§ The House went into Committee of Supply.
§ On the question that 40,000l. in aid of county-rates, to defray expense of prosecutions, be granted,
§ Mr. Humeconsidered this a most improper vote. The Government had no control over the expenditure of the county-rates, and they should not give any money, the disposal of which they could not control. The thing was given as a sop to the landed interest, and he did not approve of the principle of the vote.
Mr. Francis Baringsaid, that the principle of the grant had been approved of by the House after a full discussion last year. The proposal of the Committee was, that the whole of these expenses should be paid by the public; but to that the Government objected, as it would have no control over the expenditure. The Government then proposed, that one-half should be paid by the public, and one-half by the county. In that way the Government possessed a check to a certain degree over the expenditure. All the payments were regularly checked at the Treasury before they were made, and the present vote was only half that of last year.
§ Mr. Humesaid, there was nothing but jobbing in the expenditure of counties. Cities and boroughs bore the expense of their prosecutions, and why should not counties?
§ Lord John Russelldid not see the utility of discussing the grant now, after the subject had been before repeatedly discussed and the principle approved of in very full Houses. He agreed with his noble Friend (Earl Spencer), who originally brought forward the grant, that though it was desirable that the whole expense of these prosecutions should be defrayed by the Government, yet, that as the Government would possess no control over the expenditure, it was better that the public should pay only one-half of the expense. He (Lord J. Russell) thought 1058 that it would be very desirable to have a public prosecutor in these cases generally. In consequence of there being such an officer in Scotland, similar cases there were much better conducted than in England. He trusted they might be able to make an experimental trial of the thing at some individual assizes, and if it were found to answer, it would probably be a sufficient check on the expenditure.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the question that 78,000l. for compensation to Danish claimants be granted,
§ Mr. G. Youngwished to know, whether the claimants for losses sustained by ships seized at sea had any chance, after the discussion in that House and the close division that followed, of having their claims granted by the Government?
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, nothing had occurred during the discussion, or since, to alter his conviction. He regretted that he could not acquiesce in those claims, and he wished it to be known, that it was merely from a sense of duty that he resisted them, and not from any want of consideration for the claimants. He was afraid of setting a precedent which would be dangerous to the country. This sum (60,000l.) had been refused simply on the ground of public duty.
§ Mr. Robinsonhad had a great deal of conversation with the parties interested in these claims, and had never heard attributed to the right hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) any other motive for his refusal but his sense of public duty. There was no difference of opinion on this point. It was, however, his duty to say, that he was of opinion, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had come to an erroneous decision in having this matter referred to the law officers of the Crown on a technical ground. It was well known, that if a question were referred peculiarly on technical grounds, unless there was so strong a case made out as to leave no doubt, the law officers of the Crown would give an adverse opinion. The question ought never to have been referred to the law officers. It was a question of equity, and fell peculiarly within the province of the Executive Government to decide. When he remembered that many other claims had been equally pertinaciously resisted for a long time, but were afterwards acquiesced in, he might be excused for expressing a 1059 hope that, notwithstanding the great discouragement in the speech which the right hon. Gentleman had just made, those claims would in the end be liquidated, if on a future occasion the claimants would be able to prove, to the satisfaction of the Government, that their claims were founded in justice.
§ Dr. Bowringwas of opinion, that as the two first classes of claimants had had their claims allowed, the third class should meet with the same justice.
§ Mr. Huttsaid, that he had considered it very probable, there having been only fifty-nine who voted against the claims on the last occasion, when the subject was brought forward, and sixteen of those being members of the Government, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would consider those claims just, and that he would have included them in the estimates. After having deliberately examined the statements made, he considered that there had been the greatest violation of treaty with respect to those claims.
§ Mr. Bainesobserved, that there were many claimants called after time—claimants whose cases he thought deserved consideration. Their claims had not been sent in exactly on the day on which they ought to have been, and were therefore excluded from the benefit of proving their claims. Many persons who had not sent in their claims within the proper time were persons labouring under mental imbecility, produced, in some degree, by circumstances arising out of the poverty in which this transaction had placed them. If any thing could be done for those sufferers, it would be an act of substantial justice on the part of the nation, and he thought he was not asking for much in endeavouring to press on the Government the further consideration of those claims.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that it was necessary in such cases to adhere to some definite rule. The time for putting in claims had been enlarged to double the original time given, and though it might seem a hardship to refuse parties to put in their claims who came a day or two too late, yet it might be a greater hardship on other parties if the rule should be relaxed. He would, however, promise to inquire into the matter.
§ Mr. Humesaid, it should be borne in mind, when they talked of adhering to strict rules, that the unfortunate parties in this instance had been preferring their 1060 applications for thirty years without success, and that many of them had despaired of ever getting justice. The present Government was not answerable for that. It was a former Government that was to blame for allowing this sum of 1,200,000l. to be pillaged from the public coffers, and applied to the unworthy purpose of ministering to the fancies and pleasures of a former Sovereign. The parties to blame were those subservient Ministers who had given up this money to please the Sovereign of the day. He trusted, however, that a reformed House of Commons would do justice to the unfortunate parties who had suffered from such doings. He was as anxious to save the public purse as any man, but where a great injustice had been inflicted, the public should pay for it. The third class of claimants had just as good a case as the other two, and it was injustice to refuse them. He would tell them, however, not to despair, but to persevere, and the House of Commons would finally do them justice.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the question that a sum, not exceeding 8,000l., be granted to his Majesty, towards defraying the expenses of the experiment of establishing a communication with India, by steam navigation, by the Euphrates,
§ Mr. George F. Youngsuggested, that Government should encourage steam communication with India by the Cape of Good Hope, which was always open, and which would be a much more certain route than that of the Euphrates, where the communication might at any time be interrupted by a barbarous tribe.
