Commons Sitting of 2 February 1846

MINUTES.
NEW WRIT. For Rutland, v. Hon. W. H. Dawnay, Chiltern Hundreds.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1°. Bequests for Pious and Charitable Purposes; Fishery Piers and Harbours (Ireland).
2°. Drainage, &c. (Ireland).
PETITIONS PRESENTED. From Paper Manufacturers of Scotland, for Alteration of the Excise Laws affecting the Manufacture of Paper.—From Nuneaton, Hartshill, Sunderland, and Milngavie, for Repeal, and from Rainton, against Alteration, of the Corn Laws.—From York and Carlisle, for Remission of Sentence on Frost, Williams, and Jones.—From Bolton (7 Petitions), Headfield (6), and Heap (8), for Limiting the Hours of Labour in Factories—From Romaldkirk, and several other places, against Enrolment of the Militia.

THE PRITCHARD INDEMNITY.
SIR C. NAPIER, in reference to the question of which he had given notice on Thursday, wished to know whether any settlement had been made with the French Government respecting the indemnity to Mr. Pritchard.
SIR R. PEELsaid, he could explain to the gallant Officer what had taken place respecting the Pritchard Indemnity. The gallant Officer was, of course, aware that the principle of compensation to Mr. Pritchard had been admitted by the French Government. It was agreed that the amount of that indemnity should be determined by the two commanding officers of England and France in the Pacific. Sir G. Seymour, on the part of England, and Admiral Hamelin, on the part of France, had proceeded to make inquiries on the spot as to the amount of compensation due. Mr. Pritchard had rendered an account of it to them, but as some items of that account had not been sufficiently explained, they had requested him to supply them with some additional information with respect to them. Mr. Pritchard was subsequently removed to the Navigators' Island, where he had been appointed consul. But he had every reason to hope that when the additional information should have been supplied, a settlement would take place. There was no question at all as to the principle of granting compensation.

ENTAILED LANDS (SCOTLAND).
MR. B. COCHRANEsaid, that he was desirous of asking a question of the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government. He wished to know whether the right hon. Gentleman intended to include in his financial measure any facilities to the holders ef Scotch entailed property to improve their estates. And in reference to his question he begged to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to that clause of the general law of Scotch entail which called upon the proprietors of entailed property to invest any amount of compensation which they might receive for damage done to their property by railway or similar undertakings, in the Bank of Scotland. He would take the liberty of suggesting, that if there was to be any alteration in the law of entail, the owners of entailed estates should be able to apply that money for the purpose of fencing, draining, and otherwise improving the land. This would be of great advantage, not only to the landowner and tenantry,

425
but also to the next heir, for whose benefit, the clause to which he had referred was intended.
SIR R. PEEL: In answer to the question put to me by my hon. Friend, I beg to state that Her Majesty's Ministers are desirous of giving to the landed proprietors of Scotland in principle the same advantage they propose to give to the landed proprietors in England, with respect to increased means of draining their estates by loans from Government. He asks me another question, which I rather think is founded upon erroneous impressions on his part with regard to the state of the law. I do not believe that in Scotland the obligation to place in the Bank of Scotland that money which may be paid to landed proprietors by railway and other companies interfering injuriously with their estates, rests on the law of entail in that country. I rather think my hon. Friend will find that each separate Railway Bill as it passes does impose an obligation on landed proprietors possessing an entailed estate to deposit the money received from the railway in the Bank of Scotland. The obligation is imposed by each Railway Act, and not by the law of entail. Entailed estates in Scotland are subject to a variety of charges. They may be subject to charges under what is called the Montgomery Act. The possessor of an entailed estate is entitled to charge the reversionary interest with a certain amount, not exceeding three-fourths of the sums expended in permanent improvements, drainage, buildings, fences, &c. By another act, called Lord Aberdeen's Act, the proprietors of entailed estates have the power to charge heirs of entail with certain sums as provisions for widows and children; and by the general law of Scotland, the debts of the creator of the entail are charged on the property. The Lord Advocate introduced last Session into the Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Act a provision which does effect the main object which my hon. Friend (Mr. Cochrane) has in view. Power is given by the Act brought in and passed last Session, which enables the proprietor of an entailed estate receiving money from a railway company to apply it to the discharge of the burdens which may have been constituted on the heirs of entails, either by the Montgomery Act or Lord Aberdeen's Act, or those charges which may appertain to the heirs of entail in consequence of the debts incurred by the creator of the entail. Whether or no it may be desirable to permit the
426
money so deposited to go to the discharge of the loans obtained from Government, I won't now undertake to say.
MR. B. COCHRANEsaid, that it was not generally known in Scotland, that any such power was possessed by the owners of entailed estates as that alluded to by the right hon. Gentleman. At the present moment the banks of Scotland contained a large sum of money paid to landowners as compensation by railway companies.
SIR R. PEELbelieved that there was no obligation by which the deposits could not be taken out of the bank. It ought to be known that the money might be applied to the discharge of burdens on the estate affecting the heir of entail.

