The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-29 00:00:00

H OUSE OF LORDS

Their Lordships sat to-day to hear appeals. The
Peers present were Lord Brougham, Lord Cottenham,
and Lord Campbell.

BYRON V. COOPER.
The arguments in this case were concluded to-day,
and their Lordships postponed their judgment.
IRISH PRESBYTERIAN MARRIAGES.
THE QUEEN V. MILLIS. THE QUEEN V. CARROLL.
This case stood in the paper for final judgment to-
day at half-past four o'clock. It will be recollected
that some time since their Lordships stat€d their opi-
nions on the matter seriatim; three of them being in
favour of the validity of the marriages, and three against
it. At the hour appointed the Lord Chancellor, Lord
Brougham, Lord Cottenham, Lord Campbell, and Lord
Camoys, were in attendance. Shortly before five o'clock
the Duke of Wellington entered, and after some con-
siderable consultation between the Lord Chancellor,
Lord Brougham, Lord Campbell, and Lord Cottenham,
Lord BROUGHAM moved that the judgment of the
Court of Queen's Bench in Ireland, declaring the first
marriage illegal should be reversed ; whereupon the
House divided, when there appeared, for the reversal, 2,
against it,t2 ; the effect of which will be that the judg-
ment below will stand, by which it was declared that
the first marriage was invalid.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool-
sack at Five o'Clock.
IRISH PRESBYTERIAN MARRIAGES.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said as the opinion of
the House on the case of the Queen v. Millis and the
Queen v. Carroll had been such as to affirm the opinion
of the Court below, he should move for the re-appoint-
ment of the Committee on the Irish Presbyterian Mar-
riage Law, with a view to legislating upon it.
Lord CAMPBELL fully agreed that legislation upon
this subject was indispensable, for according to the forms
of the House, the judgment of the Court below had been
affirmed. The judges had been equally divided in their
judgment, and when this equality existed, it was consi-
dered as a decision in the negative ; but the law re-
mained by such judgment in an unsettled state.
Lord COTTENHAM could not agree in the opinion
just expressed, because the judgment which had been
given was, to all intents, a judgment of the House, and
that judgment of course asserted and settled what the
law was. He quite agreed in the propriety of having a
Committee to consider an alteration of the law.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said the decision which
had been come to was, in fact, an affirmance of the deci-
sion. of the Court below.

Lord BROUGHAM considered it was necessary to
have a Committee, with a view to legislative interference,
without delay.
MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS.
Messergers from the Commons brought up the Guild-
ford Branch Railway Bill, the Norwich and Brandon
Railway Bill, and another private Bill.
CRIMINAL LAW.
Lord BROUGHAM said, that at the time he held the
great seal a Commission was appointed to inquire into
the state of the criminal law of this country. A report
had been published by that Commission, which report
constituted a digest of the whole criminal law of this
country. It did not extend to Scotland or Ireland, but
it was a code of criminal law in England, excluding
procedure. A code of criminal procedure was intended
to follow. He had, therefore, drawn up a short Bill
founded upon the report, and he now presented it to their
Lordships, and prayed them to give it a first reading,
and he hoped the Government would take the Bill into
their consideration, and give it the support it deserved.
Lord CAMPBELL said he felt some apprehension on
account of the somewhat irregular mode in which his
Noble and Learned Friend had introduced the Bill. He
certainly thought, when his Noble Friend rose, that he
intended to introduce the Bill on the part of the
Governnaent. He (Lord Campbell) was extremely glad
that the Bill had been introduced ; and he would
have been glad to have heard his Noble
and Learned Friend say he introduced it on
the part of the Government, for he knew that the Bill
could 'clever be carried out, unless it was zealously sup-
ported by the Government. It would appear, however,
that the Government had not yet even seen the Bill.
He hoped, however, that they would take it up, and that
this country would no longer be the only nation in
Europe without a criminal code.
Lord BROUGHAM could not allow his Noble and
Learned Friend to say that this was an irregular pro-
ceeding. His Noble and Learned Friend forgot that
the report of the Commissioners on this subject was a
public one, and had been published fifteen months, and
had been in the possession of every Member of both
Houses of Parliament.

Lord CAMPBELI explained.
POOR RATES (IRELAND.)
The Earl of CLARE presented a petition from
Limerick complaining of the mode of assessment for the
poor in that district. The Noble Earl presented also a
petition from Limerick praying for a Bill to improve the
sewerage and the arrangement of the streets in that city.
The Noble Earl presented also a petition for a tax upon
absentees.

