The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-25 00:00:00

THE. SUN; • LONDON, FRIDAY EVENDTG, • MAY 25, 1860.
r

Parliament, changes of Ministry, references to the house
itself of the estimates ; and in the present session none of
those extraordinary circumstances exist. (Hear, hear.) I
therefore think that we may fairly throw aside all prece-
dents. We are called upon to-night to make a precedent.
(Hear, hear.) It does not appear to me that it is of the
slightest consequence whether the application of the Go-
vernment be for £500,000 or £1,500,000. As far as the Go-
vernment is concerned it is a question of confidence. I and
every gentleman sitting on these benches are perfectly pre-
pared to give them that confidence, provided there is a clear
underAanding of the terms upon which that confidence is
to be given. If the public service is in such a state that
there really are not in the Exchequer funds to carry it on
from day to day, I am disposed to come to the assistance of
the Government. I will not go out of the way to inquire
whether a great deal of time has been wasted. I will not
read the list of meetings of the house to show that, although
Parliament was called together in January, a fortnight
passed before any business was transacted, or that even on
one or two nights the Government did not take advantage
of opportunities to go into committee of supply. I kill not
stop to inquire why we have not been regularly in commit-
tee of supply. (Hear.) If the service c f the country abso-
lutely requires it, I will not enter into any discussion whe-
ther the sum shall be £500,000 or £1,500,000. The condition
which I snake with the Government, and which I think it
right to make, and which I think the House of Commons
ought to make, is this—if we are ready to exercise this bare
confidence, will they engne that we shall have fair oppor-
tunities and legitimate occasions of entering into that
criticism and examination of the estimates of the Govern-
ment which is our right and privilege ? (Cheers.) To ask
us to enter into an investigation of the estimates in August,
as the Secretary to the Treasury informs us, or even in the.
month of July, is not a fair constitutional fulfilment of the
conditions which, I think, the house has a right to demand.
(Hear.) If the noble lord or the right hon. gentleman will
rise and tell us that it is impossible for 'want of -supplies to
carry on the business of the country until next Thursday,
when we can meet and go into committee of supply, every
one will be perfectly willing to grant that which they re-
quire ; but we ought to make a constitutional condition.
(Hear, hear.) When they ask this unusual assistance from
the house, they ought to say—When the holidays are over
we will go as early as possible into committee of supply,
continue to take supply, and give to the house the legiti-
mate opportunities of investigating the expenditure of the
country and of bringing before the consideration of Parlia-
ment those grievances which it is theprivilege of the House
of Commons to bring forward under those circumstances.
If the Government frankly tell us that they are prepared to
do that, which I conclude a Minister of the Crown cannot
hesitate for a moment in doing—if they will enter into a
clear engagement that when the holidays are over, next
Thursday, we shall go into committee of supply, Unit these
estimates shall be submitted to us, that we shall not be de-
prived of our constitutional right to examine these civil
service estimates, and to see whether in our minds they are
of the proper amount and character, and that we shall have
the opportunity on those occasions of bringing subjects under
consideration which it is usual to bring forward when esti-
mates are moved, I shall support the proposition of the Go-
vernment. But if that offer be not accepted—if we are called
on to estalelish a most dangerous precedent, and to risk the
loss of those privileges which are most valuable, and of
which we are most proud, then I shall feel it my duty to
support the ben. gentleman. (Cheers.) I only ask the
house to remember the position in which it is placed. Cer-
tainly two-thirds, if not more, of the usual session has al-
ready passed, and we have scarcely gone into committee of
supply as far as the exercise of any real control over the
expenditure of the country or of the privilege of obtaining
redress of grievances is concerned. There is also, from the
admission of the Secretary to the Treasury, a prospect that
the remaining portion of the session will also pass without
the house having the enjoyment of those advantages. I
trust that I have placed the questionfairls before the house,
and treated it in a constitutional point of view. As I have
said, I shall support her Majesty's Government if they
enter into that engagement, but otherwise I shall support
the hon. gentleman who has moved the amendment.
(Cheers.)
Lord PALMERSTON—It is quite true, as the hon.
gentleman says, that there is a financial necessity for a vote
for these services,—not that the Exchequer is empty, but
that We have not yet Parliamentary authority to apply the
money, and unless Parliamentary authority is given the
services must suffer great inconvenience, and the public
interest be seriously prejudiced. (Hear, hoar.) That
is the ground upon which we apply to Parliament for
these votes on account. I cannot admit that an applis
cation to Parliament for a vote on account of estimates
presented is a matter without precedent. It is a matter of
almost annual occurrence. (Hear, hear.) Nor do I see
any great distinction between these Miscellaneous Esti-
mates and Estimates for the army and navy, except that
perhaps the latter are more important and present a greater
number of subjects upon which it is desirable opinions
should be expressed. These is nothing unparliamentary or
unconstitutional, when the necessity arises, to ask for votes
on account of the army and navy ; and I cannot see what
Parliamentary or constitutional objection can be raised be
in principle to a vote on accountof consular establishments,
education, or any of these different heads of estimates.
It has been stated that the necessity for votes of account on
miscellaneous estimates does not often occur, and why ?
Because these estimates—and here I may appeal to the re-
collection of hon. members to bear me out—come on
late in the session, and are frequently not finished till late
in July, and the house has usually found nothing in that
advanced period of the session to prevent it giving the
necessary attention to the details of these votes. Hear.)
We are accused of negl Bence in not having brought these
estimates sooner before the attention of the house,
but I beg to recall the recollection of hon. gentlemen '
that we called Parliament together ten days earlier
than usual. (C heers and counter cheers.) We showed no
disclination to meet Parliament at an early period—in fact
we were somewhat blamed for having anticipated the usual
period for its assembling. Have we during the period which
has elapsed from that time to this abstained from submit-
ting to Parliament measures of importance and deserving
of their consideration. (Hear.). Parliament, in fact, has
been uninterruptedly occupied by measures of the greatest
importance. (Hear.) I am not at all disposed to cavil at the
length of time which the house has thought fit to devote to
the consideration of the measures submitted to them—the
French Treaty, the Reform Bill, the Budget, and the finan-
cial measures springing out of it. They were perfectly jus-
tified in discussing them at length, but a great deal of time
has, in fact, been occupied by these discussions, and they
have so far interfered with the ordinary course of public
business in regard to the estimates that at this moment we
have not been able to give to the army and navy estimates,
which generally take precedence of the miscellaneous esti-
mates, sufficient time to complete them. (Hear.) If the
miscellaneous estimates, therefore, have been postponed to
the present time, it is not our fault, but the result of that
course which the House of Commons in the performance of
its duty has thought fit to adopt with regard to the mea-
sures of first-rate importance which were submitted to it. I

