The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY MORNING, MARCH 5, 1845.

I MPERI

AMEN T.

HOUSE OF LORDS, "'larch 4.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack
et Five o'clock.
AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition
a lai oula the owners and occupirs of land. the tradesmen,
labourers of the par sh of Cuckfield, in the
e°4lll3' of Sussex, complaining of distress. .1 he
Petitioners expressed bitter disappointment, in which he
(the Noble Duke) fully sympathised, that in the pro-
sed alteration of taxation the manufacturers, who
uw comparatively prosperous, should have
• sr%el; L'eLief, whilst none was given to agriculture,
(C." was so severely depressed. He knew the peti-
Oners and he • ld vouch for their respectability and
ter Lou
•h. the truth of their statements. For his own part,
' was determined to fulfil the pledge which he had
•,(,) frequently given, to move for the expunging
ei.lll any Biil which came before the House of any
in &your of the untaxed foreigner at the expense
4ei the heavily taxed British farmer. He had
=f
fwtheYa said that free trade would be the ruin
e country, and he now saw that every mee-
k-44; of financial arrangement was tending to that
`"4lt•'—(Hear, hear.) If all articles of agricultural
trilice
were to be allowed to come into this country
e labourers would speedily be ruined, and
thew
kethe only persons left to support the evil
„.1d be the tenantry and the landlords. The Noble
~e presented severul other petitions, from places
?ampshite and Sussex, complaining of ugricul-
b'at distress, and praying fir the repeal of the. malt •tax.
;`,:e presented also a petition from parish schoolmasters
"'tithe north of Scotland, praying tor an increase of their
ends.
1.0 LAW OF DEBTOR AND CREDITOR.
ASHBURTON presented a petition from the
rerfeuds Protection Society of London against the late al-
It talons of the law of debtor and creditor. He would
ky° that the petition be lead by the clerk at the table ;
lier'i, although the opinions of all the law Lords in the
of had been heard upon the question, the opinion
'etas tnose tradesmen, who knew by experience the
te,l working of the law, had never been
sl-i",,t(4 The petitioners stated, that in West-
it;ster the great bulk of their debts were under
the Pin of 20!., and under the present state of
lie-Jew people did not hesitate to take the goods of
'hems' tradesmen without the prospect of paying for
Paths Re regretted to see so mum overstrained sym-
ter ." with the debtor, and so little consideration
el 4 the losses of the honest and struggling trades-
,trih•
elle.theri moved that the petition be read at length.
coat , Petition was read by the clerk at the table.
.It
eselhahlhed that the law or last session aff-cted parties
duet, "ad contracted debts under 201.—that it was
ket,tless advisable to abolish the practice of imprison-
-44.1; for debt in certain cases, but that in this ease
prittigebts which were effected were those which ordinary
thence would enable a debtor to satisfy—that the
4474 aof the creditor had not been sufficiently
sade" to, and that the interests of creditors
'vett overlooked in those cases in which
Ati gas least able to protect himself; for the
ati,ket last session gave an immunity for debts,
creels." of all others it was most difficult for the
; to
.0p rto prove—that it gave an advantage to the
Iltietit°l against the fair tradesman ; and that in
it had proved highly injurious and exceedingly
tit "'ieis! to the iterests of cre.. Uder these
letsteisstances, they'pray ed for the rep ditoreal oft the Act of
Loras I°ll*
lIRO UGHAM said that he perfectly agreed with
tt taken by the Noble Lord and Le believed
retail' was highly important that the, inu rests of the
tistv, dealers should be attended to. This petition
ttettrd a large class of the retail dealers of the
ettY in which their Lordships were at that moment
the Ili this respect the city of Westminster wasplaced
1141 e same position with the dealers of that important
!lie;i)3l persons the dealers of the City of London and
klter. °rough Of Southwark, and he thought their
4 `3t4 Ought to be attended to. But had they known
114),Nsitiwi in e hich ho (Lord Brougham) was placed,
the vc)111d nut have heaped upon him the abuse which.
noshed.„ The fact was that the Bill was neither his
;,tose ":411 of his Noble and Learned Friend On the
t handAek ; it was originated by a Noble and Learned
,Plitler,ef his, not then present. They had adopted the
Nee and given it their support from the frightful
etkii which had been brought before them of the
Oktt, .ul state of the prisons which were used for the
hs gals of those who were responsible for small debts.
t'PeCtZettrits stated by his Noble and Learned Friend,
Ton
em,,e authority of most highly respectable persons,
s'iks to make one's blood curdle. Did it not.
Littsr-Zeto shudder to hear that some of their fellow-
pl itkt,B were confined in places unfit for human
litces it'h? These poor creatures had been confined in
1.114 vs't!atlasotne from the degree of abomination and
lAiuleh they presented, inhaling unwholesome air,
e'stet;:-lig upon straw, or clothes which they were
}t uttered to take Off. In fact, they were treated
opt hlanner that would be cruel even to
404°,nderaned to death for terrible crime. It was
lulotteuge of those circumstances that induced them
.('ltit,,,- 8° Much of the other Bill which woul4 abolish
tt anent for debt altogether as applied to debts for
I)ttditi,7 lit,der. He was happy to state to
.their
tkt't'fit4l3 that the working of the Act had been highly
ors ! and a report on the subject gave very satis-
kkitiltivecounts of its results. The Bankruptcy Corn-
fit 4 14,.1 had, however, thought proper to put
by Ovate conclusion on one part of the Bill,
Ile 1,4 °f those poor creatures, who ought to
.have
tkiti] rated in September, were not removed from
ttetk,„4 December. He admitted the propriety of the
tt~4pCto the Bill urged by the petitioners, but he
rtly sesPair of hereafter being able to propose a
Lady
ler this.C%A.Sll.-
1 BIi.LL would be glad to support his
1)(44414 Learned Friend when he brought his remedy
tlic Jet, there was one part of the Bill not adopted.
6h cod °,* there would have been no necessity for
But no doubt this arose out of the
e•,,wotilt4iner in which the Bill was passed last session.
lkit'tt'llet.? arid Learned Friend had referred to the mis-
-4.-110 e'ell which had been put upon one of Learned
tkaild tlll,l(hew better than his Noble and
11/41,: ho one was less qualified. to interpret a
the person who drew it up.—(A laugh.)
"()I-IGHAM,—Oh, but I did not draw up the
Itltti(4k laugh.)
,trlv I„4III3ELL--Still his Noble and Learned Friend
tlit:tel, well. the other authorities were better able to
Zest 444 14,7 meaning of the Legislature than the gen-
\ that Was entrusted to give it express'on. He
its the Honse would not be induced to re-
,t,':ps, by the importunity of the Noble Lord
;14t' :'O, as well as the petitioners, the tradesmen
14. eptelister, had always opposed the abolition
.of
t° 'nestle 'nestle process. 'I hose tradesmen had m-
ill Ito idt'e last that the abolition of mesne pro-
-Ihtit be their ruin. But he would • ask,
,„''osia result so, proved ?—(Hear, hear.)--
01,0.ttlenture to say that those tradesmen had
foes
greatly benefited by the abolition, for it
„Z,te 'eat more caut.ous about the pen-tins to whom
1cr1.,44
413URTON—Tbey did not say that they
tlihrtlitted by it.
NYI,Pqi4,N',I,III3ELL—They did say so. He believed that
°-
ttleesu el, on the subject showed that they might
imprisonment after final process, by
ltiqtletiti, better remedy against the property of
14SIttliett.r. it • The Noble Lord (Ashburton) had
L',ttt °l‘ was nothing for a man to spend
'itt r in prison. But did the Noble Lord know
ltel then catee out of prison without being de-
-1.111
?
01.11,111 IT,
oh i(f)—•,ITAM said that he had not drawn up
irle— had been drawn up by one of the Judges,
le„4ltteity to interpret it had been on the part of
ti‘ttlit thest,illed judge.—(A laugh.) Notwithstanding
'l,loess-a,l-0 Lord had said, he still thought that it
ttStiPort-',Y to give credit, and if the creditor was
endure this risk, be ought in fair justice
t, to °erre, .
ISM assert -Ponding security.. Now, he would vent-
ri't and he did it without any intention to
IC Lordships all went upon credit. He
oete ,h.thight say, without fear of contradiction,
Ntlti er? few of their Lordships, if there were
byes ;, °id not believe that there were—who paid
4,1, gbro:tier than• once .a year. It was a custom
'hide tie 1)6-'1 °Pon the country, and therefore no man
ae, cthed for abiding by it. But still, at the
Must say that example was a powerful
rt,4 attoGQtd
etip'itstem went through the several grades
cliff reached that class whose means were
s%,tt rent order, and he believed, therefore, it
ittmls,teNioartYo te titera remedy, so as to give a means of
ioist t teo far creditor for small debts; that w as, the
tp,‘ p,lthee his No honest debtor would suffer a re-
-00(14 4',1,,s person in order to preserve his goods
keg he•
tle Payment of his creditor. On those
rUsted that their Lordships would express
o,tortiaY for a revision of this measure, and in
tarO Q,kir,etrect to the terms of the petition.
s4o. )P rf, '8 ELL was not indisposed to give every
that 3' to the creditor, but it was not to be
credit should not be given. The world
101: ere sl'n without it ; but he did not believe that
4 te th
Cpore the e power of imprisoring his debtor
e evil of which the Noble Lord had corn-
zs•r
ILA Ittrquis tiLARY FORCE IN IRELAND.
(„clf NORMANBY said that, when he hal
lt,the to irate 4 his motion, he had been exceedingly
it . n,
!ly.le4tquest t, on without the smallest delay ; but
shet, O, h `„the Noble Duke postpone( the Duke (..f
the ,tad consented to it till Fri-
tli,4lteti:lltetieslnce of his Noble Friend the Secretary
Nloe,lent re he was led to believe that it would be
,041,,4 Malt' Government to reply to
Oth —at day. This was unfortunate, but
kitjlatittrliettterly for resource, for another Noble Lord, the
? 13 rebind (the Earl of St. Germains),
41,7 hie(itssi°,n of the facts with his Noble
tl4"11 "4 could been m communication with the ex-
,ert ism of all, therefore, give a satisfactory ic-
s.'eeettetieN ito be ; „the circumstances upon • which
thee) fled
•Ilis Noble Friend (Earl
latkhr ieensetiierPed to postpone his departure so as to tlir:furt bvtterTee of her Majesty's Ministers, but he
the
,liep4Posrpon?
the ni,tion on, and would,
Vl'h)tl)letl t,het thee ift. tell Friday, but no longer. He
I,it'seAt:'loll werit"vernMent would be able to give
tk Duke `on
,t.„.„, out an, , • • •
hirtner cielay.
j/Z- Seerej-e'LLINGTON said that his Noble
kee, ary
w,s tof°rthe Colonies had been unable,
e examine the documents, with
"'attire base 4,) to be acquainted, in order to re-
l., h _
oh: It, Wbt„, des.
_, inquiries. He wished to do
loaf °fuse ittrittes_Neoirbeicte to give his opinion on the
Marquis intended to submit to
thrte..,,eoutielte qUence of his inability, the Presi-
uhttlileh that; (Lord Wharneliffe) had consented
1° attentil.,!urns, but he was also indisposed,
lue }louse, The Noble Lord, too,

