The Sun.
London, England, 1838-02-20 00:00:00

COMMITTEE ON PETITIONS FOR
PRIVATE BILLS. No. 3.—(YESTERDAY.)

Mr. AGLIONET in the Chair.

1. FARRINGDONT-STILEZT, Losnov.—For making a street to Sessions'
House, Clerkenwell.—The notices in the Gazette, London newspapers,
and on the church doors, were prayed. Also notices by post on the 27th
and 28th of December to all the owners, he. of the property intended
to be taken.

The City Remembrancer proved that the money now raised by tolls
from the carts, &c. of non-freemen, would be sufficient to cover the esti-
mate of the expenses to be incurred. It was not the intention to levy
any new tolls or increase existing ones.—Petition for Lord Mayor and
Aldermen in favour read.

After the Committee had decided the Standing Orders had been com-
plied with, it was *entioned by the City Remembrancer, that from inad-
vertence the lists of owners and occupiers had not been lodged in tha
Private Bill Office.—Committee then decided that Standing Orders had
not be n complied with in this particular. Bill unopposed.
2. Ctry of, LONDON POLICE.—A question arose on this, whether
It was a private or a public Bill. It was stated that this
was a measure desired by a large majority of the Common Council, who
were chosen by the rate-payers. It was held by the Chairman and other
members of the Committee, that as it was a Bill for watching, and had
been brought before them as a private Bill, it must be considered. It
was then admitted that some of the notices had been given, as the deci-
sion of the Common Council had only taken place on the sth of Jan.,
after the time had expired. The City Remembrancer stated that in
the year 1,32 a similar Bill had been brought in, and was sent from the
Lords to the Commons, when it was determined that Standing Orders
did not apply.—Committee decided that Standing Orders were not corn.
plied with, but that these circumstances should be included in their
Report.—Bill unopposed.

3. GLABGOw WATER-Wollas.—This was an application for a Bill
to authorize one Company of Proprietors of Water-works, who
allege that they are only sharing four shillings per centum per annum
to sell their interests and works to another Company, and to enable the
latter to take the same. Notices in Newspapers proved. Stated that no
new tolls or lands were intended to be taken. Mr. Crawford, M. P. ,
asked if this was intended to save expence ? Witness answered in the
affirmative, and that it was to enable one Company to buy from another.
" Would not that produce a monopoly, by preventing competition ?"
Witness did not answer this home question. A discussion arose
whether this union of two Companies did not cause such an.extension
or continuation as brought the Bill under the Standing Orders, which
required additional and personal notices. It was stated that the union
of the two Companies and of the powers of the two Bills contained no
" extending," "enlarging," or " varying," but only to give to one
Company that which was held by two. It was proved by the petition
that power was prayed to alter, increase, or abolish existing rates and
burrow more money—Unopposed. The Committee decided that Stand-
ing Orders had beets complied with.
4. RUGBY AND LUTTERWORTD ROAD.—This petition was opposed by
trustees of a certain road, part of which is proposed to be taken. No-
tices in Newspapers proved, and shewn to be correct, save in one in-
stance, when the town Dustan was spelt Dunston. There were two
sets of notices, the one for power to take a part of the road, the
trustess of which wer the opposing parties, the other to compel those
trustees not to put up a gate. It was stated that Lord Shaftesbury
had laid it down as a rule that trustees of roads should not be
compelled to place Turnpike-gates at particular points. In this instance
it appears that these two gates were within a quarter of a mile from each
other, which it was adrnitt-d was a very great hardship. First objee-
than, that no application had been made to oivners, occupiers, &c. accord-
ing to Standing Orders ; and that Trustes of Roads were owners, and
as :having erected a toll-house, and lessees as occupiers of it; and,
secondly, that it was an intended extension o: a line, which required
other notices. Against these objections it was argued that there was no
intention to take any private property, or even the toll-house, and that the
notices were explicit, consequently no personal notices were necessary.
In reply to this it was stated that money had been borrowed upon thhs
road, and being so Parliament would protect the mortgages, and insist
that they had notice. In Railway Bills it was the iavariable practice
to give sach notice to the trustees of turnpike roads interfered with by
such railway.—Room cleared, and the Committee remained in discus.
sion about half an hour. Chairman stated that Committee had decided
that Standine Orders had not been complied with according to order,
No. 4. page 15.

5. BiNui.v (NORFOLK) IscLost:in.—it was stated that parties could
not arrange their affiirs, and it was consequently given up.
6. FESTE.NIOG RAILWAY (CARNARVONSHIEH.)—Petition
to raise additional Money—No alteration of Tolls—Or Time—Or to let
New Lands—Or to extend Railway—Notices proved—Unopposed--
Standing Orders proved—Committee censured the practice of not stating
in the Notices what is not intended to be done.
7. MintsNn COUNTIES (MOUNSORREL BRANCH) RAlLWAY.—Petition
read—fur further time end to extend powers—Notices proved—Plans
put in—Estimate to cut out of the " Corporate funds" of the Midland
Counties Railway Company—Chairman observed that Standing Order
in page 18 required that the funds should be stated to be " in the
hands" of the said Corporate Company. As to " extension" of time
it was admitted that no application had been made to owners and
occupiers, same as in Eastern Counties and Great. Western and
tenham Union Railway.—Standing Orders declared to be complied with
save as to this point ; unopposed.
S. BELFAST WATPRWORKS (No 2.)—Adjourned by consent of parties.
—Committee adjourned.

PAIGNTON HARBOUIt (DEVON) BILL.
Colonel SEALE in the Chair.
This Bill being ordered t• be recommitted, the Committee sat this
afternoon. A clause waa introduced, which had been omitted, decla—
ratory of certain rights of her Majesty, above and below low water-mark,
at the mouth of the harbour.
A Cause was also introduced, regulating the 11.7.rbour-dues to be paid
by vessels running into the harbour iii stress of weather.
These arnendmmts were unopposed; and the Bld, as amended,
passed through the Committee.