The Sun.
London, England, 1840-02-27 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FRB. 26.

The SPZAKE& took the Chair shortly before Four
o'Cleck.

A gentleman from the Treasury presented returns of
the newspaper stamps issued to the various papers dur-
ing the last year.
The Bolton Small Debts Bill was read a second time,
and ordered to be committed.
Mr. DIVETT brought in the Exeter Waterworks
Bill, which was read a first, and ordered to be read a
second time to-morrow.

CROYDON RAILWAY.
Lord G. SOMERSET rose in pursuance of the no-
tice he had given, to move that the Croydon Railroad
Company should have permission to proceed with
their Bill for the London and Greenwich Railway
Enlargement and Station, notwithstanding the Re-
port of the Standing Order Committee. No Member
was more reluctant than himself to complain of the
course adopted by the Standing Order Committee, but
he thought, in the present instance, they had pursued an
erroneous course. In order that the House might un-
derstand the ground on which he proceeded, it would be
necessary for him to state shortly the circumstances that
had taken place. There were four lines of railway,
all of whose termini were proposed to be at Lon-
don-bridge, the Croydon, the Brighton, the Dover and
Greenwich. All these railroads were to join the Green-
wich. None of those junctions, with the exception of
the Croydon, had yet taken place, and it was feared, in
consequence of the smallness of the general railway,
that some accidents would:take place from collision—
indeed one had already taken place, but happily no lives
had been lost. The object of the Croydon Railway
Company, by their Bill, was to enlarge the station and
other works in the neighbourhood of London-bridge,
in order to prevent, if possible, a recurrence of accidents,
and he (Lord G.Somerset) thought he should be able to
show special reason why they should be allowed to proceed
with their Biil. Allthe railroads to which he had adverted,
last year entered into a negotiation which had turned
out unsuccessful, and notice was then given by the Croy-
don Railroad Company of their intention to apply for
a Bill to enable them to enlarge their station at Lon-
don-bridge. The Greenwich Railroad also gave notice
of their intention to introduce a Bill something similar to
the one proposed by the Croydon Company; and with
respect to the Greenwich Bill the Committee reported
that the Standing Orders had been complied with, but
that that they had not with respect to the Croydon, in
consequence of their not having given the necessary notice.
Having had a good deal to do with the formation of the
standin orders, by which those long notices were re-
quired, he would say that in forming them it was not
anticipated that they would be enforced so strictly as in
the present instance. The Croydon Railway Company
had done everything in their power to comply with the
orders, and as the proprietors of the land which they
would require for the terminus had consented to sell it,
no interference with. the rights of private property
would be occasioned by their Bill. The Greenwich
Railway Company had put forth a paper, stating that
they were willing to undertake the work. But then it
was the intention of that Company to lay on a new tax
for the use of their railway, which was not contemplated
by the Croydon Company. All that he wanted was
that the two Bills should be allowed to proceed to a
certain extent, so that the House and the public might
bo able to judge which of the two was preferable ;
he only dosired that the communication with such im-
portant places as Brighton and Dover should be as safe,
as commodious, and as cheap as possible. At the same
time that he would not give any opinion between the two
measures, he thought that the Croydon Company
ought to be allowed a chance of coming before the
House, to show that they were able to give as good
accommodation to the public as the Greenwich Com-
pany could be enabled, by their Bill, to give, without
any increased expense.
Mr. HUMP HERY seconded the motion.

Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL was glad to
hear his Noble Friend acknowledge that the Standing
Orders' Committee had acted strictly upon the orders.
In the applications for the two Bills it had been stated
that the only object sought in the enlargement of the
terminus was the safety of the lives of her
Majesty's subjects. Now, there were two Bills before
the House professing the same object. In the case cf
the Croydon Railway Bill the Standing Orders had not
been complied with, In the other, the Greenwich
Railway Bili, the Orders had been in every respect
fully complied with, knowing that the object which both
Bills professed to hate in view, namely, the safety of
the pubic, would be secured by the one in which
the Orders had been obeyed.—(Hear, hear.)
The Committee had of course, reported untll-
- of the other. The two Bills were no:
aece•-sary. If the Croydon Company wished t,
suggest anything which was omitted in the Bill of the
other Company, or objected to anything which that
Bill contained, the Committee on the Greenwich Rail-
way- Enlargement Bill would receive their suggestim.,
and would not, he was sure, consent to anything by
which the Croydon Railway Company, or the public,
could be injured.