to whom the Noble Marquis also referred (the Earl of
St. Germains) was also unable to attend the House, for
he was absent from London. Now, he (the Duke of
Wellington) was anxious, if the discussion- came on . at
all, that the matter should be riscussed by those who
were able to throw light upon it, a'.d, therefore, he hoped
that the Nubte Marquis would consent to postpone his
motion to sonic future time.
The Marquis of NORMA NBY said that he was aware
that his Noble Fried was responsible for the whole of
these returns ; but still he thought his presence was not
absolutely necessary, for he believed that the Noble
Duke himself, or any other Noble Lord, would be quite
able to master the whole of these papers in twenty-four
hours. Taking the whole of the circumstances into ac-
count, and the great importance of them, and the excite-
ment which prevailed r.sspecting them, he could not con-
sent to any further delay than Friday. He had himself
been called by the Duke of Portland, from the country,
at twenty-four hours' notice. Should the Noble Duke,
or any other of her Majesty's Ministers who were pre-
sent on that day,-he unable to give an answer, he would,
of course, postpone it uutil some future period, but, at
present, he felt it his duty to fix the day for bringing on
his motion on Friday. He gave notice, also, that on that
day he should move for a return of all the outrages which
had been committed in Ireland during the same period.
REFUSAL TO TAKE OATHS.
Lord DENNIAN presented a petition from a person
who was a prisoner under the bankruptcy laws. In
consequence of inability to take an oath, arising from
conscientious motives, there had been an incompetency
to examine him before the commissioners of bankruptcy.
The consequence was that he had now been imprisoned
not .less than three years. He (Lord Denman) was
bound to state that all his explanations were satisfac-
tory. From the same inability to take an oath he had
been unable to procure even the prison allowance, and it
was only with the utmost difficulty, and by very great
exertion, that he had been able to sustain himself. He
(Lord Denman) felt these to be circumstances which
called for their Lordships' notice, and he should, there-
fore. move that the petition do he on the table.
The Noble Lord opposite (Lord Ashburton) had re-
ferred to several circumstances, which led him to sup-
pose that the operation of the Act for Abolishing Im-
prisonment for Debt was unsatisfsctory. He (Lord
Denman) would take that opportunity of saying that that
Act as yet could hardly be said to have come into ope-
ration. Certainly the effects of it were not as yet fully
evident. He believed, then, when we had full expe-
rience of its influence, the Act would be found beneficial
to all parties. The ill effects that were at present expe
rienced ought decidedly not to be charged to that mea-
sure. It was not, as the Noble Lord (Lord Ashburton)
supposed, the concoction of lawyers and men unac-
quainted with commercial affairs. He had sat on the
Committee for considering the details of that measure ;
and though there were not many commercial men on the
Committee, yet they had taken the opinion of those men
who were known to be high as commercial men, and
whose experience was unquestionable.
On the motion being put, that the petition do lie on
the table,
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that he would take
an opportunity of turning his attention to the sugges-
tions which the Noble Lord (Lord Ashburton) had made
to the House.

