The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-09 00:00:00

IRISH RAILWAYS.

Sir GEORGE GREY in moving for a select Committee to
inquire and report whether any and which of the standing
orders which are enforced in the case of Railway Bills in Great
Britain are unnecessary, and ought to be di:Tensed with in the
case of Railway Bills in Ireland, and to •nove the following
names for the Committee :—Sir George Grey, Lord Granville
Somerset, Sir Thomas Fremantle, Mr. Labouchere, Mr.
French. Mr. Shaw, Mr. Estcourt, M. Strutt, The O'Conor
Don, Mr. Wilson Patten, Mr. Warburton, Sir William So-
merville, Mr. T. Greene; Mr. Red.ington, and Mr. Hamilton
(Dublin University), said that he did not mean to throw the
slightest obstruction in the way of the construction of rail-
ways, more especially in Ireland ; but as a series of regu-
lations had been passed by that House, intended on the
one hand to check undue sveculation on the part of Companies,
and en the other to protect private properties, he did not see
why in particular cases these orders should be set aside, as in
the case of the Irish Great Western (Dublin 'to Galway),
Ireland. For that reason, and to ascertain in What instances
the standing orders:: which were compulsory on English specu-
lations, should be set aside on Irish railways, he brought for-
ward this motion .

After af, wores from Lord G. SOMERSET,

Mr, FRENCH said that the Right Hon. Baronet had
placed on' Lis Committee eight. Honourable Members who
had befiore decided against this railway, and that nut of a Corn-
mit.',ee of fifteen was a sufficient majority. He protested, in
the name of the majcrity of the other evening, against this

'metiou.

..„........
Mr. W. PATTEN supported the motion.
Sir R. INGLIS thought the decision to which the Howe
had come to on the Great Western (Ireland) Railway Bill was
an unwise one, and that the Standing Orders Committee ought
to be supported.
Mr. SHAW did not think any practical advantage would
arise from this motion. He thought the Committee
would end in nothing if it were appointeck. The vote
which he had given was not quite satisfactory to him-
self.—( A laugh.)
ROYAL COMMISSION.

The Hon. Member was interrupted by the appearance
of Sir Augustus Clifford (Usher of the Black Rod) at the
bar, who summoned the House to the House of Peers to
hen- the 11, yal assent given by commission to sundry Bills.
The SPEAKER, on his return, announced that this House
had 1: een to the House of Peers, where they had been present
white the royal assent was given, by commission, to several Bills
(for which see Lords' report).
IRISH RAILWAYS.

Mr. SHAW then resumed. He hoped the House would not
rescind their resolution in reference to this Bill, however
anxious he might be to see railroads in operation in Ireland.
Mr. WARBURTON agreed with the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, and he would add that the public could have no confi-
dence in the decisions of this House, if the decision in regard to
this Bill should be reversed.
Mr. WARD said that the alteration suggested by his Hon.
Friend seemed to him to have no bearing on the subject under
the immediate consideration of the House. The decision the
other night created a most unfavourable impression of the sta
bility of the present system. It was most disastrous to the
character: of this House as regarded its private Bill legis-
lation. He was reluctant to do anything which might
operate against private enterprise, but he felt bound to carry
eut the principles by which railway legislation should be
governed.—( Hear, hear.) He was afraid the House had no
choice but to redeem its character by rescinding the decision
to which they had come to the other night.
Mr BERNAL said be did not think it would be at all con-
sistent with the character and dignit7 of that House to be
affirming, by a solemn decision, certain principles upon one
night, and, after a Jim Crow fashion, reversing it the next.
Sir HENRY W. BARRON said, that within every recent
poriod, the decision of the Standing Orders Committee had been
reversed in no less than six cases, and no notice had been
taken, but a great noise had been raised about this, and the
only reason he could assign for it was, that
the six cases be had mentioned were English
ones, but this was a Scotch one. The whole
of the landed proprietors through whose estates the rail-
way was to pass were in favour of the Bill. The point
brought before the Standing Orders Committee could only
affect these landed proprietors. The House had acted in ac-
cordance with the wishes of those gentlemen. It would be
most unjust and unfair for them to reverse that decision with-
out showing a competent reason fur it.
Mr. STUART WORTLEY would decline making any
observations on the present occasion.
The motion was then agreed to.
Mr. F. FRENCH objected to several names on this Com-
mittee. Eight of the gentlemen proposed had already ex-
pressed themselves hostile to the Bill. He objected to the ap-
pointment of the Hon. Member for Kendal in particular, and
hoped he would not sit upon it.
After a few words from Sir G. GREY,

