The Sun.
London, England, 1849-04-18 00:00:00

MARRIAGE BILL.

Colonel BERESFORD presented a petition from
Essex against this Bill.
ARBITRATION.
Mr. EVANS presented a petition from a place in
Pembrokeshire in favour of arbitration instead of war.
PETITIONS.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition from Ross-
shire against Sunday travelling.
Colonel SALWEY presented a petition from Stoney
Stratford praying that all international disputes might
be settled by arbitration.
Admiral GORDON presented a petition from Aber-
deen against the Registration Bill.
Mr. H. BERKELEY presented a petition from Bris-
tol against the Public Roads Bill. orr
Mr. WADDINGTON presented several petitions
from various nlac,s to the same effect.
Mr. M. GIBSON presented four petitions from Man-
chester, and one from Bury, praying for a general sys-
tem of secular education.
Mr. W. EVANS presented petitions from Derby and
several other places in favour of the Public Roads Bill.
Mr. PACKE pre,ented petitions from Ashby-de-la-
ZAich, and other places in Leicestershire, against the
Public Reads
Mr. DUNCAN presented a petition from Dundee
against the Lunatics (&otiand) Bill.
Mr. CARDWELL presented a petition from Liver-
pool, praying tor an alteration in the Passengers Bill.
Mr. II EADLAM presented petitions from Newcastle-
upon-Tyne, praying that international disputes might
be settled by arbitration; also a petition from the same
place for the abolition of slavery.
Mr. E. ELLICE presented petitions from Warwick
against the Public Roads Bill.
Mr. SOTHERON presented petitions from Devizes
to the same effect.
Mr. B. DENISON presented similar petitions from
various places in the West Riding.
General LYGON presented a petition to the same
effect. - _ _

Sir J. PAKINGTON presented similar petitions
from Worcestershire.
Mr. SPOONER presented seventeen petitions from
places in Warwickshire, and ten from places in Worces-
tershire, all ap
inst the Roads Bill, and praying that it
might not pass into a law.
Mr. HOPE presented petitions to the same effect.
Mr. CHAPLIN presented a petition to the same effect
from Salisbury.
Sir J. Y. BULLER presented a large number of si-
milar petitions from places in Devonshire.
Mr. HUME presented several petitions from places in
Scotland against the Marriage Bill.
Mr. GODSON presented twelve petitions from places
in Worcestershire against the Roads Bill.
Colonel THOMPSON presented a petition from Brad-
ford against the Roads Bill.
Mr. NEWDEGATE presented a petition, signed by
the Mayor of Bristol, to the same effect, and several
like petitions from Warwickshire.
Mr. AGLIONBY presented a petition from the El-
ders of Staple's Inn against the attorney's certificate
duty.
Mr. COBDEN presented a number of petitions from
places in the West Riding against the Roads Bill.
DROPPED NOTICES OF MOTION AND
ORDERS.

The Dropped Notices of Motion and Orders of the
Day were re-appointed.
ROAD BILL.

On the question that the order of the day for the se-
cond reading of this Bill be now read,
Mr. PUSEY objected to the motion, and moved that
another order be read. Government had Mondays and
Fridays, and this week Thursday was granted to them;
and if they were allowed to place their Bills first on the
orders for Wednesday, independent Members had no
chance whatever of bringing forward their measures at
all, unless it were at two o'clock in the morning, after a
Government night, when their attempting to do so was
invariably objected to. Now he had an important
Bill on the orders fcr today, but it was was quite
hopeless hr him to expect to bring it on if this Roads
Bill were proceeded with, and he therefore felt that he
had a right to make the motion he had done, however
troubles ;me or inconvenier; it might be to Govern-
ment.—(Hear, hear )
Sir J. PAKINGTON perfectly agreed with what had
fallen from thy Hon. Gentlemen, and had great pleasure
in seconding his motion.—(Hear.) Now that the Go-
vernment lass deferred the Bill, there can be no doubt
shortly there will be an attempt made to take every
Thursday for the Government, and he did think that
independent Members of the House ought not to be de-
prived of the few privileges which they now possessed.
After a few wards from Mr. B. DENISON, who la-
boured under some misapprehension respecting the na-
ture of the Bill, in which he was corrected by several
Hon. Alemb rs around him,
Sir G. GREY said that he certainly thought that it
was not right that even if Government measures were
placed upon the paper at all for Wednesday that they
should not take precedence of the other orders of the
day in which independent Members of the House were
interested.—(Dear, hear) It was certainly true that
there might be measures of importance in the hands of
private aletnb rm which should take precedence of others
of less consequence, but as a ru e that which had been
made a general order should not be departed from. In
Bills to which there had been no opposition no difficulty
could possibly arise, but in a case like this, where there
had been considerable dissent expressed, he thought the
better course would be to come to some decision one
way or the other, if not to-day, at least at a very early
peeled.
