The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-05 00:00:00

COUNCIL.

Lord BROUCillAl\lsaii,hethought a misunder-
standing had gone abroad respecting the course cf
proceedings in a very important judicature in this coun-
try—the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
He thought it right, in consequence of something
which passed in another place, that their Lordships
should have an opportunity of seeing whether there
had been any neglect of duty on the part of the Learned
Judges who constituted that Court. It had been said
that they had not sufficiently complied with the Act"
of Parliament in holdir g the sittings which ought to be
held in the exercise of their jurisdiction. No personal
complaint whatever had been made against these Learned
Judges. It was on:y said that by the constitution of
the Court their meetings were accidental, that it de-
pended upon the chance of the case whether meeting;
were held or not, and that parties were brought down
again and again, and much needless expense was in-
curred. Oee would naturally suppose from such state-
ments, that such (!el tys happened very frequently.
Upon inquiry, he foun t that there were only two, or
at the utmost three, instances during the last thrice
years. The true way of ascertaining the truth was
been
move for a return of flee days of sitting. It had bden
said that the Court had only sat eighte)en
The 3,
during the year 1840.—( Hear,
truth was, that it had only
izt),
s
which elapsed
during that portion of the year ehiLe.uhrt.cen days
that is to say, the
month of August. But theretwrenr
previous to the close of last Session,
e
five or six months
was made, and wh n
of the year 1840, after ti.atvrheol
The Learned
return
attendance, instead of
they came to lo :k at the
Act a)'sto make arrange-
upon by
Pr:v Council to •
to enable the Judicial ysit
jeiugdhgteesenwietre amounted to
ments so as
often, inoftact, the Judicial •
point Privy
as often as the state of business required. They should
ascertain how
Council hart held its sittings. He would commence
,io‘ the year
1834, and take every year down to 1840
inclusive.si
lie would al3O take n the number of ap-
pee3 Mt •
I ,hich had been heard during that time, and the
number which were now received to be heard. If these
when brought before their
returns, L Lordships, should
show that there ought to have been a greater number
of sittings in respect to the amount of business, and
that there had been a grater number of causes set
down than ought, in the ordinary
course of business, to
have stood for hearing without being so despatched, no
doubt it would be the duty of the Learned Judges
to attend more closely to the provisions of the Act than
they had done. If, on the other bend, it should appear
that they had sat, one year with another, -as often ae was

