The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-24 00:00:00

ten. 4.,

LONDON, FRIDAY, APRIL 24, 1846.

The LOAD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the Woolsack
At Five o'clock
The Earl of DALHOL:SIE then rose to introduce h*
Bill, concerning the dissolution of railway companie4
notice of which he bad given before Easter, and
also to propose a series of resolutions identical
with those proposed by Sir K. PEEL in the House of C.
mons, which will be found in another column. The Noble
Earl, in his speech, recapitulated the arguments used by Sir
PEEL, and concluded by proposing his resolutions as a see'
Oional order.

Lord BROUGHAM called the attention of their Lordships to
the enormous powers of interference with private property
given to the different companies by these railway Bills, and
contended that such Bills should be entrusted for adjudication
to a tribunal of a totally different nature from such an one as
a Committee of the House of Commons.
The Earl of WICKLOW thought that the proposed order
would affect in a different manner those companies whose
Bills originated in their Lordships' House from those which
originated in the House of Commons. He thought this a
point deserving of consideration.
ht be as
The Marquis of SALISBCRY thought there mig
much reason to dread the winding-up mania, as there
se
been to dread the railway mania. He thought the propo
measure gave, in some instances, power to a minority to
control a majority. This ought to be remedied.
The Marquis of CLANRICABDE thought the Govern-
ment should take up the subject, and not leave thecisim;
beees decided
es lv, b2e-
ot
the thee s t stock propriety
market. of
W i constructingth regard r a itlowlar3e. sl
a nod
afford every facility for
ought to be constructed, and should
thought the Government should point out thep lines- that
their construction.
bl
order, app Ica eon y to
sessionalSaYWished to know whether it was
proposed The
a tr
ol ofsnake
o s
tx Bh
the present session, or a standing order, applicable to future
years?
Lord ASIIBLETON considered the proposed measures were
be best that could be proposed for enabling parties to
the
themselves from those difficulties which they had
imprudently brought upon themselves.
Lord CAMPBELL entirely approved of the measure proposed,
because it left everything to private enterprise. The rail.
way system had been carried on in this country more ad-
vantageously than it would have been had the
Government taken its management into their own hands.
He wished to know whether there was any provision in the
Bill for providing indemnity for those at present liable for
the debts incurred by railway companies.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE considered that the power of winding
up was given to too small a portion of the whole pro-
prietary.
Lord KINNAIRD asked if the standing order was to be con-
sidered to-morrow?
The Earl of DALHOUSIE said no, Monday. The Noble
Earl then expressed his satisfaction at the general approval
which had been expressed of the measure, and replied to
various objections. He thought the power of winding up
was not given to too small a number. Three-fifths was a
minimum, and if the consent of a greater number was re-
quired, it would be requiring almost an impossibility. He
thought, too, that if the promoters of Bills could not get the
consent of one-fifth of the proprietary, Parliament would be
justified in postponing the Bills. The order was meant to
be purely a sessional order, to expire with the present
session. He could assure the Noble Marquis that no delay
should be thrown in the way of the Irish Bills now standing
for a third reading by this order, and on the 27th he should
propose the third reading of those Irish Bills which now
stood for a third reading. With regard to the question put
by the Noble and Learned Lord (CAMPBELL) be understood
that no alteration would be made in the legal liabilities of
any parties by this Bill.
After a few words from the Earl of EGLINGTON, the Bill
was read a first time.
On the motion of the Earl of DALHOUSIE, the consul era-
tion of the sessional order was fixed for Monday.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

The SPEAKER took the chair at Four o'clock.
After the presentation of several petitions,
Sir R. PEEL moved the resolutions of which he had
given notice, with respect to railways. He thought a
case had arisen for Parliament to interfere to prevent the
capital of the country being employed in useless rail-
way speculations. The total amonast of capital
required for railways would, he felt convinced, be much
greater than the Legislature ought to sanction, and under
these circumstances he thought Parliament ought to have
the opinion of the parties themselves as to the expediency
of carrying on the different lines with which
they were connected. He believed that there was
a sincere desire on the part of many persona
connected with railways to relieve themselves
from the responsibilities under which they had involuntarily
placed themselves. He was not surprised at this, considering
the present state of the law with respect to inchoate com-
panies—a state which, in his opinion, ought not longer to
exist. He thought, considering the state of many innocent
and helpless subscribers to railway companies, the Legislature
was called upon to interfere, and if, after Parliament had re-
lieved them from the obligation they at present laboured
under, parties still continued to speculate is railways, they
would be no longer objects of sympathy and pity. 'the Go-
vernment had felt it to be their duty to interfere to put an
cud to the improvident speculation that was taking
place in the country with respect to railways;
and for that purpose he trusted that the House
would adopt the resolutions he had laid on the table,
in order to further the operations of a Bill which would be
introduced, giving power to all scripholders of inchoate rail-
way companies to dissolve them if they thought it necessary.
The Right Hon. Baronet concluded by moving the res
lo-
tion of which he had given notice (which appeared in The
Sun of Wednesday.)
Mr. F. FRENCH said if these resolutions were carried, the
effect of them would be materially to delay all Irish Railway
Bills. He trusted that something would be done to expedite
Irish Railway Bills.
Mr. BERNAL thought that these measures ought to
be put a stop to long before they came to a
third reading. He was perfectly sure that resolutions
like those proposed would not remedy the evils intended to
be removed. Immense expense would have to be incurred,
and all the evils inflicted before the cure could be applied.
The Sotacrros-GEsurtar, supported the resolutions. He
believed that the Government, in bringing forward these
resolutions, had done all they could to prevent improper spe-
culation.

