« ForrigeFortsæt »
worthy of consideration, whether or not the government would, by a sale of those lands, in the course of ten or twelve years when the lands on all sides of it should have been brought into a good state of cultivation, and when those lands allotted to the government would acquire a value, which they never would have acquired, if the surrounding lands were not in a state of cultivation-be repaid the capital advanced to the emigrants, for the purpose of cultivating their grants. He mentioned this merely to show, that if the plan of repayment by the emigrants was encumbered with difficulties, that the government might not necessarily be induced to give up the general policy of the measure, but that other plans might be devised, which would hold out, not an immediate, but a distant and certain prospect of repayment. It appeared to him, that the discussion upon the question ought to be reserved until after all those difficulties had been inquired into, and minutely examined by a committee, and some precise plan had been laid before the House. He had been induced to take that opportunity of stating these slight qualifications with which he gave his assent to the plan of his hon. friend, the colonial Secretary, and he trusted, that it would not be thought that the stating of those qualifications and difficulties proceeded from the slightest want of interest on his part in the proceeding; which, with certain reservations, had his most cordial concurrence.
Mr. Hume contended, that to employ 20,000,000l. in carrying to a foreign country one out of every eighteen members of our population, was a wasteful employment of the public capital, inasmuch as the void occasioned by such a measure would be made up in three years. In proof of his position, the hon. member read an extract from the evidence attached to the Report on Emigration; from which it appeared, that the void which had been occasioned in the population of the village of Marsden, in Kent, by the emigration of fifty-two of its inhabitants (which was one in eight), had been immediately made up by the arrival of fresh labourers from other places. He likewise argued, from the evidence of colonel Cockburn, that at the end of seven years from their first settlement, the emigrants would not be able to repay to government, or their parishes, the expenses of their emigration. The practical result of this project might be, to
send away beggars from England, to make beggars of those who remained behind; for what other result could follow from sending 20,000,000l. out of the country, which, if left in, would be expended in some way or other among the working classes? Employment must always be in proportion to capital, and when so much floating capital was withdrawn from circulation, a proportionate quantity of employment must be withdrawn from the labouring part of the community. From all the information which he had been able to obtain, he was convinced that this project would, both immediately and ultimately, be a losing concern to the country. It had been said, however, that it would lead to increased prosperity. Now, if 20,000,000l. were to be divided in this country among the persons whom it was destined to take from it, it would produce to them an annuity of 157. a year, and would keep them in comparative comfort. Besides, the evils of Ireland could not be cured by emigration. The system which prevailed in that country was bad, and required a stronger cure than that of emigration. If the House wished emigration to be productive of any good effect, they must repeal. the absurd restrictions which they had placed upon it. At present, no emigrants could go direct to the United States. They must proceed thither by way of Canada, a regulation which imposed an additional expense of 101. upon every person emigrating. The restrictions, however, were as useless in practice, as they were absurd in theory; for it appeared by returns published by the Emigration Society at Quebec, that out of one hundred and nine thousand emigrants who had arrived within the few last years in Canada from Great Britain and Ireland, only ten thousand were then resident in that country, and that the remainder of them had proceeded to the United States. Whilst he made these objections to the plans now proposed, he thought it right to state, that he was anxious to promote emigration upon sound principles, and to add, that the sentiments expressed by the hon. mover and seconder of the amendment were such as the House ought to follow; for if the committee was to do nothing more than bring in some measure, which was then to be postponed till next session, it would, by keeping the parties in suspense, aggravate the evil which it was intended to remove. He would not object to the
committee, though he was fully convinced that none of the plans which had been that night alluded to would be found beneficial. Useful information, however, might be elicited by a committee; and to the eliciting of such information he had always been, and always should be, friendly.