Mr. M. PHILLIPS presented a petition froth the
Manchester Dispensary, praying to be made a body
corporate.
RAILWAY BILLS.
Mr. H. HINDE moved that the Standing Order,
Number 32, relating to Railways, be read.
The Order having been read, the HON. Memeaa
proposed that the Standing Order respecting railway
Bills, which requires that a sum equal to one-tenth
part of the amount subscribed to be deposited in the
Court of Exchequer, be modified by substituting one-
twentieth for one.tenth. The Hon. Member proceeded
to say that he would not detain the House by enter-
ing into arguments at any length in support of his mo-
tion ; but he would merely mention a few facts bearing
upon the subject. The House was aware that, pre-
vious to the year 1830, of the Bills that were passed for
making railways a considerable number was confined
chiefly to the purposes of local capital ; but after the
opening of the great railway betwesn Liverpool and
Manchester a great impetus was given to speculations
of that nature, and in the following years several Bills
were introduced into the House to enable capitalists to
open railways. In the year 1832 four Bills were
passed for that purpose, and in the year 1834
five Bills were passed for a similar purpose.
In the year 1835, 24 Railway Bills had passed through
that House, including the great lines from London to
Birmingham, the Grand Junction, the North
Union, and the London and Seuthanipten,
In J 836, the number oUnPpl.cations was very
large, and the attention of Parliament was
particularly directed to the subject in consequence
of the Standing Orders having been evaded, and, in
fact, there was strong proof before the House that eva-
sions had been practised to enable parties to pass the
Standing Orders. Notwithstanding that, twenty-nine
orders or the formation of rails-a; s had passed the
House. In 1837 the number of Railway Acts was
fifteen. Ile admitted that many of the schemes in these
three years, particularly in that of 1836, were not worthy
of the support of Parliament, and were not brought under
the consideration of the House in such a way as aould
enable them to be proceeded with. Out of the large num-
ber brought forward 44 did pass the House of Commons,
and although there was no particular protection, there
was not a swede one of them could be called a bubble
Company, and in proof of it he could state, that of the
forty-four twenty-one were at the present period
actually fiinished, ten were partially opened,
nine were in progress, and four not commenced.
Two of these four were Irish railways, and of the pe-
culiar circumstances connected with railways in that
country it was unnecess try for him to say any thing
Of the other two, the Deptford pier and railway had
never been commenced, and the other, the Thames
Haven railway, could not be commenced in consequence
of the delay in advancing theEsstern Counties Railway.
In August 1836 a Standing, Order passed the House,
requiring that a longer notice should be given than
heretofore, and in July of the following year the standing
order was passed, requiring a deposit of 10 per cent.
and both these came into operation in 1838. After
the passing of tl.eie two Standing Orders there was a
remarkable decrease in the number of Bills presented to
that House. In 1838 only two Acts of Parliament
for new railways were passed, in 1839 only one, and in
1840 no a single Act for a new line passed the House.
Surety that looked like putt;ng a stop to them al-
together, and it would appear, that in taking steps to
prevent fraudulent schemes, they had prevented the
carrying on of wholesome plans. Among the
13.11 s passed- within the last three years the
Edinburgh and Glasgow one had been before
Parliament the previous year, and therefore
the Stapling Orders did not apply to it, and another.
the West Derby, hid beer, in progress of formation by
another Company, and that also was exempted. The
only Bill, therefore, which could be termed one for a to-
tally new line was one for a short line in Devonshire,
near Torbay, which was not quite three miles in length,
so that, in point of fact, only one Bill had passed since
the Standing Order to which his motion referred. He
did not mean to obj.ct to the March notices, although
he had, in common with many others, objections to
these notices, but he referred particularly to the
order which required the deposit of 10 per cent.
Ile did not 'eche% e that the Standing Orders relative
to the March notices had had the effect of preventing
these being given, because, in point of fact, in 1838
there had been 35 such notices given, in 1839, 29, and
in 1840, 30, spewing that these notices had not been
much decreased. It might be urged, and not without
reason, that the state of the money market had been
one of the great causes of the small number of Railway
Bills brought forward, and no doubt that had operated
to a certain extent ; but he would remind lion. Mem-
bers that although British capital had not been invested
to a large amount in railways at home, yet large sums