and which deserved eh the attention bestowed on them.
(Hear, hear.) Blame ought not to be thrown on us for a
result which is no fault of ours, but which has arisen from
the length of time the house has thought fit to give to im-
portant business. The right hon. gentleman opposite made
very light of the observation of my noble friend, that the
objection to this course is diminished in prof ortion to the
diminution of the sum asked for; but I think, even in
his own view of the case, that observation had great
force. The amount of money to be voted is equivalent
in meaning to a certain portion of time—(hear,
hear)—and those who object to these votes on account to
carry on a certain service, on the ground that they place the
remainder of the vote in a certain degree out of the control
of Parliament, ought to feel that the diminution of the
sum voted on account, as it involves the necessity of an
earlier recurrence to Parliament for the remainder of the
services, very much removes the objection to this course.
(Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman says he is quite
willing to agree to this vote provided the Government will
undertake that the details of these estimates shall be sub-
mitted to the house in a manner whisk shall enable it to
give to them the full and fair consideration which is neces-
sary for the due discharge of its constitutional fuxctions.
Undoubtedly that is an undertaking which we are perfectly
ready to enter into. Indeed, it seems to me to follow as a
matter of course from that power which the House of Com-
mons has over the Government. It is an engagement to
which we can scarcely be said to be parties, because the
house has the matter entirely in its own hands. These
votes will enable the Government to carry on the services
till abou the middle of June, and beyond that time nothing
can be done without the sanction of the house. When the
right hon. gentleman, therefore, asks us to enter into such
an arrangement he is rather derogating from the power of
the house, because we are in the hands of the house. No
further money can be issued without the authority of the
house, and that authority, of course, the house will not
continuo to give, unless it has an opportunity of entering
fully and fairly into a discussion of the details for which
the money is required, (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BENTINCK—It would be more satisfactory if the
noble lord would state in what manner he understands the
engagement into which he professes his readiness to enter.
When does he propose that we should go into committee of
supply ? (Hear, hear.)

