The Sun.
London, England, 1864-02-16 00:00:00

RAILWAY BILL.

Sir J. SHELLEY, in moving the second reading of this
bill, stated its object was to obtain railway accommoda-
tion for East Sussex, which was not provided by the exist-
ing line. The only opponents to a bill bearing the title of
this bill last year were one landowner and the Brighton
Railway Company, who now opposed this bill. The case of
the former was settled in about an hour. Last year the pro-
moters of the bill, according to his mind, proved that the
Brighton Company ohargad more than their legal fares,
which they had subsequently reduced. The merchants,
traders, and the residents on the line of the proposed rail.
way were in favour of its construction, and the only oppo•
nent was that powerful company which naturally was
opposed to any project that would interfere with their pro-
fits in the form of a rival company. The company which he
represented had met the objections urged against it, and
provided a more efficient mode of entrance into Brighton
than the existing. line.

Mr. lIANKEY strongly opposed the bill on independent
grounds, not being connected with the Brighton Company
or the country which the proposed railway would traverse,
and objected to the measure solely on public grounds. Ho
contended that it could not be shown that the pro-
posed scheme would be of any public benefit, or that
it would prove a remunerative speculation. Ho ridi•
culed the idea of making a line to meet the re-
quirements of so insignificant a place as Eastbourne.
There were no new features in the present bill as compared
with that of last year, and the committee investigated the
latter for 35 days, so that in his opinion it would be a most
needless expense to refer the present bill to a committee.
Ho concluded by moving, as an amendment, that the bill
be read a second time that day six months.
Mr. PAULL, as a member of the committee who consi-
dered the bill of last year, seconded the amendment, and
said that the opposition on the part of landowners amounted
to 109. He cited a precedent for refusing the second
reading.
Sir E. COLEBROKE, as a member of the committee
of last year, strongly opposed the bill. There was no doubt
there had been some complaints on the part of some portion
of the Brighton population with respect to the accommoda-
tion afforded by the existing line, but he utterly denied that
the allegation of illegal charges had been established against
the Brighton Company. No doubt there were some altera-
tions in the details of the present bill, but in the main it
was identical with the measure of last year.
Colonel BART ELOT'I' opposed the bill, and said that
the Brighton Company had made arrangements for meeting
the requirements of the trafflo of tho district it traversed.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. DUTTON and Mr. BLENCOWE also opposed the bill.
Mr. MASSEY said it was clear that the opinion of the
house was against the bill ; and being, in fact, the same
project, and promoted by the same parties as those who
brought forward the measure of last year, it would meet
with the same result.

After a fow word 4 from Mr. WALLY,
Sir J. SHELLEY said that after the strong expression
of the house, he would not press his motion to a division.
The motion was then negatived, and the amendment
agreed to without a division.
CALEDONIAN, EDINBURGH, AND GLASGOW,
AND SCOTTISH CENTRAL RAILWAY COM-

PANIES BILL.
Mr. BUCHANAN opposed the second reading of this
bill, and said the object of the measure was to concentrate
the traffic between the west and oast of Scotland, which had
been attempted before without success. lie traced the
course of legislation in reference to the attempt to carry out
the objects of the present bill, which aimed at a monopoly.
He contended that if Parliament sanctioned a scheme like
the present, it would be lending itself to a most dangerous
desoription of legislation. The opponents of the bill were
those who were interested in the matter more materially,
and, of course, were best acquainted with the advantages
of the proposed scheme.
Mr. BLACK seconded the amendment for the rejection
of the bill amid loud and frequent cries of " Divide."
Sir J. FERGUSSON deprecated the practice of oppos-
ing on second reading in a wholesale way private bills,
as being at variance with the principle at proper legis-
lation on the subject, and denied that the present bill was
identical with those which had been previously introduced
and rejected. He based his support of the second reading of
the bill on important concessions which had been made with
reference to a considerable reduction in the rates with re-
gard to the traffic, and affording the public all the advan-
tages of a competing line. With respect to petitions that
had been got up against the bill, they emanated from a
noisy but small section of those who had no interest in the
traffic of the district traversed by the proposed railway.
Mr. MASSEY objected to the bill, which had bun vir-

tually rejected in 1860 and the following year by the deci-
sion of the house, and there had been no change in the cir-
cumstances of the case to justify the introducticn of this
measure, not that he wished to pledge himself as an oppo-
nent to all railway amalgamation.
Mr. BLACKBURNE considered that after the lapse of
three years, notwithstanding the decision cone to by the
house previously, a bill might be properly brought forward.
After a few words from Mr. DALGLISIL, the motion for
the second reading was negatived without a division.
DUBLIN METROPOLITAN RAILWAY BILL.
This bill was read a second time, and referred to a com-
mittee.

DUBLIN TRUNK CONNECTING RAILWAY BILL,
This bill was also read a second time, and ordered to bo
committed.

GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY (No. 3 DONCAS-
TER TO GAINSBOROUGH, &c.) BILL.
Lord R. MONTAGUE opposed the second reading of
this bill.

[LEFT SITTING.]

LONDON GAZETTE—This Evening.

LORD CHAMBERLAIN'S OFFICE, FEI3. 15.
Notice is hereby given that the State Apartments of
Windsor Castle will be closed after to-morrow, the 16th
inst , until further orders.
WHITEHALL, FEB. 13.
The Queen has been pleased to present the Rev. Arthur
Drummond Wilkins, M.A., to the Vicarage of Dewsbury.
in the county of York and diocese of Ripon, void by the
cession of the Rev. Samuel Pryer Field.

DOWNING-STREET, FEB. 16.
The Queen has been pleased to appoint Arthur Birch,
Esq , to be Colonial Secretary for the Colony of British
Columbia.