The Sun. — London, England, 1846-06-20 00:00:00

RAILWAY COMMITTEES. ("Y ESTERO AY.) HOUSE OF LORDS. OROUP D. sitarrniza) AND LINCOLNEINUIS ZUNC- TIAN RAILWAY. The Committee re-assembled this morning, Lord Someriin the chair. The evidence taken this morning was that with •reference to the traffic from the counties along the Eastern coast, the object of Mr. Paget, who appears for theiDoncaster and Wakefield Company, being to show that the line of the promoters was circuitous to Sheffield, and the expense of transporting goods and agricultural produce from sue means of conveyance to another would destroy the benefit of the railway. Mr. Moring, the present mayor of Doncaster, testified to the unanimous feeling of the people of Doncaster in favour of the Shef field and Lincolnsnire Junction line. On cross-examination, it appeared that they were also unani mous in favour of every other line to the westward, and the Town Council had evinced so little interest in this line that they had not once during the present session discussed the necessity of petitioning Parliament in its favour. There was a resolution of the Corporation, about two years ago, to the effect that they would countenance no line NI hich crossed the main en trance of the town at a level. On re-examination the witness stated that the Corporation were as favourable now as they were three years ago. Mr. Vicxaas, solicitor, of Sheffield, and local solicitor to the line, stated that the agreement between Earl "'hewnliam and the Mid land Counties Company for the use of the Greesborough branch aro e oat of the opening of Lord Fitzwilliam's coal mines at that place, and that the Sheffield and Rotherham Company had been put to the addi tional expense of three lines of rails instead of two,the earthworks alone costing 12,0001., and the rails 4,0001. or 5,0001. His Lordship then en tered into arrangements with the Company to pay 1 per ton for the exclusive use of that line, but that included a right also to a depot and yard at Sheffield, for which other persens paid 501. or 1001. a year. Earl Fitxwilliam was favourable to this Bill, and had both last year and this given permission to Mr. Byron , h is mineral a ge n t, to testily favourably of this line. The practice of the 'Midland Coun ties' companies is to charge a penny per ton per mile. On re-examination it appeared that therewas no clause eminen t the , but to restrict the charge to a penny. There is no written agre rranged with the there is one in equity and usage, Mr. EYTo nhavina - a en the Sheffield company to the effect of what he had stated. and Rotherham Company Witt; amalgamated with the Midland Counties, the latter company took up a ll the engagements of the tormer, of which this one had been in action for seven years before. It was upon this arrangement, and not on the statute, that the com pany relied for their payment. In re-examination, the witness stated that he believed that the evidence of Mr. Morton and Mr. Brown was similar to that which would be given by all the other Yorkshire coal proprietors, and that, In fact, the rates of charge are uniform both to the Yorkshire and the Derbyshire proprietors. The letters of Earl Fitzwilliam, and of Mr. Newman, his Lordship's agent, giving the assent of both to the line of the promoters, were then put in evidence, but the assent of the former was given pre paratory to the session of last year, and that of Mr. Newman before tuts session. . . Mr. Swanwick, the engineer of the line, stated that the line from Doncaster to Lincoln was part of the Eastern Counties scheme to get from London to the north, but on the passing of the London and York Hill, that portion of the Lincoln and Swinton line was aban doned. The line as it now stands would join the London and York line about three miles south of Doncaster, but there is a good opportunity of making a good Junc tion at Doncaster. On leaving this place the line runs up the valley of th e D on , near th e li me - wor ks at Sprotborough, where it forked, one branch going to Barnsley, Wakefield, and any place to the north, opening the mineral field —the other branch gave access to Rotherham and Sheffield, the distance to the latter town being eighteen miles, and to the former thirteen and a half. The distance from Doncaster to the end of the northern fork to its junction with the Midiand line would be ay. miles. The worst gradient between Doncaster and Sheffield is one in 201, which continues for only half a mile, which, as the heavy goods would have to descend it, Is extremely favourable. On the northern branch there is a gradient of one in 1 17, but nine-tenths of the heavy traffic would have to descend that line. The smallest radius of a curve is one of 20 chains, of which there are two instances, but both are near stations, so that they are advantageous rather than otherwise. The estimates are 5,2001. for fencing, 50,0001. for earth-works, bridges, 59,0111., masonry at different points, 44,0001., perma nent way 78,0001., land 22,0001., stations 25,0001., and 24,7891. for contingencies, being something more than 10 per cent. on the gross expense, the whole amount being 249,0001. The examination then proceeded on the points affecting the pro perties on the line. There are two turnpike roads crossed on a level, but the witness knew of several others of far more importance than those on a level. One of them was near the station at Doncaster, and the other near Kilnhurat. A long cross-examination then ensued on the discrepancy between the evidence as given by the witness on the expense of construc tion, and the testimony he gave a year ago, but the difference was reconciled by the explanation, that on the former occasion one part of the line was easy and cheap, and the other difficult and expensive. After this a conversation of considerable length was held on the opposition of Sir Joseph Copley, with whom the Swinton and Dou easter Company are ready to make any compromise consistent with their main object. The counsel, however, f or th a t gen tl em an ha v ing declined to make an election as to what deviation he would wish, Mr. Hildyard, for the promoters chose the South line, which only effected Sir Joseph Copley's property to the extent cf half an acre. There is to be an embankment near to the house Sprotborongh Hall, of about twelve or thirteen feet high. The - Committee then adjourned till to-morrow. IMPORTANT DECISION. DIRECT LONDON AND PORTSMOUTH. GUILDFORD, CHICHESTER, PORTSMOUTH, AND PAREZAM. Their Lordships met this monting, as usual, at eleven o'clock, In Room A (New Houses of Parliament), Lord Beaumont in the chair. .Lll the Members attended. Mr. ALSXANDEA then addressed the Committee on the part of the landowners petitioning against the Bill. Mr. Cubitt was recalled, and examined by Mr. TALBoT, as to the practicability of ajunction between the proposed line and the London and Epsom, which he said could be made within the limits of devia tion of the plans of last session, but not within the limits of the plans of this session. The reason why the junction was not practicable was, that the levels of the two lines would be different. It would be practicable to hoist the goods, &c., from one line to the other. He was not aware of any difference in the levels until his attention was drawn to it by the evidence of Mr. Lock. Mr. Cocravivi then proceeded to address the Committee on the part of the Guildford and Chichester. Mr. Cockburn's address, which occupied the Committee for more than an hour and a half, being concluded, Mr. Taa.acrr addressed the Committee for the promoters o( the Di na London and Portsmouth, at the conclusion of whose speech, The Committee ordered the room to be cleared, and after a consul tation, which lasted for about half an hour, The parties were re-admitted, and The Chairman announced the decision of the Committee in these words :—The Committee have decided by a majority that the pre amble of the Direct London and Portsmouth Railway Bid Is proved, and that the preamble of the Guildford, Chichester, Portsmouth, and Fareham is not proved. Au application was made for the Committee to pass the part of the Guildford and Chichester Bill, which had reference to the dock-yard branch, which branch was before the House in another Bill, which was unopposed, but which would be materially improved by the passing of this Pill ; but Te CHAIRMAN said that the Committee could not assent to this proposition. The Bill must be entirely thrown out, and the parties could, it necessary, bring forward a Bill for a deviation of the dock yard branch next session. The printed clauses were then gone through, and other clauses relating to the property of Mr. Dixon, one to bind the railway com pany to adopt the deviation proposed yesterday, the other to compel them to pass through his property on a viaduct. After some discus-- sion they were both rejected, as the Committee were of opinion that the provisions of the " Lands Clauses Consolidation" Act, were suffi cient to meet the case. Mr. Cole's opposition was disposed of by the Introduction of a clause proposed by his counsel. EPSOM AND DOZNXNG. It may be necessary to explain that this Bill is a part of the Direct London and Portsmouth, and that the decision made upon the latter applies exactly to it. The Committee having disposed of the cases of all the opponents of the Bill, finally rose at about a quarter to five o'clock. The Bills will be reported on Monday. HOUSE OF COMMONS. LLTNVI VALLEY. The Committee met again this day at twelve o'clock. Mr. Lldham, chairman. The Committee were occupied the whole of the day in hearing evi dence for the promoter.i. The witnesses were cross-examined by counsel who appeared for several landowners on the line. GROUP 11. The Select Committee appointed to consider the merits of the Bills comprised In this group re-assembled at the usual hour this morning ; Lard Morpeth In the chair. WEST CORNWALL. The consideration of this case was resumed. Evidence was ad duced on behalf of the opposing landholders to the line. The object of this evidence, it would seem, was to show that Mr. Brunel had not secured the best line the country would afford. The Committee was occupied with the opposition until its rising at four o'clock. GROUP XIII. This Con.mlttee met at 12 o'clock, Sir Wm. Clay in the chair. GLASGOW AND itzi.rawr inatow. The clauses of this Bid were proceeded with. An arguntent of some length took place on a clause providing that any company entering Ayr from Dalmellington should be allowed free access to the Glasgow and Belfast Union—Counsel for the Ayrshire and Galloway contending that this company should be named specially in the clause, and that certain rates for the use of the former hue should be specified, while Counsel on the other side maintained that the clause should be general and open to all rail ways, and that the rates should be left for consideration of another Parliament, or to the Board of Trade. The room was then cleared, and, after being out for upwards of an hour, the parties were called In. The CILAIRMAN intimated that the Committee had proposed a clause to meet the case in point, generally providing for the admis sion of any railway coming from Dalmellington, which the Legisla ture might in future sanction, at certain rates of toll to be fixed by arbitration. _ _ . Tha other clause.; of the Bill were agreed to, and the Chairman instructed to report the Bill, with the amendments, to the /Louse. CALEDONIAN EXTENSION. The CHAIRMAN intimated that he had consulted the Speaker respecting the point raised yesterday, and the Speaker concurred in the opinion of the Committee, that parties petitioning against a scheme had still it locus staAdi, though the promoters of it might de cide Lo nrithdraya a portion from the consideration of the Committee. btMvnow near font*. o'clock the Committee adjourned till liondnyvat one o'doek. • „ The XVII. The CoMmitteirt et :at the' era ” ttsiaal li tour, li t T he ° l7on. E. Y o rke irtthethalri, . , .3fr. ILATEERTcoccocrunetwea th e • • to this project by calling tion," the south.w Mr. J. Houghton, farming about a.ri e arn Sunninghill, Berks, about seven miles itenaTh e e f tr a .at , Itroom-han. Great Western. He said sheep did not go I n ri t Zktn,..