The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-17 00:00:00

TIlE• SUN, LONDON, WITDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE l7, 1846.

After that preface, he (Lord Stanley) naturally concluded Government would not fulfil the wishes of those who desired
gnat t to. 1,0 t.,.;! Lori. wa, doout to (iirect LO s':t: a unat:,le h4t ',hero would, in fic,, be n c!iail,cre io the
tion strictly and exclusively to • the speech of his Government, and yet his Noble Friend took upon himself to
Noble Friend, but he had listened with the deepest attention, make a most groundless insinuation against him. He took
and he might venture to say, that .‘ not the whole, nor the upon himself to state that no doubt he ( Lord Brougham)
greater part, nor the major part, nor a considerable part, nor a showed, by the zeal of his defence, that he believed that the
large portion, nor, indeed, any portion whatever, had been Government would not go out. That statement was cheered
directed to the question at issue."—(Laughter.) The Noble by some Noble Lords, who knew not the facts; it was cheerel
Lord began by regretting that one like himself, not in the by some profoundly ignorant of the transaction of the last
prime of life, had to deal with the question ; but he ( Lord seven years with regard to protection, both in and out of Par-
Stanley) considered that the Noble Lord had done himself in- liament ; it was cheered by those who had not the
justice. Indeed. he reminded him of a line in Milton : same means of knowing the facts which his Noble Friend
" Anon, a smiling cherub he appears, had or might have.—( Hear ) His Noble Frieod had not a
shadow of a shade of ground for making the imputation, that
So well he feigned." his( Lord Brougham's)naotives in defending the measures of the
• But not to delay their Lordships longer, he would say, that present Government arose from the knowledge that they did
if they were not empowered to make an amendment, not intend to go out of office. He would ask their Lordships
it was useless for them to have the Bill before them, and he what he had gained by taking the part he had in aid of the
considered that it was no infringement upon their Lordships' present Government ? He called upon Noble Lords who sat
privileges to say that they could not alter the Bill without re- upon the Ministerial benches—from his' Noble and Gallant
jetting it altogether. To say that they had no voice in tie Friend the Noble Duke opposite, who knew to what he (Lord
settlement of the measure, because the alteration of a single Brougham) alluded, down to the latest admitted into the
clause was fatal to a money Bill, was not treating their Lord- Cabinet, who knew less —to say whether his
ships fairly. What was the use of having the measure before defence of the present Government arose from any
them, if they could not modify it when they considered it ne- interested motives.—( Hear, hear.) He called upon all of
cessary, and especially when it so much affected their own in- them to come forth and state whether his motives in defending
dividual interests ? When the Government proposed; on a new their conduct were not of the purest kind. It was no fault of
resolution of the House of Commons, to suspend the opera- theirs ; it was his own fault that he was now out of office,
tion of the present corn-laws, a remonstrance having been although he supported the present Government.—( Hear,
made on the impropriety of such a course without consulting hear.) The Government was no sooner formed than he
their Lordships, the Government acquiesced in it. His Noble declined, firmly, but respectfully declined, the most high and
and Learned Friend alluded to the Reform Bill, but he had brilliant offers of emolument. This should not have been
forgotten the circumstances that attended it, though he was wrung front him, but from the imputation which had been con-
then one of the Government. The Reform Bill was lost, for veyed, and he believed unintentionally conveyed, in the state..
it was carried by a majority of 1, and the Government thought ments of his Noble Friend. He certainly had chosen
it right to appeal to the country. It was not thought in those to be unconnected in office, to hold no office whatever, either
days either inexpedient or unconstitutional to refer to the judici-1 or other, under, or in connexion with, the present
sense of the country—(Hear, hear)—and the country did main- Government, for reasons of his own—for reasons applying to
tain the Government. The Bill was sent up to their Lord- his personal convenience, ,and from no disrespect to the mem-
ships, and they made an amendment in it which was fital to it. hers of the Government. He deemed it fit that the debate
A new Bill was then sent up, and their Lordships ultimately should not close without making this statement. His Noble
agreed to it. Now, he did not see what parallel Friend opposite, doubtless, did not mean to cast any reflection
there could be drawn between the two cases. upon his statements, but simply that he had acted
And another precedent of the Noble Lord had failed him. improperly in discharging his humble duty in de-
His Noble Friend went on to say that the price might be in- fence of the Government. Now one word more, and
creased Sc. and more than ss. in the event of a fixed duty being he had done. He had never cast any imputation
imposed to that amount. He (Lord Stanley) did not un- upon the motives of the protection party; he had merely
derstand that argument. He could not, understand how the blamed them for not acting with better party motives in their
Noble Lord enuld state that a duty of ss. would increase the attempt to defend this measure. His statement was, that
price of corn more than 53.—( Hear, hear.) He would now there was not likely to be any change in the Government.
allude to the conclusion of his address, where he referred to cer- Nothing could be fairer, more open, and more welt-principled
tain combinations against this Bill. These combinations than the conduct of the protection party with respect to this
and coalitions he entirely disbelieved, and so far as the party measure.-_( Hear, hear.) He once more begged to
with whom he acted was concerned, he absolutely repudiated apologise to their Lordships for not entering upon
and denied their existence. He agreed, however, with the the ss. duty, but he might shortly state that he believed
Noble Earl, who sat down before the Noble Lord, that the that it would not operate well for the interests of the country.
measure was supported by a strange combination of parties in He also begged to apologise to the Noble Lord opposite for
both Houses—a majority of whom he sincerely be- the remarks which he found himself called upon to make with
lieved disapproved of the measure, and he agreed respect to the insinuation he had made to him.
also in the discretion of the Noble Earl who said The Earl of BESBOROUGH felt himself called upon to
that he would risk his chance of going to an election explain that the principal, perhaps the sole object of the meet-
on this measure —( Hear, hear.) He agreed with him also in ing at Lord John Russell's, was to consider what course should
thinking that the Government would have a strong disincline- be taken with reference to the Irish Coercion Bill. Lord
Lion to exercise a similar discretion.—( Loud cheers.) They John Russell distinctly begged of those present at the meeting
rested their case upon reason, justice, and upon public opinion, not unnecessarily to protract the discussion on that Bill.
and they would not be deterred from canvassing its merits from Lord BROITG HAM—My informant seems to have been
any apprehension they might entertain of the fate of the sugar pretty nearly correct.
duties, the Coercion Bill, or any worse chance of defeat to Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared—
which the Government might be subjected.—( Loud cheers.) For the amendment
He supposed they should be overpowered, but if they should be Against it
they would place before the country their case, and also Majority
place before it the admissions made by two Noble Lords The House then resumed.
on the other side—that but for the fortuitous combination The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and obtained leave to sit
of parties this Bill would never have been brought forward. again on Friday next.
His Noble and Learned Friend said that Government would The House then adjourned at a Quarter to Two o'clock.
not resign. That appearded to him (Lord Stanley) a very
strange assertion of the Noble Lnrd. His Noble Friend, how-
ever, spoke like a man who thought the Government were
strongly settled in power ; but though he did not doubt the since-
rity of the Noble Lord he had very serious doubts whether his
anticipations would be realised, and if they were not he did not
think the country would suffer by the change.—(Loud cheers. )
He would now state the reasons why he supported the
principle of the fixed duty, though he did net altogether ap-
prove of it. At an early period of his life he had expressed an
opinion in favour of a fixed duty, but in consequence of the
communications he at that time had with Mr. Huskisson,
he had been persuaded by that Gentleman to ariopt the
principle of the sliding-scale, and his experience
had since enabled him to say that the change had been a good
one. The sliding-scale was productive of good to the producer
in times of abundance, and to the eonsumer in times of scarcity;
and if he were now called upon to choose a measure of protec-
tion, he would infinitely prefer the sliding-scale to the fixed
duty. if the amendment now proposed had been brought
forward at an earlier stage of the Bill, holding the opinions he
did upon a fixed duty, he would have opposed it ; but, under
present circumstances, he should support it. Their Lordships
had rejected a proposition for a sliding-scale, and they
were now called upon to vote for a fixed duty. Under these
circumstances, therefore he should vote for the latter.
In addition, however, to its other advantages, in point of
revenue a fixed duty was not to be overlooked. He agreed
with the Noble Lord, who stated that danger was to be appre-
hended in charging the principle of indirect to direct taxation.
If they were to go on reducing) their surplus revenue, and
sacrifice it year after year, and with a view of making reduc-
tions on the present duties, that danger would be inevitable,
and the consequence would be that instead of a three years'
income tax of the present amount, they would have an increased
and a perpetual one. He warned them, therefore, against the
dangerous nature of the present measure. They did not know
who the Government might be at the expiration of
three years, and notwithstanding the assurance of
the Noble Lord, he doubted very much whether
the present Government would occupy that position.
They might have an entire new Parliament, and before this
Bill came into operation there might also be a new Govern.
anent. Why not wait till that period—the right of the people
of this country demanded it—and if ever there was a right
Most dear to the people, it was a right to be consulted on a
question of this magnitude. They had a right to a voice on
such a measure, and if they had at all a right to be appealed
to now was the time.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.")
He agreed with the arguments of the Noble Lord on
the cross-benches, that this measure would never have
been brought forward but for the combination of
parties alien to the principles of the party who proposed the
measure, and who first brought it forward for other motives
than that of passing it into a law.--( Cheers. )
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE hoped that the "House
would soon be delivered from the present discussion, and
proceed with other important business. The Noble and
Learned Lord bad addressed their Lordships that night in
language peculiar to himself on the chimerical fears of those
who opposed this measure, but the Noble and Learned Lord
had chimeras of his own. ( Hear, hear, and laughter. )
He (the Marquis of Lansdowne) had not sought his
information from the same channels as his Noble
and Learned Friend. His Noble Friend had stated that a
meeting was called in a private house with regard to this Bill
and for the purpose of adopting measures by a coalition
of parties for the defeat of the Ministry ; and, of coot se, for
the ourvoee of also defeating the question before the House.
Now, he could say that the meeting at that private house was
not in any way connected with the present question—it was
connected with the Coercion Bill.—(Hear, hear.) The sub-
ject entertained at that meeting was to agree not to protract
the discussion upon the Coercion Bill ; and he would not allow
his Noble Friend, at whose house that meeting was helci, to be
the subject of misreprvsentation with regard to that meeting.
He entirely agreed with the arguments of his Noble Friend,
the late Secretary for the Colonies, on many points. He
would adhere to the course which he had always expressed,
and which be thought the proper course to take on any
great question—namely, that that which would confer the
greatest amount of benefit on the people was that which
should be adopted with respect to the present question. He
considered t hat the final settlement of the measure was of per.
manent importance.—(Hear, hear.) It was one which should
be placed on such a basis as would leave no room for a
future cause of complaint. He had never supported anything
like a fixed duty in any other sense than as a fixed duty
for the purposes of revenue. His Noble and learned Friend
in 1825 opposed the sliding-scale ; he said he cared not
for that scale, he cared not for it at all, and he wanted
none of it. He thought at that time that a low fixed duty
must be desirable for a revenue, but now he objected to that
course.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord who spoke-
last, and the Noble Earl on the cross-benches, said
that they proposed to adopt the child of
those who
supported - the measure. Now it was
well known that if they were to adopt that child, and that it
were to fall into the tender mercies of the Noble Lords, it
would, under their nurture, be found that in less than six
months it would cease to have existence at all. The Noble
Lords would adopt that child for the purpose of repeating the
present measure, for if the amendment before the House
should be adopted there would be a chance of altogether
throwing out the Bill, and next there would be a chance of a
dissolution of Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) He was ready
to make sacrifices for the
,purpose of settling the question.
He v the
auld prophecy that afterlapse of a few years the
questiain would not be left in the position it now was, for it
would not be
pould ssible to raiesbe any discussion on it then
howl
he expected. If,
he
effects wo be such
ever, the effects would not be such, and the landed intereste
was 'seriously affected, then he believed there would be no
difficulty in inducitig the Legislature to reconsider the question,
so as to effect an alteration favourable to the abgerictubletuergabltini-t
in-
terests. He supported the Bill, not . because
would cause a great or. sudden depreciation in the price of food,
but because it would sacaerate to prevent any great rise in the
price of
that article.—(h ear He for one had no fear of any sod-
den importations of foreign 'singr taking place, such as to disturb
to any extent the markets labour,
this country. They hai Ireland
lying by them, with cheap Lebow, so as to inundate them with
produce reduced in value, and yet that had not taken place.
In Ireland they had I,loo,ooocultivators of the land, which
raised about fourteen millions in value yearly,while in this
country there was a less number of agriculturists, and yetthey
raised the produce to the amount of thirty-four millions, so
that five Irish labourers did not produce more
forreerethlarnelatnwdo;Eanngd
no -
lish ones. There was, therefore,
if there was none from that quarter, they need. not apprehend
any from countries that were much mere
before
thestant.— (Htieeeasre.
)aUndn
.n.
these grounds he must support the ,
resist the amendment proposed by the Noble Earl (Wicklow).
Lord BROUGHAM rose to explain. When such personal
allusions were made as had been by the Noble Marquis who had
a short
just sat down, he felt it his duty to occupy
the House
time in explanation. The Noble Marquis greatly misappre-
hended him if he thought that he (Lord Brougham) meant to
cast any reflection on big. The Noble Marquis had said that
he (Lord Brougham) had obtained information of what had
passed in private habitations in a surreptitious manner—
that he had derived it in a secret and unjustifi-
able way. To that statement about publishing what
had passed in private dwellings, he would answer,
what if there were reporters at gtsl; private meeting re-
ferred to, or, if not reporters, at least a reporter, and that
actually a report of the meeting appeared, to the length of
half a column, in a newspaper, on Mond
(Hear.) He at least had read a report of thaatylennigotrhn:_ing ?
forth what. had passed at the meeting, and the parties wnsoetting
meeting. It might have been improper
to re
or the report might have been incorrect,
were
present at t
port
the proceedings. still
there was no .'doubt
of its having appeared. A friend came to
him with the port, and expressed great alarm at the de-
cision, only he stated that it was privately determined to
delay the Coercion Bill as much as possible in the House of
Commons till the Corn Bill was secure.—(Hear, hear. )
He had seen two others who gave another version
of the proceeeing, but who admitted something was kept
back from the published report, and that the feeling of those
present at the meeting was, that though no resolution was
agreed to, they would take care that the Coercion Bill debate
should not chose till the Corn Bill was safe through the House
of Lords. Mich was the information, which was not ferreted
out of a arie ate dwelling, but was to be met with at the club,
houses, au l every other public place of political resort.—
(Cries of " i9ivide, divide.") If they would persist in crying
out to intern pt him, he should move the adjournment of the
House, and ispeak on the motion then. His object was
to set himiThlf right with the House on the subject,
He must details their Lordships a few minutes longer. He did
complain that these was two hours' debate, and that during the
whole of that time they had spoken so wide of the subject before
them, but lie was much more surprised at the very serious
charge whist'/ the Noble Lord had made against him, and
which, if he ,did not explain or retract, he ( Lord Brougham )
should most i aidignantly repel, cast from him, and repudiate
the insinuatic as with which the Noble Lord closed his remarks.
Be (Lord Br pugham) did state that he believed the present

