The Sun. — London, England, 1845-04-25 00:00:00

I yid re' , b e old i •' "House, whether his words were not more words of charity_ He than those which f e ll f rom t h e H on. G en tleman's lips a would ask th e H on. G ent l eman, suppos i ng that byme . ans of that collision w hi e h ex i ste d b etween t h e M em b e rs of the House, he w ou ld say between the extreme voluntaries on his side, the ex treme invuluntaries on the other s id e —(Laughter)—this Bill had b een d e f eated, he should l i ke to k now w h a t kind of a t Governme n t t h ey h a d reason to expect f rom the Government that would spring from such a connexion —semi-bovemque `item semi-virumque bovem.—( Laughter.) The Secretary for the Home Department, in the speech which he made on a l ate occasion, did more" good in softening and conciliating the people of Ireland, than any spe ec h which had been delivered lately.—(Cheers. ) The feeling s o f t hi s country had been too subservient to Whig and there(esheers. ) H e wou ld b eg t o state to the House that would never be an ultimate settlement of the Irish ques tion until the Irish Church was, not subverted, but put on a different footing.—( Cheers. ) Lord BERNARD rose amid reat confusion, expressive of a great di s i nclination on the part of the House to hear. He was Understood to say that he would not trouble the House at so late an hour of the evening but for the remarks made by the Hon. Member who had just sat do en. He referred to a stat He«- Ment which h e (L or d Bernard) made two years ago . 'wished to be allowed to refer to a speech of the Noble Lord the Memb er f or Sunderland, in which he asked what would be the fate of the Irish Chnrch, if it were to be determined by a Parliament existing in Dublin.—( Here the noise became so great that the Noble Lord, not being able to obtain a hearing, sat d own. Mr. ELLICE said that he rose to set himself right with the (House, with respect to a statementrof his Right lion. Friend's the Secretary for the Home Department), in the course of his sPeech last nig h t. But before he did so, he wished to say in a few words that he would g some his cordial support to the pre. sent motion, H e s h ould be at see loss to do so, p if he thought that it would in any way interfere with the success of the mea sure which the Right Hon. Gentleman had introduced to the House ; but inasmuch at he should come to that vote without injuring the progress of that motion, and as he thought it essential upon this—probably the first step in it_ l l_e_vir cours e of ecclesiastical, policy with the people of o,TM—to make aprotest against making any tax on the people I L-rat:Wand to support any ecclesiastical establishment in I!•e -urs he tho ug h t it right, for that r eason, to vote for the motion R o g u l e lir. Friend (Mr. Ward). He need not fatigue the this rn t . tratefinielite. Y going over the grounds upon which he supported Th ese arguments had been so admirably concen and that t speech of the Right Hon. Member for Edinburgh, Th e sPeech followed by the declamation of his Noble Friend of the ter teethe City of London, as well as by the appeal subChject hadhleheleorirde Member for Sunderland, that the whole mouse.no_answer had completely exhausted. Respecting the Irish against which so powerful a statement had been ever been attempted in any quarter of the „ with th The Government had stated it was impossible to cope reason to The of the subjeet, but they gave no good o the House or the country that they had the least atTn Ity in being able to stand where they were.—( Cheers. ) T he first step in progressing had been taken, and they must to onwards <Hee let who might occupy the reins of Government. in , hear,) He had always during the time he had a seat iiinititeeere the subject hHeaoru.2e, taken a very active part, and a very anxious He was sure that twenty years ago, Mein had seconded a proposal of the Hon. Member for Middlesex for going into Committee on the Irish Church n su _a_ . - he had at that time made the same state :Cent! which the Honourable Member for Sheffield ee sect brought he hdforward. Upon every subsequent debate on this pursued the same course, and when he became '(mambos of the Government , when his Right Hon. Friend 4_ 11 . 4 Graham) left the Cabinet, he had avowed the same mOt Pinions, as distinct as language could avow them. He could Government in what part of his speech to the House when she Government of Lord Grey came into power, he had given anterance to principles different to those on which the present Imotiotnh was founded. It might have been that be then stated ghat as f ere was no intention on the part of the Government to 'take the Irish Church the means of forming a Roman maine;the .Establishment in Ireland. They had not arrived at reatenrt theylzeffiveerenie fo w r o m oi a id tion to judge to what purpose or to what ' make an appropriation for the Protestant of the Church. But when his Right Hon. Friend left aeo ' a . Commission had been issued to overturn the municipal covpoenirtions of the different sects in Ireland, so as to enable the e nures to advise the Crown with respect to practical Lee son this isubject. He forgot the erecise statement 0, made by his Noble Friend at th'e head of the Government la:a erd Or eY), but he believed that although that Noble Lord refused to admit the intentions of the Government to v i a r tg) 11.):Iyeuainayr object, belonging to the Protestant Church to any act, he maintained the power of the Government __aPPla the sum to any such purpose which the Govern eehrsits t o uld ian d g e o e a m ge, expedient.—( Hear, hear.) With respect rto he recollected well the debate arising on 0 Lq ue stion resp ect i ng the settlement of the tithes i n Irelan d , euht forsvard by the present Lord Hatherton, the then chary for Ireland. In the course which he took on that waeasion he lamented the loss which the Government hail h i d edp 4a . t arl by t h e retirement of his Right Honourable e (jr(S Jam es G raham) and his Noble Fr i end the present eietary for the Colonies. He thought then, as as now, that gretirernent, under the circumstances of the ce and on e principles on which they placed it, were detrimental to the larr of good government and the progress of liberal opinions regard to Ireland. The Government then had a large "Arty in the House. The Irish people were then disposed to " e !Pt conciliatory measures, and if the Government had gone a 1 ,4 naison as they were in the course of policy in which they as a "'allied, a state of affairs would now exist in Ireland .r.airtaYesdsi.fferent from that which they had the misfortune m to In stating his regret at the retirement of Right f t clo. Friend and of Lord Stanley for office, he used theseloss ofetrot.s, For what had the sacrifices—(he alluded to the :i 41 ' two Right Hon. Friends)—been made, .but . that the etecayenaavrnent might be enabled to act on that principle which HO owed with respect to the me . asure before the ns e (it Was the Irish tithe question); and upon loose ironical cheers coming from the Opposition ,eaeet'lide of the it "he scarcely knew how to interpret that thebut if nt that the Government were not united, determined m to ea act consistently with their declarations; if a' e Was the le as t diffi cu lty in the principle o.' the application the surplus revenue of the church of Ireland to the urposes -Whi ch had been stated by the Hon. Member for St. p Albans, he should have been the last man to join the Cabinet." That was saffic.ent to show that be had never swerved. To the 'Measure founded on a system of liberality to the people of Ireland he would give his support, and hoped that system would %e carried steadily forward. To the first step in that progress, ht. repeated , . he gave his willing and cordial support, protest ing with his Hen. Friend against the principle of taking money for such purposes from other sources than the surplus revenue of the Irish church, and against the principle of abstracting it from the taxe paid by the people of Great Britain.—( Cheers. ) Mr. E. B. ROCHE said the measure proposed by the Right Hon. Baronet regarding Mayisonth was a good measure as far as it went; introduced, he believed, in a good, and honourable, and kindly spirit—( Cheers)—and for that reason he regretted that the question of the Protestant Church in Ireland should luxe been brought rw fo ard on that occasion.—(Cries of "Hear hear" from the Ministerial benches. ) He regretted it the more , because urged by old and long-entertained prin ciples,_ he must vote for the motion of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Sheffield. He thought the question of the Iri s h Ch urch was not so i mportant a ques ti on now as it was a fe w years ago. It was not regarded by the Irish people with so mu c h an xiety, because, in the first _ h place, the was as overlaid in the Irish mind More absorbi n g, an d what he believed to be the more c i tte atioh ; arid, in the second place, the people of Ireland hadseen this question of Church reform what they considered trifled with by parties on that, the Opposition side of the House, be tre--( ear, hear)—and, therefore, they did not believe ihat i - "ey were sincere in proposing Church reform. H a a only state( thltheereegieneral feeling among the Irish people. He would be i ftng in saying the Hon. Member for Sheffield was not.sin _, .here Was no doubt . about that. But, at the same time, 2risn people take up this question eith great spirit, and lay - a 'own very quietly—(Hear, from the Ministerial benches) ' sa nds therefore , in their minds, it was not so importan h t a a d restion as it had been. He regretted that the question it be introduced on the present occasion, because he thought itdietter that the question should be disposed of by itself. He idnot know whether the Right Honourable Mem ber for the University of Dublin, and the n Noble Lord all;:ord Bernard), were quite satisfied with the arpect which aa t! qUestion of their Church had taken in that House. He a"'a. at regard . ed kt as an abuse. He deplored the ex- Wei se , of h t at abuse in his country. It was the Church that had v . - 7T it bone of contention between them ; but he regarded it v a t m mast regret as it was the thing of all others which p a r n e a w e lZ t e e4 the party which that Noble Lord represented, nosh he (air. Roche) represented, from uniting for the t 0. good of their common country.