The Sun.
London, England, 1847-02-24 00:00:00

at the rate-paying clause of the Reform Act might be and the last year they had obtained Acts which empowered
a
them to raise 2,000,0001. more, and this money was to be
bolished.
raised in shares. There was then the additional power to
TRAVELLING ON SUNDAYS.
raise 1,700,0001. on loan, making something more than
Lord BROOKE preeeeted a petition from Kenilworth,
10,000,000/. In addition to this, they had leased the
praying that a clause which had been inserted in a rail Bristol and Gloucester use, with a capital of 2,1;00,000/., and
way Bill, which would run through that tcwn, giving the Leeds and Bradford, the capital of which was 1,000,000/.,
the directors power to stop travelling on the line on so that the whole capital was not more than 14,000,000/.
Sunday, might be expunged. Mr. ELLICE—Then there was the Northern line.
REGENT'S CANAL (PADDINGTON AND Mr. HUDSON—That is a property entirely and perfectly
LIMEHOUSE RAILWAY BRANCH). distinct. The capital then was something like 14,000,0e01 ,
Mr. ALDAM moved that the debate on the second and it should be recollected that when any company leased
reading of this Bill be resumed, for the purpose of a line they did not undertake to find the capital; they
moving that the second reading be deferred for a tort- only engaged to carry on the line when the capital
was raised. It would be very unwise in Government to
night. 0. interfere with the raising of their capital. When they had
Mr. WARBURTON wished to know from the G,
imposed all the necessary limits they might well leave the
vernment what was intended to be done with this Bill.
raising of the money to the discretion of the companies. As
lie had received information on which he believed he
to putting on any direction for raising the money, he thought
might rely, that the Commissioners of Woods and it would be quite futile, for the directors were obliged to act
Forests had advised her Majesty not to give her according to the state of the money market. Sometimes they
consent to the Bill as it stood at the present mo- raised ;it in one way, sometimes in another, and it was a matter
ment. From this ho inferred that the Bill was not to well known that in the early stages of railway enterprise the
be assented to if it interfered, in any way, with the pri- directors had frequently put themselves into positions of great
racy of Regent's Park. Those who had built villas anxiety and peril, and yet had they not done so the works would
in the park had done so on the understanding that have been stopped and the public would have lost the benefit...
their property would trot be interfered with, and it was When the late President of the Board of. Trade brought in his
most unfair that they should be subject to annoyance, Bill two or three years since the question. of loans was most
.
fully and fairly discussed, and the conclusion was that the M-
end obliged to spend money from year to year for the
ferent companies were to be confined to the terms of their Acts.
purpose of protecting their property from aggression. He took an early opportunity of providing for the debts of
Lord MORPETH said that it had been intimated to him every company with which he was connected. With refe-
that the promoters of the Bill were anxious to propose so me
modification of their scheme in order to satisfy the objections rence to the subject of the execution of the railways, he
begged to say that the House need be under no apprehension
of their opponents, and under these circumstances he was not upon that subject, for in all his experience he never
unwilling to grant them the delay which they sought found the calls more readily and freely paid up.
for. He could only deal with the Bill in the shape inwhich
it was submitted to hire. than they now were. He had made calls to the amount of
three millions within the last three months, and he never saw
Sir BENJAMIN HALL was anxious to know what was them paid up so readily as they were, even to the present
the definite intention of her Majesty's Government with re- week. The duty of the House was to take care
spec to this Bill. He represented a great number of the that the public were protected, and that the
lessees of the around through which the railway ran, and to shareholders were remunerated for the outlay of their capital,
whom the faith'of the Crown had been pledged, that the pri- and having done that, the House might depend upon it that
racy of their dwellings should be respected. the less they interfered in the management of rail-
Sir ROBERT INGLIS said, no matter what modification ways the better it would be for the undertakings,
was proposed, it would not meet the objection which was urged or the public, and for the House itself. With respect
against the Bill. He would desire that her Majesty's Govern- Ito the guarantee fund, he would say that it was
ment would at once declare that they were not prepared to necessary for the railway companies to have the power to
assent to the Bill. borrow money under a guarantee fund. In the year 1841,
Mr. HYME said he was very much surprised that the the greatest difficulty existed to get the public to invest their
Noble Lord did not at once negative the Bill. The Corn- money even if under the guarantee of six per cent.
missioners of Woods and Forests had spent 2,000/. France was quite ready to find employment, and give good
or 3,000/. in beautifying the parks, which money was guarantee for the capital of this country, and he therefore
very properly expended, and a railway would perfectly destroy warned the House not to be too ready to interfere with the pri-
the villas which were erected in the neighbourhood of the vete enterprise of England.
Park. The nobility would not wish to ride out. having a rail- After a few words of explanation from Mr. ELLICE,
way about 40 feet off from them, the noise of which would be Sir R. H. INGLIS said he understood the object of the reso-
most disagreeable. The House should recollect that the faith lotion was to revive the same jurisdiction of the Board of Trade
of the Crown was distinctly pledged that their privacy should that it possessed two years ago in reference to railway matters.
be respected. He hoped the Noble Lord would not postpone He, therefore, saw no objection to the proposition. His object
the consideration of the measure, but at once reject it in rising had mainly been to bear his testimony to the efficiency
Lord MORPETH said that he did not wish to use any de- of the labours of the former board, which had been he thought
ception upon the matter. He could not advise that her Ma- unfairly underrated.
jesty's consent should be given to the Bill under its present Lord JOHN RUSSELL had no objection to the motion,
circumstances. But the promoters of the Bill had some and thought considerable benefit might arise from the arrange-
scheme on foot by which they hoped to satisfy the objections ment proposed. The inquiries would, no doubt, be much
of the opponents. They only asked a fortnight, and he con- assisted by the repiirts of the Commissioners, but
sidered it would be rather hard to refuse it to them. it must not be supposed that the results would so-
Dr. BOWRING quite agreed with the Noble Lord, that it persede the labours of the Committees. It would
would be an ungracious thing to reject the Bill. A fortnight be for the latter to take the inquiries forwhat they thought
was but a reasonable delay, and he did not see why the House them worth and act accordingly. He supported the motion,
should refuse to giant it. und, r the impression that no delay would be imposed, in conse-
The second reading of the Bill was then adjourned for a quence, on the railway Bills of the present session.
fortnight. The motion was then agreed to.
PRIVATE BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. COMMITTEE ON THE LAW OF SET [LENIENT
Mr. HUME moved for a Select Committee, to continue AND POOR REMOVAL.
the inquiry into the private business of the House, the expenses Mr. BANKES postponed his motion on the report of this
attending the obtaining of all Private Bills, including all the Committee, as the report had not yet been printed, till that
• expenses of the opponents as well as the promoters of Bills, day week. The Honourable Member said he would give no-
and the taxing of expenses thereto. The Committee to con- tice on the same day, of his intention to call the attention of
gist of Mr. Hume, Lord Granville Somerset, Sir George the House to a case which hail been submitted to the law
Grey, Sir James Graham, Mr. Strutt, Mr. Cardwell, Mr. office: aof the Crown affecting the construction of a clause in
Greene, Mr. Gibson Craig, Sir William Clay, Sir William the Act.
Heathcote, Mr. Estcourt, Mr. Loch, Mr. Home Drummond,
Captain Jones, and Lord Cour'enay. 'The object which he had
in view in making the present motion, was to save time,
money, and facilitate business in regard to these Bills.
Dr. BOW Ii IN G seconded the motion.
Sir WALTER JAMES wished to know if the retrospective
operation of Bills already passed would be inquired into. Many
of these enactments were quite contradictory in their provision..
