The Sun. — London, England, 1845-06-17 00:00:00

,''-' rwor ded I 10 'lll Le e ry., Pr o vrogi Cs e ggiur" at • il CO 10 1. to 01,1. opos erit- I wo P , he 0 RAIL WAY COMMITTEES. (YESTERDAY.) HOUSE OF LORDS. ThE TORS, AND NORTH MIDLAN D RAILWAY. The Select C omm itt ee appo i nte d to i nvest i gate t hi s case assem . bled to- day, at three o'clock, the Marquis of Clanricarde in the Chair. The Bill being unopposed, the Committee declared it to have passed. The Noble Chairman will report to the House. The Standing Orders Committee, Lord Shaftesbury, Chairman, al so assembled a t th ree o ' c l oc k , an d reso l ve d th emse l ves i n t o a Committe e on unopposed Railway Bills. The following Bills were then declared to have passed the Com :—The Bedford and London Railway; the Shrewsbury, Os- Westry, and Chester Railway; the Manchester and Leeds Railway ; the Burnley, Oldham, and Haldham Railway ; the Berks and Rants Railway; the Lowestoft' Railway and Harbour; the Kendal and Windermere Railway; the North British Railway; the Yarmouth and Norwich Railway; and the London and Greenwich Railway. The Committee then adjourned till one o'clock to-morrow. HOUSE OF COMMONS. GROUP A. SOITTH-EASTEILN LINE. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) On the return of the members of the Committee, WRANGHAM proceeded to examine Mr. Bidders as to some Portions of the proposed line which were not included in the esti mates of the Company, a nd also as to a level crossing wh ich must be made by the proposed line over the now existing Croydon (locomotive) line, and which might interfere with the right of way of the Croydon Company. At Deptford it would be ne -7417 to throw four streets into one. This street would have ' 3 O trains passing in 15 hours; so that 10 times in each hour the tOtes must be shut, and no person could pass through the street. 4415 would produce no great inconvenience, as the short trains would Dace in one minute, and the long ones in three minutes, and the traffic Of bo the street was very small and unimportant. A large number of hellaay must be removed at Deptford, but they would be houses t erY small value, and which would be much better removed. At Dartford Creek the line would cross a swing. bridge. He did n ot think there would be any danger from such a bridge in this a stance, as the creek was at that point very narrow, like 4 canal. In general a brick bridge was preferable to a : wi ng bridge. In entering London the South-Eastern line 1 6 1114 pass through the Deaf and Dumb Asylum, where 1 ;e noise could give no annoyance to the inhabitants. — (A 44 .) It was necessary to pass through the Asylum in order to 'oid two churches. It was impossible to enter London without ',Oa! such inconvenience. _ . L _After some evidence on uninteresting points connected with the els of th s propose d li ne at Ch a th am , Rochester, and Stroud, and vlth some inaccuracies in the plans of the South-Eastern Corn.. 1441 7, the Committee adjourned at five minutes to four o'elock. GROUP GG. GLASGOW JUNCTION IZAILWAY. The evidence of Mr. Kyle (continued from our Afternoon Edition Yesterday)—the witness added, that at a certain depth the pro. looters would come at quick.sands, which, he thought, would pre. lent inguperahle difficulties to the progress of the works. Mr. J. Collie, architect, was examined, and after giving evidence 2 1 :orroboration of that given by the previous witness, added that , the valuation of property made by himself showed that the pro. glP — ,e; ro oters' estimates were 100,0001 . below what they ought to be. As t /Mr. W. Broome, builder, Glasgow, had been extensively em. to e 5,71 „id L , "led on the Blytheswood estate. Had examined the bores +"" t Zde by Mr. Keyte with the view of testing the quality of two prr A the soil. He found that a considerable proportion of it was I " til "ing sand, or quicksand, and his experience told him 5 r idded 1 ., 4 t Such a foundation was the very worst that could be had e — re p . building purposes of any kind. He considered that Mr. il e e. toc !h!'s valuation was a most reasonable one, and not in any degree 18 0 05 1 f high. That valuation would be some 100,0001. above that 01 36 fi nished by the promoters. k inr. Joh n B enn i e h a d h ea rd the evidence given by his friends 10 1 4111 1. Collie and Mr. Broome, and he fully concurred in their to p lo y h t ln a • r on. ' .0 bi Mr. J. Hayman, carter, in Glasgow, had been in the habit of d ill wi li ng w for a considerable period to the most considerable merchants ress u ' l anow, and his general rate was Is. a ton. Few goods were 0 ' 1 0 stored 50 • i n Glasgow, and the through traffic would therefore be of a ;0 t 101 b actio ns limited character. The goods' managers at the railway r 011 2 . ")ns were in error when they quoted the charges at 2 s. 6 d. ton. i glitust Another witness, called to corroborate the preceding evidence, Under examination when the Committee adjourned. Si d , GROUP K. jenB'WYNDHAM AND DEREHAIYI LINE. Wh at (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) laSt Pore, cross. examined by Mr. GIRDEN—When he calculated 626 sel l°l Journeys travelled on an average by seven passengers, he had sup. W aal bni leti they would be both pair and four-horse carriages. He had 0 6 , ”nerany allowed one or two travellers per gig as likely to come upon w ill Su . s ail if co ns t ruc t e d , but had in all his calculations deducted 50 per 1 , 1 °) t• from the present amount of transit. Has thrown aside several o f t h e averages w hi c h h e m i g ht l eg iti ma t e ly h a ve Included, le it s ti and has adopted the principle of halving the average of transit on )W er b r ead for any three weeks in the year. Thus at one gate t assumed two-thirds of 2,080 passengers who posted on o n fideib the road is taken in the tables at 1,560, and by gigs 6to h saine proportion is taken of the 35,568 observed leif mg. Has no doubt but that the passengers through cei to Zungo would avoid, rather than adopt, the line y Wyndham ' ll all °M f ic rd h. Considers the average of 2d. per traveller as a very tar p ' 1 ;; I t r h rate to name. On the London and Birmingham the fare is tp• er more than that, and on the Colchester line 2 1 / 2 d. is the t.O l ave ra ge price per mile. p g examined by Mr. 'Judas—Has tested his calculations by the ko ne edent of other lines, and the result has proved his complete Western,Bracy, There is no analogy between t his and the Great Colchester, and London and Birmingham lines, named c riterions of traffic by Mr. Girden. l u k r• William Gravatt, civil engineer, examined by Mr. Jamas— iiles engaged last year in f.he month of September to survey the eet line between Norwich and Dereham. Has estimated the 'At of the main line at 140,9371., the New Mills branch at 10,7571., , 411 4 the Fakenham branch at 26,170/., making a total ~,1 7 7,864/. The distance of the main line is 15 miles 8 chains, iLne New Mills Branch, 1 mile and 17 chains, and of the Faken. branch 2 miles 46 chains. The land, the cuttings, earth embankments and bridges, are surveyed for a double line, into Nthe rail could be converted at any period whatever. l alls: t adients are 1 in 450 for half a mile, 1 in 257 for three f or 0 ,, 141 a furlong, I in 285 for one mile five furlon g s, 1 in 360 jah',lllile three furlongs, 1 in 917 for si x fur lon gs , the ruling nes, -",; being lin 300. Prop oses to have a ter m inus at the in order to obtain the traffic now corning up from the h etith by the canal navigat ion. The c ontinual stoppages on liti te 7reham and Wyndham line w ill entail a delay of five mi. C . St each station. la ; h p 's - examined by Mr. ANDREWS, Q.C.—Has been engaged 11.4 - " e Cons of the line in the , the ..sto the and truction Exeter as far as Taunton, a Thames ce distan of Tunnel forty. Took Il es, and a large proportion of the Great Western. lia, c ,,."°vln some bridges on the Bristol and Exeter line, after erected them. Thinks six at least required this alteration. &d ca use of the bridges being raised was the chan g e of gauge Of o I L e d on the line, an order having been made b y the House bon7 r ds that the gauge must be the same throu g hout & 4 0 On the Great Western and Bristol and Exeter Railway. Has fin b een engaged in the Direct Northern and Chur net Valley •p k neither of which have yet passed the standing orders. metre are sixteen level crossings, for which 2,0881. has been esti. $7 Lord 1301. per cross i ng . a ct; . 7 Lord SAN DON—A gatekeeper will be placed upon every crossing , a '"g also as policeman on the line, at a salary of 501. per annum; stNctien entt age would be required for each, requiring 2501. for c o n - C ' n , e s - examlnation continued—The number of bridges across kthe Li ne will be 10, at an average cost of 541/. each. c ltea est imated 1,7871. for the construction of sixteen culverts, and 08 „ . 1 ° 1 • Per ton for rail, and 71. for chains. The worst gradient k it `"e main line is 1 in 55, five chains and a half in length, (q v bY an arrangement with the Eastern Union this nod section inclination will be avoided. Has a plan no g a section also for avoiding the crossing of the road Wi tk i " e l• Does not know whether St. Stephen's.street, in Nor. Will be considered a level. The steepest level on the New Mill s e nai branch is 1 i n 48. Contemplates a traffic of corn, flour, and de eight that r a il, an d proposes to work that distance of a mile slid m Wit chains by horse power. Calculates thirty.three tons aY will p et , Ibe enabled to be drawn by each horse, the expense being Th e t° n nett, Is. 3-10ths of a penny on the whole distance. ; not en st for keeping the horse will be 3s. 10 d. a . day , a ‘ :, 4in g the driver at 12s. a.week. The draught of and h ors e up the incline wou:d be 4 3.10 tons g ross, w e , eleven journeys could be thus made daily. The equivalent tita llibt on a level would be about 21 tons g ross. A w hich incline was on the Merthyr and Cardiff line, I Ni `h he had laid out, and where a great advantage e nni ,, e XPeriented by the steep descent, on which the iro n tutu ' withth ease be carried to the latter district. The largest Zg 0 n e direct line would contain 239,400 cubic yards. *as examined by Mr. JAMES—No engineering incompetency he attributed to him for the taking down the bridges Bristol and Exeter line. The level crossings do not inter.. 4 ,7 1 : w ith any t u r n pik e-roa d w h a tever, but merely intersect lanes 1 ,4 _?ther unimportant pathways. The gradient of 1 in 48 was e att .° ° Wn because it came out in subtraction, 250 being at first th _T • ated as the ruling gradient ; but that can be at a future period .p.'n3' rectified. AS, An tri ts ":sr• RICARDO—The putting down 1 in 48 as the gradient ih a '"erely an oversight in making the survey. By a subsequent 2getnent, and altering the average gradients, the difficulty will le e Z t° gether obviated, and the short distance now with the steep n e become almost a perfect level. I, Oe ti Stough examined by Mr. JAMES—IS the assistant of Mr. th e :: C.E. Has heard the evidence of t h e last witness res p ectin g he -,,"Jectionable gradient of lin 48. That difficulty can however *XL" c cnne by raising or depressing the leve l of the line to the of a foot. tio n t°l4. eXamined by Mr. ANDREWS, Queen's Counsel—The eleva eotcldel depression of the level of the lines, when crossing the roads, Ille t ; not be effected without the consent of the inhabitants of teco n"u ,., b ) as th bridges or crossings must be altere d at a c or- The Committee then adjourned, at 4 o'clock, till 12 to-morrow. ;4 O VI t0 t ,, 0 10 be ; ft eig ed f ie r$ 0 0. oe 4 ,1 I ia' sjr de-0 GROUP L. IO ATSMOIITH ATMOSPHERIC LINE. ,it (C ontinued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Ts Ord ers D enton then stated that he had s urveyed the line by the " Lord Grantley's solicitor, and that he knew his Lord. l 'eigh,P r nPerty and every . other landowner' s on the line. In the froil„: u nrhood of Lord Grantley's property the embankment was -u tk ed_ to be . begun at seven feet high, shortly after emerging the Ptii ki "c cutting.; and from the spot he had seen the windows of !cel l P H S , I apartments in the house, and from the house he had l 'itheW e aPot where the embankment would be placed. The and de Part of the embankment would be nearest the house,. ",and - ,.