The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-15 00:00:00

ence in particular districts of the kingdom, and you must
see how intolerable the system would become if the Execu-
tive were to be ailowed unlimited licence in casting away
the guarantees by which contracts are defended. (Hear.)
I hope in the remarks I have made I have said nothing to
exeisperate or inflame the controversy. We are anxious
thi.t the question should be tried in a spirit of perfect im-
partiality and fairness, and any mixture of passion in our
die cussion would afford a bad precedent to the committee.
I trust that the committee will approach the task in a calm
and judicial manner, and if they do I am confident that the
result will be satisfactory to the house. (Hear, hear.)
,Mr. P. HENNESSY said the noble lord had defended
not` only the Government, but the Irish members against
wh at he was pleased to call a calumny. But he (Mr. Hen-
neesy) must differ from the noble lord in thinking that if
the Irish members had voted against the Government on
the paper duties question, taking it as a vote of confidence
o r want of confidence, they would have done wrong.
There was a precedent on this very question in the case of
the late Mr. Wilson, a member of the present Govern-
ment, who spoke against the former Government on a
vote of confidence, and one of the grounds he took was
their conduct in respect to the Galway contract. He dis-
firmly said that he should vote against them on that ground.
In opposing Lmd Derby's Reform Bill, Lord Palmerston
did not confine himself to that question, but objected to the
Indian policy, and Lord J. Russell criticised the foreign
policy of Lord Malmesbury. Surely the Irish members
were equally justified in voting against the Government on
a question of confidence when they found Government not
only now, but constantly opposed to the interests of Ire-
land. Many Irish members may have been influenced only to
a small extent by the question of the Galway contract ; but it
was the last straw that broke the camel's back. The whole
policy of the Government with respect to Ireland was bad,
and even the conduct of Irish business in this house was
highly unsatisfactory—to such an extent, that the Irish
members would be justified in putting her Majesty's Go-
vernment out of office as soon as possible. There was not a
single Irishman in the Cabinet, nor was there in that house
a single Irish officer of Government. For the first time
since the Union they saw the offices of Attorney and Soli-
citor-General filled by Englishmen, and all the Irish offices
either by Irish or Scotchmen. Everything relating to Ire-
land was brought before the house by Englishmen totally
ignorant of the country they were legislating for. Every-
thing relating to Ireland was referred to select committees
where the Chief Secretary for Ireland sat as chairman, and
Irish gentlemen appeared as witnesses, so that Ireland was
legislated for by select committees. The Government refused
to give Volunteer corps to Ireland, but the Irish members
were expected to vote for Government on the grant of
X 1,300,000 for the Volunteer corps of England,towards which
the Irish people contributed, but from which they derived no
direct benefit. However, no Irish member opposed that
vote. He thought the Irish members had better transfer
their allegiance to those who knew something about Ireland,
and whose policy had always been fair and generous to-
wards Ireland, who, when out of office in 1847, proposed
large grants of public money to relieve Irish distress, which
were refused by .this house in consequence of the opposition
re?sil;;;Paperrisrowhlng
mofetmhebeLrikerekisoneteipuesceiarellaedTa,ovredry.Thinhtee
the casualties which had occurred to the Galway Company.
He would read a paper which would give some infoi oration
to the hon. gentlemen, and to the Government. He pro-
ceeded to read an account of the accidents and losses of other
companies, receiving income cases larger subsidies than the
Atlantic Royal Mail Company had received. It might be
said that these were all accidents, but he said the same of
the Galway Company. There was in this matter not only a
national but a commercial jealousy. The direct rival of the
Galway Company was Inman's. The Galway Company had
401 passages in the year, Inman's 116, and Atlas 84. When
these companies found that the Irish company was beating
them out of the field, they got up a story that it was a
failure, and get their friends to exercise a pressure on the
members of the house and on the press to appose it. Lord
Brougham had said that the Irish members were desirous
of putting money in their purse, and that if Government
had yielded on the question of the Galway contract it would
be a money bribe. Now, he should like to know the opinion
of the noble lord on those questions behind the Treasury
Benches, who, in the debate on the paper duties, stated to
the house specifically the amounts of money they would
lose if the bill were not carried? If they were justified,
surely the Irish members were right in voting against Go-
vernment on a question of confidence, not from pecuniary
interest, but for the interest of the country they represented.
But it was a mistake to regard this as a simply Irish ques-
tion. The house ought to support the Galway contract on
other than Irish grounds. The great fact which had been
lost sight of was that a contract had been entered into by
the Government of the Earl of Derby with the Galway
Company, and the present Government had thrown every
difficulty in the way of the managers and shareholders car-
rying out its provisions. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. CLAY thought it very unfair that the statements of
the hon. member for Montrose (Mr. Baxter) ought not to
be allowed to go before the public without some qualifica-
tion and contradiction, and he contended that there were no
grounds for the statements of the hon. member that the
ships of the Galway Company were unseaworthy. Two at
least of the ships were certainly not open to such a charge;
they wete built by the contractors upon plans proposed by
the Admiralty, but considerably strengthened. The Co-
lumbia had been built very strongly, and had showed her •
self to be a good ship, despite all the accidents and casual-
ties to which she had been exposed. The Anglia would,
when completed, be, he believed, an equally good ship.
With respect to the proposed motion, he was glad to find
that the Government had acceded to the grant of the com-
mittee, and he hoped that the issue raised by the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer would be fairly and fully tried, and
that, as he understood it was, an unusual amount of
indulgence had been granted to this company by the
Government. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BLAKE was also glad to hear that the Government
had consented to grant the committee, and stated that the
board of directors of the Galway Company was, at present,
widely different from that which was first formed. The
chairman of the company was the owner of a larger num-
ber of steam-vessels than any man alive, and he and those
assembled with him believed that, with proper manage-
ment, the undertaking might be made a great success.
