Lords Sitting of 3 June 1861

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Consolidated Fund (£10,000,000); Reformatory Schools (Scotland); Customs and Inland Revenue. 3a New Provinces (New Zealand).
ATLANTIC ROYAL MAIL STEAM PACKET COMPANY—THE GALWAY PACKET CONTRACT.

  CORRESPONDENCE MOVED FOR.
  THE MARQUESS OF NORMANBYhaving presented a Petition from Town Commissioners and Inhabitants of Ballymoney
  440
  against the withdrawal of the Postal Subsidy to this Company, proceeded to move an Address for, Copies of the Correspondence between His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and Her Majesty's Government on the Subject of the Contract with the Atlantic Royal Mail Steam Packet Company. The noble Marquess said he postponed his Motion the other evening because there was business upon the paper which was likely to occupy considerable time, and he was also influenced by a hope that he should be able to introduce the subject to their Lordships' notice freed from any circumstances of temporary irritation. The subject of the relations between the local Government in Ireland and the Imperial Government was one of great importance, and would best be considered apart; and he regretted that a Minister of the Crown in "another place" had thought fit to introduce into the discussion a topic which it was impossible to pass over without notice. An attempt had been made to prejudice the consideration of the question to which he was about to call their Lordships' attention by insinuating that there was a connection between a supposed negotiation for a corrupt object and the votes of certain Irish Members upon a recent occasion. That allegation was made by the noble Lord the Member for the City of London, who justified it by its great notoriety, it having been publicly stated in the principal public organ of this country; and the noble Lord evidently desired that his belief in the statement should receive an equally wide circulation with the allegation itself. It was the duty of any one who sought to introduce this subject to their consideration to take the earliest opportunity of stating that the allegation was totally unfounded, and that there never had been any intention on the part of any one of entering into such an arrangement as that described by the noble Lord, that the Irish Members would give their support to the Budget upon the express understanding that the Galway contract should be renewed for six months. The noble Lord, with unnecessary indignation, had disclaimed any participation in such an understanding; but he must have known at that time that the Irish Members had never solicited any such favour from the Prime Minister, because that noble Viscount distinctly stated that he considered the person who waited upon him had no authority in the matter. And yet, in the

  441
  face of that declaration, the noble Lord the Member for London stated that an interview had been requested of his noble Friend at the head of the Government on behalf of the Irish Members by a person who seemed to have a right to ask it. It could not have been from the head of the Government that the noble Lord learnt that. The Irish Members would, no doubt, defend themselves; but he (the Marquess of Normanby) thought twenty-four hours ought not to be allowed to pass without protesting against the acceptance as a proved fact of the noble Lord's assertion, which really never had any reliable foundation.
  The particular subject to which he now wished to call their Lordships' attention was the statement of the Lord Lieutenant in relation to the Galway contract. It was necessary to bear in mind that the only connection which existed between the decision upon the Galway contract and the vote upon the Budget arose from their juxtaposition in point of time. But whose fault was that? Clearly not that of the Company, nor of the Irish Members, but of the Government, who chose such an inappropriate moment for action. It would be supposed from the insinuation that had been made that the feelings of the Irish people towards the present Government were so cordial that a hostile vote could only have been caused by a desire to exercise an influence upon the question of the Galway contract. But did facts really show that the people of Ireland were friendly towards the present Government? Had the law officers of the Crown in Ireland been able to find seats in the other House? Without entering into particulars of the causes, he might observe that with respect to the noble Lord the Member for London the Irish people regarded him as actuated by different feelings towards them since the memorable epoch of the Durham letter. Whether justly or not, it was said that the general feeling of the Irish Roman Catholics was that the noble Lord in all his communications with them had not treated them with that consideration which his former career entitled them to expect from him. In that state of things a deputation waited upon the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland a few days since, when that distinguished nobleman gave expression to his personal feelings in very consolatory terms, but it appeared that he had not the power to give the assurances which persons in his situation might be
  442
  expected to have the power of giving. He did not intend to cast the least reflection upon the present Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, for he was convinced that the last shred of popularity which the present Government possessed in that country arose from the personal character of the noble Lord. In answer to the deputation the Lord Lieutenant said—
  "I beg to assure you that I have not waited until now to express my sympathy with the views and wishes which you have laid before me. I should most sincerely regret the final disappointment of the hopes which gave birth to the contract of the Government with the Royal Atlantic Mail Steam Packet Company. It is only fair, while I perceive the force of many of the considerations set forth in your memorial, that I should mention that I have not been made acquainted accurately, or in detail, with the arguments that are alleged on the other side of the question. I shall not fail to transmit your views for the earnest consideration of Her Majesty's Government, and to entreat for them the most favourable reception which they can find it consistent with their duty to bestow."
  Whether that statement was to be regarded as an avowal or a complaint, it was one of the most extraordinary declarations ever made upon an important subject by a high functionary administering the Government of that country. But the terms of the noble Lord's reply proved that at that time he thought the question was still open for consideration. One of the strongest reasons why the noble Lord, the Member for the City of London, ought not to have thrown out the imputation he did against those gentlemen, that they had endeavoured to enter into some negotiation of which he complained, was that at that very time he held in his hand a statement on the part of the Company, and a memorial signed by fifty Members of Parliament of all sides—mostly Irishmen, but some English Members, such as Mr. Leatham, Member for a manufacturing town in the north. These fifty names were appended to a very temperate document, declaring that they considered the proposal of the Company a reasonable one, and begging to recommend it to the favourable consideration of the Postmaster General. So that, in point of fact, not only had the Irish Members no idea of resorting to any indirect and corrupt means, but they had actually taken this course of representing the matter in a fair and moderate tone, which they thought might be effective to the Postmaster General. This contract, as their Lordships were aware, had been originally entered into under the Administration of his noble Friend be-