Mr. Lisoucnuna thought the course proposed by the Right
Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government was the best
that under all circumstances could be adopted. He could not,
however, agree that the present was the best time for the
interference of the Government. He thought that the Go-
vernment ought to have interfered at a much earlier
period of the session, if they wished their measure
to be effective. He, however, thought the proposition was
replete with so much good that he should give it his cordial
support. He thought many parts of the resolutions were
defective, especially that with respect to the meetings of
shareholders. According to the resolutions as they stood,
an Irish company might meet iu London, and an *English
one in Edinburgh.
Mr. HUDSON agreed with the Government that the present
was the best time to bring this measure forward. lie be-
lieved if it had been brought forward at an earlier period
of the session it would not have met with that
general support which it would at the present moment
He was sure that, notwithstanding these resolutions, railway
measures good in themselves would be introduced. He
trusted that the measure would be received and fairly treated
by the directors of every railway, but that no needless hasty
would be adopted in dissolving companies.
Mr. M. Pinups cordially supported the resolutions, and
in doing so, expressed a hope that no legitimate undertaking
would receive a check, in consequence of their adoption by
the House.
Mr. NEWDIGATE supported the resolutions.
Mr. Warm supported the resolutions.
Mr. F. BARING also supported the resolutions.
Mr. Bacxim DENISON, although he thought the-proposed
interference late, considered it better than no interference at
all. He was sure that all directors of railway companies who
were anxious to do their duty would avail themselves of these
resolutions, call their proprietary together, and take their
opinions as to the carrying on of the undertaking.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in supporting the
resolutions, denied that the Government could have selected
a better time than the present for bringing forward their
present proposition.
Mr. G►bson, Lord Sandon, Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Packe, Lord
G. Bentinck, Mr. Hodgson, Mr. T. Duncombe, Mr. Milnes,
Mr. Disraeli, and Mr. B:ight supported the motion.
The resolution was then agreed to.
Mr. T. DuiscomßE then prop( sod the resolutions to which
he had referred in the earlier part of the evening.
The resolutions were agreed to after a short discussion, and
a few verbal amendments.

Mr. THORNILY gave notice fur Mr. WATSON of his inten-
tion on the 7th of May to move fur a Select Committee to
inquire into the Fees and Compensations in the Courts of
Law and Equity.
Lord SANDON moved for the production of copies of all
memorials addressed to the First Lord of the Treasury, and
the President of the Board of Trade, praying fur a reduction
of the duty on tea.
After a short discussion the motion was agreed to.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at a Quarter to Oae o'clock.

The Earl of DALHOUSIE in the Lords, and Sir R.
PEEL in the Commons, last night brought forward the
resolutions of which notices were given on Tuesday
evening, and in each case they were received with the
most perfect unanimity. Every one seemed to feel the
imperative necessity for their adoption, and to acquiesce
in the justice of the reasons on which they were
Founded.

As we stated in The Sun of Wednesday evening, the re•
solutions to be adopted as sessional orders are quite distinct
from the Bill of which notice was given previous to the re •
cess. The latter provided for the winding-up the affairs of
the company and returning the amount of the deposits,
less the lair expenses, to the parties entitled thereto.
'this can only be done by active measures to be adopted
by the shareholders, expressive of their desire of such a
result ; but it was manifest that mush opposition might
be given, and time consumed, before the signatures
of the number of persons required by the Bill could be
procured, and consequently, though a strong feeling might
exist on the part of the shareholders to avail themselves
of the provisions of the proposed Bill, the project might
still be actively pressed on, and actually receive the final
assent of the Legislature before the feelings of the scrip-
holders could receive an adequate expression.
The governing body might, and frequently have, in-
terests other than, and distinct from, those of the scrip-
holders. As Lord DALHOUSIE well stated, " there
were local interests which influenced them ;
there were means of profit during the passing
of the Bill, which were not without their weight. Be-
sides, there was the point of honour, which made them
unwilling to give way to rival schemes. The go.werning
bodies, therefore, had often a sensible interest and a
benefit in getting their Bill passed through both Houses
of Parliament. It relieved them from a certain weight
of responsibility, and em.bled them to get the deposits,
which, up to that time, remained in the hands of the
Accountant-General. It was obvious, therefore, that
the governing body had a direct interest in forcing on
these Bills, and there could be no doubt that they were
doing this contrary to the
general wish of the greet
mass of the shareholders."