Mr. WILSON PATTEN was very anxious to enforce
upon the Government the necessity of leaving Wednes-
day inviolate for private business, and as there was evi-
dently some difficulty in the way, he recommended his
Hon. Friend to withdraw the Bill now before the House.
After some words of explanation from Mr. PrsEY and
Sir G. GREY,
Mr. SOTHERON recommended that the Bill should
be referred to a Select Committee.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. 11. HERBERT thought, that as this Bill was a
matter which largely interested the public, a fair die-
cu-sign ef the matter ought to be held.
Mr. FIUME most sincerely trusted that the order of
the day for leaving Wednesday entirely open to the
business transacted by private Members would not be in-
fringed. With respect to the -Bill now before the House,
he thought that it was imperatively necessary that they
should come to some decision.
Mr. DI.iRAELI protested most earnestly against the
doctrine which bad been thrown out the other night with
respect to this Bill. The Right Hon. Baronet the
Secretary of State for the Home Department had pro-
pounded that the Government were not responsible fur
the principle and details of any Bills which had been in-
troduced by independent Members, but afterwards
adopted by themselves.—(Hear, hear.) Agsinst this
he must most earnestly protest.—(Hear, hear.) The
Bill now before the House came precisely under that
category.
Sir G. GREY and Mr. LABoIICITERE both declared
against any disclamation of liability.
Mr. DISRAELI—But that was the principle broadly
laid out, and which ought not in any way to be en-
tertained.
The SPEAKER then put the motion for the order of
the day for the second reading of the Bill, but was in-
terrupted by .
Mr. PUSEY, who said that the object of his motion
was to set aside the second reading altogether.
The SPEAKER explained that it had been perfectly
competent for the Hon. Member to move an amendment
on the motion for passing to the orders of the day, but
he had not done so, and he (the Speaker) had con-
sequently put the second reading of the Bill.
Mr. PUSEY, on the suggestion of several Hon. Mem-
bers, then moved that the second reading of the Bill
should be taken after the other orders of the day.
After a few words from Sir C. DOUGLAS,
Mr. PUSEY withdrew his amendment, and
Mr. B. DENISON rose to move another amendment,
to the effect that the Bill be read this day six months.
The Hon. Gentleman proposed by the Bill to accom-
plish two objects : first, to reduce and pay off the mort-
gage debt upon ail turn ttik,t trusts;; alid secondly, to put
the management of all turnpike reacts under different
machinery. He would deel with the first propositien,
and in doing so, he would ask whether that wts the
most happy time that could be selected to
pass a measure to pay nil' these debts
which, if it would not afrect severely the pockets of the
occupiers of property, would, at all events, severely
irritate them. He thought that the present time was
exceedingly unfit to introduce such a measure. There
was a general notion prevailing, that itt con-
sequence of the formation of railways the se-
curity upon turnpike trusts was very much
injured, and that, in point of fact, the tolls collected; or
likely to be collected, would not be sufficient to pay' off
all the debts. It was very desirable that a clear and
_ ......
.qepurate understanding should be come to upon this
EWSPAr int, and for this purpose he would quote from a
q!"------- -- -----;e:. eirliamentary paper (No. 492) which was published
e eeeee in- 1848. Ile found that in 1836 the tolls received
throughout the United Kingdom amounted to 1,449.0001,
ti
—_•,, ;,- and the repairs to 800,0001., leaving-a
balance of 589,0001.
ii, e::,.. : eee for the payment of interest, and for
t. , _ :-„,
paying off the per-
ratment debts. The balance in 1841 was 561,0004

and in 1846, 577,0001., and although the receipts had
fallen, since the formation of railways, 200,0001., the 1
repairs had fallen in equal proportion.—(Hear, hear.)
There was another important feature, which was, that 1
in 1836 as much as 113.0001. of the trust debts had been
been raid off, while in 1841 107,000 L, and in 1846
167,0001. had also been paid off.—(Hear, hear.)
He had, therefore, a right to assume that turnpike trusts
were not at all in a desponding state, and that they
were tolerably well managed, for a large sum of money
was paid off annually. What the House had really to
do with was the bonded debt which the Hon. Gentleman
opposite proposed to pay off by means of a sinking fund.
