The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-09 00:00:00

MEDICAL BILL.

Mr. R. YORKE presented a petition from York in
favour of the Medical Registration Bill.
Mr. HUME presented similar petitions.
BEERSELLERS.

Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND presented a petition
from the beer sellers of Preston, praying that they
might be put on the same footing as the licensed
victuallers.

CARRIAGE BY RAILWAYS AY") CANALS.

Mr. ILUNTZ presented a petition frt,ln the Birming-
ham Canal Company, praying for an inquiry into the
system of carrying by railways and canals.
NAVIGATION-LAWS.
The Hos. MEMBER also presented a petition from the
shipjoiners of the port of London against any inter-
ference in the navigation-laws.
STANDING ORDERS.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD presented a petition
from Rochdale complaining of the effect of the standing
orders.
The petition was ordered to be referred to the Standing
Orders Committee.
EDUCATION GRANT.

Mr. P. HOWARD presented petitions from certain
ROlllllll Catholics in Carlisle, and other places, praying
that Catholic. might participate in any grant for national
education.

Mr. STREIT presented similar petitions from Bath
and other places.
Mr. WILSON PATTER presented similar petitions
from parts of Lancashire.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD presented similar
petitions from Rochdale.

SMITHFIELD MARKET.
Sir E. FILMER presented petitions from Tunbridge
Wells an.d Sydenham against the removal of Smithfield
market.

TRADING IN SEDUCTION.
Mr. R., SPOONER presented petitions from tke clergy
of L 9 ion and Bristol in favour of the Bill to prevent
tradi nr, in seduction.

CORN-LAWS.
MI:. M. GIBSON presented a petition from the
Clay tuber of Commerce of Manchester, praying that ail
d'aVies on corn might be done away with immediately
&iv d the navigation-laws suspended.
Mr. W. PATTEN begged to call the attention of the
17 Louse to a circumstance which occurred in yesterday's
'private business. He was yesterday about to move the
further consideration of the London and North-Western
Railway Bill, when he was informed that it had been
already done. That appeared to have been a mistake, as
it had not been moved, and therefore he hoped the House
would permit him to move the further consideration of
the Bill then.—Motion agreed to.
RAILWAY RESOLUTIONS.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that, in pursuance of notice he had given on Monday
night, he rose to move certain resolutions connected
with railways.
Sir 'ii. HALFORD rose to order, and asked if these
resnlutions were strictly to be called private business.
T'ee SPEAKER said that all matters connected with
privrate Bills was properly to be considered private
business.
'l' T 7 ri IT .1 rvr) r t_ _ TWITT,MT, 0 _el
fortnight since, an Hon. Member had brought up cer-
tain resolutions to impose restrictions upon the railroad
pace at which the railway business was proceeding.
In conseques ce of that he had framed certain resolu-
tions, to which he was now about to ask the consent of
the House. Before doing so, he thought, however, tisat
some explanation of them was necessary. In the cour,;e
of the debate which had taken place a short time ago,
the course which had been suggested was, that the House
should interfere, and, by compulsion, stop all further 1
proceedings in the railways. That course was not
deemed advisable, and it was then suggested that a se-
lection of certain railways which should be allowed to
go on should be made. The Government had considered
that proposition, and had come to the conclusion tl sat
they would not stop any of the proceedings of the rs a-
way companies by compulsion, but would give them t he
power, accompanied by certain inducements, to stn y
their preceedinga for the present. The course whin h
they had taken was founded upon the opinion that i t
would not be advisable to attempt to compel a stoppage
of the railway proceedings, but they had come to the
determination of withholding certain powers which had
hitherto been granted to railway companies, giving them
at the same time the power of suspending the Bills till
a future period. The first resolution merely gave the
parties the power to suspend their Bills till the seas ion
of 1848, and by the second and third they merely re-
stored the regulation of the House which had existed
previous to the enormous increase of these speculative
proceedings, which had of late assumed an ascendant 'Y,
not only inconvenient but dangerous. The third tees 0-
lution prohibited the payment of interest upon capit and was thus calculated to check the increase of the se
speculations which were got up merely for the purpo le
of being sold. In former Acts of Parliament for prim to
proceedings, no such thing had been heard of as U to
payment of interest upon capital, and it was now best
properly about to be checked. The next resolution, t
he
fourth, prohibited companies, which were only enabl ed
to complete a small portion of their line, to declare &sur-
plus profits; and the fifth placed restrictions upon th e
sale or lease of railways to other companies. Man, y
railway companies were got up merely with the inters
tion of leasing or selling the line, and the parties ham
not the smallest intention of ever constructing the lint
themselves. Many companies sought powers to gua-
rantee the payment of interest to others, being by no
means substantial bodies ; and this resolution would re-
strict any such powers being given to any company
which was not in a position to make their guarantee a
bona fide security. The last resolution also placed other
restrictions upon other minor details, which he would
not enter into then. Ile should move the resolutionst,
and if the House agreed to them they would be bindings
only so far as this session was concerned. He there- ;
fore proposed the resolutions for the approbation of the.
House (tor which see another part of our paper).
Sir H. LIALFORD moved the adjournment of the de-
bate. The matter was stated to be of private business,.
but was literally of public importance, and it would in-
terfere materially with most important public business..
Mr. SPOONER seconded the motion,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
he had cited no power which the Government possefeaed
in bringing forward this matter. He had merely nett 4:1 as any private Member in that House would have done
under similar circumstances.
Mr. ESTCOURT said that the question was whether
the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite was acting con-
sistently with the practice of the House in bringing for-
ward these resolutions at that time. The subject was
one of considerable importance, and he thought that the
sooner it was determined the better. He hoped the
House would not postpone, upon a merely formal objec-
tion, the settlement of a question in which such great in-
terests were involved.
Mx. S. CRAWFORD supported the motion for the
ardallottrnment of the debate. He did not think that
way business should take up so much time of the
House, and he was aware that many Members who were
sanxious to express their opinions on this subject would
e noel opnpoowrtunity of doing so if the question were
ea s:r. of .
r '".'SSTHOPE said that the determination of
this quest on was most anpxeioolelylooked forward to, but
there were thousands of
a in_ _distress, whose mi-
series were to be alleviated bpyponeraillensvhich was on the
list of that day. The post
of the railway
injury to it,
question for one day would not be oft
and the case of these people required theana"ost immediate
consideration.
After a few words from Mr. HumE,
BANKES said that the time was come when
they should consider the question of whether the rail-
way business was to keep off and swamp all the public
businest of the Th.use. Night after night railway dis-
eassisn were taking up their time, and the consequence
Was that the House was frequently counted out, to the
great (/("laY of matters whien the House should imme-
,tiately deal with. He hoped that those Hun. Members
who were fur the adjournment of the debate would per-
st:vero in their intention.
Sir GEORGE GREY admitted that the pressure of
private business had very much of late interfered with the
public business, au d he thought that if any complaints
were made about the discussion of the present motion,
it would be better to take the sense of the Huuse at once,
and not waste more time in discussion.
After a few words from Mr. CRIPPS and Mr. E.
B 'LLER,

