The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-05 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
usE OF LORDS, July 4.
Their Lordships met at Five o'clock.
The Earl of 1- ALMOUTIIe and the Earl of ST. GERMANS,
presented several petitions in favour of the Cornwall Railway.
IRISH BANKING BILL.
The Earl of RIPON moved the third reading of the Irish
Banking Bill.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE proposed, as an amend-
ts's-
ent, the insertion of a clause giving to the Hibernian and
Royal Banks equal privileges with the other banks, which,
ceder the provisions of this Bill, had the power of issuing notes
in Dublin and within sixty miles thereof.
The Earl of RIPON resisted the amendment, and the clause
Was eventually negatived without a division.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
GAME-LAWS.
„The Earl of BESBOROUGH intimated. on behalf of Lord
Deere, that it was not his intention to proceed this session
With his Bill for alte,ing the game-laws.
Thee Lo IRISH JURORS BILL.
the I • RD CHANCELLOR moved the second reading of
tiride Jurors Bill. He would detain the House only a few
°O,tes while he briefly called the attention of their
a.n7lute'ktilfl,se to the state of the law at present in Ireland,
provisions whi• h he intended to introduce to remedy
!lie defects in it. The high constable and collectors are ordered
el
L° make out lists O,Ce a year, of the d.ff•rent parties who area to be elected as jerors. This list is sent to the c'erk of the
peace. The clerk of the peace is desired to leave it three weeks
;t,.s°rne public pace, where it will he open to public inspection.
a.subsequent period a session is held for the examination of
e list% and all persens are allowed to attend, and the high
_ecniatable and clerk of the peace are required to attend, when
any one who has an objection to make either es to the omission
or Insertion of a name can mike such objection. In perform-
irig this act there is no appeal from the decision of that Court.
0p to this point there ea nn difficulty. The magistrates make
yid
!1! from these particular lists a general list where the indi-
uals are classified according to their rank, station, and pro-
PertY. This list, so arranged, is sent to the clerk of the peace
',e lre the sherriffe and that is what is called the jurors' book for
In Year. In making out this general list an error is liable to
edi:OeP in and in the case which gave rise to this Bill an error
actually arise, for one of the lists was lost while they were
I.t)l4ing transcribe t. to remedy this defect, and to prevent
, e possibility of any terror occurring in future from this cause,
would have the list numbered with successive numbers.
`,2 would further require that the general and particular lists
Mould be delivered to the magistrates, and after they shall be
satisfied of their agreement, ti ey shall sign the general list.
That was the second step. Then the book so made out was
delivered to the sheriffs. If, however, any error should after all
°shit precaution be detected, he would have a special pro-
-I,si°n to mset it. H. would direct the particular and general
tio
ts to remain with the clerk of the peace, open to the inspec-
n of the people without fee or reward, and if any one found
Zname omitted or iteerted, so as to make an incoreet list, he
ooluild enshle this error to be rectified on an application to the
t . of Queen's Bench, a judge of which Court would he
authorised to summon the clerk of the pesee and the sheriffs.
with their book_ and have the error corrected in his presence.
These then setter the provisions of the Bill; and if it were
iheead a second time , and they went into Committee, he should
}'?Pty to insert any adde ions which Neble Lords might
nwhich ielees necessary. wa- reay to adopt any precautions
esight besuggeHsteed. He hadd been tine Mine to overload
Billwith untiece-aary provisions. Since the Bill was
P- I ted, he had receiv,el a communication from a gentleman
Who fiee .
mah u obtained some notoriety on the subject—Mr. Pierce
in the°°— ho was of opinion that. sufficient provisien wits made
_ Rill fur all that was required. If any further explana-
"a!l,vras required, he should he happy to giveit.
trZCAMPisELL ‘houeht the Bill would effect great im-
ements, but he was disappointed- that it did not make
persouprlege,
nobler provision for the challenge to the array, which was a
given by the common law of England to a
in P aced on his trial. Sufficient provision was not made
the Bill for arty mistake or indifference on the part of the
Sheriff orhoped ,°1 the Person by whom the list was made out. He
to midi Noble Friend would introduce a clause into the Bill
nu
.ght arise ter provision for any mistakes of this nature which
The LORD
array ,en , CHANCELLOR said the challenge to the
1 u.O
"ly be necessary where there we's a defect in the
s'' f the list corresponded with the jurors book, there would
be no nee •
tuis.ttyakof theesstYntiteatr a challenge to the ar:ay. It would be the
Court! to compare the book with the list, that no
light arise—nothing was left to the discretion of the
alter the /- did not apprehend that there was eny necessity to
int_em . ill with respect to the challenge to the array in the
ethate stages of the trial. However, he would take it
surLoconsideration
seered NMAN was satisfied with the Bill.
he %int LORte CHANCELLOR said if this Bill were passed
eended to introduce a similar Bill for England.
