The Sun. — London, England, 1845-05-08 00:00:00

RAILWAY COMMITTEES. (YESTERDAY.) Group F. LONDON, WORCESTER, AND SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE RAILWAY. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. ALeare said that he wished to impress upon the minds of the Committee the distinction in the relative position of his Learned Friend (Mr. Whateley) and himself. His Learned Friend ap. peared for some indvidual shareholders in the Birmingham Canal Extension Company, whereas he (Mr. Allen) appeared on the pe tition of the Company under their common seal. He wished to lay down this distinction, as he did not oppose the formation of the Company, but was there rather to elicit certain points relative to compensation to his clients He stated this much, as he did not know what course his Learned Friend intended to take. Mr. Witarsaev then proceeded to examine the witness re specting the damages which it was alleged the formation of the railway would inflict on the canal without leading to any material result. Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant KiNctAKE—A considerable number of the great iron works are on the line proposed by the Great Western. This line between Dudley and Wolverhampton is more convenient to a great proportion of the works, than the London and Birmingham branch. This is a very thickly populated district. That portion of the London and Birmingham line from Dudley to Kidderminster is very circuitous. This is occasioned by a considerable elevation in the grounds in the direct route. The Great Western line, as far as it is proposed to be made through the same extent of country, is preferable. He knew Droitwich well. There are great salt-works there. The Great Western went through Droitwich. The Londois and Birmingham proposed to take a branch there, but is not included in the present scheme. A great quantity of coal is consumed at Droitwich in the manu factory of salt. The gauge of the small coal lines in the district of about four feet nine inches. Were at present using axles on our waggons, which have beets purchased from the London and Birmingham Company. Mr. N'Vnirmoar4 who opposed altogether the formation of the extension line from Dudley to Wolverhampton, on the part of the canal between those two places, followed in cross-examination. The line of canal between Birmingham and Wolverhampton is a very fine one, almost straight, and well adapted for a railway. The Canal Company has always been very well disposed to give ac commodation to the district, and very liberal in all its dealings. A great portion of the minerals raised in the district and moved from one part to another, would still be carried by the canal, as the canal accommodated many parts of the district that would not be reached by the proposed railways. Mr. ALLEN, before proceeding to cross-examine this witness, staled that, besides appearing for the Canal Extension Company, he also appeared for Mr. 11. Foley, and Mr. Hook, a gentleman near Worcester, the tatter of whom considered that no additional railway was wanted in that district, at least such as any of those proposed by the rival companies. Ile would, as far as the present witness was concerned, only confine himself to the case of the last. named gentleman. In answer to a question put by the Learned Gentleman, the witness stated that sinkings of the land sometimes take place id the district. I know the places where the minerals are exhausted and the sinkings have taken place. The greater portion of the mines surrounding Dudley belong to Lord Ward. The main trunk line from Dudley to Wolverhampton goes through a considerable portion of Lord Dudley's lands. The minerals are principally got under that portion of the line. The roads in this district have often been known to sink in a few hours. Turnpike roads nearly always sink, but after they settle down they are tolerably sound. The exhausted mines under the railway line have not been in operation for many years, and there is no danger of rapid sinkings. Rapid sinkings only take place in recently worked mines, where the props have suddenly given way. Old mines are often filled with water, and this sus tains the surface, but any circumstance that would draw away the water would lead to the sinking referred to. Some of the bridges of the canal have given way, and fresh embankments have often been made on account of these subsidences. I know of no district except a portion of Shropshire where so many pit shafts exist as In the space of country in the neighbourhood of Dudley, Bilston, and Wolverhampton. Any portion of the line under which the coals are not yet extracted would be dangerous if the mines were worked after its construction, but the company would require notice before any such workings were attempted, and then have an opportunity of buying up the mines to prevent danger. Mr. HOPE re-examined Mr. Smith principally cn the points raised by Mr. Allen, during which the witness expressed himself satisfied with the safety of the proposed line, as the principal shafts over which the line passed were old workings that had subsided. The company had full power to purchase any of the unworked portion. He considered that the stations of the London and Bir mingham line at Stourbridge and Kidderminster were much more convenient than those proposed by the Great Western, the stations of the latter being at the first-named place ninety feet above the level of the town. In answer to a question frtm Mr. V. Stewart, whether the coal district south of Dudley, over which the line passed was similar in its character to that between Dudley and Wolverhampton, or whether the whole of the mines would have to 1 c purchased, Mr. Smith answered that all that portior • I qtreta called the Ten Yard Coal, would have to be purchased ornlted extent on both sides of the line; Mr. Williams, iron-master at Tipton, was next called. He was in the practice of sending iron by the canal to Gloucester and Bristol to be exported. It took a week and sometimes a fortnight to go there, and was often detained at Gloucester by the goods having to be taken from the narrow on to the broad guage at the break there. A railway ought to take them in eighteen hours. The greater portion of his goods in their transit to the ports from which he exported would require the narrow gauge. Cross-examined by Mr. COCKBURN—He would prefer the shortest line of railway, providing the question of gauge was kept out of view. If a broad and narrow gauge were placed along the line, his objection would be removed. Crols.exarained by Mr. WerrmoßE—He considered the best line for the district would be that proposed to be taken along the canal—the Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Shrewsbury scheme. It would connect South Staffordshire in the most direct manner with London, and save '2O or 30 miles. Mr. ALLEY cross-examined this witness respecting the sinkings of the district, without leading to anything beyond what was eli cited in the examination of the previous witness. The Committee then adjourned till twelve o'clock to-morrow. (Continued from our Afternoon Editio't of yesterday.) Captain Moorsom, civil engineer, was examined, and said the plans and sections had been executed under his direction. The line between Truro to Redruth would be best worked by atmospheric power, but might be worked with equal safety by locomotive. A train might be worked by the locomotive system at eighteen or twenty miles an hour in perfect safety ; by the atmospheric traction at fifty or sixty miles an hour, but thirty miles an hour would be about the average. There are no peculiar engineering difficulties between Redruth and Truro, except that the ground is very hilly. Having regard to the character of the county and the towns in the neighbourhood of the proposed line, he was of opinion that it would afford efficient accommodation to that district. There is no tunnel in the line. The line between Trevascus and Penzance would be better worked by locomotion. In that line there is no engineering difficulty. 180,0001. wi.l be a sufficient sum to construct all the works in connexion with the line, and to get it into working condition. The annual expense of working the line when completed he estimated at 401. per cent. on the traffic. He estimated the total amount which would be re. :Tired from the line as 24,3581. He had estimated this from the existing traffic, and in doing so had rather reduced than increased it. 10,6001. a year would be required to maintain the line in efficient condition, and there would be a net profit of 71 per cent. on the outlay. The witness then described the nature of the gradients and curves of the line, and stated that the trade of Truro would be much benefited by carrying it to Garrad's wharf. If it were made to the north of the town it would not be so advantageous. It would be more expensive, and would not accommodate the trade. The line would run at the hack of Mr. Thomas's house in an old cutting. The witness was cross-examined by Mr. BIRCIIAM at great length, as to the general construction of the line, the bridges which would run over it, the weight of the engines, and their probable effect upon the gradients. The witness was under examination when the Committee ad journed. Group DD. THE CALEDONIAN, GLASGOW, DUMFRIES, AND CARLISLE, AND THE CLYDESDALE JUNCTION RAILWAYS. . _ (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr CocKi3VitN then dwelt at considerable length on the present means of conveyance between Glasgow and London, and showed that if the proposed line were made, communication between these places would be conducted at a greatly diminished rate of ex_ pease, and with a considerable saving of time. The importance of speedily transmitting the mails would be obvious. He then alluded to the subject of cattle, coals, &c., when it ap peared that these articles of consumption could be supplied in much better eendition, and at less expense, than by any of the present modes of conveyance. The best coals would be reduced in price from 173. and 21s. per ton to the comparative low rate of 7s. 6d. per ton, and the price of lime and ironstone would be diminished in proportion. The Learned flentleman, after touching on the great local benefit which would generally result from the making of the ling, said the estimated construction of the works would amount in the gross to 2,100,0001., and it was satisfactory to state that the whale of the works, including every possible contingency, had been contracted to be done by highly respectable and responsible contractors, and there was no doubt whatever that the railway would be completed within the estimate. A very profitable return was expected to be realised from the Investment of the capital. The termini at Edin t.nrgh and Glasgow had been laid out to suit the convenience end to meet the views of the inhabitants of the two cities. The engineer would satisfy the Committee as to the generally favourable nature of the country through which the line would pass. In the first place, there were no tunnels,;and secondly, the gradients, with one exception, were not of a severe nature. The exception to which he alluded was from a place called Beatock to the summit of the Clyde, a distance of seven or eight miles, on which the e.verage rate of gradients would be 1 in g 7 ; however, to obviate the difficulty arising from this inconvenience, an assistant engine would be placed at this part of the line, in accordance with the elan pursued on many existing iines. The Learned Gentleman concluded this very lengthened address by saying that the neestion for the Committee to consider would be as to which of the two competing lines now before them was to have the preference, and read several extracts from the report of the 7 2?