The names proposed by Sir G. Grey for the Committee
were called over. The following names were agreed to:—Sir
G. Grey, Mr. Estcourt, and the O'Connor Don.
On the motion that Mr. Warburton be added to the Com-
mittee,
Mr. FRENCH objected to the name of Mr. Warburton, as
that gentleman was not at all acquainted with Ireland.
Mr. WARBURTON said, he begged to retire from the
Committee, as he had no particular desire to serve on it.—
( A laugh.)
Af-er a few words from Mr. MACKINNON, strangers
were ordered to withdraw, but no division took place, and the
motion wag agreed to.
Sir Q. GREY moved that Sir R. Fergusson and Mr. Gre-
gory be added to the Committee, in place of the O'Conor Don
and Mr. Shaw.
Mr. J. S. WORTLEY said that they were now left in the
same position they stood in before the Committee was appointed.
Ail he wished was, that when the Standing Orders Committee
reported to the House with respect to the non-compliance of
the standing orders, they should report whether the rejection of
the hill arose from the difficulty of complying with the standing
olden. He would, therefore, move that the report of the Sub-
Committee on petitions for private Bills on the Great Western
(Ireland) Failway Bill be referred to the Land Committee.
The notion not being seconded, was dropped.
Mr. GODSON presented several petitions against the en-
dowment of Maynooth College.
DUBLIN UNIVERSITY.

Mr. WYSE gave notice that on that day fortnight he should
bring forward his motion relating to the University of Dublin.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE moved that the petition of Eliza
Price (pre-ented 7th May), be printed.
Mr. HUME gave notice that he should move a call of the
House on Thursday, the •.22d.
Sir C. NAPIER wished to make some explanation respect-
ing the strong expressions which he had used on a former oc-
casion upon the conduct of Lord Seaton towards the Ban-
dieras. Since he made those remarks he had received further
nformation, and was better able to judge of the facts. lie
had received a letter from a relative of his, now in the Mediter-
ranean, containing the whole facts of the case, which he read
to the House. The substance of the letter went to show that
Lord Seaton had exercised sufficient discretion in the course
he had pursued in refraining from apprehending the brothers
Bandiera while in Corfu, and in refusing to send a vessel to
prevent them from landing at Calabria. With this explanation
he expressed his regret at having spoken so strongly on a pre-
vious occasion.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
Mr. GISBORNE, seeing the Noble Lord the Chancellor of
the Duchy of Lancaster in his place, begged to ask him why
there had been a change in the system of the Select Commit-
tees? When these Committees were originally formed they
consisted of five Members, while now he found that in several
of these Committees there were only four. He wished to
know, in the event of a division taking place, and the Commit-
tee was equally divided, whether the ayes were to have it
against the nees, or vice versa, or whether the chairman was
to be entitled to a second vote?
Lord G. SOMERSET said that it had been impossible to
avoid the evil of which the Hon. Member complained. He
presumed, that in the case of a division, the chairman would
not be entitled to a second vote, but, when there were two
against two, the question would be carried in the affirmative.
Mr. GISBORNE gave notice that he would, on an early
day, move that all Committees consisting of only four Members
should suspend their operations until the call of the House.
LUNATIC ASYLUAIS IN IRELAND.

Colonel RAWDON said he was anxious to know if it was
the intention of her Majesty's Government to introduce this
session any measure in reference to the laws of debtor and
creditor, and the confinement of criminal lunatics in Ireland ?
Sir T. FREMANTLE said there was a Bill in preparation
in reference to the law affecting criminal lunatics in Ireland,
and it would be laid before the House immediately after the
holidays. But he was not prepared to say that there was any
mea ure in reference to the other subject mentioned by the
Gallant officer, in preparation.
AUSTRALIAN GRAIN AND FLOUR.
Mr. HUTT begged to move, " That the House resolve it-
self into a Committee of the whole House, for the purpose of
considering the following resolution : That it is expedient to
permit Grain and [lour, the produce of Australasia, to he im-
ported into the United Kingdom eta payment of the same
amount of duty as is now levied on Grain and Flour the pro-
duce of Canada." In proposing this motion, he hoped he would
be heard with patience while he made a few observations on
this important subject. The House should be aware that the
attachment of the Colonies could only be secured by a systein
of 'good government, and their amount of usefulness to the
parent country by the measure of prosperity they themselvei
enjoyed. He would beg leave to remind Honourable Members
who trkht be disposed to refuse his motions by alleging. that a
free importation of grain from that colony would be likely to
to which they were so much attached; he
injure the agriculturists of this country, by trenching upon the
trie(inntilnarri'lwould lem that there were interests which equally de-
manded the attention of the House with those of the farmers.
They allowed the Canadians to introduce their corn free, and
they refused the same liberty to the Australians. What had
they done that they should be subject to that treatment?
, and obedient
notgil be liable to
IdSothveeryei
tTohethyesameshou
the same favour and protection? Why should they in-
wimernr were
laws, subject
andto
whythe
siitute a legislative distinction between portions of the
same people? What could induce them to set. aside all the
warning of experience, to disregard all considerations of justice
and prudence, and to sow discontent and disaffection for the
future? He wished that they should admit corn on.-the same
grounds from Australasia as from Canada.— The Hon. Gentle-
man then read extracts from the dispatches of the. Governor
of Van Dietnnee tq ohm the beileAtig rewt. whic4
4 . I.