The Sun. — London, England, 1845-03-04 00:00:00

.1 09- I OA- THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY MORNING, MARCH 5, 1845. I MPERI AMEN T. HOUSE OF LORDS, "'larch 4. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack et Five o'clock. AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition a lai oula the owners and occupirs of land. the tr a de smen , labourers of the par sh of Cuckfield, in the e°4lll 3' of Sussex, comp l a i n i ng o f di stress. . 1 he Petitioners expressed bitter disappointment, in which he (th e Noble Duke) fully sympathised, that in the pro sed alteration of taxation the manufacturers, who uw comparatively prosperous, should have • s r % e l ; L ' e Lief, whilst none was given to agriculture, ( C . " was so severely depressed. He knew the peti- Oners and he • ld vouch for their respectability and t er Lou •h. th e truth of their statements. For his own part, ' was determined to fulfil the pledge which he had •,(,) frequently given, to move for the expunging e i. lll any Biil which came before the House of any in &your of the untaxed foreigner at the expense 4 e i the heavily taxed British farmer. He had = f f w th eYa said that free trade would be the ruin e country, and he now saw that every mee k-44; of financial arrangement was tending to that `" 4lt •'—(Hear, hear.) If all articles of agricultural tri lice were to be allowed t o come i nto t hi s country e labourers would speedily be ruined, and th ew kethe only p ersons l e f t to support the evil „ . 1 d be the tenantry and the landlords. The Noble ~e presented severul other petitions, from places ?ampshite and Sussex, complaining of ugricul b'at distress, and praying fir the repeal of the. malt •tax. ;`,:e presented also a petition from parish schoolmasters "' ti the north of Scotland, praying tor an increase of their ends. 1 . 0 LAW OF DEBTOR AND CREDITOR. ASHBURTON presented a petition from the rerfeuds Pr o t ect i on Society of London against the late al- It talons of the law of debtor and creditor. He would ky° that the p et i t i on b e lea d b y the clerk at the table ; li e r ' i , al though the opinions of all the law Lords in the of had been heard upon the question, the opinion 'etas tnose tradesmen, who knew by experience the te,l working of the law, had never been s l - i",, t(4 The petitioners stated, that in West it;ster the great bulk of their debts were under the Pin of 20!., and under the present state of lie- Je w people did not hesitate to take the goods of 'h em s ' trad esmen without the prospect of paying for Paths Re regretted t o see so mum overstrained sym ter ." with the debtor, and so little consideration el 4 the losses of the honest and struggling trades ,trih• e lle . the ri moved that the petition be read at length. coa t , Petition was read by the clerk at the table. .It es e l ha h lhed that the law or last session aff-cted parties duet, "ad contracted debts under 201.—that it was ket,tless advisable to abolish the practice of imprison -44.1; for debt in certain cases, but that in this ease pr itt i g ebts which were effected were those which ordinary th e nce would enable a debtor to satisfy—that the 4474 a of the creditor had not been sufficiently s ad e " to, and that the intere s t s o f cre di tors 'vett overlooked in those cases in which Ati gas least able to protect himself; for the ati, k e t last session gave an immunity for debts, creels." of all others it was most difficult for the ; to .0p r to prove —that it gave an advantage to the Ilti et i t ° l against the fair tradesman ; and that in it had proved highly injurious and exceedingly ti t "'ieis! to the iterests of cre.. Uder these letsteisstances, they ' pray ed for the rep ditor eal of t the Act of Lora s I°ll * lIRO UGHAM said that he perf ec tly agree d w i t h tt taken by the Noble Lord and Le believed re tail ' w as highly important that the , inu rests of the tis tv , dealers should be a tt en d e d to . Th is petit i on tt ett rd a large class of the retail dealers of the et tY in which their Lordships were a t that moment the Ili this respect the city of Westminster wasplaced 11 4 1 e s ame position with the dealers of that important !li e ; i ) 3l persons the dealers of the City of London and klter. °r ough Of Southwark, and he thought their 4 ` 3 t 4 Ought to be attended to. But had they known 114),Nsitiwi in e hich ho (Lord Brougham) was placed, t he vc)111 d nut have heaped upon him the abuse which . noshed.„ The fact was that the Bill was neither his ;,tose ": 41 1 of his Noble and Learned Friend On the t hand Aek ; it was originated by a Noble and Learned ,Plit le r,ef his, not then present. They had adopted the Nee and given it their support from the frightful et ki i which had been brought before them of the Oktt, .ul state of the prisons which were used for the hs gals of those who were responsible for small debts. t'PeCtZettrits stated by his Noble and Learned Friend, To n e m,,e a uthority of most highly respectable persons, s 'iks to make one's blood curdle. Did it not . Litts r - Z e to shudder to hear that some of their fellow pl it kt , B were confined in places unfit for human lit ces i t 'h? These poor creatures had been confined in 1. 11 4 vs't!atlasotne from the degree of abomination and l Ai ul eh they presented, inhaling unwholesome air, e' st et;: -li g upon straw, or clothes which they were }t uttered to take Off. In fact, they were treated opt hlanner that would be cruel even to 4 04 ° , n deraned to death for terrible crime. It was lulo tt e uge of those circumstances that induced them . ( 'ltit,,, - 8 ° Much of the other Bill which woul4 abolish t t anent for debt altogether as applied to debts for I )t t diti,7 lit,der. He was happy to state to . their t k t ' t 'fit4l 3 that the working of the Act had been highly or s ! and a report on the subject gave very satis kkitiltivecounts of its results. The Bankruptcy Corn- fi t 4 1 4,. 1 had, however, thought proper to put by Ov ate conclusion on one p ar t o f th e Bill , Ile 1,4 °f those poor creatures, who ought to . have tkiti] rated i n S eptem b er, were not removed from tt etk,„ 4 D ecember. He admitted the propriety of the t t ~4pCto the Bill urged by the petitioners, but h e rtly s es Pair of hereafter being a bl e t o p ro p ose a L a dy ler this.C%A.Sll.- 1 BIi.LL would be glad to support hi s 1)(44414 Learned Friend when he brought his remedy tl ic Je t , there was one part of the Bill not adopted . 6h cod °,* there would have been no necessity for But no doubt this arose out of the e•,,wotil t4 iner in which the Bill was passed last session. l k i t' tt 'llet.? ar id Learned Friend had referred to the mis -4.-110 e ' e ll which had been put upon one of Learned t ka i ld tl ll, l( hew better than his Noble and 1 1 / 4 1,: ho one was less qualified . to interpret a the person who drew it up.—(A laugh.) " () I-IGHAM,—Oh, but I did not draw up the Itltti(4k la ug h .) , tr lv I„ 4III3 ELL--Still his Noble and Learned Friend t lit: t e l, well. the other authorities were better able to Zes t 4 44 14,7 meaning of the Legislature than the gen \ that Was entrusted to give it express'on. He i ts the Honse would not be induced to re ,t,':ps, by the importunity of the Noble Lord ; 1 4t' :' O , as well as the petitioners, the tradesmen 14. eptelister, had always opposed the abolition . of t° 'nestle 'nestle process. 'I hose tradesmen had m ill I to i d t 'e last that the abolition of mesne pro -Ihtit be their ruin. But he would • ask, ,„''osia result so, proved ?—(Hear, hear.)-- 01,0. t t l enture to say that those tradesmen had f oe s greatly benefited by the abolition, for it „Z , t e 'eat more caut.ous about the pen-tins to whom 1 cr 1. , 4 4 413 URTON—Tbey did not say that they tlihrtlitted by it. N Y I ,Pqi 4 , N ', I , III3 ELL—They did say so. He believed that °- ttlee su e l, on the su bj ec t s h owe d th a t t h ey m i g h t imprisonment after final process, by l tiqtlet iti , better remedy against the property of 1 4S It tl iett .r. it • The Noble Lord (Ashburton) had L', t tt °l ‘ was nothing for a man to spend 'itt r in prison. But did the Noble Lord know l t el then catee out of prison without being de -1.111 ? 01 . 1 1, 1 11 I T , oh i ( f )— • , ITAM said that he had not drawn up ir le — had been drawn up by one of the Judges, le„ 4ltt eity to interpret it had been on the part of ti ‘t t li t thest,illed judge.—(A laugh.) Notwithstanding ' l , l oess - a ,l-0 Lord had said, he still thought that it t t S ti Po rt - ',Y to give credit, and if the creditor was endure this risk, be ought in fair justice t, to °err e , . ISM ass ert - Ponding security.. Now, he would vent ri't and he did it without any intention to IC Lordships all went upon credit. He oet e ,h.thight say, without fear of contradiction, N t lti er ? few of their Lordships, if there were byes ;, °id not believe that there were—who paid 4, 1 , g b r o : ti er than • once . a year. It was a custom 'hide tie 1)6 - ' 1 °Pon the country, and therefore no man ae, c t hed for abiding by it. But still, at the Must say that example was a powerful r t , 4 attoGQtd etip'itstem went through the several grades cliff reached that class whose means were s%,tt rent order, and he believed, therefore, it it t m ls, te N ioa r t Y o te titera remedy, so as to give a means of iois t t teo far creditor for small debts; that w as, the tp,‘ p,lthee h is No honest debtor would suffer a re -00(14 4 ', 1 ,,s person in order to preserve his goods keg he • t le Payment of his creditor. On those rUsted that their Lordships would express o,tor ti aY for a revision of this measure, and in t ar O Q,ki r ,etrect to the terms of the petition. s4o. )P r f , ' 8 ELL was not in di sposed to give every th at 3' to the creditor, but it was not to be credit should not be given. The world 10 1 : e re sl'n without it ; but he did not believe that 4 te th Cpore t h e e power of imprisoring his debtor e e vil of which the Noble Lord had corn zs•r ILA I ttrq uis tiLARY FORCE IN IRELAND. („clf NORMANBY said that, when he hal lt,th e to i r a te 4 his motion, he had been exceedingly it . n, !ly . le 4t que st t , on without the smallest delay ; but shet, O , h `„the Noble Duke postpone( the Duke ( . .f th e ,tad consented to it till Fri tli,4lteti:lltetieslnce of his Noble Friend the Secretary Nlo e , l ent re h e was led to believe that it would be ,04 1 ,, 4 Malt' Government to reply to Oth — at day. This was unfortunate, but kitjlatittrliettterly for resource, for another Noble Lord, the ? 