The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-20 00:00:00

/\\

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVEN IN MARCH 20, 1848.

amourt of advantages in ether respects should be see
cured to the pupli.c. He did.-- therefore, trust that the
result of the proposed regulations would be to prove
as advantageous to the public as that would be which
w‘euld be likely to result from that intended by the Bir-
mtreeham Grand Junction.
Aft-. lIATTER said that, year after year, Bills were
moved fter, which so continually had the effect of un-
doing what had been done before, that it was very dif-
ficult for Hon. Members to know what they were
actually about. Now, he would esk what were the
eteetintal upon which the lion. Member for Triverwss had
founded his motion ? He said he conceived that the
public were not yet sufficiently protected, and that those
engaged in railway projects made enormous proits. A
Committee was appointed to inquire into this subject, •
and they made a report as to the results of their profits
in the year 1832, and two or three following years.
The Hon. Member then referred to the appendix of the
report, by which he said it appeared that the owners of
railways realised a dividend of nct more than 5 1-3 d.
per cent. Tnere was another point upon which not one
word had been said, namely, the taxes paid by railways
to Government, which amounted to 5 per cent. upon the
gross receipts of all railways, from which the public de-
rived a certain amount of benefit. What did that
amount to in the uggregats ? He would leave the
Horeie to judge, by instancing the case of one • line of
railway. In the year 1839, the tax of this description
paid by the Great Western Railway Company amounted
to 22,2291. In the years following, the sum was more in
each year ; but, in the year 1845, the sum paid by the'
eompany alone as a tax to Government was 30,0001 ;
and yet it had been said that those companies conferred
no benefit upon the public Then there were the poor
rates, and county rates, and other taxes of that descrip
tion ; of those taxes the Great Western alone paid
80,000/. in one year, besides other taxes of a description
which no other class of property paid. The Hon. Mem-
ber for Inverness appeared to be an advocate for the
truck system. Well, in Belgium the railways paid no
taxes of any sort, m.d in France they were wry nearly
free from taxation, or, at least, a rail. road paid only the
same amount of tax 23 any other: road, and they paid nt
direct tax to '-the Government. Now, he would ask,
which was the best system of the two ? In France, a
line, after an existence of thirty-seven years, became the
property of the Government. Now, taking the 30,0001.
a-year paid by the Great Western Company to the Go-
vernment as a. tax, that. for thirty-seven years would
amount to over 3,000,000/., and this was one of the ad
vantages derivable to the Government of this country
from rail-roads, of which the French Government lcnev.
nothing. Then, with regard to branches. Many of
them did not pay the company for their outlay, or at
least the only chance the company had of their paying
was by the traffic which the main line should bring upon
them. On those ground's„ then he would say that the
present system was the best that could he devised, and,
therefore, he would be sorry that a Committee should be
granted.to disturb it. •
Lord EBRINGTON said that the Hon. Member who
had just sat down: omitted to state that the French Go-
vernment had the advantage of having their mails trans-
mitted gratuitously by the railways, which he (Lord
Ebrington) thought gave a very fine set-off against the
French companies not paying a tax to their Government.
And as to what had been said about the amount of em-
ployment given by railways, although their labourers
were paid high wages, their wages were squandered,
while they bore no proportion to the low rate of wages
paid to the neighbouring agricultural labourer.

Mr. AGLIONBY stild that the railway projectors
deserved great thanks for the generous expenditure of
limey that they had engaged in ; but at the same time
no person could doubt that they had not interested mo-
tives in such outlay. However, he should congratulate
the public, and also the Hon. Gentleman, on the advan
ogres that were likely to accrue from the result of his
motion.

