The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-19 00:00:00

SUN, LONDON, SA

ence, be should bring the whole question before Par-
liament. At present his purpose was limited to call-
ing attention to the dispatch of Lord Malmesbury of
the 29th April.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER appealed
to the Chair, to know if it was competent for the Hon.
Member to bring forward a question now of which ho
had given notice for the 29th?
Tne SPEAKER replied in the negative.
Mr. ANSTI6Y would withdraw the notice of the 29th,
and would now go oa with the question which he wished
to bring under the notice of the House.
The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member would not be
in order in so doing. He had given notice for the 29th,
and he could not bring it on now.
Mr. ANSTEY would take the opinion of the House as
to the present notice and the notice of the 29th being
identical. The Hon. Member hero read his present mo-
tion and his motion for the 29th.
The SPEAKER said it appeared to him to be the in-
tention of the Lion. Member now to call attention to a
part of the question of which ho had given notice for a
future day. If that were so, the Hon. Member was not
in order.

THE WINE DUTIES.
Mr. ANSTEY said he had a question to ask on
another point. Yesterday the Hon. Member for Ciren-
cester had asked a question of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, on the subject of the wino duties.
Lie (Mr. Anstey) was the chairman of the Com-
mittee on that subject, and as the evidence had not
been laid on the table yesterday he wished to know whe-
ther the Right Hon. Gentleman was in order in referring
to it ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—What
is your question ?
Mr. ANSTEY wished to know whether the Right
Hon. Gentleman had been correctly reported, and whe-
ther he was in order in referring to evidence not before
the House?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said ha
had been asked yesterday by a Member of that House,
whether there was any foundation for the rumour that
the Government were going to lower the duty on wine
to Is. a gallon. That question was asked without any
reference to the evidence taken before the Committee.
He had made answer that he had not heard of the ru-
mour; but he had not referred to the evidence. Subse-
quently, and in answer to an Hon. Gentleman who was
interested in the commerce of London, he had expressed
the opinion of the Government on the subject more fully,
because he felt it was of the utmost importance to per-
sons engaged in commerce to know that no reduction
was contemplated. He had again to state that Govern-
ment did not intend to recommend any alteration of the
duties on wine, and that, in lets opinion, the assumption
that there would be an increase in the consumption of
wines in this country if the duties wore reduced rested
on the fallacy that a total change would take place in
the tastes and habits of the great bulk of the population.
He would also repeat, that if it ever should be in the
power of the Government to reduce taxation, it would
not be taxation on wine, but that on articles more largely
consumed by the people which would demand their con-
sideration.—(Hear, hear.)
The motion that the House at its rising adjourn to
Monday was then a greed to.
ADMIRALTY.
Mr. HUME gave notice of his intention to ask
whether Government intended to apply to the Admiralty
the system of consolidation which had already been car-
ried out in the department of inland revenue.
CRIME AND OUTRAGE (IRELAND) BILL.
On the Order of the Day for the second reading of
this Bill,
Mr. V. SCULLY rose to oppose its further progress.
He said he had a strong preliminary objection to the
Bill in the period chosen for its introduction when the
majority of the Irish Members were necessarily absent.
He objected to it also because it was unaccompanied by
any remedial measure. He contended that the Bill was
of the most coercive and unconstitutional character, and
that it would be most injurious in its effects. Did he
think it calculated to suppress crime and outrage ha
should be the last to oppose it, but ho believed, on the
contrary, that it would only annoy peaceable people,
while the guilty would have no difficulty in escaping its
provisions. As it was a renewal Bill, it might be con-
sidered that its passing was a matter of course, but it
should be recollected that we were now in a very altered
state of circumstances. Besides, he thought its in-
troduction most inexpedient on the eve of a general
election. The former Bill was introduced by a remark-
able royal speech, setting forth a state of great disorder
in Ireland, and there was no doubt but that, immediately
after the failure of the crops, there was considerable dis-
order, while the insurrectionary movement that subse-
quently broke out was getting prominent. But now, the
country, with the exception of one district of about eight
miles in diameter, was as peaceable as any part of Eng-
land. If the Right Hon. Gentleman had brought in a
Bill for that particular district the House might have a
reason for entertaining it; but all the information they
had was the report of the crime and outrage committee,
only two pages, and the report of Major Brownrigg dated
3d of April, 1852. These documents showed some in-
crease of crime in certain districts of Armagh. Louth,
and Dfonagan, bet in other counties formerly prominent
for disturbance there was a more than commensurate de-
crease. In Limerick and Tipperary the decrease was
remarkable, and surely these cases formed as good an
argument on the one side as the cases of Armagh, Louth,
and Monaghan made on the other. The fact was that
the proposed measure was a coercive one, framed with a
view to the coming elections.