13 rebind (the Earl of St. Germains), 4 1 ,7 hie ( it ss i°,n of the facts with his Noble tl4"11 " 4 could been m communication with the ex ,ert is m of all, therefore, give a satisfactory ic s.'eeettetieN i to b e ; „the circumstances upon • which thee) fled •Ilis Noble Friend (Earl la t khr i e ens etii erPed to postpone his departure so as to tli r :fu r t bvtterTee of her Majesty's Ministers, but he t he ,liep 4 Po s r pon ? the ni,tion on, and would, Vl'h ) tl)l etl t , het th e e i f t . tell Friday, but no longer. He I, i t's e At:' lol l we r i t " v ernMent would be able to give t k D uk e `on , t .„.„, out a n , , • • • hirtner cielay. j/Z- Seerej-e'LLINGTON said that his Noble kee, ary w , s tof°rthe Colonies had been unable, e e xamine the documents, with " ' att ire b ase 4, ) to be acquainted, in order to re l., h _ o h : It, Wb t „, d es . _, inquiries. He wished to do l o af °f use i tt ri tte s_ N eo ir b e i ct e to give his opinion on the Marquis intended to submit to thrte..,,eoutielte qUenc e of his inability, the Presi uhttlileh that; (Lord Wharneliffe) had consented 1 ° attentil.,!urns, but he was also indisposed, lue } louse, The Noble Lord, too, to whom the Noble Marquis also referred (the Earl of St. Germain s ) was also unable to attend the House, for he was absent from London. Now, he (the Duke of Wellington) was anxious, if the discussion- came on . at all, that the matter should be riscussed by those who were able to throw light upon it, a'.d, therefore, he hoped that the Nubte Marquis would consent to postpone his motion to sonic f uture time. The Marquis of NORMA NBY said that he was aware that his Noble Fried was responsible for the whole of these returns ; but still he thought his presence was not absolutely necessary, for he believed that the Noble Duke himself, or any other Noble Lord, would be quite able to master the whole of these papers in twenty-four hours. Taking the whole of the circumstances into ac count, and the great importance of them, and the excite ment which prevailed r.sspecting them, he could not con sent to any further delay than Friday. He had himself been called by the Duke of Portland, from the country, at twenty-four hours' notice. Should the Noble Duke, or any other of her Majesty's Ministers who were pre sent on that day,-he unable to give an answer, he would, of course, postpone it uutil some future period, but, at present, he felt it his duty to fix the day for bringing on his motion on Friday. He gave notice, also, that on that day he should move for a return of all the outrages which had been committed in Ireland during the same period. REFUSAL TO TAKE OATHS. Lord DENNIAN presented a petition from a person who was a prisoner under the bankruptcy laws. In consequence of inability to take an oath, arising from conscientious motives, there had been an incompetency to examine him before the commissioners of bankruptcy. The consequence was that he had now been imprisoned not .less than three years. He (Lord Denman) was bound to state that all his explanations were satisfac tory. From the same inability to take an oath he had been unable to procure even the prison allowance, and it was only with the utmost difficulty, and by very great exertion, that he had been able to sustain himself. He (Lord Denman) felt these to be circumstances which called for their Lordships' notice, and he should, there fore. move that the petition do he on the table. The Noble Lord opposite (Lord Ashburton) had re ferred to several circumstances, which led him to sup pose that the operation of the Act for Abolishing Im prisonment for Debt was unsatisfsctory. He (Lord Denman) would take that opportunity of saying that that Act as yet could hardly be said to have come into ope ration. Certainly the effects of it were not as yet fully evident. He believed, then, when we had full expe rience of its influence, the Act would be found beneficial to all parties. The ill effects that were at present expe rienced ought decidedly not to be charged to that mea sure. It was not, as the Noble Lord (Lord Ashburton) supposed, the concoction of lawyers and men unac quainted with commercial affairs. He had sat on the Committee for considering the details of that measure ; and though there were not many commercial men on the Committee, yet they had taken the opinion of those men who were known to be high as commercial men, and whose experience was unquestionable. On the motion being put, that the petition do lie on the table, The LORD CHANCELLOR said that he would take an opportunity of turning his attention to the sugges tions which the Noble Lord (Lord Ashburton) had made to the House. discussion with one of these companies, and he thought that there was as much reason fir altering the course of a canal as the course of a navigable river. After a few words•from Mr. FOX MALIK, who wished the expression of the clause to be rendered more preei,, the clause was passed, as were also the 18th and 19th clauses. On the 20th clause being read, Mr. SPOONER said he did not think the clause afforded sufficient protection to gas companies and water companies, or the consumers ef gas and water. All the houses in a town, say Birmingham, were lit with gas; and if a railway com pany, in their operations, should interrupt the supplying of gas or water for a day, see what a serious inconvenience it would be to a whole town. The clause gave 20/. a day com pensation for any unnecessary interruption; but he would ask what compensation would 20/. be for the stoppage of gas or water for a day to a manufacturer or tradesmar, ? Mr. HAWES concurred with the Hon. Member for Bir mingham, for he presumed that he only wanted to guard against a railway company doing anything of the sort wan tonly or unnecessarily. It would be much more just to provide some remedy of the sort than to put parties to the expense and trouble of taking an action. Mr. SPOONER would propose that, instead of 201. a day, the penalty be made 50/. ; either that, or substitute the word " hour " for " day ;" for, he would again repeat. that 201. would be no compensation to a manufacturer for the loss of his supply of gas or water for one day. And as to the remedy by action, why, in some cases, the expense of taking the action would amount to more than the sum to be recovered. He would, therefore; move that the penalty be 20/. an hour, if any Hon. Member would second it. Mr. FOX MAULE—This was certainly a very important point; but he perceived by the . preceding clause that a power was given to gas and water companies to' take actions against railway, companies, in the event of the latter causing damage to the works of the former. Now, he would wish to know if tradesmen and manufacturers hid any facile mode of getting compensation for the deprivation of gas or water for a day? Lord G. SOMERSET said there was a clause in the Bill giving compensation / to such for any damage unfairly occa sioned. But it should be remembered that neither gas com panies, nor water companies, nor extensive manufacturers, were generaily so impoverished as hot to be able to sustain an action in a court of law in such cases. Mr. SPOONER—The Noble Lord had stated that the clause gave a remedy against all damages " unfairly" done. But he would ask how that could be said to be " unfairly" done which was done under the sanction of an Act of Parlia ment and the direction of an engineer? He knew an in stance where a gentleman's park pailings had been broken down by a rail Way company:, and when he sought compensa tion for the injury, the answer he received , was, that nothing had been done that was not necessary and unavoidable. And as to the gas-and water companies not being impoverished, why that was very true; but what remedy were individuals of small means to have in case of such injuries? Mr. FOX MAULE perceived that the Noble Lord op posite had not made out his own case as strong as he might have done; fir he (Mr. Fox Maule) found that the clause alluded to by the Noble Lord, as giving a remedy by action, gave that remedy without any such expression as " unfairly." —(A laugh.) Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND conceived that 201. a day was a very severe penalty; but he thought if it were made 20/. an hour, very vexatious use might he made of it.• And as to a remedy by an action at law being too expensive, he could not see how any remedy was to be had by any other means. Lord G. SOMERSET said there were subsequent clauses in the Bill by which a summary mode of recovery was provided for all injuries sustained un d er th e va l ue o f 2 0 / . After some further discussion, the Committee divided, when there appeared— For the amendment ... 7 Against it Majority against it .... —23 Sir W. JOLLIFFE believed it was the intention of the Noble Lord to introduce some amendment into this clause, and it would, therefore, be very advisable for the Committee to be informed at this stage what the amendment would be. —(Hear, hear.) As the clause s t oo d, i t was hi gh l y objectionable.e did not wonder at landed proprietors complainingof the encroachments made upon their property by railway companies, for it was impossible to 'say to what extent a company might not carry the powers contained in this clause. As to a landed proprietor obtaining anything like compensation for the injury One to his property, it was quite out of the question. No idea could ever be formed of the amount or description of damage likely to be done as this part of the question rested almost entir, ly with the engineer of the company, who seldom or never gave a proper notice of the proposed encroachments. The extent to which the power conferred by these clauses was acted upon was most incredible. A piece of land might be covered with chalk, and there it remained not only for a short period of time, but to the permanent injury of the lands and the general disfigurement of a fertile and verdant estate. Such a system as this, all must, admit, was most in jurious to the rights of individuals; and he, therefore, hoped some amendment would be made in the clause to put a stop to it. Colonel SIBTHORP fully concurred in • what had fallen from the Hon. Member who had just sat.down. The inju ries done by the engineers of railway companies to the property of private individuals was most unjust, and called loudly for a remedy.—(Cries of " Hear, bear.) Not content with making encroachments in the day time, these Mohawks of engineers--(Laughter)—took advantage of the darkness to commit these trespasses, which their mo (testy would not suffer them to do at another period.— (Laughter.) Why, it was only a short time back that an Hon. Friend rose one morning and found a red flag stuck up before his door—(Laughter)—and were such depredations as this to be tolerated? Whenever a gentleman •met a stran ger upon his lands, be would certainly turn out to be the engineer of some railway company or other. They had nothing to do but to ask, " Who are you?" then the party replied, " I am the engineer of such and such a railway, and am acting under the law."