Mr. ENTWISLE would merely content himself
with making a suggestion that had long been before his
mind. Ile could not deny that it was inconsequence of
the system of legislation pursued by that House that the
present amount of speculation in railway projects ex-
isted ; and had a more judicious course been pursued, he
ventured to state that not one-half those schemes would
then be before them.—(Hear, hear) His suggestion
therefore was, that the present Committee should adopt
some uniform description of decision on the subject,
and then the same amount of wild speculation would
not exist. With that view he thought there should
be some preliminary tribunal established so as to put an
end to such speculation. He did not of course mean
that the H. use should give up its jurisdictiou, but that
some tribunal possessing an uniformity of decision should
be established.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME felt bound to express his satisfaction
that the Government should have consented to the ap-
pointment of the Cothmttee moved for, as, however
beneficial the lines of railway might have been hereto-
fore to the public, they certainly were much more ad•
vantageous. to the- shareholders. They had this evi-
dence (rein ether ceentrica.from France in particular,
that by the system which they adapted, they were not
elone enabled to pay a laige per centage. on the capital,
but also to contribute meterially to the discharge of the
natienel debt. Now, in -his opinion, if a proper system
were .adoptsd in thie'contitrk, they could also be enabled
to paY off a large portion of their national debt —([Fear,
hear.) He was of opinion that no harm could come of
inquiry. He was as much opposed as any man to a
breach of faith with the public, but he felt himself bound
to give his support to the motion of the lion. Gentleman
for a Committee ; and he hoped the inquiry would be
conducted with all fairness, and with a desire to fur-
nish all information possible on the subject.—(Hear.)
Mr. I'. STEWART would admit that the House could
not be too cautious in proceeding on the suhjsct before
it, but at the same time he felt bound to say that, in his
opinion, the present motion should rather have emanated
from the Government than from the Hon. Member for
Inverness. Nov what was the object of the Committee
then inoveror ? Was the Committee to suggest the
enactment /of some measure to prevent all future specu-
lation in railway enterprise?—(hear, hear.) Ile could
now go 400 miles to his own house in one-third of the
time, and at one third of the expense, that he was for-
merly liable to. If the Hon. Member would apply the
French system to luggage, and add to that the present
payment of 10 per cent., he would be very glad to con-
tinue the present principle. He would take the London
and Birmingham Railway as an instance. From London
to Rugby the distance was 84 miles. In the first class
the fare was I4s. 6d., in the second 10s., and the third
class 6s. Iod. The distance from Paris to Rouen was
83 miles, and the fare in the Ist class was 16 francs.
The fare in the second class was 10d. dearer than the
second class from London to Rugby, and the third class
amounted to Bs. 4d. against 6s. 10d. for English fare.
The average of fares in France was more
than in England. Wore they nrepared to
to adopt the French system--it would be no doubt a
great improvement if it could be done constitutionally ;
but look at the vast sums of money spent by the English
railway companies in fighting through the difficulties at-
tendant on their formation. Was he wrong in saying
that the London and York Railway Company, not having
got their Bill, had spent nearly half a million.—(Several
[lon. Members, " No, a quarter.")—Well, it might be a
quarter, but he still thought it was more. There was
the West Yorkshire line, which he had before him in
Committee last session; that company was now coming
on for their Bill, having spent nearly 200,0001. without
having obtained it. Under the French system, the bed
where the line was to be planted was given over. The
