The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-09 00:00:00

ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH COMPANY.

the report on this Bill was brought up and agreed to, and
the Bill was ordered to be engrosed.
RAILWAY BILLS.
I Ur. HUDSON then rose to propose the insertion of a clause
In ill railway Bills of the present session by which new corn-
pal ties are to be incorporated. At the time when he gave
not ice of his intention to bring forward this motion, he was not
aw are of the intentions of the Government with respect to the
nu tuber of schemes
mt during the which had been introduced into Parlia-
mipresent session.. Since the introduction of
th at Bill the Governments had introduced and passed cer-
ta in resolutions on the
shbut as these resolutions would
in it reach the parties whomieet
whe. was originally anxious to
if liege from the responsibilit
clause h
they had, in many cases,
th oughtlessly incurred. Thl
and
edhe intended. to move was
project,
acomnseidetetrngthe position in
to enable those parties to review
if they
w hich they were placed by calin
ofofunredgitshteermed_
sh .areholders, and dissolving the
et lees unable to proceed whiethforite.theN,ow, the Act of Parliament
could enforce the powers
c impelled the company,
o f their Act, to have thed
id deed
not signedohta, thetbnecsoaTguns atu
signatures
aroolef amount.the fut
s ibscribed, and if they
a mount their Act tecame inoperative
re-
f ared to sign on account of the Act rendering theererriaresponsible for
nypersons l
be proportion of the whole amount of capital necessaryld for. the
r eastruction of the works. Now the House not. fail to
t :ondemn this anomalous state of things when the excitement
N !Lich had taken place with respect to Lilwa 's barne
.in
1 nind, and the desire entertained by many) of the parties
i ;o withdraw from them altogether.—( Hear, hear.)e The
main object of his clause was to afford them anl opportunityeunt
of considering their position and the course, under thecr
stances in which they were placed, they ought to adopt and to-
compel them to complete their registration within four months.
The parties concerned should have an opportunity, during a
period of at least six months, of calling meetings, to determine
whether they should proceed with their works or not. There
was an anxiety in that House to limit the amount of capital to
be employed. He (Mr. Hudson) had always held that the
shareholders who Ind raised the necessary funds would go on,
and the powers given by the House would, in that case,
be executed. He was perfectly ritisfied that the passing
of such a measure as the one he proposed would not take
awry. from bona fide undertakings the opportunity of executing
t
hew works, but to the undertakings not based on the solid
f?uno'ation of capital an opportunity would be given of re•
siewin,7 their intentions, When he gave this notice he was

not aware that the Government had any intention of
taking any part in this matter, but he had since
seen the Bill proposed by Mr. Dalhousie, and it did not seem
to affect the parties who were most interested in these under-
takings—viz., the o,riginal shareholders, and he, therefore,
hoped that the Howe would accede to the present measure.
Sir GEORGE CLERK rose for the purpose of taking an
objection to the motion on a point of form. From the state..
ments made by the Hen. Member it was quite apparent that
it was a most important question, and one which, if carried,
would introduce a new mode of legislation with regard to rail-
ways. Instead, therefore, cf moving it as a clause, he would
suggest to the Hon. Gentleman the propriety of introducing
iV into the Bill of which he had charge, or of moving
that it should be inserted in the Bill which would shortly come
down from the Lords relative to railways. At any rate it
would be a much mere expedient course to make it the subject
of a separate Bill rather than a sessional order.
Mr. LABOUC[IERE quite concurred with the
Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down, that
the present course was most inexpedient, unusual, and
extremely inconvenient. The motion was one which was
more properly the subject of an Act of Parliament rather
made,
than
a clause. He, therefore, agreed with the suggestion
that the motion should be brought forward in the shape of a
distinct Bill, or should be inserted in the Bill introduced by the
lion. Getleman himself (Mr. udscn) or in that brought
forward inn the other House of Palrlliament, by Lord Dalhousie,
when it should come down there.
Mr. HUDSON, agreeably to the suggestions thrown out,
would, with the leave of the House, withdraw his motion ; but
ho begged to state that his only object in introduing it was to
protect parties who had signed the deeds, and to prevent the
recurrence of those scenes which took place in 1836,1838, and
1839.—Motion by leave withdrawn.
POOR-LAW REMOVAL BILL.
Mr. JAMES presented a petition from the poor-law
guardians of the Greenwich Union against certain clauses in
the Poor-law Removal Bill.
POOR LAWS.

