The Sun.
London, England, 1853-08-06 00:00:00

be for a temporary period, and that it would be hard all
at once to put in a free bridge between two paying ones.
Mr. FRENCH trusted the house would not sanction the
imposition of a toll.
Mr. OLIVEIRA also felt the great objection to any
toll for passing from one side of th river to the other. He
believed that this was the only great city in the woad

where such a principle existed. -
Mr. MIME wished to see all the turnpikes removed
from the metropolitan bridges. This being the metropolis
of the country, considerable expense took place for great
public purposes, and it was only right, therefore, that the
public should assist in bearing the weight of that expendi-

ture.
Mr. G. DUNCAN also expressed himself opposed to the
imposition of a toll.
Mr. WILSON said that this vote had nothing what-
ever to do with a toll. It would be for the House of Com-
mons to determine afterwards whether the bridge should
be free or not. The Government had, of course, no object
in imposing a toll, if the house provided the money.
(Hear, hear.)
The vote was then agreed to.
On 35,0001. being proposed for defraying the expense of
constructing an embankment and public roadway between
Battersea and Vauxhall bridges.
Air. W. BROWN objected to grants of this kind alto-
gether, for the benefit of the richest city in the world.
Col. SIBTHORP objected to the principle of saddling
the public generally with the expense of improvements in
the metropolis. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HEYWOOD considered that as no public or na-
tional advantage would be derived from the improvements
to which this vote was to be applied, the metropolis ought
to bear the expense itself. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI thought this vote involved a principle of
the utmost importance. The various counties throughout
the country supported their own bridges, and he had been
very much surprised at the opinion expressed by the hon.
member for Montrose, who had stated, some two years ago,
in bringing forward a motion on the subject of reform,
that he had always found that population and property
went together. If that proposition were a true one, it was
clear that the large population of the metropolis was no
reason for requiring that its bridges should be paid for by
the united contributions of all the counties in the country.
(Hear, hear.) He really thought a stand ought to be made
against the system of taking from the public purse for the
use of the metropolis sums which must be supplied by the
whole country. (Hear, hear.) When he and his hon.
friends had complained of the excessive weight of local
taxation which pressed especially upon the rural districts
of this country, they had always been told that that
system of taxation had its peculiar advantages. All those
advantages, whether real or assumed, had, however, been
withdrawn of late, and he thought it was the duty of hon.
m
gentlemen, when such votes as that now before the-
co
mittee were proposed, to scrutinise them very closely,
and ascertain whether they were founded
ourci h
n.
pld
just
principles or not. It did not seem to him a 3
ciple that the various counties
of this country
•
be called upon, besides paying for their
own bridges, to sou
contribute to the expense of the bridges of the county of
Middlesex—(hear, hear)—and that, too, on the.
tplea that
the county of Middlesex contained the nchest yin the
world. He thought they ought to oppose this vote, for he
believed that by doing so they might be able to lay the
foundation of a much more salutary system than was now
pursued with regard to the distribution of votes for public
works.
Sir W. MOLESWORTH expressed his cordial concur-
rence in many of the observations of the right hon. gentle-
man, and especially in the principle that henceforth the
metropolis should be required to bear the expense of its
own public works. It must, however, be borne in mind
that there was not in the metropolis at the present moment
any municipal body which had the power of rating the in-
habitants for these purposes, and that the inhabitants
could not be so rated without the adoption of some prin-
ciple of representation. The Government, he might ob-
serve, had this subject under their consideration. When
it was determined that a royal park should be made at
Battersea, with a bridge and embankments, the Commis.
sioners of Works were empowered to raise sums amount-
ing (as we understood) to 350,0001., upon the security of
the tolls, &c., for the purpose of carrying out the project
It was at first proposed that the money required should be
