The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-24 00:00:00

the House did net allow the Bill to be recommitted. He
was not aware of any standing order which
would oppose its recommittal. He hoped, there-
fore, the House would not refuse his motion.
Mr. D. R. ROSS seconded the motion.

Sir G. SAIYTHE supported the recommittal of the
Bill. He was satisfied, if the motion were granted, that
sufficient evidence would be adduced before the Commit-
tee to induce them to come to a different decision. He
did not blame the Committee for deciding as thEy had
upon the evidence which they had before them. It was
true there was not much traffic at present, but the Bill
would create traffic with foreign countries. The Hon.
Gentleman then presented two petitions from Colchester,
in favour of the recommittal.
Mr. TATTON EGERTON said, if the House had
heard as much about the matter as the Committee, they
would have come to the same determination, of throw-
ing out both Bills. There was no traffic to support
either line, and there was such gross jobbing in the
bringing forward of the matter that the Committee had no
choice but to reject both Bills. He thought they ought
to postpone the consideration of the subject till next
session.

Mr. ROSS said he concurred in the unanimous deci-
sion of the Committee. He had heard nothing either in
public or private which tended to lead him to an oppo-
site conclusion.

Sir G. COCKBURN said he had come down to the
House impressed with the great importance of having a
railway to Harwich ; but after hearing th© opinions
which had been expressed, he felt bound to concur in the
decision of the Committee.

Mr. H. HINDE said, having been on the Committee,
he had given a vote different from that of the Hon.
Members who had addressed the House. It appeared
very plainly that a railway between London and Har-
wich was an object of great national importance. Evi-
dence was given on the part of the Post-office to that
effect. Althouggh many landowners appeared to op-
pose the Bill, there were no cases of peculiar hardship.
He could only say, that if both the Bills were sent back
to the Committee, he would give the proposals of each
party his best consideration.
Admiral DUNI)AS suggested that a surveyor should
be sent from the Board of Admiralty for the purpose of
examining whether or not it was desirable that a line
should be constructed.

Mr. ESTCOURT said that if two parties wore to be
allowed to obtain a fresh Committee after their Bills had
been rejected, there would be no end to such proceedings.
Mr. GLADSTONE opposed the motion. He asked,
what could be said to those private parties who had
opposed the Bill at great expense ? The House had
given a judicial decision on their case. It might be a
matter of regret that the parties had come to their
senses too late ; however, the responsibility of the post-
ponement rested with themselves.
Mr. P. M. STEWART said that if the Bills were not
now recommitted the parties would amalgamate out of
doors, and the refusal would only cause additional ex-
pense. He thought it would be carrying points of form
to a cruel length to quash these Bills, and that too in
the absence of all opposition. It could not be denied
that the measure was one of great national importance,
and a mere point of form ought not to stand is its way.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said that the recommittal
would not be a mere departure from a point of form, but
a violation of all the rules of the House. It would be
better for the parties to withdraw their Bills, and next
year present to the House a measure to which Parlia-
ment could assent.

----Mr. F. FRENCH supported the recommittal of the
Bills.

Major BERESFORD was satisfied with the acknow-
ledgments upon all sides of the House of the national
importance of the harbour of Harwich, and hoped that he
would have the general support of the House next ses-
sion. He therefore withdrew his motion.