—(Cheers.) He if th he Noble Lord, and the Right Hon. Gentleman, they tho ught that by remaining in that House, and by keeping Char _question in that House, they would keep the ch safe as it existed at present. He asked sea e e ta t° look at the state of parties in England, and consider ner they were likely to get for that Church very flatter ng tern s , if t 4 %%be —on. Gentlemen on this side of the House should Ma n i n 'it° Power. Let them well consider this—whether . Irish equita Ireland could not settle that important question more ho nea h lY for both parties—more permanently, and more th e a r t aPll than by coming over to this country, which Id olitt' e `a " • Member for the University of Dublin The m H his speech to be a " foreign country:" seppoeton. Member for the University. in his argument in Chu rch of the Ch urch in Ireland, said— " T a k e f rom usthe seta ;., and you have the support of the party whic.. I re.p fb. re rei which parts, said another Hon. Gentleman, was a He eacti__garrison, existing in a foreign and hostile country. . fearZedhe listened with some humiliation when he heard his ife:eountryrnan obliged to make such a confession, 4 14k 1f-TON—I said a hostile, not a foreign country. twee,' • ° CHH—The Hon. Gentleman raid he did not say s z d a t i.a t ' ai r:t h is o h stgi it AZ:',,!uld, therefore, he retracted that expression, but still he l a i r ty ris w e a n ,. existing in a hostile country. Now, said did n ings. The all on one side, for the . people . of Ire regard the English party there with hostile feel. Pesa ta oey only regarded their prejudices with hostility, and co nnt as with contempt ; but they did not regard their fellow a ler 1.)1/ ft in any hostile spirit, and many of them, forming ve ueo ff e th P e arty in Ireland, hoped that a blessed day would _come, co mmon Y would all be united for the common good of their The R i e tamtry. But he would turn from that question. b enu ßht H on. Baronet, as he had previously admitted, had han gets.e question forward in a good and fair spirit ; but let had re !nd the Ri ght Hon. Baronet, that all the support he oeigio:telved from the Opposition side of the House, did not "set The fro a sacrifice of party to principle. Honest hot I — PPorted that motion because it was just ; men who were i atmest "a thi s 'ePported it because it was and expedient. He heard r aarrno r een Y, among the l ower gra d e of the Whig party, a nd reports of a coalition. He found them in kora „tin the pleasing dreams of one day seeing the Noble e _ sear onst suember for the City of London, and the Right Hon. % Li , he First Lord of the Treasury hob-nobbing at a se t ems a mner. What a scene it would be for that talented s t , o salan, who styled himself the historical painter of the Ant ed of Commons. He wou'd have the old story of f t e i lles e i and Octsvius dividing the empire amongst their Jai% et ; But did they suppose Ireland would aequiese in Lais a 4 i r ae? Did they think Ireland would be contented with Zke r at at t7 bribe to sacrifice the cause in which she had em- Tb he told the Right Honourable Baronet did spirit, that such would not be the case. sttre__.would not be able to quiet Ireland by this single mea trg, !to, they must give ample and full justice. Ireland was e N es; ey b e f i ant a cause which she thought was just . and good,. and ale a nea. eaed they were entitled to a domestic Legislature. e a tt Perfectly well that he was vainly attempting to adeo • mat Rs'anse uhieh had no friends in that House ; he trusted attesea,- Members would permit him to tell them, that their 'and . E`tpg to treat with an individual would not satisfy Ire .,aprute, h et' must recollect that lately a body of men had e tree" ) s a lt in Ireland, who commanded the confi not e s ?' the people of Ireland, and who would th ete; e satisfied with this measure. How were rived fee n ailed into existence? Why their existence was de "fobieth regZiate.ertain de . claration which a Lord-Lieutenant . made repealto in Ireland. That person proscribed any b:ntertaa n thi exclude, FS repeal opinions, and declared that they were I was _ a trom office. To say the least of it, he thought b j behea_n unworthy declaration. It was as much as to say, ft%At, ;eere you are to be bought, and if you are to be h . s e , of t om my price." But these men had the sym people *th them, and . he said again flu! 1111 'st have so ' a- v" e el would be met mg more than this measure before 347 Wishalyttlteintgth into this question, but if Geaaralitent had ate, satisfied. He was not going at that late hour to s hnald be settled peacefully and amicably, they must enter upon the consideration of it at once, hut he could assure them that nothing short of what he had stated would satisfy Ireland. Lord PALMERSTON did not intend to go into the ex traneous topics which had been introduced in the course of the debate—" sufficient for the debate was the question thereof." If his Hon. Friend had brought forward his motion under the circumstances, and in the same circumstances in which he first gave notice, he should have felt it to be his duty to vote against it, unwilling as he had been to take any step which could by any remote possibility have impeded the Government Bill, which, to a certain extent, had been carried ; but the course which the Right Hon. Gentleman had since taken, had enabled him (Lord Palmer ston) to give the motion his support. The question the Hon. Member had now brought forward was this, Whether there was not another fund from which the grant proposed by this Bill could not be supplied? The Hon. Member had originally asked why should not the grant be takea from the Consolidated Fund ; but he had altered his motion, and he now asked, why not procure it front the funds crea ted by the reduction of the Irish Church establishment ? He ( Lord Palmerston) would have voted for the motion for supplying the grant from the Consolidated Fund, if he had persevered in it ; but he ( Lord Palmerston) would prefer that this money should be taken from the other source, and there fore he would give his vote in favour of that proposition. The first question the House had to consi der was, could there be a surplus of Church funds sufficient to meet this demand, after providing what was necessary for the support of the Protestant Church established in Ireland ?—( Hear, hear.) He did think that no person, who had heard the statements made upon that subjs ct, but would feel satisfied that ample funds would still remain for the proposed measure, after providing in the most ample manner for the Protestant Church.—( Hear.) Then, he would ask, had this House authorised the Govern ment to make this grant? He should say that no Member, who had voted for the Churc h Temporalities Act, could dis pute that the House had that power. The resources of the Church, it had been admitted, were at the disposal of the State, who held them in trust for certain uses ; if that were so, then, he would contend for it, that those who had brought in the Church Temporalities Hill should make such use of this surplus fund as it was quite apparent it was intended for. On those grounds, then, he would vote for the en dowment of the College of Mayn ooth out of this fund.— 1 ( Hear, hear.) He knew he would be met b y the statement that this would be going a step beyond the appropriation clause, and that granting a sum for education in Maynooth from this source would be granting money for the exclusive education of Roman Catholics. But he contended that the Church Temporalities Bill did not repudiate sueh an applica tion of the funds, for they were intended for the purposes of general education of the Irish people, the great majority of whom were Roman Catholics. If, then, it should be found that the Established Church did not require the ape lication of the whole of those resources, then he would feel no diffiAilty what- ' ever in applying them to aid the religious instruction of the people of Ireland.—( Cheers.) In Ireland there were eight millions of people, of whom seven millions were Roman Ca tholics. In Ireland there was a large Church establishment, which educated about one-half of the Protestants of that coun try, and the State paid, by a grant, for the religious instruction of the ether half.; and was it then possible that this House could contemplate six and a half millions of the poorest portion of the people of that country re eiving religious instruction from their clergymen, wive were dependent for their support upon what they received by going from door to door, and from farm to farm, to collect the means of ex:3tence?—( Hear, hear.) Whatever might be the result of this discussion, depend upon it, this country would be compelled, sooner or later, to adopt some such measure. —( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") For a long while party prejudices would not permit this ques tion to be brought forward; in the meantime it had been freely discussed outside, and at length the force of argument had become so strong as to produce a reaction, and then the Government came forward with their measure ; but they came when the time had gone by—they came forward when thei spontaneous offering appeared not what it was, but as a sur r render to fear, which he was sorry to see, and which he felt assured the Right Hen. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel) did not intend.—( Hear, hear.) However, he did hope that this impression would not have the effect of deterring the Govern • ment from the path they had resolved on to pursue, in regard to the prosecution of other means of conciliation which he be lieved they had in contemplation.—( Hear, hear.) There were many other questions of a conciliatory character to Ireland which he hoped to see brought forward, and the carrying out of which would soon prevent the use of such expressions as " a hostile nation" applied to England.—(Cheers.) But if the Government imagined that this alone would be sufficient to ac complish per'ect tranquillity in Ireland, they would find their mistake, for there this would be looked upon as a measure yielded to fear, and not elicited by conviction.—( Cheers.) Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT—Sir, I mean to say a few words before the debate closes, and they shall be very short. I shall not enter into the question of the Protestant Church Establishment, and I will make no further allusion even to the motion the Hon. Member for Sheffield has brought forward than to say that I deeply regret that this question should have been brought forward now—first, because I think that it will be little understood in Ireland, and next, that it is introducing for discussion between the leading parties of this House abstract principles which have no reference to the measure before the House, awl. also because the only influence of this motion, if successful, must be, of course, to destroy the measure before the House. I should have thought this system of introducing the assertion of principles into the discussion of particular mea sures had already led to so much inconvenience in the hands of the Honourable Gentleman himself, that he would have been the last person to have proposed such a course. Look to that measure which was admitted on both sides of the House to have been of paramount necessity for the tranquillisation of Ireland—the meaure, for the settlement of the tithe question. Look to the annnal attempts that were made to introduce that suicidal clause, which long delayed the settlement of that question. But, Sir, I have risen on this occasion more especially to call the attention of the House to the statement which was made last evening and repeated again to-night, in spite of the emphatic contradiction given to it by my Right Hon. Friend, namely, that this measure had been brought forward, not from any sense of justice, not from any preconceived opinion as to its fitness for the state of Ireland, or the effect it might have on the tranquillisation of that country, but that it had question.