company went on to work the line for a certain number
of years under a tariff, and it was then given back to
them. The French were 16 years later in starting the
railway system than the English, and. the English had
to use their capital to work their way. We could now
ride over 3,000 miles of railway, while they could only go
over 300. Let the English copy from them what was
good, but reject all that was otherwise. With regard to
his Hon. Friend's expo 4 of the French system, his Hon.
Friend did not seem to know how that system was
framed. Ilis Hon. Friend, in speaking of the London
and Birmingham and the Great Western, mentions them
elightingly. Was it proper to.speak lightly with refer-
ence to two great bodies who had been of so much utility
to the public? Neither did- his Hon. Friend seem to be
in favour of the principle of
.amalgamation ; but
he (Mr. Patric* Stewart) . know that ainelga-
elation had the effect of lowering the rates of charge—
allowing of increased speed and increased acCominolation
to the public. In fact there was.only ono instance to the
contrary, and the principle pursued in that instance
possibility of improvement; He did
in7o:(t:i
thinkepe
epreclude
thiselconstantly
est discussiona thentl
y meddling a t a w
all premature, t
a g rea great eicnisutiteu institution,
and seeking in the dark for something which they knew
would be better than the present system, without know-
ing where to find it. If the Government gave his Hen.
Friend the Committee which he asked, they would have
something like final legislatioe, a legislition that would
last for years; but, unless they constructed the Commit-
tee in a superior way it would do more harm than good.
There would be constant jealousy and interference, and
the reason would ba because each line would envy its
neighbour—judging on the same reasons which Fulton
said induced a man to envy his neighbour, namely, that
he compared the inside of his own possessions with
the outside of his.neighbour's, which appeared to look
beter, as appearances were always fair.
Lord WORSLEY said that great attention would be
given to this subject when the Committee was named,
which should investigate it. Although he did not know
the lion. Member for Inverness, he knew that his obser
vations had suggested some preliminary inquiry should
take place outside the House, which inquiry would
prevent the labour falling so heavily on Hon. Members.
He could not help thinking that her Majesty's Govern-
ment could find some tribunal which would perform the
duties now performed by Hon. Members. There were
new forty-two Members on the Committees, and their
duties were most arduous ; would it not be bet er to
have some competent engineer to examine into the diffe
rent features of the lines—such as gradients—precious
to the sessions? That person should be one in whom
great confidence could be reposed.. Such a proceeding
would save great labour, and the Committees would
at once be able to take into consideration the various
schemes that might be submitted to them. There was
another point to which he was anxious to call the atten-
tion of the House, in consequence of the change which
had been made in the Committees this sessions, namely,
that the traffic on land should not be inquired into by
Committees on railways. It was true, that under
the old system very many exaggerated statements
had been made, but the persons objecting to the railway
had every opportunity of exposing any such attempt on
the part of the undertaking. It was true that although
traffic was not to be inqutred into, the principal towns
on the line from which the' traffic was to be expected
should be laid before the Committee. He did think that
tee much importance was attached to thin opinion,
that too much money would be invested in railway spe-
culations from the state of the money-market. Direc
tors, in the event of their obtaining their Bill, would
make no immediate eel!, and if they did it would not
be exorbitant; he also thought that no company start-
ing with large capital could, if they were to order new

