ARGYLE CANAL—GRANT OF MONEY. (Hansard, 7 July 1847)

§ MR. PARKER
moved that the Committee on the Argyle Canal Bill have leave to sit and report to-morrow (Thursday).

MR. CHRISTOPER
opposed the further progress of the measure; it involved the expenditure of 140,000l. of public money, and ought not to be carried through as a private Bill.

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE- QUER
observed, as objection was raised, it would be better to discharge the order for referring this in the usual way as an unopposed Bill, and he would to-morrow move to refer it to a Committee differently constituted.

§ MR. T. DUNCOMBE
thought it ought not to be referred to any Committee at all, but deferred to next Session. It was suggested that it would relieve the suffering Highlanders; perhaps if "the suffering canal company" were substituted, that would be nearer the truth. The Thames job was, it seemed, to be followed by a Scotch job.

§ SIR J. GRAHAM
had not the least notion, until that morning, of the nature of this measure. Perhaps the Chancellor of the Exchequer would he good enough to say, whether the question of the grant of this money had ever been submitted to the House in the miscellaneous estimates, or in any other manner.

§ MR. S. WORTLEY
thought it was right to withdraw the Bill under present circumstances; but, at the same time, he begged to say, that this measure was of 3 the highest importance to the whole of the west coast of Scotland, where the navigation was very dangerous, and the existing canals so narrow and inefficient, that he hoped Government would persevere with it next Session. He thought it ought to have the support of the noble Lord the Member for Lynn, as it was carrying out the application of his measure with regard to Irish railways.

§ LORD G. BENTINCK
The hon. Member for Bute has mistaken my proposition so far as regarded Ireland. I never proposed that the Government should undertake themselves any work whatever, or that where railway companies could give good security the Government should themselves undertake them. But what is the case here? It is that where there is already one canal, the Crinan canal, running parallel with this proposed canal, to which the Government has already contributed the sum of 70,000l, lent upon the security of tolls; and now the Government come forward and propose to take under their own care the construction of another canal, which is to be constructed in rivalry of this Crinan canal. Why, the two canals would be in distinct rivalry; and clear it is that if the Argyle canal is to be constructed, it will take away the whole traffic of the Crinan canal, and totally annihilate the security which the Government hold for the 70,000l. they have lent to the Crinan canal. We object to the measure on this ground, that it differs altogether from the measure which I proposed early in the Session for the purpose of stimulating private enterprise; but this proposition is intended to construct a work on the responsibility of Government by six successive instalments of public money of 25,000l. each; and this now work is alleged—I know not with what reason—but it is alleged that it is not a measure for the general advantage of the Highlands, but it is intended for the special advantage of one private individual, Mr. Campbell, of Islay. That is the charge of my hon. Friends around me. In that it differs altogether from the proposition which I made to the House. You talk of employing the destitute Highlanders. Why, they have been destitute up to the present moment; but before this measure can be applied, the destitution will have passed away. If, indeed, it had been intended by this measure to give compensation to Lord Macdonald and to M'Leod of M'Leod, for their unparalleled exertions on behalf of the suf- 4 fering poor, I should have made no objections. But here, where it is proposed to give 147,950l., which it is alleged will be chiefly for the advantage of a single proprietor, I do think that the matter stands on different grounds than have been made in the House. But, after all, what we chiefly complain of is this—that it has been attempted to smuggle this measure through the House as a private Bill—or, as it was happily described by the late Chairman of Private Committees, that it is a Bill of a hybrid nature. Under these circumstances I trust that the House will reject the Bill.

§ MR. BAINE
thought this Bill had, to say the least of it, a very suspicious appearance. It was introduced just a week ago, and he believed was entirely unknown to the great majority of those whom it professed to benefit. The Bill professed to be for the advantage of the ports of the Clyde, those ports being Greenock, Port-Glasgow, and Glasgow; but he would venture to say that there was scarcely an individual in those towns who was at all aware of such a Bill. He knew something of the locality, and he firmly believed that the proposed canal would be, as an investment of capital, totally unproductive. At all events, the measure was one that ought to be fully inquired into before it was sanctioned by Parliament.