But now he would show the House in what a position
the rate-payers would stand. By‘the Bill as it stood it
was proposed that 7 per cent. should be taken as the
first fruits of the tolls, not 7 per cent. of the tolls, but
of the debt. He did say, therefore, that, unless the
Honourable Gentleman could show that there would
be a decided surplus after payment of the repairs
and all the establishment charges, it was clear the rate-
payers of the kingdom would have to sustain the burden
of all the contingencies.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
lie would tell the lion. Gentleman candidly that he
thought some alteration ought to be made in the manage-
ment of turnpike roads—(" dear," from Mr. C. Lewis)—
and he would give the Hon. Gentleman his best and ut-
most exertions in framing such a Bill as he thought would
meet the exigencies of the case.— (Hear, hear.) He
(Mr. B. Denison) contended that with the agricultural
community in the state in which it now was it was in
the highest degree injudicious to introduce such a Bill
as that before the House at the present moment, which
would operate most prejudicially against them. That
was the burden of the statement contained in the
petition which he had presented from the West
Riding of Yorkshire, and which was signed by
magistrates, landowners, and a great number of the
inhabitants. If the Honourable Gentleman chose to
make an arrangement with the mortgagees, aid would
give them security that they should be paid annually
the interest of their debt, there would be no
occasion for a sinking fund as was proposed,
and the parties would be satisfied. Why were
they to pay 7,000,0001. for the relief of persons
who were to live after the present generation, in 1880?
He did object to that part of the Bill which refused to
pay off the debt except by a sinking lund ; and it was
impossible the debt could be paid off by a sinking fund,
and on that account he thought it was injudicious to bring
such a Bill forward at the present moment, and he
could see no occasion for such a Bill. He would now go
to another part of the Bill, which proposed to place the
management of the highways under an entirely different
machinery from the present. The proposal in the Bill was
that there should be a committee of management varying
from eight to twelve in each eueisty .sits..,,ference to the
size of the county, who were to lay down rules by
which the roads were to be managed. To that central
committee each board of guardians was entitled to send
one member, and, therefore, it would happen in some
districts that there would be more poor-law unions than
the number of twelve, and the consequence would be
that the guardians would swamp the magistrates ap-
pointed ou the central committee. However, that cen-
tral committee was to consist of eight or twelve magis-
trates, and, added to them, a member from each poor-
law board ; and they were to lay down general rules fur
the management of all the roads. Having laid down certain
rules, then the management fell on the present guardians
of the poor, and they were in point of fact to supersede all
the trustees of the turnpike-roads. They were to have the
privilege, according to the Bill, of appointing a surveyor,
who was to have the superintendence, management, and
mendirg, and making of all the roads; and looking at the
union with which he (Mr. B. Denison) was acquainted,
in the vicinity in which he lived, he found the surveyor
for that district would have the disbursement of between
4,000/. and 5,0001. a year, which was at present expended
there in repairing the high roads. There was no doubt
at all, that with respect to the turnpike rate,
it was clearly to be a union rate, and not a parish
rate. Well, then, the surveyor so appointed under the
Bill would have the management of all the roads, and he
would have to raise the money from the different pa-
rishes by a union rate based on the. county rate, not
according to the existing exigencies of each particular
parish, but according to the valuation at which
it stood to the county rate. He contended that that was
au unfair proposition.—(Hear, hear.) By that arrange-
ment he was, in point of fact, to repair his neighbour's
roads, and his neighbour was to repair his.—(!tear,
hear.) In the union to which he (Mr. B. Densioe)
belonged the cost of the highways was 5,060/.
a-year. He was not prepared to put into the hands of
any one in tividual the application of that 5,0001. a-year,
and he thought it would be putting a great temptation
in the man's way. lie would, perhaps, give security
for the discharge of his duty, but he (Mr. B. Denison)
defied a poor- law auditor to examine that man's account
so as to satisfy himself that the money had been expended.
He was quite sure that part of the Bill would never an-
swer. 1 hen the machinery of the Bill was to be placed
in the hands of the poor-law guardians. Now he knew
enough of poor-law guardians. to know that they would
say that they bad enough to do already. It was utterly
impossible that they would get them to act. The latter
portion of the Bill would alter the whole of the existing
machinery and would act most injuriously. The Right
lion. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the House
Department had expressed no decided opinion on the
Bill, and had intimated that if a strung opinion was ex-
pressed against it by the county Members that he should
' nut, on the part of the Government, press it. He suggested
to the Hun. Gentleman that he would do well to
withdraw the bill. As he entertained a strong and de-
cided opinion against the measure, he begged to move
that the Bill be read a second time this day six months.