In Bill was then read a secoed time.
IRISH BISHOPS' PATRONAGE BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Mir THE THE COATING TRADE.
the quis of LONDONDERRY moved for a return of
ofdumber of British ships and their tonnege, and of British
Ile: of ell rank-, employed in the Sonth Sea fishing in each
three years 1830, 1831, and 1832, and in the years
Years 1842, and 1843, and the total of e•ch of the three
ill,: I also a similar return of the number of British ships and
Strait tonnage, of all ranks, in the Greenland and Davis
1,,,,,e,aa whale fishery in each of the years 1830, 1831, and
sy`""er's. nd in 1841, 1842. and 1843, and the totals of these
hips; and also a similar return of the number of British
sI their tonnage, and British seamen of all ranks, ern-
cglovedi in that trade to the ports of Russia, Denmark, Sweden,
in is4ria,sia, in each of the years 18:30, 1831, and 1832, and
years. 1er1,842, and 1843, and the totals of. each of these three
tells ne Noble Marquis said his object in moving for these
tits was to show the falling,off which had resulted to the
%ates,lnle trade in consequence of the construction of railwayso.a
e ne Eirl of DA L HOLTSIE had no objection to produ
the returns
moved for by the Noble Marquis. He. was antn.e-
"'lye however that the returns, instead of showing a falling
offi, in the coasting trade, would show quite the reverse. The
ees-arge in bringingcoals by sea, a distance of 240 miles, was
C bd. Per ton, rrespective of London harbour dues, while,
1 railroad, th cost was 14e., or about td. per ton per
No.v, he did think that so long as this was the case
Aere seas very little danger to be apprehended as to a falling
t°e in the coasting trade. He believed, too, that 3d. per
ev°,tt per mile was the utmost limit in point of cheapness for
PLO"' coals could be carried. It was stated by the Noble
quis that they could be carried at one halfpenny, or even
one farthing, per ten per mile, but he thought that. with all the
Improvements that were introduced in locomotive power, coals
would never be conveyed at such low rates.
4,ord RATHER TON considered that the Noble Earl's cal-
culations were made for the districts in Derby
e ot. 25
shire,Stafford-
shire, and Leicestershire, and the no
thedrinstaenonenties.
ra lonmsteile; lnstead,
however, of basing his calculations on
let him take a shorter distance—let him take 120 miles.
he did so, he thought it would be seen that the apprehensions
entertained by the Noble Marquis were not unfounded. In
the Great North of England Railway many of the Directors of
that. Company were owners of coal-fields, and from Durham to
York he believed that coals were carried for *d. per ton.
His Noble Friend, therefore, had some authority for the state-
. !tient which he made with respect to the reduced rates. The
°tatters of railways were becoming coalowners, and coalowners
directors of railways, aced he had no doubt that coals, by the
of
force
Competitio, would soon be carried at d.o per ton per
rate A ton of coals might be conveyed to London, at this
, from the great coal-fields of the north at 6s. 3d. per ton.
ue present charge on the freight of coasting ships for light-
mouse dues alone was from 31. 10s. to 4/. per cent., which in-
creme('
the price of coals. He therefore hoped that they
Zu'd adept means to relieve the coasting trade of the country
oen such exorbitant charges.
Lord ASHBURTON spoke in favour of the coasting trade,
anat,l. ecangidered that while they were expending nail ions on the
tade".they ought to protect the ships engaged in the cowing
tLord BROUGHAM considered that the navy could be sup-
ted as heretofore, in a manner which would do honour to
euunlrY• He was alto in favour of supporting the mari-
b_e trade of the country in an efficient and proper manner,
ttri he considered that it •hould be left to legitimate means
coasts °ten resources. Let restriction be removed from the
woutinerce of the country, and the maritime trade of Britain
St at require ne pecuniary assistance at the hands of the
burden He did not object to their removing some of the
but hp -'s which a positively pressed upon the Newcastle trade,
aided did most object to their taking such a one-
, itrld
eeiew of the case as that they ought to discourage their m-
int; °ftalnunication, for the purpose of unnaturally encoureg-
Lauother branch of their commerce.