THE MILITIA.
MR. T. DUNCOMBEsaid, that the other evening he had put a question to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department, as to the intention of the Government to call out the militia during the present year. He had understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that they had no immediate intention of doing so, but that it was their intention to introduce a new law for the enrolment of the militia, and that in any emergency it should be embodied under the amended law. He wished to ask the Secretary at War whether it was a correct interpretation of the intentions of Government?
MR. S. HERBERTsaid, that he was not present when the hon. Gentleman put his question to his right hon. Friend. A great deal of the misapprehension on that subject had arisen from not drawing the distinction between training and embodying. The Government had no power to embody the militia, but it had a power to call them out for training, and beyond that it was not intended to go. With regard to the present law it was the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill to amend and consolidate the different Militia Acts, and when such a Bill passed it would be in the power of the Government to call out the militia for training. Whether they were called out for training would, of course, depend on circumstances, and upon that point he would rather not give an answer. But it was not the intention of the Government to embody the militia. If called out it would be for training only. On this part of the subject he was anxious to say a word with respect to the formation of militia clubs, which he understood was being carried on in many parts of the country, and

427
which offered, on certain pecuniary considerations, to guarantee to persons drawn by the ballot to provide them substitutes. He would recommend to persons engaged in or joining such clubs to suspend their proceedings until they were aware of the measures which would be introduced by the Government, which, as related to the mode of raising the militia force, would be found much less onerous than the present system of the ballot, which the new Act would put an end to. Under these circumstances, he did hope that all parties interested in this subject would suspend their proceedings until they saw what the Government intended to do.

COLONIAL PRODUCE—FOREIGN SPIRITS.
MR. P. M. STEWARTrose, pursuant to notice, to ask the right hon. Baronet at the head of Her Majesty's Government the questions relative to which he had given notice, or rather for the purpose of calling his attention to the subject, as he did not wish that the introduction of this question should at all interfere with, or be in any manner injurious to the carrying out of the great measure which the right hon. Baronet contemplated. But as the proposed measure contemplated the modification of restrictive duties, as well as removal of protective ones, he only considered it right to refer to the present condition of our own Colonies with regard to some of their productions—namely, rum, molasses, and sugar. The duties upon colonial spirits at present amounted almost to a prohibition. The differential duty between home and foreign spirits in England was 1s. 6d. a gallon, or about 100 per cent. on the value of the article. In Scotland the differential duty was 5s. 8d., or about 450 per cent. on the value of the article; and in Ireland it was 6s. 8d., which was a differential duty between home and foreign spirits of about 500 per cent. on the value. It was this enormous duty in Scotland and Ireland to which he wished to call the attention of the Government. Then, with regard to the other branch of the question of which he had given notice, he had only to remark, that there were two articles the produce of our Colonies adapted to distillation, he meant sugar and molasses, and yet at this moment there was a penalty of 200 l. to which any brewer or distiller rendered himself liable on whose premises such articles might be found; whilst against a great number of deleterious substances no such prohibition existed. He did not wish
428
to demand any specific reply now from the right hon. Baronet; he only wished to throw out these suggestions for his consideration previously to the adoption of his proposed commercial propositions. All these prohibitions to which he referred, so far as could be ascertained from the speech of the right hon. Baronet, remained untouched by his plan. He would not press for a decisive answer now, but merely express a hope that the Government would take these matters into consideration to which he had felt it to be his duty to call their attention.
SIR R. PEELsaid, he might perhaps have remained silent; but he feared some erroneous inference might be drawn from such a course. He had no hesitation, therefore, in at once announcing that at present Government had no intention of lowering the present rate of duties on rum, or altering the existing law with respect to molasses in distilleries. It was true the rate of duties in England, Scotland, and Ireland differed very much. The Government had attempted to lessen this difference some time ago in Ireland, by raising the duty on spirits; but this attempt had been found to materially encourage illicit distillation in that country, and therefore they had restored the law to its original condition, and even lowered the duty on spirits in Ireland. He was sure the hon. Gentleman opposite did not mean to propose that there should be a different rate of duty levied on rum imported into England, Scotland, and Ireland, and such was not the intention of the present Government; if such a thing was done great inconvenience might arise from it. The hon. Gentleman must be aware, with respect to the other branch of his question, that the prohibition against the use of molasses was only in operation with respect to those premises licensed for the distillation of spirits from corn.

