The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-14 00:00:00

1,0?!1!• A IMI
111irgirgeriNES.
.1_ I -I-4

(YESTERDAY.)

Sub-rnniittee No. 1.
This Committee met to-Coday at twelve o'clock ; Mr. Strutt,
Chlirruari.
atijThe Committxe tornmented the business by calling on the
oureed case of the
LEICE37:IIII, AND Emnrona).
r. BURKE appeared on several petitions against the Bill.
The allegations were that the standing orders had not been
complied with, inasmuct, as the property of the petitioners
Ives not properly marked on the plans and sections.
A few
overr of these allegatioLe were sustained and the others
uled: -
11r. BURKE next proCeeded on the _petition of a Mr.
turner, a landowner on the line.
Dlr. COATES objected to the petition being gone into. The
Petitioner, Air. Turner', had on the previous evei.glpetitio..noemd
the liouAe of Cominons to have his name withdrawn tr
thempetition—in fact he was not now an opponent.
.„ • huaKe said that he bad to complain of a non-compli-
:'nee with the stinding orders on a point which affected the
elinbjic- The survey of the property belonging to Mr. Turner
I,"'n,liot pro;:erly executed, inasmuch as the fences or
it;triticeti.,,lnaari.e.s.(ifhtish,e property was not shown on the plans an
in fact, amounted to a very grave breach of
IN randing orders, inasmuch as the plan was drawn from a
entintg, surrey, and was. calculated to mislead the Committee
* . the public. The property so drawn must have teen
etlaillg;tioinve rdhes:riinbged in the bunks of reference.
4 • Co
.... . ATES pressed upon the Committee the fact
Bill.
been iae room w withdrawn the petition against the
.
IvheeilnliecalleditriAinntas then cleared, and upon the parties having.
11, r,
MAN, after having consulted
.with Sir
4, Said 4teathcote, chairman of Sub-Committee No.
raised that the Committee had given the oint
Which tneir moat serious consideration, as it wasp. onet
were
_pigti, arise in many other inquiries. the Comnlit ee
o
the
,:)epiilion that the allegation, in so far as it applied t
kilrlV 0, should be entertained.
fields divided then called a witness to prove that several
h": 'iyided by fences were shown as one field, the fences
sit. Co altogether omitted.
ay °would • the fact of the petitioner
nig' withdraw 4 again press
lir. tu his opposition. • •
Petitien sr said that it was a point of practice where_ a
vio3 `:llas presented to the House for withdrawing a pre-
tounnPetteiti, unless the House referred such petition to the
kr. ,_
AeT, it could not weigh in the inquiry-
The 671 P.s then read the petition. . .
referred to AthitltA.,,,N said, that it was clear the petition was not
kr, co,-.-e k,unimittee, which was the usual course. _
the
IPrevious ''''ts Said that the petition was only presented
1,4 liouse7",,g, when it was ordered to lie on the table of
-,.,Committee44.st there was not time to have it referred to
4he roo •
xhittee ~e-hil was then cleared, but the decision of the Com-
*4 no das ennveyed pr. at ly to the agents. The point
allowetroule deeided ill favor of Mr. Burke, as he was
41r, 'jut° Proceed on the allegations.
°lithe ,„.rtiQ called other witnesses to shown that the fences
low'rr_ae ZePp.eart,:y. of Mr. Turner were not.
Ted. ° 'ton Was sustained, and several others were al-
tnitt4 SP!aker having been announced at prayers, the Com-
40urned till twelve o'clock on Monday.