Captain POLlllLL,nresented a petition from the Board of
Guardians at Brighton, complaining of the general provisions
ofthe Poor-law Removal Bill, which they considered favoured
the vagrant more than it did the honest householder. They
prayed, therefore, that the Bill be amended.
THE TEN HOURS' BILL.
Mr. HAWES presented a petition from the factory workers
in the mills of Mr. M'Phail, of Glasgow, in favour of
the Ten Hours' Bill.
Mr. G. HUDSON presented several peti ions in favour of
the Eastern Counties Terminus and other railway Bills.
Lord JOHN MANNERS presented a petition] against the
union of the sees of St. A'aph and Bangor.
In reply to Mr. CHRISTIE respecting the case of Mary
Anne Tyler, whose case was detailed to the House in a petition
presented on the 7th instant,
Sir JAMES GRAIIA3I said that he had fully inquired
into the particulars of the ease, and had come to the conclusion
that the decision of the magistrate was illegal. He had also
informed the magistrate before whom the case was heard of
the conclusion at which he had arrived, and that the case
would be specially reported to the Lord Chancellor.—( Hear.)
In conclusion he would say he had not the slightest objections
to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman.

The motion was then agreed to.
TEN HOURS' BILL.

Lord G. BENTINCK presented a petition from Bath,
most numerously and respectably signed, in favour of the Ten
Hours' Bill,-7( Hear, hear.)

SEES'OF ST. A.SAPII AND BANGOR.

Mr. BANKES presented a petition from the clergy of
Dorchester, praying the House not to permit a union of the
dioceses of St. Asaph and Bangor.—Ordered to lie on the table.
The Hose. GENTLEMAN also presented a petition from the
poor of the county of Dorset, praying that the owners of houses
rated below six pounds should be assessed, and not the residents
of such habitations.

SUGAR DUTIES.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL gave notice, on behalf of his
Noble Friend Lord Palmerston, that when the question of the
sugar duties came befor the House, he would move an address
to the Crown, that Spanish sugars should be admitted to
those countries on the same terms as the most favoured natinos.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that it was his intention to
bring the subject of the sugar duties before the Howe
at the earliest possible period. He could not state the
precise day, but be was not aware of any obstacle to
prevent the question from obtaining an early consideration.
CORN IMPORTATION BILL.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER, the report of the Committee on this Bill
was brought up.
On the question that it be read a second time being put,
Sir C. BURRELL rose and said he tnust oppose the mo-