Lord PALMER.STON---It is perfectly impossible to fix
a day. (A laugh.)

Sir F. BARING—The hon. baronet opposite referred to
sonic suggestion of mine in reference to the Public Moneys
Committee, but that committee has in reality nothing what-
ever to do with the point before us. (Hear, hear.) The real
question is this :—The Government state to the house that
they require certain sums for the public service, and I con-
fess I am surprised to hear from hon4,entletnen opposite
that their principles are such that they refuse to go into

committee to ascertain whether those moneys are actually

required by the Government ornot. (Hear.) If the Govern-
ment were prepared to ask sums which would throw off the

consideration of the estiumtes to an unreasonable extent, I

can uudentand that sum being cut down in committee to' a

proper amount, but when the Government have stated that
the public service requires certain sums to be granted, I
would ask bon. gentlemen opposite whether_they will take
on themselves the responsibility of refusing to go into com-
mittee for the consideration of the votes asked for. (Hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON—The right Lou. barouct has pais:.

understoorthe feeling which prevails on this side of the
house, (Hear, hear.) My right hon. friend made it per-
fectly clear that we have .o desire to cause any public in-
convenience. (Hear.) The speech of the noble lord was
directed entirely to an attempt to draw the house from the
fact that the proposal of the Government is intended to esta-
blish a precedent, and that one of a very objectionable and
dangerous character, and in guarding against that precedent
the language of my right hon. fi iend and the general feeling
on this side of the house showed that we had no desire to
cause any public inconvenience, (Hear, hear.) We have
asked the Government to state distinctly whether there will
be any injury to the public service by delaying this grant to
Thursday evening next, and if the Government will give us
that assurance we are ready to go into committee at once;
but they ought not to call on us to go into committee with-
out some assurance of that sort. (Hear.) If there is any
necessity for the grant being made immediately, it is the
Government who are to blame for bringing us into that
condition. (Hear.) Parliament certainly did meet earlier
than usual this year, but for the first fortnight nothing was
done. (Hear.) We rose every night at Bor 9 o'clock for
the first fortnight, and therefore we have a right to blame
the Government for making this vote on account necessary,
if necessary it be. "Without some assurance of that sort, I
should object to setting a precedent, for I deny that one al-
ready exists. The only way in which we can guard against
that precedent being established is by voting now against
the motion that the Speaker do leave the chair, unless the
Govenament;will promise that they bring these estimates
before us on Thursday next. (Hear, hear.)
THE CONFERENCE.

Mr. KINGLAKE asked the Foreign Secretary whether
the Swiss Confederation still persisted in asking for the
Conference which had been suggested with reference to the
neutralization of North Savoy, and whether her Majesty's
Government supported the Swiss Confederation in making
that demand ? (Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL.—Up to the present time--and I had
a despatch from our Minister in Switzerland this morning
—the Swiss Confederation continues to ask for the meeting
of a Conference on the subject of the neutralization of part
of Savoy. Her Majesty's Government supported that pro-
posal from the first, and unless the Swiss Government were
to abandon or withdraw that demand we shall continue to
support it. (Hear, hear.)
LORD CLARENCE PAGE r AND THE MESSRS.
GREEN.
_ _