toThis co„, 'Sub-Committee N 0.2, Cloisters 6.
\Cif! ia ti'llilitttee met to-day at twelve o'clock, Sir J. Y.
air. There were present, Messrs. Bragiston,
"eves, and G. Philips.
ttrstTle PetitionlCTZST RIDING UNION. •
144.7Itutit, 3 against this Bill were heard to-day.
_Tahneof ,
Ccito Ls that there was inaccuracy te pl .
kti shook of reference deposited with the Clerk
th . /, r the West Riding of Yorkshire.
The estateitteebrxix Proved the identity of the plans before
had bel'e wa
to net bee an —.allegation that in section 63 the tunnelling
oa H7Ol rid "'via. The inaccuracy was in the 7th furlong_
N'n-"e Le, Which not marked with a dotted line
* —s.`` Phi; in was
with the standing order
11%0 Corn •
TbleucoZit.tee considered that the standing orders had
tokit Lett ed With in this case.
~ittect e.',tegation was, that in section 55 the distance
I ee con:Nies should have been 13 miles, which the Com-
Ikea ,tctic4n, ertd sustained.
43e4Itts‘ a (168,',41,0_,? there was a similar allegation of in-
In Inl,i;"" -Committee were of opinion that in this
te3,- 'ttetioao--4'ng orders had not been complied with. _
t;,oret to the 9 ere was an allegation of inaccuracy with
4econd futderlong ou the line. In this case the
wiet°bh.sidered that the standing orders had been
atil..,ctick,
3:`'ure-ti, 4 it was a' leged that the height of the ri!il-
lie°,l!nialarieecisilrface, on the secondTiirlong of the sth mile,
"ad in
tido, Witbii question, No. 10, being proved to be a road
It ecl the atll the meaning of the Act, the Committee con-
egation sustainthe f~ ed-
iatt,4?il that in section 115 there was an error indthaet
'holljd4t, h forth as the scale of vertical measure elm
4,`,1,14v b ()R of the second mile, instead of beinge4lo,
k'Attek,,.eeti 420_
iioomea wk-' said that he would prove that theerroranin.
dootl .444
coact referable to the mechanical cause of e
44erit. °traction, but to a bona fide error -in the
to tilts; cotnt,•
thitt Lt,effeetlitttkee Considered that as there was no 11egation-
tstiv"oat,bo""at Mr. Parkes could not tender evidence on
e -t it)ight cross-examine any witness called to
svitt:'4Ett"ition.
1141111'e to-,.°441; agent to the promoters of the Bi!l, called
Ibrtc'tAso trre that the error winded to was the result of
Nolo ad to undergo in being lithographed.
toe e iz, was then cleared. On oar re-admission,
tothe l tie.B
wittert,AN said the Committee were of opinion that
!vet tlilot at liberty to give evidence with respect
Theonot "ie scales, and that the standing orders in this
bee
14
11e eNairiiri contplied with. 'h CHAIRtg allegations were of a similar charsct:er.
441.14 (;ase of•,l,it said the Committee were of opinion that
Tb,144 iio,`,lle West Riding Union Railway the standing
\.‘"ltiat gee° coin red with.
uee adjourned till Tuesday, at twelve o'clock.

