The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-08 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 8, 18(;1

member shall speak to the question before the house, and
that when he makes a motion " that the house do adjourn,"
he shall not be confined to giving reasons that It shall
adjourn. (Hear, hear.) Without giving any opinion
upon this point, I think I may observe that it will be
one of the questions which the committee will have to
consider. I have thrown out these various suggestions,
which appear to my mind at present, and which have
been referred to by different members at former
times. I shall propose that the committee consist of 21
members—a number which will enable it to be composed of
members from both sides of the house, and they will go
fully into the question and report how far the public busi-
ness of the house can be accelerated without any interfer-
ence with the useful forms of the house being Allowed.
(Hear, hear.) I beg to move the resolution which stands
in my name,
The question having been put,
Mr. HORSMAN said the terms of the resolution were so
restricted that it would render the proceedings of the com-
mittee entirely inoperative. During the last 23 years com-
mittes had been appointed for the purpose d reforming the
proceedings of the house, and the alterations made had
considerably reduced the opportunities formerly afforded to
members to make speeches or motions. But had those al-
terations brought them to a state in which they desired to
be ? Had they not rather increased than diminished the
evils complained of ? He believed that the experiments
which had been tried had not succeeded, but that they had
failed, and they were now about to proceed in the same
direction, instead of first considering whether or not they
might not, to some extent at least, have been mistaken in
the course they had adopted. The committee of 1838 stated
moat clearly in their report that the impediments which
existed to the progress of business rested with the Govern-
ment. The report of that committee recommended two
classes of alterations—the one as it applied to the forms and
proceedings of the house and the privileges of private mem-
bers, and that class of recommendation was carried into
practice, but the other class, which applied to the business
of the Government and their duties and responsibilities, had
not only not been adopted, but was, he believed, forgottenand
disregarded. He would now move an amendment to the
noble lord's resolution, and that after the word "proceed-
ings" be added the words ti by a more careful preparation
of Government measures—by the early introduction—by
a judicious disposition of the business in the two houses,
and by the order and method of conducting the business,
the despateh of public business can be more effectually pro-
moted." He thought this addition would enable the com-
mittee to consider the whole of the matter, and he would
venture to suggest their insertion. He believed it was not so
much new rules that they required, as that the business of the
house should be properly conducted by the Government.
When he read those words " more careful preparation of
msasures and their earlier introduction," he asked whether
of late years either of those suggestions had been attended
to ? (Hear, hear.) Last year there were 120 or 130 Govern-
ment bills, whereas the advice of the late Sir R. Peel was
that a Government should not intrdduce many measures,
but only such as they thought they should be able to carry.
He found that some of those important measures had been
introduced in July, and the most important, the Indian
budget, very late in August. (Hear.) They could not
complain that the house had obstructed business by taking
advantage of the forms. He had a list of all the measures
that had been passed since the Reform Bil', and he found
that the greatest number, 154 public acts, had been passed
last year. (Hear.) The next year in numbers was 1853,
when 137 measures were passed. A great cause of com-
plaint was the accumulation of orders at the end of the
session. So far back as 1821 an unreformed House of Com-
mons passed a resolution limiting such orders to 20, but
last year as many as 50 or 60 orders might be seen on the
paper for a single day. For these reasons he thought that
the powers to be given to the committee might be very
much extended, and that thereby considerable assistance
might be given to the Government in overcoming these diffi-
culties. As to the noble lord's suggestion, that an addi-
tional day should be given to the Government, he begged to
observe that a new theory had recently been broached,
to the effect that the function of the House of Com-
mons was merely to pass such measures as might be sub-
mitted to them by the Government. He demurred to that
theory, which was the rule of conduct under despotic Go-
vernments when Parliament had nothing to do tut register
the edicts of the minister. The British Parliament had two
far higher functions. The first was not to accept the mea-
sures of ministers, but to discuss, criticise, examine, and if
necessary reject them; and therefore to provide that the
measures of the Government should go through the same
ordeal as the bills of private members. The second and
still higher function was the exercise of the privilege of
initiating discussion, because these much abused prelimi-
nary discussions were the bases of legislation, and there was
not an important measure which had become law which had
