The Sun.
London, England, 1837-03-23 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 22.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, the Archbishop of CANTER-
BURY, and the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, sat at "'OW o'Clock
as Commissioners to give the--Royal Assent to the follow-
ing Bills :
The Transfer of Aids Bill, Worcester County Hall Bill,
Runcorn Gas Light Bill, Dee South Road Bill, Rochdale
and Burnley Roads Bill, Winfrith and Wool Inclosure Bill,
Newbold Derby Inclosure Bill.
After the Royal Assent was given to the above Bills,
O❑ the motion of Earl SHAFTESBURY the Aberdeen
Road Bill, the Loughborough Small Debts Bill, and some
others were read a third time and passed, and the remain-
ing Bills on the table were forwarded a stage.
Mr. TomLussoN from the Treasury attended at the bar,
and presented papers.
Lord STRANGFORD presented a petition from East
Sutton, in Kent, and one from another parish, against the
abolition of Church-rates.
Earl SHAFTESBURY presented petitions from the
parishes of Marston, South Barrow, North Barrow, and
four others, against the abolition of Church-rates.
The House then adjourned during pleasure.
Their Lordships again met at Five o'clock.
The Bishop of HEREFORD presented a petition from
the Dean and Chapter of St. Peter's, Westminster, against
the reduction of the number of Prebendaries. The
petitioners expressed very deep regret at the reduction of
the Prebendaries in their Collegiate body. They re-
gretted this, because it was not only a discourage-
ment, but the number of Prebendaries, after the reduction,
would not be sufficient for the proper performance of their
duty. Perhaps some of their Lordships might not be
aware, that in St. Peter's Church, Westminster, there
were not only two sermons preached to most crowded
congregations on every Sunday, but likewise on every
saint's day and holiday throughout the year, all of
which were preached by the Prebendaries ; and it was
considered that four alone, especially when it was re-
collected that two of those were to have extensive parishes
annexed to their Prebendary Stalls, consisting of a popula-
tion of 48,000 souls, that the duty could not be sufficiently
performed by them. The prayer of the petitioners was,
that their Lordships'. would leave, or restore the regulation
upon this subject to its original principle ; or if that could
not be granted, that their Lordships would pass no Bill
with respect to the number of Collegiate Prebendaries
without giving the petitioners six Collegiate Prebendaries,
that was four besides the two they now have.
Lord DUNGANNON laid on the table the First Re-
port of his Majesty's Commissioners on the state of the
Fisheries.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the in-
habitants of Bridgenorth and its vicinity, which he stated
was signed by members of the Established Church as
well as Dissenters, and the prayer of which was, that
their Lordships would abolish Church-rates without any
substitution. The petition he would mention was signed
amongst others by the Mayor and several of the Coun-
cillors, and by several Clergymen.—(Hear.)—He also
presented petitions to the same effect from the township of
Southerby, and from the Unitarians of the town and port
of Dover, and the inhabitants of Romsey, in South Hants.
The Noble Lord then continued to say that he had given
notice last night, that he would present a petition which
was in his hands, upon a most important subject. That
petition was one from a very important body—the House
of Assembly of the province of Lower Canada—complain-
ing of certain grievances to which it referred.—(Hear.)
He, however, had been induced to postpone presenting it,
by finding that no further steps would be taken in reference
to it at present in the other House ; and as the resolutions
which had been proposed in the other House bad 13en post:-
poned until after the holidays, he would also postpone his
petition.—( Hear.) He could not however avoid express-
ing his anxious hope—he could not say his sanguine expec-
tation—but he did hope that they would hear no more of
the resolutions which remained to be disposed of—he

meant cspeci Illy the Bth resolution, which he considered
to be peculiarly fraught with injustice.—(Hear, hear.)
He hoped the Noble Lord would not persist in pressing-
that resolution ; at all events, he hoped that if it were
pressed, it would not meet with-that concurrence elsewhere
which would bring the subject before their Lordships.
ROYAL MINT AMENDMENT BILL.

..„ _
On the nnrion of Lord DUNcANNON, the House then
went into Committee on this Bill.
The first, second, and third clauses were agreed to with-
out discussion.

On the fourth clause being proposed,
Lord BROUGHAM considered that the fourth clause
was by no means perfect,—that it would be much better
to have it altered a little ; but as It was a money clause,
• their Lordships could not alter it.
The other parts of the Bill were then agreed to. . The
House resumed. The Bill was reported without amend-
ments, and ordered to be read a third time on the Ist day
after the recess.
The Archbishop of YORK presented petitions from
Norfolk, MAldon, and several other places, against the abo-
lition of Church-rates.
Earl SHAFTESBURY presented a petition from
Aberystw•ith to the same effect.
A Message from the Commons brought up the Great
Western Raikay Amendment Bill, and two private Bills.
Upon the motion of Old SHAFTESBURY the House
then adjourned till Thursday the 6th of April next.

