Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

cations was about 1,540,000l. Of
this sum a portion had been re-
turned, leaving the sum authorized
by the Government, and borrowed
under the Act, at 1,491,000l.
About 9000l. were thus left of the
by Parliament.
sum sanctioned
Of the amount sanctioned, the
sum already issued was 548,000l.
This left yet to be issued, as a
fund for the employment of labour
for the next four years, the sum of
952,000l. To this latter sum he
now proposed to add a further ad-
vance of 300,000l., making the
whole sum to be available for the
future employment of labour under
the Land Improvement Act,
1,252,000l. He also proposed to
make some further advances for the
purpose of arterial drainage. The
sum which he thought could be ad-
vantageously expended in this way
during the present year was about
270,000l. It would be recollected
that, by virtue of an Act passed last
year, he was empowered to reissue
100,000l. of the 300,000l. repaid
of advances already made. With
this sum in hand, reissuable under
the Act alluded to, he would only
now ask the Committee to advance
200,000l. of the 270,000l. which
might be advantageously expended
in this way.
To sum up, there-
fore, his proposal was to make a
further advance of 300,000l. under
the Land Improvement Act, and
of 200,000l. for the further prose-
cution of the system of arterial
drainage. During the course of
his speech the right honourable
Gentleman, in order to impress
the Committee with the desirable-
ness of what he now proposed,
read copious extracts from com-
munications transmitted from Ire-
land to the Government, in proof
of the advantages which had been
conferred upon proprietors, tenants,

and labourers by the money al-
ready expended on arterial drain-
age, and under the Land Improve-
The right honourable
ment Act.
Gentleman concluded by proposing
resolutions in conformity with the
proposition submitted by him.

After a desultory discussion, in which several Irish Members took part, and some unfavourable reflections were made upon the inefficient policy of the Government towards Ireland, the vote agreed to.

was

A rather important motion on the subject of emigration, as a means of relief for the destitution of Ireland, was made by Mr. Monsell, one of the Members for the county of Limerick, on the 15th of May. After citing a great many statistical facts in proof of the superabundant population relatively to the soil even before the recent famine, Mr. Monsell pointed out the advantages that would result to some of our settlements abroad, especially those of Canada and South Africa, if the stream of Irish emigration could be directed to those quarters. to the means, he would suggest, that greater facilities first, should be given to the Boards of Guardians for borrowing money for the purposes of emigration, by allowing them to raise loans upon the security of the rates, to be repaid by instalments in the course The landed of five or seven years. proprietors should also be allowed to borrow money for the same purpose on their settled property for a similar period of five or seven years.

As

were

He believed if these two powers for raising money given, they would be extensively acted upon, and that the measure would work exceedingly well. He admitted that the million or million

and a half of money which it was desirable to raise should come entirely from Irish resources.

He moved an humble address to the Queen for any despatches relative to North American and Australian emigration, in continuation of despatches presented to the House in August, 1848, and February, 1849.

Mr. John O'Connell opposed Mr. Monsell's motion, and moved an amendment upon it to the effect that emigration is at the best a partial, tardy, and most expensive remedy; and that urgent necessity exists for additional state contributions to preserve whole counties from depopulation.

Sir G. Grey admitted that Mr. Monsell's suggestions were entitled to the greatest respect. He had, however, underrated the importance and the value of the natural emigration now proceeding from the districts of Ireland which suffered from congestion of the labouring population. If any means could be found to promote his views without interfering with that spontaneous flow, the Government had every disposition to as

sist. The principle of giving the Board of Guardians power to raise money on the security of the rates was not new: it had not been practically used, however; and if in the progress of the amended Poor Law any such plan could be embodied in a clause, the Government would give him every facility.

The proposal to give to landed proprietors, who were already enabled to borrow money for the improvement of their estates, powers also to assist in emigration was liable to objection. The same permanent security offered by works could not be given for the loan, while the effect would be to divert money now employed in drainage and reclamation, to the present benefit of upwards of 20,000 people. As Mr. Monsell had not submitted any formal motion, it would be time enough to express an opinion on his distinct propositions when embodied in a Bill or a clause of some Bill.

