The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-01 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

• - • - HOUSE OF LORDS, April 3Q.
Their Lordships assembled at Five o'Clock.
Lord Campbell, the,Marquis of Salisbury, and several
other Noble' Lords, presented petitions for and against
the Dissenters' Chapels. Bill,
The Marquis of NORMANBY presented .a petition
eomplaining of a practice.which had lately sprung up, of
enlisting boys out of .union workhouses without the
consent of their parents.
The Duke of RICHMOND presebted a petition froni
Sussex, complaining of the refusal by the. Ecclesiastical.
Commissioners to renew Masa of property held of sup-
pressed prebendaries. The Noble Duke, in supporting
the prayer of the petitioners, complained of the hardship,
which this refusal had imposed, both on the large land-
oWners, and the small farmers in the country. .
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said the object of this 'Bill
was to have the Church property made available to •
Church purposes. The chief complaint which his.
Noble' Friend had made was, that although the Commis-
sioners might grantleases for a stated number of years,
yet that they could not give reversionary leases: -He (Lord
Wharnclitl'e) could not see how the Noble Duke was jus-
tified in finding fault with the Commissioners for making
the most of the property consigned .to their care.
He could assure his Noble Friend . that in every case
where a .tenant in possession .sought a reversionary in-,
terest he invariably, got the preference. - •
-,The ; Duke of RICHMOND said the question he
wished to put to tfie Noble Lord 'was, how a person
.could be expected. to expend 10,0001. on a property in.
. which he had no reversionary interest ?
The Bishop of LONDON thought that the .Ecclesias-
tical Commissioners would ,be .guilty of unfairness,
they did not* try and make the most of the .property,
over which they „were appointed as, agents. Why, if
their. Lordships would recollect, they would see that in
cases where, the Crown lands were to be let, .the
:Noble Lord opposite refused, in his capacity at the
head. of the 'Woods and Forests, to grant any new leases,
and therefore he ,(the- Bishop of London) thought that
the, Ecclesiastical Commissioners were fully justified in
adopting the same course as ,that which the Crown took.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE characterised the,
conduct ef the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. as unjust
and arbitrary, and expressed his opinion to the effect
that if such conduct had for a moment. been anticipated
at the time ofthe appointment, of the Commission, that
Commission never would have been appointed. He
hoped the Noble Duke, on an early occasion, would
bring this subject forward in a more tangible shape than
he had.done that evening.
After a few words from the Earl of BESBOROUGH and
the Marquis of CLANRICARDE,
The Bishop of LONDON said he ought to state in the
name of the Commissioners, that every proposal made to'
them for the renewal of leases would meet with ample
consideration by them. • , "
The,l3ishop of EXETER said he, had opposed the ap-
pointment ofthe Ecclesiastical Commissioners from the
first, but that Commission having been appointed,- it was
their duty to obtain as much money from i the, Church'
property as they could, in order to. provide for the reli-
gious instruction of the people. Ile did not rise from
- any personal feelings, but merely because, member
of that Commission, he Iva§ deeply impressed with the
importance of the subject. r
.. •
The Marquis of NORMANBY gave .notice, that, on
Thursday next, he shoiild present a petition from a
number of artisan& in,Etlinburgh, praying for the adop-
tion of sanitary regulations in large towns.
The Duke of RICHMOND, gave notice that on, Thurs-
day next he should move for certain returns with re-_
specs to the importation of foreign wool,
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY, after presenting
a petition from the north of' Ireland, praying for the le-
galization of marriages, asked, whether it
was the intention of tier Majesty's. Government to make
aiiy giant for the imprOvement of the harbours of Do-
naghadee and Portpatrick.
The Earl of HADDINGTON said the report of the
engineers sent down to examine 'the ports, induced her
'Majesty's' Government not to: make any grant for the
purposes alluded to by the Noble Lord. •
The, Forestalling (Ireland) Bill was read a second
time, and ordered to be.committed, Frida,y.
DEBTORS. AND CREDITORS BILL