—(Laughter.) But if he were the owner of the land, he would take care that the fellow should be promptly conveyed beforera neigh bouring magistrate.—(Laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman had very properly asked, " Where,, or how, are you to get com pensation ?" "Go to law," was the reply. Go to law, in , deed ! How was a poor farmer to contend against an irre sponsible body? 'Well, then, if they conferred such enor mous powers upon a railway company, why should they not compel them to afford full and ample compensation for the injury they did to the rights of private property? Mr. DKRBY suggested that, if the Noble Lord intended is make any alterations in the clause, he ought to state them to the Committee. Lord G. SOMERSET said that he should propose that the first blank in the clause, limiting the distance at which the company • could interfere with private roads, should be filled up 'with 500 yards instead of 1,000, and the second blank with 200 yards instead of 250. This was an important alteration ; as to the remuneration for damage done, he should propose some alterations on that head in the 29th clause. With regard to the present clause, he could not see that any alteration could be made beyond that which he had just mentioned. Mr. FOX MAULE said the clause still gave the company the power of coming on private roads or approaches, and un less some alteration was made, this power would be strongly objected to. Mr. DARBY had an insuperable objection to this part of the Bill. Lord GRAN VILLE SOMERSET said the alteration he had proposed would greatly restrict the power of the otherclauses of the Act. A month's notice must be given to proprietors, and the company were bound to give good security for com pensation for any damage or injury they might do. This was a very important advantage. The clause would also give every means of obtaining compensation for those lands which were temporarily occupied. Mr. DARBY said railroads had so increased, that these powers bad now become much more injurious in their operation. Mr. STANSFIELD thought that the compensation might be made a special part of each rails a; Bill. Lord G. SOMERSET was ready to adopt any practical suggestion, but with regard to making the compensation a special part of every Bill, he must observe that these clauses were only to act in cases where no special agreement had been made. There was nothing in the Bill to prevent those special agreements being made. Mr. AGLIONBY said it seemed as if the clause was meant to give a bonus and advantage to laxity of engineering. It said if the line was properly laid down, it was Well, but if it was carelessly laid down, it was well also, and the railway company might have the benefit of its own carelessness. He snould wish the engineers to be compelled to be as strict as possible in the first instance, that the public might know how far they were injured by any railway. The altera tion which was proposed to be made in the 29th clause did not meet the case of interference with private roads. The power was taken by this clause to take 500 yards for the purpose of private roads. In the first Bill they had a power of deviation of 100 yards; then there was a further power of deviation, and now they came for 300 yards more. Now this was sufficiently onerous in itself; but after having taken the use of these private roads, there was not a single word said - about the repair of these roads when the company had done with them. Not the slightest provision was made in the 29th clause for these repairs, although that clause did give the right of compensation. [Mr. Fox Maule here handed the Bill to the Hon. Member.] He saw by the suggestion of the Right lion. Gentleman, that the provision fur repair ing private roads , was made in the 43d clause, but still he thought the right of private roads to such an extent was very objectionable, though of course his notice of a want of provision for repairs fell to the ground. Lord G. SOMERSET said that his attention had not been drawn to the former but to the latter part of the clause. By the amendment which he intended to propose to the 29th clause, he had provided all the compensation for private rights which money could give. Sir WILLIAM JOLLIFFE said that this clause was so utterly objectionable, that he did not think either the Howe or the country would suffer it to be introduced into any Bill. He did not wish to place a railway company in a worse po sition than any other company, but by having !he power of making a deviation of 250 yards, they would be acquiring aright which might prove of the utmost detriment to an estate. This deviation might bring the centre of a tunnel close to a mansion, or it might fall upon a lot of brick earth. He knew of an instance in which a plotof 23acreswastaken in thevery centre ofa property. In the middle of th i s was a clay pit, with its brick-kilns and other buildings, that covered the whole of this area of twenty-three acres. And not only was there the nuisance of making the bricks, of which not less than 13,000,000 were made during the occupation of the land, but there were not less than 300 labourers encamped upon it for the space of three years; and this nuisance might have existed for seven years, for that was the time allowed for the construction of the railway. For half a mile on all sides the trees and shrubs on the estate were injured and checked in their growth. This he conceived to be an immense nui sance. But there was a further evil, for he understood that while these labourers were domiciled on this property, the small-pox broke out among them, and created a serious danger, rot only to the family of the proprietor of the land, but also to all the other residents in the neighbourhood. Mr. FOX DIAULE said that the objection might be taken on a subsequent clause, when the obstacle might be obviated by inserting the words, " that the terms of this clause shall not apply to private walks and avenues." On the words being put, Mr. HAYTER said that he did not object to the words of the Right Honourable Gentleman, but before the words were inserted he thought that it was ad visable to ascertain what was the provision of the clause. The thing to be considered was, whether it was better to use a private road or no road at all ? Which would occasion the most damage ? By the 43d clause full compensation was given to those who suffered, •and this was one of the two parts into which the clause naturally divided 'itself. The second part refers to the deviation. Now it was necessary to take this deviation, for the company required it for four purposes—for side cuttings, for depositing their spoil earth, for private roads for the railway, and for agricultural roads. The first object for which they re quired the deviation was for side cuttings. Now, by the evidence of the, most eminent engineers last session, it was proved that it was utterly impossible for human wis dom to foresee the precise line which a railway ought to take, for it was not until they arrived at a particular place that they could ascertain what cuttings were necessary. He thought that there could be no objection to the provi sions for. enabling the makers of railways to deposit the spoil somewhere, and to draw materials from the imme diate neighbourhood of the line, especially as care was taken to secure compensation for the injury they might do Mr. WODEHOUSE said that the whole conversation on the clause convinced him that the extraordinary powers pro posed in it should not be given. lie hoped the Noble Lord 'would postpone it, for the purpose of receiving such sugges- . tions as might lead to an abatement. &the nuisances. Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET would be happy to postpone the clause, if he received any practical suggestion for its improvement. He had given the enactments all pos sible consideration, and lie did not see how the postponement would lead to any useful alteration. Mr. RICE said there were practical inconveniences attend ing the clause which they ought to diminish as much as was consistent with carrying on these great works.—(Hear.) Ile also thought that roads ought to be protected as well as land. Mr. T. EGERTON had sat on railway Committees for several years, and he was convinced that the clause would be unnecessary, if the engineers were required to state before the Committee precisely what land they would require for the objects of this clause—cuttings. the deposit of soil, the raising of materials, and the formation of temporary roads. But the statements of those gentlemen before the Committees were always of the most vague and unsatisfactory nature, so that no person along the whole line could ever tell to what extent his land might be damaged.—(Hear.)—He would move the omission of the clause. Mr. STANSFIELD said that it was too much to extend these powers to a distance of 2,000 yards. He thought it ought to be limited to the distance in the deviation clause. Mr. DARBY complained of the power given to engineers to go in upon land, and the consequence was, that the engi• neer invariably complained that he had " too little land."— (Laughter.) He (Mr. Darby) contended that the engineer ought to know how much land he would require to deviate upon, and, if he could not tell that, then he (Mr. Darby) contended that he did not know his business. Sir G. STRICKLAND agreed that there was much to be complained of on this point, but there was great difficulty to be met with in trying to remedy th e ev il. He thought it would b e well r to have all remedies for such greivances put into one consolidated Bill, in order that, when they did occur, parties might not be put to the trouble of trying to find out in what particular Bill the remedy lay. He had heard of an instance where an excavation had been made by a railway company, and they left a pond of water that they never filled up, so that the owners, instead of having the vacancy filled up, got a swamp in lieu of land.— (Laughter.) However, he feared that temporary occupation of the land in this way would always be necessary. Sir W. JOLLIFFE said that railway companies had gone to such a length in making those deposits on land as to very often sink a hoine in a hole that before that had a very good site. He had got compensath.n certainly for theinjury done to his land, but not as much as he conceived he was en titled to, and he believed that he would not have get even that had he not procured an injunction from the *cart of Chancery. Mr. HAWES Could not see how the Wellcould be 'swiped without such a clause, for if it were strutted: out altogether the landowner would be in a much worse position than before. Mr. FORBES opposed the clause. Under the present system of estimating the value of land by the injury done to it, rte proprietor very often only got sixpence where he ought to have a shilling. Mr. T. EGERTON thought the clause ought to be sta uck . out altogether, and leave,to the Committee to take evidence as to the quantity of land which might be required, and then to introduce a clause into the private Bill confirming the powers of the company to the land mentioned in the evidence.