tll. (',0,„ , Sub-Committee No. 4.
If 'IN, -"nltttee Mettwelve o'clock, and
betth,,. ire tee at
Members
present, Sir W.
T.,r443:4 t c,
a. gon the list. . proceeded with
11, j01:11Irman, and Messrs. H. Drummond, W.
Nkke,4.4 84)fte, and Acland.
Th. Itlltail AND yoNXIIIIIILD NORTH-
k. 13 till' 23E STERN.
ipt,,,_ ti, , , .
Ikdat -4 to -p-' for lta object the making of a line from
e
th htin pip, the 1 ft, which will be 43 miles,
et - g estimates . object
of J and Lock are
tii,h,_katlee ated at 800 0001. Messrs. ea
... ~
'are "3, and
~ age,u.s. Messrs. Dorringtou . .
Standing orders complied with.
D, This .„,
b sUrarcsaa. VALE.
tQII (it:: a nill to enable the Swansea Vale Railway Corn • li:, line. "P.i?rated under an Act of last ses:lion) to complete
Ag .12. Ini, ha estimated cost is 100,0001., the length of the
t0,:4 ts iteB. Engineer, Mr. W. JOnei Standingarrys'
r i
ot
co Ittt
/I"ed 4714',
:arratt and Walmesly.
Tit Xtr orde
.. , . t"Cttint. *IELD CHASE ROAD. .
1, er Mplied . .
he datum line was not
decided that in this Bill the stai_idingordere
.e•Pli '."ed in ~.. . . with, inasmuch, as. t
1444'14." The to any
inmade in figures, but
4. kords. e accessary reference was
fixed point, or near one of the
•
•IV Tow. '
NOTION.
13 IS .". AZID Ditarrxzsa) artr 'Xork
and
`),ti.•, i41,11.1:111 to f orrn a junction betweeni
itthoen)
and the
I'llll4 .I)ritn:tiltii
itillwway ( at_ Noorion,
make a brancha from the
ilkk tt}?4 !Tit d 11 Selby aY'Raftlre, ate, (Brldlington Branch ),,
'...tc2 inci„,,---• afield, to (Bridlington
• Bridge. The
1,;,14,1 , "'ng the branch, will he twenty-four miles, and
e,,,, 4 O-os_t is estimated at 240,000/.
,t 4 ••arhamPritary agents are Messrs Williamson and
444 gineer II ii k" h w •
Itlitc tidingI' ordersewr were aom.elied with. • '- •
~, jZ7317 AND complied
44 / L•',.,i- alrui E —24. aNII3 EAsl
ITII be, `• CAS a alvlauzlibta.TxoN.
I.,,,kik.3*ct of this Bill is as,its name
and
to form-fir
qtr:a'ttion between the Blackburn and Preston and the
Th a, .1(. • .
,
kii e p *shire. Railways.
,k, arliarnentary agents are Messrs. Dyson and Hall,
-14 t1.,.,4r3. Parkes and Co.
,r 4. '34ttill 'tile 'standing Oidees were couiplied :with.
GAS I', oli' °NrZIifiIITSHIRE'DIEDZikei.2rn. •
pro-
`t•
41- '041'4...et of this Bill was to make a line' from the pine
\I • 't , 'Somers t and Weymouth Railway at Fro . ,
1'13? ' lt?tlihiq of Somersete to- the Bristol
.andatExtehteernßigahil:
th kt• ' wili -- '
Atiu'ttati„, oh It will form a junction
ents. The
:hgitet'; aeola Mr. J. R. Hill is the engineer, and Messrs.
dart,t tos, rnford are the ParliamentaFy being
I -ta. -- Is 360,0004 the length.of the line thirty. 4 t :,,, w
h‘‘*hiell4t 114:Z4.soveral objections raised 'to this Bill: The
''lti, citaii7 Qat distinctly referred to any fixed point—
i4`l4l, 11.4td. -441 was fatal to another Bill, before-
1,, th bier, i hes
notice . were
t:,:fait‘tt'inl4ine,
,onsPercovoifesnceof Ofaer, tvl!cee .anfbsence of one
NJ', ' 4:344 e,',out a certificate was produced_ to show that.
4" N-e- kilo,: acColitit• of illness. It was said, that i _
eie
„4 ' N-1,41`t li,.'l:cit acknoWledgments of the service odf tthhEd
' r to fiti*thir '4lnced, and ultimately it was agree
stand
~ gli.
_4"scia)‘..444 other difficulties, the case should s
4I , ''..14...
kt 0 le p„ 4.- 1,V.,..
'1 ti 0 'rtle3 tu '4STEIL.V AND vircomnim•
le, 6.e". "'ls Lill not being in attendance, the case
ix-,,i,N
hi ),, - toe
4
adjourned to Monday next .
ott *5."'",.."..._...„...............,,........
, Yk • - -
ii•XET and CITY NEWS.
Iti,t' zits
411)f., k;l,7The Nt
CITY, THURSDAY EVENING.
i,IN Ph ‘inex,-4D,et; c„'1437 lqatket remains in the same unsatisfactory
tN4N -8 e, •'eeted ~-'nMercial discounts, in consequence of the cer-
t 1),,,,r;:5tb,1,4`iT4c1 unnatural state of things produeed by the
1' Irl,qt „'''rth. („,43' dePosits As matters now stand, the dis-
,"l:4 ' ",ie itli.: oen, -t,"ntry in • he said to be literally under the
'hi' It i -"qin ''' et gland aand for the first time since the pa.s-
ttt 'I ii tt. ' alit, g Acts h '
b4l "4 ba c'st new' .(1
,! ~ 'llie ~the th ess tO say that this is a state of things for
the principle come into
7,t0 atitii.7ed,„_ etit 19ugheut the coeutry were' not prepared, nor
A b ' 1414,
,".ally „'irctinistan had they any right to expect it.
,4.*1 t-q.,',1,11(1'11,,Q th"llee,l4!l.ed that sas soon as the railway deposits
k,, Sthrjeto,s
~_ their 4,...._,Mtan.t-Gen ral, all the difficulty was got
iyi la, tr, u, Icobtioe oluiCi)elediate investment in public securities
a short time been
1111,
ithliftt,tiotrp'theetirte:tserriihedvorocatnhtiactipahtade thfuartcircumstances would
ees from so investing their
'a 'l4la the ~,°t• the t3:ll4Yinki the c°aurrct ial• interest prostrate at the
ti. :ircn„.-1i..4,,k birreetors of the ißaenk of England. However ‘le-
t,, "144 4trati,;hrkes widelet,e, play be to extend accommodation, as far
, i:. e ti,,,,,
,' tii woiriii,-,Lry
.them, it is utterly impossible that such a
‘.e, !the, in olak, us.,
0_ satisfactorily throughout the country, sup-
' .4' everu.the pr.„.'i I all the appliances furnished them by their
L',ZeounVhstan, 'iota It is doubtful however, if the Directors
,' That 4ait3, e axercising thei i • e ower for the benzflt
il ke, th, D. ei.,n,....,,.__.
.r mm nse p
pr.441411,1e.,_ we 4,,,,e_owen tounder-
t, tem, '''e orre'v'slotial -C-m"
iy' 1,0 he a D rea tae , committees of some of the railway Com-
-137,
~ , ,thr, per cent., tmuk their deposits, at a rate of interest not
144 t! "mlltlll'at this f7.,5, tx months certain, or even a shorter
Int the i,' goem ;",,r the Directors have declined. New,
Zh, twice r think '' it would have removed all uncertainty
ietm .
tL fly , is a , ana ian tlie control of the money in
~., fr,,,..411,14,,_%crn.„4
~.. Which uncertainty, without such an as-
i,,'' p.:•it I,`,`,44lrita to 7 a cane for the Bank reStricting their
„7 it„etts,., e ,rue thim fl ell shun. periods as they have been hitherto
t‘k 4,"1,10,t tendef ' Yesterday and to-day the Directors have in
4 11, le cad ' their „1, t ,nereh (4.' toun_ commouation OH loan and discount to a
7rilt is lianri,ts to enter days: but that is too short a time to
6,ltit 1 their ec„;..1.411 busineer.l9tor the most ordinary engagements, andn
I'4l '4,,44 okt?rienti°l' the 14rTellts4 Xantrob;gseus raertilecsoLtsve Pctreodit•
1,,,,tit, ties, L'lta, dnek-...."'neY is not to 'be obtained Pon any terms on
bqi 1,,.1, btitine, wai'rants, &c., the discount houses that usually
At in th )14ent ors bolig completely a, a stand-still. At the
iiii a 3, e pre,., the railway dno -it • the banks of
'1 4"4 the 'le" 1'44 left them{.-i'' S WRS, made,
Lin', „ tro„ restrictions ' se.ves Hale room for further ea-
t." 44tea,.. that Few.c_ l'r'POSed by the Banking Acts preclude
4 , ~.._._.,1 i,,,.e y... 1 The matter has indeed-beeoine so serious
Hass ,si"tti.uti, nn his",
r,etliti, te ,he of Ministers. who, to do Clem
a „tr. °f rll.. ~."1",71 other persons have et mon coutemplated
es, bs, oi the ante, ' -.- •
al 11‘ ce of all speculatibn in commercial
In 'lO l' 4/,
I'g I.4the"ai---------------,11,_ Corti,/ LANYS,--.The meeting at Had
'4l 7-2_ 1.9.1 x, tile‘ (Rat has bOeen stuninoned by the Protectionist
',la to be tlietnsuizcernent of the Ministerial measure.
Amami.,