discussion with one of these companies, and he thought that
there was as much reason fir altering the course of a canal
as the course of a navigable river.
After a few words•from Mr. FOX MALIK, who wished
the expression of the clause to be rendered more preei,, the
clause was passed, as were also the 18th and 19th clauses.
On the 20th clause being read,
Mr. SPOONER said he did not think the clause afforded
sufficient protection to gas companies and water companies,
or the consumers ef gas and water. All the houses in a town,
say Birmingham, were lit with gas; and if a railway com-
pany, in their operations, should interrupt the supplying of
gas or water for a day, see what a serious inconvenience it
would be to a whole town. The clause gave 20/. a day com-
pensation for any unnecessary interruption; but he would
ask what compensation would 20/. be for the stoppage of gas
or water for a day to a manufacturer or tradesmar, ?
Mr. HAWES concurred with the Hon. Member for Bir-
mingham, for he presumed that he only wanted to guard
against a railway company doing anything of the sort wan-
tonly or unnecessarily. It would be much more just to
provide some remedy of the sort than to put parties
to the expense and trouble of taking an action.
Mr. SPOONER would propose that, instead of 201. a day,
the penalty be made 50/. ; either that, or substitute the word
" hour " for " day ;" for, he would again repeat. that 201.
would be no compensation to a manufacturer for the loss of
his supply of gas or water for one day. And as to the remedy
by action, why, in some cases, the expense of taking the
action would amount to more than the sum to be recovered.
He would, therefore; move that the penalty be 20/. an hour,
if any Hon. Member would second it.
Mr. FOX MAULE—This was certainly a very important
point; but he perceived by the. preceding clause that a
power was given to gas and water companies to' take actions
against railway, companies, in the event of the latter causing
damage to the works of the former. Now, he would wish to
know if tradesmen and manufacturers hid any facile mode of
getting compensation for the deprivation of gas or water for
a day?
Lord G. SOMERSET said there was a clause in the Bill
giving compensation/to such for any damage unfairly occa-
sioned. But it should be remembered that neither gas com-
panies, nor water companies, nor extensive manufacturers,
were generaily so impoverished as hot to be able to sustain
an action in a court of law in such cases.
Mr. SPOONER—The Noble Lord had stated that the
clause gave a remedy against all damages " unfairly" done.
But he would ask how that could be said to be " unfairly"
done which was done under the sanction of an Act of Parlia-
ment and the direction of an engineer? He knew an in-
stance where a gentleman's park pailings had been broken
down by a rail Way company:, and when he sought compensa-
tion for the injury, the answer he received, was, that nothing
had been done that was not necessary and unavoidable. And
as to the gas-and water companies not being impoverished,
why that was very true; but what remedy were individuals
of small means to have in case of such injuries?
Mr. FOX MAULE perceived that the Noble Lord op-
posite had not made out his own case as strong as he might
have done; fir he (Mr. Fox Maule) found that the clause
alluded to by the Noble Lord, as giving a remedy by action,
gave that remedy without any such expression as " unfairly."
—(A laugh.)
Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND conceived that 201. a day
was a very severe penalty; but he thought if it were made
20/. an hour, very vexatious use might he made of it.• And
as to a remedy by an action at law being too expensive, he
could not see how any remedy was to be had by any other
means.
Lord G. SOMERSET said there were subsequent
clauses in the Bill by which a summary mode of recovery
was provided for all injuries sustained under the value of 20/.
After some further discussion, the Committee divided,
when there appeared—
For the amendment ... 7
Against it
Majority against it .... —23
Sir W. JOLLIFFE believed it was the intention of the
Noble Lord to introduce some amendment into this clause,
and it would, therefore, be very advisable for the Committee
to be informed at this stage what the amendment would be.
—(Hear, hear.) As the clause stood, it was highly
objectionable.e did not wonder at landed proprietors
complainingof the encroachments made upon their property
by railway companies, for it was impossible to 'say to what
extent a company might not carry the powers contained in
this clause. As to a landed proprietor obtaining anything
like compensation for the injury One to his property, it was
quite out of the question. No idea could ever be formed of
the amount or description of damage likely to be done as this
part of the question rested almost entir, ly with the engineer
of the company, who seldom or never gave a proper notice
of the proposed encroachments. The extent to
which the power conferred by these clauses was
acted upon was most incredible. A piece of land
might be covered with chalk, and there it remained not only
for a short period of time, but to the permanent injury of the
lands and the general disfigurement of a fertile and verdant
estate. Such a system as this, all must, admit, was most in-
jurious to the rights of individuals; and he, therefore, hoped
some amendment would be made in the clause to put a stop
to it.
Colonel SIBTHORP fully concurred in • what had fallen
from the Hon. Member who had just sat.down. The inju-
ries done by the engineers of railway companies to the
property of private individuals was most unjust,
and called loudly for a remedy.—(Cries of " Hear, bear.)
Not content with making encroachments in the day time,
these Mohawks of engineers--(Laughter)—took advantage
of the darkness to commit these trespasses, which their mo-
(testy would not suffer them to do at another period.—
(Laughter.) Why, it was only a short time back that an
Hon. Friend rose one morning and found a red flag stuck up
before his door—(Laughter)—and were such depredations as
this to be tolerated? Whenever a gentleman •met a stran-
ger upon his lands, be would certainly turn out to be
the engineer of some railway company or other.
They had nothing to do but to ask, " Who are you?"
then the party replied, " I am the engineer of such and
such a railway, and am acting under the law."—(Laughter.)
But if he were the owner of the land, he would take care
that the fellow should be promptly conveyed beforera neigh-
bouring magistrate.—(Laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman had
very properly asked, " Where,, or how, are you to get com-
pensation ?" "Go to law," was the reply. Go to law, in,
deed ! How was a poor farmer to contend against an irre-
sponsible body? 'Well, then, if they conferred such enor-
mous powers upon a railway company, why should they not
compel them to afford full and ample compensation for the
injury they did to the rights of private property?
Mr. DKRBY suggested that, if the Noble Lord intended
is make any alterations in the clause, he ought to state
them to the Committee.
Lord G. SOMERSET said that he should propose that the
first blank in the clause, limiting the distance at which the
company• could interfere with private roads, should be
filled up 'with 500 yards instead of 1,000, and the second
blank with 200 yards instead of 250. This was an

