HC Deb 22 February 1861 vol 161 cc798-804
MR. LIDDELL

said, he had put on the paper a question with respect to Harbours of Refuge, and lie trusted the importance of the subject, and the interest felt in it out of doors, would be his apology for offering a few prefatory observations before making the inquiry itself. So long ago as 1857 a Committee was appointed to inquire into the propriety of making further grants of public money for the improvement and extension of Harbours of Refuge. The Committee, which was presided over by an hon. Gentleman whose loss they all deplored, sat during two Sessions, and reported, but it was unwilling to undertake the task of selecting the exact sites or modes of construction, and it ended its labours by recommending the appointment of a Royal Commission to ascertain exactly which were the best sites for constructing Harbours of Refuge. The Committee from the outset wished, as much as possible, to take a broad and national view of the question, and to separate it from the smaller, but also important question of claims of rival harbours, and for assistance from the public purse. A Royal Commission was appointed, and having surveyed the coast and examined a great number of witnesses, it recommended the application of public money in two distinct forms—namely, one for the improvement of existing tidal harbours, and the other for the construction of large harbours at different sites on the coast, where it was believed the greatest saving of life and property could be effected. Last Session, the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Lindsay), who, himself, had been a very efficient member of the Commission, felt it his duty to invite the attention of the House to the subject. The Motion he brought forward was to the effect That in the opinion of this House it is the duty of Her Majesty's Government to adopt at the earliest possible period the necessary measures for carrying into effect the recommendations of the Royal Commissioners appointed in 1858 to inquire into the formation of Harbours of Refuge in Great Britain and Ireland. That Motion was made on the 19th of June, and carried by a majority of the House though Her Majesty's Government considered it their duty to oppose it on the ground that it was not expedient at that time to carry out so large a scheme as that recommended by the Royal Commission. That was the ground taken by the noble Lord at the head of the Government; but at the conclusion of his speech on that occasion, the noble Lord used these words:— This matter has received, and is receiving, very serious consideration; and, undoubtedly, it will be our duty in the next Session to bring it before the House in a practical shape. He (Mr. Liddell) need not remind the House of the circumstances which had recently contributed to make the interest felt in this subject still more painful; but he would refer to a few of the wrecks recorded as having taken place on the 9th of the present month. At Whitby six vessels were driven ashore, and the crew of four saved by that lifeboat which the House would recollect with pain was lost. In an attempt to save the crew of a fifth vessel, that gallant boat, with a crew of twelve men, went down. At Hartlepool sixty-five vessels were wrecked in five hours within the bay. Thirty of these were a total loss, and eight foundered with every soul on board, in the sight of thousands, who were unable to render any assistance. No less than fifty lives and £150,000 worth of property were lost at that spot alone. Five vessels were wrecked at Tyne-mouth, close to the new piers; and eleven others between that port and the Tees, most of them being total losses On the 12th of February, three days afterwards, 139 losses of ships were posted at Lloyd's, that being the largest number ever known for a single day. The wreck chart of each year presented certain ominous black marks and crosses. The crosses denoted those places at which collisions had occurred, and the black marks indicated wrecks. He very much feared that in the wreck chart of the current year those same spots would be found still more darkly stained, and he would particularly call the attention of the House to the fact that the localities so marked, were precisely the places so pointed out by the Committee and the Commissioners to whom he had referred as being places at which the greatest amount of life and property might be saved. He wished to observe that, when he called the attention of the House to the north-east part of the coast, it was from no want of sympathy with other places which also required the protection of harbours of refuge. He wished to look at the question in a national point of view, and it was only because he was better acquainted with the north-east coast than any other that he now particularly referred to it. For a length of more than 150 miles on this coast nature had provided nothing that could afford protection to vessels during a storm. All the harbours on that line of coast were, without exception, bar harbours. Large convoys of vessels left what were called the coal ports heavily laden. If a heavy storm came on they seldom found themselves able to round the dangerous headland called Flamborough Head, they were unable to keep the sea, and were in imminent danger of being driven on a rugged lea shore. They had in those circumstances no alternative but to return and fly for the ports which they had left. If they succeeded in reaching these ports, the access to which was often very difficult, and at certain states of the tide, impossible, dreadful scenes of confusion occurred; scores of ships came tumbling in one after another, and great losses from collision ensued. Often they were unable to reach the harbours they sought, and the melancholy spectacle was too frequently seen of ships broken up upon the rocks, and their crews drowned within the sight and hearing of their relatives and friends on shore. A good deal of importance had been properly attached by the public journals to telegraphic communications having been dispatched, by the order of the Board of Trade, to certain parts of the coast, announcing the approach of the late gale; but he was able to state that no such telegraphic communication had been received at the ports of the Tyne, the Twee, or the Tees. It should, however, be borne in mind that this meteorological science, which assumed to give an account of storms, was still in its infancy, and very great doubt and uncertainty at present existed as to the certainty of the prognostics, or the propriety of attending to such suggestions on account of the exigencies of trade. The demands of the London market for coal were enormous, and the detention of coal-laden vessels in their respective ports under the circumstances he had described imposed great loss upon the owners, and equal inconvenience to consumers. He could not leave the subject without paying his humble tribute of admiration and gratitude to those gallant men who had performed such important services during the recent storms—he meant the crews of the lifeboats. He should be wanting in the discharge of his duty if he did not acknowledge the great services of those gallant crews. Neither the military nor the naval annals of the country bad ever shown nobler, calmer com age, or more intrepidity and gallantry than had been displayed by the crews of the lifeboats; and he rejoiced at the degree of organization which bad been acquired by the National Lifeboat Institution. He had no hesitation in saying that had it not been for the admirable organization and the unheard-of efforts of the men who manned those lifeboats the loss of life during the late storms would have been much greater than it was. There were about 1,000 lives annually lost on our coasts from shipwrecks, and about a million and a half of property, and he asked whether it was for a nation like England to stand by and see all this loss of life and property without making a serious effort to avert it? The preservation of life was the first thing that ought to engage the attention of a people, and the dictates of prudence and humanity alike called for the serious attention of Parliament to the subject. He wished to ask the noble Lord at the head of the Government, Whether the Government have prepared any measure for encouraging or assisting the construction of harbours of refuge on the coasts of the United Kingdom; and whether it is their intention to bring the question before Parliament during the present Session in a practical shape, in accordance with a statement to that effect made by the First Lord of the Treasury on the 19th day of June last?

