§ Mr. MASSEY in the Chair.
§ (In the Committee).
§ (1.) £3,965, Office in London under Local Government Act.
§ MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he must complain of the increase of £1,385 in this Vote over the Vote of last year, occasioned by an increase for clerks' and inspectors' salaries, and for increased travelling and personal expenses. The sum of £2,600 for inspectors' salaries was enormous, and there ought to be some explanation in regard to them.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, the Vote had reference to the Act of last year, and the department by which it was administered was in reality a sub-department of the Home Office. He considered the Local Government Act a useful and wholesome Act if properly administered. Its object was to diminish the expense of obtaining 752 local Acts. For this purpose it was necessary that there should be inspectors. The business under this Act had increased on account of the demands of the public, and the augmentation in the expense indicated the augmentation of the labour since last year. During the last year bye-laws had been examined and confirmed in 66 cases, and, if the Committee bore in mind the expense which would have been incurred in obtaining 66 local Acts, he thought they would be satisfied that the existing system was, at all events, a cheap one. The Act had been adopted in 35 boroughs and towns; boundaries had been settled in 32 cases; sanitary works, &c, had been sanctioned in 42 cases; miscellaneous inquiries had been instituted in 24 cases; and provisional orders had been submitted to Parliament in 12 cases, in four of which they had been confirmed, and the remaining eight were under consideration.
§ MR. EDWIN JAMESobserved, that this Vote had been postponed in order that the Government might inform the Committee whether the damages and costs recovered in the courts of law in cases questioning the decisions of the inspectors had been defrayed from the public Exchequer, or by the local Boards which had acted under the authority of the inspectors. He had received a letter from a gentleman who was formerly a member of that House (Sir J. Tyrell), stating that, with the sanction of inspectors acting under this Board, the sewage of Chelmsford had been turned into a river which ran past his residence three miles from that town, and that he suffered most severely from the nuisance. He (Mr. James) thought the Committee ought to be informed whether the damages and costs in the cases to which he had referred had been defrayed by the inhabitants by local rates, whether they had been paid by the inspectors, or whether they were charged upon the Exchequer.
§ MR. LAINGsaid, that since the previous discussion, he had caused a careful search to be made in the Treasury, and not the slightest trace could be found of any public money having been applied to such purposes as those to which the hon. and learned Gentleman referred, or of any claims of such a nature having been made upon the Treasury. He presumed, therefore, that the damages must have been paid by the local Boards out of the rates.
§ MR. CONINGHAMsaid, he had no doubt that gentlemen who had houses in the vicinity of moving streams were greatly 753 annoyed when the drainage of towns was turned into them, but it must be remembered that Parliament had deliberately adopted that system with reference to the drainage of the metropolis.
§ MR. PALKobserved, that the expenses under this head appeared to have increased very considerably, and he wished to know what duties in London were discharged by the inspectors and clerks. He was of opinion that the Vote might be reduced.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he could assure the Committee that there was not the slightest wish on the part of the Government to maintain any unnecessary amount of establishments under the Local Government Act. That Act was passed about this time last year and did not continue the old Board of Health, for none of the Commissioners who were connected with that Board had anything to do with this department, which was, strictly speaking, a sub-department of the Home Office, and had to consider the various requisitions and reports received from the localities which applied to be placed under the operation of the Act. No important measure could be taken without the consent of the Secretary of State, and, in fact, without the sanction of Parliament. He had made inquiries as to the necessity of the existing establishment, and had received a positive assurance that its maintenance was requisite. He might observe that it was quite a mistake to suppose that there was any Board in Whitehall Place. The only Boards referred to by the Act were the local Boards, and the powers were all exercised by the Secretary of State.
§ SIR JOHN SHELLEYsaid, he was of opinion that some more efficient check ought to be placed upon the proceedings of the inspectors. He knew nothing of those gentlemen beyond this—that they had generally shown complete ignorance of the commonest rudiments of sanitary drainage, and he thought therefore that they ought to be subjected to some controlling power.
§ MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he thought the local towns who received the benefit of the Act should pay the expense of the Board.
§ Vote agreed to.
§
Motion made, and Question proposed,—
That a sum, not exceeding £26,275, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to pay the Salaries and Expenses of sundry temporary Commissions, to the 31st day of March, 1860.
§ COLONEL SYKESsaid, he wished to call attention to the fact that the total amount of this Vote was £33,275, and that the increase upon the Vote of last year was no less than £28,873. He thought that careful attention should be paid to the objects of these Commissions, and that the House should not be too ready to grant public money for their maintenance. He might instance especially the Commission relating to the laws of Jersey, which had cost no less than £6,000, almost the value of the island.