important alteration ; as to the remuneration for damage
done, he should propose some alterations on that head in
the 29th clause. With regard to the present clause, he could
not see that any alteration could be made beyond that which
he had just mentioned.
Mr. FOX MAULE said the clause still gave the company
the power of coming on private roads or approaches, and un-
less some alteration was made, this power would be strongly
objected to.
Mr. DARBY had an insuperable objection to this part of
the Bill.
Lord GRAN VILLE SOMERSET said the alteration he had
proposed would greatly restrict the power of the otherclauses
of the Act. A month's notice must be given to proprietors,
and the company were bound to give good security for com-
pensation for any damage or injury they might do. This
was a very important advantage. The clause would also
give every means of obtaining compensation for those lands
which were temporarily occupied.
Mr. DARBY said railroads had so increased, that these
powers bad now become much more injurious in their operation.
Mr. STANSFIELD thought that the compensation might
be made a special part of each rails a; Bill.
Lord G. SOMERSET was ready to adopt any practical
suggestion, but with regard to making the compensation a
special part of every Bill, he must observe that these clauses
were only to act in cases where no special agreement had
been made. There was nothing in the Bill to prevent those
special agreements being made.
Mr. AGLIONBY said it seemed as if the clause was meant
to give a bonus and advantage to laxity of engineering. It
said if the line was properly laid down, it was Well, but if it
was carelessly laid down, it was well also, and the railway
company might have the benefit of its own carelessness. He
snould wish the engineers to be compelled to be as strict as
possible in the first instance, that the public might know
how far they were injured by any railway. The altera-
tion which was proposed to be made in the 29th clause
did not meet the case of interference with private roads.
The power was taken by this clause to take 500 yards for the
purpose of private roads. In the first Bill they had a power
of deviation of 100 yards; then there was a further power of
deviation, and now they came for 300 yards more. Now this
was sufficiently onerous in itself; but after having taken the
use of these private roads, there was not a single word
said-about the repair of these roads when the company had
done with them. Not the slightest provision was made in the
29th clause for these repairs, although that clause did give
the right of compensation. [Mr. Fox Maule here handed
the Bill to the Hon. Member.] He saw by the suggestion
of the Right lion. Gentleman, that the provision fur repair-
ing private roads, was made in the 43d clause, but still he
thought the right of private roads to such an extent was
very objectionable, though of course his notice of a want of
provision for repairs fell to the ground.
Lord G. SOMERSET said that his attention had not been
drawn to the former but to the latter part of the clause. By
the amendment which he intended to propose to the 29th
clause, he had provided all the compensation for private
rights which money could give.
Sir WILLIAM JOLLIFFE said that this clause was so
utterly objectionable, that he did not think either the Howe
or the country would suffer it to be introduced into any Bill.
He did not wish to place a railway company in a worse po-
sition than any other company, but by having !he power of
making a deviation of 250 yards, they would be acquiring aright
which might prove of the utmost detriment to an estate.
This deviation might bring the centre of a tunnel close to a
mansion, or it might fall upon a lot of brick earth. He knew
of an instance in which a plotof 23acreswastaken in thevery
centre ofa property. In the middle of th i s was a clay pit, with its
brick-kilns and other buildings, that covered the whole of this
area of twenty-three acres. And not only was there the
nuisance of making the bricks, of which not less than
13,000,000 were made during the occupation of the land, but
there were not less than 300 labourers encamped upon it for
the space of three years; and this nuisance might have
existed for seven years, for that was the time allowed for the
construction of the railway. For half a mile on all sides the
trees and shrubs on the estate were injured and checked
in their growth. This he conceived to be an immense nui-
sance. But there was a further evil, for he understood that
while these labourers were domiciled on this property, the
small-pox broke out among them, and created a serious
danger, rot only to the family of the proprietor of the land,
but also to all the other residents in the neighbourhood.
Mr. FOX DIAULE said that the objection might be taken
on a subsequent clause, when the obstacle might be obviated
by inserting the words, " that the terms of this clause shall
not apply to private walks and avenues."
On the words being put,
Mr. HAYTER said that he did not object to the words
of the Right Honourable Gentleman, but before the
words were inserted he thought that it was ad-
visable to ascertain what was the provision of
the clause. The thing to be considered was, whether
it was better to use a private road or no road at all ?
Which would occasion the most damage ? By the 43d clause
full compensation was given to those who suffered, •and this
was one of the two parts into which the clause naturally
divided 'itself. The second part refers to the deviation.
Now it was necessary to take this deviation, for the company
required it for four purposes—for side cuttings, for depositing
their spoil earth, for private roads for the railway, and
for agricultural roads. The first object for which they re-
quired the deviation was for side cuttings. Now, by the
evidence of the, most eminent engineers last session, it
was proved that it was utterly impossible for human wis-
dom to foresee the precise line which a railway ought to
take, for it was not until they arrived at a particular
place that they could ascertain what cuttings were necessary.
He thought that there could be no objection to the provi-
sions for. enabling the makers of railways to deposit the
spoil somewhere, and to draw materials from the imme-
diate neighbourhood of the line, especially as care was
taken to secure compensation for the injury they might do