—(Cheers.) wop e ni ange e esgeh n s ttt alreadybenot x egnhf t oat r —hrt a ee c t(h t pc ed oiaushnt, syme b eigner y fear soastuno.s:uptsreiheer a shape suspicion sr nd llywco. contemplated—nay, it alarm, nekm iptl a ads—s created nh aoyw, by y mh t y h r e tel Oregon tos last that it eecexteoierteeerdst questio n o arose l in t this is was country announced s w r i e t h regard to the territorial boundary of North America, or that any rup' ure was feared. It was stated further that the Bill had been act ua lly drawn, and Roman Catholic prelates con sulted so far back as November last. Nay, I may say more. During the last session, when the discussion took place on the vote for education, and likewise for the grant the introductio n of th e su bj ec t to o e Right Hon. on i l gh Y t n° H ° on. Gentleman the Member for Waterford (Mr. Wyse) called the attention of the Government to academical o f education Governmennt,in Ireland, inanswer and m y Right H on . F r i en d at t h e h ea d to th a t s p eec h, sa id th e su bj ec t had already been unde r the consideration of the Goverment ; bringthat only on sthe important lateness a ° fthe measure session, on : and his unwillingness to the pro s perity of I re l an d, had prevented them bringing forward the measure. I can go back to a still higher date because a commu f nication was made ton ca t n he be sub Zo et o re contrarythis measure. I the fact o say, m therefore, b y t h ethat Government nothing than that any unworthy motive had actuated the Government to —a motive, I think, disgraceful to the character of lier Ma jesty's Government, and one which I am anxious repel, not only because I think it would produce a most unfavourable impression as to the character and conduct of the Government, but would greatly diminish the good effects to be anticipated from this measure. I very much regret that the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edin burgh, forgetful of all these facts, has studiously tried to fix this imputation on the Government. I regret this much, be. cause it appeared to me that the Right Hon. Gentleman was thinking less of the benefits this measure might produce in Ireland, than of the degree of party strife it might cause.— ( Cheers, and counter-cheers.) I perfectly understand those cheers, but, I must say, that I draw a great distinction between the course the Whig party has pursued on this occasion, and that which they formerly pursued. I am as willing as any man to acknowledge any disinterested support of the Govern ment. I must say, however, that the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh has taken a course diametrically opposite to that which was taken by the Noble Lord, and has endeavoured studiously to fix a charge of inconsistency on the Government, and in such a manner as might be calculated to injure the success of this measure in Ireland. Let it go forth to Ireland that this mea sure ha, been extorted by fear, and all its advantages wili be lost. If through that cause the measure should be ineffective for tranquillising Ireland, the responsibility will be with the Right Hon. Gentleman. lf, on the contrary, the anticipa tion of her Majesty's Government shall be realised—if the measure does produce tranquillity—if it should have the effect of attaching the feelings of the Roman Catholic priest hood—if it does carry out the views of her Majesty's Go vernment, then the Right Hon. Gentleman will have this consolation, that it was not for want of his opposition that the measure had not failed in tranquillising Ireland.—( Hear.) I allude to this because I think we ought not to admit the ciaims of the frequenters of Conciliation Hall in the success of this measure. I have already stated that this measure was first announced in answer to a speech of the Right Hon. Gen tleman the Member for Waterford, and that it has arisen from no sudden external cause whatever. This measure is to be attributed to those gentlemen in Ireland, and those Roman Catholic prelates, who not fearing the consequences, and ex posing themselves to great obloquy, and great misrepresenta tion, and great abuse, nobly stayed aloot from agitation and refused to have any partnership in measures which they dissapproved of. The Government were determined to bring forward this measure, not as a bribe, not as a concession, but as a measure which they believed to be right—and they bring it forward because they believe it to be right, and because they believe and know that there are Roman Catholic Gentle men, and Roman Catholic prelates, who are most anxious to give their influence in promoting the prosperity and good order of Ireland.—( Cheers.) I undertook to say as few words as possible. I was anxious to vindicate the Ceovernment from this charge which has been made against them-eto vindicate them from the charge of inconsistency in bringing forward this measure, a measure which they s u pp orted when in Opposition, and which they now carry out when in office ; and I was anxious, likewise, to vindicate them from the impu tation of this measure having been extorted from them by menace and fear, and by the dread of a hostile foreign country. It was a sense of justice which prompted them to put it forward, and I beg the House to recollect, that when agitation was ripe in Ireland,that was not the moment the Government chose for bring ing this measure forward. It was after the law had vindicated itself, and a comparative state of tranquillity had been established that they did feel it their duty, in conformity with their declara tion, that they would govern Ireland with impartiality, justice, and conciliatiou, to bring forward this measure in redemption of that pledge, and I trust that it will be received in Ireland in the same spirit in which it has been conceived, and whatever threa s the Government may receive from Exeter-Hall, or from the Right Hen. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, neither one nor the other will deter the Government from pure suing that course which they conscientiously feel to be neces sary for the tranquillity of Ireland.— (Cheers. ) Sir H. W. BARRON rose amidst loud c ries of " 011, oh !" "divide, divide." He said he would not detain the House for many moments at that late hour of the night—but being the only Catholic Member from Ireland who had risen curing the pre sent debate, he was anxious to explain the reasons upon which he would give his vote ; and he trusted the House would ex tend its indulgence to him while doing so.—(Hear, hear.) He had always been an open, firm, decided, and manly oppo nent of the present Government; but when he saw them changing the principles upon which they acted when in Opposition, he tendered them his own thanks, and the thanks of his constituents. Seeing the spirit in which the Government were disposed to act towards Ireland, he could not consistently vote for the motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield. Hear. )He thought it would he gross ingratitude towards the Government, if he were to vote for the motion. That motion was most inoppor tune and ill-timed, and taken in connexion with the measure of the Government, he could not conscientiously support it. He would not answer the taunts and abuse which had been cast upon the Roman Catholics by petitions and speeches in that House. They exhibited little of charity or religion. He was glad that in the meetings held in Ireland, no such calumnious or abusive language was heard. If the Right Hon. Baronet followed up the measure for the endowment of Maynooth by other measures, he would find that no part of the British do might be more easily governed than trelatni.—( Hew'. ) THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY; MORNI - Nd, - Ai'Rl L 25,1845. Mr. HINDLEY rose amidst loud cries of " Divide," and " Oh, oh." He could assure the House he did not rise to make a speeeh.—( Hear, hear.) He rose for the purpose of asking whether a division would take place on the first proposi tion the Speaker would put fro .n the chair, and whether, if he voted against the proposition, looking at it in its simple terms, and supposing that he was determinedly hostile to the Maynooth Bill, whether he was bound to give a negative to the proposi tion that the Speaker do leave the chair ? The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion . Against it ..... •. 321 Majority against the motion ...... --174 On our being re.admitted to the gallery, we found Sir R. H. INGLIS op his legs addressing the House; in answer to a question from whom, Sir R. PEEL said that it was his wish that they should go into Committee, and that the Chairman should report progress. Of course they would go into Committee again to-morrow (this day), after he had made his statement with respect to Scotch banking. He was most anxious to give a general outline of that measure, in fulfilment of a pledge given to the Scottish Members who were interested in the question. If the discus sion on that statement were not prolonged the subject of the Maynooth grant might be taken afterwards. Sir R. 11. INGLIS thought Monday the better day. Sir R. PEEL was of opinion that as they had already nine days' debate upon the sul•ject, it would be better that they should get through the subject as soon as possible. Under all the circumstances he should feel it his duty to bring the matter forward on the morrow. Colonel SIBTHO RP—Although he had voted in the same lobby with the Right Hon. Bar.uet, did not do so out of re spect to the Right Hon. Baronet or to his measures. He did not like the principle of expediency on which the Right Hon. Baronet seemed to found his measures. Mr. HUME would wish to say a few words on the subject of Scotch banking, when brought on to-night, but did not object to the Maynooth question being proceeded with after wards. Sir ROBERT PEEL said he would not bring forward the Maynooth question after nine o'clock.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. LAW thought they should not proceed with it until Monday, and begged of the Government to postpone it to that day. - Sir lt. PEEL declined acceding to the proposal ; he had been asked not to bring it on after nine o'clock, and he con sented, but he would not consent to a greater postpone ment.—( Cheers. ) Lord NORTHLAND protested against any factious oppo sition being given to the Government—he would not lend him self to it. Mr. C. WOOD thought the measure might be brought on to-night after the Scotch banking question, which would be only, as on former occasions, a mere outline by a Member of the Government. Sir R. INGLIS had understood that the Government had consented to postpone the further progress of the 8.11 to Mon day, after the House going into Committee pro forma to night.—( No, no.) A strong feeling prevailed out of doors on the question, and tie hoped the Government would consent to postponing it to that day. Mr. PLUMPTRE denied that any factious opposition had been raised. In consequence of the rapid movements which had already been made, it would be more preferable to postpone the sitting of the Committee on the Bill to next Monday. He at the same time repudiated anything like factious opposition, as far as he was concerned. Lord J. RUSSELL did not think that there was anything like factious opposition displayed ; the Bill had been carried on as fairly as possible.