§ Sir John Hobhousewould endeavour to state the causes of the additional expense that had been incurred. It had arisen in consequence of the unavoidable delay that had occurred in getting the vessel from the coast of Syria. The perseverance of Colonel Chesney had overcome all the obstacles which, he was sorry to say, had been thrown in his way, not only by the Pacha of Egypt, but even, after this, by the officers of the Sultan, who did not give that aid and assistance that had been expected. The consequence of all this was, that, instead of Colonel Chesney being able to set sail in June, it was not till September, 1835, that the larger vessel was launched; and, in consequence of other obstacles from the local authorities, he was unable to put together the smaller 1061 vessel, which had been since unfortunately lost, till the 26th of March, in the present year, when the expedition began the navigation. Government was not prepared to aid the experiment with a large additional grant; but, in consideration of the service and the great importance to the nation and the Government that might be expected from this expedition, they had thought it right to apply to Parliament. The loss of one of the vessels would diminish for some time the expenses of the expedition. He could assure the hon. Gentleman that Government had paid great attention to the subject of steam navigation with respect to India, and had strongly recommended to the East-India Company to co-operate with the efforts making by individuals, aided by the Government, to attain a speedier route to India: for he was well aware that nothing but a combined effort would avail to conquer the difficulties of the case. The civilisation of India was of the utmost consequence to England; but he felt it impossible to expect, that our arts should extend there very rapidly till a change of system brought India within our speedier reach. The quickest steam voyage by the Cape now occupied seventy-five days to Bombay, while that by the river Euphrates, or; better, by the Tigris, might be accomplished in from forty-two to fifty-two days: or an average of forty-six or forty-seven. While the Government had such fair assurances of success by these routes or by Suez and the Red Sea, he felt that they would not be justified in abandoning the trial in which they had already succeeded to such an extent, and by which he expected that during six months of the year the mails might be transmitted with such a saving of time to our eastern possessions.
§ Mr. BuckinghamSaid, that having had occasion to traverse personally, both these routes to India, namely, that by the Euphrates, and that by the Red Sea, and being, therefore, practically acquainted with each, he was prepared to say, that great advantages would be derived by England and by India, in establishing the practicability of a steam communication by both. The difficulties presented by the former were, no doubt, the most considerable; for, besides the length of the land journey from the coast of Syria to the Euphrates, by way of Aleppo and Bir, the opposition of all the local authorities along the entire line of the route, might 1062 be expected to be formidable. Nor need the House wonder at this, because the Asiatic nations looked with extreme jealousy towards all the proceedings of Eng land within their territories; a jealousy in which they were strengthened by casting their eyes towards India, and seeing what we had done there. There was not a Prince or a Pacha throughout the east, who did not know that two centuries ago we had been permitted, by the grace and favour of the sovereigns of India, to occupy a few mercantile stations on their coasts as mere traders; and that, in return for this favour, we had, step by step, so encroached on their territory, as at length to have dethroned every sovereign, uprooted every power, and plundered every treasury, taking entire possession of the whole country, to which we had no greater right, in justice or in honour, than the Hindoos had to the soil of Great Britain; and knowing this, which all the Asiatics did, they regarded us only in the light of a nation "going forth conquering and to conquer." They knew our superiority in arms—they were acquainted with our superiority in arts, and they believed our only object in sending these expeditions through their country was, to explore their weak points and make preparations for some intended seizure of their territory. As proof, indeed, of how much this spirit of encroachment still continued to influence the minds of persons in power, the right hon. Baronet (Sir John Hobhouse) had let fall the expression, "that it was true we had not yet got possession of these countries;" to which he (Mr. Buckingham) would venture to add, the hope that we never should; as he regarded robbery in the gross to be quite as criminal as robbery in detail. [Sir John Hobhouse had merely used this expression in joke.] But the oppressed inhabitants of India felt that the usurpation and occupation of their country by armed strangers was no joke, but a matter of earnest and deep affliction to them. This jealousy, he believed, would for years to come still operate to create difficulties in the way of the route by the Euphrates; though, if those difficulties should ever be overcome by a more just policy than had hitherto been pursued by us in the East, he believed that considerable benefit to commerce and civilisation might result from the intercourse between Great Britain and India by the Mesopotamian route. The passage by the Red Sea, was, however. 1063 free from many of those difficulties, and by that the intercourse might at once be begun. It was true that on looking at the charts of this Sea the rocks and shoals seemed abundant, but while these presented formidable obstacles to the navigation of sailing ships which might have to cross the Sea while beating or tacking against contrary winds—they would not offer the slightest impediment to steamers, because there was a fair and open passage in the central channel, up which a steamer might proceed in a straight line, and the extreme clearness of the water, the most transparent in the world, made the navigation by the eye so safe as to remove almost every risk of danger. Even in this route, however, there was one great difficulty, namely the total absence of all supplies of fuel, whether from coal or wood—there being neither to be found along the, whole coast from the straits of Babel-Mandel up to Suez. To overcome this, the only resource was to have depots of coal at the several stations in the way; but this would place the vessels entirely in the power of the local authorities, who might exact any terms they chose for this accommodation. In the early history of Indian navigation it was the custom for the governors at the different ports to order the rudder of every ship anchoring in their harbour to be taken off and brought on shore: and this was not delivered up again until the commander had paid all the dues demanded of him. Now, the coals of a steamer are as indispensable to her as her rudder: and accordingly whoever has the power over these at the several depots, can literally prevent the steamer proceeding on her voyage until the dues exacted (whatever they may be) are discharged. Add to this, the instability of the Arabian and Egyptian governments, and the uncertainty as to the policy of their successors—with the frequency of the plague at Cairo and Alexandria—and it would be seen that even by this route all was not so smooth and easy as might be desired. There was yet another passage, however, which ought to be tried for steam voyages—he meant that by the Cape of Good Hope. Here, at least, the highway of the ocean was clear and uninterrupted. No political jealousies or local authorities would interrupt this; and as the practicability of going to India round the Cape by steam had been fully proved in the case of the Enterprize, though sailing 1064 under the greatest disadvantages, he could not help thinking that it was an object well worthy the attention of his Majesty's Government to fit out a steam frigate or two, specially adapted for this service, and send them out to demonstrate not merely the practicability—for that could no longer be doubted—but the speed and regularity with which such a communication could be kept up. He was aware of the great reluctance of the Admiralty to patronise any expeditions not originating with themselves; and he thought the whole country behind many foreign nations in the right appreciation of the value and importance of such expeditions: though many thousands were now and then lavished on undertakings of little practical utility to navigation or commerce—witness the immense sums expended on the expeditions to the Polar Seas. To shew this reluctance of which he complained, he (Mr. Buckingham) would remind the House that some few years ago—in 1830—he submitted the plan of an expedition for exploring the almost unknown regions and coasts of the east of China and the adjacent seas: and when he solicited from the Admiralty the use of two or three of the dismantled and unemployed ships of the navy, then lying idle in the Thames or the Medway, on condition that all the expenses of their equipment should be borne by the merchants and manufacturers of England, and their return to the Admiralty after the voyage guaranteed by the parties fitting them out—the use of these empty ships was refused, though Government would have saved rather than lost by such a step, as every one of them incurs an annual cost to keep them in their present condition. He was the more disposed to regret this false economy on the part of the Government of his own country, when he saw that since the period alluded to, the Russians had fitted out an expedition of the same kind, and for the same quarter, which was now pursuing its researches: the Russians had been since followed by the French, whose squadron had already sailed for the Eastern Seas: and America was now on the point of doing the same thing, as he had read in the Morning Chronicle of the day before yesterday. He thought these undertakings highly honourable to the countries originating them; and he was only sorry that Great Britain, boasting, as she did justly, of her great maritime superiority to all the 1065 nations of Europe at least, should be behind them all, in applying that maritime superiority to such noble and useful purposes as these. The right hon. Baronet (Sir John Hobhouse) had urged it as a strong argument in favour of improving the intercourse between Great Britain and India, that it could not fail to promote the civilisation of the latter country, by making them better acquainted with the superior knowledge of the former. Now the House would perhaps forgive him for reminding the right hon. Baronet that he (Mr. Buckingham) was once a humble instrument employed in the sincere and earnest endeavour to promote that very civilisation of India, for which he (Sir John Hobhouse) seemed now to be so anxious. The House would also readily remember, what was the severe punishment inflicted upon him (Mr. Buckingham) for thus venturing to anticipate the right hon. Baronet's wishes: as well as the still more remarkable fact, that the sting of this punishment was rendered additionally severe, by the right hon. Baronet himself, who having the power in his own hands to redress the evil, resisted every appeal for consideration, and gave his sanction to the injustice, by denying and refusing the compensation which a Committee of the House of Commons, under the sanction of his predecessor, had unanimously awarded.