engines, get them made for two or three years, for there
was suoh a. demand upon the en7ina makers, that unless
it were to oblige some old established company they
could not make any. Under the circumstances he cer-
tainly thought it was necessary that some improvements
should be made in the manner of disposing of these
railway
Sir GEORGE GREY said, that in the course of the re-
marks that had fallen from his Hon. Friend (Mr. Stewart) he
had observed that he spoke of amalgamation as not a beneficial
practice. He believed that it was a most important question.
His Hon. Friend, the Chairman of the Committee of Classi-
fication, the other night, on the part of his Committee, called
the attention of the Government to this subject, and put a
question to the President of the Board of Trada, in order to
ascertain what where the views of the Government on this
point.

- Mr. P. STEWART said he did not say that amalgamation
was not beneficial.
Fir R. PEEL said that there was a point of considerable
importance, which he had not heard referred to in this dis-
cussion. Ihe Hon. Gentleman would take into Committee
views which would be in conformity with the principles laid
down in his pamphlet, which showed great research, and
directed the attention of the public to many points of railway
legislation to which no atten ion had previously been given.
The Hon. Gentleman was under -the impression that great
errors had been committed in the railway legislation of this
country. The Hon. Gentleman asked—might it not be de-
sirable to establish some tariff on all railways seeking the in-
tervention of Parliament? and said that it was a question
whether it would not be di sirable to adopt a fresh system,
so as to give to each company newly formed only a temporary
interest in the possession of the railway. In order to illustrate
these subjects, the Hon. Gentleman would liy before the Com-
mittee every information connected with foreign railways.
Considerable time might elapse before the Committee gave
any opinion, and what was to be done with regard to
the railway Bills now in progress? It appeared to him
that this was a subject to which the Committee at once directed
their attention. It teas quite clear that Parliament had the
right to correct as error, and apply new principles to new rail-
way companies seeking the intervention of Parliament, and
there was every opportunity of now trying the question. Where
existing companies applied for power to amalgamate with other
companies, the house might have a right to impose some new
restriction on that line, if it sought for any extended powers.
The House could suspend its legislation in these cases until the
report of the Committee was made, and could put into each
Bill a clause subjecting the company to any regulation which
Parliament might make in consequence of the report of the
Committee, in order to affect the interest of the company in the
railway. The Bills giving those companies a permanent in-
terest in those railways could have a clause in them,
restricting their powers—a clause enabling Parliament
to terminate the interest of the company in twenty
years. There had been a legislation framed for these
railways since, but a few years had changed the aspect of
things. New alterations and new lights had came forth, and
it was not to be wondered at, since two years ago no one ever
contemplated the possibility of having such a number of rail-
ways as they bad at the present time, and it should be for Par-
liament to institute new regulations to suit that increase. It
is important to know the best means of serving the public
without interfering too far with the application of individual
capital, and on this ground I have no objection to the appoint-
ment of the Committee.—( Hear, hear. )
Lord J. RUSSELL, who, in his opening observations, was
inaudible in the gallery from the noise that prevailed at the
bar,said
hadth e
xp d great eR
shste
fearßaro net, at the beginning of the
cession,respecting the application of
the large amount of capital subscribed for railway projects,
lest it should damage seriously the commercial transactions of
the country. Nevertheless it seemed the Government had re-
commended nothing to meet the evil apprehended. Nothing ap-
peared to have been done beyond the plan for conducting rail-
way business acted upon last session. The question before
them was ono of great importance, as it involved the application
of a large amount of capital to railway purposes in the present
year. It would have been much better if they had taken the
subject into consideration at the commencement of the session
instead of leaving it for inquiry to a Select Committee.—( Hear,
hear.) He (Lord John Russell) had been led to believe that
the Right Hon. Baronet had in view, when he made his state-
mentnio'some general
respecting the large
sum that was proposed to be expended in this way.—( Hear,
plan as
a ons t
o railwaysw hat
the at
Government the begi mi n beginning
intended o f the se
hear.) As that had not yet been done, ho hoped when the
Cosommittee was appointed. with the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Chancellor of tne Exchequer as one of its members, that
he would state his views with respect to railways generally, as
to the best course it was advisable to pursue.--( Hear, hear. )
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
question was of a twofold character. One had relation to the
influence which the large amount of capital proposed to be ex-
pended on railways would have on the money-market, and the
other relating to competition between lines of railway and the
accommodation of the public. With respect to the first, the
circumstances which had led to the fears expressed at the
beginning of the session were now somewhat
changed. Those fears arose from the large sums that were
proposed to be expended in this way, amounting, according to
the Bills before the public, to neatly 800 millions of money.
799 millions was, at the beginning of the session, the total
amount, on which his Right Hon. Friend made his statement as
supposed
to be required for the various railway schemes pro-
jected. Certainly, if Bills involving that sum had come before
the railway Committees, there would have been a necessity for
taking some extraordinary measures to prevent the cells to in.
dividuals and to the country that must have resulted from the
t,o rapid application of capital to the purposes of these Bills.
since the period that he had referred to the Bills had been re-
duced to one-half of the whole, by the operation of the standing
orders' and other causes, and of this number many no doubt
would not be brought into action. The case therefore was dif-
ferent now to what it was at the former period to whleh he re-
ferred, and induced the Government to forbear interfering with
thus capital of private undertakings. There no longer existed
that necessity for the interference of the Parliament which was
at one time apprehended, and it nes thought best to leave to
the discretion of the Select Committees the selection of those
ines beat calculated to serve the public accommodation. With
regard to the (leaden for the investigation of which the pre-
sent Committee was appointed, he would say that he was
prepared to attend, and, to the best of his ability, endeavour to
develop facts for the information of the Heim. Respecting
what was said about the superior advantages of the French
plan, he would not then given an opinion. He would not an.
ticipite the question, but go into the Committee with every
disposition to adopt the best plan to secure the end in view—
to protect the public against the effects of monopoly, and at
the same time to act fairly towards those who had embarked
capital in railways.—(Hear. )
Mr..BARING thought that something should be done to
met the evil complained of, and to facilitate railway business.
He thought it would be of considerable advantage if it could
be arranged for joint Committees of the two Houses to sit en
Bills, instead of their passing through separate Committees, to
the great loss of time.