Mr. HODGES said that if there were before tie
House no other Bill for the same object than that to
which the motion referred, the motion ought to b,,
agreed to. But as there was another Bill for precisely the
same object, and as the parties who applied for the Bib
against which the Standing Orders Committee had re-
ported, would have an opportunity of submitting their
peculiar views to the Committee on the Greenwich
Company's Bill, the House ought not to consent to the
proceeding with a second Bill, which would only entail
great deal of unnecessary expense upon the parties.
Sir G. STRICKLAND thought that the im-
portance of adhering to the Standing Orders was lost
sight of in this discussion. The way in which private
property was interfered with by railways, had been
telt to be a great grievance, and the Railway Com-
mittee saw no means of checking it, but by in-
sisting upon the long notices. The Greenwich Com-
pany gave their notic,s at the time required, that is,
in February ; whereas, the Croydon Company did
not give theirs until so late as November.
He could see no grounds for allowing the standing
orders to be dispensed with in suali a case. It was said
that by the present arrangement there was much
danger to the public, but it was to be remembered that
there was another Bill before the House which in-
tended to provide a remedy, and the Standing Orders
had all been complied with. The land proposed to be
taken belonged to the Greenwich Company, and why
should not they be protected in their property as well as
other persons ?

- -
Mr.. FRES HFIELD—The great inconvenience and
danger was that the Croydon carriages had to pass both
the up and down line of the Greenwich Railway
It was true that the Greenwich Company had a Bill
before the House, but the probability was that they
would not proceed to put it in force, unless the Croy-
don Company succeeded in obtaining their Bill. The
question was, whether the House would give protec_
tion to the public or not. He thought the only manner
in which that protection could be given was by agreeing
to the motion of the Noble Lord.
Mr. D ARBY said there had not been time for
tie Croydon Company to serve the proper notices since
the report of the Railway Communication Committee.
He thought that Bill was an exception to the rule,
and he would have much pleasure in supporting the
motion of his Noble Friend.
Alderman HUMPHERY said he should vote for
going before a Committee.
Mr. HAWES said it was not merely a struggle be-
tween two Railway Companies, but one in which
the public interests were concerned. He thought it
very unfair that a Company which was very objection-
able orieinally, should now wish to restrict three or
four large Companies to a single line of communi-
cation He hoped the House would consent to waive
the Standing Orders. Sir Thomas Fremantle
said it was the intention of the Committee that am-
ple time should be given to parties whose land
was taken. In this case the required notice had not
been given. It appeared to him that if there ever was
a case in which the Standing Order should be main-
tained, it was this one. It was not sufficient that the
Company would pay for it. The charge was matter of
detail fora Committee.

Mr. KEMBLE said the Company were not applying
for their own advantage, but that of the public.
Lord SANDON observed that if the parties were
defeated upon this question, the result would be that
all communication to London from Brighton, Croydon,
and Dover, would be obstructed. He thought that
was a sufficient reason to induce the House to agree to
the motion.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. HINDE made a few observations that were
not heard in the gallery.
Mr. ESTCOURT contended that no case of over-
whelming public necessity had been made out for the
suspension of the Standing Orders in this case. The
House had the satisfaction of knowing that if
the Greenwich Company did not realize that which
they professed, the time would come when the Croydon
Railway Company would be able to effect all their
objects.
Lord SEYMOUR said that the Standing Orders
had been created for enabling individuals who had
property through which any line was to pass to have
notice, so that they might be able to maintain their own
rights against the combined power of capitalists. All
that the Committee desired was the question should come
ly before them, and then it could be decided.
Mr. B. WOOD said the terminus of this Railway
came into the Borough he represented, and he wished
to state that the Croy don Itiilway passed the Green-
wich every hour of the day, and accidents were of fre-
quent occurrence. Did not this prove the public neces-
sity for a new line. And unless the two lines went into
the Committee together, there could be no benefit either
to the parties or the public.
Mr. B ARN ARD—
(amid loud calls for a division)
—was understood to speak against the motion.
The House then divided, when the numbers were—
For the motion 95
Against the motion
Majority ............ —73