IMPERIAL PA RLTAM NT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Friday, Feb. 13.

At Five o'clock, neither thcb Lord Chancellor nor the
E,rl of Shaftesbury being in attendance, . .
Lord BROUGHAM. inquired if there cvas any ob-.
jeetion to L rd D nman offieiatinm instead?
N": 1 being talten bv their Lordships,.
Loi.l DEN-m t,ok his seat ou.the Woolsack.
FRO.IEC LION TO AGRICULTURE. •

Earl SOMERS presented two petitions from occupiers
of land, and other persons residing inthe countyof Here-
ford, against the proposed withdrawal of agricultural
protection. The'petitioners stated they were appreliiii-
sive that great evils would, in consequence, fall not oily
on'the agricultural interest, but on as classes of her
Maj,sty's subjects.
ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE.
The order of the day was then read for going ii:to
Committee on the Administriition of Criminal Justice Bill.

The Bill then passed through Committee; and. the
report w•asti brought up and agreed to.

RAILWAYS.

The Earl of REDESDALE presented a petition,
complaining that several names were attached to raj,-
way schemes which were not sanctioned by the parties
whose names Were thus attached. He considored•that
in a matter of such vast importance the standing
orders in Committees ought to be carefully attended to
and enforced by their Lordship. He (Lord Redesdale)
would Auggert that where names were attached to
any such scheme, security should be given that the:
parties had actually given their consent to such pro-
positions.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE then rose to move tho
adoption of the resolutions contained' in the second.
report of the Lords' Committee. on. Railways. He had!
to move that certain alterations should -be made:
in the standing orders 219, 220, and 224, in order to
facilitate the passing of certain _Bills, which were t‘i
originate in that House during the present session.
The Noble Earl then entered into a detail of the altera-
tions intended. (These have been already given in
the resolutions inserted 'in oir Thursday's paper.)—
Agreed to.
The. Earl of CLARENDON wished to ask his NohIP
Friend the Secretary for Foreign
,Affairs whether he •
would have any objection, to. lay on the table any
correspondence between himself and the Spanish Govern-
ment on the subject of Cuba sugar? ,
The Earl of ABERDEEN said that he could. not
have any objection to produce the correspondence re-
ferred to.

