when it is decided that something must be done they have to bear a long time of waiting until it is settled what that something is to be, for decision is not easy when questions arise which closely affect the property of a powerful class. From these causes arose the long delay which occurred before any mitigation of the suffering took place, and hence it was that the great feature of the period was a succession of " Inquiries" and of bills brought before Parliament and defeated. The first step in the House of Commons was made in 1840, the year following that which has just been spoken of as the one from which dates the public beginning of the Sanitary movement, when Mr Slaney, M.P. (one of the most earnest and energetic of the early labourers in the cause) obtained a Committee of the House to "inquire into the sanitary state of large towns in England." Mr Slaney wished not only to extend the investigation, but to bring the striking results already obtained directly before Parliament. My grandfather was the first witness examined by the Committee, and nearly the whole of his evidence was transferred to its minutes. Some of his words were ། "These miseries will continue till the Government will pass measures which shall remove the sources of poison and disease from these places. All this suffering might be averted. These poor people are victims that are sacrificed. The effect is the same as if twenty or thirty thousand of them were annually taken out of their wretched homes and put to death; the only difference being that they are left in them to die." And how long was it before any measure to stop this could be carried through Parliament? Dating from the time when he first examined Bethnal Green and Whitechapel, ten years. Not long, perhaps, in reality, considering the difficulties in the way, but very long to one who not only believed, but most deeply felt and realised, the truth of such words as those quoted above. The history of events was this. In 1841 Lord Normanby brought in a "Drainage of Buildings Bill." It was by no means a perfect one. My grandfather wrote of it many years afterwards in the following words : "Subsequent discussion and inquiry greatly Jan? 25th 1841. My Lad for you I have collected Farranged the necessity of Sanatory Regulations in your beneficent_ degree apest you in undertaking. I trust the measure you are about to introduce the protection of the Health of the Poor," "will constitute & will be (1) Drainage of Buildings Bill. Fuist direct attempt at Sanitary Legislation. -Introduced by the Marquis of Normanby in 1541. 5.L. recognized hereafter, as the second great legislation Enactment for Their benefit, as Elizabeth was the bet of Queen was the first; that the second will be found in practice unmixed good. I should be glad of an opporting without income fience. or two points to of explaining Your one me at any бе time for a few minutes. I am My Lad Your obliged Vaithful Sud- improved both the principles and the details of sanitary legislation as compared with the proposals in this bill. Still, honour to the House of Lords who carried it with a cordial and noble spirit through their own House and sent it down to the Commons!" The session, however, came to an end before any discussion could there be held on it. Next year, 1842, was presented Mr Edwin Chadwick's Report on the Sanitary Condition of the Labouring Population of Great Britain. He was Secretary to the Poor Law Board, and this Report was, in fact, a Return to the Bishop of London's motion of 1839. It confirmed and extended the results of previous inquiries, and greatly helped to prepare the way for legislation. In 1843 Lord Normanby made a second attempt. It was again defeated. The Administration of which he was a member was broken up before much progress had been made with the new and improved bill which he had introduced. Now came another Inquiry. Sir Robert Peel's Government, soon after coming into office, appointed a Royal Commission,1 of which the Duke 1 "The Health of Towns Commission." |