Page images
[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

had the authority of the hon. Member for within the provisions of the twenty-eighth Sec-
Southwark (Mr. Locke) for a proposition tion of this Act,”
which every one would admit, that the brought up, and read 1°.
owner of lands had no right to compensa-
tion for a view which might be interfered Mr. LOCKE thought that the hon.
with. The Middle and Ioner Temple were , Member's clause was a matter of very
in possession of the land up to a certain small dimensions. The public were not
point, and the land beyond that was

to be admitted to these bits of land ex-
vested in the Conservators of the Thames. cept under such restrictions as the Inner
The ratepayers' fund was to pay the con- and Middle Temple should impose, sub.
servators for that land, and thus theject to the consent of the Crown ; but it
Thames Embankment fund became the was not likely that the Crown would in.
owner of it by purchase. Being so, it had terfere at all in the business. The hon.
a right to do with the land what it pleased. Gentleman was told by the gardener of
They had been told that the extraordinary the Inner Temple that he could not adnit
concession proposed by the Bill was made persons without orders. It should be borne
becauso the Temples, being powerful, in mind, however, that these orders were
might by opposing the Bill have prevented given by the Benchers to all persons who
it from passing ; but the House would not chose to ask for them, and on summer
accept such a statement as a reason for evenings the whole public were let into
doing what was wrong. The concession the garden without any orders whatever.
was also justified on the ground that the The Temples maintained the gardens at
Temples would keep the reclaimed portions their own expense, and he had never before
of land as gardens for the public ; but he heard any complaint made as to restric-
found that the Bill stated that the re- tions on the entrance of the public.
claimed land not required for the roadway

MR. HARVEY LEWIS hoped that was for ever hercafier to be the exclusive the whole of the Temple Gardens were property of the luner and Middle Temples. to be included in the clause. They were As it had been said that these Societies about to have valuable river front, and always let the public into their gardens, he he thought it would be a great improvewent on Sunday, between the morning and ment to the Bill if Parliament were to afternoon services, when the sun was shin. impose such regulations on the Benching, to the Inner Temple garden. This ers as would prevent their shutting up garden was placed in the midst of a densely- the gardens from the public. populated neighbourhood, living in the MR. MONTAGUE SMITH Aaid, it equalid misery of courts and alleys, where was a mistake to suppose that a valuable almost every chamber contained a separate

river front was about to be given to the family; and one would suppose that under Benchers of the Temple. In fact their these circumstances the children of the river front was being taken away from families in the neighbourhood would have them. They were merely to receive some been found recreating themselves in the strips of land for which they could not garden ; but only about six persons were obtain one farthing of rent. there. The gardener informed himn that dens had always been kept in order at no one was allowed to come into the gar- the expense of the Societies, and cerden without a Bencher's order. This tainly were considered to contribute to proved that the words in the Bill were not the adornment of London. When it was mere words of form, but were words of said that they were the private property reality. The hon. Member then moved of the Benchers, the fact was that nothe addition of the clause.

body in London used the gardens so little

as the Benchers, who were nearly always Clause

absent. But the Benchers were not so “ Provided, That in case the Trustees of the fastidious as had been described ; they Society of the Inner Temple or the Trustees of

admitted on the Society of the Middle Temple shall not admit

summer evenings to the the public to use for the purpose of recreation gardens those dirty children from poor the land by this Act vested in such Trustees, sub- neighbourhoods of whom the hon. and ject to such restrictions and regulations as the learned Member (Mr. Ayrton) spoke so said Societies respectively, with the sanction of contemptuously the other night as being the Crown, may appoint in that behalf, then likely to play about on the embankment the said land vested in such Trustees respectively shall be and thenceforth continue vested

between Whitehall and Westminster in the Metropolitan Board of Works, as land Bridge, to the annoyance of the neigh

The gar

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

bourhood. Mr. Thackeray, who had wit- recent occasion by the hon. Member for nessed these gardens the other night filled Lancaster (Mr. Garnett) for an explanawith some 400 poor children, had expressed tion with regard to a Resolution passed in his pleasure to him (Mr. M. Smith); and the Select Committee relative to the prosaid it did his heart good to see it. There duction of a certain correspondence, I felt was no churlishness on the part of the it my duty to make a statement. I conBenchers respecting admission ; then why, sidered it due to the Committee, to myself, he asked, should they be interfered with and to an officer of the House who might in their rights of ownership which they have been deemed to have been wanting in had exercised now for centuries? There his duty, to state as well as I could what were no private gardens in London to were the facts of the case. When I had which the public were so freely admitted finished my statement, the First Commisas the Temple Gardens, and the attempt sioner (Mr. Cowper) got up in his place to interfere with the Societies in the man- and declared that I had made a false accuagement of their own property was most sation, and had stated that which was not ungracious.