Mr. WODEHOUSE said that the whole conversation on
the clause convinced him that the extraordinary powers pro-
posed in it should not be given. lie hoped the Noble Lord
'would postpone it, for the purpose of receiving such sugges-.
tions as might lead to an abatement. &the nuisances.
Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET would be happy to
postpone the clause, if he received any practical suggestion
for its improvement. He had given the enactments all pos-
sible consideration, and lie did not see how the postponement
would lead to any useful alteration.
Mr. RICE said there were practical inconveniences attend-
ing the clause which they ought to diminish as much as was
consistent with carrying on these great works.—(Hear.) Ile
also thought that roads ought to be protected as well as land.
Mr. T. EGERTON had sat on railway Committees for
several years, and he was convinced that the clause would be
unnecessary, if the engineers were required to state before
the Committee precisely what land they would require for
the objects of this clause—cuttings. the deposit of soil, the
raising of materials, and the formation of temporary roads.
But the statements of those gentlemen before the Committees
were always of the most vague and unsatisfactory nature, so
that no person along the whole line could ever tell to what
extent his land might be damaged.—(Hear.)—He would
move the omission of the clause.
Mr. STANSFIELD said that it was too much to extend these
powers to a distance of 2,000 yards. He thought it ought to
be limited to the distance in the deviation clause.
Mr. DARBY complained of the power given to engineers
to go in upon land, and the consequence was, that the engi•
neer invariably complained that he had " too little land."—
(Laughter.) He (Mr. Darby) contended that the engineer
ought to know how much land he would require to deviate
upon, and, if he could not tell that, then he (Mr. Darby)
contended that he did not know his business.
Sir G. STRICKLAND agreed that there was much to
be complained of on this point, but there was great
difficulty to be met with in trying to remedy the evil.
He thought it would be well rto have all remedies for
such greivances put into one consolidated Bill, in order that,
when they did occur, parties might not be put to the trouble
of trying to find out in what particular Bill the remedy lay.
He had heard of an instance where an excavation had been
made by a railway company, and they left a pond of water
that they never filled up, so that the owners, instead of
having the vacancy filled up, got a swamp in lieu of land.—
(Laughter.) However, he feared that temporary occupation
of the land in this way would always be necessary.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE said that railway companies had gone to
such a length in making those deposits on land as to very
often sink a hoine in a hole that before that had a very good
site. He had got compensath.n certainly for theinjury done
to his land, but not as much as he conceived he was en-
titled to, and he believed that he would not have get even
that had he not procured an injunction from the *cart of
Chancery.
Mr. HAWES Could not see how the Wellcould be 'swiped
without such a clause, for if it were strutted: out altogether
the landowner would be in a much worse position than
before.
Mr. FORBES opposed the clause. Under the present system
of estimating the value of land by the injury done to it, rte
proprietor very often only got sixpence where he ought to
have a shilling.
Mr. T. EGERTON thought the clause ought to be sta uck.
out altogether, and leave,to the Committee to take evidence
as to the quantity of land which might be required, and then
to introduce a clause into the private Bill confirming the
powers of the company to the land mentioned in the
evidence.—(Hear, hear.) As the clause stood, they
rave a company a sort of roving commission, and in-
discriminate and almost unlimited powers to encroach upon any
land their engineer thought proper to name. At all events,
if they did not strike out the clause, it ought in some re-
spects, to be materially modified.
Mr. DARBY said the Hon. Member for Lambeth had en-
tirely avoided the point he had raised. What he objected to
was this, they gave indiscriminate powers to the engineer,
who invariably omitted to mention the quantity of land he
should require, and after the Bill was passed, he turned
round and said he wanted this and that land, which
had never been thought of before, either by the Committee
or the owner. Now, what he wanted them to do was, to let
the Engineer decide in the Committee the quantity of land
he would require, and afterwards confine him to lhis.quan-
thy, without giving the unlimited powers contained in the
clause they were then discussing.
After a few words from Mr. CAVENDISH in allusion to
the railway to Lincoln, and the opposition of the Hon. and
Gallant Member for that city (Colonel Sibthorp) to every
Railway Bill,

Colonel SIBTHORP said he heartily desired the future
welfare of that city; but with respect to railroad questions
he should still pursue the course he had done. He be-
lieved that the first step towards the ruin of that city would
be the making of a railroad ; it was with that impression
—he might say conviction—that he had taken the course he
had done. They were told of compensation, and one Hon.
Member had stated a case of gent personal injury,
which he said he had overlooked on account of
the public good. .This did him great credit; but.
he understood that, in one place, three hundred
persons bad been attacked by a formidable disease,
the small pox, in consequence of the bad air produced by
throwing up the embankments of the railroad. They talked
of compensation, but could they restore any lives that had been
lost? The railroad would injure the tradesmen and inn-
keepers of the City, and he gloried in having an opportunity
of pursuing the same course now that he had done
on former occasions. He had seen so much of Committees
of that House, and so much of the " humbugging"
manoeuvres of engineers, that he was almost afraid to state
his real opinion of them. He should take the sense of the
House on the subject, and he therefore moved that this clause
be expunged.
Mr. GLADSTONE hoped the Hon. and Gallant Member
would not persist in moving the expulsion of the clause.
Colonel SIBTHORP—I will.— ( Laughter.)
Mr. GLADSTONE—What would be the result of ex-
punging it ? In his opinion it would be practically affirm-
ing every word in it, for all the powers it gave were already
obtifined by all the private Acts, and the private Bill Com-
mittee would give companies those powers again—(" More
shame for them," from Colonel Sibthorpe—laughter)—whe-
ther it would be more shame for them or nor, he knew that
this would be the infallible result. Pe should, therefore,
support every amendment and restriction of the clause as so
much gained. He was for making the best arrangement
possible, and he thought there was some reason in the amend-
ment of the Honourable Member for Sussex, to the effect
that these powers should only be given in cases
where they might be necessary to make use of them.
In the case of brick-work also ; it was impossible for any en-
gineer to foresee how many bricks would be required,
and therefore, in his opinion, the power of deviation
ought to be given. If this clause were to
be expunged the effect would be that the small proprietor
would be disregarded, and the wealthy classes alone would
be cared fix.

Lord G. SOMERSET said that he would corsider the pro-
position of the Hon. Member for -Sussex, and he would
move that the Chairman report progress, and ask leave to sit
again on Thursday. In the meantime, he would take au op•
portunity of communicating with his Hon. Friend, and try
if they could not frame a clause which should obviate the
diffictilty which aas felt on all sides of the House to the
clause as it now stood.

The amendment was then withdrawn.
Mr. AGLIONBY said that he hoped if the Nobte Lord
would not commit himself by a pledge, that he would
at least resolve to avoid the vagueness of deviation to which
he now so strongly. objected, for he thought that there ought
to be some restriction on the laxity of practice of railway en-
.
gin eers.
Lord G. SOMERSET said he was quite anxious to meet
the wishes of the House, and consider the necessities of rail-
way companies, as well as to endeavour to preserve the rights
of landed proprietors.
RAILWAY CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION(SCOTLAND)
BILL.
Mr. FOX BIAULE asked the Noble Lord when he would
bring on the Scotch Railway Bill?
Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET said that he had ex-
pected his Hon. and Learned Friend the Lord-Advocate
would have been in the House this morning, and he could
not take up the amendments without him.
It was ultimately agreed that the Railway Clauses (Scot-
land) Bill, and the Land Clauses Consolidation BM should
be considered on Thursday.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and obtained leave
to sit again on Thursday at Twelve ('clock.
The House then adjourned till Five o'clock.

