The Sun.
London, England, 1836-05-20 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Tile SPEAKER took the Chair at a Quarter before Four
o'Clock, when Daniel O'Connell, Esq., took the oaths and
hii seat for Kilkenny. He was introduced amidst loud cheers
by Messrs. Gilion, D. Roche, und Power.

The U.sher of the Black Rod (Sir Augustus Clifford) ap-
peared, and summoned the House to the House of Peers, to
hear the Royal Assent. given to certain Bills, for which see
Lords' report.
PERLETHORPE CHAPEL BILL.

Mr. E. DENISON moved the third reading of the
Perlethorpe Chapel Bill.
Mr. A. TREVOR could not allow the Bill to pass without
taking the sense of the House upon it, as he believed it was
against all principle.
Mr. DENISON defended the Bill. •
Mr. Sergeant GOULBURN hoped that the House would
not pass this Bill, as it went to establish a very bad precedent,
as every one who had a similar case would ask for the same
privilege. He hoped the Hon. Member would not trouble
the House to divide.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES hoped that the sense of the
House would favour the Bill, and he trusted that greater faci-
lities would be afforded generally for increased Church ac-
commodation, such as this Bill would afford. He hoped that
the House would not only pass this Bill, but that it would
form a precedent that would be frequently followed.
Mr. JERVIS wished to know if provision were made by
this Bill for the repairs of the chapel ?
Mr. E. DENISON said that the church had been built
by Earl Manvers—it had been always maintained by him, and
he would continue to repair and uphold it.
The Bill was awl read a third time and passed.
MIDLAND COUNTIES RAILWAY.

Mr. DENISON brought up the Report on this Bill.
BLACKWALL COMMERCIAL AND NORTHERN

RAILWAY.

Mr. H. ALSTON brought up the Report on this Bill.
The Hon. MEMBER then moved that the Committee on the
Blackwall Commercial and Northern Railway Bill be allowed
further time, until the 9th of Junc, to make their Report.
After some discussion, which was carried on in a conversa-
tional tone,
Mr. P. THOMPSON suggested that the time should be
limited to the 6th of June, in which case he would make no
objection to the time being extended.
The motion was then agreed to.
MIDLAND RAILWAY BILL.

Sir R. FERobgSoNjaresentehapetitTon from the ma.
owners of Nottingham and Derby, against the Midland Coon.
ties' Railway Bill.
TRINITY HARBOUR BILL.

Ou the motion of Sir A. LEITH HAY, the Trinity Har
bour Bill was read a third time and passed.

GRAVESEND PIER BILL.

Mr. T 0 0 KEPreSented a petition from Gravesend in favour
of this Bill. The Hon. Member said that in the absence of
his Hon. Friend, the Member for West Kent, he had been
requested to move the second reading of this Bill.
Sir E. CODRINGTON had a petition to present against
the Bill, and would oppose it, on the ground that it created an
undue monopoly.
Mr. H. HUGHES moved that the Bill be read a second
time this day six months. In doing this he would sim-
ply advert to two considerations, the Report of the
Steam Navigation Committee in the year 1831, which stated
that " considerable inconvenience would arise from the prac-
tice of many steam-vessels starting from one point at the
same time, and keeping together." And the other con-
sideration was the resolution of the Steam Navigation
and Port of London Committee, of the 17th of March, 1836, in
these words, " That it was the opinion of the Committee that
the clause of the present Gravesend Pier Act, which prevented
more than one vessel from disembarking passengers at the same
time was a considerable protection to the public and to the in-
terests of navigation, and that any alteration in the clause
would be injurious." Now this Bill was for the express pur-
pose of altering that clause, and inflicting the very injuries
which the Resolution of the Committee sought to prevent.
The Bill would allow two steam-boats to lie along-side of
the wharf, and run against each other in the river, arid thus
increase the evils mentioned in the report to which he referred.
Sir E. CODRINGTON opposed the motion for more
reasons than were put forward by the Hon. Member
for Oxford.—(Hear.) The projection of the pier would
be a serious injury to the navigation of the river ; and if it
passed, the interests of the watermen along the river would be
altogether destroyed. Those persons had subscribed 1,0001.
for the protection of their interests at the Admiralty,
and the measure before the House would shut them
out from all the advantages which they before gained. Those
who called themselves the conservators of the river, really
were the cause of all the mischief done to it. The
measure before tho House would be an act of gross injustice,
and he hoped, therefore, it would not be allowed to pass into a
law.