—(Hear, hear.) As the clause stood, they rave a company a sort of roving commission, and in discriminate and almost unlimited powers to encroach upon any land their engineer thought proper to name. At all events, if they did not strike out the clause, it ought in some re spects, to be materially modified. Mr. DARBY said the Hon. Member for Lambeth had en tirely avoided the point he had raised. What he objected to was this, they gave indiscriminate powers to the engineer, who invariably omitted to mention the quantity of land he should require, and after the Bill was passed, he turned round and said he wanted this and that land, which had never been thought of before, either by the Committee or the owner. Now, what he wanted them to do was, to let the Engineer decide in the Committee the quantity of land he would require, and afterwards confine him to lhis.quan thy, without giving the unlimited powers contained in the clause they were then discussing. After a few words from Mr. CAVENDISH in allusion to the railway to Lincoln, and the opposition of the Hon. and Gallant Member for that city (Colonel Sibthorp) to every Railway Bill, Colonel SIBTHORP said he heartily desired the future welfare of that city; but with respect to railroad questions he should still pursue the course he had done. He be lieved that the first step towards the ruin of that city would be the making of a railroad ; it was with that impression —he might say conviction—that he had taken the course he had done. They were told of compensation, and one Hon. Member had stated a case of gent personal injury, which he said he had overlooked on account of the public good. .This did him great credit; but. he understood that, in one place, three hundred persons bad been attacked by a formidable disease, the small pox, in consequence of the bad air produced by throwing up the embankments of the railroad. They talked of compensation, but could they restore any lives that had been lost? The railroad would injure the tradesmen and inn keepers of the City, and he gloried in having an opportunity of pursuing the same course now that he had done on former occasions. He had seen so much of Committees of that House, and so much of the " humbugging" manoeuvres of engineers, that he was almost afraid to state his real opinion of them. He should take the sense of the House on the subject, and he therefore moved that this clause be expunged. Mr. GLADSTONE hoped the Hon. and Gallant Member would not persist in moving the expulsion of the clause. Colonel SIBTHORP—I will.— ( Laughter.) Mr. GLADSTONE—What would be the result of ex punging it ? In his opinion it would be practically affirm ing every word in it, for all the powers it gave were already obtifined by all the private Acts, and the private Bill Com mittee would give companies those powers again—(" More shame for them," from Colonel Sibthorpe—laughter)—whe ther it would be more shame for them or nor, he knew that this would be the infallible result. Pe should, therefore, support every amendment and restriction of the clause as so much gained. He was for making the best arrangement possible, and he thought there was some reason in the amend ment of the Honourable Member for Sussex, to the effect that these powers should only be given in cases where they might be necessary to make use of them. In the case of brick-work also ; it was impossible for any en gineer to foresee how many bricks would be required, and therefore, in his opinion, the power of deviation ought to be given. If this clause were to be expunged the effect would be that the small proprietor would be disregarded, and the wealthy classes alone would be cared fix. Lord G. SOMERSET said that he would corsider the pro position of the Hon. Member for -Sussex, and he would move that the Chairman report progress, and ask leave to sit again on Thursday. In the meantime, he would take au op• portunity of communicating with his Hon. Friend, and try if they could not frame a clause which should obviate the diffictilty which aas felt on all sides of the House to the clause as it now stood. The amendment was then withdrawn. Mr. AGLIONBY said that he hoped if the Nobte Lord would not commit himself by a pledge, that he would at least resolve to avoid the vagueness of deviation to which he now so strongly. objected, for he thought that there ought to be some restriction on the laxity of practice of railway en . gin eers. Lord G. SOMERSET said he was quite anxious to meet the wishes of the House, and consider the necessities of rail way companies, as well as to endeavour to preserve the rights of landed proprietors. RAILWAY CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION(SCOTLAND) BILL. Mr. FOX BIAULE asked the Noble Lord when he would bring on the Scotch Railway Bill? Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET said that he had ex pected his Hon. and Learned Friend the Lord-Advocate would have been in the House this morning, and he could not take up the amendments without him. It was ultimately agreed that the Railway Clauses (Scot land) Bill, and the Land Clauses Consolidation BM should be considered on Thursday. The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again on Thursday at Twelve ('clock. The House then adjourned till Five o'clock. The SPEAKER resumed the Chair at Five o'cloek. The Sheffield and Huddersfield Junction Railway Bill was read a second time, and ordered t o b e comm itt e d. The Whitby and Pickering Railway Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. Mr. MANGLES and Mr. IL JOHNSTONE presented pe tition=, but, from the noise which prevailed in tha House at the time, the purport of them could not be ascertained. On the motion of Mr. T. EGERTON, the Wallasy Improvement Bill was read a second time. Sir W. JAMES presented a petition against the Hull Docks Bill. Mr. CRIPPS presented a similar petition. Mr. H. JOHNSTONE presented petitions, nume rously signed, from Edinburgh and Glasgow, in support of the Caledonian Railway. be desirable to know whether the House would at• once come to a decision, that any Member whatever, who:e. constituents , had. an . interest in railways which might happen to pass through any particular county or district, was, as a matter of course, to be excluded from serving on Committees. He had read over the resolution, and it did not appear on the face of it that such a Membe- would be necessarily excluded from serving on th c Committee. But if it was the intention of the House that all railway Bills Were to be referred to a Committee to be nominated particularly by another Committee of classification, as it was called, he apprehended it was the object of the Com mittee to exclude all those Members who had a local, though not a private, interest in railways from serving on them. He believed that was the intention of the re solution, and he hoped the House would pause before it gave its sanction to any such proceeding', for though he was free to confess, from his experience of Committees on private Bills, that a great improvement had taken place within the laA few years, namely by the House be ing able to select a sufficient number of selected Members whose decision the House invariably affirmed, yet he thought it was necessary that some person acquainted with., the locality which the Bill affected should be upon the Committee. But he thought it se ry material that this principle should not be carried out teo far; for instance, in many cases, after the counsel and witnesses had withdrawn, when the Committee came to deliberate on a particular Bill, he had seen the greatest disadvantage arise from the fact of none of the selected Members having any knowledge of the locality. Now, in proof of that, he would put one case—he would suppose that a r a il wa y was intended to pass through Lincoln or York, and he would suppose that the selected Members were three Scotch and two Irish Members, who had no interest in the subject, and knew nothing about it. and supposing that an opposition arose in the course of the inquiry, he should like to know in what situation the Committee would be placed, in consequence of having no Member present who knew anything of the locality. How, he would ask, could they come to an impartial judgment without having some person present e e ho knew something of the :Tot. He did not object to the number of selected Members, nor did he object to certain of them not being allowed to vote, hut he was certain, if it was the intention of his Noble Friend to exclude all Members whose con stituents had any interest in the measure, that the greatest inconvenience would result. He hoped the House would pause before it sanctioned such a proceeding. Mr. GISBORNE agreed with the statements and rea soning of the Honourable Member opposite, but unfor tunately he would not be able to give him his vote, as he agreed with the proposition of the Noble Lord. He agreed with the Noble Lord that, in consenting to these arrangements, he w ould give up all the advantages of local knowledge. The evidence which would be brought before the Committee, under the present ar rangement, would not furnish the best information on local subjects; for those who could give the best and truest iuformation would be excluded. No doubt but those witnesses who would be produced I y the contendin , . , parties would be well informed ; but they would be prejudiced in favour of one or other of the contending parties. It was a well established fact, and known by experience, that whenever professional men were en gaged, be they lawyers or doctors, surveyors, engineers, or chemists, the most contradictory evidence was given by the most respectable' witnesses.—(Laughter.) When upon these committees, his mind was at times perfectly bewildered by those masses of irreconcilable and oppo site statements ; and might have continued so, if some Hon. Member who possessed some local information had not said a few wards that made every thing straight and plain. He would, however, give a reluctant support to the resolutions of the Noble Lord. Captain EGERTON said that he entirely agreed with the Hon. Member as to the great disadvantages which Committees would labour under in not possess ing this local information. He trusted the house would, to a certain extent, reconsider these resolutions. Mr. EWART said it was perfectly competent for a Member of that House, having a local interest in matters referred to a Select Committee, to appear before the Committee to give evidence as a witness.