He implored the House not to be put down by any cant about sound principles; nor to confide exclusively in the views either of speculative or of practical men. The wisest plan would be to look attentively at both, and to decide as circumstances warranted. He was happy to say Mr. Wilmot Horton, in reply, said, that that speculative men were not hostile to the honourable members who had come down views which he entertained on this subject, to that House, and attacked his plans, and that several practical men warmly suphad evidently not read the printed report, ported them. But let that be as it might, upon which his measures were founded. he was ready to abide by public opinion Before he answered the attack made upon as to the correctness of his principles on him by the hon. member for Bristol, he this subject, which he had long considered begged leave to notice an observation with deep anxiety. He must complain of made by the hon. member who had just the hon. member for Bristol, for having sat down, who had contrasted his opinion drawn, as an inference from the fact of with those of his right hon. friend, the some of the settlers in Canada having had Secretary of State for the Home Depart- the ague in 1825, that the plan of emiment. He did not see that there was any gration acted upon in 1823 had failed. difference of opinion between him and his If the hon. member would look to page 290 right hon. friend. He might, individu- of the printed report, he would find there ally, entertain opinions in detail, different was a most elaborate and minute statement from those of his right hon. friend, but, relative to the settlers who went to Canada. upon the general policy of emigration, Their numbers, their names, the deaths, he agreed with his right hon. friend, that it the produce of the land, the number of would be highly advantageous to the coun- acres brought into cultivation, were stated; try and to the emigrants, and that the and opposite to the name of each settler, best means of securing the greatest bene- was a minute statement of his stock, and fit, advantage, and comfort, for them, the number of acres cultivated by him. could be ascertained only in a committee. He pledged himself to prove before the He begged to remind the hon. members committee, that the value of the property who were opposed to his plans, that there belonging to the settlers located by Mr. was a tribunal without, as well as within, Robinson, amounted to 7,000l. Mr. the walls of that House, and by that tri- Robinson, in 1823, located one hundred bunal, the tribunal of public opinion, he and eighty-two families, one hundred and had no objection to have his plans, and twenty of whom were living on their grants his arguments in support of them, as well in 1825, and only one had returned to as the arguments of the hon. member, Ireland. With respect to the opinion of judged. As the hon. member for Aber- colonel Cockburn, he could lay before the deen had spoken of "sound principles," committee the colonel's recantation of that he would state to the House something opinion. In that recantation he stated, which had passed between him and that that, at the time he expressed the opinion, hon. member. That hon. member had he was satisfied of its truth, relying, as he told him, upon a former occasion, that his did, upon the information which he had plans were contrary to "sound princi- received from others respecting those setples;" and, in support of his statement, tlers; but that, when it was proved to he had quoted the authority of a well- him, by documents, that those statements known writer on Political Economy, Mr. were unfounded, he had no hesitation in McCulloch. Now, would the hon. mem- withdrawing his previous opinion. He ber give him credit in future for sound denied that colonel Cockburn had ever principles, when he told him that he had said, that the emigrants could not prodrawn up thirty questions upon this sub-cure a market for their commodities if ject with care and attention; that they had been submitted one by one to Mr. M'Culloch, and that Mr. M'Culloch had answered them in a manner perfectly accordant to the view which he (Mr. Horton) had taken of them in that House?
emigration were continued. Every succeeding lot of emigrants would create a market for the produce of the former emigrants, provided emigration were continued on a regular plan. He begged leave to call the attention of the hon, member for
Bristol to what was stated in the Appendix respecting desultory emigration without capital. Was that hon. member aware of the deprivations endured by such emigrants? In the Report of the Quebec Emigrant Association, it was stated, that those emigrants were employed in breaking stones upon the road, as the association had resolved not to give any relief in the shape of money to able-bodied men. The complaint of those emigrants was the same as that which they had expressed at home; namely, want of employment. Such was the situation of settlers without capital; and such would be the situation of those men whom the hon. member proposed to set down in Canada, by the cheapest mode of conveyance from Ireland. How, he asked, was it possible for men thus thrown down, without capital, to prosper in a new country? He could assure the House, that the opinion in North America, respecting such emigration, was not such as had been stated by the hon. member for Bristol. The opinion entertained by all classes in North America, from lord Dalhousie down to the humblest individual, was, that "if we adopted emigration without capital, and the emigrants were to depend upon chance for employment, our plans of emigration would fail; and that the prosperity of the emigrants depended upon capital." The questions to be considered by the committee would be, whether repayment of the expense incurred by government, in making an advance of capital to the emigrants, was practicable, or whether the emigrants should be sent out wholly unprovided with capital. When he looked to the published evidence, he looked with confidence to the decision of the committee in favour of his opinions. He, for one, was glad that the evidence before the committee, and the plans of government, were published, because the publication would induce the public to turn their attention to the subject; and, by this means, suggestions would be made, which would enable parliament to come to a sound and practical conclusion.
The Amendment was negatived without a division. After which the original motion was agreed to, and a Committee appointed.