  443
  hind him (the Earl of Derby), under the auspices of his noble Friend the late Lord Lieutenant of Ireland (the Earl of Eglinton). He would not, in his noble Friend's presence, say what every one knew of his eminent qualities to fill that office; but he would say this, that he had the good fortune—which he himself knew to be the greatest requisite for the effective discharge of its high duties—to be in intimate communication with the Prime Minister of England. That fact, which was well known, gave the greatest weight to the position which his noble Friend sustained as Lord Lieutenant. He knew this from his own experience, because, during the four years he was in Ireland, he had been in weekly, he might almost say daily, communication on subjects both local and imperial with the then Prime Minister, his late Friend, Lord Melbourne. Being known to be in possession of the views and feelings of the Prime Minister did give to the decisions and acts of the Lord Lieutenant a force which nothing else could supply. That being the case, he was sorry to say that during the last two years this contract had been uniformly viewed by the Government in a harsh and captious spirit towards a Company which was fairly endeavouring under extraordinary difficulties to carry out the duties they had undertaken. He hoped that some one better acquainted with the details than he could pretend to be would explain to their Lordships the whole facts of the ease, but he could not help remarking on the extraordinary moment and the extraordinary manner in which the contract had been annulled by a letter which he did not take to be the production of the noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley of Alderley)—it was the act of the Government, for it was founded on and accompanied by a Treasury Minute. For sixteen months after the contract had been entered into there was a Committee sitting on the subject in the other House of Parliament, by which the Company was kept in suspense, and they had reason to suppose that the decision of the Committee would be against them until the Government intimated to them that the contract was to be carried out. Therefore, it was not fair to consider the contract commenced until after the termination of those sixteen months—namely, in August last. The reason for immediately determining the contract was connected with the Company's sending a particular vessel
  444
  across the Atlantic. He would not pretend to say what might be the result, but he should not be much surprised if that vessel made a peculiarly short passage. But at any rate the Government ought not under the circumstances to have behaved in so harsh a manner. Throughout the length and breadth of Ireland there was for the first time, independently of all party feeling, a universal desire that this contract, which was believed to be well calculated to conduce to the welfare of that country, should be restored. He did not mean to say that it ought not to be carefully watched; that Government were bound to do; but, at the same time, not in a harsh and capricious spirit. His firm belief was, although the contract might for a time be stopped, the parties could not fail to obtain that to which their local position gave them overpowering claims, a fair share of the Atlantic communication, which was likely to be more and more enlarged. No other port could at all compete with the western coast of Ireland in offering facilities for short and speedy communication with America; and he felt perfectly assured that sooner or later—he hoped sooner rather than later—the object of these petitioners would be attained. The noble Marquess concluded by moving the address.
  EARL GRANVILLE: The noble Marquess has imported into the discussion of the subject of which he has given notice a variety of questions raised in the House of Commons the other day with respect to the conduct of the Irish Members. He has referred to certain rumours which, he says, were first mentioned publicly by the noble Lord the Member for London, and which had no foundation. Now, I think it is not only improper but highly inconvenient to discuss here debates which take place in the other House, and I think it is still more inconvenient that this should be done in a manner which, as far as my recollection goes, is not quite accurate. The noble Marquess has not stated the facts; with the correctness which is desirable in such a matter. I do not believe that it was the noble Lord the Member for London who first alluded to the rumours to which the noble Marquess has referred. It was an independent Member who first made allusion to them; he was followed by the leader of the Opposition, who also referred to them, stating his belief that they were not true; and all that the noble Lord the Member for London said was

  445
  that if any such request had been made by the Irish Members, or if any such concession had been made by the Government, it would have been disgraceful to the parties concerned. I think his words were that "it would be better that ten Governments should fall in consequence of not making such a concession than that one should be kept on its legs through following another course." If that is a correct description, as I believe it is, of what fell from my noble Friend, then I must say that his declaration was one which your Lordships on both sides will feel to be straightforward and honourable. The rumours to which the noble Marquess referred seemed to have originated from Father Daly, a gentleman who has taken an active interest in this matter, having taken upon himself to speak for the Irish Members, they subsequently declaring that he had no authority for so doing. I am not quite sure, judging from what has fallen from the noble Marquess, whether he has authority to speak for the Irish Members; and, until I have received certain information, upon that point, I think it will be better for me not to follow the noble Marquess into all the details which he has brought before your Lordships. All I can say is that if the question of the Galway contract did influence the votes of individual Members on a recent occasion, I have no doubt those Gentlemen were not animated by any feelings of a selfish character, but were actuated simply by considerations involving the advantage of that portion of the country with which they are more particularly connected. The noble Marquess has indulged, not for the first time, in an attack upon the noble Lord the Member for London, and, repeating what he said elsewhere, has charged him with a change of political opinion. I have some difficulty in answering the noble Marquess upon that point. There are few public men who, during a long life, have not changed their opinions, even on some important question, and they are right to avow such changes. I must say, however, having watched the career of the noble Lord the Member for London, that he is less open to any imputation of that sort than at least most public men. But I must frankly confess that upon the subject of changes of political opinion the noble Marquess can speak with infinitely more knowledge and experience than myself. Turning to the merits of the Galway contract case, I have no doubt that my noble
  446
  Friend the Postmaster General will be ready to go into them if necessary. My own individual opinion is that my noble Friend having acted in concert with his colleagues in every step he has taken in the matter, he is more open to the charge of having shown undue leniency to the Galway Packet Company than to that of having treated them with undue severity; but the present is not a convenient time for discussing that question. Certain papers have been presented to Parliament, but others have still to be produced; and I think your Lordships will be in a better position for eliciting the truth when you are in possession of all the documents relating to the case. Meanwhile I shall merely say that some years ago I had the honour to preside over a Commission appointed to consider the advantages of having a packet station in Ireland, and the relative merits of different ports. Upon the latter point—the advantages and disadvantages of different ports—we gave no decided opinion, but we showed in what way the voyage might be accelerated, and how this would tend to the benefit of the whole country. It is quite clear, indeed, that if any proposal were made from Galway or elsewhere to establish a packet communication with America, the Government would be bound—as every Government would be bound—to give it a full, fair, and impartial consideration. As regarded the Motion of the noble Marquess, he had to state that there had been no official correspondence between the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and Her Majesty's Government on the subject, and, therefore, there was none to produce.
  THE EARL OF EGLINTONsaid, he did not rise for the purpose of defending the noble Marquess from the attack which had been made upon him by the noble Earl—the noble Marquess was quite able to defend himself—but he might be permitted to say the taunts of the noble Earl were cheered by some who were at least as open to animadversion as the noble Marquess. His object make a few remarks on the question of the Galway contract—and he knew of no question on which so much misstatement had gone abroad, or on which there had been so much unfair writing and speaking. Charges of the grossest kind had been brought against the late Government—accusations of their having purchased political support and of having attempted to make political capital in Ireland by means