Since Ireland had, unfortunately, given up legislating for
herself, a measure of so much real and practical value had
not been adopted for that country as this Galway contract,
and he could not help thinking that a great deal of the
prosperity of Ireland depended upen the successful carry-
ing out of that enterprise. (Hear, hear.) Having paid a
compliment to the Irish Secretary for the attention he had
paid to the affairs of the sister country, he concluded by
expressing a hope that the committee now about to be ap-
pointed would arrive at a just conclusion on the subject of
the contract.
Colonel FRENCH said that many hon. members had
expressed their gratitude to the Government for having
assented to the present motion,• forgetting that when the
committee had been asked for in the first instance, the
Government had refused the demand. He wished to know
from the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the opinion
ot the law officers of the Crown had been taken as to the
legality of determining the contract.
Lord NAAS stated that he had taken a very lively inte-
rest in this question, and that in September, 1858, lie had
recommended the Government to give the Atlantic Steam
Packet Company their support. That company had had
great difficulties to encounter, principally because an orga •
nised opposition had been formed against it. It was said
that the people of Ireland had formed unreasonable hopes
on the subject of the contract, but the fact was that the geo-
graphical position of the sister country must ever point it
out as a most desirable packet station between the United
Kingdom and America. That geographical position enabled
Galway to have 30 hours' start of London in the matter of
departure; and as to the advantages of Galway as a place for
the reception of telegraphic messages, its importance could
hardly be overrated. It was absurd to say that indulgences
similar to those given to the Galway Company had not been
given to others, tecause it so happened that the Royal Mail
Company, trading to the West Indies, received a subsidy
of £22,000 a-year. The Government had taken a most ex-
traordinary course within a shori, time upon this question.
They had terminated the contract suddenly, and now they
had agreed to the motion for a committee of inquiry. The
very fact of their agreeing to the motion was a proof that
they themselves entertained a doubt as to the correctnesss
of the course they had previously taken. Could any com-
mittee afford them any information beyond what they
had already in their possession? Why had they not-that
evening boldly and openly defended their past proceedings?
ould they be bound by the decision ot the committee ?
These were questions which ought to be answered. He be-
lieved that the whole proceeding with regait to the con-
tract was at variance with Parliamentary precedents, and
that there never had been any fixed determination on the
part of the Government in the matter. It was somewhat
singular that the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, in answer to
a deputation, should have a quitted that he was wholly un-
acquainted with the circumstances of the case; and this w s
the more extraordinary, seeing the intimate relationship
which existed between him and the Government. He com-
plained that the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland had not been
made acquainted with the intentions of his colleagues on
this question, which, although in some respects a depart-
mental question, originated in, and should be viewed as a
matter of, imperial policy. He should wish for some distinct
explanation from the Government as to whether the Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland was for the future to take part in all
shows and pageants, but have no share in any real act of
government. He did not look forward in at all a sanguine
manner to the result of the labour of the committee, for
nothing satisfactory cculd ever be arrived at until Ireland
was given that position which its geographical situation
entitled it to.

Mr. CARDWELL had no doubt that the inquiry would
b© conducted with all justice and propriety. He could not
adMit that the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland was ignorant of
the intentiona of the Government, although, as it was not a
purely Irish question, but an imperial question, he was not
asked to express any opinion on the subject. He should
not enter into the b o.ener -11 question, but would only express
his satisfaction th4t the matter was to be referred to a select
committee. _ . _

Col. DICKSON considered that the hon, member for
Galway deserved the thanks of the house for the manner in
which ha had brought the subject before them. The attack
of the hon. membefor Montrose only proved the hostility to
the Galway Companywhich he always entertained, and he
had, in order to carry out the feeling, been at much trouble
to misrepresent the real state of the case. He contended that
the company was composed of the last persons in the world to
have anything to do with a commercial sham. It was only
after the election and the defeat of Lord Derby that this cry
against the company was raised, and it was clear that hon.
gentlemen had not cared to use it on the hustings. Heshou'd
have preferred the matter being brought before the house in
a substantive form, and that the subsidy should be continued
until the committee reported. He denied that the hon. mem-
bar for Galway had appealed to the house ad miscricordia,
for he believed that Galway was fully entitled to the sup.
port she asked.
Mr. DUNLOP disclaimed the imputation that he had
acted in the spirit of a partisan in anything connected with
the contract in question. He believed, as cuairman of the
committee on contracts, he had conducted the business be-

fore i most impartially. The noble lord opposite had con-
founded two questions, totally distinct, the propriety of
maintaining a post at Galway, and the question whether the

contract with the company iiiquestion should be continued.
He hoped the Government would never decide a question
of this sort in reference to political feelings, but in reference
to the merits of the question itself.

Mr. ENNIS thanked the Government for the concession
in acceding to the appointment of this
committee. He had long enter tamed the idea of establishing
which they had mad
Communication between the west of Ireland and America,
and should be perfectly ready to afford the committee all
the information in his power on the question. It was no
part of the duty of tho Postmaster-General to speculate on
the speed of the Parana, The proper course was to have
put the vessel on trial. He had every confidence that the
proposed committee would consider the question fairly and
f 4117.. (Hear, hear.)
