The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-01 00:00:00

IMPEMAL PARLIAMEiN T.

HOUSE OF LORDS, July 31.
Their Lordships assembled at Five o'clock.
Messengers from the Commons brought up several
Bills.
RUGBt AND LEAMINGTON RAILWAY BILL.
The Earl of STRAFFORD moved the third reading
of this Bill.
Lord KINNAIRD objected to the motion, on the
ground that the parties residing in Leamington had not
been heard before the Committee, who deeided against
hearing them before they had had an opportunity of
opening their case against the Bill. He concluded by
moving the postponement of the third reading until
Monday.
Lord CAMOYS defended the Committee, and detailed
their proceedings. No appearance was entered upon
the petition from Leamington, so that they had no right
to be heard. It was true an application was made to be
heard, but the Committee decided against hearing them.
But the case of the petitioners was fully heard on another
petition, and therefore, whether they were heard or
not in their case, their opposition was virtually heard,
and was fully before the Committee, who were not
guilty of any injustice. The parties had, however, no
right to be heard, because their petition was not pre-
sented to the House until the 17th. Their appearance
was not entered in time. He therefore should support
the Noble Lord the chairman of the Committee (Lord
Strafford).
The Earl of STRAFFORD said, he concurred in many
of the statements which had fallen from his Noble
Friend who had just sat down.
Lord KINNAIRD said, after what had fallen form
the two Noble Lords, who were members of the Com-
mittee to whom the Bill was referred, he must persevere
in his motion that the third reading be postponed till
Monday.
Lord MONTEAGLE said the question was—a Bill
was referred to a Select Committee, and the parties ap-
peared, and they were to be deprived of the power of
being heard. If the case was as stated by his Noble
Friend, and that the parties did appear before the Bill
was taken into consideration, he did think it was
unjust if they would an allow them to be heard. What
earthly ground was thepe why this demand should be
refused?—(Hear.) Except what be had heard in the
House that night, he was not acquainted with the matter
before their Lordships ; but, as a matter of justice,
he thought the parties had a right to be heard.
Earl GREY said it was very natural that the parties
should appear in the first instanee, because it would
decide in what order the Committee should consider the
Bill.

Lord BEAUMONT said he was himself chairman
of a Committee when the landowners were permitted to
be heed when they came in due time. He did not
think that any rule existed on this subject ; but it did
appear to him that parties whose land was
to be taken foreiby away, had a right
to be heard to the last moment.—(Bear, hear.) Let
them suppose a case of a bad Bill which was to be pro-
posed. Before the parties opposing that Bill entered
into the expense incidental on opp,,sing the Bill, they
might wish to have some certainty on the question, and
therefore he thought they were entitled to indulgence.
The Earl of RADNOR said he thought that the
rules of the Committee should be adhered .to ; and.
therefore, he conceived there were no grounds whatever
for these allegations.
Lard BROUGHAM said he thought the rule-was to
receive petitions up to the last moment. Now what he
wanted was that the party should be compensated against
the lehry done him. Now there was a case of an hotel,
and the railway was to come within thirty-five yards of
that hotel. Now it was not very pleasant to the parties
stopping at that hotel to be subjected to the noise of the
trains, and to have the dust which they would occasion
thrust down their throats.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord CAMOYS said the Noble Lord had brought
forward a case quite different from that before the House.
The promoters of the Bill had offered remuneration, but
those terms had been refused- He Understood when the
question was put, that the railway did not touch his
property, therefore, he did not come within the operation
of the law of compensation.—(Hear, hear.)
The Marquis of AYLESBURY thought that the pe-
tition should have been received, and the case of the
petitioner heard. Ile would support the amendment of
the Noble Lord.
Lord BROUGHAM again referred to the question of
compensation. Instances could be shown where com-
pensation was given, though the property of the person
who received it was not touched by the railway. The
Commissioners, who lately reported on the central rail-
way termini, gave it as their opinion that even where
there was no direct injury, such as the passing of the
railway over property, compensation should be given.
Lord KINNAIRD would press the amendment to a
division.
Lord STRAFFORD said that after what had occurred,
he hid no objection to postpone his motion till Monday
next, agreeably to the desire of the Noble Lord.