borrowed from the Exchequer Loan Commissioners, but it
was afterwards considered that the better course would be
to come at once to Parliament, to state what would be the
expense of completing the works which had been com-
menced, and to ask Parliament to provide for their com-
pletion. When he (Sir W. Molesworth) came into office,
he desired that the estimates might be laid before him,
stating how soon the works would be finished, and what sums
it would be necessary for Parliament to vote annually, in
order to complete them as speedily as possible. If they
gave up the embankment the bridge would he completely
useless, and without the bridge the park would he compa-
ratively of no value. He was informed that the cost
of the works would be altogether 524,0001. Of that
amount the Exchequer Loan Commissioners had furnished
280,0001., and therefore 244,0001. remained to be provide d
by Parliamentary votes. He believed, supposing the park
to be completed in 1855, that by 1862-3 they would realize
from ground rents and other sources 326,0001., and 62,0001.
in connection with the Chelsea embankment, making alto-
gether 388,0001., in addition to the tolls from Chelsea-
bridge, which were estimated at 6,6001. a-year. The right
hon. gentleman opposite had said that bridges ought not
to be constructed for the metropolis at the public expense,
and it was entirely upon that ground that provisions had
been made in the acts of Parliament for levying tolls upon
the bridges. He fully approved of the principle that great
metropolitan works should be paid for by the metropolis
itself ; but he hoped the right hon. gentleman would with-
draw his objection to this vote, as it was connected with
the scheme for the formation of Battersea-park.
Mn DISRAELI said, it was in consequence of the plan
for making a park at Battersea that he particularly opposed
this vote. They were told by the right hon. baronet that
the plan of asking, for votes was adopted in consequence of
the objection which he (Mr. Disraeli) on the part of the
late Government, had made to the system of advances by
the Exchequer Loan Commissioners for carrying out this
project. The right hon. baronet had not stated, however,
that the commissioners had ceased to make these or similar
advances, for at present the machinery for such advances
still existed, although these votes were proposed in Com-
mittee of Supply. He (Mr. Disraeli's) objection to the
advances by the Exchequer Loan Commissioners was, that
very considerable expenditure was thus incurred without
any proper control on the part of Parliament, for purposes
of a local and partial character, and which had really no-
thing to do with the general convenience and interests of
the country. (Hear.) The right hon. baronet said in effect,
"We intend to continue the same pernicious system, but,
in consequence of the statements you made, we shall con•
tinue it by other means." Now, he (Mr. Disraeli) con-
sidered that Battersea-park ought never to have been
made. He objected to the expenditure of half-a-million of
money upon the formation of such a park. He wished to
stop the system—(hear)—for why should they not bo
called upon to-morrow to make a park at Finsbury. (Hear.)
He considered that every vote granted in committee of
supply for these objects was an additional argument in
favour of analogous appeals to the Legislature. Such
object ought, in his opinion, to be accomplished by local
funds, and if the committee entertained the same view
they would resist this vote. He thought the time had
come when they must put an end to these grants of public
money for local objects, for it was most unjust to continue
such a system. He therefore earnestly recommended the
committee to oppose the vote, and if they succeeded in
resisting it, he believed they would put an end to one of
the most flagrant systems of expenditure that had ever
existed. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. WILSON cordially concurred in the sentiments
expressed by the right hon. gentleman ; but he must ob-
serve that, when the present Government came into office,
last December, they found the works, for which this vote
was required very far advanced ; and although the late
Government had not commenced those works, yet they had
not stopped them. (Hear.) It was complained that the
works were not sufficiently under the control of Parliament,
but he had stated to the house at an early period of the
session that they would be carried on, but that, as votes
would be applied for in supply, they would be continued
with the full cognizance of Parliament.

