The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-20 00:00:00

THAMES CONSERVANCY BILL.

On the second reading,
Alderman SALOMONS opposed the measure. His
constituents complained that they had to go through all
the inconveniences incidental to those interested in private

bills, whereas this was a public measure of considerable im-

portance. The Thames Conservators enjoyed enormous
powers over the river utterly inimical to the
interests of denizens on the banks of the river.

The bill would endow the Board with enormous taxing
powers on parties selling goods on the river, and enable
them to charge toys upon all who travelled on the river.
As it would materially interfere, and unjustly so, with the
trade of the river, he begged to move that the bill be read a
second time that day six months.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS seconded the motion. This should
have been a public not a private bill. It would
endow a private board with enormous and exceedingly
arbitrary powers to interfere with the trade of
the river, and all people transacting business on its
banks. He confessed he was surprised to see the name of
the hon. members for Bath (Mr. Fite) and Abingdon (Mr.
Norris) on the back of the bill.
Mr. NORRIS supported the bill. The object of the bill
was simply to alter the license tax fixed by the
bill of 1857 which was introduced and passed as a pri-
vate bill, A toll would be charged per head on pas-
sengers by steamboats, instead of now a specific sum
for the ordinary license. The conservators would ob-
tain no more power by this bill than they now enjoyed by
law. The fishing powers proposed by the bill would be like
those in force before the passing of the Act of 1857. Power,
too, would be taken to punish, by fine, persons shooting
offensive matter from barges or otherwise into the
Thames ; thus the cleanliness of the river would be
promoted. The house ought to read the bill a second
time, and then subject it to an ordeal of a committee
up stairs.
Mr. TITE supported the bill, and had put his name on
the back of it, because it would enable the Conservators to
punish gas companies and others who polluted the river.
Surely this was an object worthy of the support of the
house. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. LOCK E supported the amendment, because the bill
would be inimical to the interests and pursuits of his con-
stituents.

Mr. CRAWFORD opposed the bill, and trusted that the
Government would institute an early inquiry into the con-
dition of the river and the powers ot the various municipa
bodies under whose management it was placed. There
were innumerable objections to the bill.
Mr. MASSEY said the act of 18;7 was a compromise,
under which certain disputed rights between the Crown
and the Conservator 3 were accommodated an defined.
That bill had worked well for six years, but the Conserva-
tors urge that they needed some slight extension of their
powers, the chief of which was the right to frame bye -laws
to prevent the pollution of the river. He agreed with his
hon. friend that it would be well to make the inquiry he
proposed, but that was no reason why the salutary
powers sought by this bill should not be granted. He
wished to express no opinion as to the mode in which the
Conservators had performed their duties. It would be
best to read the bill a second time, and to enter up stairs
in committee into a careful examination of its provisions.
Alderman SIDNEY and Mr. ANGEnSTEIN supported the
amendment.

Mr. HENLEY considered it rather anomalous, after
giving the Conservators taxing powers, to suggest in-
quiry. This should have been done before the powers
were given.
The house negatived the bill without a division.
SPIRITS DUTY.

In reply to Mr. STANSFELD,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER intimated
that her Majesty's Government had obtained all the infor-
mation requisite to ascertain the exact nature of the work-
ing of these duties. He wished decidedly to state that it

was not the intention of the Government to propose any
change in the spirit duties. (Hear, hear.)
POST-OFFICE SAVINGS BANK BILL.
The second reading was postponed until Monday.
Allowance to the Prince and Princess of
Wales.

The house having resolved itself into a committee for the
consideration of the Queen's Message upon the subject of
the marriage of the Prince of Wales.
Lord PALMERSTON said—l rise, sir, to propose to the
committee a resolution for the purpose of providing, in the
words of the Message from her Majesty, an establishment
for the Prince and Princess of Wales suitable to the rank
and dignity ot that station. (Hear, hear.) And in doing
so I would remind the committee of that of which they are
all aware, that we have the happiness of living under a
constitutional monarchy, and the people of this country not
only are, perhaps, mere than at any former period, sensible
by positive experience 'of the blessings which that form
of government confers, but they have also an opportunity
of appreciating its value by contrasting it with events
which are passing in other parts of the world. (Cheers.)
We see in the East some of the evils which are incident
to arbitrary sway. We witness in the West the wide-
spread misery and desolation which are sometimes created
by democratic and republican institutions. (Loud cheers.)
We enjoy a happy medium between those two extremes.
Our institutions not only confer happiness and tranquillity
upon the people of these realms, but enable them to enjoy
the-most perfect freedom of thought, of speech, of writing,
and of printing, and above all uncontrolled either by the
dictates ot despotic authority or by the Lynch law o 7 an un-
governable mob. (Cheers.) I trust that the people of this

nation will long c.ntinue to enjoy these advantages, and
that their hearts will be directed towards the Almighty
Aspenser of events with thankfulness—reverential thank-

fulness for the lot which has thus been assigned them, and
I am persuaded that their bosoms will be full of the most
affectionate attachment towards that sovereign and family
under whore mild and beneficent sway, humanly speaking,
those blessings have been administered. (Hear, hear.)
There are occasions in human affairs in which events which
are matters of joy and rejoicing produce pleasure that
begins and ends with the occasion out of which it arises.
But there are other occasions when joyful events link and
connect the present with the future—when the happiness
which mankind enjoys at the moment is also an earnest and a
security for future happiness. Such an occasion is the pre-
sent, when the heir apparent of the Crown is going to contract
a marriage which will not only, I trust, be productive of do-
mestic happiness for the family inwhich it is to be celebrated,
but will hold out to this country a prospect of a long line of
cee sovereigns who by transmitted qualities and by
the recollection of the conduct of those who went before

them, will, I trust, imitate the virtues of the stock Iron;
which they may spring, and will contribute as much as the
present family does to the happiness, and welfare,and dignity
of the country over which they reign. (Hear.) The people
of this country have always been disposed readily to give
whatever may be necessary to maintain that due dignity
which is essential for the monarchical institutions of the
country, and I am persuaded that upon the present occasion
the proposal which it will be my duty to make will be
acceded to with pleasure and readiness by this house, and
will be sanctioned by the people of this country. In consi-
dering that which it may be fitting upon the present occa•
sion to grant to the Crown for the establishment of the
Prince and Princess of Wales, it is right to look back a
little to see what has been done unon similar occasions in
times gone by. Now, if gentlemen will look at the speech
ofrivi thr. Pitt, when, in 1795, he proposed an establishment
fo
that he ethenstated Princeth athat
theand
Prince Princess
o f
Wales
of Wales,
in
117h4e5y
an(l
will
thesee
Prince of Wales at an earlier period, in 1715. had' each of
theta a net income of £lOO,OOO a year, in the one case, in
clearaddit!forne
from
o the
ee eevrednen
madee P o f theus
e eDuchyf of e
whether ere
al. It is not
in bothi cases
that income was in addition to the revenue of the Duchy
of
Cornwall, but I rather infer that it was. Everybody
is
aware what a great change has taken place in the
value
of
money since either of these remote periods, and how little
the same nominal amount in the present day represents the
command of things which that amount gave either in 1745
or in 1715. Coming down to a later period, in 1795, when
Mr. Pitt proposed, and the house consented, to an esta-
blishment for the then Prince and Princess of Wales, the
arrangement was not a simple one, because it was cornpli-