HC Deb 18 June 1857 vol 145 cc2047-76
SIR DENHAM NORREYS

said, he intended to raise a discussion on the following propositions:— 1. That the Survey of Scotland, on the scale of twenty-five inches to the mile, be discontinued; 2. That the Survey of Scotland be carried on, as it has been in Ireland, the Northern portion of England, and a large portion of Scotland, on a scale of six inches to the mile, and that it be engraved on that scale: 3. That a Map of Scotland, on a scale of one inch to the mile, be also reduced from the six inch map for engraving and publication. Owing, however, to the forms of the House, the Motion with which he should conclude, would be, that the Vote be reduced by £36,000. Hon. Members should understand that they were about to vote to-night on the question whether the 25-inch survey for Scotland should or should not be continued. This was a most important question; it was a question involving no one knew how many millions of money; and yet it had never been adequately discussed in that House. The original design was to survey the whole of the United Kingdom on the scale of six inches to the mile, and to publish also for general purposes a map of the scale of one inch. In 1851 some Scotch gentlemen thought fit to be dissatisfied, and they moved for a Committee. The result was a recommendation that the six-inch survey should be discontinued. That produced great dissatisfaction, and a list of questions were sent out, to which 130 answers were received in favour of a map on a scale as large as possible, and thirty-eight in favour of a smaller scale. The Government then appointed three gentlemen to report on the subject, and they appeared to have formed their opinions by counting the number of answers on either side; but in point of fact the opinion of one practical man who had used, and could speak from experience of, the 6-inch map, was worth that of fifty or a hundred who had no practical knowledge of the subject. In 1856 there was a discussion in Committee of Supply on the question; but no notice was given, and there was no trace of any division in the journals of the House. The right hon. Member for the University of Oxford (Mr. Gladstone) estimated that the 25-inch survey would entail upon the country a charge of £4,000,000 or £5,000,000, adding that he doubted whether a tenth part of those who had voted on the subject knew what the question was, or the extent of the expenditure into which they were plunging the country. After such a statement from so high an authority, he thought he was justified in utterly denying that the sense of the House had been properly taken upon the subject. He believed that no country in the world possessed more beautiful maps than those on the scale of six inches to the mile possessed by parts of Scotland. The Irish maps on the same scale bore no comparison to them in point of clearness and of use. They showed every ditch, the smallest fence, every bridge, every stream, marked out the garden walks in a gentleman's domains, and actually gave the position of the pumps; and yet the Scotch gentlemen were not satisfied with maps of this accuracy and minuteness, but asked for others on a scale of twenty-five inches. Now, he could conceive nothing more monstrous than a proposition of this kind. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had referred the consideration of this question to a Committee, and nine members had voted for the 25-inch survey. On this Committee of fifteen there were no fewer than ten Scotchmen, while there were only five English Members, one of whom (Captain Laffan) was unable to attend in consequence of official duties, and of the nine Members who had voted for the Report, eight were Scotch Members. Now, he challenged the composition of this Committee as being most unfair, and he could by no means understand how it was that the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Government should think it a matter of duty to adhere to their decision. The thing was altogether so absurd that he was surprised the noble Lord below him (Lord Elcho) should refer to the Report of this Committee for the guidance of the House. He had a high opinion of the personal honour of the Scotch, but surely, in considering a question involving to such an extent their own interest, there ought to have been more than five English Members upon this Committee. He (Sir D. Norreys) therefore called upon the House to intercept this vast expenditure. Colonel Hall, who for many years was the director of the survey, said the time and cost attending the 24-inch scale (at that time proposed) would be so enormous compared with the 12-inch scale, that he thought the larger survey ought not to be adopted unless it could be shown that great advantages would accrue there-from. The gallant officer went on to say that the estimates laid before the Committee showed that the 24-inch scale would cost 2s. per acre, and the 6-inch survey only 1s. per acre. The Irish survey at present had cost about —946,000—that is in round numbers a million—but as not more than four-fifths of it had been completed, its total cost would probably be £1,200,000. Scotland, upon the same scale, would cost as much, but upon the 25-inch scale, if they took Colonel Hall's calculation of 2s. an acre, the expense would certainly be notless than £2,000,000. But if Scotland were to have a beautiful map on that large scale, England would, no doubt, demand a similar map, the cost of which would be about £4,000,000; and Ireland, of course, would not be satisfied, unless she also had a survey made upon the same enormous scale. He now approached the most difficult part of his task, which was to prove that Scotch gentlemen did not know their own interests. He held that, as a general rule, a great map was a great evil, and that if you could get what you wanted on a small scale it was infinitely preferable to a largo one. For example, the 6-inch maps which had been published contained 15,360 acres on a sheet, laid down with such accuracy that an estate could be measured on them with the utmost nicety. A gentleman, therefore, with an estate of 4,000 or 5,000 acres in extent, the usual size of a moderate estate in Scotland, would find the whole of it upon one sheet; but if the 25-inch scale were adopted a sheet would not contain above 800 or 900 acres, and as by some ill-fortune the boundaries of property were sure to fall irregularly, he would have to purchase seven or eight sheets in order to have a complete map of his estate. The Chancellor of the Exchequer usually so measured in his language, had said, that upon that scale the map of Scotland would be about as large as Westminster Hall. That would be the standard map; but as it would be utterly useless for most practical purposes on account of its immense size, it was proposed to reduce it by mechanical means to a scale of six inches to the mile, and that again was further to be mechanically reduced to a scale of one inch to the mile. Professional men, however, agreed that no map could be perfect unless it were laid down directly from the field-books of the surveyors; so that in the case of Scotland there would be the standard map, too large and cumbrous to be of practical utility, and two smaller maps, which would not be correct owing to the difficulty of reducing with perfect accuracy by mechanical means made from the original survey. The Committee of 1856 suggested that a map on the large scale would be useful for the registration of titles. He contended that a 6-inch map would be abundantly sufficient for this purpose. He stated this on the authority of Mr. Griffiths, the director-general of the Irish survey, and Mr. John M' Neil, an eminent civil engineer, who had told him (Sir D. Norreys) the other day that he had laid out hundreds of miles of railway by the 6-inch map, and that he had made two purchases of estates, one to the extent of £8,000 and another of £3,000, in which he had been entirely guided by the 6-inch map, which was more accurate than the local surveys. Then there was the case of valuations. But Mr. Griffiths's evidence was, that all his valuations, down to half an acre, were made upon the 6-inch map. Below half an acre he did not like to go, in consequence of the shrinking of the paper on which the maps had been printed. Another advantage expected was the adjustment of civil and ecclesiastical boundaries. It could not be affirmed that the 6-inch scale was not accurate enough for this purpose, or for inclosures of waste lands, for it had been extensively used for such purposes in Ireland. Another point was for sanitary purposes. What this meant he (Sir D. Norreys) did not know. The same might be said of the next head, that of statistics. Then there came Parliamentary purposes—railways. Why, every engineer in Ireland had said six inches were amply sufficient for his purposes; and it was received as such by Committees of the House. Then there was geology. Every one was in favour of the country possessing a good geological survey; but what did Sir Roderick Murchison say—the person who directed the survey? "For Heaven's sake, give me a 6-inch survey; I can do nothing with the 25-inch map." Then came another object for which the 25-inch map was supposed to be useful—military and purely scientific purposes. This heading was equally unintelligible, or at least he was not aware what objects for statistical and military and scientific purposes could be attained by a 25-inch map which would not be as well attained by a 6-inch map. Another question was, whether so large a map as a 25-inch map was required for the registration of titles. The whole tenor of the Report of the Commissioners was unfavourable to the employment of maps as absolutely necessary for purposes of registration of title, on the contrary, they looked upon them as mere accessories; and that opinion was founded upon the evidence of men of experience like Mr. Vincent Scully, Mr. Brewster, and other gentlemen who possessed considerable knowledge of the subject. How could any map be properly said to be connected with registration unless a copy was appended to the deed of purchase? Now, the map on the 25-inch scale would be too small to be useful in that respect for small properties, while it would be too large for large estates. The plain fact was, that to attempt to make a national map on any scale which should be available for all purposes was simply an impossibility. The noble Lord the Member for Tiverton (Lord Palmerston) would no doubt this evening say, as he had said on a previous occasion, that he could understand the House objecting to any survey, but that he could not understand its agreeing to an imperfect survey. Now, an antithesis like that very often produced an effect in that House, but he would ask the House to consider what was really meant by the expression a perfect map, because no map could be perfect for all purposes. A high authority, the hon. Member for Whitby (Mr. Stephenson), although a Member of the Committee, said he did not agree with one word of the Report of the Committee of 1856, but that he was unable to attend to oppose it through indisposition. In an outlay involving so many millions he thought the House ought not to throw overboard such an opinion as that of the hon. Member for Whitby, and he trusted that they would not sanction such a monstrous expenditure in order to give the Scotch gentlemen a plan of their estates, which would, after all, be found a very inconvenient one. Let them follow the advice that had been given them by the late Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Gladstone) and intercept this monstrous survey as soon as they could. He had taken great pains to obtain information on this subject, and he warned the House against being deluded by statements that by means of the anastatic and photographic processes they could have maps for nothing; those processes were worthless for giving accurate and correct maps, which could be used as standard maps. He hoped the House would be on its guard against all statements about these new and cheap processes. He regretted he was not able to put the Motion in the form in which it stood on the paper, but in the form of striking out a certain sum from the Vote about to be put. His first intention was to move to reduce the Vote by £1,000, but on further consideration he had thought it better to strike out the whole of the sum put down for the Scotch survey, so that the Government might bring on the Vote in the form of a supplementary Estimate, when hon. Members would have an opportunity of stating what scale they wished to see adopted. He would therefore move that the sum of £36,000 be struck off the Vote.