§ MR. BRADYsaid, the Harbours of Refuge Commission had already cost £3,000. He wished to know whether it was true that the bottom of the harbour at Holyhead was of solid rock, as he understood that anchors were of no use there.
MR. A. SMITHsaid, that, after what had taken place during the Session of 1846, he was astonished to find that there were no less than four members of the Commission appointed to institute an inquiry on the subject of Harbours of Refuge who occupied official positions, and who, having given evidence before the Committee of the House of Commons, were identified with certain views. He therefore hoped that before any Government submitted Votes to the House in consequence of the recommendations of the Commission hon. Members themselves would carefully read and consider the evidence which had been taken by that Commission.
§ MR. ALCOCKsaid, he could not but complain of the readiness exhibited by the late Government in issuing a Commission to inquire into the Sale of Liquors in Scotland, which had cost the country a £1,000. On the other hand, he might state that the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the "Metropolitan Tolls" had done their duty, and proved themselves to be men of business.
§ Mr. W. WILLIAMSsaid, that the money of eight of the items in this Vote had been drawn from "Civil Contingencies," and consequently the sums would be voted twice.
§ MR. LAINGsaid, that as to the last point he might state that as the Government could not tell how much would be required for the Commissions no Estimates could be formed. The money was taken from Civil Contingencies and then replaced after the Votes were granted. Nothing would be done in reference to Harbours of Refuge until after the House had had the 755 fullest opportunity of considering the whole question.
§ MR. EDWIN JAMESsaid, this Vote included an item of £2,361 for the Statute Law Consolidation Commission. It appeared from a note appended to the Estimate that an additional expenditure would be requisite for fees to draughtsmen employed to draw bills, the amount awarded for that purpose in the year 1858 having been £1,300. The Commission was appointed in 1854, and he believed that up to the present moment they had literally done nothing towards the consolidation or improvement of the statute law of England, but that, on the contrary, they had been an incubus upon and an impediment to any attempt at amendment, for, whenever attempts were made by private or official Members of that House to consolidate the criminal statute law, they were always told that a Commission existed which was dealing with the subject. The late Attorney General for Ireland (Mr. Whiteside), while he was in office, applied himself to the amendment and consolidation of a very large portion of the criminal statutes; but when he laid the results of his labours upon the table of the House, the Attorney General for England stated that a consolidation of the statute law was already in progress, and that they must wait and see what was the result of the proceedings of the existing Commission. Before the late Attorney General for Ireland placed his Bills upon the table the late Attorney General for England (Sir F. Kelly) expressed his readiness to bring forward Bills for the consolidation of the criminal law in England; but nothing came of the proposal, nor was it likely that anything would be done so long as they bad a Commissioner at £1,000 a year nursing the old statutes. The Attorney General had said, in answer to the right hon. and learned Gentleman opposite (Mr. Whiteside), "Leave the matter to me, not to the Commission; and I will undertake myself to produce early next Session some measures for the consolidation of the statutes;" so that the Attorney General had taken upon himself the labours of the Statute Law Commission. Why, then, he asked, was it necessary to continue that Commission?