- ---tton of the Weyhi/I and other fairs to the north, their 'course'bArVes Item to west and vizever.o. Driving , Sheep was preferable to°2*a.t them by railway, and if the railway were made, he did net would be used for their transmission. He did not use th ni a, ti t 'Western for this purpose on account of his objection to sending them by railway. Driving did not injure them, in fact. Sand obtained from the Isle ofNight, he considered, would not be conveyed to'the north by' the proposed line as the lea st expensive mode would be by Gloucester: TheCusaamax inquired of the witness, if a gentleman carrying on 'business in. the Potteries had stated that he should save several Itmadreds in the course of a year by having sand trammittect to him from the Isle of Wight by the lit w hether he should con sider him a madman or a lunatic? The witness said if he had stated this, he should certainly consider him out.of his senses. Mr. HATIIESTON protested against the chairman instituting com parisons between the testimony of the witness in his examination in chief, and asked when his Learned Friend on the other side would have an opportunity of cross-examining him as to his testimony. He was sure no member of the Committee would become an advocate of the line sitting there, as they did, in their judicial capacity. - The CitaitsMax said, without any wrangling , he would state why he Instituted such a comparison between the testimony of the wit ness and Of Mr. Addington, tho gentleman to whom he referred. ;.rhat gentleman was actually engaged in business in the - Potteries, and he distinctly stated that the line would - he of the utmost benefit to him as he should save several hnintreds in the course of the year by the proposed Manchester and Southampton line—the witness, who was not en gaged in the trade, stated diametrically the reverse. Ile considered then that a person not angagel in the trade, but filing the avoca lion of a farmer, was not a proper witness to give testimony on this imint. if they brought a person from the Potteries, who made a similar state neat, they would be bound to listen him. Mr. AtnEitTost said the witness was one whom the opponents of the line, in their judgment, considered a fit person to give testi mony before the Committee. The examination of the witness was then continued, and he reite rated all he had stated, and generally disapproved of the line, as not - `repaired by the wants of the district. in llis cross-examination by Mr. Sergeant WRANGFIAII, he stated that he did not know the cost of getting sand to the north of the 'Jersey - . The cost of sending a ton of sand to Birmingham from Southampton would be 10s. a ton Mr. Sergeant Wasphaasst called his attention to the fact that Mr. Addington had stated that the cost of getting a ten of sand to the north was 30s. It was unlikely that they would use the present route if the line were made. and the charge was only 10s. a ton in stead of 30s. Witness—lf Mr. Allday, a cattle dealer, or any person, stated that be and his friends drove 60,000 sheep to Gloucester, and sent them to the north by the existing railway in the course of a year, he should not believe him. He was certain he would not make such a statement befbre men of business in the locality. In , his cross-examination by Mr. ALEXANDIE, he stated that he Savo evidence last year before the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolver hampton Committee, to the effect that direct railway communication from Droitwich to the south, for the conveyance of salt for agricul tarot purposes, would be advantageous. He was of that opinion still. Mr. W. Griffiths, residing in the Isle of Wight, produced a speci men of the sand raised there for the purpose of being converted into glass, and stated that the conveyance of the commodity by ships was preferable to a railway. A vessel carried from 100 to 110 tons. In his cross-examination, he stated that several days were occupied in loading a vessel—sometimes several weeks—and that it would be of advantage to be able to carry it away in small quantities. Mr. Dangerfield, coach-master at Cheltenham, formerly ran coaches from Cheltenham to Southampton, but discontinued them as they were unprofitable ; but attributed this in a great measure to the opening of the existing railway ; if, however, he were going to Southampton, h 3 should use the most direct line. The inhabitants of Cheltenham were migratory, and went frequently to Southampton and the Isle of Wight. Mr. B. Palmer, lessee of the Luggershall-gate, on the road between Southampton and Cheltenham, said the tolls amounted to 200 t. a year, but the traffic from the neighbouring fairs did not come that way, so that that gate was not a fair criterion. The large tolls were not taken at that gate, and some thon.and persons going north did not come through it. The Committee then adjourned till one o'clock on Monday. GROUP XVIII. EXETER DISTRICT . The Committee met at the usual hour, Mr. B. Denison in the chair. The Committee proceeded this morning with the consideration of an d Dorchester, and the the various clauses of the Exeter , Ye ovil, London, Salisbury, and Yeovil Railway Bills. The clauses relating to the tolls were postponed. The several other clauses having been agreed to, Mr. SLADE, on the part of the Great Western Company, proposed to the Committee to recommend the i ns ertion, making it imperative upon the company to lay down additional rails for the accommoda tion of the broad gauge between Exeter and Yeovil. Mr. MBRREWETUER objected to it on the grounds of the inconveni ence it woul d cause to the through traffic of the line. The fjp o room it the partieswecaa was i then animated being do c t l g e t ha discussion ree calledn d. in they were informed that the Com e sh should be placel al d at t down this periodth is of manner. the mi ß tt irthe b r ad ai d i basiness. " ' V The CHAIRMAN stated, that be wished to call the attention of the parties, but more especially of Mr. Saunders, the secretary to the Great Western, to a statement which had been made to him by Mr. Creed, the Committee clerk, to the effect that some observations had been made in the course of a conversation which he (Mr. Creed) had had with Mr. Saunders outside the door of the Committee, Mr. Saunders having stated, that he had taken advan tage of his situation, as clerk to the Committee, to make re marks, or give expression to certain opinions calculated to prejudice the minds of the Committee against the scheme of the Great Western. Now he (the Chairman) begged to state, in justice to Mr. Creed, that in the opinion of the Committee that gentleman had not, in the slightest degree, overstepped the bounds of his duty as a servant to the House of Commons, and further, that anything he might have stated to the Committee would not, in the slightest degree, have affected the decision to which the Committee would have felt it their duty to arrive. If the charge was persisted In by Mr. Saunders, of course he should think it his duty to represent the ease to the House. Mr. COCKBURN stated that the interference alluded to by Mr. Saunders, had been very generally noticed by the members of the bar among themselves. The CHAIRMAN did not think that such charges cents be brought against mat gentleman, at least, however, so far as that Committee was concerned, he would say there was not the slightest ground for such charge ; he had not, in the opinion of his Hon. Colleagues, done any more than was actually required of him in his capacity as clerk to the Committee. The matter then dripped. After some discussion a clause was inserted for the protection of the property of the Earl of Digby. The Comilla( e then adjourned till twelve o'clock to-morrow. GROUP xxxr. This Committee re-assembled this morning at the usual hour ; and after considerable time occupied in consultation, the subject of which was kept private, the room was ordered to be cleared. The room was shortly after thrown open to the public. We ascer tained that the Chairman and Committee-clerk had been to con sult the Speaker as to whether or not any communication had been received from the Board of Trade with respect to the break of gauge between Gloucester and Stonehouse, The Ceetamax, on his return, after consulting with his colleagues, announced that the Committee were of opinion that the preamble of the Bill had been proved, and that the line was to be constructed on the narrow gauge, so as not to Interfere with the broad gauge, which is already laid down. Tha Committee then adjourned. GROUP XXXIII. The Committee on this group met to-day at twelve o'clock, in Room 24. Present, Sir Robert Ferguson, the Marquis of Worcester, Viscount Newry, Mr. Smollett, and Mr. Fellowes. They resumed the consideration of the Warwickshire and London Railway (three branches), namely— WORCESTEIR. AND WEEDON, HAMPTON AND .ASHCHURCH, HAMPTON AND DANBUN.Y. According to the understanding come to yesterday, the engineering evidence was proceeded with at the sitting of the Committee. Mr. Robert Stephenson, the engineer of the line, was examined in minute detail, by Mr. Arnim, Q.C., for the promoters. He stated generally that the objects of the line were to give railway accom modation to every important town in the district, of which Norwich might be considered the focus, and which might be described as lying between the Great Western Railway and Birmingham. The proposed railway would not only give local connexion, but a thorough connexion in every direction through the several trunk lines already existing or sanctioned. The three lines were connected with each other, and were also under one management. The engineering character of the lines was favourable. There was but one difficult gradient, and, on the whole, he considered them the best that could be formed in the country included between Weedon, Banbury, Worcester, Birmingham, and Rugby, with Warwick and Leamington In the centre. The examination of this gentleman occupied the whole of the morning. _ _ . Mr. Locke confirmed the engineering evidence of Mr. Stephenson. Mr. COCKBURN opposed the Bills on behalf of the petitioning land owners, Lord Willoughby de Broke, Lord Saye and Sele, Sir John Cope, and thirteen others. The Committee then adjourned till twelve o'clock on Monday. GROUP XXXVIII. LEEDS, DEWSBURY, AND MANCHESTER, (wastErrELD EXTENSION). The Committee met at the usual hoar; Mr. Divett, chairman. Several witnesses were examined in this case with reference to the traffic, and evidence of other general nature was taken. The Committee rose at four o'clock 1111PERJAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, June 19. The Ea-1 of SHAFTESBURY, in the absence of the Lord Chancellor, took his seat on the Woolsack at Five o'clock. On the motion of Lord BROUGHAM, the Southwark Drainage Bill was read a third time. LUNATIC ASYLUMS ACT. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from the inhabitants of Whitchurch, Herefordshire, praying for the re peal of that part of the Act making it binding on justices of the peace to build county lunatic asylums. Messengers from the Wuse of Commons brought up several Bills, and prayed their Lordships' concurrence to them. FREE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. Lord CAMPBELL presented several petitions from Dundee, Greenock, Dumfries, and other places in Scotland, in favour of the Bill for procuring sites for the Free Church of Scotland. The petitioners did not wish to interfere with the rights of property; all they claimed was the liberty of worshipping God according to the dictates of their consciences, and for that pur pose wished to have the means of doing so. LAW OF DEBTOR AND CREDITOR. Lord BROUG HA N.' laid on the table a Bill for the better regulation of the law of debtor and creditor. The Noble Lord said he would not press the Bill forward till he had an oppor tunity of consulting the Noble and Learned Lorl en the Wool sack, and the Noble Lord behind him ( Lord Campbell). The Bill was read a first time, and ordered to he printed. The Bishop of NORWICH presented a petition, very nu merously signed, against the sale of intoxicating liquors on the Lord's day. SEES OF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR. The Earl of FITZ WILLIAM presented a petition from the Rev. Mr. Gordon, a rector in the county of Oxford, against the union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. He agreed with the petitioner, that instead of diminishing the number of bishops, there ought to be a large increase of them. He was favourable to a diminution of the income of individual bishops, but not to the extent that petitioner went. The Bishop of EXETER heard the sentiments ex pressed by the Noble Earl with great pleasure. He said that the cry throughout the country for an increase of the number of bishops in the Church was a loud and earnest one, and he hoped it would be attended to. He was of opinion that there was no necessity for an increase to their salaries, but he thought there ought to be an adequate number of bishops for the spiritual wants of the country. The question as to whether the new bishops should have a: seat in the House of Lords was a secondary question, though, for his own part, he thought that the dignitaries of the Church ought to have a seat in that House, alongside the aristocracy of the country. T.nrd RROTTG HAM said that this one wnicn affected the constitution of the country, and ought to have the most serious consideration before any determination was come to respecting it. After a few words from Earl FITZWILLIAM, The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH thought it an extremely inconveni,nt course for any discussion to take place on such a subject without previous notice. The petition was then ordered to lie on the table. CANADIAN DISPATCH. Lord LYTTELTON said he was not in the House when the Noble Duke on the cross-benches referred, a few evenings ago, to the dispach to Lord Cathcart. He rose to say that the dis patch was not sent to the newspapers, but laid upon the table of that House. The Dukc of RICHMOND said that he was not aware he had anything to explain. All he said was, that if he were Governor-General of Canada, he would have felt indignant that his dispatches, before they reached him, were previously published in the papers of the mother count"► SUPERINTENDENCE OF CONVICTS BILL. _ _ The Duke of RICHMOND wished to call the attention of the House to what he considered to be a great evil. He wanted one improved state of discipline throughout the goals of this country. Formerly the inspectors of prisons were fully efficient in number to perform their duties, but since the limi tation of their number those gentlemen were unable to per form all the arduous duties of their offices. He had no °lvo tion to their salaries being increa.ed, but he was opposed to their being appointed to the performance of duties which did not come within their province. He should move, as an amendment, that inspectors of prisons should not be eligible to serve as superintendents of convict•. After a few words from Lord LYTTELTON the gallery was cleared for a division. On our re-admission to the gallery, the numbers were— Content . Non-Content ... 