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 16.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
GL ASG 0 W, DUMFRIES, AND CARLISLE RAILWAY.
On the motion for the further consideration of the report
on the Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle Railway Bill,
Mr. HOPE JOHNSTONE, moved that it be taken into
consideration upon that day six months. From the
noise that prevailed it was very difficult in th 2 gallery to
catch the
He
import of the Hon. Gentleman's obser-
vations. He was understood to call the attention of the
House in the first place to the report of the Board of Trade
on the railway communication afforded by the Caledonian line.
The Hon. Gentleman then proceeded to read extracts from a
printed paper to the following purport :
" The Caledonian Railway follows the route which, on public
grounds, was preferred by the Government Commissioners in
1841, and by the Board of Trade and Committees of both
Houses of Parliament in 1845, as giving better trunk com-
munication fur all the more important streams of traffic.'
"It was unsuccessfully opposed before all of these tribunals
by the promoters of the Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle
scheme.

" In their report of the 13th of March, 1845, the Board of
Trade stated that it is quite clear that the trhffic from Scot-
land to the south would not be sufficient at present to support
two competing systems; and that if the one be sanctioned,
the other, or so much of the other as directly competes with
it, must be rejected. In this point of view, the Caledonian
and the Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle lines are absolutely
inconsistent with each other.'
" The decision of last year was arrived at by the Committees
of both Houses of Parliament after the fullest inquiry, nearly
one hundred witnesses having been examined in the House of
Commons ; and it having been admitted by both parties
throughout the proceedings that the traffic was insufficient to
justify the construction of both lines.
" Thereafter the Committee on the Bill, in their report to
the House, stated—' A Report by the Board of Trade has been
referred to your Committee, and the decision of your Com-
mittee appears to be substantially in accordance with the re-
commendations contained in such report.'
" Nevertheless, the Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle scheme
has been again brought forward this session, and the Committee
on the Bill has declared the preamble of the Bill proved,
thereby directly reversing the deliberate judgment of the Le-
gislature last .ession, and of the other tribunals before referred

