the contrary, his impression was that no sun had previously been named as the total required, and this was the first year that that total appeared in the Estimates. Certainly it did not appear in the Estimates for which he was responsible; for he refused to adopt any sum until he received the Report of the officer sent out to visit all the stations in China and Japan, and report upon their requirements. Upon that the Treasury and the Foreign Office were to be responsible for the expenditure recommended in each case. The officer selected, Major Crossman, had, he believed, made very considerable reductions upon the schemes of the Consular authorities, sometimes to the extent of one-half of what they proposed. More distinct information ought to be given as to the intended expenditure at each place. COLONEL FRENCH asked, if any Report had been made with reference to the matter under discussion ? COLONEL SYKES said, that the Chinese Government had never parted with the freehold of the land required by the English Government; they had simply let it to us at a rent. It was hardly credible that such large sums could be necessary. MR. OTWAY said, that an Engineer officer had been sent out on a roving commission, who said they would require to expend £179,000, but did not inform them on what they were to lay it out. The Secretary to the Treasury had said that the Committee were pledged to the Vote by what had taken place last year on the subject. Now, he was informed that there was no Estimate of this kind last year. Would they commit themselves to sanction a Vote of £179,000, by voting a portion of it now ? MR. AYRTON said, that the Vote furnished an illustration of the way in which the House drifted into expenditure of this kind. Several years ago a distinct understanding was come to that the Government should never incur expenditure on public works in excess of the amount of the Vote proposed unless the full extent of the intended expenditure was stated. In this matter, last Session, the Government simply proposed a Vote of £20,000 for Consular buildings in China and Japan, and there was no suggestion that they were embarking in further expenditure; and yet it was now said that the Vote of £20,000 was a mere Vote on account, and that they were committed to an expenditure of £179,000. VOL. CXCI. [THIRD SERIES.] THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, that the alteration in the form of the Estimates this year, in consequence of the passing of the Exchequer Audit Act, made it difficult for hon. Members to follow the Vote from last year to this. From the Estimates of last year it appeared that in the year 1866-7 a Vote was taken of £20,000 under the heading "Buildings at several Consular Stations.' A similar Vote of £20,000 was taken last year under the same heading. On that occasion the Committee did not require a list of the stations at which these buildings were to be erected. He was willing to admit it would have been better if they had been given. The omission had now been supplied by the Secretary to the Treasury. It appeared that they included Canton, Foochow, Ningpo, Tien-tsin, and other places, the names of which, however, would not afford much information to hon. Members unacquainted with the country. Major Crossman was sent out to China and Japan expressly to control the expenditure on these Consular buildings; for it had been found by the late Government that the Consular authorities were more anxious to study their own convenience than economy, and were proposing works regardless of their cost. To put an end to this, his hon. Friend opposite sent out a person in whom he had confidence, to report what was really necessary. Reports had been sent home of the requirements of the different stations, and the expenditure necessary was estimated at £179,000. Of this, £50,000 was required for the Supreme Court at Shangai, leaving £129,000 for the twelve other stations. When an officer was at that distance it was difficult to specify at which stations the building should be begun; and he was therefore instructed to begin building at such stations as it would be most convenient for him to superintend. It was difficult also to find out at such a distance where the money would be spent during the current year. The Government, therefore, could only act generally, and they came to the conclusion that it would be best to leave the control to Major Crossman. wise to have these expensive Consular buildings there. He had great confidence in Major Crossman, and it would be well that his Report respecting past and future buildings should be placed on the table. MR. LABOUCHERE asked the noble Lord at the head of the Foreign Office, whether it was contemplated to build at Pekin? MR. ALDERMAN LUSK said, that some details should be given of the expenditure at Japan, and meanwhile moved that the Vote should be reduced by £15,000, the proposed expenditure there. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Item of £15,000, for Consular Buildings in Japan, be omitted from the proposed Vote."