The Sun.
London, England, 1838-03-29 00:00:00

PRIVATE Bt., SINESS IN PAR LIA-
AILNT,--(YESTERDAY.)
, (WEST SCOTLAND LIST.)
Lord -4711.4.!5il ThwrixeK in the Chair.
GLASGOW `I,IV,TFIRWORKS BILL.
Mr. ANDREWS and Mr. Saeme'ilt3 s;terreeael for the parties
for this Bill, which was opposed by Mr. HILL slid /4f. PNIEL
vti the [art of the Commissioners of Police of Glasgow, Who
presCriftql It pa:tititie against the Bill, as injuriaus in its
tendency towards the tow ti, aed eneieashing upon the rights
of such Commisioners.
Mr. ANDREWS addressed the Conititiitc.36 in stippart of the
of which, he maintained, spulte lot itself,
The Learned Gentleria:tn wrocceded to impu4n the pout
of the Commissioners of Police io petition in the matter, and
to deny their right to be heard, contending that the Bill would
be most usrqul to the inhabitants in general. sad that, in athert he
( Mr. A.) was at a loss to conceive how the Commissioners could
fancy th, mselves entitled to interfere in the matter at all. lie de-
nied that they had any ei.tinet or peculiar intetert which could
possibly be affect( dby this 13i11. In confirmation of argu-
ment, he quoted a decision, to the same effect, of Lord Cock-
burn, in the Scottish Courts
Mr. HILL, in support of the right of the Commissioners of
Police to petition, denied the arguments of his Learned
Friend, Mr. Andrews, and avi reed that the decision of Lord
Cockburn had been overruled, on a preliminary objection
having been taken to it, in the Scottish Courts. The Learned
Counsel proceeded to call
Mr. John Gray --Witness has been a Commissioner of Po-
lice. Is not so now. Is now a member of the Glasgow
Town Council. Was a Commissioner in 1834. The
Commissioners have buildings for the care of criminals, be-
sides having the care of the streets, and .health and cleanli-
ness of the place. Glasgow is much subject to fevers ;
in all such cases, and when the cholera is about,
water in great quantities is requisite. It is a
vital necessity ; arid the present supply is not adequate to the
wants of the inhabitants.
Cross-examined by Mr. ANDREws.—Is not a paid agent in
this affair water is wanted in great quantities : it is purchased
by the Police Commissioners by private bargain ; there is no
power to compel the Water Company to supply it to the
Commis,,ioners it must be paid for : the Commissioners have
no privilege, as regards water, any more then the other inha-
bitants of Glasgow. The Waterworks Company can break
up the streets without the consent of the Commissioners.
This they are entitled to do by authority of Acts of
Parliament.
Mr. M'NEIL then addressed the Committee in support of
the petition of the Commissioners of Police. The Learne d
Advocate denied the validity of Lord Cock burn's decision, which
he designated as having been given " most incompetently,
most unjustly. and most illegally." lie then quoted the Act,
which invested the Commissioners of Police with very large
powers, almost paramount, over the well-being- and good
order of the city of Glasgow, and he proceeded to enforce reasons
why he thought the Committee on this Bill could not give a
"decision against the right of the Commissioners to petition,
after Lord Cockburn's decision to that effect had been
solemnly annulled.
Mr. ANDREWS, in reply, contended that the Commissioners
of Police were not the parties who had the possession of such
rights as had been stated to belong to them, but that the Town-
Council were the parties who now possessed the government
of the city. The Learned Counsel then commented upon the
evidence of Mr. Gray, who had merely confirmed what he, Mr.
Andrews, well knew before, viz., that the Commissioners
of Police had no more power over the Water Company
than any ordinary individuals in Glasgow, and that they had
not the command over the Company for one drop of water,
without paying for it, as every body else did. He argued
very strongly in favour of Lord Cockburn's decision
against these Commissioners, and took occasion to re-
mark that, of all the Judges who sat upon the Scottish
Bench, the decisions of Lord Cockburn were, in his ( Mr.
Andrew's) opinion, the most learned and argumentative.
The Commissioners had, by their Act of Parliament, it was
true, many powers, but they had not the power to appear here in
the capacity they had thought proper to assume. Their Act gave
them no power, and, consequently they had no locus standi for
the object they sought. In conclusion the Learned Counsel
contended that the decision of Lord Cockburn ought to be
adhered to.
The room was here cleared, after which the Chairman an-
nounced the decision of the Committee, " That the Commis-
sioners of Police had not the right to be heard before the Com-
mittee upon this Bill in their corporate capacity."
Mr. ANDREWS then proceeded to open his case in support
of the preamble of the Bill, the object of which was, that the
Glasgow Waterworks Company might be empowered to pur-
chase " The Cranstown Hill Waterworks," in order to pro-
cure a larger and better supply of water for the city of Glasgow.
The Learned Counsel then entered into a considerable
detail of the local circumstances attending the erection of both
the Water-works Companies. It appeared that the Cranstown-
hill Company had laid out 130,0001., for which they had, as
yet received nothing. On the contrary, they had, year by
year, lost the interest of their money. Consequently they were
anxious to sell their works to the Glasgow Company, which,
if effected, would be the means of great benefit to the city, as
affording it the means of that full supply of water, of which they
now stood so much in need. The supply, too, would not only
be more ample, but the prices paid for it, according to the
rates of houses, would be considerably diminished. These
facts would be borne out by the evidence he would call. The
Company also intended to tie themselves down to keep their
mains continually charged, for the purpose of extinguishing
fires, and this, although they were not bound to do so by
their present Act. His Learned Friends on the opposite side
had made a great outcry about " monopoly," which was cer-
tainly a very ugly word ; but this only reminded him (Mr.
Andrews,) of Shakspeare's play, wherein a whole French regi-
ment is driven off the field by a single English soldier rushing
on calling out, " a Talbot I a Talbot I" Here " Monopoly"
was attempted for the same purpose ; but he, Mr. Andrews,
could assure the Committee that there was no attempt at mo-
nopoly, unless it could be called a monopoly to do a great
benefit to the city of Glasgow at a much cheaper rate than
that at which it now received a smaller one.
The CFIAIIIIIAN here asked Mr. Andrews what the propor-
tion of supply of water would be, as compared with that which
was afforded now.
Mr. ANDREWS replied it would he much more ample, but be
forbore to particularize the quantity at present, as it was not a
question applicable to the preamble, but would be the subject
of a particular clause.
Mr. Sergeant SPANKIE appeared for the Lord Provost and
Corporation of Glasgow, and addressed the Committee. From
his address it appeared that the Lord Provost was prevented
by domestic occurrences from appearing in London until to-
morrow. On this ground the Learned Sergeant now applied
to the Committee to adjourn to any future convenient day, for
the purpose of his ( Sergeant Spankie's) being enabled to
fully and effectually examine the conflicting interests of this
case in all their bearing;.
Mr. ANDREWS objected to an adjournment, on the ground
that the promoters of the Bill were kept in London at a consi-
derable expense ; besides other and greater opposition might
arise in the mean time, against which the Learned Sergeant
could not guarantee his (Mr. Andrews's) clients.
Mr. Sergeant SPANKIE denied that such consequences as
those anticipated by Mr. Andrews would ensue. The Learned
Sergeant hoped the Committee would not object to adjourn
over to Friday next, or any other day the Committee might
think right, when he would be fully prepared.
The CHAIRMAN decided against the adjournment, and that
the evidence upon the preamble should forthwith be gone into.
Mr. HILL applied to the Committee to appear for Mr. John
Buckmire.
Mr. ANDREws objected to Mr. Hill so appearing, as Mr.
Buckmire had signed himself Chairman of the parties who had
been declared ineligible to oppose this Bill.
Mr. HILL contended that this fact di.i not invalidate Mr.
Buckmire's right to be heard in opposition, inasmuch as he was
a householder of Glasgow, and was, consequently, interested
in the effect of this Bill.
The room was here cleared, after which the Committee de-
cided that Mr. Hill could not be heard as Counsel in support
of the petition of Mr. Buckmire.
Mr. HILL then applied for an adjournment of the Com-
mittee, on the ground that a postponed notice of motion stood
on the paper of the House, the purport of which was to con-
sider if the Standing Orders had been duly complied with upon
this Bill.
The LEARNED COUNSEL then described the circumstances
which had prevented that motion coming on last night, and
added that an Hon. Member, Mr. Chalmers, would bring it on
to-night.
The Committee, without clearing the room, decided that
Mr. Hill's application could not be entertained.
Mr. ANDREWS then proceeded to call, in support of the pre-
amble, Mr. Daniel M'Cane. Witness is engineer to the
Cranstown Hill Waterworks Company. Has been so nine
years. Has an account of its amount of dividend which was
nil, or nearly so, and those dividends are diminishing. 19,3551.
are to be annually charged on the Water rates, whereby a
considerable saving would take place.
The whole of this witness's evidence in chief went to prove
an increased supply of water, and a diminution of rates, as the
effects of the proposed Bill.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant SPANKIE.--The gross re-
ceipts last year were 3,730/. The general average receipts,
from 1814, were between 2,0001. and 3,0001., so that last
year's receipts were more in amount, but not profitable. The
Cranstoun Hill Company and the Glasgow Company have
been in the habit of charging the same rates. A graduated
scale existed, and was adhered to by both Companies. The
Companies lay their heads together for that purpose. The
Glasgow Company had six years of " lean years," during
which they bad also a return of al/. The losses of the lean
years of the Cranstoun Hill Company were gradually restored,
but as yet they got no interest upon capital.
The cross-examination of this witness occupied a very long
time, but nothing tended to shake his previous evidence, nor
was any fresh fact, in its support, elicited.
Note. —The decision, as regards the incapacity of the Po-
lice Commissioners of Glasgow to be heard against the Bill
a ill have the effect of sending their agents, solicitors, aed
witnesses, to a considerable number, hack to Glasgow, at Ilia
loss of all their time and expenses, which, had they been de-
clared eligible to be heard, might have been allowed them.
The Speaker being at prayers, the Committee aj urned
until one o'clock next Frnay, Mr. M`Neil having previously
applied for access to the account books of the Cranstoun Wa-
terworks Company, which the last witness had extracted some
of his evidence from.
Access to them was granted by the Committee.

The snow, in some places, is lying two feet deep,
notwithstanding the very heavy showers of rain we '-ave had
during the last fortnight.—Greenock Advertiser.

LAW INT ELLIGE

COURT OF CHANCERY, MARCH 28.
ItAXWoßrity v. liAxwolinly.
In this matter the plaintiff 'ma been suing in
.forma pauperis,
arA an application was made some time back to dispauperise
;lira, en the ground that be et joyed an annuity of 50/. In
answer to this allegation, the plaintiff insisted that be owed
much more than the whole value of the annuity, that he re-
eoVed no benefit from it, and that, in point of fact, he was
,not worth five pounds after the payment of his debts. The
matter stood over for inquiry :nto the truth of the allegation
of poverty.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, after locking into the affidavits,
sail there could be no doubt that the plaintiff had made an
assertion not founded on fact with respect to the amount of
his debts. The order permitting him to sue in forma palperis
must, therefore, be discharged.
THORPE V. lIUGIIES.
was an appeal motion to discharge an injunction
grant( d by the Vce Chancellor, which restrains the trial of
as ite;ion brought I y thy defendant, as agent of the Com-
mercial and Agricultural Bank of Ireland, to recover from the
plaintiff a sam of 1.500/., the Laiance of calls on shares in
that Company. The Company sia?l established in 1834, at
the suggestion of a Mr. Japle3 Dwyer, and the plaintiff, who
is a merchant in Manchester, became the bolder of a number
of shares, on which he hag already paid 1,500/. Having
reason to be dissat:sfied with the management of. the concern,
he refused to pay the re mai.ider of the instalments, and an action
was c,)mmenced against him by the defendant, who, under the
Act of the 6th Geo. IV., represents the Company, with a
power to sue and be sup d. The cause is set down for trial at
the present Assizes for the county of Lancaster, and the
tiff, having filed a bill for the discovery of evidence of :-and
and misrepresentation, as a ground of defence to the action,.
filed a bill for a discovery, and obtained a common injunction
against ten persons., whom he represented to be the Commit-
t:e of Management of the Bank. Having got this injunction
for want of appearance, he then applied to have the terms of
the injunction extended to the defendant, as connected with
those ten persons in the fraud, and by this means he stopped
the defendant's action, the ten persons first proceeded against
having no action pending on the subject.
Mr. WAKEFIELD now contended that this proceeding was
expressly opposed to the established practice of the Court.
Mr. JACon supported the order of the Court below.
• The Loan CHANCELLoa said that it was quite 'impossible,
from the nature of the issues, that the plaintiff could derive
f
anv discovery through the oill, that could in any way assist
him in his defence to the action.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, 1111otot 28.
IN THE MATTER OF NAPOLEON DARNOUX.
This was, in many respects, a remarkable case, and in which
an extraordinary application was made. The insolvent, who
had been an extensive merchant at Rheims, and whose credi-
tors were resident i❑ France, absconded some time ago and
came to England, under an assumed name, bringing, it was
alleged, with him a considerable sum of money. He was
traced, and arrested. He was in the habit of carrying bank
notes in the top part of a walking-stick, and on his application
to this Court to be discharged from custody, a point of con-
cealing and making away with property was urged against
him. He was remanded for a period of 15 calendar months,
but suon afterwards managed to effect his escape from the
Queen's Bench Prison, where he was detained to the amount
of upwards of 5,000/. Pursuit was made after him, and ha
was discovered in America, where he was now imprisoned. He
had been, under the Code de Commerce, declared a fraudu-
lent bankrupt, and was liable to an imprisonment of 20 years.
On his hearing he told an extraordinary story about a Spanish
lady giving him money to keep for her.
Mr. NIcHoLLs applied on the part of the assignee for the
assistance of the Court, to enable the creditors to prosecute
Darnoux in America. The facts were detailed in an affidavit.
The present application was for the original documents to
be given out to the solicitor to forward to America, without
which Darnoux would escape, and get re-possession of the
property.
Mr. Commissioner HARRIS granted the application, ordering
copies to be filed until the return of the original documents
from New York.