not first gone through this preliminary stage. The noble
lord the member for London had himself told them how he
had commenced the discussion of Parliamentary reform in
1819, which discussion had been commenced by other mem-
bers long before, but he (flr. Horsman) should like to
know how many times had the noble lord had to address a
weary house and impatient treasury benches before ho was
able to introduce the Reform Bill as a Government measure?
(Hear, hear.) There was not one great measure in short
which had not been the subject of these preliminary discus-
sions, and even the very measure which was now on their
table, the Bankruptcy Bill, was first introduced by the noble
lord, and by him brought under discussion when ho sat on
the Opposition side of the house. There were therefore
two things which this committee must bear in mind. Tho
noble lord had very truly said that, although this was a
very important consideration, it was not the most impor-
tant, and therefore due care must be taken of the rights
of private members. They must also take care of the
rights of the minority. The struggles of minorities, their
battles, and final victories, had been the best tests of,
and the highest tributes to, our free institutions, and
had furnished tke best and brightest chapters in
our constitutional and national history. (Cheers.) He
feared that giving the Government more time would only
have the effect of making them more slovenly; and there-
fore he hoped that the committee would remember that
whilst on the one side they should be anxious to give every
facility to the Government for the preparation of their mea-
sures, on the other they should take care to secure the pri-
vileges of private members. He moved as an amendment,
after the words " business of the house," second line, to
insert these words, " And by a more careful preparation of
measures, their earlier introduction, a judicious distribu-
tion of business between the two houses, and the order and
method with which business is conducted."
Mr. DISRAELI was surprised to hear these complaints,
as he had not been aware of the existence of the grievance
of which the right hon. gentleman complained. He thought
that the house got through a great deal of business, and get
through it in a very satisfactory manner. They had even
suffered from too prompt legislation, as they all knew that
measures had been passed in such haste that it had been
subsequently found necessary to bring them back for re-
vision. He should not think of opposing the motion of the
noble lord, because he knew that occasional criticism of
their forms and proceedings must be advantageous. The
character of their business changed with time, and no doubt
modifications in the mode of carrying it on were absolutely
necessary. He had served on two of these business com-
mittees, when they were favoured with the evidence of gen •
tlemen from America and France—when France had a
parliamentary Government—and he believed that on the
whole the recommendations of those committees were ad-
vantageous ; but still he should object to anything which
was calculated largely to alter the character of that house
and its mode of conducting business. (Hear, hear.) The
principal duty of that house was not merely to pass the
measures of the Government. It was a House of Parlia-
ment, the great council of the nation, specially nominated
to carry on the business of the country, and to state the
opinions of its constituents. The legislation of the govern-
ment was often the result of these expressions of public
opinion. Whenever measures were laid before them, they
had shown that they could carefully attend to those
measures. He could not approve of the right hon. gen-
tleman's amendment as much as he did of his speech.
The amendment implied a censure on the government
mode of transacting business. and it must be remembered
that the language borrowed by the right hon. gentleman
was not from the formal resolution of the committee, but
from the critical observations which were to be found in
their report. • (Hear.) He had no doubt that the present
government had, like all other governments, occasionally
shown a want of skill in the conduct of public business,
and it was quite certain that in skilful management much
of the remedy might be found ; but the noble lord and his
colleagues had at least profited by the experience of last
session, and had not in the present announced any measures
of an unusually comprehensive character. (A laugh.) It
was a question, then, when nothing that the most captious
critic could object to was brought forward, whether the
house should agree to a resolution which was certainly of
an uncourteous character. .He thought, therefore, that
they could not accept the amendment, but should be satis-
fied with the motion of the noble lord, because the latter
contained everything with which a committee of the house
ought to deal. They could deal with the forms and pro-
ceedings, but they could not deal with the discretion and
capacity of government. They could not attack a minister
for being clumsy—iaor could they, by providing that mem
frboeersrmts shouldraoinfwthhoa,stepWeapkarsocacoenlelldey on h
proceedings,
anss
unnecessarytmotione
oratory.
efor e the
.; hs
ouse,he thought that advantage
might be gained by adopting the motion of the noble lord,
and therefore he should vote for it, hoping that the right
hon. gentleman would withdraw his amendment.