§ Mr. Humehad stated that he had no objection to 20,000l. of the public money being applied to a scientific expedition; but, at the same time, he was satisfied from what he knew of the route by the Euphrates, that the Government would not be able to depend on it as a fit transit for goods. What he would submit was, that the Board of Control should direct a certain number of individuals who should, as soon as the information could be obtained, or as soon as Colonel Chesney returned, institute a full inquiry into all the facts, to ascertain what the real difficulties were, and what the expense would be; 50,000l. or 100,000l. was nothing to a commercial country like England, when compared with the benefits that would result from such a measure being carried into effect.
§ Mr. Ewartthought that Government should be liberal in the support of such an experiment as was now being made for 1066 opening a more rapid communication with India.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ The next vote was, that a sum not exceeding 1,940l. be granted for the civil establishment of the Bahama Islands.
§ Mr. Humedid not rise to make any objection to this vote, but he hoped that on an early day next Session a Committee would be appointed to investigate the subject. The great evil of the Colonial Governments was, that they were too much under the influence of the Government of Downing-street. It was a great misfortune that they should have to pay the expenses of all the colonies, and that not one of them was satisfied; that they were all full of complaints, and some of them in a complete state of rebellion, owing to bad government. They ought to have a colonial budget as well as an Indian budget, and a Committee ought to be appointed to see whether any and what reduction could be made. He wished to remind the hon. Baronet (the Under Secretary for the Colonies) that he had suggested to him the propriety of adopting some means of informing that House of every colonial appointment that took place before the parties appointed left England. What he recommended them to do was, to stop the supplies when they were backward in giving information.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the vote of 20,000l. for the Indian department in Canada being proposed,
§ Mr. Leaderremarked, that it had been clearly proved before the Committee on colonial and military expenditure, that this establishment was a mere sinecure. With regard to the 16,000l. of the grant expended on presents to the Indians, it had been shown that it produced a most injurious effect on their character and manners, the money being entirely consumed in drunkenness and debauchery. He hoped that the amount of the vote would be gradually diminished.
§ Sir George Greysaid, that the Committee had recommended that the grant should be only taken provisionally, and accordingly the present sum was to be only conditionally applied. He believed, that in the course of a year or two the grant would be entirely abolished.
§ The vote agreed to.
§ On the question that 50,528l. be granted for salaries, etc. to the officers of the Houses of Lords and Commons,
1067§ Mr. Hawestook the opportunity of suggesting to the Chancellor of the Exchequer the propriety of having some alteration made in the present House of Commons during the recess, with a view to its better ventilation, and also with a view to the improvement of sound. At present the difficulty of hearing was so very great that Members sitting even immediately behind the Treasury benches were frequently unable to hear what was going on, more especially so when draughts of hot air, issuing from the ventilators in the floor of the House, passed along through the centre of it.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequeradmitted the difficulties complained of, but feared the alterations which would necessarily be required to obviate them were almost impracticable. The ceiling, in the first place, should be lowered to the level of the windows; the windows in such case should also be moved—an alteration which he apprehended the walls might not sustain. This should be followed by the lowering of the galleries which appeared to him all but impracticable.
§ Mr. Humeobserved, that he had lately consulted many eminent architects respecting the construction of buildings, and he was free to confess that they all differed in their opinions as to the best mode of securing the advantages now sought by the proposed alteration. He could not, therefore confidently suggest any plan for the consideration of hon. Members, but, without any of the alterations alluded to by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he thought that very great improvement might be effected by some slight changes in the interior of the House. Such was his opinion regarding its present state, that he felt convinced any experiment would be for the better.
§ Mr. Warburtonexpressed his inclination to leave the matter to the discretion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer: recommending him at the same time, however, to read the evidence of Dr. Reid, and to act upon his suggestions. That gentleman had erected a public shed in Edinburgh, which on trial had proved eminently successful in conveying sound.
§ Dr. Bowringagreed with his hon. friend that some experiment should be made, the more particularly as they were about to erect new Houses of Parliament, in the building, of which they would have the experience and benefit of that experiment. 1068 He, therefore, would suggest that Dr. Reid, who was examined before the Committee, should be called upon to say what alteration could in his opinion be judiciously made in that House.
§ Mr. Wakleysaid, he could suggest several beneficial alterations, which would be, he might say, unattended with any expense. He would, in the first place, have the table removed from its present position, immediately before the Chair, to the centre of the House, at the same time removing the Treasury benches also to the centre; and he would in the next place remove the Chair further back, for it was in itself a great obstacle. He had been in the reporters' gallery himself on occasions when the Speaker was addressing the House, but a single sentence of what the right hon. Gentleman uttered he could not hear. From the situation of the Speaker it was utterly impossible he could be heard, although he by no means spoke in a low tone of voice. These were alterations which could be made without expense, and at no inconvenience. The construction of the House with reference to sound was radically defective, but he would not recommend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to go to any great expense with a view to remove that defect, because he felt convinced any attempt of the kind would fail. If the lowering of the ceiling could be effected at a moderate expense he had no objection to it, but otherwise he should hope merely to see the alterations he had suggested made before the next Session of Parliament.
