The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-23 00:00:00

(LEFT SITTING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four
o'clock.

ABERAVON MARKET BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
CALEDONIAN RAILWAY (BRANCH ACROSS
THE CLYDE, AND GLASGOW STATION).
On the motion that this Bill be read a third time,
Mr. WARD said he could not allow the third read-
ing to pass without taking notice of the most unjustifi
able attacks which had been made upon the Board of
Admiralty on a former occasion, by the Ho-
nourable. Member for Montrose. Never had a cage,
he said, been more impartially and labouriously
considered by his Noble Friend (Lord Auckland) and
the other members of the Board, andhe only regretted
that the Hon. Member had not given notice that it was
his intention to make the observations to which he al-
luded, in order that he might have had an opportunity
of replying. The facts of the case were simply these—
three years ago a proposition was made to cross the
Clyde with a bridge of seven arches, which was
opposed by the trustees of the river, the bridge
trustees, and indeed by all parties in Glasgow, and it
had, therefore, received the decided opposition of the
Admiralty. During the present year, however, every
one of the circumstances had been changed. The com-
pany now proposed to carry the railway across the river
in a tunnel, resting upon a single pier in the middle of
the stream, or in such other manner as the Board
of Admiralty might direct. The only question now
left in doubt was whether there should be one arch or
two arches, but he begged to say that the company
could not proceed with the works without the consent
of the board. The company had consented to contri-
bute a fund of 12,0001. for the privilege thus granted to
them, which sum was to be paid over to the Paymaster
of the Navy, and to be applied by the trustees for
deepening and improving that part of the river. Those
were the facts of the case, and he did not think a more
simple or straightforward explanation could be given.
STANDING ORDERS.

On the motion of Mr. HEATHCOTE, a Select Com-
mittee was appointed for the revision of the standing
orders, consisting of the following Hon. Members:—Sir
William Heathcote, Mr. Ord, Mr. Bernal, Mr. Greene,
Sir Robert Ferguson, Mr. Wilson Patten, Sir John
Yarde Buller, Mr. Aglionby, Mr. Elliott, Captain Jones,
Mr. Wrightson, Mr. Home Drummond, Mr. Loch, Mr.
Sotheron, and Mr. Evelyn Denison.
THIRD READINGS.
The following Bills were read a third time and
passed:—
Edinburgh and Batbgate Railway (Extension and Devi-
ation).
Truro Turnpike-roads.
Whitehaven and Furness Junction Railway (Extension
or Deviation Line from Silecroft to Foxfieid, &c).
HAMLYN'S ESTATE BILL.
The report upon this Bill was considered and agreed to.
PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.
Mr. THORNELY presented a petition froM Bilston.
pra3 ing for an extension of the suffrage, vote by ballot,
triennial Parliaments, and equal electoral districts.
Mr. LUSHINGTON presented a similar petition.
Dr. BOWRING presented fifty petitions from Man-
chester, forty from Bolton, and a number of petitions
front the metropolis, from Glasgow, Stockport, and other
places, to the same effect.
Mr. KEOGH presented a petition also in favour of
Parliamentary reform.
Captain PECHELL presented several petitions from
Brighton containing a similar prayer, and also ten peti-
tions from:the;same place, praying the House to consider
the propriety of a measure embodying the principles
contained in the document called the People's Charter.
Mr. H. BERKELEY presented a petition from Glou-
cester complaining of intimidation and of general treating
at the last election, and praying the House to give the
electors the protection of the ballot; also a petition from
Bristol in favour of Parliamentary reform.
Sir W. MOLESWORTH presented similar petitions
from London and Bristol.
Colonel THOMPSON presented fifty petitions from
Manchester and its neighbourhood in favour ofParlia-
mentary reform. .
Sir G. STRICKLAND presented petitions to the
same effect from Preston, and in favour of a reduction
of the public expenditure.
Sir B. HALL presented two similar petitions from
Marylebone. also one from the guardians of the poor,
praying the House to facilitate the emigration of able-
bodied paupers.
Mr. GRENFELL presented thirty petitions from
Preston in favour of Parliamentary reform.
Mr. G. BERKELEY presented petitions from Bristol
and other places to the same effect.
Mr. WARD presented a petition from Sheffield for
the ballot, triennial Parliaments, and vote by ballot ;
also a petition from an individual, praying that four of
the eldest judges should have the power of investigating
Bills after they had passed through Parliament, as that
task, which nominally devolved on the Crown, was too
much for one person, and that they should have seats in
the Parliament ; also a petition, complaining of the
monopoly of the Bank of England.
Mr. HUME presented 79 petitions from different
parts of the country in favour of the reforms which he
had proposed to the House.
Mr. STUART presented a petition from Newark,
against the sale of intoxicating liquors on Sundays.
Mr. MILES presented a petition from Bristol against
the navigation-laws.
Mr. FORBES presented a petition from a place in
Scotland, against the Lunatic Asylums Bill.
Mr. BERNAL presented a petition from Rochester in
favour of household suffrage, vote by ballot, and the di
vision of the kingdom into electoral districts.

Mr. NEWDEGATE presented a petition from 200
persons connected with the Lyceum Theatre, praying that
the number of theatres in which foreigners should be
allowed to perform should be limited to two.
Mr. HERMES presented a petition from the General
Committee of Shipowners against the repeal of the navi-
gation-laws.

Mr. COBDEN presented a petition from Hereford,
signed by 2,945 persons, in favour of reform.
Sir GEORGE GREY presented a petition against the
sale of intoxicating liquors on Sundays.
SUGAR DUTIES.
_ _

Mr. BRIGHT gave notice that in the event of the
amendment of the Hon. Member for Droitwich being re-
jected by the House, he should take the first opportunity
of moving that it was not expedient at present to make
any alteration in the Sugar Duties Act of 1846.