Mr. BRIGHT agreed with what both right hon. gentle-
men had said, but he totally disapproved of the amend-
ment. Ho took it for granted that a committee would not
prescribe that bills should not be brought in after a certain
day, or pass an order that certain bills should be intro-

duced in the other house. It was quite obvious that all

that should bo left to the practice of parliament and the

public opinion of the house. lie hoped that the right hon.

gentleman would not press his amendment, but that the
noble lord would communicate to the committee a wish that

the house should have all possible assistance. They all
knew that the principal difficulty lay in the nicely balanced
state of parties ; it being the business of one half of the
house to seo that the other got through as little business as
possible~ So soon as they should have a considerable

jority on one side, the business of the country would be
got through with much greater rapidity. (Hear.)
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that last session the hon. member
for Dumfries had brought forward a motion on this subject,
and the hon. member for Finsbury had brought forward a
similar motion, and both members had withdrawn their
motions on the distinct understanding that his noble friend
would bringthe subject forward during the present session.
Besides this a noble earl had brought the subject forward
in another rlace, and the remarks with which that noble
earl introdeced it showed how, in his opinion, business
ought to be transacted. He thought that these circum-
stances fully accounted for the motion of his noble friend ;
and he ivtts of opinion that nothing that could be in-
cluded concerning the transaction of their business should
be shut out from the attention of the committee. The
right hon. gentleman proposed to insert, as the subject of in-
quiry, a teecintnendation of a previous committee. They
were all agreed that a Careful preparation of measures was
very desirab;e, and also that at an early period of the ses-
sion all measures which the house could possibly consider
should be brought under its attention. These were Par-
liamentary truisms which they all admitted, but to make
them subjects of a eottnnittee quite independent of all ques-
tions of censure on the Government seemed to him (Sir G.
Lewis) to be quite superfluous and uncalled for. He there-
fore felt it his duty to object to the insertion of the words
proposed by the right hon. gentleman. Ho did not desire
to anticipate the labours of the committee, but inasmuch as
his right hon. friend had wished to make it appear that the
Government had a sort of interest in diminishing the time
at the disposal of private members, he wished to place before
the house what he considered to be the main defect in the
present arrangement of Parliamentary business. The Go-
vernment, looking simply to their selfish interests, could
have no object in increasing the time at their own disposal.
The labour was greater to them on the nights devoted to
Government business than on the nights devoted to motions
, of private members. The effect of the arrangement by which
I the business was now conducted was this, that out of five
days in the week, three or four were almost entirely devoted
to businessbrought before the house by individual members,
and the Government could only command before Easter
two nights in the week. It so happened that in the early
period of the session the principal part of the Government
business before the house comprised the army and navy
estimates. There was, however, a power of making motions
upon going into committee of supply, and therefore the
Government could not be said to have even two nights,
for the time was very considerably diminished by motions
on going into committee. Independent members, who
came down perhaps at sift o'clock, eipecting the army or
navy estimates would be taken, might find before the
house a debate about an Indian rajah, or an island in
the Pacific, or some other subject wholly unconnected with
the subject of the estimates. This was a great inconve-
nience to hon. members, because they could not know how
long the motion would last. This was a slight grievance,
but it was of perpetual recurrence. It was quite correct
that only one motion could be made on going into com-
mittee of supply, bat a series of resolutions or observations
could bo made which might occupy a long time, and it was
only in the case of a division taking place, and the question
being decided by a vote of the house, that the rule men-
tioned by the right hon. gentleman would come into force.
The consequence was that a large portion of the legislative
business of the session was thrown forward to the months
of June, July, or August. Lord Derby particularly called
the attention of the House of Lords to the subject at the
end of last session, and said that the House of Commons
having one stage more on every bill than their lordships,
and the Government having only two days a week, these
being greatly occupied by motions on going into committee
of supply, and thus being liable to interruption and great
delay by the introduction of new subjects, the real time at
the disposal of the Government was almost nil, and that
therefore the number of bills which received the royal assent
before the end of July was comparatively small. For several
years previous to the year 1860 the number was 61, while
the average number receiving the royal assent from July to
the end of the session was also 61, so that a large portion
of the public business was transacted while very few
hon. members were in attendance. The remedy proposed
by the noble earl was, that bills should continue from
one session to another, and that those passed by one house
in one session might be taken up by the other house in the
following session, without being assented to by both houses.
He would not now stop to inquire whether that recommen-
dation was entitled to their consideration, but only say that
the present mode of transacting matters necessarily threw
over:a very large portion of the legislative business to the
very end of the session, and that any general resolution for
the early introduction of business would be entirely barren
until time were afforded for the due consideration of bills.
It was quite clear thsy could not lay down any inflexible
rule on the subject, and that it must be left to the discretion
of the Government for the time being. If the Government
did not conduct the public business in a creditable and pro-
per manner the house had the remedy in its own hands.
(Hear, hear.) He trusted they would not think it neces-
sary to insert the words proposed by the right hon. gentle -
man, butagree to the motion as originally proposed by his
noble friend.
Mr. N, EWDE GATE said that he felt deeply indebted to
the noble lord for having fulfilled the pledge first given in
answer to a motion made by him (the hon. member), that
the house should appoint a committee to consider the best
mode of proceeding with public business. It would be
within the recollection of the house that they were nearly
worn out last session, by, finding about 50 orders of the day
repeatedly placed on the notice paper. He felt that the
words proposed by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Hors-
man) would rather narrow the subject submitted to the
committee. He quite admitted that it was useless for the
Government to introduce measures to the house if they had
not time to proceed with them. He trusted the committee
would proceed to consider gravely whether it would not be
to the advantage of business that the Government should
have more time before Easter for the consideration of
their measures. It was idle to conceal the fact that the
practice of the house was to expect the Government to
originate the most important business of the session. He
should be sorry, however, to see any limitation put to
the right of independent members to make motions on
going into committee of supply. The object of the com-
mittee should be to enable the house to discuss all im-
portant measures with the largest number of its members
present, and not when they were so fatigued that they
would pass measures hastily, which they had not the
strength to inquire into. He trusted the understanding
would be come to that the nights appropriated to the Go-
vernment would be considered sacred to Government busi-
ness, and that they would not seek to invade the time
already devoted to private members. There was also the
question as to what hour their debates should usually ter-
minate. He thought it would be a provision consistent
with the dignity of the house and with the health of mem-
bers, that no debate should be originated after one o'clock
in the morning. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. M. MILNES thought the house had not much to
expect in the way of expediting the public business by the
Government committee. Ho very much agreed with his
right hon. friend opposite that the business of the house
was on the whole already expedited with great skill. He
believed the speedy advance of public business would really
rest in quite another direction. It might be expedited by
bringing the business of the House of Lords into co-opera -
tion with the business of that house, so that at the same
moment both might be going on with important business,
instead of so much to bo transacted, first in one house in
the early part of the summer, and afterwards in the other
house.

