The Sun.
London, England, 1856-06-07 00:00:00

Works, the Metropolitan Board of Works, or the Commis- ; signally failed. Having thus stated the objects of the bill
sioners of the Metropolitan Roads. When the Metropolitan i he urged its second reading on the house.
Board',of Works was established, he had hoped that they Mr. SEYMOUR FITZGERALD moved that the bill
had at last got a body which would he re9portible for these be read a second time that dey six months. Fic-roaretted
matters ; but the• board had declined, and di;clared tbftt", ; that, bo ices compelled to do so, hecanae his lootiC,n would

they did not
.believe they had
vote, he believed, was founded on the
mittee which had eat at the beginning of the sessioe A
more discordant committee had never sat; the resolutions
carried by the majority were not oven consistent with
themselves ; the first resolution declared that, " in the opi-
nion of the committee, any considerable increase of traffic
through the park was open to grave objection," but by
subsequent resolutions they went on to recommend that a
road for carriages should he made from Waterloo-place to
Storey's-gate, and an entrance for carriages from Trafalgar-
square through Spring-gardens.. He was, perhaps, better
acquainted with the parks and the habits of the people who
frequent° 1 them than env member of the committee, and.
he could say that they had neverelone anything for the good
of the people and to promote their health which could come
pare with the advantages of the perks, especially St. James's.-
Let them recollect that the greatest traffic was at Charing-
cross, and that nothing could be more delightful than the
power we possessed of changing in a moment its noise and
bustle for green fields and lowing herds, " Paterfatuilies"
and the children drinking new milk and eating rusks. Ad
that was to be swept away, es ws and all, if this plan of
the committee were adopted. The object was to accow-
ritodate Pimlico and Belgravie, and give both -access to the
South-Western Railway. They could not get that now
without coming against the greatest traffic. How did his
lion. friend propose to provide for this necessity ? He pro-
posed a road through Pall-mall, taking down the German
Chapel, and taking an immense number of turns before it
got out of the Park. This would be no accommodation to
Belgravia, and would be only an incomplete accommoda-
tion to Pimlico. in his opinion, if they were going to
make a sacrifice of the park, at least let them snake a hand-
someone, and do it in consistency with common sense. They
should crone Out at the bottom of St. James's-street: (Hear.)
For this the consent of the Crown must be obtained, as they
would have to go through the palace. He would then go
straight across to the other side of the park. (Oh.) He though t
also that the time had arrived when better accommodation
should be provided for the ladies attending the drawing-
room. He now came to the enclosure, and ho quite ad-
mitted that it would be better not to go act oss it ; but let it
not be imagined that it was the most useful part of the park
for the working classes. Our young gamins cultivated their
muscle, which was the best defence of the nation in the
Green Park and on the Mall. It was there they played
their games-and poked their fun. (Laughter.) Ho did not
see the force of the objection to a bridge over the ornamen-
tal water. At Blenheim, Sir John Vauburgh, no bad
judge, built a great bridge, not because it was wanted for
transit, but because it afihr. led a fine point of view from
the house. lie believed that the proposed bridge hare
would be also an ornament. Besides, the embankment
would hardly interfere with the view or the level of the
park. It would be a compromise between Pimlico and
Belgravia, and would give a fair amount of accommodation
to both. If they laid it (town as a priueiple to take the
smallest portion of the perk, and to give the greatest
amount of accommodation, he thought that this plan would
be the best notwithstanding all the clamour that hal been
raised against it. He had not any personal feeling in the
matter, his only object being to procure the greatest
amount of accommodation for the public, at the smallest
sacrifice. He thought that the matter had better be re-
considered, and therefore proposed that the vote be now
negatived.
Sir B. HALL was much surprised at the course which
had been taken by his noble friend, but it was a desidera-
tum with any one that Belgravia should have a road
through the park. Several plans had been submitted to
the committee, and one vote involved the taking down of
Cleveland-row, which would have involved au expense of
10),000/. It was refused, and a motion was carried de-
claring that the park should be as little invaded with traf-
fic and as little cat Hp as possible. Under these circron-
stances the present plan was adopted by 8 to 3, his noble
fiieud voting iu the -majority. It was in a road. which was
a road already, and would interfere the least possible with
the park. Ho thought that this raid would meet the
wishes of members as giving a road them- Pall-mall to Be!.
gravia, without very roue' injuring the 'park, and there-
fore he trusted that under these circumstances the louse
would allow so vexed a question to be at lest settled.