The LORD ADVOCATE said the origin of the burdens
com,,lained of was not known, and not connected with the ex-
chAsive privileges.
Mr. HUME did not know why. the Lord Advocate could
not abolish these burdens by the Bill.
The LORD ADVOCATE said the Hon. Gentleman could
introduce a Bill himself.

The clauses were then agreed- to, and the Bill was re.
ported.

MUTINY BILL..
The House resolved itself into Committee on this Bill.
Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT proposed the following
clause :—" And whereas certain soldiers, who have hitherto
been duly enlisted, and who have voluntarily taken the oath
of allegiance ang fidelity, and are now receiving her Majesty's
pay, have been sworn and attested, but doubts have
arisen whether the justices before whom the said soldiers have
been so sworn and attested were duly qualified to administer
to such soldiere the oaths prescribed by the several Acts passed
for the punishing mutiny and desertion, and for the better
payment of the army and their quarters : be it enacted, that
in every Case where any such soldier, having been
duly enlisted, shall have been so attested and sworn, and
shall not have claimed to be discharged on or before the seven-
teenth day of March, 1846, he shall not be entitled to his dis-
charge by reason of such informality, but shall be liable to al
the provisions of this Act, and of the Act passed during thel
and for the better payment of the army and their
last session of Parliament, for the punishing mutiny and de-
sertion,
quarters, where in force, and shall be entitled to the full benefit
of his past service, and to all pay and pension in respect thereof,
to all intents and purposes, and in like manner as if he had
been duly attested and sworn."
After a few words from Mr. HUME and Capt. LAYARD, the
Bill went through Committee, and the House having resumed,
the report was ordered to be brought up to-morrow.
MARINE MUTINY BILL.
On the question being put that the Speaker do leave the
Chair for going into committee on this Bill,
Sir. C. NAPIER rose, and said he did not intend to oppose
the Speaker leaving the Chair, but before going into co-
mittee, he wished to ask the rn
overnment whether there was
any intention to revise the articles of war. Many of those
articles were repugnant to his feelings as a naval officer, and
while some of them rendered men liable to be punished without
the ordeal of a court-martial he thought they were highly objec-
tionable. For instance, a sailor who fell asleep on the watch was
liable to the punishment of death, and he believed this article
was framed upon the principle that a sentry on shore was under
similar circumstances liable to the same punishment. There
was, however, no comparison between the two cases, for a ship
on the sea was not open to an immediate attack, like a military
post on shore. The articles of war ought therefore to be
revised, and he for one wished to see them more humanised than
they were at present

I CORKY nes not aware that there was any intention
on the part of Government to alter the articles or war, as they
at they at present stood.
Mr. HUME objected to the reply of the Hon. Member,
and thought that the Government ought to hold out some
hope that the articles of war would be at ne distant period so
revised as to make them in accordance with humanity and com-
mon justice.
The House then went into Committee on the Bill.
On the first clause being proposed,
Mr. HUME rose, and objected to their proceeding further
unless a more favourable answer was given to the question of
the Hon. and Gallant Member for Marylebone. The articles
of war were certainly not in accordance with the spirit of the
age, and as the punishment of death had almost been, abolished
in our criminal courts, it aught to be removed from the naval
articles of war.

Sir GEORGE COCKBURN said no difficulty of this sort
had ever arisen before, nor had it ever been found impracticable
to carry out the articles of war. The Hon. and Gallant
Member complained that men were frequently punished without
being subject to the ordeal of a court-martial ; but the Hon.
Member forgot that it was competent for the man to demand
being tried by such a tribunal.