tion, because he was convinced that if this Bill passed a great
number of persons would be thrown out of employment in the
agricultural districts, while those who would be able to get em-
ployment would have to put up with very low and miserable
wages indeed. In his opinion, too, the famine in Ireland was
by no means a sufficient reason for the passing of this measure.
The Hon. Member then proceeded to read some documents
in support of his arguments, showing the relative
bearing of the prices of corn and labour at
various periods since the passing of the corn-laws.
He was quite certain that if the present law was car-
ried into effect, it would not be possible for the
labourers of this country to compete successfully
with those of Germany, and other continental nations:
The Hon. Gentleman proceeded in his address to the House in
opposition to the Bill, but in so low a tone of voice as to render
it perfectly impossible to hear one word.
Colonel VERNER begged to say a few words on this sub-
ject. He should have addressed the House on the previous
stages of this Bill, had not so many Hon. Members pledged
themselves to do so. So much had been said with regard to
Ireland, that he felt it to be the duty of every Irish Member
to express his opinions upon this measure. He did not
rise with the presumptuous idea of entering upon the question
with regard to the effect which this measure would have upon
the public at large. He rose, however, for the purpose of ex-
pressing the alarm with which this measure was contemplated
in that part of Ireland in which he resided—apart of the coun-
try which was mainly dependent hitherto on its agricultural
produce for support. The effect which this measure would
produce upon the public at large had been fully and ably de-
tailed by Hon. Gentlemen on his side of the House over and
over again, and it was unnecessary for him to follow in the wake
of those Honourable Gentlemen.—( Hear, hear). He would
merely detain ,the House for a few moments, for
the purpose of stating in whet manner the people of his country
would be injured if it were passed into a law. He believed
the, during the progress of these debates, sufficient
attention had not been paid on the part of the Government to
the interests of the small farmers, the holders of ten and fifteen
acres.—( Hear, hear.) He should like to know who would
remunerate those men for the expense which they had been put
to in cultivating their land, and erecting houses thereon.—
( Hear, hear.) The small farmers in that part of Ireland
in which he resided were decidedly i pposed to this measure,
because they were convinced that it would tend to their ruin.
He agreed with the Hon. Members who had opposed this
motion, that the results of its pasing into a
law would be to bring a, national calamity ; and those
who had introduced the measure should look upon them
selves as participators in that calamity. If the measure had
been introduced by the Noble Lord the Member for London,
or by any other Hon. Member on that side of the House, or
in fact by any Hon. Member but the Right Hon. Baronet,
he would not have been so much surprised.—( Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Gentleman then detailed the experience which he
had of the Right Hon. Baronet's policy—he at one time had be-
lieved him; the person best fitted to lead the House
of Commons, but he was now under the sad ne-
cessity of changing all his long-cherished opinions.
(The Hon. and Gallant Gentleman then read several extracts
from the Newry and other Irish papers, which, as far as could
be gathered from the noise that prevailed, were to the effect,
that there was no scarcity of wheat, oats, and barley in Ireland.)
There had not been so good a harvest in Ireland for many
years as in the present year, and, therefore, it was altogether
unfounded to say, that there was such a scarcity to be appre-
hended in that country.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE said that it was with a- most painful
feeling he opposed a Government which he had supported for
so many years, but on the present occasion he
ceuld not help expressing his dissatisfaction at the
course which Government was pursuing with regard to this
measure, and he could not conceal frost himself that for a con-
siderable time back the Right Hon. Baronet had been syste-
matically attacking the agricultural interest. He complained
that a return respecting the poor-law, which he had moved for,
had not been presented to the House. That return would
have enabled him to have made out a strong case before the