DRAINAGE (IRELAND).
SIR T. FREMANTLEmoved the Order of the Day for the Second Reading of the Drainage (Ireland) Bill.
On the Question that the Bill be now read a second time,
MR. F. FRENCHsaid, the impressions which he entertained relative to this measure when it was first announced were fully strengthened and corroborated by a careful perusal of the provisions of this Bill, which had only been printed that morning. He conceived that the landed

429
proprietors of Ireland had great reason to complain of this Bill, which took a good deal of responsibility and discretion, with regard to local improvements in Ireland, out of their hands, and transferred them to a Public Board. A former measure, which had been introduced into the House of Commons, giving an unreasonable power to this Board, had been thrown out in consequence of the unreasonable power which it proposed to give. Now the present Bill, he contended, instead of giving employment to the people of Ireland, as it was supposed, and as he gave the right hon. Gentlemen the Members of the Government opposite credit for intending to do, would do no such thing. He believed it would rather lie as a dead letter, or, if operative at all, it would be so injuriously. Much as he might think of the character and intelligence of the gentlemen who composed the Board of Public Works in Ireland, he did not think—and he made the observation without meaning any disparagement to them individually or collectively—they could carry out the provisions of the proposed Bill; and that House was asked to place a large sum of the public money at their disposal. The Commissioners were taking advantage of the famine impending at this moment over 4,000,000 of the people of Ireland, to endeavour to get from the House of Commons and the Irish Members powers that never would be listened to under other circumstances. He contended for it that the landed proprietors of Ireland were those most calculated to take upon themselves not only the improvement of their own estates, but the employment of their poorer fellow countrymen. But by this Bill the Board of Public Works in Ireland was to take upon itself all questions relative to the employment of the people and the expediency of carrying on such or such a work. Would the Gentlemen of England sanction in their country the giving of such powers as were proposed in this Bill to any public board? All they asked in Ireland was to have the same power intrusted to the landed proprietors there, as was given to the same class in every other part of the Empire. Let them have the power to borrow money at a reasonable interest—at so much per cent., and with as stringent regulations for the repayment as they pleased. Let them employ their fellow countrymen—they were more interested in the employment and comfort of the people, as well as the improvement of the country,
430
than any public board could possibly be. He had some experience of the operations of this Board, and he had to observe that its interference was generally unsatisfactory and uncalled-for. He hoped the Government and the House would consider the question fully before those objectionable powers to which he referred were granted by this Bill.
SIR T. FREMANTLEsaid, it had been the wish of the Government to obtain the best possible information as to the working of such a measure as that proposed, as well as to consult the opinions of such Gentlemen connected with Ireland as wonld be most likely to form a just and fair conclusion of its probabilities of success. But with respect to the opinion expressed upon the measure by the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, he (Sir T. Fremantle) did not think that any one in the House would take precisely the same ground as the hon. Member for Roscommon. He believed if any works were undertaken by any other parties than those authorized in the Bill, a much greater degree of expense would be incurred in their construction than would otherwise be the case. Now, if there was a certain duty imposed by this Bill which they were then discussing, upon the Board of Works, the Board ought to have conferred upon them a power to discharge that duty which was imposed upon them. It was a duty which they neither desired nor sought for. But it would be quite impossible to carry out the works which might be undertaken under the provisions of the present Bill satisfactorily or usefully without the authority given in the Bill. As to the reduction of the required number of consents from two-thirds to one-half, he (Sir T. Fremantle) had formerly been very much of the hon. Member's opinion; but so many representations had been made to him, when in Ireland, that works were stopped, not from active dissent or opposition of proprietors, but from indisposition to come forward, that that opinion had been changed. He considered this measure of great importance as regarded the improvement of the large rivers—they were the highways of the country; and the Legislature had a right to step in, if the proprietors did not see their own interests in reference to them. The hon. Gentleman said, the proprietors would see it their own interest to drain their lands; but it should be recollected that it was necessary to the drainage of private estates that they should look after the rivers

