The Sun.
London, England, 1836-06-18 00:00:00

BRIGHTON RAILWAY.

Lord GEORGE LENNOX brought up the report of
the Committee on Stephenson's Line for the above Railway.
Mr. ALSTON brought up a Special Report from the
Committee on Rennie's Line. Both were ordered to lie on
the table.
On the motion of Sir OSWALD MOSELE Y, Thring's
Estate Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be com-
mitted.
Mr. BALFOUR brought up the report of the Glasgow
old Falkirk railway Bill.
On the motion of Lord ARTHUR HILL, the Ban Re-
senvir Bill was read a third time anAd passed.
CANAL NAVIGTION.
Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from certain
owners of property in the parish of Marylebone, complaining
of a great depreciation of property by reason of the increase of
canal navigation.
HENEAGE'S ESTATE BILL.'
On the motion of Mr. A. SANDFORD this Bill was read
a second time.
WESTMINSTER SMALL DEBTS.
On the motion of Mr. BYNG the Committee on this Bill
of tained an extension of time till Friday next to make their
report.
MEDICAL ATTENDANCE AT CORONERS'

INQUESTS.
Mr. WIL KS presented a petition from seven physicians of
Worcester, and other medical men of that City and County,
swaying some provision might be made by which medical men
might receive compensation for their attendance before Coro-
ner's Inquests. The Hon. Gentleman also presented a petition
from a place in Barks, in favour of the Registration of Births,
Marriages, and Deaths Bill.
CHURCH RATE.
Mr. WILK S stated that, in consequence of indisposition,
he had been unable to bring forward a measure respecting
Church Rates; but that he should endeavour not to let the
im,R,Jcp ip34: away without making some effort to relieve the
ome way or other from those imposts.
EAR E3' DIA MARITIME OFFICERS.
F, litg. NG, in presenting thepetition of which
e, begged to assure the Hon. Gentleman
tseke e
.Board of Controul) that he did not par-
• Tin thr tations thrown out by certain parties against
ff 0. Gie n ; on the contrary he (Mr. Young) believed
ail,' influenced by the very best intentions, al-
tbwame time he thought the course pursued by him
had operated with great injustice towards the petitioners. At the
term: .tiation of the East India Company's charter the trade was

~~

~. •
thrown open, anct- a great number o e commanders ore**
vessels were in consequence thrown of employment. A
bill had passed that House awarding c Rensation, but by
regulations reulations adopted to carry the provisions of the Act
into effect, great injustice was done to the petitioners.—( Hear.)
The question had been brought by petition before the Pro-
prietors, who unanimously decided that the parties were en-
titled to the compensation claimed, and recommending the
Court of Directors to admit the claim of these parties. Not-
withstanding both the Court of Directors and the Proprietors ,
have concurred in that recommendation, that the grant should
be allowed, they have been refused by the Board of Controul,
and they now saw no means of obtaining it, but by appealing to
that House. Such were the facts of the case. They had been pre-
vented from following their profession by the discontinuance of
the Company's trade, and in his opinion they had established a
clear and incontestible right to demand, at the hands of the
Court of Directors, the compensation that had been provided
for the other officers of that service. He would not trouble
the House further ; but as he was wholly unacquainted with
the opposition which might be offered to the petition, he
trusted the House would oblige him with a very short reply.
These gentlemen had an undoubted right to compensation, ac-
cording to the rule as laid down by the Board of Control.
An Hon. MEMBER, whose name was unknown, had been
requested to support the prayer of the petition, which he did
with very great pleasure, because the claim was one of justice,
and every one of the best feelings of man must be enlisted in
their favour. He was well acquainted with the service, to
which England owed much. All the science which had been
applied to naval matters for the last 40 years owed its origin
to the East India service. Within that time not even a junior
officer in that service but was competent to navigate the
largest of his Majesty's ships to any part of the world.
He would appeal to the person who was at the head of the
scientific department of the Admiralty, from which source
he received the information he possessed. The Officers of the
East India Company were without exception the most gallant
and the most devoted he had ever witnessed. The Hon. Mem-
ber concluded by giving his most cordial support to the petition.
Sir JOHN C. HOBHOUSE could assure the Hon.
Member who had just sat down, that, no man more
than himself estimated the value of the services of the officers
of the East India Company. He questioned not their merits,
but he must confess after looking over again the papers with
respect to the particular case in question, he had arrived
at the same conclusion to which he had come before. It

