The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-03 00:00:00

were to pass in order that their Lordships might better under-
stand why these Bills had been referred in a group to the
Committee, and not as separate Bills. It would be
remembered that in a former session of Parliament
two Bills had been passed, one called the South-Western, and
the other the Waterford and Limerick, which crossed the first
line. and so into Limerick. One of the Bills he was now ad-
verting to came out of the South-Western;about half way
between Limerick and Dublin, and went down to the town of
Nenagh. The other, the Templemore, came out of the
South-Western, somewhat further down; and proceeded
on to Nenagh also. The Limerick and Killaloe proceeded en
the left bank of the Shannon in the same district, and the
consequence was that this portion of country was supplied with
more railways than even the busiest manufacturing districts of
England. Their Lordships would see that it was hardly pas-
sible that:these lines could have a profitabe traffic, and, indeed,
it was very questionable whether the communication at
present existing between Dublin and Limerick was not
amply sufficient for every one. With regard to the Limerick
and Killaloe and the Great Munster Railway, a singular ar-
rangement existed, namely, that if the latter line did not buy
up the land required by them down the left bank of the Shannon,
power would be given to the Limerick Railway to commence
the construction of their works. By this arrangement the public
were left in doubt which of these lines would really be made.
He thought he had shown that this country could not main-
tain two lines ; he, indeed, did not know the country suffi-
ciently well to say whether the town of Nenagh required a di-
rect communication with the South-Western or not, but it was
evident enought that a town of some 8,000 inhabitants could not
maintain two lines. He would move, therefore, that these Bills
be referred back to the Committee, with a distinct understand-
ing that the district should be taken into consideration in the
event of their passing one of the lines. Before concluding
these remarks, he would merely state his opinion that a
little mistake had arisen with respect to the propriety
of passing as many Irish Railway Bills as possible,
in order to give employment to the people.—(Hear.)
By having a multitude of Bills which were not of a profitable
nature it would be found that parties would not eome forward
with the money when the calls were made, and the lines con-
sequently would not go on. So far, therefore, from its being
desirable to have many railway Bills for Ireland on the ground
of giving employment, he considered it desirable rather that
there should be few, and the few in each district
If there were already railways in course of construction in any
district, it would be desirable not to trouble them with any
more. That, however, was no ground for throwing out good
Bills that were bona fide profitable schemes, and were brought
forward by persons of standing and respectability. He con-
cluded by moving that the Bills be referred back to the
Committee.
Lord KENYON, who had been chairman of the Committee,
concurred in the propriety of the motion which had been just
made by the Noble Lord. When the Bills had been referred
to the Committee, each Bill had been takeo by itself,
which had been the course always pursued by the Committees
of their Lordship's House. The Noble Lord hadnow stated the
objections why such a course should be interfered with, in re-
ference to those Bills. That Committee investigated the
merits of the Bills, and reported the opinion they entertained
of them to their Lordship's house. Any mistake, however,
that had arisen was not chargeable to the Committee, Lot rather
to their Lordships, who were the only parties to blame in the
matter. There was no doubt that it was important to find employ-
ment for the people of Ireland; but, besides that reason, the line
pjoposed would form a complete connexion with the city of
Dublin on the West of Ireland. If the Bills were referred to
the same Committee—and he could bear witness to the dili-
g'ence with which that Committee had attended to the
matters referred to them then they should receive
such instructions as to prevent their committing such a
mistake as they had done. fhey had got all the evidence neces-
sary for the Bills already, and they should endeavour as far as
possible not to put the parties to any additional expense.
Lord HAWARDEN said there was no doubt that it was
important to supply that district of Ireland with railway ac-
commodation ; but it should be done with due regard to the
commercial success of the undertakings sanctioned.
Lord BEAUMONT said it would appear from the evidence
given before the Committee that these Bills were all useful
ones and that the more railways that were made in Ireland the
better for that country. But then he would ask what could be
the use of sending these Bills back to the Committee ? It
could be of no use unless additional evidence was to be had ;
and it was to be supposed that all the evidence that could be
had was laid before the Committee in the first instance.
Lord MONTEAGLE said he looked upon this as a most im-
portant question, not only as it affected Ireland, but as it
affected the principle upon which the Legislature had
acted in reference to railway projects generally.
("JUT sirram