The Sun.
London, England, 1857-07-18 00:00:00

DUBLIN AND KINGSTOWN RAILWAY.

Mr. G. A. HAMILTON, on behalf Col. Taylor,
wi,hed to ask the Vice President of the Board of Trade
whether he had received a memurial from certain per-
sons residing in the vicinity of the Kingatown Railway ;
and whether it was the intention of his department to
interfere to oblige the directors of that IiLQ of railway to
run trains according to law ?

7.4 r. LOWE said the Government had received Vie
memorial referred to, which they transmitted to the
Dublin and Wicklow Railway Company. As he had not
yet received that answer, it would be premature for him
to 1-.:tate what cour-e he wool 1 take, further than care
would be taken to see that the act cf Parliament was
obkerved.

REVENUE POLICE.
Mr. G. A. llil NJ I LTOS, also on behalf of Col. Taylor,
said be wished to ask the Chief S,,cretary for Ireland
whether it was intended to amalgamate the revenue po-
lice with the constabulary, and if so, whether provision
would be made to secure to the officers of the former ser-
vice their status. and progreisive rank and emoluments.
Mr. WILSON said his right hon. friend was aware
that three years age a bill passed the house by which the
constabulary force in Ireland were permitied to assist the
revenue pDlice, with a view to the prohibition cf illicit
distillation. That act operated so well that it was pro-
posed to extend the principle toen adopted. It was pro-
bable that before I)ng an amalgamation of the two forces
world be effected ; but, of course, whatever officers of
the revenue police were not absorbed in the constabulary
would have a just and fair provision made far them.
DIVORCE LILL.

In reply to Mr. Bowan,
Lord PALMERSTON said the Divorce Bill would be
proceeded with on Friday nexle
THE BATH ELECTION PETITION COMMITTEE.
Lord BURGHLEY wished to know whether it was
true that the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Horsman) ad-
journed the committee yesterday at two o'clock, for the
epecial purpose of attending a certain meeting
Mr. HORSMAN said the question of the noble lord im-
plied more than could be answered in a single affirmative
or negative. It implied that he did, of his own motion
and without notice, take upon himself to adjourn the
committee, to the great inconvenience and expense of
the parties, for the purpose of attending a certain meeting
in which he took an interest. The noble lord would be
glad to learn that he had not pursued a course so unusual
and improper, and the other members of the committee
knew their duty too we'l to permit him to take such a
course if he proposed it. On Wednesday he knew the
meeting was to take place, and on the assembling of the
committee he conversed with two members as to the
possib:lity of being able to attend the meeting. The sub-
ject was mentioned to the members of the committee,
who treated it as one which depended on the convenience
of the parties. Ile therefore asked the counsel whether
any inconvenience would arise from adjourning the com-
mittee at 2 o'clock. Counsel said that so far from being
inconvenient it was the course they themselves desired.
Not a word was said as to the object of the adjournment
or that it was to enable him to attend the meeting.
Twenty-four hours' notice was given to the parties,
and he believed it did not add a single shilling to the
expense or cause any delay whatever. Ho did attend
the meeting, and if the noble lord had been present, he
was cure he would have been very much edified.
Lord GALWAY having moved that the house at its
rising should adjourn till Monday, said that when the
right hon. gentleman proposed the adjournment of the
committee he had not the slightest notion that the ob-
j,•ct was to attend the meeting in question. Had be
been aware that such was the object be certainly should
not have assented to it. He thought it very unfair to the
parties, who weraeubject to great expense in prosecuting
these tleetion petitions. And in this case it so happened
that they concluded the business in two hours that day,
so that were it not for the adjournment they would pro-
bably have finished yesterday evening. No doubt, the
coos nt of counsel was asked for and given readily, be-
cause it was convenient for counsel to give two hours to
one committee and two hours to another. He saw the
counst 1 who were engaged in the Bath petition sitting in
two other roomsafter the adjournment yesterday. He
begged to say he had no concert with the noble lord
who asked the question. He thought the course taken
by the right hon. gentleman was most unprecedented,
and truited that it would not be made a precedent of.
Sir H. VERNEY said the noble lord made a mistake
in stating that the committee had only been occupied for
two hours, they had sat from eleven fill four. (Hear.)
The fact was that when the right hon. gentleman pro-
posed they should adjourn, no objection was made by
anybody, and counsel on both sides said it would be very
agreeable to them. (Hier and laughter.)
Mr. NE WDEGATE considered that the adjournment
of the committee was quite contrary to the usual prac-
tice. It was fortunate, however, for the meeting that
the right hon. gentleman took the chair, as his influ-
ence was Exerted to prevent the adoption of a c )urae
which would have produced a repetition of the deplor
able scenes which hail before taken place in the house
-- (cries of " Oh," from the ministerial benche=)--and
which had nearly led to the authorities of that house
beirg brought in collision with the authorities of the
law. He wished to ask the Lon. member for Swantea
(Mr. Dilly win) to ±hat day he intended to postpone his
notice, which was on the I,a per that evening
Lord GALWAY admitted he was in error in stating
the cointnittee bad only sat for two hours, but the greater
portion of the day was occupied with a witness brought
up from the country that morning, who could not be
produced the day heft re.
Mr. CH EETHA DI expressed his regret at the course
taken by the noble lord ; 24 hours' notice of the adjourn.
ment Lad been given.
Mr. ROEBUCK remarked that the noble lord had
said he would have divided the committee if he bad
known the object of the adjournment. Therefore it was
clear the divizion would have been taken not on account
of the parties concerned, but on account of the opinion of
the noble lord. (Cries of "oh" and cheers.) He mad"
no difficulty in assenting when he did not know
the motive for adjournment, and the object of thei
meeting would have been the only ground of hit
opposition. It was clear that the proposal fur
adjournment was made in the hearing not
.onlyodftha
parties but of the counsel. The noble lodrd,
ulndee rument tk,
insi-
nuated that counsel assented to the a
i
theirserre
s(L (
uprivate
The interestsnoble
lordand mighteasta laugh.on thus
couv
e.kelet,antchd
toa frogthe itfr,;e. would
jbaeuamusement tom be
eutain
teas t
le,bredel.tBo)—casbturtt
beet
cthioands
mcandheoiT.
gent e
amusement t(oo?,eottn,ottlid
sinuations against them which he had no right to do.
The parties were present and the suggestion for the
adjournment was made in the hearing of counsel, and
assented to it by tte parties, NlllO were not put to one
shilling of ( xpenee by it ; and it W 45 clear tbat if the
noble lord bad opposed the adjournment, it would not
have been from a: y care for their interest, but from re-
gard to his own feelinp.s.
Mr. S. FITZGERALD believed the house had no de.
sire to prolong the diseuesion, but he wished briefly to
tate the facts. The right hon. gentleman might have
elated to the members of the committee his reasons, but
a:1 ho said to the noble lord and to him (Mr. Fitzgerald)
was " It was impossible for him to attend to-morrow"—
and he repeated the remark with considerable emphasis,
and the impieetioo left on his (Hr. Fitzgerald's mind