llt is impossible to doubt the truth of this statement,
and there can scarcely be a second opinion but that the
wish for the dissolution of the several companies is much
more universal amongst the scripholdcrs than lit the
managing committees. The former, too, are scattered
in divers and, in many instances, remote parts of the
kingdom, and frequently their interests are so
trivial as not to make it worth their while
to take the trouble of attending a meeting
or sending their proxies ; and they may also be un-
willing to have it known that they have dabbled in and
mixed themselves up in railway speculations, of which
so holy a horror now exists, and by which, if generally
known, their credit might be seriously injured. For
all these reasons the Bill alone might prove insufficient

for attaining the end proposed ; and it was wisely consi-
dered that some active step on the part of the general
body of the proprietary should be taken to show
that they were still convinced of the prudence,
of the advantages of the undertaking, and expressive of
their desire for its continued progress. Hence the reso-
lutions now proposed as sessional orders, and few means
could have been devised more equitable, or better cal-
culated to attain the desired object. They provide for
a meeting taking place, of which due notice shall be
circulated, wafted on the wings of the press, through
all parts of our empire, and that full and sufficient
time shall be given to every party interested to appear,
either in person or by deputy, and express his opinion;
that such a number shall be present at such a meeting
as that the general feeling of the shareholders may be
fairly ascertained on the one hand, while on the other it
is not so great as to offer any insuperable difficulty to
the further progress of any well-digested and desirable
project. The proposed Bill varies in some respects from,
and is, in our opinion, an improvement on, the plan
brought forward before Easter ; it provides that
the provisional directors, cr governing body, may call
a meeting for the purpose of taking into censideration
the propriety of dissolving the company. In the event
of their neglecting so to do they were compelled to take
such a course,
on receiving a requisition, signed by a
small body of shareholders fur that purpose. Precau-
tions, similar to those in the resolutions, are to
be adopted, for the purpose of securing full
publicity to the intended meeting, and a rea-
sonable time to enable all parties interested to
be represented thereat. At this meeting no ques-
tion but that of the dissolution of the company can be
entertained ; there are minor details as to the manner
of the election of the chairman, and the taking the sense
of the meeting en the question, the constituency to con-
sist of the actual holders of the shares, and the produc-
tion of the scrip certificate to be evidence of the right
to vote. A further provision is given to enable
those who may wish to vote by proxy to
deliver their votes before a Master Extraordinary
of the Court of Chancery, or a justice of the peace—a
very proper regulation, as there may be many persons
unwilling to undertake a journey to the place of meet-
ing, and who might be unwilling to entrust their scrip
to parties who could attend, of whom they might have
little knowledge. Should a clear majority of the stock be
represented at that meeting, and that a majority thereof
voted in favour of a proposition for winding up the
affairs of the company, then the concern should be ipso
facto dissolved. The scale of voting is to be in con-
formity with the provisions of the Joint-Stock Companies
Regulations Acts of last session—viz., every share under
five should each confer a vote; every five shares above
ten, and less than 100, should confer an additional vote,
and every ten shares above 100 an additional vote.
Our readers will recollect that when the measure
was first brought forward we strongly urged in The
:Sun the necessity of having the right of voting given
according to this rule, which had been adopted on mature
consideration as the most equitable, as giving their
due weight to the small holders, and preventing their
wishes from being overruled by those who may have
ether interests to consider besides those of the share-
holders—as, for instance, an existing company to whose
lines the proposed one might act as a feeder ; or, on the
other hand, might possibly prove a rival. A clear ma-
jority of the whole stock should give the power of disso-
lution, but as it might be impossible to procure such a
declaration of opinion, there is a further provision, that
in the event of one-third of the whole stock being re-
presented at a meeting the question of dissolution may
be entertained ; and if three fifths of the stock repre-
sented at the meeting should be in favour of the dissolu-
tion, that should be sufficient, and the company dissolved.
Both plans appear to have been well matured, and we
are convinced that they will be received by the country
at large with the same unanimity and approbation with
which their introduction was last night hailed in both
Houses.