Lord COTTENHAM, in moving the second reading
of the Debtors- and Creditors Bill, said that he felt
confident he should be able to show to. their Lordships,
from undoubted authority, that the law, as it stood now
with respect to the imprisonment for debt, was perfectly
useless and futile. In support of that,_ he could adduce
the report of the year 1832, which report was signed
by some of the most eminent men in the legal profession,
amongst whoni was Sir Frederick Pollock, now Chief
Baron :of the Exchequer, and Mr._ Justice Wightman.
He called upon their Lordships to remove a grievance
the existence of which no one doubted. In the inonth
of March last no less than- four hundred and twelve per-
sons passed through the Insolvent Court; andif their
Lordships took that number as • the , monthly average,'
nearly five thousand persons annually passed through the
Insolvent Court. Their ,Lordships would therefore see
how extensive was the.evil which he was then soliciting
Parliament to abolish. The Noble and Learned Lord
then proceeded to describe the various Insolvent Act.
which have been passed. since the time, of Queen,Anne.
The first Insolvent Act on the statute-boot was that of.
Queen Anne, which their Lordships upon examination
would find to be very rude in its character. It prpvided'
that any person could get rid of his debts by means of
enlisting into the army.—(A laugh.) This law was in
the statute-book, and, he had no doubt, was in
force at the present time ; but he apprehended
that her Majesty's army pow-a-days , was not
very often recruited by means 9f the Insolvent
Act. He then.came to what was called the Lords' Act,.
which provided that unless a.man gave up the whole of
his goods on -becoming insolvent, he should. be subject
to transportation' for seven, years. • This was found to be
harsh;:and another
_Act was passed,, which was called
Lord Redesdale's. Act ; but a man,, could not avail him--
sat ey
st in wasexistence
x
pep n self of that Act until he ,had been in prison for,three
months. This- Act was found to be unsatisfactory,
and
consequentlyto.camethe ricneoptuoeratol
operation.;
furde r ;a
thai
ionsndd.
sthe.cßhyaArtghc
et
this
Act,ie mt. pre-
n after he was conveyed to prison.
~But ,by the;
'a
day
man.et might
reports to which he had referred, it would ap-
pear that, generally 'speaking, a man could not, ob—
tain his discharge, even , under the most favour-
able- circumstances, under two months. The Noble'
and Learned Lord then referred to the Act which passed
in the year 1836, abolishing imprisonment Of debt on
mesne process. 'This he had- always looked upon as a,
most important Act, although he recollected that. at the
time it was passed considerable alarm was felt amongst
the commercial community. Since it had come into
operation, there had been no' petitions against it, and he
had notheard that credit had been impaired by it. He
did.not, however; think that, this Act had had fair play,
inasmuch as now, instead-of arrestino-a debtor on mesne
proc
ess, the creditor obtained m mesne
judgment against his
Lord then referred, to the report of the exa-
debtor, and
.took' him in execution. The Noble
mination" of certain witnesses, who. . were , exa,
mined two • years ago with respect to .this subject.
The amount of the cost expended in one year by in.
solvent debtors was 8,6,970/., being an average 'of 51'
for each person. who got his discharge. He" thought
that there was considerable ,hardship in the distinction
between bankrupts and insolvents, by -which the latter
were doomed to.imprisonment and subject to sub.sequent
contingencies. After their Lordships considered. the
high authority which had been adduced on this subject,
he trusted their Lordships would give their sanction to, a
measure which would have the effect of abolishing im-
prisonment, which tended to injure commercial credit as
well as inflicting many social evils.
The LORD. 011ANCELLOR said that he thought
,nothing couldhe more inconsistent than the- law as it
now stood,-namely, that there should be 'a distinction
between its application to'
.the --cases of insolvents and
.bankrupts. The 'unfortunate insolvent, after he had
,given-up all-his property and passed. through the court,
when he ,began the world again had all his. debts still
hanging• over hitn,, audit certainly required more energy
than fell to the lot of ordinary men to exert their talents,
ingenuity, or, industry,, when they knew the result:would
be for the benefit iof others. In conclusion,• he should
express his concurrence in the Bill of his Noblean
Learned -Friend, but. he hoped that -he would defer it
for a short time, in order that a measure of such im-
portance might receive the consideration it deserved.
Lord.BROUGHAM hoped that some penalty might
be imposed in way of misdemeanour upon those, who
were guilty of fraud towards their creditors, or of. frau-
dulently transferring their. "property. .to . others, or of
giving. bills of,, sale.. Such were the provisions. of. the
bankruptcy laws of almost all the commercial states of
Europe,.andlie hoped 'they, would be' adopted in this
country.

• The-Duke;of RICHMOND perfectly agreed in What
had, fallen from his Noble, and Learned Friend, who, had
justAsit down, as to the propriety of having some penal
enactment, as applicable to those who were guilty of
fraud towards their creditors.