They have also rejected certain branches proposed by the
Caledonian Company, for the accommodation of the lateral
traffic, on which their calculations of last year were founded,
and have thus deprived the Caledonian Company of all lateral
traffic for 70 miles of their line, being the portion between
Carlisle and Lanark.
4, This decision, if confirmed, is calculated, more especially
during the present pressure on capital, to inflict serious injury
on the Caledonian Railway, which involves an expenditure of
upwards of two millions sterling, and which is new being exe-
cuted with all possible expetation, upwards of ten thousand
men being at present engaged on the works.
" Under these circumstances, the present appeal is respect-
fully made to the House, for the protection of a great national
work which was undertaken and contracted for on the faith of
the preference awarded to it by the Legislature last year, and
on the distinct understanding that the opposing scheme would
not receive the sanction of Parliament. The question is, whe-
ther the decision of the Legislature last year, or the decision
of the Committee this year, is to be sustained, the latter being
entirely inconsitent with, and subversive of the former."
It was quite impossible that the report referred to of the Board
of Trade on that Bill could not but take with the public. It
was very certain that that report was calculated to make a
great impression on the public mind. After the full inquiry
that had been made, the decision of the Committee was totally
inconsistent with the decision given by the Committee during
the last session, and also with the report of the Board of
Trade. He would beg to impress on the House the difficulty
of reconcilini, the present decision with the verdict re-
_

turned by the Committee last year. On the works
already in progress by the Caledonian Railway
10,000 men had been employed, and upwards of half a million
of money had been actually expended. The Hon. Gentleman
then alluded to the speech of the chairman of the company, at
a meeting held after the decision of the Committee, in which
he remarked strongly on the proceedings of the Committee,
who, after having induced the complainants to embark their
capital, at a great risk, had deprived them, by a recent decision,
of some of their anticipated returns. The Committee in
arriving at a decision had made an election in arriving at their
verdict which had turned out to be a most unfortunate-one.
He thought it right to state these things, because from
2,000,000/. to 3,000,000/. had been expended by the Caledo-
nian Railway, in order to meet the wants of the very district to
accommodate which the Committee had passed another line to
its great and serious injury. He did net think it
was consonant with true policy to cons.mt to such
a competing scheme. On these grounds, which he feared he
had stated most imperfectly, he was unwilling, considering the
state of public business, to trespass longer on the House, and
would, therefore, conclude by moving as an amendment, that
the report be considered that day six months.
The motion having been seconded,
Sir WILLIAM CLAY said, as he was the chairman of
the Committee, the decision of whom, with respect to this Bill,
they were called upon to reverse, the House would, perhaps,
expect that he would trouble them with a very few observations
on the subject. He had the strongest impression that that House
was not the proper tribunal for trying those questions which
were remitted to Select Committees up stairs. He might,
however, be excused if he alluded briefly to a matter personal
to himself and to the other members of the Committee. The
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Renfrewshire (Mr. P. M.
Stewart), whom he saw in his place, had thought it right, at
a public meeting of the Caledonian. Company, to cast very
grave imputations on the Members composing that
Committee. He had thought proper to state that
the' report of the Committee was unjust, and that
if the House confirmed the report of the Committee,
that the public would withdraw all their confidence in its deci-
sions, and that no property would be secure while the House
was sitting, but that there was a House of Lords, where the
opinions of certain Noble Dukes and Marquises would be
taken at their intrinsic value, and where, no doubt, the
decision of the Committee would be reversed. He regretted
that the Hon. Member had so far forgotten himself as to make
such an observation, because the Members of that House had
most arduous and important duties to discharge, involving
immense interests, and it was not right that they should be
rendered more anxious and annoyed by any such painful im-
putations cast upon them, and especially when they did not
deserve them. But if there was wanted any fresh
proof of the extreme inconvenience of dis-
cussions on the decisions to which Committees of the
House had arrived, that proof he held in his hand in the shape
of a map, sent by the Caledonian Company to the members of
the Committee, in the hope of endeavouring then to reverse
their decision. This was a document which no one should
have dared to present to a Committee of the House of Corn-
mons, as it was wrong in various particulars, as it made
the Solway Firth terminate at Dumfries instead of going up
to it, and in addition to other misrepresentations set forth
that the line through Ntihan thethsdalew Caledonian,asnotashortwerholirneeasfrom
Carlislethe
to Glasgow
iandistance from Carlisle to Glasgow by the Cale-
whilst the Nithsdale was
be reduced to 116 miles. The ques
onlyreal
125
andwas evenlsl9 by a short line passed this
construction of a railway on local
from acceding to the
had expended capital
year, the line
etance would
tion they had to consider was, whether they should be pre-
vented'
landowners to the Nithsdale
project,
in
c grounds,oostro
ebecausetioga l
itoheeooCaledonianly
accommodating
There were no dissentient portionof the district.
imon-
amnedrciiatl
dwiosturlidetisn;tearnsdecwt
hgertehaetrmthienyerwale,raegrtiocureltfuorsaelioansdancoot
lines required by the wants of districts,
simply because lines
which had been sanctioned by Parliament, but which did not
offer that accommodation,
wished to have no competition. The
Caledonian Railway completely broke down with_ respect to
their through traffic. The Nithsdale would interfere with it.
The Committee sat for fourteen days, and after the most care-
ful
of the whole evidence, they una-
was required for the wants
conclusionof th
the district.
thestri
est! bj
Heet thatwoo
ithewould
onlylino
further add that the promoters of the line had completely made
out a strong case of local traffic, auinnidprtehson that they would
that it did not interfere
with the
tChaeleHdoonosiae witch the firm
Caledonian
He would leave the matter in the
s
see the propriety of not interfering -with the decision of the
Committee.
Mr. P. M. STEWART wished to make a few observations in explanation of the question before the House, and inrefer
ence to what he had said at a meeting of the shareholders a
fortnight ago, and about which there was some misunderstanding.
What he stated was rather a compliment to the Committee
and the House than otherwise. He stated that he was sur-
prised at the decision of the Committee, and that if the Com-
mittee and the House understood the real state of the question
they would not agree with the decision which had been some
to. All the Caledonian Company wanted was fair play, a