  447
  of the Galway contract. He was obliged to the noble Marquess for giving him an opportunity of contradicting in the most emphatic manner these monstrous accusations. Let their Lordships suppose for a moment that the Galway contract was a mistake, a blunder, a bad investment of the public money—let them even suppose that it was entered into partly with the view of influencing the feelings of the Irish people before a general election, and of rendering the Government popular—nevertheless, he appealed to their Lordships whether that would be half so bad a ease as throwing away £1,300,000 of indirect taxation, and repealing a comparatively inoffensive and increasing tax, very much for the purpose of conciliating a certain powerful demagogue who had embarked in the speculation of a penny newspaper, and that small party who own him as their leader Now the real facts of the case of the Galway contract were as different as possible from that to which he had just referred. He had no hesitation in avowing himself guilty of this delinquency of the Galway contract, if a delinquency it had been. He avowed himself to be the great delinquent in the matter. He had no hesitation in saying he was the originator of the Galway contract; that he approved of it, and was answerable for it. He would state the reason which induced him to favour the contract. When he was first in office in Ireland he found that a strong national feeling had long existed in favour of the establishment of a steam communication between North America and some Irish port. It did not require much penetration to see that if such a scheme were successfully carried out it would be advantageous to Ireland, and he accordingly lent a willing ear to it, though he saw the difficulties in the way. The claims of various harbours were brought before him—those of Galway especially were recommended as the port from which the shortest voyage could be effected between the United Kingdom and America; but he felt that, however grateful he might be to the people of Galway for the almost royal reception they had given him, and however much he might desire to restore the prosperity of that interesting old city, his duty was to submit the case of Ireland generally to the Government as to the place at which a mail packet station might be most beneficially established in connection with America. He induced the Government to appoint a Commission to in-
  448
  vestigate the claims of the different Irish ports for this transatlantic communication. The Commission reported in favour of establishing a steam communication between Ireland and America, and they named Galway and Foynes as the harbours best suited for the purpose, giving the preference rather to Foynes. On his return to Ireland in 1858, to his surprise and pleasure, he found a company established at Galway for steam communication with America; that large ships had been placed on the station, and that it only required the countenance of the Government to make the enterprise permanent and successful. He had only to look at the map to see it was the shortest route to America, and it was shown to him that the voyage could be done in less than five days; he had, moreover, every reason to believe from the inquiries that he had made that the company was perfectly solvent. So long, he might add, as it was an open question which of the Irish ports would form the best station for the purposes of Transatlantic communication he had felt to some extent debarred from making a recommendation in support of any one of them in particular. When, however, he found what he believed to be a powerful company had selected for themselves the route in question, which had been favourably reported upon by a Royal Commission, he no longer hesitated to urge upon his noble Friend who was then at the head of the Government the expediency of assisting by means of a subsidy, or in some other shape, an enterprise which had been so auspiciously and unexpectedly set on foot, and which, appeared to open to Ireland the prospect of increased commercial advantages without, in his opinion, being at all likely to operate to the detriment of any other part of the United Kingdom. He felt, he might add, more particularly justified in taking this course, because he found they were already successfully carrying out the mail service with Newfoundland, So constantly, indeed, had he pressed the subject on the attention of his noble Friend that he had no doubt he began to detest the very name of Galway, as was now very probably the case with noble Lords opposite and their colleagues in both Houses of Parliament. Be that, however, as it might the subsidy was at last granted—a subsidy, be it remembered, not for the payment of a large sum of money on the mere chance of the Company performing

