Promise made by Board of Trade. Motion made, and Question proposed"That a Select Committee be appointed to ascertain the condition, revenue, and expenditure of the Harbours of Ramsgate and the Cinque Ports." British ships when they were cleared from | manner whatever do I mean to cast the port, and on foreign vessels whenever they slightest imputation on the trustees; they entered an English harbour. This ought are all men of high integrity and honour, to continue so long as the harbour of well-known and respected; their offence is Ramsgate wanted repair, which the trus- not one of commission but of omission; tees took care should always be the case. they all reside in London, go to Ramsgate Not only is this toll most impolitic towards once a year to eat a good dinner, and then foreigners by making them avoid our har- return to town, all the business of the harbours and seek refuge in the ports of bour is left in the power of engineers and France or Belgium, but it is most gene- superintendents, who seem to act as they rally felt by the shipping interest, who, please without supervision or control, and according to the Report laid before the are constantly pulling down and building Board of Trade, dated July, 1853, are up, purchasing enormous masses of stone taxed by the passing tolls to the amount not required, and expending vast sums of of 500,000l., which large sum is paid by money to little or no purpose. Under this that interest without any remuneration or view of the case, convinced as I am that a advantage whatever; now, in the Trinity public benefit will accrue, I now make my House duties they have the advantage of Motion, unless the Board of Trade assure lights, buoys, and beacons for their ship- me they will remedy this crying evil, which ping. It appears that in 1822 a Commit- cannot long continue in these days. tee of this House considered the question, and reported that 1,500,000l. had been expended on Ramsgate Harbour up to that period, and since 1822, it now appears that nearly 500,000l. more have been laid out, making up the enormous sum of 2,000,000l. on that harbour, which evidence before my Committee stated might have been done for less than half that sum-not to exceed 700,000%.! What an immense waste of money drawn out of the shipping interest! Now, it appears that the receipts of the trustees of Ramsgate Harbour amount, from tolls levied on ships to about 25,000l. yearly, that their income from their capital in the funds, houses, and land near the harbour amounts to about 6,000l., making, together, 31,000l. a year; now, it appears from the report of General Williams, of the engineers, that the sum of 7,000l. a year is amply sufficient for all the purposes of keeping up and repairing Ramsgate Harbour. On these grounds, therefore, it was recommended by the Committee of which I was chairman, that the whole amount received from passing tolls should be done away, that the trustees should have the power to levy 6d. per ton on ships entering the harbour for refuge, which toll would make up, with the 6,000l. a year, the income of the trustees, a sum of upwards of 7,000l. a year, so that the tolls could be abolished on passing vessels without any deficiency of means in the trustees to repair the harbour of Ramsgate. On these grounds it is, Sir, that I call on Her Majesty's Government to take such measures as may be necessary for bringing about this beneficial result. Before I sit down, let me say that in no MR. BOUVERIE said, that the hon. Gentleman had confined his observations solely to Ramsgate Harbour, and had left the Cinque Ports altogether out of view. He was sorry he could not assent to the Motion of the hon. Member for a Select Committee. The object of any Select Committee must be to inquire into facts, whereas with regard to Ramsgate, inquiry was altogether exhausted. There had been already four several inquiries into the state of that harbour, and his opinion was that they should now be prepared to deal with it. The harbour was maintained mainly by a toll levied upon the shipping passing up and down the Channel. These tolls produced a very large revenue, but in 1850 a reduction of them was made to the amount of 4,600l. a year, and in 1852 they were further reduced to the amount of 5,000l. per annum. The tolls now levied were 63 per cent less than the rate which the trustees of Ramsgate Harbour were allowed to levy. The trustees, therefore, deserved credit for the endeavours they had made to lighten the burden on the shipping passing Ramsgate harbour. This Motion respecting Ramsgate harbour practically involved the question as to the propriety of passing tolls, and they could only be justified on the principle that the bulk of the passing shipping on which the tolls were levied derived