The SPEAKER resumed the Chair at Five o'cloek.
The Sheffield and Huddersfield Junction Railway Bill
was read a second time, and ordered to be committed.
The Whitby and Pickering Railway Bill was read a
second time, and ordered to be committed.
Mr. MANGLES and Mr. IL JOHNSTONE presented pe-
tition=, but, from the noise which prevailed in tha House
at the time, the purport of them could not be ascertained.
On the motion of Mr. T. EGERTON, the Wallasy
Improvement Bill was read a second time.
Sir W. JAMES presented a petition against the Hull
Docks Bill.

Mr. CRIPPS presented a similar petition.
Mr. H. JOHNSTONE presented petitions, nume-
rously signed, from Edinburgh and Glasgow, in support
of the Caledonian Railway.

be desirable to know whether the House would
at• once come to a decision, that any Member
whatever, who:e. constituents , had. an . interest
in railways which might happen to pass through any
particular county or district, was, as a matter of course,
to be excluded from serving on Committees. He had
read over the resolution, and it did not appear
on the face of it that such a Membe- would be
necessarily excluded from serving on th c Committee.
But if it was the intention of the House that all railway
Bills Were to be referred to a Committee to be nominated
particularly by another Committee of classification, as it
was called, he apprehended it was the object of the Com-
mittee to exclude all those Members who had a local,
though not a private, interest in railways from serving
on them. He believed that was the intention of the re-
solution, and he hoped the House would pause before it
gave its sanction to any such proceeding', for though he
was free to confess, from his experience of Committees
on private Bills, that a great improvement had taken
place within the laA few years, namely by the House be-
ing able to select a sufficient number of selected Members
whose decision the House invariably affirmed, yet
he thought it was necessary that some person
acquainted with., the locality which the Bill
affected should be upon the Committee. But he
thought it se ry material that this principle should
not be carried out teo far; for instance, in many cases,
after the counsel and witnesses had withdrawn, when
the Committee came to deliberate on a particular Bill, he
had seen the greatest disadvantage arise from the fact
of none of the selected Members having any knowledge
of the locality. Now, in proof of that, he would put one
case—he would suppose that a railway was intended to
pass through Lincoln or York, and he would suppose
that the selected Members were three Scotch and two
Irish Members, who had no interest in the subject, and
knew nothing about it. and supposing that an opposition
arose in the course of the inquiry, he should like to
know in what situation the Committee would be placed,
in consequence of having no Member present who knew
anything of the locality. How, he would ask, could they
come to an impartial judgment without having some
person presentee ho knew something of the :Tot. He did
not object to the number of selected Members, nor did
he object to certain of them not being allowed to vote,
hut he was certain, if it was the intention of his
Noble Friend to exclude all Members whose con-
stituents had any interest in the measure, that
the greatest inconvenience would result. He hoped
the House would pause before it sanctioned such a
proceeding.
Mr. GISBORNE agreed with the statements and rea-
soning of the Honourable Member opposite, but unfor-
tunately he would not be able to give him his vote,
as he agreed with the proposition of the Noble Lord.
He agreed with the Noble Lord that, in consenting to
these arrangements, he would give up all the advantages
of local knowledge. The evidence which would be
brought before the Committee, under the present ar-
rangement, would not furnish the best information on
local subjects; for those who could give the best and truest
iuformation would be excluded. No doubt but those
witnesses who would be produced I y the contendin,.,
parties would be well informed ; but they would be
prejudiced in favour of one or other of the contending
parties. It was a well established fact, and known by
experience, that whenever professional men were en-
gaged, be they lawyers or doctors, surveyors, engineers,
or chemists, the most contradictory evidence was given
by the most respectable' witnesses.—(Laughter.) When
upon these committees, his mind was at times perfectly
bewildered by those masses of irreconcilable and oppo-
site statements ; and might have continued so, if some
Hon. Member who possessed some local information had
not said a few wards that made every thing straight
and plain. He would, however, give a reluctant support
to the resolutions of the Noble Lord.
Captain EGERTON said that he entirely agreed
with the Hon. Member as to the great disadvantages
which Committees would labour under in not possess-
ing this local information. He trusted the house would,
to a certain extent, reconsider these resolutions.
Mr. EWART said it was perfectly competent for a
Member of that House, having a local interest in matters
referred to a Select Committee, to appear before the
Committee to give evidence as a witness.—(Hear.)
Mr. SHAW said this course had been pursued with
very great advantage in the Committee of last year.
Mr. BANKES did not understand that it was any part
of the proposed resolutions not to summon Members of
Parliament as witnesses on certain lines; and if doing
so did not meet the question now before the House, if
the resolutions were to be passed in that undefined form,
the result would be endless contention and misunder-
standing; and for this reason, that besides the interests
of the different classes mentioned as intended to be re-
presented, there was yet another class whose interests
were much more important than any of the others, he
meant the interests of the public.—(hear, hear.) And
if the public interests were not to be represented by
Members of Parliament, he would like to know who
could give local information to the Committees on the
subject ?—(Hear, hear.) He made those observations
in order that the House should be careful not to give its
sanction to any Bills which were adverse to the public
interests.
Mr. GREENE said it would be quite impossible for
the House to dispose of those Bills, if they were to be
called upon to attend and listen to every local interest
sought to be represented. If the principle of the repre
sentation of local interests was to be admitted, the House
ought not to have reduced the number of local Members,
which they had dune some years ago. He thought it
would be inflicting an injustice if they were to adopt
such a principle. They ought to admit no local Mem-
bers. They sat either judicially or representatively.
If they sat judicially, the smaller the number of Mem-
bers, the better. They would be enabled to procure all
the information they might require much better from the
examination of witnesses than they could from the
attendance of local Members. If the Committees sat.
representatively, the House had committed a gross in-
justice in reducing the number of the Members. He
could not see the smallest utility in having the attend-
ance of Members representing local interests.
Mr. C. WOOD was sorry to hear from the Noble
Lord and the Hon. Member who had just sat down that
they considered that it would be impracticable to devise
a plan for securing the attendance on these Committees
of Members possessing local knowledge. He had here-
tofore seen great benefit derived from the attendance on
railway Bill Committees of Members possessing local
knowledge. No doubt inconvenience midst arise in some
cases. In the case of a long line, for instance, such as
that from London to York, he admitted that it might be
difficult to secure the attendance of Members possessed
of local knowledge, and, at the same time, to provide
for the fair representation of all the local interests, but
that case was an exception. The Board of Trade had
reported on three groups of railways—one in Kent—
another in Yorkshire—and another in Northumberland.
Now, as to these three groups, no difficulty could
al ise. He did not see why they should not have the ad-
vantage of the attendance of Members possessed of local
knowledge upon those Committees, and there could be
no difficulty in selecting them, so as to secure a fair re-
presentation of local interests. He did not see why the
Committee of Selection should not select six Members
possessed of local knowledge from the Speaker's list,
and five impartial Members; they would thus obtain the
advantages of both plans. He did not think that eleven
Members were too great to attend on a Railway Com-
mitte. They did not sit judicially on Railway Commit-
tees. No one bad been a greater advocate than himself
for the reduction of the numbers of a Committee which
sat judicially. He had always advocated the reduction
of the number of Members on Election Committees, as
increasing the responsibility of the Members, for he was
convinced that when Committees eat judicially, the
smaller the number of Members the better the tribunal.
The investigation with which the Committee would be
entrusted was of the most extensive nature. For him-
self, he should feel great difficulty in deciding on the
merits of the whole of the South Devon, or of the Ken
lines, bring totaliv without the statistical or local know
ledge that would fie required.

