HC Deb 06 March 1839 vol 45 cc1378-80

Mr. Robert Steuart moved, that a Select Committee be appointed, with a view to consider and report to this House what steps are advisable to be taken with respect to the present state of the Caledonian Canal.

Mr. Hume

was of opinion, that this was devolving upon a Committee of the House a duty which ought to be discharged by her Majesty's Ministers.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

thought, that if the Government had come down to the House for a vote, with a view to carry into effect the recommendations contained in Mr. Walker's report respecting the Caledonian Canal, the hon. Member for Kilkenny would have been the first to have suggested that before a work of that extraordinary nature, and before the recommendations of what might be called an extraordinary report, were adopted, the entire subject ought to be referred to a committee of the House, in order that inquiry might be made. The House, should remember, that this work was a matter for which the present Government were not responsible. They were not the originators of the Caledonian Canal. But as it was well known that not only the preservation of the work but also the ruin or safety of a vast tract of country might depend upon the course taken by the Government, it was absolutely necessary that some definite steps should be adopted; and he thought no better course could be pursued than that of first obtaining the opinion of a select committee of the House of Commons.

Sir R. Peel

thought the objection of the hon. Member for Kilkenny a perfectly just one. The proposal was not (according to the terms of the notice) that a Select Committee should be appointed to consider the state of the Caledonian Canal, and to make such observations upon it as they might think proper, which would have been the correct mode of wording the motion; but it was "to refer the report of Mr. Walker on the state of the Caledonian Canal, and the annual report of the Commissioners of the Canal to a Select Committee." Now, he had never seen such a motion as this. There was no definition of what the functions of the Committee were, or what they were to do. If they were required to receive evidence on the state of the Caledonian Canal, and then have referred to them the reports of Mr. Walker and the Commissioners, then he should not have the least objection to the appointment of the Committee.

Mr. R. Steuart

admitted, that the notice of motion was as the right hon. Baronet had stated; but the words of his motion were precisely those which he had suggested. By a subsequent motion he intended to refer the report to the Committee.

Motion agreed to, and Committee appointed.