§ House in Committee on the Louth Australia Bill.
§ Mr. Humeexpressed his strong disapprobation of the manner in which the colony had been governed from the time of Lord Glenelg downwards. He accused Colonel Gawler of extravagance, and the Colonial Ministers of mismanagement and carelessness. They had all acted wrongly, and yet none of them would bear the responsibility of their misdoings. The colony had been involved in the greatest distress, and its credit had altogether gone. Money had not been borrowed when it might have been lent with safety, and now a loan had been asked for and granted at a time and in a manner the most unsuitable, unfair, and inexpedient. What he proposed was, that the colony should still be held liable for the money which had been given to it; and he would, therefore, move that the clause relieving it from its liabilities be omitted.
Lord Stanleysaid, that it was no part of his duty to defend the conduct of those 342 who had preceded him in office, and to whom the mismanagement of the colony must be attributed, but he could not go the length to which the hon. Gentleman had gone, either in his attack upon Lord J. Russell the other night, or upon Lord Glenelg to-night. He thought the mismanagement of the colony was to be attributed, not to one Colonial Minister or to another, but to the House of Commons and to Parliament. But the question now really was, how could that mismanagement be altered, and its evil consequences to some extent remedied? As to Colonel Gawler, he confessed that he had not exactly pursued the course which he should have recommended. His conduct had perhaps fairly exposed him to the charge of extravagance; but that very conduct, that free expenditure of money, had canned his popularity in the colony. But yet it certainly was one of the evils against which they had now to contend. With respect to the omission of the clause as proposed by the hon. Member, he did not think it would answer the purpose for which it was intended. He believed that to make them colony liable in case of any surplus revenue accruing at a future period would be a mode of proceeding calculated to extinguish the energies of the colonists.
§ The committee divided on the question that the clause stand part of the bill. Ayes,;73 Noes, 10; Majority, 63.
List of the AYES. | |
A'Court, Capt. | Fitzmaurice, hon. W. |
Ainsworth, P. | Fuller, A. E. |
Baldwin, B. | Gaskell, J. M. |
Bankes, G | Gill, T. |
Baring, hon. W, B. | Gladstone, rt. hn. W. E. |
Bateson, R. | Gordon, hon. Capt. |
Blackburne, J. I. | Goulburn, rt. hon. H. |
Bolder, H. G. | Graham, rt. hon. Sir J. |
Brimstone, T. W. | Grimsditch, T. |
Broadley, H. | Grogan, E. |
Brice, Lord E. | Hamilton, W. J. |
Buckley, E. | Hensley, J. W. |
Cardwell, | Herbert, hon. S. |
Cavendish, hon. G. H | Hodgson, R. |
Chute, W. L. W. | Hornby, J. |
Clerk, Sir G. | Hughes, W. B. |
Colvile, C. R. | Hussey, T. |
Crimps, W. | Hutt, W. |
Darner, hon. Col. | Jermyn, Earl |
Denison, E. B. | Jones, Capt. |
Douglas, Sir C. E. | Knatchbull, rt. hn. Sir E. |
Dugdale, W. S. | Leg, G. C. |
Duncombe, T. | Lincoln, Earl of |
Eliot, Lord | Lockhart, W. |
Farnham, E. B. | Mackenzie, W. F. |
Ferguson, Sir R. A. | March, Earl of |
Masterman, J. | Sibthorp, Col. |
Neville, R. | Stanley, Lord |
Nicholl, rt. hon. J. | Stuart, H. |
Patten, J. W. | Sutton, hon. H. M. |
Philips, M. | Taylor, J. A. |
Rashleigh, W. | Tollemache, |
Rice, E. R. | Vesey, hon. T. |
Rose, rt. hon. Sir G. | Ward, H. G. |
Rous, hon. Capt. | Young, J. |
Rundle, J. | TELLERS. |
Rushbrooke, Col. | Pringle, A. |
Russell, J. D. W. | Baring, H. |
List of the AYES. | |
Aglionby, H, A. | Scholefield, J. |
Bowring, Dr. | Thornely, T. |
Brotherton, J. | Wawn, J. T. |
Cobden, R. | |
Crawford, W. S. | TELLERS. |
Gibson, T. M. | Hume, J. |
Morris, D. | Wood, B. |
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Bill passed through the committee.
§ House resumed. Report to be received.