The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-24 00:00:00

If ‘itr gIY 1,1, iv,
1,1 ts ,„ 6
)
P

SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock

; RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
(THIS DAY.)

Sub-Committee No. 2,

DIRECT LONDON AND TVIANCNESTER.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)

It was also alleged that the properties marked 8 and 16 In the books
Of reference were omitted from the plans deposited with the clerks
of the peace for the counties through which this line was to pass, and
in the Private Bill-office. This allagation was not pressed. There
were three similar allegations which were abandoned.
The next allegation was that the radius of the curve on the 142 d
mile of the main line was not marked, which was established.

It was also alleged that in the plan deposited with the clerk_of the
peace no owner or occupier of the ground No. 64 appeared, which
was sustained.

The next allegation was that Sos. 515 and 543, in the liberties of
St. Alban's and Presbury, were not marked in the books of reference.
Evidence was given for and against the allegation.
The Committee considered that the standing orders had not been
complied with in this case.
The next allegation was that In the book of reference No. 95,
tom 545 to 553 inclusive, in the parish of Presbury, in the county
of. tliester, was described as being in the county of Stafford. This
allegation was sustained,
It was also alleged that the radius of curve on the 174th mile and
second furlong was not marked in the plans.
Mr. Remington, engineer, proved the omission in question.
Mr. DYSON contended, that the allegation referred to a line which
thee' had not power to construct, and that therefore they were not
bound to mark the radius alluded to. -

The allegation was ultimately withdrawn.
It was next alleged that there was an omi,:slon on the 13th mile
and 7th furlong, which was sustained.
'The petition further alleged that the vertical line, mile 5, furlong
Was not marked on the plan deposited with the Clerk of the
Peace for the county of Derby. This allegation was proved.
The petition also alleged that the height of the railway above the
public road on the twenty-third niiie and third furlong was not, cor-
rectly marked, it being marked in one place as three feet, and in an-
other eight feet. This allegation was established.
several similar allegations were abandoned.
Mr. Psarr said that he would pass from 178 in the petition to the
28th allegation. The general allegation was that there was no
notice even to certain owners of property on the line.
ThdMas Slingsby, one of the petitioners, was examined to show
that he had not been served with notice.
Ma. DYSON —Pray how long is it since you have signed your consent?
Mr. Slingsby—l don't know.
11 It was also alleged that Nos 78 and 79 were omitted from the plan
deposited in the Private Bill-office, which was not pressed.
The next allegation was that No. 181, described in the book of re-
ference as a parish road, did not appear on the plan, which was sus-
tained.

Mr. DYSON—HOW old are you? Mr. Slingsby—l am twenty years
of age.
Mr. DYSON then contended that the witness was not entitled to
be beard, as being a minor.
•
Alter some discussion between the agents,
'lhe CnainmaN, (Mr. G. Craig), said that the Committee were of
opinion that the wittness had a right to be heard, being of an age
sufficient to enable him to understand when his interests would be

affected, as in the present case, being the owner of the property in
question.

The case was then proceeded with.
Mr. Slingsby in reply to Mr. Dyson, said that he was living with
his mother, who was not present. The notice was served on his
matter in September last.
The CUAIRMAN said the Committee were of opinion that in this
case the standing orders had been complied with.
The Committee then adjourned shortly after four o'clock, till
twelve o'clock to-morrow.

Sub-Commlite,e No. a

This Sub-Committeeresumed its sittings at the usual hour this
morning; Mr. Aglionby in the chair.

THE WELSH MIDLAND.

The object of the petitioners in this case was to make a railway
front the city of NY: reester to Swat:sea and Carmarthen, with branches
to various mineral fled tbljacent to the line.