An HON. MEMBER here moved that the House be
counted, but more than forty Members being present,
Mr. SCULLY resumed, and on our return to the
gallery was explaining the provisions of the 13111. Per-
sons having arms in their possession in districts under
the operation of this Bill were liable to ho prosecuted
for misdemeanour, and the Lord Lieutenant had discre-
tionary power to increase the police force in such dis-
trict. Mr. Meyer said that the provisions respecting
arms were inoperative, as the persons who intended to
use them criminally contrived to conceal them, while
the farmers who were obnoxious to the secret tribunals
were disarmed and left wholly without defence. At pre-
sent this Act was in force in twenty-one counties in Ire-
land, and, in addition, the two Whiteboy Acts, which
were known to have a most coercive character. Both
Acts were embodied in the Bill before the House. The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman proceeded to describe at
length the character and machinery of the previous
Act, his object being to show that it was unwise, with
a view to the effect upon the public mind in Ireland, at
election time, to place at the disposal of the Secretary
for Ireland such monstrous powers as that previous Act
conferred, and as this renewal would also convey. The Bill
would apply even to election addresses; and would enable
the Lord-Lieutenant to burden any district momenta-
rily excited by electioneering with the heavy charge of
police. Local magistrates might send up to Dublin a
highly-coloured account of an exceptional outrage; and
then the district in which the offence was committed
would be at the Lord-Lieutenant's mercy. This
what
act
must be tested by the answer to this question;
would Englishmen say were such an Act applicable to
England? It had been said that the principle of taxing
for
the hundred for the crimes committed within it tha slaw
an
was a Norman invention, to punish the Saxons then kept
down (as Irishmen were now kept down), and who were
; but that was totally untrue;
old Saxon law
guilty of assassinating Normans wherever they could do
so secretly. Such a law was arbitrary and unjust, and
was totally opposed to the Constitution of England.
in 1842 to the late Sir Robert P
By whom were these crimes in Ireland committed? Ac-
cording to a letter of Sir Mathew Barrington, addressed
Potionoo in the matter being very considerable—these
agrarian murders were invariably committed by non-
residents, by vagabonds, and never in any case by
eel—Sir Mathew'e ex
the farmers and settled inhabitants of the district.
All the evidence they possessed on this subject was
to the same effect. To tax a district, therefore,
for a crime committed by none of the inhabitants of
the district, was absurd. But there was evidence to
show something more. It was clear that all these coer-
cive Acts were failures even as Acts of police. They
failed because they wore unaccompanied by those reme-
dial measures which would go to the root of the state of
soniety whence these crimes proceeded as inevitably as,
effect followed cause. The Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man then went on to contend that this admission had
been made by Mr. Disraeli, in his speech on a former
coercion measure. The Right Hon. Gentleman had said
the other day, in reference to that speech, that his ob-
jection to the measure in question was founded on the
curfew clause. But the Right Hon. Gentleman bad
never said a word about the curfew. He had said dis-
tinctly that he was opposed to all such legislation for
Ireland, unless it were accompanied by reformatory.
social measures. The Government were boasting that
they had lying perdu their remedial measures. But
where was the Landlord and Tenant Bill the Attorney-
General (Mr. Napier) had spoken co much of? Why
was it not produced? Not having been produced, the
inference was not favourable to this panacea in re-
serve. There were other measure of which the
wer Go-
vernment had given some hints. Why e
they not frankly laid on the table, in order that they
might be considered in the recess? Returnin said that
to the
consideration of the Bill before the House, he
the measure was produced backed by no recommendation
from the Committee which had sat to consider the whole
question of Irish orime. And was the last fortnight of
the session the proper period for dealing with such a
Bill? It was a period at which Irish Members wore
compelled to be absent; and certainly its introduction
just now looked like a settled and rather suspicious plan
on te art of the Government. The Hon. Gentleman
concluded by moving that the Bill be read a second time
this day three months.