Mr. SPOONER, said that the Government had already
taken 10,000 W. to fit up Marlberough-house as a residence
for the Prince of Wales, awl now it was proposed to make
a public road through the court yard. How were these two
propositions to be reconcile:)?
Mr. TITE feared that the sudden turn by Marlborough-
house would be inconvenient and dangerous. By removing
the present entrance by Marlborough-house to a little dis-
t mace, and taking in a ro,tion of the adjoining royal garden,
they would lieve a road far 9001. ; whereas this plan would
cast 21,900/. (Hear.) With regard to the Gurniau Chapel,
he had letters from many architects, protesting against the
pulling dorm of that building, which was a perfect gem in-
side. It was built by inigo Jones for Catherine of Bra-
ganza, in the reign of Charles 11., and had so many histo-
rical associations connected with it that it would be a great
sacrifice to pull it down. With that view he placed on the
piper the following motion :—"That the road from . Pall-
mall into St. James's-park be so placed that the necessity
for pulling down and rebuilding the German Chapel be
avoided, and that the 10,0001. provided for doing so be
omitted in the estimate, thereby reducing the cost of the
new road and other works t 01.4,7001."
The CH A.IRAIAN said that he could not put the motion
till that of the noble lord (Lord R. Grosvenor) was dis-
posed of.
Sir J. PAXTON said that the German Chapel need not
be destroyed ;it could be removed. With regard to the
whole question Ito should like to see it stand over for a
little time. (Hear.) Let thorn Open the prePent thorough-
fares and see how that would w( e.c, before they engaged in
more expense. (clear.) That was the best thing to be done
at present. He thought it would be invidious it the road
was confined to certain classes. He decidedly objected to
a foot bridge across the ornamental water in S. James's.
There should be more entrances broken into the park, in
addition to the Horse Guards one; and the present hurdles,
which would disgrace Donnybrook fair, ought to be re-
moved. (I-leer.)
Colonel BOLDER° said it was hardly fair to the com-
mittee to go back upon the decision which they had, arrived
ut by a majority of Bto 3. There were other parts of the
plan, hoWever, which were only carried by the casting vote
of the chairman (tire right hon. bart).
Mr. S. WORTLEY said that he formed one of the mino-
rity against the plea in the committee, and his objection
to it was, that it gave a minimum of advantage at a great
cost. (11sai, hear.) It interfered in a most objectionable
manner with the adjoining petits.
Dr. IiIICFIELL intended to vote with the noble lord, on
the ground that the proposed arrangement was intended
for the benefit of the few, to the prejudice of the many.
He objected to those funrls which belonged to the country
at large. and to which the whole population were compelled
to contribete' being drawn upon to improve the value of
house property in London,
Lord R. GROSVENOR said a few words in explanation
of leis vote in the select committee on the Bth paragraph
in the report.
The committee divided upon the question that the
amount of the vote be 24,7001.—
Ayes

4y authority

some members of the house whom they ware accua•
tomed to meet and to respect, and because the property of
inuoseut shareholders would he swept away if this bill was
not passed. But it was at the same time a measure so cruel
to small depositors and so injurious to the general policy
relatieg to joint stock banks, that he felt bound to take
this course. His hon. friend (Mr. Melina) had asserted that
ho'had no design to whitewash the shareholders in the
Tipperary Bank, but only improve the state of the law.
He must give credit to that aesertim. But there was a
suspicious haste in bringing in the bill both in the other
house end in that, and especially in the bring,ing:on of the
second reading after twelve o'clock when it was understood
that course would riot be taken. It was clearly the object
t het the bill should pass so soon as to becorne applicable to
the Tipperary Bank. If that was not theintention, a pro-
visioe might be inserted in it preventing its having a re-
trospective effect. Ho was of oeinion that there was .no •
language too strong to mark the criminal conduct of some
persons connected with this bank, white of others who were
less to blame, it roust be said that they were guilty of an
almost criminal carelessness. There was yet another class
who, being quite innocent, had had all their means swept
away, and every sympathy should be felt for them ; but
for time poorer depositors, who had also lost their alt, and
wile) could net make their C.lBO heard in that house, still
greater sympathy ought to be felt. This was apeculiar
case of ex post facto legislation ; a kind of legislation
always to be deprecates, for it was intended to vary the
rights of parties interested in joint-stock banks, and to
useet a particular case, in a manner which wassopposed
to all the policy of legislation on this subject. To
show the object of the measure it was only necessary to
point out that the bill was passed through all its stages in
the House of Lords between Monday and Friday, and the
printed bill only reached Dublin after it had passed through
the house. He believed that under the second clause it was
competent for the representative of the creditors after he
was appointed, to enter into a composition which should
free the shareholders from all liability, and the creditors
would be barred from all remedy under the Bankers' Act.