Amendment proposed "to leave out £151,744, and insert £115,744, instead thereof."

VISCOUNT DUNCAN

said, that so far from objecting to the Motion of his hon. Friend, he thanked him for calling attention to a subject which was of the very greatest importance. No one was more anxious than himself that the question of this Ordnance survey should be perfectly sifted, and he concurred with his hon. Friend that this ought not to be discussed as an English, Irish, or Scotch question, but as a national survey, and, as such, of general interest to the whole kingdom. He hoped he should be able to show that this survey was necessary in order to place Scotland and the northern parts of England on the same footing as Ireland. His hon. Friend found fault with the Scotch gentlemen because a few years ago a Committee recommended a 6-inch survey, and then, in 1856, a Committee, not composed exclusively of Scotch Members, recommended a 25-inch survey. His hon. Friend charged it upon the Scotch Members that they attended the Committee too regularly. Now, seeing the very great interest his hon. Friend took in this matter, he regretted that he had not attended on many previous occasions, and more especially when the Report of the Committee was discussed in the last Session of Parliament. A great portion of the expense had now been incurred, and after a number of the Scotch counties had been surveyed his hon. Friend rushed in and attempted to induce the House to change its determination. But he (Viscount Duncan) trusted that the House would hesitate before they adopted the suggestions of the hon. Baronet, as the effect would be to plunge them into a mass of confusion with regard to these surveys. The survey of the United Kingdom was commenced in 1784 on a scale of two inches to a mile, the survey being published on a scale of one inch to a mile. That survey was continued from 1784 to 1828, when it was suddenly interrupted by the appointment of an Irish Committee, of which Lord Monteagle was the chairman, who recommended that the survey of the United Kingdom of England and Scotland should be stopped, that a new survey should be commenced in Ireland, and that it should be on a scale of six inches to a mile. The result of that Committee was that the survey in Scotland was actually stopped from 1829 to 1840, during which period the Irish survey was conducted, and very properly conducted, on the 6-inch scale. Ireland was divided into about 60,000 town-lands, and it was thought that the 6-inch scale would be best adapted to the wants of that country. He agreed with the hon. Baronet that the experiment in Ireland was eminently successful, and the Commissioners who sat on the subject of the registration of titles spoke of the 6-inch survey as one of the most valuable practical measures ever carried out in that country. When Ireland was completed, the survey was resumed in Great Britain, and it had been continued not only in Scotland, but also in the northern counties of England. The whole county of Durham and parts of Northumberland had been surveyed on the 25-inch scale, as well as most of the cultivated districts of Scotland, Cumberland and Westmoreland had also been drawn on the same, scale. As the 6-inch scale had proved to be so well adapted to the town-lands of Ireland, so the 25-inch scale was deemed well adapted to the parishes of Scotland. The hon. Gentleman bad sought to alarm the House in respect to what he called "gigantic maps;" but the fact was that the survey on the 25-inch scale had been confined to the cultivated districts; the uncultivated parts of Scotland were to be surveyed on the 6-inch plan, and the maps were to be published on the scale of one inch. Practical surveyors knew that although a scale might easily be reduced it could not be increased. In this case the large scale was used merely for the purpose of the survey. The engraved map would be on the 1-inch scale, and it was being produced as speedily as possible. It never bad been intended to engrave on the 25-inch scale; but it had been ascertained that when the survey was once taken the drawn plans could be easily reproduced by the anastatic process, and the sale of thirty copies would repay the whole expense. The sale commenced only five months ago in Linlitligowshire, and seven copies of the 25-inch maps had already been sold in that county. The history of the Scotch survey was somewhat singular. When the Irish survey had been finished the survey of the southern counties of Scotland was commenced on the 6-inch scale, and six or seven counties had been completed when a Committee was appointed to consider whether the map should be published on the 6-inch or the 1-inch scale. The Committee reported against the 6-inch scale, and orders were afterwards issued to reduce it to one inch; but in 1852 representations were made by the Royal burghs, and by the mining and other interests, praying for a return to the 6-inch plan. Lord Derby's Government gave directions that the county of Fife (then in course of being surveyed) should be conducted on the 6-inch scale. This continued up to 1853, when the noble Lord the Member for Haddingtonshire (Lord Elcho) filled the office which he (Lord Duncan) now held. That noble Lord, who deserved great credit for his endeavours to supply what every other country in Europe possessed—namely, a survey on the scale that would be the most generally useful, issued a circular to various scientific bodies, inviting opinions as to the best scale to adopt for a national survey. The answer given in the large majority of instances was favourable to the 25-inch scale. Sir J. Burgoyne, Mr. Rendell, and Mr. Blamire were then employed by the Government as a Commission to investigate the subject, and they reported unanimously to the same effect. Experiments were then made in Ayrshire and Dumfriesshire upon the 25-inch scale, and they proved highly satisfactory. He (Lord Duncan) then succeeded to his present situation, when he brought the whole matter before the House, and another Committee was appointed. Seven members of that Committee voted in support of the 25-inch scale, and only two against it. The entire question was subsequently discussed in a pretty full House, and the Report of the Committee was approved by a majority of ninety-one. The estimate of the present survey of Scotland, which Colonel James laid before the Committee, was £300,000 less than the Irish survey had cost, and that gentleman now found that his estimate was higher than the actual cost, for the survey was proceeding at a cost of 11¼d. per acre in the cultivated districts, and 6½d. in the uncultivated districts, whereas his estimate was 1s. and 7d. respectively. The