had been invested by British capitalists in railways
in Germany and France, and particularly that one be-
tween Havre and Paris in the latter country, besides many
speculations in the United States. Having disposed
of the reasons why so small a number of railway bills
had been brought before the House within the last three
years, it only remained for him now to meet the objections
of lion. Members, who thought it of little importance
whether railways should continue to progress or not, and to
these he would use the strong argument that Brit.sh
capital was being absorbed in these undertakings in fo-
reign countries. Some time ago it might have been a
question whether every large town should have a con-
nection by railway with the metropolis ; but. from what.
had occurred of late years, that was a point on which
there cculd be now little doubt. lie would take
an instance with which he was familiar, namely, the
Great North Road. It was true there was a railway
from London to York, but instead of being a benefit to
the large towns in a direct line it was the reverse,because
in many instances it, deviated 30 miles frera that di- act line.
A great number of persons were employed upon these
railways, but this employment, so far from being a boon
to the labouring population, would be a curse if it were
to he suddenly withdrawn. Look at the operation of
railways at this moment. During the last year, from
February 1840 to February 1841, about 60Q miles of
new railway had been opened in the kingdom. On
these 600 fades fur more than a moiety of the labourers
throughout the kingdom had been employed. It might
be asked if he had the means of showing the number
now out of employment, and he confessed that he had
not. The works, especially the embankments, had been
subject to so much dilapidation front the state of the
weather, and from the railways having been opened
with undue speed, that on many lines the same
number of labourers were employed in repairing
them, as had been employed during their for-
mation. But as spring advanced, these would he
thrown out of employment, for though there were many •
railways going on, with the exception of the Great
Western and another, he knew of none that were going
on with spirit. These were the chief causes he had to
advance in fas our of a modification of the Standing Or-
der ; but he would point out another inconvenience,
namely, the formation of railways without the sanction
d
of Parliament. If persons found generally s'
the landownersthe
greater
more easily make a bargain witillaidupon
than by submitting to the restrictions
otfhisansy•stem
them bwould y.
increase, P ,i rli Parliament, t,
saving deiAp
appli-
cation to Parliament wou,u,eancso
railway
s were not sub-
sums to the landowners,
session for the regula-
fuunrdtherer thsetntsela,nthtchla,tad if
jest to the Act of lastelated only to those formed
Lion of railways, lueepxtophieienmsiatt
give
He would only
e nt
the eb
the House agreed to the
only
these
Place
alienaecel t
Ist) hot ea
Standingtnilii
Standing
Ourr d
eotros
proposition
w
they wouldv:heoennellwio:an'inusiefrfooPtaindgiamasentat of the House
a communication was made
rdreernlr:tkinica:
that house on
ott.
oof the iric,‘lsts. ha. le sr
House, rues e passed,und e the aucstp:ieceest thean dlt
of theNobleLord
then at the head of the Board of Trade, to assimilate the
rouse s believedta
Standingthere
was
no Ordersothr
of
fft the
otnwet:
b Houses,
that the House of Commons proposed a deposit of 10
per cent., and the House of Lords thought this too
much, and would assent only to a deposit of o per
cent. lie thanked the lleuse for the attention they
had paid to his statement, and submitted his motion
for their decision.
Mr. JARVIS seconded the motion.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said, that although he was
certainly prepared to offer every opposition in his power
to the motion made by the Hon. Gentleman—(Hear,
hear)--the Hon. Gentleman was quite
:right in assum-
ing he did not rest opposition on any wish to
discourage the progress of railways in this coucoun-
try—(Cheers)— provided they were real and bona
He was as much con-
vincedfide undertakings.—(;;beers.)
every encouragement to the
.e
.c railway
but he was well convinced t iat t le only way by
as any man could be
development
mwans
thoisf. dutyth to. give
system,
would ho by
on the part o
which they eetuhtlhegluinareesl
alagr,eaaindsyt
oaxipsfrianegtiewaol monopoly
lines more or less parallel, and constructed in such a man-
14r nsto offer sonic competition for the benefit of the pub-
lic. Hir trusted H therefore' the on. Gentleman would be
satisfied that if lie (Mr. Labbueliere) felt it his duty to
oppose the motion, he did not do so from any desire to
haerfere with the progress of the railway system. But
he really was at a loss to conceive how it could be
behersd that any railway undertaking could be car-
ried on, so as to afford a fair and reasonable prospect
of remuneration to the suLuribers if there were a