%rd . of Trade, tendi n g to show that the C a ledonian Railway, for wnni he appeared, was the best that could be selected for the commercial and pri va t e i n t eres t s o f t h e peop l e o f S cot l an d . Dlr. TALBOT proceeded to examine Mr. Buchanan, mar. Chant at Glasgow. He said that the present population of Glasgow was T e h s:imated at 322,204, and it was still increasing, entered the Clyde during number of British vessels which fielded a total of 41,524t0 the last year amounted to 221, which Of foreign ships entering the same F irer, the number was 39, an s cia amounted in tons to 7,950. The cus. torn dues paid in 1e42 were s6 m 2 and the amount of harbour d u es was 26,0001., which amounts had °l' been increased at the rate of 52 per cent. on the whole estimate. tc the present time. The principal manufactures of the west of Scotlandweren iron, woollen,cotton, flax , end silk, and the principal trade was with London and Lancashire. ig witness was examined at great length, d . his evidence tended .1 - b re with London to show that, If greater facility for communication And the western parts of England were afforded co mmercial importance of Glasgow w iuld b e still fu l' rt t h h e e r , i i i m 'c i r ir e o a y si e n d g , and its trade with London and other cities very considerably in_ creased. Mr. J. G. Kinnear, Vice. President of the Chamber of Commerce se Glasgow, was then called, but his evidence was oily corrobora. ge f ey of what was stated by the previous witness. Mr. COWAN next called Mr. Easton, calenderer and parker at Glasgow, who said:he was habitually accustomed to s en d very large qua ntities of dry and other description of goods to Liverpool, )4anchester, and London. He was strongly of opinion that the proposed Caledonian Railway was by far preferable to the Dumfries and Carlisle line, as it was shorter, and the terminus was more conveniently situated for the accommodation of the inhabitants of Glasgow. If the traffic could be conveyed as cheaply by railway as it was at present by steamers round the coast, be would eertainly transmit his by it in preference. The witness was cross-examined, but his statements remained unaltered. Mr. Sergeant WRANGnAM proceeded to call Mr. Cogan, mer. Chant at Glasgow, who briefly said that he approved of the Cale donian line on account of its direct course, and the consequent diminished difficulty of the mode of conveyance, and also on ac count of the time that would be saved in the transit. Mr. Anderson, manufacturer at Glasgow, was then examined, but his evidence was precisely similar to that of the last witness. Mr. Dixon, merchant at Carlisle, was next called—He said it would be of very great advantage to the northern districts of Scotland to have a direct connexion between the Glasgow and javerpool markets, as the existing modes of conveyance were e I pensive and tedious. He considered the Caledonian Railway ought to have the preference, and he was supp ited in his opinion by a large majority of the people of Carlisle. Mr. Steal, the mayor of Carlisle, was then called to prove the extensive advantages which would result to Carlisle and the neighbourhood from the making of the railway. He was corrobo rated in his evidence by Mr. Mouncey. At the close of the examination of this witness a messenger from the Commons entered and announced that the Speaker was at prayers. The Committee adjourned till twelve to-morrow. LONDON AND YORK RAILWAY. (Continued from our Afteraoon Edition of yesterday.) The witness was cross-examined to show that the proposed !erminus at Farringdon.street would be superior to one at King's- Cross. Mr. Bloodworth, of Rimbolton, gave evidence as to the produce of the above districts. Mr. Pitman, ex.director of the Clarence Railway, was called to prove the principle which had been acted upon in taking the traffic tables for the proposed railway. Men were stationed in various places, and they took an account of every person and thing which passed on the road, with the exception of foot passengers. They took an account of sixteen millions of sheep. All those went to Smithfield market.— (Laughter.) The witness was cross-examined by Mr. LEE. Mr. Bishop, examined by Mr. Sergeant KINGLAKZ —lle resided at Hackney, and was conversant with the mode of taking traffic tables. He had prepared the traffic tables for that part of the line between London and ilitchin. He handed in his returns. Mr. J. Badley, a cattle dealer, gave in certain re urns of the cattle traffic. The Committee adjourned at four e'clock. Group Q. CHESTER AND HOLYHEAD RAILWAY (MOLD BRANCH). (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. King, Secretary to the Chester and Ifolyhead Company was next examined—He read extracts from the books and minutes of the promoters of the Chester and Holyhead Railway Company to confirm the evidence of the last witness as to the existence of the alleged egreement. It appeared that on the 18th of March, 1 544, at a meeting of the Board of Directors of the Chester and Plolyhead Railway, the pro posal of the amalgamation of the two Companies was dis cussed, and a Committee was in consequence appointed to consider the policy of negotiating with the proprietors of the Chester and Birkenhead Railway Company for the sale of their line. This Committee recommended that the sum of 500,0001. should he offered as the purchase-money of the line, to be paid either in cash or in shares of the Chester and Holyhead line at the option of the Directors of the Chester and Birkenhead Company. This resolution was then communicated to the latter Company, and a reply was made on the 30th March following, approving of the proposal made by the promoters of the Holyhead and Chester line. On the 30th August next following the formal ratification of the shareholders was obtained to this agreement, and it was generally understood by the proprietors and shareholders of both companies that the negotiation and agreement had been finally settled. On the 13th of March, however, of the present year a communication was made by Mr. Cockerill, as the Chairman of a Committee appointed by the Directors of the Chester and Birkenhead Company, to the promoters of the Chester and golyhead line, and enclosing a series of resolutions in reference to the agreement, and requesting an interview with them. A reply was made agreeing to the interview, but before this took place another letter was sent by Mr. Cockerill containing the following proposal :—That the 50/. shares of the Chester and Birkenhead Company should be paid in shares of the Chester and Holyhead line, at the rate of GU, and the half shares not paid up in proportion. Also that] seven, instead of three, of their number (as at first agreed upon) should be elected on the Chester and Holyhead Board of Direction. The Directors of the Chester and Holyhead Company immediately passed a resolution that they should adhere to the terms of the original agreement, and would not entertain any proposition for opening up the matter anew, as they considered the matter finally settled. Mr. Wm. Potter, cf Liverpool, who had been a Director of the Chester and Birkenhead Railway Company, was next examined. Ile resigned his situation at the last meeting of the Shareholders of that Company, in consequence of being outvoted in a proposition he had made, to amalgamate that line with the Chester and Holyhead line. He believed this junction would confer great advantage upon the public generally, and he considered that the arrangements for that purpose had been completed, and that the agreement entered into and ra tified by the two Companies respectively, was binding. He re ferred at great length to the negotiations that had taken place in reference to the alleged agreement, and in which he had taken a part, for the purrosc of showing that a distinct agreement had been entered into between the two Companies. The Committee then adjourned till twelve o'clock to-morrow. Group 00. THE YORK AND NORTH MIDLAND RAILWAY (BRIDLINGTON BRANCH.) (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. AUSTIN, for the promoters, agreed to insert a clause in the Bill protective of the existing rights of the Bridlington Harbour Commissioners. The clause was agreed te, and the Bill went through Committee. HULL AND SELBY RAILWAY. Mr. Baines appeared for the promoters. The Bill was opposed by the Turnpike Road Trustees on the grounds of the line crossing public reads on a level. The Committee agreed that the crossings complained of were to be allowed. There was also a petition from Thomas Denton, Esq., a land. owner, asking compensation for the injury that would be done to his property by the construction of the line of railway. The parties agreed out of doors t• the amount of compensation that should be given. The preamble was then adopted, and the clauses were gone through. The CHAIRMAN said all the Bills comprised in the group would be reported on Friday. The Committee then dissolved. Group 0. TRENT VALLEY. The Committee met et twelve o'clock, Mr. Hawes, chairman. The greater portion of this day's proceedings before the Corn. tfle 0114 - UM Min s aucy s...ompany concena ing that, if their line were used by the Grand Junction Company, it should be at the usual rate of 2d. per mile; and the Grand Jun ction Company contending that clauses should be introduced allow. ing their carriages to run on the Trent Valley line without such payment. - • • • The Committee at length came to the resolution that in case of any dispute arising between the Trent Valley and the Grand Junc. Lion, as to the use of the Trent Valley line, or any part of it, and the amount of toll to be charged, the settlement of such amount should be left to arbitrators appointed by the Board of Trade. Mr. MEREWETHER wished to know what construction the Com mittee intended to put upon the word " use ?" The CHAIRMAN said they intended to put the same construction which Mr. Austin put on the 85th clause, which he quoted. They had no power to tell the arbitrators to put the same construction on it, but they used the word as they found it used in the 85th clause. It was understood that clauses based upon this resolution were to be prepared. The Committee then went on with the other clauses, after passing several of which they adjourned. Group V. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. iliu. then called one or two witnesses to speak to the de• terioration of Lord Chesterfield's property of Gedling by the pro. posed line. The evidence of the witnesses was proceeding at four o'clock, when the Committee adjourned. lIIE NORTHUMBERLAND ATMOSPHERIC LINE. The Committee resumed the consideration of this proposed line of railway this morning. At their sitting the Noble Chairman intimated that the Committee were willing to sit during the Whit suntide vacation if the counsel and their clients were inclined that they should. Mr. ALEXANDER said that, as far as he and his side were con. cerned, they had no inclination that the Committee should be put to the trouble of sitting during the vacation. Mr. HILDVA RD said that it would be a very great convenience to his clients if the Committee sat till their part of the business was transacted. The final decision on that point was then deferred till Friday. The Noble CHAIRMAN, after the room had been cleared for a short time, said that the Committee had determined to ask leave to sit till five o'clock to.day, and to meet to-msrrow at eleven, for the purpose of adjourning at two o'clock. Mr. Brunel's cross-examination by Mr. TEMPLE, with regard to the passage of the line through certain portions of Sir Mathew Ridley's property was then proceeded with. The witness was then asked concerning the estimates, which had been already given. Mr. Brunel was then re-examined by Mr. ALEXANDER—He stated that there were a great number of engines in the vicinity of Mr. Brandley's and Sir Matthew Ridley's property, none of which consumed their own smoke, as will be the case with the eta.. tionary engines on the proposed line. The opening of the Nor thumberland line would probably lead to the adoption of the at. mospheric principle on the northern railways. Mr. Brunel's evidence occupied the attention of the Committee for some time, and corroborated the principal statements made by Mr. Samuda. Mr. Cubitt was then called, and produced different diagrams for the purpose of illustrating the method in which the breaks, sidings, &c., fie., would be used on the atmospheric line. He had no doubt that the atmospheric principle could be easily carried out. He has recommended its adoption on the Portsmouth line, and on other railways in Kent. On cross.examination by Mr. HILDVA RD, he stated that the North of England line carried a considerable quantity of coals, which lead to great derangements. He wonld not recommend them to give up any of their coal traffic. There were three or four coal depots on that line. What he had said with regard to coal-pit business would not be applicable to other mineral traffic. The Stockton and Darlington line, which he recommended, passed over several coal-pits, hut his reason for re commending it was, that it was a shorter line. He very frequently rcornmended level crossings where making bridges would be inconvenient. It was not one of his recom. mendations in favour of the London and York Railway that it would increase the traffic of manure. He believed they intended to bring coals to London which were to come from Durham, and it was likely that manure would be taken back. If he managed the traffic, the manure would form no obstruction to the through traffic by being distributed in different places on the line. They had four miles and a quarter of double tunnel on that line. He did not recommend the Company to alter it for the purl•ose of making a single atmospheric line. He was of opinion that a greater number of trains could be worked at less expense per train. per mile according to Mr. Brunel's system than by the locomotive system. Mr. Cubitt was then re-examined—A given number of trains would be w eked less per train per mile by the atmospheric than the locomotive system, and would afford greater convenience to the public. The gradients of the line were such as could be easily sur mounted by the atmospheric system. Sometimes it was cheaper to make a bridge than a land crossing. Mr. Sopwith was then examined. —He surveyed the line in ques tion and approved of the plans adopted by Mr. Brunel. He be. lieved it to be well adapted for the carrying out of his atmospheric plan. His evidence was merely a confirmation of what had already transpired. The Committee then adjourned. Group IL The Committee re -assembled this morning shortly after twelve o'clock, and proceeded with the engineering evidence in the case for the WEST YORKSHIRE LINES. Mr. Geo. Parker Bidden, a civil engineer, had gone through with Mr. Dickenson the estimates for constructing the works of the West Yorkshire Railway, and considered them reasonable. The railway was unobjectionable in respect of engineering features, for, at all events, much less so than the West Riding line. The West Yorkshire Railway could be worked at a considerably less expense than the West Riding. The advantage, as regarded curves, was nearly three to two in favour of the West Yorkshire lines. It was an absurdity to suppose that a line with a severe gradient could be worked without extraor. dinary expense, or witbout a stationary engine. For instance, i n the case of the Birmingham and Gloucester, which the Roard of Trade in one of their reports dwelt upon at much length, a few days age it took five locomotive engines to push the carriages containing the Queen Dowager aiid her attendants up the lickys. The witness was cross-examined at some length, with a view o f proving that a stationary engine might easily be dispensed with on inclines of a severe character. and hilly concurred with Mr. mates for the West Yorkshire lin e , Mr. IL Nicholson, C. E., of Newcastle, had gone over the esti. h Shields Railway, and was Bidder. lie wu engineer of the Nort E SUN, LONDON, THITR,SDAV EVENING, MAY 8, 1845. fully of opinion that Is. 6d, a mile was a fair price for locomotive power. Cross-examinei—The cost per mile on the North Shields was 6 3 ,4 d. , exclusive of depreciation and interest. Was not sure that the Manchester and Leeds could work this line cheaper than an independent Company could. His estimate for coke was s.lBths, or sd. out of the 18d., and his experience would lead him to be lieve that Mr. Cubitt roust have been wrong if he said that the cost of coke was 1.12 th of the whole. Several other witnesses gave corroborative testimony, and the Committee adjourned at five o'clock.. Group U. GREAT GRIMSBY AND SHEFFIELD, AND HULL AND PUBLIC PETITIONS. orders, simply on account of some omission of a solicitor or Parliamentary agent. But he did not wish to throw the slightest reflection upon the Standing Orders Committee, and he should reserve to himself the line of conduct be might in future pursue, and vote for the second reading or not. Mr. DUNCOMBE conceived that the feeling in Ireland, in reference to having railroads in that country, had nothing whatever to do with this question. That argument had never been used during the whole of the discussion, except upon one occasion, by an Hon. Member near him, who used it on the introduction of the qnestion. He. could not see how the public could have any confidence in the proceedings of this House, if upon one day they decide that a Bill should not be proceeded with, and upon another decide that a question should be referred to a Committee, to the effect that an inquiry should be made to ascertain whe ther the decisions of this House were erroneous, for that in reality was the question.—(Hear, hear.) The question was then put, and the motion agreed to without a division. CORNWALL RAILWAY. Sir CHARLES LEMON presented four petitions in favour of the Cornwall Railway. Mr. M. GIBSON proposed the second reading of the Manchester Courts of Review Bill, which was agreed to. Mr. GREENE presented 14 petitions against the Edinburgh Northern Railway. Sir J. TYRRELL moved that six petitions which he had presented on a former occasion be referred to the Select Committee.—Agreed to. Mr. DUNDAS presented a petition against the Edin burgh Northern Railway (as we understood its prayer.) Mr. B. BALDWIN presented a petition from Surrey, against the London and Portsmouth Railway. The SPEAKER called on the notices of motion. Mr. DUNCOMBE said that private business now took so much time that it was almost impossible to present public petitions within the time prescribed by the Ikuse. Ho thought, therefore, that the public business had better be postponed for half an hour to admit of the public petitions being presented. The House acquiesced in this suggestion. Mr. EVANS presented petitions against the May nooth grant. Lord DALMENY presented two petitions, one from Stirling and another from Inverness, against the May nooth grant. Mr. TURNER presented a petition from a place in Cornwall to the same effect. Mr. H. F. BERKELEY presented a petition from tradesmen in Tewkesbury against the Insolvent Debtors' Bill of last year. Captain BERKELEY presented a petition from Gloucester, against the Insolvent Act passed last ses sion, and praying that it might be altered and amended ; also a petition from Nottingham against the Maynooth grant. Mr. SHAW presented petitions against Maynooth. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD presented a petition from the medical practitioners of Rochdale in favour of the Medical Reform Bill. Mr. DUNCOMBE presented several petitions against the grant to the College of Maynooth ; also a petition, signed by 10,400 inhabitants of Lancashire, praying the House to institute an inquiry into the regulation of coal pits. The Honourable Member also presented a petition from a female named Price, complaining of the conduct of a Worcestershire magistrate, named Briscoe, who refused to grant her a summons against a common informer, who had assaulted her, and who afterwards obtained a warrant against her, signed by Mr. Briscoe, under which she was sent to prison, and otherwise ill-treated, although she was far advanced in pregnancy ; and that upon the case coming before two other magistrates and Mr. Briscoe, although the latter gave evidence against her, the two other magistrates dismissed the case. It was his intention to-morrow to move that the petition be printed with the Votes, and afterwards to found a motion upon it. Mr. COMPTON presented petitions against the grant to Maynooth and railway travelling on Sundays. Lord DUNCAN presented a petition from the sur geons of Bath, praying the House to institute an in quiry into the manner in which the Royal College of Surgeons was governed. Colonel T. WOOD presented a similar petition from the county of Brecknock. The petitioners, the surgeons of this country, ought to have power to elect their own governing body, and prayed the House to inquire into the effect and operation of the last charter . granted to the College of Surgeons. Mr. ROEBUCK presented a petition from a medical practitioner residing in Bath, praying for inquiry into the management of the Royal College of Surgeons. Mr. WAKLEY presented petitions from the surgeons of Wellingborough ; also from the surgeons residing in some place in Northamptonshire ; and from the surgeons residing in some place in Glamorganshire, praying for an inquiry into the effects produced by the last charter granted to the College of Surgeons. Mr. HUME presented a petition from an individual named Johnson, who was at present a prisoner in the Queen's Bench prison, for penalties incurred by him for smuggling. He had been examined before a Committee of the House of Commons, and a re solution had been come to that whatever acts oismuggling persons might have been guilty of, if they gave evidence before that Committee they should be held harmless. This witness had been examined, and had given evi 000ee, oes ooseeiessisnuing mat ne nact peen attached for acts of smuggling of which he had been guilty. He knew that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would say that he was not attached for ants of smuggling which he had detailed to the Committee, but for acts of smuggling of which he had 'previously been guilty. Still the case was a hard one, and was well worthy the attention of the House. The petition prayed for inquiry into his case. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose, but was met with loud cries of " Order, order," in the midst of which he sat down. Mr. HUME gave notice that he would on an early day draw the attention of the House to the subject, in order to give the Right Hon. Gentleman an opportu nity of giving some explanation of the matter. The HONOURABLE GENTLEMAN then presented petitions from the shipowners of Durham against certain clauses in a Bill for regulating the shipping of the port of Newcastle-upon-Tyne ; also a petition from J. A. Wilson, M.D., praying for an inquiry into the state of the law regulating the practice of medicine. SCHOOLMASTERS IN SCOTLAND. Mr. HUME also presented a petition from the Pres bytery of Forfar, praying the House to take the case of the schoolmasters in Scotland into consideration, with a view to the amelioration of their condition, and an in crease in their allowance. PAROCHIAL SETTLEMENT BILL. Mr. IIEATEICOTE presented a petition, signed by the chairman and every magistrate but one in the county of Rutland, against the Parochial Settlement Bill. Mr. J. PARKER presented a petition from several persons connected with the iron trade, to the contrary effect. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 7. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. Mr. FITZGERALD took his seat for Tipperary, in the placo of the late Mr. Otway Cave, deceased. HUDDERSFIELD WATERWORKS BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. RAILWAYS. Mr. GREENE moved "That it be an instruction to the Committee on the York and North Midland Railway (Doncaster Extension), and London and York Railway Bills, to receive and consider petitions from the proprie tors of land on the north of the river Dun, against the London and York Railway Bill, and against the York and North Midland Railway (Doncaster Extension) Bill," which was agreed to. Mr. W. I'ATTEN then moved, " Thlt the Report of the Sub-Committee on Petitions for Private Bills, on the Great Western (Ireland) Railway Bill, be printed," which was agreed to. Mr. W. PATTEN also moved " That it be an In struction to the Committee sitting on the Railway Bills comprised in Group G and G 2, that they entertain and consider the petition of the Company of Proprietors of the Parrett Navigation, which was presented to this House on the sth day of May instant, against the i ßristol and Exeter Railway Branches Bill." Mr. GREENE said that this question had been re peattdly asked him—viz., whether petitions against a railway project should be presented three clear days before the first reading, or three days before the consi deration of the Committee. It was important that a decision should be made on this subject, as it would materially affect the interests of many parties. The SPEAKER said that if the petition was against the project of the Bill the petition should be presented three clear days before the first reading, but if the oppo sition was only to a portion of the project the petition should be presented three clear days before the Bill went before the Select Committee. Mr. W. PATTEN said that as the petition had ooiy been presented on the sth of May he should withdraw the motion. GLASGOW BRIDGE TRUST. Mr. P. M. STEWART, in moving the recommittal of the Glasgow Bridge Bill, said, that the object of this Bill was to incorporate the trusts of three bridges over the Clyde. On one of these bridges there had been an outlay of 20,0001., and there was a surplus revenue of 1,800/. a year. On another there had been a similar ex penditure, but there was an annual deficit of 1501. Both these bridges had been built for the purpose of improving the private property in Glasgow. The Bill had been passed through Committee by the casting vote of the Chairman, six of the Committee being for the Bill, and six against it. and there were ten of the proprietors of one of these bridges who wished to be heard on the Bill, and on these grounds, he moved that the Bill should be recommitted. Mr. FOX MAULE thought that his Hon. Friend had stated a very bad case very well.—(A laugh.) But the House ought to bear in mind that all the six Mem bers who voted in favour of the Bill were locally inte rested, whereas the opposing six Members were the selected Members. Mr. HASTIE thought that a fair opportunity had not been given to certain parties to be heard in Committee on this matter, and he should, therefore, support the motion that the Bill be recommitted. 'The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion . • 27 Against it 52 Majority The Hungerford and Latnbeth Suspension-Bridge Bill was read a third time. GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY (IRELAND). Jr. F. FRENCH moved for leave to bring in the Gr. at Western Railway (Ireland) Bill. Mr. WARBURTON said that this Bill was one which the Standing Orders Committee had reported against, and the lion. Member for Roscommon had induced the House to go against the Standing Orders Committee. It was proposed that a Select Committee should be appointed to inquire how far the existing standing orders with respect to Irish Rail way Bills should be dispensed with. It seemed to him that., when the Standing Orders Committee had reported against a Bill, and a Select Committee was appointed to consider the subject, they ought to have the report of that Committee before they pro ceeded further. He should therefore move that the sub ject rhould be adjourred. Sir G. GREY did not see why the standing orders should be dispensed with. At the proper time it was his intention to move for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire whether any, and which of the standing orders in force with respect to railways in Great Britain were unnecessary, and ought to be dispensed with with respect to railways in Ireland. He thought that the House ought not to adopt the pre sent Bill until the notice he intended to give had been considered, and the Committee had come to some decision upon the subject. He thought they should read the Bill a first time, and then postpone the second readir ' s to a future day. Mr. F. FRENCH said that all he wished was that the subject should be fairly considered ; and for that pur pose he was anxious to introduce the Bill. Mr. LABOUCHERE thought it desirable that the House should have the Bill before it. It was absolutely necessary to ascertain whether or not the standing orders which were applicable to English railway Bills ' were also applicable to Irish railway Bills. Nothin ' orders applicable to Irish railway Bills not to adhere to them. Under all the circumstances, however, he holed that his Honourable Friend would not press his motion, but would permit the Bill to be read a first time, and then the second reading could be delayed until after the report of the Committee, to be moved for by his Hon. Friend the Member for Devonport, should be presented. Mr. WARBURTON had no wish to give unnecessary trouble, and he would, therefore, not object to the first reading of the Bill, but before the second reading came on, he hoped the House would exercise its jurisdiction over it. Mr. GREENE thought that great inconvenience would result from delay. He thought it was hardly fair to the promoters of the Bill to this threat of oppo sition hanging over them. He would rather that the House should vote that all further proceedings should be suspended until the report of the Committee to be moved by the lion. Member for Devonport should have been made. He thought it would be much better to ad • ;ourn this debate until after that report should have been made. Lord G. SOMERSET could not see how any incon venience could arise from permitting this Bill to be read a first time. But he hoped the House would seriously consider the subject before they consented to the second reading of the Bill. Before they did that they should have it determined how far the standing orders which applied to English railway Bills applied also to Irish railway Bills, and the second read ing should be delayed until the report of that Committee should have been made. If it were attempted to press forward the Bill to a second reading until that report should have been made, he should feel it his duty to op pose any such motion. Mr. WARBURTON wished to be again permitted to address a few words to the House. Suppose the Com mittee should report that certain standing orders did not refer to Irish railway Bills, would it be regular in that case to refer that Bill back to the Standing Orders Committee to see if the modified s tanding , orders had b een comp li e d with. He wished to ask the Speaker if it would be al lowable to refer this Bill back to the Standing Orders Committee after it had been read a first time. He apprehended that it would be too late to do so, and therefore he thought it would be better to suspend the further progress of the Bill until the report should have been made. Mr. S. VS'ORTLEY thought that if the Bill was read a first time, they would be precluded from referring it back again to the Standing Orders Committee. He thought the proposition of the Honourable Member for Devonport was hardly sufficient, and was nut of general application to Irish cases as far as the standing orders were concerned ; and he gave notice that in case the Right Honourable Gentleman should succeed in obtaining his Committee, he (Mr. Wortley) should move that the report of the Standing Orders Committee on this Bill be referred to that Committee. Lord G. SOMERSET apprehended thatit would be no breach of the orders of the House to refer this Bill back to the Standing Orders Committee after it had been read a first time. The SPEAKER said that after the Bill had been read a first time it might be referred back to the Standing Orders Committee. The motion of Mr. WARBURTON was then withdrawn. Mr. ESCOTT