The Sun.
London, England, 1848-07-05 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, July 4.
Their Lordships met at Five o'clock.
The Earl of BAN DUN presented a petition from the
merchants and inhabitants of Cork against any altera-

Lion on in the navigation-laws.
The Earl of EGLINTON presented a petition from
Ayr against the Scottish Registration Bill.
Lord CAMPBELL presented some petitions with a

similar prayer.
JUVENILE OFFENDERS.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented petitions with a
similar prayer; also a petition from the city of London,
complaining of the increase of juvenile offenders. The
Noble Duke said that if the Government did not intro-
duce a measure on the subject, he should lay on the
table a 13111 for the purpose of withdrawing juvenile
offenders from trial, and of consigning them by a sum-
mary process to a place of reformatory punishment.
Lord KINNAIRD urged upon their Lordships the
necessity of attending to the condition of the vagrant
children with which the metropolis and the large towns
were infested.
Earl GREY admitted the necessity of some alteration
in the method of treating juvenile offenders, but was not
prepared to discuss the subject at the present moment.
After a short conversation the petition was laid on
the table, and several other petitions to the same effect
were presented by the Duke of RICHMOND.
LAW OF MARRIAGE.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE laid on the table
the report of the Commissioners on the law of Marriage.
NORTH WALES RAILWAY.
Lord MONTEAGLE, pursuant to notice, presented a
petition from an individual, complaining of the conduct
of the directors of the North Wales Railway. The pe-
titioner was one of the original shareholders in this line
of railway, which was intended to run between Carnar-
von and Bangor. The act authorizing the construction
of the railway passed in 1845, and two instalments of
10 per cent. were paid up by the shareholders. Soon
after a change in the direction of the company took
place, and one of the first proceedings of the new di-
rection was to lend the money of the North Wales Rail-
way Company for the purpose of completing another
railway with which the North Wales Railway had no-
thing to do. Many of the members of the new direc-
tion were also directors of the London and Richmond
Railway Company, and to this latter company the money
of the North Wales Company was lent. But, as the
North Wales Railway Company were not empowered
by law to lend, nor the London and Richmond Com-
pany to borrow, the course taken was not to lend the
money to the London and Richmond: Company
in its', corporate capacity, but to private in-
dividuals connected with the company on their notes of
hand. After a time the Richmond Railway was made,
and sold to another company. The directors of the
North Wales Company, having lent the money of the
company on insufficient security, and contrary to law,
nevertheless thought proper, when this took place, to
repeat the experiment, and they lent the money of the
company to two other individuals. A shareholder ap-
plied to inspect the accounts, and after some resistance
he was allowed to have access to them. Their Lordships
would hardly believe in what manner those accounts
were kept. He held in his hand a copy of the very
account in question, and he found these entries—
" Loan to A' for investment, 1,500/." " Loan to B'
for ditto, 1,2001." " Loan to C' for ditto, 4,0001."
" Loan to D' for ditto, 8,0001." " Loan to E' for
ditto, 3,000/." " Loan to F' for ditto, 1,0001." " Loan
to G' for ditto, 1,0001." In fact, the account was
a cypher which explained nothing. The parties
asked for an explanation as to who were represented
by the letters " A," " B," " C," " D," " E," " F," and
" G," but that was refused. These were the two main
allegations contained in this petition ; namely, first, a
misapplication of the funds from the purposes for which
they :were intended by Parliament, from the North
Wales Railway Company to the London and Richmond
RailwaylCompany ' • and, second:y, the mode in which
the accounts were kept. The answer of the directors to
the latter charge related a most curicus fact. They
stated that this mode of keeping accounts—namely, that
of putting forward an unintelligible account to be in-
spected by the shareholders, and keeping a private
ledger for their own use, was the common course taken
by other railway companies, and they justified them-
selves by this most extraordinary plea. He thought it
behoved their Lordships and the Parliament to take notice
of this matter. He should content himself at present with
presenting the petition; but, if the subject should be
allowed altogether to drop, he conceived their Lordships
would be partly making themselves accessory to a
system of fraud. Of the parties he knew nothing. He
had no connexion with either of the companies. The
facts were admitted by both sides; and they clearly
showed a departure from the law of the land, and a
violation of a public trust. The prayer of the petition
was, that a Bill might be passed to exclude these parties
from the direction, and to appoint others to carry out
the railway. So important did ho consider the question
that ho should be inclined at a future day to move for
the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into
these facts, and to report upon them to the House.
Earl GRANVILLE suggested, that whether the
Noble Lord brought forward a Bill or moved for a Select
Committee, it would be better that he gave a formal
notice of the course he intended to pursue.