MORNING l-41DITION.

difficulty in obtaining a deposit of ten per cent.—
(Cheers.) It appeared to him that if there were a
difficulty in obtaining a deposit of rive per cent. as a
subscriber, he should think he had little chance of ob-
taining the remaining 95 per cent. This subject
had often been before the House. The principle
had been considered by two Committees of the
House of Commons, who had decided against it,
in consequence of those disgraceful gambling trans-
actions which, under the name of trailway specu-
lations, had imposed upon the country.—(Hear, hear.)
It would, indeed, be with great concern he should ace
the House relax their rule, which had had the most
satisfactory effect in guesting the progress of schemes
which were set up for no bona fide object, but only to in-
duce inexperienced capitalists to purchase shares and give
the advantage of temporary rises in price to the first
speculators. The House of Lords had adapted a
different principle, and the consequence was that Bills
were introduced in that House which subsequently
became abandoned, after much loss and inconveni-
ence to parties who were misled by the projectors.
To him it appeared impossible that any parties
of character and substance could find any difficulty in
obtaining a deposit of so small an amount. But the
Hon. Gentleman said that the effect of the restriction
was to arrest the progress of railroads in this country,
and to send capital abroad to be invested in rail-
way speculations in foreign countries. Now he (Mr. L.)
`thought he found a complete answer to that statement,
'upon examining the notices of private Bills, upon which
he found in this Session already 58 notices of plans
for new railways. He thought therefore there need be
no apprehension that parties who had projects calcu-
lated to be beneficial to themselves and the public would
End any difficulty in making the deposit required by the
present regulation —(hear, hear.) AA he should
feel very sorry if the House should alter the determi-
nation to which it came after so much deliberation.
Mr. WARBURTON was so far from thinking the
existing regulation requiring the deposit of 10 per cent.
at all excessive, he was convinced that in all bona fide
•hemes no difficulty could be found in conforming to it.
Until that was enacted, men of straw came before the
public with ephemeral and good for nothing speculations,
by which people were induced to invest their savings in
projects that could never be attended with the least ad-
vantage to them or to the public. Hon. Gentleman
then read an extract from the Committee of the llouse,
appointed in 1837, to the effect that the only means of
checking delusive schemes was to require that all parties
petitioning for a Bill should be required to make a de-
posit. But that Committee had no intention to specify
a particular amount of deposit, and he thought that
the subsequent Committee very properly fixed the sum
at its present amount. With respect to the Hon. Mein-
ber's (Mr. IL's) statement that the effect of the regula-
tion was to reduce the number of railway speculations;
the Hon. Gen:Linen had himself given the answer
when he said that the state of the money mirket in the
last three years had operated to the discouragement of
those schemes.—( Hear.) Yet, no less than sixty-eight
Bills had passed since the enactment of the present
Standing Order, and 55,000,000/. of capital had been
invested in carrying them into effect.—(Hear, hear.)
He (Mr. W.) had had the best opportunities of
inquiring into the merits of the case, and he was satisfied
that the existing regulation was the best that could be
devised.—( Hear.)
Mr. BROTHERTON had been a member of the
Committee of which his Hon. Friend, the Member for
Bridport,
,was the chairman ; and, keowing the number
of bubble schemes which were brought forward, he
thought the present rule ought nut to be relaxed.
He wished to state a fact which he thought of consi-
derable importance. The Liverpool and Manchester
R rilway Company, a year or two ago, obtained an
Act for a railway to pass through the borough which
he had the hollow. to represent, and they had con-
trived to introduce a clause leaving it optioual to
thv in whether they should complete the railway or
not. The consequences were, that parties who had
received notice that the railway would pass through
their property were completely tied up from disposing
of their land in any way—(Cries of " Hear, hear")—
and the Company had the sole power of determining
whether the property should be requir'ed at any
time for the purpose of the railways.—( Hear, hear.)
Ile did think that Parliament should take every precau-
tion for having their works vigilantly and vigorously car-
ried into eff ct.