Colonel qu p_,'VILLE said that long before the contract
was annulled an'iuciinakion had been shown to upset the
contract. The Postmaster-General had stated that, cm.
traiy to the usual practice, the contract had been givep
without competition. Now that was a question into which
the rostrlasier7qeneral had no right to enter. (Heir,
11,9F1 no conduct or the Iloottuuter!Qenefal could nos

be defended. It was unworthy of him, because the com-
pany had been unable to complete their contract owing to
the conduct of Government, and on account of conditions
which had not been contemplated originally, as the Admi-
ralty themselves admitted, to break off the contract. It
was better to borrow a form of expression from the noble
lord (lord J. Russell), that ten Ministers should perish
rather than that the just claims of Ireland should be disree
garded, and the just expectations of the people disappointed
Mr. MAGuntE would give no thanks to the Government
for not opposing the motion ; because, if a division had been
taken, every Irish member on the opposition side of the
house, and many of their own supporters, would have gone
into the lobby against them. The Galway contract brought
Sir S. Cunard into Cork harbour, and those who were inte-
rested in Cork could not therefore do anything to injure that
contract. One successful enterprise in Ireland led to
another, and Irish people were quite as able to manage their
own affairs as people in England were able to manage them
for them. As an instance of this he mentioned that some
time ago a company was established in Cork called the St.
George's Company, which was managed in Liverpool—it
failed, and involved in its failure the ruin of hundreds of
families. Another company was started; but this time tha
management was in the hands of Cork men, and it was as
successful as any company in the United Kingdom. Its
success gave rise to other companies. One successful enter-
prise gave rise to twenty others, and therefore this question
of the Galway contract was one cf national importance to
Ireland, and so it was regarded by the Irish people. He
knew many who were not connected with the west of Ire-
land who had subscribed their money to the company, not
for the purpose of making money, but for the purpose of de-
veloping the undeveloped resources of that country, which
had been so neglected by the House of Commons. No
doubt it was the uncertainty in which they were left that
paralysed the efforts of this company, and this result was
owing to the Scotch radical members. He trusted that the
Government would have none of the Scotch radical element
upon this committee. (Laughter.) Let them appoint five
thoroughly honest John Bulls, five honest and impartial
men, and Ireland would be satisfied with their decision.
It was said that the hon. member for Montrose had some
connection with a particular line that felt the rivalry of the
Galway line. That might be true or not, but at all events
he exhibited a strong bias as a Scotch radical on this ques-
tion. He believed that Lord Derby entered into this eon-
tract on fair and just grounds; but whatever were the
motives under which the contract was made, it ought not
to be disturbed on political grounds. (Hear, hear. He de
nied that any compact had been made with the Government,
or that any threat had been held out to them. He had been
spoken to by the Rev Mr. Daly on this question, and the
answer he gave him was that, though in favour of the Gal-
way contract, he was committed body and soul to the paper
question—(laughter)—that he could not vote against the
Government. He hoped that in this matter justice would
be done to Irelend, which had suffered much injustice from
all parties.
Mr. B. OSBORNE—I am neither a Scotch Radical, nor
a shareholder in the Galway company, nor committed body
and soul to the question bar,a thu houoo but, If I were
committed body and soul, I should feel bound to vote in
support of the motion. The hon. member for Galway, in
bringing forward this question, has, I think, entitled himself
not only to the thanks of Great Britain in general but of
Ireland in particular for the very lucid statement he has
made, and for some of the declarations it has been the
means of eliciting, not from members of the Government,
but from this House of Parliament. It was my hon. friend
the member for Montrose who said that the surveyors at
Liverpool who surveyed the Hibernia passed an opinion
that she showed symptoms of weakness. I think, if those
surveyors had inspected her Majesty's Government on this
question (a laugh), they would also have been obliged to pro -
nounce an opinion that in granting this committee so readily
the Government have shown symptoms of weakness (hear) ;
at any rate, that their bottom required some scraping (much
laughter), and that like that unfortunate ship the Hibernia,
they were now rather on their beam ends. (Hear, and a
laugh.) I complain of the conduct of the Irish Govern-
ment on this matter. I keep clear of the particular com-
pany. I take the bold lino of it being necessary to cherish
and nourish Ireland in some way; but I say the Govern-
ment have shown symptoms of weakness on this principle.
Either they ought Lot to have terminated the contract in
such an excessive hurry—either they have shown ignorance
in making it a purely departmental question; or, having
come, as an united Cabinet, to a conclusion that it ought to
be terminated, they ought not to have turned round and
granted this committee. (Hear, hear.) I say they have
rather discredited themselves, in my opinion, than done
themselves good by showing these symptoms of weakness,
like that noble vessel the Hibernia. (A laugh.) So much
for the Government. Now for a point to which I should
not have reverted bat for what fell from my hon, friend the
member for Montrose. He has taken upon himself—l must
say in partial ignorance of facts—to style this new com-
pany, forgetting there have been two distinct companies, a
commercial sham. Does the hon. gentleman know who is
the chairman of the company? Let me tell him the chair-
man of that company is one of the first commercial men not
only in Ireland, but, I believe, in Great Britain. It is Mr.