founded in fact. The right hon. GentleMR. COWPER, while sympathizing man at the same time stated that he did with the hon. Member for the Tower llam- not mean to say anything uncivil. With lets in his desire to see the Temple Gar- respect to that observation, I do not think dens used as freely as possible by the pub- it is necessary that I should say a single lic, thought the clause proposoù would not word; but still the words that were effect the object which the hon. Gentleman uttered remain, and is due to the Comhad in view. The public were at present mittee, to myself, and to my constituents, admitted to the gardens under certain re- that I should clear the matter op, which strictions, which were of by no means an I can do in a few moments. When the illiberal tendency. But now the learned Resolution in question was carried in the Member proposed that the Crown should Committee-carried in the words that aphave the power of overriding the decision pear on the fly-leaf issued by order of the of the Benchers in that respect. That Speaker—and when the public were comwas a proposal which he did not think it ing into the room, I went from my place would be worth while to embody in the at the table, which was at some distance Bill. He might add that he did not from the Chairman, and said to him, concur with those who thought that the

“Now that we have carried this ResoBenchers had been exacting in their de- lution, I hope no time will be lost in mands in connection with the proposed em- bringing out the correspondence.” The bankment, inasmuch as it would interfere right hon. Gentleman turned round to prejudicially with the existing river front- me and replied, “The Resolution exage of their property.

tends to Hungerford market and other

matters not now before the Committee." Question put, “ That the Clause be read I then said, “I have heard enough of a second time.”

Hungerford market, and, as far as I am The Committee divided : - Ayes 18; concerned, all I want is the correspondence Noes 139 : Majority 121.

relating to the Crown property.” The Sir JOHN SHELLEY : Sir, I trust right hon. Gentleman thereupon said, the Committee will permit me to make a “Oh, very well, we will alter the Resofew observations on a personal matter.

lution." I objected to that, saying, When the proceedings in Committee of the Neither you por I can make any alteraHouse had once commenced, I thought tion without the consent of the Committee, it right to refrain from intruding myself and I object to any interference with the on the attention of the Committee, because Resolution until the question has been I desired that certain irritable feelings regularly put to the Committee." I then which had been excited in the previous went back to my place, and as far as I was discussions should be allowed to cool concerned that was all the conversation that down. But there are some things which took place. I told the right hon. Baronet a man cannot allow to be said, without the Member for Petersfield (Sir William endeavouring to set himself right with his Jolliffe), who sat next to me, and other friends and society. It is a common say- members of the Committee what had oeing, that an Englishman's word is as good curred. As to what passed between the

his bond. The Committee will recol- Chairman and the noble Lord the Memlect, that upon being called upon on a ber for Hastings (Lord H. Vane) I know

Mr. Montague Smith

It was

nothing; but the noble Lord the Member thought it not becoming of him to take adfor Huntingdonshire (Lord Robert Mon- vantage of the alteration in the Resolution tagu) has told me that he well remembers in my handwriting to charge me with the my protesting against any alteration being responsibility attached to that alteration, made in the Resolution. I can only say because unsuspiciously I made it with my I believed, as I think every member of own hand, instead of returning the Resothe Committee believed, that the Resolu- lution to him for the purpose of having it tion as carried in the Committee would made. Had I handed it back to him, and appear on the Minutes of Proceedings; but, said, “You alter it,” we should have heard as I stated in the House a few evenings nothing more about it; but because I ago, the Resolution as carried by me in adopted the course of altering it with my the Conimittee did not appear in the Mi- owo pen, I put myself in the hon. Member's nutes, and the copy presented to me by hands. When the matter was brought the right hon. Gentleman was not in under the notice of the llouse, I had no the words in which I proposed my Reso- better means of setting myself right than lution. I never did consent to the altera- by appealing to the Members of the Comtion made in it by the Chairman; and I mittee ; and such of them as were present think it most important it should be confirmed by statement-[“No, no !” and clearly understood that the Chairman of a Hear, hear !"]—that the alteration was Committee may not take away a Resolu- made with the consent of the Committee. tion in his pocket, and, without bringing (Sir John SHELLEY: Not with my consent.] it back again, allow the Committee to It was made, as I believe, with the unanidisperse; and then, when a member of the mous consent of the Committee. Committeee makes an objection to the because I understood it to be the unaniResolution as carried not appearing in mous wish of the Committee that the the proceedings, stand up, and because amendment should be made, I made it. he had some conversation with individual The matter itself was of no mportance. members of the Committee, charge the It occurred in a great hurry ; and possi. member who complains with not telling bly there may have been some misunder.. the truth. Emphatically, in the face of standing about it, and that the hon. Bathis House, I say I did not consent to the ronet did not hear me. But I thought it alteration. I believed the Resolution most unfair and most unworthy that any would appear in the Minutes as I had Member of this House should have taken proposed it; and when I told the House advantage of such an occurrence to make that the other night, I told the truth, the a charge against me which, if true, would whole truth, and nothing but the truth. have implied that I was unfit for the If the right hon. Gentleman is not satis- society of gentlemen. I was very angry, fied, I think the proper course for him and I feel I am getting angry again ; would be to call the Committee clerk to so I will say no more. The hon. Genthe bar. Before I made my statement I tleman has taken a liberty with me which conversed with the clerk on the subject; I beg he will not take again ; for I cannot and if called to the bar, he will confirm promise that on a future occasion I would every word I said. I do not ask the right bear it so quietly. hon. Gentleman to say anything further; MR. DARBY GRIFFITH rose to a but I ask the House to believe that I did point of order, with reference to a matter not state what was untrue.