Scotch survey would cost altogether £989,000. It was estimated that the engraving would cost 1d. per acre, but the actual cost was only ¾d. The survey during the last year had given great satisfaction—1,400,000 acres having been actually surveyed on the 25-inch scale during that period. In fact, the greater part of the cultivated portions of Scotland had been surveyed, and he had received communications to the effect that the landowners were quite satisfied with the mode of the survey. The whole of the district between the Tay and the Clyde had been surveyed, and he submitted that it was not worth while, now that the uncultivated portions only remained to be surveyed, to interrupt the survey. The interruptions which had already been made in the survey of Scotland had rendered useless at least £50,000 of the money already expended. If the hon. Baronet's motive in objecting to the present survey was economy, he could assure him that the public would not gain much if he succeeded in his object, because the difference between a survey on a 6-inch scale and a 25-inch scale was only about £50,000. The 1-inch scale had not been found to be very successful in England. The Tithes Commutation Commission desired to have a more correct map, and expended £2,000,000 upon a survey like that now being carried on in Scotland. He hoped, therefore, that, for the sake of economy and public utility, the House would now determine once for all that the survey of Scotland should be completed uninterruptedly on a 25-inch scale. Imputations had been cast on the proprietors of land in Scotland in connexion with this survey. It was said that their object was to get their estates surveyed at the public expense on a scale so large that it would serve their own purposes. But those imputations were unfounded. Many of the Scotch proprietors had already surveyed their estates at their own expense. It was only from a belief that the 25-inch scale would be for the benefit of the public that the Committee had recommended it, and he trusted that the House would adhere to the decision to which it had already come.

SIR, WILLIAM JOLLIFFE

said, he thought that the hon. Baronet (Sir D. Norreys) was entitled to the thanks of the Committee for having introduced this subject at a very opportune moment. He regretted, however, that he could not support the hon. Baronet's Motion either as it was upon that paper or in the shape it was forced to assume according to the forms of the House. He did not object to Scotland being surveyed as satisfactorily as the other portions of the United Kingdom, but he did object to Scotland being surveyed on a scale that would not prove to be satisfactory to the country, and such he thought a 25-inch scale survey would be, notwithstanding the arguments of the noble Lord (Viscount Duncan) opposite. He was anxious that the whole of the United Kingdom should be surveyed in the most economical manner and upon the most efficient scale. The 6-inch maps had been found sufficient for the purposes of tithe commutation and for poor-rate valuations, as also, he believed, for what they were threatened with—the registration of property. The fact was, however, that notwithstanding £2,000,000 of money had been spent in England, they were still where they were in 1784, and might be called upon to-morrow to spend another £2,000,000 for registration purposes. Under these circumstances he would press upon the noble Lord at the head of the Government the necessity of changing the present system of survey. The populous and cultivated districts of Scotland had been surveyed, but he hoped the Highlands would not be finished before Warwickshire, Staffordshire, Somersetshire, and other places. They ought not to survey the Hebrides in preference to such districts. The island of Lewis had been surveyed, though he believed the gentleman to whom it belonged had paid the whole or a portion of the expense; but whether this was so or not, he thought it a dereliction of duty to let Lanarkshire wait until Lewis was surveyed. The principle ought to be adopted of first attending to those districts in which the demand for maps was likely to be greatest. It would be instructive, for the purpose of showing the relative value of the survey, if the noble Lord would lay upon the table a return of the sale of maps in the populous districts and the sale in the island of Lewis. The 6-inch scale had been found sufficient for Lancashire and Ireland, and he hoped the Government would speedily give us the same useful survey of all England.

THE EARL OF GIFFORD

said, that he would support the Motion of the hon. Member for Mallow, for the purpose of getting rid of the 25-inch scale, but not for the purpose of putting the 6-inch scale in its place. He had read the two bluebooks published on this subject, and he had come to the conclusion that this 25-inch scale ought never to have been commenced, and that the sooner it was abandoned the better. No doubt it would be very beneficial to the landlords of Scotland, but if they wanted a map upon this scale they ought to pay for it themselves. All practical and scientific men united in agreeing that a map upon such an immense scale was of no use whatever to the public at large, whether for geographical, geological, or any other purposes. He had calculated that the map of Scotland taken upon the 25-inch scale would be 250 yards long, would require a very extensive field to contain it, and a large telescope to inspect it and read the names at the other end of it. He would ask the House to compare the rapid and efficient system of surveying carried on in India with our comparatively slow and unsatisfactory progress at home, as instanced by the case of the Punjab, the survey of which, for revenue purposes, was conducted in the most rapid manner, after its annexation, by his friend Colonel Waugh, the present Surveyor General of India, and it was now almost completed. It was said that it would be easy to reduce a map on the 25-inch scale to another on the 1-inch scale, but if all this time were occupied in making the original map, and then another must be produced before the public could use it, at the present rate of progress none of them were likely to live long enough to see the completion of the Scotch survey. He hoped that the hon. Member for Mallow would press his Motion to a division, in order that they might see whether an end could not be put to this job—for so he must characterize it—this reckless expenditure of the public money, which, however advantageous it might be to the landowners of Scotland, who were alone interested in it, could be of no earthly use to the tax-paying public of the United Kingdom.