431
which supplied the means of carrying off the surplus water; until this was done it was altogether vain for any one to attempt the drainage of their land. He would be ready to consider the details of the Bill in Committee. But he hoped there would then he no objection to its second reading; and he would give his best consideration to any alterations that might be suggested to them.
SIR R. FERGUSONsaid, one great cause of complaint was the enormous preliminary expense incurred, and the extraordinary powers possessed by the Drainage Commissioners, who in their proceedings prepared no estimates, and were guided by no plans or estimates, nor indeed by anything else. The whole effect of the present Bill was to increase the powers of the Board beyond all precedent. It was, perhaps, the most objectionable measure ever introduced in reference to Ireland. The power of compulsory levy in Ireland had now got to such an enormous extent, that it ought to be checked instead of being extended. He hoped that the Government would consider well before they pressed the present measure; and he would ask why did they not bring over the Chairman of the Commissioners of Public Works here? He objected to the manner in which that Board exceeded all ordinary estimates, and, instead of letting the works to others, kept them in their own hands. In conclusion, the hon. Gentleman referred to the immense improvements which had taken place in agriculture in Ireland, particularly during the last ten years, in proof of which he referred to the reports of the Irish Agricultural Society.
MR. O'CONNELLsaid, he meant to vote for the second reading of the Bill; and it appeared to him that the discussion of its details ought to be reserved for the Committee. He had no complaint to make of the Board of Works, although Irishmen were supposed to be ready enough to make complaints. The only proceedings of the Board of Works of which he thought there was any reason to complain, were the enormous preliminary expenses; and those expenses were not attributable to the Board. In his opinion a great improvement would be ensured by the provision requiring that the measure should be carried into effect with the consent of one half of the parties whom it would affect. The right hon. Baronet would have ample time to consider the details of the subject; for the Bill could not be carried into effect
432
for some time, as the waters were at present high in every part of the country, and no draining oould be commenced until the lapse of a considerable period. He heartily concurred in the Motion for the second reading of the Bill, but he hoped it would be deliberately considered before it was brought into operation.
Bill read a second time.

PUBLIC WORKS (IRELAND).
The Order of the Day for the further consideration of the Report on the Public Works (Ireland) Bill having been read,
MR. F. FRENCHwished to take that opportunity of expressing his regret to find that his hon. and learned Friend the Member for Cork (Mr. O'Connell) was so much in favour of compulsory presentments. Since 1833 the money on account of the compulsory presentments amounted to 1,300,000 l.; yet it was proposed to give all the powers they possessed in a more objectionable form than that in which they originally stood. By the 5th Clause every power to which objection had been taken as to the extraordinary presentments was renewed, and he thought that they had great cause of complaint with his right hon. Friend in thus pressing upon them this course, inasmuch as they understood from him that the power given in this clause would be withdrawn.
SIR T. FREMANTLEsaid, he had merely stated on a former occasion that he would withdraw the clauses to which his hon. Friend referred, but that he would bring up other clauses in place of them. He was then acting in conformity with that engagement; and he thought that the provisions to which his hon. Friend objected ought to be maintained. He proposed to omit the words relating to repairs in the 4th Clause, and he hoped that that alteration would, to a certain extent, meet the objections of his hon. Friend.
SIR R. FERGUSONsaid, the words having reference to repairs were to be withdrawn, but still the same thing would be included under the word "improvements." He proposed that the Government should leave out the 5th Clause altogether; it was impossible they could ever make these compulsory presentments justifiable under any form. The compulsory powers possessed by the Board were a great subject of complaint in Ireland.
COLONEL CONOLLYshould be sorry to retard a measure which the Secretary for