—(Hear.) Mr. SHAW said this course had been pursued with very great advantage in the Committee of last year. Mr. BANKES did not understand that it was any part of the proposed resolutions not to summon Members of Parliament as witnesses on certain lines; and if doing so did not meet the question now before the House, if the resolutions were to be passed in that undefined form, the result would be endless contention and misunder standing; and for this reason, that besides the interests of the different classes mentioned as intended to be re presented, there was yet another class whose interests were much more important than any of the others, he meant the interests of the public.—(hear, hear.) And if the public interests were not to be represented by Members of Parliament, he would like to know who could give local information to the Committees on the subject ?—(Hear, hear.) He made those observations in order that the House should be careful not to give its sanction to any Bills which were adverse to the public interests. Mr. GREENE said it would be quite impossible for the House to dispose of those Bills, if they were to be called upon to attend and listen to every local interest sought to be represented. If the principle of the repre sentation of local interests was to be admitted, the House ought not to have reduced the number of local Members, which they had dune some years ago. He thought it would be inflicting an injustice if they were to adopt such a principle. They ought to admit no local Mem bers. They sat either judicially or representatively. If they sat judicially, the smaller the number of Mem bers, the better. They would be enabled to procure all the information they might require much better from the examination of witnesses than they could from the attendance of local Members. If the Committees sat. representatively, the House had committed a gross in justice in reducing the number of the Members. He could not see the smallest utility in having the attend ance of Members representing local interests. Mr. C. WOOD was sorry to hear from the Noble Lord and the Hon. Member who had just sat down that they considered that it would be impracticable to devise a plan for securing the attendance on these Committees of Members possessing local knowledge. He had here tofore seen great benefit derived from the attendance on railway Bill Committees of Members possessing local knowledge. No doubt inconvenience midst arise in some cases. In the case of a long li ne , f or instance, such as that from London to York, he admitted that it might be difficult to secure the attendance of Members possessed of local knowledge, and, at the same time, to provide for the fair representation of all the local interests, but that case was an exception. The Board of Trade had reported on three groups of railways—one in Kent— another in Yorkshire—and another in Northumberland. Now, as to these three groups, no difficulty could al ise. He did not see why they should not have the ad vantage of the attendance of Members possessed of local knowledge upon those Committees, and there could be no difficulty in selecting them, so as to secure a fair re presentation of local interests. He did not see why the Committee of Selection should not select six Members possessed of local knowledge from the Speaker's list, and five impartial Members; they would thus obtain the advantages of both plans. He did not think that eleven Members were too great to attend on a Railway Com mitte. They did not sit judicially on Railway Commit tees. No one bad been a greater advocate than himself for the reduction of the numbers of a Committee which sat judicially. He had always advocated the reduction of the number of Members on Election Committees, as increasing the responsibility of the Members, for he was convinced that when Committees eat judicially, the smaller the number of Members the better the tribunal. The investigation with which the Committee would be entrusted was of the most extensive nature. For him self, he should feel great difficulty in deciding on the merits of the whole of the South Devon, or of the Ken lines, bring totaliv without the statistical or local know ledge that would fie required. Mr. M. MILNES said it was of the highest import ance that a due deference should be felt by the public for the decisions of the Committees of that House. The choice laid between the Committee proposed by the Go vernment or one composed of the local Mem!): rs. The great object of the Government would be to select five Gentlemen, who should be entirely ignorant of all parts of the subject.—(Laughter.) On the other hand, there might be five Gentlemen who were the best informed on the question, but then they would be most liable to the influence of local prejudices. On striking a fair balance of these difficulties, he thought, to secure an im partial decision, their best course was to p ass th e reso lution proposed by the Government. Sir JOHN EASTHOPE said, that formerly he had been in u railway Committee that sat sixty days ; and in consequence of the system which existed, they were ob liged, under the pressure of interests which they could not resent, often to vote against their own conscience —(Laughter.) He was more ashamed of the fact than the avowal ; but no consideration—nothing. in fact, but compulsion, would induce him to place himself in the same situation again. In that case, local interest was found to be destructive of public right. Mr. AGLIONBY thought that the opinion of the Hon. Member who had just spoken was entitled to great weight. He had always felt that nothing w o uld ever satisfy the public but constituting a judicial tri bunal guided by no interested or pecuniary motives. He congratulated the House 'in having this resolution submitted for their sanction ; and if they were obliged to divide, he hoped there would be an overwhelming Majority in its favour. The scheme proposed by the resolution was the only method practicable and con sittent with justice. Mr. PAKINGTON, in reference to what had fallen from the Hon. Member for Chester, said, that he had served on a Committee last year, and he never saw the interests of the landowners better attended to. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the gallery was cleared for a division, but none took place, the amendment having been negatived without a division. Mr. ENTWISLE said he disregarded those phrases which had been launched out so abundantly against railway shareholders and speculators, who were en gaged in hor.est commercial enterprise. The Hon Member was proceeding to address the House upon a former resolution, when The SPEAKER interfered, and said, such a course was irregular._ The How. MEMBER then went on to say, that the House should clearly explain its opinion as to the propriety of Members serving on Committees who were interested in local speculations. The House should clearly state whether Members who were in any degree interested in railways should be Members of a Select Conimittee or not ; and if its opinion were in the affirmative, it was only fair that they should be protected from reproach. In his opinion, the bare fact of a Member having an in terest in a line of railway should not disentitle him from sitting on a Committee. Mr. BEIiNAL did not think the wording of the reso lution sufficiently clear and explicit, because it wag im possible for any one to say, according to the wording of the resolution, when a Member was entitled to sit on these Committees or when he was not. Lord G RA NVILLE SOMERSET defended the word ing of the resolution. Mr. HUME thought no individual should sit on a Committee where his private or personal interest was concerned. Members on private Committees should be as free from all bias or prejudice, and local interests as men in the jury box.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the present one of the most salutary regulations that had been introduced into the House. The principle had worked well, and ought to be pursued. He was sur prised that any Member should object to so useful a re solution. He would give it his hearty support. Mr. HAWES said that it was very important that there should be entire unanimity on this question. He thought the clear and indisputable meaning of the resolution was, not that Members should pledge themselves that no individual number of their constituencies had a personal interest, but that the constituency, as a body, had no local inte rest.—(Hear, hear.) Those who had opposed the rm. lution had not proposed any other course. If the evi dence of Members was desirable it could be given with much more weight and solemnity as witnesses, and the decisions of the Committees would thus have greater weight on the public mind. Mr. S. WORTLEY said it was impossible for the re solution to be practically and usefully carried out, unless the construction put upon it by the llon. Member fer Lambeth was agreed upon. He entirely concurred with the Hon. Member in the observations that had fallen from him. Mr. ROEBUCK approved of the general plan pro posed in the resolution, and concurred in the view taken of it by the `lon. Memb,r fur Lambeth. It would be better, he thought, to leave it to the Select Committee to say whether the constituency of such and such a Meta er had a local interest or not. Lord G. SOMERSET said the Committee had already had sufficient responsibility thrown upon them. Lord H. VANE thought the 10th resolution would get rid of the difficulty. Mr. ;HAW suggested that the word "believed" should be introduced into the declaration. It was not always in the power of an Hon. Member to say distinctly whether his constituency had, or had not, any local in• tirest in a particular undertaking. For instance, an in dividual constituent might have an interest, and yet his representative would not be aware of it. But this diffi culty would be done away with, if he had only to declare that he believed his constituency had no local interest. After a few words from Mr. GISBORNE and Mr. COLLETT. Sir R. PEEL said a distinction was made in the reso lution between the local interest of a constituency and the personal interest of an individual Member or a con stitueet. The resolution was then agreed to, as wcre also 5 and 6. On resolution 7 being put, Mr. GISBORNE wished to ask whether he was right in supposing that no railway Bills would be committed before Easter. At the some time he should be glad to know if the whole of the reports of the Board of Trade would be made before Easter. He would not detain the House with any observations on the subject of these re ports, because