said that he believed it was not right for such a difference to be made between railways in Ireland and England. A great error had been com mitted by the House, which was likely to work very in jut i aisly to many proprietors on this side of the Channel, and he should therefore wait for the second reading of this Bill before he offered it any opposition. Sir G. GREY said that there Wits a material diffe rence between the two cases, and there was a something peculiar in the Irish railways, which entitled them to a special reference to the consideration of the House. From the general nature of Irish railways, it was impossible they could be regulated by the same standing orders as English railways. Sir R. PEEL said that he would not by any means vote for this Bill, if by so doing he was likely to throw the slighest reflection on the Standing Orders Com mittee. He thought there was a general impression on both sides of the House that the standing orders on this Bill should be dispensed with. There were certain circumstances connected with this Bill, which made it necessary that the rules should not be strictly applied. He would be the last man in that House to throw any re flection on the Standing Orders Committee, for he thought they had done their duty with respect to this Bill in the most praiseworthy manner, and he should, therefore, support them. But he thought that in respect to Irish railways , some of those s t an di ng orders should not be strictly construed. Many which worked well in this country would be entirely inoperative and injurious when they came to be applied to the projects of Irish railways, and which would under the circumstances of Ireland, work great injustice to many parties there. lie had understood the Right Honourable Gentleman, that the peculiar po sition of Ireland should be considered, and that the ad vantages conferred upon them should be bond fide, and if that were to be the case, this Bill should enjoy the benefit of an exemption from the standing orders, and was entitled to the great consideration of the House. If this Bil l worked an y particular mischief in consequence of the disre g ard of the standing orders, it would be easy t o o pp ose its further progress at some future sta t ge. It work for Ireland which this Bill sought to ef fect, and ho thought, therefore, i injustice to its promoters, and, oppo sin g the g e neral tense of the people of Ireland, if they threw this Bill out for a non-compliance with the standing would t was a a great ga GAINSBOROUGH LINES. The Committee assembled this day at two o'clock pursuant to ad journment, when— Mr. PICKERING said he was happy to be able to state that the ob jection in reference to the question of the Gainsborough.brifige Tolls Commissioners had been arranged, the Railway Company having agreed to give the Commissioners of the bridge a sum of money. Mr. WEBSITR, on the part of Mr. Duckle, said he was also happy to be able to state that an arrangement had been made by which the Committee would be saved all further trouble its refer ence to that Gentleman's petition. Clause 17 was then agreed to, it having stood over for considers. tion from yesterday. Mr. Cootes, Parliamentary agent, then proceeded to read the amendment made in the clause, fixing the maximum rate of tolls for the carriage of goods along the line by the Company's loco motives, and those which should be made to parties who supplied their own carriage or locomotive, or both. This concluded the labour of the Committee on this Bill. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, May 7. (Sittings in Banco.) EXPARTE W. G. WARD. Mr. KELLY (with whom was Mr. Baddeley) moved for a rule to show cause why a mandamus should not issue directed to the Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of the University of Oxford, to command them to restore the Rev. W. G. Ward, late a Fellow of Balliol College, to the degree of Bachelor of Arts and Mister of Arts in the said University, of which degree he had been deprived by the House of Convocation of that University. The affidavits 011 which the motion was made stated that the applicant =trio'. lated in 1830 ; that he proceeded in 1834 to the degree of Bachelor of Arts, and in 1837 to that of Master of Arts ; and subscribed the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England, and three articles in the 36th Canon, and continued to enjoy the said degree until the month of February, 1835. In 1844 he pub lished a book, called " The Ideal of a Christian Church Consi dered," to which the attention of the University was called, and the authorities there, after certain preliminary proceedings had been adopted, held a convocation upon the 13th of February last, and then by two several resolutions degraded the applicant front his degree. He had since applied to the University to be allowed to exercise the rights which the degree of Master of Arts conferred upon him, and had been refused. He was, therefore, compelled to apply for the mandamus. The first ground on which this applica'ien rested was, that the applicant had not committed any offence which could lawfully justify the loss of his degree, ac cording either to the laws of England or the statutes of the Uni versity. The next ground was, that even if it should appear that the publication of the book referred to was a violation of the sta tutes of the University, it was submitted that he was not punishable in the manner in which punishment had now been inflicted. But thirdly, even if the publication of the book was punishable at the University, and if that punishment was degradation, still the ap plicant was not liable to that punishment until after he had been tried in the University, according to the proper forms in the Court of the Chancellor of the University. In this instance he had not had an opportunity of making his defence in any judicial proceeding, as the Chancellor's Court was the only place in the University where such proceedings could be held. By the arbitrary act of the convocation he had been, without any trial whatever, degraded from his degree, and deprived of all the rights and benefits thereto attached. In the first place, it was clear that the publication of this book was not any offence, and if it was, then it was cognisable as such in the Chancellor's Court. The proceed ing by the Convocation alone;; without such preliminary trial, was illegal and void, and yet by such a proceeding the applicant had been deprived of a freehold interest of such a nature, that he was entitled to a mandamus to restore him to his rights. The statute showed that all that might be done by the Chancellor in his Court might also be done in the Vice-Chancellor's Court; but, in order at all to justify the exercise of the jurisdiction of the Court, the offence proceeded against must clearly be shown to be within that jurisdiction. Among the general powers of the Vice-Chancellor was that of preventing heresy. Now, here the applicant had sub- scribed the Articles of the Church when he first received his de grees, and, as he stated in his affidavit, he had not done anything in violation of that subscription. If a person was not consistent in maintaining the Thirty-nine Articles, he might be called upon again to subscribe them, and if, after being three times required to do so, he still refused, and was found so to have refused, he might be punished, but his punishment would be by exile, by banishment from the university, and not by degradation. In 1834 and ]837 the applicant subscribed these articles; he might have chonged his opinion since then, but if he had, or if he had done anything which was inconsistent with the articles, he ought to have been called on again to subscribe the articles, and had he then refused to do so he might have been tried for the offence of refusal, and, on conviction, might have been banished from the University, but could not be degraded from his degree. As the case now stood, no offence had been committed which could be the subject of trial and punishment in the Uni versity, and the proceedings taken were not warranted by the statutes of the University. The publication of the applicant's book was net a violation of the University statutes, nor of the law of England. It was purely a matter of ecclesiastical cogni sance. But, even supposing it to be an offence against these eta. tutee, the only proper course would have been to send Mr. Ward before the Vice-Chancellor's Court, and to subject him to a regular trial. After that he might, upon conviction, have been sentenced to whatever punishment the statutes allowed. But even the statutes would not have allowed the punishment now inflicted, for that punishment was only capable of being applied to a par ticular class of offences, of which this was not one. The act of Convocation was illegal, and, therefore, void. The only remaining question was, whether this was a case in which the Court would interfere by way of mandamus ? There was no doubt it would do cttnna rtiverel; de' tiegrre -, A*4 heceasary to cp, alify its possessor to take holy orders to obtain certain advantages the University, and to vote for the Members sent to Parliament to represent the University. Lord DENMAN asked whether anything was said in the MM_ davits of the visitatorial power ? Mr. KELLY answered in the affirmative. The existence of that power was denied in a case of this kind. Lord DEN MAN—You may take a rule. CATASTROPHE AT YARMOUTH. YARMOUTH, MAY 6.