The Express.
London, England, 1847-07-08 00:00:00

Mtn READlNG.—jeints
SECOND READINGS.--D
(or Lyon's) Estate; Bak.
REPORTS.—WiIts, Romer
Ertdport, and Exeter
REPORT CONSIDERED.-

PETIIIONS.—By Yr. liTi.;uisios, foe the establishment of a pro.
Marko In ammo et the Beath uzurereitlea—Mr. Geosee,
Bum dr at iimtlime biIL
Bilk &Miens
kw Damages Ureteral) ; Vexatious
;
REPORT.—llleult In Trade iimplks Bill.
RETURN 011DICRID.-0a Oa motion of Mr. Aoum. BY, Account
M the roam at pohlte and jekteatet heats red in fedi
brier e; of ell t stock kasha
mg Melee ea Um tat fay January, 1344
thst woma• doe aim et their velllshasekt, the plum
where thq_holl luau aMellehed, with them
emelfee of partners la
each, on Me Ist dap et Jommy, 1543, 1604, IMi, 1814 and 1341;
dietleguldsing batmen *see bias that trued lad Mom that did not
Woe notes (In conttsmeles of
Mon ISO). Partiusentary Paper, No. 35 of see.
ARGYLE CANAL BILL.
Mr. PARKER moved that the committee on the Argyle
Canal Bill have teams to sit and report on Thursday nest.
Mr. CHRISTOPHER opposed the further progress of
this bill. It was • measure which had originally been pro-
moted by a private company with a view to cut a canal
through a certain portion of the county of Argyle, but in
consequence of some communication with an influential
landowner in that county, Mr. Campbell, of Islay, very
much in the confidence of her Majesty's government, the
measure, which had been treated as a private bill, had been
handed over to the government, who ought to have treated
it as a public measure, and to have given notice of its
introduction in the usual way, and not to attempt to
smuggle through the house as a private bill • mea-
sure of this description, involving, as it did, an
expenditure of the public money to the amount of 141,0001.,
of which 2.5,000/. was to be voted in the protest maim. The
bill had been altogether treated as a privatlkilli; tad he ma-
derstood that the standing orders had been sispeadad is
maw that it Wild be carried throe & dasoilatim with
gpsatmempeilltlaa I take& to peseent motion sought to
take the bill out of the usual course even ae & private bill in
order to expedite it more rapidly. In consequence of the
suspension of the standing orders an bon. friend of his who
possessed one of the largest estates in the county of Argyle
would not have an opportunity of being heard against the
bill, and the hon. member for Montrose had received com-
munications from other parties interested, making the same
complaint. As to the merits of the bill, he must remark that
the house was asked to page it on the report of Capt. Sir E.
Belcher, who, though most able for the duty in which he
was employed, that of surveying the coast, still, being a
captain in the navy, was not Co competent to form a judg-
ment upon such an undertaking as an engineer, such as Mr.
Walker and many others, one of whom ought to be sent
down before the bill was adopted or the work undertaken.
He was informed by persons melding in the Highlands that
there was no necessity for passing the bill this section merely
with a view to give employment to the labouring population,
inasmuch es from the provision made for the destitute partly
by the government, and to a great extent by the resident
gentry, including Lord Macdonald and Mr. M'Cleod of
M'Cleod, the poor people bad been enabled to return to
their employment and to the fisheries, and in a short time
there would be (unemployment through the country. Again,
there existed no necessity for the proposed canal, because there
already was the Crinan Canal running within 30 miles of
the same district. He therefore called upon the house not to
agree to this bill, but to deal with it next session, when the
government ought to bring it forward as a government elm-
' sure, founded upon the report of emu. eminent engineer. In
order to defeat the bill for this session, he should move as an
amendment that it be an instruction to the committee on the
Argyle Camel Bill not to proceed further with the said bill
during the present session. (Hear, hear )
The SPEAKER observed that as the bill stood referred to
the committee to report thereon, the proper course for the
hon. member to pursue would be to move the rejection of the
report when it was brought up.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the bill
was an unopposed bill, so far as private individuals were con-
cerned. It had been sanctioned by the house last 14,11i011,
and the promoters had then obtained powers to construct the
canal, which powers they had since conceded to the govern-
ment; therefore he imagined that the friend in Argyle-
shire of the hon. member opposite, and those of the hon.
member for Montrose, had no locus standi in opposing it
now. The house had already ordered that the till should be
referred to a committee ; and perhaps it would save time if
he now moved to discharge that order, and give notice that
to-morrow he would move that it be referred to a committee
properly constituted to deal with it as a public bill.
After a few words from Six W. HEATHCOTE, which were
inaudible,
Mr. SPOONER remarked, that even if the private indi-
vidual had no locus stands, still the public had a locus stands
in opposing • measure which authorised the grant of 25,0001.
of the public money every year for the next four years. He
thought that money might be much better applied.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had avoided
going into a discussion of the merits, because it could be
much better taken when the vote of money was brought
forward.
Mr. ESTCOLTRT warned the house to be careful to avoid
bills of this hybrid description being referred as unopposed
bills to the chairman of ways and means only.
Mr. T. DUNCOM BE objected to the printiple of the bill.
which, though it had a very captivating. title, ought to be
called a bill to relieve suffering canal proprietors in tbelligh-
lands of Scotland. (" Hear," and a laugh.) He objected
to the order being discharged on the understanding that it
should be referred to another committee. It would be much