- .
Lord DENMAN said he concurred in the Bill intro-
duced by his Noble and Learned Friend. (Lord Cotten--
ham) "which he hoped would be so dealt with as to,enable
theit.Lordshipa,to again' every information respecting it.
He hOped sincerely this. Bill.would be carried into effect.
With respect -to .the provision suggested by his gable
axid.Leartied. Friend near him (Lord Brougham); • eon-
cernizig persons in the last stage of insolvency, obtaining
goods by • false representations from others,. he could
only say, that that -was amply provided for by the
criminal code at, present ;• for a ease of this kind had
lately Cotne•before,him in his judicialcipacity, -where the
offender was 'con vieted of felony, as. having -obtained • the:
goods under false pretences. He thought the subject ofbills
of sale was :one which deserved the deepest consideration
from•the Legislature, for it .was not at:all unlikely.
.that,.
insmany.inatances, persons exchanged these instruments
with •each other; but still he would be• rather jealous
ofadopting precipitately any measure which would make
the :execution -of such a deed a felony. There was
another point-to whieh he- would briefly, allude, and that
was where persons allowed Others the use of their pro-
perty, and in. ,consequence.. that ...those -persons got- in
debt.. He 'thought thatit would be only . justice if such
property "was -to. be, cOnsi dered to. belong to the assignees.
'After afew words from Lord-.COTTENHAM in reply,
aria frotalthe LORD CHANCELLOR;-
-The • Bill was. read a. second time, and ordered to be
committed on -this day fortnight. • ,
TheirLorciships then adjourned. , - • .

•
':HOUSE OF C'OMMONS„ApriI
.30.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at the usual,hour.
BASIN6STORP, AIsTD 'NEW'IVRY VAILWAY.
Q the i otisw. for.thefurther, consideration of the re-
Pt °PA 13teno4is .-
r: . LL rose for the purpose of proposing
that the consideration of the report be postponed till
the next session of Parliament. He did this on the
ground that the line of railway which had been pro-
posed to the town of Newbury from the Great Western

Y A CI7 -A a Tr 71.

~._

kJ,

WEDNESDAY' MORNING, MAY

Railway, .was not only shorter than the line which was
at present before the Rouse, but would cost, in its Con-
struction much less: The-line from Basingstoke' to New-
bury was to be;a single line, while the one from Read-
ing- .to Newbury, was proposed to be' double. The cost
,of the former. would be :200,000/ov-bile the cost of the
latter would be only 150,000/.: With respect todistance,
the. Basingstoke and Newbury 'line was 10 per cent.
-longer than the-other line, and with 'respect to. cheap-
ness for passengers, '2O per cent. Under these circum-
stances, he • should propose,that this report be further
considered that day six Menthe:
Mr. LABOUCHEREiconsidered that no Honourable
Gentleman Would be -willing to serve upon a: Commit-'
tee .if .their decision ,were t 0... be -brought.' before
the House. a'id subjected to 'a rovisal..- Mr. Ord,
the Member for Newcastle ; Mr. Etans; the Member
,for' Derbyshire.; 'Mr. 13eCkwith, the Member for'
Leeds ; 'Mr. - Colqulionn and Mr.. Pakinzton were
-the five gentlemen 'wile constituted that Committee ;
and he here asserted that these , gentlemen were alone
influenced in their deeison .by the evidence that came-
before, them. Those were the grounds-upon which he,
as a member of that Committee, was induced to give his
vote; and he hoped .the House, if a decison *ere called
for,: would confirm that: vote. Ile hoped the . House
would .reject the proposal of the Honourable Member
f©r Reading, who himself could not be fairly said to be'
anunbiassed party In the affair, inasmuch as he was
'the Chairman of the Great Western Railway,
Mr: PAKINGTON hoped the House would not look'
upon this as a: matterOF private business,. but that they
would attend,te a few observations which he fontid
self. bound
as a, .Member of .that ComMittee. to offer.
From - the tithe when the Committee franied their
,report . great; dissatisfactitin had bet n 'expressed bymany persons connected With the Great .Western Rail-
way; and the Committee hada right to complain of the
manner -in. which those objections were. made. He,
one, never heard fOf any intention of revising the deci-
shin of that COmmittee pp' to the present moment. The
'flon..'Metiberfor Reading'
bad stated that, he.was in
possession otuertain•
evidence Vihichwould show that local -
interests prvailed on:the Committee, . and he (Mr. Pak-
ingtan) Wouldappeal to any Of the four gentlemenwho sat
:upon that COnmueealong.with him;whether he was not
perfectly, justified -in saying that he denied, in the
strongest terms which the usages ofthat House allowed,
the truth of that assertion. The Crommittee tat for
sev4in,days,Aticl SO anxious were they to .einiae to.ti right-
conclusion, that they -called. Whet might even be .termed
superfluous evidence; He would ask the House to re-
flect fairly upon 'the- relative positions in which the
Honourable'..Meinber for Reading and the. Coinmittee.,
were placed.: op, Member for Reading Was the Chai-
r Man or the Great,Western 'Railway; while every Meni-
ber who composed that Committee could 'not possibly
have any ulterior abject in view, but must alone have.
been influenced in their decisions by the evidence which
was* laid' before them. With respect to ,the proposed
line to Newbury/and that of Woolhampton.. the. Com-
mittee, in deciding in favour of the latter, were
influenced- :by a conviction, that- the latter would
tend` more generally to : the public. convenience.
He had not mentioned.. what he was sure would
, have. great. ,Weight with the . House, namely;• that on
"every.decision to which the Committeelad come,' they
hia...beea unanimous., .But he Wertild 'ask .the House
whether the ...rule was- to be to put 'Cbitimittees upon
their trial in that House :after they zealou4y and
conscientiously dotie'their duty—(Hear, hear)--and that
for the:satisfaction of -parties avowedly interested in
opposing their decisiOns ?—(lrear,leaeo
Mr. HAYTER said' he must Ile', allowed - to ex-
,press ditSent from, the proposition that a
• reversal by that Heine of. the decision of a Committee
was to be lopheci upon as condemnatory ArA. that Com-
mittee.—(Hear, hear.) If Hon. Metnbers were td sit in
that House merely.to enrol the decisions of Committees,
all that he could say was that their duties would become
a mere farce. In his gpieion they. Were there to discuss
the propriety-of the:deeisions 'which their - Committees
arrived at,- for that Rouse sat as a ,court .of appeal.
Looking at the reasons of till committee, , he, was in-
capable of coming, to .the noneluaion to which they had
come; although he, was aware the communication,could
be made easier film', Newbury. to Reading than from
Newbury to Basingstoke,: yet he could not Consent to
the -conclusion come. to,' and.. must 'vote - against ,the
measure. •, • -,