Lord C. PAGET.--I am unwilling to interpose between
the house and a divison, but having received a letter from
an hon. gentleman opposite informing me that he intended
to make a statement affecting me on going into Committee
of Supply, I think I may claim from him that he should
make the statement with which he has threatened me on
the occasion on which he said he desired to make it. I re-
ceived the following letter this morning :
" Mr. Lygon presents his compliments to Lord Clarence
Paget, and has the honour to inform him that it is his in-
tention, on going into Committee of Supply this evening,
to call the attention of the house to the reports which are
current respecting his connexion with Messrs. Green and
Co. of Blackwell."
I trust the hon. ge, tleman will now fulfil his intention.
Mr. F. LYGON--I can assure the noble lord that it is
not my intention to bring forward this question in a hos-
tile spirit. I have not mentioned the matter to any beyond
my very intimate friends, and after the debate which has
just taken place, I am quite prepared either to bring forward
the subject on the motion for adjournment to-morrow, or
to proceed with it at once, as may be most conveniantto the
noble lord by whom it has just been opened. (Cries of "Go
on," in which Lord C. Paget joined.) The question is not
one with regard to which it.will be necessary for me to de-
tain the house at any length ; and, in common with every
other member of the house, I shall rejoice if the noble lord,
as no doubt will be the case, should be enabled to give a
satisfactory explanation. I entirely disclaim all hostile feel-
ing towards the noble lord, and I can assure him he entirely
mistakes my object if he supposes that my inquiry is made
with any such purpose. But everybody, lam sure, will
agree that under the circumstances which have taken place,
when contractors have publicly acknowledged that they
were the builders of certain gunboats which have suffered
very severely frcm decay, and when it is reported in com-
mercial circles that the Secretary to the Admiralty was a
partner in the firm at the period when the gunboats were
built—every member of this house will see that it is for
the advantage of the service, of the House of Commons, of
the Board of Admiralty and of the noble lord himself that
these circumstances should be explained. (Hear.) I for
one have no doubt that they are capable of a satisfactory
elucidation ; and so far from the motion being received by
the noble lord in a manner implying that he regards it as
one which is brought forward in an unfriendly spirit, it
ought, I think, to be matter of gratification to him to have
the opportunity of meeting the reports which are current as
to his being largely connected with Messrs. Green and
Company. Such a report has gained notoriety, and must,
it is evident, be most prejudical to the public service. (Hear,
hear.) It is needless for me to enter into the question of
the gunboats or the culpability of contractors. I have sim-
ply discharged a public duty of a very painful character.
But the importance cannot be overrates of clearing up and
setting at rest all misapprehensions which may exist on a
matter so vitally affecting the credit of all public servants.
(Hear, hear.)
Lord C. PAGET—I must ask the indulgence of the
house, having already spoken on this question (cheers), and
very few words, I think, will suffice for the purpose I have
in view, which is to clear my character from any imputa-
tions which may have been made upon it. The hon. gentle-
man opposite I understand to state that he has heard I am
a partner with Messrs. Green of Blackwall ?
Mr. F. LYG ON—That you were connected with them
at the period when the gunboats were built.
Lord C. PAGET—That I was a partner with them
when the gunboats were building. Ido not make any
complaint of the honourable gentleman for having called
the attention of the house to this subject; on the contrary,
I think that he—having been a member of the depart-
ment with which I have also the honour of being assooi-
ated—if he heard any reports of a nature which he con-
sidered derogatory to my honour, both as an officer and
a member of this house, was quite right in bringing them for-
ward. If I were disposed to make any complaint it would
be that he had not placed the matter on the notice paper, in
order that every member, if he had desired, might have
come down to the house and delivered his opinion upon it.
(Hear, hear.) I might answer the accusation very much in
the same vague way in which it has been made, because the
right hon. gentleman brings no proofs, but merely states
that he has heard certain reports, and I think I might sa-
tisfy the the house by giving my word of honour that those
reports are utterly without foundation. (Loud cheers.) But
I think it is always best to be perfectly frank and fair in all
matters where the personal honour of individuals is con-
e°. ned. (Hear, hear.) All thoroughly ingenious stories have
some sort of foundation, by which a great deal more may be
made of them than they are really worth, and, therefore, in
order that there may be no misunderstanding—although I
really scrupple to take up the time of the house with a mat-
ter of this sort—l still think it my duty, holding as Ido a
very high and honourable position inher Majesty's Govern-
ment, to state exactly the circumstances of the case. (Hear,
hear.) It is perfectly true that for many years past I have
been—alas I a very small, but still a shareholder to some
extent in cerL;ain ships in the Australian trade. In 1857 my
right hon. friend, now the Secretary of State for India, did
me the honour to invite me to take a seat at the Board of
Admiralty. I will not quote his letter, because it was in
terms rather complimentary to myself, and I wish to con-
fine my ob: ervations exactly to the point in issue ; but if I
read my answer to that communication, at least that part
of it which relates to these transactions, it will, I think,
be quite sufficient to show the house the mo-
tives by which I was actuated. I should state
that in that same year my right hon. friend,
through his private secretary, Captain Drummond,
an intimate friend of my own, expressed his desire that in
the event of a vacancy taking place I should hold myself in
readiness tofill a seat at the Board of Admiralty. I told my
friend Captain Drummond that I had great scruples of
conscience in the matter; for although I had nothing what-
ever to do with shipbuilding, or with any vessels likely to
be taken up by contract for the Government, yet, neverthe-
less, to hold a seat at the Board of Admiralty, and at the
same time to retain a connexion with shipping concerns,
was what I thought would not be fair or proper. This,
therefore, was the reply which I wrote to the very flatter
ing letter of my right lion. friend :
" Plas Lanfair, Oct. 22, 1857.
" Dear Sir Charles,—l hasten to express my obligations
for the flattering and friendly communication I have this
day received from you, dated the 21st. When during the
last session the subject of my going to the Admiralty was
talked over between my friend Captain Drummond and
myself, I, from a sense of honour, stated for your informa-
tion that I could not conscientiously undertake the contract
branch, which I believe falls to the Junior Lord, because I
have for several years been, and still am, a shareholder in
some ships belonging to Messrs. Green, and it would ill be-
come me to open tenders in which they might be offered for
Government service. As to building I have no connexion
with him or anybody else, but I should be very loth to dis-
continue my connexion, small as it is, with that eminent
man " '