thing which every Englishman required. The decision which
the Coraeiittce had come to in June this year was precisely
different to the decision in July, 18-15, when the two
lines underwent an investigation for six weeks, ending
in the approval of the Caledonian Company, and he
rejection of the other. He stated at the meeting that he was
sure the Committee were not aware of the merits of the case,
else they would not have come to such an unjust decision.
He stated also that there was still the report to be considered
when the House of Corm-rms could be appealed to on the sub-
ject ; and if such reports were not to be considered in a bona
fide manner, to bring them before the Houle under that name
would be a naockeiy. If this consideration was not successful,
reversing the decision, he said they had then the House
of Lords to apply to, where any aristocratic witnesses
that might be taken would only be estimated at the intrinsic
value of their evidence. He stated this, because one Noble
Duke. who was adverse to the Dumfries line last year gave
evidence in its ravour this year. He said then that if justice
was to be done, this decision must be reversed. When the
Committee met, they seemed to have been under the impres-
sion that they were proceeding to a new trial of an old subject,
and, accordingly, the other party moved for the evidence of
last year.
An Hoer. MEMBER here rose to explain, but was called to
order.
Mr. P. M. STEWART continued to say that he had his in-
formation from those who were better acquainted with the de-
tails than himself, and he certainly was informed that counsel
—he thought Mr. Cockburn—applied for the evidence of last
year, but it was refused by the Committee. What, then,
he asked, were those facts which had affected the decision of the
Committee of last year ? There were two schemes proposing
to proceed into Scotland by Carlisle ; these two were brought
before the public—Commissioners were appointed by the Board
of Trade to investigate both of them—the very same schemes
as were now before the House. These Commissioners
having made their investigation, gave their decision in favour
of the Caledonian, as the best of the two schemes. That Com-
mission was appointed in 1841, but it was not till 1844 that
subscriptions could be get up sufficient for the company pro-
ceeding with their operations. Here he claimed the help of the
Board of Trade, for they bad interfered in a most obvious
manner. The Board gave their decision in favour of the Ca-
ledonian, because, in their opinion, there was not traffic suffi-
cient for both lines. Both schemes, however, were now '
brought before the House. He would not mention the sums
expended in the contest, for he thought it would cast a slur on
that House, that public undertakings must be burdened with
so great a cost. The Caledonian passed both Houses last year,
and on the 31st July it received the royal assent. Since
then contracts bad been entered into, as many as 10,000
men were employed on the line, and as much as
200,000/. had been laid out, although the other scheme had
been put forward as not being a competing line ; but the
chairman of the Nithsdale Company said at a meeting of that
company that they might rejoice, for they had broken the
back of the Caledonian at last. The map was faith-
fully drawn as regarded the districts through which this line
was proposed to pass. Was there anything, he would ask
the Hun. Member, required in a map beyond showing dis-
tinctly the juxta-position of the railroad ?—( Hear, hear.)
And as regarded the traversing of the country, and the juxta-
position of the railroad, he would maintain that
the map was sufficient for every purpose of that nature. It was
alleged that it represented the line as too near Dumfries, and
too far from Carlisle. The original plan of the Caledonian
was laid down by Mr. Locke, the engineer, and Annan was in-
cluded in it. The Board of Trade ordered him to draw it out
in its present shape. It was proposed that there should be,
instead of one branch as originally proposed, a south branch
springing from the main trunk line at Carlisle, and a north
branch near Glasgow. But what had they done ? They had
awarded the construction of those branches to their opponents.
Now he would ask the House to consider this most impor-
tant expenditure of 2,000,000/. on the construction of one
line. It had been plainly stated that there was traffic only for
one line, and that the Caledonian line was merely a 5 per cent.
line with all its expenditure. The Committee appeared to have
acted in a most anti-Caledonian spirit,—a spirit for which he
could not account. For a length of seventy miles there was a
strictly Caledonian line. By this fell swoop of the Committee
they had refused to give the Caledonian, for a length of seventy
miles. one single branch.—( Hear.) It had been reported by
the Board of Trade that there was traffic only for
one line. The Caledonian had faithfully discharged
their duties. Why were they not permitted to go
on and finish their work ? And if they did not
properly carry out the spirit of their undertaking, let Parlia-
ment visit them with all the vengeance they could exercise, but
let them not pretend to say that this line was not a competitor.
He would ask them to say whether between 300,000/. and
40 000/. had been expended by the Caledonian Company ? He
asked whether that was the way to dispose of the public money
without any reasons being assigned ? He asserted that he was
not interested in this matter, further than being a director of
the Caledonian Company, and he was glad to be able to afford
that information to his Hon. Friend, who appeared to feel no
sympathy for him. He had no interest in it beyond that. His
constituents and friends were strongly in favour of the line, and
last session he presented a petition from them in favour of the
Bill, but after the Legislature had given its decision in
favour of the Caledonian, all the constituents on
earth should not induce him to play so foul a part, to turn round
against those who, under the sanction of Parliament, had em-
barked their capital in the undertaking, and support their old
competitor, who, like a snake, had been lying in the grass for
the last few months. In truth, the present Bill was the same
as the one which came before the House in the last session of
l'arliament, only it was under a different name, but he trusted
the House would not allow it to pass, and at the same time
require the Caledonian proprietors to complete the task which
they authorised them to take in the last session of Parliament.
Mr. HUME wished to ask whether the Committee were
unanimous or not ?
Sir W. CLAY was understood to reply that they were per-
fectly so.
Lord JAMES STEWART said it was not his intention to
have addressed the House, but after what had fallen from his
Hon. Friend the Member for Renfrewshire, who appeared
anxious to support a huge monopoly, he felt it iodispensibly
necessary to trouble the House with a few observations upon
this important Bill. His Hon. Friend had told the
House that the Committee upon the Caledonian Bill
sat for six weeks, and that at the end of that
period, after carefully considering the matter, the Committee
came to the decision that the preamble to the Bill had been
proved; but his Hon. Friend carefully avoided stating that
the Committee was not unanimous in that opinion. He did not
tell the House that the Noble Lord the Member for Plymouth
was opposed to the decision of the Committee. Now, with
regard to the merits of the Bill itself, let him remind the
House, that Ayr was one of the most important counties in
Scotland,-4 county which abounded in rich minerals that were
rapidly and daily becoming more and more developed; and he
had no doubt the knowledge of this fact weighed with the Com-
mitteee in coming to this decision. The line, too, passed through
the whole of the important towns of the district who had peti-
tioned strongly in favour of the line. Most of the principal
landed proprietors were favourable to the line, and to show the
estimation in which it was held, he might mention on its being
made known that the Bill had passed it was made the subject
of a general rejoicing.
Mr. FOX MAULE said, before the House divided, he
must be allowed to say a few words upon this important
subject. He was connected with neither company,
and was only interested in obtaining the best trunk
line from -England to the North of Scotland.
In 1839, it would be remembered, a Commission was ap-
pointed by Government to examine the county, with a view of
discovering :be best trunk line from England to Scotland.
The Commission discovered, after a very careful investigation,
that the county was exceedingly poor, and that any line of
railway running through it must depend upon the through
traffic to Edinburgh and Glasgow. They were, therefore, in-
clined to think that only one line could be maintained, and they
reported what they thought would be the best and proper line.
In 1841 the line laid down by the Commissioners was adopted
enrolledompanyt,heamndselivnestuhnedeerontrhaee noafmteimoer title
of
an-
other company presented itself to the country under the name
or title tatihe
teleomCofaptlaehndeyoGnila who
Glasgow, Cow, Dumfries, and Carlisle Railway. Board of Both
these schemes were considered first of all by the
Trade, who came to the same opinion as the Commissioners,
they
tt
rhaaffit the
to countryi n w
to
wu lod
gnroeta t affordtrunk alinessu;ffi c
andienc y
decided that the line which ought to be selected
and adopted by Parliament was the Caledonian Railway.
The Committee, after sitting for six weeks, and taking the
most voluminous evidence, came to tae decision that the Cale-
donian was a right and proper trunk line to be given to Scot-
land. They rejected the preambles of the other Bills, because
they found that the country would not admit of two railways.
In 1845, after great expense and a contest of six weeks
in the Committee of that House—he could not say how long
elsewhere—they attained their Bill. They were now employ-
ing 10,000 men on their works ; they had entered into
engagements for a million of money in their con-
tracts, and there was also a large sum for which
they were engaged. The present company was one not ori-
ginating in wild speculation. It was a bona fide company,
acting upon the faith of Parliament, entering upon their works,
and carrryine them on with the greatest possible speed. The
Caledonian teompany requested to be allowed to produce be-
fore the Committee evidence of the best possible nature,
namely, the evidence given before the Committee last year ;
that application had not been granted. —( Hear, hear. )
From a report which he held in his band, it appeared
that Mr. Sergeant Wrangham made this application, for
some reason unknown to him. That evidence had not
been received. If the House concurred in the decision of the
Committee, the effect would be to deprive the half of Scotland
of a trunk line. He hoped, therefore, that Hon. Members
would exercise that power vested in them of reviewing the de-
cisions of their Committees. If the House consented to aban-
dont its right to do so, there was an end to the matter. He en-
treated the House to take it into their serious consideration.
He thought if such a decision was to be acted on, it would
risk the carrying out of the railway system throughout Scot-
land, and materially interfere with the application of capital.
An Hoer. MEMBER, whose name we could not learn, spoke
in favour of the decision of the Committee on the Nithsdale
line, as it would open an important mineral and agricultural
district, at present overlooked from the absence of railways.
The mineral riches of Ayrshire at present were very greet,
there being 34 iron furnaces in blast, and the connexion with
Dumfriesshire would be a great service in bringing the coal
and iron of the former county to the latter, and in taking back
agricultural produce to the manufacturing districts of the west.
Sir THOMAS COLEBROOKE said that on the present
question it was important that they should have before them
the grounds of the first decision on the merits of the two lines.
He did not wish to consider the question as a shareholder, but on
public grounds, and he appealed tothe Chairman of the Committee
of last year, when the whole question was fully considered, to
state whether the inquiry went to show that the
country was too poor to support the two lines of rail-
way. If the fact were so, no alteration, he pre-
sumed, had taken place since last year to justify another
decision. They must, if the joint decision was the right one,
and if the Caledonian was the best to supply the general
wants of the country, support it, and reject the Nithsdale
scheme.

