836 
THE PHARMACEUTICAL JOURNAL AND TRANSACTIONS. 
[April 13,187*. 
flict between the interests of his patients and those of i 
the public. For a medical man must be well paid to 
secure independence of action, when he devoted his 
whole time to the health of communities instead of to 
the health of individuals. But the Bill made no pro¬ 
vision for such officers. Still, he hoped that the Presi¬ 
dent of the Local Government Board would admit that 
the reasons for wishing them were strong, and that in 
Committee he would introduce amendments in order to 
assure the House that the officers appointed would 
possess, or will soon acquire knowledge of the health of 
communities, because that was a very different thing 
from the health of individuals. He hoped that provi¬ 
sion would be made for offering a better position and 
pay to such Poor Law medical officers as passed exami¬ 
nations in the subject of hygiene. As long as local 
medical officers did not possess a knowledge of public 
health, inspectors and other officers, appointed by the 
Central Board, were necessary, and the local officers 
would be used chielly as collectors of information to 
be digested and made useful to the public through a 
central administration. This centralization of local 
duties, which he considered to be a misfortune, 
cropped up in various parts of the Bill. Thus, 
in the 64th clause, the Local Government Board 
offered, and sometimes enjoined itself to be analytical 
chemist for the Avhole of England. They invited “ pur¬ 
chasers of any article of food or drink ” in the provinces 
to send their articles for examination to London. They 
insisted that potable waters and the waters of polluted 
streams should be analysed as the Central Board directed. 
This was a serious matter, for it not only affected the 
responsibilities of local Boards, but also the interest of 
science. There were few towns in the kingdom in which 
well-qualified analysts did not exist. Take, for example, 
Manchester or Newcastle. Surely an analysis executed 
in the laboratory of Owens College, in Manchester, or 
in that of the Newcastle School of Science, would be as 
good as one made in a London laboratory. Why should 
Manchester men and Newcastle men be invited to dis¬ 
trust their local science when it was efficient ? Let them 
take what securities they choose for analytical efficiency 
in localities, but let them encourage rather than dis¬ 
courage local laboratories for local purposes. Our cen¬ 
tralization was always injurious, for it weakened local 
administration ; and centralization of science was per¬ 
nicious, because it prevented the diffusion and stunted 
the development of science in the provinces. He was 
glad to find that the Bill dealt with the pollution of 
rivers, for the subject was ripe for legislation. As to the 
impossibility of dealing with the subject asserted by Mr. 
Fielden, the objection was of the character always urged 
when nuisances were made the subject of legislation. 
When the late Lord Derby introduced a measure for 
preventing the pollution of air by the acid gas thrown 
out by soda works, he did him the honour to consult him 
on the subject, and asked him if those were processes suf¬ 
ficiently matured to be enforced by law. He told him 
that they were not; but asserted that if the measure 
passed the manufacturers would soon mature them. And 
now 97 per cent, of these gases was prevented from 
passing into the air, much to the benefit of the public 
and of the manufacturers themselves. One of the car¬ 
dinal commandments of the ancient Egyptians was, “Thou 
shalt not pollute riversand he trusted we were now 
about to make this a new commandment for this country, 
for the want of it had produced intolerable evils. Even 
with the large stream which washed the metropolis, and 
which was the source of its <^«.sa'-potable or unpotable 
water, more than 600,000 human beings poured their ex¬ 
creta and filth into it before the Londoners drew it off for 
their daily water supply. And the dirty water of the 
Thames was purity itself as compared with that in rivers 
which flowed past manufacturing towns. The fact was 
that individuals and communities had exercised unmiti¬ 
gated selfishness in regard to all river courses, for they 
used them entirely with reference to their own interests,, 
as if those below them in the stream had nothing to do- 
with the flow of water which the bounty of Nature had 
supplied for the use of all. 
Sir II. Selwyn-Idhetson supported the Bill, but de¬ 
murred to the selection of Boards of Guardians for rural 
districts, since they were already overworked. Ho 
hoped the Bill would make compulsory the appointment 
of a public analyst in each district. 
Mr. Dimsdale said that different standards of purity 
had been proposed by the Purification of Ri vers Com¬ 
mission and the Water Supply Commission. The- 
standard proposed by the former commission had beeru 
adopted in this Bill, but that of the latter was preferred 
by himself and others. He had received that morning a 
letter from Dr. Letheby stating that the Public Health 
Bill of the Government was unworkable as regarded the 
standard of purity. He proposed to raise this question, 
in a definite shape when they should get into committee, 
by proposing to substitute the standard laid down by 
the Water Supply Commission. Dr. Frankland said 
that if we wished to make the waters of all the rivers- 
and streams throughout the country potable, he did not 
think this standard would be sufficient; but that it 
would, if our object was to make them safe as regarded 
the health of the people. 
Dr. Lush said that medical men were entirely dis¬ 
satisfied with the provisions of the Bill as to the appoint¬ 
ment of sanitary inspectors. The nomination was vested 
in the guardians, who also had to pay them; and there- 
was reason to believe that instead of selecting persons- 
outside the sphere of their own influence, they would 
nominate the medical officers of their several districts. 
There was nothing in the Bill which required the guar¬ 
dians to pay these officers for the new duties devolving" 
upon them; they would be mere servants of the Board, 
and would have no power to carry out the sanitary 
measures they might think necessary. 
Mr. Muntz suggested that clauses should be inserted 
for the purpose of guarding against the adulteration of 
articles of loo 1. 
Sir Charles Adderley expressed a regret that con¬ 
solidation had been postponed, although he hoped it- 
might be accomplished next year; and asked that his 
Bill for that purpose might be read a second time that- 
night. He warmly praised the Government Bill, and 
defended the selection of the Boards of Guardians to ex¬ 
ercise the powers in the rural districts, on the ground that 
they were a local authority already in existence, whilst it 
would require considerable time to constitute a new body. 
The discussion was continued by Sir T. D. Acland, 
Mr. Hardy and Mr. AY. H. Smith, who, while criticiz¬ 
ing various details, gave a general support to the Bill. 
Mr. Stansfeld in reply defended the selection of the- 
Boards of Guardians, and protested against the general 
charge of inefficiency that had been made against them, 
in certain quarters. After explaining the various reasons 
that led him to adopt the organization proposed in the 
Bill, he alluded to the appointment of medical officers, 
and said that it was his desire to keep this question as 
far as possible open until some progress had been made 
with the Bill. As soon as he became assured of the precise 
form in which it would issue from the House, he would 
present a supplementary estimate with the view of pro¬ 
viding assistance for the present staff, and to start the local' 
sanitary authorities with an efficient and complete staff 
of inspectors. With respect to the question whether in 
dealing with the pollution of rivers it were possible to- 
lay down any table of chemical tests, he had after con¬ 
sideration arrived at the conclusion that he had better- 
not attempt to draw up a clause binding in all places 
and under all circumstances, and that he would act most 
wisely in so shaping the clause that the matter would 
be left open to the consideration of the House. 
The Bill was then read a second time, as was also tho 
Public Health and Local Government Bill. 