Malcomson —a gentleman whose acquaintance I have the
honour to rejoice in. What is his status in the commercial
world ? Mr. Malcomson is not only the largest c tton
spinner in Ireland, but the greatest proprietor of steam-
boats in the United Kingdom. He is the chairman of the
Galway Company. And when nay hon. friend says that the
directors are men of straw and the whole thing a commer-
cial sham, I say that it is no such thing. Whatever is
opinion of my hon. friend the member for Montrose, I can
tell this house that the chairman and directors of the com-
pany are as solvent men as any merchants in her Majesty's
dominions. (Hear, hear.) I think the English members
ought to be guarded against the representations which have
been put forward-'-not by the member for Montrose, or
the Scotch Radicals, for, whatever may be their opinions
on Maynooth, upon mercantile transactions they have no
hatred of Ireland—but by the Irish Government. The
question is, how is the Irish Government to be carried
on ? For the Secretary of Ireland to rise and say
this is a purely departmental question is not telling us how
Ireland should be dealt with. What are the facts of the
case ? I was astonished to find that that most estimable
nobleman the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, in answer to a
deputation, stated he knew nothing whatever of what was
going on on the other side of the water, and no one could
have been so surprised as his Excellency when he awoke
one fine morning and found that the Postmaster-General
had put an end to the Galway contract. If that is the way
in which you carry on the Government of Ireland, it is ut-
terly impossible that your Government or any other Go-
vernment can be popular there. (Hear, hear.) Ido not
look at this question as a mere question of the Galway Con-
tract, but if you are to support the institution of the Lord-
Lieutenancy you must make it a reality. (Hear, hear.)
The reason I have always objected to the continuance of the
Lord-Lieutenancy is, not that I object t.) the office of Lord-
Lieutenant, but that you have made him such a king Log
that he is of no use. (Hear, hear.) If I wanted an argu-
ment against the Lord-Lieutenancy I could not have a
stronger one than this case. (Hear, hear.) Here you have
a nobleman hi the receipt of a paltry sum as Viceroy.
(Cheers.) I say it is a paltry sum—l don't like to bring
in names—the names of royalty—but he gets £20,030 to
exercise the office of Viceroy, and you have made him a
man of no power, not able to give an opinion, and then the
right hon. gentleman comes down and tells us this is a de-
partmental question. (Hear, hear.) Without any reference
to the Galway contract, this becomes a serious question
whether the Lord-Lieutenant ought to be kept in the posi-
tion he now is. (Hear, hear.) It is all very well to talk of
justice to Ireland and to throw out fine phrases in this house
—(hear)—but having a long and intimate acquaintance
with Ireland, I say she ought to share in the saute benefits
which you give to this and the sister country. You com•
plain that she knows very little of you. She only sees you
in the most disagreeable form, when the judges of assize go
their circuits, and then she is told she ought to bless her-
self for the connexion. (Hear, hear.) It the Government
had done their duty they ought to have looked at this ques-
tion as one far beyond a mere departmental question. (Hear,
hear.) I don't go on to the question of the Galway Contract
or the objects of this company, but I say that neither this
nor any other Government can shut their eyes to the just
wants of Ireland—(hear, hear)—and without going into the
Paper Duty question, my support of this or any other
Government which may come after it would materially, de-
pend upon the way in which they treat the sister kingdom.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. CARDWELL—The hon. gentleman has entirely
mistaken me. I did not say that this was a departmental
question ; on the contrary, that, regarding it as an imperial
question, it had been settled hero by the department by
which it was begun and by the Government collectively, to
whom the responsibility belonged. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI—Being the individual who signed the
Galway Contract, I trust the house will not think it pie-
sumptuous on my part if I make one or two observations
before the discussion closes. (Hear.) A year has elapsed
and I find the task of defending the policy of that contract
not so difficult as a twelvemonth ago it might have seemed.
(Hear, hear.) Time and the truth which time often brings
appear to have influenced public opinion. Little less than a
year ago the attention of this house was called to the pro •
posal for another select committee on the same subject, but
moved in a very different spirit and with a very different
object. (Cheers.) A year has gone round and "the engi-
neer" is "hoist with his own petard." (Laughter.) There
is a committee again to be appointed on the Galway Contract,
but I think the labours of these gentlemen who will serve on
it will be animated by a different meaning from that which
influenced those who came to a decision on our recent com-
mittee. Looking at this question generally, what is urged
against the policy of this contract ? There were many ob-
jections urged against the policy, but they all seem to have
disappeared. (Hoar, hoar.) The noble lord the Secretary
of State the other night said that no one could far a moment
impugn the policy of the contract; and I think myself he
would bo a bold man who did it. (Cheers.) Looking at
the relative positions of America and the United Kingdom
I think ha would certainly assume a perilous position who
would impugn the policy of selecting, or establishing a
communication between the two countries—those two points
by which the nearest communication could take place. It
was placed before us, that if this service were established at
Galway, as between Liverpool and Galway, with respect to
reaching America there would be in favour of Galway a

saving of at least 30 hours' voyage, and as reg;d;;ele:
graphic communication, question and answer both con

sidered, there would be an absolute saving of eight days.
(Cheers.) Even in 1858 that was an important considera-
.

tion with statesmen; is it less important in 1861 ? (Hear.)
No one now, therefore, according to the authority of the
Secretary of State, impugns the policy, but the means by
_ _

which it is carried into effect, are still, though much more
faintly, abused. A subsidy, it is said, is a means which is
highly to be deprecated and objected to. It is, we are told,
the office of private capital, unassisted by the credit of the
State, to undertake enterprises of this character. But does
private companies undertake the enterprises of this nature ?
What evidence have we that if the Government of
1858 had not interfered any private enterprise
with this object would have been established ?
(Hear, hear.) Is not all the evidenc3 the other way ?
(Cheers.) This is 4 want wi ich icta lQng been felt.
Philosophers and politicians had king recognised its im-
portance, merchants and traders have asserted that it was
an object of the fist nuossity, and for years they did this,

but no steps were ever taken by them to accomplish their
purpose. (Cheers.) There w are placed before the Govern-
ment representations in favour of this communication
between Galway and the nearest point of America,
signed by all the great capitalists, all the great firms and
the Chambers of Commerce in the country. (Hear.)
But they did not stir in the matter, and the
Government took the responsibility of interfering.
