The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-11 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

GROUP XVII.
MANCIEBSTER AND SOUTHAMPTON? A.ND
SOlrril-WESTERN (BorasrAr AND
BRIDGE
_Bnamcn).
The Committee met this morning at the usual hour ; the lion'
Yorke in the chair.

MANCHESTER AND SOTITHAMPTOIL
Mr. JADIEs handed in the corrected statement, on which the Pifad-
moters rest their case. An error —merely a numerical (OZ. lino
occurred, which made the population of the districts which L".r, was
was proposed to traverse 200,000 more than it actual; y was'
set down at 1,859,000, whereas it should be 1,659,000.
Mr. Matthews, a farmer, at Stockhead, near Cirencester, Wits tee
called and examined by the Chairman and Committee with resPeS,
to the saving which the line would effect to him. He said he fatTz;
800 acre but that he had only made a calculation on 640.t0 the
cost of the wear and tear of carryin his goods at present .;
g
nearest market town in the course of a year was about 7814 but r
calculated if the railway was made that he should save two-Ultra' e
531., besides loss of time. audned
Sir Willoughby Gordon, Bart., Quartermaster General, ex two
by Mr. JAMEs—It is of importance to have direct co
between the inland districts and the various parts of the
th re
e
Railways afford great facilities to the public service, and the m°
direct and the less break of gauge in them the better. It Would_rts„b
of great importance to have direct communication between F`L.,h,
mouth, Southampton, and the manufacturing districts of the.ny......
The movement of troops was invariably accompanied by ca7lie
brances, such as women—(A laugh)—baggage, ammunition, Wee
don,
bodies of troops were stationed at Birmingham, Coventry,
Chester, and Preston. Assuming a line to be made like the
chester and Southampton, without break ofgauge, it would be used
the transmission of troops from the south to the north, and to
Ireland,
and vice versa, It would also facilitate the passage of trOOPS
north to the Channel Islands.
By the Committee—lt would be of great importance to Gosport,
Winchester, and other towns to have such a communication with the
north.
By the CHAIRMAN—The Manchester and Southampton IS an el-
ceedingly iniportant national work.
By Mr. AusTirt—As at present advised should send troops for Ire-
land by Liverpool. Portsmouth must always be considered a more
important town on account of the garrison. Was aware that there
was a line to Basingstoke, and from Basingstoke to Reading ; but he
would, with all submission, leave it to the consideration of the Com'
mittee, whether a line from Oxford to Rugby, and thus establishing
fracas
a new connexion between the south and the north, would be of ei
advantage than the proposed line. A difference of tighten H
of
and break of gauge would be disadvantageous; but the saYtue -
au
expense was a great object, so also was the saving of time, and
easy mode of conveyance.

{GROUP LIII.
airan)•
This Committee, consisting of the Hon. E. Laseelles (A in
tl
an
the Earl of Arundel aad Surrey, Mr. Bildyard, Mr. 11. Clayton,
Captain Dalrymple, met at the customary hour to day.
SHIZEWSISURY AND DIRDZINGELAIVI. car•
Mr. Rork (in the absence of Mr. Austin), briefly opened
ache;
on the part of the promoters, and described the route of the sar;d,
The line, including all tare branches, would be about sixty Luile'c'erto
the total estimate 2,200,0001. With regard to the engin re-
-character of the works, he believed there was nothing we' ould
markable. The gradients were as favourable as the counts'? to
admit, and when he -stated that Mr. Stephenson W 2.7 pre
engineer of- the line, - the" Committee must Pv
that there would be no steep gradient on the line,w let
could possibly be avoided, as that gentleman was to a
to easy gradients, and for great reason in his (Mr. Hope's) el' WO T.
There was one gradient of lln 100, and another that was " teris'
steeper at the station near Birmingham, and therefore not niscouroe
There was also some tunnelling of a few thousand yards the
of the line. degree eeinioo.

