he begged, therefore, to move that it be referred to a Select Committee.
§ Amendment moved, to leave out all the words after ("That") and insert ("the Bill be referred to a Select Committee.")—(The Earl De La Warr.)
§ EARL COWPERthought that before their Lordships intrusted the rural sanitary authorities with increased powers they ought to inquire into the way the work already intrusted to them was discharged by those bodies. It appeared to him that in some instances they had performed their functions in a very unsatisfactory manner. In many cases the members quarrelled among themselves and did nothing else; in other instances they were completely in the hands of their medical officer; and in others everything was carried against the single representatives of a parish by the persons who represented the other parishes.
§ LORD NORTONobserved, that whatever might be thought of rural sanitary authorities they were established, and he deprecated arresting the progress of the Bill, which had been brought forward a second time by private Members of the other House fully competent to deal with the subject, while the Government had not found time or opportunity to deal with the subject more perfectly. Nevertheless, he regretted the re-commencement of patch- 1157 work of sanitary legislation so soon after its consolidation. The Sanitary Commission, over which, he had had the honour to preside from 1869 to 1871, and to which many eminent men had devoted much attention, and whose Report had been the basis of all subsequent sanitary legislation, had laid down the proposition that the chief cause of the imperfect working of the law was the complication of the law itself and the multiplication of Acts in detail. He therefore, immediately upon the Report, attempted a consolidating Bill, and meanwhile had a digest made of all the numerous Acts upon the subject. The late Government recognized the importance of consolidating the law, and next year passed the Act of 1872, preparing the way for consolidation, and the present Government passed the consolidating Act of 1875, of which this Bill dealt partially with one part only—namely, water supply to cottages. The Act of 1875 did not pretend to be complete in many parts, and especially in this of water supply. The Sanitary Commission said that water supply was the most difficult part of their inquiry, because it dealt not only with the interests of local authorities and consumers, but with intricate proprietary rights; and particular places could not well be compulsorily supplied without consideration of the whole watershed, which introduced further questions of area and rating; but this Bill dealt only with rural districts, and with them imperfectly, as the Report of the Select Committee to which the Bill was referred in the House of Commons amply showed. Its clauses ran parallel with sections unrepealed of the Act of 1875, and the charging of water rates or rents might come under either or both. Still, the Bill should pass as a step in the right direction, and as compelling the Government to deal completely with its subject next Session, and to make one separate Act on water supply, repealing the sections on the subject in the Act of 1875. The law might so be restored to clearness and intelligibility to the public.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYhoped their Lordships would not consent to refer the Bill to a Select Committee. No doubt the object of the Bill was important; but much of this importance attributed to it was due to a forgetfulness of what the law already provided—it was, in fact, 1158 but a small advance on the existing law. The Consolidation Act of 1875 enabled the rural authorities to construct works for the purpose of supplying water and to tax the whole parish for those works. It was quite clear that in some cases that might be an oppressive mode of proceeding, and what the Bill sought to effect was a comparatively small change. The Bill before their Lordships gave the rural authorities power to charge the owners of particular cottages with a water supply for those cottages. No such charge as that supposed by the noble Earl who moved the Amendment would be thrown on an owner. Clause 2 enacted that the supply must be provided at a reasonable cost, not exceeding a capital sum the interest on which at the rate of 5 per cent per annum would amount to 2d. per week. It was true that, in the clause as it stood, there were added the words—
or at such other cost as the Local Government Board may, on the application of the local authority, determine under all the circumstances of the case to be reasonable;but he intended to propose an Amendment which would limit the power of increase by the Local Government Board to a sum which would make the entire cost not exceed an interest of 3d. per week. There were some persons who had crotchets against improvements; but as there was nothing more important than a pure supply of water, he hoped their Lordships would not delay this measure by sending it to a Select Committee.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYpresumed that his noble Friend meant to convey that those who opposed this Bill were the people who had crotchets against improvements. He did not wish to oppose the progress of the Bill; but he ventured to repeat what he said on the second reading, that caution was necessary in order that the rent of cottages might not be raised, as this would be a very serious calamity to the labouring classes, and he feared that the improvements proposed by the measure would prevent the most important of all improvements, the housing of the poor. Owing to strikes and the rise of prices, the cost of cottage building had considerably increased—indeed, it did not now pay to build cottage property. It might be argued that it was desirable to have cottages with the best possible water 1159 supply. They might argue in that way, and be victorious in the argument; but if they added to the cost and difficulty of building cottages, and if, as a consequence, those who now built them abstained from doing so, they would have won a damaging and dangerous victory in a sanitary point of view, for the overcrowding of cottages would be a result. They ought to take care that this Bill did not increase the difficulty already experienced by the labouring classes in obtaining cottages, because that would be a very serious calamity.