THE CHOLERA IN LONDON.
The Earl of FITZHARDINGE said he had seen an
announcement in the Times newspaper of this day, on
that authority of the Lord Mayor, that the cholera had
broken out in London. The statement put forth did not
distinctly soite the species of cholera which had so
broken out, and in order to allay anxiety on the subject,
he wished to ask his Noble Friend below him (the Mar-
quis of Lansdowne) whether the Government had
received any official information on the subject.
The Martinis of LANSDOWNE had seen the state-
ment in the Times of this day, and considered that gnat
importance was attached to it on account of its ernanet-
ing from so high an authority as the Lord Mayor of
the City of London. His Noble Friend, in using the
term cholera, seemed to imply that it was of that virulent
species which was denominated Asiatic cholera, which
caused so much &oral throughout Europe and in this
c some years ago. He did not think the opinion of
tlTh Lord Mayor was tantamount to create an impression
that Asiatic cholera was existing in this city ; and he
was extremely happy to make a statement which could
not tail to be satisfactory to his Noble Friend and the
House. It was strictly true that a very confident opi-
nion prevailed in this city that Asiatic cholera had existed
for some time in London, but especially in the lower,
and consequently densely-populated districts. Imme-
diately on the Government being apprised of the exist-
ence of such an impression, they employed an officer,
who had practised in the hospitals of this city, to in-
quire into the subject, and he was sent into all the
localities which had been indicated as being affected
by the cholera. He visited those houses and those
lodgings, and rep',rted in the course of the I illowing
day, that he could not find a single instance bearing the
character or symptoms of Asiatic cholera.—(Hear,
hear.) Not, however, content with this, he visited the
hospitals in the immediate neighbourhood of these lo-
calities, and he did not find in any of these establish-
ments a single case of cholera.—(bear, hear.) He cer-
tainly did find au increase of those diseases which were
frequently found at hot seasons of the year, and a species
of acrid cholera which was not unfrequent in this
country. Therefore he thought the House might rely,
that as far as this report was concerned, no alarm need
prevail on the subject. He, however, desired the
efficer alluded to, and another connected with the
Medical Board, to be on the look out. He had been at
the council-office that day, but up to that hour no inti-
mation to the effect had been received. The House
might prevent, in some measure, the spreading of dis-
ease in hot seasons of the year, by passing a measure
before their Lordships for promoting cleanliness amongst
the labouring classes.
Lord BROUGHAM' stated that nothing could be
more satisfactory than the statement of the Noble Lord,
because nothing could be more prejudicial than to allow
such reports to remain uncontradicted if they were de-
void of truth. When he was in office he was informed
that the cholera had prevailed for some time before the
attention of the authorities was called to its existence.
He apprehended, however, that the anticipated disease
from the hot weather might be obviated by persons not
exposing themselves to sudden chills, for at this period
of the year—in the end of July and in August—what was
termed " Lammas-flood," in Scotland prevailed to a
great extent. In the neighbourhood of Bedford-square,
in the mews behind it, English cholera prevailed, but not
to a great extent. He considered the Government ought
to have information from week to week ; but he con-
sidered that there was no ground for alarm, that the
cholera existed ; and no dangerous results need be
anticipated if persons did not expose themselves to
chills, and did not eat raw vegetables. But there was an-
other kind ofcholera which he called legislative cholera.
He alluded to the Bill for the Recovery of Small Debts,
and the Sugar Bill, which he called the Slave-trade Bill,
which he feared, from the late period of the session,
would not receive the attention they required. He
hoped no delay would take place, and that these im-
portant measures would be brought before their Lord-
ships at the earliest possible period.
The Earl of FITZHARDINGE expressed himself
satisfied with the explanation.
Lord CAMPBELL, in presenting a petition from
Wisbeech, in favour of the Small Debts Bill, urged the
House to pass it without &lay.
Tho Earl of ST. GERM NS hoped the Government
would not postpone th. Da sine- of this Bill.
The Marquis of LAa`lggiDgo-snWNE said scarcely a day
passed without his reeeivin
mutrgent entreaties to
pass this Bill. Under these eiroCut tances it would be
the duty of Government to proceed at once with this
Bill.
After a few words from Lord BROUGLIA3I and Earl
GREY, the matter dropped.