§ MR. RICHsaid, he begged to ask the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether the Report, dated the 10th July, 1851, of the Select Committee on the Ordnance Survey of Scotland, recommended the abandonment of the six-inch and the adoption of a two-inch to the mile scale, and the Treasury Minute thereon of the 16th December, 1851, had been set aside; and also, whether any steps had recently been taken for authorising a survey of Scotland upon a scale exceeding twenty inches to the mile, and if so, whe- 201 ther he would submit to Parliament copies of any correspondence that may have taken place respecting such survey, together with an estimate of its cost?
§ The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERSir, in answer to the question of the hon. Gentleman, I have to state that the Treasury Minute of the 16th December, 1851, which was itself a departure from former arrangements, was set aside by the Government of Lord Derby, and that upon the formation of the present Government, we found the question of the Ordnance survey of Scotland in a state that appeared to require further consideration. Upon going into the question, it appeared to me that it required a reconsideration as a whole. There was no principle laid down, and no conclusion arrived at, of so distinct and definite a character as could be satisfactory to Parliament, to the Government, or to the country; especially considering the large expenditure of money which it involved. We are under the impression that, while the original scale of one inch to the mile was a scale sufficient for purposes which were national in the strictest sense, the scale of six inches, which was adopted as an extension of the original scale, was not sufficient for purposes of a purely local and departmental character. Neither, as far as we are able to judge, is a scale of twelve inches sufficient for such purposes. We desired, therefore, to come to a conclusion upon the question, what was the best scale to adopt with reference to the survey and the production of a map that should be satisfactory to all parties; but it would have been very difficult to come to a conclusion on that question with the facts as they stood before us, for we had no correct means of ascertaining the cost of the survey. The course, therefore, which has been taken has been this—we have marked out certain particular districts of the country, and those districts are about to be surveyed with a degree of minuteness which will make the survey applicable to the purposes of a map upon any scale that may be desired. We are likewise going to take care that the expenses of the survey in those districts so selected shall be so taken account of as to enable us to judge of what the future expenses of the prosecution of the work will be. Directions have also been given, that whereas the survey up to the present time has been conducted simply by the officers of the Ordnance, working in their ordinary manner, upon their regu- 202 lar salary, two other methods shall be tried in the selected districts—one of them, the method of contract, properly so called, by independent parties, and the other the method of piece-work instead of day's wages by the officers of the Ordnance department itself. We believe that when the survey has been completed in these districts in the manner which I have just described, we shall be in a condition to come to a conclusion upon the mode in which it should be prosecuted throughout the country; but the question is a very large one, and it is not too much to say that it is at least possible that before we have done with the whole mass, it will cost the country, not some hundreds of thousands, but some millions of money. Under these circumstances it is obviously proper and right to bring it under the full view and consideration of Parliament. The responsibility is too great for it to be treated merely as a departmental subject, and, perhaps, it would have been desirable that even at an earlier period steps should have been taken for bringing it under the consideration of Parliament. There are other questions of considerable importance besides the question of scale. One of these is whether the scale shall be less or more than that which has hitherto been adopted; another is with respect to the practice of contouring; and the third is whether the expense of the survey is to be defrayed entirely out of the Exchequer, or whether the principle of local contribution is to be called in aid. The principle of local contribution was a part of the original plan, and it is quite plain that if, instead of making the survey sufficient for military and national purposes only, we are to execute it upon a scale for local and even for estate purposes, the principle of local contribution becomes still more just and appropriate than it was before. I have said now, perhaps, as much as can be said at the present stage of the business; but with respect to the second part of the question of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Rich), whether any steps have been taken for authorising a survey of Scotland upon a scale exceeding twenty inches to the mile, he will understand that particular directions in reference to certain districts have been given to that effect; and with respect to the production of papers, I may state that papers on this subject are in preparation, and shall be submitted to Parliament when in such a state as to enable Parliament to form a judgment upon the whole subject.
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, he wished to ask if he was right in understanding the right hon. Gentleman to have said that the Government of Lord Derby did not decide upon the six-inch scale, and did not order the survey to be pursued upon that scale?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERWhat I said was, that the Government of Lord Derby deviated from the Treasury Minute of the 16th of December, 1851; which Minute was itself a deviation from former arrangements. The deviation made was this: according to the Minute of the 16th of December, 1851, the order given by the Treasury was, that those counties in Scotland which had been actually commenced on the six-inch scale, should be finished on that scale; but that all the rest of the country should be executed on a one-inch scale. The Government of Lord Derby deviated from that Minute—and I am far from blaming them for having so deviated—to the extent of ordering, in answer to petitions or memorials from certain counties in Scotland, that the six-inch scale should be extended to certain other counties; but no general or definite decision had been taken when we entered upon office.