The Sun.
London, England, 1837-04-24 00:00:00

BRIGHTON RAILWAY.

Lord GEORGE LENNOX presented a petition from
tl:e Secretary of Stevenson's Line, complaining of the
manner in which Renny's subscription list had been got up.
The petitioner stated that false and fictitious signatures had
b 'en obtained, which he could prove before a Committee
of the House.

Captain ALSAGER said it was very singular that the
Committee had been sitting for three months, and this was
tl'e first time anything had been alleged against false and
fictitious signatures having been placed on the subscription
list. The proprietors of Rennie's line courted an inquiry,
and he held in his hand a petition from those individuals,
praying it might be referred at once to the Committee on
the Bill.

Mr. CURTIS said the statements contained in the pe-
tition which the Noble Lord (Lord G. Lennox) had pre-
sented were altogether false and unfounded.
Lord GEORGE LENNOX gave notice that be should
to-morrow move that the matter be referred to the Dept-
ford and Dover Railway Committee.
Mr. BOLLAND presented a petition against the Man-
chester and Chester Canal Company.
Mr. GORING presented a petition from Shoreham
in favour of Stevenson's Brighton line.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition from the
Birmingham Grand Junction Railway Company against the
Deptford and Bermondsey Railway Bill. Also a petition
ogaiost the Birmingham Equitable Gas Company.
Sr G. S'FRICKL AND brought up the Report of the
Committee on the Sheffield and Halifax Road Bill. The
lion. Member then presented a petition from Barnsley
against the Barnsley Waterworks Bill.
Mr. AI A MLA ND presented a petition in favour of the
Etockport Improvement Bill.
On the motion of Mr. TOOKE, Gardaer's Divorce
Bill was read a third time and passed.

Mr. PEASE presented petitions from Durham against
certain parts of the North of England Railway Bill.
Mr. LOWTHER presented a petition from certain
shareholders of the Exeter and Falmouth Rail-way Com-
pany, complaining that the title of that Bill had beenchanged.
Mr. VILLIERS brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee on the Birmingham Plate and Crown Glass Com-
pany.
Mr. HINDLEY brought up the Report of the Butter-
house Green and Gorton Road Bill.
Major C. BRUCE presented petitions against the Edin-
burgh and Glasgow Railway Bill ; from the Trustees of a
Turnpike-road against the Glasgow and Greenock Railway
Bill ; and petitions from Inverness against the Commercial
Steam Company Bill, and against the North American
et.-3ain Packet Navigation Company.
DUNDALK WESTERN RAILWAY.

On they motion of Mr. S. CRAWFORD the Dun-
dalk Western Railway Bill was read a second time and or-
dered to be committed.
Mr. J. WORTLE Y presented a petition against the
Barnsley- Water Works Bill.
Mr. CHALMERS presented a petition from the Ma-
gistrates and Merchants of Montrose, praying for an Equa-
l:zation of the Port Duties at Leith._

The LORD ADVOCATE and Admiral ADAMS
presented similar petitions.
AGRICULTURAL AND COMMERCIAL BANK

OF IRELAND.

Mr. E. TENNENT presented a petition from certain
persons, stating that they had been induced, by false repre-
sentations, to embark their money in the Agricultural and
Commercial Bank of Ireland ; that they had since been
refused payment ; and praying that the circumstances might
be inquired into by the Committee on Joint-stock Banks.

Referred to the Committee.
On the motion of Sir E. WILMOT the Birmingham
and Derby Railway Bill was read a second time.
Sir H. CAMPBELL brought up the report on the
Roxburgh Road Bill.
Sir G. CLERK presented a petition from Edinburgh-
shire, in favour of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway.
Sir R. PEEL presented a petition from the Chamber of
Commerce, Glasgow, against the American and Colonial
Steam Navigation Company, and praying that no private
Company should be granted exclusive privileges.
Captain ALSAGER presented a petition from the
London and Brighton (Rennie's Line) Railway Company,
denying the allegations made against them in a petition
which had been before presented from the Engineer of a
rival Line.