MR. SLANEY

said, he hoped that, if the Government were induced to take any steps in this matter, they would not neglect the claims of the coast of Wales, where there was not a single harbour of refuge. Vessels going to and from Liverpool kept as near the Irish coast as possible, but when the wind and sea rolled heavily into Cardigan Bay it was almost impossible for the vessels to save themselves.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

said, he was a member of the Committee which sat on this subject, and he might state that there was no point on which the Committee was so unanimous as that a harbour of refuge was called for at the particular part of the coast referred to by the hon. Member (Mr. Liddell). The Commission that was afterwards appointed also concurred in the absolute necessity of one or two harbours of refuge being constructed there. He believed that convict labour might be advantageously employed upou these harbours; and, as the works of Portland were very near completion, be trusted the convicts would afterwards be transferred to the north-east part of the kingdom. These harbours ought to be well planned, and, above all, they ought not to he made too small or undertaken in a niggardly spirit, for the harbour at Holyhead had been spoiled by being constructed on too small a scale, and the same thing was said of the harbours of Alderney and other places. Some interesting evidence was given on this subject before the Committee on Miscellaneous Expenditure, and he would take that opportunity of asking the noble Lord (Lord Harry Vane), the Chairman, whether it was his intention shortly to move for its reappointment, in conformity with the recommendations of that Committee.