—(Hear, hear.) As he did not expect that a long discussion would arise on it ; he would desire that they should go into Committee to-morrow. Lord NORTHLAND having stated that he only meant that he would be no party to factious opposition, The House went into Committee, pro forma, and the Speaker got leave to sit to-morrow in Committee. THE INFEFTMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. The other orders of the day having been disposed of, the House adjourned at One o'Clock. SEVEN' TR REPORT FROM THE CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE OF RAIL WAY BILLS. The Select Committee appointed for the Classification of Railway Bills, according to the resolutions adopted by the House, and who are empowered to report from time to time, have further considered the several matters referred to them. and agreed to report as follows: Your Committee recommend that the following Bills or projects— IV W. Manchester and Leeds Railway, Sheffield, Ashton-under-Lyne, and Manchester Railway, Manchester, Bury, and Rossendale Railway, and the Manchester, Leeds, and Hull Associated Railway Com panies, be referred to one and the same Committee. Your Comrnitteefurther recommend that the following Bill or project be referred to a distinct Committee : XX. Taw Vale Railway and Dock. Your Committee further recommend that the following Bill or project be ;referred to the same Committee to which the recommendation ur.der the letters VI/ applied : VV. 2, St. Helen's Canal and Railway. PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23. The following Bills were presented and read a first time: — Waterford and Limerick Railway. Aberdare Railway. London, Worcester, and South Staffordshire Railway (Ex• tension from Dudley to Wolverhampton ). The following Bills were read a second time, and committed and referred to the Committee of Selection : London and Greenwich Railway. Ely and Huntingdon Railway. The following Bills were referred to the Select Committee on Standing Orders : Londonderry and Enniskillen Railway. Cambridge and Lincoln Railway. Gravesend and Rochester Railway,—Petition for Bill re ported, and Bill ordered to be brought in by Sir Edmund Filmer and Mr. Kemble. NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE BILL OFFICE. Erewosh Valley Railway (So. 2) Bill,— Committee on pe titions, to prove Standing Orders, Friday, April 25. Great Western Railway (Ireland) ( Dublin to Mullingar and Athlone),—Committee on petition, adjourned till Friday, April 25. Dunstable and London and Birmingham Railway,—Com mittee on Bill, Thursday, May 1, at twelve. Liverpool, Ormskirk, and Preston Railway,—Committee on petition, adjourned till Friday, April 25. Liverpool, Ormskirk, and Preston Railway (Skelmersdale Branch),—Committee on petition, adjourned till Friday, April 25. Staines and Richmond Railway,—Committee on petition, adjourned till Friday, April 25. Chester, Manchester, and Liverpool Junction Railway, — Committee en petition, Monday, May 5. Runcorn and Preston Brook Railway,—Second reading, Monday, April 28. RAILWAYS. Sir William Somerville discharged from attendance during the week commencing Monday, May 5 ; Mr. Cornwall Legh added to the list. Select Committee on group G. The Committee of Selection have referred the following ad ditional Bills and projects to the Committee Berk and Hants Railway, and Salisbury and Dorset Railway (Poole Branch). Select Committee on group Y.,=-Committee discharged. The Committee of Selection have nominated the following Select Committees on Railway groups : A Committee of 1. The Right Hon. F. Shaw (Dublin University),— Chairman, 2. Mr. 13ramston (Essex), 3. Mr. Ord (Newcastle. upon-Tyne), 4. Mr. Villiers Stuart (Waterford county), 5. Mr. Lockhart (Lanarkshire), to whom they have referred the Bills and projects com prised in group F., viz.:— Oxford, Worcester, and 'Wolverhampton Railway, Oxford and Rugby Railway, Oxford and Didcot Railway, London and Worcester and Rugby and Oxford Railway (Dudley to Wolverhampton), Birmingham and Gloucester Railway (Worcester Branch and Deviation), Birmingham and Gloucester Railway (Wolverhampton Ex tension), Bristol and Gloucester and Birmingham and Gloucester Railway, London and Worcester and Rugby and Oxford Railway (Dudley and Sedgeley), London, Worcester, and South Staffordshire Railway, Grand Junction Dudley Branch Railway, Grand Junction Shrewsbury and Stafford Railway, Grand Junction Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton Branch Railway, Shrewsbury and Birmingham Railway. The Select Committee will meet on Monday, May 5, at Twelve o'elock. A Committee of 1. Mr. Charles Wood ( Halifax),—Chairman, 2. Lord Hotham (East Riding of York), 3. Sir John Hanmer (Kingston-upon-Hull), 4. Mr. Stafford O'Brien (North Northampton), 5. Earl Jermyn (Bury St. Edmund's, to whom they have referred the Bills and projects com• prised in group M., viz : North Devon Railway, and Exeter and Crediton Railway. The Select Committee will meet on Monday, May 5, al Twelve o'clock. A Committee of 1. Sir Charles Douglas (Warwick),—Chairman, 2. Mr. Hope Johnstone (Dumfries-shire), 3. Mr. Evelyn Denison (Mallon), 4. Mr. Cornwall Legh (Chester, North), 5. Colonel Rolleston (Nottingham, South), to whom they have referred the Bills and projects comprised in group N., viz : South Devon, Tavistock, and other Branches Railway, Launceston and South Devon Railway, Cornwall and Devon Central Railway, Cornwall Railway, West Cornwall Railway, St. lye's Junction Railway, Great Western Railway (Cornwall Junction). The Select Committee will meet on Monday, May 5, at Twelve o'clock. A Committee of 1. Mr. Sotheron (North Wilts),—Chairman, 2. Mr. Bickham Escott (Winchester), 3. Sir Thomas Colebrooke (Taunton), 4. Viscount Duncan (Bath), 5. Captain Gladstone (Ipswich), to whom they have referred the Bills and projects comprised in group Q., viz : Shrewsbury, Oswestry, and Chester Junction Railway, Cheshire and Shropshire Junction Railway, Bangor and Carnarvon Railway, Portdinllaen and Bangor Railway, Chester and Holyhead Railway, Chester and Holyhead Railway (Mold Blanch), North Wales Mineral Railway. The Select Committee •till meet on Monday, May 5, at Twelve o'clock. A Committee of 1. The O'Conor Don (Roscommon County),—Chairman, 2. The Right Hon. 'l`. B. Macaulay (Edinburgh), 3. Mr. Pusey (Berkshire). 4. Sir Thomas Estuonde (Wexford County), 5. Sir John Rae Reid (Dover), to whom they have referred the Bills and projects comprised in group V., viz.: — Midland Railways Extension (Nottingham and Lincoln), Newark and Sheffield Railway, Manchester, Sheffield, ead Midland Jupct p Railway. The Select Committee will meet on Mont May 5, at Twelve o'clock. And a Committee of 1. The Right Hon. H. Labouchere ( Taunton),—Chairman. 2. Mr. Divett (Exeter), 3. Viscount Ingestre (South Stafford), 4. Mr. Lindsay (Sandwich), 5. Mr. 0. W lieneage ( Devizes), to whom they have referred the Bills and projects comprised in group 00., viz..-- Hull and Selby Railway (Bridlington Branch), York and Scarborough Deviation Railway, York and North Midland Railway (Bridlington Branch), Whitby and Pickering Railway. The Select Committee will meet on Monday, May 5, at Twelve o'clock. RAILWAY COMMITTEES. (YESTERDAY.) Committee S. This Committee re-assembled at twelve o'clock to-day, and consisted cf Mr. Stuart Wortley, Chairman, Mr. Ewart, Mr. Ainsworth, and Mr. Bulkeley flughes. After the Committee had taken their seats the room was cleared, and upon our re-admission The CHAIRMAN informed the parties appearing for the schemes—Londonderry and Enniskillen, and Londonderry and Colraine Railways—that the Committee could not enter tain them in their present shape as projects• The Com mittee would prefer postponing going into them till they shall be committed as Bills. Indeed, the Committee felt them slves precluded from entertaining them, until they were in that state. 'Fire Committee then proceeded with the adjourned inquiry in the case of TIIE BELFAST AND BALLYMENA RAILWAY. Mr. Gregg appeared as Counsel for the opposing peti tioners, the Corpus ation of Belfast. The nature of the opposition to this Bill was not against the construction of the line of railway. They opposed it on public grounde, in so far as it injured the reven ue of the p ort of Belfast. This revenue was raised for public p ur p oses, and the Railway Company came f o rward to ask fur p owets which er se the y did not possess ; but . their clause, which allowed them to carry goods from Whitehou se Pier, which it just without their limits, to Carrickfergus Loch, would ma terially diminish the revenues of the port. '[lie clause would enable many persons to elude the dues which were laid down in un Act of Parliament. The Corporation was favourable to the construction of the line, for they were of opinion that it would be of great advantage to the town of Belfast, pro vided the following clause were inserted in their Bill : " And whereas, by an Act passed in the let year of the reign of her present Majesty, intituled, an Act for the fitrination of a new cut or channel, and for otherwise more effectually improving the port and harbour of Belfast ; it was amongst other things enac.cd, that certain tonnage dues should be payable by the master, owner or owners, conSignee or consignees, of every sbip or vessel coming into the said . harbour of Belfast, at the office of the th corpora ti o n for improving the said port or harbour of Belfast, or t o such person or oint to rece persons as ive the same. e sa id corporation s hall app And also that certain rates and duties should in like manner be payable on all goods, wares, merchandise, and common dities imported or exported in any ship or vessel entering and using the said harbour. Provided that nothing its said Act contained should be construed or taken to charge or snake liable to any of the charges, tonnage, dues, or rates, any vessels shipping or discharging any goods or merchandise on any part of the shores of Belfast or Carrickfergus Loch, between the Black Head in the island M‘Gee, and the White House on the county of Antrim side of the said loch, and between the Cope. land Islands and the w est point of the Kinnegar, on the county Down side thereof, provided such vessel or vessels should not dis charge or load in certain places, or make use of certain moorings, or other matters and things therein specift d. And whereas the said exemption from charges, tonnage dues, and rates was intended to apply to goods, wares, and mer chandise which should not be sent from, or intended for, consumption within the town of Belfast, or at any place nearer to the said town of Belfast, on the said County Antrim side of said Loch, than the said Whitehouse, or nearer is the said town on the County Down side, than the said west point of the Kinnegar ; but by reason of the formation of the said railway such goods, wares, and merchandize may be conveyed thereby to and from the said town of Belfast, and places Leann to the said Antrimside of said harbour, town, on the sa id County than the Whitehouse aforesaid, to the evasion of the charges, tonnage dues, rates, and duties lawfully payable to the said cor poration for the maintenance and improvement of the said harbour, and payment of the interest on the debt they have already incurred for that purpose for remedy whereof, be it enacted, that if any the l'ort of Belfast, not within the aforesaid limits, would be liable egmoobdasr,kwedareas,t moerrchfroanmdizea,uyorpacrotmmoodf ities, which, if landed or to the payment of rates, dues, or duties to the said corporation, shall be lauded or embarked at or fr,m any place on the shores of Belfast or Carrickfergus Loch, between the port of Carrickfergus and the Whitehouse, in the county of Antrim side of the lough, which goods, wares, merchandise, or commodities, shall be conveyed upon the said railway from or to the town of Belfast, or from or to any place nearer to the said town than the aforesaid Whitehouse, such goods, wares, merchan dise, and commodities shall be liable to the payment Co r to ran y shall be liable to the a person, or persons, as n s u ch of the same rates and d uties to the said Corporation as the same would have been liable t o if shipped in or discharged at the port of paymentßelfe st. t .A thecl the said said the said Corporation shall a pp oint to receive the same, of all such rates, tolls, and duties, as aforesaid. And also to all such tonnage dues as the vessel, or vessels , which shall have shi pp ed or discharged such goods, wares, or merchandise, or commodities, as o aforesaid would have been liable, or subject to, in case the said vessel or vessels had shipped or discharged the same at the port of Belfast ; and shall keep a correct account of the number, weight, quality, and quantity, of all goods, wares, merchandise, and con. modifies, conveyed on the said railway, which would be liable to the payment of such tolls, rates, and duties under the provisions hereinbefore mentioned, which accounts shall be at all times open to the inspection of the and Corporation, or of their authorised officers, and in the event of the said Company failing