Mr. LAWLESS congratulated Irish Members on the
Government having thrown off the mask, and shown
what their intentions were. The Hon. Gentleman ex-
pressed his belief that Lord Eglintou wished well to
Ireland, but was controlled and thwarted, as Lord
Anglesea was, by the present Premier, then Secretary
for Ireland, under Lord Grey. He complained of the
period at which this Bill was brought in, and of its
being one of three measures relating to Ireland,
which were all that the Government had intro-
duced, after all their professions while in opposition. He
diranesogkwlaerndredl
Orange
tnhrodaant,thwgiweas
was at
ct?eh
se
s iTi
hand.on
hnt ese
,nllvt2ai onost
hu
,s 1
yodoef
Ift
July,l
this
ahi
sse Goadnopl vuibemter ndpmoo rwet
usedann
ntt
tonwdpii
atubyht.
bonisna? He believed the Ribbon Societies had done less
harm and caused fewer murders than the Orange asso-
ciations.—(Oh, oh.) Let Ribbonism he put eidown if
they liked, but put down also the Orange societies,
which went through the country rousing the passions of
the people —(011, oh.) As to the argument of the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, which was the only one which
was at all in favour of the Bill, that many criminals now
imprisoned under its provisions would be released, that
might easily be remedied. The country was now more
peaceful, and crime was becoming less and less every
year; therefore let there be an end of coercion Bills, ane
let the Government trust to the ordinary powers of the

law in Ireland. Ho would recommend the Government,
for their own sakes, and with a view to the approaching
election, to give up this Bill.
Mr. Will fESIDE said that the Government felt it
to be on imperative duty to prorose the col-nil:mane° of
this Bill till next year, or to the end of the next session
of Parliament, for the reasons which had been stated at
length by his Right Hon. Friend the Attorney-General
for Ireland. Since his Right Hon. Friend addressed the
House a return, moved for by the Right Hon. Member
for Louth, had been laid on the table, which showed the
amount of crime which existed in Louth,. Monaghan, and
Armagh, from the year 1849 to 1852.
No impartial
man could read this return without coming to the con-
clusion that the ordinary law was not sufficient to cope
with offences of the character and description mentioned
in it. No less than 136 gentlemen, belonging to these
three countries and of all politics, asked for additional
measures of protection beyond this Bill. This Bill did
not take away the trial by jury or any
of the constitee
tional safeguards of the subject. All that it did was to
protect life and property, from a conspiracy, the object
of which was to take away human life, iu order to subvert
law and order and government in Ireland,--(Bear, •
hear.) He solemnly believed that was the object in
view, and he confessed that his sympathies were with the
loyal and well-behaved, and not .with those
who de-
sired to subvert and destroy all lava and order. There
were persons now in prison under the Act, and they
must be liberated if it was not continual. This was Ein
additional reason why the House should pass this Bill.
The ion. and Learned Member for Cork, who introduced
several topics into the discussion not connected with the
measure before the House, asked what the Government
had done for Ireland. His answer was that they had
not time to do much for Ireland, but they gave assist-
ance to railways; they reduced the rate of interest.—
(Hear, hear.) Besides, there was a measure prepared
and ready to be brought before the House, for the
amendment of the Court of Chancery in Ireland; but
they felt that there would be no use in bringing in such
a measure in the present Parliament. There were other
measures also in preparation for the improvement of that
country. He could assure the Hon. and Learned. Gen-
tleman that the present Government was not the Go-
vernment of a clique or a party, but the Government of
a nation; and that they would treat
411—whether Pro-
testant or Roman Catholic, Orangeman or Ribbonman—
with the same justice.—(Cheers.) It was with that
object—to protect the well disposed and to punish the
guilty assassin—that the present measure was proposed.
The Government would endeavour to give peace and
justice to Ireland; by which, as Lord Bacon said, the
prosperity of that country could alone be secured.