In the town which he represented there were several local
Bills which clashed with each other.
Mr. HUME replied that cases of this kind had been already
provii'ed for. In cases where a new Bill was sought for any
locality it was arranged that a general Bill should be passed
to repeal all previous enactments, and thus get rid of every-
thing of a contradictory character.
The motion was then agreed to.
LOAN TO IRELAND.
Mr. ROEBUCK wished to ask a question. He had under.
stood from the Noble Lord at the head of the Government,
that the 15,000,000 for the relief of Ireland was to pass the
House p tri posse with the Irish poor laws. He desired now
to know how the grant of that sum had been settled.
Sir GEORGE seREY was understood to say that a Bill
must bet reught in on the subject.
Mr. POULETT SCltter E was proceeding to make a
statement to the House, when he was called to order.
RAILWAY BILLS.
Mr. ELLICE proceeded to move that all Railway Bills in
the present session be referred to the Railway Commissioners,
for their report to this House, upon the following points, pre-
viously to such Bills being considered in Committees of this
House:—That every report so to be made upon each Bill
should state the amount of the capital proposed to be
raised, and of the loans proposed to be authorised by the
Bill ; and if, under the provisions of such Bill, any powers were
to be g ven to any company already incorporated, of raising
further capital or loans, or of making alterations, branches, or
extensions of their existing lines, or of purchasing or leasing
any other lines made or to be made, or of subscribing to the
capital, or guaranteeing the capital of, or amalgamating with,
other companies ; such report should also state the
powers ranted by any former Act or Acts to such companies
already incorporated for any of the above purposes, and of the
manner in which, and extent to which, such powers had been
exercised ; and the report should further state the opinion of
the Commissioners thereon, and also their opinion as to any
special provisions with which it might in any case be expedient
to accompany the grant of any powers for any of the above men •
tioned purposes. That every such report bs:i eferred to the Com-
mittee of this House appointed to consider 11,e Bill to which the
same may relate. He found that the North-Western Corn; any
had raised 11.000,0001. of money, and they had power to raise
16,000,0001 by way of loan, making 27,000,000/. of a total sum
for ths railway. The Great Western Company had raised
4,e00,0e0/. of capital, and they had power to raise 4,500,000.
more by way of loan, which, with the other ern-
powerments in their Act, for the purpose of entering
into guarantee leases, would enable them to raise
upwards of 30,000,000/ He found that the Eastern
Counties' Railway Company had a capital of 4,200,000!. ,
and powers to raise 3,400,0001., and they a'so had in
addition other powers of raising money. The fourth company
to which he would refer was that of the Manchester and Leeds,
where they had 2,000,0001. of capital, and a power to raise
1,800,0001. more, but with additional powers' the sum
to which they might extend reached some 10,000,000 e
He thought that these circumstances ought to be reported to
the House, together with the respective cases in which the
several powers were to be exercised. There were cases were
the capital stock of the company was in 100/. shares,
and yet the interest paid was upon 150'.—(Hear, hear.)
He thought that it was necessary that the capital, together with
the loans proposed to be raised should be stated, and that the
House should be put in full possession of all the circumstances
before the Bills were read a third time, as well as all the powers
which each company sought of making grants to other corn-
prnies, together with all amalgamations, loans, leases, and other
engagements into which they proposed to enter. There was one
company which proposed to raise a capital of 5,000,000'. in
addition to that which they already possessed. There were
set eral other companies who were acting in the same way ; and
he wished to draw the attention of the House to the number of
these Bills now lying on the table, with a view to impose some
restriction upon them. He might take as an instance
of the extensive powers sought by the old companies, that
of the Cheltenham and Oxford Railway, which was
er-ornotad by that enormous company the Great Western.
They proposed to raise a capital of 1,000,0001., with
the poser to raise a loan of 330,0 )0/., giving a
guarantee of five per cent. to their original subscribers.
It would be advisable to inquire what amount of funds were at
the disposal of the Great Western Company, over and above
the means required for the fulfilment of their present engage-
ments. There was also the Eastern Union Railway and
several others of a like nature. Then there was the Shef-
field, Rotherham, and Doncaster Railway, the subscription
deed of which was signed by three solicitors, two engineers,
and twelve directors, who had subscribed together 192,000 ~
while the public subscribed only the sum of 30,000/. The
Bill proposed to give authority to the promoters to sell
this railway to five different companies, or to any person
or persons who might be willing to purchase it.
There were as many various conflicting propositions for borrow-
ing money as the House could very well imagine, and it appeared
to him that it would be desirable that each dill should be inves-
tigated by the Railway Commissioners previous to coming before
a Commit tee of that House. Then with respect to amalgamating
there were as many different principles of amalgamation and
powers of leasing as of borrowing, while there was a very dans.
;serous practice in existence to creating fictitious capitals.
That was another question which required to be examined
into, and he thought it ought to be ascertained whether
the public had to pay interest upon this fictitious
capital as well ai upon the cost of construction. There
was one case which would illustrate what he was contending
far. 'The new North-Western Company had several Bills for
branches and exteusions, in which the directors had pledged
the capital of the company for that purpose. In such
a case it was desirable to inquire how far such a
proceeding was in agreement with the standing orders, which
required that no pledge ef the company's credit should take place ,
beyerel ti e actual capital; raised. He would offer no opinion
on the case, but thought such a matter ought to be referred
to the Railway Commissioners. Some better system should be
brought into operation than the one which at present prevailed.
He would not trouble the House further on this subject, but he
must say that, in the committee on which he was engaged
himself last year, they declined to assert the supe-
r osity of one gauge over another. They left that
question to the Board of Trade, although there were witnesses
there to have occupied them for two or three days. He himself
was the more inclined to do this, kno ing that parties
promoting a railway had expended 150,000/. before a Com-
mittee of the House of Commons, and had afterwards the mor-
tification of losing their Bill before the House of Lords, the
effect of which would be, that these matters would be referred
to the House, or decided by an authority responsible to the
House.
On the motion being put,
Mr. HUDSON said he meant not to take the least objec-
tion to the I r p sition made by the lion Member, nor
would
he enter into the details which the Honourable
Member had laid before the House ; but he
would make one or two observations on points noticed
in the speech of the lion. Gentleman ; and, first, as to the capital
iirezl7nertl hienetaithperailwayof projects of this year. He said that last
He at thattime roen prop( sett railways amounted to 300,000,0001.
wined that the capital of the lines which would
be sanctioned by Government. would not execs d 100.000,000/.
avid in that he was quite right, for Parliament had not
sanctioned lines to a lamer
ti amountun than 90,000,000/.
He was not of opinion that.aossstasion the projects passed
would involve any large
had particularly bring no extraordinary pressure „,`,ll money, erel would
preside,rnon referred market.
kt owto.
The Right Hon. Gentleman
and had
be made he would
companies, over which he had the honour
but as it
he been aware that these charges were to be
tadt os_t areply
t that
have come provided with the necessary
etbese hbeabregleies.vedit.hbaet hßeigshhtoullidobne aGbelen,tioetiLandh
Was,
the capital of the Aidland Company amounted to something ,
like 30,000,000/. •
A notice of dissent was here made by Mr. Ellice.
Mr. HUDSON. was quite willing to give the Right lion.
Gentleman full credit for the candour and fairness with b
j which he intended to bring the matter eforetheHrousere,bdutot
he had underatoodthat msertion to be made, and wasepa
say that the capital was nothing like that sum. The whole
amount of the original capital of the Midland Company was
5,000,000/. In 1645 they had obtained Acts which empowered
them to raise 2,000,000/. more. That would make 7,000,000,

PUNISHMENT OF DEATH.