MR. HENLEY

said, the noble Lord (Viscount Duncan) need not have made any apology for not being a practical man, because no one could have brought forward the more salient points of his case in a more lucid manner than the noble Lord had done. The noble Lord warned the House against departing from the present system of survey, and said that the very raising of this question would cost something like £50,000 to the country. Well, that was a staggering assertion, and one that made them inquire as to how such a result could happen. The noble Lord had given a general history of the survey of this country, and he said that England had remained quiet, and had accepted the survey of her counties on a 1-inch scale. But in 1828 in rushed Ireland, and not being content to be treated in the same way as England, she got a survey on a 6-inch scale, which was said to answer admirably there, and he had heard that it was a very useful one. After Ireland had succeeded, Scotland went in for a 6-inch scale, but some evil genius arose and said that as Ireland had got the 6-inch scale, Scotland should have an increase from a 6-inch to a 25-inch scale. This it was that led to discussions in that House and the loss of £50,000 to which the noble Lord had alluded, but that was because the Scotch gentlemen were not content with a 6-inch scale. Among other objections which were made to the 25-inch scale, it was said by the noble Lord (Earl Gifford) that it never would be completed, and that was certainly an inconvenience. With regard to the expense, the noble Lord (Viscount Duncan) said that the estimate of the expense made by Colonel James was so accurate, that whereas the estimate was 1s. an acre, the survey had been executed for 11d. and a fraction, and in the districts in which the 6-inch scale was adopted the expense had been calculated at 7d. an acre, it had been executed at 6d. and a fraction. There seemed to be some confusion here in the noble Lord's figures which required explanation.

VISCOUNT DUNCAN

said, what he stated was this, that the cultivated districts would cost 11d. and a fraction an acre on the 25-inch scale, and the uncultivated districts would cost 6d. and a fraction an acre on the 6-inch scale, which would be the only one applied to uncultivated lands. He then struck an average between the survey of the cultivated and the uncultivated lands, and observed that there would be only a penny difference between the two kinds of surveys.

MR. HENLEY

said, that averages were always very deceitful. He could hardly believe that if the whole of Scotland was surveyed on the 6-inch scale, it would only cost a penny an acre less than the 25-inch scale. The noble Lord said that in Ireland the 6-inch survey had cost £1,100,000, while that of Scotland would only cost £900,000; but the noble Lord did not state the relative amount of acreage. He (Mr. Henley) had always thought the survey on a 25-inch scale a wasteful expenditure of money. He wished that an opportunity had been given of voting on this Estimate in Committee of Supply; but as the hon. Member for Mallow had taken a course in order to get the Vote reconsidered, he should be glad to vote for his Motion, for he could not see that any Scotchman had shown that any such advantage to Scotland would be derived from it, as to compensate for so great an inequality in the survey of the United Kingdom. Moreover, if it did really derive any superior advantages from the 25-inch scale, England and Ireland would no doubt ultimately demand the same, and it would be impossible to calculate the enormous amount of expenditure to which the country would ultimately be put.

