The Sun.
London, England, 1836-04-15 00:00:00

MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS,

Mr. BERNAL and others from the Commons brought up a
copy of the Report from the Committee for ascertaining the
best mode of obtaining information respecting railways.
The House then adjourned.

Earl Grey took his seat this evening for the first time this
Session, and was cordially welcomed by Noble Lords on both
sides of the House. His Lordship first had a tete-a-tete with the
Bench of Bishops, after which he gradually went down
past the Treasury Bench, and sat where Lord Brougham
usually sits. There Lord Lyndhurst joined him, and sat for
some time in pleasant conversation with the Noble Earl. Soon
after several other Noble Lords paid their respects to the
venerable ex-Premier, who, we are happy to say, looked in
exceedingly good health.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, APRIL 14.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.

Mr. A. TREVOR presented a petition from the Marquis
of Londonderry, praying to be heard by counsel against certain
parts of the South Durham Railway Bill. The Hon. Mem-
ber also presented a petition from Durham to the same effect.
Lord A. CON YNG HAM presented a petition from Can-
terbury, against the South-Eastern Railway Bill.
Lord C. MANNERS presented a petition from Leicester,
against the Midland Counties Railway Bill.
EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY BILL.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY presented two petittiitooifonns l,afnrovdemroynCnothgue-
geshall, in favour of this Bill. As the Bill would come on
for a second reading presently, he would not make any obser-
vationsm u uMr.
us l onTy . s
it
ghGne
Lepresentation
bpy stthe
o oNw ofowners
r presented
and
these
occupiers
line of road of this railway against the Bill.
Mr. WILLIAMS presented four petitions from the
owners of land on different parts of the line of road to the
sameP effect.etition
Petitions were presented in favor of this Railway from 1,220
owners and occupiers of property on the line between London
and West Ham ; from the Tower Hamlets, with 2,200 si
natures ; by Lord Stormont, from Norwich, with 3,635 s'g g-
ln-
tures ; by Mr. Praed, from the inhabitants of Yarmouth, and
from the fishermen of Yarmouth ; by Sir C. Broke Vere,
from Woodbridge, Beccles, Bungay, and Needham Market ;
by Mr. Morrison, from Ipswich ; by Mr. Sanmdeornstohns,.
Lordi from
Colchester ; by Sir John Tyrrell, from Chelmsford ; by Mr.
t
Bramston, from Brentwood ; by Mr. Quintin Diek from
Witham ; and by Mr. Hall Dare, from Romford. ,
Sir C. B. VERE moved the second reading of the Bill.
An HON. MEMBER,
whose name we could net learn,
some
Onegrounds
the
reasonwould
d
bevery much moved
itvhhatoh G
theli
oßpidp.ll
SOMERSETebd woulderead induce a sedu wishedcoone the House to
s statedtimetohato
to accededay
six
mo-
tion for reading the Bill that day six months.
which presented itself tohisemyeinnidngwaangs tohattohperheseeldn it nahpiesthitaionnd
a petition from
property, d
into law.
y who o w
thoef largemeasurepr o
pa
He had the honour a
few
aggrieved a gentlemanif
from a friend of his, a gentleman who would be seriously in-
convenienced by the Bill ( Mr. Fellowes) and he thought the
House ought not to proceed in a hurry with the second read-
ing. He understood that a large number of landholders would
be affected by its provisions, but the gentleman of whom he
spoke would have cut off a reservoir of water which was most
useful to him. It was impossible to remove the objections of
the Committee, because if they attempted to deviate from the
particular line in any particular, they would not have complied
with the Standing Orders of the House. It was a common
argument to say in cases of this kind that the objectionable
clauses would be struck out in Committee, but so far as his
friend was concerned that was impossible. He had a great
right to complain of a serious injury about to be inflicted upon
him, for the line would not run through highways, but through

