The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-04 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF LORDS, July 3.
Their Lordships as3embled at Five o'clock.
BEER SHOPS.
The Bishop of NORWICH presented a petition from
the inhabitants of St. Giles•in-the•Fieldi against the

spread of beer shops.
THE MAIIRATTA WAR.

The EarL of -ELLENBOROUGH rose to state the
circumstances tinder which booty taken from the enemy
in the Mahratta war in India had been granted by the
Crown to the East India Company or to the Indian army.
This property had been transferred to the East India
Company, which was in point of fact the Government of
India, but that transfer in no way respected the private
interests of the individual directors of the company. Ac-
cording to universal custom, with certain reservations as
her Majesty might be advised to make, the booty in
question had been made over to the Court of Directors
and the Indian army. Confiscation implied power over
the object confiscated, but the property in question,
situated in the state of Lahore, belonged to the
enemy in the Mahratta war, and it could not
be rightly confiscated by the Governor-General
of India according to the principle which he (Lord
Ellenborough) had laid down, for that property was not
in the power of the Governor-General of India. That
property, consisting of all the state jewels of Lahore,
was acquired by war, was retained by right of conquest;
it never changed hands, and belonged, therefore, to her
Majesty in right of her crown, and the Governor-Gene-
ral of India had no right to dispose of it. It was a
matter of policy, as well as of justice, to deal with
this property as the law directs, without throwing any
difficulties in the way of its legal appropriation. If this
booty, which belonged to the Crown, as he contended,
were not conceded to the army of India, the army of
India would have no reward whatever.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said he would inter-
pose no objection to the production of the papers for
which the Noble Earl had moved. The question was,
how far the state property, of Lahore was to be consi-
dered as booty of war, and how far it was to be consi-
dered as state property, liable to the provisions of a
treaty? He held in his band the treaty applicable to the
case in point, one of the articles of which was that all
the property of the state, of whatever description and
wheresoever it should be found, should be con-
fiscated in part payment of the debt due
from the state of Lahore to the British
Government. Upon that treaty rested the right of the
East India Company to the property which they had
acquired, and the right of the Queen of England to the
precious stones to which reference had been made by the
Noble Lord.
The Duke of WELLINGTON thought the most re-
gular mode of proceeding would be to leave her Majes-
ty's Government to settle this question with the Court of
Directors. He must do the Governor-General of India

the justice to say that his Noble Friend (the Earl of
Elleuborough) was mistaken if he supposed that the
transactions in question recently pertormed in India
had not been well and maturely considered by the
Noble Lord in his recommendation to the public autho-

rities of this country.
After a few remarks from Lord GLENELG,
Lord BROUGLIA.II said the Governor-General of
India could not change the nature of the property in
question by anything that he did.
.If the property
was booty, using the word " confiscation" was a little
inconsistent with all idea of treaty. Confiscation seemed
to him to exclude the idea of contract.
Lord ELLENBOKOUGH replied. There was, in
his opinion, enough in this case which rendered it in the
highest degree necessary that this matter should be fully
and judicially considered.
After a few words from Lords CAMPBELL and

BROUGHAM,
Lord ELLENBOROUGH consented to withdraw his
motion.
Lord CAMPBELL laid on the table a Bill to empower
the Crown for one year to appoint a sheriff for the
county of Westmorland; which was read a first time.
On the motion of Lord BROUGHAM, a copy was
ordered of certain correspondence, in which the General

Board of Health had taken part, relative to the printing
of official reports in the octavo instead of the folio form.