—The jury re-assembled this morning at the Church-hall, shortly after nine o'clock, and thence proceeded at once to view the bodies of eleven persons, whose names had been registered at the police-office. The names of the eleven other deceased persons are : —Henry Dye, aged 9 years; Elizabeth Read, 6; Mary Ann Roberts, 19 ; Ann Beckett, 8; William Walter Watts, 9; Reeder Hunston Balls, 16; Elizabeth Fulcher, 16; Alice Gott, juts., 9; Alice Gott, 51 ; Emily Young, 6 ; Susannah Field, 8. Thejtiry, having completed the view of their bodies, returned to the Church-hall and re-commenced the task of formal identi cation. The whole of the eleven above.mentioned were identified, and the total number that had been viewed by the jury and formally identified amounts now to 75. At the conclusion of this duty, The CORONER said— We must now consider what is, as far as we are concerned, the most important part of the question. There are several reasons why this matter should be re-considered, and there is, I believe, a gentleman in Norwich who can throw some light upon this matter; for he states that on Thursday he saw a fracture in that portion of the bridge where the bar broke. The Foreman said it was certainly a matter of necessity in the consideration of so important a case as this to ascertain in what state the bridge was at the time of the accident, He thought it was essentially necessary that some scientific gentleman should be had before them, and he had in his hand a list of questions which had been suggested to him as fit ones to be proposed to such a witness. In the propriety of these questions he fully concurred, and he would read them to the jury. They were these:—" By whose orders did you make the bridge wider? What was the extra width, and how many square feet were added 7 What was the weight of the cast and wrought iron with the wood placed extra upon the bridge? Did you offer or give to Mr. Cory any mechanical ideas as to the propriety or impropriety of making the bridge wider, or explain the consequences of adding extra weigtht and breadth to act as leverage beyond the chains ? Did you know the weight the bridge was calculated to bear by the con tractors, or inquire of Mr. Cory the terms of the specification ? Did you examine the chains, bolts, bars, &c., before commencing the alterations, and report the same to Mr. Cory as to their soundness and capability? Did you calculate the extra weight you were going to add to the bridge before you commenced the alte rations, and report tha same to Mr. Cory ? Did you suppose that if the bridge had been in its original state, it would have broken with the number of persons then upon it ?" A juror said, that according to the mechanical rule, he believed, that every square foot of surface should bear a hundred weight, and that the suspending power was generally made exactly in that proportion. It appeared here that one-third additional surface had been added to the bridge by the platforms on each side of it, and that nothing had been added to the suspending power. The CORONER observed, tbat that matter would more properly be discussed when the general merits of the case should come on. The room was then cleared of strangers , and, after a short dis cussion amongst the jury, the following presentment to the Town Council was agreed to : " We, the undersigned, now acting as jurymen upon the in quisition upon the bodies of the several persons who met their death from the falling of the suspension.bridge on the River Burt, within this borougi, beg to represent to the Mayor, Aldermen, and Councillors of this borough, in council assembled, the absolute or. ccssity that exists for the employing some scientific engineer, in order to come to a just consideration of the circumstances in which the bridge was placed, and to enable them to discharge the oaths they have taken." litr. S. Cobb, a magistrate, who was on the bench, undertook to support it. The inquiry was then adjourned to enable the jury to receive the determination of the Council. The excitement appears to have nearly subsided in Yarmouth. The bodies found and identified are far short of the numter returned as found by the boatmen. The discrepancy can only be accounted for by supposing that they returned, as dead, parties who were afterwards recovered. The Coroner stated that ttaejury had viewed 75 bodies, which, with the four missing, makes 79 in all. COAL MARKET. Prices per ton at the close of the market :—Adair's Main, 15s ; Buddle's West Hartley, 163 6d ; Carr's llartley, 17s ; Chester Main, 15s 6d Charlotte, 15s; East Tantield, 14e; Hasting's Hartley, 16s 6d; Holywell Main, 16s; Nelson's West Hartley, 16s 6d; New Tanfield, 14s; Old Pontop, 13s 6d; Pott's Primrose, 13s; Ravensworth West Hartley, 16s 6d ; Taylor's West Hartley, 16s ; Tanfield Moor, 17s 6d ; Townley, 153; West Hartley, 17s ; West Wylam, 15s 6d ; Wall's-end, Clennell, 16s; Heaton, 16s 6d; Hilda. 163; Killingworth, 16s ; New March, 15s 6d ' • Riddell's, 16s 6d ; Walker, 163; Wharncliffe, 163 3d ; Eden Main, 17s 3d ; Braddyll's Hetton ' 18s 6d ; Haswell, IBs 9d ; Hetton, 1 8 3 641; Hylton, 15s; Lamhton, 18s; Russell's Hetton, 18s 3d • Rich mond, 17s; Caradoc, 18s; llartlepool, 18s 6d ; Heugh 17s ; Kelloe, 17s 3d ; Adelaide, 17s 9d ; Evenwood, 15s 2d ; Eden Hartlepool, lis ; Maclean's Tees, 15s 6d ; Seymour Tees, I7s ; South Durham, 17s ; Tees, 183; Cowpen Hartley, lis ; Derwentwater Hartley, 16s ; Hartley, 163; Sidney's Hartley, 16s 6d; West Hartley Netherton, 16s 6d.—Ships arrived, 103. C 0 ) I\ l PIAANGYNTiorIisCIBENHTEmETPRESENT . — FROM Tll epo ß EAST deportment INDIAof friendly Pacha of Egypt towards our country is about to be acknowledged by the Court of Directors of the East India Company in a manner d the worthy of the greatest political and military power of the East. A silver fountain of extraordinary magnitude and exquisite work manship, intended as a present to Mehemet Ali from the Company, has just been completed by Mr. Smith, of Duke-street, Lincoln's inn -fields. It is upwards of ten feet high, and contains 10,400 ounces of silver. It is richly ornamented with fruits and flowers, itt employedp r m a t n h e ae u r t e tEite3g the likeness of beast, bird, or fish being scrupulously avoided, in deference to the feelings of the good Mahomedans, among whom i resting ohf, placet heLatin,gi Ae c rr a sa s b t da T nt h dh e er f c o : n ei n :a t e :L: lr : c a i nt n :o i n lun s t c d r ai i an p ny . cordingionon each of the four sides, simply, and in excellent taste, re. ic, addition. The language on each side varies ; the four languages Nail, May 7. CORN-LAWS. Mr. VILLIERS gave notice that be would postpone, until the 20th of May, his motion in reference to the corn-laws. PHYSIC AND SURGERY BILL. Mr. MUNTZ gave notice that upon the House going into Committee on the Physic and Surgery Bill, he would move a clause obliging all practitioners to write their prescriptions in plain English, and all druggists and apothecaries to have their jars and bottles labelled in plain English, from and after the_lst of January, 1846. WAlt IN CHINA. Sir C. NAPIER gave notice for an early day, that he would move for certain returns in reference to sailors who had been engaged in the late war with China, and who had got leave of absence, and prize money. DROPPED NOTICES OF MOTION. Mr. WAKLEY said he would wish to renew his motion for any day upon which he thought that he would be able to bring it on.—(A laugh.) He con ceives' he had much reason to complain of the Govern ment not trying to make a House last night.—(A laugh.) Last night the House adjourned, there being only 34 Members present. Not a single individual connected with the Government being at his post. He considered this conduct as most unfair. Instead of throwing any obstruction in the way of any individuals who had im portant duties to discharge, the Government should do all in its power to facilitate them on such occasions. Surely • there ought to be some new arrangement adopted. He could suggest many, but he feared they would not meet with the favour of the House. He must therefore indefinitely postpone his motion, and bring it forward when an opportunity offered. (Mr. Wakley's motion was : " To call the attention of the House to the petitions from members of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, complaining of the unjust distinctions which have been created by the charter of 1843 ; and to move for the appointment of a Select Committee, to in quire into the operation of that Charter, and into the system of government pursued by the Council.") Mr. COLLETT postponed, till the 22d :of May, the introduction of the Bill for consolidating the dioceses of Bath and Wells, and of Salisbury, at the death of the present Bishop of Bath and Wells, and, in doing so, observed that he hoped the time would soon come when all these dioceses would be consolidated into nothing. PUBLIC EXPENSES. On the motion of Mr. WILLIAMS, returns were ordered relative to the allowances to the Royal Family, and to his Majesty the King of the Belgians ; the establishment of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland ; the expenses of th e t wo H ouses o f P ar li ament, an d the Civil Departments; the other pensions on the Consolidated Fund, on the gross revenue, and the Civil List ; also, the payments for the administration of justice ; diplo matic expenses, and an account of the sums voted for the army, navy, ordnance, and miscellaneous services ; also public works, bounties, and Post•office. LIGHT SOVEREIGNS. Mr. HUME wished to know from the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether there was any public office where persons might bring light sovereigns, and have them changed, deducting the difference in the lightness ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said there was no such office. CONDEMNED SERMONS- Captain POLHILL wished to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if any communication had taken place between him and the Sheriffs of London, respecting the admission of persons to hear condemned sermons? and also, whether it was not his opinion upon a recent occasion the Sheriffs only acted in conformity with their undoubted rights and privileges ? Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that, in answer to the inquiry of the Hon. and Gallant Member, he was pre pared to say that he (Sir James Graham) had under stood that a commission had reported on the subject in 1825, 'and communications had taken place between his predecessor, Lord Normanby, and the corporation of London; and that, in consequence, the corporation had made a regulation which absolutely prohibited the ad mission of the public generally, to hear the condemned sermon on the Sunday previous to the day ordered for ' execution. Acting on the authority he possessed, he (Sir James Graham) had ordered a prison inspector to proceed,to Newgate and to inquire into the circumstances connected with the lust execution. The inspector had received instructions to examine into the transactions both of the Sunday and of the Monday morning. As soon as he should have received that report he should be prepared to lay it on the table, and to express his opinion on the whole matter. Alderman COPELAND was glad to hear the course the Right lion. Baronet intended pursuing, and fully ad mitted the necessity ler an inquiry. A morbid appetite was abroad on this subject. The curiosity of the public upon occasions such as these exceeded anything the House could conceive. This curiosity pervaded all classes, and the desire of persons, not only to get seats at the trial, but to be present at the condemned sermon, was beyond all conception. Having been the sitting magis trate at Guildhall on Easter Monday, cases had come before him, that led him to the conclusion that the time had arrived, when the authorities ought to consider whether it was not ad- . visable to dispense with these public exhibitions. On Easter Monday he sent some fur trial, and convicted three in a gang for picking pockets under the gallows, and this had led him to the conclusion that it would be better to adopt some means of putting an end to these executions altogether. Mr. BROTHERTQN rose to express his concur rence in the remarks of the Hon. Alderman, but he was called to order by the Speaker, who put the ques tion, that the returns he laid on the table, which was agreed to. Mr. EDWARD ELLICE moved the substitution of Lord Frederick Hallyhurton and Mr. David Morris for Mr. Patrick Stewart and Mr. Bickham Escott, on Select Committee on Prisons (Scotland.) Mr. PRINGLE opposed the motion, and said he would divide the House.