21 Majority against the amendment —2 The House then resolved itself into Committee on the CORN IMPORTATION BILL. The Duke of RICHMOND said if he knew anything of the high-minded yeomanry of the country, he felt satisfied that they could be ashamed to ask anything of Sir Robert Peel, who had cruelly deceived the country. He respectfully de manded that the House should adopt the clauses he was about to propose as an act of justice to the farmers. He conceived that they were not !going to legislate like those cold-blooded capitalists,.-who openly confessed that they would screw every possible shilling out of the tenants' pockets. Surely they could not compel men to pay 50s. a quarter for wheat, when in the market it was selling for 40s. He contended that they must not throw the tenant tied hand and foot to the tender mercies of the Anti-Corn-law League. He proposed that every tenant' should have the power twelvemonths after the passing of that Act, to give his landlord six months' notice of his intention to quit ; and then he proposed by arbitration to settle the claims of the tenants for compensation ; and the arbitrators were to be the Commissioners of the commons and wastes of this country. The Noble Duke concluded by moving the addition of the clause, which he read, to the Bill. Earl of RIPON—So entirely did he agree with the obser vations of kis Noble Friend with respect to the worthy class he had eulogised that he would vote with him, if he did not think that there would be no end to litigation in all parts of the country, if the clauses proposed were adopted with the Bill. He could:not see the necessity of going out of their way to do that which on every principle was objectionable. He knew that a more generous landlord than his Noble Friend did not exist in the country, and he felt sure that if any of his tenants were to wish to be relieved from any pressure that might result from the passing of the measure, his Noble Friend would im mediately release him. He certainly could not consent to the introduction of the clause. Lord MADIESBURY thought that the introduction of the clause was only one of the many difficulties which they would have to encounter in dealing with the Bill. The law would put the tenants completely under the power of the landlords. They had been made to sow under one law, and were now com pelled to reap under another law. He was not ready to place the tenant entirely at the mercy of the landlords, and he should therefore, support the amendment. Earl of MORNINGTON said, that having resided abroad for several years, he was much surprised when arriving in Eng land, at the change that had occurred in the social order amongst the yeomanry. He found them a greatly improved class of people, and intelligence had greatly increased among them. He had served 110 notices on his tenants, who rented land at a very small amount, and he wished to show to those of their Lordships who opposed the Bill from their fear of finding no tenants to occupy their farms, that the inferior order of tenants would be succeeded by a superior class. There was one instance on his estate of a place called Rochford Farm, the birth-place of Anna Boleyn, which he bad undertaken to let at 1,4001. a year, and within a week afterwards he had an offer from another man of 1,8001. a year for the same farm, which of course he could not aceept. He had conversed with many farmers • and one, whom he had seen scarcely two hours ago, in alluding to the proposed measure, said that he began to think that Sir Robert Peel was going right at last. He had heard all the speeches of the Opposition in the House, and they did not contain one single new argument or one new fact ; they were all attuned to the same cry, " The tenants will be ruined."—( A laugh.) He had been to many auctioneers, and had asked them whether they had any difficulty in finding purchasers for land, and they replied, " Not the least. He doubted not but that the price of land would be raised every day after the pas.ing of the mea sure, and that opinion would be confirmed before long by the farmers of England. They had already established the prin ciple of reciprocity, which was more than ;lir. Huskisson had ever done, and let them not shrink from proceeding with the great work which they had so nobly begun, and which had already allayed the irritated feelings of foreigners to the Eng lish. Mr. Pitt had attempted those things, but in consequence of foreign war had never been able to accomplish the change. The newspapers on the continent were a much better exponent of public feeling and opinion than the newspapers in this country, and the differetice in the tone of the foreign public journals to wards this country was very great. until very recently they abused the policy of England, and now they were extolling it to the utmost. He felt satisfied that the measure would not be injurious to the tenant-farmers or to the landlords, but he saw so many bright prospects to come from it that he could not consent to have any portion of it mutilated, nor interfered with in any wa y. He thought that the amendment proposed by the Noble Duke ( Richmond) had no necessary connexion with the measure, and he should certainly oppose it. Lord ABING DON believed he was a protectionist, a great protectionist • r.ay, more, an exalted protectionist.— ( Laughter.) The farmers had strong constitu tions, and a strong feeling of attachment and loyalty to their Sovereign. If there were no protection their would be no woolsacks.—(Laughter )—( Here the Lord Chan eellor left his seat. ) He had always been a constant supporter of a Conservative Government and now regretted that all his cherished principles were be thrown overboard. It he were accustomed to speak heshould detain the House at much greater length. In early youth he had served I. is country, and had been brought up, not under a bishop, but under a Gallant Duke. He had been appointed chief drummer in the band—( Roars of laughter)—and subsequently he had been ap pointed Speaker to that House, and he proved that he could perform the duties of the latter office as easily as he transacted the duties of the former office. Lord STANHOPE did not mean to make a reply to a speech which was totally irrelevant to the question before the Howe. He said the Noble Earl (Mornington ) called on them to defend protection; and, though defeated, they assuredly would defend it while breath were in their bodies. They con tended that the measure proposed was opposed to the best inte rests of the country. He had only to refer to the general and unsolicited movement among the farmers from one end of the country to the other. About three years ago there was a ge neral movement, unsolicited by landlords, against the reduction of duty. But here was a measure which proposed to reduce the duty from 165., as it was at present, to 4s. a quarter. Then they ought to look at the rents at which farms were let. Why, the reduction of 10s. a quarter on wheat in the market, he said, would annihilate the rent of the corn land where such wheat had grown. He was not speaking at ran dom when he referred to such a reduction. He could quote the speeches of Sir Robert Peel, who had promised uni versal cheapness to the whole community. But at whose cost, he asked, was this cheapness to come about? But turning from these merely introductory re marks, he would confine his attention to the amendment of the Noble Duke. And, as to that, he differed so far from the President of the Board of Control that he thought no amendment was ever more founded on the pure principles of eternal justice. That amendment was the more necessary in these days of political experiment and chimerical notions, to save the tenantry from coming ruin. The Noble Earl had said it would produce confusion. He (Earl Stanhope) did not see that such a power given to the tenant was any more than existed already in the case of the tenant-at-will. The Noble Earl had said that the amendment had no connexion with the Bill, but it was certainly his opinion that it proposed what was due from even-handed justice as it affected the tenant. The Earl of MORNINOTON rose to explain what he said concerning Alr.yitt, that he was a free-trader; and read from involved had inF not France, war.ce, beena n allo and of America, He a speech by Mr. Pitt, w hi c h t h e N o bl e E arl said fully proved what he had a verre d, if th e i r L or d s hi ps would take into ac count (the they prop osed. rre circumstancess which eooupf were or n in gj o t f o the) just before country, fsoaried he of his time at h ome ,• he had been much ab roa d, an d k new what, but f or th at ; h e would not have known, and he was deec even firm etd e certain that th ey cou ld never ava i l themselves of the advantages they would ga i n f rom the Continent, till they were prepared, ha thevu the the hm w es a po y of lwhichceyc r eciprocity ot they ey n. t w erehHi this c o ho w audn t tamrki met with d t o t hmeet many t o who e h n e t m i n o n n ct on such liberal principles, and they inv y ariably s aid they could that the p not make th ose on the Continent believe they we re sincere in wh a t Now, he (the Earl of 1 1 Iornineton) was sure that su c h a measure as the p resen t would greatly extend their moral power on the Continent ; and he was sure a lso h t c*t measure e was perfectl y in the spirit of Mr. Pitt' s policy. THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORNING, JUNE 20, 1846 GROUP %LI This Committee reassembled to-day at twelve o'clock, and re sumed the consideration of the NLANCIIESTED., BOLTON, AND BURY CANAL NAVIGATION' AND RAILWAY BILL. Mr. °moll, on the part of the corporation of Salford, ad dressed the Committee against the Bill. lie said that the town corporation of Manchester bad considered the town of Salford of such importance as to have improved the approaches on the Manchester aide of the river at considerable ex pense. An embankment bridge had also been erected, and tbr the purpose of rendering the town of still greater utility to the public it was intended to expend further sums of money on similar Improvements. Through one of the streets of the town crossed by the proposed railway no less a number of cattle and passengers than fourteen and a half millions passed annually, and this street would be effectually blocked up by an abutment which would be erected by the proposed project. From what he had stated, if, as he had no doubt it would be fortified by evidence, the Committee must perceive that the proposed project would do Infinitely greater disservice than advantage to the public. After hearing evidence in support of this statement the Committee adjourned. GROUP ILII. LIVERPOOL, ORMSKIRIC, AND PRESTON. The Committee re-assembled this morning at the usual hour. The business was commenced by The examination of Mr. M'Phee, the engineer, who was partly examined yesterday. It was concluded this morning. It was to the effect that there were so engineering difficulties, the gradients favourable, and the estimates fully sufficient to carry out the con struction and working of the line. Another witness was examined as to the value of the land through which the line would pass. It was proved that the sum put down in the estimates was fully sufficient to remunerate the owners of the land for any damage that might be caused by the passing of the line. Mr. Errington, the engineer, was then called, and examined at considerable length in support of the engineering capabilities of the line. lie supported the evidence of Mr. M`Phee in every particular as to the practicability and usefulness of the line. The conclusion of the examination of Mr. Errington closed the Case tbr the promoters, after which the case of the landowners in opposi tion to the line was opened, and Mr. Siniker, a farmer, the Earl of Sefton, and other were examined, to prove the residential and other injuries that would be occasioned if the line was adopted. They were of opinion that neither the public interest nor the welfare of the dis trict would be benefited. The Committee then adjourned. GROVE XLVI. NEWCASTLE AND CARLISLE BRANCH. The Committee appointed to consider the merits of this line met to-day at