that should be incompatible with the interests of the public
and the companies concerned. Now these were the simple
conclusions at which they had arrived. And the Hon. Mem-
ber opposite would hear in mind that, in the first instance, the
Caledonian was considered to be the best for Scotland at large,
and they left the question as to the best railway accommodation
for the western district to a future decision. They were de-
cidedly of opinion that that district should be immediately Fo-
vided with railway accommodation. He had felt himself called
upon to lay this !Sort statement of facts before the House.
Mr. ESTCOURT rose, and was almost inaudible in the
owpeiouinornlearsotofod:hheim to
hasairym h
hgeaallredry,thbut
the
last year. He begged the House to recollect that that Com-
mittee
had given its decision on evidence such as was laid
C
before them, and the facts as they were there stated no doubt
appeared to justify that decision. . Both schemes went into
Committee, and that Committee it seemed preferred one of
them on the grounds then laid down. But that evi-
dence was also introduced, no doubt, by the Niths-
dale Company, and that was the time when the Caledonian
ought to have opposed it ; now to come in and oppose it,
however good a line it might be, however convenient for the
country, was too much.
All that had been done by the Com-
mittee of this year was, that they disallowed one expression
used in the decision of last year's Committee, "that there was
not sufficient traffic for both lines," and gave it as their opinion
in the decision they had come to, that there was traffic enough
for both lines.
Mr. AINSWORTH said that an impression seemed to have
been made on several Members of the House that the Com-
mittees of this year refused to hear evidence; such seemed to
be the impression made on the Hon. Member for Perth.
What had been said in that Committee was simply that they
were ready to receive all information that might be offered on
the merits of the line, but they had nothing to say with
ought that had been done by a Committee of last year.
They listened with the greatest attention to the whole of the
immense quantity of evidence adduced before them in order that
they might come to a just decision on the merits of the Bill. It
had been stated that the Caledonian and Nithsdale were rival lines,
but this was not so, and he considered the distinction drawn by
the Hon. Member for Oxford was a fair one. The Caledonian
was given last year as a direct line to the north, and without
the slightest regard to affording railway communication to the
eastern and western districts of Scotland; it was not granted with
any view to intersect those rich mineral and agricultural dis-
tricts. They had the evidence of parties from Kilmarnock
and from the mineral districts, and of every landed
proprietor, all of whom were praying that the Nithsdale
line might be made, as it would promote the interests of
the country at large ; in short, they had the evidence,
it seemed, of the whole population, whose prayer was to the
same effect, and the country from Dumfries up to Kilmarnock
had been illumninated by the decision of the Committee.—
( Hear, hear.) And there could be no doubt that it would be a
very great benefit to the whole country at large. It appeared to
him that the Committee last year looked forward to this
Caledonian line as connecting the South with the North of
Scotland, and the Committee this year viewed it in this light
when they refused to pass the North British Railway, as
they considered it would compete with the Cale-
denian Railway; but they could not take that view of the
Dumfriesshire line, as no reason was adduced why the im-
portant districts oeDumfriesshire, Kilmarnock, and Ayrshire,
should not have the communication with the Dumfries line.
—( Loud cries of " Divide, divide.")
Mr. LOCKHART considered that the Committee were
justified in passing the Dumfriesshire project, but that they
were not justified in cutting off branches projected by the
Caledonian, which in the aggregate amounted to seventy miles.
Mr. EWART said, as he represented the district which the
Nithsdale Railway was proposed to traverse (Dumfriesshire), he
wished to state that upon its success depended in a great mea-
sure the prosperity of those large districts. He would not say
one word more, except to express his hope, that after
the unanimous opinion of the House and of the Honour-
able Member for Oxford in favour of the project,
the Hon. Member (Mr. H. Johnstone) would not per-
severe in his motion. ( The Hon. Gentleman sat clown amidst
loud cries of " Divide, divide ")
CURTEIS wished to ask the Honourable Member for
Renfrewshire whether he was a reader of the Edinburgh Ad-
verti,er.—(Cries of " Divide, divide.") He wished to ask
the Honourable Member this question, because he thought it a
most unbecoming thing for any Hon. Gentleman to go to a
public meeting and say that the decision of the Committee
was a partial one, for that was what the remarks of the Hon.
Gentleman amounted to. He stated that the Committee had
been dazzled by the case attempted to be made out
by the promoters.—(Loud cries of "Divide, divide.")
He did think there was something very im-
proper, and indeed something very unfair, in the
remarks made against the chairman of that Committee. He
did not care one farthing whether they set aside the decision
of the Committee or not; he did not care in the
slightest degree whether or not they upset the vote
of the Committee; but he would say what was
the use of sending Bills before a Committee when
the decision of that Committee was to be opposed in that
House by Hon. Members for no other reason than that they
differed from that decision? All the Scotch Members in that
House were up in arms against the decision of the
Committee.—(Great confusion.) He believed that there was a
Gentleman who had just entered the House who expressed
himself very strongly at a public meeting against the decision
of the Committee, and he believed that the Hon. Member
went so far as to say that the decision of the Committee was
not a fair one. He would not allow any one to say that he had
been influenced by any but the most impartial motives
in voting in that Committee, and he would take the
first opportunity of fully contradicting that imputation when
he met that gentleman in private. He thought such conduct
was most unprecedented and unworthy. He wished to know
if the Hon. Member had read the report of that meeting in
the Edinburgh Adertiser. He would hand the paper to the Hon.
Member for his perusal.—( Loud cries of " Divide, divide,"
during which the Hon. Member handed the paper to Mr. P.
Stewart.) The Hon. Member proceeded amidst great confusion.
Hon. Members ought not to go to public meetings where all
were on one side, and there attack a Committee who could not
be present to deny or controvert what was stated.—(Hear.)
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.
On our re-admission, after an exclusion of nearly two hours,
we found that the numbers were—
For the motion that the report be considered ... 119
For the amendment ..
Majority
—2
Mr. HUME then objected to the votes of some Hon. Mem-
bers, as they were interested in a pecuniary manner in the
railway.
A long discussion then ensued, and the House again divided,
when the numbers were—
For the motion ......
For the amendment
Majority against the Bill
Mr. EWART suggested that the motion should be post-
poned for a week. It was in vain for the House to purify its
Committees if it admitted of such verdicts in its own body ;
verdicts obtained by the most indirect motives.
After some remarks from Mr. GREENE, which did not
reach the gallery,
Mr. CHRISTIE said that under all the circumstances this
second division must have been anticipated. The motion was
lost by a majority of two, and it appeared that there were two
directors of the Caledonian Company amongst the majority.
The House ought to allow further time for consideration.
Mr. WARD said tbat the observations made by the Hon.
Member were most unfair. 121 Members had voted on one
side, and 119 on the other. How many Members did the
Hon. 31ember require to give their votes in order that the
sense of the House on a private Bill might be ascertained ?
Lord PALMERSTON suggested the adjournment of the
and concluded by moving the adjournment of the debate.
debate,' which would more fairly meet the views of all parties,
The SPEAKER then put the question, and after some
further conversation,
Mr. LABOUCHERE strongly urged upon the House the
necessity for supporting the decisions of its Committees, and
should be most happy to let the House have another opportu-
nity of considering this question.
Mr. PAKINGTON agreed with the Hon. Gentleman
that it was most important for the House to support and
respect the decision of its Committees, but this was a very par-
ticular case. It in fact established a dangerous precedent, and
showed the inconvenience which resulted from a Committee of
this year reversing the decision of the Committee of last year.
For his part he was ready to agree to an adjournment, but he
confessed he felt strongly disposed to support the Committee of
last year.--( Hear, hear. )
Mr. AINSWORTH pointed out to the House that the evi-
dence brought before the Committee of last year was entirely
different to that which induced the Committee of this year to
pass the Bill. He should support the motion of the Hon.
Member for Kilmarnock.
Sir T. COLERROOKE complained that their legislation
with regard to railways was most defective. There was no
principle to guide them, and the consequence was the decision
of one Committee was not binding upon another. Something
ought to be done to render their system more binding and
uniform, and more in accordance with the principles of common
sense.

The House then divided on Lord Palmerston's motion for
adjournment, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it
Majority in favour of it
On our return to the gallery we found
Mr. PARKER suggesting that both the Bills should be
postponed for a twelvemonth, and then parties would have an
opportunity of reconsidering their respective positions.
Mr. HUIIE said there had been a good deal of crimination
and recrimination indulged in in the progress of this discussion
on the part of some Hon. Members, but being the humble indi-
vidual who sugaested that the votes should be tested, he begged
to assure the House that he did it upon principle, and without
the slighest intention of wounding the feelings of any Hon.
Member.—( Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Mr. BOUVERIE,
Mr. HUDSON expressed it as his opinion that the question
ought to be discussed, not in the light of a private measure, but
as a matter of public policy. He protested against being
thought to have any shares in this undertaking. At the same
time he believed that shareholders, if there were any in the
House, and if they voted at all, would vote on public grounds,
and consider only the public interests. The Hon. Gentleman
sat down amid cries of " Divide."
After a few words from the mover and seconder in reply,
the House divided, when there appeared--
Against the amendment
59
In favour of it
Majority against the amendment
The debate was accordingly adjourned till Tuesday next.
Messengers from the Lords brought up several Bills, which
were ordered to lie on the table.

