The Sun.
London, England, 1836-04-19 00:00:00

ST. KATHARINE'S DOCKS' BILL.

Mr. CRAWFORD brought up the report of the Corn-
rnittee on this Bill.
LONDON AND CAMBRIDGE RAILWAY.

Sir F. POLLOCK presented a petition from Huntingdon,
most numerously and respectably signed, in favour of this
Railway Bill.

KYAN'S PATENT.

Mr. H. HUGHES brought up the report of the Committee
on this Bill; and also the report of the Committee on the
Lanarkshire Roads' Bill.

-------
MANCHESTER JUNCTION RAILWAY.
Mr. ORD presented a petition from the ironmasters of
Staffordshire and Worcestershire in favour of this Bill.
GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY.
Mr. CLAY rose to move that the Bill for making a railway,
called the Great Northern Railway, be referred back to the
Committee on the Bill. The Committee to which the Bill
had been first referred determined unanimously that the parties
had failed to comply with the Standing Orders of that House.
The point on which that decision was more especially
come to was, that the plan deposited with the Clerk of the
Peace, and that which was placed in the Private Bill Office
were not similar, and duplicates of each other. He would
not lightly throw obstacles in the way of parties coming be-
fore the House because of any informality, but he did not think
the Standing Orders were trivial matters ; and he could con-
ceive nothing more inconvenient than that persons relying on
the protection afforded by the Standing Orders should after-
wards'find that their reliance failed them. He did not think
the Committee sufficiently adverted to this fact when they
gave leave to the parties to amend ; and he trusted the House
would consent to his motion for having the Bill re-committed.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM would shortly state to the House
the grounds of the decision of the Committee with respect to
the Standing Orders. It was always, of course, competent for
the committee to alter or revise the orders agreed upon by
the Committee. The standing orders required that the whole
plan of any line of railroad should be deposited with the
Clerks of the Peace of the counties through which the
railroad was to run. In this instance, however, only
. some portions of the plan were deposited.—( Hear. )
The sole objection upon that point, therefore, was, that the
map or plan of the entire line had not been deposited. The
Committee had come to the unanimous conclusion that, consi-
dering the great length of the line, and the enormous expense
of preparing the necessary maps. The error had been one in
judgment, but that it was not a violation of the Standing Orders.
The second point was, that the assent of 43 owners and 36
occupiers had not been obtained ; but it was distinctly proved
that the whole line having been divided into two parts, and a
person appointed for each division, one of them had neglected
his duty, but the moment the mistake had been ascertained,
the promoters of the Bill had called upon the owners
and the occupiers—(Hear)—and it so happened that
there was only one dissentient among them. The Committee,
therefore, had thought that that objection was not of
.much
avail. The third point was that the map and plan lodged in
the Bill-office did not exactly correspond with that lodged with
the Clerk of the Peace for Middlesex, but it appeared that
there was merely a trifling difference in the scale. His Hon.
Friend had totally abstained from touching upon the merits of
the question, and upon that point he was hound to say that the
Committee were unanimous, and that they were of opinion
that these objections were merely technical. It appeared,
therefore, that the Standing Orders were not arrested to the
extent that would call upon that House to arrest the further
progress of the Bill ; and if his Hon. Friend persevered in his
motion, he ( Sir J. Graham) would feel himself bound to op .
pose it.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. O'CONNE LL said it was scarcely correct to say that
they had been unanimous in the Committee. He had yielded
to the opinion of others, but he had been of opinion that it
was necessary that. an entire map of the line should be depo-
sited in the office of the Clerk of the Peace—though he had
not urged the objection, for a favourable construction of the
Standing Orders might sanction the plan adopted by this. Co-
mpany. As to the second point of the sections, no controversy
was raised about_them before the Committee, and therefore
they had come to no decision upon the matter. If parties neg-
lected to raise points below, he thought it would be opening too
wide a field for expense to allow them an appeal to the House.
The Map in the Bill-office was much more full than those
filed in the office of the Clerks of the Peace ; it was most im-
portant that the latter should afford every information, for a
man had a perfect right either to use or abuse his own propeHy
as he liked. He could not see the use of sending the Bill
back to the Standing Orders Committee unless the Standing
Orders were rescinded.