Mr. HORSMAN referred to the Committee that sat in
1844 on this question. They were told then that the fares
would be regulated by what the coach fares had previously
been, and that the regulation of railway tariffs should keep this
point in view. This he disputed. An engine could do the
work of two thousand horses, and a train taken from London
to Birmingham would cost only 261. It was, therefore, evident
the rate of fares was extravagant. It was a fact that the in-
terests of the public and the railway companies are opposed.
It is the interest of the public that passengers should be
carried at a low rate, while it is the interest of the companies
to carry few passengers at a high rate. It was then also given
he evidence that the effect of amalgamation was invariably to
raise prices. There was a case in point referred to, he be-
lieved, by the Hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Hudson)—
the Midland, Birmingham, and Derby line—in which the di-
rectors said the object of the amalgamation was to raise the
fares. When he (Mr. Horsman) compared the lines of the
south on the subject of fares with those of the north, he saw
great difference. The Hon. Member for Renfrewshire (Mr.
P. Stewart) stated a fact respecting a line with which he was
associated (the Glasgow and Greenock Railway), in which
first-class passengers were carried for lid. a mile, second-
class at ltl., and third-class at id., running the trains at the
rate of 2d miles an hour, against the formidable competition of the
river Clyde, and yet the secretary stated that they were doing
well; yet this line had cost 30,000/. As had been stated by
the Right Hen. Baronet, in his unanswerable speech at the
beginning of the session, it was to be hoped great attention
would be taken to prevent their going beyond the resources of
the country, and that no railway Bills would be passed but
what were really required by the urgent neeessities of the
country, and of which there was some certainty of their being
beneficially carried into effect.—(Hear, hear.) But the ques-
tion now was—were they performing their duties to the public?
It might happen that a railway once commenced would be
left unfinished, and it would only he in such a case that they
could conceive the great misfortune of passing Acts for the
completion of which there was no money, nor other resources.
Let them conceive an individual proprietor, through whose
lands a railway passed—a railway that at first, perhaps, was
viewed by him with great apprehension. That railway, once
begun, was uncompleted ; and this, too, after gangs of la-
bourers had traversed his grounds. Under such circumstances,
they were sanctioning lines to the extent of two or three times
the resources of the country, not only thereby inflicting an in-
jury on the country generally, but cn each individual mem-
ber of it.

Sir CHARLES NAPIER said, in the whole course of his
experience, he had never heard of a man who had been sen-
tenced to a punishment by a superior officer demanding to be
tried before a court-martial previous to his sentence being
carried into effect. Had a man done so, he believed it would
have been deemed a presumptive act, and he would have ren-
dered himself liable to further punishment for it.
Sir GEORGE COCKBURN having made a few further
observations, being, in fact, similar to those which he had pre-
viously made,
Sir CHARLES NAPIER gave notice that he intended
bringing forward some measure to remove the grievances which
be complained of.
Captain LAYARD, having made a few observations as to
the unnecessary severity of the present law, and the extra
powers of punishment which were given to the captains of the

After a few word from Mr. WAWN,
Mr. MORRISON replied. The giving an uniform scale to
railways was a matter that required early and deep.considera-
tion. What they had to complain of at present was a want of
system, and it was with a view of remeaying this evil that he
moved for the present Committee. He had no idea of reply-
ing to all the remarks of Hon. Members during that evening,
but he could not help saying that it was rather unfair for the
Hon. Member for Renfrewshire to compare the Rouen Rail-
way, the dearest line in France, with the London and Bir-
mingham, which was universally allowed to be the cheapest.
It was curious, too, to hear Gentlemen connected with rail-
ways complaining f interference. Why, their very existence
depended on their interference with the rights of others; and
it was still more curious to hear the Hon. Member for Sunder-
landbme assured, no later
some general
general system of
speak of the rights of competition, when he himself, with
so many others, brought before the House so many amalgama-
fo timer
he that
ilad so
farest io n ischhoeuml
de s. It
wasestablished, high
than that day, that a railway com;any to Windsor intended to
found a town on Hounslow Heath, for the benefit of the work-
ing clasies of London, to which they might be conveyed for
twopence, and back again at the same rate. This surely would
be
be better than living in the purlieus of Whitechapel, and such
like places, and perhaps walking three miles to their work
besides.
The Committee was then agreed to,
INDIA POST-OFFICE.
Mr. HUME moved for returns of the receipt and expendi-
ture of the post-office at each of the Presidencies of Bengal,
Madras, and Bombay, under separate heads, for each of the
years 1842 and 1843; of the number of letters, packages, and
newspapers, dispatched from and received by each af the post-
offices at Calcutta, Agra, Madras, and Bombay, is each day,
for the period of one month in 1816.—Agreed to.
AFFAIRS OF MALTA.

