The Sun.
London, England, 1865-02-16 00:00:00

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Standing Orders were declared to have been com-
plied with in the case of several private bills.

CENTRAL WALES AND STAFFORDSHIRE
JUNCTION RAILWAY BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of this bill,

Mr. GREAVES said that this bill had been folr times
before the house, which refused to sanction it on its merits.
Ho thought the house should reject the bill, the standing
orders not being complied with, instead of allowing the
time of the house being further occupied with a bill which
came before it under such circumstances. He moved that
the bill should be read a second time that day six months.
After a few words from Sir E. DERING, explaining the
manner in which the bill came before the house on each
occasion,
Mr. ROEBUCK said that the bill had been thrown out
in 1861, 1862, 1863, and finally on its merits last year. It
was now brought forward a fifth time, much to the incon-
venience of land owners in the neighbourhood where the
railway was to traverse. When the Chancellor brought
forward the subject of a committee on railways the other
evening ho (Mr. Roebuck) suggested that the attention of
such committee should he directed to the initiation of such
cbmpanies. There were many sham companies brought
before the house, which were originated with engineers,
contractors, and solicitors. The lawyers got a large share
cf the plunder, but there was generally a man of fortune
behind who received a lion's share of the plunder.
Sir B. LEIGHTON considered that the promoters had
not been properly treated, and supported the second reading.
Mr. DODSON hoped the house would not take upon it-
self the responsibility of reversing the previous decisions.
The house divided, and the numbers were—
For
the second reading B3
Against 54
Majority —29
The bill was accordingly read a second time.
LONDON, TILBURY, AND SOUTHEND RAILWAY.
On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. COLLINS moved, as an amendment, that it be post-
poned for a fortnight.
Colonel FRENCH seconded the amendment.
Mr. JACKSON was in favour of the bill going to a com-
mittee.

Mr. DODSON trusted that the bill would be allowed to
go a committee, which would be more able to judge of its
merits than the house.
The amendment was withdrawn, and the bill was read a
second time.
PICCADILLY AND PARK-LANE NEW ROAD BILL.
On the motion of Mr. TITE, the second reading of the
bill was postponed for a week.
PRIVATE •BILLS.
Mr. TORRENS moved that on every private bill to be
considered by a committee of the house all petitions which
shall stand referred to such a committee be printed at
the expense of the petitioners and copies of such petitions,
together with a copy of the bill to be considered, be deli-
livered to each member of the committee not less than two
days previous to its sitting. He believed that the expense
of this proceeding would not be great, and a practice was
proposed in regard to petitions in the other house similar
to that he suggested. If the expense fell on the promoters
it would be heavy, considering their number was limited.
Col. PEEL said he believed very few members would
trouble themselves to read these petitions, which in many
cases were not proceeded with. He thought every altera-
tion in the standing orders should be referred to a com-
mittee and reported upon before the house was asked to
sanction any such change. A. class of persons had arisen
who were called promoters, wi-lo received a gratuity to
promote.certain undertakings, for the benefit of persons
interested. He proposed that for " petitioners"- " pro-
moters" should be substituted.
Mr. M. GIBSON approved the motionovith some altera-
tion, to which Mr. Torrens assented.
Mr. CRAUFURD said he had heard nothing to show
him that the alteration proposed was necessaiy.
Col. W. PATTEN did not see what benefit could
with the
result
from the adoption of the resolution, It
it.
gh,
alterations agreed to, ho would not oppo_nit
The motion was agreed to without a division.
THE LATE MR. GREGSON, M.P.
Lord PALMERSTON drew the attention of the house
to the decease of this gentleman, and passed a high
eulogium on the services ho had rendered for seven years
in his attendance on committees. He took this opportu-
nity of alluding to value of the services of hon. members
on committees on public and private bills, which did not
attract that attention which was given to speaking in the
house, and which reflected so much credit on their pa-
triotism. The country had sustained a great loss in the
late gentleman, and he deplored him on private as well as
public grounds.