Mr. FORBES moved the second reading of the Loan-
head and Stirling Canal Bill.
Admiral ADAM rose to oppose the second reading
of the Bill, because it had been opposed by the
Chamber of Commerce of Edinburgh, and by nearly all the
proprietors on the line, whose property would be sacrificed
by it. The Gallant Admiral concluded by moving that the
Bill be read a second time that day six months.
Mr. C. BRUCE seconded the amendment, feeling con•
vinead that no great commercial interests would be affected
by passing the Bill.
Mr. LOCH supported the second reading of the Bill.
Sir J. GRAHAM complained of two Ms having been
introduced for the same object, the intention of which evi-
dently was to distract the attention of the opposers of the
undertaking, so that they might not be able to know which
Bill they should-oppose. That was a•proceeding he hoped
the House would never sanction, and he would suggest that
both the Bills be rejected.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL had had the honour
to present several petitions from Scotland against the Bill,
and he could state that the commercial communities of
Scotland were, generally speaking, averse to it. The con-
duct of the Company had been most arbitrary—they had
brought in two Bills having the same identical object in
view ; and the consequence was, that parties opposing the
Bill would be subjected to double expense. When parties
proceeded in so vexatious and harassing a manner, he
thought the House had good grounds for throwing out
both these Bills.

Mr. CHALMERS also opposed the second reading of
the Bill.
Sir R. PEEL said that if it were true that two Bills had
been brought in to effect the same object, he thought that
principle was so objectionable, that on that single ground hr
should give his vote against the Biii, and he trusted the
House would mark its sense of such a proceeding by reject-
ing it altogether.
The SPEAKER said, that if he had known or had
been informed that two Bills had been introduced for pre-
cisely the same purpose, he should not have considered.
that he hail di.;charzed his duty unless he called the atten-
tion of the House to that fact.
Mr. LOCH said that be hail cognizance only of the
second Bill.
After a few observations from Sir G. CLERK,
The Amendment was carried without a division, and the
Bill consequently lost.
On the moticri of Mr. VILLIERS the Worcester
Cattle Alai-Let Bill was read a third time, and pas.A.
Mr. FAZAKERLEY presented a Report from the
Poor-law Committec.—Ordered to be printed.
Mr. WA RBuirroN brought up the Report of the
Committee on the Deptford and Dover Railway pi tition
Ile moved that the evidence relative to the subscription
list be printed. It was desirable that it should be in the
hands, of Members as soon as possible.
Petitions in great numbers were presented in favour of
the Ministerial plan for the aboliticn of Church-rates, by
Mr. alines, Mr. Barnard, Sir G. Strickland, Dr. Bow,
ring, Mr. Thornier, Mr. Parrott, and other Members.
Petitions against the measure were presented by Mr.
BA RNA BY.
Admiral ADAMS presented several petitions in favour
of the Ministerial plan for the abolition of Church-rates.
Mr. GROTE presented similar petitions from the inha-
bitants of Wood-street, Cheapside.
Captain WOOD presented petitions from Herefordshire
against the abolition of Church.rates.
Mr. HUME presented petitions from Harrow, Leices-
ter, Hammersmith, Debenham, Cardiff, Dingay, and
Denby, all in favour of the Ministerial plan for the aboli-
tiol of Church-rates.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented similar petitions from
places in Lancashire.
Mr. HARDY presented petitions from HuldersLld
and other places against the measure.
Mr. WILKS presented a petition in favour of the mea-
sure from Boston and other placos in Suffolk.
Mr. CARTWRIGHT presented petitions from North-
amptonshire against the measure.
Mr. PALMER presented similar petitions from Berk-
shire.

Petitions against the Ministerial plan for the abolition
of Church-rates wcro presented by Mr. Maunsel, Captain
Gordon, Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Heathcote, and Mr. Stewart
Wortley ; and in favour of the Ministerial plan, by the
Attorney-General, Mr. Protheroe, Lord Ebrington, Mr.
Gore Langton, Mr. P. Scrope, Mr. Potter, and . Major
Beaucledt.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM presented a petition from Car-
lisle against the Ministerial Ma: for the Abolition of
Church Rates.
Mr. R. WASON presented petitions in favour of the
Ministerial Plan.