Dr. bOWRING concurred with the Hon. and Gallant
Member, that it would be a gross injustice to pass this Bill.
Captain PE C HELL was requested by the watermen of the
river Thames to oppose this Bill, and he never opposed any
Bill with greater pleasure. This was the third County of Kent
Bill he had felt it his duty to oppose; and, in his opinion, the
present Bill, if passed, would be an act of downright robbery.
He trusted the House would allow the Bill to go into Com-
mittee as the only means of enabling the party to pay the debts
they had incurred.
After a few words from Mr. BERNARD,
Mr. G. F. YOUNG wished to state that a petition bad
been forwarded to the House that very evening, signed by
three-fourths of the bondholders of the debt, declaring them-
selves perfectly satisfied with the present security.
Mr:TOOKE explained—The debt was 30,0001., and the
amount due to bondholders was only 19,000/.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when the numbers were—

For the Bill l4
Against it
Majority against the 8.11
Captain AL SAGE R brought up the report of the Com-
mittee on the London and Croydon Railway.
Mr. E WART presented a petition from Liverpool against
certain parts of the Liverpool Dock Bill.
DUBLIN AND DROGHEDA RAILWAY.
On the motion of Mr. O'CONNELL, the Committee on this
Railway obtained a further extension of time to make their
report, viz. till July 6. Some mistake had occured, and time
was requisite to oorrect it
HUNGERFORD MARKET BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
NEWCASTLE AND NORTH SHIELDS RAILWAY.'

Mr. A. TREVOR moved the third reading of this
Mr. G. F. YOUNG would not suffer this Bill to be
read a third time without expressing the strong objections
he and his constituents had to it, if he could hope that

his opposition would be attended by any goo 4 accts.
As, however, his opposition to this Bill in a former
stage had been attended with a different result, he thought it
useless* trouble the House further on the present occasion.
The Bill was read a third time, and passed.
Mr. A. TREVOR brought up the report of the Committee
on this Bill, stating that the standing orders hal been com-
plied with, but (as we understood) that the preamble of the
Bill had not been proved.
Mr. HUME, as the report did not state the reasons of
the Committee in compliance with the re.alations laid down
by the House, moved that the Bill be recommitted, in order
that the Committee might make a special report according to
the rules of the House.
Mr. A. TREVOR thought the course pursued by the Hon.
Member for Middlesex rather unusual, and in support of which
no ground had been stated. He was sorry the Chairman of
the Committee was not in his place, that he might explain what
had taken place, but he thought the House ought to be cautious
before they acceded to the proposition made by the Member
for Middlesex, who it seems had taken the whole county of
Durham under his especial protection, as if the Members
from that county were incapable of alluding to the interests
of their constituents. He supposed that Hon. Gentlemen had
enough on hands in the county which he was more intimately
connected, and that he had no occasion to travel so far as
Durham, in search of subjects on which to expend his care.
It appeared the interests of the people in that county were
opposed by a cabal, at the head of which, at least
as forming a principal part was the Hon. Member opposite.
In the Committee every attention was paid to the interests of
the parties, every subject connected with it minutely investi-
gated ; and if the House sanctioned the motion at the other
side it would be establishing a dangerous precedent, of which
every disappointed speculator would hereafter take advantage
in impugning the decision of Committees.
Mr. HUME believed there was no other Member in
the House but the Gentleman who had just sat down ignorant
of the motion made by him (Mr. Hume.) It was one simply to
ascertain if the Standing Orders were complied with, and
therefore the Hon. Gentleman's indignation was altogether
thrown away.
Mr. IPOULETT THOMSON entirely concurred with
his Honourable Friend, the Member for Middlesex,
that this Bill ought to be recommended. The Railway
Committe had been appointed for the purpose of
procuring and communicating to the House information on the
subject of railways. In this instance the Committee had not
stated in their report the reasons which induced them to throw
out this Bill. By the regulation of the House they were cer-
tainly bound to do so, and be therefore thought the Bill ought
to be recommitted for the purpose of procuring the necessary
information.

