The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-09 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, APRIL 9, 1859.

Government would give this matter due consideration. The
house would see it was a matter of serious import, when he
told them that the amount proposed to_be paid to the Gal-
way lino of packets was £3,000.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE would, in the first place, answer
the question put by Mr. Hopwood. He would explain, at
the outset, that the Commissioners of Emigration acted
under the Colonial-office, and that no gentleman could
properly be admitted into that departmentunless he received
the certificate of the commissioners. Some gentleman to
whom the question related was an employe in Mr. Gurney's
office, and was taken from there during a great pressure
which occurred in the Government offices some few years
since. Several other gentlemen were also taken into the
Government employment. It was intended that their en-
gagements should cease at the end of the Parliamentary
session, and such intention was carried out in all cases
except that of this particular gentleman. As the engage-
ment was temporary at its commencement, these gentlemen
did not receive the certificate of the Civil Service Commis-
sioners. When that gentleman remained in the office, his
case was not brought before the commissioners for some
time. When it was, they found he was perfectly competent
for his post, so far as literary attainments were concerned.
He could not, however, produce the necessary certificate of
health, and hence the commissioners had no option but to
refuse their certificate. He could assure the house that this
subject of the health of the Government clerks was a most
important one ; in one case of an office where but 21 clerks
were employed, the absences through ill-health were equiva-
lent to the loss of one clerk. With reference to Mr. Beamish's
question, he must say that when he read that question he
was much surprised, and his surprise had not been lessened
by the few words which the hon. member had addressed to
the house. The hon. gentleman seemed to insinuate that a
certain duty would be performed for £5OO, or, as he now said,
£250, for which the Galway line of packets would receive
£3,000. Now, he had not had the advantage of meeting the
deputation which had waited upon the Government on this
subject, but he had seen Sir S. Cunard and also the hon.
gentleman upon it, and the proposition of Sir Samuel was
m fact this : that for the sum of £soo—in addition to what
he already received—(hear, hear)—that gentleman would
allow his vessels to call at Cork. Now, Sir S. Cunard
already received £3,400 in respect of his postal contract, and
hence by his proposal the country would pay, not £5OO
merely, but £3,900 for that which the Galway line would
undertake to do for £3,000. (Hear, hear.) And even this
did not represent the whole of the question; the Galway
line of vessels would run at times between the running
Cunard line, whereas Sir S. Cunard's proposal was only
that his vessels, which now carried the mails, should call at
Ccrk. He could only answer the hon. member's question
in'the affirmative.
Mr. GLADSTONE said that he thought the house ought
to consider the general question of this engagement to.which
the country was apparently about to be pledged. He should
be glad, therefore, to know if some opportunity could not be
affordeu to the house to consider this matter.
Lord DUNKELLIN believed that the effect of this ques-
tion was intended to be a support to capital and monopoly
against struggling enterprise. What he believed to be
wanted was, not that every mail vessel for America should
start from Liverpool, but that the mail should start from
the port nearest to America. The house would remember
that at the beginning of this year Liverpool had done every
thing possible to throw cold water on the Galway scheme.
He could not understand how Sir S. Cunard could claim
anything for going round by Cork ; it was as near to go by
the south as by the north of Ireland. Galway was within
15 hours of London, and thus within 16 hours from leaving
town passengers would be on their voyage to America.
Mr. MAGUIRE had never said one word, and did not
now intend to say one word, against the Galway scheme.
But on the other hand he believed that the south of Ireland
was also to be Considered. Sir S. Cunard, a most competent
judge, was of opinion that Cork was the best port in Ireland,
and was, within 25 miles, equidistant from New York with
Galway. He had further said that his vessels might run in
there at any state of the tide, and that the journey from
London to Cork might be done in 17 hours ; and thus there
was only two hours between him and the last speaker. He
thought, therefore, that it would be much to the ad vantage
of the canunercial world if the Government required Sir S.
Cunard to- drop the mails at Cork, giving him for that ser-
vice a sbla l'sum to meet the extra expense. The advantage
of calling at Cork would arise every week, whereas the Gal-
way harbour packet would only sail once a fortnight. He
wished well to Galway, but he thought that something ought
also to be done for Cork.
Mr. MONSELL thought the real question was whether
this contract ought to be carried out at all on the sole autho-
rity of the Government, without the consideration of that
house. (Hear, hear.) The commission which had sat on
this subject reported that all postal contracts should be the
subject of competition. The Government, instead of taking
this course, it appeared, intended to complete a contract
with a particular company. He was not going into the
merits of those ports, but there were statements in the re-
ports of commissions by no means favourable to the Galway
scheme. He trusted that his right hon. friend the Chan-
chellor of the Exchequer would intimate to the house that
the Government did not intend without inquiry to conclude
this contract. (" Spoke.") He was aware his right hon.
friend had already spoken on this question before the
house, but a word from him would be satisfactory. (Loud
laughter.) He regretted to see the head of his right hon.
friend was immoveable. (A laugh.) He must say, for his
own part, that he thought this subject ought not to be com-
pleted until a 6ommittee of the House of Commons had had
an opportunity of expressing its opinion upon it.
Mr. REPTON'saxl he saw no interest whatever in the
rival claims of different ports. He thought that if this
question was referred to a committee of the new Parlia-
ment, much valuable time would be lost without any coun-
terbalancing advantage. The subject had been reported
upon again and again, and there was now in the hands of
the Government every possible information they could re-
quire. He thought the Government would exercise a very
wise discretion in concluding the contract with the Galway
Company.
Mr. LABOUCHERE thought that the estimates for
these contracts should be submitted to the house. He
offered no opinion as to the eligibility of Galway for a
packet station but he thought that some explanation should
be afforded to the house before the contracts were concluded.
Mr. COGAN said that, if they were to have a revision of
the mail contracts, they had better begin with that of Sir
S. Cunard, which had been renewed without competition.
(Hear.) He thought that the Government were entitled to the
support of the Irish members from all parts of the country
for the conduct which they had pursued respecting this
contract