The House divided on Mr. J. O'Connell's amendment, which was negatived by 45 to 10, and Mr. Monsell's motion was carried.

CHAPTER V.

Affairs of the Colonies-Increased attention paid by the British Public to Colonial Interests-Causes of this Change-Mr. Baillie moves on the 20th of February for a Select Committee to investigate certain Transactions in British Guiana and Ceylon-Speeches of Mr. Baillie, Mr. Hume, Mr. Ricardo, Mr. Adderley, Sir W. Molesworth, Sir Robert Peel, Lord John Russell, Mr. Disraeli, and other MembersThe House determines in favour of the Motion without a Division, and a Committee is appointed-A protracted inquiry takes place, and the Committee is unable to report before the end of the SessionMr. Hume, at a late period of the Session, moves a Resolution founded on the Evidence taken respecting the Administration of British Guiana -Mr. H. Baillie seconds the Motion, which is opposed by Mr. Hawes, and negatived on a Division by 94 to 17-Affairs of CanadaAlarming Intelligence from Montreal-Insurrection and Destruction of the Parliament House by the Populace-Occasion of this Outbreak-Lord Stanley questions Lord Grey on the subject in the House of Lords-On the same Day a brief Discussion takes place in the House of Commons, on which Mr. Herries, Mr. Roebuck, Mr. W. E. Gladstone, and Mr. Hawes, take part-The Transactions in Canada afterwards become the occasion of formal Debates in both Houses— Mr. Gladstone enters at large into the subject on going into Committee of Supply on the 14th of June-He is answered by Lord John Russell-Mr. Herries moves an Address praying the Crown to withhold its Assent to the Indemnity Bill-Speeches of Mr. Roebuck, Mr. C. Bruce, Dr. Nicholl, the Attorney-General, Mr. Hume, Sir W. Molesworth, the Marquis of Granby, Mr. Labouchere, Sir R. Peel, Mr. Disraeli, Mr. Sidney Herbert, and Lord John Russell-Mr. Herries' Amendment is negatived by 291 to 150-Lord Brougham brings forward the subject in the House of Lords by moving Resolutions on the 19thHis Speech on that Occasion-Earl Grey, Lord Campbell, the Marquis of Lansdowne, and Lord St. Germans oppose the Resolutions, which are supported by Lord Lyndhurst and Lord Stanley-They are negatived on a Division by a Majority of 3-General Discussions on Colonial Policy--Mr. Roebuck moves for a Select Committee, and enters into a comprehensive Review of the British Colonial System, propounding his own Views as to the Changes required-He is answered by Mr. Hawes, who objects to the proposed Committee-Speeches of Lord John Russell, Mr. Gladstone, and other Members-Mr. Roebuck's Motion is rejected by 116 to 73-Another important Debate takes place on the 26th of June, upon Sir W. Molesworth's Motion in

favour of a Royal Commission with reference to Colonial Policy—Able and lucid Statement of the honourable Baronet-He enters into a detailed account of the Abuses, Discontent, and extravagant Expenditure engendered by our Colonial Policy-Mr. Hume seconds the Motion, which is opposed by Mr. Hawes, and after some Discussion is negatived by a Majority of 74-Vancouver's Island-The Earl of Lincoln moves an Address to the Crown expressing disapproval of the Grant of this Territory to the Hudson's Bay Company-The Motion is seconded by Mr. Hume, but falls to the ground, the House being counted out-The Question is discussed in the House of Lords on a subsequent Day-Earl Grey explains the reasons of the Grant-Observations of Lord Monteagle, the Earls of Selkirk and Aberdeen, the Duke of Buccleuch, and Lord Brougham.