—(Great laughter.) The gallery was then cleared, and the House divided, when there appeared— For the motion Against it . Majority fur the motion —sB MR. MAZZINI. Mr. BOUVERIR said that it would be recollected that the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department had, upon the debate with regard to the opening of letters in the Post office, made a charge of a very grave and heinous character against Mr. Mazzini, which had never yet been withdrawn. A charge of such a nature as that made against Mr. Mazzini was one which, under no circutn stances, could be justified, unless there was the strongest grounds for believing it to be true. That charge was aggravated, coming, as it did, from one in the position of the Right Hon. Baronet, whose Parliamentary privi leges prevented Mr. Mazzini from taking those steps which he could do if the charge had not been wade by a Member of that House within the walls of Parliament. That charge was spread abroad next morning, not only through the country, but through the world , stamped with the authority of the Secretary of State. The Right Hon. Baronet derived the ground of his charge from an anonymous statement in a French newspaper, and he promised to substantiate it by papers which he would de liver to Members of the House. The only papers delivered were papers which he (Mr. Bouverie) held in his hand, but they did not contain one iota of evidence to substan tiate the charge.—(Hear, hear.) .He therefore hoped that the Right Hon. Baronet, reflecting upon the hor rible nature of the charge, would think that he ought to withdraw it. He might mention that the French Go vernment communicated to a friend of his, a Member of that House, that they carefully investigated the matter, and that they found there was not one tittle of evidence to support the charge. Sir J. GRAHAM stated that the Hon. Gentleman who had sat down gave him notice yesterday, by a note, of his intention to put this question. If there had been a House yesterday, it was his (Sir J. Graham's) inten tion to make voluntarily the statement to the House, which it was now his duty to make. On Mon day last the Honourable Member for Kilmar nock, and another Honourable Member, communicated with him on the subject, and he stated to them what was then strictly true, that he was not in a position to make a statement satisfactory to them or to Mr. Mazzini. In consequence of the question put to him by the Honour able Member for Bolton, he thought it his duty to insti tute inquiries through his Noble Friend the Foreign Secretary in those quarters where he would be likely to obtain the most correct information on the subject ; and, till yesterday, the information which he had re ceived, so far from shaking his impressions, only tended to confirm them. But, not satisfied with the question to which the inquiries were directed, he was particularly anxious that the judge who presided at the trial of Ribiero and Caprioli, in 1833, and also the public prosecutor, should be consulted, and at his request those persons were con sulted. He did not, till two o'clock yesterday, receive an answer to the inquiries made, and if there had been a House yesterday it was his intention voluntarily to have made the statement ; it was now his duty to make it, in answer to the question"put to him. The Hon. Gen tleman referred to the statement which he (Sir James Graham) made originally. He stated that the informa tion being derived from a newspaper, and not from an official source, was not entitled to implicit confidence. And he was not aware, till the Hon. Member for Fins bury afterwards stated it, that Mr. Mazzini had, in 1840, brought an action against a newspaper for repeating a statement which first appeared in the litoniteur. The Hon. Gentleman said that in the papers which he pre sented to the House there was no recognition of the statement which he quoted from the Moniteur. If the Honourable Gentleman looked attentively at the papers he would see a letter from Mr. Foster, their agent at Turin, to the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and that there was a distinct recognition of the statement to which reference was made. He was bound to state that the accounts he re ceived yesterday rested on the statements of the judge who tried Ribiero, and of the public prosecutor, and their answers to the inquiries made were full, explicit, and direct; and they stated that no evidence was pro duced at the trial which inculpated Mr. Mazzini in the least.—(Hear, hear.) Had he known at the time he made the original statement the fact that Mr. Mazzini brought an action against a newspaper for repeating the charge, and much more, if he had known what the im pression of the judge who tried Ribiero, and that of the public prosecutor were, he would never have made the statement he did.—(Hear, hear.) He now thought it due to Mr. Mazzini to make the only and the best repa ration in his power—namely, that the retraction should be as public as the accusation.—(Hear, and cheers.) Mr. DUNCOMBE said he thought that no Member had any right to press or wish another Member to make an apology to another individual unless he was persuaded that that individual deserved to have an apology or a re traction made to him. He thought the Right Hon. Gentleman was right in abstaining from making an apology till he made :himself acquainted with the facts. But he thought the Right Hon. Gentleman had reason to complain of the individual who put the Moniteur into his hands—(Hear) —who must have known that the statement against Mr. Mazzini was fabricated and false, at the time, for it was publicly known. It was the duty of the person who gave the Right Hon. Gentleman the Moniteur, to give him also the judement of the judge of the Tribunal Correctionnel, pronounced on the 23d of April,lB4l, which iu itself was a refutation of the charge. The retraction came late, but certainly the Right Hon. Gentleman was right not to make it till he inquired into it. Now that it was fully made, it would be satisfactory to Mr. Mazzini, and the other exiles who were in the country; and he (Mr. Duncombe) would say, if lie did not believe Mr. Mazzini to have been innocent, he would not have introduced his name in that House, because he would the: emsider him not only to be unworthy the consideration of that House, but unworthy of the friend ship of many high men in this country, wh ch it was his happiness and his privilege to enjoy.—(Hear, hear.) Sir J. GRAHAM said thct the Hon. Gentleman stated that the explanation came late. He would state the facts to the House. He had a letter from Lord Cowley, dated the 2d of May, enclosing the answers of the Judge who tried the case and the Pr.cureur du Roi, which were not received by Lord Cowley till the Ist of May. He received a note from his Noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, dated yesterday, and stating " the enclosed papers were received yester day (on the sth of May) from Lord Cowley, and the statements are of a different tendency from those pre viously given by the Prefect of Police and the Minister of the Interior. He received the papers yesterday at two o'clock, and he could only repeat his assurance that if there had been a House yesterday he would have made the statement he now made.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. DUNCOMBE did net mean to attribute any un necessary delay to the Right Hon. Baronet.—(Hear.) SLAVE TRADE. Lord PALMERSTON said he rose for the purpose of putting the questions, of which he had given notice, to the Right Hon. Baronet opposite. The first question he wished to ask was founded on the 9th article of the Treaty of Washington, dated August, 1842. He wished also to know in reference to the 17th article of the treaty of December 1840, for the suppression of the slave trade, which was signed by the representatives of England, Austria, Russia, and Prussia, whether the contracting parties had in pursuance of this article made application to Belgium, Hanover, and Greece, to obtain their exertions In favour of that treaty, which stated that the parties to the treaty, namely, Great Britain and America, would unite in all becoming representations and remonstrances to Spain and Brazil, for the shutting up of markets for the sale of slaves. He wished to know whether, in pursuance of this article, the Governments of the United States and Eng• land had united in making those remonstrances? Sir R. PEEL said that with regard to the first ques tion, several communications took place between the Government and the American Minister, Mr. Everett, on the subject, and it was considered whether more ad vantago would be likely to accrue from joint represents floes or from separate representations, and they came to the conclusion that it was not necessary to make joint representations, and they considered that, under the 9th article of the treaty, they might, if they so thought fit, make separate representations, though the word " unite " was certainly in the treaty. Representations had been made both to Spain and Brazil, and he under stood that the Minister of the United States at Brazil had shown himself desirous to put an end to the trade, and had co-operated with them in throwing difficulties in the way of the prosecution of the trade. With regard to the second question, the Noble Lord had correctly stated that, in 1841, a treaty was signed by Great Britain to suppress the slave trade, Austria, Prussia, and Russia agreeing to uphold the right of search. France also signed that treaty, but cl:d not ratify it ; but the other groat Powers of Europe, not withstanding the non-ratification by France, waived any point of form that they might have objected to, and the treaty was still held inviolate by them. The question, after the refusal of France to rst.ifv the freers% was, whether it w Lau colfuntl - ICULlt)11 e01:- ternplated by that treaty should be made to Belgium, Hanover, and Greece. They had all combined against the slave-trade, although the refusal of France to ratify the treaty gave the power to the other three natins to refuse adltering to it. He had every reason to believe that no communication had been made to that efft.'et to the other three Powers. Lord PALMERSTON said that as to the second uestion with regard to the powers of the Government of the United States, he presumed that there wou ld be no difficulty in obtaining diplomatic conamunicatien rn those remonstrances from the United States' Gove: merit, and in having them laid before the House; an d if they were joint remonstrances, of course they wou ld he laid before the House; as they were repr esented would joint in spirit, he thought that no inconv enience arise from doing so. WELSH MAIL. Mr. HENRY F. BERKELEY wished to ask sto od tion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Be understo rem ove that it was the intention of the Government to the mail which passed through South Wale s from Bri; tot, and to direct it in some other line, and as he vva Lot,4)` opinion that it would have the effect of injuring Bris he wished to know whether it was true? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER oil!! that m stte of t case ws, Oat the it for Sou Wales the pass a ed thro h u e gh Bristo a l, the effect o f which was to retard the letters for Sou* Wales for several hour!! and as it was the desite of the inhabit ants of Sciutow Wales that their letters should be deliver ed as soon rer possible, arrangements to that effect were in p rog tut; and would soon be finished. He wished t o state, at . - same time, that Bristol would not suffer a n y inconvent ence. NAVY E. Captain PECHELL wished M to k now if the na estimates were to be brought before the House the l evening ? Tr ull laid The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQ that that was his wish. POOR-LAW (SCOTLAND). , On the order of the day being read for mewle th second reading of the Poor-law Amendment (Scot o d) Bill, e The LORD ADVOCATE said, that a s be was d; sirous to give some time for drawing up the re port ° a r th ea is dr i n i AT g ll, o h n e r li , s i l a - k 3 e , d w tl e i e a l t ,. the house would tak e the see° rle CH TEL INTEREST ( REAL PROPERTY)7 a kis Mr. SCOTT, ie moving the second reading 0. toe, Bill, presented petitions from Dudley, Wolverhang re. Birmingham, and Stirling, signed by 'awe he siding in those localities. He said tpa' iiill (hi not understand on what ground this re , could be rejected. The petitions were signed by re' he spectable solicitors of long standing and practice, It il i oe s believed that there were many others in other 1 ) e re . who were of opinion that it was a beneficial Inell'050"01. n H l e hoped they would allow the Bill to go lti t° „id be ittee, and if they put any restrictions on it, it 11° T io der desirable that they should have them brought - their consideration. o 3 .d o et The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that he lion'& feel very much oppressed by the arguments f tile disposed Gentleman in favour of the Bill, nor did he feel of to deport from the resistance to the second retedilget this Bill which he intimated that he should be d i Nich to make. He never recollected having sanction , that a measure as that. He did not see the nece.se./ 0.00 the Houourable Member should preface his' mote for the second reading of this Bill bY hod petitions, every one of them being in the s3alc is the writing, and every one of them being expressed ) bee re, same f language.—(Laughter.) If the Hon. Nier6i.cors erred to the report of the Real Property me asur e C ol ° fflis- he would find that they recommended no such to of as that. The evils which resulted from such a, state things were obvious. The Hon. Member Asko!, ', e s benefit was it, that the law should remain as " o rs and he said it was for the sole benefit of the e , 0 1 and that the present Bill would correct this ev l ' we re its operation would render valid titles that now to being questioned. Now, he (the S°, h oe General) could not foresee that this Bill wo , le 0 he any such effect. He could not approve of it , o e 3 n ot saw that the Real Property Commissioners "(goo) given any intimation of their approval of lt• -- ea suret He took no particular interest in the r° ie od but at the same time he would not like to tbet his sanction to it, as he apprehende _,,e much inconvenience might follow. Ile would sulltl°;eo case, a man dying worth 10,0001. intestate, a °. Y ro igbt might have been the mortgagor of the cod_ ale of become administrator, and what then would he c B, the e those who were the heirs of that deceased ? . t o ale whole, he should say, that he could not, in PI: tha w public, give his sanction to this Bill; and vioa do e V fore, move that it be read a second time tillis of months. en rots,„ . ,,e • Mr. GRANGER contended that the a,,,,,f10ugh - 2_, the Solicitor-General were contradictory. , ',,, -- at s how to be done in that House on this subject, but Wm - c ot attd i ; receive the approval of the Real Properti se should sioners ? He really did think that the House the/ require some stronger argument than that h were eon rejected this measure. The man evils wii le , tinually springing up by reason of defects tl e refo e, d, 01 . 3 ed dered this measure absolutely necessary; A he cons' er h he trusted the House a euld pass it, an. „ f , her who the country aas much indebted to the 11 00 • ''''" 133 had introduced it.—(Hear, hear.) DI! Mr. ROEBUCK said he conceived this n' e ,' ot epP'e an extremely suspicious appearance. for it diall',,,cl ta' to the future at all f therefore the law, as it s''''' - vent future time, would remain exactly as it was now; ~, the there was the fact of the four petitions present e d all ill Hon. Member who introduced the measure, be" w ti ord s ' the same hand-writing, and in exactly the sato ° , ' d be On these grounds he would oppose the Bill, r e i o ., ill should find some specific object to be attalne u t u , tood',„ -tles, re rejected its present state, it did not alter the law as it 11°-. 4 13 1 '' Mr. HUME could not see the harm of letting Il eo eld go to Committee, for it was a very short one, en' be easily disposed (if. ni 0 tat Mr. T. B. C. SMITH would oppose the Die - Lt, 0 ground that it would have a most mischievous ene - te in3e s a retrospective measure. In Ireland it Was clerk es t" the vii elf the practice of au attorney to set up his own cler k bt representative of a deceased party, in order th,a„ 00 make him administrate with the view to gi v°4 'esre .tt" (the attorney) the power of enforcing an)" e ' - „ it P7' might have on deceased's property, and svr' e r sol• away, to the prejudice of all the other ered it° e rs - 14#' this Bill would have the effect of g e e ing the ° ra t t h l t D / in this country. He did feel very stronglY tba' 00 it. was bad in principle, and, therefore, hew ould opP le , we Mr. Sergeant MURPHY would wish to . I r n e for the the Government prepared to say that a proels' e- 01 01 5 bon4 fide sale of an assignment was one w hich s i l lo 00_ 0 , be made ? He would say let the Bill be reaullootrii time, and in the meantime the solicitors of s i t Opioi°' would have an opportunity of expressing th eir of it h o e l upon it.—(Hear, hear.) And let the operation _ dee postponed for three or four months, or that opportunity. I d be Mr. CHRISTIE suggested that the Bill shot colte r lowed to stand over, and abide the result of L° l " a the ham's Bill. 'O.- t. Sir J. GRAHAM said he should vote ag l . l o , whe al second reading of the Bill, without any bes itts e ti n sice 13 r ever, more especially as there was a comp the °the,' regarding probate laws coming down from OO4OP House of Parliament, under the high ansr ices Cottenham. Mr. SCOTT replied. red' The House then divided, when there aPP ea 2 For the second reading .................. - sO 7 Against it .............................. - 3 in order te e Majority ........................... int ° FIELD GARDENS BILL:, ~„ go Mr. COWPER then moved that the o°".i - . i Committee p: o forma on the Field Gardens 1 3 'h,, , 0 0 0 1 1 .0 Mr. ROEBUCK moved that the Bill be re a ' n f therhe time that day six months. The prineiPleii it conllr 0 were wholly untenable, and the only n'tq : 0 - o s. L h s improved would be to erase its chief prov' s- to "" er e main object of the Bill was to supplY wagees;:ons were sort of auxiliary to the poor-law. Poor l )-- eting - .„ 1( 1 ; of supper , a nd to be allowed to have land as a means istence, whereas it was cle it that the labogrere:."Tbeele well-regulated country ought to depend upon loilt-ii to the were about to bring down the people of thiS e r i f ire l rof condition of the pauperised potatoe.ted Pe°P e r hls k ill e - i • h He wished to remove the poor man from w. in l' ' ' h e el mock humanity. Let them look to any P ears sad . h eel these allotments bee existed for tvventy 9_,s"„otagee.tee' would find a settlement of pauper • A l l; a o rl ° lt l - 00, taken of the labourer who had a little g farmer, and less wages given to him, °l' the 1155 forsooth, that he hada pig and a garden. A Mr. B. ESCOTT seconded the amendn3e°-,,a Dee,l., Sir JAMES GRAHAM hoped the Lio toe lt- anteivlsi' Gentleman would not press the motion 1100, He (Sir James Graham) had stated to th e . ro te, i bis °i Learned Gentleman, bath in public and in Pr i es iti a he had great objection to several of the claus es oil it meat, he (Sir James Graham) Bill. If the Hon. Gentleman should press '.'„ lf tee,' a , 1 e Bill Pr o i n tr , his duty to vote forthe committal of t 1 h IA als lll He believed would pie .., form e , that the Hon. Gentleman we o htt- t he duced the Bill had done so with the lostVh-o mozives. The acquisitfon of small plots d land c e of hap" labourer with his dwelling, was a great sour r, ere ere piness . and comfort to him, This Bill, h wevegill w ere e tlot 0 not give him that. The provisions of the be compulsory, and the land which woula a b e icl woe' vioe to the labourer under this Bill •• Dill .. f et, enable the fi•ld wardens to a distance from his dwelling. Ths, esbow oi l sa y tO the boa , li la "You have half an acre of very productiv e we rh l e . you pay a small rent for it, you can thereforC h the 0 11 me for lower wages." Thus far he agreed",v,l,l,r nob D or Member for Bath, and the Hon. Membe ' 0;o st 3 Coin. only done h;s duty in entering his pro g o Lip rawly tion of this measure. Should this Bill g o Or mittee, he (Sir James Graham) should 01° w at watch the details of this measure. s to dre vh 3t Mr. ROEBUCK said, that his o bject w, ° , - After should tention to the mischievous effects of this Dill. ho had fallen from the Right Hon. G Dil l d the not press his amendment. an The amendment was then withdrawn, passed through Committee pro forma' C o the - he MEDICAL 1.31 LL• rove it t- Sir JAMES GRAHAM then rose to o to in o to C et a' 1 0(11101- C 1110.' mittal of this Bill. He wished the lion s i Z Bill p'o :forma, for the purpose of intr 1. ele die alterations which he was about to su llcal adju st dies • b l e to ,bo - entletaan, - always had an earnest desire, if poss l gree' e 1 $ land an , .. d eon of the general practitioners of Ertof buh,br differences which unhappily existed betweell a Iv" e .: and the governing body of the Colleg e oo andit 'oder The College of Surgeons was in posses'les, coder Tr ee stroll and which gave them extensive privileg Lille/I ce. it e gwehniecrhaltphreayetietndoonyeresd n g u r m e e a r t ie p a o ll w y e r w a e n ro d very to " e ve ll powerful, and if they were empowered Council, i f' a _,,d ..i. " • lies '''' f presentative body in the shape of o.° th los 03 o short time the elected body would reflect h a d smith ha opinions of the constituPnt body. III; raise acre 0 the general practitioners in the terras 0 .I ) ._ they _,,tis felt was due to them. In rural districF ~. ow most important class, but in the metropolis the