Under that act every species of property of shareholders
was liable to the creditors, and ho could not understand
how if his hon. friend's bill was meant to be in the interest
of creditors, how it could give them more than they now
had under the present law. Would it not, in fact, din:d-
i:deli their rights? The proposal made in this bill differed
from those in bankruptcy, to which it was said to assimi-
late the proceedings in bankruptcy, every estate, joint and
sepaiate vested in the assignee, and he was at once in the
position to say whether or not a composition would be be-
neficial and equitable as between all parties. It was im-
possible to give the representatives of the creditors under
this bill that knowledge of the separate estate of the share-
holder, which would enable him to judge of the really be-
neficial course for all parties. The representative of cre-
ditors could bind all who had nut proved their debts, as
consenting parties to any compromise which might be en-
tered into. It was clear that the richest creditors living
in a town near the bankrupt bank would be able to avail
themselves of the provisions of the bill, while the poorer
creditors dispersed over the country would be less able to
do so. This bill would alter the whole system of credit on
which joint-stock banks were established, for the deposi-
tors would no longer have the knowledge they now pos.
reseed of those men who, as shareholders, were liable to
their utmost property ; but they would only know of a list
of men, who, by 'a collusive composition with an official
manager, could deprive them of the 20s. in the pound, to
which they would be entitled for the security on which
they relied. On all these grounds, believing that the bill
was intended to meet a particular case, and was opposed
to the general policy on which joint-stock banks were
founded. he moved the rejection of the second reading.
Mr. HENLEY seconded the motion. He said he did-not
see that there was any necessity for Mr. Malins to defend
himself against any imputations which he thought had
been cast on him. His hon. friend had relieved the house
from one difficulty, for he had avowed that .the bill was
int oided to apply to the Tipperary Bank. What was the
only ground on which the assent of the horse was asked to
this special legislation ? All that was tasked was that all
the shareholders in a bank shoal I be placed in the hands
of a kind of official assignee; but it was not proposed that
all i heir property should vest in that functionary. It was
said that the shareholders should have time to pay, but
the creditors had trusted the bank on the faith of the pro-
perty and means of those shareholders ; and it was now'
sought by this measure to remove all the liabilities of con-
tracts entered into between the, several parties interested
in these banks by ex post facto legislation. This was open-
ing the door to ali sorts of collusion and jobbing; and, in
short, tending to defraud creditors of what the law now
allowed them, and he should oppose the further progress
of the bill.
Mr. F. HUME moved the adjournment of the debate.
(No, no.)
Mr. MA.LINS said he should be sorry to take a division
at that hour, after his having given an assurance that he
would not proceed with the bill after 12 o'clock, and there-
fore he would accede to the motion for adjournment.
Mr. WHITESIDE said he should prefer going on then.
Mr. BLAND did not think this a fair bill as between
debtor awl creditor, 'nor did it put them in the same posi-
tion as in bankruptcy. He should assent to the amend-
ment, and vote against the second reading.
The debate was then adjourned.
NUISANCES REMOVAL (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
SMALL DEBTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The Small Debts Imprisonment Act Amendment (Scot..
land) Bill was psssed through committee.
LONDON CoRPORATION BILL.
On the motion for postponing the-second reading of this
bill,
Sir .T. V. SHELLEY inquired when it was likely to be
brought on. It was .a most important measure, and con-
siderable anxiety was felt out of doors to know when it
would be really brought forward for second reading.
Sir G. GREY said ho could not answer that question
until the remainder of the estimates were disposed of. He
should certainly bring the bill forward on the first avail-
abla day after the whole of supply had been got through.
The order for the second reading was then put for Mon-
day.
SMOKE NUISANCES ABATEMENT BILL.
The Smoke Nuisances Abatement (Metropolis) Act,
1853, Amendment Bill was read a second time and ordered
to be committed.
INSURANCES BILL.
The Insurance on Lives (Abatement of Incomestax) Con-
tinuance Bill was read a second time and ordered to be
committed.

a7I:: c t

Noes la2
Majority .
A vote of 2,570/., for the cost of the new road across
the park, was then put and carried.
6,1811. to the Clerk of Justiciary in Scotland as eons -
pensation on the surrender of his patent, the °rap being
abolished, was next voted.
Mr. WILLIAMS moved that the vote should be omitted.
