The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-13 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

11017 SEOF LO S, March 12.
The LORD CUANCELLOR toLIC his seat upn the Wool
sccic, Five o'clock.

BIRMINGIi AM AND WORCESTER RAILWAY.
The Earl of RIPON presented a petition from the Bir-
mingham and Worcester Railway- Company complaining
of the conduct of the London and North-Western Rail-
way Company, in purchasing up the Birmingham and
Oxford Railway, in order to defeat the policy of
an Act passed last session. He would accordingly move
that the petition should lie upon the table of the House.
Lord LYNDHURST said it was a matter of great
importance, and he considered that the House ought to
grant a Committee of Inquiry into the facts of the case.
The course they have adopted was this—out of the 50,000
shares, they had purchased 38,000 ; the remaining
sharks were divided among the shareholders and the
dependents of the company. The object was plainly to
defeat the opposition of a rival company, and he would
suggest that his Noble and Learned Friend should move
for a Committee of Inquiry into the allegations of this
petition. _ _ _

Lord BROUGHAM quite concurred in the opinion.
that these allegations should be left to the inquisition of a
Committee, for the Bill alluded to was clearly a fraud
on Parliament. The only difficulty that struck him
was, that this matter was under a course of inquiry in a
court of law.

Lord LYNDHURST had made inquiry and was cer-
tain that no such difficulty existed.
Lord BROUGHAM was sure that his Noble and
Learned Friend would perceive that he was in favour of
the Committee.

Lord LYNDHURST said that there were more in-
terests than those of the Oxford and Birmingham
Company invested in this question. There was the
Great Western Company also, who were largely affected
by the conclusion to which they might come.
After a few words from the Duke of BUCKINGHAM
and the Earl of WICKLOW,

Lord BE AUMONT said that he was quite opposed
to this Committee, for a Bill was at the present moment
pending before the other House of Parliament to enable
the London and Birmingham Company to lower their
tolls, and as that Bill would have to go through both
Houses there would be ample opportunity for inquiry.
Lord LYNDHURST was of opinion, that as the Lon.
don and Birmingham Railway was already in the pos-
session of the Oxford and Birmingham Company, that
Bill could not affect the matter at all.

Lord CAMPBELL professed himself wholly ignorant
of the faces of the case, and he would, therefore, refrain
from offering any opinion whatever ; but ht- must say
that he perfectly concurred with his Noble and Learned
Friend on the cross-benches (Lord Lyndhurst), and with
his Noble and Learned Friend opposite, that inquiry was
quite necessary, but he thought that object could be
obtained without a Committee.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE agreed with his
Noble and Learned Friend, that this was not a matter
with which they should proceed hastily. As the subject
divided itself into two parts, that very materially affected
the interests of the public ; he would suggest that they
should refer it to the Railway B.oard that had been
specially appointed to superintend the operation of
railways.
After alew words from. Lord BROUGHAM,

Lord LYNDHURST then said, that after what fell
from the Noble Marquis, he would suggest that the fur
ther consideration of the subject should be adjourned till
Tuesday next, and he should then move the appointment
of the Committee. He would now move that the petition
-be printed, to which he presumed there would be no
objection.

Lord BROUGHAM thought they would be better
able to consider the question than the Railway Board,
and he would not give his reasons why he thought so.
The subject then dropped.
PAUPERS.

Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Black-
burn, complaining of the influx of the Irish poor into
this country, and praying for a stringent law to compel
the landlords of Ireland to support them. The Noble
Lord proceeded to comment on the statements of the
petitioners, and stated that the poor were sent over at
2s. 6d. a head, at the expense of the landlords of Ireland.

The Earl of DEVON- said that there was one state-
ment made by his Noble and Learned Friend which
ought not to have been made without the best founda-
tion. That statement was, that the poor of Irelaud
were sent over by the landlords of Ireland at 2s. Gd. a
head, to be fed by the people of England. This was a
n flection upon a large, and, as he believed, a highly
respectable body of men, on whom he believed it was a
reflection as unnecessary as it was unjust.
Lord BROUGHAM had the greatest confidence in
the sources of his information.

The Earl of DEVON wished to know whether his
Noble and Learned Friend spoke in explanation or reply?
Lord BROUGHAM—Which I please.
The Earl of DEVON spoke to order.
Lord BROUGHAM—So do I; and I put it to your
Lordships whether I am not entitled to a reply on a debate
upon a petition, and, it I am not in order in that motion,
whether I am not entitled to speak on a motion for a
Committee for the consideration of that petition? His
only object in the presentation of this petition was to
show the practical effects of the present proceedings of
Government. He had the best possible authority for
the assertion that the poor of Ireland had been
sent over to this country _at the expense
of others, to be sustained in this country.
His Noble Friend was a member of a committee before
whom he had summoned his informants, and they were
ready on oath to confirm the statements which they hid
made to him of the fact which he had put before the
House.