Their Lordships then adjourned until Monday.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Friday, Feb. 13.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at a few minutes before
Four o'clock.

PETITION FROA THE CITY-CORN-LAWS.

The Sheriffs of London Messrs. Chaplin and Laurie,
appeared at the bar, clothed in their insignia of office,
and presented a petition from the Lord Mayor, aldermen,
and citizens of London, in Common Council assemble d,
in which, after stating their approbation of the general
policy pursued by her Majesty's Ministers with respect
to the commercial interests of, England, regretted that
the total repeal of the corn-laws was to be delayed for a
period of three years.
NEW WRIT.

A new writ was moved for by Mr. BERESFIORD, for
North Nottinghamshire, in the room of Ilenry Gaily
Knight, Esq., deceased.
RAILWAY BUSINESS...;

Lord DUNCANNON brought up the report on the
Manchester, Matlock, and Buxton Railway Bill, which
was ordered to be read a first time.

•
The following Railway Bills were read a.second time,
and ordered to be committed :—Wakefleld, Pontefract,
and Goole Railway (Methley, Askern, and Oaken haw
branches) ; fioth4ham, Barnsley, Wakefield.
Huddersfield, and Goole Railway ; Leeds and Bradford
Railway (alteration of levels in Bingley).
Mr. STRUTT broughe under the notice of the House
the fact that several petitions for private Bills had been
received by the House in cons'equence of some irregu-
larity which they contained having . been overlooked.
There were several instances where the standing order,
11l A, had not been complied with. •
Mr. GREENE gave a notice of motion to the effect,
that in all cases of private Bills no petitions should be
received unless' they had been' prepared and' properly
signed by the parties themselVes. • ."
Mr. ENTWISLE said, that complaints had fre-
quently been made of the, operation of the standing
orders in referenee to matters of a minor-and very trivial
nature, and parties were often put to enormous expense.
by being compelled' to atfend here, and then.; all
that was lost by reason of the Bill being
thrown out upon some matter of a very trifling
nature, and they were told that they had been defeated
by a non-compliance with the standing orders. With
regard to what the Hon. Member for Lancashire had
s.id, he would just make this observation, that the
number of petitions was so great that it was quite
impossible for this House to take cognizance of the con-
tents of the whole of them. It would be well, there
fore, if some measure were introduced to prevent this
useless expenditure of thousands of pounds before a Bill
had passed the standing orders.
Mr. STRUTT said his observations did not apply to
the Standing Orders' Committee, but to the omissions
of this House.

Mr. E. ELLIS said that much inconvenienee had
visen by reason of the vague manner in which the
standing orders required the notice of a Bill to be in-
serted in the " first part" of the petition, without defining
the particular part. _ _ _

Mr. GISBURNE said he could not at all understand
on what grounds his Hon. Friend had submitted his
motion to the House. The House itself had established
certain rules, and they were neither few or unimportant,
with which all public companies were compelled to
comply. He belie►ed they amounted to about 120 or 130,
the slightest infringement of any one of which was suffi
cient to cause the rejection of their petitions ; and
now there were petitions presented to them by parties
who had only two standing orders to comply will).
He thought it, therefore, extremely unreasonable
to ask for this indulgence in the House, with-
out any notice having been given of the intention
to present them, although they concerned property to a
very large amount, and when in fact the House knew
no more about them than if they had just dropped from
the clouds. He could see no reason for assenting
to the proposal of his Hon:Friend,and if his motion was
persisted in, he should certainly divide the House ageinst
him.