Mr. DISRAELI said the hon. member for Westbury
was mistaken in supposing that no attempt had been made
by the late Government to stop these works. The subject
had been been brought before him when he was Chancellor
of the Exchequer, and it appeared to him of the greatest
importance to the public interests that measures should be
adopted for stopping all works of the kind. He took the
earliest steps in his power to discontinue advances, and he
had entirely opposed all grants for the establishment
of a park in Finsbury, which was proposed to the
late Government. It was represented to him by a very
large deputation from that populous and wealthy district,
that it was of the utmost importance that such a park
should be made, and he told them he would consider the
proposition if they would inform him what sum the dis-
thie-iwetewveoto,ldthaco-tntrute to the object. He was sorry to say,
were a e very wealthy community of Finsbury
sterling faorre utthl 3' not prepared to advance a single pound
late Governmentpurpose. (Hear, and laughter.) The
whatever to such therefore, had given no encouragement
Sir W. MO
lst sessionLEtS,l!4!AtetTsil found an act of Parliament.of
previouspr act, tO huase tene of which was, by , amendino. the
of the Thames. than(Rea mpletion of the embankment
first act the embankment .11). laugh.) According to the
certain agreements were entered' not be commenced until
prietors, the object of which was to with the landed pro-
contribute a certain sum of mon° make those gentlemen
towards the construc-
ts
cLie and 16th Vic-
passed' of the embankment. An aeptaTe3
iocuouerse with the
toria, chap. 71—was therefore
assent of the late noble Chief Comnu94
rs of Works
(Lord J. Manners), and the then Chancellor of the Exche-
quer—(hear, and a laugh), in order to
e
Commissioners of Works to proceed with the"iel‘ the
ments before such agreements were made.embank-
Mr. FRENCH was sorry to say that the arguments
the right hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire failed in carrying conviction to his mind. Re be_
lieved that the property would pay every sixpence laid. out
upon 'it. He entirely disapproved of the toll upon the
bridge, which would shut out a great portion of the public
from enjoying the advantages of the park.
Colonel SIBTHORP hoped that the present vote would
b
opposed. It had been said of the late Government that
they had not proposed any change in the expenditure,
bat the fact was that hon. members opposite had not
given them time to do what he firmly believed they would
have done. Hon. members odppositeathteamdpttehrdowten
seavdedryle
impediment in their way, an no 7
them with their own vices and follies. (Laughter.) He
considered the proposals of the present Ministry to be most
iniquitous and dangerous, and although he had been
many years in Parliament, and had never beetnbeopunre
dsetannt hye
Government, a more fraudulent one than h
had never seen. (Laughter.) They were trying every
trick, but he hoped that they would be shown up, and that
there was still sense and intelligence enough in the country
to declare that they were regarded with the utmost want
of confidence.
Mr. HENLEY bed to state, for the information of
his right hon. friend that counties could not be, and were
not liable to build bridges. His object was to get this
bridge built, and then the
expenses of it would be thrown
on the counties of Surrey and Middlesex.
Mr. HORSFALL said, that the real question vas
whether distant counties ought to be called upon to pay
p
for the luxuries of other
arts of the country.
Mr. DUNCAN objected to a toll being placed on the
bridge ; but in the hope that
eventually the Government
would
for the ngrat.ot ant
mpose any such toll, he was prepared to vote
Mr. SPOONER was of opinion that, as these works had
been commenced, Parliament was pledged continue them,
and on that ground, although he perfectly
what had fallen from his right hon. friend, he in
he should sup-
port the vote.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE objected to any toll being placed
on
the bridge.
Mr. HUME had objected to the commencement of these
works, but now that they were actually in progress, it