The Earl of DESART would put it to their Lordships
whether they were to be wearied night after night by
the attacks of the Noble and Learned Lord, who possessed
abilities and varied attainments to which many of those
who had to make their defence could not pretend?
Lord BROUGHAM had but one object in all these
attacks, and that was to impress on the minds of the
landlords of Ireland the truth that the poor of that
country were not to be supported by the people of Epg-
land, nor even at the expense of the Irish people, but
that the landlords were themselves to bear their portion
of the burthen.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE only rose to refute
the absurdity that the sustentation of the Irish people
was to be at the expense of the English. Tbey had
come to us in an extreme exigency, and it was our
duty to relieve them as a portion of the population of
Great Britain, for in truth Ireland was aportion of Great
Britain. He was prepared to prove to his Noble and
Learned Friend that if Government had not interfered
for the relief of the distress of Ireland, instead of thou-
sands, hundreds of thousands would have fallen under
the influence of the angel of death that was spreading
destruction over that country. Ile did not regret the
part that Government had taken ; they came in not as
principals, but, as auxiliaries, in the relief of the dis-
tress, and he was convinced that, in consequence of the
prudent course which they adopted, a stimulus was
given to the dormant energies of the people which would
be productive of the most beneficial results. At that
moment Parliament was engaged in framing a poor-law,
and when that Bill came up to that House it would be
his duty to invite the cooperation of his Noble and
Learned Friend and their Lordships to make that law
as effective as possible. In making that Bill it was the
object of the Government to impose, as far as possible,
the support of the poverty of Ireland on the property of
Ireland, and he trusted that this, and the other men-
mires for the improvement of that country, would meet
with the support of their Lordships.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY presented a petition
from the poor-law guardians of the County Down, praying for
an alteration of the law relating to the present mode of poor-
law assessment. The Noble Marquis again complained of the
animadversions of the Noble and Learned Lord (Brougham)
against the Irish landlords.
TIDAL HARBOURS.

Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition from Ely, praying
their Lordships to establish a board for the regulation of the
tidal harbours of this country.
TRANSPORTATION.

Lord BROUGHAM moved that the report of the Select
Committee, that sat last August on the subject of the renewal
of transportation, should be laid on the table.—Agreed to.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE laid on the table a copy of
the committal of John Hockham to Tothill-fields prison.
POOR-LAW ASSESSMENTS.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented petitions from
several parishes against unequal assessments under the poor-
law.

RAILWAYS.

The Earl of AUCKLAND laid on the table several returns
respecting the railways leading to the several Government out.
ports.
HANOVERIAN JEWELS.

Viscount STRANGFORD said that through the courtesy of
the Noble Marquis he was permitted to make a communication
in private with respect to the relation between this country and
Hanover. The object which Le had in view was one which
nearly affected the present Sovereign of Hanover, and one
which had excited much notice among the public. The ques-
tion which he wished to put was as to whether her Majesty's
Government would have any disinclination to state what was
the position of the present negotiation between this country
and Hanover with respect to the jewels claimed by the Sove•
reign of that country as heirlooms.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE had no objection to give
all the information which he possessed, although he
decidedly refused to produce any papers connected
with the subject. The dispute had originally arisen
with respect to certain jewels which had been brought over to
this country by,George 1., and which had been successively the
property of George 11., George 111., and of the .late King,
and part of which had been in the possession of Queen Char-
lotte. The illustrious persons who were particularly interested
in this affair had, alike with sense of their position and the
claims of justice, agreed not to appeal to law, by which they
could not be bound, but to a decision by which they would be
bound in honour. They had agreed to submit the decision of
this dispute to three of the most eminent lawyers of this coun-
try. Those three were the late Chief Justice of the Court of
Common Pleas, Lord Lyndhurst, and Lord Langdale. Un-
happily the final settlement of the question had been postponed
through the sudden death of Sir Nicholas Tindal ; but thus
much he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) might state, that before
the decease of that eminent person, all the three Commissioners
were unanimous in agreeing that Queen Charlotte had not a
right to dispose of the jewels by will which she had been pos-
sessed of during life ; but on the other portion of property
they had not decided. At their last meeting they had had con-
siderable discussion, but before the next time appointed for
their meeting, one of the Commissioners had died. This,
however, did not materially interfere with the settlement
of the question, for it was known that they had been unanimous
in the belief that as far as the first proposition was concerned
these jewels could not be retained by, j her Majesty otherwise
than as heir-looms. With respect to the other jewels, no de-
cision had been arrived at; yet, seeing the state of the case,
and knowing that the Commissioners had been unanimous, a
proposition had been made on the
.part of her 'Majesty to the
King of Hanover to take the decision of the two remaining
Commissioners, rather than reopen the whole question, and
thereby oblige the reconsideration of all the arguments which
bad been adduced upon the subject.
Lord BROUG HAM said if the House of Hanover had not
succeeded in this case they need not abide by the decision. He
I believed this country had nothing whatever to do with the
matter, and he thought it better if they abstained from ex-
pressing any opinion in that House till the arbitrators decided
upon it. He thought it would be better to leave the matter to