HOUSE OF COM_3IOIVS, Jihrtrff 22,

The SPEAKER took the Chair this day at Seven Minutes
to Four o'clock.
LIVERPOOL AND MANCHESTER RAILWAY.
On the motion of Mr. GREENE the Liverpool and Man-
chester Railway Improvement Bill was read a third time
and passed.
GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.

Mr. C. RUSSELL moved the third reading of the Great
Western Railway (Paddington) Bill, and stated that no part
of the compensation granted fur the land near Paddington
could by any possibility find its way into the pocket of the
Bishop of Lo:idon, the only interest derived by that Prelate
being in the increased %aloe of the land.
Aff,S.Xtil.: FROM THE LORDS.,

Sir A. rt.ii rt.'," the Usher of the Black Rod, ap-
peared at the table to summon the Howe of Commons to
the House of Peers, to . hear the Royal assent given to
several Bills.
The SrEAKER, attended by several Members-, immediately
left the House, and returned in about ten minutes, when
he announced that the Royal assent had been given by
Commission to several Bills, for which see Lords' Report.
Mr. Crayford, from the Treasury, appeared at the Bar
and presented papers, which were laid on the table.
Mr. TOOKE presented a petition in favour of the
Trinity Harbour Bill, and a petition from an individual
against Rennie's Brighton line. The" Hon. Member then
moved the second reading of Gardiner's Divorce Bill.—
Agreed to.
Mr. HUME presented a petition against the Glasgow
and Ayr Railway Bill.
SOUTH MIDLAND RAILWAY.

Mr. cmcrwRIGHT presented several petitions in
favour of the South Midland Railway Bill.
Mr. V. SMITH presented two petitions to the same
effect.

Mr. C. ROSS also presented a petition in favour of the
Bill.

Mr. PEASE presented a petition from the Leioester-
shire Canal Company against the Bill.
Mr. J. GLADSTONE presented a petition against the
Bi►l from Market Harborough.
Captain PECHELL presented a petition signed by
139 owners of Mansions in Leicestershire and Northamp-
ton to the same effect.

Mr. CARTWRIGHT rose to move the second read-
ing of the Bill. This measure came before the Committee
last year as a competing line, and an arrangement was then
come to, that in the Midland Counties Railway Bill a clause
was introduced, by which it was agreed that they should
not commence their line from Leicester to Rugby until this
Company should have had an opportunity of applying to
Parliament for leave to introduce their Bill for a competing
line from Leicester to Northampton. There was no
doubt that this line would be nearer by five miles than
the other; and it took a straight course through the towns
of Market-Harborough and Northampton, through
a large population, and a country where there was an ex-
tensive business. The other line, on the contrary, traversed
a country where there was no particular quantity of trade
carried on. At all events, it was only fair, whatever objec-
tions there might be to the Bill, that it should be allowed
to go into Committee, in order to have the subject fully in-
vestigated. He would conclude by moving that the Bill
be read a second time.
Mr. T. GLADSTONE rose to move as an amendment
that the Bill be postponed till the Report was received
from the Select Committee to which the petitions were re-
ferred on Monday last. There were some very peculiar
circumstances connected with this Railway, with which it
was necessary that the llouse should be made acquainted.
According to the statements of the petition of Sir H. Hal
ford, of the sum of 600,000/., 156,000/. had been subscribed
for by individuals that were either not to be found, or were
in exceedingly indigent circumstances, and some of them
were, it was asserted, induced to sign for a pecuniary
consideration. Now, supposing the allegations in that
petition to be correct, and that the 156,000/. would
ultimately be struck off the amount subscribed for
that would leave about 440,000/. In addition to this,
it was stated by the petition presented yesterday by the
Hoh. Member for Liverpool, signed by 77 shareholders, that
they would subscribe to the amount of 77,000/. ; they stated
among other things that the Company originally proposed
to make branch Railways ; but since, that had been aban-
doned, and they stated farther that they believed that the

