The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-20 00:00:00

INAIr I A X..ILIUTA.

SMITHFIELD. —Old 3leadow Hay, 31 to 41; New ditto, 215 s to
31 14s; Old Clover, 415 s to 5/ 16s ; New ditto, 315 s to 41 18s; Oat
Straw, 1/ 12s to 1/ 14s; Wheat Straw, 11 14s to 11 16s per load. Sup-
ply good, and trade dull.

CUMBERLAND.----04 Meadow Hay, 3/ 5s to 4/ 4s ; New ditto, 2/ its
to 41 17s ; Old Clover, 41 lOs to 5/ 15$ ; New ditto, 3/ os to 41 17s ;
Oat Straw, 1/ lis to 1/ Its; Wheat Straw, 1/ 16$ to 11 18s ; per load.
A lull average supply, and a sluggish demand.
WHITECHAPEL.—OId Meadow Hay, 3/ 8s to 41 4s ; New ditto, 2/ 5s
to 3/ 16s ; Old Clover, 415 s to 51 18$; New ditto, 3/ lOs to 51; Oat
Straw, 11 12s to 11 14s; Wheat Straw, 1/ 14s to 11 its per load.
Trade dull at the above quotations.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS DA Y.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Twelve o'clock.
DUKE OF NORFOLK'S ESTATE BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
CORK AND WATERFORD RAILWAY.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
LORDS' AMENDMENTS.

The Lords' amendments to the following Bills were agreed to.
Caledonian Railway (Clydesdale Junction Railway Deviations).
Glasgow and Belfast Union Railway.
London and South-Western Railway (London-bridge Exten-
sion).
Metropolitan Sewage Manure Company.
Sion College Estate.
Taff Vale Railway.
NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNE AND CARLISLE BRANCH
RAILWAY.
On the Lords' amendments to this Bill being proposed,
Mr. JOHN ABEL SMITH opposed their adoption, and
said that the company had, through five or six Acts
which they had obtained from Parliament, power
to raise, by shares, the sum of 915,000!., and by loan,
335,0001.; but in 1844, the company had raised the enormous
sum of 741,000/. by loan. This it was true had been reduced
in 18-15, by a large sale of shares, but the money obtained
thereby, instead of being applied to the reduction of the dtbt,
had been carried to the account of profit and loss, so as to in-
crease the value of the property in the hands of the proprie.
tors. Now, with this enormous debt, this was anything but
right, and he felt—not having the slightest interest one way
or the 0-her—that it was but his duty, as a Member of Par-
liament, to bring it under the consideration of the House, in
order that there might be a proper inquiry before this Bill
was: passed.—(Hear, and cheers.) But there was another
and, as he conceived, a most flagrantly disgraceful transaction,
which ought to be known. In the accounts submitted to the
members of the company, in 1844 and 1845, there was a state-
ment of a realisation upon 3,000 calls, subject to the redemp-
tion by the company, by which the sum of 300,0001. had been
raised, and also another item of a similar transaction upon 2,250
shares, upon which the sum of '225,000/. had been paid. Thus
there was a sum of 525,0001. stated to the public to be a
realised capital, but which was instead of that absolutely, and
in fact, an additional debt. A more disgraceful transaction
had never come under his notice, for when an inquiry was in-
stituted by the House of Commons no statement was made
whatever of any of these sums. He would, therefore, call the
attention of his Honourable Friend, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, to those facts, and ask him whether
he could countenance a transaction which might, by
the fraud on the face of it, give such occasion to the
distraction of the money market, and, above all things, was so
likely to destroy the whole credit of railway debentures ?
Being himself confident of the great mischief likely to occur
from such a proceeding, he should conclude by moving that
the Bill be read this day month, for a more gross breach of
regard to the premises of an Act of Parliament he had never
witnessed.
Mr. FOSTER trusted that his Hon. Friend would not per-
severe in this motion, for this very same allegation had been
submitted in extenso to the Lords' Committee by whom these
amendments were proposed. By them these allegations had
been fully examined, and yet they had passed the Bill, and
sent it down to this Hcuse. His Hon. Friend had really
brought forward no public grounds, and as, after all, the whole
fault appeared to be only an irregularity of accounts, he hoped
he would not press a motion which would have the effect of
throwing out the Bill,
Mr. WARBURTON thought that the House were deeply
indebted to his Hon. Friend for bringing this matter forward ;
for if they were to pass the Bill in its present stage, it would
be neither more nor less than giving a premium for the fraudu-
lent transactions of railway directors.
Mr. GREENE said, that really there was no sufficient
ground for throwing out this Bill, which must be the con-
seqUence of the success of his motion. The fault which had
been committed by this company was one of irregularity only,
and that defect had been provided ft,r by a clause of the general
Act of last session ; and it was preposterous that a Bill, which,
after a searching investigation by both Houses, had received
their approbation, should be met with such opposition. He
thought that this would be unjust; and he trusted that after
having passed this ordeal it should not be rejected for what in
fact was not a defect.
After an inquiry from Mr. AGLIONBY,
The SPEAKER stated, that in reality there was no breach
of privilege, yet the motion was not in accordance with the
rules of Parliament. These directed that when a Bill had
once passed the House of Commons, they had nothing more to
do with it; and that in the event of there being amendments
made in it by the House of Lords, the House of Commons
could touch neither the principles nor the clauses of the Bill,
but could either pass the Bill by agreeing to the amendments,
or express their disagreement, and state so much to the other
House:
Mr. SMITH then remodelled his motion, and moved that
that the Lords' amendment be disagreed with.
Mr. AG LIONBY had been exceedingly anxious, both
on public grounds as well as from private motives,
that the Bill should pass. It was for the formation of
only a few miles of railway; but on the principle that it was
absolutely necessary that the most unlimited confidence should
prevail between the shareholders and the directors, he de-
sired its pstponement, for, upon the face of the ac-
counts, it appeared that there was some delusion. It
was stated that there was a large capital, when abso-
lutely there was nil. It would be better, therefore, on all con-
siderations, much as it was against his private feelings, to
accede to the proposition for the postponement of this Bill till
another session.
Mr. P. HOWARD trusted the House would not so far
forget the usual mode of proceeding in Parliament, as to reject
a Bill which had received the deliberate sanction of both
Houses; and that, too, without the advancement of any one
single public principle whatever. The Bill was to maze a
line to communicate between the Newcastle and Carlisle Rail-
way and the mineral district of Alston, for which plenty of
capital had been already provided. There was no public
ground, he would re-assert, for the shareholders were perfectly
satisfied with the conduct of their directors, and he trusted,
therefore, that on such a pretence as this the House would not
reject the Bill at this stage of the proceedings.
Mr. ESTCOURT conceived that whatever be the stage of
the proceedings, if there were any appearance of fraud, it
was the duty of the House to reject the Bill. Now, from the
statements allowed to have been made it appeared that a debt
of 741,0001. had been contractedcontrtrytoth! express terms