SITES FOR SCHOOLS BILL.
Lord REDESDALE moved the second reading of the
Sites for Schools Bill.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was of opinion that
it would be of great use in particular districts, and he
hoped in Committee its powers would be extended.
The Bill was then read a second time.
AUDIT OF RAILWAYS ACCOUNTS BILL.
Lord MONTEAGLE, in moving that their Lordships
should go into Committee on this Bill, said that he would
in a few words explain the magnitude of the transactions
affected by the Bill, because, if they had been under-
stood, he was satisfied that an unexpected division
would not have taken place upon the second reading
last night. The companies had already pledged
themselves, with the consent of Parliament, to expend
a sum of 300,000,0001. upon the construction of rail-
ways, out of which 200,000,0001. had been ex-
pended already. When he looked at the national
debt of 750,000,0001., which took nearly a century to ac-
cumulate, he could not but feel that so enormous a sum
as 300,000,0001. voted in the course of a few years, to
be applied to one branch of industry, and withdrawn
from others, was the best justification for such a Bill.
They had 12,000 miles of railway sanctioned, equal to
half the circumference of the globe, and when it was
recollected that the whole of these railways were prac-
tically monopolies, it was clear the public should have
some power over them; and it was nut less necessary
that protection should be given to the shareholders.—
(Hear, hear.) Their Lordships were bound to pass this
Act, because they were parties to these transactions,
and it was their duty to endeavour to put a step to a
spirit of gambling speculation and adventure, greater,
he believed, than had existed in this country slue,. the
South Sea scheme, and in which all classes, high as
well as low, had participated.—(Hear, hear.) It was
stated in the papers before him that in one particular
company the difference between the value of their
stock at different periods represented a capital of up-
wards of 3,000,0001.; that fact showed the wide mar•
gin for speculation. He held in his hand a return
showing the variation in the prices of the stock of
four principal companies during the years 1845,
1846, 1847, and 1848. The stock of the North-
Western in 1845 was 2221., in 1816 it fell to 2101., and
again to 1701. in 1847. In 1848 it fell to 1141., and in
October that year to 1001. During the same period the
shares of the Great Western fell from 2461. to 771.; those
of the South-Western, from 821. to 361.; and of the
North Midland, from 1801. to 661.—(Hear.) The aver-
age fall in the value of the property from 1845 to 1848,
amounted to 64 per cent.—(Hear.) This was mainly
attributable to the way in which the affairs of these
companies were managed, and which had thrown discre-
dit upon them all. The public, alienated by the expense
of the bad management of some companies, had with-
drawn all confidence from them. Though he had not the
experience of the two Noble Lords who opposed the
Bill last night, one of whom was chairman of two
railway companies, and the other of one, he had had
the advantage of the careful inquiry instituted by
their Lordships' Committee, and on the evidence given by
the witnesses before that Committee.. He believed that
he saw clearly the manner in which the in-
tentions of the Legislature were evaded, and
the opportunities for fraudulent transactions were
created.—(Hear.) The auditors proposed to be
appointed by the Act were not the nominees of the Go-
vernment, but would be independent men, and be re-
peated that, for the protection of the shareholders them-
selves, it was desirable that such officers should be ap-
pointed.—(Hear, hear.) The records of the companies
were full of illustrations of the necessity for such public
officers, and showed that the plain meanng of the Acts
under which they were corntituted had been disre-
garded, and that the directors were in the habit of
acting according to their own discre'ion, without
reference to the powers invested in them by
the law. As an illustration of the gross misapplication
of railway capital to other purposes than Oat for which
it was subscribed, he instanced the case of the Cale-
donian directors, who had appropriated from the funds
entrusted to their care, a sum of no less than 381,0004
in the purchase of traffic on railway, and had given
guarantees and security for the payment of a consider.
ably larger amount. Shareholders, he thought,
should have the power of preventing the directors
from applying their money to arty other purpose than that
for which it was subscribed. Such cases of mis-
application as he had mentioned could not have happened
if there was a good system of auditing railway accounts,
for such practices would be at once ch-tected. The Bill
on which he asked them to go into Committee was not
calculated to do harm to the shareholders, but was in-
tended to enable them to exercise cor.trol over their di-
rectors and chairman. It took care that they should
have the entire truth placed b-fore them. Moreover,
it had been opposed by the great bulk of the railway
authorities. He asked their Lordships then to go into
Committee on the Bill and to give their sanction to the
clauses,
Lord BROUGHAM expressed his fullest concurrence
in the measure, and took the opportunity of stating that
he considered the country ought to feel deeply indebted
to the Noble Lord, the author of the Bill.
Their Lordships then went into Committee on the Bill.
Vartp_t question that the first clause do pass,
'4° LANSDALE objected to the principle of Go-
vernent inter!
specuktion,nlee with private trading and commer-
ercised, great here that interference had been ex-
the discouragementex...e was the result. He also
objected to
would' entaily.mo local railway
the countryolll°ll sending down auditors to
The Earl of companies.
haste with which so im o
Bill was being pressed
UGH. p^ntested against the
',s.l;aiveetirrent interfered in
through Parliament. ff Tea:
the concerns of railway cora
areesatataa incliffe-
. tors, perhaps the shareholders mightYmif°lnttlt audi-
rence to look after the accounts, and the
. great evil instead of expected good. would be
. Earl POWIS complained of the railroad speed p with
which their Lordships legislated in so importanta- a
mat-
ter, and expressed himself dissatisfied with several
clauses of the Bill. None of the railway companies cer-
tain to be affected by the measure could possibly have
any knowledge of its important provisions.
• Lord BROUGHAM thought they had not only a
right, but that it was their bounden duty to interfere, as
the Bill proposed, with railway companies; for they were
monopolies, and monopolies created by the extensive pri-
vileges which Parliament had given to the several rail-
way companies.
After some further conversation, in which Lord
• MONTEAGLE and Earl Fowls took part, the several
clauses were agreed to, Earl Powis expressing his inten-
tion of moving amendments on bringing up the report.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE laid upon the table
certain returns connected with the number of ejectments
issued from the Court of Exchequer in Ireland during
the years 1846, 1847, and 1848.
Their Lordships then adjourned,_

HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 3.
POOR•LAW (IRELAND) BILL.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Mr. FAGAN admitted that if they had sufficient
workhouse room in Ireland, it would be well to adopt
the workhouse test by refusing out-door relief to able-
bodied poor, but as such was not the case, he thought
the course proposed by the Ron. Baronet could not be
safely acted on. He must, therefore, oppose the clause.
Mr. CONt)LLY thought that it was the bounden
duty of the Government to make some modification in
the ruinous system of out-door relief, or do away with
it altogether. He would support the clause of the Hon.
Baronet the Member for Waterford.
Mr. STAFFORD thought it would be better that the
clause should be postponed till the third reading of the

Bill.
Sir W. SOMERVILLE had not been able to elicit
from any Hon. Member who had spoken by what means
they proposed to preserve the lives of the people if they
did away with out-door relief. He admitted that abu,es
were inseparable from the system, but it was surrounded
with as many safeguards as possible, and would be
abandoned when it could be done with safety. He trusted,
therefore, that the Hon. Baronet would withdraw the
clause, and allow the other portions of the Bill to be
_ _

proceeded with.
Sir 11. W. BARRON withdrew the clause.
Colonel I)UNNE then proposed the following clause:--
" And be it further enacted that in any electoral division
where the ratepayers of any townlaud, or union of town-
lands within such electoral division, shall undertake and
satisfy the guardians of the poor of the union in which
such electoral division is situate, that they will support a
proportion of the poor of the electoral division, which pro-
portion shall seem to the said board of guardians to be a
fair proportion of the poor (taking into consideration the
entire amount of paupers liable to be relieved under the
poor-law, and the valuation and extent of the townlands
aforesaid and the electoral division), then it shall be
lawful for the board of guardians to exempt such town-
land or townlands from any rate, except a rate for union
and establishment charges; and in case any pauper
within such townland or townlands should appeal to
the board of guardians against the support afforded to him
or her by the rate-payers of such townlaud or townlands,
and it shall appear to the guardians that such complaint
is well founded, then the board of guardians shall re-
lieve such person or persons appealing, and charge the
townland to which such pauper or paupers appealing
shall be chargeable ; provided always, that should the
decision of the board of guardians ba disputed, either by
the pauper or paupers appealing, or by the ratepayers or
any ene ratepayer on their part, then an appeal shall be
given to either party to the magistrates and assistant
barristers at the Quarter Sessions next ensuing,
whose decisions shall be final." He was convinced
talisat
up.dousien andisopteccllausseo,me,lesruecl.l
would
thatunles:o the
be but Itiottllericshhanpcaeupoefrisamny. aFdreoquauactoenvreelriseaftiobnesinwg
which
ted with boards of guardians in his neighbourhood,
he was sure that such a plan was one which would be
of great use.
Mr. C. LEWIS reminded the House that this ques-
tion had been very fully discussed and determined upon
on the occasion of a Bill having been proposed by the
Member for Strood (Mr. Scrope), and after the rejection
which it met with there he hoped that the Hon. and
Gallant Member would not press his clause.
Sir A. BROOKE thought the clause could not be
carried into practical operation.
Mr. P. SCROPE thought that the system of support-
ing able-bodied men by out-door relief was a very per-
nicious one, it would be much better to employ them
in cultivating the land which lay untilled. He should
support the clause.
Mr. FRENCH wished to contradict a charge against
Irish Members of taking but little interest in this Bill.
He could confidently state that every Irish Member at
present in London was then in the House.
After a few words from Sir W. BARRON,
Sir G. GREY wished to recal it to the attention of
the House that the principle of this clause was identical
with that of the Bill introduced in the early part of the
present session, and which had been rejected by a ma-
jority of 166 to 4l; and it would be found that the ma-
jority of the Irish Members had voted against the Bill.
Mr. GROGAN suggested that the Government should
adopt this clause, and modify it so that it might be re-
ceived favourably by the House.
Lord J. RUSSELL was in doubt whether Irish Mem-
bers, and especially the Hon. Member who had spoken
last, were or were not in favour of this clause. He re-
membered that such a plan had been introduced many
years ago by the Duke of Richmond. but when it was
debated whether this should be made compulsory, it
had been satisfactorily shown that such a course would