  449
  their engagement, but a sum paid for each trip for work absolutely performed, and withheld for work not done, and that under the most stringent regulations, as the Company had since found to its cost. Such, so far as he was aware, was the history of the Galway contract; and he could most truly and solemnly declare that in the part which he took in the matter he was actuated solely by a desire to benefit a country which had been committed to his charge, feeling, as he did, that he might do so without any disadvantage to the rest of the United Kingdom. He was influenced throughout the whole transaction by no desire of making political capital, or obtaining a stray Irish vote for the Government of which he was a member. Not only would he have scorned to recommend the granting of the subsidy on that ground, but he had no idea that such an effect as that to which he alluded would result from the course which he pursued. If, indeed, any idea of that kind had crossed his mind at all, he could have hardly failed to perceive that the benefit conferred upon Galway would be likely to give rise to a feeling of jealousy, which it actually did in Limerick and other parts of Ireland, while he would have looked upon Galway itself as too hopelessly hostile to the party to which he belonged to hope that it would derive any accession of strength from that quarter. That opinion would, no doubt, have been falsified by facts, for a Gentleman who supported the Conservative party had since been returned for Galway; but in the division by which the Government of his noble Friend near him was turned out of office he believed the question of the contract did not make the slightest difference, except, perhaps, so far as the vote of the Gentleman to which he had just referred was concerned. Having said thus much he should not enter further into the subject—which he had felt it to be his duty to enter upon at greater length than other noble Lords—beyond saying that he thought the Company had been somewhat hardly treated. It appeared to him that the Company went into the contract with great vigour, and that their energies had been continuous from the first, though they had been dealt with in a most hostile spirit. Scant justice appeared to have been for some time past dealt out to them, and he could not help expressing a hope that for such a state of things a remedy might be afforded.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE, as one interested in the locality to which the discussion related, wished to bear testimony to the importance of the question at issue. That question the noble Lord the President of the Council seemed to intimate was one which, so far as the Government were concerned, he considered as still open?
  EARL GRANVILLEwas understood to say, in explanation, that what he had intended to convey to the House was that the general question of the expediency of establishing communications between Ireland and America was one on which the Government had pronounced no decision.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE: Well, passing over that point, and referring for a moment to the remarks of the noble Marquess who had brought forward the subject, with respect to the alleged attempts at corruption made in the present instance by the Irish Members, and their endeavour to seduce the noble Lord at the head of the Government into the adoption of a particular course, by the threat that they would desert him at a critical moment if he did not accede to their wishes, he must be permitted to say that he did not believe a word of the story. He knew that noble Lord too well not to be perfectly satisfied that no man who was acquainted with his character and general public conduct would be fool enough—to put the matter on no higher footing—to make to him such an intimation. While, however, he placed no faith in the statement to which he was alluding, he could tell their Lordships, of his own knowledge that the Irish Members might have told the noble Lord with justice that since the days of the Volunteers of '82 no feeling so unanimous in opposition to a particular measure had manifested itself in Ireland as that which prevailed in the case of the annulling of the Galway contract. In Belfast and Ballymena, in Drogheda and Dublin, the state of feeling on the subject was precisely the same; while Waterford and—to her honour be it said—Limerick had spoken out their opinions in. favour of Galway Packets. That a very strong feeling on the subject should have been created was, indeed, to be expected; and he felt perfectly astonished that no communication was made to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland before taking a step which involved consequences of the utmost importance to Ireland. As to the utility of the office of Lord Lieutenant different persons entertained different opi-

  451
  nions; but no one could deny that so long as the office existed, the individual filling that position was not only the instrument of the Government in Ireland, but the person to whom they ought to apply for information on all questions affecting the interests of that part of Her Majesty's dominions. Petitions, memorials, the expression of public opinion furnished by meetings and through the press all tended to show that the present was a question which was regarded in Ireland to be of the utmost importance; and great as might be the mistake of a Government which had evoked the feeling which now existed in that country with respect to the withdrawal of the Galway contract, there remained behind the equally grave question whether that feeling was or was not justified by the occasion? That was a question which for his own part he was prepared to answer in the affirmative. But in endeavouring to prove the justice of that view, he did not propose now to enter at any length into the details of the contract as entered into in April, 1859, or of the manner in which the Atlantic Company had carried out its engagements; but it was necessary briefly to refer to the origin of the contract. The subject, of Irish American Packets, he might observe, was by no means a new one. With the application of steam to Atlantic voyages, the subject, of course, became more interesting, and was more forcibly brought before the public; and in 1858 certain persons, who had already steam-boat enterprizes in the west of Ireland, seriously turned their attention to the question of establishing a communication between Ireland and America, and, in concert with persons of capital in England, determined to get up a Company for that purpose. Application was made to the then Government for assistance, and he must say that they were prompt but not hasty in giving that assistance. They well considered the matter, and at last assistance was given—he might almost say reluctantly—and he believed that never was more undeserved abuse cast on any set of Ministers than that attempted to be thrown upon the Government of the noble Earl opposite in respect of this matter, because the Ministers fairly considered whether Ireland had not a right to be assisted in developing the full advantages of her geographical position when combined with the interests of the whole commercial world. The noble Marquess here quoted from
  452
  the Life of Pitt by Lord Stanhope—who, he stated, was entitled to take a high rank among historical writers—a passage describing Pitt as saying that there were two ways of dealing with countries situated like Great Britain and Ireland—either to make the smaller country subordinate to the greater, and a mere instrument for the advantage of the latter, or to make it the participator in a community of benefits and a system of equality and fairness which would aggrandize the interest of both. He believed the last view was a fair description of the policy which the noble Earl opposite intended to adopt when he entertained this question of establishing a steam communication between America and Ireland. At the election in 1859 not a word was uttered at the hustings in disapproval of the noble Earl's policy in this respect; nor when Parliament met was one word said against it. Circumstances had occurred which made the question of packet and telegraphic contracts one of great interest, and a Committee was appointed to inquire into the subject, but the new Ministry never hinted to the Atlantic Company that they had the slightest disposition to cancel the contract. He had said that he would not go into details with respect to the manner in which the Company performed the contract, which was a great deal too stringent in its provisions as regarded the Company. He was ready to admit that there had been many failures, and the noble Lord at the head of the Post Office was welcome to that admission; but the noble Lord was not welcome, and would not be permitted, to treat Ireland in an unfair spirit and to take from her together with the pound of flesh what she considered her heart's blood. This was not an affair to be treated lightly, for it was a serious matter to provoke the opposition of a whole country, and it behoved those who had to administer the affairs of the kingdom to consider the effect of such a course, both at home and abroad. As to the manner in which the contract had been performed, if the Government had come with deliberation to the determination that the Company was not in a condition to carry on the great work they had undertaken, the Government might have given fair notice to that effect, and then the result would have been a surprise to no one. They might have acted in that way in the course of last year. But what did the Government do? He believed that they were ex-