LORD ELCHO

said, that having been directly alluded to by the hon. Baronet who brought forward the Motion, and also by another hon. Member, who used the word "job," as if those who had been connected with the subject had been jobbing for the proprietors of Scotland, he wished to say a few words to explain the circumstances under which the 25-inch survey took its rise. This survey was commenced when he was a Lord of the Treasury in Lord Aberdeen's Government, and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, knowing that he had been Chairman of the Committee in 1851, referred papers to him, with a request that he would draw up a memorandum on the subject. The only question which the Committee of 1851 had to decide was whether the survey should be on the 6-inch or 1-inch scale, and the decision of that Committee completely exonerated him from the grave charge of jobbing for the proprietors of Scotland, with a view of getting a large map or plan of their estates at the national expense, for the Committee, composed of eleven Scotchmen and four other members, came unanimously to the decision that the 6-inch scale adopted in Ireland was so excessive and extravagant compared with the benefits likely to accrue, that they recommended that that 6-inch scale should be abandoned, and the 1-inch scale alone proceeded with. The result was, that the counties of Scotland not surveyed on the 6-inch scale thought it extremely hard the benefit conferred on Ireland, and also on a large portion of Scotland, should not be extended to them, and fifty-nine memorials from public bodies were presented to the Government urging the concession of the larger scale. The Government of the Earl of Derby partially acceded to the memorial and directed the counties of Haddington and Fife to be surveyed on the 6-inch scale. When the Government of the Earl of Aberdeen came into office they were in this difficulty—there was a Resolution of the Committee disapproving of the 6-inch scale, and the Government of the Earl of Derby yielding to the memorial of the Scotch landowners, and directing a partial survey upon that scale. What, then, were they to do? The question being referred to him by Lord Aberdeen's Government, he drew up a memorandum stating the whole history of the matter, which was to be found in the blue-book laid before Parliament His own opinion of the soundness of the recommendation remained unchanged, but from the pressure placed upon the Government by the counties of Scotland, and from the difficulty which they felt of refusing to all what had been conceded to some counties, he was unable to recommend the Government to carry out the recommendation of the Committee of 1851. Under these circumstances, he determined to apply to Colonel Dawson upon the subject—a most able and efficient member of the engineer corps, and one who had the greatest experience in matters of this description. He (Colonel Dawson) stated it as his opinion that the 6-inch scale adopted in Ireland, whatever might be its value there, was practically useless for England and Scotland, and recommended the course to be adopted, which, in his opinion, ought to have been adopted long ago, namely, to have a survey upon a much larger scale. The Law Amendment Society in the same way recommended a survey on a large scale, with the view to introduce a more simple and efficient system of conveyance of land. Lord Langdale also suggested the same course to be adopted. But for the purpose of obtaining the best information upon the subject that he could, he determined to communicate with the learned societies and various bodies which were likely to be well informed, and with the most distinguished members of the profession throughout the country. A series of questions were accordingly drawn up and forwarded to these parties. He received 152 replies, of which thirty-two were in favour of the 6-inch scale, and 120 proposed a larger scale, varying from 24 inches to 26¾ inches—the latter scale being that adopted by surveyors when valuing for property purposes. The weight of the opinion of these learned bodies and gentlemen had been questioned by the hon. Baronet (Sir D. Norreys) but he thought the House would be satisfied, when he read some of the names, that their opinions were entitled to the greatest weight. Among those who were in favour of the larger scale were the Registrar General, the Tithe Commissioners, Sir H. de la Beche, Mr. Brunel, Mr. Stephenson, Mr. Locke, Mr. Ramsay, the President of the Geological Society, the Poor Law Board, Earl Rosse, the Astronomer Royal of Edinburgh, the General Board of Health, the Statistical Society, &c. The Law Magazine, which might fairly be supposed to represent the general public, and not the Scotch landed proprietors, strongly approved of the course taken by the Treasury, and the conclusion at which they had arrived. He would not trouble the House by reading the voluminous reports given in favour of the larger scale, as they were all contained in the blue-book, but which he was afraid, from an observation let fall by the hon. Baronet (Sir D. Norreys), that he had not read. Well, what had been the course pursued by the Government? They had appointed a second Committee which had reported in favour of the 25-inch scale. The Treasury had adopted the recommendation of the Committee, and he trusted the House would not that evening reverse the decision at which the Treasury had arrived. He could understand the course which was taken by the hon. Gentleman the Member for St. Andrew's (Mr. Ellice), who said there ought not to be more than an inch survey, but he must confess he was totally at a loss to understand upon what principle the hon. Baronet the Member for Malton proceeded, inasmuch as every one of the objections which applied to a 25-inch scale were equally applicable to one of six inches, while the latter had scarcely any of the advantages which the former possessed. He had found in the library a volume constructed upon the 6-inch scale, from an inspection of which any hon. Member might see that the moment a departure from the 1-inch scale took place it was no longer a map but a plan which was produced. He might add that in the opinion of the most competent engineers the 6-inch scale was too small for a property plan and too large for a map. He might also observe that the Tithe Commissioners recommended the adoption of the large in preference to the 6-inch scale. The origin of the adoption of the latter scale was not because it was the best for all purposes, but because it was adapted to the peculiar circumstances of Ireland. But what was the evidence of Irishmen themselves upon that subject? Sir J. M' Neill, in giving evidence before the Select Committee which had sat in 1851 in favour of the 6-inch scale, had expressed his regret that a larger scale had not been adopted in Ireland. All he (Lord Elcho) asked the House was not to give its assent to the adoption of a scale which was suited only to special purposes, but to adhere to one which would be found useful for all time and for every purpose. The question, in short, resolved itself into the old story of "Brown Bess" and the Enfield rifle, and would, he trusted, be disposed of in a similar manner. When the latter weapon was introduced there were letters from all quarters in favour of "Brown Bess," and it was urged that it had won the battle of Talavera; but fortunately those counsels were not attended to, and the superiority of the rifle as a national weapon for all purposes was now abundantly recognized. He should observe, in reference to the Estimates of Colonel Hall, that they were merely theoretical, while those of Colonel James were of a practical character. These Estimates confirmed the estimates of Colonel Hall, and established the fact that this survey, instead of 2s. might be done for 1s. an acre. The question, therefore, was whether the House would not pay a little more to have a really good and efficient survey, instead of the inefficient survey of the Irish scale? As to the relative cost, he had the authority of the Superintendent of the survey for stating that the difference would not be more than £50,000. He had the same authority for stating that if this survey were extended to England it would cost £1,500,000. The Scotch survey was commenced in 1809, and the Irish survey in 1824. It must be remembered that for the sake of the Irish survey the Scotch survey had been stopped for fifteen years, and the Scotch were, therefore, now justified in asking the House to finish their survey before they went back to Ireland. The survey in England was originally a general survey for military purposes, and was progressing from the southern to the northern counties when it was interrupted by the Irish 6-inch survey. Thus, the six northern English counties were still unsurveyed. The fault he found with the Motion of the hon. Member for Mallow was that it did not go to the bottom of the subject, for he (Lord Elcho) thought that it had been brought forward in ignorance that the English survey was now proceeded with on the 25-inch scale. It said not a word about the survey of England, and if the Resolution were agreed to the 25-inch survey would be stopped in Scotland, and might go on in England. In adopting the 25-inch scale, this country was only following the example set by the Continent during the last forty or fifty years. He trusted, therefore, that the House would sanction the continuance of a system which would be of the greatest public benefit, and which would enable transfers of property to take place from the map. He asked the House to believe that those who were responsible for the 25-inch survey had been actuated by no other motive than an anxious desire to do what was best for the public. This scale had been in operation in France for many years, where it had first been projected in 1793, and it was also in use in Wirtemberg, Bavaria, and the Continent generally, while in 1853, a statistical congress assembled at Brussels, which resolved that a survey of twenty-five inches to a mile was the smallest survey for national purposes that could be adopted with advantage. He held in his hand a blue-book containing a paper by Mr. Vignolles, the celebrated engineer, who enumerated eighteen purposes to which a survey on the large scale could be applied. Mr. Vignolles said that most of the countries of Europe had paid attention to the subject of national surveys and possessed detailed maps, constituting the basis upon which all proceedings were taken in respect to landed property and assessments for local and general purposes. The large scale of survey had met with the sanction of the most intelligent and scientific public bodies in the kingdom. It had been sanctioned by a Committee of the House of Commons, and last Session it had been sanctioned by the House itself, by a majority of 91 votes.