be fall of dunger.
After a few words of explanation from Mr.
GROGAN,
Mr. S. CRAWFORD could not agree with the Noble
Lord that this clause was identical with the proposal of
the Hon. Member for Stroud. That Hon. Gentleman's
plan made it compulsory for boards of guardians and the
ratepayers to enter into thesearrangements, but this clause
partook more of a voluntary than a compulsory character,
and he was quite willing to support it.
Mr. A. STAFFORD was afraid the clause would in-
flict too much labour and trouble on the boards of guar-
dians to admit of its working with facility. He was
fearful, too, that even if the machinery of the clause could
be put into operation, it would have a tendency to de-
press the condition of the pauper, and for these two
reasons, although he did not disapprove of its principles,
be felt bound to oppose the clause.
Mr. ROCHE al.o thought the clause would work prac-
Vcally against the poor, while it would perpetuate the evils
of townland rating system, and overturn the very prin-
ciple upon which die pour law was founded. The guar-
dians, under the existing law, were bound to support the
poor in certain circumstances, and in a specified manner,
but establish the system proposed by this clause, and the
poor would be subject to the mercy of the ratepayers.
Colonel DUNNE only wished the Cumuli tee to pro
nounce for the principle of the clause and he would
modify its terms to meet some of the objections which
had been urged against it.
Lord C. HAMILTON quite approved of the prin-
ciple, but he was decidedly averse to the mode in which
the clause was propos, d to be put in force.
Mr. FITZSTEPIIEN FRENCH. really could not
understand, then, why the Noble Lord should not sup-
port it.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause ... ... 16
Against it ... ... 80
Majority
Sir D. NORItEYS then proposed the following
clauses :-1. Whereas in many unions large sums are
due to contractors and others, for the payment of which
the outstanding amount of uncollected rates is insuffi-
cient, be it enacted, that the Commissioners for the ad-
ministration of the poor-laws in Ireland, shall cause au
account to be taken of the debts which shall be due
on the 29th day of September next, and also of the
probable amount of rates which may be expected from
the outstanding collection; and if it shall appear that in
any electoral division, in which the expenses for the
relief of the poor have during the year exceeded five
shillings in the pound of its valuation, the debts due by
it shall exceed its probable assets, and that a rate of
sixpence in the pound, in addition to the five shillings
maximum rate, would be insufficient for their payment,
it shall be lawful for the Commissioners to require the
board of guardians, or the paid officers in charge of the
union, to borrow such sum as may be required on
the security of the rates of the union at large, but on
condition always that the sum so borrowed shall be re-
paid, with interest, by instalments extending over a
period not exceeding ten years; and the instalments
and the interest payable thereon shall be the first charge
on the rates of such union, and the treasurer of such
union shall be bound to pay off the instalments and
interest as they become due, out of any money which
may be in his bands to the credit of the union, or
to advance the amount thereof and charge interest on
such advance, and for so doing the order of the Com-
missioners shall be a sufficient discharge: provided always
that the union at large becoming responsible for the
debts of the electoral division, shall not affect the sepa-
rate liability of the electoral division for the debts due
by it. 2. To enable boards of guardians to raise the
union rate in aid at any period within the current year.
Sir G. GREY said the clauses were open to great ob-
jection and opposed them.
Sir D. NORRETS then withdrew the clauses.
To clause 68,
Lord NAAS proposed an amendment to the effect
to repeal so much of an Act for the more
effectual relief of the destitute poor of Ireland
as smarted " that any covenant and agreement whereby
any person liable to pay rent, and entitled, under this
Act, to deduct therefrom any rate, or any portion of any
rate, shall have covenanted or agreed, or shall hereafter
covenant or agree, to forego such reduction,
shall, so far as such rate is concerned, have no effect, be
repealed, except as to anything heretofore done or now
pending under this Act."
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said helfelt disposed to vote
for the amendment.
After some discussion, in which some opposition was
offered to the clause,
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the clause... •..
Against it ... ••• ••• ... 10
Majority ••• ••• ••• —6l
Lord JOHN RUSSELL intimated that he proposed
to proceed with the Bill on Thursday, at twelve.
The House then adjourned until five o'clock.

