Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Bethnal Green]
This page requires JavaScript
5
statute, which provided a different punishment for the same
offence, and a different mode of enforcing it; and Lord Chief
Justice Campbell, in delivering the Judgment of the Court, thus
expresses the rule which governs such cases: " If," he says, " a
later statute again describes an offence created by a former statute
and affixes a different punishment to it varying the procedure, etc.,
giving an appeal where there was no appeal before, wo think that
the Prosecutor must proceed under the later statute. If the later
statute expressly altered the quality of the offence as by making
it a misdemeanour instead of a felony, or a felony instead of a
misdemeanour, the offence could not be proceeded for under the
earlier statute, and the same consequences seem to follow from
altering the procedure and punishment. The later enactment
operates by way of substitution and not cumulatively giving an
option to the Prosecutor or Magistrate."
It was suggested, however, that section 73 of the Metropolis
Local Management Act, 1862 (20 and 26 Victoria, chapter 102),
has exproesly applied the provisions of the 07 of George the Third,
chapter 29, to the whole Metropolis, including St. Matthew,
Bethnal Green; but that section in terms only applies to the later
Act, " so far as the same is in force and is not inconsistent with
the provisions of the recited Act that is, namely, 18 and 19
Victoria, chapter 120, and of this Act; " and for the reasons wo
havo given wo regard tho provisions of section 72 of tho earlier
Aot as inconsistent with those of section 119 of tho later.
Upon this ground, therefore, wo aro of opinion that tho
conviction must bo quashed; but wo think that wo ought also to
express our opinion on the second point raised, for unless tho
Appellant is correct in his contention that the projections
complained of aro authorised by tho Metropolitan Building Act,
1855 (18 and 19 Victoria, chapter 122, section 26), fresh
proceedings oould at onoe bo taken against him (unless barred by
lapse of time), under section 119 of the Metropolis Local Management
Aot, 1855. This quostion, however, has already beon the