MR. JOSEPH LOCKE

said, that discussing such a question as this on the report of supply was very much like locking the stable door after the steed was stolen. If he had seen a way of stopping the expenditure on this large scale he should have been glad to do so; but as he had heard from the noble Lord that if the expenditure were suddenly stopped we should be involved in further difficulties, he should have great hesitation in the vote he should give. He happened to have been a member of the Committee of 1851, which resolved to stop the 6-inch scale and to adopt the 1-inch scale. He believed that the agitation in favour of the 25-inch survey, which had led to all the confusion that had arisen since the Report of that Committee on this question, had been very much got up by the officers of the Ordnance Department, whose opinions were not adopted on that occasion, and he thought it scarcely becoming in the officers of a public department to set aside the authority of a Committee of that House, and the proceedings of the Treasury founded on the Report of that Committee. In answer to a circular which had been sent to him, in common with other professional men, he had expressed the opinion that for such local purposes as drainage, transfer of land, tithe commutation, poor law assessment, &c a survey on a scale of twenty inches would suffice; but that, as to engraving for publication, he did not see the necessity for anything more costly than a 1-inch map. To that opinion he still adhered. No doubt, if the owner of a field wished to lay out his land for buildings, he must have it surveyed on a large scale; but the question was, "Ought the public to go to the expense of providing such a survey for him?" It was with a survey for general, and not for special purposes, that that House had alone to do; and there was not a man connected with his profession who did not feel that a 1-inch map was the best they could have for the general public. It was proved before the Committee that the 1-inch survey for Scotland would cost only £250,000, whereas the expense of the 6-inch scale would be £850,000. Another advantage of the 1-inch survey, besides its cheapness, was that it could be finished in much less time. He believed that no man now living would see the completion of the Scotch survey on its present scale. There were two modes of executing these surveys. The one was by marking on the maps fixed points, such as the crossing of roads, the confluence of streams, the passage over particular mountains, &c. The other was by what was called "contouring"—a very difficult and expensive system. The hon. Member here explained the process of contouring, as applied to the survey of mountains, and quoted the authority of Lieutenant Colonel Dawson to prove that it was impossible to make contour maps accurate, and that, even if accurate, they would be useless. He wished to ask, was this contouring to proceed, or was it not? If it were to proceed, what limit was the Government to fix upon its cost? Unless they knew what it would cost, they ought to stop it at once. He (Mr. Locke) was entirely in favour of maps with fixed levels, and, like Colonel Dawson, decidedly opposed to the system of contouring. They had the cadastral maps of France and other States paraded before them, but none of those countries had maps on the scale of twenty-five inches to the mile; in fact, France had not a map published equal to our own one inch one. He also wished to know distinctly whether or not all the engraved maps were to be confined to the 1-inch scale?

THE LORD ADVOCATE

said, he thought it very desirable that the House should understand the precise question which it had to decide. The Motion originally placed on the table by the hon. Baronet was clear and intelligible. Now, however, by proposing to reduce the Estimate by the amount asked for the Scotch survey, he had left the House in the greatest possible uncertainty as to what was to be done on this subject. If they were to have a national survey at all, surely the wisest course was to have it executed on the plan best adapted to their objects, provided they could afford the expense. But the very worst plan of all was one which was constantly changing, and by which what they built up in one year they pulled down the next, thereby incurring an expenditure which was wholly profitless. The hon. Baronet who introduced the discussion eulogized the 6-inch scale, as applied to Ireland, and treated the 1-inch scale with contempt. The hon. Gentleman who spoke last, however, pronounced as strongly against the 6-inch scale as against the 25-inch. The question they had to determine was not the abstract merits of different scales, but what was best to be done to finish a survey which was now in progress, and on which a considerable outlay had already been incurred? Of the cultivated districts of Scotland two-thirds had already been surveyed, some upon the 6-inch, and some upon the 25-inch scale. With regard to the expense involved, the most extraordinary statements had gone forth. It had been said that it would cost three, four, or five millions sterling; but the fact was, that it would not come to so much as the Irish survey; the latter having cost £1,290,000, whilst the former would not exceed the sum of £1,000,000. In some respects, too, a 1-inch scale was more expensive than a 25-inch scale, because on the former skilled persons had to be employed, whereas on the latter, which was inferior work, inferior workmen and boys could be employed with perfect safety. His noble Friend (Viscount Duncan) had scattered to the winds the unjust imputation that a 25-inch scale was desired by the Scotch proprietors, in order that they might obtain maps of their estates at the public expense. Besides, this imputation betrayed the ignorance of those who used it, as to what the survey was. It was never meant for a map, and therefore this imputation could not apply. Some hon. Gentlemen had talked of a 25-inch scale as an enormity and an absurdity, but France, Bavaria, and Belgium had been surveyed on that scale. The 25-inch scale was never meant for a map. One inch was the proper scale for a map; but nothing less than a 25-inch scale survey could show the details of a country. It was said that, although continental countries had made 25-inch scale surveys, yet they were never published. That was true; the expense would be too great. But copies of those surveys might be obtained at a very trifling expense by the anastatic process. The Ordnance survey of England had been taken upon a scale so minute that the Tithe Commutation Commissioners found it was useless for their purposes; and, in addition to the £2,000,000 which they had expended on a survey upon a scale of 26¾ inches, £1,500,000 had been expended by the Enclosure Commissioners. He believed that much money would have been saved by the railway proprietors in this country if there had been an Ordnance survey of it upon a large scale some years ago. The hon. Baronet (Sir D. Norreys) had stated, in a tone of indignation, that all the Members who had sat upon the Scotch survey question were Scotchmen; but he appeared to have forgotten that Lord Monteagle (then Mr. Spring Rice) presided over a Committee comprizing fourteen Irish Members with reference to the Irish survey. It should be remembered, at the same time, that this survey originated with a Committee of the House. Even the 6-inch survey of Ireland was described in the Parliamentary Report as one of the most useful acts of practical legislation which had ever been effected for that country. This survey having been completed, then came the Scotch and English surveys; and perhaps it might not be known to some hon. Members, that the survey of England went on with that of Scotland, and at a rather quicker pace. The scale in the two countries varied together from the 6-inch to the 25-inch scale, and 9,349 miles of England had been surveyed, 1,407 of them being on the 25-inch scale, while only 8,000 miles had been surveyed in Scotland. The real question for the House to consider was, whether they would pursue a retrograde course on this question. The staff of surveyors was now at work; all the preparations were made for continuing the Scotch survey on the 25-inch scale, which would admit of the most minute admeasurements, and he asked the House whether it would be worth while once more to change the system adopted for the sake, of saving some £50,000, the work which would then be produced being one which would not be creditable to the country. He trusted the House would look upon this as a national question. If there was to be a survey at all, let it be the best they could procure, and he believed that the money would be found well spent.

COLONEL BOLDERO

wished to remind the hon. Member that the map on the large scale which he mentioned, for England, had been defrayed out of the pockets of private gentlemen. As for the opinion of Colonel Dawson, one of the best surveyors, no doubt, in England, that gentleman spoke rather as a tithe commissioner than as an engineer. On the contrary, all the engineers disapproved of a map on this immense scale, and Colonel Dawson stood alone. The reason for applying the 6-inch scale to Ireland was, the unsatisfactory condition, of that country at the time. It was over populated, and the gentry dare not survey their own estates for fear of exciting the suspicion of the peasantry; therefore the Government stepped in, and surveyed the whole. That survey of Ireland was, he believed, one of the most useful, perfect, and complete which any kingdom in the world possessed; and even as regards the Ordnance survey of England, he must remind hon. Members who spoke against it, that engineers were now content to walk a hundred miles over the ground with an Ordnance map in their hand, and to come afterwards before them in Committee to give their opinion. That showed the usefulness of the map.