Mr. EWART gave notice that he would on the 9th March
move the abolition of the punishment of death.
DIRECT TAXATION.

The HON. MEMBER also ;are notice that on the same day
he would call the attention of the Iluuse to the expedieuey of
direct taxation.

out without an Act of Parhamunt ?
L - id

ild be

ible to

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it wou_ imposs.
carry it out without an Act of Parliament. So soon as he
received the report of the Commission, he should ask for leave
to introduce a Bill upon the subject.
THE FRANCHISE.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said he was in a difficulty as
to the course he should take with reference to the notice ho
had on the paper. He did nut know what was the intention
of the House or the Government in reference to it. He Un-
derstood the Government had no objection to his introducing
the Bill, but there were some gentlemen opposite might. Now,
if Government could give him permission to intro.tuce the Bill
upon the understanding that they approved of the principle, but
did not pledge themselves to the details, he would postpone the
discussion till the second reading . If, however, Government
did not object to the Bill now, because they would have an op-
portunity a strangling it hereafter, he mu.t go at once into the
matter.

etßhitlal
doing Lord J. RUSSELL said, if the Hon. Gentleman merely
wished before
so. I
the Howe,
certainlys oue
,he
should
offer
no to
objection
hiseshould
ill
ln
was,t ahais
helay inhgad it
sotantedth, e
mtitelarleely;
offer
but ifan thoebj"Bt
proposed to repeal that clause of the Reform Bill which had
reference to the day on which taxes should be paid to secure
a vote, without proposing any new provisions 'or other condi-
tions, he thought it right to state at once that he was opposed
to the spirit of such a Bill. If they wished to have the Bill
discussed now, he thought it right to state to him at the out-
set, that he should oppose a decided negative to the Bill.
Sir DE LACY E VANS said as he had consented to second
the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, he begged to suggest to
him, that he should simply move for leave to introduce the
Bill, and defer the discussion un; it a future day.
Mr. DUNCOMBE said he was perfectly aware that
the Noble Lord was opposed to such a Bill as
the one he now sought to introduce. It however,
contained but one clause, and its object simply was
to repeal that portion of the Reform Bill which made the
payment of rates imperative by a certain day to receive the
registration of a vote. It was entitled " a Bill to repeal so
much of an Act passed in the reign of William the Fourth,
intituled, ' an Act to amend the representation of the people
in England and Wales,' as makes the right to registration in
cities and boroughs conditional on the payment of poor's rates
and assessed taxes." As, however, deferring the Bill would
only lead two discussions, he thought it better to have the
discussion then and to fight it out at once.—(Hear.) There-
fore he would state as shortly as possible the grounds on which
he sought leave to introduce the Biil. It provided for re-
moving one of the greatest blots iu the Reform Bill—a blot
complained of by the whole electoral body whether in cities or
in boroughs, and was one which he sincerely believed deserved
the most sorious consideration of the Government and of the
House. The chief objection to the clause was that it was un-
constitutional In principle, vexatious in its operation. and that
it opened the door to all manner of bribery and farouriti•in.
He should prove that it was unconstitutional from the worth
of the Noble Lord himself, in speaking of the operation of the
Reform Bill. The substance of the Noble Lord's opinion on
that occasion was that no man should be taxed until he had a
voice in the making of the laws which imposed those taxes
upon him. The Reform Bill, he contended, had not answered
the expectations which had been formed of it; it even had not
answered the expectations of the Noble Lord himself.
At the time that Bill was passed, the Noble Lord stated that
the metropolis,
hevointendedrst to call into electoral existence half a million of new
\
number to
640,3
thoatshe would give 100,030 to the English counties,
had been the Illretzotp?ohs,
32,341 rated householders, 40,000. to Ireland, and a considerable
making nearly 500,000. But what
In Marylebone, in 1841, there were
; register, showing a grearts,b there were only 11,765 on the
householders were 112,954, hdifference.t In Finsbury the rated
register. In the Tower Hamlet
there were only 32,550 on the
13,000 on the register ;
and
ins
Greenwichthere were 64,b96, but only
' 3,610 on the register. In Greenvich 11,536, but only
many of the houses were

Dy
ing." Certainly this wa: not intended by the Reform Bill.
The Honourable Gentleman was here interrupted by the
entrance of Sir Augustus Clifford, the Usher of the Black
Rod, who summoned the House to hear the Royal assent given
to several Bills, a list of which will be found in our Lords'
report.]
On the return of the Speaker,
Mr. DUN COMBE went on to state that he could not be-
lieve that anything so vexatious as this was intended by the
Reform Bill. Gentlemen connected with counties did not
feel this, as the clause only pressed in cities and boroughs.
Parties living in those places were open to considerable
oppression from the neglect of overseers and others. This
was no new complaint. It had been the subject of complaint
ever since the passing of the Reform Act. The Hon. Member
then read an article which appeared, in the Times—which
showed some of the evils of the system. It was never th,
intention of the Reform Act that such abuse should occur.
Why should they make a difference between county and city
rates? This question should be made an open one, in order to
leave it the more fully to the operation of public opinion. It
was only a question of the reform more or less, and therefore
he begged to move for leave to bring in the Bill.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I stated to my Hon. Friend at
the commencement of the discussion that if it was his desire
to lay his Bill upon the table of the House, without any discus-
sion at the present time, that I should not be averse
to such a course, but that I could not promise him my
support upon a future occasion. But my Honourable Friend,
has thought it better to have the discussion now, unless I should
promise him the support of the Government on the second
reading of the Bill. My Honourable Friend has not entirely
comprehended what was the ancient law. He has read para-
graphs from newspapers to the effect that this was an entirely
new principle, introduced by the Reform Act, no person
thought of paying rates to be allowed the privilege of
voting. He was mistaken. The state took the
security they thought necessary; and so in regard to
borough. where there was a common law right
of voting, and where there were no particular charters to restrict
the right, it was vested in householders, but with this qualifica-
tion, that they should be householders paying scot and lot.
The meaning of this was, that they should pay the poor rates.
So it has been interpreted by the courts of justice. Therefore,
with regard to country voters, there was a security, anti in
burghs it was held that they should not be chance lodgers, but
persons keeping a house and capable of paying the poor t ates,
which certified and assured to the State that they were per-
•ms worthy to be intrusted with the right to vote ; therefore
the principle is not a new one introduced by the Reform Act.
Whatever the Reform Act might do to change the ancient con-
stitution of the country, the principle that occupiers should pay
some of the rates due by them, was an ancient principle trans-
ferred into the provisions of the Reform Act. My Hon. Friend
said that the Reform Act did not extend the franchise so Yen
extensively as I calculated. Tine calculations which I formed
were made on a very wide basis, and I could not expect
that they would turn out with a critical accuracy.
But I do think that the lion. Gentleman himself has proved
that a very great extension of the franchise has been effected
by the Reform Act. Lambeth has the powers of returning
Members of Parliament; so has Finsbury; so has the Tower
Hamlets. The Hon. Gentleman has stated that 45,00 t) person•