BATTLE OF THE GAUGES.
Mr. GREENE presented a petition from a number of
carriers of the metropolis praying the House to adopt some
measures to secure the ,uniformity of gauges.
Sir G. CLERK rose to call the attention of the House,
pursuant to notiee, to a case of considerable importance, the
question of uniformity of gauge, and to devise some means for
ob'aining a gauge throughout the country of a uniform charac-
ter. A commission was appointed last year, upon the motion
of the Hon. Member for Stockport, to consider what measures
should be adopted upon this subject. A report had been made
by that Commission, and the Board of Trade were requested to
consider what practical measures could be adopted for carrying
their resolutions into effect. Their report had been laid before
the House. No person could doubt the inconvenience of having
a diversity or break of gauge. At the same time, when it was
considered the large sums of money which had been ex-
pended by these companies in constructing their lines, it was
hard to compel these parties at their own expense
to alter the gauges. It was also a measure
not to be entertained that the charge should be made at the
expense of the Crown. Several ingenious mechanical con-
trivances had been laid before the Committee for the purpose
of obviating these evils. The Government had to consider
the whole bearing of the case, both with respect to lines al-
ready constructed or those about to be constructed. The Corn.
missioners considered that the South Devon line, which wag
merely a continuation of the Greatffestern Railway, should be
allowed to remain a broad gauge line. They also thought it
desirable that the South Wales should be allowed to he con-
structed on the broad gauge. There were two lines which
were passed last year by the Parliament in which clauses
were inserted compelling the parties to lay down, if
it was required, a narrow gauge upon these lines. These
lines were the Oxford and Rugby and the Oxford, Wor-
ce:er, and Wolverhampton. It was proposed by the Com-
missioners compel the parties forthwith to lay
downthe tonarrow gauge according to the terms of their Acts.
With regard to all railways hereafter to be sanctioned, the
Board of TrAds proposed that the Government ehoald no

Mr. PARKER, as he
nothad
.been. appealed to, rose
to explain. It wasintenuon to have
spoken on the question, but aftr havingisi dutybeen so pointedly ap-
pealed to, he felt it to beto risef and offer
an explanation as to the proceedings
of last
tas.t. year.
It was perfectly true that the Committee
divided on this subject. The four Members forasWnetahrewsteerre
Cheshire, and Barnstaple joined with him (Mr. Parker) in
the opinion, that for the general purpo'es of Scotland, that was
to say for local traffic—(Hear, hear)—they considered, and he
saw no reason why be should now change his opinion, that as
a national line, and one calculated to accommodate all parts of
the north of Scotland, the Caledonian was the best trunk
line.—(Hear, hear.) If, therefore, there was to be a
Caledonian line, then they had to consider what
was to become of that most important population situate in the
mineral district in the west of Scotland, a line for which dis-
trict should, in point of fact, be considered with respect to
Dumfries. He was sorry to be fot red to say that last year the
Committee came to the conclusion that these two lines could
not exist together.--( Hear, hear.) He was bound under the
Present it iumstances to state the reason= of that decision.
thote Caledonian
thought that they were called upon to sanction
consider
it
ldonian and reject the other, as they did not
coas well adapted for the traffic of the district through
which
It would pass. The Noble Lord the member for Ply-
mouthco old existw s
at
tf
tah, samediffti.r iert opinion ; he thought that both lines
time. The
matterCotmo vanni tottehee,
rt hdeercei
decision,
con-
on t
h
the view of leaving the
eluded that the decision
whole
the branch to Dumfries should be
perstponed. They did not
wish to sanction a scheme

permit any line to be made upon any other than the gauge of
4 feet 8i inches. This recommendation the Government pro-
posed to carry out with certain modifications, which could be
seen from the resolutions he was about to submit to the House.
He knew it would be difficult to resist the app:ieation, which
would doubtless be made, fur making lines in connexion with
the Great Western. He hoped, however, that if the House
should sanction the resolutions which he would propose to the
House, that it would of prevent parties from coming
toefinogornuwasbtaohrlfeielrthoimeclohioonfdnhees:truct broad gauge lines in the country north of
ttthhlieee dutyg rtGeGoarrtpeeariaomt
tppoVsolevevsfeeimsertreetnrnhntesßceow.aotf
oinhltswi ay. It was owing to the utter im-
possibilityeffh
aea ctod tf i
givennt gh
ep
proceeding—either
notice.
eyooet
own
nen
.g
exTeuniformitypihteehnesHre
House
of
rey gaugemaut compelling
ttbbhyee a are txii y:
e
consideration
Takingea ryha
broadat di od nota
knfve
eotnGhaaedrrCer
cgroa
aotawswum
gnge—as
gauge
Crown—that t
hcat
Company
me
np
oGa
wno
yve
hr
nearlyan
dm leencdto
tmhf
come
upt
way
ai it
yt
oi their
eh i
aller
etnt
hrh
eptte hil
circumstances
unsme narrowrs
narrowattahiinewegare
gauge.
ys
usa
,uunrl gauge
superioritysvmppeeei ex-
pense
speed
(nie tra-
velling. .fh° the
t The
theihtbnher
ll
o
e
consideration, he was not prepared to state that there was any
He would, therefore, mova the resolutions of which he had
given notice:-
1. That no line shall hereafter be formed on any other
than the four feet eight and a half inch gauge, excepting
lines to the south of the existing line from London to Bristol,
and excepting small branches of a few miles in length, in
immediate connexion with the Great Western Railway;
but
that no such line as above excepted shall be sanctioned by
Parliament, unless a special report shall have been made by
the Committee on the Bill, setting forth the reasons which
have lad the Committee to advise that such line should be
formed on any other than the four feet eight and a half inch
gauge.
2. That, unless by the consent of the Legislature, it shall
not be permitted to the directors of any railway company to
alter the gauge of such railway.
3. That, in order to complete the general chain of narrow
gauge communication from the north of England to the
southern coasts, and to the port of Bristol, any suitable
measures should be promoted to form a narrow gauge link
from Gloucester to Bristol, and also from Oxford to Basing-
stoke, or by any shorter route connecting the proposed Rugby
and Oxford line with the South-Western Railway.
4. That the South Wales line, and its branches to Mon-
mouth and Hereford, should be permitted to be formed on
the broad gauge, as sanctioned by their Act.
5. That the Rugby and Oxford line, and the Oxford, Wor-
cester, and Wolverhampton line, should be permitted to be
formed on the broad gauge, as sanctioned by their Acts :
that the Lords of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade
shall exercise the powers conferred upon them by the several
Acts, and shall require that additional narrow gauge rails
shall forthwith be laid down from Rugby to Oxford, and
from Wolverhampton to the junction with the Birmingham
and Gloucester line ; and that if it should hereafter appear
that there is a traffic requiring accommodation on the narrow
gauge from the Staffordshire districts to the southern coast,
any suitable measure shall be promoted by Parliament to
form a narrow gauge link from Oxford to the line of the
Birmingham and Gloucester Railway.
Mr. LA BOUCHERE said that the question which the
Right Hon. Gentleman had submitted to the House was one
of the most important with respect to the railway interests of
the country that could be submitted. He confessed that if he
thought that it was necessary for the public interest of the
country that all the railways throughout the country should be
on the narrow gauge, it would not be the expense of the
alteration of the gauge that would deter him from supporting
the alteration. He did not wish to enter into any discussion
of the merits of the two gauges. But any one who had
travelled on the Great Western must have felt that it was an
easy mode of travelling, and that the railway was a great un-
dertaking. Look, again, at the effect of competition on rail-
ways of different gauges. Taking these circumstances into
consideration, and looking at the fact that the railway system
was still in its infancy, he should feel no difficulty
in pronouncing an opinion against the broad gauge. He
thought there were evils in a diversity of gauge, which would in-
eclounc
set
rtnli
eet
iHo
nosu steo ttoh
esay, e
sceentetr ims ii)gahrtibhues,etrheaatt
erailwaysThereof
roef different
spoamrteohf
itnhe ts rfoesrotlhuetioenotsisoidnewra.htticonh he
of the
venture
h-eßightuon.tuo
et w
Gentleman.
There was one point which recommended that both the broad
and the narrow gauge should be constructed on the same line.
He was of opinion that that double system should be admitted
only in special cases. In the case of the Birmingham and Ox-
ford, and the Birmingham, Dudley, and Wolverhampton Rail-
ways, he would suggest to the Government whether it
might not be allowed to establish the double line, and
also in cases of the like description. He held that the decision
on the gauges should be decided by public opinion alone, and
that no board, whatever might be their authority, should be
suffered to pronounce a dictum which could not be appealed
from. The Hon. Gentleman then briefly adverted to the ex-
ercise of the powers conferred on the Board of Trade, and
concluded by saying that he was of opinion that the Govern-
ment had adopted the best course under the circumstances that
it was possible for them to adopt.
Mr. HUME could not agree with the Government in the
course that they were now taking. He would fully confess
that formerly he was in favour of the broad gauge, and it was
.only since he had perused the report of the Board of Trade
that he was at all altered in his opinion. He thought
the Commissioners had come to a wise judgment—they had
stated that a break of gauge was a great inconvenience. The
broad gauge had been carried on with great public spirit, but
still he was not satisfied that it was the more proper. The
railways extended, he believed, to 2,200 miles, and he wished
to ask himself whether it was possible to have a universal broad
gauge ? He thought that every additional mile that was added
to the broad gauge, was only increasing the difficulty of rail-
way legislation. He hoped that the House would agree to the
first resolution of the Commissioners, that the gauge of rail-
way should not exceed four feet and a half. He thought the
intentions of the Government, if carried out, would only in-
crease the difficulty in which the gauges were already enve-
loped. Perhaps an intermediate gauge might be found, in
after years, to be superior to either the broad or the narrow
gauge. The opinion of the House ought to limit, at least for
the present, the construction of railways to the narrow gauge
alone. He would submit, in answer to the motion of the
Right Hon. Gentleman, the following amendment :—That the
gauge of 4 feet 8i inches be declared by the Legislature to be
the gauge to be used in the construction of all railways, in
after years, in Great Britain.
Sir G. GREY thought, in order to prevent the Great
Western Company from completing their continuous line to the
Western Coast, by means of the Cornwall and South Devon Rail- •
way, it would be necessary to allow the Right Hon. Gentleman's
motion to pass. With regard to the third resolution, he was
not prepared at present to carry out its provisions. It would
only increase speculation in the market, and he thought that
until some tangible schemes were produced, the House
should suspend its judgment. He should decidedly object to
the fourth resolution. The South Wales Railway had already
been passed, and the broad gauge line had been declared to
be the proper gauge for it. The same remark applied to the
Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton line, with the excep-
tion that the Board of Trade possessed the power of com •
pelling the company to lay down rails on the narrow gauge.
With these exceptions he was prepared to support the substance
of the resolutions.
Mr. E. ELLICE had adjourned the Committee of which
he was chairman that day in order to get at the
opinion of the House with respect to the gauges
on the Bristol and Birmingham line at the Gloucester
and Stonehouse Junction. The Midland Company proposed
to alter the broad gauge between Stonehouse and Bristol to
the narrow gauge ; hut such a proceeding was contrary to the
spirit of the resolutions of the House. He had been teased
with the opinions of counsel on the subject, and had heard a
multitude of witnesses, but could not form a competent opi-
nion. He had adjourned his Committee for the opinion of the
Government, so that he might be guided in coming to judg-
ment on the subject.