MR. WHITESIDEsaid, he regretted that none of the law officers of the Crown were present to explain the views of the Government upon this important subject. As his hon. and learned Friend 756 had said, if the present system were pursued no satisfactory result would ever be attained. His hon. and learned Friend had even understated the case, for in addition to the item of £2,361, included in the Vote, he found from a note in the next page of the estimate that work had been done the fees for which were not yet settled, so that £2,361 did not accurately represent the expenses incurred for this purpose within the year. He had in his hands the Report of the Statute Law Commission, which was signed by Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Brougham, Lord Cranworth, Sir Page Wood, and other gentlemen of eminence in the legal profession, who in February, 1859, after stating that as many as ninety consolidating Bills might be expected, suggested that some barrister of eminence should be selected to devote his whole time and attention to the superintendence of the work; and they added that this gentleman would have no difficulty in parcelling out the different Bills, and that, as each Bill was completed, it would be his duty to compare it carefully with the register, to ascertain that it embodied all the existing Acts, and to point out any incongruities which might be apparent. The Commissioners stated that the general improvement of the statute law was beyond the scope of their duties, and he thought the House ought to determine whether this work was to consist of the mere copying out and putting into smaller compass the criminal and general statute law, or whether, as the Commissioners stated they had no power to "improve" the statute law, it was worth while continuing a Commission which could not improve, but could only pursue the work of consolidation. The Commission, however, had collected a great deal of useful matter, and issued several reports, which were important, although they were not always consistent with each other. What they wanted to know now was what course the Government intended to pursue with respect to this subject. As Mr. Bellenden Ker had resigned his office it was hardly necessary to continue the Vote.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he also would express his regret at the absence of the law officers of the Crown, but he would afford the Committee all the information in his power with respect to the intentions of the Government. The right hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. Whiteside) was mistaken in supposing that a larger amount than that now asked for was to 757 be applied to this purpose, for if the Committee assented to the Vote it would not be in the power of the Government to apply more than £2,361 to the consolidation of the statutes during the present year. [Mr. WHITESIDE: The fees to which he had referred might be paid from the Civil Contingencies.] At all events, the Vote for the Statute Law Commission for this year was £2,361, and it was not intended to fill up the office of the paid Commissioner which was then vacant by the retirement of Mr. Bellenden Ker. The question was, then, whether it was worth while to get rid of the name of the Statute Law Commission, when there would be a certain number of unpaid Commissioners, with a secretary and clerks, who would afford them assistance. It was not intended, as he had said, to establish a system of paid Commissioners. As hon. Gentlemen were aware, this was a subject of considerable difficulty, and most discordant opinions prevailed among professional men of the greatest ability as to the proper mode of codifying our laws. At one time a plan was proposed, and was very favourably entertained, for reducing the common law into a written form, and placing the whole of the criminal law in writing by means of an incorporation of the common law with the statute law. After considerable discussion, however, that plan has been rejected, and they had now to deal with the more easy and feasible proposition of simply consolidating the existing statute law. To this object the labours of the Commission had been directed for some time past, and they had made a most elaborate register, containing a complete index to the different enactments, without which it would be impossible to proceed safely in the work of consolidation. That work had, to a great extent, been accomplished; the subject had been mapped out into a number of divisions, and considerable progress had been made in the consolidation of the statutes. About ninety consolidating statutes had been prepared, and it was reckoned that the whole statute law of England might be distributed in 300 statutes. There was no doubt that if that work could be accomplished it would be of immense advantage, not only to students and practitioners of the law, but to all persons connected with business, as well as to the public at large. Great advantages, he need scarcely say, had resulted from the consolidation of criminal statutes, of the revenue Acts, and of other branches of the law, which had already 758 been effected. The desire of the Government was, that the process of consolidation should be carried on under the authority of the Lord Chancellor, the Attorney General, and those eminent law Lords and Members of the legal profession who now constituted the Statute Law Commission. At the same time he thought it was evident that work of this description, requiring minute research, great labour and accurate professional knowledge could not be carried on without adequate payment; and although it was far from the desire of the Government to convert the Commission into a source of patronage, or to employ any persons whose services were not required, it was obvious that reasonable remuneration must be given, while care was taken that the public had full value for their expenditure. The right hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. Whiteside) had said that the Statute Law Commissioners disavowed all intention of improving the statute law, and he (Sir George Lewis) conceived that they had taken a perfectly correct view of their duties. He did not think they ought to have such a power, but that they should continue their work upon the understanding that their business was essentially one of consolidation and not of new legislation. It was the business of Parliament to provide for new legislation, and the Commissioners ought to confine themselves to the duly of consolidating the existing law, without attempting to improve that law, which was properly the duty of Parliament. It would be utterly impossible for Parliament to discuss these consolidating measures in the same way in which they would discuss new questions of legislation; for if thirty, forty, or fifty consolidating Bills were placed upon the table, they could not go through them clause by clause in Committee, but must to a great extent take them on the credit of the body by whom they were prepared. Indeed, unless Parliament could feel satisfied that the Bill laid upon the table were a faithful compilation and digest of the existing laws without the introduction of any important innovation, it was utterly impossible that the consolidation of the statute law could ever be effected upon a large scale.
§ MR. WISEsaid, that as the paid Commissioner was to be abolished, the best course would be to wind up the whole affair and make a fresh start on this subject, and that if the Government nominated two or three first-rate lawyers to perform the duty of consolidating the statutes, and 759 paid them properly, they would soon have Bills prepared in such a manner that they might at once be submitted to the House. If the Government did not withdraw the item for the Statute Law Commission from this Vote, he would move the rejection of that item.
§ SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, that the House was to blame for the condition in which the statute law now stood. When hon. Members brought in amending Bills they ought, instead of repealing this or that enactment, to consolidate the whole matter. Let dead and useless statutes be repealed, and if, as was once said, the statute law could be reduced to four volumes, that would indeed be a great advantage to the country.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he hoped the Committee would not come to a decision for omitting the item. He had already explained that there was no more to be a paid Commissioner, and if it was the wish of the House that this particular Statute Law Commission should cease, he had no doubt that the Vote could be proposed next year under some different title. [Laughter.] What he meant to say was that if the jealousy of the Committee was directed against the Statute Law Commission, and if they wished that the work to be done should be placed more directly under the Executive Government, the present item might in future disappear from the Estimates, with the understanding that the business now executed under the Statute Law Commission should be continued, though in a different form.
§ MR. WISEsaid, he would ask what was the use, if a paid Commissioner was not to be appointed, of voting his salary of £1,000? When Sir R. Peel consolidated the statutes he required no Commission.
§ MR. EDWIN JAMESsaid, he understood that the hon. and learned Attorney General had stated, that between this and next Session he would prepare certain consolidated Bills. That hon. and learned Gentleman did not want this Statute Law Commission, and if he needed assistance, no doubt the House would be prepared to pay for it afterwards under the head of Civil Contingencies. The Committee ought to get rid of this Commission altogether by getting rid of the item.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he had no 760 objection to reduce the item by £1,000, the salary of the Commissioner. It appeared that there was now but a mere verbal difference on this question, for the hon. and learned Gentleman said, he was quite content to give every assistance to the Attorney General for consolidating the Statutes from the Civil Contingencies. That was substantially what he (Sir G. Lewis) had proposed—namely, to bring the matter under the control of the Executive Government, but the Civil Contingencies constituted a fund voted, not for any specific purpose, but to meet unforeseen demands.
MR. WHITESIDEobserved, that the Commissioners themselves stated that they did not intend to make any fresh consolidations of importance, because they awaited the result of an inquiry commenced by a Select Committee of the House of Commons as to the expediency of appointing an officer of the Houses of Parliament to revise and improve the current legislation.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he would point out to his right hon. Friend that the Committee he had referred to had no reference to consolidating existing statutes.
§ SIR JOHN SHELLEYsaid, he thought that what the Attorney General had undertaken to do was more likely to be well done than if executed by this Commission. It was not certain that that learned Gentleman would require the assistance which had been spoken of, but if he did, no doubt it would be granted to him.
§ COLONEL FRENCHsaid, he did not see, as the Government had undertaken to do away with the Commissioner, what was the use of maintaining the body after the head was cut off.
§
Motion made, and Question put,—
That the item of '£2,361, for the Statute Law Consolidation Commission,' be omitted from the proposed Vote.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 91; Noes 80: Majority 11.
§
(2.) Original Question, as amended,—
That a sum, not exceeding £23,914, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to pay the Salaries and Expenses of sundry temporary Commissions, to the 31st day of March, 1860,
put and agreed to.
§
(3.) Motion made, and Question proposed,—
That a sum, not exceeding £20,095, be grant-
761
ed to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Fees, Salaries, Expenses, and Compensations, payable under the provisions of the Patent Law Amendment Act, to the 31st day of March, 1860:"—
§ MR. BRADYsaid, he wished to call attention to the expenses a poor man of genius was put to for obtaining a patent. The consequence frequently was, that he was obliged to sell his invention to some wealthy person, who thus obtained nearly nil the reward which should belong to the inventor. There were a number of officers and clerks attached to the Patent Office, and their allowances occasioned the expense in obtaining patents. There was also a sum of £8,300 in the Vote payable to the law officers of the Crown in England. He had no objection to the law officers being properly paid, but he objected to their being paid in this way. They ought not to be paid out of the pockets of the poor man. He had no hesitation in saying, that it was a tax on the intellect of the poor, and therefore he felt it his duty to propose that the Vote should not be agreed to.
§ MR. LAINGsaid, that the course the hon. Gentleman proposed would defeat his own object, for his Motion, if carried, would prove an injury instead of a benefit to the poor inventor. The expenses of obtaining a patent were by the change in the law greatly reduced. The registration Court and the Museum had proved of the greatest utility, for nothing was more important for a humble man, before going to the expense of taking out a patent, than to ascertain whether a similar patent had been registered beforehand. It was mainly to establish a machinery for this purpose that the expense for the Patent Offices was rendered necessary. The fees now fixed were on the lowest rate, simply rendering the office self-supporting. The question concerning the law officers of the Crown was discussed very much last year, and it was then very clearly shown that the fees they received were not mere honorary fees, but every patent which passed through their hands involved points respecting the rights of the Crown, on which it was necessary that the Crown should take the opinion of the law officers, and if a charge were made, according to the usual rate of professional fees, that charge would be larger than the one that appeared in the present Vote.
§ MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, the amount received by the law officers of the Crown out of the inventive genius of the country amounted to the extraordinary sum of 762 £8,300. He would move that these fees be reduced one-half. He would like to see the fees go into the Exchequer, and the law officers of the Crown paid by salary. He understood they received three times as much as the Judges of the land, while the business was actually done by a few clerks.
§ SIR EDWARD GROGANsaid, that there ought to be branch patent offices in Dublin and Edinburgh, fie was disposed to agree in the Motion of the hon. Member for Lambeth. The Crown lawyers ought to be paid and well paid, but they ought not to be paid at the expense of the poor inventor.
§ MR. WISEsaid, he could not Vote for the Amendment of the hon. Member for Lambeth; for if these fees were abolished, other provision must be made for the law officers.
§ COLONEL SYKESobserved, that there would be a surplus of £20,000 next year on the £68,500, which was likely to be raised from the inventive intellect of the country. He hoped that some of this money would be applied to reduce the stamp duty, and the other expenses which debarred the poor man from bringing out his invention.
§ MR. LAINGobserved, that the law officers had to give their opinion on the legality of patents before the seal was put to them, and it was of importance to the industry of the country, and to poor inventors as well, that the records of the Patent-office should not be filled up with a number of patents of doubtful validity occasioning difficulties and litigation.
§ MR. BRADYobserved that at present there was scarcely a day passed without litigation of the most serious character being carried on with regard to patents.
§ MR. EDWIN JAMESsaid, he believed that the law officers of the Crown had a good deal to do with respect to patents, and nothing would be more disastrous than that people should get patents for all sorts of things without any proper investigation.
§
Whereupon Motion made, and Question,
That the item of £8,300 for Fees payable to the Law Officers of the Crown in England be reduced by the sum of £4,150,
put, and negatived.
§ Original Question put, and agreed to.
§ The following Vote was also agreed to.
§ (4.) £9,254, Board of Fisheries Scotland.
§ (5.) £1,000, Board of Manufactures Scotland.
§ MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, it was a most 763 astounding thing that £1,000 should be required to teach the people in Scotland manufactures.
§ COLONEL SYKESWhy is it not stated so distinctly in the Estimates?
§ MR. BRISCOEsaid, this estimate showed the carelessness in which Estimates were prepared by the Government.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (6.) £5,000, Highland Roads and Bridges.
§ MR. LAINGsaid, the money was required to keep in order roads in poor districts. The money was formerly taken out of the Excise receipts, but under the new system the Vote came under the notice of Parliament.
§ MR. W. WILLIAMSremarked that he could not understand why the public should be taxed to keep these roads in repair.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (7.) £900, Ancient Laws and Institutes, Ireland.
§ MR. LAINGsaid, the Commissioners were not paid, and they merely asked for a small sum for printing these old, valuable, and historical documents.
§ MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, two years ago a promise was given that this Vote should be discontinued.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, these old laws were of the highest value to those who took an interest in Ireland. He thought the money was well spent.
§ Vote agreed to, as were also the following Votes:—
§ (8.)£58,700, Merchant Seamen's Fund Pensions.
§ (9.)£15,000, Distressed British Seamen Abroad.
§ (10.)£4,000, Quarantine Arrangements.
§ (11.)£40,000, Payments under Reciprocity Treaties.
§ MR. LIDDELLsaid, the attention of the Government ought to be directed to this Vote, which had grown and was growing to an enormous amount. He trusted that they would not only stop its growth but reduce it to a proper size.
§ MR. LAINGsaid, propositions for reducing the Vote were now under the consideration of the Treasury.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (12.) £15,000, Tonnage Bounties on Slave Vessels.
§ MR. CAVEsaid, he wished to call attention to the objectionable principle con- 764 tained in this Vote. The system was wrong, and in his opinion some change might be made. He had been told by an American officer that the object of the commanders of our cruisers on the African coast was not to capture slavers when they were going in to receive their cargoes, but to wait until they had shipped them, because they then gained a higher amount of prize money, obtaining the bounty on slaves as well as the tonnage bounty. He (Mr. Cave) did not believe there was the slightest ground for such an imputation, but he thought it of great importance, especially so far as America was concerned, that our conduct on this subject should not only be pure and upright, but above suspicion.