• Qrci ASHBURTON did not mean to say that the coast-
Iti3g trade had fallen off, but he protested against the assump-
tien, that by increasing the wealth and commerce ofcoun-
' nrY'lheY were necessarily improving the coasting navigatiod..
e°ll which the defence and iiidependence of the nation rested.
al, a fallacy, too, for Noble Lords to suppose that it was
e
ea w
h,a Ys to the advant4a f the country to purchase in the
them e market. For instance, it would be much better for
toPaY a little more for their fish when caught by En,glitin
4sherinen than to have it cheaper when caught by Dutchmen
I,:ettng, however, upon te latter view f he ase, Govrnment
""' removed the protectiohn from acmes oft ourc fi-heries,e and the
consequence had been a falling off in the trade.
• Lord S lANLEY denied that any reduction had taken place
llt this trade of the country from a removal of the protection
e
"totid rly given to the whale fisheries.
eoIj~COLCHESTER thought it highly important that the
nerY trade should be maintained and fostered as much as
i;:!sibiet inasmuch as that part of the coasting trade formed
nurs, ry for our ettarnen.
the Earl of HADDINGTON remarked that a great deal
the o-asting trade was now carried on hy steamers, and,
therefore, that part of it which was carried on by sailing yes-
became ot more importance to the country. He di
in d not,
"'ever, think that there had been any diminution the
to
trade. On the contrary, he thought it had rather
tecreased than diminished.
After a few words from Lord KINNAIRD and Lord Wsi Alter-
thill' erq aat ohs. maintained that there had been no falling off in
trade.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said that he concurred
-.AI the First Lord of the Admiralty that it would be better,
even if eoals or timber did cost a little snore in conveyance by
l° Pay the additional cost than to damage the coasting
b"`°. His reason for moving for the returns was nut prompted
bej ha: personal interest he had in the subject, but because
lie
ed that coalowners, when they found the laud
of the
so much cheaper would prefer it to the exclusion owotuhle( sea
~cinveyance altogether. The consecpence of t
that the coating trade would be ruined. Coale at the or
"t 7s 6d., and the carriage to London made up the pailmwoeuile!t
sold in
He would like, therefore, to know, ounce
—se' in London at 26s per ton, what became of the difference?
ate thought that if measures were not taken to remove the re-
atric:iions to which the shipping were liable, in the shape of
harbour nueei tee', there would be an end to tne carriage of
by sea.
The
o Due of WELLI7, CiT°N word in
favu kwished to say one
' •onferred upon the country
th, rof a corporation which hats
R thatgreatest benefit—he meant the Trinity - oard. •He hoped
th in any regulations which might be made with „met to
• • . ‘.l
t,l coasting trade or the harbour dues, their Lordships won...
2'!e care that the'lights on the coast of England should claim
`o4llt share of their attention.
the subject then dropped.
RAILWAYS.
•Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from certain
ntiners in Staffordshire in favour of the nartow gauge.
II A in
conversation then ensued about the broad and
hltarr°vl age, the London and Birmingham Railway Company
rv'tcd raised their tolls contrary to agreement, and railway
noeolies in general, in which Lords Brougham, Redesdaie,
Hitherto and the Marquis of took part, when
The Du'ke of RICHMOND said that heed
id not intend to
enter into the question of the gauges, for he had not not read
upon
upon the subject to enable him to come to a decisitn
We
it. Bet he thought it very desirable that Parliamtnt
s_nould decide upon the tolls and rates of carriag-. There
twkere not two railway Bills that came into that House that Lai
tilt, Same tolls. They could only hope, therefore, to prevent
inequality by an Act of Parliament, which would make it
te,Tripulsory on railway companies to revise their scale of
kind'l every five years.—( Hear, hear.) Somethieg of this
utpamaallslo was required to prevent large companies from buying
.
companies, and thereby acquiring- -preponderance in
these companies, and thus creating a monopoly. He thought
tnat the injuries arising to the interests of the public from a
nen°Poly of this kind should he gut an end to.
'lle Marquis of CLANRICARDE gave notice that, on
at enday nextorders, lie would bring forward a motion relating to the
4ndin g.