The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-19 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS-YESTERDAY.

The SPEAKER took the chair at twelve o'clock.
EAST INDIA COUNCIL AND HIGH COURTS

OF JUDICATURE BILL.

On the motion that the house go into committee,

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY asked whether the right hon.
gentleman opposite could give him any information as to
the change this bill would lead to in the revenues of India ?
Mr. M. GIBSON said he could not, as he had been asked
by his hon. friend the Secretary for India merely to move
the resolution which he held in his hand, as a matter of
form.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said it was necessary that the
greatest care should be taken of the finances and revenue
of India. This bill contained two new appointments
of members to Council, which would cost £B,OOO
each. (Hear.) As the appointments would be made
in this country, that would be an addition to the patronage
of the Secretary for India. Then, again, the number of
judges was increased from 14 to 21; all this would be fresh
charges, and as he felt it his duty, as far as possible, to use
his best exertions to protect the revenues of India, he should
move some amendments when the house was in committee
on the bill.

The house then went into committee, and a resolution
was passed on which to found a clause relative to salaries
and compensation.
THE HARBOURS BILL.

On the motion that the Speaker leave the chair,

Mr. LINDSAY said before the Speaker left the chair
he wished to make some observations with respect to this
bill. The object of the bill was to enable loans being made
for the purpose of constructing harbours, the abolition of
passing tolls, for charitable purposes, and other differential
dues. Now, with respect to the abolition of passing tolls
he could have no objection, but an hon. member had given
notice that he intended to move that the bill be referred to
a select committee, but he must beg of the hon. member to
withdraw his motion, as that subject had been decided over
and over again. The bill had been very much altered since
it first made its appearance in the house, and he thought the
utmost care should be exercised before the bill was passed
a further stage because the amounts of certain sums of
money to be paid to various places had been greatly in•
creased, and that without the slightest cause being shown
for what the money was required. He also found that there
were other clauses, Nes. 32 and 42, which would
enable the Board of Trade to sell harbours to private com-
panies. Ramsgate Harbour, for instance, upon which up-
wards of £2,000,000 had been expended, could be disposed
of by that department if the bill passed through com-
mittee as it stood. Then, again, Hull, Newcastle,
and Liverpool had been dealt with most par-
tially by the bill, and although he agreed with
the principle of the measure, he should feel it his duty to
move several amendments to many of the clauses as they
came under the consideration of the house.
Mr. THOMPSON moved that the bill be referred to a
select committee. He thought it was unwise to abolish
passing tolls without providing a substitute, and also that
the measure would have the effect of destroying many of
the Harbours of Refuge. For these reasons he could not
assent to the motion for going into committee.
Mr. DEEDES seconded the motion.

On the question belt g put by the SPEAKER,
Mr. CAYLEY hoped the hon. gentleman would not per-
severe with his motion for referring the bill to a select
committee.

Mr. DEEDES said he supported the proposition for re-
ferring the bill to a select committee because that course
would enable private parties whose interests were seriously
interfered with to place their grievances and claims before
such a tribunal. The Dover Harbour Commissioners felt
that their interests were severely affected by the bill. If
the measure was referred to a select committee the authori-
ties at Dover could place their claims before the committee.
If they failed to convince them of the justice of their com-
plaints he of course had nothing to do. The bill proposed
to abolish the payment of passing tolls after Jan., 1862, but
he thought that while that was laid down in the bill some
arrangements ought to be made for the extinction of debt of
the Dover Harbour Commissioners.

Sir F. GOLDSMID thought the President of the
Board of Trade had rejected various points in this bill too
easily, but if the measure was referred to a select commit •
tee ho should consider the question of compensation to be
again entirely re-opened. _ _ _

Mr. CAVE thought it bad policy to deal hardly with
private interests. He was of opinion that the bill had
better be referred to a select committee.

Mr. MOFFATT said the present bill was different in all
its essentials from the bill first brought in. There was also
another startling provision in the measure that dealt with
the great harbour of refuge of England, he meant the har-
bour of Ramsgate. He could not for an instant assent to
any proposition which would enable any set of men to merge
the important work at Ramsgate into the hands of a rail-
way company. He was at a loss to understand how such
a proposition could have been embodied in a bill of the na-
ture of that now before them.

Mr. BENTINCK supported the motion for referring the
bill to a select committee.