  453
  ceedingly indulgent on some occasions to this Company, but at last the Post Office de-decided not to send out the mails on the 7th of May by the Parana, because she only went on her trial between eleven and twelve knots an hour; and a few days afterwards Government put an end to the contract, and to direct communication between Ireland and America. He thought that not a statesmanlike course of proceeding, and it justified the great warmth of feeling which still continued on the subject. He asked their Lordships whether they considered the ground stated in a Parliamentary paper for stopping the mails from going by the Parana to be sufficient for terminating the contract? The Parana was surveyed on the 3rd of May, and the surveyor reported that her average speed was only between eleven and twelve knots an hour, and, therefore, that he did not think that sufficient to secure her passage to St. John's in six days. The whole question turned on this point. The Parana had on a former occasion reached Boston one day and some hours under the contract time, yet the Postmaster General had stopped the mails of the United Kingdom and of Europe upon an unfounded suspicion on the part of the surveyor that the Parana could not make the voyage within time. The whole case for breaking the contract turned upon the efficiency or inefficiency of this vessel, for if the vessel when tried at Southampton had been found to have a speed of twelve to thirteen knots instead of eleven to twelve the contract would have stood to this day. His noble Friend at the head of the Post Office thereupon wrote to say—
  "The failure of the Company to provide an efficient steam vessel for the conveyance of the American mails of the 7th of May has rendered it necessary that the Postmaster General should again consider the obligations of the Company under their contract, the manner in which those obligations have been fulfilled, and the means possessed by the Company for continuing the mail service."
  Thus the question whether the Government were justified in breaking the contract rested solely on the speed of the Parana. He doubted whether, if the matter were one that could be brought before a Court of Equity, the Postmaster General would be held to have had any legal right to refuse the Parana. There was, therefore, the more reason why his noble Friend should have carefully considered the whole case, and have shown to the people of Ireland, to Parliament, and the commercial
  454
  public, that he and the Government had provided the best substitute in their power for the Galway contract. There had been some talk of economy, but the Post Office would have saved money by sending their letters by the Parana under the contract. An impression had gone abroad, which appeared to be entertained by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, that if this contract had been suspended for six months the Company would have received £36,000 during those months. But his noble Friend (Lord John Russell) did the Postmaster General a great injustice if he thought he had been paying at that rate for the services actually performed by the Company. Since the commencement of the contract in June last how much did their Lordships suppose the Company had received? They had made during the whole year six complete voyages both ways and one voyage out besides those not in accordance with the terms of the contract, yet so many fines and penalties had been imposed that the whole payment from the Government to the Company had only amounted to between £15,000 and £16,000. What had been the result of the abrupt determination of the contract? Why, the benefit of early intelligence to British property during the last month might have been more than the value of the whole contract. What were the chief topics of interest in the news from the United States at the present moment? The effectiveness or otherwise of the blockade of the Southern ports, and the views of the American Government on the right of search, and the principles of international law. Our underwriters and shipowners were deeply interested in obtaining the speediest news on these points, and yet this was the moment chosen by the Government, for the sake of making a small saving, of putting an end to the quickest communication with the United States. He believed that if the Post Office had allowed the Company to continue the service the latest news received from the United States would have been anticipated by at least five days. The decision of the Government, it was clear, had been hastily adopted; and if the Irish Members withdrew their support from the Government it was not they but the Ministry that had been guilty of inconsistency, because the Government had held out the assurance that they would carry out the policy of their predecessors in maintaining this communication by Irish packets with the

