begged to know whether it was the intention of government to re-appoint the Finance Committee. He had expected the announcement of such an intention, and was convinced that nothing would, tend to satisfy the public, so much as an investigation of our financial affairs by such a committee as that which last year gave such general satisfaction.

said, that the object of the hon. member was, in a great measure, accomplished by the mode which had recently been adopted by the noble Secretary for Ireland, of referring the Irish estimates to a select committee. This was a very important branch of the public expenditure; and he thought that the subject would be sifted more satisfactorily in this isolated manner, that if the whole question of our financial system were opened to the investigation any committee, however able and industrious. In fact, such bad been the hon. member's opinion early in the present session.

rose to state to the House the reasons which actuated his majesty's government, in the proposed sale of the City Canal, leading across that part of the Isle of Dogs which interposed between Blackwall and Limehouse, and running parallel with the West India Docks. This canal had been undertaken, in consequence of the circuitous navigation of the Thames in that part of the river, which frequently prevented vessels from reaching their destination higher in the river for a whole tide. The improvement was thought not only a desirable one in this respect; but it was represented, when the bill for the canal was introduced, that it would prove a profitable speculation, inasmuch as the duties which were imposed at a fluctuating rate, from two-pence to seven-pence per ton, in proportion to the size of the vessel, would not Only pay within a few years, the money expended, but return a sum so much greater than the interest, that a surplus would be created sufficient to keep it in repair, and to defray various charges of maintaining moorings, & c. in the port of London. The canal was purchased by the government in 1799, as a kind of part payment for what the port of London owed to the consolidated fund; with the expectation, that the tonnage dues of vessels passing through it would be a profitable source of revenue. But that expectation had not been realized: on the contrary, there had been an annual loss of 1,200l. per annum for several years; that is, the expenditure exceeded the receipts of the canal by 1,200l. a year: and besides this annual loss, 20,000l. would be required, in a few years, for the mere repairs of the canal, if it were not, in the mean time, disposed of. Under these circumstances, government had gladly accepted of the tender of the West India Dock Company of 120,000l. for their interest, a sum only 28,000l. less than they gave for it, and which would be applied to the reduction of the debt due by the port of London to the consolidated fund. Had a higher tender been offered, it would of course have been accepted; but no such had been offered, though the sale was open to competition. He would move, "That leave be given to bring in a bill for the sale of the City Canal, and for other purposes relating thereto."

contended, that if the canal had been disposed of by public auc- tion it would have fetched a higher price; not that he considered the present sum under its value.

did not object to the bill but to the secret mode in which the canal had been disposed of. He thought there must have existed private reasons for not bringing it openly into the market, and selling it by public auction to the highest bidder. This was a fresh instance of the necessity of parliament exercising a vigilant control over the expenditure of the public money; for had it done so, the present loss of 160,000l. to the country would have been prevented. He was not sorry that the canal had been disposed of, for, like other government undertakings, from the Caledonian to the Ridout canal, it had turned out an expensive failure.

said, that so far from, secrecy having been observed in the sale of the canal, for twenty years it had been actually in the market, with a view to inducing a high price from the competition of buyers. Public auction had been also tried, but it had failed. The present tender was the highest that had been offered, or perhaps that could be expected; and it was, therefore, very properly accepted by the government.

was sure that 120,000l. was a less price from the West India Dock Company, to whom the canal recommended itself by such peculiar advantages, than a lower sum from parties. If, therefore, the canal had been put up to public auction, that company would most probably have given a higher price for it. If it had been set up to sale in the year 1815, it would probably have fetched a higher price; as that was a year of great speculation. The St. Catharine Dock Company would very probably have purchased it. He conceived that it would have been better for the public to have kept this canal even at a loss for a few years longer than to have sold it to a body, whose only reason for wishing to have it in their hands, was to promote their own monopoly, and not to serve the trade of the port of London.

maintained, that the West India Dock Company were anxious to obtain possession of this canal as well for the public advantage, as for the promotion of their own private interests. They wished to have possession of this canal, in order to secure the property in the West India Docks from the dangers of fires; which might occur if this canal were left open for promiscuous use. He contended, that its passing into their hands would afford them the means, of, giving additional accommodation to the trade of the port. So far from the chancellor of the Exchequer having procured a low price for the canal, he had got a great deal more for it than it was worth. The West India Dock Company had been badly treated by the right hon. gentleman. They were told, in the first instance, that there were a number of competitors, and when the purchase came to be completed, it was found that they had no competitor at all, and they were bound to the price which they had offered, which was by one half too much for it.

contended, that the best way of disposing of this canal would have been to have put it up to public sale, with a reserved price. This was a public high road; and he did not see what right the House would have to shut it up, until at least the parties whose, interests might suffer from the closing of it were heard against it. The principle of public competition in the disposal of public property should not have been departed from in this instance.

contended that upon the showing of the hon. member for Bramber, the government had obtained the highest price that could be obtained for this Canal. Of late, it had been perfectly useless; for steam-packets now towed vessels up the river with such rapidity, that no ships would undergo the expense and delay attendant upon passing through this Canal. He conceived, that the disposal of it would be beneficial to the port of London, as one effect of the measure would be the reduction of the tonnage duty on shipping. In answer to the hon. member for Dover, he should merely say that this Canal had been for some years past on sale, and that the St. Catharine's Dock Company could have purchased it if they had thought proper.

Leave was given to bring in the bill.

brought in a bill to impose certain duties upon the importation of Silk goods, and to allow a draw-back upon the exportation thereof.

said, he should give no, opposition to the bill in its present stage. He was anxious that it should now be printed, to afford the country an opportu- nity of knowing its details. He should certainly hereafter give, all the opposition in, his power to the principle of the bill.

The bill was read a first time; after which, the House adjourned to the 28th instant.