, --- .... .—....—....._
the terms of the resolutions should be.... more general.
He (Sir G. Clerk) thought it would be better for him to ap-
ply directly to the Board of Trade on the subject, fur the line
betwixt Gloucester and Bristol was peculiarly circumstanced,
and he was certain the Board of Trade would give it their
ear;iest consideration.
111 r. LABOUCHERE, who concurred in the views of the
Government, thought, however, it would be more convenient
if they would consent to adjourn the present debate and recon-
sider these resolutions, for he thought after the discussion which
had taken place any amendments that might be introduced
would be very defective. He thought that too much was left
to the discretion of Committees, and that more should
depend directly on the sanction of the House. His principle
was, that the broad gauge ought not to be extended ; always,
of course, presuming that no engineering difficulties interfered
to prevent the construction of narrow guage lines. But in the
resolution proposed, exceptions were made in favour of certain
short branch lines running into the Great Western, which
were to be permitted to lay down the broad gauge. Now, there
was a short line connected with the South Wales Railway—a
short line from Portsmouth to the Bristol Channel—but it ap-
peared to him most vicious to lay down that line on the nar-
row gauge. He mentioned this only to show the Douse how
these resolutions would operate in certain cases.
Sir T. WILDE said, it was the general opinion that the
object of the resolutions was to avoid a break of gauge, and
that these resolutions should be reconsidered. Defects in
them had been suggested which he thought attached to them,
but he had heard no answer given upon the subject. These
resolutions ought be reconsidered, for in his opinion they
were deficient. The second resolution, for example, made
certain exceptions, yet in reference to these excepted lines,
svvatincd h
at t had already got the sanction of the Legislature, it was
tad already
not to alter their gauge without the
sanction of the Legislature. He did not understand what was
meant; they had already obtained the sanction of the
Legislature, and they were
compelled to apply for it
again. Again, by the fourth solution, the South
Wales line and branches into Herefordlre should
eite be sanctioned
on the broad gauge. Why, he asked, oud these lines be
sanctioned again when they had obtained the of the
Legislature already. The effect of the sth sanction
equally irregular. For if the house intended to do something,
as as the resolution presumed, why should the Board of Trade
recommend them to do that—why should the House he u m
pelled to do that which it was willing to do ? Surely, he
said,
the propositions might be stated in a mariner more worthy of
the dignity of the House, and, therefore, the resolu-
tions might be reconsidered with advantage. The last
resolution was most unparliamentary, for it proposed that
the House should compel the Board of Trade to do some-
thing recommended by the Gauge Commission. The Learned
Gentleman proceeded to comment upon the first resolution, il-
lustrating the inconvenience which would arise from it if car-
ried out. The Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton line,
he said, joined the Great Western at Oxford. Was that line,
he wished to ask, to be considered as a connexion with the Great
Western Railway, and would that be among the exceptions
allowed in favour of some short branches running into the main
line of the Great Western ? It was doubtful whether
they would so consider it. But if it were, he submitted
that branches of a few miles in length, though not directly
connected with the Great Western, yet running into the
Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton line, were as much to
be looked upon as branches of the Great Western as those
which fell into it immediately, and therefore to be made excep-
tions under the resolution. He therefore thought that the
words of that resolution ought to be general, and he was sure
that the Right. Hon. Baronet would lose no tittle, and would
consult the general convenience, if he withdrew the resolutions
that they might be reconsidered.
Mr. E. DENISON said the House seemed to be almost
unanimous in thinking that the last three resolutions ought to
be withdrawn, and that the first two should be amended as had
been suggested by the Honourable Member for Devonport
He wished to insert the Board. of Trade in the resolutions.
He thought there could be no objection to this course. With
that slight alteration lie thought the resolutions should be
allowed to pass.
Sir R. PRICE thought it unfair that the broad gauge
lines should be confined to the narrow limits assigned to it
by the report of the commissioners. He hoped they would
shortly see one of these broad gau.ge lines going to the north
with double the speed, and carrying three times the load which
the narrow gauge company, could. .
Mr. DENISON thought that there should be no time lost
in deciding thirquestion. He had the honour of being chairman
of a Committee in which one portion of country between
Exeter and Yeovil was contested, for by the broad and the
narrow gauge. It it was the pleasure of the House that only
the narrow line should be laid down on this district, they would
of course know what to do in the matter.
Mr. W. COLLETT considered that, although the broad
gauge had been a very pretty and successful experiment, and
had produced a spirit of competition among railways which
had been of great advantage to the interests of the public; yet
with reference to the statements of the Hon. Member for
Reading (Mr. Russell) of the economy of the broad gauge,
he would say that it was a statement utterly unsupported by
evidence. fhe Commissioners had decided quite the contrary
in their report. After hearing all the evidence which could be
adduced before them, they declared that the narrow gauge was
the more economical of thifitwo, and better adapted for the
interests of the public. He hoped the House would at once
come to some resolution upon the matter, and not allow the
present state of uncertainty to hang over the Committees
having to decide upon the railways brought before them.
Mr. HAYTER considered that with reference to the South
Wales Railway the present resolutions would prove highly ob-
jectionable, as the Tenby and Saundersfoot, and other branches
belonging to the South Wales, must be constructed upon the
narrow gauge if the resolutions were carried out in their in-
tegrity. The same would apply to the Oxford, Worcester, and
Wolverhampton, and even to the Great Western Railway
itself. He hoped the Government would make those resolu- 1
tions more perfect and more adapted to the circumstances they
were required to meet.
Mr. F. SCOTT wished to know why the three resolutions
had been abandoned. He thought the whole of the resolu-
tions should have been passed as they were first proposed.
Sir J. CLERK stated that objection was taken to the word-
ing of these resolutions.
Mr. F. SCOTT—Does the third resolution stand as
originally proposed?
Sir J. CLERK—It does not.
Mr. F. SCOTT—Then I object to the alterations the
Right Hon. Baronet intended. He was supposed to adhere to
his second speech.
Dr. BO WRING wished to know whether the short branches
of railways from the South Wales lines, running towards the
sea, would be allowed to be constructed on the broad gauge.
The sea would be an effectual boundary, and they could not
run into the narrow gauge country.
Sir G. CLERK said that provisions had been made in the
resolutions for that circumstance. Under all the circum-
stances he saw no reason why they should not be constructed
on the broad gauge.
Mr. HAWES thought that it was of some importance to
conclude the discussion on these resolutions as early as pos-
sible. He could not help remarking that during the whole
evening not a single Member had supported the amendment of
his Hon Friend the Member for Montrose, yet the system pro-
posed by him was one of considerable value. The Board of
Trade had taken into consideration all the circumstances con-
nected with railway companies, and had come to some deter-
minations with respect to the broad and narrow gauge. It
was most desirable that the Government should press these
determinations upon the attention of the House.
Colonel ANSON said that the gest of the argument of his
Hon. Friend was, that some discretionary power should be left
to the Government to continue the double line further than
was conveyed in these resolutions. He would be glad to sup-
port such a plan, but at the same time he thought that no
mixture of the gauges should take place ; but that the lines
should run entirely and strictly separate.
Lord PALMERSTON said that he had heard of a curious
invention for the purpose of obviating the inconvenience of a
break of gauge. The principal inconvenience arose, not from
the transfer of passengers from one gauge to another,
but from the transfer of goods. It consisted of a waggon,
the trunk part of which was separable from the truck
part, and the trunk part when loaded could easily he
transferred to another truck on the broad gauge. In
this manner a merchant could load his own waggon and send it
down by the ordinary waggon to the railway, where it would be
transferred to the truck on the line. He thought that the
House should have some report upon this subject, in order to
see how far the principle was applicable to break of gauge.
Mr. HUME said that he would not then press the motion
he had made to a division, but he would allow it to remain
upon the paper to mark his sense of the conduct of the Govern-
ment.
The first resolution was then carried, with the exception of
the words " South Wales " being inserted after the words
" Great Britain."
The second was then proposed.
After a few words from Lord PALMERSTON,
Sir G. CLERK consented to add the words "that it is
the: opinion of this House that no directors shall hereafter alter
the gauge of their line without the consent of Parliament,':
before the words " that no line shall hereafter be formed.'
Sir R. PEEL suggested that the best way of wording the
resolution would be this—" That it is the opinion of this House
provision should be made by law to prevent directors of rail-
ways from altering the gauge hereafter."—( Hear, hear.)
After a few words from Mr. Ricardo, Sir T. Wilde, and the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, the suggestion was adopted, and
the resolution as amended agreed. to.
On the third resolution being proposed,
Mr. T. BARING said he was afraid the spirit of the reso-
lutions might be misconstrued, and parties who were promoting
particular schemes, such as the Manchester and Southampton
fine, seriously injured by such misconstruction. He wished,
therefore, to add these words to it, " Without prejudice to
the formation of.any other railway connecting the north of
England with the southern coast."
A short discussion ensued upon the propriety of more spe-
cifically defining the line from Basingstoke to the south, or
rather the part in the south, whence it should be carried.
Colonel ANSON moved that the words specifying the line
from the north to the south should be omitted altogether.
Mr. C. RUSSELL said the resolution was sufficiently plain
and explicit, and he was prepared to support it as it stood.
Mr. B. HAWES supported the resolution upon the same
ground.
Mr. E. DENISON protested that he would divide the
House upon the resolution, if it were persevered in, for it was
understood at an early period of the evening, thatits
meonnresidnexr:
ation would be postponed, with a view of
defining
plicitly the line to which it alluded. It was the knowledge of
this fact, which induced him to resise its adoption now.
Mr. HAYTER hoped that the Right Hon. Baronet would
not submit to any alteration in the original resolutions.
Colonel ANSON said he would withdraw his amendment if
the Right Hon. Baronet would consent to the reconsideration
of the resolution.
Sir G. CLERK said what they proposed was to lay down
the narrow gauge to Oxford, and
rails on both
the broad and
narrow gauges along some part of the Northb the two
Western.
Mr. HAWES said the object was to
between them.
gauges, so that the country should
abe sharedharmonise
ge had got the lion's
share. Yet a line had been
He granted that the narrow
g thede Hon.
demarcation between
foren
fixedtion uooff
them, but the effect of the resolution
Portsmouth would be tobrea k in upon that.
The galleries were orderedadourn the debate.
to be cleared for a division, but
to j
it
was afterwards agreed
_
Mr. HUME moved for leave to bring in a Bill for procuring
accounts of receipt and expenditure by all persons administer-
ing charitable trusts in England.—Agreed to.
Mr. FREWEs moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the
more effectual administration of justice.—Agreed to.
Captain PECHELL postponed his motion for taking into
consideration the petition of the rate-payers of the'parish of
Winkfield, complaining of the conduct of the Poor-law Com-
missioners, and the proceedings of the board of guardians of the
East Ilampatead Union, till a future day. The Honourable
Member then moved for a copy of the minute record-
ing the dissent of one of the Poor-law Commissioners to the
issue of the Order of the Bth day of November, 1845, pro-
hibiting the employment of paupers in workhouses in pounding
bones. Also, a copy of a report of the Secretary of. the Poor-
law Commissioners on Bone-crushing.—Agreed to.