433
Ireland was so anxious to advance, and which it was desirable should be enacted as soon as possible, with the view of giving some employment to the people; but he quite agreed with the two hon. Gentlemen opposite, that the county Members were called on to object to the proposed compulsory presentments; because the very fact of their being compulsory cast an imputation on the grand juries, which he did not think they deserved, by superseding them in those very functions for the performance of which they were elected.
SIR R. FERGUSONmoved the omission of the 5th Clause, on the ground that it would give to the Commissioners unlimited powers.
SIR T. FREMANTLEsaid, that the power of the Commissioners would not be unlimited, as they would extend to a sum of only 50,000 l.
MR. F. FRENCHfelt it his duty to support the Motion of the hon. Member for Londonderry.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that no one who understood the point under discussion could suppose that the clause involved any violation of principle. The course now in Ireland was, where the Treasury gave one half the sum required, there was a compulsion on the grand jury to pay for the remainder of the work when finished. The present Bill provided, that if there was any manifest improvement to be made to an existing work, and the Treasury made the grant to that work, then the grand jury should provide for the repair of that work in the same manner as if the work had been a new one. As to the compulsory clauses, neither the Treasury nor the grand jury could move unless first a meeting of the cesspayers had been held to decide whether the work should be undertaken or not; and on their petition to the Treasury, and on the grant being made according to that petition, the grand jury should act; but only in that case. Under the present circumstances of the country, when it was desirable in particular districts to set about works of a more extensive character, in order to give persons scattered over a great extent of country occupation near their homes, he thought there could not be a more reasonable proposition than that of his right hon. Friend.
MR. S. CRAWFORDsaid, the right hon. Gentleman was mistaken with respect to the cesspayers. It was not the cesspayers in general that possessed the power
434
to which he had alluded, but a small number selected that had to decide on the propriety of the work. He disapproved entirely of compulsory presentments.
MR. HAMILTONhoped hon. Members would not persist in their opposition.
SIR R. FERGUSONpersisted in his Motion, and
The House divided on the Question, that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill:—Ayes 97; Noes 3: Majority 94.

List of the AYES.

A'Court, Capt.

Hawes, B.

Acton, Col.

Herbert, rt. hon. S.

Antrobus, E.

Hodgson, R.

Archbold, R.

Hogg, J. W.

Baillie, H. J.

James, W.

Baillie, W.

Johnstone, H.

Baldwin, Barry

Lennox, Lord A.

Barron, Sir H. W.

Liddell, hon. H. T.

Borthwick, P.

Lincoln, Earl of

Bowring, Dr.

Lindsay, hon. Capt.

Bright, John

Lygon, hon. Gen.

Brotherton, Joseph

Macnamara, Major

Browne, Hon. W.

M'Neill, D.

Bruce, Lord Ernest

Mahon, Visc.

Buller, Charles

Maule, rt. hon. F.

Buller, Sir J. Yarde

Morris, D.

Busfield, William

Napier, Sir C.

Butler, P. S.

Neville, R.

Cardwell, E.

Nicholl, rt. hon. J.

Cayley, E. S.

O'Brien, C.

Chapman, B.

O'Brien, J.

Clements, Visc.

O'Connell, D.

Clerk, rt. hon. Sir G.

O'Connell, M.

Cochrane, A.

O'Connell, M. J.

Cockburn, rt. hn. Sir G.

O'Connell, J.

Collett, W. R.

Patten, J. W.

Collett, J.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Craig, W. G.

Peel, J.

Crawford, W. S.

Plumridge, Capt.

Curteis, H. B.

Rawdon, Col.

Dawson, hon. T. V.

Reid, Sir J. R.

Denison, E. B.

Repton, G. W. J.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Ross, D. R.

Drummond, H. H.

Russell, Lord J.

Duncan, G.

Smythe, hon. G.

Escott, B.

Smollett, A.

Esmonde, Sir T.

Somerset, Lord G.

Forbes, W.

Somerville, Sir W. M.

Fremantle, rt. h. Sir T.

Staunton, Sir G. T.

Gaskell, J. Milnes

Strickland, Sir G.

Gladstone, Capt.

Sutton, hon. H. M.

Gore, hon. R.

Thompson, Mr. Alderm.