Mr. M. MILNES said it was of the highest import-
ance that a due deference should be felt by the public for
the decisions of the Committees of that House. The
choice laid between the Committee proposed by the Go-
vernment or one composed of the local Mem!): rs. The
great object of the Government would be to select five
Gentlemen, who should be entirely ignorant of all parts
of the subject.—(Laughter.) On the other hand, there
might be five Gentlemen who were the best informed on
the question, but then they would be most liable
to the influence of local prejudices. On striking a fair
balance of these difficulties, he thought, to secure an im-
partial decision, their best course was to pass the reso-
lution proposed by the Government.

Sir JOHN EASTHOPE said, that formerly he had
been in u railway Committee that sat sixty days ; and in
consequence of the system which existed, they were ob-
liged, under the pressure of interests which they could
not resent, often to vote against their own conscience
—(Laughter.) He was more ashamed of the fact than
the avowal ; but no consideration—nothing. in fact, but
compulsion, would induce him to place himself in the
same situation again. In that case, local interest was
found to be destructive of public right.
Mr. AGLIONBY thought that the opinion of the
Hon. Member who had just spoken was entitled to
great weight. He had always felt that nothing would
ever satisfy the public but constituting a judicial tri-
bunal guided by no interested or pecuniary motives.
He congratulated the House 'in having this resolution
submitted for their sanction ; and if they were obliged
to divide, he hoped there would be an overwhelming
Majority in its favour. The scheme proposed by the
resolution was the only method practicable and con-
sittent with justice.
Mr. PAKINGTON, in reference to what had fallen
from the Hon. Member for Chester, said, that he had
served on a Committee last year, and he never saw the
interests of the landowners better attended to.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
gallery was cleared for a division, but none took place,
the amendment having been negatived without a division.
Mr. ENTWISLE said he disregarded those phrases
which had been launched out so abundantly against
railway shareholders and speculators, who were en-
gaged
in hor.est commercial enterprise. The Hon
Member was proceeding to address the House upon a
former resolution, when

The SPEAKER interfered, and said, such a course
was irregular._

The How. MEMBER then went on to say, that the House
should clearly explain its opinion as to the propriety of
Members serving on Committees who were interested
in local speculations. The House should clearly state
whether Members who were in any degree interested in
railways should be Members of a Select Conimittee or
not ; and if its opinion were in the affirmative, it was
only fair that they should be protected from reproach.
In his opinion, the bare fact of a Member having an in-
terest in a line of railway should not disentitle him
from sitting on a Committee.

Mr. BEIiNAL did not think the wording of the reso-
lution sufficiently clear and explicit, because it wag im-
possible for any one to say, according to the wording of

the resolution, when a Member was entitled to sit on
these Committees or when he was not.
Lord G RA NVILLE SOMERSET defended the word-
ing of the resolution.
Mr. HUME thought no individual should sit on a
Committee where his private or personal interest was
concerned. Members on private Committees should be
as free from all bias or prejudice, and local interests as
men in the jury box.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the
present one of the most salutary regulations that had
been introduced into the House. The principle had
worked well, and ought to be pursued. He was sur-
prised that any Member should object to so useful a re-
solution. He would give it his hearty support.
Mr. HAWES said that it was very important that
there should be entire unanimity on this question. He
thought the clear and indisputable meaning of the
resolution was, not that Members should
pledge themselves that no individual number
of their constituencies had a personal interest,
but that the constituency, as a body, had no local inte-
rest.—(Hear, hear.) Those who had opposed the rm.
lution had not proposed any other course. If the evi-
dence of Members was desirable it could be given with
much more weight and solemnity as witnesses, and the
decisions of the Committees would thus have greater
weight on the public mind.
Mr. S. WORTLEY said it was impossible for the re-
solution to be practically and usefully carried out, unless
the construction put upon it by the llon. Member fer
Lambeth was agreed upon. He entirely concurred with
the Hon. Member in the observations that had fallen
from him.
Mr. ROEBUCK approved of the general plan pro-
posed in the resolution, and concurred in the view taken
of it by the `lon. Memb,r fur Lambeth. It would be
better, he thought, to leave it to the Select Committee
to say whether the constituency of such and such a
Meta er had a local interest or not.
Lord G. SOMERSET said the Committee had already
had sufficient responsibility thrown upon them.
Lord H. VANE thought the 10th resolution would
get rid of the difficulty.
Mr. ;HAW suggested that the word "believed"
should be introduced into the declaration. It was not
always in the power of an Hon. Member to say distinctly
whether his constituency had, or had not, any local in•
tirest in a particular undertaking. For instance, an in-
dividual constituent might have an interest, and yet his
representative would not be aware of it. But this diffi-
culty would be done away with, if he had only to declare
that he believed his constituency had no local interest.
After a few words from Mr. GISBORNE and Mr.
COLLETT.
Sir R. PEEL said a distinction was made in the reso-
lution between the local interest of a constituency and
the personal interest of an individual Member or a con
stitueet.

