The Sun.
London, England, 1857-07-04 00:00:00

THE THAMES AND MEDWAY CONSERVANCY

BILL.

Sir J. GRAHAM called the attention of the house
to this bill, which proposed to deal with the
question that had been a long timein dispute between the
Corporation of London and the Crown, relative to waste
spots on the embankments of the Thames. The bill pro-
posed to deal with two points of great public import-
ance, viz., the constitution of the body of the conser-
vators ; and, secondly, as to the funds to be raised
from shipping by that body. He was of opi-
nion that the conservancy body, instead of being
nominated, as was proposed by the bill, by a
close body, should be elected by those who had to
pay the due--, and, secondly, that dues should not be le-
vied upon shipping, and should not beexacted to a greater
extent than shipping purposes required. He asked whe-
ther the recommendation of the Board of Trade were not
to the proposed constitution of the former, and read ex-
tracts from the report of the Board of Trade showing
that the corporation of London would possess greater
powers under the formation of the conservancy body
than the Government. In reference to the second point,
the right hon. baronet also read extracts from reports
of the Board of Trade, and said that the bill would
not carry out the recommendation of the Board of Trade
for the reduction of the dues if any surplus remained
to be carried out.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that no departure of the principle laid down in the re-
port of the London Corporation Committee had been
assented to by the Government. The only variation
that had been made was one of detail, and not of prin-
ciple. The dispute between the Government and the
Corporation of London was with reference to the right
to pieces of wasteland between high and low water. The
Corporation claimed it as conservatories of the Thames,and
appled the funds to the conservancy of the river, and
the Government claimed the bed and shores of the
river between high and low water mark as belonging to
the Crown. The right hon. gentleman proceeded to de-
tail at considerable length the disputes between the cor-
poration and the Government relative to this matter,
which it was attempted to settle in 1846, and what had
been done subsequently towards that object. The board
was to consist of six members of the corporation,
three to be appointed by Government and two by
the Trinity-house, which, he thought, would give
the Government a fair preponderance, because he con-
sidered more weight ought to be given to the persons
nominated by Government than to their members. If
the Corporation of London were found to act improperly,
the matter would be reconsidered by the Government
with a view to its alteration.

Mr. L. KING moved the adjournment of the debate
till that day week.
After some remarks from Mr. W. WILLIAMS,
...

Mr. LABOUCHERE resisted the motion for the
adjournment of the debate. The bill had been referred
to a select committee and thoroughly examined, and the
whole of the facts were known to the house. He was
still of the opinion he had formerly expressed that a tax
levied in a given port upon shipping should be applied
to the shipping purposes of that port, and be under the
controul of a separate body.
Sir D. L. EVANS asked what amount of taxation
would be conceded to the corporation under this bill,
and expressed an opinion that no greater taxes should
be levied on the shipping of the port than was ne-
cessary for its conservancy. Several important ques-
tions were involved in this bill, and he should sup-
port the hon. and learned baronet, the member for
Carlisle, for an adjournment.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
it was not proposed, by this bill, to give new pOwer
to tax shipping. The present navigation fund was in
arrears 2,8441., and he thought it was not likely that
the income would be increased.

Mr. HENLEY approved of the constitution of the

proposed board, and expressed an opinion that adjourn-
ing the debate would be injurious to the parties inte-
rested. He thought this bill proposed a satisfactory
arrangement, considering the right of the respective
parties were in dispute.
Sir J. GRAHAM would not press for a division, but
wait till the further stage of the bill. In the meantime
he advised hnn. members to read the reports of the Board
of Trade in reference to this subject. If he read the bill
rightly, there was a new principle in it for taxing ship-
ping between Putney and Teddington, and an appropri-
ation of the surplus, to which he also objected. It also
dealt with matters relative to the coal and corn duties.
He proposed that the bill should not be advanced a
stage, but that it should stand over, and the matter con-
sidered before itg third reading.
Sir G. GREY said it was not a Government bill, but
arrangements should be made to meet the views of the
house.

