The Sun.
London, England, 1865-02-10 00:00:00

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The standing orders were said to have been complied
with in the case of several railway and other bills, includ-
ing the Caledonian Railway Company, the Southampton
Gas Company, the London and South Western Railway
Extension, the Leeds Water Works Company, the South
Lancashire Docks Company, the North British Railways
Extensions, the Furness Dock and Railway Company, &c.
The reading of the titles of these bills, as well as several
others, in which the orders were not complied with, occu-
pied the greater portion of the early part of the evening.
The SPEAKER said that the gentlemen elected as re-
ferees on private bills last year, viz., Mr. Adair, Mr. Has-
card, and Mr. Rickards, were to continue their useful
duties during the present session.
THE STANDING ORDERS.

Mr. C. F ORS TER made a motion to amend Standing
Order 7 by the substitution of 3 for 4, as the number
of members to compose the Select Committees on
Private Bills. He said that much difficulty had been
experienced in getting the requisite number of members
under the existing rules of the house to attend the com-
mittees. He thought the proposition of reducing the number
of members attending committees from five to four was
not practically efficient, and that his proposition, if adopted,
would be found to work effectively.

Mr. SMOLLETT said that he did not consider the pro-
position of the hon. member would meet the real grievance
of which they had to complain. He referred to his per-
Bonal experience of committees to show that the duties of
attending these committees were not properly distributed,
for in one instance he knew that a member had
boasted that for seven years he had evaded serving on
committees. He strongly objected to barristers
or other professional gentlemen being exempted
from attendance on these committees, and contended that
members whose private business interfered with their
public duties should resign their seats.
Sir F. GOLDSMID thought that the motion of the hon.

member would not be found efficient. For instance, a
member might be unable to attend a committee through
the death of a relative, or through his own
illness, and then it would not be equitable to proceed
with the consideration of a bill, for in order to come to
a decision they must give the Chairman a casting vote, a
proceeding which would be rendered unnecessary if they
adhered to the present regulation as to the number of
members composing a committee.
Sir G. BOW YEE, advocated a recurrence to the old prac-
tice of having five members on the committees.
Captain JERVIS opposed the alteration.
Mr. HODGSON and Mr. H. SEYMOVII followed on the same
side.

Lord STANLEY contended that the fewer the number
of members on committees the greater would be the
responsibility of the individual members. No doubt
that the chairman of a committee in general paid more
attention to the proceedings in regard to private bills, but
at the same time he did not agree to investing him with
a casting vote. He considered that the time to which these
committees sometimes extended might be profitably re-
duced, and he expressed himself in favour of the motion in
certain points.

Colonel W. PATTEN said that in his opinion it would be
dangerous to reduce the number of members of committees,

and advocated the practice that prevailed in the House of

Lords, by which, if the committee were equally divided,
• the bill wa.s to be negatived. He denied that the great
railway companies would be satisfied with the decision of
two members of a committee.
Mr. M. GIBSON was in favour of a committee of five
members ; but if that number could not be obtained with-
out difficulty, he thought the quorum should not be re-
duced further than it was at present constituted.

Mr. BENTINCK complained that the practice in regard
to private bills was not regulated by system or precedent.
(Hear, hear.) He hoped the house would take into their
consideration the means of remedying the existing defects
by the appointment of a tribunal efficiently constituted.
After some further discussion, the house divided, and the

numbers were—
For the motion
Against
Majority —B2
PRINTING PRIVATE BILLS AT THE EXPENSE
OF THE PETITIONERS.

Mr. TORRENS moved, as a new standing order, " That
on every private bill to be considered by a committee of the
house all petitions presented by the promoters, opponents,
or other parties connected with such bills, be printed at the
expense of the petitioners, and copies of those petitions, as
well as a copy of the bill to be considered, be delivered to
each member of the committee not less than two days pre-

vious to its assembling."
After a few words from Colonel W. PATTEN and Mr. M.
GIBSON', the motion was postponed.
On the motion of Colonel W. PATTEN, some verbal
amendments were introduced into standing order 192.
Mr. H. D. SEYMOUR moved that a message be sent to
the Lords, requesting their lordships to communicate to
this house the minutes of evidence which may be taken
before every committee on a private bill originating in the
present session with their lordships, and sent down to this
house.

The question was put and agreed to, unobserved by Mr.
M. Gibson, who rose to oppose it, but was called to order
by Mr. Speaker.
DISTRESS FOR RENT IN IRELAND.

Mr. MAGUIRE gave notice that on an early day he
would move for leave to bring in a bill to abolish the
power of distress for the recovery of rent in Ireland.
MONASTERIES AND NUNNERIES IN ENGLAND.
Mr. NEWDEGATE gave notice that on Friday, March
3, he would move as an amendment, on going into com-
mittee of supply, for the appointment of a committee to in-
quire into the existence, character, and increase of conven-
tual and monastic establishments in this country.
THE EXTENSION OF THE BOROUGH
FRANCHISE.
Mr. BAINES gave notice that he would on an early day
move for leave to bring in a bill to extend the elective fran-
chise in boroughs in England and Wales. (Hear, hear, and
ironical cheers.)

THE MALT TAX.
Sir P. KELLY postponed his motion on the malt tax
from February 28 to March 7.
--

THE NATIONAL GALLERY. .
Mr. a sE.,-.-
1 LIOITR gave notice that on an early day he
would ask the First Commissioner of the Board of Works
whether he had taken
any steps to carry into effect the re-
solution of the h
of the National aau
euse last year with regard to the building
ec7 in Trafalgar-square, and what the
Government would
0 in regard to the Royal Academy, in
accordance with the report of the
Royal Commission.
REGIMENTAL,
QUARTERMASTERS.
Sir F. SMITH asked the
eceivedThader-Secretary War whether he had r of State for
appointed to inquire into the the report of the committee
equartermasters ; and whether it was clition of the regimental
the table of the house, or take any
ati intended to lay it upon
The Marquis of HART INGT ON saiedtohne upon it.
reporthad been received, and there would be
no
objection in question
upon the table of the house. Some of the questions
to lay it
involved
`would have to be referred to the Treasury, others to
War Office, the Commander-in-Chief, and the Secretary of of
State. On the army estimates he would state the course
which would be pursued by the Governmentin this matter.