The Sun.
London, England, 1837-07-14 00:00:00

STANDING ORDERS.

Mr. P. THOMSON moved the farther consideration
of the report of the Committee on Standing Orders. The
Committee of which he had had the honour to be Chair-
man had appointed a Sub-Committee composed of gen-
tlemen who had given great attention to the subject.
The Standing Orders, as proposed to be amended, had been
submitted to all the different parties likely to be acquainted
with the subject. He was aware that in asking the House
at any time to agree to alterations of Standing Orders, he
would require some authority, which would have great
weight with the House ; but he did not feel that any tri-
bunal could have been appointed more competent to consider
those Orders than that Sub-Committee of Gentlemen who
were good enough to undertake that duty, and the
result of whose labours were then before the House.
He regretted the absence of the Honourable Member
for Hampshire, the Chairman of the Sub-Committee,
who was unfortunately prevented from a severe domestic
affliction attending the House to-day, because that Hon.
Gentleman would have been able to have stated the
grounds on which they had agreed to the proposed altera-
tions; but be (Mr. P. Thomson) confidently hoped the
House would assent to the amended Standing Orders. One
of the recommendations of the Sub-Committee was that
proof should be offered before the Committee upon
Railway Bills that a sum of money amounting to 10 per
cent. of the capital to be subscribed had been deposited in
the Bank of England before the Bill could be introduced
into the House.—(Hear, hear.) There was no other
alteration in the Standing Orders of any importance, with
the exception of that to which he had called the attention
of the House.

The SPEAKER, before putting the question thought it
would be advantageous to the course of public business to
apprize the House that he did not intend to take the Chair
to-morrow, till a quarter before four o'clock.
Mr. HAWES was hardly prepared to express an opinion
upon the proposed alterations, as they had been only just
placed in the hands of Hon. Members. The alterations
were very serious, and it was now proposed to incorporate
in the Standing Orders what was formerly but recommen-
datory matter.—(" No, no," from Mr. P. Thompson.) It
appeared to him that the parties concerned in the promo-
tion of Railway Bills would consider that these alterations
were likely to throw very serious obstacles in the wny of
these Bills. He would suggest to the Right Hon. Gentle-
man the propriety of postponing the subject till to-morrow,
when the House would be in possession of these alterations.
Mr. P. THOMSON-1 am quite ready to discuss
them now.

Mr. HA WES—The Right Hon. Gentleman might be
prepared to discuss these alterations now, but he (Mr. H.)
suspected that no other Hon. Member was.
Mr. P. THOMSON explained—What the Hon. Mem-
ber supposed to be alterations were no alterations at all.

Mr. HA WES contended that some of the alterations
now proposed had been recommended by the Committee
which sat last year. He regretted that the Standinc, Or-
ders Committee had made its report at a period of the ses-
sion when the House could not consider it properly, and
if the House was with him he should move the postpone-
ment of the discussion till to-morrow.

Captain PECHELL fully conceded with what had just
fallen from the Hon. Mcmbcr for Lambeth.

After a few words from Sir J. \Vrottesley,
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE hoped the discussion would be
delayed for only one dal-. The Report of the Committee
was only put in the hands of Members that morning ; they
therefore were not unreasonable in asking for one day to
look at them.

Mr. P. THOMSON said, in the present state of the
Session it was important that they should take the earliest
opportunity of passing the Resolutions, otherwise the la-
bours of the Committee might be lost. There was no sub-
stantial alteration ; but that which required the tenth part
of the capital to be paid into the Bank, and that alteration
he was then prepared to discuss.
Mr. WILKS saw no reason for pressing the resolutions
on that occasion ; one day would give Hon. Members an
opportunity of making themselves masters of the question.
Mr. JEPHSON also wished for the delay of one day,
as alterations were made with respect to the maps required.
Sir SAMUEL WTHALLEY concurred in the objec-
tions urged by the Hon. Member for Lambeth.
Mr. WARBURTON said that the abuses discovered
by thu Committee, of which he was Chairman, under the
old system were so monstrous, that he was sure no person
would be desirous of upholding them.
Mr. G. P. YOUNG thought the discussion of the
subject ought to he postponed till to-morrow.
Mr. ESTCOURT was satisfied, though there were
some defects in the Standing Orders of the present Ses-
sion, tl:ey were infinitely better than those of the last,
and he should cordially support the motion before the
house.

