The Lord Advocateof Scotland moved, that the house should go into a committee on the report of the committee in 1803, for erecting a light-house on the Bell Rock on the east coast of Scotland. The learned lord stated that the measure, though universally admitted to be highly advantageous to the shipping interest, and though agreed to by the house in 1803, 861 had failed of being carried into effect, in consequence of circumstances which did not now apply. His lordship then moved that it be the opinion of the committee that a lighthouse be erected on the Bell Rock, or Cape, on the east coast of Scotland; near the entrance to the Forth and Tay.
§ Lord H. Pettyseemed to doubt of the necessity of the measure. On an explanation from the lord advocate, however, he stated that what he had thrown out, he did more in conformity to the opinion of the first lord of the admiralty, than to any opinion he himself had entertained.
Mr. Bakerdid not pretend to be Competent to judge on the subject, but as it seemed to be intended that part of the public money should be expended on the erection, he wished the learned lord would more clearly point out the utility of the measure.
The Lord Advocatereferred for the utility of the measure to the report of the committee in the year 1803. He had no doubt the hon. gent. opposite would have no objection to the measure, if the erection could be made without money. Nay, he conceived it to be a self-evident proposition, that in a mercantile country there could be no objection, if it could be done without expense, that a light should be fixed on every rock in the ocean. The report of the committee, in the present case however, shewed that here there was peculiar danger; that seldom a vessel came near it without being almost instantly dashed to pieces; and that from the circumstance of its being covered at half tide, there was hardly an instance where such an occurrence took place, but every soul perished.
§ Mr. Percevalexpressed his surprize that the business had been so long delayed. He also thought, if, as was stated the preceding night, no measure could be extended to Scotland at this period of the session, there was no call on the house at so late a period to confer a boon on that country.
The Lord Advocatesaid, he should be able to show, if it should afterwards come before the house, that the measure alluded to was inapplicable to Scotland. He declared that he had no particular predilection for the present measure, which he only brought forward in the discharge of his duty as representing that part of the 862 country where the beneficial effects of the measure would be most felt. As to the subject of money for carrying on the erection, that was not now before the house. The only question was, if it would be advantageous that the erection should take place. Besides the funds from Which it would naturally fall to be supported, he understood they would be entitled to a farther sum from the commissioners for northern lights.
§ Mr. Johnstonerecollected that his hon. relation (sir W. Pulteney) had formerly carried through this measure, and had shewn to the house that it would be highly advantageous to shipping in general, particularly to those ships trading from Hull and Scarborough.
Mr. W. Smithconfirmed the statement. The cause of the former measure not succeeding, was an idea entertained of comprehending the Baltic trade among the ships which were to pay a certain per tonnage, which was objected to. The house, would be better able to judge of the matter when the estimates came in. The resolution therefore had his concurrence.—The committee then passed resolutions declaratory of the advantages which would result from the erection of the lighthouse in question; and that there be paid for every British vessel passing in the line pointed out, being between Peterhead and Berwick-upon-Tweed, a duty of 1½d. per ton, and for every foreign vessel so passing 3d. per ton.