The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-30 00:00:00

MIDDLE CLASS EDUCATION.

Lord EBURY presented petitions from Kensington
sad other places, praying. for improvement in middle
class education, and also against church rates.
THE DIVORCE LAW,

The Bishop of OXFORD presented petitions praying
for a revision of the divorce law.
VICTORIA STATION AND PIMLICO RAILWAY
BILL.

The Earl of DONOUGHMORE moved that the First
Commissioner of Public Works should have liberty to
appear by counsel before the select committee on the
said bill. It was necessary the First Commissioner
should be heard, because if the railway was carried
across the river near Chelsea-bridge it would interfere
with public property that ought to be protected.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY said the Chief
Commissioner stood in the same position as a private
individual in this matter. When the bill was intro-
duced in the other house, the Chief Commissioner ex-
pressed his concurrence in the scheme, and it was not
until he was precluded by the forms of the other house
from interfering that he had !petitioned this house.. 4 He
hoped their lordships would not assent to the motion.
If the bill was thrown over the session they might not
be able agairi to obtain the assent of the interested
partieS on such favourable terms. The course
now proposed was a most unusual one. The Chief Com-
missioner would have an opportunity of showing on the
third reading of the bill that the place where it was pro.
posed to carry the railway across. the Thames would
materially injure public property.
The Earl of HARDWICKE considered her' Ma-
jesty's Government were justified in making the
motion before the house. Their only desire was to
protect the interests of the public. It was a matter
of great public interest, and he hoped their lord•
ships would agree to it. By adopting the motion
they would not be establishing a bad precedent for future
legislation under similar circumstances.
Lord REDESDALE considered it desirable the Chief
Commissioner should be heard before the committee
and the points at issue, relative to the mode of
carrying the railway across the Thames, and its interfer-
ence with the Crown lands, fully discussed and considered.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE opposed the mc-
tion. The opposition to the scheme originated from a
change of Ministry, and a desire on the part of the pre-
sent Chief Commissioner to review the decision of the
previous Chief Commissioner on this subject. It was
an unusual proceeding, and one that ought not to have
emanated from the Government.
The Earl of MALMESBURY said that if the First
Commissioner was refused a hearing on the bill, the
Government would be disposed to recommend that the
royal assent should be withheld. The word " veto" was
not the proper term to apply to the case. The late
First Commissioner had not seen the plans, the present
Commissioner had,!and he was of opinion that the ex-
penditure on Chelsea-bridge would be thrown away if
that plan was not modified.
The Earl of WICKLOW said that no sufficient rea-
sons had been shown to induce their lordships to depart
from their usual rule. All the circumstances were known
to Sir B. Hall, than whom no man in the office of First
Commiesioner had conferred greater benefit on the
public. (Hear:) The companies promoting this bill
had incurred enormous expense ; and if the bill were
now defeated, it was probable the public would be per-
manently deprived of.the advantage which it would afford.
Earl GRANVILLE said, if the Government was
determined to refuse the consent of the Crown, which
must be given to the bill at some stage, there was an end
of the question.
Lord REDESDALE said he was only anxious to
ascertain what was the relation of the Crown to the
property in question.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY said that the late
Chief Commissioner had been informed that he might
petition, if he thought proper ; but he had not thought
it necessary to do so. The case now made against the
bill was the most frivolous that could be imagined.
Lord REDESDALE said that the land of Battersea-
park had been bought by a grant of public money, and
was vested in some form or other in the Board of Works.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY was understood
to deny thii, and to say that the assent of the Crown
was not necessary to the progress of the bill.
After a conversation,
The LORD CHANCELLOR said it was necessary
that a legal opinion should be obtained as to the rights
of the Crown„ He had had no previous notice that the
question wool l be raised, or be should have been pre-
pared to ad vise the house. He would therefore suggest
an adjournment of the discussion.
After a few words trom Lord CILANWORTII,
The Earl of DONOUGHMORE consented to an ad-
journment until Thursday.
LEASES AND SALES OF SETTLED ESTATES