he believed there would be another oppor• tunity afforded the House for considering them. Lord G. SOMERSET replied that the whole of the reports would be made before Easter, but he did not think any of the railway Bills would be committed be fore Easter; at all events, none of them of any import ance. He was pledged to the Hon. Member for Lam beth to give the House an opportunity of stating their opinion with regard to the railway department of the Board of Trade. Mr. HAWES thought the railway department of the Board of Trade, as it now stood, was very unsatis factory. He would take that opportunity of suggesting whether a Board possessing such extensive powers ought not to be an open tribunal. It might, in his opinion, be regulated, under certain rules and regulations, in the same way as a court of law, whose judgments and de cisions were invariably delivered in the presence of all parties interested. At present, however, the Board gave their decisions to the public without its being known whether the objections urged on both sides had been fairly considered or not, and this was evidently not a satisfactory mode of dealing with matters of such vital importance to the public interest. Besides, it would put an end to the unpleasant surmises indulged in respecting the partiality of any particular Member for this or that railway. He was not prepared to say to what extent this publicity should be carried, but cer tainly some measure ought to be adopted to attach more responsibility to the Beard. Sir R. PEEL could hardly think the Hon. Member contemplated any alteration in the constitution or bearing upon the peculiar functions of the Board so far as the present year was concerned.—(Hear, hear.) Before they could make this alteration not only would the opinion of the Board itself be known with respect to particular lines, but the reports themselves would be being discussed in a Committee appointed to inquire into the merits of competing line,; and, therefore, to make any alterations in that Board, which could have any effect upon the regulations of the present year, would be exceedingly unwise. The Hon. Gentleman he hoped, then, would agree with him, that any question relating to the constitution of the Board had better be deferred. His firm belief was, whether the tribunal were secret or not, the degree of weight or authority of the decision would entirely depend upon the reasons which the Board should give in support of their conclusion. His lion. Friend, who sat in the other House, had de voted a deal of his time to the Presidency of the Board, in deed he did not think any public man ever entered upon the discharge of his duties with greater determination to go fully into the subject to be submitted to him, nor did he think the functions committed to him could have been discharged with more attention or greater ability. —(Hear, hear.) He believed the yeti: us members of the Board were eminently qualified to assist in coming to a sound conclusion as to the general merits of two competing Pnes.—(liear, hear.) He knew nothing what ever of the real proceedings of the Board, except what he read in their published reports. He had read the report issued on Monday upon the merits of a particular line, which certainly did appear to him to afford most important information. Alteration and improvement were there suggested, which they never could have ob tained through the medium of any other tribunal than the Board of Trade. He strongly recommended Hon. Gentlemen to read the report of the Board of Trade upon the question of gradients, and the manner of over coming the disadvantages which had hitherto been thought to be insuperable, on account of the sudden rise of railroads. It was then stated that on the Birming ham and Gloucester line there was going to be established a locomotive engine, peculiarly adapted to raise heavy weights!upon railroads as a substitution for the stationary engine.—(]:ear.) It was cl ear ly a most import an t re p ort as bearing upon future railway legislation, and he very much questioned whether a Committee reporting upon a railroad could have supplied half the information. Be. fore Easter they would have got all these reports before them, and to make any alteration in the present Board before that time would be injudicious. Judging from the nature of the report, their arguments and their reason ing he certainly must say strongly influenced him in favour of the tribunal.—(Hear. hear.) At all events he (lid not think it would be possible to make any altera tion for the better in the constitution of that Beard. The Hon. J. S. WORTLEY did not think any mate rial alteration could be made in the constitution of the railway department of the Board of Trade.—(Hear, hear.) Before, however, he entered upon the subject, perhaps the Hon. Member for Lambeth would per mit him to suggest that the question which the Ho nourable Member had brought forward should be deferred till a later period of the session, and then let the matter be brought regularly before the House._ (Hear, hear.) The reports of the Board of Trade were about to be sent before a Committee of merit, and until they knew the results of their practical investigations he did not think it advi'able to alter the constitution of the Board. Mr. HORSMAN said that his Hon. Friend had ad duced nothing serious against the character of that Board, or the soundness of the reports that had emanated from them, and he hoped that if his Hon. Friend revived the question of the constitution of that tribunal it would be during the hours of public business.—(Hear, hear.) What had been asserted of their mode of discussion was proved to be incorrect by the fact that it was necessary for the President or Vice-President to have three Hon. Members to assist him with their ad vice. What had first given rise to any credit being given to the suspicions expressed as to the motives by which the Board was actuated, was its having amongst its Members some Gentleman who had no public name or standing. The proceedings of last session bad shown that in those transactions much opposition might be expected to be raised against these reports, by disap pointed and prejudiced parties. At the same time, he could not help feeling that the absence of a public man somewhat justified these suspicions. Mr. CURTEIS said that he bad a letter from one of his constituents, who was exceedingly well versed in railway matters, complaining of the limited period allowed for inspecting the plans and sections of pro posed railway lines. The office for that purpose was only open, he believed, for two hours a day, thus en tailing an accumulation of business that was most un satisfactory and annoying. He also complained of the exorbitantly high charges made for leave to inspect them. For every reference made to those plans, the parties so referring were charged about six shillings while in other courts, such as in the Clerk of the Peace, jl an inspection of papers would cost no more than about one shilling. An HON . : MEMBER said the office for the purpose of permitting a reference to plans of railways was open from ten to four, thus giving a clear six hours of accom modation to parties seeking information on the subject, and therefore the complaint, in ono: particular at least, was overcharged. The SPEAKER then read a series of resolutions, which were individually agreed to, until he came to that making the attendance of Members on Committee meet ings compulsory; when Mr. BERNAL rose. He did not know whether it was proposed to compel the attendance of Members in a similar manner as with Election Committees. At present they could only compel the attendance of Members in that particular case. They could not, for i nstance, make them attend in the formation of public roads, or in other descriptions of private business. The passing of this resolution would be imposing a very great hard ship on many Hon. Members, and he would only wish them to consider the annoyance to Hon. Members who would require to go the circuits, or who were engaged in other avocations. They would, by-and-bye, be re ceiving excuses from Hon. Members, and they would be required to admit them, too, from those gentlemen who went the northern and western circuits. And then the lengthened inconvenience many of those Railway Com mittees might endure for an extraordinary time. He would venture to say, and Hon. Members might be surprised, if some of the contested , Irish railways should last for three months—(Laughtcr) Were those excuses to be'' RAILWAY BILLS. Earl DALHOUSIE presented reports on the Corn wall and Devon and other railways, which were ordered to lie on the table. ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS' REFORM. Lord CAMPBELL said he begged to ask the ques tion of which he had given notice, as to when her liajeity's Government proposed to bring in the Bill for a reformation of the ecclesiastical courts? A rumour had gone abroad that one of Ler Majesty's Ministers in another place had stated that it was not the intention of the Government to bring in any measure this session upon the subject of ecclesiastical courts' reform. He wished to ascertain what were the facts, for he thought the matter was well worthy of attention. • When the Ecclesiastical Commission had been appointed the judges had sat upon it, and they were all unanimous in the agreement of some measure being absolutely requisite. Another Commission had been appointed, on which he had sat. Their opinion was the same. There had been Committees of both Houses of Parliament, which una nimously agreed in the same conclusion. Over one of these Committees Sir James Graham had presided, and he believed that there was a full impression of the ne cessity of such a measure as that to which he had al luded. He had since made an inquiry of that Right Hsn. Gentleman. The Duke of WIILLINGTON—But you don't know what his answer is. Lord CAMPBELL---That was true ; but he was alarmed at what was rumoured to have taken place in another place. No mention had been made of eccle siastical reform since its introduction into the Queen's speech in 1843. and he therefore wished to ask when her Majesty's Ministers intended to introduce the Eccle siastical Reform Bill ? The LORD CHANCELLOR said that if the Noble Lord would have put a short question he would have given a short answer. It certainly was not his intention to bring in any Bill on this subject this session. Lord ELLENBOROUGH said that it was not the custom of that House to make speeches upon asking questions, unless the speeches were to be concluded by motions. The Earl of MINTO said that it certainly had not been the custom of that House formerly to adopt the practice assumed by his Noble Friend on the present occasion, and to which the Noble Lord