Mr. GLAI)STONE theught. the T-touSe would agree
to this, that In approaching the decision po in ques-
:tion, they should took with confidence
,on the proceedings
of the Comrnitteel7that, was the great ingredient, in the
dase, although net theeoly one. Now he-thought, as far
as. confidence in a .Ppnmpitteo:: Could proceed in any case,
the; present,7,Conemittee. -had claims to •• the . highest
degree of confidence. He . was glad that - the
Chairman of ~.,the 'Committee • • had - stated briefly
an -outline of the course on which the Committee
had proceeded.. They had not come to their decision
without fhll examination, of theevidence and arguments
thatlad been adduced.; appeared, to him,: fromallhe
had heard-of the 'case, the Commiitee had done, their
,duty.with the greatest cafe and fidelity, ;They had given
full :Considera.tion,k local interests, and they had pro •
ceeded VerY Much upon the consideration not.only of ac-
coromodatingthe local traffic of NeWbury,:but upon the
general. principle. on which railways•should befounded.
The House should recollect that these queatiens re-
lating. to railways hid of late much elittinged their
character, and were becoming every year more difficult,
and.getting beyond.* capacity of A Cotl4Baitte to deal
With them, as. thOie the
Were usually con-
stituted. They. were, • increasing in complexity.- every
year: It had be:eel:de, tfeeNsary, in considering- them,
.to calculate on distaot contiogencies, . Projects which at
first might appear to be of a local nature might become
of . national importance,: and they would be in a dismal
condition if in a.case like.this, in, which the'greatest care
had been-exercised by the Committeeof Selection in the
choice which: they had, Made, and which: the Com-
mittee had exercised the, greatest cireurnspection in the
discharge of their duty, the result.should be the sum-
Mary reversal by the House of the important
:verdict of
that Committee.
Mr- HAWES,. in reply; to iii'ainbservatienef the Right
flen..4entlimao that the Mouse-came to this discussion
under ,great 4isLiyantage,, inisnitich as they. had not
before them the evidence taken before the Gonamittee,
would remark :that ouch Mast-alleys be the :ease unless,
in every instance the evidence Were, printed, and time
wdre given to Members to peruse it before entering en the-
general discussion=a course of proceeding which would
_
• scarcely meet with the:approbation a the, Right Hon.
Gentleman.: Nyheii the report of. ,a Committee :was laid
On the table; it was , Perfectly:competent for -the House
to raise the question Whether or. not the decision of the
CenilnittOe . was a sound ,one,.; and, differing as he
did from the Committee he should support the
nAPtioo tog.r..the HonOniable 'Member, for 'Reading.
The Committee had rejected the most direct line, 'and a
double line instead,of st single line; • the cheapest line
instead of the dearest one. He thought it best to
defer the consideration of the Bill, until the whole of
the lines of communication intended to be embraced in
that wide'field °F.-consideration which the Right Hon.
Gentlernan had thrown out before them, were fully before
the HOuie. Without, meaning to cast any aspersion on
the decision of the ,Committee, he must say that if the
House adopted that- decision they. would impose on the
public_ an inferior and dearer. line:
AIr..AGLIONBY said that he should give his vote in
favour of the.decision,otthe Comniittee, but on grounds
entirely different from • those put forward by the'Right
Hon. Gentlemairoppoaite, and by the Right Hon. Gen.
tleman the Member for He would not enter'into
any details. He —e agreed with the Hon. Gentleman oppo-
site, that the House was to be, to a certain extent, the
judges of the merits of a line, but to the least possible
extent. He voted fOr the decisiOn of the Committee on
this ground, that-it •was-the _duty of the House to sup-
port'the great principle 'that Cominittees ought to be
free from all local and private interests.. They had to
a certain extent got rid of-the bfirthen whigh existed
for many years of Committees being influenced by•local
interest, and their decisions never gave satisfaction to
anybody. He thought that a new system should he
established. which would give Committees :more•of a
judicial character. . He. hoped to see this principle ex-
tended to other classes of railways. •The best possible
tribunals .should always •be obtained. • All matters
were. discussed Lwith harmony and unanimity before
independent Committees. They were now about
to set. aside • the decision, because ' some gentlemen
said that better evidence might be laid before it, or
that a better judgment might be- formed upon the evi-
dence: He denied.' that it was a good principle to set
aside the decision of the Committee on _that account.
The party. impugning the:-decision of the Committee
must do so by -laying• strong grouts, by showing that
there was either gross. injustice, or flagrant want of judg-
nient.by the Committee. .There was no evidence to in-
duce hit to alter the .decision of :the Committee. The
Committee. as. the best judge which of the two lines
were: best, and on ,this ground it. was most dangerous for
the House.to interfere, with their decision.