to keep such account, are to pay the said tonnage dues, rates, and duties, from time to time, as they may become due; they shall forfeit to the said Co, poration treble the amount of the said tonnage dues, rates, and duties, for , the payment of which they may become liable, as aforesaid, and such amount may be sued for and recovered by the said Corporation, by action at law its any competent court. Provided always that nothing herein contained shall extend to prevent the said Railway Company from carrying on the sad I railway to or from any pcint on their line all such quantities of coal and coke from time to time as shall require to be used, and shall be bona fide used for the purposes of the engines of the said Company, without any dues, rates, or duties being payable in respect thereof." Mr. ALEXANDER, at great length, arg ued a g ainst this clause. He referred ' the Committee to the fact that, in the case of the Lynn and Ely Railway, the Committee on that Bill refused to introduce a clause - for the p rotection of a public body, and lie trusted that the Committee would not sanction the present attempt to cripple the advantages of the railway to the public, who would be more affected by the datae than the Railway Company. The room was then cleared, and upon our re-admission, The CHAIRMAN said the Committee having deliberated upon the points of the arguments regarding the clause, they considered that the corporation of Belfast were entitled to some security for the protection of their dues. The parties of course would understand that the Committee did not agree to the insertion of the clause, but they were in favour of the principle. They hoped the parties would mutually agree on such a clause, which, while it would confer no fresh powe es rs upon the corporation, would secure them against parti evading the harbour dues. Mr. ALEXANDER thought such a clause would be ex- er sons now tremely difficult to frame. There were sev eral p entitled to land goods, millers and others, below the limits he of the port, and how those persons were to be protected was at a loss to know. Mr. GREGGI said the difficulty would be overcome by a point being fixed, say two miles from the port; at a, those now entitled to land goods would not be disturbed in their privileges. The other clauses were then agreed to, and the Committee adjourned the further hearing on the corporation protection clause till twelve o'clock to-morrow. Th e Committee rose at hree o'clock. Committee, Group T. t set foi th in the petition of the Blarquis o f g i 1' into. e h t e allegations ea o n n e s On the Committee resuming this m ornin g: x Nlr. Sergeant WnaNconAsi a ppeared dcent a t a lt b e ., e l‘ c I t a i a r n q u t i a s o a iden- Exeter. lie said the Noble Marquis -4 , to be accomplished. to the plan by which this was proposedino being carried He was decidedly against the ' that town at a railway being brought into the town of Stamford, but only across a principal street of passage of traffic l i e ng 'el; the b a r n i d d ge, with laced in it, as there over it, there was no confidence to the Company to widen was no clause in the Bill to authorise wired b ' the circunt - viril eg 3 the bridge in a manner, neces. all these difficulties could stances of the case. He thought asregtaardfactiel)itatthebee P of the north proposed the making north ride of the town, an li)6, but the near enough for station outside of the town, yet of the inhabi all the purposes and conveniences theronii" of w the - be overcome by tants. It had been objected to this line that gra dients Giles's plan, which to_ok e line by the wherep on la e ce iii he would show by good engineering evidence that this objec tionsdtiaetnitosn wwearse proposed too steep 1 o e s b p e e e b i a . V t, thatwhich at wasti le respecting the gradients was not trustworthy. After commenting at some length upon the evidence of Mr. Ste• phenson given before the Committee yesterday, the Learned Gentleman proceede d to call witnesses. The Cnatuotsot be f or e the witnesses were called, intimated thoughtth according iwould t to t h e standing orders of the House, he n ot be admissable to put in particular ga i n ed by the d evidence l he should call, with evidence regarding Mr. Giles's plan, which, as yet, was not before the House ; but only general evidence to prove that f. M t r h . e G b i r l i e d s g 's e. lin l e i b e before a better line than the one under the consideration of the Committee might be found. rat examined. It was Mr. WRANGIIAM thought that the object of the Com the Committee. dent Registrar Mr. Clapton, the Superinten of Births, Mar omaitt tespeawcojauilidy be gained his opinion that the railway passing over the street would be a serious inconvenience to Dl r. the station proposed in r. Giles's plan on the other o f Stamford,tiietheetawsa trafficos fllo side of the town to be much more convenient, as being nearer riages and Deaths, to the place where the fairs and cattle-markets were held. In cross-examination, he . stated ai that Mr. Giles's station , f a mile from was a quai ter o n the wharf on the admitted river at the bridge, and that the as cent from the wharf to the station was very steep, passing through' narrow streets, and would interf ere to a considerable extent with the carriage of heavy goods be tween the two places. He believed the inhabitants of Stam ford were generally in favour of the station at the bridge, though he was not. Mr. Barton, who was employed to take the traffic across e the bridge, was n ext called-4I . was en gaged for two weeks. Th e following was the result for the first week, being from March 24 to March 29, the time being from seven o'clock in the morning till seven o'clock in the evening ;......For the week, foot-passengers , 25,730; two-horse carriages, 116 ; one-horse carriages, 77 6 ; men on horseback, 612 ; passengers in carriages, 1,690 ; carts and waggons, 5,,, uu ; horses in waggons, 9 - 14 ; horses, 216 ; oxen, 52 ; s h eep, 1,687. The foot passengers that passed on the Tuesday were 3,485 ; and on Friday, the market day, 6,782. On a fair day, April the 10th, the foot passengers were 7,747 ; sheep, 4,282 ; oxen, 401. Mr Jackson, surgeon accoucheur, followed, but nothing of material importance was elicited in his evidence. Mr. Hopkinson, surgeon, and Mayor of Stamford, ex- - amined—He thought that the railway crossing the street would have the effect of driving many parties from the town, especially those who lived in the St. Martin's suburb, which the line cut off from the main part of the town of Stamford. Mr. Haycock, a resident of Stamford, said there were six fairs and five cattle markets annually held in the town. Two of the fairs lasted two days, the others one day each. At those times the inconvenience at the bridge would be very much felt. He thought a station at the north of the town decidedly preferable tc the one proposed. The danger of the train crossing the thoroughfare would always be' consi derable. Mr. MACAUTAY, in cross-examination, asked this witness, if he bad never signed a memorial to tke Midland Counties hallway in favour of this line, strongly recommending the station at the bridge as the best adapted for the wants of the inhabitants of Stamford. Witness replied that he believed he had, but he did so then because that line was the only one before the public. In doing this,' however. he did not con sider it to. pledge.him to all the letails of that measure, so as to shut out better information afterwards. He believed that the opposition of the Marquis of Exeter to the present line did not commence till after the signing of the memorial, but that had not influenced him (the witness). The CITAIRMAN—The great mass of the people are in fa vour of this railway, principally, because it is all impression of theirs that if this line were successfully opposed they should not get any other. Mr. Phillips, mister, late Mayor - of Stamford, and a tenant. of Lord Exeter, gave evidence in favour of Mr. Giles's plan for the station. In his cross-examination he admitted, however, there was no certainty of that line going forward it the present were defeated. At the last election excitement ran very high on the sub ject of the railway, and a s rong feeling was expressed by many inhabitants against Sir G. Clerk, but he did not think that that feeling was general. Mr. Grant followed in a similar course, but without deve loping any new point. In answer to a question, put by Mr. Macaulay, he admitted having voted in the Town Council of Stamford in favour of the present scheme, but he did so in hi 3 official character, in deference to the feelings of the in habitants. His private sentiments were against it. Mr. Lawrence, land surveyor, was of opinion that the passing of this line through the valley and across the street in Stamford was highly objectionable. He had never seen anything like it before. Mr. Hill, surveyor in Stamford, gave similar evidence against the proposed crossing, and cited the case of one on the old Warrington and Liverpool line, which had been found very annoying to the people of Warrington. He also considered that the lines passing through the valley would interfere with the drainage, and cause flooding. The Committee then adjourned till to-morrow at twelve o'clock, when the engineering evidence in support of the pe tition will be gone into. LYNN AND ELY.—(Group I.) The Committee met at twelve o'clock. Mr. PAGET stated, on the part of the Middle Level Com missioners, that the parties were agreed upon the clauses, with the exception of one or two points. One of those points related to the bridge which the railway company wished to make over the river. They wished that the bridge should be made in one span of 110 feet, instead of in three spans, as was the intention of the company. Mr. BAGGALLAY said that he did not see any reason for making such a proposition, when of the thirteen bridges which the Commissioners were about to throw over the river, it was intended that every one of them should have three spans. Mr. P.uaEl' replied that thene_ was a great difference be • tween a .permanent bridge for a railway and temporary bridges, which might be easily altered if the necessity of drainage required it. The CHAIRMAN asked of Mr. Rastrick what would be the difference of the expense for making a bridge with three spans and a bridge with one span ? Mr. Rastrick said that the expense of a bridge of three spans would be about 3,000/. ; that of one span would be double. He did not see why the Company should be com pelled to make a bridge of one span, which the Comtnis inoners did not think necessary for their bridges. The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee were unani mously of opinion that a permanent bridge for a railway was very different from bridges for ordinary purposes. They therefore thought that a bridge of one span ought to be con structed. Mr. PACKET said that the other point upon which there was any dispute related to a piece of land belonging to the Eaubrink Commissioners, which was absolutely necessary for them for hauling. They therefore wished that a clause should be introduced preserving this land to the Commis sioners for this purpose. After some discussion it was agreed that the Company might purchase the land in question, giving the Commission ers a full right of usage for hauling, and that in any case their rights in this respect should not be interfered with. Lord Hardwick said he appeared there as Chairman of the Bedford Level Commissioners, and it might facilitate operations if the clauses which referred to the Bedford Level were now read. Several clauses were then read and agreed to. It was understood and agreed upon between the counsel for the promoters