The House resumed at Five o'clock.
PETITIONS.

Lord SEAHAM presented a petition from Durham.
in favour of the People's Charter.
Captain PECHELL presented a similar petition from
Brighton.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a pet Non from Edin-
burgh, praying that an Ambassador might be appointed
to the Republic of Rome.
Mr. B. OSBORNE presented several petitions from
Middlesex, in favour of household suffrage.
Stuart, 1
_ Petitions were presented in favour of the Charter by
Mr. Villiers Mr. George Thompson, Lord Dudley
Villiers,
and Mr. Brig►ht.
al. yiebrne,
~.Laror.d.-DirIIDLEY STUART presented a petition from
Mr. IiUME presentedute.
praying that the Government might reoog-
nizl the Roman Republic.
br
BUcßrletAiLr
ndfr)oumiri.alliirk apinst
the Marriage Registration a
oWmeYDLllepawrtimsheendt toif
his
sk tahtteent
mEutopoLPetitiolan
been directed
ySof State for
the Home
to the statement of Dr. Simon, trehat,
Health for the city of London, as to the cr. of
oPfublie
cer-
tain cases of cholera within the city of cause ;
also if it be his intention to introduce any measure- dur-
ingaud
the present session of Parliament for the prevention
of the interment of dead bodies within the city of London.
Sir G. GREY said he bad not seen the report of Dr.
Simon, but having made inquiries yesterday, in conse-
, queace of the notice of the Noble Lord's question, he