twelve o'clock, in Room No. 13. The Committee were occupied during the whole day In the consi deration of the clauses of this Bill. GROUP XLVII. This Committee re-assembled this morning at twelve o'clock, in room 25 (Grand Corridor), and proceeded to hear witnesses and learned counsel against the SWANSEA VALE undertaking, but the preamble of the Bill was eventually declared by the Committee to be proved. The clauses Were gout through, and having been agreed to Vittca few verbal antendments, the Committee Adjourned at four o'clock • GROUP LIII. The Select Cominittee appointed to inquire Into this Group of Railway Bills re assembled this morning, pursuant to adjournment, in Room 26 (Grand Corridor); present, the Hon. E. Lascelles (in the chair), the Earl of Arundel and Surrey, Mr. Hildyard, Mr. It. Clay ton, and Captain Dalrymple. SHIM VISBURY AND BIR,IVIINGICAM. Mr. CORBETT opposed the line on behalf of certain landowners through whose property this project would pass. Mr. Thorneycroft was one of the principal of the petitioners. He intended. if the preamble were passed, to object' to the dausea, but he hoped that the preamble would not be declared by the Committee to be proved. The works of Messrs. Hatherton, Henderson, Hyde, and Clarke, and Joseph Mellor, of Wolverhampton, would be destroyed if the ];ill were passed. There was another line, which would come before the consideration of the Committee, which would afford his clients mach better accommoda tion than the Shrewsbury and Birmingham, and which would not at all injure their works. He therefore hoped that the Committee would pause well before they passed the preamble of thiS Bill. In endeavouring to accommodate some parties, the promoters of this Bill proposed to injure the interests of others Ins manner that Par liament could net sanction. He did not oppose the scheme merely on the old narrow ground that it was a railway. The peti tioners on the contrary, believed that a railway would be of infinite benefit to them, but they begged to repre sent that there was another scheme which would afford equal and even better accommodation, without inflicting the same injury on private property. The Learned Counsel then explained by the aid of a wooden model which lay on the table before the Com mittee, the manner In which this line would injure the property of his clients. If this line were formed, it would divide his extensive works._ which would render them less valuable. It would also cause ,; wmdes•-fields-road to be raised on a high embankment, which ur e . l .ru ia have the effect of forming a complete barrier is the access to vit zeirs works on the most extensive side. Further than obtaint t b,._t_he Shresisbury and Birmingham had not yet the manneeo ec ;.:!rpro trestees.of that road to interfere withit in templatedalteratt ee ,„ m b° trustees of the road were against the eon at that part where theii4w ' hbi eli th ent em 's , Zne rta res ; nl Inconvenience to th e „ Adi C . l . l 3 , a n ss uneernea a th m i o t, u a n s t t o o been it vested in the er,..um,.. ' slightest barrier were put t o tit . most serious, not only to them but tha t' , which would be raised to such a height f ea m use one s y eri li o a u d s results would d th be e district. The proposed interference en g„,. inr _mmi_ ty at laree in that uncalled for. Mr.. CoaBETT, having called the atten:tou:t rig u ata wa's totally to o the --'' Proceeded the local grievances which tis ne would tem, " e Committee t... to be afforded district through which this rifle " 1 ' Proposed to the dress them generally with reference o aose sa m od .„. to ad.. was little difference Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton, between that afforded by this lute the o x „ .. ,g The case of Mr. Thorneymi -1. ". and Wolverhampton . , t h a d Worce.ter, contended, that as between b hamDto., ther been attempted to be . . oh ! oh'd ' down by Learned Counsta, because he happen was one of the most intelligent, own witnesses admitted that lie ed to be the chairman of the rival line, but their wealthy. and respectable • .11 a local, but a ea merel) i sheuld consider this subject, not d Counsel had over and men in his neighbourhood. The Committee tional point of view. The Learne over again attempted to impress up But Mr. Chauee, tion did not profit, but damage the public interests . itted that the contrary ose of their witnesses, had, by chance, adm on the Committee that competi ' to the district throae, iwhich was the fact. The p , omoters of this line proposed to dry which had given good accommodation 160 miles, following .ffpri nal it passed. The line, which would be about 150 or tere. , 1 lie the course of the canal, would dodge in and out every Learned Counsel then dwelt at some length on the fact that all the ironmasters of Wolverhampton and the neighbourhood were not, as had been attempted to be represented, in favour of this scheme. On cross-examination the witnesses admitted that sonic of the most exterive iromnasters of that district were agaithit this line, and in favour of its rival. Why was th2re to be an ascent in this line at Wolverhampton of forty feet? Not for the interests of the inhabitants, but to benefit a few individuals who were interested in the Birmingham Canal. Should the Committee then decide that the station proposed by this Ccm pany for Wolverhampton was the best? Public opinion, he said, was no doubt divided upon the subject of these schemes ; he believed it would be proved by the witnesses on behalf of his clients, that that opinion preponderated in favour of the scheme which he had advo cated. The Learned Counsel having concluded his speech, which occupied nearly three hours in delivery, by calling in evidence. Mr. Thomas Merritt, architect, surveyor, and valuer, stated that Mr. Thorneycroft's works ranked second in the neighbourhood of Wolverhampton, and that the Shrewsbury and Birmingham would interfere most seriously with the access to the works. He described on the model before alluded to the situation of the works, and the manner in which the rival lines proposed to cross that part of the town. Mr. Thorneycroft had at present a frontage of 300 yardp to Horaley-flelda-road, which this lluo would cut off. From 10,000/.,0,17,000/. had been expended in the erection of Mr. Thor neyeroft's . wOrks ; they were amongst the best in the neighbourhood. The height of the embankment of the Horsley-fields-road, at the point where the Shrewsbury and Birmingham line would pass, would be 21 feet, the gradient would be 1 in 20. The eligible site of Mr. Thorneycroft's works enabled h m to manufacture his goods at a cheaper rate than he otherwise could do. The bulk of Mr. Hatherton's work would be destroyed, for the line proposed to pass through the works, and the adjacent valuable works of Messrs. Hatherton, Mr. Henderson, Mr. Clarke, &c., would be completely hemmed in by it. The witness, in cross-examination, admitted that the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway would not give the iron masters of Wolverhampton a direct communication with London, and that it, as well as the Shrewsbury and Birmingham line, would cut off a portion of Mr. Thorneycroft's works. If that gentleman were a consenting party, the promotdrs of this line would be able to give him access to his works, even if the line were made as proposed. Mr. Thorneycroft was the chairman of the rival companies, and one of the other petitioners against this project (Mr. Crane) was also interested in them. The approach to Mr. Barnett's works might be very much improved by the removal of the porter's lodge. The pre sent approaches to the other works already mentioned were not of the best description ; they were private occupation roads. There would be no slifilculty in giving access to every portion of Mr. Thorneycroft's works by constructing arches on the embankment of this line over a portion of his grounds. Mr. E. Hamilton, civil engineer and architect of Wolverhamp ton, confirmed the evidence of Mr. Merritt, and stated that it was impossible to calculate the injury which this line would in flict on the owners of the works in question. They could not possibly procure such sites in Wolverhampton as their works at present occupied. If they destroyed the means of Importing and exporting heavy goods into these works, they at once destroyed them. Mr. Crane and Mr. Hatherton would sufferdamage to the extent of 30,000/. if the line in its present shape were sanc tioned. Mr. Henderson would suffer to the same extent. The works were at present in a most convenient spot for carrying on business. Cross-examined by Mr. WADDINGTON—The works are adjacent to the canal, end the produce is generally carried by it. A direct com munication with London would be of great advantage to the manu facturers of Wolverhampton, if not encumbered with disadvantaBso, which he feared this line presented. Mr Barker, proprietor of the Chillington works, confirmed the preceding witness's evidence, and admitted, in his cross-examination, that he had been a director of the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolver hampton scheme, and was now a contractor for the rails. The Committee having, in reply to Mr. Lang, stated that they would take the Dudley line next, adjourned at four o'clock till twelve on Monday next. GROUP LS 111. MIDLAND RAILWAY (PURCHASE OF OAIIRADI CANAL). This Committee met to-day at twelve o'clock, in room No. 8. The greater part of the day was occupied in the consideration of the clauses of the above Bill, the preamble of which was declared proved a few days since. The Committee adjourned until twelve o'clock to-morrow. GROUP LXIV. This Committee re-assembled to-day at eleven o'clock. XILISH GREAT WESTERN (PORT/LAZING— TODI - .11;t1 11.i41.JA lA/ IVY), cra%4l 111 . 1.1aJlaCiatir2ia 11111R.Z1111.:17 WESTERN (111IUMLINGAR TO ATHLONE). Mr. Sergeant WasNonam (on behalf of the latter Bill) resumed his arguments against the preamble of the former Bill, contending that as it was not shown that the present pro moters of the scheme intended to carry the undertaking into execu tion, but to dispose of it to parties who were under •no covenant to proceed with the work, it would be promoting a pernicious gambling in Bills coming before the Legislature. Mr. Sergeant Murphy replied. The CHAIRMAN then required that the subscription agreement of the Midland Great Western should be handed in. The portion of the deed containing the Scotch signatures vt as then produced, but the remaining portions were not forthcoming. Secondary evidence, however, cf the existence of the document was then given. The room was then cleared, and on our re-admission the Chairman announced that the Committee had decided that the preamble of the first Bill—namely, the Irish Greet Western Bill—was not proved, hut that the preamble of the Mullingar to Athlone Bill was proved. The Committee then adjourned till Monday. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS. BRISTOL, JITNE 18. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Bristol and Exeter, New, 10— Calsdoniau, 1 —Midland, New, 31%. LIVERI.'OOL, JUNE 18. NEW STOCK EXCHANGE.—The Share Market continues firm, and a slight improvement Is manifest. The sales are—Birkenhead, Lan cashire, and Cheshire Junction, 11. Is. 6d. p.—Derby and Crewe, 31. 16s. 3d. p.—Eastern Counties, York Extensions, 18s. 6d. p.—Grand Junc tion. 224—Great Grimsby and Sheffield, Extension, 1% dis.—Hud derstield and Sheffield, 5 p. —Leicester and Bedford, Is. 6d. dis.— Liverpool and Bury, 8 p.—Liverpool, Ormskirk, and Preston, 13s. 6d. p.—London and Birmingham, Quarter Shares, 27 p.—London and Brighton, 65%—Manchester and Birmingham, 82—Ditto Quar ter Shares (B), 9;4 p. —Manchester and Southampton, % dis.—Mid - land Stock, 401. Shares, 13% p.—North Staffordshire, 16s. 6d. p. — North Union Stock (A), 209—North Western, par—Preston and Wyre, Half Shares, New (B), 14 p.--Sheffield and Manchester Quarter Shares, No. 2,1% p.—South-Eastern, New, Halt Shares, 4 p.— West Riding Union, 2% p.— Caledonian, 3%—Dutch Rhenish, IA, p MANCHESTER, JUNE 18. STOCK Excnltioz.—The sales are--Boston, Stamford, and Bir mingham, it dls.—Chester and Manchester Direct, 245. 6d. dis.— Clitheroe Junction, 225. dis. —Derby and Crewe, 4 p.—Eastern Coun ties, York Extension, 1 p.—Leicester and Bedford, 1-16 dis.— Liver pool, Ormskirk, and Preston, 13-16 p.—Manchester, Buxton, Mat lock, and Midland, It c p.—Manchester and Birmingham, Quarters (B), 914 p.—Ditto, ditto (C), 8% p.—North Eastern, 1 11-16 dls. —North Staffordshire, 3% p.—Preston and Wyre, Halves (B), p. Sheffield and Lincolnshire Junction, par—South-Eastern and Dover, Halves (No. 4), 4s. p.—South Midland, 7 4 dis.—Welsh Midland, 134 dis.—West Lancashire Coast, 34 dis.—West Riding Union, 2 3-16— Dutch Rhenish, 1% p. LEEDS, JUNE 18. STOCK EXCEWNGE.—The sales are—Eastern Counties, York Ex tension, 20s. p.—East Lancashire, 2% p.—Huddersfield and Sheffield, 5 p.—Leeds and Bradford, 26% p.—Leeds and Dewsbury, 1% p.— Leeds and Thirsk, 53 dis.—Neweastle and Berwick, 10 p.—North British, Carlisle Branch, 9s. 6d. p.—Clitheroe Junction, 235. dis.— Leicester and Birmingham, 17s. dis.—Liverpool, Ormskirk, and Pres• ton, I Is. p. —London and Portsmouth, 10s. dis.