GROUP LVII. o'clock,
The Committee on this group met today at twelve °
chair-
Room No. 27 (grand corridor) ; present, Mr. Francis Barlegiloo.
mm), Mr. Baskerville, Mr. Staunton, Mr. C. East, and the
Bouverie. They resumed the case of the
zurAir
BartrarNmatian CANAL AND RAZ—

ARRANGEMENTS.
Mr. ROBINSON, for the promoters, called additional evidence
support of the Bill. ton, Priv
r. Sparrow, from the neighbourhood of WolverhainP- con.
prietor of extensive iron works, having used the canal for Its pro•
veyauce of iron and coal for many years, was favourable rehro, Isar
posed arrangements, which he was of opinion would be big
tidal to the public.
•

Other witnesses gave testimony to a similar effect. ' if"
irn ° Mr. Robert Scott, M.P. for Walsall, and Chairman of the Dat gres
ham Canal Company, was examined by Mr. RostrisoN
coutar
length, for the purpose of proving that the arrangements traillo of
plated in the Bill would be of moat important benefit to we ~„adoill
the district, indeed of the whole county. The part of the x.-rot
be
traversed by the Birmingam Canalunless and its brancheS oo
accommodated with railwayDY22continUa"
arrangement with the Canal Company. The effect of boon to
meat
all of railway and canal accommodation would be a
all those who now used the canal.