` l edlY there would be danger to a person driving a four-in- It At 1,,..40111 the viaduct, which came close to the turn of the road. ler"" intended to carry the line within 150 yards of Lord Grant. Ile elate, lat e, and would touch his brother's house, the place where of li r ki Norton had lived. The line would be within 150 yards 4 e. j SParke's, and the cutting would be immediately behind it. 41. 41 'PaAte's ho use , near God a lming, would be within 200 y a rds, !N. , eli Mita of deviation would bring it within 100 yards. In snotimc• Would greatly interfere with the property, but that, he t , h ,a b'fight be a matter of compensation. But the injury to sue b o u t would be beyond compensation. lit several instances lu,/, " 0 1 line differed in its basis. 4 6 081,11 on the part of the promoters of the atmospheric ted t ' o the evidence as leading to the contravention of ~,,itle ce d— , :" of the Standing Orders' Committee. This had been 'ittli n . " 4 the Lo n d on an d Y or k li ne the other day, where, ac `aitt,d' to the observation of the Chairman, the engineer had ad- That his ass i stants had made such an error i n their sections 11 04: f ul d have let in the North Sea, and rendered the construe -11411 othe line as laid down impossible. the c " ning persisted in his right to examine on this point. t„, . 11 _, Al amatc pointed out the peculiar features of the two cases, that Mr Csbitt had been putt into the box, and ought examinednbe examined. . oon that point, but conceived that the wit °lll_ . n r ten, to Mr. AUSTIN, replied that his clerks had obtained % Lc) t he Plans deposited at the Private Bill Office. • AUSTIN objected as not being evidence. They th er "ave been obtained by the witness himself. He denied ti. T hc c e Wa a any error in the sections. , ey nAli t y,„, at lend for the th. said that of the copies before the Committee original. 4 tra • s, the --I N stated that, according to the standing or_ pta ori ginal was deposited with the Clerk of - 704 al " for the county. He objected to the dis t°lP3t.heri and begged to put the case formally before if h , o s of b o il I ° ,oo 0 1 ' tho B pd I . o rl Cv l4 :: to m ti rst:oo, e, i 0 11 TIIE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY E VENING JUNE 17, 1845. GROUP Z. DUBLIN AND GALWAY RAILWAY. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yes:erday.) Cross.examined by Mr. COCKBURN—His surveys commenced in October, about two months before the plans and sections were de- livered to the Board of Trade. The breadth of the gauge would be 5 ft. 3 in ; the iron 101. per ton ; the chairs and sleepers 71.10 s per ton. The lines would rest on longitudinal bearers. There would be twenty five stations, and three drawbridges. The witness was then examined on minute details in connexion with the line. The cost of constructing this line would be nearly 10,0001. a mile. Mr. MuapuY said he had a great number of witnesses, but as it was his desire to save as much of the time of the Committee as he could, he would not call them unless they thought that he should do so. The CHAIRMAN, after consulting with the other members of the Committee, said they saw no reason why additional witnesses should be examined, but he (Mr. Murphy) had better keep his witnesses in town as it might be necessary to examine them with respect to the testimony of witnesses on the part of the petitioners. . _ Mr. COCKBURN objected to this course on the part of the Corn mittee, as he considered it in opposition to Parliamentary practice. The CHAIRMAN said they had heard a great deal of evidence on the same points. If the promoters chose to call further evidence they were bound to hear it. They (the promoters) must use their own discretion in the matter. Mr. Lee, clerk to the Company, was then called to prove the capital of the Company, which he said was 1,800,0001., that the number of subscribers were 16,390, and that the deposits amounted to 40,975/. Much discussion was caused by Mr. COCKBURN taking an objec tion to this formal evidence of the capital of the company, and by calling on the promoters to produce the subscription deed, as he was instructed that the subscribers' names had bean fraudulently obtained. At length, the receipt of the Accountant-General of the deposits was produced, and the Learned Counsel consented to take the witnesses' proof of the truffle; the deed, however, was shown to him. Mr. Nuzum gave evidence respecting the assents and dissents. . . This closed the case for the promoters. Mr. Rowe then applied to have Mr. Boyle, the engineer, to the Mullingar Company, who had certain sections in his possession of importance to the case of thepetitioners, the Grand Canal Corn. pany, summoned before the Committee by a warrant of the Speaker. The Learned Counsel then called Mr. Hannington, who stated that he was the engineer to the Canal Company. That in March last, in conjunction with Mr. Boyle and Mr. Henry, he made a survey of the site of the proposed line for the purpose of testing the accuracy of the sections. They found a great number of errors in the levels. The specifications were given to Mr. Boyle after he (witness) had placed his initials on them, on the understanding that he would produce them when required. He had since refused to do so. Mr. TALBOT said they might have Mr. Boyle before them, but they could not compel him to produce the plans and sections in question. _ Similar applications were made for the attendance of Mr. W. T. Mulvany and Mr. Lether. The Committee then adjourned. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. (from the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.) MONDAY, JUNE 16. EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY (CAMBRIDGE AND BURY ST. EDMUND'S EXTENSION) BILL. Motion made, and Question proposed, " That the Bill be now read a second time :"—Amendment proposed, to leave out the word " now," and at the end of the Question to add the words " upon this day six months :"—Question put, " That the word now' stand part of the Question." The House divided:— ➢iAJORITY-AYES, 47. Aldan, William Greene, Thomas Parker, John Bannerman, A. Grosvenor, Lord R. Pendarves, E. W. Baring, F. T. Hatton, Captain Philips, G. R. Barnard, E. G. Hiude, J. H. Phillpotts, John Bell, Matthew Hope, Alexander Plutnridge, Captain Beresford, Major Horsumn, Edward Rediugton, T. N. Bowring, Dr. Humphery, Alderman Stuart, W. V. Brotherton, Joseph Inglis, Sir R. 11. Trelawny, J. S. Busfeild, William Johnson, General Vane, Lord H. Cavendish G. H. Lemon, Sir C. Wawn, J. T. Christie, W. 1). Lennox, Lord A. Wilshere, W. Clive, Robert 11. M`Geachy, F. A. i Winnington, Sir T. Collett, W. R. M‘Taggart, Sir J. Wrightson, W. B. Duke, Sir J. Maher, N. Duneombe, Thomas Mitcalfe, Henry TELLERS. Estcourt, T. G. B. O'Connell, M. J. Ward, 11. G. Forster, Matthew OTerrall, It. M. Duncan, George the Committee. On looking at the petition of Lord Grantley he saw that there was no allegation of errors in the sections whatever. By the 66th standing order it appeared that no petition on a private Bill shall be laid before the Committee which did not distinctly allege the objection to such private Bill ; and that no petitioner should be heard, except on the points stated in the peti tion. If a distinct ground were alleged in the petition, hut not accurately stated, that then it should be in the discretion of the Committee to allow the bounds of inquiry. As there wau no alle gation of error in the sections, clearly the counsel could not be heard upon it. The CIIAIRNIAN apprehended that the object of the standing orders which had been cited was for one party to give nctice to the other of the ground of objection which it was intended to allege. Mr. GUNNING conceived that the error in those sections was so great as to be fatal to the line, and that therefore he wis en- titled to put in evidence to that effect—especia:ly as there was a distinct statement in the petition that the line by Guildford was the batter line of the two, and on this ground he conceived he was justified in objecting against any evidence for the atmospheric line, and these sections were certainly part of the evidence. The Corn. mittee might see that the line was impossible from the sections : they would be entitled to decide against the line. Mr. AUSTIN said that the objection must go to the extent of stating that the line could not be constructed at all. Consequently, if the objection was that the other line was better than this, it was nothing more than saying that the other line was better than one which never came into existence, which was an absurdity. There was nothing in the petition to show that there was an objection to the plans and sections, and therefore there was, to use the ex pression, " nothing to amend the Court," and the objection of the other side was, therefore, untenable. The CHAIRMAN decided that Mr. Gunning should proceed. Mr. AUSTIN then claimed that they should have the original plan deposited with the clerk of the peace. Mr. Oswald and Mt. M. Milnes thought that the copy before the Committee was sufficient. The CHAIRMAN thought that the point was of sufficient import. ance to justify Mr. Austin in calling for the original. Mr .GUNNING pleaded that the question ought to be decided just as a case at nisi prius. Mr. AUSTIN said that if this question were to be decided for the opposing party, he ought to recal the engineers, and that Mr, Gunning should proceed suo periculo. To this the Chairman assented, and Mr. Gunning was proceed ing with the examination of the witness when the Committee debated whether they should receive this act upon the plan which had been laid before them. At length Mr. Gunning proceeded, and Mr. Denton stated that in page 11, where a length of five fur ' longs was stated, as horizontal there was at one end a difference of eight feet; four pages, consequently, were irregular as to the da. turn line. It was stated in one page that a portion of the line was 315 feet, when it was really only 206 feet. The further distance might be explained because there was another datum line of 100 feet difference, but the difference o. 91 feet was not to be explained. In the next page thioF Was a difference of 110 but he did not rely on these larger differences, because he con ceived they were clerical errors; but the 91 feet was a decided error. He would not state it more precisely, because he had allowed for shrinking, but the difference was 9 or 10 feet, and he should say that the work could not be executed on the sections as stated. The discrepancies in four pages consecutively were such as he could not account for, and certainly they were more than clerical errors. In page 12 there was a difference of 12 feet, which he could not account for. In page 10 continued to page 11 the difference was 100 feet, but that was a clerical error. But from page 11 to page 12 there was a discrepancy for which he could riot account for. To the inquiries of Lord CLIME, the witness stated that he as sumed the two ends to be correct, and then found the discrepancies. Some of thcsediscrepancies might be accounted for, but the error of the five furlongs was altogether irrespective of all datum. To the cross-examination of Mr. AUSTIN, Mr. Denton stated that if the plan were drawn out as it was written the difference would disappear. But there was evidently an error either in the writing or the plan, and whichever might be right there was certainly a difference which was irreconcilable with mensuration truth. To the inquiries of Mr. M. MILNES, Mr. Denton stated that he did not ascribe any males animus to the promoters of the railway, nor could he say whether this difference extended to Lord Grant. ley 's property, or was beyond it, but if this error was made within the precincts it would be decidedly injurious to the property. To Mr. AUSTIN the witness stated that he conceived that the rule was that any alteration of a gradient better than 1 in 100 was not allowable, which was more than three feet ; and as this alteration was more than five feet, it would affect the whole line. The place affected was Norbrook, where the bend was taken ; and as the cuttings would be deeper, and the embankments