And I concluded by saying, " I have no alternative but to
decline your offer." (Cheers) I was altogether independent
of the Board of Admiralty until the present Government
was formed, when my noble friend the First Lord of the
Treasury did me the honour to invite me to join that de-
partment. I stated to hire exactly as I had stated to my
right bon. friend the Secretary of State for India, that I
had been the owner of shares in a few ships, with which,
however, I had nothing further to do, any more than one
would have by holding shares in a railway—(hear, hear)—
and that as long as I retained them I felt it incumbent on

me to decline all connexion with the Admiralty. "Well,"
said the noble lord, "have you still those shares in the
ships ?" To which I replied, " No ;" because on the occa-
sion of my bringing forward during the last session circum-
stances connected with the building of ships for the navy,
to which, as an officer, I felt it my duty conscientiously to
call attention, there were--I will not say open accusations
—but there were inferences drawn to the effect that as I
was personally connected with a shipbuilding yard, I was
therefore desirous of having ships built by contract there,
instead of in the dockyards, and was consequently desirous
of running down the dockyards. From that moment I de-
termined that it was impossible for a public man, and par,
titularly for a naval man! who wished to take a part in this
bsitse which would be peae4elal to the service, to 004-

tinue longer exposed to such suspicions, and the sooner I got
rid of these shares the better. (Hear, hear.) There and
then—and lam bound to add at considerable loss to myself,
for everybody knows that last year there were no dividends
on ships—l sold my shares. (Loud cheers.) The letter
which I wrote to the noble lord was as follows
" 2, Ennismore-place, S. W., June 16, 1859.
"My dear Lord Palmerston,—ln accepting the post of
Secretary to the Admiralty, I feel it due, no less to your
lordship than myself, that I should advert to the reasons
which principally deterred me from joining your lordship's
Government in 1857. I was then, and have been till lately
a shipowner in the Indian and Australian trade, and while
so employed I felt I could not conscientiously fill a post
where questions of personal interest to myself might possi-
bly have to be decided ; such as contracts for troopships,
transports, &c. Vari,us circumstances having induced me
to dispose of my shipping property, I am now perfectly free
to accept without scruples of conscience the office your lorl-
ship has been good enough to offer me."
(Loud and continued cheering.) Let me entirely acquit the
hon. gentleman who has introduced this subject of any in-
tention to lower my character in this house ; I believe that
was not his wish—(hear, hear)—and I am glad to have had
the opportunity of making the statement which I have now
done. (Loud and general cheering from both sides of the
house.)
Sir 11. CAIRNS—As my hon. friend beside me (Mr.
Lygon) has spoken already, he is not therefore at liberty
again to rise. But I hope th house and the noble lord will
allow me to express what I am sure is the feeling at this
side of the house, and which I am glad to believe is shared
in by the house at large, that if it be the fact—of which I
confess I was not before aware—that rumours of the nature
alluded to have been current regarding the noble lord, it is
matter of satisfaction that in this place, where alone oppor-
tunity can be given to the noble lord to meet those rumours,
the subject should have been brought forward—(hear)--and
we must all rejoice to feel, after the full and frank explana-
tion which he has given, that neither in nor out of this
house can any such rumours continue to prpvail. (Cheers.)
The house then divided on the question that the Speaker
leave the chair. The numbers were :

