The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-07 00:00:00

REPORTS.

The following reports were brought up, the amendments and
alterations agreed to, and the Bills ordered to he engrossed,viz. --
London and South Western Railway (Chertsey and Egham
Branch).
London and South Western Railway ( Hampton Court Branch).
East Lincolnshire Railway.
Royal Asylum of St. Anne's Society.
Upwell-cum-Welney Rectory.
Scottish Midland Junction Railway Branches.
Exeter and Exmouth Railway.
Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway Amendment
and Branches No. 3).
Eastern Union Railway (Ardleigh to Colchester).
South-Eastern Railway (No. 11) (Branch from Rye to Rye
Harbour).
Midland Railways (Syston and Peterborough Railway Devia-
tion and Branches).
General Terminus and Glasgow Harbour Railway.
Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Arlrorsan Railway.
Ayreshire, Bridge of Weir, and Port Glasgow Junction Railway.
Witham Navigation.
Bolton Waterworks (by order).
THIRD READINGS.
The following Bills were read a third time and passed, viz. :
Willingham Inclosure and Drainage.

Welsh Charity School Incorporation.
Birmingham Cemetery.
Eastern Union and Hadleigh Junction Railway (further pro-
ceeding, by order).
London and Brighton Railway (East Grinstead Branch)—
( by order).
Brighton and Chichester Railway (Bognor and Littlehampton
Branches)—(by order).
South Eastern Railway (Extension of Stations at Ashford)--
(by order),
Melton, Witham, and Braintree Railway (by order).
Scottish Grand Junction Railway (by order).
Lord G. SOMERSET moved that all proceedings on rail-
ways shall, after Thursday next, be postponed until Monday
the 27th day of this instant April. There could be no doubt
that this adjournment of railway proceedings would afford great
facilities for those companies who were doubtful of the pro-
priety of carrying on their Bills to obtain the opinion of the
majority of their shareholders.
Parties would be put to great expense if they were called
together immediately on the re-assembling of Parliament, if
anything during the first week of its re-assembling was done
ehat interfered with the further progress of this scheme. It
was to obviate this expense that he proposed the postponement
of a fortnight. _

On the 'question being put,
Lord H. VANE said he merely rose, as the member of a
Committee, to say that the motion would be a serious in-
convenience to the Committee on which he we=
engaged, as it had nearly terminated its labours,
He had no objection to the motion a= a general proposition, but
there were cases in which Committees had nearly closed their
investigations, and to prevent their sitting on the assembling
of Parliament, would put the parties to great inconvenience
as well as expense.
After a few words from Lord J. STEWART,
Mr. ESCOTT thought that tho expenses to the share-
holders would be the same, whether the Committees met in a
week hence or in three weeks. He was on that account dis-
posed to support the motion of the Noble Lord.
Mr. PRO l'H E ROE thought that a serious inconvenience
would be induced by this delay from the want of Committee.
rooms. It would be better to dispose of as many of the Bills
as possible, instead of deferring the consideration of them until
the business of Parliament had greatly accumulated.
Mr. LA BOUCHERE rather took the views of the Noble
Lord oppisite than of the friends beside him on this matter.
He thought that a period longer than ten days would be ad-
vantageous to the shareholders, as it would give them time to
mature their future plans.
After a few words from Sir John Easthope, the O'Connor
Don, and Mr. Thornely,
Mr. WAKLEY requested the Noble Lord to postpone his
motion until to-morrow, because all parties would be surprised
and considerably inconvenienced if it were persisted in this
evening.
Sir G. CLERK supported the motion of the Noble Lord.
He believed the House was unanimous en the previous night in
allowing parties time to consider whether they would rather
wind up than go on with many of the Bills now before Par-
liament.
Mr. BECKET DENISON hoped the motion of the Noble
Lord would be read, for he was not himself aware of its exact
tendency.
Sir WILLIAII HEATHCOTE wished to learn whether
the motion of the Noble Lord included petitions on private
Bills generally. He had much experience of the manner in
which petitions against Bills were urged in committee, and he
thought that if the motion included the presentation of peti-
tons for and against Bills it would prevent much expense and
trouble ; and it could not be of injury to any of the parties, in-
asmuch as it was possible they would, after having had time to
-consider of the steps they should take, withdraw the Bills
altogether. He would, therefore, suggest to the Noble Lord
that the motion it was originally framed would be much better.
Lord G. SOMERSET declined to restrict the motion, only
to the Bills in a particular stage.
After a few words from Mr. EsrcoueT and Lord WORSLEY,
Mr. ST BUTT said, !in the sub-committee of which he was
chairman, there were petitions for Bills which grouped in
comm►tteess appointed to meet or, the 27th instant. Many of
then• petitious were yet unheard, and if the sub-committee
were obliged to adjourn to the day on which the committees on
groups met, it would be attended with considerable inconve-
nietice.—( Hear.)
The motion was then put and agreed to.
Lord G. SOMERSET then moved that no railway Bill be
read a third time before the 27th instant.