opposite ob jected. But he begged to assure the Noble Lord that it had now become a habit in that House, though he must acknowledge that the habit did grow up during the Noble Lord's absence. It was extremely disorderly and inconvenient, and the sooner it was put an end to the better ; yet still, as it was the habit of the House, he thought his Noble Friend (Lord Campbell) was jus= tified in the mode of proceeding he had adopted. Lord CAMPBELL said that ever since he bad had the honour of a seat in that House, the usual mo-3e of proceeding had been to state the facts which *ere ne ces-ary to render any question or notice of motion intel ligible. Such was the custom in the other House of Parliament, and be begged to refresh the memory of his Noble Friend as to several occasions on which this prac tice had been observed in their Lordships' House. He was unwilling to subject their Lordships' House to the opprobrium of neglecting so important a business. The Duke of WELLINGTON begged to speak to order. The usual order of that House was to make no speeches upon a question, without concluding it with a motion. That when a motion was intended to be made it was the courtesy of that House to give notice of that motion. Having explained what was the order, and what was the courtesy of that House, he must protest against the Noble Lord entering so fully into a subject of this kind, and violating both. Lord CAMPBELL would consider the best mode of formally bringing forward the question on an early day. (Hear. from the Duke of Wellington.) The House then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 4. The SPEAKER took the chair at Twelve o'clock. COMPANIES CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION BILL. On the order of the day for the second reading of this Bill being read, Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET arose, and said be had taken an opportunity of considering the amendment proposed on a former day by the Hon. Member for Cockermouth, to the 120th clause, and he was now disposed to insert wo r d s t o meet the views f the Hon. Gentleman. The clause related to the capital stock ; and he proposed to insert words making it necessary for a company to obtain the consent of its mort gagees, and other persona who had liens upon the funds of the company, before any reduction should be made in the capital stock. The clause, with this amendment, was agreed to. Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET said he had another amendment to propose before the Bill was passed. He 'un posed to insert words in-clause 142, limiting the liabilities of a treasurer to debts of a company which did not exceed 20/. For debts under this sum the treasurer would be liable, whe ther he had money in hand or not; but for any debt above that sum he would not be responsible. Mr. ENTWISLE objected to the amendment. If the House suffered it to pass, it would be quite impossible for a company to get a man of property to become its treasurer, while, on the other hand, men in insolvent circumstances, and living almost entirely upon their salaries, would be placed in these situations, not only to the disadvantage of the parti cular company,.but also to that of the public. The liability' of a treasurer ought to be limited to debts under 51. After a few words from Mr. GREENE, the amendment was agreed to. The Bill was then read a third time and passed. RAILWAY CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION BILL. On the motion of Lord G. SOMERSET, the House went into Committee on the Railway Clauses Consolidation Bill. On the 15th clause being put, Lord G. SOMERSET said, that after a good deal' of con sideration he had come to the determination to leave out from the words " such lands" to the end of the clause, if the House would permit him. The clause, as it would then stand, would give everything to which either the company or the parties with whom they had to deal might feel necessary for the preservation of their respective rights. The power of deviation would be sufficient for the purposes of any company, and if there were any peculiar circumstances which would affect the proceeedings of any parties .in a particular case, they could easily be provided for by the'private Bill for the institution and government of the company. On these accounts, and especially as the clause would then be sufficient to answer the purposes of a consolidation Bill, he thought it better to yield to the opposition offered to the clause, and strike out the words "such land" to the end of the clause. Mr. HAYTER said that he regretted the Noble Lord had expressed a wish to leave out these words, for he believed that they were necessary, in order to define the limits of deviation. If not forming part of this clause, they must be introduced into some other clause; and if not introduced into this Bill, must be introduced into every other Bill that came before the House. Now, the expressed object of a consolida tion Bill was to obviate all this reiteration ; and, therefore, he cone' ivied that it would be better to give the power at once in this Bill, especially as the same power must be allowed to every railway company that shonkl hereafter be formed. Lord G. SOMERSET said that the observations.of the Hon. Member .for Wells (Mr. Hayter) with respect to the power were perfectly correct; but the feelings of opposition to this clause on both sides of the House were very strong, and although he believed that it was very desirable to introduce the power into this Bill, yet there were difficulties about it which, perhaps, might be obviated quite as well in the Com mitteeson Private Bills. In many rail Way Bills there would be very peculiar circumstances to be considered which would greatly affect the operation of this clause, and on this account he thought it would be better to strike them out. ➢lr. F. MAULE said that he did not see well how the dill: culty which had been started would be obviated, in either case ; but, perhaps, it would be as well to leave them out. The words xere then omitted, and the clause was passed as amended. On the 17th clause being put, Mr. ENTWISLE said that he thought the restriction upon the canal companies was too strong, and that, in fact, it did not Lord G. gOSIERSET said that a canal was a navigable river made by art, and if the Hon. Member had had as much experience of the opposition of canal companies, as he had, and he was aware that he had had a great,deal, he would not think the restriction too stringent. He remem bered having on one occasion been engaged in a ten days' RAILWAYS. • Lord G. SOMERSET rose to propose the resolutions recommended by the General Committee on Railways, of which he had given notice; but the low tone of voice in which the Noble Lord spoke, and thi buzz of voices in all parts of the House, rendered it quite impossible for more than a word or two in a few sentences to be heard in the gallery; but the following is the substance of his Lordship's observations as well as they could be underztood. He said there was an enormous number of railway Bills now before the Board of Trade, many of which had been reported favourably upon, and would therefore be brought before the House; they amounted, he should say, to about two hundred and forty-six, and those Bills, he need not tell the House, involved the outlay of vast sums of money, much of which had already been expended. The Board of Trade, the better to facilitate the progress of those Bills, had divided them into h th o e t y her ; and he should be families or classes, and proposed that th ey s h ould be taken up in that order, and disposedofin found dwtaoyeboymptehtee with or accordingbear rupon e as each hoped that this course would be found a convenient one by the House, for the Board of Trade had found it im possible to proceed with the vast number of Bills be fore it without adopting this mode of classification, unless injustice were done in some quarter. The second branch of the inquiry related to the compo sition of the Select Committees to whom the Bills were to be referred, and the main question to be considered was, whether or not Members representing local interests should be permitted to serve on such Committees. He was fully alive to the great advantage which was attendant in many respects on the admission of Members representing local interests on these Committees. The protection of the poorer proprietors through whose land it was intended a projected line should pass was better attended to by local Members than it could be by any others. But, when he came to consider the manner in which the appointment of these local members was to be regulated, he was reluctantly compelled to admit that it would be utterly impracticable to frame any roles so as to secure fair dealing to all par ties. Let them take a long line—,the London and York, fur in,tance. How would it be possible to arrange any Committee so as to represent all the local .interests on the line. He had been very anxious to devise means to regulate the attendance of these Members, but he could not find any means of attaining the object which would not give rise to greater evils than those which they pro posed to remedy, and therefore he had given it up. He understood that it was not probable that any rail way Bill would go into Committee before Easter. The Noble Lord concluded by moving the resolutions. Mr. CHRISTOPHER said he wished to call attention to that resolution the effect of which would be to exclude Members who had a local interest in railways from serving on Committees, and he thought it would taken, or was the House to admit the legality of those excuses ? Then, what were they to do with all those Railway Committees ? The attending upon them was not one of those regular duties to which Hon. Members were expected to be subjected to. True it was, that railways were now become a great element in the wel fare and general disposition of th e wea l t h o f the country, and a iththat resolution could th e y h ope to overtake the 284 railways that were to be considered and decided upon in that session. There had never been such a rush of railway speculations, and he (Mr. Bernal) could foresee much difficulty in settling those matters, unless they acceded to the proposition of the Hon. Member for Lambeth, or at least constituted a tribunal with powers of a somewhat similar character. He was opposed to the resolution. Mr. WARBURTON asked if the Hon. Member meant that the House should at once abdicate the per formance of the duties which were essential for carrying on the business of the country. He (Mr. Warburton) was very confident that unless the House did its duty in this particular, the country would soon inquire whether the other departments were not equally neglected. How ever