-(Mr. Lusk.) COLONEL SYKES said, that the Committee was left in the dark as to the mode in which this expenditure was to be distributed, as regarded the several Chinese ports. He would suggest that the Papers supplied to the House should state the number of European subjects residing at the places where these Consular buildings were required. LORD STANLEY said, he must point out that in Japan you could hardly hire houses; for you could not hire the houses of the Daimios, and there were hardly any others that were fit for the residence of Europeans. Moreover, the system of hiring instead of building was exceedingly expen. sive. As the Committee were aware, two new ports were opened at Japan, and when new ports were opened it was necessary to have Consuls and Consular residences. In China we were at present paying £8,000 a year for buildings occupied for Consular purposes, and even then complaints were frequent respecting the accommodation. £8,000 capitalized represented a sum of £200,000, and the expenditure on buildings must not therefore be regarded as wasted, but rather as a reproductive invest LORD STANLEY said, that there was a very extensive, and he believed a very good Embassy house at Pekin. He did not undertake to say that it might not want repair, nor that some additional buildings might not be required; but there was no intention to undertake building on a large scale there. MR. WATKIN complained that they had no information as to the total amount which had been voted from the beginning in reference to Constantinople and other places. LORD STANLEY observed that a Return had been moved for which would give the information. MR. OTWAY said, he wished to know whether £15,000 was all that would be required with respect to Consular residences in Japan? Last year the House voted £20.000 for Consular residences in China; and this year the House was told that, because it voted that amount, it bound itself to vote £179,000 for Consular residences in China, for the purpose of completing the business. He wished to know whether the £15,000 now asked for Consular residences in Japan was only a portion of a greater sum, as in the case of the Consular residences in China? MR. CANDLISH said, the Committee need not expect that by granting, money for the building of Consular residences, they would get rid of annual charges with regard to the residences of our Consuls abroad. He observed that there was an item of £2,000 for ordinary repairs of the Consular residence at Constantinople. The buildings at distant stations seemed always to want repairing, and he thought that in such places it would be better to hire than to purchase houses. He hoped the hon. Member would insist on a division. MR. CHILDERS hoped the Government would give some further explanations. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, that the House had voted last year the sum of £10,000 for these Services under the head of buildings required at certain stations, and £7,000 the year before that, and besides this there was last year £5,000 for building in Japan. Major Crossman had sent over a Report with respect to the buildings which would be required in Japan, and he believed the sum of £15,000 would have to be spent upon them. The detailed Report, however, had not been sent home as yet. Unless the Committee would trust the Govern MR. LABOUCHERE said, he had always been under the impression that there was a very good house at Teheran. He agreed with those who thought it far better to build than to hire a house; but he thought that the Committee ought to have some definite information as to how much money it would be necessary to expend upon it. Were they, for instance, going to send out European furniture? If they were it might cost as much as the house itself. ment in this matter the consequence might be they would have no money to go on with, and that, owing to the distance, Major Crossman's time might be, to a great extent, thrown away. The Committee must be aware that, in dealing with matters of this sort at so great a distance, it was impossible to have the same particulars and details as might be had in the case of buildings nearer home. A great deal must be left to the discretion of Major Crossman, who was on the spot, and it was therefore wholly impossible to give the Committee all the information they might desire. The late Government had acted very judiciously in sending out Major Crossman, and he trusted that the Committee would not, by its Vote on this occasion, render that officer's mission of no avail. MR. SERJEANT GASELEE inquired, whether Major Crossman was not at this moment in England? COLONEL SYKES wished to know, if it was proposed to erect a new mission-house in Teheran, this never having been considered necessary before? We had had a mission to Teheran for half a century, and our Chargé d'affaires used to find a house for himself. LORD STANLEY said, this was a great mistake, as there was a mission-house which had been built in the early part of MR. SCLATER-BOOTH said, he was the present century, and the land on which not; he was abroad superintending these it stood was British property. Of course, works. He had recommended that ex-it was very unfortunate that houses should penditure should be incurred at thirteen tumble down and fall into such a state places. that they could no longer be inhabited, but so it was. The matter had been inquired into by two engineers on the spot, who reported that the mission premises were partly uninhabitable and partly in need of extensive repairs, and that the site was unhealthy. On these representations it was thought desirable to remove the residence to a somewhat healthier quarter. The old house and land would be sold, and the sum obtained by the sale would defray a considerable