The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-02 00:00:00

PETITIONS.

The Earl of HARROWBY opposed the principle of
allowing railway companies to establish steam-boats in
connexion with their lines; and with reference to the
South-Western Railway, he did not see that the com-
munication between Southampton and the Channel
Islands and the coast of France was beyond the reach of
private enterprise.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE considered that
their Lordships, having appointed a tribunal to investi-
gate the merits of their private Bills, were bound to sup-
port, its decision. He should vote for the Bill apart
from its merits, on the ground that the Committee of
both Houses to which it had been referred had reported
in its favour. He was as great an enemy to monopoly as
the Noble Earl opposite, and it was because he was so
that he objected to the principle being laid down that in
no case should a railway company have power to run
steam-boats, but wished every question to be treated on
its own merits.

The amendment was then put and negatived, and the
Bill was read a third time and passed.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

ROUSE OF COMMONS, August I.

FARMERS' ESTATE SOCIETY (IRELAND) BILL.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Mr. ROCHE said the great panacea required for
Ireland was the investment of capital; but this would be
altogether prevented if the support of the poor on land
purchased was mad° a permanent charge upon a com-
pany like this.

P. SCROPE wished to prevent the eviction of a
large class of persons in Ireland, and he knew of no
better mode of effecting this than by compelling the
company to support those whom they evicted. He
supported the amendment, and trusted the Government
would agree to it.
Mr. MONSELL said if he considered the Bill calcu-
lated to evict the small cottiers of Ireland, that he should
not ;,;ive it his support. He supported it because it
would tear! to the improvement of the land and employ
the idle poor. _ _

Mr. A:LCOCK supported the amendment.
Mr. P. HOWARD said the clause compelling the
company to support persons whom they had evicted for
five years would lead to those people remaining during
the whole of that time in idleness, instead of striving to
support themselves by honest labour.
Colonel DUNNE said he would not oppose the wish
of the Government, and would consequently withdraw
his amendment for the present, hoping at the same time
that the Government would be prepared to pledge itself
to support his amendment when the report was brought up.
Sir G. GREY said it was not a Government measure,
but he considered that the House would support the
Hon. and Gallant Member in his amendment when the
report was brought up.
After a lengthened discussion, in which Mr. Augustus
Stafford, Sir G. Grey, Sir D. Norreys, Mr.. Reynolds,
Mr. Henley, Mr. Roche, Mr. Alcock, Mr. P. Howard,
and other Hon. Members took part,
Colonel DUNNE withdrew the clause, and said that
he should bring forward an amended one on the bring-
ing up of the report.
The other clauses were then agreed to, as was also the
preamble, and the report was ordered to be brought up
on Friday, at twelve o'clock.
PAROCHIAL DEBT AND AUDIT BILL.

The Committee on this Bill was postponed to Friday,
at twelve o'clock.
POOR-LAW UNION.
___.

The Committee on the Poor-Law Union Distrie'
Schools Bill was postponed to Friday, at twelve o'clock.
HIGHWAY RATES BILL.

This Bill went i1;IoTili Committee, and was ordered
to be reported to-morrow.

COURT OF JUSTICIARY (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The Committee on this Bill was postponed till to.
morrow, at twelve o'clock.
CALEDONIAN CANAL BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
CONSTABULARY FORCE (IRELAND) BILL.
This 13i11 was read a third time and passed.
LOAN SOCIETIES BILL.
The Committee on this Bill was postponed till Friday.
FEES (COURT OF CHANCERY) BILL.
The report on this Bill was brought up.
TURNPIKE ACTS CONTINUANCE BILL.
The second reading of the Bill was postponed till
Friday, at twelve o'clock.
The House then adjourned until Five o'clock.

The SPEAKER resumed the Chair at Five o'clock.
Sir B. HALL presented a petition from the parish of
St. Pancr.as ft,7,ainst the increased police rate.
THE NATIONAL LAND SCHEME.
Mr. HAYTER brought up the report of the Commit-
tee appointed to inquire into the state of Mr. Feargus
O'Connor's National Land Scheme.
On the motion of Mr. O'CONNOR, it was read by the
Clerk at the table. The report, after stating that the
evidence taken before the Committee would be laid upon
the- table, proceeded to state that the Committee had
come to the following resolutions:—" Ist. That by this
Bill it proposed to make additional provisions to the
Friendly Societies Act, which is incorporated with the
Bill in question, and to alter and amend the 9th
and 10th of Victoria for the amendment of the
law
relating to friendly societies, but the Bill does not
include the National Land Company. 2d. That the
National Land Company is not consistent with the
principle upon
generalwhich friendly societies are
founded. 3d. That the National Land Company, as at
pre,ent constituted, is an illegal scheme, and will not
fulfil the expectations held out by the directors to the
shareholders. eitdheTehe.hat appears to the Committee,
evidence and by the
of several witnesses, that the
whole system of proceeding in the National Land Com-
pany, as well as the accounts, have been most imper •
fectly kept ; that the original balance-sheets signed by
the auditors have been
namely, for
and that only three
of these balance-sheets,
the quarters ending
the 29th September, the 25thyl)e ember, 1847, and the
25th March, 1848, respective?
beenes
s d p
hisr -
duced ; but Mr. O'Connor hYtt.'vinh:veex
opinion that an impression had gone abroad that
the moneys subscribed by the National Land Company
had been apf4ied to his own benefit, this Committee
clearly of opinion that, although the accounts hatO.: ro et
been keys with strict regularity, yet that irregularity
has been against Mr. O'Connor s interest, instead of in
his favour; for it appears by the evidence of Mr. Gray
that there is due to Mr. O'Connor the sum of 3,9981.
ss. 31d., and by Mr. Finlaison's account the sum of
3,4001. sth. That considering the great number of
persons interested in the scheme, and the bona fides with
which it appears to have been carried on, it is the opi-
nion of this Committee that power might be granted to
•

The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL presented a petition
from the grand jury of Monaghan, complaining of the
interference of the Poor-law Commissioners with regard
to the quarter-acre clause.
SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY'S
(ACTS AMENDMENT) BILL.
Earl GRANVILLE moved the adjourned debate on
the amendment moved on the third reading of this Bill.
The Committee to whom the subject was referred was
presided over in the House of Commons by Sir R. Peel,
and the Committee of their Lordships had for its chair-

man the Noble Earl on the cross benches (the Earl of
St. Germans), facts which insured a most patient and
careful inquiry. He thought the power given by the
Bill to the company of running steamers in connexion
with their line would not in the end prove to be a mono-
poly; but, on the contrary, would be advantageous to the
public. The period was limited to 14 years, and the
maximum rate of fares was fixed. This railway company
had an interest themselves in establishing tho greatest
amount of accommodation for the public, not only to feed
the traffic of their own line, but also to enable them to
compete with other lines of communication between Lon-
don and the continent. They offered great advantages to
the public by the performance of the voyages with much
greater rapidity and regularity than before—a voyage
which formerly occupied 23 hours having been accom-
plished in nine. The Bill had been considered carefully
in Committee, and the general principle had not been
objected to on the second reading. He hoped, therefore,
that their Lordships would allow it to pass this stage, or
they might lose the general character which they pos-
sessed for the regularity with which they conducted the
private busine6s of that House.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE did not find fault with the
decision of the Committee, but thought, if it had been
possible, that it would have been desirable to have re-
committed the Bill for a day or two, in order that the
question then under discussion might be more fully
considered. He should, however, support the third read-
ing of the Bill, believing that a strong case had been
made out in favour or the company being allowed to es-
tabli3ll steamers in connexion with their line.