which had occurred that evening. He had MR. COWPER: I suppose one word is always understood that a proposition made required from me, and I wish to explain in Committee required no seconder, and that when I stated the accusation of the therefore no second voice when the queshon. Baronet the Member for Westminster tion was put; and he was therefore sur(Sir J. Shelley) was not a true accusation, prised to find that a single voice was not but was founded altogether on a mistake, sufficient to divide the House. If that what I understood him to charge me with were so, it would place hon. Members was, that I had altered his Resolution sur- under as great a disadvantage in Commitreptitiously, and on my own account, and not tee as they laboured under in the House ; in my capacity as Chairman of the Select and he therefore asked for an explanaCommittee, endeavouring to give effect to tion. what I believed to be the unanimous wislı of THE CHAIRMAN: The question was the Committee. I said I thought it not fair, as to whether a certain clause should stand - I believe I used stronger language-1 part of the Bill. The hon. Gentleman said “ No." I listened to hear whether it then stood. Ile thought they ought he was supported by any other voice ; but to be careful as to the appropriation I failed to find any negative but that of of the money they voted.

There was the lion. Gentleman. I repeated the ques. a difference of opinion as to certain of tion a second and a third time with the these works, and it was considered more same result ; and although it is true that desirable to carry out some of them a second voice is not necessary in Com- than others. The question was, whicmittee, a second teller is necessary in case ther they had then the means of giving of a division. Therefore I thought it un effect to their opinion upon the details necessary to trouble the Committee with of the Bill — wliether they could reduce a division when there did not appear to be the expenditure upon certain fortifications, a second teller.

wliether at Portsdown or at Plymouth, MR. DARBY GRIFFITII said, he was If they did so, according to the ordinary glad to find the Chairman concurred with rules of appropriation they would effect him that it was a privilege in Committee nothing by reducing this Vote, because it that a single Member might raise the seemed to him that the Government could question on a clause by calling for a divi. use the money promiscuously for any pursion. If that was so, though no second pose mentioned in the schedule of the Bill. voice was heard, tellers might subsequently if the House were to express its opinion appear. In his case, there were, in point against any particular part of the Bill, of fact, tellers, and one hon. Member he took it for granted that the Governraised his voice with hinn He did so ra- ment would take care not to proceed with ther feebly, no doubt, but perhaps his lungs that portion of the works, but there was were delicate.

nothing in the form of the Bill to prevent House resumed.

their doing so in spite of a decision of Bill reported; as amended, to be con

the llouse. They were very much in sidered To-morrow.

danger of passing Bills like this year after year ; and if the House were to

rest merely upon an honourable underFORTIFICATIONS (PROVISION FOR

standing with the Government, without EXPENSES) BILL-[Bill No. 168.]

a very strict appropriation clause, there COMMITTEE.

was no saying to what extent the power Order for Committee read.

might be used by the Government. Of Motion made, and Question proposed, the £2,000,000 granted two years ago " That Mr. Speaker do now leave the certain sums had been set down in the Chair.”