The motion having been seconded,
Mr. RICE rose to supportethe Bill. lie concurred
in the statement of the Honourable Member who had
just sat down, that the Bill had been pressed
upon the Government. It appeared that the ex-
penditure in respect of turnpike trusts had been
vastly increased of late years. Another Bill would im-
prove the present system of management, and at the same
time reduce the expenditure. That was an additional
reason why the Bill should pass. Then with respect to
the auditing of accounts. Now, as a county magistrate.
he was prepared to stare that the accounts were
not properly audited. Many ware passed without the
intervention of auditors. Then the lion. Member said
the Bill would throw an additional burden upon the
counties. if he could bring himself to ;believe that this
would be the case he would not support it. He believed
that the expenditure would be reduced. The
counties were bound to make up the amount of
the tolls if "deficient, but inasmuch as the Bill would
introduce an improved and less expensive system of
management, he considered it would be beneficial rather
than injurious. In West Kent, for instance, he believed
the system which the Bill would introduce would meet
with approval.
Sir J. PAKINGTON would support the second read-
ing of the Bill, although he felt ouund to admit that it
had excited an alarm throughout the country that
was totally uncalled for. lie admitted that it
was most desirable to consolidate the various
turnpike trusts, but he doubted the efficacy of
the Bill to effect so desirable an object. He thought the
consolidation of turnpike trusts would tend
to the gradual liquidation of their debts,
and if such a measure was introduced, he
would give it his support. If the measure was to be
carried he thought it wou'd be better to divide it into two
Bills—one for the highways and the other for turnpike.
roads. He thought many of the provisions of the Bill
were most harsh and unfair, especially that part of it
which dismissed parties without any compensation what-
ever.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE was favourable to the principle of
the Bill, but he was decidedly opposed to the manner
in which it was proposed to carry it out. Many of the
details of the Bill were calculated to afford great
dissatisfaction to the parties interested in turn-
pike trusts. The railway system was making
great inroads upon the interests of those par-
ties, and notwithstanding what had been said by
the Hon. Member for the West Riding, he still thought
that turnpike trusts were in anything but a flourishing
condition ; but of this he was certain, that some o: the
roads were kept in anything but an efficient state of re-
pair. He concluded, therefore that many of the trustees
were unable to obtain funds to repair their roads.
The objection of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Droit-
wich to this Bill was, that the Bill itself was not divided
into two; but he (Sir W. Johiffe) altogether differed with
him in that view. The subject of these roads ought to be
d sposed of in one large and comprehensive measure ; but
while he sail that, it must not be understood
that he was of opinion that no difference ought to
be made between a first and second class road.—(Hear,
hear.) There was a wide difference between the two so far
as their wear and tear were concerned, and he thought that
an equal difference ought to be made in the amount of taxa-
tion which each inflicted in the localities through
which they passed. (Hear, hear.) With regard,
hOwever, to the question of compensating officers at
present engaged in the management of turnpike trusts, he
understood that the majority of them followed other
occupations, which were not interfered with by the
duties the roads demanded of them, and he did not
think they were entitled to any compensation.
With regard to the matter which bad been mooted by his
Hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich, there was little
doubt but that most of the details would be best considered
in Committee; but it was idle to • suppose that any good
could possibly arise from taking any such measure as this
into a elect Committee, when it was clearly evident that this
Bill was intended to merge in some larger measure, and he
thought that it was absolutely necessary at this stage of
the proceeding, that the Government should come forward
and give some explicit declaration as to their intention with
respect to future emergencies. He thought that by far the
better course to pursue would be that prescribed by his Hon.
Friend the Member for Droitwich, namely, to take the ob-
ject of the Bill in its two definite and most important sub-
jects—those of the turnpike trusts and the highways.
Separated even thus, the matter to be laid before the parties
invested with the authority to carry out the objects of the
Bill would be so surrounded with the difficulties which had
always beset this matter, that he, for one, could never see his
way clearly through it. One point, fur instance, did
appear to him to be ineurruounteble. How could they
amalgamate insolvent trusts with those whieh were solvent
in any general measure? If this system was to be pursued,
and centralization were to be tee order of the day, they must
appoint commissioners, and, so far as he could see, the only
object which they seemed to desire to carry out was, to give
those commissioners plenty to do, Seeing, then, the number
and amount of these difficulties, de did think that the Govern-
ment were bound to give some explanation ot the mode and
the end to which they intended in future to proceed.
Mr. C. LEWIS said, that when he had introduced this
measure; to the House he had expressly stated, that althou h
the Bill proposed to deal with great and important interests,
yet they were not such as came properly per se under the
cognizance of Government. They were under the supervi-
sion of local trusts, and such as, properly speaking, ought to
be dealt with by those trusts, and it was upon that concep-
tion, and that conception alone, that he bad in a' y way
that which implied that the Government were not respon-
sible for the details or for the principle of the Bill. How far
the Government felt themselves responsible had been already
explained by his Right Hon. Friend to-day. Having made this
short explanation, he should pass to the allegations and ob-
iectinuswhich had been made to the House during this discus-