§ Mr. Buckinghamsaid, that there was a previous question which ought to be determined, before any just decision could be come to as to the matter under discussion, and it was this:—The House should first get rid of the absurd fiction which still formed part of its standing orders, namely, that it was a breach of privilege to take any reports of its proceedings at all. When it had determined, by a rescinding of this absurd order, that it was right and proper that its debates should be reported, it might then apply itself without difficulty to the best method of doing this well. Now, in the debates which took place in this House, there were two objects constantly in view,—the one was, to make such statements of fact and argument as should justify the view taken of the subject, by the individual speaking, and prevail; if possible, upon those 1069 who heard him to adopt his opinions; this might clearly be done without the aid of reporting. The other object of debating was, to inform the whole country of the proceedings of its Representatives; and nothing was more frequent than the admission of this fact in the course of the debates themselves. If so, did it not follow, as a matter of course, that the utmost pains should be taken, not merely to secure the best reporters that the country could furnish, but to place them in the best position of the House for hearing, and still more to place them so effectually under the control of the House, as to ensure their giving a full and accurate report of all that transpired with the utmost impartiality. Was that the case at present; or was it not, indeed, directly the reverse? Not a single reporter engaged in taking down the debates belonged to the House; among them were some of the most skilful, but many also of but moderate capacity—and some that were mere learners in the art. They were placed in almost the very worst part of the House for hearing—and they were under no degree of responsibility or control whatever to the House itself: except, indeed, that they might be brought to the bar for breach of privilege, for presuming to take any report at all, however accurate it might be. What was the natural consequence? Why this, that every reporter took down as much, or as little of the speeches as he chose—thus erecting himself into a censor and a judge—while he omitted altogether any mention even of the names of very many of the Members, and of the fact that they spoke at all. Besides this mangling and mutilation on the part of the reporters, there was the further exercise of the caprice of the editor when these reports got to the office; each editor abridging, or wholly omitting, even the fragments that had been brought to him according to the party bias of the paper he conducted. The reports of the debates in Parliament, as published in the newspapers, were therefore, he would venture to say, amongst the most imperfect, and most garbled, and unfair records of any public proceedings in the whole world: and although those who read the public journals only could not discover this, since they knew nothing but what these journals conveyed to them, yet, whoever passed much of his time in that House, as an actual spectator and auditor of what transpired, and looked into the papers of the following day, must have constantly seen that nearly the half of what was said 1070 and done, was wholly omitted, at the mere discretion of the reporter or editor, and that of the half that was reported, the inaccuracies were excessive, except in the speeches of some particular Members—such as the great leaders of the two political parties, or persons who had other claims on the favour of those, on whose will alone it depended as to who should be heard by the country, and who should not. There was no remedy for this, but that of the House taking the matter entirely into its own hands, when he should be prepared to shew, that with no additional expense to the country, an arrangement might be made that would secure a full, faithful, and impartial report of all their proceedings under the official authority of the House itself, leaving the newspapers to make as much or as little use of this as they thought proper; but presenting an original and authenticated report, for the information of the country, and for the credit of the House itself; to which any one might refer when they chose. On the subject of the best form of the House for hearing, it seemed to be thought by some Gentlemen that the principles of acoustics, as applied to architecture, were at present but imperfectly understood. But there was one fact which was incontrovertible, which was this: that from the construction of the first public theatre by the ancient Greeks, up to the present day, the best form for hearing, had been found to be the semi-circular; and therefore it was, that the Romans, following the Greeks, the Italians following the Romans, and all the modem nations of Europe coming after these, had everywhere constructed their public theatres, in which the facility of hearing well, was of the first importance, in different variations of the semi-circular form. [An Hon. Member, they spoke only from one point.] That might be the case generally; but he had known repeated instances in which speakers had addressed the auditory from different points of the body of the theatre, addressing the stage, and they were just as well heard as persons speaking from the stage itself. Hence it was, that not only in the dramatic theatres of Europe was this the form universally adopted, but in almost all the senate houses, and legislative chambers of the world, it-was preferred. In France, the Chamber of Deputies and Chamber of Peers were both of the semi-circular shape; in Belgium it was the same. In America, the House of Representatives was so constructed; and the theatres of all the literary and scientific institutions 1071 of England, when built expressly for that purpose, were formed on this ancient Greek model—from the Royal Institution, in Albemarle-street, and the London Institution, in Moorfields,—to the Mechanics Institutions in almost every town of the kingdom; and whoever would refer to the beautiful plan of that excellent architect, the late Mr. Goodwin, for a new House of Commons, formed on the model of the horse-shoe semi-circle, contracted at the radius end, and expanding at the circular, engraved as part of the evidence given before the first Committee on building a new House before the fire of 1834, would see how practicable it was, to unite a very high degree of architectural beauty, with the most important requisites, distinct hearing, easy access, and comfortable accommodation; and he hoped that in the construction of the new Houses of Parliament, all these points would be embraced.
§ Dr. Bowringcomplained that discussions in Committee, which would on many occasions prove interesting to their constituents, were not reported. On the present occasion, for instance, when they were voting away public money, he supposed what was taking place would not meet the public eye. He hoped the question would be formally brought forward by his hon. Friend, the Member for Middlesex, with a view to secure full reports of their proceedings as was the case in France and Belgium.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that there should be no neglect on the part of the Government to obtain information respecting the improvement of the House against next Session, and he would, if practicable, be very glad to make some experiment with reference to sound. He hoped the House would not be led away by the observations which had fallen from the hon. Member who had spoken last. He confessed he was satisfied with things as they were. All these conversations in Committee might be very important in the due and necessary discharge of their duty, but of what interest were they to the public? Or, even supposing they were of public interest, and that they were to be reported, where, he would ask, would they find readers for the immense mass of matter which they would amount to in print? It was all very well for hon. Gentlemen to talk of getting the proceedings of Parliament fully reported for the benefit of the public, but pf what utility would it be if they could 1072 not find readers? For his own part, he was disposed to leave to reporters the discretion which they at present exercised, of giving to the public what they conceived the public would take an interest in.