Sir W. HEATHCOTE begged to explain that the
resolution upon which the Committee had acted wits
one which had been imposed by the House. It was not
founded upon any general apprehension of the standing
Orders, but was a specific direction of the 111th clause.
Although many directions of the standing orders
were general in their character, yet, whenever any
particular rule of proceeding was to be observed, it was
,114-arly laid down, as was the ease in No. 9. The Com-
mit'ee, therefore, could not dispose of this case, and he
conceived the lion. Member for Di rby was perfectly
right in repeating it to the House, instead of disposing of
it summarily.
After a few observations from Sir GEORGE CLERK
and Mr. GISBORNE, which did not reach the gallery,
Mr. R. HODGSON said if the parties referred to had
made a mistake, they might petition the House to allow
them to rectify it. The case was precisely similar to one
which occurred in the House a few nights ago.. The
27th order required that a list of the assents and dissents
to a Bill should be delivered to the Clerk for
Private Bills, who wits desired to endorse the fact of
their receipt on the hack of them. In the case
to which he referred,, this
,endorsement had been
omitted. The parties petitioned the House to permit
them to rectify the mistake, which was granted. The
case was perfectly analagous, and the parties in this
case might adopt the same course.
The report was then ordered to lie on the table.
Sir JOHN YARDE BULLER presented a petition
against the Birmingham and Leicester Railway Bill.
Mr. BARRY BALDWIN presented a petition against
the Direct Union Railway Bill.
Mr. VILLIERS gave notice, that he should, on
Wednesday next, move for a return of any direction of
the Peor-latv Commissioners for the incorporation of the
parish of Farnham, in Surrey, with other parishes in
a poor-law union, and the copy of any memorial that
may be presented against it.
LORDS 'OF THE ADMIRALTY.
Mr. FERRAND gave notice that he would, on Mon-
day next, put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet at
the head of her Majesty's Government, (if he should
then be in office)—(A laugh)—whether it was his inten-
tion to fill up two offices lately vacated—he' alluded
to the offices of Lords of the Admiralty—(Laughter):L--
as, in the event of his not doing so, he (Mr. Ferranti)
should move that the offices be abolished as being quite
useless to the countrr.—(Renewed laughter.X
LANDLORD AND TENANT.-

Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORI) gave notice of his
intention to put-a question to the Right Hon. Baronet
the First-Lord of the Treasury, as to whether it was the
intention of Government to propose any measure on the
subject of landlord and tenant in Ireland.
MERCHANT SEAMEN'S SOCIETY.

An HON. MEMBER inquired whether it was the inten-
tion of Government to bring forward any measure in
the present session in referenbe to the Merchant Sea-
men's Society, as the matter had been strongly rt com-
mended to the consideration of the Legislature by two
Committees appointed on tl.e subject?
Sir G. CLERK replied that he had been for some
time in communication with some of the most eminent
merchants on the question, and he hoped in a few dap;
to be able to give a satisfactory answer to the question.
Mr. FORSTER said he had uo -.doubt the petition
spoke the sentiments of the Ship-owners' Society. Ho
must, however, protest against these parties coming for:
ward in the way they had dune of late, and stating that
they spoke the sentiments of the great body of ship-
owners. That society had been invariably oprsed
to relaxation.—(Cheers.) He was not, however,
opposed. to discussion on the subject of which
they complained, as the more they eatered into filo in-
ve,tigation they found that they had no reason to com-
plain.
Mr. LIDDELL said he was not desirous of bringing
on a discussion then, but he could not allow the re-
marks of the Honourab'e Member for Berwick
to pass without a reply. It was his intention to make a mh-
stantive motion to the effect that the petition beprinted, when
it would stand before the House on its own basis. The ch;lir-
' man of the General Society of i-hipowners had signed the
petition. and he believed it expressed the opinions of the whole'
of the members of that body. It was a matter of little conse-
quence to him whether Hon. Members said the petition was got
up or not.—( Hear.) By .printing it, it would be placed before
their observation. He should take an early opportunity of re-
ferring•to the subject. •
Mr. WALL said he was prepared to support the allegations
in the petition. •
The petition was then ordered to be printed.
RAILWAY DISTURBANCES.
Mr. JAMES asked the Right for.. Part. the. Secre-
tary of State, if he had received any official account of a

savage affray which had taken place it Penrith; in the
county 'of Cumberland, between a numeer of Irish
labourers, who were armed with knives, sticks, and other
weapons;' and to such an extent had this been carried,
that it had been difficult, with the assistance of the
yeomanry cavalry, to preserve the peace of the district.
Sir J. GRAHAM said he bad received nn official
information on•the subject.
Mr. EWART wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentle-
man the President of the Board of Trade, 'whether he
had taken into his considerati,)n the necessity of obliging
railway companies to make some provision to prevent
the recurrence of such acts, and • thus to protect the
public against the injuries likely to .be sustained, by
baying some hundreds of these labourers scattered over
the country.
Sic G. CLERK made a remark across the table,
which was inaudible in the gallery. . •
• . WESTMINSTEIi.BRIDGE.