  455
  United States. He trusted that the final decision of the Government would yet be in favour of renewing this contract. Whether the recent evident change in the opinion of the Government had been caused by the representations of the Lord Lieutenant or by the manifestations of popular feeling, it was a perfectly legitimate course for his noble Friend at the head of the Government to win the confidence of the people of Ireland, aye, and of the commercial public of this country, by doing that which would promote their interests, and at the same time secure for the Government a great and deserved popularity in Ireland.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY:—My Lords, the Government are anxious to promote postal communication with America, and there is no objection on principle to establishing such a communication between Galway and America, and the chief objection to the contract with the Galway Company was not that the contract was made for the benefit of Ireland, but that, contrary to the universal practice, as stated by the late Secretary of the Treasury, Sir Charles Trevelyan, it was given without competition, and without any notice to any of the great public companies, or to the mercantile community, that might have enabled them to enter into a competition for giving the service on the terms most advantageous to the country. The question itself is divided into two distinct parts. The first is whether the contract has been properly performed by the parties who have entered into it? If a contract is not fulfilled by one party, I have never heard that it could be made a just charge against the other party that it put an end to it. But I will go further; I will admit, if we had pushed the conditions to an extreme, and terminated the agreement on the very first omission to fulfil its terms, we should not have acted with a fair liberality. But a very short history of the proceedings under the contract will, I hope, satisfy your Lordships that so far from having treated the Company with severity it has been shown more than usual indulgence. We have from time to time met every application the Company has made to us. It has from the first moment been allowed on many different occasions to employ vessels that did not answer the conditions of the contract; it was allowed temporarily to alter the voyages from once a fortnight to once a month. Then the Company, not having a single vessel fit for
  456
  the service, made another application to be allowed to postpone the service for four months to the 12th of March. That was also conceded. But under these circumstances it is quite clear that it was competent to the Government to terminate the contract without any imputation, of harshness. The Government, however, said we will suspend the contract for the time you yourselves name, but solely and entirely on this condition, that if at the end of that time you are not ready with proper vessels, under the terms of the contract, it will be terminated. It is very inconvenient to the public service that a contract should be changed, mutilated, or imperfectly executed; and that there should be no certainty of the Company having proper vessels ready to perform the duty, particularly in this service, of which speed is such an important element. It is most necessary that the vessels should possess the power and speed that would enable them to perform the voyages within the time stipulated; but only once has the voyage from Galway to St. John's been performed in six days since the commencement of the service. In every case except one the Cunard boats have made as short or shorter voyages from Queenstown to Boston and New York than the steamers from Galway. It, therefore, comes to this, that as far as a direct communication between Ireland and the United States is concerned, no advantage has been gained by the establishment of the Galway line of packets; equal advantage has been derived from the Cunard steamers and Liverpool line touching at Queenstown, and from the other lines of steamers that run from Liverpool, calling at Londonderry, without receiving one sixpence of subsidy. The Company had certainly a right to require from the Government full and due notice that in the event of certain circumstances occurring the contract would be put an end to. My Lords, I can refer to the correspondence to show that not once only, but repeatedly, the Company has had such notice. The suspension of the service from October to March was only granted on the clear understanding that if the Company had not, at the end of that period, proper vessels for the recommencement and continuance of the service, the contract would be terminated. And what was its condition at the end of the term? On the 26th of March the Company had not a single qualified vessel to go to sea. I am obliged to say

  457
  that under these circumstances I felt it extremely difficult to avoid carrying into execution the declaration made when the extension, of time was granted; but on very urgent representations being made to me of an accident that had occurred to the Hibernia, the Company was allowed to forego a voyage on payment of a fine; but it was declared to them that they were not to be allowed to resume the service unless they had efficient vessels. On the 7th of May a vessel was offered for acceptance by the Government. It was the Adriatic. This steamer fulfilled the conditions of the contract, and has performed the service admirably. Had all the vessels been equal to the Adriatic no question would have been raised. The next vessel, the Columbia, had been so strained that she was obliged (o go into dock at Liverpool to be repaired, and would probably be retained there four months; and the Hibernia, even on her way from Southampton to Galway, was so injured, that it was stated she would not be fit to go to sea for three months. The Company, therefore, has not a single efficient vessel but the Adriatic, and the Adriatic was still on her American voyage. The Company, therefore, had not a single vessel ready for the next voyage. Under these circumstances the Company offered the Parana. The Government agreed to accept the Parana if the Admiralty surveyor, whom they were bound to consult, reported her fit for the service; but the report the Government received was that the Parana had not speed enough to perform the service she was bound to perform under the contract, and that he could not recommend her. Under these circumstances I ask my noble Friend, had he been Postmaster General, could he, with such a report in his hand, have consented to send out the Parana? It really is of vital importance to a service of which speed is such an essential that the vessels should be sufficiently fast for the purpose; it is speed alone that makes the service valuable. I admit that the communication with Newfoundland is a most important one, and I should be sorry to see it dropped; but to effect it with advantage the vessels must have speed enough, according to the contract, to perform the voyage within six days. If they take a longer time than that the communication is of comparatively little advantage. No advantage has been gained by the substitution of Galway for Queenstown. I must, therefore, contend that there is no
  458
  ground for charging the Government with unduly pressing on a particular Company, or with a want of feeling for the interests of Ireland. It is not possible that the Company could have been treated with more consideration. And what would have been said if the Company had been allowed to continue the contract when they notoriously had not performed it? The Government is already open to the strongest representations from the mercantile community generally against the policy of subsidies to lines of steamers running to ports of the United States to which communication already exists, while any assistance is refused in aid of the Canadian line of communication direct between England, Ire-, land, and the St. Lawrence. Under these circumstances it would have been impossible for us to continue any lax indulgence to the Galway Company after the ample notice it had received. Is it possible, then, after all that has passed, to accuse the Government of having acted harshly or unjustly towards the Company? I can say with the utmost sincerity that Her Majesty's Government and all those with whom I am politically connected have never shown any indifference to the feelings or the interests of the Irish people. The noble Marquess who introduced this Motion (the Marquess of Normanby) when he accused my noble Friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs of having changed his political opinions, should, I think, have recollected from what party he received support and from what party he encountered opposition when he was himself pursuing a truly liberal policy in Ireland; and I am, therefore, surprised that he should have ventured to come forward and in a similar spirit endorse the accusations which have been made against the Government on this subject. I propose shortly to lay on your Lordships' table the whole of the papers connected with this matter. I do not wish to withhold one single letter or iota of the correspondence. Your Lordships and the other House of Parliament will be able, after reading those papers, to form your own judgment on the conduct of the Government, and, however much we may regret the feeling which prevails in Ireland; I think, upon calm consideration, it will be found that it would not be just to visit us with condemnation for the course we have adopted. No man can be more anxious than I am at this moment to see an early opportunity offer for promoting direct and immediate communication between