Mr. W.. EVANS said there had been no "such hurry
in the Committee as that which had been attributed to
it, for they had been willing to sit as long Itathe proper
performance of their duty required. He would not deny
that the other line was-somewhat better as a London
one, but the Committee looked to the best line for all;
and, therefore, they -determined upon-that which 'joined
Newbury to the coast as well as London, and gave ad-
vantages to,the entire district. They refused no evi-
dencethat'was offered, .acid they' given an unani-
mous decision; which he, trusted the House would
confirm • • .
,Lord HOWICK said, were he to exercise his rown
judgment.upon the present queition, he certainly- should
comb to a different conclusion than that which the Com-
mittee had arrived ; but he was so persuaded that if
they did not support tbe authority of their Committees,
such immense harm wonld.arise, that he should feel it his
duty to support their decision in this ease._
He thought the interests of the companies were of minor
importance. The interest of the public was to be con-
sidered, and he-thought it would be. for the interest of
the public that both lines should go forward.

• Mr. COLQUHOUN..wiehed that, Consistently with his
sense of duty, he could have • voted for both' lines,•but
when he.-founil.that there wouldilot be traffic enough .to
support both lines. That there was the strongest desire
evinced -on"' the .-Tart"' or 'those ' connected with
the trade;athe diStribffluit the .Basingstoke line. should
be completed, a desire evinced not only by expres-
sions-initilie-eoming forward with the subscriptions; and
When he fount that..- there. existed- the- greatest apathy
among them With regard to thuotherline," which; more-
over, wai.opPosed by. the greater part of the.landownerS
of. the district, 'ho felt that he had no clioiee', and Was
keldetantly compelled. to4:l6lßde.the.Great Western line.
Sir It.'PEET, had ifockipwik anything of the subject
before he entered the'llopse -but he Wished the Corn-.
in Mee; am-posed as.} yowo gendeafen- haviifg %eel
interest on the subject, had been unanimous in the deci-
sion to which they had come. If that were the case, it
would be very dangerous if the House were to reverse
the decision of the Committee. _

Mr. ORD said that the Committee had been unanimous
in their decision.

affT

,Irwetisxck
iiatkllgua

11:(!:.144

, 9WC
1 184 4 .