Mr. P. THOMSON hoped the House would adopt the
report at once, as the sub-Committee who had drawn up
the report, and who were capable of giving any explanations
' would not, lie believed, be able to stop any longer in town.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG said though lie would rather have
had time to examine the report, yet, after what had fallen
from the Right Hon. Gentleman, he would withdraw all
further opposition.
Mr. FRESHFIELD thought there could be no serious
difference of opinion upon the report. As to the subscrip-
tion list, he thought, if nothing else was done, that
that at least ought to be adopted.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
The only complaint he had to make on it was that it did
not go far enough, and be had originally proposed that
the deposit should be twenty per cent. upon the amount
of the capital instead of ten per cent. It did
appear to him the proposed regulations would not interfere
with any fair or vvt 11-founded transaction, but that it would
interfere with a foul and improper transaction that ought
never to have made its appearance before the public ; and,
therefore, he should be most anxious to give his support to
the proposition.
The amendment was then withdrawn.
The several Orders were then called over by the
SPEAKER numerically.
Capt. PECHELL objected to the Order which re-
quired that the notice should be published in one news-
paper in the county. In the county in which
he resided there were no less than six newspapers,
and the paper which might be selected, if it happened to
be a Conservative one, might not be read by the liberal
portion of the county. He would suggest that the notices
should be published in two of the county newspapers.
Mr. P. THOMSON objected, as it would be putting
the parties to additional expense.
Mr. P. M. STE w ART thought the notices should be
published in November, as formerly, instead of in February
and March, as was now proposed.

After a few remarks from Mr. P. THOMSON, the
order was agreed to.

Captain PgCHELL had an amendment t 9 Tay9, which

‘has necessary Idl the piirpose of aftorditig (hid protettion
to the iAndmilier6; The object was to compel the parties
to furnish the landthimei• plans And Seeilotis Of that
land which they intended to take from him, instdad tit 66m-
pelling_him_to go to adistantcountyto the parish church.

Sir-JOHN -WROTTESLEY 'did not think it neees-
sullicient noltice was given to the landowner by the
illatiO and 6cel.itinl +Hill the Oerk of the Peace.
Mr. MAXWELL, before they weut Vitig
anxious to call the attention of the Right Hon. Gentlemen
to the fact, that parties when giving their assents to Railways
thought they knew the particular psrt of their land which
MO to be taken but when the tills came Wore tha
.1-10u,2
W*ol. was glvdii take othef kinds than that Which ap.,
peared in the scciimis.
Sir JOHN WROTTESLEY considered that end
notice* whieli %rare obliged to be served upon all
the proprietors were quite siitilOctiti nv they contained
all the deviations which were proposed to be made.

Mr. P. THOMSON thought that sufficient protection
Was already given by the plawg and sections being deposited
with the Clerk of the Peace. If every landowner was to be
served with plans and sections, companies would be put
to the, expense of making thousands and thousands of maps.
Mr. Wings and Mr. EsTcounT supported the original
proposition, which was then agreed to.
On coming to that resolution which required one-tenth of
the capital to be lodged in the Bank,
Mr. T. DUNCONIBE complained that it applied
to all private bills, and proposed that it should be confined
to Railroad Bills alone. lie raw no reason for its being
extended to Bills for making turnpike roads, building
bridges, Etc.
Mr. CHALMERS said that the order only applied to
Bills that were brought in under a subscription contract.
Mr. DUNCOMI3E said, that under the clause it was
absolutely necessary that a subscription contract should be
entered into for a Turnpike Bill.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought that the
House ought not to allow the Order to have retrospective
operation ; it ought not to have the effect of an ex post
facto law. It was unfair, in his opinion, that Bills that
had passed that House, and which would doubtless have
passed the other House of Parliament but for the unfortu-
nate event which would lead to its dissolution should be
prejudiced by the new resolutions. He would therefore
propose, and he should take the sense of the House upon
it if it was necessary, that the Bills that had passed that
House this session, if introduced next, should not be -sub-
ject to the new resolutions with respect to subscription,
deposit, or otherwise. He proposed to move that as a
proviso to the ninth resolution.
Mr. P. M. STEWART said, that as he believed the
Right Hon. Gentleman had not yet made up his mind, he
wished to make one observation. One of the most im-
portant - resolutions was that which required 10 per
cent. on the amount of the capital should be de-
posited in the Bank of England, or invested in
the Government Securities, in the name of the Chief
Clerk of the House of Commons. Now, if such Resolu-
tion had been in force last year, there would have been
upwards of 2,000,000/. lodged in the Bank or in Govern-
ment Securities, which yielded little or no interest ; and
even in the case of the Brighton Railway, a sum of
100,0001. would have been lying in the Bank, the entire
Session without the parties deriving any benefit from it.
He thought it would be quite sufficient if a private
banker's book were produced before the Committee, show-
ing the deposit had been made.
Mr. P. THOMSON believed that no private hanker
would give much interest on a sum of money that was liable
to be drawn out of his hands at any moment.
_ .