Ayes
135
Noes
Majority --26
SUPPLY.
The SPEAKER left the chair, and the house went into
Committee of Supply.
A vote on account of a sum not exceeding £400,000 was
asked for for certain charges of the civil service, under the
following heads :
X 30,000 for printing and stationery.
£35,000 for expenses of County Courts.
£82,000 for the Irish Constabulary.
£lOO,OOO for charges on account of public education.
On this vote Mr. LAING, in answer to a question, ex-
plained that the sum was required chiefly for the payment
of the salaries of schoolmasters, of which a quarter was
falling due.
Mr. BENTINCK observed that the sum was nearly a
seventh part of the whole vote f)r public education; yet it
was only asked for to carry the Government over a short
time—in fact, over the holidays. It ought to cover a longer
period.
Mr. LAING said the sum was not more than sufficient
to cover the expenses to the 10th or 12th of June.
£54,000 was taken for the expenses of Consuls abroad.
£12,000 for the expenses of certain temporary commis-
sions.

Mr. LAING complained that commissions had been re-
cently appointed on some military matters, but their ex-
pense was chargeable on the civil contingencies ; this ren-
dered the vote necessary.
Sir W. NORTHCOTE thought the item might have
been deferred till the whole of the charges under Class 7
came before the committee. With regard to the expendi-
ture under Class 7 ; a sum of £17,000 was voted last year
for a plan and works connected with the improvement of
the Serpentine, and after that vote hal been passed and the
works begun a select committee reported against that plan;
whereupon the Government not only stopped the works,
which he thought they were right in doing, but had begun
to spend money in carrying cut a different plan, without
any authority from the house. Ile mentioned that as a
reason why the committee ought to have the votes in Class
7 before them without delay.
Col. DUNNE wished to know whether this vote included
the enormous sum, amounting to between £7,000 and £B,OOO,
charged by the professional accountants employed by the
Weedon Commissioners to investigate the accounts of that
establishment. He characterised the expenditure as unjus •
tifiable, seeing that the commissioners might have had the
assistance of Commissary-General Adams, an officer in the
ray of the State, in investigating and arranging the ac-
counts.
Col. DICKSON commented upon the circumstance of one
of the Weedon commissioners being a police magistrate,
and receiving an allowance for his services on that occasion,
though he (Col. Dickson) believed his duties as a magis-
trate only occupied his attention during six months of the
year. That commission, he added, had been carried on at
an expense perfectly unjustifiable; and he was astonished,
at a time when there was an outcry by the country against
the extravagance of the public depas tments, to see members
on the Ministerial side of the house, while they were con-
tinually preaching economy, going into the lobby and vot-
ing away large sums of money in the lump.
Mr. TURNER, adverting to what had been stated in re-
ference to the Weedon Commission, said when the proper
occasion arrived he should be able to defend the proceedings
of the commissioners. In the meantime, after the immense
labour which he knew the commissioners had devoted to the
investigation in question—(hear)—he protested against the
insinuation that they had been guilty of any unjustifiable
act.