  459
  that country and America, and my only desire is to see it established on the best and soundest foundation.
  LORD BROUGHAMsaid, it was impossible to deny the fact that this moderately important question had excited a more universal and intense feeling throughout the whole of the sister kingdom than any other question, great or small, within their memory. Men of every party and sect, and of every class, and whether employed in agriculture or trade, had united together with unexampled unanimity upon this local question. He, therefore, hoped it would be yet found possible, notwithstanding what had passed, for the Government to excuse this Company to a certain extent for the non-performance of their contract, and to renew this contract with the Galway Company, provided the Government had reasonable grounds for supposing that the Company would for the future be able to perform their part of it. He could not sit down without adverting to a point referred to by the noble Marquess in reference to this subject—namely, the rumours, or rather positive statements, as he (Lord Brougham) would call them, that, upon the authority of a Cabinet Minister, an attempt had been made on the part of certain Irish Members of the other House of Parliament, to obtain by threats of voting, on a totally different question, adversely to the Government, a promise from the head of that Government that this contract, or subvention, would be continued to the Galway Company. As the noble Marquess stated men must be extremely unwise and exceedingly foolish if they could suppose that any such threats could influence his noble Friend at the head of the Government to betray his duty. It had, however, been shown by his noble Friend near him, that action was actually taken—that was the expression—by the body of Members in question long before the time when this proceeding was alleged to have taken place. Now all that went to show that the charge itself was wholly unfounded. He (Lord Brougham) should, however, like to have a better rebuttal of the charge, and that could only be given by Father Daly himself. That gentleman might either deny that any Irish Members had authorized him to go to the First Lord of the Treasury with their threat and their offers, or he might show that no Irish Member connected with the Galway contract had given him any authority to take that step. It was obvious that if any hon. Member
  460
  sent a message to a Minister, "If you do not put money in a certain place," which was the old form of a threatening letter, "I will vote against you," or that if the Minister did not give the Member the assistance he asked he would not support him upon a great question which had no possible connection with the subject matter of the application—that a more corrupt proceeding, or a more direct act of offering to be bribed, could not well be imagined. It was in vain for the other House of Parliament to challenge the respect of the community if they allowed such a charge to be made without taking means to rebut it by a thorough investigation. With what justice could they order a poor voter in some borough who had accepted a bribe of £5 to be prosecuted if they were to connive at Members of their own House of Commons offering to sell their votes for a bribe of so many thousands? The facts of the case should be ascertained at once. If Father Daly were examined at the bar of the House of Commons he would declare whether any Member or Members of the other House of Parliament had authorized him to go to Lord Palmerston with that joint menace and promise. If he said he was so authorized, then let him declare who those Members were, and then let it be seen whether or not such Gentlemen shared directly or indirectly in the Galway contract—which circumstance would have the effect of converting this message into an offer to receive a bribe. If Father Daly, however, chose to say that he had no authority from hon. Members to make this statement to Lord Palmerston—if he said that he had merely intermeddled in the matter from over zeal in the good cause—then, of course, there could be no charge made against any Members in reference to the matter. But so long as this statement remained uncontradicted by proof, or unretracted by Father Daly, men would not hesitate to believe that there was good foundation for the report.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsaid, that Father Daly had called upon him before going to Lord Palmerston, and asked him to accompany him. Father Daly, however, did not say a word to him about the propositions which he was represented to have made at his interview with the Prime Minister. Having declined to accompany the rev. gentleman he could not tell what passed at the interview with the noble Viscount, He could only state that

  461
  Father Daly said he was going, as he believed he actually did go, straight from his house to Lord Palmerston, but he much doubted whether the rev. gentleman said that he had any authority from any Member of Parliament. Father Daly showed, him a paper signed by forty-eight Members of the House of Commons of different shades of politics, who were all in favour of the Gal way contract, but he did not say a word to him about the Irish Members voting.
  THE EARL OF LEITRIMsaid, there was a strong feeling engendered in the people of Ireland that they were not being justly treated—that everything was to be taken from them and nothing given to them. It was of very little consequence for them to be told in a case like this that such and such persons had acted improperly. The question with them was whether their country was still to be commercially crippled and depressed, or whether she was to be permitted to rise to the rank of a great mercantile and prosperous community? With regard to the conduct of Father Daly, he had no acquaintance with that person; but he knew the rev. gentleman had taken great interest in the social improvement of Ireland, and, regarding this question, no doubt, as one of vital importance in a commercial point of view, he had been induced to seek an interview with the Prime Minister upon it. There were strong rumours that the Galway Company had met with most unfair treatment from the English Government, and that there was a determination to prevent Ireland from taking the position she ought to occupy as one of the first commercial countries in the world; and if ground was given for these feelings, he feared that most disastrous results would follow. He appealed to the Government to take the matter into their very serious consideration, and would prove that these suspicions were not well founded by establishing—without reference to this particular Company—a communication between the west coast of Ireland and America.
  THE EARL OF CLANCARTYthought the noble Earl the President of the Council must have been misinformed when he stated that no correspondence had passed between the Government and the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland on this subject, inasmuch as the Lord Lieutenant had certainly conveyed an impression of an opposite character in his recent observations upon the subject of the Galway contract.
  462
  He (the Earl of Clancarty) should certainly hear with satisfaction that the Government considered Ireland the most desirable part of the United Kingdom for the establishment of steam communication with America. Galway was undoubtedly the most convenient port for this Transatlantic communication. At the same time, he could not but think that the proposal to throw open the question at a moment when all classes in Ireland had agreed that Galway was the best port for a packet station was a device to cast among them an apple of discord, and to create differences which had not hitherto existed among them. He thought that the general public had obtained a great advantage from the policy pursued by his noble Friend near him (the Earl of Eglinton) when Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, particularly in having initiated the postal steam communication between Ireland and America.
  THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREsupposed that after the statement of the noble Earl, the President of the Council, he was justified in believing that the Government was willing to consider the question of a postal communication between Ireland and America?
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, the Government admitted the desirability of such a communication, and, if the matter were thrown open to public competition, they would consider what proposition would be most for the advantage of the public generally.
  THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREsaid, he would have been satisfied with the statement had it not been for the observations which were made by the Postmaster General to the effect that the Galway contract interfered with a line already subsidized between Liverpool and Canada. The advantage of the Galway line was that St. John's, Newfoundland, could be reached within six days, and thence there was telegraphic communication with Canada and the United States. But even a line of packets stopping at St. John's, would be exposed to the same hostility as the present Galway line. This was not a mere local question, but affected Imperial interests, and he hoped the Government would regard it in that light. He thought no time should be lost on the part of the Government in establishing steam communication between a port in the west of Ireland and America.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYbegged to explain. His complaint was,