There were several petitioners against the Bill, amongst whom
were the Earl of Jersey anti the Corporation of Worcester.
The customary formal proofs of the serving of notices and deposit
of plans, &c., having been put In,
Mr. ELLTCOMBE stated that owing to Mr. Sidney Hall, who had
had the entire control of the englueerin,, department of the line,
having been confined to his bed by Illness from the 13th to the 30th
of November, the plans and sections of the scheme deposited with
the clerks of the peaco on the 30th of November were not so perfect
as they ct•u!d have wiiihed. They could find uo one to supply Mr.
Hall's place, and they were, therefore, compelled to deposit the plans
ha the condition he hail mentioned. The promoters of the scheme
had a meeting upon the subject, and they determined upon
depositing, on the 31st of December, with the clerks of the peace
plans which had been prepared by Mr. halt ;subsequently to his ill-
ness fur, being deposited with the parlll clerks, and which were more
perfect tll4ll those deposited on the 30th of November. Now, these
deposited with the parish clerks ought to barn been duplicates
_ .

Oth of Nov

of those deposited on tt
mittec would consider that t
justified a departure from the

cirouns

lees he had already state

Mr. BIRK, wiio :r

cared fir a petitioner against the Bill, appre
imittee had nothir,g to do with the plans dc-
I)ece!u with the clerks of the peace, and he
cement of his Learned Friend, that the
it to be admitted—namely, that the plans de-
s of the peace on the 30th of November were

elleltt

posited with th clerk

imperfect,

de-

5,1 r. ELLICOMD2 remarked that in the late case of the Monmouth
and Hereford hallway, which was similar to the prese,:t one, it was
decided that the promoters of the Bill might a, opt the perfected plans
deposited with the parish clerks, on the 31st of December, in prefer-
ence to those deposited with the clerks of the peace, on the 33th cf
November. He trusted, therefore, that the Committee would be
gnide•d by precedent. and allow him to prove the accuracy of the
plans deposited on the 31st of December. . -

.
Mr. Bum said the case of the -Monmouth and Hereford Bill was
d'fferent to the present one. In that case there was no opposition ;
and the parties had given ample testice that they intended to rely en
the plans deposited on the 31st of December, and not on those depo-
sited on the 30th of November. Ile insisted that the Committee
would not he justified in allowing the parties in this case to prove
that . the- plans deposited on the 30th of December were accurate.
',Hwy ought to be confined to the plans deposited on the 10th of No-
vember, and required to show that the plans deposited on the 31st of
December were duplicates of those deposited on the 30th of Nov.
_ .

The Committee, after a short consultation, decided that they
would take evidence as to the illness of the engineer, because it came
within the province of a Sub-Committee to ascertain whether the
cause which had prevented the parties from comply-
ing with the standing orders was an exonerating cir-
cumstance in favour of the parties or not; but the question
as to whether the plans deposited on the 31st- of December with the
c erks of the peace should be substituted for those deposited on the
30.11 of Nov., must be left for the decision of the Committee on stand-
ing orders.
Mr. Sidney Hall was accordingly called to prove his illness, and his
cons •quent inability to examine the plans and sections previ misty to
the deposit on the 30th of Nov.
The Committee nevertheless decided that the standing orders had
not been complied with in respect of the point relating to tins deposit
of plans.
The Committee shortly afterwards

Sub-Committee No. 4

11 to-morrov

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)

GM.S.S.Ce' 11117:7 .11.1 ii-D 2 mxinavr NEON.