in thee new metropolitan burghs possfised the right of voting

Manchester, Leeds; and Birniingbam had now —obtained the

power of sending Members to Parliament; so had Bath, and
RAILWAYS. a number of other places, not on the scot and lot principle,
Lord GEORGE BEN FINCK gave notice of his intention but on a IW. house qualification, and a test similar
to move to-morrow fur certain returns which would form a to that of the scot and lot principle, which meant
basis on which he meant to found certain observations in re- the payment of poor rates. According to my own
spect to the figures and statements of the Chancellor of the Ex- belief, when you do intrust the franchise to persons
chequer last night, viz., a return of all the sums of money ex- of property, you are more likely to have a better than with a
pended by certain English lines of railway previous to the year universal suffrage. I own, I think, that if you take away the
1845, including the South Western, the South Eastern, and obligation to pay rates and taxes, you would be running a risk
the Midland Companies ' • and a return of all the sums expended of int rusting the francbise to persons not worthy of it. And 1
by the railways of Great Britain and Ireland on carriages, locos thank we have improved upon the practice of scot and lot. I
motives, anti waggons, made up in triennial periods previous to cannot, therefore, consider that the Bill is in point a good one,
the years 1841, 1844, and 1847 respectively. and it would be a great innovation on the Constitution of this
COPPER ORE. country, that persons, not in the possession of any property,
Mr. SPOON ER said that in the absence of his Hon. Col- should be intrusted with the right of voting. I shall, therefore.
league, he should move that the petition presented by him the oppose the introduction of this Bill.
othr evening be printed with the votes. , Mr. GISBORNE said he should support the Bill. He
JAMALSA. I thought the occupancy of a House quite enough, and saw no
Mr. HUME begged to ask a question whether any mea- ' reasonable grounds to deprive a man of a vote because he had
sure hail been adopted to put an end to the disputes between not paid his rates on a particular day. He should, therefore,
the House of Assembly and the Judge of the Supreme Court, : supp wt. the introduction of the Bill.
by which the public business had been suspended for one year. 1 Sir DE LACY EVANS was in favour of the Bill. The
Mr. HAWES said that he was aware that such interruption real q estion they had to consider was, did the rate-paying
had taken place, but means had been taken to reconcile the , clauses operate in the way originally estimated. He sub-
differences, and he had great pleasure in stating that public, mitted that they did not. They were no test of the solvency
business would at the earliest period be resumed- ; of the parties' as he could prove from several instances which
NUMBER OF DEATHS, IRELAND. ' hod happened in the city of Westminster. In the parish of St.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN postponed the motion of which he had ' George's no less than 339 persons had been disfranchised by
given notice, respecting the return of the number of deaths these clauses ; yet these parties resided in St. James's-square.
which had taken place in Ireland from starvation since the Ist i Belgrave-square, and Great George-street. Was it to be said
of November, 1846 that these were insolvent persons ? Now it was a remarkable
Mr. P. SCROPE had heard that the workhouses of Ireland fact that not one of these had been disfranchised for the noes
were already completely filled with inmates, he saw that a pro- payment of the poor-rates, but because they had not paid the
vision was made in the Poor-law (Ireland) Bill of the Ist and Government taxes. lie trusted that the House would allow
2nd Vic., for the purpose of extending the means of acconamo. , the Bill to be read a first time, and that in a future stage the
dation for the people by either enlarging thebuildings or hiring question might be fully discussed. Ile asked the House to do
others. He wished to know whether it was the intention of so when they considered that in the metropolitan boroughs
the Government to lay upon the table of the House any returns there were not more than 50,000 qualified electors, while at
respecting the workhouses in Ireland and their number of in • , least 100,000 occupiers were deprived of votes by the operation
mates. of these elauses.—(llear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY—In a few days a series of p.pers will be laid I Mr. P. HOWARD could not agree to the principles of
on the table of the House, which will contain the corres- the Bill sought to be introduced by the lion. Member for
pondence with the Board of Guardians, as well as the steps Finsbury. If they gave up the rate-paying qualification, he
which have been taken is consequence. a ,uld met see how they could stop short of universal suffrage.
DRAINAGE OF LANDS. , It was the duty of every man to pay the poor-rates and Govern-
Mr. BAILLIE wished to know whether it was the inten- ! ment taxes, and therefore he thought the provisions in the
lion of her Majesty's Government to introduce any measure for i Reform Bill should be maintained. He would give his de-
the improvement of the Drainage Act of last session, or whe- tided negative to the present motion.
ther they intended to introduce any new Bill that might alter , Mr. HUME agreed with the last Hon. Member, that every
the principle of that Act. man ought to pay his ra es and taxes, but there were ether
Sir G. GREY said that a new Bill had been prepared for means of inducing him to do so than by the provisions of this
the amendment of the Act fir the drainage of last session, I Bill. He regretted to hear the intimation of the Noble Lord
though he could not go to the length of saying that the new at the head of the Government to oppose the Bill. The Noble
Bill would alter the principle of the Act of last year. Lord, when he introduced the Reform Bill, said he believed
Mr. HUME wished to ask whether it was the intention of that it would be the means of giving satisfaction to the country.
Her Majesty's Government to introduce any measure to enable This had not been the case. The Reform Bill had not given
the proprietors of entailed estates to dispuse of part of their satisfaction to the people of this country. They were
property for the improvement of the rest of it, or whether it generally against the Bill in its present shape, and especially
was intended to burden the country with the expense. against these clauses. Why, at the present time, there were
Sir G. GREY said that his. reply to the question of the but 12 males in every 100 who had a vote. The Noble Lord
Hon. Member for Inverness would have intimated that there would also recollect that his prophecy about the Reform Bill
was to be no change in the principle of the measure, but he had failed. He stated in introducing the Reform Bill, that
might add that it was the intention of the Government to if it came into operation there would not be a borough with
apply to Parliament for no more than the sanction of part of less than 300 voters. At the present moment there were 35
the 2,000,000/. grahiet last year unto the Drainage Act. boroughs which had less than this number. Some of them, in
Mr. BOUVERIE wished to know whether the Govern- fact, had as few electors as 150. He trusted the Noble Lord
merit had any objection to lay the correspondence respecting I would take these matters into his consideration, and withdraw
Scotland on the table, as well as that which concerned Ireland. • his opposition to the Bill.
Sir G. GREY—None at all, it would be inclu led. Sir B. HALL thought that the repeal of the ratepaying
Mr. COLLETT wished to ask whether there was any truth clauses was absolutely necessary. In many of the principal
in the statement that the Government were about to establish boroughs these clauses were most oppressive. He knew from
a bishopric in Manchester, and whether the Noble Lord would experience that a great number of most respectable persons
give any information on the subject? had been disfranchised by the non-payment of rates. He
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought the best way of giving trusted that the Bill would he allowed to proceed, and that if
information on this subject, was to lay a copy of thecommission its provisions were not agreed to, that at least a longer time
issued by her Majesty for the founding of the new bishoprics, should be allowed than at present for the payment of rates
on the table. This he had done a week ago, and it had been Mr. D'EYNCOURT was in favour of the present Bill
ordered to be printed, and schen it was in the hands of the Hon. The statement of the Noble Lord had proved that the Re-
Member, he would find that it was intended to found a form Bill had come far short of his original calculation when
bishopric in :Manchester, as well as three other bishoprics. he introduced the Bill. The Noble Lord had referred to the
From the present state of the Episcopal revenue, it would not scot and lot voters before the passing of the Reform Bill, and
be necessary to add any new charge to the country for the sup-
said that the Reform Bill carried out in another form the
port of these bishoprics. He might add, that it was not the in- principle of the previous qualification. He could not agree
non of her Majesty to summon the new bishops to sit in Par- with that proposition, as the Government taxes had nothing
liament, but they woual take their turn, as any casualty among whatever to do with the right of scot and lot voters. If there
was anything unconstitutional in the Reform Bill it was taking
he bishops eceasioned a vacancy.
Mr ROEBUCK asked if the arrangement would be carried away the scot and lot qualification that formerly existed; and
114

if the Noble Lord would introduce a measure to restore that
nubfication, he (Mr. D'Eyncourt) would support it.