  463
  that whatever objections might have been entertained to the contract originally, the contract having been given, and the Company having received a large subsidy, the conditions of the contract were not carried out, and that the contract should not be continued unless these conditions were performed.
  THE MARQUESS OF NORMANBY, in reply, expressed a hope that the Government would follow the advice of his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham), which would meet all the real justice of the case, by showing some indulgence to this Company, provided they could satisfy them of their power to carry on the contract. This would prevent delay at a time when rapid communication with America was most important. He did not think that in the House of Commons or elsewhere there had been any accusation that Mr. Daly had stated that he was authorized to enter into any terms with the Government for the support of the Irish Members; on the contrary, he asked—he would not say whether he did so in the most judicious manner or in the way most likely to carry his point with Lord Palmerston—that was a different question—but what he asked was, that the Premier should see the Irish Members. And what he accused the noble Lord the Foreign Secretary of was that he had stated that this person who had asked that interview of the Prime Minister seemed entitled to speak on the subject, That was entirely inconsistent with what had been stated by the Prime Minister himself, and it would have been better if the noble Lord the Member for the City of London had not used the phrase, "that this rev. gentleman appeared entitled to speak on behalf of the Irish Members," which, no doubt, misled the House and was not founded in fact. The noble Earl the President of the Council had asked whether he was authorized to speak on this subject in the name of the Irish Members? He certainly had no aggregate authority; but he could state from those he had seen, that no such representations as had been made were founded on any authority from them. Besides, the hon. Members for the Queen's County and Roscommon stated on Thursday evening, in the House of Commons, that Mr. Daly had no authority to represent the Irish Members, and that they had told Mr. Daly so themselves. He had been told that he ought not to accuse others of inconsistency, being so open to that charge himself. He should be glad
  464
  to know on what single subject he had shown inconsistency. All the measures he was connected with as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland had been long since disposed of, and those which Her Majesty's Ministers were now foisting on the House of Commons did not exist at that time. There was not a single Member of their Lordships' House on the Bench opposite who was ever a colleague of his, and the reason why he had stated that he had no confidence in the present Government was that he shared the opinion of the Prime Minister, expressed by Lord John Russell, and on which that noble Lord had acted. If on any question connected with Ireland any change of opinion existed, it was on the part of Lord John Russell, not on his part. The only true judge upon this point must be the Irish people. He repeated, he was not open to any charge of inconsistency in not supporting noble Lords opposite, whom he saw collected from all points of the political compass. As his noble Friend had stated that there was no public Correspondence on this subject, he could not persist in his Motion.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

  MARRIAGE LAW (IRELAND) AMENDMENT BILL.—REPORT.
  Amendments reported (according to Order).
  LORD REDESDALEmoved that the following clause for the registration of buildings for Roman Catholic worship be added to the Bill:—
  "Every Chief Constable of Police shall, within One Month from the passing of this Act, deliver to each Registrar within his District a Certificate signed by him in duplicate, of all Buildings set apart for the public Celebration of Divine Service according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Roman Catholic Religion, within the District of such Registrar; and from Time to Time thereafter similar Certificates of any other Building which may be so set apart, and such Certificates shall be for such Buildings the Certificates required by the Twenty-seventh Section of the recited Act for Buildings to be licensed for the Solemnization of Marriages, and shall be acted upon accordingly for the Purpose of licensing the same for the Solemnization of Marriages under this Act only; provided always, that the Issue of the Certificate of the Registry on Vellum or Parchment mentioned in the said Section shall not be necessary, and that the Registrar shall be entitled to the sum of One Pound only, to be paid from the Police Rate, on the Delivery of any such Certificate, although more than One Building may be returned therein."
  THE LORD CHANCELLORwas glad of this opportunity of correcting a mis-

  465
  apprehension which had gone abroad, that he had consented to the two clauses of Ms noble Friend being added to the Bill. He had consented to certain Amendments moved by the noble Lord, which he thought unnecessary but harmless, being introduced with the most laudable object of preventing clandestinity, and to preserve the evidence of marriage; but the other two clauses he had strongly condemned, and, instead of carrying them out, he said he would rather abandon the Bill altogether. The clause was condemned in Ireland, not only by Roman Catholic priests, but by persons of all religious persuasions.
  THE BISHOP OF DOWN AND CONNORsaid, the clause was most objectionable in its character, and would have a very injurious effect.
  Amendment negatived.
  Bill to be read 3a to-morrow.
  House adjourned at Eight o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.