Colonel SIBTTIORP said that upon th e present °coa-
ti.) i he should do that which he did not v ery often do—
atyport her Majesty's Government.—(L aughter.) He

But let the House look to the consequences which This.
Bill . would produce. It would at once set aside all the frame
rents , and would thereby destroy the value of upwards
of 1,: 700 frames in Sutton and in Ashfield alone, whose
props ietors mainly depended on these rents for
their support. Did the Honourable Member know
that out of the forty thousand frames upwards
of ter 1 thousand belonged to independent proprietors ?
Itwii 4 because he conscientiously believed that this Bill
would not benefit the parties who were distressed, and
becatt se be also believed that it would inflict injury on
othlelrri.
,11)thi.TaNt he would give it his decided opposition.
nufac turer, paerodtect the honest earnings of the poor ma-
MBE said that the object of the present
Bill 'as to
raise or regulate t was not by any means an attempt to
Hon. Baronet as inconsistent in him
seeev,i.neL
sever he had expressed his
consi-
dered by the Ri g the
rate
of
wages. It had been consi-
oial objectionable details
to s ipport it,
p
nic)n, but the only way
opini, on that there
la it. True that was his
good.econd read
,Cemraitte t(tiel'ltssar' hear
rby
steondii .n•egmetd2e- thoseßil l
to
aad t hat was the reason he supported
in,, f or he believed the principle of it was
owner : of these frames, who was a middleman, let the
e
frame to the workman, and in doing so he required
him to deal with a certain butcher or baker.
the e fleet of which system he would illustrate by the
folio ring fact:--A mail, who had a wife and five children,