would be, in his opinion, not by any means a wise pro-
ceeding to discontinue them.
The committee then divided—
Ayes
Noes

94
27
-67

Majority
The vote was then agreed to.
On the vote of a sum not exceeding 20,000/. to defray
the expenses of the harbour and lighthouse of A.rdglass, in
the county of Down,
Mr. MACARTNEY objected to the vote on two grounds;
one was, that he did not believe that the country would
receive advantage commensurate with the expenditure, and
the other was, that if the Government were prepared to
lay out money upon harbour accommodation, they should
fall back upon the report of the Tidal Commissioners of
1851. He suggested that the vote should be postponed till
next year.
Mr. KIRK objected to the vote. The report of the Tidal
Commissioners of 1845 was clearly to the effect that an
outlay upon this harbour would not be at all advantageous,
and that opinion had been confirmed by a later report.
The money proposed might be much more advantageously
expended, and he was clearly of opinion that the vote ought
to be postponed.
Colonel DUNNE supported the vote, and expressed his
surprise that any Irish member should propose so small a
sum as this for an important local improvement in Ireland,
after voting a large sum for metropolitan improvements

out of an Irish income tax.
Mr. FRENCH was one of those who had supported the
metropolitan votes referred to, because he thought they
were intended to promote important public improvements ;
but
nhoet think it wouldfeltboundtoo serve any
bjecttotheupsreefulsenptuvroptoes.
,ebec(aHuesserhoe
did
Mr. WILSON explained that the vote had been recom-
enrdnanalle(ntht etocormempoirt
on the subject), and who were of opinion that the s-
smi
oe
nn
edres d
wbhyo
wereCa p t a i
an
pDp
oe
innht Denham
m
banydthMerG. Rov°
improve-
ment of the harbour would not only be of great advantage
to the coasting trade, but would tend to prevent the occur-
rence of the numerous shipwrecks which now took place in
Sir R. FERGUSON hoped the vote would be with-
the neighbourhood of Ardglass.
drawn.
Mr. CAIRNS suggested that, at all events, it should be
postponed until the Government had ascertained whether
the money could not be laid out to greater advantage on
some other part of the coast.
Mr. G. A. HAMILTON said, it was impossible that for
20,0001.
Ardglass could be converted into a harbour of
refuge. He thought it would be better to postpone the
vote until they had ascertained which was the best site for
a proper harbour of refuge, which he maintained was es-
sentially necessary.
Sir J. GRAHAM protested against postponing the vote
in order to have an inquiry with regard to a much larger
work ; but with regard to the smaller question as to whe-
ther 20,0001. should be laid out on Ardglass or not, he had
no objection to postpone the vote. (Hear.)
The vote was accordingly postponed.
On the vote of 4,0001. for the purchase of Archer's pa-
tent perforating machine.
Mr. V. SMITH wished to know what advantage the
Government expected to derive from this machine at all
commensurate with the sum of 4,0001., which seemed to
him a monstrous sum to give for it ? (Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he
thought the committee who had inquired into the subject
must have formed a high opinion of the advantages likely
to result to the public from the adoption of Mr. Archer's
invention, or they would not have recommended its pur-
chase. He must say his own opinion was, that the patent
was worth the money they were giving for it. (Hear,
hear.) As the patent had been purchased without any
reservation, any person might make use of it, and it might
be applied to bankers' checks, or any other purposes.

Tlie vote was then agreed to.
On the vote of 5,0001., as compensation to Sir W. Snow
Harris for his expenditure of time and money in perfecting
a mode of applying electric conductors on board ships,
whereby great saving of life and property had accrued, more
particularly in her Majesty's navy,
Mr. HUME said he believed the adoption of this inven-

tion had been the means of saving a large amount of pro-
perty, and he asked whether the Government would pro-
duce any papers or documents in their possession showing
the merits of Sir W. Harris's conductors ?

Sir J. GRAHAM said ho would have much pleasure in
laying on the table the report of the Admiralty to the
Treasury, strongly recommending the conductors invented
by Sir W. Harris, who, he thought, had contributed more
to the preservation of life and property than perhaps any
individual he could mention. Sir W. Harris had never,
until this time, received any grant of money whatever,
although the public, her Majesty's service, and the mer-
chant service had had the free use of his valuable inven-

tion ; and he (Sir J. Graham) never in his life recom-
mended any reward with a clearer conscience than he did
this vote.

The vote was agreed to.
The next vote was for 30,00 W., for the purpose of laying
down an independant line of wires from London to the con-
tinent, and thus to enable her Majesty's Government to join
a convention recently concluded between France, Belgium,
and Prussia, for regulating the transmission of messages
by electric telegraph.
In reply to a question from Mr. Hume,
Mr. CARDWELL said that a convention had been agreed
upon between certain foreign countries for the establishment
of electric communication throughout the whole continent
of Europe. This country was invited to join the conven-
tion, but the Government of the day did not accept the
invitation because they had no power of establishing a
communication with the wires upon the continent, That
communication, had, however, since been effected, and he
thought it most important that the Government of this
country should avail itself of the advantages of the con-
vention. The advantages of joining the convention, so far
as the diplomatic service was concerned, were the right to
priority of intelligence, to send messages in cipher, and to
the continuous transmission of messages, which might be
sent through several countries without any delay. Then
the advantage with regard to commercial messages was this
--the English language was not allowed to be used in the
transmission of English messages across the continent,
unless the British Government wore parties to the conven-
tion. If the Government of this country joined the con-
vention, messages in the English language might, however,
be sent to all the continental countries the Governments of
which had agreed to the convention. The estimate now
proposed included the sum required for laying down six
independent lines wire from London to Dover, and thence
to the opposite coast. This was the estimate of the whole
cost Parliament would be called upon to incur. He had
been informed by the Foreign Secretary that, even if this
arrangement were confined to the transmission of diplo-
matic messages, it would be attended with great advantage.
He (Mr. Cardwell) had, however, to deal with the com-
mercial bearing of the question, and he was most desirous
that, if any just and fair arrangement could be made, the
benefits of this mode of communication should be avail-
able for the interests of British commerce. (Hear, hear.)
He might observe that it was not intended that any
of the lines of this telegraph should extend beyond
London, or interfere with the perfectly free competition
which now existed between the electric telegraph compa-
nies whose lines were established in this country.
In reply to Mr. HUME,
_ _ -