§ Mr. Humeobserved, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer might say what he pleased, but one practical proof was worth a dozen theories; and he therefore begged to direct his attention to the Legislative Assembly of Belgium, where their proceedings were reported in full. [The Chancellor of the Exchequer: How long do they sit?] Five or six hours, but that did not matter, for if they sat ten hours, and their proceedings were important, they would be reported at equal length. He did not mean to say that every word was reported, because that would be unnecessary, but every thing of importance was. He complained of the very different manner in which matters were conducted in this country. It was only last night that they had a discussion of some length on the Benefices Plurality Bill. In conjunction with other Members he had opposed it, and though the Bill went into Committee, the progress made in it there was not very considerable. A gentleman had called upon him that morning, and had told him, that he was much surprised to find, that that Bill, which he suspected would have met with great opposition, had passed the third reading without opposition, according to the report in the Times, which he said, was very meagre and very unsatisfactory. He had not seen that report himself; but if such a statement were contained in that paper, nothing could be more intentionally erroneous. He also complained that after a certain hour in the evening the reporters made a point of stating that the other orders of the day were then disposed of. This led their constituents to believe that they led a very idle life, and did nothing for the country. But if any personal quarrel arose in that House, the report was then given fully and fairly, even to the very words; and then their constituents were led to believe that they formed nothing but a mere meeting of brawlers. In point of fact, things had come to such a pass, that the House must have an organ of its own for the publication of its debates. He would give notice that he would, in the course of next Session, move for the appointment of a Committee to see whether this could not be done. He wanted nothing but facts to appear in the Reports, and to 1073 put a stop to the erroneous statements which went forth at present to the public.
§ Colonel Sibthorpsaid, that all this declamation was used for no other purpose than to make a tedious and unfounded tirade against the reporters. Of all men in the House, none had less reason to complain of the reporters than the hon. Member for Middlesex, for no man was more indebted to them. If they were to measure the reports of the Session by the inch rule, they would find at least a mile of reports headed by the name of that hon. Member. If the hon. Member had spoken more than that, and it had not been reported, it was because it was not worth recording.
§ Mr. Robinsonthought, that this was too large a subject to be discussed now. There was no analogy between the business transacted in the Legislative Chambers of France and Belgium and that transacted in the House of Commons. If the House of Commons were to have authorised reports of its own, it must also have an authorised newspaper. Now, he would take upon himself to say, that no newspaper in that metropolis could report all the matter which occurred in that House with any hope of realising afterwards a profitable sale.
§ Sir Robert Ingliscalled the attention of the Committee and of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the extreme inconvenience to which hon. Members were exposed who had occasion to visit the library in the dog-days. He hoped that something would be done to remedy it.
§ Mr. Aglionbysuggested, that some additional remuneration should be given to those clerks of the House who had attended late and early for the purpose of taking the divisions.
Mr. F. Baringwas not prepared to propose any specific vote for that purpose. He agreed, however, that those clerks were entitled to a fair remuneration for their services. There was a balance of 3,000l. less for the expenses of the House, and he thought that out of that sum this remuneration could be made.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the question that 6,496l. for the completion of the repairs of Buckingham Palace be granted,
§ Colonel Sibthorpprotested against the enormous and prodigal expenditure of public money lavished from time to time towards the repairs of Buckingham Palace. After all, it was doubtful whether 1074 it would ever be occupied; and the country had a right to know whether, in fact, this would be the last grant called for under this head.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequerhoped the Committee would bear in mind, that the present Government were not responsible for the truly enormous sums which had been expended in the repairs of Buckingham Palace. Lord Grey's Government had submitted the whole question to a Committee of that House, and the result of their investigation was, a recommendation that a certain definite expenditure should be fixed. He admitted there had been a most unwise expenditure under this head; and the most ample and becoming accommodation for the Sovereign might well have been produced for much less than half the money. The present vote originated in certain works the charge for which had been matter of dispute, but being now adjudicated on, it was proper, provision should be made for the payment. He did not anticipate that anything material in addition to this vote would be called for.
§ Mr. Warburtonagreed with the gallant Colonel (Sibthorp), that a more scandalous job had never been perpetrated in the country than what had from the beginning been called the repairs of Buckingham Palace, although it was notorious not two bricks of the former building had been left together.
§ Mr. Humehad lately visited Buckingham Palace, and felt bound to say, it was in a much more perfect and satisfactory state than he ever expected to have seen it. It was ready to be inhabited tomorrow. But if Buckingham Palace were to be inhabited, he wished to know what was to be done with St. James's?
§ Mr. Ewartrecommended Government, during the alterations that would be necessary in the present Houses, and the erection of the new, to put St. James's Palace into a state which would supply the requisite temporary acommodation for the meeting of Parliament.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ The next vote was 400l. to defray the expenses of preparing "an adequate portion of the stranger's gallery for the admission of ladies."
The Earl of Lincolnobjected to the vote. He could not help feeling that the subject had been brought forward as a mere joke, and it was never supposed by the majority 1075 of the House that the proposition would be adopted.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequerstated, that the Government would not have originated a vote of the kind, but the House had already come to the determination of having a portion of the gallery set apart for ladies. He had voted against that proposition; but having found himself in a minority, he had felt it to be his duty to submit an estimate of the expenses of the proposed alteration to the House, and it rested with the Committee to deal with it as it pleased. Neither the arguments urged at the time, nor the subsequent reflection he had given to the matter, had induced him to concur in the proposition.
§ Mr. Freshfieldsaid, so far from the matter being regarded as a joke, that the motion was adopted after the most deliberate consideration had been given to the subject. He was of opinion that it would be highly advantageous to admit well-informed and intelligent women to the discussions of that House. He thought that the knowledge that ladies were present would tend to prevent the recurrence of that want of courtesy which was occasionally manifested during discussions in that House. He could not help feeling that the opposition now made to the vote was rather unfair as the House had already come to a determination in favour of the motion. He begged the Committee to recollect that the proposition had twice been agreed to by the House, and although the noble Lord the Secretary for the Home Department, on both occasions opposed it, yet, on its being carried, stated that, notwithstanding the opinion he entertained on the subject, he felt bound to carry into effect the desire of the House. The only regret that he felt on the subject was the smallness of the estimate, as he did not think that sufficient accommodation could be afforded for such a sum as 400l. The House of Lords on this subject had set an example which should be followed.
§ Mr. Ewartshould like to know whether any hon. Gentleman ever observed any evil or inconvenience result in the Chamber of Deputies in France in consequence of ladies being admitted to hear the debates?
§ Mr. Tookewas of opinion, that the presence of the ladies, instead of having any good effect, would be productive only of [...]sorder and interference with the business of the House, because Members would be 1076 abstracted from their places in order to attend to the accommodation of their female friends. In fact, he thought the plan altogether would endanger that grave and sober temper in which they ought to discharge their duties in that House. He thought it would be much better to let the ladies acquire political intelligence through the ordinary channels, than to bring them there to keep bad hours, and witness proceedings that would not always be agreeable to their feelings.
§ Mr. Philip Howardwould vote against the grant, because he was convinced that the good sense of the country was opposed to making the ladies of England political partisans.
§ Mr. Potterhoped the Members of his Majesty's Government who were present would not go after their leader, the noble Lord, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, who had declared, that he did not mean to give any further opposition to this measure, after the two resolutions of the House in its favour.