his private demesne. Oh !it might be said that private inte-
rests should give way to the public convenience. He could
not see that the advantage to the public was so great, or that
the proposed line should be so exceedingly useful. He did
not deny that Ipswich was an important town : he did not deny
that Norwich was an important town. But what he meant to
say was, that the commercial intercourse between them was
not so great as to warrant them in making a line from London to
Norwich by Ipswich. There was but one coach travelling on that
road, and he was informed that the great majority of the tra-
vellers preferred a different route. In the prospectus put
forth by the Company. it was stated to be the intention to raise
15,0001., by shares of 251. each, and it was stated as a boast
that one-twelfth was subscribed on the whole line of the pro-
posed road. Now that fact showed the little degree of interest
taken by the persons, whose benefit it was said would be
promoted by the railway. In the list of the Committee
he saw but one respectable gentleman of Norwich, and another
of another place, upon it, and nine-tenths of the gentlemen
were not resident in the neighbourhood. This was not a
measure, so far as the traffic of Ipswich and Norwich
was concerned, that could justify the sacrifice of pro-
perty which the undertaking would require. There was
another objection to the Bill, the merits of which he would
not then enter into. There was, he understood, another
line of railway in contemplation, and without giving an opinion
as to the comparative utility of either line, he thought, at all
events, that this fact was a sufficient reason for delaying the
second reading of the Bill until the facts should be investigated.
Under these circumstances he must second the amendment.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY rose and said, that the Noble Lord
had asked why the supporters of this Bill, in moving the se-
cond reading, had said nothing in its defence ? His answer
to the Noble Lord was, that if any observations had been made
on such occasion it would be a departure from the usual course,
and the Noble Lord himself would perhaps be the first person
to stand up and complain of the irregularity. With respect
to the Gravesend and Dover Bills, a most merciful intimation
had been given by the Government, that these works, under
no possible circumstances, could be allowed to go on. This
intimation had the effect of saving the heavy expense which
otherwise would have been fruitlessly incurred. The Noble Lord
said that no evidence had been given of the utility of
the undertaking ; but he (Mr. Harvey) would ask, was
this the time for the production of such evidence ? If such
a course had been pursued on the second reading of a Bill,
that House itself would be turned into a Committee room,
and the ordinary routine of business would be completely set
aside. From his knowledge of the trade and population of
the towns through which this railroad was to pass, he was
perfectly convinced of its utility. The line itself was pecu-
liarly adapted for the construction of a railroad, it being a
perfect level from Whitechapel Church to Norwich. What-
ever may be the demerits of the present line, let
them be considered where all such objections should
be considered—in Committee. If the claims of Mr. Fel-
lowes were so very great, he could not object to go
before such a tribunal, for there was no very great reluctance
on the part of Committees to throw the shield of their pro-
tection around the parks and pleasure grounds of private in-
dividuals. It was only the other day that a strong objection
was raised to the Hull and Selby line, because it ran within half
a mile of the choice country seat of a gentleman. He was
not aware that the Noble Lord (Granville Somerset) bad
opposed any lines that had been brought forward du-
ring the present session in such an incipient stage as
the second reading.—( Hear.) Let the Bill be referred to
a committee, and if Mr. Fellowes could make out a case for
their interference, although he (Mr. D. W. Harvey) had not
the honour to know him, no one would oppose the measure
more strongly. The arguments of the Noble Lord were all
directed to details of the measure, which were all to be consi-
dered in Committee, and there riddled and sifted. The Bill
was one of the greatest importance to the agricultural coun-
ties of Norfolk and Suffolk, and it would be impossible for
them to compete with the Northern Counties, which were at
present so fruitful in railways, if they were not afforded the
same facilities. The present measure, therefore, was not the
offspring of choice, but the result of necessity ; and he trusted,
therefore, the Ilouse would not allow the gill to be strangled
in its present stage.
Mr. WO ODH OU SE believed that the injury which would
be inflicted upon Mr. Fellowes was of such a nature as not to
admit of compensation. With respect to the arguments of
the lion. and Learned Member opposite, all he would say
was, that he, for one, entertained doubts whether any perma-
nent benefit could be derived from it. . .

Mr. G. F. YOUNG was not going to say anything with
reference to the
_present measure, with the merits of which he
was not acquainted. But a question had been raised, and it
had been alleged that opposition to Bills of the present descrip-
tion was unusual. He did not think that such was the case;
but even if it were, there were some cases in which
the House would be justified for departing from such a prin-
ciple. There could be no objection to parties expending their
capital in whatever speculations they pleased ; but they should
not be invested with the enormous power of taking from other
parties their houses and domains, whether they pleased or not,
unless there was a strongly proved case of public utility.
The House would most certainly not do its duty, unless they
insisted upon having at least a prima facie case of a
great public good, before they granted such extensive powers
as were asked for by this Bill. Unless such evidence was be-
fore them, he thought they were not justified in giving power
to any Company to invade the private dwellings of any one.
Mr. El ERR IE S said if the House adopted the amendment
which had been moved, it would place the parties in a diffe-
rent situation from that in which any other party had been
put during the present Session of Parliament.—(Hear.) It
was true it was moved, without any reasons given in its favour;
but it was to be remembered that that had been the usual
course during the whole of the Session.—( Hear, hear.) It
. .