The object of this 13111, against which there were two petitions, is
to make a line from Ayr to Portpatrick, that being the newest har-
bour to Bella t. Thelength of the line is 60 miles, and the required
capital 800,0001.
Mr. John Miller Is the engineer, and Messra. Rubardson and Co.,
the Parliamentary egants.
lie two petitions above alluded to, are both preferred by Mr. P.
Mackay, a writer to the Signet, but in the one petition he repre-
sented the magistrates of Newton-upon-Ayr, and some other persons.
Mr. Webster appeared in support of the petitions.
The first allegation of the petition, in which, as stated above, the
petitioner represented other persons, was that an occupation-road,
leading to the house of 31r. T. Gordon, which was crossed by the
line, was reprmeived 'in the plans as being it public road. It was
objected that this allegation ought to state that this road was the
property of Mr. Gordon, and that as it did not, it was informal.
After same discussion, the Committee dismissed the allegation.
The next allegation was that a belt of planting in the parish of
Newton'on-Ayr, marked No. 2 in the book of reference, and in the
plaits and sections dodged at the Private Bill-office was not so
marked in the plan lodged with the sheriff's clerk of Ayr, and that
therefore the standing orders had not been complied with.
Similar objections were raised to various other numbers, and evi-
dence was brought forward to substantiate them.
On the ether hand it was contended that as the numbers were
correctly marked in the plans deposited in the Private Bill-office,
and proper notice had been given to the several owners and occupiers
of the lands referred to in the allegation,. there had been a sufficient
compliance with the standing orders. -
In some of these cues the allegations were considered as proved
and the standing orders not complied with ; in others the allega-
tions were civerrnietLbut they could not discriminate the sustained
from the nnsustained.
The 15th allegation was to the effect that the railway was to cross
a public of turnpike road by a bridge, and no height or span of arch
of such viaduct was stated In the plan.
After some discussion between the agents for and against the alle-
gation, the Committee reserved their decision.
The petition contained several other allegations, all of a technical
and trilling character, relating to defects in the plans and sections, as
deposited with the Sheriff-clerk.
After considerable discussion, strangers were ordered to withdraw,
and the Committee .considered their judgment upon the objections
which, as stated above, had been reserved.
011 the re-admission of strangers, it was announced that two (Mite
idle,,atiens had been, stistah ed, anti all the others were overruled.
The Committee then adjourned.

Sub-Committee No. 5.
Members present, Mr. Home Drummond, chairman, Mr. Egerton,
the O'Conor Don, end Mr. Compton.
LONDOTZ, 5it.L13231.72.7.7, ATM YE 316*1L 3-UNC-
TION' (EASZATOSTOICE TO YEOVIL).

-
The Committee procnded with the further consideration of this
Bill, which was opposed on several grounds The first allegation
this day was, that the elation line was not truly or accurately defined.
The Committee unanimously decided that the standing orders on this
point were not complied with. The second objection was, that there
was a branch of the proposed line not intelligibly defined.
lir. Smith, engineer, was examined by Mr. Venables, and proved
that it appeared to hint there was a branch marked on the line of
which no notice was given, and from the construction of the plan it
could not be defined clearly what were the objects of the line.
Mr. Webster, on behalf of the petitioners, called the engineer to
the line, who proved there could be no difficulty in distinguishing
the necessary particulars.
.The Counnittee postponed their decision until they heard the next
objection, which was that " two branches were marked on the map,
while there was only one petitioned for, and that the plan was in
consequence calculated to mislead." On these two points the Com-
mittee decided that the standing orders were not complied with, In-
asmuch as duplicates were not lodged in the Private Bill-office, the
distances being incorrectly marked for several miles.
In every other respect they decided the objections were not
Sustained.

The next allegfition contained in the petition of Earl Dighy, that
the roads and rivers did Lot correspond on the &tit= line with those
on tho railway line.",

The Cominittec7dc' hied, that in this case, that the allegations wore
not sufficiently specific tv correspond with the standing orders.
The petition of Air: Wm. Hyman was then considered, '" That the
Om; Of the proposed work are not correct, inasmuch as certain fields
through which the proposed line is to pass, were not described in
the bock of reference, and that no notice was given the petitioner in
reslicet of the said fields, although he is the proprietor of the same."
not c
The
emPCommittee in this case decided that the standing orders were
lied
31r. BATTEN, solicitor, was called to prove that another geld eel-
joining those in the preceding objection, was not marked ou the map,
as a matter of course, was not described In the book or reference.
'lnln this case also, the
alitCommt decided that the standing orders
an g a quarter put four o'clock,
were not complied with ;
they Adjourned the further hearing of rho ease till to-morrow, at
Twelve D'elock.

Sub-Committee No. 6.
(COfttinued from our Afternoon Edition).