e
House. He would, however, go into
eohiroensArysicid-i
of
quarters
wftffataaahfinonw:rtws..otteeui
oppose
enedaaspphmasitioaettottpasradteint:wihnrtl
tlasehoolonrafteii
measure
,wanthtmehidni iNsyhaaetvuahsahaeor
nuctcttrweforo:rmuuhleinnefulorettecnrrrrs
much
tuonce.wßheanarrnioeo
nniotnefo
thts
ehothhelafieotsitaulmoens operation
importance
thatapttohoi
nor:tthtahl
)
olotechffreee
ghhBwre4aeotsrwit
pactwool
uaeribhns consideration,
eldvpeteahrrofaeootayri
good, but
n.
rabre,
uadwydt
ready
he
some
as
i measuresnf
eahl nti
ys l (Sirsot,other
eot
roh
himself VaHobt
000wJun
was
he
ouseee
this, which sought the aggrandisement of one party at the ex-
pense of another.—( Hear, hear. )
Mr. GEORGE BANKES fully concurred in the observa-
tions of the Hon. Baronet who had just sat down. He rose
for
the purpose of expressing his surprise that, after the speech
of the Hon. and Gallant Member who had preceded him, re-
specting the effect which this measure would have on the
small farmers of Ireland, the Noble Lord the Secretary for
Ire'and had not risen to contradict the statements which he
had made. And as that Noble Earl had not done so, the only
conclusion to which they could come was, that the statements of
the Hon. and Gallant Member were perfectly true.—( Hear,
hear.) They now heard from an Hon. and Gallant Member,
connected with Ireland, that the distress in that country was
not so great as it had been pictured to them. They were told,
too, by the same Hon. and Gallant Member, that instead of
alleviating this distress, the measure of the Government would
increase it? Now, if his Hon. and Gallant Friend were
in error, why did not the Noble Lord the Secretary for
Ireland, who had recently been in that country, get up and
tell them so.— (Hear, hear.) But his Hon. and Gallant
Friend's statements were quite correct, and he for one defied
the Noble Lord to get up and refute them.--( Cheers.) Allu-
sions had been freely made, in the course of the debate on this
subject, to the year 1822, and he was not sorry for it, for that
theyear
distressw a was in saonmde parallel parinlale
rellal
nwditvrhatshepresent o fa
concerned;
, but
tr asthe
fiei
ng Governmentoneof thatotfhe
greatday didint
interests
tpsr propose to
et oe.oaallaetvriyat.e_it( bcyhesearesr.i)-
raccording
distress
esLords
in
tDarnley,year
Bn2a2 m,
thatst
.lamentableexceeded
statenr eel axntoedfn
extent
the
,
crisis,
No,but rittowm,aesasruermesuvoefdthbiys ktbmedwer
spon-
taneous resorted
subscriptions to t oprems eonvte
of the
people, aided by grants of publiche
ought
ty
to fromremu v
ethe e
distress Exchequeranri;
miseryand this
thwe apsresheoulvty
day.—
(Hear, hear.)
want in Ireland.lie Hweaswnaorittedthtehree Steo denycretar that
y forltrhelearne wdtaos
nu
tell
himas what
thatt was the
it
wasreal
aa
statestatoef
otfhatc prosperity,en ntry e
slpleeeihaal
idy aa rightas
Ithh the
to
Right Hon. Gentleman had k( pt silence on the subject.
hlieo na.wla3raer Baronet waslre
Ireland
d doubtv‘ as wella
that read
oe wbbisictobryb,aadnducheeasn
would
d
anxiety for
reyehaiarspast. attention The
e fir
se
times were worth eadinrr, from the information they afforded.
The Hon. Gentleman then read an extract from ore or the old
sus
theoaeifdntt i
,n and Tudors,
sstatutes Henry
of VII., i
had
statutes, which reprobated the cus,om of turning arable laud
into pasture ; and the result of such a practice was the diminu-
lien of the population in particular parts. From the abantlon-
mabayebnl,
labour.
thoofwura . tillage,plafs
passed,
wltialw:nedaadasm,uncetienetttehoisltEal
pnreyes
ualrtampoenlsee,eui
were
oetrhyrreceaosetuputtlalhht(iieed poor-lace of Eli.
zpalabnethwaisn
the want of employment forg the labourer.
confounded the question of the Crnadßill
ttnheeaGsuorvs,e,rynomoledn
affordt had doneroief so, and
Iraenldandh.withp follow,bio fyoH raerniaaewsl
hada nans 3snadfi
never
confounded eEeibvll notaueyi rr-t,
ey assertedhad, that
not rased their case, and be called upon them to do so at once
if it laidnLionltNtbhceeeoinr
Lpallohwl statedeera.t a
nt hat
earlier i
e
ri
odtake
the
consequence of indisposition
to part in this
Secretary
hhd
discussion,
had
sdihoanv,e which
thoughtha di
ts ohlaodn ghe e occupiedn o e oe
stahaer House.yfor He should
of Ireland to reply to the invitations to speak which had
d
been
showered
for upon him. He would hold himself responsible
that had been stated with respect to the condition of Ireland,all
xa
and was satisfied that those statements had not been egge
rated. The Hon. Member for Northamptonshire could a4l;