LORD ELIOT AND THE IRISH JOBBERS.
LORD ELIOT has pushed on the Lagan Navigation Bill, to which we adverted in our last number, another stage. He took for this purpose the "genial hour," as IVIocuis says, for Irish jobs—just before the House rose at one o'clock on Tuesday morning. The bill, therefore, stands committed without a word of discussion. This is according to Parliamentary usage for jobs, no doubt, but not for honest business : the rule is that every public measure shall be debated before it goes into Committee.
Notwithstanding this step in advance, we much question the success of this bill. English and Scotch Members must feel the necessity of putting a stop to this accumulation of public works in Ireland at the national expense. Lord ELIOT, moreover, is begin- ning to learn the true character of the Irish jobbers. When be went over to Dublin, he was beset by them, as all Irish Secretaries have been for years past. They had made many a good thing of Lord MORPETH, and they hoped to make as many more of his successor. Their attentions, accordingly, were proportioned to their expecta- tions. Lord ELIOT did as others before him have so often done ; he fell into their open arms, seduced by the blandness of their ad dresses and the winning manner in which he was approached. In this mood, he gave his sanction to several ready-made projects, with that most deceitful of all pretences for their recommendation, "the improvement of Ireland"; a term which, whenever it comes from the mouth of an Irish Minister, we may set down to mean just this—additional power, patronage, and money, to the Board of Works in Dublin and the various persons employed by it. The correctness of this opinion may be gathered from one circumstance : there are three " improvement measures " produced by Lord ELIOT this session, namely, the Drainage Bill, the Rivers Bill, and the Lagan Navigation Bill; and the Board of Works is constituted, under each of them, the authority from which all undertakings are to emanate, and by which they are all to be directed. There can hardly be two opinions as to the impolicy of creating an all-absorbing institution of this kind for the purpose of grasping every public work of Ireland in one monopoly of patronage. Be- sides, there are some things in the constitution of the Irish Board of Works, and particularly in the indirect manner in which the funds to defray its expenses are provided, to which we object on principle. Let us recapitulate a little. The present Board of Works in Dublin had no common paternity : it was fashioned by Lord MONTEAGLE, under the presiding inspira- tion of the Marquis of LANSDOWNE. The new body naturally partook of the genius by which its founders have been so eminently distinguished. Take this fact for an example. In the Irish Mis- cellaneous Estimates, a vote is taken annually for the " sums required to defray the expenses of sundry departments under the charge of the Board of Works in Dublin"; which are shortly set forth as follows-
£
s. d.
Chairman 1,200 0 0 Two Commissioners, 6001. each 1,200 0 0
2,400 0 0 Inland Navigation 384 6 4
2,784 6 4
Any person reading the beading of this estimate would suppose that it embraced the cost of the establishment. The words are " an estimate of the sums required to defray the expenses of sundry de- partments,"—leading to the belief that the whole expenses are in- cluded. But that is not the case : we know from other sources that the establishment consists further of Secretary, Auditor, Engineer, and several clerks, whose salaries in 1835 were 5,5001.* That amount, we have reason to think, has since been increased; but, taking the figures as they stand, where, it will be asked, does the difference between the Parliamentary vote and the sum of these salaries come from ? The answer, unless we are greatly misinformed, deserves attention : it comes from a profit realized upon the sale of Exche- quer Bills by the Board! We have made particular inquiries into the matter, and, according to the information laid before ua, the procedure is somewhat as follows. Grants and loans from the Treasury in aid of Public Works in Ireland are made in Exchequer Bills : these bills are issued at par ; and being so received by the Bank of Ireland to the credit of the Dublin Commissioners, they are disposed of by brokers appointed for the purpose, at such prices as the market of the day may yield. That price is generally a premium ; and out of that premium means are found to cover the extra expenses of Secretary, Auditor, Engineer, and clerks, over and above the annual Parliamentary grant.
If this be true, it is a discreditable way of providing for the sup- port and maintenance of a public office. It has not, we dare say, led to corruption or peculation as yet ; but it seems strongly sug- gestive of breaches of confidence and duty. When it is borne in mind that this Irish Board has received, during the ten years that it has existed, no less a sum of public money than 887,6001., the propriety of inquiring how far such a practice has prevailed or is likely to recur must be obvious. Instead, therefore, of referring the Logan_ Navigation Bill to a Select Committee, it would be more to the purpose if Lord ELIOT would appoint a Committee to report upon the administration of Public Works in Ireland by the present Board ; and further to show, if it be possible, that the establishment is a useful one and well con- ducted,—and that the public ought to be satisfied that undertaking after undertaking should be allowed to drop into the hands of the Commissioners, in every instance at an increased expense to the public. Last session, as we mentioned before, the Tralee Canal was handed over to them ; and the report presented to Parliament shows that one of the first things they did was to advance them- selves 2,0001. for carrying on the work ! It is not two years since the Commission for improving the Shannon was superadded to the Commission of Public Works ; and we find, upon turning to the Estimates of last session, that in addition to between 600,0001. and 700,0001. advanced for that purpose, there is an annual sum of near 3,0001. for the Shannon Board. We point to this item more particularly, as we perceive another embryo establishment in Lord &Joy's Drainage Bill : the preamble names the Commission- ers of Public Works as the persons to carry the act into execution; but it goes on to authorize the Lords of the Treasury, if they see fit, to appoint one or more helpers. Does any one doubt that, if the bill pass, they will " see fit" to appoint new officers ; or that, after a year or two, such appointments will lead to a settled esta- blishment worth some four or five thousands to the placeholders?
The Members to whom the bill stands referred are Mr. NICHOLL, Mr. VERNON, Sir J. WALSH, Mr. CHRISTOPHER, Mr. J. YOUNG, Captain CARNEGIE, Mr. Dicaisisosi, Captain JONES, Mr. C. Wive', Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD, Mr. Sergeant MURPHY, Mr. PROTHEROE, Mr. THORNELY, Mr. REDINGTON, and Mr. PATRICK STEWART. We take the names from the Votes, because if the job pass they will be its sponsors and fosterers.
Previous page