The subject dropped, and the Bill was read a second time,
and ordered to be committed.

The Fever (Ireland) Bill was then read a third time, and
passed.
The House adjourned at Half-past Eleven.

FIOUSE OF LORDS, March 19.
The Earl cf SHAFTESBURY took his seat on tho Wool-
sack at Five o'clock.

THE MIDLAND GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.
Lord
.BROUGHAM presented a petition : from a
landed proprietor in Galway against the Midland Great
Western Railway. He moved that the petition be re-
ferred to the Committee on the Bill.
IRISH GREAT WESTERN.

The NOBLE AND LEAUNED LORD also presented a peti-
tion from. the tindertalccrs-of the. Grand Canal, Ireland,
praying that they might be heard by counsel against
the Great Western ;• and a. petition-from Thomas Berry,
a proprietor in the same Company.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
Lord DACRE presented a petition against this Bill.
DIRECT -PO wrs mOUT AND EPSOM, AND

DORKING RAILWAYS.
Lord CAMPBELL said he had two petitions to pre-
sent, in which he took ft lively interest, against these
railways, from a lady of the highest respectability—the
widow of the late Under-Secretary for Ireland, Mr>
Drummond. She stated that she was now the
proprietrix of a beautiful estate, near Ledwell (as
we understood), in the county of Surrey, which was
formerly the property of Mr. Richmond Sbarp—(Herr,
hear, from Lord Brougham)—who he believed was well
known to his Hon. and Learned Friend. This estate
commanded the most beautiful prospect in the world.
Now, he was of opinion that her rights were by no
means respected, because she was a widow, as the Direct
Portsmouth and Epsom and Dorking Railways were
projected to run through the very heart of her estate,
which in that part was laid out in mo 4
beautiful plantations, upon an elevation of fifteen feet.
This he cone:ived to be a very great hardship, and he
tructed that such spoliation would not be permitted. It
was a mere mockery to speak of compensation in
such a case as this. If the late Mr. Drummond
were alive no such aggression would be attempted, and
therefore he (Lord Campbell) hoped that whatever
Committee should have charge of the Bill they would
take care of the rights of the petitioner.

GT a copy of the
orders Governor of Malta,
Mr. HUME moved for an address, that her Artjesty would
be pleased s
trPatrick Stuart,s
to lay betfuoarr, et the
the
lland by Mr. Selby, officer of police in that island, interfering
graciisosuueldy h
with the amusements of the people in that island at the car-
nival, in February last; and, also, copies of any dispatches or
reports that may exist conczrning the riots that took place in
Malta on the 2'2d of February last.—Agreed to.

AFFAIRS OF THE COLONIES.
Mr. IIUSIE moved for a copy of the rules issued by the
Colonial Land and Emigration Commissioners, dated the 27th
day of october, 1843, and sanctioned by the Secret ry of State
for the Colonies, relating to the immigration of Chinese labou-
rers from the British settlements in the Straits of Alalacca into
the colonies of Guiana, Trinidad, and Jamaica. Copy of a dis-
patch addressed by Lord Stanley to the Governor of Jamaica,
dated the 26th day of October, 1843 (No. 160), relating to
contracts with labourers. Copy of any dispatch addressed to
the governor of Trinidad, disi3owing an ordinance passed by
the Council of Government of that Colony, on the 29th day of
January, 1843, for regulating the relative rights and duties of
masters and servants.—Agreed to.
BURGHS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
. .

The Houle then resolved itself into Committee on this Bill.
Mr. HUME said this Bill was intended to abolish certain
monopolies possesied by the Guilderies, and he thought it
ought at the same time to abolish certain burdens which had
been imposed in oonsequenc© of these monopolies. For in-
stance, certain trades were compelled at certain times of the
year to Act as guards to the magistrates.