schedule for particular stations, and they Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE (who been spent upon these stations, and lie

had now returns of how the money had had given notice on going into Committee found that at several of these places there to move

had been considerable excess. He kney “ That it be an Instruction to the Committee, that £350,000 of that was to be speat to set forth in detail in the Schedule to the Bill, upon works already sanctioned by Parliaunder the head of each station, the name of the works in each district to which it is proposed to ment, and pot set forth in detail in the apply the sums to be grauted by the Bill; the schedule ; but he found that at Portstotal estimated cost of each work, and the amount mouth more than £120,000 would have proposed to be applied to it beforo August 1, been spent in excess by the end of this 1863,")

mouth beyond what was sanctioned by the said, that he forbore from moving his schedule ; while at Plymouth, £68,500 ; Amendment, because he had been informed at Portland, £112,000; on the Medway, by the Speaker that he should not be in £40,000 ; and at Dover, £66,000, more order in doing so. At the same time, he than was sanctioned by the schedule, had was anxious to make an appeal to the Go- been expended ; and the expenditure at vernment to make some alteration before all the military stations had been £440,000 hon. Members discussed the Bill in Com- more than was granted by Parliament. mittee. He wished to know how the sum Deducting even the £350,000, there was of £1,200,000, lately granted, was to an excess of expenditure of £90,000. be expended, and to have a detailed ac- How had that money been obtained? count appended to the schedule. By Why, £150,000 had been obtained for a this means they might discuss the Bill central arsenal, which had not yet been better than in the general form in which fixed upon, and that money had been

The Chairman

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

spent on works at Portsmouth and else-, tory, and he should be ready to adopt the where. What he asked was, that the course he proposed if he saw how it could House should not go into this matter blind- be reconciled with the ordinary practice of fold. He did not wish to express any the House with regard to appropriations. particular opinion upon the fortifications He was quite ready to follow the precedent mentioned in the Bill; but it was important of a Committee of Supply. The course that they should keep the matter in their proposed by the hon. Baronet was someown hands, so that they might be assured what stricter. What the hon. Baronet that the money would be applied to the proposed was to insert crery item, whereas purposes for which it was voted. He pro- | the Appropriation Act only adopted tho posed, when they came to the appropria- total of a Vote. What the Appropriation tion clause in the Bill, to move a proviso, Act required was that the money spent limiting the power of the Government with should not exceed the total of the vote ; regard to the application of these monies. but within that Vote the separate items, If the Government would allow them to although, no doubt, the Department obgo into Committee pro forma, they might served each as strictly as it could, were then discuss the matter, and decide which not enforced on it by law. But in the works should be sanctioned and which not. making of contracts—for instance, when If not, he must at a future time propose an Estimate for a barrack was contained the Amendment which stood in his name, in the Army Estimates, the whole amount which would render necessary the altera- being £80,000, and the annual Vote being tion of the schedule ; and if there was any £20,000—the invariable practice was to probability of his Motion being carried, the make the contract for the entire sumi. Government would see that time might be That practice was followed with reference saved by adopting his proposal. He felt to these forts. If, for example, the whole sure the Government would treat the amount allotted to Portsmouth was stated House with perfect fairness, for in the in the Bill at a certain sum, and the conwhole of this business the Government had tractor for one part of the works becamo acted in that spirit: they had always bankrupt, or an interruption occurred to freely shown what they had spent, and the works from soine other cause, it miglit what they proposed to spend. The plan be convenient and economical to the public had been originally sanctioned by a willing that the sum intended for that work should majority of the House, and he thought the bo spent on some other work within the Government had no course but to perse same schedule. If he were to adopt the vere in the plan. All he desired was to proposition of the hon. Baronet, and make put the matter in such a shape that they the Return a part of the Bill, it would might deal with it practically.' He should become an appropriation of every item in content himself, on the present occasion, that Return, which would be much stricter with earnestly asking the Government than the practice ever followed in Comto adopt the course which he had sug- mittee of Supply. He should be quito gested.

ready to enter into an engagement with SIR GEORGE LEWIS admitted that the House that he would not, in the casc of there was a difference of opinion as to any one fort, exceed the total amount stated some of these forts ; and the Government in the Return which was upon the table ; had found it their duty to object to many and if that could be engrafted upon tho of the opinions that had been expressed. schedule, he should make no objection ; but But on one subject he thought they were all beyond that he was afraid that it would be agreed—that whatever might be the deci- difficult to go without unnecessarily tying sion of the House, it should be founded on the hands of the War Department. Ho clear data ; that there should be no mis- should be quite willing to make any arunderstanding as to the proposals of the rangement which would carry into effect Government ; and that when once there the general principle that the Government was a decision of the House, embodied in should not take any advantage of the an Act of Parliament, it should be strictly House, or enter beyond their expectations observed by the executive Government. and intentions upon any of the works inHe was therefore quite prepared to take cluded in the list. any course which sbould correspond with Mr. LINDSAY said, that when the that principle. The hon. Baronet had noble Viscount at the head of the Governstated withi fairness that the information ment brought this subject before the House the Government had given was satisfac- two years ago, he alleged as the reason VOL. CLXVII. (THIRD SERIES.)

3 D

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »