The Sun.
London, England, 1836-05-05 00:00:00

SOUTIIAMPTON DOCKS.

Oa the motion of Mr. BARLOW HOY the Southampton
Docks Company Bill was read a third time and passed.
DUBLIN AND DROGHEDA RAILWAY.

Mr. MONTAG U CHAPM AN presented a petition from
an individual, complaining of the promoters of the Dublin
and Drogheda Railwry Bill; and complaining that he had, as
we understood the Hon. Member, been deceived by them, as
he now discovered, if it pasSed through his property. The
Hai. Member moved that the Bill be referred back to the
Standing Orders Committee.
The SPEAKER said it was irregular to present a petition
for the purpose of having a Bill referred back to the Standing
Orders Committee after it had been read a second time.
Lord STANLEY said it appeared to him that the peti
tioner was not aware in due time that the line was to pass
through his property. •
Sir JAMES GRAHAM suggested, as the petition was in-
formal, that the Hon. Member had better withdraw it.
The petition was then withdrawn.
Dr. BO WRING presented a petitien from the magistrates
of Dunbarton, against certain clauses of the Clyde Navigation
Bill And one to the same eff:ct from the Glasgow Water
Wo ks Company.
Colonel SEALE brought up the report from the Com-
mittee on the Niodbury Road Bill.
Mr. ANGERSTEIN presented a petition from the free
holders of Greenwich, praying that no railway might le
allowed to pass through that to wn; and 0 e
the same effect from $OO inhabitants householders of Green
wich.

Clptain ALSAGER prsn:ed a petition from Thomas
Miller, of Croydon, against certain clauses of the South
Eastern Railway.
Sjr J. GRAHAM brought up the report of the Committee
on the Carlisle Dock Bill.

Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the Dublin
Steam Company, praying for leave to bring in a Bill for their
regulation.
Sir M. S. STEWART wou!d oppose the motion, for it
was for leave to bring in a Bill in place of one which had been
thrown out on the third reading. He must throw himself upon
the House and the Speaker, for he was bound to give every
opposition to the motion in his power.
The SHEARER said that the petition was in order.
Leave had beer, given for its presentation.
Sir M. S. STEWART wished to know whether he ought
to oppose the reception of the petition.
Mr. OiCONNEL said the motion was not to the effect
stated. There had been a petition presented before, and leave
given to present one.
Mr. ROBINSON had voted for the third reading of the
Bill, but still he thought the rule was against the bringing in
of a Bill after one similar had been thrown out.

Mr. O'CONNELL—If gentlemen would only take the
trouble of inquiring into the present proceedings they would
find that what had been done was regular. The merits of
the Bill would be discussed hereafter. A petition had been
presented by the company for leave to petition, and that
had been referred to a ComMittee, which had reported that
leave should be given, and the present petition bad been
presented in consequence of such leave. The petition would
be referred he another Committee which would report
whether the Bill ought to be introduced ornot.
Colonel SEA LE presented a petition from Stockton pray-
ng for the alteration of the law with respect to Marine In-
surances.

Mr. KEMP presented a petition from Rye, praying for the
total repeal of the Stamp Duties on Newspapers.

VOTE BY BALLOT.

Lord C. LENNOX presented a petition from Lewes in
favour of the Vote by Ballot.
W. KEMP supported the prayer of the petition, which was
then laid on the table.