A

N increased interest in the government and prosperity of the British Colonies may be noticed as one of the most healthful symptoms in the progress of public opinion during the last two or three years. The state of ignorance and indifference in which Englishmen have been too long contented to remain, with respect to the numerous and valuable dependencies of the empire, has produced that mismanagement which is the natural consequence of neglect, and has in many ways retarded the development and prosperity of these settlements. But a new impulse has recently been given to the public mind, and the curiosity which had been too long dormant has now been actively awakened in this direction. Concurrently with the desire to investigate the resources and capabilities of our transmarine possessions, there has arisen also a keen interest in their political administration, and a jealous regard to the abuses and defects which have too long been overlooked in the constitution of societies so far removed from the centre of government.

Various causes may be assigned for this decided change in public opinion. Perhaps those which have had the most prominent ope

ration are the demand for retrenchment in the public finances. and the extraordinary stimulus given to emigration. The costliness of our colonial system as hitherto carried on could hardly fail to strike the minds of those who were seeking for means of reducing the expenditure of the State, and the movement which within the last few years has drafted so large a portion of our population to the colonies naturally directed attention to the system of government, the laws, and institutions, under which the expatriated settlers were to live. Information and discussion were thus attracted to colonial subjects; and the Legislature, as in other cases, was not slow to reflect the prevailing tendency of the public mind. Thus it happened that in the session with which we are now concerned several important debates on questions connected with our various colonies brought their affairs almost for the first time within the range of popular observation. The first of these occasions which we shall have to notice was an investigation originated by Mr. H. J. Baillie, the Member for Invernessshire, into some transactions affecting the governments of Guiana and Ceylon

which had afforded matter of bitter complaint and dissatisfaction in those communities. On the 20th of February, Mr. Baillie brought the case of these two colonies before the House of Commons. The circumstances out of which the alleged grievances arose will be found clearly summed up in his speech.

The honourable Member began his speech by appealing to the general feeling which pervaded the public mind that the Colonial Office was incapable of discharging its functions with advantage, and he observed that there had been a succession of Colonial Ministers, not deficient in talents, who had failed in inspiring the colonies with confidence, or in giving satisfaction at home; and the experience of last session had shown that the present Colonial Secretary had not been more fortunate than his predecessors. He (Mr. Baillie) charged the Colonial Office with tyranny and oppression, and with a wasteful expenditure of the colonial resources; and he insisted that the time had arrived when the colonies were competent to control their own expenditure, and to manage their own affairs. He then entered into an exposition of the systems of local government prevailing in the Crown colonies, and of the specific grievances of which they complained. He detailed the fiscal eccentricities of Lord Torrington in Ceylon, to which he attributed the late rebellion in that island; and after condemning in strong terms the severities, some of which were illegal, exercised towards the rebels, he produced a marked sensation in the House by the statement, that a Bill of indemnity was passed in his own

In

Council only by the casting vote of Lord Torrington himself. British Guiana the withering influence of the Colonial Office had produced fruits of misgovernment not less deplorable; its mission was here, indeed, accomplished; the ruin of the planters was complete. The honourable Member showed how unjust was the resistance offered by the Colonial Office to the financial reforms proposed by the Combined Court of Guiana; and concluded by asking the House how the colonies could place confidence in a Minister who stood convicted of a deliberate attempt to deceive the House of Lords, and who perverted truth for party purposes.

Mr. Hume, who seconded the motion, wished the House to understand that it was the system under which our colonies were placed, and therefore it was the fault of Parliament itself, which had produced the disastrous results so well described by Mr. Baillie. He dilated upon the harsh treatment which Ceylon had experienced, upon the insult which Demerara had received at the hands of the Colonial Secretary in the matter of the civil list, and he claimed for the colonies that self-government which was denied only on account of the patronage which such a change would wrest from the Colonial Office.

Mr. J. L. Ricardo moved an amendment, the object of which was to extend the inquiry of the Committee to the means of enabling these colonies to meet the difficulties of the transition from a system of protection to that of competition with the produce of foreign states. The honourable Member thought it would have

« EdellinenJatka »