'47.4f I t 2;
iLLA
!girl t‘legi (
&---AvsA-- 44

three judges, another being appointed in .ieu o
lieu
Tinf'al.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said there was
use the expression that possession was nine points of the
law. There should be no improper use of the fact of pos-
ses-ion in this case, for there was no intention of making a
profit by the possession of the property.
The subject then dropped.
Their Lordships then adjourned.
HOUSE Or COMMONS, March 12.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
The following Bills were read a second time and
ordered to be committed :
Axholme Railway (from the Leeds anti' Selby Railway
to Gainsborough, with branches).
Bingley Gas.
Edinburgh and Northern Railway (improvement of the
ferry between Ferry Port on Craig and the North
Shore:of the river Tay).
Enfield and Edmonton Railway Extension.
Leominster Canal Navigation Sale.
Liverpool Corporation Waterworks.
Manchester and Birmingham and North Staffordshire
Junction Railway,
Newhaven Harbour, Ouse Lower Navigation, and Lewes
and Laughton Drainage.
Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway (No. 1
—Extension and Amendment).
Portland Harbour of Refuge and Breakwater.
Rochdale Improvement.

MACDUFF HARBOUR.
On the motion of Sir A. L. HAY, the second reading
of the Macduff Harbour Bill was postponed till this day
week.

STOCKTON AND HULL RAILWAY.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition from Lord
Brougham and others against the Stockton and Hull
Railway Bill.
It was ordered to be referred to the Committee upon
the Bill.

POOR-LAW FOR IRELAND.
The O'CONOR DON presented a petition from the
High Sheriff and Magistrates of the county of Ros-
common, in favour of a general assessment for the relief
of the poor ; and praying that an extensive system of
emigration might be introduced as a means of relief to
the distressed.

WINDOW-TAX.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented several petitions
against the window-tax. The petitioners stated that
the tax was unfavourable to the health and comfort of
the inhabitants.

THE FAMINE.
Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL presented a petition from
the county of Mayo, complaining of the want of energy
in the Irish landlords, and praying that the House
world take some further measure to prevent the spread
of the calamity which now exists.
HARBOURS AND TIDAL WATERS.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from the ship-
owners of Ilfracombe, praying the House to further, as
soon as possible, the Bill now before it for the better
management of harbours and tidal waters, and stating
that the harbour of Ilfracombe would receive much be-
nefit from such a measure.

Mr. MILNER GIBSON presented a petition from
the Chamber of Commerce at Manchester, praying
for a better management of harbours and tidal waters.
Also a petition from Manchester against the, rating of
tenements ; and three petitions from the same place
against the law prohibiting marriages between certain
degrees of kindred.
POOR-LAW IN IRELAND.

Lord CASTLEREAGH presented a petition from
the board of guardians of a parish in the county Down,
praying for an extension and alteration of the Irish
poor-law. Also, a petition from the parish of New-
tow•nards, praying for an equalisation of the rating
system.

Sir R. PEEL presented a petition from the assess ors
and collectors of property and the assessed taxes, in the
county of Stafford, complaining that they did not.receive
adequate remuneration, and praying that the House
would take some step to increase it.
Mr. P. SCROPE presented a petition from the parish
of Craig, in the Queen's County, praying for an efficient
poor-law ; and also for such measures as would enable
them to do what the inhabitants of every country on the
face of earth were enabledoto do—namely, maintain
themselves by their industry on the face of their native
land.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
Messengers from the House of Lords brought up a
message intimating that their Lordships had agreed to
several Bills which had been sent up for their approval.
NOTICE OF MOTION.
Mr. AGLIONBY gave notice that on Tuesday next
he would ask the Secretary for the Home Department a
question as to the course the Government intended to
take with respect to the introduction of a general Bill
for the lighting, paving, and general improvement of
towns.

RATE OF WAGES ON PUBLIC WORKS IN
IRELAND.

Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL, seeing the Right Hon.
the Secretary for Ireland in his place, wished to call his
attention to a statement which he had made last week,
in answer to a question from the Honourable Member
for Limerick, respecting the rates of wages in
the west of Ireland. It appeared that the
answer of the Right Honourable Gentleman had
bc en misunderstood. It was stated that the Right
Hon. Gentleman had said that the wages of labourers
on public works were nearer is. 2d. than 8d a day.
The Gentleman who wrote to him (Mr. O'Connell)
said that this was an error, as no person in Sligo, or the
neighbouring county, had ever received more than Bd.;
he added that that could not support a family with the
present high rate of provisions.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said that he would repeat to
the House what he had stated on the occasion referred
to by the Hon. Member. He said that from informa-
tion he had received from Sligo, it appeared that the
system pursued was this—that as far as possible the
principle of task work was introduced, and under that
system an able-bodied labourer would earn nearly Is. 2d.
a day. If day work was given, then only Bd. per day was
paid ; but in the cases of families where they could not
be supported by the labour of one member of that
family, it was allowed to give labour to another person
from the same family, rather than give a higher rate of
wages than was to be had in agricultural operations.
EXPORTATION OF GRAIN FROM ENGLAND.
Mr. H. BAILLIE wished to ask a question of the
Noble Lord at the head of the Government. The Noble
Lord was perhaps aware that France and Belgium had
prohibited the exportation of corn from those countries,
and that there were now Belgian agents in this country
making large purchases of gram. There was a general anti-
cipation, therefore, that in consequence of these purchases
the prices of food would advance, and a scarcity ensue.
He wished, therefore, to know whether the Government
would feel called upon to prohibit the exportation of
corn from this country?

Lord JOHN RUSSELL complained 'that the Hon.
Gentleman had asked a question on this important
subject m ithout giving notice of his intention
of doing so. He would, however, tell him what was the)
general opinion of the Government under these circum-
stances. The members of the Government were aware
that a great demand existed in France and Belgium for
grain, and that prices had risen in those
countries, but they were also of opinion that
to prohibit the exportation of corn was not the way
to cause articles of food to be brought into this
country, because they thought that the importing
merchant, if he had a security that he could bring
corn here, and be permitted to re-export it if he
thought proper to send it to other markets, would
bring it here ; but if it were at once shown that when
he did come here they refused to allow him to re-export
it, then the probability would be that he would avoid
their market. Although he had not been prepared to
meet the question of the Hon. Member, he had no hesi-
tation in saying that this would be the ruling principle
of the Government.

CUSTODY OF OFFENDERS BILL.-PRISONS

BILL.

In reply to a question from an Hon. MEMBER,
rrSisiornGs
hadEY justsaid
cometh
down Custody
fromo Offendersfthe P Bill an Bill d
Prisons House,
and he proposed then to move that they shouldp be read
a first time. He would, with the permision of the
House, fix Thursday next for the second reading, when
the discussion would be taken upon them.
The Bills were according read a first time.
CAPTAIN WARNER'S INVEN LION.
Sir R. PEEL said, a short while ago certain officers
were appointed to ascertain the value of Captain War-
ner's invention. In the report which those officers had
made upon the subject, allusion was made to certain
minutes that had been kept in the course of the investi-
gation, and he wished to know if Government had any
objection to lay these minutes on the table?
Lord JOHN RUnSELL replied, that he under-
stood Captain Warner had no objection to the produc-
tion of the minutes, and he would readily lay them on
the table.

LOUGH FOYLE.
Mr. BLAKE said a short time ago plans and specifi-
cations were prepared for the improvement of Lough
Foyle, but the works had not yet been commenced.
Now he should be glad to know the cause of the delay.
Mr. LABOUCHERE replied that the officers of the
Board of Works were not answerable for the delay. It
had occurred solely from the parties interested in these
works not having sent in their assent to them. He
must add, however, that the assent had just been re-
ceived, and he did not think there would be any
further delay.
wauisyhepdretpoaraktnioonws,wohrethhae,ri
itth ei n Ge
eonvteermn
EMIGRATION TO AMERICA.
hVadESalEaYde
meArlitr.
plation to assist poor persons emigrating
from Ireland
upon their arrival at Quebec. Hebelieved that up-
wards of 400 families were now preparing in one part
of Ireland to proceed there,
without the assistance of
the emigration committee; and, as it v • ats not probable
that they would be enabled to collect together more
than a • sufficient sum to carry them across the Atlantic, it
would therefore be d csirabl9 if the Government could
afford thorn an • y assistance upon their landing.
Mr. H AWES said that there was a fund in Canada
available for the sick and destitute emigrants who might
be
landed there. This fund was, however, very small,
arising mainly from a tax upon the emigrants, and
from a vote taken with the estimates for Canada,
and required considerable care in its distribution.
He did not anticipate that the fund at present
existing in Canada would be found insufficient for the
purpose. He would add, that during the last year the
number of emigrants to North America had been up-
wards of 125,000, the system of emigration had been
found to work well, and in general no complaints were
made of their condition.

4011.•••••
POOR RATES (IRELAND).
Sir J. GRAHAM wished to know when the return,
which he moved for about a fortnight since, on the sub-
ject of levying poor-rates in Ireland, and also showing
how the account of the sum of 1,200,0001. advanced for
building workhouses in Ireland stood, would be ready?
Mr. PARKER replied, that the papers referred to by