Sir J. PAKINGTON thought that some of the hon.
members who had taken part in this discussion had lost
sight of the practical question, how wes that house best
to conduct the business of the country ? He hoped his right
hon. friend (Mr. Horsman) would not press his amend-
ment. lie felt bound to go further than his right hon.
friend the member for Bucks, in giving his assent to the
motion of the noble lord. He felt greatly indebted to the
Government for having made the motion, and he agreed to
it most cordially ; bat he must say he thought the House of
Commons had born more odium and blame than it deserved
for the delay of business during the last session. Ho thought
the cause of our late legislative failures must be attributed
to the Government itself rather than to the house, and he
thought it was very much the programme of the Govern-
ment which led to those failures. (Hear, hear.) When they
called on the house to accept their commercial treaty, their
budget, and a bankruptcy bill of 500 clauses, they called on
the house to do that which was simply an impossibility.
He was quite free to own that the Government had corrected
their errors in the present year. Their programme was a
much less ambitious one, and it also appeared that the mea-
sures they were about to introduce were ready at the meet-
ing of Parliament. lie felt great regret, however, that the
noble lord had this year departed from the precedent which
he established last year, of calling Parliament together at
an earlier period. He very much wished that Parliament
had been called together fully three weeks earlier, and he
saw no reason why it was not. He really thought one of
the evils to be corrected was the intolerable length of the
session. The object of the motion was for a committee to
consider whether the forms and proceedings by which they
transacted business did not require amendment. Hon. mem-

bers had praised the manner in which the business of th 6
house was conducted, but, without the least disrespect, he
must say that ho could not concur in that opinion. He be-
'laved they might perform their business very much better.

Minor evils were complained of, one of which was great loss
of time, and he thought that was to be attributed to their
forms of proceedings, and not to the conduct of individual
members. Nobody would deny, again, that every year a
great deal of business was left undone, and, in the third
place nobody would deny that of the business done a
considerable part was hurried over in a very inde-
corous manner in August, and after a great portion of the
house had ceased to attend to their duty. At the end of
the session they endeavoured to hide under a very bad cloak
a want of attention to the business of the country of which
they ought to be ashamed. Every July the minister pro-
posed what was called the "massacre of the innocents ;"
namely, announced what bills of the year would be aban-
doned. That annual ceremony was nothing more nor less
than a confession that the House of Commons was unable

to transact the business of the country. The fact \Nas that
the immensely increasing business of the country had out-
grOWA the forms of its proceedings, and they ought to adapt:

