The Sun.
London, England, 1837-04-08 00:00:00

BELFAST HARBOUR BILL.

Mr. E. TENNENT moved the second reading of the
Belfast Harbour Bill. There were two Bills on this subject
before the House ; one that had been introduced by the
Noble Lord opposite (the Earl of Belfast), and one by
himself. He was sorry to say that great differences existed
among the inhabitants of Belfast with respect to this mea-
sure ;but from the letters he bad received that day, he was
in hopes that those differences would be amicably settled.
He trusted that the House would allow both Bills to go
before a Committee, in order that the merits of both mea-
sures might be understood.
The Earl of BELFAST trusted that the Hon. Member
would postpone the second reading of the Bill till Tuesday
next.
Mr. E. TENNENT had no objection, if the Noble Earl
could show any reason for it.

—Captain PECHELL felt bound to ask that the Bill
might be delayed for a much longer time than was requested
by the Noble Lord. It was his intention to ask for a delay of
no less than six months.--(Laughter.) He considered that
the present Bill, if it became law, would have the effect of
excluding altogether the bringing of water to the town of
Belfast ; and on that ground, therefore, he would move that
the Bill be read that day six months.
Mr. DUNBAR hoped the Noble Lord in justice to the
town of Belfast would allow the Bill to go before a Com•
mittee, when the merits of both would be fully investif,ated.
Sir R. BATESON thought that in a question of so
much importance to one of the first commercial towns in
Ireland, no party or political feelings should interfere. He
thought, after what had passed in Committee about a fort-
night ago, that the Noble Lord was bound in honour not
to oppose the commitment of the Bill, as it was then
understood that both the plans should go before a Com-
mittee for its decision. The Gallant Captain (Pechell)
had merely spoken from the brief put into his hand, and
could not know as much about the feelings of the inhabi-
tants as he (Sir R. Bateson) did. He hoped the motion
would not be persevered in.
Mr. WILKS entirely agreed with the Honourable
Baronet, the Member for Londonderry, that the present
question should net be considered as a party. one. The
Bill would make the harbour of Belfast, which was ac-
cessible every tide, one which could not be entered with-
out very great difficulty. He had strong objections

to the Bill, and he understood that the merchants of Bel-
fast as well as those of London loading to that port, were
decidedly opposed to it. If the matter was pressed to
a division, he would most certainly vote for the rejection of
the Bill.
The Earl of BELFAST could assure the House that
he had no party feeling on the subject whatever—the ob-
jection which the merchants of Belfast made was, that by
their plan the harbour would be very much improved
at an expense of only 70,0001., while by the Bill before the
House, the harbour would be rendered worse at an expense
of upwards of 150,000/.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appered—

For the second reading
Against it. _ 43

Majority in favour of the Hill ...... -23
The Bill was then read a second time and ordered to be
committed.

Mr. ROBINSON brought up the Report of the Com-
mittee on the Worcester Cattle Market Bill.

Mr. ROBERT PARKER presented a petition against
the Chester and Buckingham Railway.
Mr. WALTER CAMPBELL presented a petition
against the Glasgow and Ayr Railway.