higher, Lord Grantley's property would be affected to that particular extent. He was not, however, an engineer, and was diffident of stating positively what would prevent the injury from being obviated. By continuing, however, the inclination of 1 in 100 further, until it reached the horizontal plane, to the end of 7 furlongs, it would not exceed the prescribed limits, and he did not see that it would injure the property at that spot. But as to the precise boundaries of the property he was ignorant. To the cross-examination of Mr. 11/MUNSON, he stated that he had surveyed the line through eight miles and three chains on one line, and in the other one furlong less; but he could not say what width he had surveyed on either side of the line, but it was very irregular and expressed on the plan which he produced; nor could he say what was the precise value of the land. He had gone into no estimates, and, therefore, would not state the money-value either of Mr. Drummond's or Mr. Lomax's land ; but certainly it was not ornamental ground. The South. Western line would pass close by a new house now in the course of erection in the Gothic style, by Mr. Smirke, but he thought that, taking Lord Grantley's house, Mr. R. Sparkes', General Norton's, and Mr. J. Sparke's house, and putting them into comparison with Mr. Lomax's, Mr. Brag's, and Mr. Drummond's,the injuryeffected would be greater by the atmospheric line than that proposed by the South-Western Company. In passing from there to Albury, his line passed through a valley which contained a great number of residences, five or six of which would be cut off from any com munication with the opposite side of the valley, and with their own property. There were six or seven public roads passed upon a level by his own plan, but he believed that they were the same roads which were passed also by the atmospheric line. One at Ash Farm ; another at Albury, though he could not say that it was the main road from Dorking to Godalming, but was the chief access to Mr. Drummond's property; the third crossing was over the same road, about 1 mile further on ; the next was a lane leading to the gunpowder-mill, which he passed about 150 yards off. He was not aware that a line was not allowed to pass within 500 or 600 yards of a gunpowder-mill, but he was aware that it was an objection, though, as this was to be an atmospheric line, he had discarded that consideration from his mind. The next crossing was over an occupation road, where a diversion was proposed to prevent crossing the road twice. The next crossing was over the road from Shalford Common to Wonersh,but the esti. mates he could not give. He would however produce a paper which had been made in Mr. Locke's office. A discussion arose as to the putting in the paper, which con tained a copy of the estimates. It was ultimately decided that it should be put in. The paper was in the handwriting of one of Mr. Locke's assistants, and the:validity of its statements the witness could only assume. The Hon. G. Norton, a brother of Lord Grantley, stated that he had known the mansion at Wonersh for thirty.five years. It was the principal residence of his brother, and had been in the family for several centuries ; and he was of opinion that the proposed railway would greatly injure the property. It would take the whole of the pond as it was called, but which was in reality a very fine trout stream. It then passed down the whole of the valley of Norbrook, which was very beautiful, going through two or three excellent pheasant covers. After that it passed through part of the park, arid if the Company acted on their power of de viation, it would trench on Lord Grantley's pleasure-grounds. It subsequently went close to General Norton's house, and thence to the village pond at Wonersh, which was a store pond for fish. But that was not only a store pond for fish, but it supplied the pleasure grounds with water, and he believed half the village. The deviation line would also touch the rectory house, and then on to Chinturst Hill, which was a cover for game, being topped by firs and surrounded by wood. From this hill Lord Grantley's communication would be almost entirely cut off. It then passed through a wOOO which was a very beautiful object, and the witness expected that the cutting would entirely destroy it as a feature of the landscape. The embankments and the viaduct would be all seen from the windows of Lord and Lady Grantley's apartments, and if this railway were made, was quite certain that it would drive his brother from Wonersh, because Lord Grantley's chief pleasure was driving, and the railway would make it so dangerous as to be impossible. Altogether it would be a serious detriment to the property. The Committee then adjourned till to-morrow. GROUP P. THE SOUTH WALES RAILWAY. The evidence of Mr. Giles (continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday—The level of the ground on the Bristol side was quite sufficient to permit of the construction of a suspension bridge of a proper height, but on the Chepstow side piers would be re quired. The engineering difficulties on the line were objection. able, but not impracticable, and the expense of construction had been under.estimated. He considered that bridges of the magni tude which it was contemplated being made should not be con. structed of timber, because the worm in tidal water invariably de stroyed timber, and he knew many instances of timber bridges that had not lasted more than eight or ten years, owing to the ravages of the worm. It was called the augur worm, and: it bored its way through the wood in every direction, and there were no means at present discovered to prevent its ravages. He thought the bridges should be built with stone abutments and iron tops. The general estimate:for the entire line was, in his opinion, too small; it should have been taken at 4,000,0001. sterling, which was 1,200,0001. more than was proposed to be raised. Looking at that line as 911 miles in length, and regarding also the different works connected with its construction, the bridge across the Severn, the tunnels, and other matters, it ap peared to him that the cost of the railway wouldbe on the average 20,0001. per mile for a double line laid down on the broad gauge. He would endeavour to show the points which had induced him to come to that opinion : for some of the particular works he would take Mr. Brunel's own estimate:— The bridge and canal of the Severn £200,000 The Forest of Dean Railway The harbour at Brimshill The harbour at Fishguard Excavations 582,000 Stations 100,000 Total £1,026,000 All these items had been taken from Mr. Brunel's own statements, and he was not inclined to say they were insufficient. The points which, in his opinion, would cost more than had been laid down in the estimates of Mr. Brunel were, in the first place, the tunnels. He (Mr. Giles) had estimated that there were altogether 7,719 yards, which would cost, on the average, 501. per yard, and not 301 per yard, es Mr. Brunel had stated, making a total of 395,950/. for tunnelling. No estimate of the lands necessary to be taken had been taken. He should take it at about 200 miles, and looking at what had been paid for similar property by existing railways, he should calculate the expense of the land at 3,0001. per mile, the result of which would be 600,000/.. The permanent way, consisting of 204 miles, he had estimated at 5,0001. per mile, which would yield a total of 1,020,0001. The bridges on the entire line, with the exception of the bridge at Stockhill, would cost 2,500/. per mile on the entire length of the line, making altogether 500,0001. The gross value of these items would give a sum of 3,541,0001., to which 10 per cent. being added for contingencies, 354,000/., the entire estimate of the line would be 3,895,00/., which was 1,095,000/. greater than the estimate made by Mr. Brunel. Mr. TALBOT cross-examined the witness on a few points, but nothing of a material nature was elicited. Mr. LAW then proceeded to address the Committee on the evi. dense that had been adduced. There was no doubt the existing traffic between South Wales and through Bristol would be entirely destroyed, if the proposed line were made. The best line of corn. munication for this traffic would be by way of the Aust Ferry, and for the traffic coming from Birmingham and the manufacturing districts of the north the most favf.urable point of com munication would be by way of Gloucester. The consent and approval of three public bodies had been given to the scheme; but he would contend that this was not su ffi cient. The jurisdiction of the Committee, In dealing with the matter, was limited by an Act, the Eth Victoria, which, in cap. 20, sec. 17, provided that where a railway company contemplated carrying a bridge over any navigable river the consent of the Admiralty should be obtained previously to the passing of the preamble. Mr. E. BuLLEa, M.P., observed that the Act prevented the construction of the works without the consent of the Admiralty ; but there was nothing in the clause to hinder the Committee from deciding that the preamble of the Bill was proved, and, further, the consent of the Admiralty might be obtained. Mr. Law (in continuation) said that it was compulsory on the promoters of the Bill to get the comsent of the Admiralty first, and as it had not been so obtained, it was evident that the part of the preamble which declared that the construction of a line from Standish, across the Severn, would be of "great public advantage by opening an additional, certain, and expeditious means of communication " between South Wales and England, could not be legally tenable. t was clear, if the opposition of the Admiralty continued against the making of the proposed bridge across the Severn, that the intentions of the railway company as regarded Standish could not be carried out, and therefore it would necessarily follow that the consent of the Committee could not be given in the preamble. In the opening harangue of Mr. Austin he had observed that considerable difficulty had been experienced on this subject, and even had gone so far as to say that supposing the line could not be continued to Standish, it was still desirable to have railway communication to Chepstow. The Learned Counsel then shortly adverted to the various lines which had appeared in the course of evidence as preferable to the route laid down by the South Wales Company, and also briefly commented on the inadequacy of the estimates for the construction of the proposed line. He con. eluded by calling on the Committee not to allow the preamble of the Bill to pass. Sir Walter Riddle withdrew the opposition on the part of Colonel Lewis to the Bill, a satisfactory arrangement having been arrived at between him and the promoters of the railway. After a few words from Mr. DAVIS, on behalf of Sir T. C. Bovey and the Rev. Mr. Jones, the opposition against the line having been brought to a conclusion, the room was ordered to be cleared. On our return The CHAIRNIAN said the Committee were of opinion that it was unnecessary to trouble the Counsel for the Bill to make a reply, as they were unanimous in thinking that the preamble of the Bill had been proved. After some desultory conversation between the Committee and Counsel, as to the method in which the opposed clauses should be proceeded with, the Committee adjourned till twelve to-morrow. GROUP PP. MIDDLESEOROUGH AND REDCAR RAILWAY. This Committee met at half-past three o'clock, the Hon. Eliot Yorke in the chair. The preamble of the Bill being proved, the clauses of the Bill were gone through without opposition, and the Chairman was directed to report to the House that it passed with its amendments. GROUP SS. COVENTRY, BEDWORTH, AND NUN EATON RAILWAY. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. Shailor, an int keeper, at Nuneaton, signed a petition against the railway under precisely similar circumstances. Mr. Edward Phillips, a land valuer, of Whitmore Park, near Coventry, proved that the railway would require sixty acres of land, which he estimated would cost 14,0001., including the severance. This sum was for ninety years' purchase. Mr. Banbury, Secretary to the Company, proved that the num ber of shares subscribed for was 3,574, being equal to 89,3501. The amount of deposits already paid was 4,4671. Mr. PARKES here intimated that he was authorised to state that the London and Birmingham Company were prepared to take a lease in perpetuity of the line, but the terms had not been fixed on. Mr. DANIEL, before entering upon his opposition, wished the Committee to draw from Mr. Parkes the fact that the London and Birmingham Company had agreed to take a lease of the proposed railway, on the condition that the promoters were prepared to aban don a portion of their line. If this were the case, the nature of his opposition would be materially altered. The CHAIRMAN remarked that there was no witness before them who had spoken to the point, and of course there was no one to whom they could put the question. Mr. DANIEL replied that under these circumstances it would be his duty to call evidence to prove that it would be a greater public advantage if the proposed railway struck off to the westward in stead of the eastward of Coventry. Mr. William Willis Bailey, who was well acquainted with the mineral districts of Coventry and Nuneaton, had been over the proposed line from Coventry to Bulkington, between which places the collieries dipped to the west, but on the east many of the collieries were already exhausted, and others were of a very inferior character. The land between Longford and Bulkington was in a sinking state, and it was highly natural that the railway should run to the west instead of to the east. There were extensive collieries working towards the west region, if he might be allowed the term, or main bed of coal, but on the east side the collieries were chiefly exhaust^d. The proposed railway would afford an accom modation to the collieries he had just mentioned. There were also tome important lime works on the west side, but none on the east. Mr. George Starkie, ground.bailiff to Bedworth colliery, con firmed the testimony of the last witness. On cross-examination, he admitted that the bulk of the iron. stone was raised on the east side of the proposed railway. Mr. John Sinclair, engineer to the Coventry Canal, said the bulk of the population on the proposed railway resided to the west of the line. A railway to the east would therefore afford very little accommodation to them. The witness also spoke to the sinking of the land between Longford and Bulkington. Within his own time it had sunk twenty.one feet, and was still sinking. At one point since November last it had sunk two feet, and that point joined the proposed line of railway. A railway takinga west wardly direction would better serve the wants of the mining in. terest, and in fact the population at large. He had prepared the plans and sections for such line for the use of the Coventry Canal Company, and these plans and sections could be easily made avail able, because they were in every way complete. On cross-examination he said he received no particular instruc tions from the Canal Company to prevent him from carrying the line eastward of the turnpike-road. His instructions were of a very general nature, and he was to make out what he thought would be the best line for the district. He had made three-tram roads, but had never made or laid out a locomotive line. The line he had marked out would cross two turnpike roads by bridge and three on the level. The canal of which he was the en gineer was of two meandering a nature to afford sufficient accora. modalion to all the traffic of the district. It was evidently con. structed with a view of accommodating the mineral interest. It being announced that the Speaker was at prayers, the Com mittee adjourned till to-morrow. GROUP KK LIVERPOOL AND BURY AND LIVERPOOL AND MANCHESTER EXTENSION, WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE BRANCHES. The Committee met at one o'clock, Sir C. Lemon in the chair, but business was not commenced for nearly an hour after, is con sequence of the absence of Mr. Talbot. SOUTHPORT AND ORMSXXRE BRANCH. IMPORTANT DECISION. Mr. TALBOT said he appeared on behalf of the Liverpool, Preston, and Ormskirk Railway. He, in accordance with the re. commendation of the Board of Trade, wished to suggest the post.. ponement of any railway at present to Southport. The project which his clients had brought forward, had been shipwrecked in the Standing Orders Committee, but would be brought forward next session. There could be no doubt but an improved communica tion between Liverpool and Preston was required, and that improve. ment he proposed. The present distance between Liverpool and Preston, by Parkside, was thirty-eight miles and a half, and the transit occupied two hours and a half. The present mode of traffic between Liverpool and Preston was most inconvenient, and was so spoken of in the report of the Board of Trade. The insufficiency of the transit was demonstrated by the fact that, instead of the number of passengers having been increased sixfold since the opening of the railway between Liverpool and Preston, as was usually the case between such important towns, there had been an increase upon the old coach conveyance of only five per cent. He thought this state of things should not be permitted to continue, but that they should cut off the angle which Parkside made with Liverpool and Preston, and supply the hypothenuse which he would propose in the Liverpool and Ormskirk line. By the new line, a saving of twelve miles would he effected, and there would be also a considerable saving in the communication in the route front Pres. ton to Wigan, and thence to Liverpool by the Liverpool and Bury Railway, which the Committee had sanctioned. Preston contained a population of 50,000, and the trade between it and Liverpool, which was carried on by the river Ribble was, notwithstanding the exceedingly tedious and expensive communication was very consi. derabie. In fact, 16,000 tons of small craft were at present engaged between these towns. The project which he advocated had re. ceived the support of the great spinners at Preston--men whose capital was more than 2,000,0001, and who last year obtained from Liverpool more than 20,000 tons of cotton. Not far from Preston was a most important town, Blackburn, which was the centre of a district, a radius of five miles, containing a population of 120,000 souls. The project he advocated would greatly abridge the distanc. between Liverpool and Blackburn, a most desirable step, as almost all the provisions and raw materials for manufactures used in Black burn were obtained from Liverpool. The course between those places was, at present, a most circuitous one, a distance of 64 miles, whilst by the railway his clients would propose it should be only 34. This would be six miles shorter than any other which had been submitted to the notice of Parliament. The Blackburn and Preston Railway was now in course of construction, so that the communication between all these important towns would be then complete. By this means the whole of the northern part of Lan cashire would be brought into direct communication with Liver pool, and a population of 545,000 would be accommodated by the line which touched upon the immediate vicinity or their dwellings. The main line was in length 26i miles; the branch to Southport, 7i ; the branch to Blackburn, 2 miles ; and the Skelmersdale and Ormskirk branch, 3 miles. The estimated amount of construction was 730,000/. The Learned Counsel went on to argue that his line would, in fact, confer greater advantages upon Southport itself than the other. for it would place it in direct communication with the important towns he had mentioned. Until the people of Southport heard that the line his clients projected had been thrown out by the Standing Orders Committee, they were most anxious for it; and in fact, the only petition which had emanated from that town up to a very recent period, was in favour of their pro ject. The Learned Counsel concluded by requesting the Com mittee to accede to the recommendation of the Board of Trade, and postpone the Southport and Euxton project to next year. After some deliberation the room was cleared of strangers. Upon our return to the room, The CHAIRMAN said we are perfectly ready to hear all the wit nessess on the other side, but I think it right to tell you what the opinion of the Committee is. The Committee is of opinion that the case for the promoters of the Bill is of such a natnre as to dispose them to agree in the recommendation of the Board of Trade. They are, therefore, willing that the project should be postponed to next year, but we are unwilling the expenses which have been incurred should be wasted, and we will therefore postpone the further con sideration of the matter to a late day in July. Such is the unani mous wish of the Committee at the present moment. The Corn. mittee are of opinion that there should be a line of railway com munication with Southport; but the Act which will be passed this year will enable the Committee to resume their proceedings where they left them off, so that if any better project be not offered, the Southport and Euxton one will certainly pass. Mr. Sergeant KINGSLAKE--.Will the Committee declare the preamble of the Bill proved ? The CHAIRMAN—Yes, under the condition that I have men- tioned, that no better line be proposed in the interim, we will re. port in favour of the Bill, so as not to shut out any rival project. The case for the supporters of the present project does not appear to have been well sustained. The following note was then, with the consent of the leading Counsel pro. and con., adopted : " That the passing of the preamble of this Bill does not give any advantage over any competing Bill which may be brought forward in the ensuing session." The CHAIRMAN added, that a communication between South port and Euxton was most desirable, but that, as a better project than that which had been proposed might be proposed, they post poned the further consideration of the preamble to the ensuing session. The Committee then adjourned to the Bth of July. Sergeant KINGLiam said he was afraid such an expression of opinion would prejudice his case. - The CHAIRMAN said his case was so bad that it could hardly be prejudiced. They would not proceed with the clauses of the Bill this session. The preamble of this 13111 was not therefore passed. GROUP X. CAMBRIDGE AND x INCOLN LINE. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. Buckle, spirit dealer at Peterborough, deposed that he got his wines, spirits, and all the other articles he dealt in from London, and had not the least doubt but that the Farringdon.street station would have the preference to either that of King's cross or Bow creek, for the conveyance of all sorts of goods to Peterborough. Mr. W. P. Stanley, ironmonger, of Peterborough, corroborated the evidence of the dealers in the same article who had preceded him, as to the saving of time and money to be effected in the transit of the article, if the proposed line of railway should be made. At the conclusion of the cross.examination of this witness, during which no material evidence was elicited, The Committee adjourned. MINORITY-NOES, 32. Arkwright, George Duncombe, A. Richards, Richard Astell, William Fei;den, William Round, C. G. Baillie, Joseph Fellowes, Edward ' Smith, Abel Beckett, W. Flower, Sir J. Thornhill, George Berkeley, Captain Godson, Richard Trollope, Sir J. Bodkin, W. H. Granby, Marquis Trotter, John Buller, Sir J. Y. Grimsditch, T. Villiers, Viscount Clive, Viscount Hamilton, C. J. B. Yorke, E. T. Coote, Sir C. Hodgson, F. Denison, E. B. Law, C. E. TELLERS. Douglas, Sir 11. Meynell, Captain Allix, J. P. Douglas, Sir C. Price, Richard Fuller, A. E. CAMBRIDGE AND LINCOLN RAILWAY BILL, Motion made, and Question put, ':That the Cambridge and Lincoln Railway Bill be re-committed to the same Committee (Group X.), and that it be an Instruction to the Committee, that they have power to take into consideration whether the Section deposited in the Pri vate Bill 01lice may not be amended, without injury to public or to private Interests ; and that it be a further Instruction to the said Committee, that they have power to amend the said Section, if on inquiry they shall deem fit so to do." The House divided : it d‘ j va . Martin, C. W. rd MINORITY—AYES, 