The Sun.
London, England, 1837-03-10 00:00:00

MPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

TOUS,E OF COMMONS, MARoz 9.
The SEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four o'clock.
Mr. lolmes presented the Report of the Commis-
sioners I the Port of London.
Mr. frafer, from the Treasury, presented papers.
Mr. lOUSTON presented a petition in favour of the
Glasgoc Railway.
Capttn WINNINGTON brought in the Leuer Na-
vigationßill, which was read a first and second time.
WESTMINSTER BRIDGE, GREENWICH, AND
DEPTFORD RAILWAY.

Mr. ". DUNCOMBE presented a petition from a
Mr. Bajamin Weaver, who stated that he had been in-
duced tc subscribe to the Westminster-bridge, Greenwich,
and Dotford Railway, in consequence of seeing names
down fo large subscriptions. The petitioner stated there
were 11 individuals' names down for 610 shares, to the
amount )130,5001., and that every one of those individuals
were p.upers.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Duncombe)
thoughtthis was a matter of considerable importance, not
only as ifecting the interests of the public, but the pri-
vileges d the House ; and this system of fraud called for
summary interference, and summary infliction of punish-
ment, if :he House had any such power.—(Hear, hear.)
One of tlese individuals, named Spencer, signed an acknow-
ledgment admitting that at the time he signed the subscrip-
tion list to was not a shareholder, nor did he become so
since ; tint he received 10s. for doing so, and that his po-
verty elate induced him to do it. The amount of shares
subscribed for in his name was 1,7001. He (Mr. Dun-
combe) vas not aware what could be done, but he thought
the trarsaction was a gross fraud on the public, on indivi-
duals, and on that House. _ _

Mr. HUME wished that the petition be referred to a
CoMmittee on a similar subject, as all these cases were of
the same class. If the public were thus taken in, it was
the duty of the House to make inquiry with a view to their
protection.
Lord G. SOMERSET suggested the propriety of the
Member for Fiusbury giving notice of an instruction to the
Committee necessary for that purpose.
Mr. WILI<.S was anxious to have the petition printed
with the Votes, and then a decision could be had upon it.

Mr. DUNCOMBE said he would move to-morrow that
the petition should be referred either to .the Dover Com-
mittee, or one specially named ; meantime he wished to have
it printed.

EDINBURGH, GLASGOW, AND AYR RAIL-

WAY.

Mr. OSWALD presented a petition from 200 inhabi-
tantsof Glasgow, in favour of the Edinburgh, Glasgow, and
Ayr Railway Bill.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL presented a petition
to the same effect from 4,000 inhabitants of Edinburgh.
Mr. WALLACE presented two petitions to the same
effect.

Lord W. BENTINCK presented a petition from the
Town Council of Glasgow, to the same effect, and moved
the second reading of the Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Ayr
Rai way Bill. •
_Mr. R. STEUART strongly objected to the Bill, in as
much-as it was proposed to terminate in the middle of
Edinburgh, passing through Princes-street Gardens. He
did not mean to oppose the second reading, but the ter-
minus would be strongly objected to.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL believed that a large
portion of the inhabitants of Edinburgh also objected to a
terminus which would destroy the appearance of that most
beautiful city.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be
committed.

Captain ALS AGER presented two petitions against the
London and Brighton Railway (Gibbs's line.)
Alderman WOOD presented petitions from London, Lam-
beth, and Southwark, in favour of-the Westminster Bridge
and Deptford Railway. He felt certain that the merchants
and most respectable tradesmen, whose names were attached
to the petition, from London, would not have signed it, had
they not thought the railroad would prove beneficial.