Sir R. INGLIS said he had given notice of his inten-
tion to put certain questions relative to Westminster-
bridge and the w Palace at Westminster. At the
close of the last session of Parliament he put several
questions upon these subjects. . The Right. Hon. Gentle.
.man the First Lord of the Treasury then said he bad
receivectcertain communications on this subject. He now
wished to ask w hether tho e communications comprised the
amount of money which.had been expended in the repairs
of the.bridge, if such a word could be applied to such
an object ; and whether the Government were prepared
to appoint a Committee, or object to the appointment of
a Committee, upon the subject?
Mr. CARDWELL said 'that the subject had been
carefully and fully 'considered by the Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman at the head of her Majes-
ty's Government, and, after considering the report'
of the Commissioners who had the care of Westmin-
ster-bridge, he did not think that there was sufficient'
reason fOr building a new bridge. Instructiomi,lhowever,
were given to the Commissioners to inquire into the
state of the bridge with respect to its security. The re-
port of the Commissioners did not recommend any alter-
ation in.the bridge, nor did it recommend any further
steps to be token. Under these circumstances, seeing that
ample oare had been taken with reference to the safety of
the public, he (Mr. Cardwell) h,sped the Hon. Bart.
would not think it necessary to move for a Committee.
Sir R. H. INGLIS. was
.not at liberty to say more
than that he thought the answer most unsatisfactory. !
He would now, however, ask when it was likely that the
New. Houses of Parliament would be ready to be occu-
pied ? He did not: mean, the room Inily in which
the Legislature was to meet, but the committee-meeta
eee see Faro or tne minding. He wished
to .know when they would be able to
have their accommodation in the new Houses
of Parliament—not merely into the room where they
were to sit, but also when the other apart-
ments w uld be in a state of readiness ;
if the expectation which had been held out, that
the new Houses wonld be ready at the commence-
ment of the session of 1837, would not be realised? He
would also wish to know4hether her Majesty's Govern-
ment would consent to appoint a Committee to ascertain
the cause of the delay?
Mr. CARDWELL—I have some reason to entertain
a doubt that the expectations with regard to the readi-
ness of the new Houses at the commencement of the
session of 1847 may possibly not be realised.—
(Laughter.) I am aware that some causes of delay
have occurred with regard to them, and in consequence
of those causes some postponement nsay take place, but
I can assure the Honourable Gentleman that every
exertion will be made to bring the works.
to a completion without any unnecessary delay...
And I hope, in answer to the hist part of the Ron. Gen- 1
tleman's question, that should the Houses not be in a
state of...readiness at' the expected time, he will not ap-
'point the Committee to which he referred.
Mr. COLLETT begged to ask the Right Hon. Baronet
the Secretary of State for the H3me Department if the
statements which had lately appeared in the public
(papers in reference to an alleged loss which the revenue
ihad sustained by a flaw discovered
,in the recent Corn
'Act were true, and .if so, what course the Crown in-
tended to adopt in reference to the parties concerned ?

Sir J. GWAHAM said that different constructions
;had been put on the Act in question. The first ch cision.
,was in favour of the Crown. The parties afterwards
appealed from that decision, and by the judgment of
the Judges in. the Court of Exchequer, that decision
has reversed. Now, whether the case would proceed
further he was not prepared to say ; but the case, as
tated in the newspapers, was considerably exaggerated.
It was then agreed that the Home at its rising,
hould stand adjourned till Monday..
1 - CORN-LAWS.

Lord MORPETH presented a petition, numerously
'signed, in favour of a total and immudiate.repold of the
corn-laws.

if Mr. RAIKES CURRIE presented a petition from
Northamptonshire in favour of a total and immediate
tepeal of the corn-laws.
SPOONER, presented a petition against the
abolition,ol the corn-laws.
I Mr. HUME presented several petitions from dif-:
ferent plaCes, -one of which was from the linen manu-
facturers of Reading; praying for a total and immediate
repeal of the. corn-laws. The petitioners stated that
the Legislature afforded no protection to their trade,.
and they, therefore, did not think it was just to protect
agriculture.
Mr. L tkI3OUCHERE presented a petition to a similar
effect.

Mr. B. SMITH presented a petition from the city of
Norwich to the same tffect.

I Sir J. M'TAGGART presented a petition to _the
Same effect.