After some explanation from the Loan ADvooATE,
Mr. WILSON consented to withdraw the vote.
The house then resumed.
JOINT•STOCK COMPANIES WINDING-UP ACTS
AMENDMENT BILL.
Mr. MALINS moved the second reading of this bill. It
had come down from the Home of Lords, having been there
introduced by Lord Brougham, and sanctioned by the Lord
Chancellor. Its object was to remedy a defect in the Wind-
ing-up Act of 1818, which left creditors to their remedies
as before, after taking a proof of debt into the Master's
office. Au idea had got abroad that this bill heti betel
brought in to give protection to the shareholders in the Tip-
perary Bank. (Cries of " Hear, been"), He had no such
object in view, nor could be be supposed to have, from his
political connection. He disclaimed any sinister object in
promoting this bill. The origin of the bill was this : Mr.
Bacon ha i pointed out to him in court the imperfections
of the Winding-up Act; one of which was that the share-
holders in the Tipperary B ,nk could not be made baekrupe.
He had promised to intrcdeco a bill to leme ly this. The
bill had been introduced tu the other house by L eel Broug-
ham, and he admitted that the failure of the Tipperary
Bank wes the occasion of its being brought forward. (Hear )
It might be an advantage if this great public celainity led
to the amendment of the law. In a company of 10 mem-
bers, the separate estate of every member would go to pay
the creditors, and why should not this be the case in acorn-
pany of 100 member,. In the case of a bank, the moment
it was proclaimed that payment was stopped, he who pro-
ceeded most rapidly obtained the spell, and a comparatively
wealthy shareholder was assailed, as it were, by a pack of
Woodhotteds. What he objected to was, a sin le litigious
ereditorbeing allowed to have an advantage over the general
body of creditors. One effect of the present state of things
was, that a large portion of the property of the creditors
was swallowed up in law expenses Some hon. gentlemen
supposed the object of this bill was to whitewash the share.
holders of the Tipperary Bank. (Hear.) That was not
the fact. A call of 401. per share had already been made,
and this call was equivalent to a judgment debt. If the
shareholders' property was to be exhausted, let it be done
by calls made from time to time for the benefit of all the
creditors. If the party had a little time affsrded him he
night be able to pay up, but if he were pressed for pay.
meat suddenly the result was, perhaps, that he was ruined,
and the shareholders obtained nothing from him. The
machinery of the law at present enabled shareholders to
coin pound among themselves, but it did nob make any
composition binding on the creditors. The pima!), ob-
ject of this bill was to enable the shareholders to elect one
of their number to represent them as the official manager
represented the creditors. 'Was that an object which de-
served the character that had been attributed to it ; or
ought he to have been treated as he had been, out of
that house at least, as if he lied raegiv(el a bribe to white.
wash some political delinquents ? This bill, instead of
being introduced on behalf of the shareholders, was pro-
moted by the larger creditors of the bank. As regarded
the late Mr. Sedleir, he might observe that he was in the
habit of visiting Buckinghamshire and Hertfordshire in
consequence of.his connection with another bank, and the
result was, he believed, that hundreds of persons who were
induced to take shares now found themselves suddenly
ruined. He admitted that all these persons possessed must
to the last fertliing, if nocesssery, be applied in paying the
debts of the company. By the second section of this bill he
proposed that the Master should be enabled to call meet-
ings of the creditors. at which the creditors should !appoint
a representative, and that this official person should.have
the power "of making arrangements with the shareholders
either for payment in full or for payinent in part, giving
time, entering into compromises, and so on ; and that the
official persen who represented the sharehulderq should
have the same power of compromising with the creditors
that the assignee in bankruptcy noW possessed under the
sanction of the court. It had been supposed by tessi.
tlemed from the other side of the water that his object
was to release shareholders from their liability. That
would, in fact, be ineleNsible under an Irish net called
"The B mkers' Act," the 3:ld. Goo. 11. By the 3d Fiecti`on
of that act, from the moment any person became a banker
his estate was {dodged to his creditors, and he could not
afterwards make any settlement so as' to 'deprive his credi-
tors of the security of any pert of the estate. It was des
cide I in 1838 by Lord Plunkett that where a banker inalfe
a settlement on his son and became bankrupt the setl
meat was vol.]. This principle was applicaMe to joint-
stock banks, so that in the c tse of the Tipperary Bank, all
shareholders possessing real estate were liable to the full ex-
tent of their property, so that if he had intended by his bill
to protect the shareholders in that bank, he should have