those farms so as to enable them to transact that busrde.Zs
in a satisfattisry manner. He had been long convinced that
those forms might be simplified, modified, and greatly im-
proved, without the slightest *endue encroachment on the
liberties and privileges of individual members. So strongly
was he of that opinion that he himself, in 1854, moved for
the committee to which allusion had been made, and he ear-
nestly hoped that the committee now proposed to be ttp-
pointed would carry out the important object referred to
in a spirit less cautious and less timid than that which cha-
racterised the committee of 1854, over which he presided.
To show that the recommendations of these committees
were:not:always adopted by the house, he might mention
that one of the few resolutions to which that committee
had agreed was, that the house at its rising on Friday
should stand adjourned until the following Monday, unless
the house otherwise ordered. Without wishing to pay any
disrespect to that committee, he said that they were not
disposed to alter the forms of the house, and that though
they passed eight or nine resolutions, they referred to very
trifling and unimportant matters. He submitted to them 30
or 40 resolutions, proposing changes which he thought might
be advantageously made in the forms of the house, but
they scarcely entertained them ; yet there was not one of
them which had not received the consideration and con-
currence of the late distinguished Speaker of the house,
now Lofd Eversley. When he told Lord Eversley how in-
disposed the committee was to make any change in order to
expedite the proceedings of the house, his answer was,
" Don't be discouraged ; the same thing happened to me in
the early period of my Parliamentary career ; but I have
seen every one of the changes which I then proposed gra-
dually brought about ; and depend upon if you will sit long
enough in the house to see carried every one of the resolu-
tions which have been rejected by the committee." The
committee proposed by the noble viscount, when they en-
tered upon their inquiry, would be surprised how moderate
those changes were. He was glad that the subject was
now taken up by the Government, and he hoped that in
their hands it would be placed on a satisfactory footing.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said the right hon. bart. gravely
asked them whether they did not think that the proceedings
of the house might be vary much improved. He (Mr. Dun-
combe) said decidedly yes. The whole matter lay in a small
compass, but he would ask whether much time was not
wasted in the vicinity of that table in a long speech about
nothing at all. (Laughter.) From a number of years' ex-
perience in the house he thought that much time was so
wasted. Some how or another also they heard of arrange-
ments being made contrary to the rule of Parliament, to
the effect that so-and-so should follow so-and-so in a de-
bate. It would be far better that the member who first
caught the Speaker's eye should have an opportunity of
speaking. The arrangements to which he adverted were
an encroachment on the right of debate, and ought not to
be allowed. If they were to have a committee upstairs,
consisting of 21 members, he thought that committe would
leave the question very much where they found it, and
would not prove so advantageous as a committee of nine or
11 practical men, fully acquainted with the business of the
house. There was one branch of inquiry which ought not
to be committed to the gentlemen upstairs—namely, that
with regard to bills in that and in the other house of Parlia-
ment, near the time of the prorogation. The Earl of Derby
on the 19th of July last made a very rational and sensible
proposal in the House of Lords, that that house should ap-
point a committee to ascertain how Parliamentary business
might be better conducted. How was his proposal met ?
This case was that there were 58 bills before the House of
Commons in their different stages, and 45 sent up from it
to the other house ; 19 of which had only come up that
morning to the House of Lords to be discussed. It was
utterly impossible for the House of Lords or the House of
Commons, on the 19th of July, if they were to prorogue at
the beginning of August, as they generally did, to get
through those bills in a satisfactory manner. The
Earl of Derby proposed a committee to consider whether
some plan might not be devised bY which those different
bills might be taken up in the ensung session at the stage
at which they had arrived at the prorogation. The answer
made by the Government was that it might be right to
appoint a joie committee on that subject, but that the
House of Commons was in such a state of indignation with
regard to the paper duties that it would not be soft; for a
committee composed of members of the two houses to me.!l.
(Laughter.) That was I ord Granville's opinion, and he
recommended the noble earl to withdraw his motion. Well,
there they were with the paper duties, and the insult which
had not yet bien resented. Certainly resolutions were pro-
posed by the noble viscount at the head of the Government
in reference to the privileges of the house, but they never
mentioned the paper duties; and posterity might read them
without knowing that such a difference had arisen. Lord
Granville's reply to the Earl of Derby was, therefore, quite
imaginary. He (Mr. Dun combo) did not think that the in-
quiry should take place by such a committee as the noble
lord now proposed, but by ajoint committee of the two houses.
The Earl of Derby proposed that the prorogation should be
considered as an adjournment with respect to bills pending,
and that they might be re-introduced at the same stage the
next session. No harm could proceed from such an arrange-
ment; and it would always be competent for either house
to reject, if necessary, a bill treasured in that manner.
A great deal of public time might be saved by such an ar-
rangement, and also by gentlemen curtailing their observa-
tions on matters in which the public were interested. Up
to 11 o'clock on notice days, however, the house was fre-
quently occupied with adjournment questions, merely be-
cause some members would mulct; speeches, first en Chills,
then on France, then on Italy, then on Austria, and then
on India ; so that the Foreign Secretary ought to be like
one of Colt's revolvers, in order to answer them all. Ile
repeated that he would prefer the committee to consist '3l's,
9, or 11, instead of 21 members.

Mt. V. SCULLY agreed with the hon. member for Fins-
bury that with a committee of 21 the matter would be left
in much the same state it was in at present.
Col. FRENCH said that if the statement of the hon.
member for Finsbury were correct, and the proposed com
mittee did not embrace the point as to continuing bills from
sessiqn to session, he did not think that committee would
do any good.
INlr. HonsmAN then withdrew his amendment, and the
motion was agreed to.
CHURCH RATES.'
Sir J. TRELAWNY moved for leave to bring in a bill
to abolish church rates.

Tho motim was agreed to, and the bill was brought in
and read a first time.

CHARITIES.

Mr. DILLWYN obtained leave to bring in a bill to re-
move doubts as to the eligibility of certain persons to be
trustees of certain charities.