They took means of ascertaining whether there
was any prospect of private enterprise, or private capital,
unassisted and unsanctioned by the Government, taking it
up, and they leant from all quarters that the supposition
was quite illusory. And very naturally so. Had not this
country for a long period of years adopted a different policy
on a most extensive scale, and sanctioned the interference
of the State ? (If ear.) Had you not had considerable and
extensive services from various ports of England, assisted
by subsidies from the Treasury to a large amount ? Were
not they proofs that private capital could not efficiently un
dertake the duty, and could you expect private capital in
Ireland to effect that which private capital in England
shrank from attempting ? (Cheers.) We ourselves believed
that it was of the utmost importance for the public welfare
and generally for the advantage of Ireland that this com-
munication should be established. (Hear.) But then we
are told that we made a great mistake, because, having
come to chat opinion, we did not put the enterprise up to
public competition, The subject was well considered by
the Government of Lord Derby, and it was the result of
their deliberation that nothing could be more unwise, and
indeed, to a certain degree, nothing could be more unjust
than to put that service up to competition. We found a
company before us established to a certain extent, and in
possession of a colonial contract which gave it a great ad-
vantage—(hear)—but at the same time we were assured, and
we believe f and still believe that, if we had resolved upon
estab:ishing that communication between Ireland and Ame-
rica by competition, great companies, with the command of
large capital, whose interest it was to prevent any such com-
munication, would have taken advantage of that public
machinery of competition, and ultimately would virtually
have suppressed the very enterprise we wished to foster.
(Cheers. Whether, therefore, we look to the policy of the
enterprise, which is no longer impugned, or to the means
to which we had recourse, and which I with confidence
vindicate, thsre is no point to which objection can be
taken. But then we are told that though the policy might
be right, and though the means might not be questioned,
yet the conduct of the company, when once we had granted
this contract, was so unsatisfactory and so unequal to the
occasion that they had no claim whatever to the considera-
tion of the State, and that the conduct of the Government
in the course they have recently taken was not only justi-
fied but necessary. But is that the fact? (Hear, hear.)
There is no doubt that it was an enterprise of no slight
difficulty to establish this communication between Ireland
and America. (Hear, hear.) The very difficulty alone jus-
tified the interposition a the State, and that interposition
was not an accessory but the condition of success. It was
the credit and strength which the sanction and assistance
of the State gave which allowed the company, and could
alone allow the company, to succeed. What eves the
assistance which the Sr ate gave after the policy was adopted
and the contract signed ? I say it was an alternation of neg-
lect and menace. (Cheers.) That is the complete history
of the relations between the Government and the Galway
Company. It was the cheerful grant of the subsidy which
was the foundation of the credit and capital of the company.
(Cheers.) There was no other reason which could justify
the interference of the State, and chilling and churlish as-.
sistance really prevented its success. (Hear, hear.) It was
worse than chilling and churlish. It was critical and hostile
from the beginning. What was the reason of this conduct
on the part of the Government? There was a dissolution of
Parliament, a change of Ad ministration, and those who were
responsible for the policy and who signed the contract left
office. What was the cause of the conduct of our successors?
I confess lamat a loss to say. Nothing has surprised me
more than that noble lords and right hon. gentlemen oppo-
site, when they have acceded to office, should have always felt
it one of their first duties to blacken the conduct and character
of their predecessors. (Cheers.) I should have thought that
they might have been contented with their success. Their
triumph has generally been obtained on easy terms. I think
that, considering the unnatural coalitions which have some-
times been called into existence to expel us from power, the
impossible pledges, and the impracticable policy to which
they have given their public adhesion, in order that they
might sit on these benches, might have satisfied them.
(Cheers.) No one on this bench, at least, has ever begrudged
them their triumt h, however obtained. With such unequi-
vocal success at least they might have spared themselves the
task always to blacken the character and conduct of their
predecessors. (Hear, hear.) It was the same in 1852. It
was the same in 1859. In 1852 we were responsible foe the
conduct of the Admiralty. We were in office less than a
year. The Duke of Northumberland was then First Lord.
He found the affairs of the Admiralty in no satisfactory
state. There was great alarm in the country, and a great
call on the Government to produce a Channel fleet. To
the Duke of Northumberland alone, supported, of course,
with the entire sympathy of his colleagues, belongs the
credit that in less than a year we had a Channel fleet.
(Hear, hear.) So far the Government in 1,52 might have
left office without any attempt on the part of their success-
ful rivals to blacken the conduct of that department. But,
on the contrary, a most amiable and accomplished man,
much beloved in this house, and by all who knew him was
hunted to death by the noble lord. (Cheers from the Op-
position; and cries of " Oh I" and " Question I" from' the
Ministerial benches.) The most exaggerated and miser-
able charges were brought against him for conduct which
all his predecessors had been allowed to pursue with impu
nity, in order to raise a cry against the Government of the
day. (Cheers.) In the year 1859 there was only the Gal-
way contract, and I should conceal my convictions if I did
not say that the licence of public life was stretched to
create an unjust odium against the Government. (Cheers.)
What is the consequences of these illegitimate means of
attempting to createafalse sympathy and raisean unfounded
an unjust odium against the conduct of their predecessors?
(Hear.) If I had really perpetrated that job which lam
described in the public prints to have done, and which some
in this house have insinuated that I have done, do you
think I should have drawn the contract in the form in
which it appears on the table now for our consideration ?
Remember, that until this Galway contract it was in the
power of the Government, on their own authority, to enter
into these contracts, and Parliament had no control over
them. Who was the first Minister who put in that language
which brought these contracts under the supervision of the
House of Commons. Why, it was. the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer of the Administration of Lord Derby. (Cheers.)