SOVIrg..,76ASTZRZT
ASISI'OII23 STATION' Erna. ne,4;;FIE),
This object of this Bill Is simply the extension of the present
Ilan at Ashford, where it is also intended 't,) construct .sta-
„„rkAhops. rower is given in the Bill to take laud to the extent
MO acres. The 04. in-tilted cost is I1,0)0/. The e„gineer Is Roberti.
Stephenson, Esq.
The standing orders were compl:ed with.
CHICHESTER, POIZT.SIVIOUTTI, AND rAR,E.
SA= WAY.
. . .
The object of this Bill is to authorise tile sale of the above-named
Railway to the South-WeStern and London and Brighton Railway
Companies. The amount of purchase-money had been previously'
agreed upon, and did not transpire.
The standing orders were declared to have been complied with,
except as regarded a mere notice which was not served in proper
-time

aILILIMSE7.I33 117t2 7.7.0C:q7:5T1M 27,11ZINJ'AY

AND CANAL.

;.This is a Bill to enable the South-Eastern Railway Company to
plltyhase the Gravesend and Rochester Ita Tway and Canal.
pe standing orders were complied with.
THE TAP 'VALE (BRANCHES).

The' 1311 i is to authorise the construction of two small branches,
about t Went? :tides in length, from the TatfeTale Rails ay. The es-
timated coat is 216,000/.. and the amount subscribed 16,5 A. The
engineer is E. g‘ighton, Esq., the Parliamentary agents Messrs.
Burka and Co, afloiAie solicitors Messrs. W. D. and W. Hunt.
Standing ort:ar: covagied with.
WEST IsOlirn,N2f RAILWAY IMPROVEMENT
azi-0 =XTEATEctoNs.

This Bill is to authorise 'he extension from the basin of the Kens-
ington Canal to the Thames:. The length is about I% miles, and
the estimated. cost 50,0061. The engineers are Robert itephenson
and Dockray, Eaqrs.; the Parliamentary agents 'ours. Bvalie
lsleasrs. Parker and Co.
1a CO., Alla tilie Solicitors,

The standing orders were comptied with.
The Committee then adjourned at Four o'clock

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEES.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
The Committee of standing orders met this day at 12 o'clock, for
the dispatch of public business. After hearing the usual evidence, the
DUBLIN, DUNDRUM, AND ENNISKERRY Company wtre de-
clared to have compiled with the standing orders.
CORK AND WATERFORD RAILWAY.
This case - occupied a considerable portion of time, it being
opposed by the Dublin and Cashel Company. The Com-
mittee, however, decided that the standing orders had
been complied with, and ;that the Company might proceed, the
Cove branch of the line being thrown out for non-compliance.
The CoMmittee reported that the Glanmire branch had also failed
to fulfil the standing orders, but recommended that the Company
should be allowed to proceed.
THE CARLOW EXTENSION RAILWAY
Has been postpOned until Thursday next. This line is 22 miles in
length, and the capital of the Company 180,0001.
SLIGO AND SHANNON RAILWAY.
The usual evidence having been gone through, the Committee re-
ported that the standing orders had been complied with in this case.

LAIRNE, BELFAST, AND BALLYMENA,
The Committee reported that in this case the Company had corn
plied with the standing orders.
BALLYMENA AND BALLYMONEY.

This company were also declared to have complied with the
standing orders and to have passed.
THE KILLARNEY JUNCTION RAILWAY

has been reserved for the want of two witnesses ; it may, however,
be considered virtually to have passed.
THE GREAT SOUTHERN AND WESTERN (IRELAND)
CORK EXTENSION
has also been reserved till Thursday next.
The Committee adjourned at half-past four o'clock.