qt
He thought that under the present system there were cases
which required some alteration of the law, and therefore he
wished that his Noble Friend would either give them this Bill,
or take the matter into his own consideration.
Captain PECHELL thought that any person holding a
house, for which he paid 101., ought to have a voice in the
representation of the borough to which he belonged. The
majority of the people of this country were very much dis-
satisfied with the present system as framed under the Reform
Bill, and thoug:,t that considering the present pressure of the
country, and the quiet state of the people, it was most extra-
ordinary that the Noble Lord refused to allow this Bill to
come to a first readit K. He could only say that having been
intrusted with a petition from his constituents, asking them to
repeal these hateful clauses of the Reform Bill, he felt bound
to support the measure.
Mr. WA KLE Y trusted that a division would take place at

once, and if it were to oceupy another night, when the same
arguments only could be used, it would be a was to of the public
time. The Noble Lord had, in his opinion, fails d in shewing that
the measure of the Hon. Member for Finsbury was an unjust
one. Although the Noble Lord had spoken earnestly—more
otlhot earnestlyoa,,t,fi
oehtnei
ohpnt
ahta
prnTemnuhesaeudnaNtlsh—ho:bht
ul
eeml
dtLel i
nbod
rewnd oet
appear
rem excluded
seemedad et
otpoforadvocateoorin c
be
bayt actuated
the
improper
eeg
ip principle-
firm
giiregistration.
nsle:
lation, and then they told him that he should be deprived of
that which every free man ought to have—a right to vote in
the representation of his borough. Under the present cir-
cumstancesd ar
somerit
tyrant
avote
of were esrtee na
Lu,enwchedo
entirely by theirmany landlord,who ha
or
forced them to vote Inconsistently with his opinions.
He thought the present system was merely a trick
to rob the poor man of what the law pretended
to give him, namely, a 10/. franchise. He called upon the
Government to show to the satisfaction of the public and of the
House, why the borough voter should be deprived of the pri-
vilege enjoyed by the county voter. He was surprised at the
silence which prevailed on the Treasury bench, and he called
on them to show any good and valid reason why the Bill should
I not he granted.
Sir G. GREY said that the Hon. Member who had just
spoken had complained of the silence which existed on the
Treasury bench; but he (Sir G. Grev) thought that any fur-
ther explanation on their part was rendered unnecessary by the
statement of the Noble Lord. The Hon. Member had also
said, that the arguments adduced against the Bill were of no
weight. There were many of those arguments which west
beyond the Bill; but he differed from the Hon. Member when
he said they had no weight. The argument of the
Honourable Gentleman the Member far Finsbury, did
not entirely go the length of universal suffrage, but
it certainly went on to an indefinite extension of the franchise.
It was quite clear that the Bill would fail to satisfy the expec-
tations of a large class of the people of this country, but it was
not a proper mode to speak of the Bill, to say that it had disap-
pointed the expectations of the country. His Noble Friend,
when the Reform Bill was passed, gave it as his opinion, that
it would be better to adhere to the old constitutional maxim, of
the payment of rates, as included in the scot and lot principle.
It had been pointed out that there were many abuses
which existed under this system by candidates paying
the rates of voters a few days before the ,election,
but there would be considerably more difficulty in adjusting
the measure of the Hon. Member, and it was for that reason
that he, as a Member of the Government did not support it.
Sir C. NAPIER was very glad that the Hon. Member for
Finsbury had succeeded in unsealing the mouths of some of the
Members of the Government, and he (Sir C. Napier) would
be very glad to hear the opinions of the Hon. Members for
Lambeth and the Tower Hamlets en this subject. He had
always understood that thi, clause was for the purpose of mak-
ing the people pay up their rates and taxes, but it had evidently
failed in that object. He thought that the franchise ought to
be more extended, and therefore he should support the Bill.
Ms WILLIAMS did not think the scot and lot system bad

rated at little above 5/. ; so that all, with the exception of ever answered its purpose. The Noble Lord, in initOducirig
women, were entitled to have a vote according to the avowed the Reform Bill. had allowed a very large number of the voters
objects of the Refcrm Bill. Only 45,000 votes had been added of this country to vote without any qualification at all. He
to the metropolis. This was the result fifteen years after the alluded to the freemen and burgesses. He had always been one
passing of the Reform Bill. In fact, the constituency was di- of the Noble Lord's best supporters ; and were it not for the
minishing instead of increasing. In Westminster there good deeds he had done in former days, he believed he should
were 23,295 rated householders, but only 13,860 voters ; not now support him. He believed that about 3,101 of his
showing that Westminst. r was in a worse state than own constituents were honest men. although they might not he
at the time Sir Francis Burdett was elected in 1807, when able to pay rates.—( Laughter.) And yet a qualification was
18,000 voted. A similar result had taken place in Southwark. required from the others, who were not more honest men.
In Liverpool the number of rated householders was 44,924, Lord G. BENTINCK said that the Hon. Member who had
but only 14,970 were voters. In the City of London the con- just sat down had charged his Noble Friend with a backward
stituency had been greatly reduced since the passing of the movement. Now he thought that all the Members of the House
Reform Bill, which was mainly to be attributed to this rate- who remembered 1831 and 1832, should support the resolution
paying clause. In fourteen parishes in the City of London, of his Noble Friend.
the overseers would not put any man on the register unless he Mr. B. ESCOTT was inclined to support the motion of his
claimed to be rated ; so that the parties had all the technicali- Hon. Friend, because it would prevent that wholesale system
ties of the law put in force against thorn. The decision of the of bribery, which exhibited itself in a donation of coals and
Common Pleas in the great Stockport case, was another rea- candles.
son why they should abrogate this clause. Eight rates were After a few words from Colonel WOOD,
made in that town in the course of a year, and it was con- The House divided, when there appeared,
tended that a voter ought to make eight different claims to re- For the motion for introducing the Bill
ceive his vote; and Chief Justice Tindal, in deciding on the Against it ...... ........ 58
matter, said, " it was like keeping a vote by continual claim- Ma_jority against the introduction —2o

