HC Deb 15 July 1836 vol 35 cc234-5
Sir A. L. Hay

presented the report on the petition for leave to bring in a Bill for forming a harbour at Trinity. He then moved for leave to introduce the Bill.

The Attorney General

opposed the motion on the ground of the lateness of the session, and said that the rules laid down by the House with respect to notices and subscribers had not been observed.

Sir A. L. Hay

contended that the previous Bill brought in this session had not been thrown out upon the merits, but merely on the ground of informality, the House of Lords having made a pecuniary amendment. All that was now asked was, what had been granted in the previous cases of the Leith Police Act and Glasgow Gas Act. The measure, in various shapes, had been already three years before the House, and the object was merely to re-introduce the Bill, which in an amended shape had been approved by both Houses of Parliament.

Sir G. Clerk

opposed the introduction of the Bill. He did not deny, that the promoters of it were highly respectable, but asserted that they were much better known on the Stock Exchange than in Edinburgh. He contended that the old harbour of Leith might be improved in such a manner as to answer every purpose, and called upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer to interfere in consequence of the large sum of the public money risked by the new undertaking.

Sir Edward Codrington

remarked, that the difficulty having arisen out of a clause moved by the hon. Baronet, he ought not to object to the introduction of a new Bill which would remedy the defect.

Mr. Hume

said, that the clause out of which the rejection arose had been frequently before a noble Lord in the other House, who had not objected to it as long as it seemed likely that the Bill would not pass. When it became probable that the Bill would pass, the objection had been raised. He did not mean to impute motives, but merely to state his own impression of the fact. The inhabitants of Edinburgh were naturally opposed to the undertaking of making a new harbour to the detriment of the old, but the real question was, whether the House would sanction a measure which would give to the trade of Scotland the accommodation it required.

Ayes 73; Noes 56: Majority 17.

Leave given to bring in the Bill.