And I say that if I had larch influenced by those corrupt
motives which have been imputed, should I have put that
language into a contiact which made it amenable to Parlia-
ment, or should I not rather have shrouded the contract in
the old language of such engagements, which would have
permitted .me to have defied the criticism of Parliament ?
(Hear.) I did nothing of the kind. I sanctioned the remo-
delling of these contracts because I felt that the Govern-
ment of which I was a member would not have ratified a
contract which they did not believe was for the public wel-
fare, and because I thought that my successor in office,
whoever he might be, would be animated by far too exalted
and generous sentiments to find time at such a moment to
blacken the conduct of his predecessor. (Cheers.) After a
year has passed, the conspiracy havingsucceeded, no doubt
—es here do we find ourselves ? We have had, I think, as
remarkable a piece of Parliamentary conduct with reference
to this contract on the part of her Majesty's Government
as I ever recollect. The motien of the hon. member for
Galway was, in fact, a vote of censure. (Cheers,) It was a,
proposition that the house should appoint a committee to
consider the announced decision of the Cabinet. (Cheers )
If the committee came to a different decision from the Ca-
binet the only logical conclusion should have been that the
committee should sit on these benches. (Cheers and laugh-
ter.) Every effort was made on the part of her Majesty's
Government that there should be no mistake or misconcep-
tion on this point. Their friend a however, annoyed by their
policy in this respect, charitably intimated—to use the lan-
guage of the evenings—that it was a departmental error. (A
laugh). But the Government would not for a moment agree
that it was a departmental error. It was a policy upon
which Cabinet Councils were ostentatiously called, upon
which they pompously sat, and the result of which was
announced to us with ostentation by the Prime Minister.
(Cheers and laughter.) They had considered the subject.
The Postmaster-General had nothing to do with it, or had
only an infinitesimal portion of responsibility. It was a
Cabinet question. The Cabinet had decided, and the noble
lord threw down his glove on the floor of the house. (Loud
cheers.) The hon. member for Galway gave notice of a
motion that, notwithstanding the decision of the Cabinet,
the question should be remitted to the consideration of a
committee. (Hear.) What does that mean ? Why, that
we are not satisfied with the policy of the Government. We
are not content with the decision of the Cabinet. (Cheers.)
If that is not a question of confidence, what is a question of
confidence ? (Hear.) This is the state into which wo are
brought by the tortuous policy of the Government now and
then blackening an oppcinent, new and then laying a trap
to injure a body of public, men, now and then dis-
appeinting supporters, who placed confidence in them, now
and then using this contract as an object of defiance by
which to punish those who regarded • more the interest of
their country than the interests of the Government. (Loud
cheers.) And it is come to this—to a scene of unprecedented
humiliation, remarkable, I must say, this night, for an un-
rivalled exposition of Irish policy by the Secretary of the
Lord-Lieutenant. (Cheers.) I wonder whether the right
hon. gentleman still retains the constitutional title of Secre-
tary to the Lord-Lieutenant. (Laughter.) Generally
speaking, when principals are not contented with their
seereteries they dismiss them but here we have the Secre-
tary of the Lord-Lieutenant Of Ireland agreeing in the Ca-
binet to a policy of the greatest importance to the country,
of which his Excellency, as it now turns out, on evidence
which no one can question, was kept in entire ignorance.
(Hear and laughter.) That is a very remarkable state of
affairs. I am perfectly aware of the objections which have been
urged against the office of the Lord-Lieutenant, and by none
with more liveliness and force than by the hon. and gallant
member for Liskeard. There may be abuses, but I believe
they arise from neglect and non-appreciation of t he real cha-
racter of the office. Ido not think that they constitute a
sufficient reason why we should abolish a post now of
antiquity, of great distinction and authority, which by
good management and proper appreciation on the part of
the home Government might be made to exercise a sub-
stantial power and a most beneficial influence in Ireland.
(Hear.) But where is the authority of the Lord-Lieutenant,
after the exposition of his policy which has been given
to-night by his Secretary, who has rather aggravated his
sins by his explanation P (Laughter and cheers.) If it'had
been a mere departmental question—though what thatjar-
gon means I cannot in the least comprehend—that was no
reason why the Lord-Lieutenant should be kept in igno-
rance of the decision. But, as we are now told, it is an
Imperial question, in which Ireland is deeply concerned,
and that upon such a question the chief governor of Ire •
land should not be consulted, appears to me really mon-
strous. (Hear, hear.) Well, we shall have a committee
sitting upon a subject which has already received the ma-
ture deliberation of her Majesty's Ministers. (Laughter.)
It will be curious far us to ascertain whether they agreed in
their conclusions ; whether they differed ; if they differed,
how they differed, and which opinion had preponderanceo in
the assembly. (Hear.) I shall await the reportthe
I committee with considerable interest. Meanwhile may
say that these discussions, which have now occupied nearly
12 months, more or less, have not been without result.
Whatever may be the policy of this Government, I believe
that the policy of England towards Ireland has received
from these discussions a new aspect, which I hope may lead
to a future that may realise the hopes of the most ardent
gca
n and
friends of that country. (Loud and renewed cheers.)