SPEEDY TRIAL AND PUNISH bIENT OF JUVE-
NILE OFFENDERS.
Sir JOHN PACKINGTON, in introducing a Bill for the
more Speedy trial and Punishment of Juvenile Offenders, said
that the want of a system of education seemed to him to be
the great cause of crime; and, therefore, he thought that an
extended system of national education ought to be enforced, in
order to prevent the growing evil. An attempt had been
made by the present Government to remedy this evil, and he
(Sir J. Packington ) would tender his heartfelt thanks to the
Noble Lord, or the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, if he could
in any way put a period to the present defective system.
He would limit himself to the second branch of the subject,
viz. the trial and punishment of juvenile offenders, and not-
withstanding the value which he set on the trial by jury, he
believed he could show the reasonableness of doing away with
it in the ease now before him, and tne judiciousness of adept.
ing summary convictions in the place of it. He would take one
instance to show the folly of retaining the trial by jury. The
circumstance occurred in the county of Worcester. A boy was
committed on the 13th November for stealing twepence, and
was not tried until the first week in January, and thus
suffered seven weeks imprisonment. There was another case
of a little girl, who had been committed for stealing a quart of
milk. In the petition submitted the other night to the House
of Lords by Lord Brougham, it was stated that out of 50,0410
prisoners committed, fully 5,1)00 were prisoners under
fourteen years of age, and, from his own expe-
rience in the county of Somerset, he could state
that more than one sixth of those committed were under 16
years of age. Such was the extent of the number of the,
juvenile offenders. He would now turn to a very high autho-
rity. In the report of the inspectors of prisons it was stated
that there was an evident necessity for an alteration of the law
with regard to juvenile prisoners. In 1844 a Commit tee was
appointed, of which the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for
Tamworth was the Chairman, and one of the subjects for the
consideration of that Committee was criminal prosecutions,
and in the report which they made to the House they stated
hat there was a peat need for the establishment of some
tribunal for the summary trial of young prisoners, and he
trusted the Right Hon. Baronet still entertained the same
opinions as he did at that time. The authority to which he
would turn, was one to which he attached great importance, and
which, he trusted, that her Majesty's Ministers would concur
with him in giving it the great weight, which he believed it
possessed. That was the opinion of Sir Edward Ryan, who,
at the time he expressed it, was Chief Justice of India, and he
had Sir Edward Ryan's permission for using his name in saying
that he still retained the impression that it was absolutely ne-
cessary for some change being made in the process of
examining and convicting juvenile offenders; and he
thought that the doing away of the trial by jury
would be cheaply purchased by the advantages to be
obtained by the summary conviction of young offenders.
The Hon. Member then read a series of extracts from the
report of the Criminal Commissioners in 1837, all tending to
show the wisdom of giving some authority to the magistrates
for the conviction and punishment of prisoners of tender years,
charged with trivial offences. He need not say that, from the
eminent position and character of the persons teem whom this
report emanated, that it was worthy of the utmost attention.
The magistrates were, indeed, at present placed under the

most cruel embarrassment, for while some of them did not

'qesitate to send the young offenders brought before them to

prison for the crimes of which they were clearly guilty, others,
who were of more doubtful minds, felt themselves obliged
to send young offenders to another place fir trial, and
in one instance the judge, before whom one of these offenders
was tried had sentenced a prisoner, after conviction, to one
'tour's imprisonment. He held in his hand a report which
-tad been prepared by Mr. NI. Hill for the Law Amendment
Society, and which was founded on the returns made front the
town of Birmingham, which went to the same effect. It hao
been suggested that young off. nderi should be tried by small
juries at petty sessions, in the event of their doing away with
he trials at general sessions. To this he could he no party,
or he believed that the benefit to be derived from it, saving
the contamination of a prison, would be entirely lost by that
plan. He would propose that a power should be given to two
magistrates to decide upon all cases of offenders who had com-
mitted felony while under fifteen years of age. and who were
committed for offences under forty shillings, and to adjudicate
them to six months' imprisonment. He proposed to
give to the parties so convicted the right of
appeal to the general quarter sessions. Further
than that in all cases of difficulty he would give to the magis-
trates the power of sending any offender for trial at sessions.
Such was the outline of the plan which he proposed to adopt,
hut he was aware that it was open to objection, but
he trusted to be allowed to bring in his Bill and
that he should have the assistance of the Govern-
ment in carrying it out ; for he felt assured, that if
this change in our criminal law were carried out through the
aid of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Home De-
partment, no Minister who had ever held the office now filled
by him could have been the means of promoting a greater
benefit than he would confer upon his country. With thanks
tor the attention which he had enjoyed from the House, he•
would move for leave to bring in the Bill, and that it be read a
first time.
Sir G. GREY felt grateful for the attention which had
been bestowed upon this very important subject, and though
he would not commit himself to the principle of the Bill, be
was quite ready to accede to its being brought in and read a
first time. He was fully impressed with the importance of the
subject, and the Hon. Member might be assured that it would
receive the best attention of the Government.
Mr. HUME wished I.he Hon. Gentleman to consider whe-
ther the punishment of juveniles could not be obviated by
some improved system of education. He did not join in the
opinion the Hon. Gentleman had expressed that great improve-
ments had taken place in the present system of education. For
his part he could not discover where the improvement, had
taken place, and he regretted, and believed the country joined
him in that regret, that Government had not brought forward
an extensive system of national education. Government was
alone to blame for the present anomalies of the law. It was
monstrous to punish a boy or a girl with several months' im-
prisonment for stealing an article scarcely of the value of 2d.
They claimed to be a civilised country ; but he would venture
to say, that in a country they were pleased to style as barbarous,
he meant China, there was no such abominable system.
but with regard to its other provisions,
D said education was net sufficient to re-
Mr. SHAW did nhoet
aaggrreeeedwwitihth that part of the Bill which
Orllilsdy°;hewould suggest that Government, at the
Something more was required to prevent
juvenile
relatednegcet
sorlgyi
T.
nt.peeep,
‘mr
ye
aa a.
public expense, should build a number of penitentiaries in dif-
ferent parts of the country, where juvenile offenders should be
keptmixe
mixed
distinctu p from
with
th
e other offenders.
bad
,alid thA
e consequence
epirueesna
enet
was,the goodjuve
juvenile
offenders never were reclaimed.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
CHARITABLE BEQUESTS.
Lord JOHN MANNERS moved for leave to bring in a Bill
to amend the law relating to the disposition of property for
pious
and charitable trusts. The chief provisions of the Bill
would be comprised in a clause requiring that all wills
three months before the death of the testator, and a
clause providing that all landed property bequeathed for the
same purposes
should be converted into funded property.
R.H.
INGLIS said the Bill was very similar to one
the Noble Lord had unsuccessfully brought forward on a
be bequeathing
signed property for charitable or pious purposes should
former occasion, but the improvements she Noble Lord had
int, oduced into the present one though not inconsiderable,
were not sufficient to mitigate his objection to the Bill. He
should, however, not divide the House upon the present occa-
sion, but leave the measure to be fully and amply discussed on
the second reading.__

ie sr..
Sir GEORGE GREY expressed his approbation of the
but he was bound to add that he did hot think the

alterations ma not think they
were sufficiently extensive. He would, however, reserve his
objections for the second reading.
Mr. COLLE l'T wished to know whether the Noble Loid
had intended that the fact of the will not being sigtled three
months previous to the death of the testator should invalidate
the will generally ?
Lord JOHN AIANNERS said that the will would be in-
validated only as regarded the bequests for charitable purposes.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
CHARGES AGAINSTH OFFICERS IN THE WOOL-
WIC ARSE.
Mr. DUNCOMBE, in moving for a copy of the evidence
taken before the Court of Inquiry, instituted in the month of
April, 1845, by the Board of Ordnance, at the Royal Arsenal,
Woolwich. to investigate charges preferred by Daniel Toner
against William Jones, depaty storekeeper; together with a
cot •of the charges and the report thereon. Also, a copy of