An Hort. MEMBER presented twelve petitions from
ampshire in favour of protection to agriculture.
Sir W. HEATIICOTE presented a petition, pray-
rig for total and immediate repeal of the'corn-laws.
Mr. AGLIONBY presented a numerously signed pe-
ition from the inhabitants of Cockermouth, in which
he petitioners stated that, although the proposal of Go
ernment was in many respects defective, yet 0
: whole they looked upon it as a good measure; and they
herefore prayed the House to pass it into a law. He
ad also another petition from the inhabitants of "Egre-
ont, in Cumberland, praying for a total and immediate-
epeal of the corn-laws:"
Mr. E. BARRINGTON presented a petition in favour
f agricultural protection.
Mr. G. BANKES said he had a petition to present
rom the inhabitants of the county of Dorset. That
ietition was egreed to at a public meeting of that
ounty, regularly convened after a long notice, and the
.eeting was of so extensive a nature, that no hall in the
ounty-town, or street in that county-town, was capable
o contain the nuniber of those who attended.—(Minis-
erial cheers.) The consequence was, that they ad-
urned to a plain without the town, and at that meetr
g the petition which he was about to present was
greed to.
Mr. POULETT SCROPE presented several petitions
n favour of a total repeal of the corn-laws.
Mr., B. ESCOTT presented several petitions from
buffo!): in'support of the Government measure, with the
• xception that they prayed the repeal of the corn-laws
sight be immediate.
Sir A. BROOKE presented a petition from Lanqicle,lti
avour of a repeal of the corn-laws.
Mr. PHILIP MILES presented a petition frem the
unty of Devon against the commercial policy of the
i. overnment, and stating that the present corn-laws had
:ntirely answered the end for which they were pro-
; used, and praying that no alteration be made in them.
Mr. BRIGHT presented petitions from the county of
1 urban' and Wiltshire in favour of a repeal: of the

trn-laws. -
Sir R. PEEL presented a petition in favotir of the
ovelnruent measure, from Sunninghill ; also (me from
ifeshire, for a total repeal of the corn-laws. •.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.

On the order of the day for the adjourned Debate
wing read,
Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS said that he was sure

ießight Honourable Gebileman at the head of her

: tajest-y's Government would understand his objec-
ttoo,aremns
the
blhai
etnhdot
tpi
uniformly
or thepon stoeefioiintention
:measureoavn,rotti
protectingdst ownvswa.oi
tnaaees
sgbt
iregifa:noguri
against
cunasrtnhte
t.e
repeal
1
et the measure
hoitiuehm7s.
epeser. t
caeaossnurecnrnleei
lams in the. House, and he (Sir Howard Douglas) had no
14 ason to regret his having done so, although he' had
re-considered all he had said and heard stated on that
Measure. He had nothing to regret, except that he could
tlmy imperfectly speak his sentiments on that subject, to
s hich he had given his most dispassionate con4dera-
on. He could not, in consequence, concur in the
measure of the Right lion. Baronet, on which he would
tke leave to make a few observations. It was true
there was a stop put to the exportation of
British and Irish produce in the year 1844.
The period which the Right Hon. Baronet had taken
was that of the lowest depression, he meant the year
102. It was very material to inquire what were the
causes of that depression. He believed that the solution
viould be found in the system which prevailed in their
reanufactUres, and the extension of • mechanical
pOwar ; but with respect to the corn-laws the
Bight Hon. Baronet had himself admitted that no
alteration ,of the corigraTvii-votild remedy evils in-
separable 'froth the commercial system he had already
referred to. Thus, .he-: admitted that the corn-
laws were not the cause of the depression. In
1844 the exportation to foreign countries was not
se great as in many years. With respect, for
instance, to Russia, it was greater in 1837, and
as regarded France, the case was nearly similar.
He should be sorry to attempt the repeal of protection,
or the relaxation of restrictive duties. When he first
appeared in Liverpool, and avowed the principle of pro-
tection, he admitted his readiness to alter and
'modify it so as to make it of advantage to the
generai interest, and as little hurtful as re s
sible to 'individual rights; but he was now called
upon .not .to modify or surrender protection, but abso-
lutely to extinguish it. Protection had never been tie
voted to the interests of any particular class of persons,
and 'far less had it been devoted to the interest, of
any class 'which he had the honour to represent.
It was his principle to protect all classes of
artizans without diatinclion—to protect labour when
the labour .market was in that state of severe de-
pression which it so frequently experienced. When
he perceived the Government about to rush into
a measure by which native industry, unprotected,
was Made to compete with the protected industry of
foreign states, without even much capital to protect it,
he felt it necessary to enter his protest. He was
not going to discuss the relation—if there was indeed any
relation—between the price of food and the price of labour.
'He would not take up much time; he would leave the
question in abler hands, but he was perfectly convinced
'that a repeal of the corn-law would displace the produc.
tions of 'British manufactures in every rearkut
in the world to which the British merchant had access.

Ile found another_ retnatjtahle deduction from the poi-yer
to which he had referred, and that was fit I unlimited
importation of corn did not by any - • wails