77. Allis,s nAnson, Ainsworth, on j: .cpo 1. Peter oncl E } stone, IL Martin, T. B. Maule, Fox Archbold, Robert Evans, William Meynell, Captain Ellice, '' l a p t h o n i, , E , Baillie, H. J. Fielder, John Miles, P. W. S. Baird, William Fellowes, Edward Murphy, F. S.] Barnard, E. G. Fitz william, G. W. Neville, Ralph Barron, Sir H. W. Forster, Matthew Newdegete, C. N. Bateson, Thomas Gardner, John Dunn O'Connell, M. J. Beresford, Major Goulburn, H. O'Ferrall, It. M. Blake, Sir V. Grimsditch, T. Ogle, S. C. Bodkin, Win. Henry Ilastie, Archibald Phlllpotts, John Bulkelcy, Sir it. Hatton, Captain Plumridge, Captain Buller, Sir J. Y. Heathcote, G. J. Itashlergh, W., Busfeild, W. Hope, Alexander Roebuck, J. A. Carew, R. S. Hume, Joseph Ross, 1). It. Carnegie, Captain James, William Round, C. G. Clayton, R. R. I ermyn, Earl Rutherfurd, A. Clifton, J. T. Johnson, General Stanley, Edward Colebrook°, Sir T. Kelly, Fitzroy Tancred, II.:W. Colborne, W. H. Law, C. E Trelawny, .1. S. Collins, William Lennox, Lord A. Ward, 11. G. Coote, Sir C. H. Leslie, Charles P. Yorke, E. T. Copeland, Alderman Lowther, Sir J. H. Currie, Itaikes .Lowther, Colonel - TELLERS. Dickinson, F. H. Mangles, R. D. Sutton, H. M. Dundas, Frederick Manners, Lord C. S. Trollope, Sir J. MAJORITY—NOES, 118. Alford, Viscount Fuller, A. E. l'raed, W. T. Arkwright, George Gladstone, W. E. Price, Richard Arundel, Earl Gladstone, Captain Pringle, Alexander Astell, William Godson, Richard Rawdon, Colonel Baltic, Walter Hamilton, C. J. Richards, Richard Baldwin, Barry Hamner, Sir J. Ito Heston, Colonel Balfour, J. M. Hayter, W. G. Russell, Charles Barclay, David Hodgson, F. Russell, J. D. W. Baring, F. T. Holland, Robert Sandon, Viscount; Baring, Thomas Hornby, John Seymour, Lord Baring, W. B. Ilouldsworth, T. Sheridan, R. B. - Barrington, Viscount Hughes, W. B. Smith, A. Beckett, William Humphery, Alderman Smith, J. A. Bell, Matthew Inglis, Sir lt, H. Somerset, Lord G. Bentinck, Lord G. Irton, Samuel Somes, Joseph Berkeley, Captain James, Sir W. C. Stanfield, W. R. C. Berkeley, Grantley Kemble, Henry Stuart, Lord J. Blackburne, J. I. Lambton, H. Stuart, W. Y. Boyd. John Lascelles, W. S. Stuart, Henry Broadwood, 11. Lawson, Andrew Strickland, Sir G. Brotherton, J. Legh, G. C. Strutt, Edward Brownrigg, J. S. Lemon, Sir C. Thompson, Alderman Campbell, J. 11. Lincoln, Earl of Thornhill, George Cartwright, W. R. Lockhart, William Tower, Christopher Christopher, R. A. Lygon, General Trotter, John Clerk, Sir George Mackenzie, W. F. Turner, Edmund Clive, Viscount M`Geachy, F. A. Vernon, G. 11. Collett, John M`Taggart, Sir J. Villiers, Viscount Deedes, W. Maher, N. Waddington, Li. S. Denison, W. J. Manners, Lord J. Wawn, J. T. Denison, E. B. Milues, R. M. Welby, G. E, Dodd, George Mitcalfe, henry Williams, William Douglas, Sir 11. Morgan, 0. Winnington, Sir T. Dugda:e, W. S. Morris, David Wood, Charles Duke, Sir J. Neeld, John Wortley, John S. Duncombe, T. Norreys, Sir D. J. Wrightson, W. B. Duncombe, 0. Patten, J. W. Duncombe, A. Peel, Jonathan Egerton, Sir P. Pendarves, E. W. Feilden, W. Philips, G. It. Forman, T. S. Polhill, Frederick TELLERS. Estcourt, T. G. Greene, Thomas BANKING (IRELAND) BILL Read a third time. Mr. Smith O'Brien's Clause brought up, and read a first time ; Motion made, and Question put, " That the said Clause 1)a now read a second time." The House divided : MINORITY-AYES, 24. Archbold, Robert Gregory, W. 11. Ross, David R. Bellew, It. M. Hume, Joseph Somers, J. P. Blewitt, R. J. Ilumphery, Alderman Trelawny, J. 5, Bowring, Dr. Norreys, Sir D. Tulle, 11. M. Brockleburst, J. O'Brien, J. Wawn, John T. Browne, It. D. O'Connell, D. Williams, W. Crawford, W. S. O'Connell, J. TELLERS. Dawson, T. V. Rawdon, Col. O'Brien, W. S. Duncan, George Roche, E. B. Somerville, Sir W. MAJORITY-NOES, 77. Acton, Colonel Denison, E. B.; Lincoln, Earl Allis, J. P. Dick, (phalli Lowther, Sir J. Arbuthnott, H.Lygon, General Mahon, Viscount Arkwright, George Baird, William Ent wisle, William Miles, William Baring, F. T. Escott, Bickham Mitchell, T. A. Baring, W. B. Forman, T. S. Nichol', John Baskervllle, T. B. M. Fremantle, Sir T. Peel, Sir R. Benbow, John Dickinson,Dourg Douglas, Sir F. H. 11. . Gladstone, Captain Peel, Jonathan Bernard, Viscount Godson, Richard Polhill, F. Blakemore, Richard Gore, Montague Round, C. G. Borthwick, Peter Goulburn, Henry Smith, T. B. C. Boyd, Joint Graham, Sir J. Somerset, Lord G. Brisco, 111. Greene, T. Somes, Joseph Broadley, H. Grimsditch, T. Sutton, Henry Brotherton, J. Hampden, Henn Thesiger, Sir F. Browne, W. Hatton, Capt a i n Thornhill, G. Busfeild, William Holthouse, Sir J. Tower, Christopher Cardwell, Edward Hope, Charles Trench, Sir F. W. Chelsea, Viscount Hope, A. Vernon, G. H. Clerk, Sir G. !lope, G. W. Vivian, J. Ennis Clive, R. 11. Hughes, W. B. Wellesley, Lord C. Cockburn, Sir G. Hutt, William Wortley - , James S. Connolly, Colonel Irton, Samuel Coote, Sir:C. 11. James, Sir Walter TILLERS. Corry, Henry Jcrmyn, Earl Young, John Darby, George Lefroy, Anthony Baring, Henry PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS. MONDAY, JUNE 16. The Eastern Counties Railway (C am b r id ge an d B ury St. Edmund's Extension) Bill was read a second time, and coin. mitted, and referred to the Committee of Selection. The following Bills were read a third ti me , an d passe d : Blackburn and Preston Railway. Newcastle and Darlington (Brandling Junction) Railway. Monkland and Kirkintilloch Railway. Sheffield and Rotherham Railway. Taw Vale Railway and Dock. Waterford and Kilkenny Railway. DOVER, JUNE IG.—Their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess de Nemours arrived about half-past two this afternoon, by special train of the South. Eastern Railway, and went to the Ship Hotel. About five o'clock they embarked in the Prin. cess Nary steamer, and proceeded to Ostend, where they will ar rive about ten o'clock. They were received with a guard of honour, and royal salutes fired from the western heights at their arrival and departure. Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent is expected this evening at the York Hotel, to proceed in the morning by the Princess Alice, Captain Smithett, to Calais. FORTUNATE ESCAPE.—On the evening of Sunday an occurrence of a most serious character took place on board the Eclipse, Richmond steamer. It appears that the Eclipse left Rich mond -bridge at its usual time, with 200 passengers. She proceeded down the river until nearly opposite Hammersmith when it was dis covered that the boiler had become red hot, and that if an explosion did not take place the vessel w ould take fire. The crew imme diately poured water into the engine.room, and th e constcrna . amongst tthe passengers was so great t h at the steamer was nearest shore, on the B arnes side, where the whole were disembarked, several jumping int o t h e water and wading ashore. S rtiu e l v n' e t r oa a mltohofenthe females were nearly in a fainting state from fright, and were conveyed to the Boileau Arms public.house, in the Hammersmith Suspension Bridge-road ; and eventually the whole body crossed the bridge to Hammersmith Broadway, where the Hammersmith Conveyance Company provided omnibuses for their conveyance to town. IMPERIAL PARLIAM EN T. HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 16. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. DUNDEE WATERWORKS. The Dundee Waterworks Bill was read a third time and passed. GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY (IRELAND). The report on the Great Western Railway (Ireland) Bill (Dublin to Mullingar and Athlone) was brought up. WEST LONDON RAILWAY. The report on the West London Railway Extension and Lease Bill was brought up. LIVERPOOL AND BURY RAILWAY. The report on the Liverpool and Bury (Bolton, Wigan, Liverpool, and Bury Extension) Railway Bill was brought up. ST. HELEN'S IMPROVEMENT BILL. The report on the St. Helen's Improvement Bill was brought up, and the amendments were agreed to. REVERSIONARY INTEREST SOCIETY BILL. The Reversionary Interest Society Bill was read a third time and passed. HARWELL AND STRENTLY ROAD BILL. The Harwell and Strently Road Bill was read a third time and passed. BLACKBURN AND PRESTON RAILWAY. The Blaekburn and Preston Railway Bill was read a third time and passed. NORTH WOOLWICH RAILWAY. The report of the North Woolwich Railway Bill was brought up. EASTERN COUNTIES (CAMBRIDGE AND BURY ST. EDMUND'S) RAILWAY. On the order of the day for the second reading of the East ern Counties (Cambridge and Bury St. Edmund's) Rails% ay Bill being read, Mr. A LLIX rose to oppose the motion. The greater number of the landowners on the line were opposed to the Bill, and he should, therefore, move that it be read a second time that day six months. Mr. WARD said that the principal landowner on the line, who had heretofore opposed the Bill, and through whose pro perty the railway would pass for more than four miles, had on Saturday withdrawn his opposition to the Bill. As there would, moreover, be ample time and opportunity afforded for consider ing in Committee any opposition that might be urged against the measure, he should support the second reading. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared— For the second reading Against it Majority in favour of the Bill —ls NEWCASTLE AND DARLINGTON RAILWAY. The Newcastle and Darlington (Brandling Junction) Rail way Bill was read a third time and passed. WHITTLE DEAN WATERWORKS. The Lords' amendments to the Whittle Dean Waterworks Bill were agreed to. SHEFFIELD AND ROTHERAM RAILWAY. The Sheffield and Rotheram Railway Bill was read a third time and passed. TAW VALE RAILWAY AND DOCK. The Taw Vale Railway and Dock Bill was read a third time, and passed. NEWRY AND ENNISKILLEN RAILWAY. The report on the Newry and Enniskillen Railway Bill was brought up. EASTERN UNION AND BURY ST. EDMUND'S RAILWAY. The report en the Eastern Union and Bury St. Edmund's Railway was brought up and the amendments were agreed to. CAMBRIDGE AND LINCOLN RAILWAY. Mr. MANNERS SUTTON rose to move that the Cam bridge and Lincoln Railway Bill be re-committed to the same Committee (Group X.), and that it be an instruction to the Committee, that they have power to take into consideration whether the section deposited in the Private Bill Office may not be amended, without injury to public or to private inte rests ; and that it be a further instruction to the said Conn • mittee, that they have power to amend the said section, if on inquiry they shall deem fit so to do. In bringing forward this motion he did not mean to impugn, either di rectly or indirectly, the decision to which the Committee had come, nor did he ask the House to impugn that decision, or to withdraw its support, without which it would be impossible for Committees to perform their functions.