§ MR. HUME
thought Ministers should produce the Minute of Treasury consenting to the advance of this money. He wanted to know what inducement they could have, in the present state of the Exchequer, to agree to this grant; and he strongly suspected that if they once began, they would just be following up the course pursued with regard to the Caledonian Canal. It was represented as a measure for the relief of the suffering Highlanders; but it was more likely to be one for the benefit of Highland lairds. In the case of the Caledonion Canal, that undertaking had given increased value to the properties through which it went, and afforded great facilities for the transmission of wood and other produce of the land; but, nevertheless, they were obliged to pay to the Highland lairds from 30,000l. to 40,000l. for the land which was required to form the canal. This measure, he maintained, would not be of advantage to the Highlands; and the hon. Member for Greenock (Mr. Baine) had told them that it would be of no advantage to the commercial classes. The House ought, therefore, to mark its sense of the impropriety of the whole proceeding, 5 and teach Ministers that, if they would not do what was correct and proper, they would at least not be countenanced by that House in doing what was not correct. It was with pain that he made these statements with reference to those whom he usually supported; but he felt himself compelled by a sense of duty. He moved that the debate be adjourned to that day three months.

MR. WILLIAMS
considered that nothing could be more discreditable to the Government than the present job. When the Crinan Canal was projected, the line of the canal now proposed was examined, and that of Crinan preferred. The parties who established that company, however, found that it was a losing concern, instead of paying, as had been expected, 1/5 per cent upon the outlay. The canal now projected would not be a more profitable concern.

§ The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
did not expect that, on the withdrawal of a Motion as informal, a discussion would have arisen upon the merits of the question. He had not entered on the merits of the case; but finding that other Gentlemen had not exercised the same forbearance, he would now, in a few words, explain what the views of the Government were. The state of the case was simply this: Early in the year applications were made to Government that they should undertake some works by which employment might be given to labourers in the Highlands. Some gentlemen, who had taken great pains in affording work and relief to the destitute, among others Mr. Campbell of Islay, came to him and stated that the people of the Highlands were in extreme distress; and suggested that some undertaking of public advantage like the present should be commenced by which employment would be given. The Government sent down Sir Edward Belcher, a competent officer, to report on the subject which had been thus brought under their notice. That officer inspected the Crinan Canal; and his report was, that that canal it was impossible to improve so as to make it a ship canal; and that for such a purpose a totally now canal must be made on different ground, and at an expense of not less than 500,000l. An engineer of high eminence, who had been employed in Ireland, was sent down to examine the proposal now before the House; and on receiving all the information which could be derived from these sources, the Government did not delay in coming to a 6 conclusion. They would certainly never have dreamed of undertaking this work, unless for the purpose of giving employment to the people of the Highlands. It had been stated to the Government by proprietors in the Highlands—and he could not speak in too high terms of the manner in which the Highland proprietors had provided work and relief for the people—it was represented that as there would not be the same amount of potatoes planted this summer as usual, it would be beyond their power in these circumstances to give the necessary employment to the population. Now, it was felt by the Government that if they could give employment to the labourers in the Highlands, and at the same time do that which would be of great public utility, they were called upon to do so; and, therefore, he thought they did not deserve to be told that this was a mere job for the advantage of a single proprietor. All the papers connected with the subject were before the House; and more decided evidence of the necessity of the case, he would venture to say, could hardly have been given. He would not, however, go further with the Bill till he obtained the consent of the House to the vote in a Committee of Supply.

§ SIR J. GRAHAM
did not wish to forestall the decision on the vote; but he must say, that, having voted against 620,000l being given for railways in Ireland, and considering the present condition of the country, he was not prepared to vote a grant of 150,000l. for the formation of a canal in Argyleshire.