some benefit from the harbour or the lights. To a certain atrocious exaction of passing tolls. The extent, he thought it had been clearly only principle on which passing tolls could made out that ships passing Ramsgate did be justified was, that something was ofderive benefit up to a certain amount of fered for the money in the way of a har. tonnage. A very large number of ships bour of refuge; but neither Ramsgate nor took refuge in the harbour from the Downs, Dovor offered a secure protection to shipand upon those ships no more than the ping at all times. Dovor was only a mousepassing tolls were levied. The Downs, trap; it was a dangerous place for a loaded which constituted the greatest anchorage vessel to attempt to enter, and, when in, in this kingdom, were thus relieved of the no one knew when it might come out presence of many ships with which they again. When the navigation laws were would be otherwise encumbered, and he repealed, it was understood that such local thought it would not be desirable to take charges as these were to be abolished as away from the harbour all sources of fur- speedily as possible, and he hoped no time ther existence. If the tolls were taken would be lost in granting this relief to the away the harbour must be maintained from shipping interest. The hon. Gentleman other sources. In short, Ramsgate har- had not given any good reason for refusing bour must have a revenue, and that was this inquiry, and he should therefore supjust the difficulty. At present the harbour port the Motion of his hon. Friend the was not in an efficient state. Works abso- Member for Rye, lutely necessary were in the course of construction, and others were required, and thus a considerable extraordinary expenditure was occasioned. When they had put the harbour in an efficient state, there would arise the question of how it was to be maintained. By dint of other sources of revenue, by the aid of the property the trust already possessed, and by the continuance of the passing tolls for a limited period, the necessary funds might be provided, and at the same time relief be given to ships from the pressure of the tolls; but the best way would be to alter the management of the harbour, which was now in the hands of independent trustees -gentlemen of high character-mostly men of business in London, but who, from their other avocations, were unable to give all that attention to the concern which it required. He was prepared, therefore, to propose, and hoped in the course of the present year to be able to lay on the table of the House, a Bill to provide for taking away from the present trustees the management and direction of the harbour, and vesting it in another authority under the control of the Board of Trade. When that was done, the Board of Trade would be able to ascertain how far the extraordinary expenditure of the harbour was likely to go, what the ordinary expenditure would be when the extraordinary had ceased, and then, he thought, they would be able to deal with the question of the passing toll in a satisfactory way. MR. JAMES MACGREGOR said, he should support the Motion. The steps proposed by the hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Board of Trade were not of sufficient scope to meet the question, which embraced not only Ramsgate, but the whole of the Cinque Ports. A reform in the administration of Dovor harbour was quite as much needed as in the administration of that of Ramsgate, for a large expenditure had been going on there for many years without the harbour being, comparatively speaking, much improved. The harbour of Sandwich had also a grievance, for it had been greatly injured by the works now going on at Dovor. He could not help thinking that a Report of a Committee on all the Cinque Ports would be of great use, and he should therefore support the Motion. MR. CARDWELL said, he thought it would be a great disappointment to the House to be told that they were still at the stage when inquiry was necessary in the matter of passing tolls. In the case of Ramsgate, that statement was too ridiculous, for inquiry had been exhausted. First, there was the Committee of 1850, then the inquiry by Mr. Walker, and afterwards other inquiries by Captain Vetch, Sir John Rennie, and lastly by Sir William Cubitt, who was sent down by himself in conjunction with the right hon. Baronet the Member for Carlisle, when First Lord of the Admiralty, and who reported that at the end of the present year it would be perSIR GEORGE PECHELL said, he was fectly safe to abandon the passing toll sorry that the hon. Gentleman the Vice altogether. In accordance with that RePresident of the Board of Trade had taken port, he had prepared a Bill for the abothe part of defending the enormous and lition of this passing toll at Ramsgate, MR. MACKINNON said, he would not protract the discussion any longer, as he had obtained his wishes-namely, an assurance from the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bouverie) that he would bring forward a measure to do away eventually with these passing tolls. He would withdraw his Motion, relying as he did on the promise-the positive promise-of his hon. Friend. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. HARDWARE, &c., MANUFACTURES BILL. but which was not introduced in deference | quiry was needed with respect to Ramsto the recommendation of the Commission- gate harbour. The trustees had not exers who had been appointed to inquire into ceeded their taxing powers-but the system the burdens upon shipping all round the of legislation had changed, and the neceskingdom, and who thought that all legis- sity for passing tolls was now neither oblation ought to be deferred until they had vious nor expedient. presented their Reports, when a general and comprehensive measure could be laid before Parliament. Their Reports, both for England and Ireland, had now been presented, and the time was come, therefore, he thought, for legislation; and he trusted that his hon. Friend (Mr. Bouverie) would very speedily bring in a measure, not with regard merely to Ramsgate and the Cinque Ports, but having reference to the broad and general question of all these burdens. The question involved not only burdens on shipping, but also some of the most important questions of MR. HADFIELD said, he had to move treaty with foreign countries. He should for a Committee of the whole House to certainly unite with the hon. Gentleman consider the laws for securing the prothe Vice-President of the Board of Trade perty of manufacturers of iron, steel, cutin opposing the present partial, meagre,lery, edge tools, hardware, gold, silver and and unnecessary inquiry. Somebody had said that the Ramsgate harbour money was wasted, and wasted in hospitalities and in eating and drinking. But the trustees of that harbour were independent gentlemen who received nothing for the labour they performed, and when it was proposed to abolish the trust, the chairman and members of that trust waited upon him, and said that they had no object in the world except one, and that was that their trust should be taken from them and placed upon some satisfactory footing, and that there should be done for Ramsgate harbour that which would most contribute to the uses for which it was instituted. and silver plated, Britannia metal, German silver, copper and brass articles, and other metals, mother of pearl shell, tortoiseshell, bone, horn, ivory, leather, and wood, and also for securing the wages of the workmen engaged in such manufactures. His object was to introduce a Bill to extend the provisions of the 6 & 7 Vict., chap. 40, to the hardware and other manufactures of Sheffield, Birmingham, and Wolverhampton. The exclusion of those three towns from the operation of that Act had been productive of considerable inconvenience, which it was the desire of their inhabitants to have remedied. MR. BOUVERIE said, that the proMR. HUDSON said, he was obliged to visions of the 6 & 7 Vict.-at present the right hon. Gentleman for the way in applying to the woollen, linen, worsted, which he had dealt with this question, and cotton, flax, and silk manufactures of this he regretted he had not remained in office country-appeared to be of a very beneto carry out his liberal principles and mea- ficial character. They had reference to sures. He heard with regret the state-workmen who embezzled tools and other ment of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bouverie) that it was intended to continue passing tolls. He had hoped that the principle of passing tolls had passed away. He must contend that ships which passed Ramsgate harbour without receiving any benefit ought not to be compelled to pay any toll. He could tell the hon. Gentleman that his measure would be opposed by the shipping interest, and he had no doubt the hon. Gentleman, if he did not abandon his view on the subject, would sustain defeat on the obnoxious principle of passing tolls. He agreed that no in materials entrusted to them by their employers, and they also provided a very simple and summary process by which the workmen could recover their wages. Primâ facie, therefore, there was no objection to the extension of this Act to the iron and metal manufactures of Sheffield and other towns; but it was desirable that the Bill which the hon. Gentleman proposed to bring in should be circulated in the places to which it would refer, in order to afford them an opportunity of expressing their opinions upon it. Motion agreed to; House in Committee. Resolved "That the Chairman be directed to move the House, that leave be given to bring in a Bill the better to secure the property of Manufacturers of iron, steel, cutlery, edge tools, hardware, gold, silver and silver plated, Britannia metal, German silver, copper and brass articles, and other metals, mother of pearl, shell, tortoise shell, bone, horn, Ivory, leather, and wood, and also for securing the Wages of the Workmen engaged in such manufactures, by extending the provisions of the Act of the sixth and seventh years of Her present Majesty, chapter forty, commonly called The Woollen, &c. Manufactures Act,' to the said hardware and other manufactures." The House resumed. Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. HADFIELD, Mr. ROEBUCK, Mr. MUNTZ, and Mr. SCHOLEfield. Bill read 1°. SCREW PROPELLERS. He no objection. He would candidly tell the House that he had ascertained that the Government would not grant this inquiry, and he, therefore, appealed to the House to do so. Did the parties who had received this money ask for an inquiry? One of them, though he had since recanted, had asked an hon. Member to second this Motion. And the House also had before them the petition of Mr. Lowe, asking for an inquiry and impeaching the utility of Mr. Smith's screw. He mentioned this in order to show that the five parties who received the money voted by Parliament had quarrelled among themselves. would now lay before the House evidence to show that the screw used in Her Majesty's ships was not that of either of the parties to whom the 20,000l. were given. The person who really got the money was Mr. Henry Currie, a banker in the City, CAPTAIN SCOBELL said, he rose pur- then a Member of the House, and sitting suant to notice to move for a Select Com- on that (the ministerial) side of the House, mittee to inquire into the circumstances who had previously applied to Sir Robert under which compensation was granted to Peel and to Lord John Hay without sucthe patentees of the screw propeller, as cess. Mr. Currie had stated his own case used in Her Majesty's ships and vessels. in a letter to the Solicitor to the Admiralty, He considered that this question concerned dated the 30th of May, 1854. His stateone of the most important inventions- ment was to the effect that he had become saving the electric telegraph-that had the director of a company to which Mr. been invented for many years. He would Smith had conveyed his patent; that the deal with the question in a manner as little company, having expended their money in personal as possible. He would attack experiments and trials at law, had connobody, for he was only demanding justice sented to an amalgamation with other on behalf of an individual who had been companies which were the proprietors of unjustly treated by four consecutive Boards four different patents; that in 1851 he of Admiralty. A noble and learned Lord was instructed to put himself in communi(Lord Lyndhurst) had already taken up cation with the Government, and the merits this question in another place, and he was of the five patents were again investigated; not a person to have done so unless he had that the result was an agreement by the been convinced that a great grievance ex- then First Lord of the Admiralty (Sir F. isted. The question related to the screw Baring) to pay him the 20,000l. upon his propeller, used in the Royal Navy. So personal security to relieve the Governimportant did this invention seem to the ment from all further claim; and that the Admiralty of the day that two votes of distribution of the money was left entirely 10,000l. each were taken, one in 1851 and to him, but was made according to the the other in 1854, to reward the patentee, award of the eminent patent agent, Mr. not of the best screw, or of the earliest Carpmael. Mr. Currie concluded by sayscrew, but for the screw that should be ing that, in his opinion, the screw used in adopted in the Royal Navy. These were the navy was Smith's, and Smith's alone. the terms of the grant, and before he re- He (Captain Scobell) contended that, acsumed his seat he should show to the cording to the documents in his possession House that the grant had not only not and the judgment of the Judicial Comreached the person for whom it was in-mittee of the Privy Council, the invention tended by the House when the grant was made, but that they had been excluded from the dispensation of the Vote. That was his statement, but he only asked that the circumstances should be inquired into, and to this he considered there could be was Captain Carpenter's, and Captain Carpenter's alone. Captain Carpenter was a captain in the navy who had not endeavoured to make a profit of his invention by private trade, but who desired that the screw he had constructed should be adopted