§ Mr. Poulett Thomsonsaid, his noble Friend, the Member for Stroud, had stated, that as the House had come to a decision in favour of the question, he did not wish to see it agitated again on the same grounds and in the same manner. But his noble Friend was then perfectly aware, that in order to carry the recommendation of the House into effect, it would be necessary to submit a pecuniary proposition to the House in a Committee of Supply, and that the fate of the recommendation depended upon the result of that proposition. His noble Friend had given no pledge in favour of this plan; on the contrary, he still held the same opinions which he held before the House decided in its favour. He should certainly oppose the motion. He thought they ought not to be guided by what passed in the French Chamber of Deputies—a place which he had visited, and he must say, from the disorder which he there witnessed, he hoped this House would not imitate so bad an example.
§ Viscount Palmerstonsaid, that as he had been appealed to directly, and as the Government seemed divided in opinion on this question, he did not wish to subject himself to the misunderstanding to which his giving a silent vote might give rise. He had a right to say that this was not a Cabinet question. He differed entirely from the sentiments expressed by his right hon. Friends who had spoken on this 1077 occasion, and he voted for the resolution on which the estimate was founded, because he could see no inconvenience that could arise from the presence of ladies during their debates. For the first night or two some trifling inconvenience might perhaps be felt; but after the novelty had worn off they would say of the ladies' gallery, as Mr. Wyndham had said of another gallery when reminded that he could not be heard if he did not speak out, that when he spoke he forgot that there was such a thing as a gallery in the House. It had been said, that the ladies took no interest in the proceedings of that place; but he believed that they took very considerable interest in them, and thinking that no harm could result from their presence, he was anxious that they should be admitted.
§ Sir John Hobhousesaid, that he dissented most decidedly from what had fallen from his noble Friend who had just sat down. He had considered the matter as a mere joke, and he considered it so still, for in his opinion nothing could be more absurd or preposterous than the motion on which the estimate was founded. He had a strong feeling against the proposition, because many things passed in that House, and necessarily in the elucidation of particular measures, which could not be listened to by ladies, and because they ought to have some place to retire to in which they would be relieved from everything like political strife and annoyance. He certainly should not like to be obliged to debate over again in a drawing room the different questions which might be discussed in that House, and if they were to agree to the present proposition he was quite satisfied that it would be impossible to continue society on the footing on which know happily stood. As far as literary knowledge was concerned he was as desirous as any man to extend the means of information to the ladies; but certainly he did not wish to see the peace and comfort of men's homes disturbed by having the discussions of the over night renewed in the day, as would be the case if this proposition were acted upon. France had been alluded to; but without any disparagement to France, he should be exceedingly sorry to see the state of society in that country transferred to this. It was in his mind most indecent to see high-bred females present during the debates, and when he saw them in the House of Lords he had often shuddered. 1078 In the course of a debate it was impossible to prevent allusions from being made which no man could wish his mother, sister, wife, or daughter to hear; and, therefore, considering this, as he did, to be a very bad joke, he hoped the Committee would rectify the mistake into which the House had fallen.
§ The Speakersaid, the House having twice already decided in favour of the admission of ladies to the Strangers' Gallery, I have felt it a matter of great doubt whether or not I ought to give any opinion at all upon the question: but as I have now been specially called upon by the House to do so, I must say, that having well considered the subject, and looking at it as a question of great importance, with reference to the preservation of the order and decorum of our proceedings, and with reference to the influence which may be exerted by such a course on the deliberations of this House, and viewing it also as a question awaiting the confirmation of the Committee this night, I have come to a distinct and positive opinion, that the measure is undesirable. As it is the first time I have expressed my own individual opinion upon this subject, I beg to say, that I have now done so without reference to those whom it may please or displease, but solely in discharge of what I conceive to be my duty to the House. Considering the proposition in all its bearings, I must repeat my decided opinion, that it is most undesirable and inexpedient.
§ Mr. Aglionbythought the only preposterous feature in the whole question was the kind of objection set up to the proposition. He was quite surprised that a Gentleman possessed of the extreme sensitiveness now exhibited by the right hon. President of the Board of Control had never lifted up his voice against the practice of admitting ladies to the lantern of the old House.
§ Sir John Hobhousesaid, it was a practice which had always excited his disgust.
§ Mr. Aglionbysaid it was a great pity, then, that the right hon. Baronet's disgust had not been embodied in words upon some occasion.
Mr. Goulburnmust dissent from the doctrine that because the House had once voted in favour of a particular measure they were bound to adhere to that opinion in Committee of Supply. He was opposed to the admission of ladies to their debates. The admission should be indiscriminate or 1079 select. If indiscriminate, who would wish wife and daughter to be present; and if select, who would wish to undertake the invidious task of excluding particular persons.
