HC Deb 20 July 1847 vol 94 cc597-8
MR. HAWES

appeared at the bar of the House, and presented the Report of the Select Committee appointed to draw up the reasons of the Commons for disagreeing with certain Amendments of the Lords in the Passengers' Bill.

LORD G. BENTINCK

said, he had great reason to complain of the course which the Government had taken with respect to certain clauses which had, at his suggestion, been introduced into this Bill, and which had since been struck out by the noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Colonies, while the Bill was passing through the House of Lords. One of those clauses was to enforce an official survey of all ships employed to carry passengers; and the other clause was to require a certain number of men to be employed in British ships. The Chancellor of the Exchequer assented to these clauses, and undertook to insert them in the Bill. This he considered a compact binding on the Government; but, to his surprise, one of those clauses—that relating to the manning of the ships—had been since struck out of the Bill by the Secretary of State for the Colonies. This he (Lord G. Bentinck) considered to be a direct breach of compact between him and the Government.

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

protested against the language of his noble Friend, in making the allegation that there had been any breach of compact on the part of the Government. The only arrangement entered into between him and his noble Friend was as to the surveying of the ships; and this had been strictly complied with, for the clause was in the Bill. It was true his noble Friend did afterwards propose that a clause should be introduced to regulate the number of men which should be employed on board the ships; and at the time he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) said that he saw no objection to the clause, and it was accordingly introduced into the Bill; but it had upon consideration been since struck out by the Lords, with the consent of his noble Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies. This, however, could not be called a breach of compact, for no compact was entered into with respect to the clause relating to the manning of ships; it was entirely confined to the surveying of the ships, to ascertain their seaworthiness.

LORD G. BENTINCK

said, he thought that, in his position, he had good right to complain, because, if this were allowed, it would put an end to all conventional arrangements, which saved so much trouble, and to that confidence which was so desirable between parties in that House.

MR. HAWES

denied that any such compact as the noble Lord had referred to was entered into.

The matter dropped.

Forward to