The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-26 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT
HOUSE OF LORDS, June 25.
Their Lordships met at Five o'clock.
ROYAL ASSENT.
Her Majesty's assent to the following Bills was given
commission.
rh. -Lords Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor,
the Earl of Shaftesbury, and Lord Campbell.
Sc,ap Allowances; Stage Carriages Duties; Lunatic
Asylums ; Out-Pensioners, Chelsea and Greenwich;
N ewfoundland Government; Collection of Duties (Port
fatal; Loan Societies; Representative Peers (Scot-
land); Transference of Lands (Scotland); Burgage
Tenure (Scotland) ; Service of Heirs (Scotland) ;
Crown Charters (Scotland) ; Heritable Securities for
Debt (Scotland) ; Trust Money Investment (Ireland) ;
Prisoners Removal (Ireland) ; Destitute Persons (Ire-
lsn?i—(No.•2) ; Windsor, Staines, and South-Western
Rfrilway (Staines to Ascot and Wokingha:nwithßranches) ;
'Windsor, Staines, and South-Western Railway
(Richmond to Windsor) ; Cork, Blackrock and Pas-
sage Railway ; Wilts, Somerset, and Weymouth
Railway (No. 1) ; Waterford, Wexford, and Wick-
lOW and Dublin Railway ; Liskeard and Cara-
don Railway ; Wexford and Valencia Railway ;
Norfolk Railway ; Dundalk and Enniskillen Rail-
way ; King,uorton, Northfield, Beverley, and Edge-
b•st.on Rates ; Liverpool Gas ; Weymouth and Mel-
tombe Regis Harbour and Bridge Trusts ; Van Die-
men's Land Company; British American Lands Com-
pany ; Ross and Cromarty Roads ; Townshend Peerage.
MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS.
Messengers from the House of Commons brought up
several Bills.

HEALTH OF TOWNS BILL.
Ee.rl FOKTESCUE presented several petitions in
favour of the Health of Towns Bill.
citi A LIFiCATION OF PEERS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The Earl of ROSEBERY moved the second reading
of thia Bill ; and in doing so took occasion to describe
the w ode of electing representative Peers of Scotland.
Alter a few words from Lord MONTEACLE, Lord
bEevateN, and Lard BROUGHAM,
The 81111 was read a second time.
The Usher of the Black Rod having announced a
Message from the Commons,
The LORD CHANCELLOR proceeded to put the
usual question, " that the messengers be called in,"
when
Lor'J BROUGHAM said that he thought the waste
of tirae called for by this absurd mummery ought really
to be put an end to. He thought that their Lordships
oright to adopt the same mode with respect to Bills cOm-
;.nra from the House of Commons as that House did with
respect to Bills from this House—viz., the mode of re-
ceiving Bills by a list. The Noble Lord also gave notice
that he would bring the whole subject before the House
on Monday.
The messengers were then called in according to the
old ceremony.
RAILWAY ACCOMMODATION BETWEEN
LONDON AND BIRMINGHAM. ;
Lord. REDESDALE postponed his motion, " That
the Railway Commissioners be directed to inquire into the
accommodation afforded by the several lines of raileiay
nose open or in the course of construction, or projected,
heaween London and Birmingham, and ;to report to this
-House early in the ensuing session of Parliament in what
manner they are of opinion that the interests of the
public may be most effectually secured in regard to
such lines, and whether it is expedient that the broad
gauge should he extended to Birmingham ; and if so, in
what manner such an arrangement can be carried into
effect with the least interference with existing interests,
and with the system of railway communication as set-
tled by the Act for regulating the gene of railways;
and what conditions it would be desirable to annex to
any permission granted to the Great Western or other
railway company to lay down a broad gauge contrary to
the provisions of the said Act.
OXFORD AND BIRMINGHAM JUNCTION
RAILWAY BILL.
The Earl of DEVON then brought forward the mo-
tion of which he had given notice, to refer the petition
of the chairman of the Oxfoid and Birmingham Junp-
tion, and the Birmingham and Wolverhampton and
Dudley Railway Companies (presented to this House on
the 17th instant), to the Select Committees on Standing
Orders, with instructions to the said Com-
mittee to report their opinion whether in the case
of the Birmingham and Oxford. and Birmingham
Wolverhampton and Dudley Railways Amalgamation
Bill, it may not be expedient, under the peculiar circum-
stances of the case, to dispense with the proof of the
standing order 220 sec. 6, which requires that the said
Bill should be submitted to a special meeting of the pro-
prietors of the Birmingham and Oxford Railway, and
that the saidXotninittee do proceed at their meeting
on Tuesday next, to ascertain whether the other stand-
ing orders applicable to the said Bill have been complied
with, and to report their decision thereon forthwith to
the House." The Noble Earl who was heard most in-
distinctly in the gallery, was understood to say, that
from the information he had received, he was perfectly
satisfied that no shareholders in the Birmingham and
Oxford was prevented from voting at the meeting, on the
4th of December, by the withholding of the scrip certifi-
cates of the directors, and that, therefore, the statement
that had gone abroad, that they were withheld for the
purpose of preventing them from voting was without
foundation. At the meeting of the 4th of December,
Mr. Motley presented himself, and stated that he repre
%rented the North-Western. He produced an otter,
sinned by persons high in office in the North-Western,
offering a larger sum for the line than that offered by the
Great ‘‘' estern ; nevertheless, the agreement was con
finned for the sale of the line to the Great Western.