Lord PALMERSTON—It can excite no suprise on the
part of those who have watched thecouuchrse ficlaatii
administration
in this country of late years that the right hon. gentleman
should express great resentment, much
somewhat of grief that the conduct cif the successive Go-
vernments of which he has boas a member should in-
variably, when they have been overthrown by advero Ma-
jorities, become the subject of public censure; (t, Hear,
hear," and laughter.) That can mite
wonder is rather that the torren_t of no surprise. The
indignation should so
long!3,14):.! 1141 113 and should only have hunt its

Ibounds upon the present occasion, for the purpose of exciting
those cheers which have so loudly followed the sitting down
of the right hon. gentleman. (Hear, hear.) I must say,
however, that there was one part of the speech of the right
hon, gentleman which did excite astonishment in my mind,
The right hon. gentleman alluded to a melancholy event,
deplored by all who had the honour and pleasure of acquaint-
ance with Mr. Stafford, the late member for Northampton.
an event which was totally unconnected with political mat-
ters, and was the result purely of physical disease, and I
must say, without casting a reflection on the medical science
of the sister isle, of medical mismanagement. With a taste
and feeling to which I shall not advert, the right hon .
gentleman was pleased to say that my hon. friend—for s 6
I may call him—was hunted to death. I never in the course
of my life heard an observation less founded on fact—(hear,
hear)—more impertinent to the question under considera-
tion, or less becoming a person occupying the position of the
right hon. gentleman. (Hear.) I shall not follow the right
hon. gentleman in discussing the merits or demerits of the
Administration of 1852. I will not even go into a discus-
sion of the conduct of the late Government in regard to the
granting of the Galway Contract, or the motives, time, and.
circumstances of that transaction. Much might be said on
that subject—(hear)—but it is a question which has gone by.
If there was anything in the granting of that contract which.
exposed the late Government to criticism, it has been con-
doned. (Hear, and a laugh.) The matter was referred to a
committee of the house, on whose report the contract was
acknowledged and carried on. It is made a reproach to the
present Government that they referred the matter to a com-
mittee ; but, as the contract was to depend on money to bet
voted by Parliament, as there was great difference of opinion
on the question at the time in the house, and as it turned
on detailed information, I think it was the duty of tlee Go-
vernment to refer the matter to a select cemmitteee and not
allow it to be discussed merely on the vote in Committee of
Supply. (Hear.) The company having been acknowledged
and their contract continued, it was our duty to see that
they fulfilled the engagements which they had undertaken.
They failed on several occasions to fulfil the conditions of
the contract, and repeatedly received extensions of time and
other indulgences. A certain time having elapsed, we
found that failures were still taking place, and arrived at
the opinion that the company did not contain in itself the
elements of faithful and efficient performance of the con-
tract. It therefore became our duty, in performance of the
obligations we had undertaken, to tell the company that no
further time could be allowed, and that the contract must,,
therefore, be terminated. (Hear.) We are told that it in
an act of weakness, a piece of self-condemnation, to agree
to the committee now moved for. I say it is in exact accord-
ance with the course which we pursued on the former oc-
casion, in regard to maintaining the contract. It is pen-
fectly true that we felt that if we had resisted this proposal
we should have been left in a minority. We deemed it
ourselves to be a reasonable proposal, and we believe that
others shared that opinion. Instead of being an act of weak-
ness, it was the only eourse which a Government acting
without passion or prejudice, and wishing simply that the
merits and justice of the case should be ascertained, could
pursue. (Hear.) The only person in the house who, I
think, should have voted against the proposal is the noble
lord opposite, who, in his speech, gave what appeared to me
strong reasons for such a vote. Then we are told that in
acting as we have done we have slighted the Lord-Lieu-
tenant of Ireland. (Hear, hear.) I w ould ask where the
contract was made, and who sanctioned it. Was it
made in Ireland, or did it receive the sanction of the
Lord-Lieutenant ? (Hear, hear.) We were just now
told by the honourable gentleman that it was a contract
made by the Government of this country upon Im-
p-rial considerations, to be paid for out of the Impe-
rial revenue, and to be sanctioned by Parliament. I say,
therefore, that if a question arose as to whethee the contract
should be continued or not, the same authority by which it
was originally made—namely, the Imperial Government,
was called upon to determine whether it should be cola-
tinned. This being so, it was not fair to throw upon the
Lord-Lieutenant a responsibility which did not belong to
him, or t o take him into council upon a matter of Imperial
policy which in no degree formed part of his functions. So
far from casting any slight upon the legitimate authority
vested in him, "say that we should have been going out of
our way if we had remitted to him a question the decision
upon, which belonged solely to the Government of this
country, and in thus acting we pursued the natural course,
the course followed by our predecessors, and the only course
which ought to be followed by the Government upon a
question of this kind. (Hear.) The Lord-Lieutenant, how-
ever, was informed of the decision which was taken. The;
noble lord himself read a passage, from which it appeared
that the Lord-Lieutenant knew of our decision, though he
said be was not aware of all the detailed reasons upon which..
that decision was founded. Now, as the decision was not
his, it was unnecessary to take him into council and inform
him of all the steps by which it was arrived at, it was
enough to tell him what the decision was, and, therefore,
the answer which he gave was a perfectly obvious and na-
tural one. There is nothing in that transaction which in the slightest degree affects the functions or the position of
the Lord-Lieutenant, and if gentlemen have no better rea-
son than that for proposing the abolition of the office, I
think the ground for making such a proposal exceedingly
trivial. (Hear.) Great complaints have been made by
Irish •nembers in the course of this debate that sufficient
attentionis not paid by the Government to the interests of
Ireland —(Opposition cheers) —that Ireland is neglected;
and that there is hostility on our part towards Ireland.
(Cheers.) Really, to accuse the Government of hostility to
one-third of the United Kingdom implies, I think, less
wisdom on the part of those who make the assertion than
the accusation imputes to those against whom it is made.