Sir J. SHELLEY suggested that the third reading
of the bill should stand over till this day week. He would
then recommend the withdrawal of the amendment.

Sir J. DUKE defended the conduct of the Corporation
of London in introducing this bill.
Sir G. GREY said that no private bill would be re-
ceived after Wednesday next by the House of Lords.
He suggested that the third reading should stand over
tit Tuesday.
The amendment was withdrawn,And the third reading
fixed for Tuesday next.

TEWKESBURY ELECTION.

Mr. ELLICE jun., reported that the committee ap-
pointed to inquire into the election of Tewkesbury de-
clared Mr. J. Martin duly elected for that borough.

INDIA.

Lord C. HAMILTON asked the First Lord of the
Trea-ury, what day he would give for the conclusion of
the Indian debate, the adjournment of which on the 23d
June was agreed to by the President of the Board of
Control on the ground of the great importance of the
subject.

Lord PALMERSTON said he was unable to fix a
definite period fur the resumption of the debate, owing
to the pressure of business.

ORDNANCE SURVEY.
Sir D. NORREYS asked the Secretary to the Trea-
sury when the supplemental estimate for the ordnance
survey of Scotland would be presented to the house ;
and whether any orders or instructions had been issued
to the Ordnance Department in respect of the scale on
which the Survey of Scotland and England was to be
drawn in future.

Mr. WILSON could not state the precise time when
the supplemental estimates would be presented. After
the decision of the house, orders had been issued to the
Ordnance Department, that all work commenced from
this time should be drawn on the 6.inch scale.
POSTAL COMMUNICATION BETWEEN LON-
DON AND DUBLIN.
Mr. CORRY asked the Secretary to the Treasury
whether the Government had accepted the conditions
of a contract for an improved Postal and Passenger
Communication between London and Dublin.
Mr. WILSON said that, with the exception of
one point of a trifling character, arrangements had been
made between the Great Northern Railway and the
Post-office for the conveyance of the mail. The land
passage would be performed in 34 hours, and the whole
service between London and Kingston would occupy 11
hours, and between London and Dubli❑ 11. hours.

THE CASE OF JOHN TILLEY.
Mr. DRUMMOND asked the Secretary of State for
the Home Department what report he had received from
the Commissioners of Lunacy with regard to the com-
plaint of Thomas Tilley, that he had been confined in an
iron jacket in a dark room for seven weeks in the Bever-
ley Retreat for Lunatics near York, to which Commis-
sioners the said complaint was sent for investigation ?
Sir G. GREY said that this lunatic was a violent man,
but the commissioners had condemned, in strong terms,
the particular treatment complained of, which conduct
would not be repeated in future.
BOARD OF HEALTH ACT.

On the motion of adjournment,
Mr. PALK asked the Secretary of State for the Home
Department if it was the intention of the Government
to bring in a bill to remedy the defects proved before a
elect committee of the present Board of Health ?
Sir G. GREY said that a bill had been prepared to
remedy the defects in the Act of 1848, but he could not
Admit that the Board of Health had been so much con-
demned by a select committee as the hon. gentleman
seemed to infer. The bill to be introduced contained
considerable improvements upon the Act of 1848.
BRITISH GUIANA.
Mr. T. BARING, after adverting to a petition he
had received from British Guiana, asked whether her
Majesty's Government had adopted any measures to fa-
cilitate immigration into that colony ? He thought that
an abundant supply of free labourers could be obtained,
under proper regulations, from Africa, India, and China.
Mr. LABOUCHERE was anxious to give every faci-
lity for the introduction of free labourers from every
quarter into the colonies, provided the existing condi-
tions be maintained. These conditions were absolutely
necessary to protect the immigrants, and to guard
against the horrors of slavery being revived under an-
other name. With regard to emigration from China,
Lord Elgin bad been instructed to obtain the fullest and
most authentic information on the subject. The atten-
tion of the Indian Government had also been directed
to the matter.