undertaking, if carried on, would a nly be a wasteful
expenditure of money ; and they, therefore, prayed
the House to relieve them from these 11. abilities. Now, if
that 77,0001. was taken from the 440,00( )1., it would leave a
sum only of 363,0001., which was a sun considerably less
than was required by the Standing Orde rs—less by the sum
of 183,0001. Now, on such allegation is as those it was
that he grounded his objection at the present moment to
the second reading. He did not ask -axe House to reject
the Bill ; all that lie required was, that: The second reading
should be postponed under all the circui ris tances of the case.
His object was to have this part of the subject sifted, which
could not be done unless the Bill was postponed. The
Hon. Member concluded by moving, at ; an amendment,
that the second reading of the Bill be postponed till the
Report of the Committee on the De, ptford and Dover
Railway was received.
Mr. VERNON SMITH thought :that' none of the
reasons stated by the Hon. Member wars anted the amend-
ment he had moved. The petition of the s hareholders ought
not to be received without further invesf ;igation, which could
not be had unless the Bill were read a sc sr.oncl. time. Besides,
ifthe Bill were read a second time, the Reis ort of the Deptford
and Dover Railway Committee would lee presented before
the time the House would be able to gos into Committee on
the Bill. He hoped the House would. allow the Bill to
pass the second reading, and he thought the objections to
it might be best considered in Committee.
Captain PECHELL hoped the Hon. Member for Lei-
cester would persevere in his motion. , He begged to state
that the number of shareholders who petitioned the House
was 85, and the amount of capital subscribed for by them
77,400/. He thought the allegations age inst the Bill such
as to warrant the rejection of it altogether ; but he would
for the present be content with the pro potiition of the Hon.
Member for Leicester.
Sir JOHN BECKETT said some of his constituents
were interested in this railway, and he I iad heard from them
that they were induced to subscribe for shares by the mania
for such speculations which prevailed last year, and that
they would be now most anxious to gel rid of the responsi-
bility they had incurred.
After a few words from Mr. C. ROSS,
Sir J. GRAHAM said he had no in terest in the Bill,
but he thought the proposition that had been made was a
most fair one, inasmuch as if the chars -0 which had been
brought forward was substantiated it woe uld show that the
House had been most grossly imposed ipon. It was stated
that out of 600,000/. subscribed, 150,0(101. had been fraudu-
lently obtained—and that the House would admit was
an allegation of a most serious natui.e. The petition in
which that charge was preferred had been referred to a
Committee for investigation, and was now sub judicii. No-
thing, therefore, could be more fair or• just than a motion
to postpone the Bill until the decision of that Committee
had been obtained, and he (Sir Janzes Graham) should
give the motion his support.
Mr. PEASE thought it would 'be exceedingly unfair
to allow the Bill to proceed under ste circumstancs. The
amount of the subscription list was barely more than half
the estimate of the undertaking, an& where parties come
forward to say that with that bare nsoiety 150,0001. had
been unfairly obtained, he thought the House would be
defrauded if they proceeded with the Bill under such cir-
cumstances.
Mr. FINCH could not agree wit'h. the Hon. Member
for Durham. Although the Right I ion. Baronet said he
had made a very fair proposal, he (ifrlr. Finch) must say
that he thought the parties interestel would consider the
proposal exceedingly vexatious. They expected that the
House would adhere to its decision of last year. He put
it to the House whether these parties- would incur the ex-
pense of going into a Committee, if they were certain that
the Report of that Committee would, in the course of three
or four weeks, overthrow all the proeee dings, and that all
the money would be then thrown away. Considering the
immense importance of the subject, he hoped the House
would give the parties an opportunity of a full and fair in-
vestigation.
Mr. HUME was as much disposed to watch over the
interests of individuals as any Member, but he thought it
was a duty which the House owed to its elf, not to sanction
a Bill which on the face of it bore marks of fraud. The
statement was correct that 150,000/. was set down in the
names of individuals who bad no means of paying it—it
was a clear case of fraud. The rules of the House would
be good for nothing, and ought to be removed from the
books, if they allowed a Bill under such circumstances to
be read a second time. With this view, he not only
would object to the second reading of this Bill ; but he
thought that the House ought to take the opportunity
of marking its opinion of cases, whenever fraud was
proved. They ought, without any hesitation, to reject
all plans of this kind. The House ought to take a decided
' course. They should either maintain respect for their or-
ders and regulations, or abolish them altogether. He in-
treated the House not to listen to any considerations for
those who came forward out of regard for their own inte-
rests, when fraud appeared on the face of the proceed-
-it°rs. He was decidedly for rejecting the Bill, and
throwing it out, and thus telling to the country that
every Company who came forward under the like circum-
stances would have their Bill rejected.
Mr. C. W. WYNN thought the House was bound to see
that the bona fide amount required by the Standing Orders
was subscribed for. In his opinion, the House had no power
to rescind the Orders it had already made.
Lord G. SOMERSET said that if it were the wish of
the House to throw out the Bill, the mode pursued was not
the proper one to adept. It appeared tolain, that to call upon
tie House to adjourn the question to an indefinite period
was most unjust. Unless the investigation was to be de-
layed fur a short period only, he should consider it his duty
to give the proposal his determined. opposition.
Mr. BROTHERTON said he believed the Chairman
of the Committee would present the Report immediately
after the recess.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY said it appeared to him there
was as great a reaction upon Railroads at the present time
as there was upon other matters which had lately
occupied public attention. Last year the House had sanc-
tioned every thing that bore the name of a Railway ; but,
this year, it had shown a great predilection to strangle
every thing that came before it in the shape of a Rail-
way.—( Heer, hear, Lear, and a laugh.) In his opinion,
and he had stated that last year, no Railroad Bill ought to
he aliowed to come into the House, or have the sanction of
Cie House, unless something like ten per cent. had been
actually subscribed and bona fide given. When the 10/.
was paid up, it was no matter whether the man who had
paid it was a man of straw, or a man of sub-
stance. He had ventured in the early part of last
Session to bring the subject under the consideration
of the House ; but his suggestion was thrown on one side,
and a series of regulations adopted, the working of which
was now pretty well manifest. As regarded the present
measure, he thought it would be extremely unjust to
throw out the Bill altogether in its present state, and he
should give his vote in favour of its being postponed till
the Report was brought up.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when the numbers were,
For the Second Reading .. . 16
For the Postponement 63
Majority
47
The Bill is consequently postponed.