(Hear, hear.) Why, of late years, the whole course of
legislation has been for the benefit of Ireland. (" No I")
When you talk of Ireland, I presume you consider it
as part of the United Kingdom. I presume we are
not discussing Ireland as if it were a colony sepa-
rated in its interests from the rest of the country,
locally situated, and unconnected, except by sovereignty,
with this country. (Hear, hear.) I say that every measure
which is proposed and carried for the benefit of the country
at large is a measure from which Ireland also derives her
share of benefit. All those improvements in commerce and
in internal administration of every kind, which have re-
sulted from the labours of Parliament during the last 20
years, are measures from which Ireland has derived as much
ben efitas England. These advantae esare not confined to one
part of the United Kingdom. The repeal of Customs duties,
the freedom of commerce—any measures which add to the
wealth and prosperity of the United Kingdom—confer
equal benefits on Ireland with the rest of the country. No
man who compares the state of Ireland now with its state
20 years ago—no man can traverse the country, or can go
the slightest distance through it, without seeing the vast
improvement which has taken place there. (Hear, hear.)
I dare say I shall be told by those who are so much alive to
result
he
o f intereststhof I
e native
ti Ireland an d h t a
energies
t of thist iherapperoopvl
people—(hear,
te(nht ha
s e beenhear)—of
r the)_ o
f
their industry, intelligence, activity, the fertility of the
soil, and the natural resources of the country. (Hear,
hear.) But will all these elements ',recluse national pro-
sperity unless superintended by a good Government ?
When a nation is prosperous, when intelligence and industry
reap the legitimate reward of their exertions, when the
natural resources of a country are developed by the activity
of its people—whop you see such a result you may con-
fidently assert that that country is well governed. On the
other hand, when you see intelligence cramped, industry
deprived of its proper reward, a fertile soil lying waste
and uncultivated, and great natural resources unproductive
to man, you may safely predicate the existence there
of a ban, G. (Hear, hear.) The greatly increased
happiness and prosperity of Ireland of late years show, I
think, convincingly that the Government under which such.
results are brought about is not liable to the imputations
made against the present Ministry of being neglectful of
the interests and hostile to the welfare of Ireland. (Hear,
hear.) I shall not pursue this subject further. I am of
opinion that the course proposed by the hen. member for
Galway is a proper one. We are perfectly willing to sub-
mit to the committee the reasons upon which we thought
it our duty as guardians of the public purse to announce the
termination of the contract. It will be for the committee
to judge whether those reasons are sufficient, or whether
any excuses which the company can offer for the non-per-
formance of their engagements are such as will justify the
Government and Parliament in continuing the subsidy
which under the contract the company are entitled to
receive. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. E. P. BOUVERIE, who spoke amidst a good deal
of interruption, said the point was that this contract had been
given to 'the -Galway Company without the competition.
which had been promised. He also deprecated the allusion
which had been made to his deceased friend, and the state-
ment that he had been hunted to death. The truth was
that the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucks had
taken this opportunity of; waggering about those matters
out of which he and his friends had not come out in the
best way possible. He regretted that this committee should
have been appointed, for there were no facts to be ascer-
tained, but the real object seemed to be to set this contract..
on its legs again. If this course was to be pursued ith
be the first time in the history of this country t
sumed
House of Commons had, by one of its committeaa,lßa the executive functions and arranged the terms 01
at the remarks
con-
tract of this kind. He hoped that the result o
would show that the course which had beer. pursued e_t_h.e.i,nwOuasirl•
right hen.
one.
Lord J. MANNERS expressed his regteet
aft t h e Stafford.
said, whylwaftotduthih'
?ea
.°ll T, ht he
e late ri
which had fallen from the noble lea
a had
gentleman in reference to Mr. Augustus
right hon. gentleman really mean.
Govern-
ment,he no not divide iNvviidiec
hthe
ehhoauds et
the
en
step which they member,had taken •
in
no desire to shrink from any
reference to the whole affair.
thepain
Mr. H. HERBERT expressed . he felt at hearing
Stafford being bandied about the house.
He name of Mr. Sta
t the death of that 1
lamented gentle •
He had been present a
state that •
could
surely nothing whatever in
man, and he
eth the Galway contract had anything to do
connection w;
event.
with that lamentablepaid h*
Mr. NE\VDEGATE a igh tribute to the memory'
of Mr. Stafford,
of whom he said that, if he had been de
fended by his friends. as strongly as he was assailed by his
enemies, his reputation would have remained in a different
position. He had done nothing Which had not been done
htohneoeurubioef:tbt
before, and it would be fortunate for Parliament if no future
member ever was connected with darker practices.
r al
Colonel DUNNE expressed an opinion that the present
Government was exceedingly unpopular in Ireland, and no
create
taxationl t,haenydhna
odt
spendone
aimptehnen
penny
countryinth e
ewoau
us tt or
yi
.n -
e its
The motion was then agreed to.
passed.
The East India Loan Bill was read a third time and
The Local Government Act Bill passed through commit-
tee peo forma.
The order for the Committee on the Municipal Corpora-
tions Act, was discharged.
The amendment,: to the Locomotive Bill were considered
and agreed to.
The third reading of the Courts of Justice Bill was post-
poned till Moor' ay.
The houso went into committee on the Harbours Con-
solidated Fund, for the purpose of passing a preliminary
resolution, on which to found a bill. The resolution was
agreed to, and the further consideration of the subject was
fixed for Tuesday next.
Annoyance to Jurors (Westminster) Bill was read a
third time and passed.
The other orders of the day were disposed of, and the .
house adjourned at a quarter-past one o'clock.

LONDON : Printed and Published by MURD 0 YOUNG, of
No. 112, Strand, Printer, at ThE SUN Cam, No. 112,Strand,
in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the Coup,ty at Middlesex
Saturday, June 15, um