§ Mr. Mellishmoved the third reading of the Gas Light bill, but at the same time prayed the indulgence of the house in allowing him to propose five new clauses; and that the house would take the debate upon the question that the bill do pass. He read the clauses in his place.
§ Sir J. Anstruthersaw no necessity in the present case to depart from the usual mode of proceeding; and hoped the house would not encourage a custom which had prevailed of late; namely, that of keeping back the principal clauses of private bills until the very last stage, and there proposing them by surprize upon the house.
§ Mr. D. Giddydelared himself decidedly averse to this bill; first, upon the general principle of granting chartered monopolies to any great body of men, to the preclusion of all competition. He would admit there might be some exceptions, in cases where great advantages to the public must manifestly arise, and where the fortunes of a few individuals must be inadequate to the accomplishment; in the case for instance of a great aqueduct, for the supply of a city, such as the New River, or of a canal, as the West India Docks, or such great undertaking, where the public advantage was clear, and the profits within some calculation. But upon such an undertaking as the present, where, however ingenious the plan, the practicability was problematical, and no estimation produced to prove it capable of adoption to any thing like the extent proposed, he was against the sanction of parliament being given to the measure, for the purpose of procuring immense subscriptions to an undertaking, which, on the face of the plan, seemed unmanageable by any act of directors; for it appeared that in the parish of St. James's alone, six different establishments would be required to furnish the light, and that the expence of lighting by Gas would cost 550l. a year more than by oil. What, then, must the number of establishments be for all London, and where was the advantage to the public, supposing the plan practicable? It might turn out ultimately a second South Sea bubble. He could not at all events, agree to autho- 861 rize the company to receive subscriptions to an amount which would enable them to monopolize oil, coal, and the oilier materials which afforded the public an alternative, in order to drive them into the adoption of this scheme, the failure of which would entail disgrace upon the nation. He concluded by moving, that the bill, instead of now, be read the third time this day three, months.
The bill was also opposed by sir James Hill, Mr. Thompson, of Hull, Mr. Hall, and Mr. Babington.
§ Mr. Wilberforceopposed the bill. It was not necessary, he observed, to re sort to charters to procure capital. He would not encourage these gambling projects, by which men were to be princes or beggars, in a moment. He could not avoid directing the attention of the house to the extravagant expectations that were held out in a pamphlet recommending this plan. Among other impudent impositions, it was endeavoured to be shewn, that it would produce, in the course of a short time, no less than 10,201,741l. 13s. 2d. in the way of taxes. In the same statement, the annual profits, after a certain period, were calculated at two-hundred and ninety-nine millions. He considered it as one of the greatest bubbles that had ever been imposed on public credulity. He could compare it to nothing so well as the Ayr Bank, the loss by which was immense to the public, and had involved in difficulties, for years, most of the great landed proprietors of Scotland.
The house having divided, the amendment was carried by a majority of 52 to 38. The bill was consequently lost.