—( Hear, hear.) He would confine himself to sim ply stating the facts of the case. No doubt he should be told that there was no precedent for the application he was making, but in reply to that he would observe that the circumstances of the case were likewise unprecedented. The petition for the Bill had been presented in February, and had been referred to the Sub-Committee of Standing Orders, and it had not been opposed. The parties who promoted the Bill informed the Standing Orders Committee of every thing they were aware in which the standing orders had not been complied with. The Sub- Committee reported that the orders had not been complied with. The petition was then referred to the Standing Orders Com mitteee. It was then also unopposed, and the promoters of the Bill brought forward before the Committee all the errors of which they were aware. The Standing Orders Committee permitted the promoters of the Bill to alter two lines, and reported to the House that they ought to be allowed to proceed The Bill was then referred to the Committee on Group X. It was ascertained in that Committee that an error had been introduced into the Bill as to the construction of one of the sections of the line, as compared with the datum line. He would not enter into discussion as to the character of that error—as to whether or not it affected the real merits of the line—nor would he ask the House to interfere with the functions of the Committee. He would not ask the House to express the slightest opinion as to the merits of the case, all he asked them was to give to the Committee on the Bill the power to inquire into those circumstances. When the error was discovered in the Committee, the Committee considered that the best course to pursue was, to decide that the preamble do not pass, and to report the matter to the House, accompanied with the reasons upon which the decision was founded, so as to give an opportunity of bringing the subject before the House at the earliest possible time. The hardship of this case was that the adverse decision of the Committee did not arise from any demerits in the measure itself, but from the fact of a clerical error—an error that had escaped the notice of the original promoters of the Bill and also the Standing Orders Committee, and which was not detected till the Bill was brought under the consideration of the present Committee of Inquiry. The Committee, though they did not consider the error as fatal to the merits of the measure, were nevertheless bound to take notice of it, and report in the manner they had done. This was a case of special and peculiar character, and called for the interference of the House. He did not call upon the House in dealing with the case to reverse the decision of the Committee, but to grant further powers of inquiry to the Committee. As regarded the power he proposed to vest in the Committee, he did not be lieve it would be exercised prejudicially either towards the par ties interested in the measure. or the public. The powers he proposed they should exercise were those which had been exercised on several occasions by the Standing Orders Com mittee. He could state a few cases in which that Committee had allowed the sections and the datum line to be corrected. There was a case during last session in which an error similar to the one in the present Bill was allowed to be corrected in a branch of the Sheffield and Huddersfield Railway. In the present year there had been eight easesin which corrections had been made. Of these he might instance theWakefield,Pontefract, and Goole, the Cornwall, the North Wales, and the Brighton and Chichester Railway Bills. He saw no reason why a power which had been exercised in these several instances might not with perfect safety be extended to the present Com mittee. The merits of the competing lines was not the ques tion at present, but it was, whether it would not be judicious and proper to extend, in this special and important case, the e powers of reconsideration which had been exercised by the Committee on Standing Orders. Were this done, he was sure the power would not be abused. Viscount COURTEN AY said he was anxious to state a few words before the House gave its decision. He might state that the facts set forth in the petition were correctly stated. It was true that an error was discovered in the Com. mittee in investigating the engineering evidence, but he was forced to say it was merely a clerical error, and did not at all affect the main features of the Bill. The interests of the land lords on the line were not prejudicially affected by the error to which he had referred. Mr. ESTCOURT said that it had been decided that cer tain notices should be given to that House and sections of lines lodged preparatory to the investigations of the Standing Orders' Committee. It was also required that the datum line should be marked. This had been departed from in the present instance. If the error was a clerical error, they had had plenty of time to correct it, and he did not think there should be any depar tore from the rules of the House in the present instance. Other parties had been called upon to comply with the standing orders, and had been successfully paying proper attention to the getting up of their sections and their specifications, and if any mistake had occurred, they were themselves to blame for it, as it had been occasioned by their own neglect. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. said he thought it was a case it, which the House ought to interfere. Statements had been made which showed that the error was merely a clerical error, and did not affect the merits of 'the Bill. As a great measure was involved he did not think an error of this kind ought to interfere with its progress. He should support the motion of his Hon. Friend. Lord G. SOMERSET was opposed to the motion. If any re-investigation was to be made, the Bill should be referred again to the Standing Orders' Committee. Mr. W. PATTEN thought that if it was consistent with the rules of the House it would be better to refer the matter to the Standing Orders' Committee. He would rather support an amendment of that sort than the motion of his Hon. Friend. He would, however, wish to have the opinion of the Right Hen. Gentleman in m chair on the subject The SPEAKER said he did not think it would be con sistent with the standing orders for the House to adopt the suggestion of the Hon. Member for Cheshire. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion 77 Against it Majority against the motion -41 RUNCORN AND PRESTON RAILWAY. The second reading of the Runcorn and Preston Brook Rail way Bill was agreed to, upon the motion of an Hon. Member, whose name we could not learn. LONDONDERRY AND COLERAINE RAILWAY. Lord SANDON moved the second reading of the London and Coleraine Railway Bill, which was agreed to. BROAD AND NARROW GAUGE. Sir GEORGE GREY said that, as there was a great deal of anxiety felt by the public abroad, as to the time when this House would take up the consideration of the very important question of the broad and narrow gauge, he would wish to know whether it was the intention of the House to take it up to morrow ? Mr. BRAMSTON said it was a question of great con sequence, and therefore he would propose that it be taken up on Thursday. After a few words from Hon. Members on both sides of the House, it was agreed upon to take up the subject on Friday. The Agricultural and Commercial Bank of Ireland Bill was read a third time. SCOTCH BANKING BILL. Mr. HUME presented several petitions on the subject of the Scotch Banking Bill, but amidst the confusion which pre vailed we could not collect the import. A great number of petitions, relating to railway and other private Bills, were also presented in a state of the House which rendered it impossible to distinguish them. BRIDGE OVER THE SEVERN. Mr. ROEBUCK here rose and was on the point of ad dressing the House, amid the most intense silence, when Captain BERKELEY said he wished to ask his Hon. Friend opposite, the Secretary to the Admiralty, if the bridgp over the Severn, which had already been objected to by the Board of Admiralty, as calculated to obstruct' the naviga tion of that river, would be allowed to be erected ? Mr. CORRIE (who, from the excessive noise in the House, was almost wholly inaudible) was understood to say that mea sures would be taken to prevent any interference with the in terests of the public by the contemplated construction. Mr. HUME observed, that by a rule of that House, no Bill which was objected to by the Admiralty, could pass with out the sanction of that Board. He believed, however, that when the Bill in question was opposed by the Admiralty, their objection was contravened in consequence of their not appearing in person or by counsel before the Com mittee; he wished to inquire whether the letter from the Ad miralty prohibiting its erection, was not sufficient to prevent the passing of the Bit, j, Mr. Bge 7 l:4lT was understood to say, as Chairman of the Committee before whom the Bill was heard, that no appear avec, being made, the preamble of the Bill was declared proved. Mr. HUME said he hoped the question would not rest there because it was a matter of very great importance. The clause had been introduced to remedy great inconvenience, and if the subject were properly understood the Bill would not be allowed to pass. fir ROBERT INGLIS wished to ask a question of the Under Secretary for the Colonies, viz., whether the represen tatives of her Majesty's Government in Ceylon had paid honours, or in any way countenanced idolatrous worship in the island of Ceylon. Mr. HOPE in a few words replied that no such countenance had been given to such worship. The Government offi cers had given directions to discountenance the idolatrous cere monies reerred to. Sir ROBERT INGLIS was satisfied with the explanation. An HON. MEMBER, whose name we could not learn, put a question to the Secretary for the Colonies, whether he had seen an edict issued at Hong-Kong, fcr the suppression of Secret Societies there, awarding a sentence of three years' imprisonment and hard labour, and branding on the right cheek, after the manner of deserters. The following remarkable words concluded the edict, that if any member of that society should be slain by the people in any disturbance, no inquiries should take place as to the manner in which the death of the individual had been occasioned. Mr. HOPE was aware *at such a society, existed as that mentioned by the Hon. Member. IS►was a society consisting of a considerable number of persons, who were all bound so lemnly by oath to obey the directions, whatever they might be, of one person, whom they regarded as the head of their establishment. The society was a band of robbers and assassins, and was a terror to all well-disposed Chinese, upon whom the confederacy were in the habit of levying a species of black mail, for the preservation and protection of their lives and property. It was also true, that the members of this society possessed power to brand on the cheeks any persons who withdrew from their association, but it was not correct to say that the punish ment of deserters in the royal army consisted of a visible brand on the cheek--it was only a secret mark, by which they might be identified on inspection. In all the jurisdiction of the Tr}ad Society over the Chinese subjects their powers were re ported to have been supreme, and no notice would at present be taken with respect to the power they posses-ed. CHALLENGE TO MR. ROEBUCK. Mr. ROEBUCK rose and said he had a very important matter to bring forward with regard to a question of the privi leges of that House. He would wish to call the attention of the House to a letter which be had received on Saturday last. A carriage drove up to his door, and a person having knocked at the door, the letter which he held in his hand was left at his house. The letter was addressed to him personally, and was dated from the Reform Club. The letter was to this effect, that the writer wished to know if he ( Mr. Roebuck) had used these words as reported in the Morning Chronicle, or words to that effect. Here the Hon. Member read the passage as enclosed by the writer of the letter, the substance of which was, that he (Mr. Roebuck) had said that the parties to whom he had alluded, under' the peculiar cir cumstances, deserved very little respect for their position or their intellect. The writer then went on to say that if he (Mr. Roebuck) used those words, the insult to him, the writer, was plain. His second question, then, was, was he (Mr. Roe buck) prepared to justify them? He (the writer) presumed that he (Mr. Roebuck) was too well read in the history of chivalry to misinterpret the meaning of this word, which the writer had underlined three times.—( Lond laughter. ) Sir V. BLAKE rose to order. He was ready to admit that the Hon. Member (Mr. Roebuck) had an undoubted right to express his opinions in the House, upon any measure brought before it, but he had not a right to catechise or to lecture any Hon. Member who—(Loud cries of " Order, order.") The SPEAKER said that the interruption of the Ilon. Baronet was most irregular.—(Loud cries of '• Hear, hear. ) Mr. ROEBUCK then proceeded to read the conclusion of the letter, which was that the writer enclosed the Morning Chronicle, and had marked the passage. In answer to that letter he had written what he would now read, and which he delivered himself. The Hon. Member then read his answer, which was to the effect that he would answer the Hon. Mem ber's letter in his place in the House of Commons : that the House should not be coerced in his person—(Cheers)—and that he would take the proper means of punishing such threats. (Cheers.) He concluded by expressing a hope that the writer of the challenge was sufficiently read in the law of his country, not to misinterpret this.