§ MR. PEASEsaid, he wished to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, whether it is the intention of the Government to propose to the House, during the present Session, any measure with a view to the encouragement of the formation of Harbours of Refuge on the coasts of the Kingdom, in conformity with the Report of the Royal Commission of last year upon this subject. It was proved before the Commission, that 277 there was no part of the coast which so much required harbours of refuge as the east coast, and there was no part of that coast which offered such facilities as the bay of Tees, in the county of Durham.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONEverybody is aware of the great importance of harbours of refuge upon those points of the coast especially to which the hon. Member refers, and the Report of the Commissioners confirms his views. But their calculation of the expense of forming the harbours of refuge recommended by them is £4,000,000 sterling, and those who are acquainted with the adaptation of the cost to the estimate in works of that description, will say whether the expense is not likely to be much greater than the estimate. I have, therefore, to state that Her Majesty's Government have no intention during the present Session of making any proposal on this subject.
SIR FREDERIC SMITHsaid, that a one of the Commissioners, he wished to remind the noble Lord that the Commissioners did not recommend an expenditure of more than £200,000 per annum. When the House recollected that 800 lives per annum and a vast amount of property were lost for want of harbours of refuge, it was not unreasonable to expect that the Government would turn their attention to the subject. The estimates of expense had been gone into with the greatest care by-civil engineers, and as he had himself revised them, he could venture to say they exceeded the amount that would be required. Considering that only £200,000 would be wanted per annum, he hoped that the Government would propose a Vote for that sum in the next Session of Parliament.