Mr. J. EWART thought that the contract should have
been open to public competition.
Sir J. GRAHAM hoped that some explanation would bo
given respecting this contract. He was extremely unwilling
to enter into any criticism on the merits of Galway harbour,
but he had great doubts as to whether any additional
Atlantic packet accommodation was required. But there
was a much graver question to be considered, and that was
whether Government was justified in entering into engage-
ments to the extent of £70,000 a year without the sanction
of the house. He trusted that the right .hon. gentleman
would be able to state that the arrangement with the corn-
panv was only conditional on its ratification by the house.
Mr. LINDSAY, alluding to a correspondence which had
on a previous evening been discussed on the motion of Mr.
Horsfall, complained that no Liverpool house had been
allowed to compete for the contract.
The motion was then agreed to.

SUPPLY-THE REFORM BILL-THE DISSO
LUTION.

On bringing up the report of supply,
Mr. CAY LEY said—l wish to put a question to the
Chancellor of the Exchequer upon a matter of great in-
terest, which I trust it may not be inconvenient or inoppor-
tune for him to answer, though perhaps I ought to have
given him a more formal notice. An impression has gone
forth, founded apparently on the statement made by my
right hon. friend on Monday last, or on that made by Lord
Derby elsewhere, that Lord Derby's Government have
come to the resolution of altogether washing their hands of
the question of Reform for the time to come, and that it is
not their intention either this year or in any other year to
bring in another Reform Bill. The question I wish to put
to the Chancellor of the Exchequer is, whether he meant
by his statement on Monday last to convey to the house
and to the country that Lord Derby's Government, if then
in office, had no intention of introducing a Reform Bill in
the session of 1860; and whether, on the other hand, it is
not the intention of Lord Derby's Government to introduce
another Reform Bill on the first practicable opportunity ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—It would
perhaps be more convenient that I should answer the ques-
tion which has been put to me by my hon. friend at once
than that I should mix it up with those other subjects
which have been brought under our notice this evening, and
to which it will be my duty to allude before the report of
the Committee of Supply has been received. I am not
quite sure whether I have succeeded in collecting exactly
the precise nature of the inquiry which my hon. friend has
addressed to me, but I understood him to ask me whether,
when I announced it to be the intention of her Majesty's
Government to withdraw the bill which we introduced for
the amendment of the representation of the people, I
made a statement to the effect that it was not
the intention of the Government under any circum-
stances to bring forward again a measure of Parlia-
liamentary reform ? (" Hear, hear," from Mr. Cayley.)
Now, I certainly never intended to make, and my impres-
sion is that I never did make, any such statement. And
although on the occasion in question I was desirous of in-
troducing no subject which could lead to controversy, I ne-
vertheless asserted the right of members who sit on this side
of the house, to deal, as a political party, with that question
of Parliamentary reform, which it seemed to me some per-
sons would maintain to be the peculiar privilege of another
party. I asserted then that I considered we had a perfect
right to deal with that or any other public question, but
that, having fulfilled the pledge which we had given to the
house and to the country by bringing forward a Reform
Bill, we did not wish to burden ourselves with any specific
pledge to bring forward another measure of reform at any
particular time ; that we reserved to ourselves the right to
bring forward such a measure when we considered the in-
terests of the country required it, if we had an opportunity
of carrying it ; but that I did not wish to bind ourselves
specifically to bring forward any such measure at a particu-
lar time. That was the impression which I intended in my
mind—and I thought I succeeded in doing so—to convey to
the house. I spoke with reference to the meeting of the new
Parliament in June or July next, and I did not wish to hold
out to the house or to the country the erroneous impression
that we intended to do then at once that which we did not in-
tend to do. But on a future occasion, if the opportunity
should be favourable, and we happen to be in power, I do
consider we are perfectly at liberty to introduce a measure
on the subject. I believe the Conservative party have pecu-
liar advantages in dealing with the question of reform.
What has occurred has not changed my opinion upon that
point—(hear, hear)—and I should certainly be very happy
to be the instrument in bringing forward a measure which
would have the object of settling, as far as we can expect it,
for a considerable time the question of the amendment of the
representation of the people. (Cheers.)
Mr. FITZROY then brought up the report of the Com-
mittee of Supply.
On the question that the report be received,
Sir G. GREY rose and said4,-I am anxious to make a few
observations with respect to a question of some importance
as to the course to be pursued in reference to which it is, I
think, extremely desirable that we should obtain some in-
formation from her Majesty's Government. On Monday
last the right lion. gentleman the chancellor of the Eiche-