§ Amendment (by leave of the House) withdrawn.
§ Then the original Motion agreed to.
§ House in Committee accordingly.
§ Clause 1 agreed to.
§ Clause 2 (Duty of rural authority to provide or require provision of sufficient water supply, and procedure for enforcing such requirement).
§ EARL FORTESCUEsaid, he would now move an Amendment, of which he had given Notice, the object of which was to draw a distinction in this Bill between water for cooking and drinking and water used for other domestic purposes. There was a much greater consumption of water for the latter than for the former purpose, and, therefore, the supply needed to be larger, and the hardship of having to fetch it from a distance was much more serious; so, on grounds of economy, it was desirable to make a distinction between "pot water" and "slop water."
§ Amendment moved, in line 12, to leave out from ("distance") to ("use") in line 13, and insert ("water sufficient for the.")—(Earl Fortescue.)
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONhoped that the noble Earl who had charge of the Bill would not accede to the Amendment, which would provide for two sources of supply, the one less pure than the other. It was of equal importance to have pure water for domestic purposes as for drinking. The Medical Officer of the Board of Health reported that in 1873 there were 240 cases of fever which could be traced to water containing sewage matter having 1160 been used for washing vessels in which food was afterwards cooked.
THE MARQUESS OF BATHsaid, that it would be a harsh thing to make the owner of a worthless cottage incur the expense of a water supply, even though he might wish to throw the cottage down.
§ Amendment negatived.
§
THE DUKE OF SOMERSET moved an Amendment, to leave out the words—
Or at such other cost as the Local Government Board may, on the application of the local authority, determine under all the circumstances of the case to he reasonable.
This would limit the power of the local authorities to raise a capital greater than would at the rate of 5 per cent amount to 2d. a-week.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he would accept the noble Duke's Amendment so far as it put a limit on the power of the local authorities to raise capital; but would move that the limit should be 3d., instead of 2d.
§ Amendment made; then—
§ THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY moved to omit the word ("twopence,") and insert ("threepence") in lieu thereof.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 3 (Appeal against apportionment of expenses) agreed to.
§ Clause 4 (Appeal by owner against requirement to provide a water supply).
THE MARQUESS OF BATHsaid, the right of appeal was given by the clause under these five different conditions—(1) If the supply of water is not required under the circumstances of the case; (2) if the time limited by the notice for providing the supply is insufficient; (3) if it is impracticable to provide the supply at a reasonable cost; (4) if the local authority ought themselves to provide a supply of water for the district; and (5) if the whole or part of the expense of providing the supply, or of rendering the supply wholesome, ought to be a charge on the district. The appeal with regard to the first three conditions lay to the Justices in Petty Sessions; and with regard to the two 1161 last conditions, it lay to the Local Government Board. He contended that the appeal ought to be in all cases to the Local Government Board. The working of that Bill would virtually lie with the Inspectors, acting under the local authority—persons who, in many instances, were not fit to be intrusted with such functions, being without either education or experience. If an appeal were made under either of the three first conditions above-named, the Justices in Petty Sessions would hear the evidence of the Inspector and that adduced on behalf of the owner, which might be very conflicting; but they would have no technical knowledge or any means of arriving at a sound or impartial judgment on the merits of the case. Speaking as a landlord, he would himself much prefer that the question should be decided by the practical knowledge of an engineer or surveyor sent down by the Local Government Board. In a small village not far from his own neighbourhood the local authority, by the advice of their Inspector, established a system of drainage which, instead of improving the sanitary condition of the village, made it a great deal worse than it was before. An application was made by persons interested in the matter to the Local Government Board, who sent down their engineer, and that officer reported that the whole of the works which had been executed by the sanitary authority, and for which the proprietors of houses had been charged, were utterly valueless. To guard against the recurrence of such cases he would, therefore, suggest that the clause be so altered as to let the appeal lie to the Local Government Board, and not to the Justices in Petty Sessions.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYthought that if the noble Marquess referred to the Public Health Act he would find that the argument went in the contrary direction to that which he had indicated. It so happened that in that Act—under which that appeal was to be instituted—it was provided that the works should not be commenced without the sanction of the Local Government Board, and that that Board might appoint an Inspector to make an inquiry on the spot. He confessed he had rather a liking for local authorities, and had not that distrust of Justices in Petty Session which the noble Marquess seemed to entertain. 1162 He hoped their Lordships would not alter the clause.
§ EARL FORTESCUEfelt neither the noble Marquess's vehement distrust of local authorities, nor his unbounded confidence in Government Inspectors.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Remaining clauses agreed to, with Amendments.
§ The Report of the Amendments to be received on Friday the 21st instant; and Bill to be printed, as amended. (No. 106.)