the charges preferred, and the evidence given against Daniel
Toner, late a labourer in the Royal Arsenal, Wool-
wich, by Mr. Reed, a clerk in the Storekeepers' de-
partment, before Lora Bloomfield, Colonel Bloney, and
Mr. Chatham, in 1g45, with their report thereon;—
said that he was compelled by the difficulty which intervened
between the application for copies of papers from the Arsenal
of Woolwich, and the production of them, to bring the matter
thus publicly before the country. Daniel Toner stated that,
in consequence of his having thus brought charges against his
superior officers, he had been prosecuted, while those charged
had been advanced. He (Mr. Duncombe) would feel it ne-
cessary to call for those papers, before he took another step on
the subject.
Colonel ANSON said that if his Hon. Friend, the Member
for Finsbury, had taken the trouble to look at the report which
was furnished, and which he (Colonel Anson) requested the
Hon. Member for Finsbury to examine; if he had looked at
the statement, the House might have been spared the in-
fliction of these details.—(Hear, hear.) There had not,
and he would appeal to the Hon. Member for Finsbury
himself, appeared one word on the subject of convict labour.
He had no objection to give the evidence taken before the
court of inquiry in April last with respect to the charges
optrheeferrereviddbeynceT,ognievren aagagiainsntst TJoonneser;
byb Reed, he did not thinkut with respect to the
that the production of such voluminous evidence would tend to
any advantageous result.
Mr. HUAIE did not know whether the first papers were
necessary for the investigation, but, as pilfering was admitted,
he would ask, how was the public property to be protected,
unless a check was given to those practices? He did not think
that any one who exposed this system should be subjected to
punishment, and he hoped the House would grEnt the docu-
ments, and that they would be the means of having an inquiry
instituted into the mode in which the whole department was
conducted.
Mr. BOLDER() detailed the circumstances of the inter-
view he had with Toner, and was of opinion that, from the
course then pursued, no injustice had been done to him. With
regard to the subsequent proceedings, and his dismissal, he
could offer no opinion.
Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE replied.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, but as there
were only thirty-one Members present the House adjourned at
a quarter to Eleven o'clock.

PARLIAMEN TARY BUSINESS.

(From the Vo es and Proceedincs of the House of commons.)

MONDAY, FIB 22.
The following Railway Bills were presented, read a first
time, and ordered to be read a second time :

Caledonian r Extension of Motherwell Branch of Clydes-
dale Junction Railway to Auchinheath Mineral Field, with
Branches to the Wiabaw and Coltnese Railway, Canderside,
and Hamilton)—" to enable the Caledonian Railway Corn
pans, to make an Extension of the Motherwell Branch i)f the
Clydesdale Junction Railway to Auchinheath Mineral Field,
with Branches therefrom."

Caledonian (Branches from the Clydesdale Junction to the
Douglas and Lesmahagow Mineral Fields, and to Strath-
avon)—" to enable the Caledonian Railway Company to
make Branches from the Clydesdale Junction Railway to the
Dow2las and Lesmahagew Mineral Fields, and to Strathavon.',
Caledonian (Purchase or Lease of Wishaw and Coltness
Railway)—" to effectuate the sale of the Wishaw and Colt-
ness Railway to the Caledonian Railway Company."
Wilsontown, Morningside, and Coltness (Branches to Ben-
har Coalworks and Edinburgh and Glasgow Turnpike Road)
—" to enable the Wilsontown, Morningside, and Coltness
Railway Company to make Branch Railways to the Benhar
Coalworks."

Strathtay and Breadalbane Extension—" to enable the
Strathisty and Breadalbane Railway Company to extend
their Line to the Dunkeld Branch of the Scottish Midland
Junction Railway."

Caledonian and Dumbartonshire Junction (Deviations be-
tween Duntocher Limeworks and Bowling, &c.)—" to enable
the Caledonian and Dumbartonshire Junction Railway Com-
pany to make certain Deviations and Branches."

Herne Bay and Canterbury Junction—" for making a
Railway from Herne Bay to a Junction with the Canterbury
and Whitstable Railway, to be called The Herne Bay and
Canterbury Junc ion Railway.'"
Taw Vale Railway and Dock (Deviations and Bideford and
South Molton Branches)—" for making a deviation in the
Line of the Taw Vale Railway, for making Branches there-
from to the towns of Bideford and South Molton, for enlarg-
ing the Dock, and for amending the Acts relating thereto."
Colchtster, Stour Valley, Sudbury, and Halstead (Exten.-
sion to Melford, Lavenham. and Clare)—" to enable the
Colchester, Stour Valley, Sudbury, and Halstead Railway
Company to make an Extension of their Railway from Sud-
bury to Melford, Lavenham, and Clare, in the county of
Suffolk."

Colchester, Stour Valley, Sudbury, and Halstead (Exten-
sion from Lavenham to Bury St. Edmund's)—" to enable the
Colchester, Stour Valley, Sudbury, and Halstead Railway
Company to make an Extension Railway from Lavenham to
Bury St. Edmund's, in the county of Suffolk."
Ipswich and Bury St. Edmund's (Extension to East Dere-
ham and to Aylsham)—" to enable the Ipswich and Bury
St. Edmund's Railway Company to make an Extension of
their Railway from Norwich, to join the intended Railway
from Dereham to Wells, with a Branch from such Extension
to Aylsham, in the county of Norfolk."
Colchester, Stour Valley, Sudbury, and Halstead (Stour
Navigation Purchase)—" for enabling the Colchester, Stour
Valley, Sudbury, and Halstead Railway Company to pur-
chase certain Shares in the River Stour Navigation."
Aylsham and North Walsham—" to enable the Ipswich
and Bury St. Edmund's Railway Company to make a Rail-
way from Aylsham to North Walsham, both in the county of
Norfolk."

Eastern Union and Hadleigh Junction (Sale to the Eastern
Union Railway Company)—" for authorising the sale of the
Eastern Union and Hadleigh Junction Railway to the Eastern
Union Railway Company."
Dublin and Drogheda (Purchase of Navan Branch, &c.)—
" to authorise the purchase, by the Dublin and Drogheda
Railway Company, of the Navan Branch of the Dublin and
Belfast Junction Railway, and to authorise the Dublin and
Drogheda, the Dublin and Belfast Junction Railway, with a
Branch from Drogheda to Navan, the Ulster, and the Dun-
dalk and Enniskillen Railway Companies, or any of them, to
amalgamate with one another."
Guildford Extension, and Portsmouth and Fareham—" for
enabling the London and South-Western Railway Company.
to make Extensions of the Guildford Extension and Ports-
mouth and Fareham Railway near Portsmouth, and a Devi-
ation in the authorised Line thereof, near Godalming."
Ipswich and Bury St. Edmund's (Branch from Ipswich to
Wood'oridge)—" to amend the Acts relating to the Ipswich
and Bury St. Edmund's Railway Company, and to enable the
Company to construct a Railway from the Ipswich and Bury
St. Edmund's Railway near Ipswich to Woodbridge."
Newry and Enniskillen—. to alter and amend the Newry
and Enniskillen Railway Act, 1845."
Great Western (Amendment and Extensions)—" for mak-
ing Branch Railways from the Great Western Railway to
Henley and to Radstock ; to widen certain portions of the
Great Western Railway; to enable the Great Western Rail-
way Company to purchase or amalgamate with the Bir-
mingham, Wolverhampton' and Dudley Railway, and to
purchase the Wycombe and Great Western and Uxbridge
Railways, and for other purposes."
Cork, Blackrock, and Passage—" to authorise an Exten-
sion of the Cork, Blackrock, and Passage Railway to Monks-
town, and to amend the Act relating thereto."
Cork and Bandon Railway Act—" to authorise an alters.
tion in the Line of the Cork and Bandon Railway, and an
Extension thereof into the city of Cork, and to amend the
Act relating to the said Railway."
Newmarket and Chesterford (Extension to Bury St. Ed-
mund's, with a Branch to Ely)—" to enable the Newmarket
and Chesterford Railway Company to extend their Line of
Railway to Bury St. Edmund's, with a Branch to the city
of Ely."
Royston and Hitchin (Extension from Royston to Cam-
bridge, &c.—" to enable the Royston and Hitchin Railway
Company to extend their Line of Railway from Roysti n to
Cambridge."
Royston :and Hitchin (Sale or Lease)—" to enable the
Royston and Hitchin Railway Company to lease or sell their
Line, and to authorise the said Company to enter into con-
tracts and complete arrangements with the Great Northern
'Railway Company."
East Lothian Central—" for making a Railway from the
North British Railway at East Linton to Ormiston, to be
called' The Rest Lothian Central Railway."
Darrin Llynvi, and Porth Cawl and Llynvi Valley Rail-
ways Amalgamation.
Shrewsbury and Chester.