Sir J. JOHNSTON thought that some assistance ought
to
be given by the Government to the small tidal harbours
ofalhitby, Scarborough, and Bridlington if the recommen-
d fewo
a harbourt.Vonof Harbour of Refuge Commissioners to construct
FileyfrewfuorgdesaftromMr.
waKsEnNopt tAoLbLe, carried out.
After a
Sir M. PETO
said be thought the house would
have adopted a much wiser course had they
gone at one, into
clauses which could havegbevarious objections to several
committee on the bill in
preference to discussing
in its regular order. Variousen disposed of with the flause
with respect to the effect the fears had been expressed
carefully
would have upon Rams-
gate harbirar. He had
looked at the clause, and
sletest alarm. Such a
found nothing in it to cause the slightest
takenb before, and
moreered Folkestone
course as that now proposed had
with great success. Ho very well remembered
before it was sold to the corporation, andrna
alive place he had never seen, except Dover 0
aatit the present
time. (Laughter.) Now it was made atl
and a large sum of money had been expended 4opttoritt,
Lowestoft was another instance of the same success. Ho I
had seen that harbour so bad that a fishing lugger got in
with difficulty at low water; but now since it had been dis-
posed of to the corporation, and in consequence of the im-
provements that had been made there, vessels
now of 200 tons could get in at low water,
and he himself had seen upwards of 900 vessels
riding safely in the harbour, and all this had been
done with the aid of passing tolls. He was sure the Go-
vernment would take care that neither Ramsgate nor Dover
were handed over to any company without good guarantees
forits proper management. He thought the house were just
as able to deal with this question as five of their members
would be with the assistance of several gentlemen in big
wigs up stairs. He could not consent to refer the bill
to a select committee.

Mr. NICOL saw no reason for referring thebill to a select
committee.

Mr. M. GIBSON said there were not so many alterations
in the bill as had been supposed, particularly with regard
to passing tolls, which would be abolished from the Ist of
January next year; as originally proposed with regard to the
dues levied by charitable corporations,they would be allowed
to continue for 10 years. If the bill were referred to a select
committee, it would boa practical defeat of the bill, and be
must therefore object to the course proposed. He should
be prepared to agree to the amendment of the member for
Dover, to constitute a nem, board for the management of
pover Harbor.
Sir B, BRIDGES thcught that the people of Dovei would

be better pleased with the continuance of the present board
than with the body proposed to be created by the amend-
ment of the member for Dover. He should support the mo-
tion for referring the bill to a select committee.
Mr. LIDDELL approved of the scope and tendency of
the bill, and believed that the terms proposed were equitable.
After some further discussion,
Mr. THOMPSON withdrew his amendment, and the
house went into committee on this bill.

-----
Six clauses were agreed to, and at 4 o'clock the sitting
was suspended.
The house resumed at 6 o'clock.
THE CHANNEL FLEET.

Mr. DAWSON asked the Secretary to the Admiralty
whether it was intended that the Channel fleet should enter
Lough Foyle in their cruise of observation along the north-
ern coast of Ireland; and whether, consistently with the
convenience of the service, such visit, which would be
esteemed most gratifying, and was desired by the citizens of
Londonderry, could be accomplished ?
Lord C. PAGET was afraid that he could not give the
hon. gentleman any assurance that the Channel squadron
would visit Londonderry and Lough Foyle, but it was very
gratifying to the Admiralty to find that the inhabitants were
anxious for the presence of the fleet, for he regretted to say
the inhabitants of other districts had remonstrated against
having the fleet sent to them, a fact which was not, in his
opinion, at all to their credit.
A LIVERPOOL SLAVER.

Mr. PEASE asked the President of the Board of Trade if
it was true that the United States steamer Saratoga had
captured, near the Congo River, the ship Nightingale
of Liverpool; whether the ship had 960 slaves on board,
and was ready to carry 1,600 slaves ; and, provided such
were the facts, asked when the ship last cleared from
Liverpool, and for what port ; what was the nature of her
cargo; and whether her owners resided in Liverpool, and
were amenable to the law ?

Mr. M. GIBSON had made inquiries of the Customs
authorities at Liverpool, and ho found that the ship Night-
ingale had cleared out from that port on the 24th Nov.,
1860, for St. Thomas. He was informed that she was a
United States ship, and was bound to St. Thomas and the
West Coast of Africa; but neither the Admiralty nor the
Foreign-office had received any official account of her cap-
ture.