pppeared that all the subscriptions had been paid up—that was
a proof that the parties interested were satisfied with the pro-
ject, and he thought that the House acting now as it had hi-
therto done, would not do its duty unless they sent the
the Bill before a Committee. It never bad been usual to
reject a Bill of this kind on the second reading. Surely it
was not to be thrown, because it was stated that the property
of some gentleman was much affected ; by doing so upon
the present occasion, the House would not be doing the
same
.justice to this Bill as they had done to others.
The most respectable of his constituents were in favour of the
measure, and therefore he objected to the opposition to the
Bill—because it was unusual, uncalled for, and was not war-
ranted by the practice of the House.

_ .
Lord STORMONT, in presenting a petition from Nor-
wich, signed by 3,600, said that this showed that a large
number of persons in that city were favourably disposed
towards the Bill. There were two lines of railroad
at present in contemplation in Norwich. Now, it was certain
that two lines could never answer, and the House was to de-
cide which line should go on. For his own part, he should
vote for the second reading of the Bill, reserving to himself
the opportunity of considering which was the most advantageous
lino of railroad.

Sir J. TYR RE L L said that as he was a Member for the
county, he must be allowed to make a few observations. If
he should ultimately feel inclined to oppose the measure, his
opposition would entirely rest upon private grounds. He had
presented several petitions in favour of this railway ; and he
was bound to say, that the two public meetings which were most
numerously and respectably attended, the line through Col-
chester was the most popular. At the same time he mint be
permitted to say that about a fortnight ago there had an op-
position sprung up along the line of road. He would at pre-
sent stand entirely aloof, but at the same time representing
the county, he did not feel bound to offer any opposition to the
second reading, or stand in the way of what was called public
improvements.

Sir E. KERRISON rose to offer his opposition to this
measure; and he could assure the House that he did so, not on
private, but on public grounds. This railroad was by no means
necessary for public purposes, as at that very moment,
as had been well observed by an Honourable Member
who had preceded him, there was only one coach
—or two at the very most—which travelled regularly on
that road. Under these circumstances, therefore, and upon
public grounds only, he wished to oppose this measure. If,
however, the second reading should be carried, his opposition
would cease immediately.
Mr. O'CONNELL protested against this species of discus-
sion.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") If the Noble Lord
(Lord G. Somerset) had proposed to refer this Bill to a
Committee of the whole House, every man in it would
rise and not suffer him to be heard, however much he might
deserve it. Yet what were they now doing ? They might
discuss the details of the Bill as if they were in a Committee
of the whole House.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) To this he
most strongly objected. He concurred with those Gentlemen
who said that private property ought to be sacred.—(Hear,
hear.) No man in that House would go further than he would
to protect private property from invasion, except in cases of
unavoidable necessity. But it was in Committee that the
petition of Mr. Fellowes ought to be inquired into, and
when the question came again before that House, he (Mr.
O'Connell) must have the clearest case made out before
he would consent to invade private rights. But he did object
to discussing them until after the ordinary method of the
Committee had failed.—(Loud cries of " Hear.") That
gentleman was no doubt a very respectable man, and he had
very respectable advocates in that House ; but the same rule
ought to apply to this Bill as to every other.—(Loud
cheers.) This was a question of practical details, and ought
to be left for a Committee.—( Hear. )
Mr. T. GLADSTONE wished to say one word relative to
the manner in which the petition from Norwich in favour of
this Bill had been got up. It was got up by the foulest
means—by means of eating and drinking.—(Great laughter.)
Every person who went in and put his name to the petition,
got a good lunch.—(Renewed laughter for some time.) So
much for the petition. He wished to say a few words
relative to what had been stated as to that part of the line
which crossed the river Lee. It was not in the power of the
committee to alter that line, if they passed this Bill hi the pre-
sent session. He had already referred to the means by which
petitions in favour of the Bill had been got up, and the means
by which it had been introduced into that House were equally
objectionable. It had been stated that part of the line passed
through the park of Mr. Fellowes. Not only was not this gen-
tleman's consent asked, but he had not even notice of this rail-
road previous to the second reading. The parties who intro-
duced this railway had resorted to the most disingenuous con-
duct. Previous to the first reading of the Bill Mr. Fellowes
had received no intimation whatever of what they were about
to do, and he thus had no means of opposing it. But
he (Mr. Gladstone) opposed this Bill on public grounds. The
persons who had entered into this undertaking were distant
speculators—Norwich itself had hardly one share-holder ; at
least he had only heard of one gentleman who had shares in
this railroad, who was not totally disconnected with the county.
The traffic on the line of road would not support any thing
like a railroad—(Hear)--and they had already every
advantage that could be afforded by a good sea navi-