rented out a frame; his wages for twelve weeks aveleaged
at 71.; he was obliged to deal with a baker;
and when he came to be paid for his labour,
he found that 41. 12s. was stopped for the single article
of bread. An enormous charge was made for the rent
of the frame, but the result was, that only thirty-seven
shillings was left to the poor man and his family, to
feed and clothe, pay rent and taxes, for the spacn
of twelve weeks. They might say that they should not
interfere with the rights of property. They had al-
ready done so in the Ten Hours' Bill, and it was
nonsense to say that a number of independent
frames would be rendered valueless; there was not one of
these frames which had not been paid for five times over.
He did not propose that they should say that
these middlemen should not hire out their frames, but
that such hiring out should be declared " truck." He
hoped that the House would not deal so contemptuously
with the distresses of these pcor people as to throw
out the Bill without a second reading.
Mr. ROEBUCK was an opponent of the present Bill,
as it was a direct interference with capital in the country,
and because it would reduce the already wretched con-
dition of the labourer into greater wretchedness.
What was the case which was charged as a robbery?
Why one man brings his labour and another brings his
money. Well, where then was the robbery? for as it
seemed to him there was an equable exchange. lie
might cite the example which he had previously adduced
of the farmer who brought his skill and his money also
into the market, and it the landlord exacted a more
than sufficientrent the time would come when the cause
of loss to the farmer would be discovered, and the land-
lord would have to come down with his rent. This
Bill, therefore, he repeated, if carried would only be
successful i❑ working a great loss. They could no more
regulate wages by Act of Parliament than they could
regulate the price of bread, or the profits of the mer-
chants of London, by Act of Parliament. It should be
recollected that machinery was now in existence, and
was every day improved, and it was firmly established
in his mind, that if this Bill were to be adopted, the very
first persons to rue its passing, would be those whom
this Bill was intended to benefit. They all knew the
case of the hand-loom weavers. There was not
the slightest doubt in the world, that if
there was to be any interference with the
hosiery weavers there would quickly be machinery
invented to supersede the assistance of the artizan alto-
gether, and everything would be effected by machinery;
and if Parliament did not desist from its headlong career,
and refrain from interfering in matters which it could
never improve, the consequences would be that greater
evil than benefit would ensue from the alteration. He
was sorry to have trespassed so long upon the House, but
trusted that he had not treated the subject in a spirit of
asperity, and that what he had said would be received as
it was intended, with the hope that no step would be
taken that would not be eventually instrumental in pro-
moting the welfare of the operative.--(Cheers.)
Mr. BANKES perfectly agreed in the opinion ex •
pressed by the Hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Roebuck),
to the belief that they ought to go into the inquiry to
ascertain how benefit could be rendered, but he totally
differed with him in the conclusion at which he had
arrived; for he seemed to assert that :if even this in-
quiry were to turn out favourably to the Bill, he
still would oppose it, as it was contrary to the
principles of political economy. But such a course
had not been pursued by the Honourable Member
for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe), for, although that
Hon. Member had declared himself a supporter gene-
rally of the principles of political economy, yet still he
did not restrict himself from deviations from the strict
principles of that science whenever the occasion arose
from particular causes, and he was not, consequently,
opposed to this inquiry.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon.
Member for Bath had objected to the 7th and
Bth clauses of the Bill ; but what was the object of
those clauses ? Why, simply declaratory that a
mischief had been practised and ought to be prevented.
and that was, in fact, the principle of the Bill. The
Right Hun. Baronet at the head of the Board of Control
had stated that he had made great exertions to overact
the truck system, and yet he opposed this Bill, although
its principle was precisely the same. For what reason,
then, did he oppose the Committee for which his Hon.
Friend had moved? None but that of personal conve-
nience; and, for his own part, he believed that the best
reason for voting in the affirmative was, that the inquiry,
whether successful or not, must prove useful.
Mr. BROTHERTON was desirous of not giving a silent
vote on the occasion, because he was anxious to state that,
although he was favourable to any emancipation of the
operative, he did not anticipate any good effects from the
Bill this session, and because he believed that it would
be easier to make a new Bill than to amend this. He
should, therefore, oppose it, not because it would be bene-
ficial to the manufacturer, but because it would be inju-
rious to the operative.
Mr. FERRAND said that the very reason which
had been adduced by the; Hon. Member for Salford
was that which would induce him to support the Bill,
for he evidently felt that there was a case for inquiry,
and he regretted that the Right lion. Baronet the Presi-
dent of the Board of Control did not conceive himself to
be the Member, not for the manufacturers only but for
the artizans also of Nottingham. He (Mr. Ferranti).
when Mr. Gladstone was at the head of the Board cc
Trade, waited upon him. with a deputation from the
Midland districts, and that Minister had sent down a
Commissioner who had ascertained that the operatives
had far understated their case.