We know not whether there are many such priests in
Ireland as the Rev. J. SAVAGE, of Mullingar, the patron
of the murdered martyr and the sainted SEERY ; but if
only a few such firebrands are scattered throughout each
county, all the mystery of the numerous assassinations
that degrade the Irish people may be easily cleared
up. This SEERY, it will be remembered, was con-
victed of attempting to assassinate Sir FRANCIS
HOPKINS, and convicted on evidence about which there
cannot be the possibility of a doubt. He was
well known to his intended victim, he had lived with
him as a sort of land steward, and afterwards rented a
farm belonging to Sir FRANCIS, who, on being fired at
on a moonlight night, seized the assassin by the collar,
held up his face to the light to see if he was known,:and
distinctly recognised his old tenant. There could be no
mistake as to the identity in a case of this kind; Sir
FRANCIS HOPKINS could have no interest in swearing
away the life of an innocent man, and he in
the most solemn manner, and with the fullest
conviction of the truth of his statement, distinctly de-
clared on oath that SEERY was the assassin. Ilia evi-
dence was firmly believed by almost every respectable
person in the neighbourhood, and no one whose opinion
was unbiassed had any doubt whatever of the man's
guilt. The priest SAVAGE, however, took a different
view of the case, raised this assassin to the rank of a
martyr (without the slightest intention, of course, to
encourage other assassins), and has been engaged ever
since in collecting subscriptions " for the protec-
tion and support of the afflicted widow and
helpless orphans of the late martyred BRIAN
SEERY." These are the terms used by this parish
priest in a letter addressed to a Mr. DEVITT, of
Limerick, thanking him for the receipt of 6/. 3s. 3d.
towards this patriotic pespose. But that is the least
striking part of the letter, and we therefore give what
follows, to show the dangerous spirit which animates
certain of the lower Irish clergy, and the determi-
nation to destroy all community and all friendship
between Protestants and Catholics. The letter is
published in a Dublin paper of Liberal politics,
with the words marked in italics as we give
them, the underlining, we presume, having been made
by SAVAGE himself:—" SEERY was a man of the best
character. Six respectable Catholic witnesses proved
at the trial that he aas nine miles from Rochefort at
the hour the attack was made on Sir FRANCIS HoPtaNs.
The man who actually fired the shot at Sir FRANCIS
openly declared his own guilt, but a Protestant baronet
having sworn—no doubt conscientiously—that SEERY
was the man, a Protestant jury believed the Protestant
baronet, an outcry is raised, hang him, hang him,'
and he was hanged, having declared with his
dying breath that he had neither act, nor
part, nor hnowledge of the crime." Here we
have the loose and unauthenticated saying of the
" man who actually fired the shot," according to this
priest, placed in the balance with the oath of a gentle-
man highly respected in the neighbourhood, and the
solemn verdict of Welt e jurors. It is a well known fact,
that ninety-nine out of a hundred of these self-accusa-
tions of murder are without the slightest foundation,
and put forth solely for some temporary purpose, and it
is equally well known that one-half of the persons con-
victed of capital offences on the clearest evidence
deqlare their innocence to the last. But that is
a matter of trivial importance compared with the awful
consequences of the principles upheld by this Catholic
priest, for he distinctly tells the people that SEERY was
innocent, that the Protestant baronet had declared a
falsehood on oath, and that the Protestant jury were
guilty of murder, in condernnihg a man of the " best
character," on the evidence of one Protestant, distinctly
contradicted by " six respectable Catholic witnesses."
According to SAVAGE, no Protestant witness and no
Protestant jury ought ever to be believed or trusted when
a Catholic is tried. Need we wonder that so many
assassins escape, or that so many Protestants are mur-
dered, when we find such doctrines laid down by a
teacher of the people, who, it appears from the accounts
of the execution, had the :lower classes of the district
around Mullingar so completely under his control, that
the whole of them stayed away in order to mark their
conviction that this assassin was a "martyr?" A
martyr to what cause ? A martyr to the pa-
triotic and Christian principle of expelling Pro-
testants from Tipperary by assassination. Need we
wonder that Catholic peasants when murder
is committed in broad daylight " stand laughing bye"
and that not one of them will bear evidence against
t
another for crimes the most disgraceful to human na-
ture, perpetrated against a fellow-creature, merely be
cause he is a Protestant, and claims the privileg • •
oecup)ing Lis own land? Is the important business oot
the session to be stopped because a few Irish Members
are opposed to any legislative Act fur abating such a
ruinous and barbarous system?

A correspondence, which is just now published
Mayor of NOTTINGHAM, and which consists
of by
the
halHozen communications between himself', as aotne
chair-
man of Lord LINCOLN'S election committee, and M
T. B. T. HILDYARD, induces us to make some retro-
spective remarks concerning the recent contest for the
representation of South Nottingham. The circum-
stances to which this correspondence bears refe-
rence, and to which our observations are here
applied, are simple enough in tb.wselves ; and the
deductions which must necessarily be drawn from
them are so obvious, that we shall content ourselves with
a mere narration of them, unaccompanied by any indig