DANISH CLAIMS AND COMNWIi/

HONESTY. S' UN-
TO THE EDITOR OF 27--- have read the,
SIR,—No lover of honesty and fair play e"
debate (if it may be called such) of
claims, without feelings of disgust. "reallY:a this coffunu;/
only object of the existence of Government in
claims
of the
were to obstruct the course of justice and the 1
eoennitshue Danis:
and
Hawes stood alone, resting on the obvious justice
ve
people for protection. It is deeply to be regrettedc that gr.
yesterday,
In
of his case only, while the Government, by an active
to wwl'i
defeat
contrived, not by argument,but by mechanical votes,
once more the settlement of a cane on the merits of 410-`:
the House of Commons has five times decided in the wrens
Live. The speeches of the two Government mouthPlee7a
contained not one argument, and were solely mad?ou_pciai
what Sir Thomas Wilde recently well described as
denials." Permit me, having no personal interest in ,
but that of a love of and who has tak theiet
Lne facts of the case, to make a for
brief comments on the two Government speeches.
Mr. Goulburn adopted quite a new line of argument;
and, for him, quite an amusing one : he must have wee._
it in gentle satire of the votes retained for the occasion. !e.le
professed, forsooth, great consideration for the pockets of tn
people I Now, sir, I have always heard that England ?a
sentially a commercial nation—that her merchants &fi he;
d,
strength. In my school days I learned she was a11,117-p
having divers seaports, whence myriads of mercham
against
conficing in the protection of their native Government g
aggression, departed to all parts of the world, to bri.eBg•_.,,.-1‘
again sources of wealth to their native shores. But all Wail "v;
olano,
thing to Mr. Goulburn. To him she is some linngarY
torF fieetS,
which, devoid of seaports, unencumbered by merchant t
sad
needs for such matter no consideration but conten3P, who
sneers. It is in this case the merchants of England
have suffered for the alleged good of the whole country ,„
whatever the events cost at the time these merchants n„
tributed their full share, and to any public cost now to mo oo
pensate their losses they will also contribute. And villycae..
they in addition to suffer these tremendous losses, this
fiscation of their property, in order to put money iii
As
pockets of the King and Government? The pretence is
shallow as it is hypocritical. For forty years they have .e
promised and just compensation withheld, while Governnta
has all that time been in possession of its immense ill-got:;,
plunder, obtained by the same act which ruined thni
merchants, an act which morals have not language le
enough to characterise. It was England which made
aggression against a nation in profound peace with
made it in defiance of every law of nations and of 00- of
and now English Ministers have the effrontery to talk of
these robberies as "captures made in the ordinary cenrseer,
war." It is not material now to show what is, holve:es
fact—that at first it was expressly alleged by Governo4
that these seizures were contrary to the usages of war 17ot
the law of nations. England having made such unprovemt
aggression, it is not to be wondered at that Denmark, 'i,`"o
justified, in her only self-defence, in herself violating thoseli.a,,,
and seizing English ships on a neutral sea, for these 8;1,5
were not seized on the high seas. This is a line of &TWO" is
not touched by Mr. Hawes, but very important, as else.
.
that other, also not touched by him, but in itself concluelvo
that England, in her confiscation of Danish property,
t
guilty of a breach of positive English law; as a conseq,"7,;t
of which it was that English property was confiscated.
really settles the question.
It is curious that every lawyer consulted in this earf
has given his opinion in favour of the claimants, howev._
convenient it might be, when in office, to desert that opinla.l
No such sophistry as Mr. Cardwell used can alter or arl._r,
the fact, that the present Solicitor-General gave his opine
that the ordinance of 16th August, 1807 (which no man ev`;
yet read and honestly supposed it to be a declaration of War
was NOT a declaration of war. Every act and order in Cali.„1111
cif of the English and of the Danish Governments conlinr
this opinion. Had I time, I could cite more than tweny., .
official documents in proof of it; and the first I would or
would be that very ordinance of the 9th September, which,
in such a Jesuitical, but truly "official" way, Messrs. Gnu::
burn and Cardwell quoted, omitting carefully to state its wilt
objects and contents, which are to recite that very ordinal:"
of 16th August, not as a declaration of war, but as an ordi"
nance for EMBARGO ; and to proceed it self, not to confiscate
English property, but to provide for its safe custody till the
result of events was known. Would space allow. I Oulu'
strengthen this ground by numberless facts and authorities.
I will only add that Lord Ellenborough and Sir Wm. Grants
neither of them idle spectators of events, both had the event'
of those days brought under their judicial notice,
and both decided that no war existed between England
and Denmark at that time or much later; and Lord Mell-
en of ordinary prudence
borough expressly held that there did not exist such
state of things as should lead anynncil he
was
right. P
to suppose war would arise. A
England was guilty of a systematic course of
well as on Denmark deception and
Unlese
fraud on her own people, no honest
observed that towards every It is to be 0 part of these
ungracious and dishonourable man could suppose that waras would arise.
claims the same
of justice has taken piace.. Two classes, against whose
claims a fair colour of objection might have been raised,
have, however, been paid—through some favour and influ:
ence, it must be presumed. The present class stand
for
the twentyyears. Why,peSuiF.:
on a much better foot-
ing,yd I t
inainntdo, faltapwr,eseenqu4itremains
huo
nn
ltehgeerde
aret ha that
tt htehyi s weremom silenten moment
inis most falsely al'
tions, lodged there in 1808 and succeeding years. This is a
Treasury numberless
most barefaced and daring " official denial." One of these
original petitions has been recently reprinted, and an ea'
a
cellent one it is. Little dreaming
it
that it would be nega'
tively prophetic, it assumwahon
will not '
otofbezisasmaiiteshas
h
proved to be, "'the • ,' W that
and determination, Government to obtain in this manner,' and keep a pecuniary,
gain' to the Crown at the individual expense of its own subjects.
Well might Mr. Goulburn talk of a " new principle." A
" new principle," indeed, it is ; and one to be universally exe-
crated, for a Government thus to enrich themselves, and to
persist in retaining the plunder got by wholesale spoliation,
at the direct cost of their own merchants.
Three Chancellors of the Exchequer have promised par
ment—three times have the Lords of the Treasury expressly
referred it to Parliament to determine to whom payment le
due—five times has Parliament adjudged it to the present
claimants; yet do Ministers, in defiance of common honest'',
in dereliction of their duty to their Queen, and in contempt
of their duty to the nation of whom they are the hired ser'
vants, refuse to obey the judgment of that tribunal to which
they themselves appealed. If there is no way of compelling
their obedience, defective indeed must be our system of ad-
ministration of justice. I will not believe there is none. The
proposition is full of danger to our liberties.
I trust the claimants will not be disheartened, but that
they will rather redouble their energies, and arm their ad-
vocates with the numerous facts, as yet wholly untouched which
bear upon the case—and, if there is any right, if there is
any justice to be had in England—if Parliament has any
sense of consistency or honour, or of its own privileges and
fanctions, and deserts not its office and its independence"!