better to defer the biliTiltogether until the neat session.
Sir J. GRAHAM said, till he saw the votes of yesterday,
he had not the least notion of the nature of this bill. (Hear,
hear.) Would the right hon. baronet (Sir C. Wood) inform
the house whether the grant proposed would come on with
the miscellaneous estimates ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
vote was in the miscellaneous estimates already on the table,
with explanatory papers, and it would be taken on the first
night the house got into a committee of supply. The bill
would go on pari passu with the vote.
Sir J. GRAHAM suggested that it would be better to
take the opinion of the house on the vote, before the bill
was proceeded with, because, if the vote was negatived, the
bill would be useless, and, if granted, there would be no
inconvenience from the delay.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
had intended to bring on the bill as • public bill, but had
been inf allied by the officers of the house that he could not
do so. But after what had passed be thought it better not
to proceed further with the bill until the discutsion on the
grant of money bad been taken.
Mr. J. S. WORTLEY defended the merits of the bill.
which, he contended, would be productive of the greatest
benefits to the west of Scotland.

Lord 0. BF.NTINCK said that the government had al-
ready advanced 70,000/. on the security of the toll of the
Cnnan Canal, and yet they were about to grant 147,0001. of
the public money to construct another work in rivalry of the
Crinan Canal, and thereby to annihilate the security they
have for the repayment of the 70,000/. already advanced.
This was not a measure for the general advantage of the
Highlands, but for the special advantage of one private indi-
vidual, Mr. Walter Campbell, of Islay. He objected to it
chiefly because an attempt bad been made to smuggle it
through the house as a private bin.
Mr. BAINE denied that the bill had local support, and
expressed his belief that the investment would be totally un-
productive.
Mr. HUME wished to know what bad induced the Trea-
sury, in the present exhausted state of their finances, tc
' sanction a grant of 26,0001. to this scheme, which was but an
instalment of 147,0001. The public money was thus voted
to relieve certain Highland lairds of their liabilities. It war
said the undertaking was productive whence, then, the
anxiety to give it up, and throw it on the government ? It
was the wildest delusion to suppose that any Highland laird
would ever surrender en undertaking which had anything
profitable about it. (Laughter.) Why should the time of
the house be occupied with such a proposal at this period of
the session ? It would have been better to proceed with the
Incumbered Estates (Ireland) Bill, rhea which no measure
would more have promoted the regeneration of that country.
(Hear.) He moved the adjournment of the debate for sin
months.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS seconded the adjournment, and de-
nounced the undertaking as a discreditable job.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he hod
. .

proposed to withdraw the order, in the prospect of an oppo.
anion being raised to it. He now felt called on to state
what were the views of government with reference to thin
undertaking. Early in the year many applications were
made to government to sanction works which might give
employ to the distressed Highlanders; amongst others Mr.
Campbell, of Islay, made similar applications in reference to
the Argyle Canal, and Sir E. Belcher was sent down to make
the requisite surveys of that and the Crinan Canal. An
eminent engineer was also sent down, who reported that the
estimates would be more than sufficient. Government had
only been induced to undertake the work with the view of
employing the Highlanders ; and if, at the same time, tht y
could forward a great public object the result would be most
beneficial. Those hon. members who denied that the under-
:taking would be an advantageous one could not
have read the papers before the house. He was
anziotui at first to have made it a public
li but the officers of the house told him it was necessary
to comply with the forme of private bins. If, however, the
house would allow the order to be discharged, no further
steps would be taken with the bill until the proposed vote
was discussed in committee of supply.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that was the most correct course.
and he hoped further time would not be lost in discussing
the adjournment of the debate.
Mr. HOME having withdrawn his motion, the order for
referring the bill to a committee on Thursday was read and
discharged.

CALEDONIAN, AND GLASGOW, PAISLEY, AND
GREENOCK RAILWAYS AMALGAMATION.
On the motion for considering the Lords' amendments on
this bill,
Mr. HUME moved their postponement till Monday next,
on the ground that the Glasgow, Paisley, and Greenock
Railway Company had refused to appear before the railway
coramirienen, and abandon an agreement into which they
had entered with two other companies for maintaining a
monopoly disadvantageous to the public.
Mr. GREENE opposed the postponement, as inconvenient.
Mr. STRUTT sum that the Glasgow, Ac Company had
not acted precisely in the way stated by the hon. member
for Montrose. They had not refused to cancel the agree-
ment ; but the companies had not been able to agree among
themselves on the terms on which that should be done.

After a conversation, Mr. HUME withdrew his mottos,
and the Lords' amendmenta were considered and agreed to.

GREENOCK ELECTION.
Mr. G. BANYES wished to put a question to the by