Mr. G. F. YOUNG said, the London and Westminster
Bank, or the London Joint-Stock Bank, would give interest
upon any sum of money so lodged. He objected strongly
to the parties being compelled to ledge the money in Go-
vernment securities, they being of a very fluctuating cha-
racter, and the parties might be compelled to sell out at a
very considerable loss. He suggested that they ought to
extend their permission to private Banks, which would be
a sufficient security that the money had been actually
paid up.
Mr. P. M. STEW ART said that the parties by having
the money lodged in private banks would have this ad-
vantage, that they would know that the full amount lodged was
safe, instead of being compelled to sell out at discount, and
at a great loss, as had been justly observed by the Hon.
Member for Tcignmouth. Let the Committee be satisfied
that their subscriptions had been paid up ; but for the sake
of all that was fair and just towards these enterprising
parties, do not compel them to lodge the money in the
perfectly unprofitable, although safe, coffers of the Bank of
England.
Sir J. WROTTESLEY—That would completely de-
feat the object in view. A private banker would be ready
to advance any sum of money that might be required, with-
out the amount having been actually lodged with him.
Sir R. INGLIS hoped the regulation would be perse-
vered in, otherwise the public would not obtain the pro-
tection they were anxious to afford.
Alderman THOMSON thought there was a precedent
for the plan which the House was about to adopt, namely,
the Court of Chancery, which required that parties holding
money in trust should invest it in Government securities ;
and he was quite sure that if they departed from that
principle on the present occasion they would not secure the
object in view, which was a bona fide subscription list.
Mr. WAKLEY hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman the
President of the Board of Trade would postpone the consi-
deration of that question till to-morrow, as the regulation
was one of very great importance. The groat sum which
10 per cent. upon some of these undertakings might amount
to, if thrown upon the Market, might have a serious effect
upon the Funds. He hoped such an important Resolution
would be discussed in a fuller House.

Sir S. WHALLEY said the ten per cent. was to be in
addition to all the expenses, so that there must be a paid
up capital of fifteen per cent., which would put an end to
these speculations ; he did not, however, object to it, because
he saw no means of making those for which Bills had already
been passed.
Mr. P. MAXWELL thought the object would be com-
pletely effected if the parties were allowed to choose their
banker, who would produce his book or other voucher for
the money being actually in his possession. There was not
a banker in London, except the Bank of England, who
would not give interest and perfect security for the money.
Mr. P. THOMPSON thought it was impossible that
the plan could be carried into effect, otherwise the object
the Committee had in view would be defeated. They
wanted security, and security that the money would not be
withdrawn until the Bill was decided upon by that House.
It, of course, would not apply to Bills brought in next
Session merely for the purpose of amending those Bills
which had passed this Session.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE proposed that the clause should
1 not apply to the Turnpike Trusts. _

After a few observations from Mr. P. THOMSON and
Mr. CHALMERS the amendment of the Hon. Member for
Finsbury was negatived, and the original resolution was
agreed to.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved, as a proviso
to the ninth clause, that all Bills that had passed that
House in the present session, and which should be introduced
in the next, should not be subject to the new resolution.
Mr. P. THOMSON said that provision was made for
all Railway Bills which should not pass this Session, being
introduced in the next. He could not accede to the mo-
tion of his Hon. and Learned Friend.
Mr. WARBURTON said it (lid not at all follow that
because a Railway Bill passed the HOWL? this Session, that
therefore it would pass the next ; although the subscrip-
tion lists of this year_might be composed of very respect-
able and responsible persons, yet the subscription list of
next Session might be composed of jobbers of every de-
scription.
Mr. FRES HFIELD also opposed the motion.

Sir IL INGLIS should certainly feel it to be his
duty on this occasion to support her Majesty's Government
against her Majesty's Attorney-General.—(Laughter.)—
There could be no security for the public if the Order was
not retrospective, as they would never have the same
list of subscribers in a second session.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—When he saw the
unnatural coalition-F(A laugh)--that had taken place be-
tween the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford and
his Right Hon. Friend, he must admit that it was irresis-
tible.—(Hear, and a laugh.) He must say, however, that
justice was overborne by it, and he only hoped that a better
feeling would be evinced in another session, when, if he had
the honour of a seat, he should certainly bring forward a
similar motion.

Mr. YOUNG denied that justice was overborne by the
decision that had been come to : on the contrary, justice
would be defeated if they had acceded to the Right Hon.
the Attorney-General's proposition.
The amendment was then withdrawn, and the Order un-
dor consideration was agreed to.
The remaining Orders were then agreed to.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL gave notice that he would to-
morrow move that the Lords' Amendments to the Eccle-
siastical Appointments Suspension Bill be taken into con-
deration, and he would move that they should disagree to
one clause introduced by the House of Lords excepting
from the operation of the Bill three Rev. Gentlemen who
had filled the office of Chaplain to that House.—(Hear,
hear, hear.) It was a subject which belonged exclu-
sively to that House, and it was impossible for them
to allow the House of Lords to interfere with it, and
i
direct them n what manner they should carry into effect
their own wishes, as expressed by addresses to the Crown.
At the same time he might state that the Bill was only
suspensory for one year, and must come under con-
sideration again, when he would be quite ready to dis-
cuss any equitable claim which these gentlemen might have.
Sir R. INGLIS denied that the House of Lords had

interfeted at all with an./ thing that had been done by the
House of Commons: The Lith of the House, and the
honour of the Crown; were pledged to the protection of
Ciittaiti rights; which it was the object of the clause intro-
duced by the n0(1.56 of Lords to effnt. As the Noble
Lord had stated that it as his intention to consider
the subject farther to-morrow, he notild feTerve himself
611 thfn in any farther observations he might talc Vialcq.