part of the expense of the new buildings, which were not intended to be in any way superior. MR. NEATE urged that the Committee should trust the Government. The amount was not a very large one, and as they knew they had not a very flourishing Budget, it was the interest of the Govern ment to be as economical as possible. His experience was that there was an excessive cutting down of the Estimates at the Treasury. Question put, and negatived. Original Question put, and agreed to. (2.) £8,000, to complete the sum for the Metropolitan Fire Brigade. (3.) Motion made, and Question proposed, MR. LABOUCHERE had the same objection to this Vote that he had had to that respecting Constantinople. It was for the purchase of land for the new house; and before the Committee was asked to grant £20,000 for that purpose, he really thought that it should be told what was the price that the old site was likely to fetch. He believed that the present house was healthy, and he desired to know, what superiority the new site would possess over de-it in that respect? "That a sum, not exceeding £8,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1869, for the purchase of Ground and for the Erection of a House for Her Majesty's Mission at Teheran.' " MR. ALDERMAN LUSK said, he cidedly objected to this new Vote; because if it were agreed to, no doubt it would be followed in future years by larger Votes. Next year they would be told that the Committee had voted so much this year, and so the thing would go on. He wanted to nip the matter in the bud, and therefore he moved that the Vote be disallowed. un LORD STANLEY said, a conjectural estimate might, no doubt, be furnished of what the land would sell for, but this would be of no practical value, as the price of land at Teheran could not be estimated beforehand, as it might be in London. The old site could not be disposed of till the new house was built. MR. SERJEANT GASELEE said, he before them. He supported the Vote on considered that the House was sitting to economical principles. no good purpose, after the Vote of the other night. He thought they ought to finish up their concerns, garnish their house, and set it in order for the new Parliament, which he hoped would be more economical than any Parliament they had ever seen. It was very wrong of the Government, when they hardly knew that they were any Government at all, except on suffrance, to insist on pressing new Votes. The best thing they could do was to complete the Votes already partly taken, and shut up shop as fast as they could. MR. CHILDERS suggested to the noble Lord, as a large deficit in the Revenue was unavoidable this year, it would be better to postpone this Vote to another year. LORD STANLEY said, no doubt it might be possible to keep the present buildings in repair for two or three years longer; but the price of land in Teheran, both for letting and selling, was rising every year. Ten years ago that which it was now proposed to do might have been done much more cheaply. He did not put this as a matter of extreme urgency; but from all the information he had, and the best judgment he could form, he believed the expense would be greater the longer it was delayed. MR. GOLDNEY thought they ought to pass this Vote, after the explanations given by the noble Lord. Question put: The Committee divided: Vote agreed to. (4.) £103,675, to complete the sum for certain Harbours of Refuge, &c. MR. ALDERMAN LUSK called the attention of the Government to the fact that in the case of Alderney there was some discrepancy to be explained. Of the total amount of £1,274,000 voted, £1,226,861 had been expended, leaving a balance of £47,000 of which £9,000, excess of former Votes, was to be surrendered; whereas it was now proposed to vote £56,000, which would exceed the total. MR. GRAVES said, the sum asked this year for Alderney was £56,000, or an increase of £13,800 upon the amount voted last year. He confessed he had great doubts as to the propriety of any large expenditure upon Alderney. He had visited the place recently, and was quite unable to ascertain what we shall gain from the large and increasing outlay which went on there. The impression he had derived from his inspection was that they might as well throw the money into the sea as go on with the construction of that harbour, further than the most simple and speediest completion.. It could not contain more than four or five first-class ships, and it would take a garrison of 10,000 men to defend it. It was desirable to bring the expenditure upon these works to an end. MR. CHILDERS said, that if the price of land at Teheran was rising, the value of the old site might be expected to rise in proportion. MR. CANDLISH pointed out that the THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE-sum proposed this year for Holyhead Har QUER said, the Treasury had accepted bour, together with the amount previously the proposition to build a new house at taken for it, would exceed the estimated Teheran with very great reluctance, and cost of the works there. The Estimate had only on the ground that it was by far the also been exceeded at Dover. He wished most economical step that could be taken. to inquire of the Government, whether any It was extremely undesirable that the Vote idea could be given of the total expenditure should be withdrawn; because they would which would be required to complete the have to spend a great