Mr. CARDWELL said that the States which had already
joined the convention were France, Belgium, the Nether-
lands, Hanover, IV urtemberg, the German States, Prussia,
Austria, Bavaria, Saxony, Switzerland, and Sardinia.
In answer to a question from Mr. BRIGHT,
Mr. CARD WELL said he had been assured by engineers
that the vote they proposed would be fully sufficient to
carry out the plan, and that no farther vote would be re-
quared.
Colonel SIBTHORP viewed the proposition with the
utmost suspicion. He objected altogether to the principle
of trusting to foreigners, who, he was sure, were trying to
undermine the country to which he was proud to belong.
The vote he considered absurd, ridiculous, and dangerous,
and he must protest against it.
Mr. COBDEN thought that it would be more advan-
tageous to endeavour make arrangements with some exist-
ing company before asking for a vote of public money to
establish a new line, and he did not clearly understand on
what principle the line when established would be worked.
Mr. CARDWELL said that the object of the new line
would be to obtain means for diplomatic and Government
correspondence, but at the same time the commercial in-
terest of this country would derive the same advantages as
that of the other nations who joined the convention. It
was most expedient that the Government should have the
power of laying down an independent line.
Mr. COBDEN wished to know whether the line pro-
posed to be laid down was to be at the service of the public,
or only to be used by the Government.
Mr. CARDWELL hoped that advantage might be
given to the public without using that line for commercial
purposes. _

Mr. COBDEN did not think that the necessity of the
vote had been clearly established. It did not appear to

have been considered whether the same purposes could not
be accomplished by the line already established. It was
not clear that the use of cipher in diplomatic correspond-
ence could not be employed in existing lines ; and, as to
priority of intelligence, it had not been shown that ex-
isting companies would not have entered into arrangements
to afford that priority. He was not quite satisfied that
it would not have been possible to enter into an arrange-
ment by which the Government could have sent a clerk of
their own to work the wires, so that any message could be
dispatched in cypher or otherwise. There had been so
much mystery in the explanation which had been given by
the President of the Board of Trade, that he should like to
have heard the matter fully discussed.
Mr. CARD WELL explained, that one of the principal
reasons which rendered it advantageous for this country to
join the convention was, that the whole of the lines were
worked at present under monopolies granted by the Sove-
reigns of the various nations.
The vote was agreed to.
On a vote of 2,5001. for the funds of the Royal Dublin
Society,
In answer to Mr. F. SCULLY,
Sir J. YOUNG stated, that there were four professors
of distinguished eminence connected with the Royal Dub-
lin Society, three of whom had enjoyed salaries of 1501. a-
T.e,aF, and the remaining one a salary of 100/. A committee
to lecture belonging
;vo,cla had inquired into the matter thought that those sa-
il:me, W
that they we
were not sufficient, and recommended that 5001. of
this ga.ut
provincial
Pro-
fessors bei should be applied to increase those salaries. Pro-
to the society were generally sent down
was
sesteors had lectured.
then agreed to.
different places, but it had sometimes occurred
[ On the pv:ooft:iot available, and on six occasions last year
The vote
civilx co.
unttnningencie;ooo:o
t,hfeoirtecmlesfrcoaynitnagintehde i
nextphienssveosteof.
passage of General Roses, late , Among other itenas
Republic, to this countsryaB;vlate Dictator of the Argentine
that a sum of 500/. for the
sat down.
description
should be called upon to
just in the opinion
for what public reason the " included, and he did not see
pay an item of that descri
Colonel SIBTHORP entireli
He thought
of the hon. member who had
it a very unusual course to
(" Divide !") It was all very well cforlil n this way.
hers who had no property to look after roi ourable mem-
12 in the day till 3 o'clock in the In° sit here from
would not do for members who were differnrsiont but it
It was an attempt of Government to shut& through placed.
sures they did not wish the public to be acquaiaea lira-
It was a trick, and he would join the hon. memberw lip);
Montrose in resisting it. Were they to go on in this Way
(exclaimed
the hon. member looking up to the reporters,
gallery) voting away the people's money, of which thev
but they
heard much from the other side of the house, about
gentle cared a penny ?
which he did not believe the hon.
He would move they reported progress in case the hon.
tno .
d
member did not persist, as he supposed he would
this vote an go
)
Mr. WILSON proposed to pass over
on to the next. (" No, no !")
Mr. WILKINSON appealed to the Government not to
press them so hard. The house ought really to strike for
shorter hours of labour. for Mr. HUME said he must insist on the motion
re-
porting progress. He was obliged to leave the house last
night at 1 o'clock. He could stand it no longer.
Lord J. RUSSELL bad no objection to reporting pro.