. HOUSE OF COMMONS.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)

In the case of the following Bills the Committee have decided that
they should b,l allowed to be proceeded with :
NORTH OF SCOTLAND AND EASTERN EXTENSION.
SO 11 E RSETS H IRE MIDLAND RAILWAY.
RICHMOND RAILWAY (Kew Branch).
RUGBY, LEAMINGTON, AND WARWICK.
EDI N BURGHAND;NORTH ERN RAILWAY (I t unfermline Branch)
AIRDRIE AND BATIIGATE:RAILWAY.—This Bill was allowed
to be proceeded with on the promoters proving that each of the sub-
scribers had paid up their amount previous to the presentation of
the petitions.
LEICESTER AND TAMWORTII RAILWAY.—At the time
when this Bill was called, there was no person representing that
scheme In attendance.
WEST RIDING UNION RAILWAY.—The Committee came to
a decision that they would make especial report to the House to-night
upon this case.

Vire hear it said that the Division is likely to take
thee on Ti nrsday night.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS EVENING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY took his seat on the Woolsack
at Fire o'clock.

CORN LAWS.

The Duke of RICHMOND presented numerous petitions
from the West and North Riding of Yorkshire, the counties of
Derby, Cornwall, and Devon, in England ; Montgomeryshire,
in Wales; Forfar, Elgin, and Aberdeenshire, in Scotland; and
Tyrone, Carlow, and Londonderry, in Ireland, against the Go-
vernment measure. _ _ _ _ _

HIGH CONSTABLES' BILL.
The NOBLE DUKE then gave notice that he intended to
move that the High Constables' Bill be referred to the com-
mittee which was to be named on Thur.day next.
THE CASE OF BRIAN SEERY.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH wished to call the atten-
tion of their Lordships to a question which had been put to the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of the Home Depart-
ment, in the other House, last night, relating to the care of
Bryan Seery, who was recently convicted at Mulinger, and it
was answered by the Right Hon. Gentleman that a deputation
proceeded from the county of Westmeath to the Lord Lieu-
tenant of Ireland with the object of impressing on his mind to
allow the law to take its course. The Right lion. Gentle-
man having thus answered the question, he (the
Marquis of Westmeath) coneidered, under the
circumstances, it was his duty to bring the matter
under their consideration. He regretted such an
answer had been given, asino deputation on the subject did
proceed from the county of Westmeath to the Lord Lieutenant
of Ireland.

The Earl ST. GERMANS rose to ofder. With the greatest
respect he must tell the Noble Marquis, that it was not proper
to advert in that manner to what took place in the other
House.

Lord BROUGHAM concurred, and said that ii was ex-
ceedingly irregular to refer to a speech purporting to be made
in the other liouse, and which was only known to the Noble
Marquis through the ordinary channels of communication, or
as he (Lord Brougham) would say plainly, the newspapers.—
(Ilrar, and laughter.)
The Earl St. GERMAINS said the more regular course
would have been for the Noble Marquis to have given rotiee of
his intention to put the question, and then he (the Earl St.
Germans) would have been Drepared to give an answer. As
it was he was quite incapable of answering it or making any
explanation.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH had no desire to adopt any
unusual proceeding, nor to take any member of the Govern-
ment in that House by surprise, by referring to statements
made by one of his colleagues in the other House without
giving notice of his intention. He was anxious to
contradict the statement to which he referred, on the
earliest possible moment, for when that statement ar-
rived in Ireland, the portion of the press which considered
that Bryan Seery ought to haie been executed would vitupe-
rate the magistrates of the county, and there was no telling to
what injury they might be subjected to in consequence. He
admitted that in courtesy he ought to have notice of his in-
tention to put the question, hut the necessity of giving an
immediate contradiction to the assertion must be his
apology. He therefore wished to ask the Noble Earl
(Eari St, Germans) if the Secretary of State in his place
admitted that such a deputation did wait upon the Lord Lieu.
tenant, and that he regretted the circunistance, as it was un-
called for.

The LORD CHANCELEOR—In what place?
The Marquis of WESTMEATH—In the other House.—
(Lau;httr).
The LORD CHANCELLOR—Then the Noble Earl can-
not answer the question.
The Duke of BUCKINGHAM suggested that his Noble
Friend should give notice on Thursday of his intention to put
his question to the Noble Earl.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH was understood to assent
to the suggesti,m, and there the matter dropped.
TAE LAW OF ABDUCTION.