The following Railway Bills were read a second time, corn
mitted, and referred to the Committee of Selection :

'Caledonian (Branches to Canobie, &c.).
Caledonian (Lease of part of Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle
Railway).
Caledonian (Branch across Clyde and Glasgow Station).
Wishaw and Coltness (Branches to Auchinheath Mineral
Field and Canderside).
Great Northern ( Branch to King's Lynn).
Ayrshire and Galloway (Smithstown to Dalmellington).
Lynn and Ely (Lynn and V. ormegay Navigation).
Lynn and Ely (Deviation and Lynn Docks).
Newport, Abergavenny, and Hereford Deviations.
Newport, Abergavenny, and Hereford (Extension to Taff
Vale Railway).
Northern Counties Union Deviation.

Sheffield, Rotherham, and Doncaster Junction (blasbrough
to Doncaster).
Portadown and Dungannon.

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE.
The following Resolutions were reported from the above
Committee :

1. That in the case of the Sowerby Bridge Improvement
and Waterworks petition, the standing orders ought not to
be dispensed with.
2. That in the case of the Great Northern Railway (De-
viations between London and Grantham) petition, the
standing orders ought to be dispensed with :—That the
parties be permitted to proceed with their Bill.
3. That in the case of the Edinburgh, Leith, and Granton
Railway (Leith and Granton Junction, Sze.) petition, the
standing orders ought to be dispensed with :—That the par-
ties be permitted to proceed with their Bill.

4. Tfiat in the case of the London and North-Western
Railway (Birmingham and Lichfield Line, &c.) petition, the
standing orders ought to be dispensed with :—That the par •
ties be permitted to proceed with their Bill, on the insertion
of a Clause restraining them from taking any part of pro-
perties numbered 2 a and 3 a, in the parish of St. Michael,
in the Book of Reference, and not correspondingly numbered
on the Plan; and also any part of properties numbered 2 a
and 3 a ont I'4 Plan, and not correspondingly described in the
Book of Reference; and also restraining them from altering
the level of a public carriage Road, No. 163, is the parish of
Sutton Coldfiuld :—And that the Committee on the Bill do
examine, in the first place, how far such order has been com-
plied with; and do report the same to the House on the re-
port of the Bill.

Second, third, and fourth resolutions agreed to.—Report
to lie on the table.

NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE BILL-OFFICE.
The following Railway Bills are appointed to be read a
second time on Friday, Feb. 26 :
London and South •Western.
York and North Midland ( East Riding Canals Purchase).
York and North Midland (Knottinglev Branch).
York and North Midland (Harrogate Branch, Boroughbridge,
and Knaresbcrough Extension).
York and Newcastle
sPelaw Tyne Dock, &c., Branches).
York and Newcastle and Newcastle and Berwick Atnalga-
mation.

PETITIONS ‘pisi PRIVATE BILLS.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
(Room 22, before Mr. Examiner Slant.)
UNOPPOSED LIST.
In the following unopposed cases the customary formal
proofs were completed :
Leeds and Thirsk Railway (for sopplying water to Leeds
and the neighbourhood, and selling same to the Corporation
of Leeds, and the Leeds Waterworks Company).
York and Newcastle Railway (Wearmoutii Dock Enlarge-
ment).
York and Newcastle Railway (Hartlepool Dock and Rail.
way, and Great North of England, Clarence and Hartlepool
Junction Railway, Lease and Purchase Act).
York and Newcastle, Newcastle and Berwick, and North
British Railways Amalgamation.
Axholme Railway (from the Leeds and Selby Railway to
Gainsborough, with Branches).
Manchester Corporation Waterworks (with power to pur-
chase tile Manchester and Salford Waterworks Company).
Manclester Corporation Waterworks (with power to sell
to the Manchester and Salford Waterworks Company).
Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railways (Station
at Sheffield, and Branch to the Sheffield Canal).
Scottish Equitable Life Assurance Society.
Great North of India Railway Company.
Shropshire Union Railways and Canal (Shrewsbury to
Worcester).
Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway (No. 1—
Extension and Amendment).
OPPOSZD CASE.
Kilmarnock and Ayr Direct Railway (Railway from Kil-
marnock to Ayr, with Branch to the Harbour of Ayr).
This opposed case was part heard, and adjourned till to•
morrow.
(Room 23, before Mr. Examiner MAT.)
UNOPPOSED LIST.
In the following unopposed cases, the customary formal
proofs were completed :
Direct London and Portsmouth, Brighton and Chichestq,,
and London, Brighton, and South Coast, and London asd
South- Western Railway Companies Acta
WaterfordAmendment.
a
iiandnl
e for Limerickpnrc Purchase
aoi lfw
Lands,a3, ( D ev
furtheriationsin R
iLgihntes, Ea
and
Es.
Privileges as to allowing Interest and giving Security and
Amendments). .
tension
Edinburghrant
n I
Railwa3n.a dANmoartlghaemr
Dunfermline Waterworks (for the better s ipp 31•'n g the
town of Dunfermline, and places adjacent thereto, with
oalinn.
and
.
G Edinburgh, Leith, and
Water).
= Tranmere Docks.
„.,
DEATH OF GENERAL IJARROCII or GOUROCK.--
L' ht Company.
tern Gas Light
We have to record the death of General Duncan .arroch of
City of York, Freemen's Strays or Common Pastures Re
Gourock, which occurred at his mansion en Tuesday last,
ulations.
the 16th inst. The General entered the army in March,
g Stockport Manorial Tolls and Bridges.
ITvheeaßritish Commercial Insurance Company.
1792, having heen appointed ensign in the 41st regiment at
Lytham Improvement.
the age of sixteen; he became lieutenant in 1794, captain in Bristol Building and Improvement Act Amendment.
the 104th by purchase in 1794, and major also by purchase in OPPOSED CASE.
,i,rtt regiment in the same year. In 1800 he was appointed Manchester and Southampton Railway (Line from South-
ut.-coionel. In 1810 he was promoted to the colonelcy,
ampton to Cheltenham, to join the Midland Railway, with
and in 18,2 was placed on the staff of North America as connecting lines, to join the proposed London, Oxford, and
brigadier-general. In 1813 he was appointed major. general,
iu 1825 lieut.-general, and general in November, 1841. Cheltenham Railway, the Great Western Railway, and the