Mr. FRENCH said that, while admiring the great
eloquence of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who had
just spoken, he could not concur in ruby of his conclu-
sions. lie had rightly described the provisions of the
Bill. It had now been tried in Ireland for three years,
and had not at all improved the state of society there.
life The army and the police bad uniformly failed to protect
and property in Ireland; that would be done by the
people themselves if they were allowed the means. The
provisions of the Bill could only be required at present
in part of the counties of Louth and Monaghan. In the
former county, two cases had occurred where, after the
agents had been shot, reductions of rent had been made.
It was impossible to contend against auch a state of
things as that. In the county he represented (Roscom-
girueilltayn;dbuhtadthis Was not the
mon), threatening notices having been sent, the
had combined for their own defence, and the result had
been to restore the most perfect tranquillity.
that if the country at largemere thrown on its own re-
sources the benefit would be equally great.. (Hear.)
e r
coagpght
set Stated that it
opposite effect. He was in
the Act. He denied that there was any
Captain MAGAN was opposed to the
necessity for it.
continuanceioccthuopuigehorstf
case—it
threwahs ee it the
had e xp expense Solicitor-Generalisoenlyt hftohere
favour of the Act being carried out as regarded the pri-
soners
now in gaol; he would not turn them loose on
all hearts in
society. He denied the statement of the Learned Gen-
thHatethheadLodrdon-Leienuottehnitanngt htoadgwaio:
such an end,
the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill
could be supposed to contribute to it.---(A laugh.) By
Itulrceemlleasanincl his advocacy
preamble.—(Laughter.) His
eersenaandders.the Act which it was proposed to renew, the Lord-Lieu-
owto Lieu-
tenant
was
none
ttniooabhne
obnoxious
etododx i
tpohbouyews power ct t o 0 proclaimf George
eor g e certainili ~
which,districts:
though
re great.
tgheill was that it revived the Provisions
corned, by an Act of William IV., was highly °niece
hceotthldeldnoat hailglei)lwo Thee inpealed, as far al the punishment of death
tionable. He doubted whether a poor man, carrying a
Was con-
pitchfork or other agricultural implement, might
harmo-
niousnot b e
within these provision; or even those
nintletmheenchawrhaoctberlaockf eEdthtihoepiiranfasc
Pass Unnoticed.
the socieintyAolPOllraDngAeLmLens,aaindd
He must protest against the imprudent and stupid abuse,
at-
tack that had been made on that body to
the infamous statements of the Hon. Member for Clon-
mel (Mr. Lawless) with regard to the Orangemenmasque-
raded
of
Ireland. Whatever might be the opinions of the Hon.
Member, that body would continue to act upon their
principles, and to be distinguished by loyalty and obe-
dience to the law.

Mr. F. SCULLY said that in very recent times the
body of which the Hon. Member acknowledged and
boasted himself a member had been condemned by reso-
lutions of both Houses of Parliament.—(Bear, hear.)
It was the duty of the Government to watch very nar-
rowly tho proceedings of that body, in the north of
Ireland; for it was a society possessing Signs, pass-
words, and other marks of a secret association; and, in
his eyes, it was just as exceptionable as a Riobon so-
ciety. He (Mr. Scully) was opposed-to the Bill, be-
cause it proposed to apply to the proclaimed districts
the most atrocious enactments of the Whiteboy Acts.
In other parts of the United Kingdom, the' Polio! couldgood cause; but, in
He not break into a man's house without.
Ireland, that would be done on the merest rumourth.e
also objected to the Bill, because it would tax
in-
nocent population in a very cruel and oppressive manner.
On comparing the returns, he found that the agrarian
crimes committed in Armagh,
bore no proportion to those in the other partsof I
the Bill
Ire-
laud; and therefore there was no reason why
1 ined of
should be applied to those counties. He comP 4Bill till
the Government for postponing so important
3 Divide.)
such an advanced period of the sessione—fd have
He very much regretted that they
Down, and Mointgh„tren.,
adopted the policy of their predecessors in
important
--
important measures relating to Ireland through the
it:ha:n:li ualipeevene
r°:
House. The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite bad al-
d
luded in sarcastic terms to his
most
but a very short time would show who were t ~,.
was
popular men in Ireland.—(cries
of
.-. " Divide.") toi'
talk
all very well for the Right Liton. Gentleman be (Mr.