Mr. MARK PHILIPS said that he was perfectly
convinced that this Bill was most objectionable. The
object pf the Bill. namely,to_teeplat.e..waw.eatiu.Y.ottd
more delusive than an attempt to meddle with the question
and he saw so much that was objectionable in the Bill,
that he would not give it his support.
Sir HENRY HALFORD said that the dis-
tress had lasted thirty years, which fully proved
two things—first, that there was no corrective prin.
ciple in the system itself ; and, secondly, that
it was therefore necessary for the Legislature to interfere.
He had been accused of having devised a crude system.
That was the fault of the Government, for he had no
ambition to be a legislator, and the question ought to
have been in the hands of the Government.—(Hear.)
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House was cleared for a division, when there appeared—
For the second reading
Against it
Majority
SEDUCTION AND PROSTUUTION.
Mr. SPOONER presented several petitions in favour
of the second reading of this Bill, and moved that it be
read a second time.

The question was then put, and the gallery was cleared
for a division, but no division took place.
An HoN. MEMBER having observed that strangers
were present, the gallery was again cleared.
After a considerable interval the gallery was again
opened, when we found

Mr. ROEBUCK concluding a speech in opposition to
the Bill.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE opposed the Bill.
Mr. P. BORTHWICK and Col. SIBTHORP supported the
Bill.

After a few words from Mr. ifumE and Sir G. GREY,
The Bill was read a second time, and was ordered to
be referred to a Select Committee for the consideration
of the clauses.

SAVINGS BANKS ANNUITIES BILL.
The House then went into Committee on this Bill,
and the clauses were agreed to.
Mr. DUNCOMBE obtained leave to bring in a Bill
to provide for the better ventilation of mines and col-
lieries, fur the protection and preservation of the lives of
persons employed in and about the same, and to !Lake
other provisions relating thereto.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of,
and the House adjourned at Six o'clock.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES

(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Room B.
warzEronD, 'WEXFORD, WXOXLOW,

AND DUBLIN.

The Committee cn this Bill met this morning, at eleven
o'clock, and the opposition having been withdrawn, the Bill,
was passed.
The Committee adjourned until to-morrow at eleven
o'clock.

Room D.
The Committee met this morning at the usual hour; the
Duke of Richmond in the chair.
WINDSOR, STAINES, AND SOUTH-WES-
TERN (STAINES TO ASCOT AND WOKINGHAM,
WITH BRANCHES).
WINDSOR, STAINES, .A_alra. SOUTH-WES-
TERN (RICHMOND TOFWINDSOR).
Mr. AusnN addressed the Committee at great length in
opposition to these projects, and contended that the lines
proposed by the Great Western, which had an undoubted right
to supply the district with railway accommodation, would
afford greater advantages to the district than the lines of the
South- Western.

Mr. WARREN was proceeding to call evidence in opposi-
don to the line of the South Western from Windsor to
Slough, but

Mr. Sergeant IVRalmitax objected, on the round that
the line had been admitted in the House of Commons by
Mr. Talbot not to be a competing project; and besides the
line of the Great Western to Slough had been thrown out.
The Committee decided that it was not a competing pro-
ject.

Evidence in opposition to the other portions of the South
Western line was then adduced.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
GROUP X.
The Select Committee appointed to consider the merits of
the Bills comprised in this group, re-assembled at the usual
hour this morning; Lord Qive in the chair.
118.1LUTICII AND EASTERN COUNTIES
JUNCTION. 1
The Committee were occupied the whole of the day with
the usual general local evidence in favour of this line.
The Committee then adjourned.

GROUP XXX.
GREAT WESTERN (EXTENSION TO
EXETER).

Mr. Brunel was cross-examined fora short time, when the
Committee stated that, in consequence of an important mea-
sure coming on in the House, at which they were obliged to
be present, they must adjourn the Committee till twelve
o'clock to-morrow.
The Committee then adjourned.

GROUP XIV.
The Committee were engaged%X all day arranging and pass-
ing the clauses of the
r.T.A.NcuESTRITL. SIEEPPIEI.E AND ZXII-
COLEBRIEE (ASHTON PURCHASE). and
TEE OLDHAM ALLIANCE.
, The Guaraittee afterwards broke up.