Col. DUNNE explained that ho had said the expenditure
of the commissioners was unjustifiable, and he thought he
should be able to prove it when the subject came fairly be-
fore the house.
After a few words from Mr. CHILDERS, the purport of
which did not reach the gallery,
Mr. LAING said, as regarded the unfortunate Weedon
Commission, he admitted it had brought an enormous charge
upon the public expenditure for, he believed, a very inade-
quate result. The present vote, however, did not include
any part of the large bill of nearly £9,000 sent in by the
professional accountants, inasmuch as the Treasury had
thought it their duty to take legal advice as to whether they
were liable to pay the whole of that sum, and the question
was still pending. The vote did include some of the minor
expenses of the commission.
The vote was then agreed to, as were the following :
£lO,OOO for the suppression of the slave trade;
£7,000 for the Dublin Police ; and
£5_,,000 for civil contingencies.

MALTA HARBOUR.

On the vote of £2,500 for the extension of Malta Har-
bour,
Lord C. PAGET said the present vote had become neces-
sary in consequence of an agreement with the Maltese Go..
vernment, most advantageous both to the navy and the Isle
of Malta, but which had not been entered into when the
former estimates were prepared. Ever since Malta had be-
longed to the British Crown the limits of the merchant har-
bour and the man-of-war harbour had not been very clearly
defined. The result was that the merchant vessels had en-
croached upon the best part of the harbour, so that the
mem-of-war sometimes had great difficulty in finding a
berth. The great addition in the number of ships frequent-
ing the harbour and the increase in the size of vessels of
war made it imperative to improve the harbour of Malta,
which was in a most unsatisfactory state, although Malta
was our head-quarters for repairs, &c., in the Mediter-
ranean. An engineer on the part of the Admiralty had
surveyed the harbour in the company of an engineer selected
by the Maltese Government, and they had come to the con-
clusion that the only plan was to deepen the head of the
harbour, which was now a swamp, and to give it up to the
merchant vessels, while French Creek, which was safe for
vessels of war, would be given up for the navy. It was
necessary to bring this vote before the committee to-night,
because the work was to be done at the joint expense of the
two Governments, and the parties who owned the land
around French Creek were only under contract to wait until
the middle of June, when the agreement, unless previously
confirmed, became null and void. The total estimated ex-
pense of the work was £111,0.0, but he only proposed to ask
to •night for £2,500, in addition to the £2,500 whh.h would
be found in.the estimates already before the house.
Sir F. SMITH expressed his satisfaction at finding that
the proposed works in connexion with a harbour at Malta,
which ho characterised as the key of the Mediterranean,
were to be carried out.
Admiral WALCOTT also stated his concurrence in the
expediency of the undertaking, and, alluding to the
explanation made by Lord C. Paget, said he was extremely
happy to hoar the noble lord's character so completely via •
dicated. (Hear, hear.)
Sir S. NORTHCOTE wished to know whether there was
any security that when the necessary property came to be
bought it could be procured for the sum of £60,000, set
down in the estimates.
Lord C. PAGET said the utmost pains had been taken
in drawing up the contract on the subject.
Mr. BENTINCK, referring to the explanation made by
the noble lord, in reply to Mr. Lygon, observed that no man
could have listened to it without feeling that it removed all
doubt—if, indeed, any such doubt existed—as to his noble
and gallant friend having been implicated in any transac-
tion in any way inconsistent with his high character.
(Hear, hear.)
Colonel SYKES asked what was to be done with the
mud which it would be necessary to remove in order to con-
struct the proposed harbour, and whether any estimate had
been framed in connection with the subject ?
Lord C. PAGET said an estimate bad been framed which
was based on the probable cost of conveying the mud clear
outside the harbour.
Mr. HENLEY complained that the committee were asked
to sanction the vote, which would in all probability involve
I even a more considerable outlay than was estimated on so
short a notice. The committee ought to be informed of the
exact nature of the works, in order that they might form
some idea of the ultimate cost.
Mr. A YRT ON asked whether, in the event of the estimate
being exceeded, the Maltese Government or municipality
would be bound to pay any portion of the excess ?
Lord C. PAGET said that unless the local Government
of ]Aalta undertook to pay their moiety of the whole ex•