about putting down religious processions; but
re of a
Scully) was not aware of any in Ireland tbst We
ta But if
character to give ()Ilene° to the Protestant—
(Mr. Scully
they brow there were, the Government gays their sanction
military
miler processions in the colonies, where 's)befriet)eclasi.,
the Peohpel
sup-
port were
proclamation ordered
at os
a attend
w wanton
0 tjeat
ht in measures_
0.
different character from coercion Bills. The
Irishwpere
Ipreerltanodf .
the T The
people Government
au essth
pu lotion had no confidence iu their rulers, and .
leaving their country in shoals. If intro-
duce they did not
some remedial measures, Ireland would soon really
.
became what the Premier had (sailed it—" almost a de
but the
serf"—a country which would contain none d
people in the workhouses. Iris ,
ursoe expecte
greatexcellent
things from the present Governmon
c'
after
he
statements in the Chancellor of the ee
eexchequer s address.
withdrawing
Let bins give them an earnest by
the Bill fur the. present session, and by stating what
were the measures he intended the next
to introduce in
atthisniedetTedaot the
Parliament.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the'second reading
. ... 118
Against it ... .
.. .. 13
Majority ... * •'•_l
ENCUMBERED ESTATES . ;
(aREND) BILL'
This Bill was read a second time. On the question
that it be committed on Monday,
m Mr. F. FRENCH said her having
ajesty'a Ministers s
opposed a similar measure when
". out of office. he
without
surprised that they had now introduced this Bill
dt.
any observation. Ile wanted to know what extraor
~
nary than ;e had taken plat© One 01
c - powerful opponents of
irt their opinion'
teen was
the most
i for
the Attorney-Generalreland
and the president of
the Board of. Trade was strongly
.. against it. Nearly
every member of the Government, 0
was pledged
against: fact,
against: the principle carried
_ out. - vvir, was this mea-
sure. proposed? Had not Irelend 'suffered enough?
not sufficient that half , had been
Was it the g try
swept away, and.many parts e
of h -e-
-" e country depopulated?
The Hon. Member for Montrose
'r roperly asked
the Goverment the other evening whether
they meant
permanently to supersede the ordtiiVyand he
r tribunslee
hoped the Government would now
question.
4 - answer the
It was his intention to oppose th,.
u Illeasure to eat
on.
and though he might be beaten, there would be a
fight in annther place which would astonish the Govern-
ment.—(A laugh.)
Mr. NAPIER said the reason why he had
not spoken
before was that he thought it best to wait to hear the ob-
jections to the Bill. He believed thttt the introduction
of this measure was the very best course which the Go-
vernment could take with reference to the interests of
the landed proprietors of Ireland. that was the real
state of the case? When the Govertunent oame into
office they found that triod for presenting petitions
would expire in July; and if the period were not ex-
tended, the result would be a crowding 13" f
Petitions before
that period, which must oause a very great depreciation
of landed'property in Ireland. He adrnitted that the
proper remedy in the first instance would have been to
reform the Court of Equity; but the truth Was, that law
reforms were delayed too long both for the
public and
for the- profession—(Hear, hear)—.and
the Court of
Chancery, as at Presentlegulated, was
not at all suited
to the effecting of sales.
Mr. J. STUART had hoped the Government would
-overament
have paused before proceeding with this Bill, and moved
that it be committed that day six months. Ile did so
because the Bill had enormously depreciated the value
of land in Ireland. The petitions presented under it re-
ferred to property valued at 28 millions of money. Of
tbe property sold, to the amount of five millions only,
the price received had not been more than four or five
yeara' purchase. Such a state of things war anprecee
dented in the legislative or economical history of any
country in the world. This result had been propheeied
by many Hon. Members who had oppoaed the Bill, and
he thought that it ought not to be con tieued fora day
longer. The tribunal before which thug cases came,
and which was the instrument of fraud and confiscation,
ought at once to be abandoned, and he should take the
opinion of the House on the subject.
Mr. WHITESIDE submitted that the argument of
his 'Hon. and Learned Friend was not a just ono. It
was difficult to abolish a tribunal which had existed for
some years. Besides, the Encumbered Estates Court
was already wearing itself out, as was shown by the
diminution in the number of the petitiojal bsid before it.

Instead of four years' purchase being the price obtained
for estates sold under the commission, in many cases
twenty or twenty-one years' purchase had been obtained.
Mr. BUTT suzgested that the discussion of the prin'
ciple of the Bill might be taken on going into Committee.