Lord WIIARNCLIFFE considered this to be one of I
the most scandalous cases that had occurred in the mis-
management of railways. He considered it to be highly
incumbent on their Lordships to apply a corrective and
check upon these proceedings.
Lord REDESDALE said, that unless some Noble
Lord should hereafter make a statement on the other
side that should satisfy their Lordships, he considered
this was a case in which the Legislature ought to inter-
fere. These great bodies ought to be compelled to ren-
der accounts of their proceedings. If they concealed
them from the shareholders, they could never hope to
possess the confidence of the public.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said it appeared to
him to be a subject of very considerable importance. It
had been said that there was a Bill pending in the other
House of Parliament to facilitate the dissolution of one of
these companies. He had not seen that Bill, but he
thought that no such step should be taken without first
ascertaining the state of the accounts, because Parlia-
ment might otherwise be sanctioning a great injustice.
Their Lordships ought not to allow any facilities what-
ever to the parties until after a full investigation into
these facts, especially after a Bill had been rejected
which would have enforced a distinct and bona fide audit
of all these vast budgets that were going on in the
country under the direction of these companies.
Lord MONTEAGLE said, that before the Bill em-
powering the company to effect a dissolution reached
their Lordships' House, he should move for a Select
Committee to consider and report on the facts stated in
the petition.
The petition was then laid on the table.
GAME CERTIFICATES FOR KILLING HARES
On the motion of the Duke of RICHMOND,
This Bill was read a third time.
Several amendments were then added by way of
riders, and the Bill was passed.
The third reading of the Certificates for Killing Hares
(Seotland) Bill was postponed till Thursday next.
Their Lo;dships then adjourned till Thursday next.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 4.
ENCUMBERED ESTATES (IBELAND) BILL
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday).
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL was very desirous, in
a few words, to explain the objects of the Bill; but as
the principles of the measure had already been amply
discussed, ha hoped the House would not raise another
debate upon it before they went into Committee. The
simple object of the Bill was to make land marketable
in Ireland. At present laud was not a marketable com-
modity in Ireland, owing, he supposed, to the peculiar
state of the country. From returns which bad already
been laid before the House, it appeared, even during the
time of the greatest distress in Ireland, capital was con-
stantly coming over tp be invested in this country which
would have been applied to improving the land in Ireland
had the law relating to the transfer of that commodity
been simple and easy of attainment. Under
the present system there were two registries of property,
but they were so exceedingly defective that it was most
difficult and embarrassing in effecting a transfer of
landed property in Ireland. These registries, for in-
stance, contained accounts of the encumbrances which
rested upon the land of Ireland, and before a piece of
land could be sold the vendor was obliged to prove that
all the registered encumbrances bad been satisfied. The
complicated nature, however, of the law of mortgaging
in Ireland rendered it extremely difficult and expensive
for the vendor to do so. In t his country that difficulty did
not exist, and by this Bill it was proposed so to
simulate the law of the two countries that the difficulty
which had hitherto existed in proving that old encum-
brances had been satisfied should be removed. It was
proposed to do this through the medium of the Court of
Chancery, which would have power to order the sale of
encumbered estates upon the owner and purchaser com-
plying_ with certain regulations to be established by
this Bill. Provisions had been introduced into the Bill
to prevent anything like an improper or fraudulent sale
of property. It was proposed to give the fullest notice
to every parson who might be interested in the property
before any sale could take place, and on it being proved
satisfactorily that these notices had been given the pur-
ohase-money was to be paid into the hands of
the Accountant-General. If, however, there should
be any fraud the whole proceedings would be
perfectly bad and void, and the sale might be
set aside at any time when such fraud was discovered.
The effect of the Bill, in fact, would be to give the real
owners of the property a much better price than they
could obtain under present circumstances, and it there-
fore would be a great boon to the landlords of Ireland.
It had been urged as an objection to the Bill that it
would have the effect of depreciating the
value of property, by throwing too
much
land into the market at once, but that was easily an.
swered, by stating that persons so thinking might delay
the sale until the market price was higher. There
no doubt would be is good deal of legal opposition in
that House to the Bill. He was one of the profession, and
considered that it would certainly be the means of taking
a great deal of business out of their hands—(Laughter)
—but he supported the Bill on public grounds, think-
ing that it would confer a great benefit upon Ire-
land. It would not interfere with any other Bills
which bad been proposed for giving relief to Ireland, it
having been thought desirable to confine it exclusively
to the emancipation of land, and not to incorporate with
it anything with respect to tenant-rights, or
the improvement of land. The Bill would
give to persons a full, expeditious, and safe
mode of investing capital in Irish lands, and it
was well known that a vast amount of capital through-
out the country was seeking for investment at the
present moment. There could be no doubt that if
persons could get a clear title to property in Ireland it
would be the means of bringing a great influx of capital