—London and Man chester (Rem.), 395. dis.—Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Mid land, 14s. p.—Northumberland and Lancashire Junction, 15s. 9d. dis.—North Staffordshire, 3/. 161. p.—North Western, is. Gd. p.— Oxford, Witney, and Cheltenham, 20s. dis.—Shrewsbury and Bir mingham, par—South Midland, 15s dis.-- West Riding Union, 4/. 4s. SHEFFIELD, JUNE 18. STOCK EXCIZANGE.—The sales are—London and Cro3don, 22 Sheffield and Manchester, Quarter Shares, No. 3 (scrip), 2s. 6d. p.— Grimsby and Sheffield Extension, 225. dbl.— Leeds, Wakefield, and Midland, 17s. dis.—Liverpool, Ormskirk, and Preston, 10s. p.--Shef field and Lincolnshire Extension, 20s. dis.—Sheffield, Buxton, Leek, Potteries, and Crewe, 13s. lid. dis. , HULL Jorts 18. STOCK BECTLCSOZ.—The sale; are—Hull and Selby, Ralf Shares, 36 —North British, Carlisle, 335. 9d.—Ambergate, Nottingham, and Boston, 255. 64.—East Lincolnshire, 16s. 3d.—Leicester and Bedford, 20s. 6d.—Leicester and Tamworth, 11(—London and York, 2—Man chester, Buxton. and Matlock, 21. 14s. &I.—North Western, 235. 6d.—North Staffordshire, 5/. 19s. 6d.—West Riding Union, 4%. NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, Juxm 18. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Leicester and Tamworth, 17s. dls.—Maryport and Carlisle, par--North British, Halves, Carlisle, Bs. 6d. p.—North Staffordshire, 1 p. YORK, JUNE 18. STOCK EXCEANOE.—The sales are —Azheltne, It. 12s.—Eastern Counties, York Extension, 11. Bs.—Grand Union (Nottingham and Lynn), 12s. 6d.—lpswich and Bury, B%—Leicester and Bedford, 11. 2s.—Leicester, Tamworth, Coventry, &c., 1 —Malton and Drif ileld Junction, 21. 1 ls.-3lanchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Mid land, 21. 15s. 6d.—Newcastle and Berwick, 2534—Newcastle and Darlington, Extensions, 91. 3s. 9d.—North British, Carlisle Exten sion, 11. 14s..—Ditto, Dalkeith, 3134—North Staffordshire, 5/. 18s. 6d.—West Riding Union, 4M—York and North Midland Extension, 3354—Ditto, New (East and West Riding), )114. EDINBURGH, JUNE 16. STOCK EXCHANOE.-The sales are-Aberdeen, 31. 55.--Aberdeen, Banff, and Elgin, U. Gs. 6d.-Airdrie and Bathgate, 3/. 11s.-Ar broath and Forfar, 271. 10s.-Ditto, Half Shares, 151. 10s.-Ar magh and Portrush, 12s. 6d.-Ayr and Galloway, 11. 45.-Ayr shire and Bridge of Weir, 2/. 45.-Banffshire, 165.-Belfast and County Down, 11. 15s. -British and Irish Union, 21. 2s. 6d.-Cale donian, 111.-Ditto, New, 1/. 10s.-Caledonian Extension, 1/. 55.- Caledonian and Dumbarton, 11. Bs. 6d.--Caledonian and Northern Direct, D. 145.-Carnwath and West Linton, 1/. N.-Chelmsford and Bury, 12s. 6d.-Clydesdale Junction, 131.-Cornwall and Devon Central, H. Bs.-peestde Railway, W.-Direct Northern, U. 16a.- Dublin and Enniskillen, 1/. 10s.-Dundee and Arbroath, 381.- Ditto, New, 211. 55.-Dundee and Forfar Junction, 11. 165.-Dundee and Earth, 171.-Ditto, Kinross Extension, V.-Eastern Counties Extension, 11. 55.-East Indian Railway, 9s. 6d.-East of Fife, 1/. 1 Is.-East Lothian Central and Tyne Valley Junction, 1/. ss. 6d.- Edinburgh and Bathgate, 21. 35.-Edinburgh and Glasgow, 751.- Ditto, Half Shares, 171. 10s.-Ditto, Quarters, 181.-Ditto, ditto, New, 18/.-Edinburgli and Leith Atmospheric, IN.-Edinburgh, Leith, and Granton, 15/. 10s. -Dille, Preference, 19/.-Edinburch and Northern, Si. 100.-Ditto, Newport, 10s.- Edinburgh and Peebles, 11. Ils. M.-Edinburgh and Perth, I/. IN.-Edinburgh, Portobello, and Musaelburgh, 1/. 9.5.-Forth and Clyde Junction, 11. 195.- Glasgow and Ayrshire, 731. 10s.-Ditto, New Stock, 321. 10s.- Ditto, Quarter Shares, 18/. IN.-Glasgow and Belfast Union, 2/. 25.-Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle, 2/. Is. 6d.-Glasgow and Dundee Junction, 11. 125.-Glasgow and Garnkirk, 40/. 10s.-Glas gow General Terminus, Si. 12s. 6d.--Glasgow and Greenock, 16/. 10s.-Ditto, New, 8/. 155.-Ditto, Preference, 11. 155.-Glasgow Han bour Grand Junction, 1/. 105.-Glasgow Harbour Mineral, IL 155.- Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ardroasan, 11. Bs.- Glasgow, Strath even, and Lesmahagow, 2/. Bs.-Granton Junction, 10s.-Great County Down, 11.75. Gd.-Great North of Scotland, li. 135.-Inver ness and Elgin, 1/. Is. Gd.-Lanark and Lothians, 21. 4s. Gd.- -Larne, Belfast, and Ballymena, Gs.-London, Bristol, and South Wales, 11.-London and Hounslow, 155.-London and Manchester (East.), 3/. 125. 6d.-London and Manchester (Remington's), 15e. -London and York, 21. 25.-Ditto. Half Shares, V.-Midland and Eastern Counties, 1/.-Morayshire, 11.-Newcastle and Berwick, 851.-Newry and Londonderry, 165.-North British, 291.-Ditto, Halves, 111. -Ditto, Extension to Carlisle, 1/. 135.-Ditto, Exten sion to Dalkeith, GL North Staffordshire, 6/. 25.-North Wales Mineral, 141. IN.-Ditto, New, 6/. 10s.-Perth and Inverness, 11. 12s. 9d.-Scottish Central, 15/. 17s. 6d.-Ditto, New, 71. 55.-Scot tish Central and Caledonian Junction, 1/. 10s.-Scottish Grand Junction, 12s.- Scottish - Midland, 71.-Scottish Southern, 1/. 17s. 6d. -Shrewsbury and Hereford. 95.-Shrewsbury, Oswestry, and Ches ter, 31. Gs.-South Midiattd, 1/. 7s. 6d.-Stirling and Dunfermline, 1/. 11s. Gd.-Stirling and Midland, 2/. 25.-Strathern Junction, 1/. IN.-Surrey Grand Junction, 2s. 6d.-Wishaw and Coltness, 511. GLASGOW, JUNE 17. STOCK EXCHANGE. —The sales are—Direct NOithern, 345. 6d.— East Indian Railway, 9s.—Forth and Clyde Junction, 39s.—Glasgow General Terminus, 91.—Glasgow and Belfast Union, 41s. 6d.—Glas gow, Dumfries, and Carlisle, 3Ss.—Glasgow, 'Kilmarnock, and Ar drossan, 29s.—Glasgow Harbour Mineral, 25s.—Larne, Belfast, and Ballymena, ss.—Lesmaltagow, 50s.—London, Bristol, and South Wales, 19s. 6d.—Maneliester and Southampton, 235. 6d. —Perth and Crieff, 35s.—Scottish Central, 161. —Scottish Southern, 365. 6d.— Slamannan and Borrows touness, 66s.—Stirling and Dunfenialine, 30s. (ADVERTISEMENT.] —BRUSHES.—NEW INVENTIONS. —The Triple Hair Brush. One stroke of this is equal to the effect of one penetrating, five small-tooth combs, and one even cut brush ' • to be had in four sizes, No. 7, ss. 6d ; No. 8,7 s. 6d ; No. 9,9 s. 6d. ; , No. 10, 1 ls. 6d. The Double Anti- Pressure Nail Brush, which does not divide the quick from the nail, no pressure being 'required, and thoroughly cleans and po lishes the nails in a tenth part of the time of any other me thod; price in bone, ,No. 1,2 s. ; No. 2,2 s". 6d. ; No. 3,3 s. 6d. ; No. 4, ss. ; and of all sizes and prices in ivory. The New Tooth-pick Brush, which entirely enters between the in terstices of the closest teeth ; marks, full-sized brushes, No. 1, hard ; No. 2, less hard • No. 3, middling • No.• 4, soft. The narrow brushes, No. 5, ' hard ; No. 6, less hard; No. 7, mid dling ; No. 8, soft, at ls. each, or 10s. per dozen in bone ; and 2s. each, or 21s. per dozen in ivory, the hair warranted never to come out. The Medium Shaving Brush, between the usual badger hair and bristle brush, being a selection of the strongest hair only from the badger skin. in a variety of sizes, both in bone and ivory.' The above articles are the inventions of Ross and Sons, 119 and 120, Bishopsgate-street, London, and, being protected, any one imitating them will be proceeded against. , ANNIVERSARY OF THE BATTLE OF WATERLOO.— Thursday being the thirty-first anniversary of this victory, the mounting guard on the Parade, St..Tames's Park, had a large bunch of laurels at the top of their colours. As usual, the Waterloo men belonging to the Ist and 2d Life Guards, Royal Horse Guards Blue, those of the three regiments of Foot Guards, and the Royal Artillery, I . t o e f be ttra q i ni lw t ay Royal Engineers, and Sappers and Miners, at Woolwich, were exempt flrighton butchers , es ay from doing duty on the occasion. I ' BPIIGHTON AND LEWES RAILWAY.—Since the open ingbetwetn Lewes and Brighton the passengers daily reds by on lannyd n a t n s y . er oo n s is e a r. o s couldn availedhave themselves s e e x by p e e s c expected, ihand trip o n this means Of ell • Sunday last as en, as last, being the market day, most of the to and fro. as a portion of the stock they purchased, lirlithton at a much trahe'rcreYance, and consequently arrived in buildings at the Friars Stationi hour than they have hitherto done. The the flue weather having been exceedingly n progressing rapidly of late, poses. Throughout the line of the ie in favourabie for such pur of handt are employed, and it is slated ihaetrti'arisanehda great number completed in IS months. The centres are fixed fo u r a tl e t r e tkngwilt be bottom of Watergate-lane, and judging II•om the number bridge at the men at work at it, it will soon be made p assa bl e . A t the tunnel also are at work night and day. .We hear that the line from this town to' 'men to H a stings will be opened on the 29th instaut.—Brichlonpaper. A K N OTTY POlNT.—Three years ago, says a Paris paper, the courts and tribunals of Austria were consulted upon the .. knotty" qtlest,cn, whether there was reason to change tile mode of executhig cap it a l sentences, and sub s tit ut i ng decapitation for • Their reply was for the rejection of decollation sus pension.principal reason, that (as prac tised in France), for blood,th e but at the it accustomed the people to the sight of. on might be sae time they expressed a wish that some mOditicamade in the prevathng system which tortured the victim too A year ago of strangulation , t ofj'adua proposed to a surgeon of the univer?iy for which he t to the Government took care to have him selfa new method of strangula tion, d chiefly consisted of a mechanism which, when breveted. This metho d the gibbet, drew was fastened to him violently by when the criminal rt bral e the feet and the head , occasioned the dislocation of the vertebral I of the neck , and this occasioned inst an t aneous column on the level death. This method, after being tried for one year, has just b een Lombardo -Venetian kingdom, and the definitively adopted in the L om surgeon who invented it has , to the gre at surprise of his " companions " and compatriots, accepted the " honourable ofilce of director of executions," over which he wi ll be bound to preside, lit order to superintend the application of his plan. After a few words from Earl STANHOPE in explanation, Lord ASBBURTON (who was for some time inaudible) stated that the tenant-farmer was, by this Bill, exposed to con siderable risk. They were told that it was immaterial, so long as cheap bread could be obtained ; but it was not so, in his opinion. The loss would, in the first instance, fall upon the the tenant, vt - he,'finding a reduced price for his produce, would, no doubt, begin to "screw" his labourers. If by an Act of legislation they took away a large portion of the value of the soil, they were bound to make some equitable adjustment. A considerable amount of difficulty would attend such a course, and much litigation would necessarily be the consequence. Some reduction must necessarily be made by the landlord, whose interest would not be to keep people upon his estate who were ruining themselves as well as the land ; and he had no doubt that, after some time, some such arrangement would be come to. There was one evil which would most probably result from the adoption of this measure, and he had a motion to submit to the House with regard to it, but he would postpone it until they got upon the order of the day for the third reading. There were at present 2,000,000 of quarters of corn waiting to be admitted into the country, and the sudden admission of that corn at a very low rate of duty, with every prospect of an abundant harvest, would p ro d uce a ca l am it ous uffect. He spoke - as much to those favourable to the Bill as to these against it, to provide some measure against such a contingency. He could put off his amendment until Monday. The Duke of RICHMOND said that he could not withdraw his amended clause, nor could he press it to a division, for be did not see the advantage of being again beaten by a majority of 33, or perhaps 40, and he could not therefore discredit their Lordships by proceeding any further. After some discussion the question was then put, and the amendment was negatived. Lord DALHOUSIE and Lord MONTEAGLE said that they understood that the tariff was to be taken on Monday, and this Bill to be read a third time on the Thursday following. The Duke of WELLINGTON said that he understood that the Bills were to go pari passu. He had understood that the course to be adopted was to take the tariff on Tuesday, and the third reading of the Corn Bill on the Thursday following. If it seemed fit to their Lordships to alter that course it was not for the servants of her Majesty to object. After a few words from Lord CAMPBELL, it was even tually arranged that the Customs Duties Tariff Bill, with Lord Ashburton's resolution as a substantive motion, should betaken on Monday, and the third reading of the Corn Importation Bill on Tuesday. . _ _ The remaining clauses, with the preamble, were then agreed to, and the Bill was reported without amendment. The House then resumed. The other orders of the day having been disposed of their Lordahins adiourned at a Quarter p►st Nine o'clock; HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 19. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. Returns from the Poor-law Commissioners, Trinity House, and other public offices, were brought up. SECOND READINGS. The following Bills were read a second time, and ordered to be committed, viz. :—Larne, Belfast, and Ballymena Railway ; Limerick, Ennis, and Killaloe Railway; Mountmellick Junc tion Railway ; and Templemore and Nenagh Railway. REPORTS. The following reports were brought up and laid on the table, and the Bills were ordered to be engrossed, viz. : Blackburn, Darwen, and Bolton Railway; Cornwall Rail way ; Curtis's Divorce Bill ; Dudley Canal and Birmingham Canal Companies Amalgamation ; Eastern Counties Railway ( Stations Enlargement) ; Great Leinster and Munster Railway (No. I—Carlow to Kilkenny); London and Birmingham Railway and Birmingham Canal Arrangements. THIRD READINGS. _ _ The following Bills were read a third time and passed, viz.: —Argyll Canal ; Banffshire Reads; Caledonian Railway (Glasgow, Garnkirk, and Coatbridge Railway Branches); Eastern Counties Railway (Epping Extension); London and Blackwall Railway (Widening) ; Midland Railways (Burton upon-Trent to Nuneaton Branch and Ashby Canal Purchase); Newcastle and Berwick Railway; Newcastle and Darlington Junction Railway (Durham and Sunderland Railway and Wearmouth Dock Purchase and Branches); Scottish Central Railway (Crieff Branch). WEST LONDON RAILWAY (IMPROVEMENT AND EXTENSION j BILL. Captain MANGLES moved the third reading of this Bill; which was objected to by Mr. MASTERMAN, who proposed that the third reading should be postponed until Monday next, when he should move that clauses 21, 22, '23, and 24 be omitted. Captain MANGLES objected, on behalf of the promoters, to any delay being occasioned in the progress of the Bill. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the postponement of th• Bill was necessary, as litigation was pending between the City corporation and the company with respect to compen sation for the soil of the bed of the river. He thought the clauses alluded to should be retained. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the principle which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had laid down was quite correct, but he (Lord John Russell) did not see that any case had been made out by the Corporation of the City of London, and it would, therefore, be unfair towards the promoters of the Bill to postpone the third reading. After a short conversation, the House divided, when there appeared— For the Postponement For the Motion. Majority The Bill was then read a third time and passed. IPSWICH AND BURY ST. EDMUND'S RAILWAY. Earl JERMYN moved—" That the report on the Ipswich and Bury St. Edmund's Railway (Extension to Ely, with a Branch therefrom) Bill, and the Thetford, Bury St. Edmund's, and Newmarket Railway Bill, be taken into consideration upon Monday next."—Agreed to. REPORTS. The following reports were considered and agreed to :—The Ardrossan Municipal, Police, and Improvement; the Forth and Clyde Navigation and Bowling Bay Improvement; and the Stockton Gas. Captain LAYARD presented a petition praying the House to take into their consideration the late deduction of 5 per cent. in the amount of the pensions paid to the out-pensioners of Greenwich and Chelgea. UNION SETTLEMENTS. Lord MORPETH presented a petition from York in favour of the Union Settlements. SUDBURY DISFRANCHISENIENT. Lord MORPETH presented a petition from Doncaster, praying that the two Members should be added to Doncaster who had formerly beenreturnedf)rSudbury. ART UNIONS. Lord MORPETH also presented a petition from a town in the West Riding of York s hire in favour of the legalization of art unions. SEE OF ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR. Mr. FINCH presented a petition from Rutland against the union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. TAXING RAILWAY COSTS. Mr. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from a number of shareholders in the Dublin and Armagh Railway, praying the House to adopt some measures for taxing the costs of engineers and solicitors in railway Bills. An HON. MEmexit presented a petition from Queen's County, signed by a large body of landlords, praying that hal the rates should be paid by the landlord and half by the tenant. SUPPLY OF WATER TO THE METROPOLITAN POOR. Mr. HUME presented a petition from the working classes of the metropolis, stating that they were pleased to see the in quiry which was at present going on into the health of towns; but that they see with deep regret that in all the Acts which have been passed this session relating to the supply of water, there has been no provision for the poor ; the ACES have only contemplated the supply of water to the richer classes. He would give notice that be would put a question to the Govern ment upon the subject. Dr. BOWRING moved for a copy of a communication made by Lord Monteagle to the Board of Trade on the sub ject of burdens on land. MR. MOTT, THE LATE ASSISTANT POOR-LAW COMMISSIONER, In answer to Mr. W. 0. STANLEY'S inluiry as to the truth of some of the allegations which appeared a few days ago in the Times relative to the conduct of this individual in his management of a certain private lunatic asylum in the north of Lancashire, Sir J. GRAHAM said that he was quite willing ti• produce copies of any documents which migh have reached his hands in reference to Mr. Mott during the time that he was employed by the Poor-law Commissioners, which was now four years ago. A most gross statement had appeared in the Times a few days ago (but no doubt unintentionally), in which it was represented that Mr. Mott some years ago corn menced a newspaper, under his (Sir J. Graham's) patronage. He had to' state, in answer to that, that Mr. Mott was per sonally unknown to him, and that he had ceased to bean Assis tant Poor-law Commissioner for nearly four years. This error no doubt arose from the facts which he would state to the House. Mr. Aloft, on the 11th of March, 1843, became the editor of a weekly paper which was called the Poor Law Guide. It was printed, he believed, by Messrs. Bradbury and Evans, of London, and he believed that it was edited by Mr. Osborne, who also resided in London. This was in March, 1843. On the Ist of October, 1843, another periodical, called tke Union Gazette, was pub lished, edit e d by a gentleman named Marriott, which contained notices with reference to paupers who had deserted their families ; and the Board of Guardians of Netherby, of which he had the honour to be chairman, applied to the Poor- law Commissioners for permission to take in this publication for the purposes of the union, and the Poor-law Commissioners stated in reply that if the information was considered necessary they were at liberty to take in this publication, and to charge it upon the rates. He again repeated that Mr. Mutt has ceased to be a Poor law Commissioner for four years, and he could not possibly see how a statement so unfounded could be published. Mr. Mott was at no time the editor of a newspaper under his (Sir James Graham's) patronage. Mr. W. 0. STANLEY said the Right Hon. Baronet had alluded to him as in some way connected with the Times newspaper, with reference to the subject before the House.— " No, no.") He begged to say that he had nothing whatever to do with the article in question. Mr. DUNCO3II3E said the Right Hon. Baronet had omit ted to answer the most material part of the question, namely, whether any person having a joint speculation in the Lunatic Asylum was connected with the Poor-law Commission? Sir J. GRAHAM repeated that Mr. Mott had no longer any connexion with the Poor-law Commissioners. Mr. CHRISTIE wished to know whether Mr. Moffatt held office under the Poor-law Commissioners as a district auditor. In reply to the former part of the question he had nothing to say, as there was no certain information from the Commissioners at Somerset House. In reply to the second part it appeared that when Mr. Moffatt was introduced Mr. Oliver had certain districts appointed to him, but it having appeared to the guardians that the office of auditor was unnecessary, Mr. Moffatt had him suspended from his office. BARRACKS AT ARMAGH. Colonel RA WDON wished to know whether the design for the enlargement of the barracks at Armagh had been set aside ? The inhabitants of that town had spent much money in pro viding accommodation for the officers, and if this design were to be set aside they would lose large sums. He wished to know whether the grant was to be continued or not. The Earl of LINCOLN said that the sum of 5,0001. had been originally proposed, but it had a ft erwar d s been altered to under the for the enlargement of the baracks at' Armagh, he the impression that it was to be the chief depot . dis trict. But the military authorities had afterwards revised that decision, and made it a place for a detachment had been . was simply a military question, and on that ground de cided, ?PLANATION. SIR ROBERT PEEL'S Upon the order of the day E ming the debate on the !PROTECTION TO LIFE Speaker—Sir, in rising E:r(u.IRELAND) BILL, Sir R. PEEL rose and f s t a h t e day for resuming the de to move the order to Life (Ireland) Bill, I deeply bate on the Protection regret that it should be necessary for me to ob s t ruc t f or one ent the public b usiness b y taking up th e t i me of the in Fruse with any personal matter with regard to myself. I deeply regret that it should be necessasy for me to avail myself of what perhaps at best is but a doubtful privilege, of making an explanation of matters personally reflecting on myself ; but deeply as I must regret taking up the time of the House, and so delaying the public business, I doubt whether there is a Member in this House in whose estimation I should not fall if I did not avail myself of the earliest op portunity of noting the accusations made against me in this House on Monday evening.—( Hear, hear.) I deeply thank the House, at least many of the Hon. Members, for suspending their judgments at the time those accusation , : were made They telt no doubt that it was something hard that a public man should have so many charges made against him at this period, when they might have been preferred many times for the last fifteen years.—( flea-, hear, and cheering.) Why were they not made before? Why were they not made at a time when the opportunities of proving the whole matter were greater than they can be after the lapse of years ? ( Hear, hear.) I abaur under great disadvantages. I little thought that I should be cal'ed upon to answer for my acts since 1825. Since the year 1825 there have been many changes. There had been a severance from Mr. Canning ; there was also one with the Duke of Wellington and Mr. Canning; there was a separation in 1828. There were fierce conflicts in 18:29, and then I felt it neces•ary to support the Cath-lic Then came the formation of that Government of whioh the Right Hon. Baronet opposite was a distinguished meraber ; then shortly after succeeded the conflicts on the Reform Rill ; then came the dissolution of the Government of Lord Mel bourne in 1834. An How. Memean—Lord Grey !—(Contusion and cries of " No, no.") Sir R. PEEL—The dissolution of the Government of Lord Melbourne and the formation of that Government over which I presithd in 1835. I conducted the affairs of Gov. rnment with a minority for three months, and then yielded it again to the Hon. Gentleman opposite. Then at the close of these contests I thought that the events of 1825, 1827, and 1829, as far as any subject of crimination against me was concerned, was buried in oblivion.—(Great cheering.) When that speech was made on Monday night, I had no means of referring to a single paper which bore upon the events of those years; my time has been too fully occupied to allow me to examine at leisure the subject of the Hon. Member's accusation, and the secre taries by whoirs the letters of those years had been answered hive long ago ceased to exist. I have been myself occupied for the last three days in collecting materials and collating newspaper reports in order to free my reputation from the charges which have been directed against my veracity as a man, and my honour as a Minister.— ( T remen d ous c h eer i ng. ) Yes, Sir, 1 have looked at every newspaper with this object alone in view, for when I heard the charges which were urged against me, I felt within my own breast a perfect conviction that they were uufounded.—(Great cheers.) I heard them with that calmness which results from the accused's own knowledge that they were not founded in truth, hut yet with that anxiety which everyman must partake of who fears that, after a lapse of twenty years, he may not be enabled to estannsn tom, complete aria satisractory defence against charges which, in common fairness, and in common justice, should have been preferred when the memories of men who took part in those debates were more recent, and when I could have referred to them to say whether those were the very words, whether those were the very expressions, that I had used ; when I could have referred to my political op ponents—( Great eheering)—whether they would remember my words or the impressions which I intended should be un derstood from them.