—( Great laughter and cheers.) Sir, I am now about first to move that the letter be read by the clerk at the table.—(Cheers, and laughter. ) The SPEAKER asked whether this Hon. Member for Sligo was in his place ? Mr. SOMERS rose in his place, and bowed to the Speaker, The Clerk at the table then read the letter at length. The following is Mr. Somers' letter, with Mr. Roebuck's reply:— " Reform Club, June 14, 1845, 6 p.m. " Sir—Unfortunately I was not in the House of Commons last night when you spoke in committee on the Irish Colleges Bill. If I had been present the necessity of addressing to you a letter like this, which is one of inquiry, would not have existed. But having been absent, lam compelled to rest on the newspaper reports, and I wish to ask you if the following words were spoken by you, or words to that effect :—' Those who follow such a leader deserve little respect either for their position or their intellect.' [So we understoed the Honourable and Learned Member's reading of the letter, but he spoke in so low a tone, and as rapidly, that we followed him with some difficulty.] If you did use these words the insult you convey to me as a repealer is plain. Sly second question is, are you pre pared to justify these words. (These words are underlined. ) The meaning of the words I have underlined I am sure you are too well read in the old histories of chivalry to misinter pret.—(Loud laughter).—l have the honour, &c., " J. A. Ptoebuck, Esq. "J. P. SOMERS." " Sir—You shall receive the answer your letter requires in the House of Commons on Monday.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear")—and I now give you the following warning for your guidance in the meantime. lam determined that the free expression of opinion shall not in my person be coerced or checked.—(Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches.) I shall, therefore, use the most stringent and effectual means to punish your present menace, and to put down all future violence. I trust you are sufficiently well read in the laws of your country to understand this.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," and cheers from the Ministerial benches. )—I am, &c., "J. P. Somers, Esq. " J. A. ROEBUCK." Mr. ROEBUCK said, 'ir, I am exceedingly sorry to be obliged to adopt the course which I feel it my duty to pur sue. 1 feel it, however, a paramount duty—not as regards myself, but as regards the privileges of this House—to make the following motion, " That J. P. Somers, Esq., having sent a challenge to a Member, for words spoken in this House, is guilty of a contempt and breach of privilege." My reasons for taking this course I shall state as calmly and shortly as I can. If it were a question that regarded only myself, the law would have afforded me instant protection, and I would be quite prepared to throw myself, in such a case, on the law's authority. But this is not a matter in which I am concerned. It is the House that is concerned—and the privileges of the Members—and the most valuable of those privileges is the free expres.ion of their opinions as to the conduct of public men. Under these circumstances I claim the right of availing myself of the privileges of the House, certain as I am that I myself have committed no breach of its privileges. I thought proper to refer to the superiority in intel• lect of some of the Hon. Members in this House, and 1 have received in consequence a letter suggesting that an Hon. Mem ber should be allowed to shoot at me.—( Laughter and cheers. I do not think that that shows any superiority or that it proves any superiority of the intellect. I throw aside all other consi derations. I feel as a Member of this House that lam acting in a proper manner when I pursue this course, and, therefore, assuming that Hon. Members will not deny my right to do so, I shall move the motion which has already been received by the House, Lord ASHLEY said, I rise with great satisfaction to second this motion with the most heartfelt thanks, not only for my self, but also for, lam convinced, a great majority of the Members in this House, and of right-minded persons through out the country—the thanks of those persons who look with alarm at any breach of the privileges of this House. The motion will go far to establish not only a social, but a very great constitutional privilege. I can foresee, Sir, the time when, if this system which the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath has called our attention to, was introduced into this House, and into a deliberative assembly—l can see the time when liberty of speech would be at an end, and when we should meet here as our ancestors met here, not for the exhibition of reason, but for violence and for the sword. —(Cheors). In seconding this motion, "therefore, Sir, I tender to the Honour , able and Learned Member for Bath, in my own name and in the name of many gentlemen of England, and as I said be fore, in t"be name of thousands of his fellow subjects, I do tender to him my most sincere thanks for the manly, the cou rageous, and the constitutional course which he has taken.— (Loud cheers). Mr. SOMERS then rose and said—Sir, seeing the feeling of the House, I have no hesitation whatever in withdrawing that letter which he has read. It was merely a letter of in quiry.—( Great laughter). The Honourable and Learned Member for Bath did not condescend to answer these in quiries. Ido not call in question his motives for not doing so. I am here, Sir, in the hands of the House, and I bow with unaffected deference to the decision of the House. I am little inclined to play with the authority of the Hou►e. The sense of the Speaker is paramount on all occasions, and the sense of the Howe I conceive is on all occasions para mount. I certainly do deeply regret this matter.—( Loud cheers). I do deeply regret that any matter so personal to myself should ha^e occupied the attention of fhe House for one moment.—(Cheers). If the Honourable and Learned Member for Bath is satisfied with this explanation I trust the House will be satisfied. I think I can add nothing to what I have said. I trust, however, that the House will bear with me for one moment, while I call the attention of the Honour able and Learned Member for Bath to the observations which he frequently makes, and the gross imputations which he occasionally casts upon certain Members of this House. I will take the liberty of saying that the Hon. Gentleman's observations do not always correspond with—(Here the Hon. Gentleman hesi tated for a moment)—l must take the liberty of saying it—do not always correspond with the truth so as to entitle him to permanent respect. I beg to apologise to the House generally for intruding on its attention, and for being the cause of en croaching so considerably on its time.—(Loud cheers.) Sir. G. GREY assured the House that he felt deeply for the Hon. Member who had last addressed the House.— (Cheers.) He understood him to say, at the commencement of his explanation, that he retracted the letter which had been the origin of the present discussion; a more satisfactory line of conduct could not have been pursued, still he confessed he should not be doing his duty did he not deprecate the practice too often adopted of resenting supposed injuries. He thought the course adopted by the Hon. Member for Bath was the only one consistent with his duty to the House and to himself which he could have pursued; and he at the same time hoped that this, the second example presented to and b y that H on. Member,it livareed himself woul would teach be omtheerresretgoavradlfueel of thesim ifleaelinrcogusresce,etrtehrisle. —( Loud cheers.) He agreed with all that ha d been said by him against the immoral and un chr e i n st e ia s n en p t r i a m c e u n c t e , a o n f d du w eil as in n g et ; but his approval was limite d to that night.extended vv t iteh HounwarrantableGentlemen c n o a u d r e s e he i te point pursued of conscience se Friday nee not to give or accept a hostile measure, instead of yielding to s t a h m feelings e eniaatriloyn sedulousor resentment, s e t r h v e i y h gsh theou d language at t e of gentlemen.—( Reiterated cheers.) He did not wish to g ive e time be of pianr indignation offence to the lion. Member for Bath, but he only felt he was doing his duty in reminding him that there was a tone and a gesture calculated to give offence.—(Prolonged cheer ing.) He heard his speech on Friday last with that attention which the addresses of the Learned Gentleman inva riably demanded, but he felt at the time that it was calculated to produce needless irritation. Truth might be spoken with plainness and with honesty without wounding feelings or pro ducing offence. Such, however, was not the tune usually adopted by the Member for Bath ; it was net the tone adopted on Friday last ; and while he deprecated it he could scarcely wonder at the em o ti on o f f ee l ing on t h e part of the Hon. Mem ber for Sligo. —( Cheers. ) Sir R. PEEL observed that the Hen. Member for Bath had taken a course consistent with true courage, at the same time he:willingly admitted that the Hon. Member for Sligo had made every reparation in his power.—(Cheers.) He had retracted the letter which had given cause to the present un fortunate discussion, he had regretted the hasty courso he had adopted, and had apologised to the House. A more complete reparation could not possibly have been made by any man. — (Loud cheers.) At the same time he thought, as the lion. Member had made the fullest reparation in his power, that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman should be satisfied with the ex planation which had been made. Mr, 13. ROCHE did not rise for the purpose of Prolong" ing this unpleasant discussion. They had entered into it with unwillingness. He thought kis Hon. Friend (Mr. Somers). had given all the reparation in his power. He could not, how ever, sit down without remarking that it would be very well if the Hon. and Learned Member did not use such severe language, and if the House would, by a strong intimation, show that it was determined to discountenance all such attacks.— (Hear, hear,) It caused irritation and excitement not only in that House but out of doors, and the repetition of such lan— guage was by' no means calculated to raise the character of that House in te opinion of the public. A pledge had been given to the HouStA of withdrawing the offensive words, but he considered the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath would not be justified in withdrawing his motion. Lord HOWICK agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet that the matter should not be withdrawn, in consequence of the full and ample apology tendered by the Hon. Member for Sligo. If the matter were withdrawn it would appear on their minutes that a Member of Parliament was justified in sending a hostile mes sage to another Member for expressions emplo)ed in that House on public business. He was not prepared to consent to the withdrawal of the motion. He considered that the motion having been confirmed, the next course would be to form a second resolution, to the effect, that after the full and ample apology of the Hon. Member for Sligo, the House would not take any further notice of the matter. Lord PALMERSTON submitted that, in his opinion, a resolution pointing out a single individual would necessarily imply some opinion on the part of the House that blame and censure had been incurred by that particular person named in that resolution. It appeared to him that the apology which had been made to the House by the Hon. Member for Sligo was a sufficient amendment on his part to restrain the House from any further proceedings. It further appeared to him that the objections of his Noble Friend might be fully answered by permitting the proposed resolution to be withdrawn, and to have, as a substitute, a general resolution, to the effect that it was a breach of the Parliamentary privileges of the House, for any Member to take notice by a hostile message of what had passed from any Member in that House. He quite agreed with other Hon. Members that the Hon. Member for Bath deserved their thanks for the course he had pursued in bringing the matter before the House. The effect of such challenges was to strike a blow at the constitutional functions of Parliament. There were many Hon. Members who if similarly , treated, might have been, driven to the destruction of them selves and to the injury of their families. He thought that the House ought not to try the Hon. Member (Mr, Roebuck) with respect to his speech the other night. He (Lord Palmerston) wished to show the title courage of his Hon. Friend in coming forward in the way in which he did. There was many an Hon. Member in that House whose courage had not been tried, who had not been put in a situation like his Hon. Friend, and who could not come forward and throw himself on the House to vindicate nut himself alone, but the privileges of the House. He thought the remarks of the Hon. Baronet misplaced, and truly inapplicable on this occasion. He wished to know whether this was a breach of privilege, and if it were, what should be the way of dealing with it. The Hon. Member, in the commencement of his address, made every re paration it was possible for man to do. It was not a question in which his Hon. Friend (Mr. Roebuck) was alone con cerned, it .