The house adjourned at 25 minutes to 9 o'clock.

L 4 TV INTELLIGENCE.—Feb. 7.

COURT OF CHXNCERY.
(Before the Lord Chancellor.)

TIIE EARL OF RADNOR V, THE SOUTH-EASTERN
RAILWAY COMPANY.
_

This was an appeal from a decision of Vice-
Chancellor Kindersley, pronounced on the 15th
of November last. The object of the suit was to
obtain an injunction to restrain the defendants,
their servants, agents, and workmen, from digging
or removing any rock or gravel, &c., from lands
and quarries belonging to the plaintiff, under these
circumstances:—The plaintiff is the lord of the
manor of Folkestone, and owner of the shore and
cliffs running to the north-east of the harbour,
which, having been erected under powers conferred
by the 47th and 58th of George 111., was purchased
by the South-Eastern Railway Company, under
the powers of an Act of Parliament in 1843. The
company under the first two Acts had power to
take stone, rock, &c., from the shore belonging to
the plaintiff, for [keeping and maintaining the har-
bour, such taking being compensated by a sort of
percentage upon the tolls of the harbour, and pay-
able to the plaintiff. The defendants had, as is
well known, formed a railway and station on the
west and south sides of the harbour; the beach to
the south side in front of the station being low and
open, and vessels of any burden, being unable to
come up there were obliged to go into the inner
harbour. In consequence of this, and to enable
steamers to land passengers, the defendants pro-
posed to construct, and were actually constructing,
a pier or jetty along the south beach of the outer
harbour in connexion with their railway, aickd for
the purpose of forming these works had laid down
a tramway on the plaintiff's land, and were taking
and using his rock, gravel, &c., for the purpose of
these works. It was also proposed to form an extra
and distinct pier to the south-east of the harbour
at the back of the railway station. The case for the
plaintiff was that under the powers conferred by
the above Acts of Parliament the company were
not at liberty to take the plaintiff's rock, &c., for
any other purposes than maintaining and keeping
in repair the harbour itself, and that such rock,
&c., could not be taken and applied to any other
new works, such as were now being made. The
Vice-Chancellor granted the injunction prayed for,
and the defendants now appealed. The question
turned entirely upon the construction of the before
mentioned Acts of Parliament.

Sir If. Cairns and Mr. C. Swanston appeared for
the plaintiff; Mr. Baily and Mr. J. T. Humphry,
for the company, appealing.
The Lord Chancellor, without calling for a reply,
said that he felt no difficulty in the case. The Vice-
Chancellor had arrived at a correct conclusion, and
the,appeal must be dismissed.

[A DvEnTisEmENT.I--Tlolloway's Pills—Life's Grand
Bare.—lndigestion, dyspepsia, or disordered stomach, are
more or less the companions of most men whose time is
occupied by literary, legal, or commercial pursuits, which
prevent tho out-deer exercise essential to health.

'this last is increased vin winter in females, and
all whom the weather makes prisoners. Holloway's
pills have long been famed as the easiest, safest, and most
certain corrector of weak stomachs, disordered livers, or
torpid bowels. They ensure a healthy action throughout
the alimentary canal without distressing. or debilitating
the system ; fr,e the most efficient and painless anti-
dote of all visceral disturbances; they stimulate, mode-
rate, or repress any exceptionable function ; they make the
Cligtiti9n good; the body Won) and the mind Tigeretiel

RAILWAY IN TELLIGEN CE.

GREAT tit, ASTERN.

The directors of this company have decided to
recommend the payment cif a dividend at the rate
of 34 per cent. per annum for the half-year ending
the 31st day of December, 1860, leaving a balance
of about £13,000 to be car tied forward to the next
half-year.

• BRISTOL AND EXETER.

The half-yearly accounts of this company to the
31st of December last were submitted to the Board
yesterday, and the directors resolved upon mom-
reendireg to the proprietors at the approaching
meeting a dividend at the rate of 5!--f per cent. per
annum.