Mr. O'UONNELL wished to say a few words on
the subject. It seemed to him that the regulation, as
it stood at present, was, like many others, highly
favourable to the rich, and to great capital,sts, and
that it went to increase the influence of those who were
already possessed of enormous wealth, while it acted
injuriously as regarded the smaller capitalist. It had
that effect in the country from which he ci.me, where
there was but little capital. They felt severely in that
country the pressure of the present regulation, and he
therefore believed it to be his duty to protest against it.
All railways were now a monopoly, and be thought it
would be better, in that instance, to relax the rule, as
proposed by the lion. Member.
Lord HOW 1C l. said that the Hon. and Learned
Member who had just sat dozen, instead of corsid ring
the regulation as it. now existed as favourable to large
capitalists, ought in his opinion to consider it as likely to
operate hi en exactly opposite way.—( Hear, hear.)
B •fore the regulation had been introduced a great in-
justice was frequently done to parties having small pro- I
perties in counties throueli which it ryas proposed rail-
ways should p iss. Schemes for the coinmeneem,nt cl rail-
ways were brought forward, and which, as they were never
carried into effect had no other result than to put resi-
dent landlords to the expense of needless litigation.
lie thought it was the interest of small proprietors that
a check should be put upon those who entered into decep-
tive schemes, by insisting rigidly on the rule as it now ex-
isted. He was persuaded that all gentlemen connected
with landed property would do well to pause before
they countenanced the resolution of the Hon. Member.
He was not hostile to that particular line of railway,
in favour of which it was supposed the Honour-
able Member had made his motion. He was so
far from that that he could assure tine Honourable
Member, that no one could be more anxious than he
was to see a line of railway carried through that county
which he himself had the honour to represent. But
he felt that wherever a good line could be made
out, the regulation they were now discussing
would not offer the slightest difficulty in the way of
its being carried into effect. On those grounds he
would undoubte fly give his opposition to the motion
of the Hon. Member.—( Ilear, hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought that they
ought to modify the order as it now existed. In
his opinion the deposit of 10 per cent. would be
sufficient. He did not think that a large per centage
should be required before a Bill was brought into Par-
liament. That was th hardship of which he com-
plained, and of which those who were favourable to
the line of railway, referred to by the Noble Lord,
must bitterly complain. The modification which he
(the Attorney-G.:neral) wished for, was that they
should require a deposit of 10 per cent. not
before the Bill was introduced into the House, but be-
fore the works were begun. That was the principle which
had been acted on in the case of the Edinburgh end
Giasgow Railway, and which had been attended with com-
plete success. It would, he thought, be quite sufficient
that they should have a certificate from a public func-
tionary before a spade was put in the ground. In that
case they would be sure to have a bona fide under-
taking that would sufficiently protect the landed in-
terest, and which would not at the same time discourage
those useful works.
Mr. FRESHFIELD could not see the benefit of
changing the present law. If the undertakings were
Of a bona fide and reasonable character, there was no
fear but capital would be employed on them in this
country rather than abroad. The Attorney-General said
that a 10 per tentage paid before a spade. was put in the
ground would offer sufficient protection to the public.
lie ( Mr. Freshfield) was persuaded, on the contrary,
that such regulation would tend to encourage improper
speculation. It could only tend to encourage eereing
in shares, to the injury of the public.
Mr. W. 0. STANLEY expressed his approval of
the motion.
Mr. HODGSON HIN DE, in reply said, that
almost all who had addressed the House were
against rescinding the Standing Order. The Noble
Lord had said that he considered the Standing Order
as most beneficial to the landed interest. Now, he
(Mr. Hodgson Hinde) considered, that if there
was one Standing Order more injurious to the
Landed Interest than another it was this very
order requiring a deposit of 10 per cent., for many
railroad schemes, after having been brought to a certain
degree of maturity, were not brought under the con-
sideration of Parliament on account of the inability
of the parties to make the deposit required ; but these
sehemes were not on that account abandoned ; they were
merely postponed to another session, and thus these
schemes were kept hanging over the heads of the land-
owners on the proposed line from year to year, in conse-
quence of this standing order, without the decision;of Par-
liament. The It'ght lion. Gentleman had said that there
were fifty-eight notices for Railway Bills this Session ;
now it was not by the numb.:r of notices given that they
could judge of the effects of the Standing Order, but by
the number of Bills brought in, and he would venture to
assert that not more than half a-dozen Bills would be
brought in of all the fifty-eight notices. He felt the
sense of the House was against him, but he was desirous
of recording his vote, because that, at another time, when
the number of railway labourers thrown out of employ,
ment would be considerable, the House would be glad to
rescind this Order. . .

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it .4

Majority against thg motion... -- 129
Mr. KELLY presented a petition from the late
collector of taxes for the county of So:ucrset, corn.
plaining that the Government, in granting him com-
pensation bad acted against a law and custom, and
praying the House to take his ease into considc.: ation
by rrio .
nng to u evtaltilittee,

Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petit'on from
Doter, praying for a total repeal of the Corn-laws.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from the
Plasterers of Dublin, praying for the repeal of the
Union.