Sir J. GRAHAM contended, that under the circumstances
stated by the Committee, they did not feel bound to make any
special report to the House • and, in adopting that course, they
had acted upon the advice Of the officers of the House.
Mr. LAMBTON, as a Member of the Committee, de-
feuded the course pursued by them.
Mr. WA SON was sure that it was the wish of every one of
the Members of the Committee to do justice to all parties.
Mr. H. HUGHES hoped the House would not be satisfied
without seeing the reasons why the Bill was rejected in Corn-
mittee, in order that the House might see whether they had
exercised a sound discretion or not. He believed that on
those reasons being seen there would be ample cause for the
recommittal of the Bill.

Mr. PRA ED thought if the Bill was to be re-committed
it should be done upon some special resolution of the House.
Mr. E. DENNISON said that the resolutions of the
House were intended to controul the proceedings of Commit-
tess, and therefore the House required to know as well why a
Bill was rejected as why it was adopted.
Mr. ROBINSON would vote for the re-commitment of the
Bill.

Mr. PEASE said that the Committee had not adjourned.
They were, in point of fact, still sitting as the motion of ad-
journment was put and negatived. If the House, therefore,
wished them to state their reasons for making this report they
were ready to do so. All they wished to know was, whether
the House would require them to make such a report.
Mr. WARBURTON supported the motion.
Sir T. FREM ANTLE thought the precedent esta-
blished by acceding to the resolution a very inconvenient one.
If a motion were made for reviving the Committee with
instructions to report it should meet with his concurrence.
Mr. HUME said that was his object, and he would consent
to shape the terms of his motion so as to meet the views of the

Hon. Baronet.
Mr. LA MBTON wished to know if the House would sanc-
tion the principle of allowing- members to vote in Committee
who had not heard a word of the evidence.
The SPEAKER said that it was of the utmost impor-
tance, that the rules of the House should be strictly ad-
hered to, and that the House should be in possession of
the groury:s upon which a Bill was rejected. In his
opinion the orders of the House had not, in the present in-
stance, been complied with, inasmuch as the rules required
that Committees should state the grounds upon which Bills
were rejected.
Mr. PRAED contended that when the preamble of the
Bill was not proved, the Committee had no right to report
specially.
-After a few words from Mr. PHILLIP HOWARD,

Sir G. C LE RK said the question for the House was whether
when the preamble was not proved the Committee were bound
to make a special report stating their reasons for the decision
they had come to. He thought the Bills should be re-com-
mitted, for the purpose of enabling the Committee to make
their report of the minutes of the proceedings to the House.
He thought the resolution could not be looked upon by the
House as anything else than the Report of the Committee.
The Bill was re-committed.
Mr. T. DUNC °MBE moved the second reading of the
Westminster Small Debt Courts' Bill.
Mr. C. BULLER opposed the Bill. In these Courts there
was no one having the authority of a Judge, nor was there any
one capable of being so by Their education. These Courts
were in bad odour throughout the country. The Bill had not
been put into the hands of Members, and they could not yet
judge of its provisions. He would move that the Bill be read
a second time that day six months.
Mr. HA WE S hoped his Hon. Friend would not press
hi s motion. The parties had now agreed that in Committee
the Bill should be made analagous to those which had lately
passed for the regulation_ of similar courts in Macclesfield and
Leicester. The Bill ought to be allowed to go into Committee
where these amendments might be introduced, and then it
might be opposed upon principle.
Mr. H. HUGHES thought if the Hon.. Member (Mr.
Buller we believe) understood this Bill rightly, he would give
it his most ardent support.
Mr. HUME begged to remind the House that this was
not a new Bill, it was a Bill to amend the 23d and 24th of
George 11., and to reduce the expenses of the present system.
When the Bill was in Committee, he would be happy to have the
attention of his Hon. F.iend, or any other Member who could
propose any amelioration, and to remove imprisonment for
debt. It was very desirable to get rid of imprisonment for
debt as early as possible.
Sir E. CODRINGTON thought that the present system
was very severe, and would therefore support the Bill.
Mr. BULLER would not withdraw his amendment, and he
must protest against the manner in which the Bill had been
smuggled into the House.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. O'CONNELL thought it would be better if there was
a general Bill upon the subject, as Leicester, Macclesfield, and
several other towns had obtained similar measures.
FA Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE denied that the Bill had been
smuggled into the House. It had been printed, and in the hands
of Hon. Members for some time.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but no division
took place, and the Bill was read a second time.
DUBLIN STEAM PACKET COMPANY.

On the motion of Lord SANDON, this Bill was read a
second time and referred to a Select Committee.
Mr. O'CONNELL, on being nominated as one of the
Committee declined to act.