§ Mr. Buckinghamhad often heard it remarked out of doors, that the House of Commons was at least half a century behind the rest of the community, in soundness of understanding, and in accuracy of taste and feeling; and he could not help saying that the discussion on this subject gave to his mind a striking confirmation of the justice of the reproof; for he did not believe there was any other assembly in existence—he was quite sure there was no assembly in England—in which the discussion, as to whether ladies might be permitted to be present at their debates, would have been conducted in a spirit of so much contempt for the understandings of women, and so utter a disregard to their intellectual character, as had characterized this debate of the assembled Commons of Great Britain—and he believed that some of the speeches delivered on this occasion, if they were faithfully reported, or indeed if they were reported at all, would be read with the utmost surprise and indignation. To take the speech of the right hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Control (Sir John Hobhouse), a Member of his Majesty's Government, and who, as a Cabinet Minister, was obliged to pay his necessary homage to the Queen;—to hear the expression of his horror and disgust (for those were the terms he used) at the bare idea of any English female taking any interest whatever in politics, one would imagine that the right hon. Baronet must revolt with a horror and disgust more inconceivable still at the country being governed, as probably it soon might be, by a female sovereign, in which case, of course, the right hon. Baronet would instantly resign. To hear the right hon. Baronet talk, one would think, first, that the women of England were at present wholly ignorant, and wholly indifferent to, the public affairs of their country; and next, that by the simple act of admitting some twenty or thirty ladies, chiefly, perhaps, the relatives of Members of that House, occasionally to hear the debates—the whole of the females would be converted into mere politicians—would cease to become good wives and good mothers—and be so many firebrands casting nothing but discord into every circle of society. It was really difficult to say 1080 which of these views was the most remote from the truth; but that they were each entirely devoid of foundation he thought all impartial persons would admit. The women of England, were often as well informed on matters of history and policy as the gentlemen themselves, and quite as competent to form an accurate opinion on the subjects of interest that engaged the public mind; and it was fortunate that it was so; because, having an influence over the conduct of men, through the sources of their affections, the question was, whether that influence was safest when exercised in ignorance, or when based on accurate knowledge. The first assumption of the right hon. Baronet being erroneous—if the second were examined, it would be found to be equally so. It might be thought, indeed, that the question of admitting ladies to hear the debates was now first raised, and that the experiment was now first to be tried—so full was the right hon. Baronet's mind of dreadful apprehensions on this score. But did the right hon. Baronet not know that for centuries past, ladies had been admitted, by an order from the Sergeant-at-Arms, to hear the debates of the House of Commons, in the ventilator of the old House—that for centuries past, ladies had been permitted to fill the body of the House of Lords on the opening and closing of every Session of Parliament—and while Peeresses have the privilege of hearing all the debates from the space behind the throne, and the ladies of Commoners enjoyed the same privilege in the gallery of the House of Lords—and had the right hon. Baronet ever heard it once alleged that this practice had been attended with the slightest inconvenience to others, or productive of the slightest evil to themselves? Indeed it was absurd to suppose, that while the women of England read the public journals, and studied the history of their country, so as to enable them to join in the conversations of men at the dinner table and in the drawing room—any danger could arise from admitting them to hear the debates on the same topics in the House of Commons. The right hon. Baronet said, indeed, that he "thought there would be a species of indecency in admitting the high-bred ladies of this country into the House of Commons. It was not flattering to the House of Commons to hear its proceedings thus characterised by one of its own Members; but for his part, he thought that while the high-bred ladies of 1081 England were permitted to witness the ballets of the Italian opera, and to hear the equivoques and songs which too frequently disgraced our national theatres, the purity of their taste would not be in greater danger by attending occasionally to witness the proceedings of the House of Commons. But he would turn from the effects to be produced on the ladies by their admission, to the influence which their presence would have upon the conduct of the Gentlemen themselves. It was matter of every day observation that in proportion as women were well educated, so were they decorous in the exercise of every feminine virtue, (and he did not believe there were any women in the world superior to the English in this respect); and it was equally matter of constant remark, that their presence operated favourably in restraining the rude and boisterous manners of men. If hon. Gentlemen doubted this, he would only beg them to try the experiment of attending some public meeting at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, where men only constituted the auditors, and attending some other public meeting at Exeter Hall, where females formed an equal portion of the assembly, and they would then see how powerfully the presence of the latter operated to produce order and decorum. For his own part, he had never known an instance to the contrary; and it was his earnest wish and desire that those who were worthy of the society of man as equals at his banquets and festivities, should be regarded as his equals in every intellectual enjoyment—and he was satisfied that the more this was the case, the better it would be for the community at large. So long too, he would observe, as mothers took an important part in the education of their sons, so long was it proper, as their sons must in time become citizens, and perhaps senators in their turn, that mothers should themselves be rightly informed as to those principles which it was desirable that their children should imbibe. The observation, indeed, was often made, that women should have nothing to do with politics, as they were altogether out of their sphere. But he had never heard this observation, without being reminded of the happy reply of the celebrated Madame de Stäel, of whom the following anecdote was told. This distinguished female, as was well known, exercised considerable influence over the political circles of Paris, by the admirable productions of her pen; nor was the influence of her 1082 conversational talents in the society of that capital less powerful in exposing the despotism and restraining the unbridled will of Napoleon, in his most arbitrary days. On one occasion, the Emperor of the French, on receiving her at the Court of the Tuilleries, is said to have complimented Madame de Staël, on her brilliant talents and unrivalled powers—but to have expressed a regret that instead of being confined to literature and the arts, her best and happiest sphere, they were too much devoted to politics, which were beyond a woman's province. To this, the accomplished daughter of Neckar readily replied, "Will your Majesty do me the great kindness of defining what is meant by politics—as a subject to be forbidden to women—and if we agree in the definition, we may enter with greater hope of success on the discussion to which the subject may lead." Napoleon was silent—unwilling probably to commit himself with so able an adversary—when Madame de Staël rejoined and said,—"Perhaps your Majesty will condescend to permit one of your subjects to attempt such definition, and set her right if she errs. By politics I do not mean the noisy disputes which begin and end in ringing changes on the watch words of particular parties in the state, each striving for the mastery, because of the emoluments it brings; but by politics I understand the science of government, and the art of forming such institutions as shall produce the greatest sum of happiness to those who live under them. Is this a subject on which your Majesty will venture to say that women ought to have no knowledge, and in which they can have no share? Besides forming our own sex, an equal half of the number of created beings in the world, and on the score of numbers alone, entitled to some attention, do we not stand in the endearing relations of daughters, sisters, wives, and mothers to the other half of the creation? Can your Majesty then say, that when by mistaken policy and bad government, our fathers, brothers, husbands, and sons, are condemned to exile or imprisonment, or are rendered in any way unhappy by the unjust exercise of power, that we shall not weep for their misfortunes, and sympathise with their sorrows; and if they can be made happy by good government, shall we not take an interest in promoting it, and share with them their triumphs and their joys? If your Majesty 1083 can root out and destroy those ties of nature which make us feel for the misery or the happiness of others, then may you interdict the subject of politics from female consideration; but till you can do this, women of education will feel and think on all that can ameliorate the condition of their fellow-creatures; and to make them feel and think rightly, it is well that their judgments should be called into exercise on correct principles and accurate information." He would apply the admirable reasoning of Madame de Staël to the present case; and he thought that all who admitted the soundness of her reasoning, would vote with him for the proposition before the House, which was to admit of proper accommodation being afforded to the ladies of England to hear the debates of the House of Commons—the adoption of which would do them honour, and the rejection of which would, he thought, be a standing reproach to all those who should vote for their exclusion.
§ Viscount Howickwas quite prepared to support the proposition upon the general principle involved. He must confess that he could by no means attach the same importance to excluding females from the gallery of the House which was expressed by his right hon. Friend. On the contrary, he thought that the desire of ladies to hear the debates in Parliament, or to listen to the speeches of those in whom they took an interest, was not only very natural, but very laudable, and he was quite ready to promote it.
§ Colonel Sibthorpsupported the proposition. He had seen ladies of the highest rank attending at courts of justice, and why should they not be allowed to be present in the House of Commons?