But as no promise was given by the Government that an
opportnnity should bo afforded him, the Honourable
and Learned Gentleman proceeded with a statement of
his objections to the Bill. It was not asked by the op-
ponents of the Bill that the proceedings of this court
should be brought to a speedy termination, but that
those petitions before it, and no more, should be taken,
and that no extension of the time for sales should be,
allowed. It was not hero proposed to extend the time
for sales or the distribution of the proceeds, but to ex.
tend the time for sending in petitions. This Bill gave
a right of sale to a class who never possessed it before,
and who were most likely to use it to the prejudice of
the owner. The argument against the measure when it
was first brought forward was, that it would, by forcing
a glut of property into the market, reduce the value.
Bat it was answered that it was necessary to get rid
of an encumbered proprietary, and yet, almost
immediately,' when that glut occurred, a pro-
posal wA3 brought forward to allow the pro-
perty purchased through these courts to be encum-
bered to one.half their amount. The number of peti-
tions now before the court was 931, involving property
amounting to 800,0001. a year rental. Surely that was
sufficient to occupy the court for the next three years
without giving them another year's petitions. Then
there were 2,000,000/. lying in the courts to be distri-
buted, and which had not been yet distributed in conse-
quence of the difficulty of deciding upon who were the
parties entitled. Add the value of the 800,0001. rental
to this, and the commissioners would have 10,000,0001.
to decide upon and distribute within three years. Was
not that business sufficient for them, without adding to
it that which must arise from an additional year's peti-

Lions? The average of all the property sold under this
Act had been ten years' purchase, and he believed the
result of the depression in value caused by forcing so
vast an amount of property into the market had been
as injurious to the creditors as the owners of the land.
Yet this was the Bill they were asked to continue. He
asked the House to adopt the course recommended by
Lord Derby when the Act was passed to continue a
measure passed under special circumstances only so long
as such circumstances existed.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion for going into Com-
mittee on Monday... ... 78
For the amendment ... ... 6
Majority ... —72
The School Sites Extension Bill, and the Property of
Lunatics Bill, were read a second time.
The Master in Chancery Abolition Bill passed through
Committee, and the compensation clause was added.
The Representative Peers of Scotland Bill was read a
third time and passed.
The County Rates Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Protestant Dissenters Bill was read a third time
and passed.
PIMLICO IMPROVEMENT BILL.

The House having gone into Committee on this Bill,
Colonel SIBTHORP complained of the large expendi-
ture incurred for the royal palaces, especially Bucking-
ham Palace, for the alterations in which this Bill was
brought foward, and referred to the enormous charge,
for the removal of the marble arch, viz., 13,0001. and
upwards.
The clauses were then agreed to, and the House re-

The Savings Banks (Ireland) Bill, the Inland Revenue
Office Bill, and the Thames Embankment Bill, were
read a third time and passed.
The Public Health Act (1848) Amendment Bill went
through Committee, and the House adjourned at Half-
past One o'clock.

PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES.
WORCESTER AND HEREFORD RAmway.--Yesterday
after five days' inquiry in the Lords' Committee, the
preamble of this company's Bill was declared not proved.
The cost of the inquiry in Lords and Commons and
other matters, cannot, it is thought, have been less than
70,0001.
LONDON AND NORTII-WESTERN AND BIICKINGUADI-
SHIRE RAILWAY.—Yesterday in the Committee of the
House of Lords, the preamble of this Bill to connect the
Buckinghamshire Railway with the Oxford, Worcester,
and Wolverhampton, and for other purposes, was de-
clared not proved.
The Bill of the Great Western, Shrewsbury, and Bir-
mingham, Shrewsbury and Chester, Shrewsbury and
Hereford, Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire, and
Hereford, Rose, and Gloucester, for traffic arrangements,
was declared proved.
WYCOMNE RAILWAY.—The Committee of the Lords
passed this Bill, for lease to the Great Western and
other purposes.
KINGSTON-UPON-HULL DOCILS.--1110 preamble of this
Bill was proved.
BIRKENHEAD DOCKS.—The Committee have come to
a resolution to refer the difforences of opinion between
Mr. Rendel and Mr. Abernethy to the adjudication of
1 Mr. Brunel, and adjourned to Monday.