gation. For these reasons he would most decidedly
oppose this measure. -r( Loud cries of " Divide.")
Mr. MO RIZIS ON would not detain the House one moment.
It was proposed that the line of road should pass beyond the
plantation of Mr. Fellowes ; therefore he hoped the second
reading would not be objected to.
Mr. WILKE S rose amidst loud cries of " Question," and

" Divide." He had but one word to say. The Hon. [Wern-
her (Mr. T. Gladstone) said that there was not a shareholder
in the county of Norwich.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Now, he
could assure the House that five thousand shares had been
taken by the owners of property along the line.—( Loud cries
of " Hear, hear, hear.") This was undoubtedly the best line
of road that could be adopted.—(Hear, hear.) It passed
through a rich, well-populated district, in which there were
many improving towns, and he was quite sure that the House
would feel that not one argument had been urged to induce
them to adopt so harsh a proceeding as to reject the Bill on
the second reading.—( Hear, hear.)
The House then divided—

For the second reading

. 99

Against it v 2O
Majority
BRISTOL AND EXETER RAILWAY.

On the motion of Mr. SANDFORD, the Bristol and
Exeter Railway Bill was read a third time and passed.
LEITH HARBOUR IMPROVEMENT BILL.

The LORD ADVOCATE, as we understood, moved for
an extension of time for bringing in this Bill.
Sir GEORGE CLERK said a petition had been pre-
sented from the inhabitants of Leith a few evenings
ago, complaining of an infraction of the standing orders in
respect of this Bill. The majority of the inhabitants were
opposed to the measure, and all they asked the Corporation
to do was to postpone the Bill for one year, in order that time
might be afforded for the consideration of the important mat-
ters which it involved. He trusted that the House would not
sanction a departure from the rules which they had laid down,
more particularly as the present Bill was opposed to the wishes
of the great body of the inhabitants.
Mr. HUME wished to know from the Hon. Baronet oppo-
site, whether he thought the House would be acting wisely
in refusing to admit the parties to correct an error, when
it was clear that correction would be of great advantage to
the community.
Sir G. CLARKE said that the error committed by
the parties was not sending up persons to prove the
allegations of the petition. He believed the majority of the
people of Leith were against the measure, and that great
advantage would arise from delay.
The LORD ADVOCATE admitted that the parties
had neglected to obey the Sessional Orders, but that neglect
arose from a supposition that it was not necessary to produce
witnesses, until the Bill came before the Committee. The
question was whether for that small error the House would
visit them so severely as not to allow the Bill to proceed
further? He was in hopes that, without expense, the matter
would be adjusted in a satisfactory manner.
Mr. FE R,GUS SON trusted the House would grant the in-
dulgence required. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.
The House then divided—

Ayes
Noes

42
Majority —3s
SHEFFIELD AND ROTHERHAM RAILWAY.

On the motion of Sir G. STRICKL AND, the Sheffield
and Rotherham Railway Bill was read a third time and passed.

YORK AND NORTH MIDLAND RAILWAY.

Sir G. STRICKLAND presented a petition from Thomas
Boyse, Esq., against the York and North Midland Railway
Bal.—Referred to the Committee.
GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY.

Mr. CL AY presented a petition against the Great Northern
Railway, and gave notice that on Monday he should move that
the Committee on that Bill be revived, or that it be referred
again to the Standing Orders Committee.
Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition against the South
Durham Railway Bill.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from Charleville, against
certain clauses in the Ulster Canal Bill.
FLOGGING IN THE ARMY.

Capt. BO L DERO begged to ask the Hon. Member for Mal-
don, whether it was his intention to persevere in the motion of
which he had given notice on the bringing up of the Report on the
Mutiny Bill. He (Captain Boldero) had consulted with
several military men, who were of opinion, that after
the victory that had been achieved last night, and after
the promises that had been held out to them by the
Government, and after the very full discussion the question
had undergone last night, it would be injudicious to press the
question further?
Mr. L E NNARD (as we understood the Hon. Member) said
the hopes held out by his Majesty's Government appeared to
him unsatisfactory, and he was determined to persevere in his
motion.