—( Cheers, ) I am now to answer those charges.—( Continued cheering.) I shall confine myse!f to those charges, and to the evidence on vt hich they are founded It was not fair on those two different occasions to make charges inculpating my honour unless the evidence on which the charges were preferred was brought forward. —( Loud cheering.) If there is any other evidence which can be produced, and I am not cognisant of any, when I shall have to meet it, I shall ask the House to be generous and just enough to give me the opportunity of repelling that new evidence, if new evidence is brought forward. I will now proceed to the vindication of myself from those charges, and whatever may be the disad vantages and difficulties of that task, if I do not succeed in es tablishing. to the conviction of every honourable mind that those charges are without foundation, I shall retire from this discussion with deep mortification and despondency. I shall say nothing of any charges but those to which I have referred in the notice I have given, and that evidence which has up this time been brought forward against me. When the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Shrewsbury, rose to speak on Monday night the question at issue was this. On the pre ceding night the Noble Lord, the Member for Lynn, who was a Member of Parliament in 1826. 1527, and 1828—( Immense cheering)—who was the relative and Private'Secretary of Mr. - Canning, and cognisant tf Ms C ruling's feelings, l,rought f trward at that late stage of the deliste—not an/ question affecting Mr. Canning's horou7—set at that late stage of the debate on th. Cern Bill the Noble Lot d brought fort-aid these charges a:ainst tee. T. .e iNt ble Lord said, " Such ..as the conduct of tee Right Hoe. Gentle man in 1827 (alluding to my separa ion from Mr. Canning in 1827), anti, said the Noble Lord, in t e year 1629. Sir Robert Peet intimated to the House that he had changed his o im ns in 1825, and he had concealed that change of hI opt ions except t Li r Liverpool ; but that did t, it prevent him, in 1827, from g,ting up in the Howl • at d static g, as h.s reasons for sep crating from Mr. Cann ng's Government, hat he could not consent to su -port a Government of which the chief 111i nis'er Cr4s . a otrable to those measure, which it : ppeared a.ter wards .n twi yea •s he ..ims If suppi rted." This simp:e charge a the Noble Lord the Memeer f r Ltnn stet. d that, in 1827 I had decline I to act wi h Mr. Canning as Pri rte 511- ni.ter, on the ground that I w s hosti.e still to t e r ,- reoval of the Catholic disabiliies, and that I oh jectm ta the state of tee Cathoics it ng, at all am. Herat d " But," said the Noble Lord, " ir.1829,in bringing forward the Catholic question, the Right Hon. Gentleman informed the House that in 1825 his opinions on the Catholic question had changed, and that he had intimated the change of his opipions to Lord Liverpool. then at the head of the Government, and notwithstanding that change of opinion in 1825 he had refused to act under Mr. Canning." I state at once that the charge is altogether unfounded, and that I never did inform Lord Liverpool that my opinions on the Catholic question iw 1825 had changed. I told the Earl of Liverpool then that I was responsible for the Government of Ireland—that there were questions of great and vital interest to which I could not assent. In 1825 there was the question of the relief of Roman Catholic disabilities, the question of the curtailment of the elective fran chile, and the question of the payment of the Roman Catholic clergy; on every one of which my colleagues were in opposi tion to me. I said, therefore, to the Earl of Liverpool, that I could not consent to fall in with the views of the Oppostion, and I asked to be relieved from my official duties, and no longsr to be responsible for the arlministration of affairs in Ireland. Such are the facts relasive to what then took place. The Hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Mr. Di raeli), is his speech of lava Monday, insinuated that which was wholly without foundation—he insinuated that there was a letter to the Earl of, Liverpool in existence, written by me in 1825, in which I wished to be relieved from my official duties, and in which I intimated a change in my opinions on the Roman Catholic question. He also stated that such a. le:ter was in my poSsea , ion. In proof of its existence he referred to the Edinbnrgh Review, stating that Ihad a copy of the letter in my possession. To that I said, if that assertion was made by the Honourable Member, he ought to know that such a- letter was in existence.—(Hear and cheers) — and I challenged him for its production.—(Loud cheers.) I said, further, " this I will engage to do, if I have a copy of such letter in my possession, I will myself produce it.,—( Hear, hear.) So Much for this point; so much for the statement that I changed my opinion on the Catholic question. I now proceed to meet the other charges that have been preferred against ate; and, in doing so I will plead no statute of limita tions. Public men, I hold, should be above all such - means of defending their character. Let those who oppose me establish these charges if_ they can. I want no evasion. I will not say a word about motives, but will meet the charges distinctly and boldly. I am charged by the strongest insinuations, that I wrote a letter to the Earl of Liverpool intimating change in my opinion, and that there is reason to believe, that that change of opinion took place in 1825, and was communicated to the Earl of Liverpool, then at the head of the Government. This is the first accusation. The next one is as follows : Whether or no such a change had taken place, or whether they had been communicated to the Earl of Liver pool. He stated that I had distinctly avowed in my place in Parliament, in the year 1829, that there had been such a change in my opinin. I think that was the charge.—( Cheers.) It is possible, however, that no change of opinion may have taken place, and that no communication had been made to the Earl of Liverpool. But it is just possible, al hough the object is not great, that there had been no change of opinion, yet still that I might have informed the House falsely, that there had !ieen such a change in my opinion. The grounds upon which t hat assertion Viislohnded, and the evidence brou g ht t or war d in support - of that charge by the Hon. Gentleman was this : That there was a report in a newspaper, called The Mirror of Parliament, in which it was stated that I had informed the Earl of Liverpool that the time was come, when something should be done respecting the Roman Catholics disabilities. these are the expressions upon which the Hon. Gentle man founds the charge, that I had informed the Earl of Liverpool that a change in my opinions upon the Catholic ques tion had taken place ; and the Hon. Gentleman says, -4' I wish to state most fully the whsle evidence against him ; whether actual or plausible I wish to state the whole evidence." Then. said the Hon. Gentleman, the Mirror. of Par,iament employed an independent class of reporters, men of high eminence and great attainments in the art of short-hand writing, and that the Mirror of Partiammt was published every three da)s. and therefore there shou.d be a strong presumption that the report was correct. If, said lie, there was any doubt of this, there was a sarong corroboration of the accuracy of the report upon this ground, that the Times newspaper contained a re port which contained in it precisely the same words as in the Mires,. of Parliament, and consequently there was a strong confirmation from a separate and independent authority to the correctness of the reports of the Mirror o f Parliament. This is the charge; am I not stating the chrrge correctly ? t Cheers.) " Well," said the Hon. Member, " but there is another evidence corroborative of the accuracy of that report, which was that the Right Honourable Baronet Sir Edward Knatchbull, speaking a fortnight after, referred to that report, and assumed it correct." Now I think these are the grounds upon which the charge was made. Then there was another charge which the Hon. Gentleman brought against me, namely, that I had been guilty of a suppressio veri, anti that, for unworthy purposes, I had given a mutilated and garbled report of the speech.—(Loud cheers.) Thorp may hay.- been some other small and incidental charges besides these three, which are immediately connected with it. The gravamen of the charge, and the nature of the evidence by which those charges were support. d, I belie /e I have correctly stated. I now first address myself to the question—Did I intimate to the Earl of Liverpool that my opinions upon the Catholic question had undergone a change, and that I was prepared to sup port a Bill for the removal of Catholic disabilities? First, I refer to the course which 1 took in the year 1825. I first ask whether the course I took in Parliament , publicly expressing my opinion as I did, was incon sistent with such an intimation as that stated itiomfer; been conveyed by me to the head of the q °vreremember, Sir Francis Burdett, some Hon. Members y wo u ld 1825. H e brought forward the Roman Catholic que_sotra Committee to began, in his usual manner, by moving f During d eyl the progress consider the Roman Catholic que stion. c l a aced a ted 'if the discussion two other measures were p p to facilitate the success of the first measure, m , o n s a e m re duction of the number of freeholders in teelnadnidnegnttihtelefdratnoce vote his at county elections, and a measure f or e to Roman Catholics. I t was on the 28th of February that Sir Francis Burdett brought forward the primary question — the 28th of February, 6 s—and I took part in the debat e the motion that the Housel2 on doresolve itself int o a Committee o n the On Catholic question.the 28th of February, 1825, otion without expressing an y ob j ection to the time when was made, I stated " that no change had taken place in my opinions upon the subject, and I should therefore pursue the course which I had uniformly pursued, and 1 must give my decided opposition to the mot i on. " At the conclusion of the debate Sir Francis Burdett " said a few words in reply, and thanked the Rig ht u a r r e a b d ! t e h at Gentleman . for the candid manner i n which he had decl tions went to the principle, anti not to the d e t a il s o f t h e ques tion of Catholic emancipation. There was, I think, a considerable majority in favour of the motion made by Sir Francis Burdett. opinion 47to the 2 is 34 numbers hee were in Sir Francis Burdett's motion d reading of the Bill was proposed on the Bth of April, ' 18 c 2 0 5 n , when I took part in the debate ; and I find this in the report:—" Mr. Peel expressed his satisfaction at the frank and candid manner in which the Hon. Member for Armagh had declared that his opinion upon this subject had undergone El change, but he (alr. Peel) had not changed his own opinions upon it, and he could not, therefore, support the measure." The Bill was neverthe less carried be a majority of 268 to 241, and the third reading came on on the 10th of May, 1825, when I said, " If the offices of the Executive and the Crown were reserved to per sons who were averse to the Roman Catholic religion, he did not think there could be any just ground for complaint." I should state that on several previous occasions I admitted that _ I was not prepared to oppose all the details of the Bill, but still I thought the chief offices of the Executive Government ought to be reserved to persons professing the Protestant religion.—(Hear, hear.) And the conviction of my mind remain. unaltered I said that I felt it my duty to persevere in my opposition, Well, then, it is not very pro liable, after such a sta'ement, that I could have gone to the Earl of Liverpool and said that a change had taken place in my opinion. But it was after the 10th of May, after I had been in a minority, that I intimated that the continuance of this division in the Cabinet was objectionable, but, above all, that my owe position at the head of the Executive Adminis tration of Ireland was intolerable, and I asked to be released from the resporsibilities of office. hi 1827 I stated what were the ci cumstances on which I consented to remain in office rather than break up a Government that certainly np to that time had maintained the general con fidence of the country. It was then resolved ;hat the question should await the decision of another Parliament, and that it should remain an op- n question, every member of the Govern ment being at liberty to pursue his own opinions upon the sub ject. It, was between the itith and 20:h of May I signified saY desire to be relieved from office ; and it was also between those neriedsthat I in imated my reluctant consent to re- ain in office. Bet on the 26th of ay there was a division in this House on h e state of Ireland. The Rill had been sent up to this House from the Lords : and, in the debate in the Lords, Lord Liver poi male the most decided speech against t: e measure that ever he had dime. and there was a majority of 40 against the 8.11. This was the iangunge I held at that time to Lord Li verpool on the subject. I said " My Hon. Friend now seemed to expect an apology from me fair continuing to hold the same opinion, end so my Hon. Friend thought it necessary to call , upon me to explain wha I changed my opinions after hearing the evidence of Dr. Doyle. The ground f .rmerly held ap- • peered to be utterly untenable." That I stated in the year 1826, in May, in the presence of Mr. Canning, that I had changed my opinions on this question.