of the Bill, and the counsel for the Eau brink Commissioners, that a clause should be drawn up allowing a right of purchase to the Company, guaranteeing at the same time all the rights of the Commissioners, but the Committee being of opinion that the Railroad Company would not interfere with any existing right, the clause agreed upon was not inserted. HUNTINGDON AND ELY. Mr. Ai sTEN mentioned this Bill. The - CHAIRMAN said that it would, be reported that even ing, and probably they would meet to consider it again on Monday week. The Committee then adjourned. Committee (No. 2.) lUDDERSFIELD AND COOPER-BRIDGE LINE. THURSDAY, FOURTH DAY. The Committee sat at twelve o'clock, and counsel proceeded to give evidence in support of the statement of yesterday, upon the Leeds and West Riding line. Mr. Samuel Co!them, accountant, Manchester, deposed that he had been employed by the Manchester and Leeds Com pany, to ascertain the extent of traffic carried on between Huddersfield and Staleybridge. He had made a table of the traffic for seven days, and the result gave 165,620 passengers in a year, producing a sum of 3,1761. The sum likely to be realised by the transit of merchandise was over 15,8001. His calculation of the like intercourse between Huddersfield and Cooper-bridge gave a much less result. He did not think that the calculations made by Mr. Cope had been founded on correct data. The witness was examined at great length upon this point, and the whole detail of Mr. Cope's cal culations gone into very minutely, with a view to show, by the witnesses' answers, that all these calculations had been overdrawn and "very inflated." Cross-examined—The whole receipts for the half-year, on a distance of 65 miles, was over 165,5001. on the Leeds and Manchester line, or 4,800/. per mile per annum. To Mr. Sergeant BELLASIS—Thc majority of passengers travelling by the Leeds line are third-class passengers, to whom a difference in the price of the fare would be an object. To the CHAIRMAN—WouId prepare the same tables it' he - was called upon to make calculations for the promoters of a Bill. Capt. Lawes—Has been a long time in connexion with railways. Would prefer a terminus in the centre of a large town to one at a distance, because it would be a great con venience to the public. There is a great deal of traffic and intercourse going on between Dewsbury and Hudders field, and other large towns along the line, and great inconvenience is felt by the want of the line ; it would be much more economical to the parties, and more convenient to the public, if the line was in the hands of one company. A junction at Cooper-bridge would not only be very expen sive, but very inconvenient, and of very little use ; the effect of a line to Cooper-bridge would be to isolate kind dersfield ; the receipts of the Manchester and Leeds line for the last half-year were decidedly the best they ever had. Cross examined—The Grand Junction is a line passing through an agricultural country ; the line between Staley bridge and Cooper-bridge passes through a very populous district, and is nearly a straight line. The one witness is in favour of is somewhat circuitous. There is no lease between the Caldon Canal Company and the Manchester and Leeds Com pany, but there is some understanding as to the rates. The rates were not doubled when that understanding was entered into, but an addition of about 12 per cent. was made on part of the line. An unusual amount of traffic has been created on the Birmingham line by those gentlemen flying about the country with new projections, but they can't last. — ( Laughter.) He saw hundreds of witnesses surrounding this House, in anxious expectation that those projects would be carried out. Mr. Wickham—ls a magistrate of the county of York shire and a partner in the Lowmore Iron Works. Has a very large traffic on the Leeds and Manchester Line of iron, coke, and lime. Is decidedly of opinion that the line proposed by the Leeds Company would be the most convenient to his district, as it would be worked by one Company. Cross-examined—lt was the want of unanimity, caused by many Companies, that caused much delay and incon venience on the Normanton Line. Mr. Hawkshaw, engineer of the Leeds and West Riding Railway.—Had compared Mr. Jee's estimates, and found that the works on the line he gave evidence of would amount to 781,000/., including a tunnel of three miles of single line ; Mr. Jee's estimate was 638,000/, but if the purchase cf two canals was to be included, the cost would be one million ; a single line of traffic through a tunnel would be very dangerous unless the line *as single all through ; if the tunnel were to be made so as to give adoteble rail the additiOnal cost would be 115,6001 ; it would be less expense to make the double line at once than to make it afterwards ; the second tunnel would cost as much as the first, that was to say 211,200/. Mr. James Thompson, an engineer of great experience in tunnel works in Scotland, deposed that the proposed tunnel on the Huddersfield and Manchester line would be highly dangerous, as it had but one line of rails, while the road at either end had two. The whole of this witness's testimony went to corroborate that of the last. Several witnesses then were called to show that the inhabitants of Huddersfield were in favour of the Leeds and Manchester line. Mr. TALBOT then stated that was his case in favour of the I.eedsand Manchester proposition, and spoke at some length upon it; and hoped the Committee would postpone their de cision until the whole of their case was before them. The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee could not depart from the rule they had laid duwn. Mr. TALBOT then said he could not proceed further at that late hour. The Committee then adjourned. BLACKBURN, BURNLEY, ACCRINGTON, AND COLNE—BLACKBURN, DARWEN, AND BOLTON. —(Group D.) The adjourned Committee met this morning at twelve, and shortly afterwards proceeded with the further considera tion of these projected lines of railway. Mr. Bernal in the chair. Mr. GREGORY resumed his opposition to the Blackburn and Colne, on behalf of Mr. Parker, and called Mr. Wald, who stated that many buildings were being made, and many more were contemplated being made on that part of Mr. Parker's property through which it was proposed to carry the line. At this point of the proceedings Mr. Locke, the engineer, entered the room, when, by the Chairman's permission, Mr. Ward's examination was suspended until Mr. Locke's opi nion had been given. Mr. Locke . said, in reply to Mr. GREGORY, that he saw no difficulty in forming so immaterial a deviation as that which was desired by Mr. Parker, and that he would concede it without hesitation. Two approaches on a station were unne cessary, and in his opinion were rather an inconvenience than otherwise. Mr. Ward's examination was about to be resumed, when it was suggested that the preamble and clauses should be first proved. The preamble was passed without opposi • tion, and Mr. Qoates, the Parliamentary agent proceeded to read the clauses; and on reaching clause 14, entitled " Power to make railway according to deposited plans," Mr. GREGORY rose to oppose it, and proposed substituting ano ther clause, which would have the effect of throwing the Bill out he the House of Lords on a non-compliance with standing orders. After a great deal of conversation, Mr. PARKER said, that in order not to waste unnecessarily the time of the Committee, and to hinder any unpleasantness, he would at once withdraw his opposition to the clause. The CHAIRMAN then said, after the handsome manner in which Mr. Parker had behaved, he thought the Railwa • Company should do all in their power to satisf y Parker as to the manner in which th e prop osed line would pass through his property ' • and to effect that the Hon. Chairman recommended that Mr. Parker should withdraw with Mr. Cawley, th e engineer, and confer toge ther, when, no doubt, a satisfactory arrang ement wou ld b e come to. After a delay of about half an hour, during which a com plete stop was p ut to the p rocee di ngs, Mr. Parker and Mr. Cawley enterec, when Mr. Pa rker said he c o u ld no t come to satisfactory arrangement with Mr. Cawley as to the extent of deviation to be made through his land, but that rather than injure the property of Colonel. Scarlett, through which the line must goif altered, he would no longer oppose the clause before the Committee. - Mr. GREGORY resumed, on behalf of Mr. Parker, and in sisted that a saving clause, or rider, for a satisfactory devia• tion, should be inserted in the- Bill for the protection of Mr. Parker's properly, and proceeded to. call him as a_witness. Mr. Parker,stated he had nearly 900 yards of ground, part of which Was built over, and the remainder he intended letting out on building-leases. Mr. Sr. Jolts contended that Mr. Gregory was trying to establish a most unusual precedent, inasmuch as the clause under which he endeasoured to classify Mr. Parker's pro perty was only intended to protect land already built on, and it had not been satisfactorily proved that, Mr.' Parker's pro perty had been built on to the extent which would warrant the interference of the clause referred to. Several witnesses were then called ; but nothing of further importance appeared in evidence. _ . The Ciimummi then ordered the room to be cleared, and on our return, stated that the Committee had come to the deter mination of limiting the deviath n on Mr. Parker's property at the station and immediate vivinity to ten yards. hut the amended clause was not yet to be considered as part of the Bill until one or two points had been cleared up. The final resolution of the Committee would therefore remain suspended until to-morrow. Mr. GREGORY then said that he had intended opposing one or two other clauses, but would not proceed with his opposition. He would leave his client's (Mr. Parker) inte rests in the hands of the Company; only requesting that compensation might be made to Mr. Parker by an annual payment, and not in fee. lir. Sergeant WRANGIIAM saw no objection to the course proposed, and the opposition of Mr. Parker was relin quished. The remaining clauses were about being proceeded with when _ . „ Mr. Me.nEwETILER stated he was instructed, on behalf of the trustees of the Blackburn turnpike-road, to oppose clause A, and presented a petition from the trustees re questing that the proposed line, where it should cross the turnpike-road, might be carried over by an arch instead of on the level, as was ►ntended. Mr. Sergeant \VI:ANGLIAN* appeared to support the clause. Mr. Cawley and Mr. Gooch, engineer, were severally examined, and their evidence tended to show• that. the line could not, without a very large expenditure, be carried over the road otherwise than on the level ; and further, that the constriction of an embankment for making the arch would throw the line out of the limits of deviation ; and also that crossings on the level were not dangerous to the public if the line were properly constructed, and the servants of the Company attended to their duty. Mr. Hardcastle was called as a witness by Mr. Mere wether, and said he had seen several accidents resulting from a line of railway crossing" the road on the level, and instanced one in particular which happened a short time since on the Bolton and Lee line. _ _ Mr. Sergeant Wranginun and Mr. Merewether having mutually addressed the Conimittee, The CIIAHL\tAN stated that the Committee were unani mously of opinion that the line should be carried over the road on the level, and that the original clause A should he agreed to. Some of the remaining clauses were then proceeded with, when a messenger from the Commons announced, that the Speaker was at prayers. The Committee adjourned till twelve to-morrow. COURT OF CHANCERY, April 24. The Lord Chancellor sat in his Court at Westminster to day, and took appeal motions. ROLLS' COURT, Apil 24. • , Notions and the part-heard case vt . "ti ewer z. Fyson" occupied the Court the whole day. VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURTS, April 22. (Before Sir L. SHADWELI.) PEAPSON V. THE LONDON AND CROYDON RAILWAY COMPANY. Mr. STUART (with whom was Mr. Malims) was heard in conclusion of this argument, in support of the demurrer of the Company. 