deal of money in works at those Harbours? keeping the old house in repair. MR. LABOUCHERE said, that in that case he hoped the Vote would be agreed to. If it was intended to build a new house in two or three years' time it would be mere folly to spend £2,000 or £3,000 in tinkering up the old buildings. MR. GREENE thought it bad taste for the hon. Member for Portsmouth (Mr. Serjeant Gaselee) to remind people who were going to die of the fate that was MR. STEPHEN CAVE was not going to defend what had been done at Alderney. For the works at that place £1,300,000 had long ago been estimated as the sum necessary. When they had gone so far with those works it was requisite to go a certain length further, and not leave them in an unfinished state, which would be really dangerous to shipping. Whether the works would be advantageous to shipping under any circumstances was a point on which he was not called on to express, hon. Member for Finsbury that it was not any opinion; but the increased Estimate an unusual thing to have as many as 300 this year for Alderney was simply owing vessels in Holyhead Harbour at one time. to the works being pushed on with greater He wished the expenditure upon all their rapidity, and not to any proposed exten-harbours was as profitably laid out as that sion of them beyond the point to which the upon Holyhead. He found that a sum of original Estimate had been cut down. £496 was asked for Portpatrick Harbour. There was no intention of going beyond A very large outlay had been made on that; but it was of great importance, in that harbour, with a view to make it a an economical point of view, to have the packet harbour, but he understood that works finished as soon as possible. He iden had been abandoned; and if that were hoped the Estimate of £1,300,000 would the case, why should the harbour be kept not be exceeded. If it were exceeded, the up? Government would have to explain the cause of it; and if any fresh works should be proposed they could not be carried out without the previous sanction of Parliament. There was, however, no prospect of anything of the kind, and he trusted that the works at Alderney would shortly be brought to a close. At Dover there had certainly been some excess over the Estimate, because it had been found necessary to extend the pier and build a new pier-head, and to provide protection for the rest of the work. As to Holyhead, considerable expenses had to be incurred in consequence of a breach made by a heavy storm last year at that important harbour. It was necessary to repair the breach at once, and it had been done as economically as possible. COLONEL FRENCH confirmed the statement of the right hon. Member (Mr. Cave) with respect to the breach at Holyhead, and said it was absolutely necessary to expend the money in repairing it. MR. CHILDERS asked, whether, in consideration of the accommodation provided for the mail packets at Holyhead Harbour, by the expenditure of the sum of £6,500 mentioned in the Vote, the Post Office and Treasury had agreed with the mail contractors as to certain conditions with respect to time, which had been the subject of much correspondence; and, if not, what was required to be done before the Post Office would be in a position to impose fines upon the mail contractors for not keeping time? MR. SCLATER-BOOTH said, it was necessary to expend the sum asked for at Holyhead. He would make inquiries relative to the question of the hon. Member for Pontefract. MR. ALDERMAN LUSK complained of this continual outlay upon the harbour of Holyhead, which was simply used for a few steam packets. MR. GRAVES said, he could tell the MR. BONHAM-CARTER said, that it was greatly to the interest of Ireland that they should obtain the best means of communication between Portpatrick and Ireland; and when the necessary amount had been expended it would ensure accuracy of service. SIR PATRICK O'BRIEN asked, if the reason why the penalties had not been enforced against the packet company at Holyhead was because that company alleged that the contract for the execution of the necessary works had not been completed in a proper manner? MR. SCLATER-BOOTH believed that there had been a long dispute respecting this matter, and he would take care to inquire into it. He believed there was also some point of dispute as to time. It appeared that a sum of £9,000 would be surrendered to the Exchequer, but that sum had not yet been surrendered. MR. CANDLISH remarked, that no answer had yet been given with regard to the item which appeared in the Vote respecting Portpatrick. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER hoped that this was the last time an item in connection with Portpatrick would appear in the Estimates; for he was glad to say that it had been decided to abandon that place as a port of departure for the mail packets. The difficulty had arisen in consequence of a Treasury Minute of 1856, in which the Government of that day undertook to make a harbour suitable for packet services. On the faith of that Minute the railway company spent a large sum of money, and the object of the Government had since been to come to some arrangement with the company on the subject. It had at last been arranged that the Government should lend the County Down Railway Company the debenture capital at a lower rate of interest than that which they were now paying, and that Portpatrick should then be finally aban |