HC Deb 11 May 1860 vol 158 cc1176-8
SIR JOSEPH PAXTON

proposed that—Sir Joseph Paxton, Lord John Manners, Mr. Cowper, Sir John Pakington, Mr. Alderman Cubitt, Sir John Shelley, Mr. Stirling, Mr. Tite, Lord Robert Montagu, Mr. Walter, Sir Morton Peto, Mr. Philipps, Mr. Roupell, Mr. Yorke, and Mr. Beamish—be appointed Members of the said Committee.

LORD FERMOY

thought the Metropolis was not fairly represented on the Committee, and moved that the name of Sir James Duke be substituted for that of Alderman Cubitt.

MR. SPEAKER

said, the hon. Member could not suggest the insertion of another name on the Committee without due notice.

LORD FERMOY

would move that the name of Alderman Cubitt be omitted.

MR. CONINGHAM

thought it quite necessary that the Metropolis should be fully represented.

LORD CLAUD HAMILTON

hoped that the name of Alderman Cubitt would be retained.

MR. CUBITT

begged, on the part of his absent relative, to say that Alderman Cubitt was by no means disposed to encourage an unnecessary expenditure of the public money.

MR. BERNAL OSBORNE

moved that the debate be now adjourned.

SIR JOSEPH PAXTON

was astonished that any person should object to retaining the name of Alderman Cubitt on the Committee. If the advice of the noble Lord were taken, they would have eight Metropolitan Members on the Committee, and he should like to know what respect would be paid to a Report emanating from such a Committee?

MR. JOHN LOCKE

complained that the inhabitants of London, upon whom it was plainly intimated that, if this plan for embanking the Thames were carried out, the expense would mainly fall, were by no means adequately represented, although I the Committee was largely composed of contractors, engineers, and others, whose interest it was to promote expensive undertakings.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

referred to the names of four or five Gentleman intimately connected with the Metropolis, for the purpose of showing that its claims had been very fully considered in the formation of the Committee. Considering that the functions of that Committee were only to inquire as to the practicability of the embankment, he did not think there were grounds for any serious opposition to its appointment.

MR. AYRTON

said, it was perfectly understood that the Committee was only to be appointed for the amusement of its Members, and therefore the nomination of individual Members was of no consequence whatever. No practical results were to follow.

Motion by leave withdrawn.

Question put and agreed to; Power to send for persons, papers, and records. Five to be the quorum.

House adjourned at half after One o'clock, till Monday next.