was with the greatest pain that he felt compelled from a
sense of public duty to resist those claims, more especially
when, as stated by the lion. Gentleman, (Mr. Young,) they
were recommended by the Court of Directors and the Court
of Proprietors. But the Hon. Gentleman made a slight mis-
take when he stated that the Court of Directors took in the
first instance the same view as they did now. They had at
first decided that these claims were not admissible, but they
afterwards changed their opinion. He, however, had no
reason to differ from the opinion of Lord Ellenborough, when
that Noble Lord was at the head of the Board of Controul.
A total misapprehension prevailed as to the meaning of
the Act of Parliament. It was never contemplated that
the power of that House was to govern individual cases. If
it was to be occupied in that way, the whole time of the
House would be taken up, to the exclusion of all other
business. He had certainly given the most attentive consi-
deration to the case of the petitioners ; and after the most mi-
nute investigation, he must say that he fully concurred in the
decision of Lord Ellenborough, that the petitioners had proved
no prospective loss. On these grounds it appeared to him
that the present was not a ease for Parliament.—( Hear.)
Mr. ROBINSON thought the only question for the House.
was, whether these parties had been injured by the discontinu-
ance of the East India Company's trade with China. In his
opinion they bad, and their case was one of peculiar hardship.
and he might add of injustice. The Right lion. Baronet had
stated that the Court of Proprietors had nothing to do with it.
liedoubtedlv the Court of Proprietors had no pecuniary
interest in the matter, because their dividend was secured to
to them ; but they had a right to interfere, because they were
one of the three parties to the contract which had been made
between the Company,the Proprietor,and the Maritime Officers.
He was only anxious that justice should be done to ail parties.
He was not aware of the intentions of his Hon. Friend, neither
could he then say whether he would take any ulterior pro-
ceedings upon behalf of other officers ; but the case was one
which the House ought—in fact it was incumbent upon the
House to enquire into the subject, and take some steps for
securing. iwitiee for the parties.
Mr. PR :El), after detailing the state in which the ques-
tion was when he was Secretary to the Board of Control.
said that he thought there was a strong claim on the part
of more than one of the cfficers of the East India Com-
pany.—( Hear.) With respect to the statements of the
Right Honourable Baronet, that Lord Ellenhorough
had given a decided opinion on this subject, he begged to say
that that Noble Lord had not given any decided opinion on the
subject ; he had only given an opinion on the case before him,
stating at the time, that if a case of a different complexion
came before him upon the subject, he should give it his consi-
deration.

Mr. V. SMITH did not think that the petitioners had
made out a good claim for compensation.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG would not occupy the house further
with this discussion ; he merely rose to give notice that on the
7th of July he would move that the petition he had just pre-
sented he referred to a Select Committee.
IRISH CORPORATION BILL—LORDS' AMEND-
MENTS.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER appeared
at the Bar of the House, and being called upon, said, that as
Chairman of the Committee appointed by the House to draw up
reasons to offer to the House of Lords for disagreeing to certain
amendments made by their Lordships in the Irish Municipal
Corporations Bill, he was directed to state they had drawn up
those reasons, and to report the same to the House. The
Report having been presented, was read by the Clerk. It
began by stating the necessity that a good correspondence
should exist between the two Houses of Parliament for the
enactment of good laws, and to promote the security, peace,
and tranquillity of the United Kingdom—it stated that
the Bill for the better regulation of Corporations in Ireland
was framed on the principle of a reform of abuses, retaining a
system of Municipal Government, but that the Bill which was
returned from the House of Lords abolished Municipal Corpo-
rations in Ireland altogether, and placed the Corporate funds
under a Board of Commissioners.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The
Bill, as amended, contained an entirely new principle,
and a new title, and must, therefore, be considered
as an original measure—that from an earnest desire of preser-
ving a good understanding and correspondence between the
two Houses, and considering it essential to the well-being of
thz.. Monarchy, that House had proceeded to take into conside-
ration the amendments made by the House of Lords, and they
hoped that the measure founded thereon would meet with the
concurrence of the other House of Parliament.
The Clerk then proceeded to read in detail the various
amendments made by the House of Commons, with the rea-
sons therefore.

yV
Sir ROBERT PEEL hoped that it would be distinctly
understood that the reasons were given under protest, and
that they were not the opinions of the entire House.—
(Opposition cheers.) It was impossible to deny that
arguments might not be urged for not agreeing to those amend-
ments, but that could not be done without opening the whole
question and provoking a lengthened debate. By withhold-
ing or not provoking that discussion, he trusted that it would
be understood that these reasons were given under protest,
and with a distinct reservation on that side of the House.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the understanding on such occasions, and as had been the case
last Session was, that these reasons were to be considered as
the reasons of the majority.—( Hear, hear, hear.) As re-
spected the minority of that House, the matter was a
mere ex parte proceeding. He would suggest that the
same course be now pursued as was done on the former
occasion. They were the opinions of that side of the House,
and of course did not in any way preclude the gentlemen of
the other side.

Sir R. PEEL doubted whether it would be a good prece-
dent to set, that the report of a Committee should be taken
and received as the opinion of the House.
Mr. S. RICE said they were read as a mere matter of
course.

The Clerk then proceeded with the reading of the reasons,
which having been agreed to by the House,
The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER, Mr. P. TnortmsoN,
the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, and a great number of Members,
proceeded to the House of Lords, to request a Conference.
Petitions against tithes, and against the Lords' Amend-
ments, were presented by Mr. Smith, Mr. O'Brien, and Mr.
Sheil, from places in Limerick and Tipperary.
Mr. F. SHAW, presented a petition from a place, the
name of which did not reach us, in favour of the Lords' Amend-
ments.