The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-12 00:00:00

STATE OF TRADE.

MANCHESTER, TUESDAY, AUG. 11.—There is no change
in the market to-day. Good printing cloths continue in
fair demand ; but other descriptions of cloth, and most kinds
of yarn, are in limited request—•in some cases at rather lower
rates.

ROCHDALE, MONDAY, AUGUST 10.—The flannel market
still continues inactive, and demand limited. Wool has un-
dergone little variation, either in price or quantity sold.
HUDDERSFIELD, TUESDAY, AUGUST 11.—There have been
a good many buyers in the market, and a fair business doing,
although perhaps not quite so much as during the two last
weeks. Wools are steady in price, and the demand for
woollen yarn is very brisk.
LEEDS, TUESDAY, AUGUST 11.—The improved state of
our Market continues, and almost all descriptions of woollens
are in very fair demand.—Manchester Guardian.

MPERIAL PARLIAMENT

(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
GAUGE OF RAILWAYS BILL.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Mr. HAY TER said the Right Hun. Gentleman the Vice-
President of the Board of Trade laboured under a mistake
when he said, in opposition to this clause, first, that it
would sanction a complete violation of the principles by which
the Commissioners came to their resolution ; and, secondly,
that, in point of form, this resolution ought to have been pro-
posed when they were in Committee on the Bill ?—( Hear,
hear.) The resolutions of the House did not militate against
the clause proposed--in fact, they made an exception
with respect to that part of the country to which the resolution
of the Hon. Member for Birmingham referred.—(Hear, hear.)
The Bill proposed to interfere with two parts of the kingdom—
the Birmingham district and a Welsh county—on which the
Gauge Commissioners had not reported. The clause now pro-
posed was only similar to that which was inserted in the Ox-
ford and Birmingham Railway Bill, and he thought that the
House ought to allow it to be inserted in this Bill.—(Hear.)
Mr. WILLIAMS supported the clause. The advantages to
the public of having a continuity of gauge from Birmingham
to Rugby were incalculable, and those advantages would be
obtained by the insertion of the proposed clause in the
Bill. The public would save an immense amount of
money by the proposed continuity of gauge• and he
thought that the Right Honourable Gentleman the Vice-
President of the Board of Trade, had utterly failed in
showing that the clause ought not to be agreed to. The
public were fairly entitled to the clause, which would tend in
a great measure to put an end to the monopoly which at pre-
sent existed on the railways in the district in question.—
( Hear, bear.) The manufacturers of the northern districts
suffered much from the inability of those railways to accom-
modate them in the carrying of their merchandise.
Mr. MARK PHILLIPS briefly opposed the clause. He
thought that this proposition had come upon the House
by surprise. At so late a period of the sesuion, it had
been supposed that the Bill would not have been at-
tempted to be altered. He certainly could not agree to the
introduction of the clause, which would not, in his opinion,
confer the advantages anticipated by Hon. Members.
Mr. BERNAL thought that the public were entitled to the
insertion of this clause.
Sir GEORGE GREY said that the question was fully
discussed when tha resolutions were before the House, and the
President of the Board of Trade of the late Government
brought in a Bill founded on these resolutions, which Bill was
the one now under discussion. During the debate on these
resolutions no mention was made of the present pro-
posal ; and he thought it extremely inconvenient
to re-open the question now de wino. Without
entering into the merits of the question, be thought that the
safe course vrould be to adhere to the Bill, and to remit the
clause as being contrary to precedent and the ordinary usages
of the House with regard to Bills at that stage.
Mr. HENLEY supported the clause, inasmuch as it was
within the spirit of the exceptions allowed by the resolutions.
Captain MANGLES opposed the clause. The merits of
the question had been, already fully discussed, and the pro-
moters of the broad gauge had the sole opportunity of being
heard before the Board of Trade, without making the present
proposal. Under these circumstances, he did not think the
House of Commons was a fit tribunal to reverse the decision of
the authorities, who supported the course determined upon by
the Board of Trade and sanctioned by themselves, in passing
the resolutions on which the present Bill was founded.
Mr. lIIUNTZ replied, and said it would be a great injustice
if they rejected the clause on the technical ground of its not
being printed.
The House then divided, when the numbers were—
For the clause
Against it
Illajority against the clause 3l
The Bill was then read a third time and pared.
EJECTMENTS (IRELAND) BILL.
The House went into Committee on this Bill, and the se-
veral clauses were read and agreed to.
The House resumed, and the report was ordered to be
brought up to-mori•ow.
RATEABLE PROPERTY (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion for going intr. Committee on this Bill,
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD moved, " That it is the
opinion of this House, that any new law for the valuation of
rateable property in Ireland, should be made in conformity
with the recommendations contained in the report of the Select
Committee on the Townland Val int. ion of Ireland ( July 18,1844),
viz., that there ought to be only one valuation for all purposes
of local taxation, framed on the net annual value to let,
determined on the principles laid down in the Poor Relief Act."
He said that it was now required to put taxation on real value,
and not proportionate value ; and if they adopted that course
they would have no necessity to resort to this cumbrous ma-
chinery. Was it not preposterous that after the real value
had been decided by the assistant, the petitioner might find
bis property by some plan or other cause taxed according to
the proportionate value? He thought the valuation for poor-
rate should be made at the expense of the public.- An endless
number of valuations would result without any benefit,
but, on the contrary, causing a greater confusion in
what was already too confused. He thought it
was unreasonable, when so many of the Irish Members were
absent, to pass a measure of such importance as the present.
He admitted that the rating of property in Ireland was most
important, and he trusted that it would form one of the
beneficial measures it was proposed to introduce ;
but he thought, from the considerations he had stated,
it would be better to postpone it for the present.
Mr. LABOUCHL RE said he could assure the Hon. Gen-
tleman who had just sat down that there was no individual to
whose suggestions on the social condition of Ireland he would
be more ready to attend. but in the present case he could net
advise the Government to postpone ~this measure. He agreed
, with the Ron. Gentleman as to the importance of this measure;
but its postponement would lead to the postponement of other
desirable measures for Ireland. At the same time, concur-
; rently with this measure, there would be a valuation on the
. principle suggested by the Hon. Gentleman.
f The motion was then withdrawn, and the House went into
s Committee on the Bill.
, The House immediately afterwards resumed.
5 MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
, Messengers from the House of Lords brought up several
. Bills and reports.
The House again resolved itself into Committee on the
Rateable Property (Ireland) Bill.
Having disposed of forty clauses (there being eighty-seven
in the Bill), the House resumed, the Chairman reported pro-
gress, and obtained leave to sit again on Friday.
MARRIAGES (IRELAND) BILL.
On the motion of Mr. PIGoTT (who stated th4t he would