Major H ANDLEY was acquainted with many northern
Gentlemen whose property was to be taken away, who knew
nothing of the matter until after tile Bill had been introduced.
It appeared to him that the engineer had gone directly from
one point to another, taking a gentleman's pleasure ground
here, his kitchen garden there, and anon going through his dog
kennel in the most ignorant manner. Ile supported the motion.
It had been frequently said that the Committee was the proper
place to discuss the details of a Bill ; that might be so, but it
it was a great hardship on gentlemen that they should be put
to the expense of employing Counsel to protect their property
before Committees of that House.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY thought the statements made by
the Chairman of the Committee would at once set the subject
brought forward by the Hon. Member for the Tower Ham-
lets at rest. Although the petition came quietly before the
House, it was not to be concealed that one line was strugginig-
against another; he had no doubt, if it was enquired into,
although the petition was signed by a great number
of respectable persons, that more than half of them
would be found to be interested in another line. If
the House was to defeat the Bill it would deprive the
public of the advantage of having competitors before the
Committee—(Cheers)—if there was competition the incon-
venience of other lines would be brought before the Com-
mittee. He agreed with the Hon. Member that it was a
matter the Government ought to take up, on what princi-
ple gentlemen were to be drawn before the Committee to pro-
tect their private property at an enormous expense. It was a se-
rious embargo upon gentlemen to be brought before a Committee
to preserve their hereditary property, and to be obliged to
employ counsel, who were running all the day from one Com-
mittee room to another, and were never to be found when
wanted.—( Laughter.) He trusted that as regarded this ap-
plication, tile House would be the guardian of the public in
seeing that the best line from London to York was adopted.
He was not prepared to give any opinion himself in this stage
of the proceedings, but he hoped the public would derive all the
advantages they ought to derive from such an undertaking. •
Mr. PRYME, as a Member of the Committee, could state
that it was their unanimous opinion that the standing orders
had not been complied with. One of the grounds for coming
to that decision was, that the plans deposited with the Clerk
of the Peace were not of a proper scale. This they con-
sidered so decisive that they refused to go into other grounds
that were offered. It was attempted to be proved that the
greater number of the owners and proprietors of land on the
line had made an application in favour of the Bill, but he re-
collected the Hon. and Learned Member for the City of Dub-
lin saying what was the occasion for going into this question,
when the matter was clear and decisive on other clauses—viz.,
the deficiency in the plans. That was the opinion of the Com-
mittee, and accordingly they shut out evidence that was ten-
dered on this question. They had relied on the Committee
upon the Standing Orders sanctioning this decision ; they
thought that they could say that it was sufficient for the inha-
bitants of those places through which the railway passed, to
learn this after the Bill was in Parliament. They were of
opinion that there ought to be time for consideration and
meeting of persons resident in the counties through which
the line of road was intended to pass. He assured the Hon.
on
owi tttphtl i
ye:
Member. for Southwark that they ought not to go into the
r
merits of the question then, and he would therefore abstain
from any further observations at present.
Mr. RICHARDS said that the arguments of the Hon
Member for Southwark were founded upon the assumption
hadnte
og b certainlytrhooeurgdpher
etrssfeonhr
present
had been
forward
der
si
btgi
ohntt
et
which
hmo
complied
phmg
veeeaars
that this Bill was beneficial to the public. He (Mr. Daniel
pwhetherWhittleconceived
t with
Harvey)the
reference
tsh
teStanding
nc adi
Tower Hamlets sufficient to prove that the decision of the
committee was not a wise one. He held a petition from a ;e-
-spectable and numerous body of his constituents against the
Bill ; and on their behalf he claimed the protection of the
Standing Orders. He begged to give his cordial su
port to the motion for the recommitment of the 8i11.—.( Heal?)
Mr. SCARLETT said the argument relied on by the sup
porters of the motion was the want of sufficient notice. No
fact was, that out of 5,201 occupiers of land along the
line, 3,128 had assented to the Bill. 071-900 had dissented,
and from the remainder sufficiently explicit answers had not
been obtained. He thought there was, therefore, a sufficient
notice.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG said that even admitting the justice of
the course pursued by the Committee, as !tated by the Right
Hon. Baronet, still if the -allegations contained in the petitions
were,true, the Standing Orders had not been complied with
The Bill was allowed to proceed on certain midi:.
tions, namely, that the defect should be supplied, and the
whole of the plans deposited in tee proper quarter. These
conditions had not been complied with, and he therefore
thought it ought to be referred to the Committee to enquire
into the fact.
Lord STOItMONT said the question had been already de_
cided, and the question was whether the House should stand
by their standing orders ?
Mr. CLAY said a few words in reply.
Sir J. GRAHAM contended that no ground had been shown
for recommitting the Bill, and he should therefore feel it his
uuty to oppose it.
The SPEAKER made some observations relative to the re-
gulations of the Standing Orders' Committee, hut in so low a
tone that we could not catch a single sentence.

Mr. CLAY, seeing that the authority of the Speaker was
against him, would withdraw his motion.
Mr. M. PHILLIPS presented a petition against the Maid-
stone and Norwich Railway.
Mr. HUME presented.. a petition from certain butchers,
praying that a Bill for abolishing Smithfield Market might
be passed. He remembered that certain parties obtained a
Bill last Session, on the ground of doing away with a monopoly.
As the Bill in question would continue the monopoly, only in
other hands, he hoped it would not pass.
Mr. RICHARD S presented a petition from Knaresborough
against the North Midland Railway Bill.
Mr. PEASE presented a petition from Great Marlborough
against the Naturalization Bill.
Mr. A. TREVOR presented a petition from Durham,
praying to be heard against certain parts of the South Dur-
ham Railway Bill.

REGISTRATION OF VOTERS BILL.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved the Order of the Day for
the House going into Committee on the Regulation of Voters'
Bill.
Mr. P. SCROPE wished to know whether it was the in.
tention of Government to produce, in the course of the pre-
sent session, any 'series of measures founded on the report of
the Commissioners directed to inquire into the state of the
Poor of Ireland ?
Lord JOHN RUSSELL would say at once that it was the
opinion of the Government that it was inexpedient to bring in
a series of measures, founded on the Report of the Poor
Law Coinmissioners during the present Session ; he was not,
however, prepared to say that no specific measure might not
be brought forward in conformity with the Report.
PUBLIC PETITIONS.

In reply to a question from Captain PE CHE L,
The SPEAKER said he would not be doing his duty
by the House if he recommended it to re-commence
the system of morning sittings. _ _ .
____