WHITBY AND PICKERING RAILWAY.
On the motion of Mr. A. CHAPMAN, the Whitby
and Pickering Railway Bill was read a third time, and
passed.
Mr. WILKS presented a petition from Fishguard in fa-
vour of the Fishguard Harbour Bill. Also a petition from
the Stockport Gas Company against the Stockport Im-
provement Bill. And a petition against the South Union
Railway Bill.
CORK AND PASSAGE RAILWAY.

On the motion of an HoN. MEMBER, the Cork and Pas-
sage Railway Bill was read a second time, and ordered to
be committed.

TRINITY HARBOUR.

Sir A. L. HAY presented a petition from Edinburgh
in favour of the Trinity Harbour Bill.
GREAT WESTERN UNION RAILWAY.
Mr. LEADER presented a petition complaining of cer-
tain frauds in connection with the Great Western Union
Railway, and gave notice of his intention to move to-mor-
row that it should be referred to the Committee on the
Deptford and Dover Railway Bill.
MANSUGH ENCLOSURE.

The Report of the Mansugh (Westmoreland) Enclosure
Bill was brought up and laid on the table.
BIRMINGHAM AND DERBY RAILWAY.

EWART presented a petition from Liverpool
against the Bill ; and a petition to the same effect, from
the occupiers of land along the line.
GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY, TROWBRIDGE.
This Bill was read a third time, and passed.
POOR-LAWS.
Mr. FAZAKERLEY brought up the, Report of the
Committee on this Bill.

A Message from the Lords brought up the Small Debts
(Loughborough) Bill, which their Lordships had agreed
to without any amendment.
PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS.

Mr. BAINES wished to know whether any means
would be afforded to Members before the recess to pre-
sent public petitions, as there was at the present moment
a very great accumulation of them ?
The SPEAKER said he should be happy to adopt the
suggestion of any Hon. Member that would facilitate such
an object.
Mr. BAINES thought that it would not be inconsistent
with the Orders of the House to meet to-morrov► at three
o'clock for that purpose.
The SPEAKER said that he should be happy to sit at
three o'clock if it could give satisfaction to I.ietubers.

Hitherto he believed sitting at that early hour had given
great dissatisfaction.
Mr. BAINES said that perhaps the Speaker would
have the kindness to suggest some mode by which so de-
sirable an object should be effected.
Mr. HUME hoped that some arrangement would be
made, by which the Chairman of Ways and Means could
sit for two or three hours in a morning, in order to re-
ceive petitions. It was at present half-past five o'clock,
and there was still a great number of petitions to be presented.
If Hon. Members were to present them in the manner they
had latterly been obliged to do, it would be better for the
House to publish to the country that they would not re-
ceive any more petitions.—(Cheers.) He could not see
why two or three hours in a morning should not be devoted
to the presentation of petitions. The Hon. Member then
presented six petitions against Church-rates from Bruns.
wick Chapel, Mile-end, the Limekilns in Scotland, a parish
in Wales, and also one in Oxfordshire. One of the peti-
tions was signed by no less than 3,500, and another by 500.