in Her Majesty's navy; and the the screw, though it was impossible for question was, whether Captain Carpenter's Captain Carpenter to bring an action, for screw had not been adopted in the Duke this wrong, against the Government. Mr. of Wellington, the Agamemnon, and other John Ellis, one of the witnesses examined, vessels which had sailed or were to sail for stated that the screw of the Agamemnon, the Baltic and the Black Sea? Mr. Lowe, which he manufactured himself, was Capone of the five persons who had obtained tain Carpenter's screw. The screw invented a share of the money granted by Her Ma- by Captain Carpenter combined the maxijesty's Government, had applied to the mum of power with the minimum of resistJudicial Committee of the Privy Council ance, and Sir Edward Parry, who, as he four or five years ago for a renewal of his had previously stated, was Surveyor Genepatent, but the application was refused, on ral of the steam department of the navy, in the ground that the invention did not 1838, and who had been ordered to witness possess sufficient merit. About the years the experiments with Captain Carpenter's 1838 or 1839, before Mr. Smith's screw screw, testified that those experiments, as was known, Captain Carpenter made com- far as they went, were satisfactory. The munications to the Admiralty, stating that next witness examined before the Judicial he had perfected a screw, which he be- Committee was Mr. Robert Galloway, the lieved to be very useful to the ships of surveyor of steam vessels to the Board of Her Majesty's navy, and in 1840 he took Trade. He gave evidence distinctly to out a patent for the invention. Some ex- the effect that the screw used in the navy periments having been made by Captain was a screw formed on the model of that Carpenter on the Thames, in the presence of the Agamemnon, and that he had never of Sir Edward Parry, Surveyor General seen one of Smith's screws used, either in of the steam department of the navy, and the Royal Navy, or in the mercantile maothers, on the part of the Government, rine. Here was additional evidence that the Captain Carpenter was appointed to the screw used in the navy was that of Capcommand of the Geyser, a ship of war, tain Carpenter. Then Mr. Thomas Lloyd, and was ordered to the Mediterranean, the chief Admiralty engineer, gave evihaving been permitted to fit his screw to dence that there was no vessel in the the pinnace of that vessel. The pinnace Royal Navy fitted with the screw before to which the screw was adapted was tried 1843, and that there was no vessel fitted in the Mediterranean in the presence of with one entire turn of the screw, which Admiral Sir William Parker, and her sail- was the description of screw made by Mr. ing qualities excited great admiration and Smith. The evidence of Captain Carpensurprise. Captain Carpenter did not re-ter described the various applications made turn to England until 1845, when he found by him to the Admiralty, and the replies that many persons had been endeavouring he received, showing that there was no to establish claims to his invention; and chance of his obtaining redress from the he was informed, in reply to an application Board. Then came the judgment of the to the Admiralty, that a certain sum of Judicial Committee, which was given on money had been granted to the inventors the 30th of May last, and in which he of the screw used in the navy. Captain found it distinctly stated, that "The GoCarpenter had, however, unsuccessfully urged his claim to this reward. Last year Captain Carpenter applied to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council for a renewal of his patent, and officers employed by the Government declared that his screw was that which was in use in Her Majesty's navy. The Attorney General appeared before the Judicial Committee to watch the proceedings, and he did not object to the renewal of the patent, but desired that the Government might have the use of Carpenter's screw. The Judicial Committee, however, refused to assent to such an arrangement, and at this moment the Admiralty were wrongfully using VOL. CXXXVIII. [THIRD SERIES.] vernment did not contest the validity of the patterns or the utility of the invention" adding, "that it has been proved at the bar that this very invention is at this day, and has for some time, been in use in the Royal Navy." Now, after evidence like this, he would appeal to the sense of justice of the Lords of the Admiralty, and ask whether they were not prepared to remedy the error which had been committed? The Judicial Committee then showed that Captain Carpenter had been no party to the arbitration. But now, 20,000l. having been paid, the question was what could be done? Before this sum of 20,000l. was given by the Govern Y |