111 r. James Parker supported the Bill. His HosOuu said the case was a very clear one. It was true the thing was not expressed as clearly as it might Lave been, but still it was clear enough. The second resolution alluded to the 10th of August, but it was so worded that the date was not annexed to the expressions regarding those who were registered owners, but only applied to those who held scrip, if they should bring their scrip to be registered on or before the 10th of August. But it would be rather whim- Meal to put this construction, that with respect to registered shareholders they might at any time claim their shares, but for those who had scrip they should only obtain their shares on or before the 10th of August. Although it was not ex pressed clearly before the 4th resolution at what time regis tered shareholders should make their al - Ovation, that reso lution, however, removed all doubt, for it expressed iu the plainest language that the shares which should not have hem applied for on or before the 10th, should be distribnted ameug those who had applied before the 10th 01 August.. His Honour, therefore, allowed the demurrer. The suit, it will be recollected. arose from the accident that Sir Edward Pearson was at Naples when the resolutions were passed, and had not time, therefore, to make his appli cation as a registered shareholder on or before the 10th of August, as he did not, in fact, hear of the resolutions till after that date. (Before Sir J. L. KNIGHT 1h THE ATTORNUN-GF.NERAI. C. MUNtio. This was an information filed by the Attormw-General at the relation of James Kennedy, JZnSTieWerd, --. Cie;;;; Spence, James Young. William Kennedy. John Frazer, David Johnstone, on behalf of themselves:all other the en rolled communicants and pew or seat-holders in the church in St. Peter's square, in Manchester, and of all other persins, if any, entitled to the benefit of the trusts declared by the indenture of the 4th day of April, 1833, except those w h o were severally defendants thereto. The relators objected to the doctrines of Mr. Munro. Under these circumstances the relators insisted that Mr. Munro could not come within the description in the deed of constitution ; that he` must be considered as no longer belonging to, or in communion with, the Established Church of Scotland ; and that, therefore, he ought to be restrained by the injunc tion of the Court, from conducting Divine worship and service, or otherwise officiating, in tk Scotch Church in St. Peter's-square, Manchester, and rsstrain the defendant, James Burt, the elder, and othas, from permitting or allowing - the church, &e., to be ust d for any other purpoie than for Divine worship and service, in connexion with. aud according to the uses of the Establish ed Church of Scotland. The motion also prayed for an injunction to restrain several other defendants from conveying or assigning any estate or interest in the same church, &c., otherwise than fir the pur [me of giving effect to the trusts declared concerning the same in the deed of the 4th of April, 1844. Mr. J. Russell and Mr. Little appeared on behalf of the relators. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Mr. hour appeared on behalf of the defendant, the Rev. Alexander Munro. The very principle of the Scotch Church was one of self-government, and this was proved by thellook of Discipline of Knox, and by the writings of Andrew Melvil. The views which the Free Church entertained were unques tionably the views which were entertained by a majority of the Church of Scotland in the year 1832. The Veto Act passed in 1834. He would admit that his client did not approve of the system of lay patronage; but he had never done any act to show whether he still belonged to the Est a- Wished Church or to the Free Church. The deed referred to the doctrines of the Established Church at a particular pe riod, and it was not proved that Mr. Munro had ever ex pressed opinions contrary to those doctrines. Mr. WIGRAM and Mr. SELWYN appeared for the defend ants. After addressing the Court at some length, they took an objection on the ground that the deeds relating to this property were informal. inasmuch as they had not been en rolled accordirg to the provisions of 9th Geo. IL, cap. 36. His HONOUR said that, some of the defendants having ex ercised their undoubted right of raising a question in this case, founded on the statute of the 9th of Geo. 11., and if all parties concurred in thinking that the objection was ap plicable, it became the duty of the Court first to consider that question. The order, therefore, would be this : let the defendant James Burt, the elder, naming also the other de fendants, be restramod from permitting or allowing the. church, buildings. &c., in the pleadings mentioned, to be used for any other purpose than Divine worship and service ac cording to the rites, forms, and usages of the Established Church of Scotland, by a minister or licentiate who has been ordained or licensed according to the doctrines and rites used under the authority of the Established Church of Scotland, and from doing any act or procuring any act to be done by • which the said church, building, &C., might become liable to be used for any purpose save as aforesaid, and let the defendants Marshall, Burt, and Stewart lie restrained from conveying any estate or interest which they might have aequireil by virtue of the indenture of the loth of February, 1844, in any manner otherwise than in giving effect to the trusts deelured of and concerning the said trusts by the said deed f the 4th of April, 1832. This order was to be without prejudice to any question whether any injunction should be . granted against the said Alexander Munro, or any further injunction should be granted against the other detendauts, or any of them, without prejudice to any question as to the extent of relief to be granted at the hearing of the cause. It would be for the relators to prosecute it with dispatch. Be would hear it whenever the parties were ready. APRIL `i4. (Before Sir J. KNIGHT BRUCE.) His Honour, after disposing of several motions, proceeded 'A hear the further arguments in the part-heard case of Law t. Law," which occupied the Goth;; the remainder of the day. (Before Sir J. WIGRAM.) His HONOUR, after disposing of the different motions in his paper, proceeded to hear the further arguments in the part heard case of Warren r, Russell, which occupied the Court the remainder of the day. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCIL dpi! 23. Their Lordships were engaged the whole miming heal Mg arguments as to the liability of the borough of Salisbury to repair the bridge of that town. . . Mr. Crowder was for the borough. and Mr. Cockburn contra. Their Lordships took time to consider. BAIL COURT; April 23. (Sittings at Nisi Prius.) int4.KNLAN S. AnwEws. This action was brought to recover a portion of a premiums alleged to have been forfeited by an infringement of the articles in an indenture of apprenticeship. Mr. Knowles, with Mr. Merrvweather, were for the plain tiff ; Mr. Ifumphery and Mr. Lush for the defendant. The circumstances of the case are very easily told. The plaintiff was 'apprenticed with the defendant, a baker in Uxbridge, to learn his trade. The stipulations in the inden ture provided that the plaintiff should not marry, play earth, patronise theatres, or remain out of his 'nesters house all night, and in consideration of his faithfully fulfilling these conditions the defendant covenanted to give the plain tiff his meat, drink, and lodging, with a shilling a week as an encouragement to industry. The defendant, fortified by lova and his " splendid shilling," went out, however, on the Christmas-eve of 1844, and got married, and his master then gave him notice that no married apprentice should reside within his doors. The defendant had not the same objection to the premium, however, and malgre the remonstrances of plaintiff's parents, he retained the whole of it. For this .the action was brought, the plaintiff averring that he had been turned away, and the defendant contending on the other hand that lie had left, of his own accord. Mr. Justice COLERIDGN summed up, and the jury at ones found for the plaintitt—Damagts, 121. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, April 23. • (Sittings in Banco.) The LORD CHIEF BARON announced at the vatting of the Court this morning, that his Lordship, with Mr. Baron Rolfe and Mr. Baron Platt, would sit to-morrow ou the trial at bar between the Attorney-General and George Smith, the distiller, of Mile. end, while Mr. Baron Alderson would bear motions in the other Court. Their Lordships proceeded to hear arguments in cases from the special paper, but nothing of any interest came before the Court. Arm 24. TRIAL AT BAIL-THE GREAT DISTILLERY CASE THE ATTORNEY • G ENERAL I'. GEORGE SMITH • BARNSLEY JUNCTION RAILWAY. The inquiry on this railway was this morning resumed before Mr. Barnebv and the other members of the Commit tee on Group C, when Mr. Robinson was examined upon the quantity of coal consumed in the manufacturing districts in the neighbourhood ofManchester, but especially at Glossop. He stated that the population of Glossop was more than 22,000, and allowing the consumption of each house to be 7 tons per house, the saving effected in this article alone would be 16,143/. in that town. But there was also a population at Mottram of 21,115, at Hyde 10,170, at Ashton 46,304, at Staleybridge 12,371, and at Stockport 84,382, making a population of more than 197,500, all of whom would be benefited by the forniation of this railway. By several of the inhabitants of these places he had been informed that the opening of this railway would be considered a great benefit. To a question from Mr. SOMES as to whether he was in formed that some of the Railway Companies conceived that the carriage of coal was a loss rather than an advantage, Mr, Robinson replied that he was aware that an objection had been entertained against carrying coal by the London and Birmingham Railway Company, but he knew that now they were prepared to carry coal at Id. per ton per mile. By this railway the carriage to Selby would be 4s. 3d. a ton, and to Goole 4s. 7 1 / 2 d. During fourteen days in last De camber he bad taken the traffic on the Dearn and Dove Canal, which he found to be in limestone and coal to gether 650,000 tons a year, and on the Wakefield and Barnsley Canal it was 160,000 tons, making a total of 810,000 tons a year. But as this traffic was taken at a pe riod of the year when the coal trade was in state of great activity, he would reduce the traffic on the Deans and Dove Canal to 540,000 tons a year, and that on the Wakefield and Barnsley Canal to 135,000 tons. Of this quantity 170,000 tons went to Goole, Gainsborough; Grimsby, and Hull ; and the greater part of the remainder to other places to the east. To the inquiries of Mr. Talbot, Mr. Robinson stated that the passenger traffic to the Cud worth station and to I'ennistone, at 6,059/.165. 10d. anti the prospective traffic at 3,368/. 16s. 10d., making a total of 9,4281. 