COMMITTEES OF APPEALS ON PRIVATE BILLS.] Mr. Littleton said, that the machinery of the resolutions which he had VOL. XVI.
formerly introduced, relative to appeals on private bills, would be incomplete, if the House did not sanction an additional resolution, subjecting the party appealing to the payment of all costs and expenses, in case the committee of appeal declared the petition to be frivolous and vexatious. It was necessary that the House should do this with as little delay as possible, because he knew that one report at least was about to be presented, relative to which it was probable there would be an appeal. He had, some time since, proposed two measures for the purpose of carrying his object into effect. One was, to compel the petitioner to enter into recognizances to defray such costs as might have been incurred before the committee, in case the appeal should be considered frivolous and vexatious. Some gentlemen, however, especially those of the learned profession, had objected to this, on the ground, that there existed no precedent, where one branch of the legislature assumed the power of taking money from individuals. In all cases of that nature, it was observed, it must be the concurrent act of the three estates. He had next proposed, that the party or parties appealing should deposit a certain sum of money to meet the expenses incurred if the appeal should be considered frivolous and vexatious. Against that, however, it was objected, that where the parties were poor, the call for a deposit of money would effectually prevent the appeal, let the grounds of it be ever so just. He had, therefore, in the interval since the former resolutions were carried, endeavoured to collect the opinions of the gentlemen (especially of the legal profession) who had objected to these two propositions; and he had now their concurrence in the propriety of the resolution which he was about to lay before the House. His proposition was, that one or more of the parties appealing should enter into a penal bond, for a certain sum, covenanting to defray such costs and charges as might be incurred by the other side, in case the committee of appeal reported the petition to be frivolous and vexatious. The hon. gentleman then moved, "That no proceeding shall be had on any petition so referred to a Select Committee, unless the petitioner, or one of the petitioners, in case there be more than one, shall, within two days after presenting such petition, or within such further time as S
shall be limited by the House, enter into a bond or obligation to the agent or agents, or some person named for that purpose by the agent or agents of the opposite party or parties, according to a form to be approved of by the Chief Clerk, or one of the Clerks Assistants of this House, in the penal sum of 5001. and with two sufficient sureties, to be approved of by one of the said Clerks in the penal sum of 2501. each, conditional, to be void, in case the said Petitioner, or Petitioners shall duly pay all costs, charges and expenses of the party or parties who shall appear before the House in opposition to such petition (such costs, charges, and expenses to be found and assessed by one of the Clerks of this House, for the time being) in case the said Select Committee shall report to the House that the said Petition appeared to them to be frivolous and vexatious."
Mr. G. Bankes was anxious that the question, which was of considerable importance, should be postponed to another night, in order that it might be properly discussed. In his opinion, the objections which were raised against the resolution which called on parties to enter into recognizances, applied with equal strength to the present proposition. If a man was poor, he could not enter honestly into a bond for 500l., since he knew that if the committee voted his petition frivolous and vexatious, he could not meet it: and thus the right of appeal was virtually denied to him. Besides, how could they expect a poor man to procure two sureties in 2501. each? The resolution gave a great advantage to the rich man, while it precluded the poor man from seeking redress. In fact, he thought it was very unjust to impose on individuals the necessity of entering into such a bond. He did not wish that the expenses attending the private business of the House should be increased. On the contrary, he hoped they might be lessened; and if no other member made the attempt, he would hereafter bring before the House some proposition with the view of effecting a diminution of the expenses attendant on private bills. He was convinced that such expenses frequently operated as impediments to improvements in the country. effect such diminution of the expenses would not affect the officers of the House, as they were not paid by fees; those fees going to a treasury fund. The expenses
frequently operated as reasons for not applying for bills, or for not coming to the House to renew most useful acts respecting roads, &c. The parties were deterred by the expenses; they being 500l. or 6007. for each bill. There was no necessity for the enormous expense to which parties were now exposed. On account of the importance of the present proposition, and that it might be considered before a fuller House, he would move, "That the Debate be adjourned to Monday."
Mr. Alderman Waithman observed, that the expenses incidental to getting private bills through the House were enormous; and, instead of increasing them, some means ought to be devised for reducing them. He was of opinion that the debate ought to be adjourned.