IRISH MAGISTRACY.
The Marquis of NORMANBY wished to call the
attention of their Lordships to a recent appointment to
the magistracy in Ireland, to which his own
attention was not called until this day. He
objected to the appointment of Mr. O'Brien as a
stipendiary magistrate, because only a few years ago he
was a violent Repealer. True, he might have altered
his opinions ; and if this was done in a way to prove
that it had been done in sincerity, he certainly did not
see that office should be barred against a gentleman.
(LEFT SPEAKING.) '

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
The Guilford Junction Railway Bill, and the Norwich
and Brandon Railway Bill, were read a third time and
passed.
Mr. THORNELY presented a petition from Liverpool
against the Liverpool Docks Bill.
The Wells (Norfolk) Harbour and Quay Bill, and
the Wells (Norfolk) improvement Bill were read a se-
cond time.
ATMOSPHERIC RAILWAYS GRAVESEND
RAILWAY.
Mr. SHAW rose to call the attention of the House to
a petition which he had presented a few nights ago from
certain parties who had projected a railway, to be con-
structed upon the atmospheric principle. He called the
attention of the House to this subject upon public
grounds, in order that the atmospheric principle might
be fairly applied to railways in this country. It had al-
ready been tried in Dublin on a short railroad, but the
engineers who had been sent over to observe the work-
ing of the principle, amongst whom was Mr. Brumel,
were of opinion that the Dublin and Dalkey
Railway was too short to enable them fully
to judge of the merits of the principle
and they therefore recommended that the principle
should be tried on some railway in this country, and
upon that recommendation a project had been started
for constructing a railway to Gravesend upon the at-
mospheric principle, The parties had presented a peti-
tion to the House, praying to be allowed to bring in a
Bill ; but their petition, prayed for a Bill to construct a
common railway. They afterwards, however, presented
another petition praying to be allowed to con-
struct a railway on the new principle. This peti-
tion, however, was presented too late to be re-
ceived by the Standing Orders' Committee, and there-
fore the Company were prevented from bringing
in their Bill. Now, what he wished was, that these par
ties should be allowed to present a petition to the Stand-
ing Orders' Committee, to grant them permission to
bring in their Bill this session, as it was highly im-
portant to the public that the new principle should be
fully tested. lie was anxious to bring the question be-
fore the House, because twelve months' delay might be
of serious consequence to the projectors of the Gravesend
Railway. The Right Hon. Gentleman concluded by mov-
ing, that the petitioners for the Gravesend, Rochester,
and Chatham Railway Bill have leave to proceed with the
Bill, and that the Standing Orders be suspended for
that purpose.
Mr. STRUTT said, that as Chairman of the Standing
Orders' Committee, it might, perhaps, be expected that
he should give some explanation of the reasons why lie
should oppose the motion of the Right lion. Gentleman.
He would not throw any difficulties in the way of the
railway, but the non-compliance with the Standing
Orders, which the Right Honourable Gentleman said
were mere matters of form, were, in his opinion
very important. In few cases were they so
important--and lie believed they were over twenty in
number. There were two sections on the line, one for
the atmospheric system, the other for the ordinary mode,
and one or either of these plans must be adopted. But
though the Bill enabled them to adopt either, they gave
no notice at all with regard to one. It was necessary
that parties whose property was to be cut through should
get notice, in order that they might be able to
defend their interest. The Committee were of
opinion that the question was of that kind
in which they should follow the rules upon
which they ordinarily decided. There were two
schemes before them, and they would have neglected the
duty which they owed to the House if they showed any
favour to one part of the scheme in preference to the
other. They were decidedly of opinion that this was a
case in which it would be impossible for them
to allow the proceedings to go on. The House
would also bear in mind that the Gravesend line was
a competing one, and that there was another competing
line before them at the same time. They would, there-
fore, be guilty of great negligence if they dealt with one
line in a manner different from that in which they dealt
with the other.—(Hear, hear.) The question, therefore,
was not merely whether they would allow one particular
scheme to be carried out in opposition to the Standing
Orders, but whether they should allow to one com-
peting line what they did not allow to another.
The Right Hon. Gentleman said that it was a most im-
portant invention—indeed it was of national importance,
and that it was necessary that it should be tried during
the present year, as there was no other mode of making
the trial except through this Bill. Those were material
allegations, and he thought they should receive some
better proof of them than that of their being merely
alleged in a petition. The Right Hon. Gentleman
wished the subject referred to,the Standing Orders' Com-
mittee. In his (Mr. Strutt's) opinion that was not the
tribunal before which such a question could or ought to
be received. He would, therefore, suggest to him that it
oughtif
the notiio tuos be referrede
chose
to a
top thepoi
appoint
Standing
Selectclin g Orders'
Committee
to Committee.in
quire into the merits of this atmospheric railway, and
if the Committee were of opinion that the national ad-
vantages to be derived from it were so important, and
that the urgency of the case was so great, that the in •
terests of the competing railways ought to be disregarded.