§ MR. LAINGsaid, he was satisfied that no such mercenary motives could justly be imputed to our naval officers and sailors on the African coast; but it was well known that if they captured as slavers vessels on board of which no negroes were found, there were great difficulties as to the condemnation of such ships, and they ran the risk of being involved in expensive legal proceedings.
§ SIR GEORGE PECHELLsaid, the stigma formerly attaching to the name of British officers and sailors in this service did not now exist. Great indulgence ought to be shown to men who were wasting their lives on a troublesome duty, without hope of promotion by the Board of Admiralty.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (13.) £36,700, Lighthouses abroad.
MR. A. SMITHsaid, that this Vote was annually growing. It appeared that lighthouses had been erected at the Bahamas and Ceylon, British Columbia (in this case at a cost of £7,000), the Cape, Western Australia, and Sable Island, Nova Scotia. He was at loss to understand the principle on which this assistance was given to the Colonies, and as there was an increase of £10,000 on the Vote of last year, he thought the Vote ought to be reduced by that sum.
§ MR. LAINGreplied that lighthouses for local purposes were paid for by colonial funds, except in case of a new colony, such as British Columbia. In places where there were no local funds, and lighthouses had to be erected upon barren rocks—as was the case with the majority of those for which the Vote was asked—for the protection of our own shipping and the shipping of the world, the national fund was clearly the only one available. At Ceylon lighthouses were paid for locally, except with regard to those 765 which were required for the purpose of the national traffic, and these appeared in the Estimates. Sable Island he would inquire about.
§ MR. HALIBURTONsaid, that the contribution of this country of £400 towards the expenses of the establishment at Sable Island, Nova Scotia, for the relief of persons shipwrecked was wise and proper. The coast there was one of the most exposed on the whole American Coast. Formerly no Government owned Sable Island, but in consequence of wreckers having taken possession of it for the purpose of causing shipwrecks, the Government of Nova Scotia embraced it within their jurisdiction, and provided the other moiety of £400. There had been numerous wrecks on that coast, and he thought this a humane and excellent provision, and one which could not be withdrawn.
§ MR. LAINGsaid, if any economy could be introduced into this department of the Estimates, it should have his best attention.
§ Vote agreed to; as was also—
§ (14.) £1,000, Settlement of the Orange River Territory.
§ On the Vote of £40,000 for promoting the improvement of the Kaffirs, and for the settlement and government of British Kaffraria,
§ MR. WISEsaid, that in 1855 a Committee of that House had very properly acceded to the request of Sir George Grey, the governor of the colony, by granting £40,000 for this purpose, and it was understood that the grant should be continued for three years. Last year the Treasury considered that the time had arrived for a reconsideration of the Vote, but at the suggestion of a noble Lord opposite a grant of £20,000 was agreed to, in order that no inconvenience might result from the sudden cessation of aid which had heretofore been afforded. They had already spent £415,000 for this object, including the removal and settlement of the German Legion. In 1857 their imports from British Kaffraria were £41,000, last year they were only £13,000. The exports in 1857 were £79,000, last year they were only £8,900. He wished, therefore, to know whether the objects contemplated in 1855—the establishment of industrial schools, of educational institutions, and of hospitals had been attended with the anticipated results, and whether the Kaffirs evinced any disposition to abandon their warlike pursuits, and to yield to the influence of civilization and Christianity. 766 Judging from returns of the imports and exports, and of the Customs' duties, the settlement of British Kaffraria, so far from progressing and prospering, was in a state of declension, fie should rejoice as much as any one at the spread of education and civilization amongst the Kaffirs, but he really thought they might find as worthy objects of their benevolence at home.
§ MR. CONINGHAMsaid, there was an ample military force in the Cape when the German Legion went there. He objected to this Vote of £40,000, and should take the sense of the Committee upon it.
§ MR. C. FORTESCUEsaid, he could assure the Committee that he had every reason to believe that the expenditure of these grants had been attended with great advantages. The natives were employed in industrial pursuits, they were receiving wages for their labour, and the consequence had been that during the Russian war and the Indian mutiny this country had not been called upon to bear the additional burden of a war in Kaffraria. The Vote was last year diminished by £20,000, but it was stated by the Governor that sufficient notice had not been given of the reduction of the grant to enable him to cut down the expenses, and therefore the Vote of £40,000 was now proposed, but without any intention of asking for a similar Vote next year.
§ It being within ten minutes of four o'clock, the CHAIRMAN left the Chair.
§ House resumed.
§ Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.