MR. BLAKE

said, that every hon. Member connected with the shipping interest must thank the hon. Member who had again brought this subject under the notice of the Government. He did not speak in the interests of his constituents so much as in the interest of humanity when he urged the claims of Waterford and Carlingford, which were two of the harbours recommended by the Select Committee and the Royal Commission. Some of the worst of the recent casualties had occurred outside Waterford, and might have been averted had a harbour of refuge existed there. It was important, also, to observe that not one of the vessels so wrecked was coming to an Irish port. One of them was a ship of 1,200 tons, eighteen of whose crew perished. She was coming from Mobile Bay to Liverpool, laden with cotton. Another large vessel, bound from Halifax, to Liverpool, was placed in the most imminent danger. The greater portion of the shipping going up Channel on the homeward voyage from America to Liverpool must go by Waterford. A harbour of refuge at Waterford was one of the cheapest recommended by the Com- mission. It need not cost more than £50,000, as no natural or engineering difficulties existed. He trusted that the noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) would announce that the Government were prepared to give effect to the vote of last Session, since they incurred great responsibility bv postponing it.

MR. CLAY

said, he should be sorry to see the present discussion degenerate into the advocacy of particular places. He, like other hon. Members, entertained a strong impression where the first harbour of refuge ought to be made. The subject had been, however, fully considered and reported upon by a Select Committee, and afterwards by a Royal Commission, and if there were any use in blue-books they ought to save hon. Members the pains of stating, with less authority than the Royal Commission, where the harbours of refuge ought to be made.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

Sir. I can assure the House that Her Majesty's Government are fully sensible of the great national importance of the subject which the hon. Member has brought under the notice of the House. In the first place, we lament that so large an amount of property should be lost upon our shores. This, however, is a loss that falls on individuals, and they have the means of indemnifying themselves to a great degree by assurances and other arrangements. But we lament still more the loss of so many valuable lives—the loss of some of the best seamen of the country, for that is a loss against which no assurance can be made, for which no compensation can be obtained, and which is, therefore, a great calamity to the country. But when we say we are sensible to the magnitude of the evil, we cannot shut our eyes also to the magnitude of the remedy that is proposed; and what has passed in this short discussion suffices to show the extent to which the demand would go. The hon. Member who began this discussion urges the claims of the north-east coast of England. An hon. Friend of mine (Mr. Slaney) calls attention to the necessity of harbours of refuge on the Welsh coast. An hon. Member opposite (Mr. Blake) points out how necessary they are on the Irish coast. No doubt, my noble Friend the member for Wick-(Lord Bury) would be ready to insist on the extreme advantage of a harbour of refuge in the place he represents. But these harbours of refuge would cost a very large sum of money, and I am sorry to say that the Government are not prepared at present to propose to Parliament to advance out of the public revenue for this purpose grants at all commensurate with the objects in view. At the same time, we did make a pledge last year that we would propose some measure this Session, and my right hon. Friend at the head of the Board of Trade has a Bill ready to be presented for the purpose of taking the first steps in this matter. The hon. Member who spoke first urged that steps should be taken to improve the existing harbours. That is more within the scope of our means than the construction of new works. An hon. Friend who sits behind me (Mr. A. Smith) says that a mistake has been committed hitherto by making all the harbours of refuge too small. It is quite true that, if we are to make new harbours of refuge, care should be taken to make them large enough to meet all demands. As our commerce increases, and as our ships grow larger, we must look forward to new demands of space for this purpose. My right hon. Friend (Mr. Milner Gibson) has a Bill ready which enables the Exchequer Bills Loan Commissioners to make advances, both in England and Ireland, to those parties who are willing to take money under certain conditions for the purpose of improving existing harbours. We have been told that the Committee made a recommendation which I am afraid will not be at all approved—that if the Government advance money for the creation of harbours of refuge, the interest of part of the money so advanced may be repaid by passing tolls. Some hon. Members, I am afraid, will not be at all disposed to agree in that recommendation. I hope it will be satisfactory that enlarged powers should be given to the Exchequer Loan Commissioners for the purpose of making advances on easy terms to those who draw upon them for the improvement of the existing harbours.