Mr. Littleton said, that the House could not be considered to be taken by surprise, as the measure had already been discussed twice. He understood also, that it had been agreed to in its present shape, by those gentlemen who, on the former occasions, objected to its adoption. He was anxious that the measure should be speedily disposed of, as he understood there were several reports ready to be brought up, and that in one of them an appeal was to occur. As the resolution did not possibly impose any grievance, but merely specified the mode in which a favour was to be granted, he was determined to take the sense of the House on the question.
Mr. Batley agreed with the hon. member for Corfe Castle in thinking the measure impolitic. It might also have the additional inconvenience of bringing the privileges of the House in contact with a court of law.
Mr. S. Bourne thought that all scruples on legal points might be silenced, when it was recollected, that the resolution was drawn up by the Attorney-general. Unless this resolution was carried, the other measure of the hon. member would be incomplete.
The House divided: For the Resolution 32. For the Adjournment 10.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
GRANT TO THE DUKE AND DUCHESS or CLARENCE.] On the order of the day for taking his Majesty's Message into consideration,
The Earl of Liverpool said, he did not feel it necessary to trespass on their lordships with many observations in reference to the Address which he was about to propose; for, after the melancholy event that had recently taken place, and the situation in which the illustrious duke stood in consequence of it, he thought there could be no objection to a reasonable provision being made for him, under such circumstances. He knew that the measure must originate elsewhere; still he wished that their lordships should be informed of the nature of the proposition which was to be brought forward. By the death of the duke of York, a sum of 3,000l. ayear fell to the duke of Clarence, as well as to the other sons of his late Majesty. To that sum it was now proposed to add 3,000, a-year more, and 6,000l. as a further provision for the duchess, making in all 12,000l. a-year. He was quite sure that no one would say that this was too much, considering the situation in which the illustrious duke now stood as heir presumptive to the Throne. With respect to the duchess of Clarence, he could say, from the knowledge he had of the conduct of her royal highness, that it was altogether irreproachable and unexceptionable. Those who with himself had similar opportunities of witnessing her demeanor, would fully bear him out in this assertion. The noble earl concluded by moving an Address to his Majesty expressive of their lordships' concurrence in his Majesty's Message.
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, February 16. GRANT TO THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF CLARENCE.] The House having resolved itself into a Committee on the King's Message for a Provision for the Duke and Duchess of Clarence, and the said Message having been read,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer rose, and addressed the Committee as follows: Sir; whenever parliament has been called upon on former occasions, to consider what provision ought to be made for the due maintenance of the station and dignity of different members of the royal family, the consideration of the degree of proximity which any individual of that family might have to the throne, has always been one of the most important
elements of that consideration. case of his late royal highness the duke of York, that principle was acted upon, even before he came to be so near the throne as he was at the time of his decease; for, during the life of his late majesty, indeed during the life of the princess Charlotte of Wales, the allowance he enjoyed from parliament was greater, in consequence of his proximity to the throne, than that which was assigned to the younger branches of the royal family. It will, perhaps, be as well for me here to state, what the income assigned to the duke and duchess of York, under these circumstances, amounted to. In the first place, his late royal highness derived 26,000l. per annum from the consolidated fund. In addition to this, there was a pension on the Irish pension list, of 7,000l. per annum, making together the sum of 33,000l. The duchess had, for her own support, an annual income of 4,000l., which, added to the 33,000l. enjoyed by the duke, made 37,000l. And it was thought, upon numerous occasions, when brought under the consideration of the House, that taking into view the relation which their royal highnesses bore to the throne, it was an allowance not more than sufficient for them to maintain the station in life which they were called upon to fill.---I will now state to the House, the income of his royal highness the duke of Clarence. That prince has a charge upon the consolidated fund of 26,500l. per annum, but he is without any allowance whatever for the duchess. The whole of his royal highness's allowance is, therefore, only 26,500l.: this is somewhat more than is assigned to the other junior branches of the royal family. It was considered but right that his royal highness should have 2,5007. beyond the other junior branches of the royal family, for a reason which I shall presently state. Sir, the income he now enjoys was assigned to him by various acts of parliament. The first act to which I shall allude, was passed at an early period of the late king's reign. It was to take effect after his death, and assigned to all the younger princes a sum of 60,000l. per annum, which was to be divided between them in equal portions, with benefit of survivorship, until the sum enjoyed by the survivors should have reached 15,000l. per annum each. The six younger princes, since that act came into operation, have enjoyed 10,000l. per