The bill was committed in June, by a majority of 191 to 50; the only Worcestershire members who voted in the minority being General Lygon and Mr. P. Borthwick. The bill was, however, after all, with a multitude of others, in the annual “slaughter of the innocents;” and then came the general election.
In seconding Mr. Ricardo’s nomination as a candidate for Worcester, Dr. Hastings again mentioned sanitary matters, and declared, amidst the cheers of the assembly, that he would not give his vote for any man who would not pledge himself to support a bill for the improvement of the public health.
In January, 1848, Mr. Thomas Beggs lectured in the Town Hall, Worcester, on sanitary improvements; and on the following day a public meeting was held, over which the Mayor, Mr. Edward Webb, presided. The Rev. John Davis then moved a petition to the legislature in favour of sanitary measures, which was carried without dissent; and Mr. Ricardo, who was present, expressed the pleasure he should feel in presenting it, and in supporting Government in any measure they might propose for the advancement of the sanitary condition of the people.
In April, a town’s meeting was called to consider the Government measure, on a hostile requisition; and the Mayor being indisposed, the friends of sanitary improvements took no part. Mr. Summerfield was called to the chair; and on the motion of Mr. Mence and Mr. Hooper, a petition was adopted in opposition to the Health of Towns Bill, and ordered to be forwarded to Mr. Urquahart, for presentation.
In May, the Town Council, with only one dissentient, petitioned in favour of the measure; and a petition of similar import was also very generally signed by the inhabitants of the city.
The bill passed the House of Commons on the 20th of June—the opposition, in their strongest division, having only mustered fifty-four votes. It met in the House of Lords with entire approbation; and every one of the amendments made in committee there, were with a view to make its provisions more stringent and “centralising.”
On the 3rd of October, 1848, the Worcester Town Council, on the motion of Mr. Alderman Elgie, came to a resolution, “That it is desirable forthwith to bring into operation within the city the provisions of the Public Health Act.” In a numerous meeting there was only one dissentient to this resolution. A committee of fifteen members was then appointed to carry out the resolution. They communicated the resolution of the Council to the Central Board, and requested that an inspector might be sent down to inquire into the propriety of applying the act to Worcester.
Mr. George T. Clark, Government Inspector, accordingly gave notice in November, both by advertisement and handbills posted in all parts of the city, that he should make the necessary inquiries as to the sanitary condition of the city, and invited all parties to give evidence before him. Mr. Clark sat for the first time at the Guildhall, on the 4th of December, and was very cordially received by the Mayor, Mr. Padmore, and a considerable number of leading citizens and tradesmen, some of whom have since taken a very active share of the opposition to the working of the measure; but not one word of objection to the application of the act to Worcester was ever uttered in Mr. Clark’s presence.
Mr. Clark’s report appeared in April, 1849, and the conclusions to which the inspector arrived were, that the public nuisances in Worcester were many and great—constantly creating sickness, and increasing the mortality of the place; that what was principally wanted was a proper water supply, surface paving and drainage; and that remedies for the evils complained of might be applied for a rate of not more than one penny a week per house. The cost of the necessary drainage he estimated at £20,315, and of the water supply at £21,750, while he set down the annual income derivable from the water works at £4,238.
Acting upon this report, the Central Board made a provisional order for the application of the Public Health Act to Worcester; being competent to do this, as to any place where the mortality ranged above 23.0 in 1,000 per annum—and, according to the Registrar General’s report, the average mortality in Worcester, for the seven years previous to the passing of the Public Health Act, was 25.05 in 1,000. A bill to confirm this provisional order was introduced into Parliament in July, 1849; and, passing without opposition, received the royal assent in August.