The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-01 00:00:00

TIIE SUN,

Bill was in Committee. That was all that it was neces-
sary to say on the subject.
Lord BROUGHAM had no objection whatever to the
indemnity, but on constitutional grounds he wished to
make one observation. When any one came for an
Act of indemnity, the parties who sought it should
make out a reason sufficient for the break-
ing of the law. And to this he had not
the slightest objection, for he believed, in the present
case, there was ample reason for the breach of the law.
But there was another reason why he should make some
objections to the Act, and that was to be found in the
delay that had occurred in the obtaining the Act of in-
demnity. Now, in this case, there had to be such
delay, and he thought that there had been culpability in
waiting so long for this Act. Yet that might be no ground
of complaint, but he found, under a certain clause of the
Act, that all the parties had acted under the au-
thority of the Government, and the Noble Lord stated
the substance of a correspondence from a party in Ire-
land, in which a curious misnomer had been put upon
the acts of the Government officials in his part
of the country. It appeared that the party who
had written the letters received by the Noble
Lord had paid a considerable sum for
the formation of one particular road, whereas the funds
were afterwards applied to another. But he did not
mean to say that these letters were a sufficient ground
for postponing this Act indemnity.—(Laughter.)
Lord MON ITAGLE was quite agreed also in the
belief that in no case were the Government officials more
entitled to the Act of indemnity sought than that
which was to be obtained under this Bill. Yet though
commending their conduct, and believing that they
could aet in no other way than they had done under the
circumstances there was one thing which in his opinion
called for immediate attention, and that was the com-
pulsion taken under the Bill for forcing the employ-
ment of the poor on the farms in Ireland. He
thought that this would be better done under
the Drainage Act of last session, and leave the agree-
ments to be voluntary between the landlord and the
tenant. Any interference more than that which was
absolutely necessary would be unwise, and if they
did interfere the people in Ireland would be left
to their only resource in Mr. Labouchere's letter,
The more the works were carried on with mutual con-
sent the better they would be performed. He
had no objection that the Bill should give the
Government power to rectify all technical mis-
takes ; but he considered that it ought to be done
upon the principle of strict justice and not of making
any person pay more than he had contracted to do.
Those were the only points to which to draw the atten-
tion of the House.
Lord BROUGHAM rose and was
[LEFT SPEAKING.]

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
SECOND READINGS.
The following Bills were read a second time:—
Aylsham and North Walsh= Railway.
Caledonian Railway (Branches from the Clydesdale Junc-
tion Railway to the Douglas and Lesmahagow Mineral

Fields, and to Strathavoii).
Caledonian Railway (Extension of Motherwell Branch
of Clydesdale Junction Railway to Auchinheath
Mineral Field, with Branches to the Wishaw and
Coltness Railway, Canderside, and Hamilton\
Caledonian Railway (Purchase or Lease of Wishaw and
Coltness Railway).
Caledonian and Dumbartonshire Junction Railway
(Deviations between Duntocher Limo Works and
Bowling, &c.)
Colchester, Stour Valley, Sudbury, and Halstead Rail-
way (Extension from Lavenham to Bury St. Ed-
mund's).
Colchester, Stour Valley, Sudbury, and Halstead Rail-
way (Extension to Mellord, Lavenham, and Clare).
Colchester, Stour Valley, Sudbury, and Halstead Rail-
way (Stour Navigation Purchase).
Duffryn Llynvi, and Porth Cawl and Lynvi Valley
Railways Amalgamation,
Eastern Union and Lladleigh Junction Railway (Sale
to the Eastern Union Railway Company).
East Lothian Central Railway.
Guildford Extension and Portsmouth and Fareham