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Thornely, T.

Graham, rt. hon. Sir J.

Trench, Sir F. W.

Greene, T.

Turner, E.

Gregory, W. H.

Wood, Col. T.

Grogan, E.

Yorke, H. R.

Hall, Col.

TELLERS.

Hamilton, G. A.

Young, J.

Hamilton, W. J.

Cripps, J.

List of the NOES.

Conolly, Col.

TELLERS.

O'Brien, A. S.

Ferguson, Sir R.

O'Conor Don

French, F.

Report agreed to; Bill to be read a third time.

FISHERIES—PIERS AND HARBOURS (IRELAND).
SIR T. FREMANTLErose to move for leave to bring in a Bill to afford encouragement to the construction of small Piers and Harbours calculated to extend the Fisheries in Ireland. No subject since his official connexion with Ireland had occupied more of his attention than this; and he hoped the House would agree with him that it was most desirable to extend and encourage the fisheries both in rivers and the sea. When it was considered what the extent of the coast of Ireland was, and how much indented it was with hays and estuaries, no one could doubt that the whole coast was admirably calculated to supply the finest fish. He regretted to say that, whatever exertions had hitherto been made, had not been successful. The fact was, the fisheries were in a neglected state. Grants had been made in former times for piers, harbours, boats, gear, and nets; and roads had been made and various devices adopted; but he was sorry to say they had all hitherto failed, and the fisheries had relapsed into a state of inaction. He feared there was some want of enterprise, but the first thing to raise the fisheries appeared to him to be providing the fishermen with boats of sufficient size to go out into the deep sea. The number of such boats at present in Ireland was not great. The reason was, that on very few coasts were there any landing places, piers, or harbours, to afford conveniences for this kind of fishing. Smaller boats only were used, which did not require any landing place or pier. The best mode of encouraging the employment of large boats, appeared to him to be to increase the number of piers on all parts of the coast of Ireland. He proposed, therefore, that in this Bill the sum of 50,000 l. should be voted, to extend over five years, at the rate of 10,000 l. a year, for the construction of piers and harbours for fishery purposes on the coast of Ireland. He also proposed that the Treasury, or Board of Works, should advance three-fourths of the sum required for the construction of each of these piers and harbours, and that the remaining fourth should be provided for in a way to be afterwards decided by the Board of Works. Many of the piers and harbours constructed under the old Act had not been constructed in the most convenient spots for the public generally. He hoped the
436
House, therefore, would allow as large a limit as possible to the power of the Board of Works on this point. With reference to the mode of raising the remaining fourth of the expense of these piers and harbours, they could not lay down a rule for every case; but it was proposed to grant power to the Board of Works to determine how this should be done in each case. If there was a gentleman who had an estate in the neighbourhood which would be benefited by it, then the Board would say that he should pay the remaining part of the expense. If there was no landed proprietor in the neighbourhood who would be particularly interested in it, but if the locality would be benefited, then the Board would levy a rate on the inhabitants of the county. If, on the other hand, it was connected with some public line of road, the Board would recommend that the grand jury should make a presentment for that portion of the expense. In some instances it would be raised partly in one way and partly in another. Power would also be taken for the purchase of land for the enlargement of harbours. It would also be desirable that facilities should be given to poor fishermen for the washing of their nets, and that means of curing should be provided. The rents of the fishermen's houses and the tolls levied on the piers would afford the means of keeping the piers in repair. As to the means of providing boats, he thought that this would best be done by combinations of individuals. This had already been tried and found successful by a company in Waterford. He concluded by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to afford encouragement to the construction of small Piers and Harbours calculated to extend the Fisheries in Ireland.
MR. ROSSwas glad to find that the Government had taken up this subject. He had himself taken a great interest in a fishery in his part of the country, and by proper management had made it a most successful speculation. Such a measure as that was highly necessary at the present moment, particularly as the state of Ireland was most alarming. He had seen a letter that morning from Lord Lurgan, stating that the hon. Member for Cork (Mr. O'Connell) had not in the slightest degree exaggerated the present unfortunate condition of Ireland.
SIR H. W. BARRONapproved of the Bill as far at it went; but he thought that it ought to have been carried much further. Piers and harbours were of the first necessity on the coast of Ireland, and