Lord BROUGHAM said, in presenting a petition, that there
were very serious anomalies in the law relating to abduction
which required amendment. After referring to the cases of
Edward Gibbon Wakefield and the late Lord Redesdale, he
proceeded to present a petition from Jane Worthing, a widow,
whose husband died in 1842; as her circumstances were reduced
in eonsequence of the death of her husband, she was induced
to take a lodger into her house, named Burton Newman.
By the present law, a man may be inveigled into a marriage
that nothing could set aside. Here was a person of
forty years of age inveigling a child into a marriage,
which there is no power to annul. That was the law
of Scotland at present. He brought in a Bill to remedy
that law, but others determined to keep it, and thus the law as
it at present exists what be could call nothing but a gross and
brutal law. He took off this young girl, and when he came
back he was tried for seduction at the Central Criminal Court,
and ,was very properly convicted by the learned judge, Baron
Gurney, who in passing sentence said, he never heard of such
a case before. He was now undergoing that most just and
righteous sentence of the law, an imprisonment for a period of
two years. The Bill he proposed would not dissolve that
marriage; that eould not now be cured, but he (Lord
Brougham) hoped their Lordships would give their attention to
the present measure to prevent such occurrences in future. In
the case before their Lordships a marriage actually teok place,
and he could not then question the validity of that
marriage, as he did not wish to provoke a discussion,
and would therefore abstain from arguing the case.
If no remedy were given for this state of things, tae greatest
evis would continue to result. He considered it too bad that
one party should by stratagem and artifice be allowed to prey
upon the ignorance, innocence, and even weakness of another
party. In the present case there would be a transfer of
4001. a year, which was her property, and over which she would
cease to have any control unless their Lordships n itnessed. He
hoped, therefore, that their Lordships iiould take the matter
into their consideration, and remedy the grievances he had
stated.

—...—.
The LORD CHANCELLOR suggested that it would he
desirable to have the petition printed before any other steps
were taken in the matter.
Lord BROUGHAM had no objection that the petition
should be printed.
Lord CAMPBELL entered his solemn protest against the
course proposed to be adopted by the Noble Lord. He approved
Of the Bill to dissolve the marriage in such cases as that of
Wakefield and Turner, where she left the man an intact
virgin, but he could not assent to it as being at all appli-
cable to those cases where the marriage was consummate d.
When a marriage was celebrated according the law of
Scotland—when that marriage was consummated—when
the parties afterwards lived together as man and wife,
and when, perhaps, children were born the fruit of
that union—to talk of dissolving a marriage under
such circumstances, and to make •the children illegiti-
mate, was contrary to all principle, and involved far more
serious evils than those which this Bill sought to remedy.
The Law of Scotland, he admitted, was ex-
tremely defective on the subject, and he hoped
that the Learned Judges of this country would see the propriety
of returning to the opinion which they entertained in 1835, but
while the law remained as it was, it must be respected and
obeyed. To talk therefore of dissolving marriages eontracted
in the way stated, was contrary to all principles of justice, and
if once they made a change of the nature proposed, where he
would ask where they to stop.
Lord BROUGHAM said, that if all these marriages were
contracted under the same circumstances, he did not see that
any great harm would follow from dissolving. If a robber of
forty years of age entered a house and carried off a child of four-
teen, pretending to take her to Furnival's Inn, and by a gross
fraud contracted a marriage, he thought the consummation of
that marriage only aggravated the offence.
The Earl of SHHFTESBURY said it was not usual to
print petitions.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that it was a mere matter
matter of form, and equivalent to petitioners presenting their
own petition at the bar.
Leave was then given to print the petition.
tot-ala
CORN-LAWS.
llr andKimlN:edAialtß: presented a petition from some place
In Scotland, pra3ing that the repeal of the corn-laws should be