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 28; Noes 42: Majority 14.
| List of the AYES. (Not-official.) | |
| Baring, F. T. | Philips, M. |
| Bernal, R. | Potter, R. |
| Blake, M. J. | Richards, R. |
| Bowring, Dr. | Robinson, G. R. |
| Brotherton, J. | Ruthven, E. |
| Buckingham, J. S. | Sibthorp, Col. |
| Burdon, W. W. | Smith, B. |
| Butler, Col. | Tancred, H. W. |
| Crawford, S. | Thornley, T. |
| Ewart, W. | Tulk, C. A. |
| Freshfield J. W. | Villiers, C. P. |
| Hindley, C. | Wakley, J. |
| Hume, J. | Williams, W. |
| Howick, Lord | TELLER. |
| Palmerston, Viscount | Aglionby, H. A. |
| List of the NOES. | |
| Baines, E. | Morpeth, Lord |
| Baring, T. | Morrison, J. |
| Blamire, W. | Murray, J. A. |
| Bonham, F. R. | O'Ferrall, M. |
| Brady, D. | Parnell, Sir H. |
| Carter, B. | Perceval, Colonel |
| Chalmers, P. | Pusey, P. |
| Donkin, Sir R. | Ross, C. |
| Fremantle, Sir T. | Seale, J. H. |
| Gladstone, T. | Seymour, Lord |
| Gordon, R. | Shaw, F. |
| Goulburn, H. | Smith, V. |
| Grey, Sir G. | Spry, Sir S. |
| Hector, C. J. | Stewart, P. |
| Hobhouse, Sir J. | Thomson, P. |
| Inglis, Sir R. | Thompson, Alderman |
| Labouchere, H. | Tooke, W. |
| Lennox, Lord G. | Warburton, H. |
| Lynch, A. H. | Woulfe, Sergeant |
| Macleod R. | Young, G. F. |
| Mangles, J. | TELLER. |
| Maule, Fox | Lincoln, Lord |
§ Grant rejected.
§ On the question that 9,250l. be granted for the purchase of certain etchings and vases for the British Museum,
§ Mr. Wakleysaid, it was worthy of remark that though the Government refused to sanction the vote of 400l. for the erection of a gallery for ladies, in favour of whose accommodation the House had twice decided, the Committee was now called upon for a vote to meet an expenditure that had been made without the authority of the House.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, if the etchings had not been purchased when they were they would have been lost. As a proof of their value he might state that 1,000l. more than the Government gave for them would have been offered the next day by the agent of a foreign power. While he held his present situation he would not hesitate, with a view to the improvement of art, to make a purchase on his own responsibility when the sanction of Parliament could not be obtained.
§ Sir Thomas Fremantlethought, it would have been extremely improper in the Government to have erected a gallery without the sanction of the House, that being a debateable question; but the case was very different with respect to questions on which the House might be expected to be unanimous. For instance it could not be expected that there would be much difference of opinion as to the propriety of securing valuable works of art.
§ Mr. Warburtonbelieved that the purchases of the British Museum were not 1085 always conducted with the greatest judgment. The elite of the collection he understood to have been purchased by the French government: we had bought only the refuse.
§ Mr. Bernaldoubted if the British Museum ever had the power of purchasing the whole collection. This Government laboured under great disadvantages as regarded the purchase of works of art. For every 1,000l. expended by this country in that way, 3,000l. or 4,000l. were expended by France and Austria.
§ Sir John Hobhousethought it a great pity that this great nation had not some authority to secure that which, once lost, could never be obtained.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the question that 1,500l. be granted for a school of design, with a view to the improvement of the national manufactures,
Mr. Williamsobserved, that it would be desirable to extend the advantages of this grant throughout the country. It would be particularly serviceable in the city of Coventry, where a school of design already existed, in connexion with the Mechanics' Institute.
§ Mr. Poulett Thomsonadmitted, that it would be desirable to extend the influence of such institutions through the country, but grants of 40l. or 50l. to each town could be of no use, neither did he wish to see these schools of design in connexion with mechanics' institutes, as the variety of objects there pursued would distract and weaken that attention which, when excellence was the end sought, should be directed to only one object.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ On the question that 38,289l. be voted to the Governor and Company of the Bank of England for losses incurred in 1831 upon the silver coinage.
§ Mr. Humeobjected to the vote. He thought that this was a matter that ought to be explained. He did not understand why they ought to be called on in 1836 to defray an expense which it would appear had been incurred in 1831.
Mr. Goulburnobserved, that the Bank was not bound to receive more than 5l. in silver. It had, however, done so, and the question now was, whether the public was to have this advantage and the Bank to be a loser?
Alderman Thompsonremarked, that the Bank, being no more than any other person in the community bound to receive more 1086 than five-pounds in silver, had, however, done so, and this for the accommodation of the public. The consequence was, so great an accumulation of silver, that the Bank was obliged to melt it down for the purpose of exportation as bullion. By this means the Bank was a loser often per cent., and the public had that advantage. It was then only fair, that the Bank should be repaid. It was only proposed to give to the Bank five per cent., the half of that which the country had received.
§ Sir Thomas Fremantlestated, that the Bank had served the public greatly. Had 600,000l. which the Bank received, been allowed to remain in the country, the Government could not have received seignorage more than once upon it, while by the transactions of the Bank the Government received seignorage twice upon that sum.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequerregarded this as a very important subject, and he promised that, should he have the honour to fill next year the situation which he then held, he should, having in the mean time consulted with the Master of the Mint, bring it under the consideration of the House. With regard to the delay which had taken place in bringing the subject of the present Resolution under the notice of the House he begged to say, that that was entirely owing to the changes which had taken place in the Government since the minute was drawn up, which was in the time that Lord Spencer was in office, before the dissolution of Lord Melbourne's first Administration.
§ Sir John Reidthought the explanation which had been made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on this subject was in every respect satisfactory, and that it certainly appeared from the right hon. Gentleman's statements that the Bank, instep of being gainers had been losers by this transaction.
§ Mr. Robinsonthought, that the delay which had occurred in bringing this minute under the notice of the House, however some hon. Members might be disposed to complain of it, was in itself no sufficient reason for opposing the present vote.
§ Mr. Humewished to know what possible benefit the public had derived from the melting down of this coin, as on that depended the whole gist of the question, and the propriety or impropriety of allowing this vote.
§ Mr. G. F. Youngsaid, there could be no doubt that it was better to melt down this coin than to keep it lying idle in the 1087 coffers of the Bank; but the question was, who had the benefit from so doing? He thought the Bank.
§ Mr. Humethought the delay which had occurred in bringing forward the minute which had taken place in respect to this proceeding was highly reprehensible; and he should therefore move, that the further discussion on the question be postponed until all the information connected with it was produced.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequerhoped, the hon. Member would be satisfied if he got the information he sought for by the time the report was brought up, the House would then have an opportunity of disagreeing to the vote, if the information adduced on the subject were not satisfactory.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ The House resumed.