The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-05 00:00:00

RAILWAY BUSINESS.

Mr. MASTERMAN presented a petition for leave to
Indan
tmioanr
r. Drdsi
doe.
pcokoo
rsßut tßilottirartnihEl Birmingham bring in a Bill for making a railway from the West
N
d
pßetaiitliownayfo. r the Leicester
presented a petition for the So-
merset and Southampton Railway.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented petitions for the Man-
chester and Chester, the Manchester and Leeds, the
Leeds and Rugby, the Dumblane, and the Leeds Direct
Railways.
An HON. MEMBER presented a petition in favour of
the Wolverhampton Railway.
Mr. OSWALD presented a petition in favour of the
Glasgow and Kilmarnock Railway.
Mr. FITZSTEPHEN FRENCH presented petitions
from several places in Ireland, praying that the Great
Munster Railway Bill might pass into law.
Sir JOHN YARDE BULLER brought up the report
of the Glasgow, Paisley, and Kilmarnock Railway, and
presented also several petitions for railways.
Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET brought up the
report of the Sub-Committee:on Railways.
Mi. DUNCAN presented a petition in favour of the
Dundee and Perth Railway.
Mr. DUNCAN presented a petition in favour of the
Dundee and Arbroath Railway.
Mr. ASTELL presented a petition in favour of the
Direct Manchester Railway.
Sir R. H. INGLIS pr.mosttod a p.tit;.,n against the
Direct London and Portsmouth Railway.
THE DIRECT MANCHESTER AND SOUTH-
AMPTON RAILWAY.
Mr. HOPE presented a petition from the Town Coun-
cil of Southampton in favour of the Direct Manchester
and Southampton Railway. The petitioners, he stated,
prayed that the House might order the petition to be re-
ferred to the consideration of the Railway Committees.
Mr. GISBORNE, in rising to move for a Committee
to inquire into the conduct of certain parties who had
fraudulently inserted a sheet in a petition which referred
to this railway, while it was in the offices of the Go-
vernment, said that he did Hot intend persisting in his
motion, inasmuch as the parties offending had made a
sufficient apology and explanation. He had much plea-
sure in being able to do this ; for had not the re-
quired explanation been given he should cer-
tainly have called upon the House to visit the
interpolation with the most severe condemnation.
He in consequence thought the House might waive the
matter, feeling the fullest confidence now that it was in
their hands, that all the necessary steps would be taken
to prevent a recurrence of the kind.
The SPEAKER said that the petition may be taken
before the Committee, provided the sheet which was added
to it after its presentation to that House was withdrawn.
In reply to a remark from Mr. H. JOHNSTON,.
Mr. GISBORNE said he did not bring any charge
against any person whatever.
Mr. F. FRENCH said he could call the attention of
the House to a case very nearly similar, but that
it would not bo necessary for him to do
so, as he presumed the matter in question
would be referred to a Select Committee.
It appeared that these petitions were interpolated, and
that words were subsequently inserted in them. In
some places these words were written in ink, and in
other places in pencil. After the petitions were pre-
sented to the House it turned out that the additions
were made without the knowledge of some of the parties
who signed them. He (Mr. French) thought it right to
call the attention of the House to this subject, as it was
nearly similar to that which had been just detailed by
the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gisborne).
The order was then discharged.
Mr. BLEWITT presented a petition against the corn-
laws, but from what lace could not be ascertained in
the gallery. 13

TEN HOURS' BILL
Mr, cHRISTIE presented a petition in favour of the
Ten /lore' Bill.