inconvenient it might be to Hon. Members, when entering the House they must be prepared to do what the country required from them in the shape of business. Notwithstanding the objections advanced by the Hon. Member below him, he (Mr. Warburton) was very sure that that Hon. Member himself would be one of the very first to do his duty to his constituents and to his country, by conforming to the very resolution now under discussion. Sir ROBERT PEEL said he was surprised that the • Hon. Member should advocate the expediency of con stituting another tribunal to discharge those duties which it was the peculiar province of the House to attend to. They might rest assured, that if there were to be such another tribunal—a tribunal having the power of Government, and giving force to law —if private business were to be left to this tribunal, he repeated, that the House of Commons would very soon regret that they had committed the powers which belonged only to Parliament, to such a tribunal. What was to be its constitution—what its representative character ? It lvis the first time that a proposition had been made in that Ilouse to transfer the duties peculiar to that House to a tribunal out of doors, and to register its decisions as if they emanated from the representatives of the country. Were they to have no power of reversing its decisions? hear.) Were they about to constitute a power, which would soon assume to itself a hostile character ? He could hardly justify the proposition made by the Honourable Member for Weymouth (Maßernal). Were they to adopt a measure so pregnant with evil to the liberties el that House ? They had the opportunity of recommending themselves to their constituents, and of exalting the character of the House of Commons in the eyes of the country, by a determination to devote themselves to the performance of those duties; and he did believe that the good sense and the right feeling of Hon. Members would preclude the necessity for any ex position of the evil of the Hon. Member's proposition. The House of Lords had deputed five of its Members to consider private Bills—and were they, the ,House of Commons, to complain because they were also called upon to attend for the business of the country? lie (Sir R. Peel) should be ashamed if it were said that they, the representatives of the country, had a judge sitting in another place to adjudicate upon what it was their duty to have done. Let them at once resolve to adhere to their duties. He (Sir R. Peel) would come down to that House and sit for four or six hours each day on a Railway Committee, rather than that opposition should be carried by the House. If they did not demur to their attendance on Election Committees, why should they, in th e matter of pr i vate Bills? The House of Commons would, if this principle were not carried out, degenerate into a mere debating club. Would they say that they would not attend at that House to examine into the internal affairs of the (toiletry, while they were ready to consume eight days in an adjourned discussion —a mere questien of party, involving no principle of pa ramount interest to the country. He repeated— let , them beware of the power that would grow up beside them. If they allowed that tribunal to discharge the duties which were peculiarly theirs, they might be assured that not one year would elapse before they would repont that they had consti tuted it. He would not listen to that doctrine, brought forward for the first time, but he would fain hope that the good sense of the House would negative it. He ventured to say that this opportunity of making a character for the House would not be lost sight of by Hon. Members; and he would also venture to say, that many lion. Members who volunteered, under these cir cumstances, would, in two or three sessions, achieve a higher character than other Hon. Members-who spent the greater part of the session in unprofitable debates in the House. But he trusted that they would all be pe remptory in expressing :a determination to overcome that difficulty, and he was certain that nothing would more tend to establish the confidence of the country in that House, than by a steady adherence to these duties, instead of a continuation of these debates, which, if extended to the month of September, would still be unprofitable. He hoped that the Right Hon. Member would bring forward a motion, in order that the good feeling of that House might at once extin guish it. After a few words from Mr. HAWES in explanation, Mr. P. BORTHWICK thought that the resolution being compulsory took away any credit which might be due to lion. Members for this performance of their duty. He thought the matter might be safely left to thei r own honour. lie thought th at t h e high Roman virtue, so ably advocated by the Right Hon. Baronet, would not be the less exercised if left to the sense of Hon. Members. Mr. HUME said it was all very well to talk of Hon. Members doing their duty, without its being compulsory on them to do so. The Hon. Member opposite spoke of Roman virtue. He (Mr. Hume) did not doubt that the Hon. Member would exercise it, but he knew many on that (the Liberal) side of the lle use, who might not be to certainly re lied on. What was every. body's business was nobeely's bueiness—(Laughter)— and he (Mr. Hume) thought it was certainly the duty of that House, as a collective body, to provide that the business of the House should be properly done. He re. gretted that the Hon. Member had broached such a pro position, and he thought the Right Hon. Baronet had done himself great honour by his conduct on that as on previous occasions. Let them suppose that witnesses had been summoned from Yorkshire on a private Bill, was it to be supposed that they would come without a certainty of having some tribunal to go before. He was certain that the character of the House had been lowered by these private Committees —(Cheers and counter-cheers)—and it was high time that they should retrieve that character. He did not blame individual Members—it was the system he reprobated. He hoped this resolution would be carried, for he held that Hon. Members should take everything in turn, and if lawyers could not find time to attend to the duties of that House they should not have entered it. Mr. J. S. WORTLEY thought that the resolution was more peremptory than the necessity of the case re quired. With respect to election committees, they were acting under the authority of the Act of Parliament ; and they were aware by a preliminary notice that their attendance would be required on such a. Committee, and it was only after an answer had been returned to that official notice that Hon. Members were appointed. Colonel SIBTHORP said that the Hon. Member for Montrose had stated that no Hon. Member should enter that House unless he was prepared to fulfil its duties. lib (Col. Sibthorp) had not seen the Hon. Member for Mon trose in the House that day, or on previous days when property to a very great amount had been disposed of. Hundreds and thousands of pounds were voted away in that House, and the strictest attendance was therefore required on the part of Hon. Members, but as long as those votes did not affect self, it was all very well. Some Hon. Members had shares in railways, and it was very easy to vote away a million of money when it did not concern themselves personally. He was gladto perceive that an order was to be issued compelling the Mem bers of the House of Commons to attend in their places, and he, for one, had no objection to the resolution. Mr. DARBY protested against the aspersions which had been cast upon the Secret Committees of that House. He did not think them justified by the facts, and, as far as his own experience went, he was prepared to repel the imputation. He believed that, on the question of railways, the strongest feelings would ever be evinced, and that no matter what the tribunal were, imputations would still be cast upon it by prejudiced and disappointed parties. Lord G..SOMERSET said that the conveniences and inconveniences attendant upon this subject had been amply corsidered, and they had thought it better, on the whole, to make the order compulsory, than, perhaps, to meet pro forma and do nothing. Mr. GREENE said that it was very true that it was impossible to obviate the inconvenience under present cir cumstances ; but what course was to be taken in respect to those Members who positively refused to serve on Com mittees at all? It was necessary that Members should be compelled to attend, for if a system were to be adopted, it was better that it should be abided by, or it was no system at all. It was better to have no system, than to have a system that was ineffectual to enforce the duty of those who were involved in it. How would they compel the attendance of Members on Committees ? There were 250 Members of that House who positively reused to serve on any Committee, and he felt that, unless there was a requisition, which was sufficiently weighty to compel their attendance, the whole system was faulty, and would fall to the ground. Mr. PROTHEROE said, that in consequence of having come late into the House, he felt that he was hardly entitled to take part in the debate; but one thing had struck him. He thought that there was something more necessary than to adjudicate that Members should s it on Committees. It was necessary not only that they should be Members, but that some means were ne cessary to compel their attendance when they- were fleeted for that purpose. But in order to do this, they mutt take care that measures were adopted that conflicting duties should not render the attend ance of Members impossible. Last session he had been a Member en one of these private Committees ; but during its sitting his attendance was required on a local Committee. His lion. Vriend the Dlember for Wakefield had been in the same circumstances with him self. lie had beta called to attei:d the West Riding Cemmittte, when his presence was required in the pn vate Committee. Some means ought to be adopted to obviate this inc., nvenienee. Sir WALTER JAMES said that the refusal of Members to attend on these Committees was a great evil, and he did not doubt but that it caused great con fusion and impedimc nt in the consideration of railway Bills. Another evil was, the effect which the refusal occasioned, and that was, that the refusal of these Mem bers to serve had the effect of working other Members to such an extent that it was likely to work them to death. There were 250 Members who tient came into the House at all fur anything, and unless the system were carried out it was worth nothing. The attendance should either be free and voluntary or comp Mr. FERRAND said that it was unfortu that there were no mean§ of punifilAng thole who Ofused A