—(Hea r, hear.) Is it probable that I would utter that language in the face of Parliament if I had not intinaltei to Lord Liverpool that my opinion was changed. I was not prepared to acquiesce i n the Roman Catholic Emancipation B'll, but I then showed that I was prepared to admit that they should enjoy some freedom. In 1826 there was a general election ; and in the early period of 1827, before Lord Liverpool's death," when I had not the slightest expectation to anticipate so early and melancholy a termination to his political career, came on the Roman Catholic question ; and on March 6, 1827—for it was not until the latter end of March that Lord Liver Pool was rendered incapable of transacting public business —I said this, " He, Sir Robert Peel, should still retain his opinions as to the system that the legislature ought t o en f o rce with regard to the country. He thought it right again to express those opinions—c er t a i n ly common sen s e sa id t h at somet hi ng as to the Roman Cath o li cs s h ou ld b e d one — t h at i s to say , that the anomaly of the laws betw een E ng l an d an d I re l an d s h o uld be removed. . But in expres sing .hi s op i n i on ,. h e t h oug ht it right to retain the e xi s ti ng di sa bili t i es as f ar as re l ate d to admitting Roman Catholics t o th e l eg i s l a t ure an d t o th e offices of state." If his opinions were unpopular, he had now an Nee portunity of showing that he retained the Fame opinion still. And how was it possible that he could have expressed those opinions with respect to this Bill, with any view of acquiring public favour, or gratifying his personal ambition.—(H ear ' hear.) I, myself, fully expected that in 1827, we should have had a minority, as we had in 1825, an d was p re pared to teae _ again the same course, n ame ly, t o a dh ere t o m own opinwnt still, and to r; linquish office. But to the surprise, I believe, of e all parties, in 1827 there was a majority of four aga i n st Roman Catholic R e li e f Bill. I h a d taken this course W the slightest expectation o f w h a t was t o f o ll o w, and I still re mained in the office of. Secretary o f State for the _ Home Department. N ow , t h a t is a Parliainen. tal ! . , profession of opinion whi c h t oo k place at that tun_e Well, now, what took pla ce b e t ween me and Lord LiverpFolf I stated on Monday night, th at if I cou ld fi n d that I had in t mated any opinit n to Lord Liverpool in writing, that I would produce it. But I sa id a l so t h at the commun i c ation whi ch took place between us was not of a personal nature, for I Wl' in the habit of seeing him every day, and not of making an i formal communications to him. My impression was• as ce stated on Monday night, that no communication took between us in writing on the subject, but still I undertooke,i_i there was any com mun i cat i on, to produce it to the 1 - 1 .use. ,4 11 1 1827, three years after war d s , w h en o f course m y m emory respect to these transactions was stronger, speaking h t House I said, not that I had written to Lord Livetre'f that had informed him that it. was my intention to disconnec t myself from those for wh om I en t er tained esteem, but having been left in a minority, it was my desire to be relieved from the office which I held. My resignation was accepted, and to did leave office. I think any Gentleman has a right to say that there was no written communication from Liverpool on the subject. I may be asked, have you , g,e nand whole of the correspondence which took place between yo and Lord Liverpool at that time ? Why, I ordered the corresp and ence for seven years, under the letter A, to be brought up, ex. I have searched through the whole of my correspondence , correspondence which tending over 7 years, in order to find any was d between us on the subject. As I said before, had passe eneastke:L. e n .h rd e in that constant communication wi . h Lord Liverpool which rendered it unnecessary for us to communicate with each other except verbally. And this I state that there was an letter which has the remotest bearing to this subject, or which can throw any l•ght upon it—there is no letter which lam not nd ready to pro uce which passed . between Lord Liverpool a myself. I see the letters of 182.5; here they are.— (The Right and Hon. Baronet here took a packet of letters from the table exhibited them to the House ) Some may think they are not very, material, or they may think they are. I hold h and the originals in my hand ; I looked at the lettertsoef otherou years, but they have no bearing on this subject. I thendo _ .ve my honour declare that no letter passed between Lor d Liver pool and myself on this subject which I have not produced' and I have no hesitation in communicating in extenso the con' tents of the letters to those who have the least curiosity to see them.—(Cheers.) I find only three, and the House will jade whether from the tone of those letters they do give the slightest colour to the charge that. I had intimated to Lord L:verponi the change in my opinions. But now—it was on the 10th of March, 1825, I h..el then been beaten on the Catholic claims—there were rumours that Lord Liverpool had ehanged his opinions. It certainly was material for me to ascertaus that fact, because if really Lord Liverpool's opinions had changed, and, I was in a minority in the House of Commons, it was one additional reason for any retiring. On the 10th March 1826, I received this letter from Lord Liverpool. I will read it:— " March 10, 1826. "My dear Peel,—l return you the report of the Irish Association, and in consequence of the appearance of an article in the Morning Chronicle of this day, I have caused an article to be sent, to the Courier, contradicting the reports in circulation, of any change in my sentiments on Catholic emancipation.—Very sincerely yours, " LIVERPOOL." Now, it is not likely that at the time the letter was written which I have read 1 had changed my opinions. That letter was written on the 10th of March, and certainly intimated that my opinions had not changed. The only other letter that I received from Lord Liverpool in connexion with this subject —the other letter—is dated on the 10th of 2day. 1825, think that it completely rebuts the charge that has been brought against me of a fondness for office. It will be recol lected that 1 went out of office in 1818, whew I left the duties of the Secretary for Ireland. I was again invited to return to office in 1822, after having de c li n ed a place in the Cabinet in and I 1821. This next letter is dated on the 19th May, 1825. On the 17th May the division took place in the Lords. This su bs ject had been discussed, and I was solicited to remain in office rather than break up the Cabinet. It is dated on the 19th May, and reads thus " 19th May, 1825. "My dear Peel,—l have seen Canning, and should be glad if you will call on me to-night, between nine and ten o'clock, for five minutes.—Ever yours, LIVERPOOL. "Pray do not trouble yourself to send an answer." This will surely create some impression that at that time I had not changed my opinion=, and that I con.ented to remain is office, although I had not changed on this subject, but that did remain rather than break up the Ministry. This will to some extent appear from the request which this letter con tains, to call upon Lord Liverpool (II that night between nine and ten. It is true that I cannot prove that this letter way written on that particular subject—( Loud and continued eheers) —but surely the Hou.e will grant my assertion that such was the case. I have yet another communication which passed be.: tween Lord Liverpool and myself. It is dated on the 25th of September, 1825.- I find that it is the only one at -that tio! written upon this subject, and was written in answer to 011 ' from me. It was forwarded from Walmer Castle. "Weimer Castle. . " Most confidential. 15th Sept., 1825. " Sly dear Peel,—l return you Goulburn's letter, under aU other cover. Will you be kind enough in let me know what yeg . would think of a di sso l u ti on . I t must b e d eci d e d in one way.S; the other on the 22d. I have had some conversation with Canning. Hi s i nc li nation i s to put off th e dis.olution till a r=t year. I a r n for dissolution immediately, if the Catholic claim are to receive duo support.—Ever yours, If that <' LIVERPOOL." be rightly interpreted, can any one say that at that tioSe I had changed my opinions? Now, his inferring that nrY opinions were in conformity woth his own in 1-25 proud nothing of the charge made against me. The Rig ht Hotr, c ientteman then resumed r.-a.ting Lord Liverpool's letters which st a t e d it was his opinion that if the Catholic claims wens to be pressed there would be a dissolution of Parliament, bat that if the Catholic question was not to be brought on th,ere would be no dissolution. The Right Hon. Gentleman con tinued—These are the three letters which I received front Lord Liverpool ' • but they are not os such as would benriti CA b tto 6 man who told Lord Liverpool that he was opp to ta e r r t d el d t m b l ei , at e l - o n s a n t tholic claims.—( Hear, hear.) Now, speaking of 1829, I. hold in my hand a document which will prove this faet—that al leaving office would lead to a dissolution of the Minist.ry.. I am certain that my opinion on this m atter was e xpressed in a conversation between myself and another ; but I have 1 3 0 let ter to show me the exact words on _th o is point. t l h n a o t w l did i ; a th t come m make oeevuitneoet bthy,:tt.iiewboriats wsbury was, that I said, in 18:9, :hat Hon. Member for Stare .nnyo that quibbling; Isici inter these star' went in 1829. The whole foundation of the charge, o the I had communicated to Lord Liverpool in 1825 that t'ne lita3 was come when something respecting the Catholic , question ought to be done. l am - going_ a m sas a yt k hd l e al ation of these words. I positively ven i%l m Y a i re p s r u e e s h sin a n s — ta rn te Y m ent Pre' I assert that I did not ' words at all. sincere im • that I 2a9il.t_h_at(- Cheers.) was come when something ought to be done w ith the ' rs ' ....,athol ic question. not e iression.....,s, , And now I come to the evide House to follow me, for I vv nce...-( Cheers, ) I request the which it is founded ; that I really ant to dissect the evidence on state ment, and that did in 1829 make that I afterwards tendon of perverting the garbled a speech With the Abe did . fact. member for Shrewsbury , Says the Hon. Gent. ,tu a t m y Right Honourable "I am making no cht,rge ega lns d a garbled and Friend, but I say that he use lit)* St'. • mu ti lated or f this a mi.tilated , to use the softer La_.guage o- ,„,. of the Hon. __ report of his speech Why, the f rec..-,- in diff er. nit iVerrther for Shrewsbury are kliff:rent y ePorteu Joe nals and .4 videnee is it just as this to a per iod of 2 Jto refer upoa such e . , ch to found a charge again, y t elrs' A lp'fore, for w-rde on n w 1 The cha i rge is a emarkable one: andli:Aister-.. is advanced fthe in C a...o;st eiv gh , ar manner. The Hon. 'Gent' , man be in , by saying tha h r..verts to this subject with 4 ' (I " lel" the ring and laughter, the deepest pain.-- ' g says that there are only two s.nrcesto which we snot- refer or the report- of th e p rocee di ngs in the-House at that period. The one was " H ansar d," i n .which H on . Members bad-an or: portunity of correctin t h eirb • h e al sid th..t g speeches, _ but SC , .- , . h there was anotner, " The - Mi . ror 'Of Parligment,"":lOr Ol e 1 the speeches were taken down .n snort-hand by the nloit ikilfu sh on-hand writers, . any of them m , n of educie.;lon and in.. telligence, and conversant with the business which •occurced in Parliament. This journal was published every tbrai days: The Hon. G ntleman who introduced this subjectvith sm m uch pains says also tbat he has been making the most '''bitrefid in quiries on this subject. He is most honourably epaneela 4 wil b the press, which enables him to, speak witivantharitY ipon the de point. The Hon. Member says that he ,has been making liberate inquiries, and that he has ascertained the reports 9f t he Mirror of Parliament were contributed liyiidePend int g tlemen not connected with 'the ';public press. - , A$ a cons' quence, therefore, one confirms another. There was. evidence of the concurrence of these two sets of independent reporters, and it was remarkable that two•independent sets of re porters should have made the same report., And the Hon. Gen tit man went on to say, " Sir, I have • inqtrired, and I hail been informed that the report in the ' Mirror, of Parliament_ to which I have referred Wag done by Air..734lT o Yr, : One 4g th e 7-'4l'l :r•' 1 Pc of of