13s. Bd., a great portion of which was likely to accrue from the abstraction of passengers from the Leeds and Manchester Railway. He believed that the number of persons travelling in consequence of the con venience of this railway would be doubled, and he assumed that a great portion of the mass of the population at Ashton, Staleybridge, and other places, would travel by the Manches ter and Sheffield and the Barnsley Junction, and so on to the North Midland Railway; but he had made no allowance for the traffic likely to be attracted to any of the railways proposed, but yet unformed, in that neighbOtnitood. By the present line of railway the distance to Manchester from Barnsley was 63 miles, that the journey occupied 41 Mlles, and the fare was lls 6d. ; while the distance by the new line would be 36 , miles, occupying an hour and a half in the transit, and the fare would be 65., making a saving of 27 miles in distance, three hours in time, and in money 5. The traffic westward he estimated at 255,000 tons, that from Barnsley 200,000 tons, and that from Silkestone 1500 tons. To the inquiries of Mr. Talbot, Mr. Robinson replied that he was aware that a considerable quantity of the Dunkinfield coal, which was found near Ashton, was used in that neighbourhood. The traffic in coal and limestone he estimated at about. 35,000 tons more than was now carried on the canal. The carriage to Hull, Leeds, Huddersfield, and York, lie calculated both ways at 24,000 tons, and lie did not conceive, from the pecu liar nature of the traffic; that any of it would be diverted to _ any other line. Mr. Jee, the engineer of the line, and acting engineer of the Manchester and Sheffield line, stated that lie fir:it re ceived instructions to survey the line in 1841, and that he was requested to select the best line of country, having re spect to the wants of the neighbourhood, and passing as much as possible through the coal district. The difference between the summit of the Barnsley Junction Railway, at Pennistone, and that of the North Midland, at Cudworth, was more than 500 feet, which lie proposed to surmount by a uniform gradient of 1 in 95 ; but lie did not anticipate any difficulty in surmounting this bar, which extended through the whole length of the line, which was 9 miles 58 chains, for there were two gradients on the Liver. pool and Manchester line of similar or greater steepness; one of 1 in 89 and one of 1 in 95, which extended over planes of about a mile and a half each. There would be two tunnels on the road, one at Oxspring of 500 yards long, another near Barnsley of 440 yards long. There would be two viaducts on the line, one over the Don 156 yards long, and with the greates height 78 feet ; the ether over the valley of the Hearne, 286 yards long, and having its greatest height 129 feet. He did not contemplate the use of stationary engines, considering them unnecessary, as they were not needed on the Sheffield and Manchester line, where the planes of 1 in 95, and another of 1 in 118 were three miles long. There were cuttings through Lord Wham cliffe's property, within half a mile of which there were drift ways from the Silkestone coal-bed. Mr. Locke, the engineer, stated that he was well acquainted with the district and had looked at it with an engineer's' eye. He had no doubt that the Silkestone Coal-field. was the largest unwrought coal-field in England, and he believed that the only obstacle to the fuller working of this field was the want of good railway communication. He had twice surveyed that coal-field with a view to open up a commu • nication with Goole and the sea, and if that were effected he felt assured that the coal, which was of very good quality, would be brought into competi tion with the coal from the north. lie was convinced that the line was the best that could be projected, and that the high line of railway was necessary to carry the coal from the Silkestone-field to Manchester and all parts of the west, and that indeed so necessary was this railway, that it would be only one of several which would be formed after this was made. Perhaps there are very few cases that eorne before our legal tribunals that have excited more interest, and more genuine feeling on behalf of the defendants, than the case of " the Attorney-General v. Smith." Front the pro ceedings that have already taken place, our readers must _ e be . aware that the defendant is charged by the Crown with t .v l o frauding the revenue to an enormous amount. That cba , he repudiates, and calls upon a jury of the country to decide whether he be right or wrong. Upon several occasions the case has come before the Court, but no result has been arrived at. The case was specially appointed to come before the Court to-day, and its interest WM such, that long before the Learned Judges took their seats every part of the Court was crowded to excess. Shortly l a l ft a tr ten r . onu o' oli c e l , o a c n k d tle 3 r ir L . o ß rd ar C o h n iefa Platt, too(Skirt. their'lo ' s l ea le t c s k Q ) n , Mr. the bench. In answer to the question of the Lord Chief Baron, The SOLICITOR-GENERAL stated that he, together with Mr. Sergeant Wilde, Mr. Jaryis, and Mr. Wilde, jun., appeared for the Crown; and Mr. Kelly, Mr. Martin, Mr. Wilson. and Mr. Greenwood were fur the defendants. The SOLICITOR-GENERAI, in opening the case, said that it would be in the recollection of their Lordships, that a few days since his Learned Friend, Mr. Kelly, had applied to their Lordships to permit the jury to have a view of the premises of the defendant. At the time that that application lilvtv‘to, views, s h;eaowbel n secu t ,e a t sai d : eies e i i) , itnwoe l c i ca e ettsi i did bnat iteoiwatN li ,hti e teotluN ti me,,Cl4ol innti having 1 1 tieearN acting tnei isg hi m s e lf ltgciuon uar:liojt maturely ett f ur hil t . s i o. l i m i t, a consideredcacdeod adopt principlesnt g latt in. l ade o s prepared to say, on the part of the Crown, that he was not Only desirous. hut anxious that the view should take place. • Mr. KELL' thanked his Hon. and Learned Friend for the candour he had exhibited, and would at once accede to hie LAW INTELLIGENCE. proposition. The LORD C HIEF B ARON sa id that he had taken consider able HOUSE OF LORDS, April 22. pains with respect to the present subject. He had COD CORMACK V. HENDERSON, EXECUTRIX, &c. sidered it fully, and after that consideration he continued The brought present appeal wasopinion against a judg men t o f t h e to be of the same that be bad expressed first division of the Court of Session, suspendi ng a c h arge at before, that the Court liad no power I togrant a the instance of the appellants, originally dire c t e d aga i nst t h e view. The doctrine of view was of modern origin. It was deceased, Edward Henderson, and afterwards transferred said that it was error not to grant a view where justice de• against his widow, the respondent, for paym en t o f t h e balance manded it. Th a t propos i t i on was a fallacy. G rant a v i e w due upon a bond granted to the Royal Bank of Scotland by where it was necessary if they pleased ; iMt in the present the company of Sceales, Henderson, and Co. In the begin- instance, in his opinion. everything tended to show ning of the year 1836 a prop osa l was made to the late sus- that all had been done that could be done. It had been said pander, Edward Henderson, by .Mr. Adolphus Meiklejohn that it was error not to grant a view—that it was against sit Sceales, to form a co-partnery in business with him. Mr. precedent to avert such a proposition, he had only to refer to A. M. Sceales, who resided with his father, Mr. Andrew Jacob's Law Directory. Sceales, pf the C us t oms , L e i th, had been previously en- The foreman of the jury wished to know how they were isgaged ,in business as a wine merchant, under the desig- act. F or hi s own part , an d on th ose o f hie brotherjurvaies, nation of A. M. S cea l es and Ce., and it was proposed h e b egge d t o say th a t th ey cou ld un d ers tand the model musk that the sam e b us i ness should be continued, and that better than viewing the premises. the new firm sh ou ld b e t h at of Sceales, Henderson, After some further discussion the jury retired to takea and Co. Mr. H en d erson had not previously been in busi- view of the premises. and the 'f ur ther consideration of the ness, and was unacquainted with its details. He agreed to case was adjourned till thejury should enter into the partnership proposed by Mr. A. M. Sceales After an absence of four hours, jury . was " the first witness called and examined by the Sorierron the arrangements for which were made with the full know- names having been called over, and liihon' ledge of Mr. Andrew Sceales. A bond of co-partnership was Robert Button, sworn to survey the distiper:y a .Si. . of 6th July, 1843, entered into, and the question was as to the extent of the GZICERAI.—I am a supervisor obligation incurred under the terms of the bond by eachk • in Smith. I was not ordered ordered to aiisist Mr. Drin we the subscribers to it. - I was on the 18th August There was a ditierenceo Mr. Rutherford and Mr. Gordon appeared for the ap taking drip of the receiver : _ proof spirits. 1 also ex pellant ;and Mr. Kelly and Mr. Anderson for the respondent. I.loth, fore`qual to 14 gallo . nr t )1 - •sor of Excise. and I was, en _r_b r e The Lords reversed the judgment or , the Court below. a • 1 the cover of the spa Hire'experienced for Live years; and I found that the pro- APEII. 24. I The Peers present la xly f the wash in Mr. appointed to rsecuro:ev3e-r.thle r i i:c tu n i f.. b. - in ee g r : ho si t: i: Smith's distillery was leas than in The House sat to-day to hear appea s. due- 0 1 . tilleries. I NM on duty on 15th Oct., 18 4 13, ' were Lord Brougham, Lord Cottenham, 1 examined the lipor pm . 14 Their Lordships Were occupied the w on his premises. Scotch appeal of no general interest. haonied.Ltoorr(nliCtigan"lp.ibthelel. other .(Is.. To the inquiry of Mr. Sou s, Mr. Locke stated it as his opinion that coals could not he so cheaply carried by canal as by railway. To the inquiries of Mr. AUSTEN, Mr. Locke expressed his opinion that the formation of the Sheffield and Huddersfield Railway would tend to increase the traffic on the Barnsley Junction Railway, as also would the formation of the latter line increase the traffic on the former, as it would be necessary to go three miles on the Barnsley Junction Rail way to get at the Silkestone coal-field. The gradient was the best that could be got, and with reference to the coal -field the gradient itself was an advantage, and would enable them to form communications with existing lines on both sides of the island, and an extremely desirable line for the district and the consumers of coal both in the neighbourhood and at a dis tance. He would undertake to carry 100 tons of coal with every train, with an engine of no extraordinary power. There was a proffer of a guarantee from the Sheffield Com pany of 5 per cent. upon 200,000/. and of 4 per cent. on 100,000/. of the capital. There would be no difficulty in making tramways from the several pits to the railway, so as to render the coal easily accessible, and the field could not be opened without better railway communication than now existed. In reply to an observa tion in the report of the Board of Trade, Mr. Locke said that there would not be any difficulty in accommodating the future bringing of coal to the level of the railway, and that the line, so far from skirting a coal-field, never left the Silkestone-field from the moment the coal cropped out at the Oxspring Tunnel till it joined the North Midland Rail way. The CHAIRMAN, having advised with the Committee, stated that it was the unanimous opinion of the Committee that the preamble of the Bill had not been proved.