Mr. CHARLES RUSSELL said, it was his intention to
support the resolutions of her Majesty's Government, and
should oppose the amendment. It would be a great injustice
to compel the supporters of the broad gauge to alter their gauge
to the narrow line, after the immense sums they had expended
in the broad gauge. He had no objection to the report of the
Board of Trade ; it was plain, short, and above all it was prac-
ticable. The broad gauge was to have possession of one side
of the country, and the narrow gauge the other; and the report
ordered that in particular cases the narrow gauge should be
laid down in addition to the broad. The Government he
thought had acted wisely in not binding themselves to either
gauge,; that was in not",expressing itself in favour of the narrow
gauge. The broad gauge had advantages over the narrow,
independently of speed and power. It afforded more accom •
modation to trade, and was far more convenient for passengers.
He admitted that a break of gauge was attended with some
degree of inconvenience, but he thought the evil, if evil it
could be called, had been greatly exaggerated. They had as
yet only the experience of one break of gauge, and that occurred
at the junction of two lines whose proprietors were opposed to
each otaer, or rather the narrow gauge company adopted
a policy antagonistic to the broad gauge company. The
broad gauge, it had been proved beyond a doubt, could be
Worked more economically than the narrow, and this enabled a
broad-gauge company to carry passengers cheaper than a
narrow. Under these circumstances, he thought the narrow
gauge line, the only narrow gauge line which existed in the
Great Western district, ought to be changed. The Great
Western Company had done all they could to effect that object,
but hitherto without success. They had offered to convert the
narrow into the broad gauge, or to lay down an additional
line on the broad gauge, but it had been refused. Still, how-
ever, the Great Western Company did not object to the reso-
lution., and he, for one, should give them his most cordial
support.
Mr. CHOLMONDELY said it was important that some
tribunal should be established to whom should be referred dis-
puted questions as to the applicability of either gauges to par-
ticular districts, or great injustice must eventually be inflicted
on many parties. He would mention a case where injustice
would be done through the want of such a tribunal, or rather
through the decision of the Board of Trade. The House was
aware that the Great Western line already went to Oxford,
while last year a Bill was passed for extending it on to Wor-
cester and Wolverhampton. Now after, or perhaps before, the
passing of that Bill certain parties suggested that it would
be a great public advantage, _particularly to Irish
traffic, if that line were continued on from Worcester,
through Wales, to Portdynllaen, but it was discovered that the
traffic of the district was of so meagre a character as not to
justify the construction of such line by an independent com-
pany. Ultimately, however;the Great Western Company, seeing
the necessity of shortening the communication between the
metropolis and Ireland, were induced to take up such a scheme,
and last session it was sanctioned by a Committee of that
House, and it stood in the other House in the position of a pri-
vileged Bill. Now, if these resolutions were carried, the line
could not be made upon the broad gauge, and might in con-
sequence be altogether abandoned, or at all events, if it were
carried out, it would involve another break of gauge at
Worcester. Now he thought this was a hard case, and it
served to convince him, and he hoped it would convince the
House too, of the necessity of establishing some board or tribunal
to whom such cases as these could be referred.—( Hear. )
Mr. M. GIBSON said the Portdynllaen Railway Company
having obtained an Act from that House to make
the line on the broad auge, he tought
it could not, or at least it ought not, to beinterfered with by
these resolutions. But he rose for the
of
purpose o
rather
asking
oiana
question, which might perhaps be a question
a question coming under these resolutions. lawH
He wanted to
know if a railway company, having obtained power to make a
line on the broad gauge, had the-power of making it on the
narrow as well as the broad, although there is no mention of
the narrow gauge in their Act? He asked this question because
last year a branch railway was sanctioned on the broad gauge
from Yeovil and Taunton, and now he understood that the
Great Western Railway proposed to carry their line to Yeovil,
and the South- Western, which was on the narrow gauge, pro-
posed to carry theirs to Taunton, and the consequence was the
promoters of the branch passed in the last session were anxious
to make it upon the narrow as well as the broad gauge.
Sir GEORGE CLERK said he had not legal know-
ledge enough to enable him to justify his answering
the question of the Honourable Member. He begged
leave to state also, in answer to the Honourable Baronet
the Member fur Devonport, who asked, in reference to the
Oxford and Rugby line, where power was already givers to lay
down rails on the broad and narrow gauges, whether it would
be necessary to receive again the sanction of the Legislature,
that any additional sanction was unnecessary. The Member
for Coventry, the chairman of the company for the construc-
tion of the connecting trunk of railway between the north of
England and the south coast, a line front Rugby, suggested that

CHURCHES BILL.
The second reading of the Churches' Bill was postponed till
this day.
COUNTY WORKS PRESENTMENTS (IRELAND)
AMENDMENT BILL.
The consideration of the report on this Bill was postponed
till Thursday.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at Half-past One o'clock.