MR. E. ELLICE (St. Andrew's)

said, he would not discuss the question whether Scotland was to have an estate plan or not, but if the House thought proper to provide, at the public expense, detailed maps of all the estates in Scotland, he had no doubt Scotchmen would be very glad to avail themselves of those maps. The inevitable consequence of such a decision must, however, be the extension of the same system to England and to Ireland, which, according to Sir C. Trevelyan, would involve an expenditure of some £4,000,000 or £5,000,000, although he (Mr. Ellice) was disposed to believe that if that amount were doubled it would not be an exaggerated estimate. The Lord Advocate had stated that two-thirds of Scotland were to be surveyed upon the 6-inch scale, but he (Mr. Ellice) would ask any one acquainted with that country what possible benefit could result from surveying uncultivated and mountainous districts upon such a scale? He knew that the survey already published included the estates of his hon. Friend the Member for Ross, who was probably the only person who had purchased a copy, and that copy had been placed in a cellar, because it was so large that it was perfectly useless. He (Mr. Ellice) considered that the survey of the mountainous districts of Scotland upon a 6-inch scale involved a most unjustifiable waste of public money. The Report of the Committee of 1851, of which his noble Friend (Viscount Duncan) was Chairman, denounced the 6-inch scale, but that noble Lord was now supporting the Lord Advocate in an attempt to saddle the country with the expense of maps which could be of no possible use. If, however, the application of a 6-inch scale to the islands of Scotland was objectionable, how much more absurd was the adoption of a 25-inch scale! Yet, in defiance of the engagements which had been entered into with the House, the 25-inch scale was adopted with regard to the islands of Scotland. He was speaking upon the authority of a Return made by order of the House, from which he found that the island of Harris, in Inverness-shire, was being surveyed and plotted upon a scale of 25 inches to the mile. He could not conceive anything more absurd than applying a scale of 6 inches, much more 25 inches, to that island, and he thought the House was justified in complaining that its wishes had not been carried out by the Treasury. The survey of Scotland seemed to be in a state of utter confusion, and he thought the best course would be either to prepare a map on a 1-inch scale, or to apply the 25-inch survey to the cultivated districts, and carry it out upon a regular system. He found that, in consequence of the diminution of the Vote, no less than 650 men who had been engaged upon the Ordnance survey, and who were trained to the work, had been discharged, and the services of about 200 more would be dispensed with at the end of this month. He thought this was injudicious, because as the survey had been commenced it ought to be completed efficiently. He would suggest that in those counties of Scotland where the survey had not been commenced it should be conducted on the scale of 2 inches to the mile, but that where it had been commenced upon the 25-inch scale it should be proceeded with only to such an extent as was necessary to furnish materials for maps upon a reduced scale of 1 inch.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

Of all the difficulties which I remember the greatest would be that in which the Government would be placed if the Motion of my hon. Friend the Member for Mallow (Sir D. Norreys) were carried. We are told that if that Motion should be agreed to it would be the duty of the Government to withdraw this estimate, to present another, and to carry into effect the wishes and opinions of the House. Now, I defy any man who has listened to this discussion to know what is the opinion and what are the wishes of the House, for almost every hon. Gentleman who has spoken has had a different opinion upon the matter in question. My hon. Friend who made the Motion condemns the 25-inch survey and the 6-inch survey, with a view to a 1-inch map, and is for a 6-inch survey and a 6-inch map. The hon. Baronet who spoke on the other side (Sir W. Jolliffe) is for a larger scale for England. My hon. Friend who last addressed the House is for nothing but a 2-inch survey and a 1-inch map. It would be utterly impossible for any Government acting upon this debate to know what in the world they should do, and it would end in their doing nothing. The only result at which we could arrive would be to stop the survey altogether, to have no map, to leave that part of Scotland which has not yet been finished entirely unsurveyed. I must entreat the House to discard those enormous exaggerations which have been used by hon. Gentlemen who have supported this Motion. We are told that this 25-inch survey is to cost I do not know how many millions, and that if completed for that kingdom it must be applied to England, which will cost £4,000,000 or £5,000,000 more. It is true that if this survey succeeds in Scotland it may be wished for in England, but it cannot be carried out without the consent of this House embodied in a Vote; and, therefore, if hon. Gentlemen think that it would be an improvident application of the public money to re-survey the whole of England upon the larger scale, it is perfectly ridiculous to tell the House that that must be the necessary consequence of completing the work which is in progress in Scotland. I think it was a great misfortune and a great waste of public money that the survey of England was conducted upon so small a scale. I differ in opinion from those who think that a 1-inch map is sufficient for all purposes. It would be much better if the map of England had been on a 2-inch scale; but that is done. We are not talking about the re-survey of those parts of England which have already been surveyed. The House must remember, however, that this is not simply a Scotch question, because the northern counties of England are being surveyed upon the same scale as the cultivated parts of Scotland. Therefore, this is an English as well as a Scotch question. It is a national question, and one in which the whole country is interested. It has been admitted that the 2-inch survey with a view to a 1-inch map is totally insufficient for the populous districts of England; and there we have been obliged to have a 6-inch map. I have seen that 6-inch map, and I defy any man to say that in places where houses are thick, the divisions numerous, and the country thickly populated, that map is satisfactory for any purposes but those of a common map. If we are to have a survey of the country, surely it is best that it should be sufficient for all the purposes to which a survey can be applied. The hon. Member for Honiton (Mr. Joseph Locke) asked whether we intended to publish a. 25-inch, or only a 1-inch map? Undoubtedly it is not intended to publish in the ordinary sense of the word a map on the 25-inch scale, but my hon. Friend knows that scientific improvements enable you to obtain copies of that 25-inch map at so cheap a rate that a very few purchases will repay the cost of their transference. For the purposes of the general public it is not intended to do more than to publish a map on the 1-inch scale, similar to that which has been published for England. When we are told of the space which these maps would cover, I should like to ask hon. Gentlemen whether they know of any room which is sufficiently spacious to allow the 1-inch map for England to be spread on its floor? That is no test of the utility of a map. The 25-inch map is not intended to be put together in a room or to be spread out upon a table. It is in sheets, and these sheets are available for those who want them. I should like to know what area any one would think sufficient for the spreading out of the map of Ireland. My hon. Friend behind me (Mr. Ellice) says that it is absurd to survey and plot down the uncultivated districts of Scotland upon this 6-inch scale, but that has been done with the whole of Ireland, and there are in Ireland large districts as totally devoid of enclosures and of marked objects as are the highlands of Scotland. The island of Harris is not surveyed on the 25-inch scale. It is surveyed, as I understand on the best authority, only on the 6-inch scale. That survey is carried on in conjunction with the hydrographical survey carried on by the Admiralty both on the coast and inland, and the only portions surveyed on the large scale are the small patches to which my hon. Friend has referred. I do entreat the House not to give way to that vacillation of purpose which would be indicated by the adoption of the Motion of my hon. Friend the Member for Mallow. There have already been too many changes in the arrangements as to the survey of Scotland. The difference between the expense of the 25-inch survey and that of the plan which my hon. Friend the Member for Mallow recommends, is stated not to be more than £100,000 for the whole of Scotland, not more than £50,000 for what remains to be done; and will the House, for the sate of £50,000, mar a great national work, and deprive a large part of Scotland of the advantages which must result from the 25-inch survey? It is said that this is only for Scotland and for the landowners of Scotland. Why, what is Scotland, except a very important part of the United Kingdom? If hon. Gentlemen go on arguing that nothing is to be done at the public expense for any part of the United Kingdom, they entirely put an end to public works and reduce all our operations to parish undertakings. Let each parish pay its own expenses, and never let the public go beyond the bounds of these small divisions. If England had been surveyed upon the 25-inch scale, we should have saved the two millions of money which were spent on the maps for the tithe commutation. It is said that these maps were paid for by private individuals. Private individuals ! Why, they were paid for by all the counties and parishes of England. They were paid for by the community, and it is the same thing to those who pay whether they pay by a county rate or by a general tax.