-as a question of the privilege of the House. If his Hon. Friend was sorry he ought to have been set right on Friday, and they then ought to have tried him for his impru dence, and for the manner in which he expressed his opinion on that subject. Had he not been held up in a way in which the characters of others had not been ; and was the Hon. Baronet to lay down a rule as to how he was to express his feelings in that House. If they were to conduct themselves peaceably and quietly they should above all have freedom of opinion, and every man should be allowed to express his feeling of the injury he received, and if he acted wrong he (Lord Pal merston) hoped that they would call him to order. They were not now to try the Hen. Member for Bath, when the question was as to the conduct of another Hon. Gentleman. He thought that his Hon. Friend deserved the thanks of every gentleman in the House. Sir R. INGLIS thanked his Hon. Friend for the Christian manner in which he seconded the motion. He observed a strong and concurrent opinion on both sides of the House, that, if it should be the pleasure of this House that the motion be 'withdrawn, the Honourable Member on the other side of the House should express his regret. lie hoped he would not be misunderstood—namely, that he should apologise to the House, and to the Hon. and Learned:Member for Bath, and express his regret that the letter in question had been sent. Less than that would not satisfy the House, or secure to any Member of the House, as well as to the Hon. Member for Bath that privilege, which he (Sir R. Inglis) regarded the most essential of all their privileges—namely, the free expression of opinion in that House.—( Hear.) He entreated of the House to attend to the observation of the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Devenport, and he hoped that if Hon. Members could not be held responsible for language used in the debates of that House, neither should they use those irritating and offensive epithets—( Hear, hear)—which gave unnecessary pain. With out taking upon himself the task of acquitting the Ho nourable and Learned Member, he thought that the Ho nourable and Learned Gentleman would, on reflection, feel that observations were made by him, not only on Friday night, but in other debates and on other occasions, upon the conduct of Irish Members, which the necessity of the case did not demand or justify. He did not mean to say that the conduct of the Irish Members was justifiable, on the contrary he was disposed to agree in the general view that they were not acting properly in absenting themselves from Parliament. He did hope that whilst on the one hand the House would interfere effectually to prevent such pernicious conduct, Hon. Members would feel the propriety of acting in a manner so as not to give unnecessary offence, and with a view to maintain the character of that House in the opinion of the public.—( Hear. hear.) The SPEAKER then read the minute which had been made on the books of the House containing the offensive ex pressions before stated, and the apology of the Hon. Member for Sligo already mentioned. Sir W. SOMERVILLE expressed a hope that, after the full and ample apology which had been made by his Honourable Friend, the House would% permit him to pass without further censure. During the time that he ( Sir W. Somerville) had been in the House he had never known his Hon. Friend to have been guily of a single offensive or unparliamentary expres sion.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. ROEBUCK said, he had set out with stating that it was not upon his own account he brought this matter for ward, but in order to vindicate the privileges of that House —(Hear, hear)—and therefore, when the House declared that its privileges had been satisfied, it was far from his wish to interfere, or throw any impediment in the way of the matter being brought to a close. But he should be doing an injustice to himself if he had admitted in any degree that charge which had been made against him by the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Devonport. He had expressed an opinion, that the conduct of certain Irish Members was most mis chievous to the interests of the country—he then used that language, shish accurately described his own feelings and opinions. He had done no more—he had a right to do that—he repeated it—what he said was accurately true. His language had been gentle and guarded—( Laughter)—yes, gentle and guarded as compared with the language of others who spoke of that House and its Members individually else where.—( Hear, hear.) As, however, the privil eges o f t h e House had been vindicated, he would say no more on the matter. That was all he asked. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN said the Hon. Member for Bath had used insulting language to him, and treated him with " The contempt."—( Order, order. ) SPEAKER said the Hon. Member for Limerick could not refer to language used in former debates at which he was not present. Mr. ROEBUCK said he had been accused of using lan guage unfit to be heard in the House, and he thought the Hon. Gentleman ought to be called upon to retract those expres sions.—(Cries of " No, no," and " Hear, hear," and great confusion, in the midst of which), Mr. TURNER rose, but not one word the Hon. Member said reached us. Lord J. MANNERS was understood to express a hope that the House would not call upon the Hon. Member for Limerick to retract the language he had used. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN rose, evidently labouring under great excitement, and said that which had been conceded to the Hon and Learned Member for Bath had been denied to him. He had used most offensive language towards him, and had nut retracted a single offensive expression which he had used towards him in the debate on Friday night. Was that so or not ? The Hon. Member sat down, expecting an answer from the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, but the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. assuming a particularly derisive look, turned his back to the Hon. Member, and did not stand up. There upon Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN said the position in which I stand before the country is this, that I have been insulted, and the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, whose offensive ex pressions still remain unretracted and unexplained—( Order) . The SPEAKER—If the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath had made use of language of an unparliamentary cha racter, it would have been my duty to call him to order.— ( Hear, hear.) It did not appear to me that the language used by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in the debate on Friday night was unparliamentary, and therefore I did not call him to order. No Hon. Member, on that occasion, called the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to order, or in any w ay signified that he was using language of an unparliamentary character.—. (Hear, hear.) I cannot, therefore, admit that either then, or on the present occasion, the Hon. Member for Bath used un parliamentary language.—( Hear, hear.) Sir H. W. BARRON—When language, said to be of an offensive character to Hon. Members of this Reuse, was used by the Hon. Member for Cork (Mr. O'Connell) — Just at this moment Mr. O'Connell himself entered the House, amid loud cheering and waving of hats from Hon. Members on the Opposition side of the House, and derisive laughter from the Ministerial benches. Mr. Brotberton, Al.. derman Humphryes, Mr. Hawes, Mr. Roche, and others came over and shook hands with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, as soon as he took his seat. There was great excitement for a moment, or rather the excitement which previously existed was increased. The Hon. and Learned Member seemed in excellent health and spirits, and laughed heartily, apparently at the coincidence of his name being mentioned Just as he en. at b e when s of that A ir OH': C u o tered. Soon after Mr. S. O'Br ien went over to the Hon. Member, who shook his han d warml y . House, nellihraHd.ußseAdßoffßeOnsNivewelanntgounagteo tsoayAltmh Hon. Gentlemen oppo site took a very different course from that which they now p ursued. The Hon. Member for th e University of Oxford told the Hon. and Learned Member for Cork, on that occasion, that he should be cautious of using lan guage of an offensive character towards Members of that House ; but the Hon. Gentleman had not given that caution to the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, which would be quite as well placed; for it was notorious that the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman was in the constant habit of using offen siveill'iceh meant no personal and dictatorial language towards Hon. Members.—( Order.) Sir T H h e S . l 3 w E . AK ß E Aß ß ß in o te N rfe e r x e p d fa u in p e o d n w . offence. What he meant to say was, that an Hon. Member who used such language as the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, ought not to be so choice about the language u.,ed by others, and that one who sheltered himself on every occasion under the privileges of that House should not use language calculated to wound the feelings of Hon. Members.—( Hear. ) o L f o t r h d e o House rd i had w i la c e k e ) n xs.a teas vindicated, resol v e a d n and uponre grie,trteesds pressing a 7 . Sir R. PEEL again interposed. He thought thq.,prives The Right lion Baronet in s i4 mrtio b n le . .instanced the case of Mr. T. Hope, now the Lord Justice Clerk, who had acted in a similar manner as the lion. Member for Sligo, and whose apology was accepts by the House. After a few words from Lord SANDON and Sir V. BLA ax e Bath, be resolution oaunris e c opnu, e t r e s x i u n p e n r d e a s t s o b i r Y e y theoofi t t t h iia e ot approbationnt;kat,nndbr Learned atrhne o e f idi t oi‘ h ni e e. ni H mb o et u iri s I f a rr for Sligo, and also the amendment expressive of the satisfaction of the House at the apology of the Hon. Member for Sligo, were put and carried. The subject then dropped. Mr. OSBORNE asked whether the Right Hon. Baronet th Secretary of State for the Home Department would bring o the Academical Eddcation question, in case the hour a which the Irish Banking question concluded was late. Sir J. GRAHAM said he would not pledge himself to the House, buto would not certainly bring up the report on the Academical Education question at a very late hour. • '-ANNUITY TO SIR H. POTTINGER. Sir R." PEEL said that he believed that the unanimous feeling of the p, the appreciation of the conduct, character, and public services of Sir Henry Pottinger were such, that independent of the personal . question of merits which were universally acknowledged, his claims upon the gratitude of his country were equally well appreciated. He proposed that the great services which Sir Henry Pottinger had rendered tq