BROAD AND NAIMOW GAUGE.
Lord MN N AIRD, in pursuance of the question of which
he had given notice, said, that among the many important
measures likely to come before the House this session, both as
regarded their social and commercial position, he thought the
railways one that required their most serious considera-
tion. In whatever view they examined this subject—
whethcr as enabling the merchant to dispense with
. •

LORDS' SU Isi NilsAltY.
The Loan CHANCELLOR took h scat upon the Woolsack
rn as
ren
at Five o'clock.
After the presentation of petitions,
The Dimwit's of WESTMEATH asked a questio
what had taken place in the House of Commons in to
efe
to the case of BRYAN SEERY. The question having boon
objected to as irregular, the Noble Marquis gave notice of a
question on the subject for Monday.
Lord BROUGHAM then presented a petition from a person
named Worthing, praying their Lordships to amend the law
relating to divorce. The case was somewhat similar to that
of Edward Gibson Wakefield. The daughter of the peti-
tioner, a minor, had been abducted by been named Newman,
and married by him. The man bad convicted of the
abduction, and she prayed their Lordships to amend
the law, so 'as 'to give an easier remedy in such cases.
The Noble and Learned Lord concluded by announcing his
intention of moving.that the petition he referred to a Select
Committee.

The LORD CHANCELLOR suggested the propriety of having
the petition printed.
Lord CAMPBELL protested against this proceeding. In the
case of Wakefield, the marriage had never been consummated,
but in this instance there had been issue, and he trusted their
Lordships would not illegitimatise the issue. The Scotch
law of marriage ought to be altered, but until it was altered,
marriages contracted under the law ought to be maintained.
After a few words from Lord Bnotetasam, the petition was
ordered to be printed.
Load KINNAIRD then rose to ask the Government what
course they intended to pursue with respect to the report of
the Gauge Commission ? The question was of great impor-
tauce in a social, a commercial, a military, and
a financial point of view, and he hoped the House would
grant a Committee to inquire whether it would not be
advisable to establish a general system for superintendence
and control of railways generally, which would ensure the
safety and convenience of the public, and prevent the pro-
mulgation of bubble schemes. With regard to the report of
the Commissioners, it appeared to him to be all hi favour of
the broad gauge, with the exception of the conveyance of
troops and of goods ; and after reading the report
he was surprised to find the Commissioners
recommending the narrow gauge. He trusted they
would not attempt to limit the speed, and he
regretted that the Commissions had not considered the pro-
priety of adopting a medium gauge. The narrow gauge
nnght, without any inconvenience, be altered into a six foot
gauge. Indeed, he believed it was impossible to alter the
whole of the narrow gauge into the broad without any incon•
venience to the public, and without anv enormous expense
to the parties. He trusted the Roble Lord would
maturely consider the subject before he tied
down the country to an inferior gauge. The expense
of the alteration might be defrayed by a.mileage-tax upon
all railways. He wished to know how soon it would be
before the evidence was laid before the House, and that the
Government would be prepared to state their intentions on
the subject.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE replied, that the recommendations
of the Commissioners were of very great importance, and
must be maturely considered. No effect could be given to
those recommendations without an Act of Parliament, and
the Government felt that it would be unjust to propose to
take any steps until the members of the Legislature should
have bad an opportunity of studying the evidence, which
woula be laid on the table of the House as soon as possible,
possibly in the course of two or thpee wchks; and as soon as
the Government should have considered the evidence, they
would propose some' measure on the subject.
Lord BROUGHAM thought that time should be given not
only to Parliament, but to engineers and scientific men, to
consider the subject.

Lord HATHETTON rose, and was left speaking.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at a few minuteg before Four.
'f he following Bills were read a second time, and were
ordered to be committed, viz., the

Mallon and Driffield Junction Railway.
Glasgow Waterworks.

Cambridge and Oxford Railway.

Aston Riies.

York and North Midland Railway (East Riding Branches)—
No. 2.
Great North of England Railway Purchase.
Great North of England and Bcroughbridge Branch Railway.
Great North of England and Bedsle Branch Railway.
Blackburn, Preston, and East Lancashire Railways Amalga-
mation.