MR. HENLEY: The tithe maps were not paid for out of the county rates.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: I may have made a mistake as to that, but they were paid for by the owners of all the lands in the parishes, and the owners of all the lands in all the parishes in England are a pretty large portion of the community, and may, without exaggeration, be called a very important part of the public. I am told that the sums thus paid for surveys of no earthly use, except for parish objects, exceed the amount which, if properly applied, would have sufficed for the completion of a national work which would have been available for all purposes. I therefore hope that the House will not agree to the Motion of my hon. Friend. I may state, that it is intended to go on with the 1-inch map as soon as possible, and we hope that in a very few years we shall be able to finish the survey of Scotland, and to publish a complete 1-inch map.

MR. TITE

, who with difficulty made himself heard, said, he wished to explain that the expense which had been referred to was not the expense of the survey, but the expense of drawing, engraving, and printing maps on a large scale. The fact was, that the 6-inch scale was large enough for all practical purposes; and when they came to plot, to engrave, and to print upon the 25-inch scale, he believed that the estimate which had been spoken of would be enormously exceeded.

Question put, "That £151,744 stand part of the Resolution."

The House divided:—Ayes 162; Noes 172: Majority 10.

On Question that £115,744 stand part of the Resolution.

MR. BLACKBURN

said, that he should take the sense of the House upon the question. As the progress of the Scotch scale would be entirely stopped by the decision to which the House had just come, it would be but fair that the English survey also should be stopped, and he thought, therefore, that the Vote should be reduced by £24,430, the amount charged in the Estimate for the expenses of the English survey for this year.

Question put, "That £115,744 be inserted instead thereof."

The House divided:—Ayes 290; Noes 22: Majority 208.

LORD ELCHO

wished to put before the House the position in which the question now stood. It was first decided by a majority of ten that the 25-inch scale should not be continued in Scotland. The next question that arose was, what was to be the Vote for the survey in England. An hon. Gentleman moved that the Vote for England should be reduced by a certain sum, his object being to spite England for what had been done in the case of Scotland, and the result was, that a principle which was negatived in the case of Scotland was affirmed in that of England. He had nothing further to add, except that he congratulated the House on the position in which it had placed itself.

SIR DENHAM NORREYS

said, he fully accepted the interpretation which the noble Lord had put upon the matter. He accepted the first Vote as a condemnation of the 25-inch scale, not only in Scotland but everywhere. He trusted that it would not now be carried out, either in Scotland or in England, The noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) had stated that the 25-inch scale was being carried out in Durham, and had taunted him with the absurdity of the course he had pursued on that account. He did not know on what authority the noble Lord made that statement; but the Ordnance map appended to the Estimate was headed thus: "Index to the Ordnance Survey of England and Wales, on the Scale of Six Inches to the Statute Mile." That was his justification for having voted as he had done in the last division, for had he believed that the 25-inch scale was being carried on in England he should not have opposed the Vote for the same scale in Scotland.

MR. HENLEY

believed that the House had intended to put a stop to the 25-inch scale for England as well as for Scotland. When it was proposed to reduce the Vote by £34,000, it was plainly stated that the effect of that Amendment being carried would be, that the Government would have to bring up an amended Estimate, and it was supposed that in that Estimate they would reduce the survey for both countries.

MR. BLACKBURN

said, that he must repudiate the construction of desire to spite England, which had been put upon the Amendment he had proposed. Although it was quite true the map to which his hon. Friend the Member for Mallow referred was on the 6-inch scale, there must be some mistake, because Colonel James told him only an hour ago he had never seen it.

MR. STEUART

wished to know in what sense the Government interpreted the two divisions which had taken place.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, that he would shorten the discussion by saying that the Government looked upon the first Vote at which the House had arrived as implying that the opinion of the House was, that no further surveys should be made upon the 25-inch scale. When a survey had been already made upon that scale, as he believed was the case in the county of Durham, it would, of course, remain as a matter of record; but he interpreted the Vote of the House as implying that no further survey ought to be made upon that scale.

MR. E. ELLICE (St. Andrew's)

said, that the document appended to the Estimates was calculated to mislead the House. It was on the 6-inch scale, and now they were told that the gentleman who had charge of the survey knew nothing about it, although it was made under himself, and the map had his name attached. Mr. Soffit, an eminent mining engineer, declared before the Committee of which he (Mr. Ellice) was a member, that a map of twenty-five inches to the mile would be inadequate for mineral property, and that a map of eleven feet per mile, or something like that, would be required. They had this fact before them, that Estimates were made and put before the House on one scale of survey, whilst the Ordnance had been conducting a 25-inch survey, and that apparently without the knowledge of the Treasury?

MR. ROEBUCK

wished to ask Mr. Speaker a question upon a matter of form. The House was now called upon to affirm a Vote supposed to have been arrived at by some Committee, but there was no Committee then sitting.

MR. SPEAKER

said, the business before the House was the bringing up of a Resolution of a Committee of Supply. What the House had done was this—to amend the Resolution passed in Committee of Supply. The question he had to put, therefore, was, that the House agree with the Resolution of the Committee so amended.

Resolution, as amended, agreed to. Subsequent Resolutions agreed to.