of their Acts of Parliament. There hail also been an issue,
what appeared to him a fraudulent issue of shares, and on
these grounds he conceived that the Bill ought to be postponed
till 'another session.

Mr. iIUME did not see how, after the inquiries which had
been made in both Houses, the House could proceed further in
the matter, and he should therefore vote for the amendments.
Lord MORPETH would not have given any opinion upon
the matter, had it not been for the absence of all Members
connected with the part of the country through which this rail-
way passed. This railway had been one of the earliest of the
railway companies, and their earlier proceedings were not
marked by that regularity which was now required. He
thought, however, that as the Bill had passed its ordeal in both
Houses, any further interference was not called for.
Mr. T. S. DUNCOM BE said that the slight irregularities
alluded to by the Noble Lord were certain gross misrepresen-
tations made to the shareholders of the company for the pur-
pose of deluding them. He thought that some explanation of
the matter was certainly due to the House ; and with reference
.
to any inquiries made in the Upper House, there asno
l not
takeoffic official
ai
it into intimationcon consideration. eorna tit ohnelsuHbjee thought
andtherefore, theyco
w
that these amendments
ought not to be acceded to, and he recohmenmettedesed
things
theposetapnonbee-
ment of the Bill until next session,
arranged.
not likely to benefit the public, and might
.company.
Mr. MUNTZ said that the postponement
injure the
the Bill was
There was no complaint made on the part of the shareholders.
Mr. MILNER GIBSON said, that if the irregularities re-

ferred to had been of so gross a nature, a committee of the
Lords would not have deliberately recorded their eecisions that
they were of a venial nature, and he certainly preferred taking
the authority of that decision before the simple statements a
Members of that House. He therefore would not be a party to
reject the measure on such slight allegations.
After a few words from Lord GRANVILLE SOMER-
SET, which did not reach the gallery.
Mr. J. A. SMITH said that he thought that the conchict of
the company certainly required some explanation, for if they
had raiaed 400,0001. more than they were authorised to do, and
had afterwards covered it by a fraudulent statement, these
amendments ought not to be acceded to.
Mr. BERNAL thought that the present system of their
railway legislation was most inefficient, as Committees of bcth
Houses had inquired into the Bill, and yet these enormous
frauds had been allowed to pass unnoticed and unchecked
He hoped that some attempt would be made to modify that
defective system.
Mr. SHEIL thought that where the question had been re-
ferred to a proper tribunal, and the efficiency of that tribunal
not disputed, it would be wrong to impugn their decision.
Mr. WAKLEY moved that the debate be adjourned until
Monday next, in order to give the parties time to explain or
refute the allegations made against them.
Mr. HAWES thought that the adjournment of the debate
would be to pronounce the sentence of condemnation on the
Bill. The facts were already fully before the House, and he
thought that they ought to be proceeded with at once.