The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-05 00:00:00

bad been made by a Member of that House to give in-
formation, he, for one, should insist upon his being exa-
mined. That Member would be subjected to a cross-
examination by the counsel in the case, and no difficulty

would therefore arise.
Mr. DARBY thought that a Member locally ac-
uainted with the facts brought before a Committee
ought to be allowed to take part in the proceedings of
that Committee.
Sir R. PEEL thought tit very important that there
should be some general understanding on this subject.
He presumed that no party would appear before any
Committee in respect of any matter of private interest,
except on the presentation of a petition. The Railway
Department of the Board of Trade was expressly pre-
cluded from making a report on matters of private inte-
rest. By the recommendation of the Committee of last
year, it was provided that the report of the Railway De-
' partment of the Board :of Trade ,should not be held to
prejudice the claims of private persons, the examina-
tion of which was altogether to be reserved to the
Houses of the Legislature. The report of the Railway
Department of the Board of Trade would, therefore,
give them no information on the subject of private
rights. He apprehended that questions of private rights
meet arise on the presentation of petitions, whether
those rights affected Members of Parliament or others.
Whether any sort of courtesy was to be extended to
Members of Parliament, was another question; but
the common sense view of the question was, that
a Member of Parliament, sitting on a Com-
mittee of the House of Gal:mons, merely ex-
ereieed his fanctione as a Member of Parliament, and
no other. With respect to a Member being examined,
he could only say that if such a practice were allowed,
Members, under the pretence of being examined, would
be continually found making speeehes.—(Laughter.) It
was quite clear that a Member of Parliament, not being
one of the five selected Members, had no more right to
interfere with that tribunal than with any other. On
the other hand, he did not see anything which precluded
the Chairman of the Committee, with the consent of the
Committee, if a Member stated that he had information
to give bearing materially on the public interests, and
not affecting matters of private right, from calling that
Member as a witness. In the case of private interests,
of course a petition must be presented, whether with re-
spect to the interests of a Member of Parliament or any
ether person. Now, supposing the case of two com-
peting lines, between which an understanding had been
come to respecting the interests of the public, and a
Member of Parliernent tendered his evidence with re-
spect to that fact, of course the Committee would avail
themselves of such evidence.
After a few words of explanation from Mr. JERVIS,
Mr. STUART WORTLEY said he did not think
that if thiS privilege were extended to Members of Par-
liament, other parties could be prevented claiming simi-
lar privilege. Take the case of two competing lines—on
the close of the investigation of those two lines, a third
and better line came into the field, but could not be
brought before Parliament, could they deny to those
third parties the privilege of offering evidence in opposi-
tion to the first two lines?
Mr, BOUVERIE suggested that power should be
given to Committees to decide which party should be at
liberty to commence the proceedings before the Com-
mittee.
Mr. P. BORTIIWICK thought that parties locally
interested ought to be examined before that Committee.
Mr. BERNAL said that in five cases out of six Mem-
bers would wish to attend Committees, not as witnesses,
but as the representatives of their constituents.
Mr. DARBY explained.
Lord JOHN MANNERS thought that it should be
left to the discretion of a Committee as to what witnesses
should be examined.
The resolution was then agreed to.
The following resolution was then proposed :—" That
in Committees on a Bill or Bills, when such evidence has
been given, it shall be within the competency of a Com-
mittee to adjourn their proceedings until the Bill or
Bills for such other project shall be before them, care
being taken by the Committee of Selection that in all
such cases the Bills for the so opposing projects shall be
referred to the Committee by which the first Bill or Bills
had been considered."
Mr. JERVIS suggested that Members of Parliament
appearing before the Committee should be placed in the
same position as other witnesses.
Mr. HUME thought that, when strangers were or-
dered to withdraw from a Committer-room, Members of
Parliament not on the Committee should be allowed to
remain.
Mr. SHAW thought it right that the Committee
should have all the evidence they thought proper to
enable them to come to a correct conclusion, no matter
whether that evidence was to be given by a Member of
Parliament or other person,
After a few words from Mr. S. WORTLEY,
Lord G. SOMERSET said he had a strong impres-
sion that the Committee should have the right of ex-
amining any persons, whether they were promoters of
Bals or not. He did not think it could be a matter of
doubt that the Committee should have all the informa-
tion they deemed necessary ; and he was also of opinion
that a Member of Parliament had no more right than
any other person to force himself upon the Committee.
He thought the Committee might call him if justice
required it.—(Hear.)
Mr. W. PATTEN said he was prepared to vote for
the resolution, but he thought great care and cautima
was required on the part of the Committee, with regard
to adjournments, for he knew cases where advantage
was taken of them by the promoters of lines, for the
purp:se of procrastination and delay. Unless great care
and caution were taken by the Committee in investi-
gating the claims of parties, neither the present resolu-
tions, nor any others, would enable them to get through
the regular business of the present session.
Mr. GREENE said that he knew there were many
objections which might be urged against the present
resolution, but it was the least objectionable course that
could be adopted.
wishedresolutions
wwthoeernek ntt ehh wee n
rfaregoi reed
nieaei dnt tnoes,
Nwrioet
bhs
looeluutrt A
resolutions
'rho resolution was then agreed to.
Theothe rmu
Somerset)
discussion.(
Aord.
Gi
u.
would he brought forward?
Lord G. SOMERSET hoped that he would be pre-
pared to bring them forward on Friday
NOTICES OF MOTIONS—INDIRECT
TAXATION.