437
they ought to be constructed on the same admirable system as those which had been made with so much success on the coasts of Scotland. It was a melancholy fact that a great quantity of fish which had been cured in Scotland was actually imported into Ireland, although the Irish coasts abounded in fish, and afforded much more than sufficient to supply the demands of the Irish people themselves, leaving a considerable surplus which might be exported to foreign countries. The fisheries which had already been established in Ireland had met with great success. There were two companies in his (Sir H. W. Barron's) immediate locality, one of which had been established principally on account of the harbour of Dunmore, on the eastern coast of Waterford, which had been built at the public expense, though perhaps not on the best principles. Mr. Strangman (to whom the light hon. Baronet had alluded) was connected with one of these companies, and had been extremely successful. The company had made a clear profit of 20 per cent., besides appropriating a sum of money for repairs, and a sinking fund for contingencies. He mentioned this to stimulate other parties to proceed in the same course, as he was quite sure that they would find their account in it. Another company had followed Mr. Strangman's company, and had been equally successful, since the profits yielded at the present moment upwards of 20 per cent. on the capital invested. There was one point in the speech of the right hon. Baronet which he did not exactly understand. The right hon. Baronet had said that a sum of 50,000 l. which he proposed should be granted was to be extended over a period of five years. Did the right hon. Gentleman mean by that to say, that the money could not he, spent in one or two years, but that it must not be spent in less than five? He thought that as much as possible of that sum should be expended in the approaching spring and summer, for the reasons which had been already alluded to by his hon. Friend below him. He thought it but right, whenever the opportunity was afforded him, to press upon the Government the very great necessity there was for attending to the famine which was now hanging over Ireland. If it were at all necessary that additional testimony should be given as to the urgency of the peril, that testimony he had it in his power to supply. He had received a letter from a member of the commit-
438
tee of the board of guardians of the city of Waterford, which committee had been appointed to report on the state of the potato crop, and the prospects of the poor in that locality. The Union in which Waterford was situate was very large, extending fourteen or fifteen miles in every direction round the city. The gentleman to whom he referred had taken a very active part in the labours of the committee, being himself the agent for a nobleman who had very considerable property in that part of Ireland. His correspondent wrote thus:—
"The potato crop is rapidly progressing to utter destruction. The last accounts are unanimous on this point. The interior of the potatoes is black and actually rotten."
He was more and more convinced every day that the fatal disease which had attacked the potatoes was advancing, and that in a few weeks the poor of Ireland would be placed in a most alarming position. He should not do his duty, therefore, unless he warned Her Majesty's Government of this impending evil, which must be met with a bold hand and with decided measures.
Mr. GREGORYsaid, that the right hon. Baronet who had brought in the Bill was not aware that, in certain parts of Ireland, where there were the greatest opportunities for promoting fisheries, the object of the Bill would be thwarted by corporations who had got into their own hands the power, though he would not say the right, of fishing. He would point out to the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the bay of Galway, where a corporation held the Cladagh fisheries. These people had laid down such regulations, that on person could fish before or after a certain time, or on any day but when the company's boats went out themselves. To show the extent to which this tyranny had gone, he would just mention one instance of it which occurred last year. They allowed fishing with the hook, but interdicted the use of the trawl, which, as every person who was acquainted with fishing knew, was the most effective mode of fishing. A friend of his introduced the trawl in the bay, and caught an enormous quantity of fish of the finest description, with which the whole neighbourhood was supplied. As soon as the fishermen of Galway heard of this encroachment upon their prerogative, they sallied forth at once, and nothing but the providential interposition of the police prevented the utter destruction of all his friend's fishing apparatus. Application was subsequently made to the Castle, and

439
a small ship of war was sent round to the bay of Galway, in order to protect persons engaged in the fisheries. If the Government would act upon the precedent which was set upon that occasion, and take care that the fishermen should be allowed to pursue their occupations in peace, he was sure that the Bill would have the best effect upon that part of Ireland which relied on fishing for the means of subsistence. The Irish fishermen ought to have the epportunity of using the trawl on their own coasts, and not be compelled to stay at home while the fishermen from Torbay came round with the trawl, and swept the fish into English boats.
Leave given.
Bill brought in and read a first time.
House adjourned at a quarter past seven o'clock.