The directors of the Birmingham, Wolverhampton and
Dudley also agreed to lease their line to the Great Wes-
tern, and the Great Western agreed to purchase both ;
but after these agreements had been deliberately entered
:into they would hardly believe, because it was an un
eemmon thing in the ordinary transactions of life,
that disgrace‘ul proceedings were resorted to by those
interested in the North-Western, in order to obtain pos-
session of these lines.
Lord REDESDALE said it would be his duty to re-
sist tlosnotion of the Noble Earl, and in doing so he
must take leave to tell their L irdships, that if they did
not persevere in supporting the standing orders, it would
be impossible to carry on the business of the House. The
standing order in question was framed for the purpose
of protecting shareholders against the acts of the direr-
tore, and it would not be fair to deprive the existing
shareholders of the Birmingham and Oxford Junction
Railway of the privilege which it gave them. Besides,
it would be establishing a bad precedent, and to pass this
resolution, they would have company after company
coming forward to ask for the same indulgence, Ile
betrusted, therefore, the House would not adopt it.
-
fe; Lord ASHBURTON stated that he had no interest
whatever in either of the conipeting lines. But he cer-
tainly thought that the whole affair was one of the
grossest juggle on the part of a powerful company to
defeat the intentions of the Legislature, and deprive the
-ii public Of the benefit which they had a right to expect
La_ from competition.
d 4 ; Lord WHARNCLIFFE opposed the motion.
It Lord PORTMAN denied, on the authority of Mr.
Glynn, the chairman of the London and North-Western
Company, that that compeny had had anything whatever
to do with the purchase of the shares as alleged by the
petitioners.
After a few words from Lord %I.I.APTESBURY tl.e
House divided, when there appeared—
Contents,
Non contents
Majority against the motion —B
Lord REDESDALE then moved the resolution of
whichlhe had given notice, namely, to refer the con-
sideration of all the lines existing, projected, or in the
course of construction between London and Birmingham
to the Railway Commissioners. T 14,0 Noble Lord stated
that there had been so many dispuillas upon this point.
and the present system was so very scrambling and un-
Lain, that he thought their Lordships could entertain
no objection to this motion.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY then put the motion,
which was agreed to.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

, HOUSE OF COMMONS. June 25.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
The House resumed at Five o'clock.
:l el' The -Usher of the Black Rod appeared at the bar and
* S411:1111oned the house to the bar of the Howe of Lords
to' hear the Royal Assent given to several Bills (for
which see Lords' report).
CROWLAND AND COWBITT DRAINAGE BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
INVERNESS HARBOURS BILL.
ammo;
This Bill was also read a third time and passed.
,11(• The Leeds Waterworks Bill (No. 2), and Lytham Im-
provement Bill were both read a third time and passed.
•
The report on the Eastern Counties Railway (Ilford
to Tilbury Fort and Southend, with a Brsnch from
Vange to Battle-bridge), was brought up.
The reports on the Kingston-upon-Hull Dock Com-
b,dAeeiny, and Liverpool Insurance Company Bills, were
aaiwAirtheF considered.
edi
~., THAMES CONSERVANCY BILL.
,! Mr. WARD rose to move the recommittal of this
He said &Bill on this subject was brought on at
„,1,, an early period of this session, the object of which was
to disjoin the interests of the Corporation and the
Crown on the Thames Conservancy. The Hon. Gen-
tleman then went into the details of the Bill at c0n-
..., siderable length. It would be necessary to make an
outlay of- 45,0001. on the improvement of the river.
gentlemen who had been consulted on the ques-
tion in the City concurred in the terms proposed
by this Bill, but
the constitution the great difference was as to
of the conservancy board. That
`hpard was to consist of nineteen members, it being
posed to infuse ne,w blood into the management. It
'was prop,,sed that teri`of these should be appointed by
City, the rest by Government, but
Watshatitiproposi
tion the City would not accede,
It to
-posed that these should be appointed 'est4ro subject
to a veto on the part of the Crown. An Ron. Member
of the Committee had said, that that proposal having-
been made, it was inconsistent with the
of that House to make a second, proposal,' but
he was happy to state that the City hail wisely ree,,,_
sidered that decision, and at a meeting at Covent_
.garden, a resolution in conformity with such a change
~of opinion had been passed.
Mr. HLTME said that he did not think that the Com-
Ines., Council of the city of London were the proper
partiAss to undentake the clearing of the river ; he
thought that the responsibility ought to rest upon a
much higher power than that of a self-elected corn-
muity such as the Common Council. It gave them a
, control over the property on the Thames from the
a:. mouth up to the Nore. It was proposed to the
lei Common Commit that one-third of the committee
-„should be chosen by the Crown from parties in-
-rina`tweested in the Thames, but, after a long debate,
the Common CO4nC4 refused that offer. He thought
that it was beneatri the House of Commons
to enter into any ,such arrangements as those which had