Mr. EWART gave notice that he would postpone his
motion on the subject of indirect taxation till this day
week.

BURDENS ON LAND.

Mr. WARD postponed his motion respecting the
burdens on land till this day fortnight.
INDIA.
Mr. lIUME gave notice that he would postpone, till
after Easter, his motion for the production of papers
relating to the government of India by Lord Ellen-
borough.

moved that the petition of Joseph
ATMOSPHERIC RAILWAY.
D'lsAigr.uiSlaiW
riSAamuda and Samuel Clegg, the inventors and
patentees of the atmospheric system of railways, be
printed, with the votf,s.—Agreed to.

SL AV E- GRMV N SUGAR.
put a question to the
Mr. THORNELY wished to
Right lion. Gentleman at the head of the Government.
He had been informed that on Sunday, the day before
yesterday, an American ship, called the Franconia,
arrived from New Orleans with sugar from Louisiana,
the produce of slave labour, and the captain stated that
more was on the way, The question he wished to ask
was, whether, as this was the first importation of sugar
from America, and the produce of slave labour—whether
it would b
Java,
1 e admitted
anialta,twhehiscahmewadsutpyroadsueseua
dgbr from
China,
labour ?
Sir R. PEEL said that the Hon. Gentleman should
have given him notice of the question. If he put the
question to-morrow he would give the best answer he
could.
FIELD GARDENS FOR THE POOR.
Mr. COWPER said that he thought lie had brought
this subject before the House during the last session;
the period at which it came under consideration prevented
it from receiving that consideration which its importance
required. His object was t ) attempt an extension of the
garden system in this country. And seeing that there
was of late a strong desire on the part of the Legislature
to attend to the interests of the poor, he thought it time
to bring the present subject under the consideration of
the House of Commons. And though it was said that
they could not benefit the condition of the poor by direct
legislation, he thought that if the wisdom which was
collected within the walls of Parliament applied itself to
the subject, it would not fail of finding some remedy ;
arid, at all events, it was to the Legislature that the poor
themselves looked, for to no other quarter could they
look for relief from their distresses. While the
wealthier classes of the country had made great advances.,
there was no proportional progression ii the part of the
working classes ; and though, in comparison with the
working classes in other countries, they were not badly
off, yet, looking to their real and absolute condition, no
person would contend that it did not require ameliora-
tion and improvement.—(Hear, hear.) He thought it
was in their connexion with land that that improvement
was to be sought—(Hear, hear)—for that connexion
Was an important ingredient in the well-bei n g of the
working classes. In former times, all those who were
above the condition of serfs had their cottages with a
portion of land attached to them. He did not know that
GoldsmLh was right when he said—
" Ere England's woes began,
When every rood of ground maintained its man."
But there could be no doubt that the great change which
was made in the sixteenth century brought great
disasters upon those who were connected with land, and
Wl9 the cause of six rebellions in the reign of Edward
VI. Sinn that time a vast number of Inclosure Bills
were passed. The system of consolidating farms, a
u nd
the gradual change which had taken place by giving p
the system of leases upon life, contributed to take from
the poor man the interest which he ha d previously in the
land. There was muali to be said about cottage farms,
and muck against it, but with respect to that they had
nothing to do. The Bill he proposed moreo introduce
provided that parties should not occupy than half an
acre, anti the probability was that under its provisions the
parties would not have more than a quarter of an acre
In his opinion, it was most desirable, that the labo
should have some connexion with the land, because it
created an inert aseil desire to cultivate it—(Hear,
hear)—but what he most considered was, the moral
effect that it would produce ; it would afford amusement,
it would renovate health, and it would improve the
mind and faculties of the occupiers of cottages, and small
portions of land. There was no attempt made by the
Bill to force'
PersOn to carry out its object. The
Bill was rather of an auxiliary character. It provided,
in the first instance, that there should be a public
meeting of the inhabitants of the parish, to consider
the propriety of adopting the plan. Then officers were
to be appointed who were to have certain powers
to carry out the object among the labouring classes; and
then a provision for the case of enclosure. There could be