The resolution was then agreed to, as wcre also
5 and 6.
On resolution 7 being put,
Mr. GISBORNE wished to ask whether he was right
in supposing that no railway Bills would be committed
before Easter. At the some time he should be glad to
know if the whole of the reports of the Board of Trade
would be made before Easter. He would not detain the
House with any observations on the subject of these re-
ports, because he believed there would be another oppor•
tunity afforded the House for considering them.
Lord G. SOMERSET replied that the whole of the
reports would be made before Easter, but he did not
think any of the railway Bills would be committed be-
fore Easter; at all events, none of them of any import-
ance. He was pledged to the Hon. Member for Lam-
beth to give the House an opportunity of stating their
opinion with regard to the railway department of the
Board of Trade.
Mr. HAWES thought the railway department of the
Board of Trade, as it now stood, was very unsatis-
factory. He would take that opportunity of suggesting
whether a Board possessing such extensive powers ought
not to be an open tribunal. It might, in his opinion,
be regulated, under certain rules and regulations, in the
same way as a court of law, whose judgments and de-
cisions were invariably delivered in the presence of all
parties interested. At present, however, the Board
gave their decisions to the public without its being
known whether the objections urged on both sides had
been fairly considered or not, and this was evidently
not a satisfactory mode of dealing with matters of such
vital importance to the public interest. Besides, it
would put an end to the unpleasant surmises indulged
in respecting the partiality of any particular Member for
this or that railway. He was not prepared to say to
what extent this publicity should be carried, but cer-
tainly some measure ought to be adopted to attach more
responsibility to the Beard.
Sir R. PEEL could hardly think the Hon. Member
contemplated any alteration in the constitution or
bearing upon the peculiar functions of the Board so far
as the present year was concerned.—(Hear, hear.) Before
they could make this alteration not only would the
opinion of the Board itself be known with respect to
particular lines, but the reports themselves would be
being discussed in a Committee appointed to inquire
into the merits of competing line,; and, therefore, to
make any alterations in that Board, which could have
any effect upon the regulations of the present year, would
be exceedingly unwise. The Hon. Gentleman he hoped,
then, would agree with him, that any question relating
to the constitution of the Board had better be deferred.
His firm belief was, whether the tribunal were secret or
not, the degree of weight or authority of the decision
would entirely depend upon the reasons which the
Board should give in support of their conclusion.
His lion. Friend, who sat in the other House, had de-
voted a deal of his time to the Presidency of the Board, in-
deed he did not think any public man ever entered upon
the discharge of his duties with greater determination
to go fully into the subject to be submitted to him, nor
did he think the functions committed to him could have
been discharged with more attention or greater ability.
—(Hear, hear.) He believed the yeti: us members of
the Board were eminently qualified to assist in coming
to a sound conclusion as to the general merits of two
competing Pnes.—(liear, hear.) He knew nothing what-
ever of the real proceedings of the Board, except what he
read in their published reports. He had read the
report issued on Monday upon the merits of a particular
line, which certainly did appear to him to afford most
important information. Alteration and improvement
were there suggested, which they never could have ob-
tained through the medium of any other tribunal than
the Board of Trade. He strongly recommended Hon.
Gentlemen to read the report of the Board of Trade
upon the question of gradients, and the manner of over-
coming the disadvantages which had hitherto been
thought to be insuperable, on account of the sudden rise
of railroads. It was then stated that on the Birming-
ham and Gloucester line there was going to be established
a locomotive engine, peculiarly adapted to raise heavy
weights!upon railroads as a substitution for the stationary
engine.—(]:ear.) It was clearly a most important report
as bearing upon future railway legislation, and he very
much questioned whether a Committee reporting upon a
railroad could have supplied half the information. Be.
fore Easter they would have got all these reports before
them, and to make any alteration in the present Board
before that time would be injudicious. Judging from the
nature of the report, their arguments and their reason-
ing he certainly must say strongly influenced him in
favour of the tribunal.—(Hear. hear.) At all events he
(lid not think it would be possible to make any altera-
tion for the better in the constitution of that Beard.
The Hon. J. S. WORTLEY did not think any mate-
rial alteration could be made in the constitution of the
railway department of the Board of Trade.—(Hear,
hear.) Before, however, he entered upon the subject,
perhaps the Hon. Member for Lambeth would per-
mit him to suggest that the question which the Ho-
nourable Member had brought forward should
be deferred till a later period of the session, and then
let the matter be brought regularly before the House._
(Hear, hear.) The reports of the Board of Trade were
about to be sent before a Committee of merit, and until
they knew the results of their practical investigations he
did not think it advi'able to alter the constitution of
the Board.
Mr. HORSMAN said that his Hon. Friend had ad-
duced nothing serious against the character of that
Board, or the soundness of the reports that had emanated
from them, and he hoped that if his Hon. Friend revived
the question of the constitution of that tribunal it would
be during the hours of public business.—(Hear, hear.)
What had been asserted of their mode of discussion
was proved to be incorrect by the fact that it
was necessary for the President or Vice-President to
have three Hon. Members to assist him with their ad-
vice. What had first given rise to any credit being
given to the suspicions expressed as to the motives by
which the Board was actuated, was its having amongst
its Members some Gentleman who had no public name
or standing. The proceedings of last session bad shown
that in those transactions much opposition might be
expected to be raised against these reports, by disap-
pointed and prejudiced parties. At the same time,
he could not help feeling that the absence of a public
man somewhat justified these suspicions.
Mr. CURTEIS said that he bad a letter from one of
his constituents, who was exceedingly well versed in
railway matters, complaining of the limited period
allowed for inspecting the plans and sections of pro-
posed railway lines. The office for that purpose was
only open, he believed, for two hours a day, thus en-
tailing an accumulation of business that was most un-
satisfactory and annoying. He also complained of
the exorbitantly high charges made for leave to inspect
them. For every reference made to those plans, the
parties so referring were charged about six shillings
while in other courts, such as in the Clerk of the Peace, jl
an inspection of papers would cost no more than about
one shilling.

An HON.: MEMBER said the office for the purpose of
permitting a reference to plans of railways was open
from ten to four, thus giving a clear six hours of accom
modation to parties seeking information on the subject,
and therefore the complaint, in ono: particular at least,
was overcharged.
The SPEAKER then read a series of resolutions,
which were individually agreed to, until he came to that
making the attendance of Members on Committee meet-
ings compulsory; when
Mr. BERNAL rose. He did not know whether it
was proposed to compel the attendance of Members in a
similar manner as with Election Committees. At present
they could only compel the attendance of Members in
that particular case. They could not, for instance,
make them attend in the formation of public roads, or
in other descriptions of private business. The passing
of this resolution would be imposing a very great hard-
ship on many Hon. Members, and he would only wish
them to consider the annoyance to Hon. Members who
would require to go the circuits, or who were engaged
in other avocations. They would, by-and-bye, be re-
ceiving excuses from Hon. Members, and they would be
required to admit them, too, from those gentlemen who
went the northern and western circuits. And then the
lengthened inconvenience many of those Railway Com-
mittees might endure for an extraordinary time. He would
venture to say, and Hon. Members might be surprised,
if some of the contested, Irish railways should last for
three months—(Laughtcr) Were those excuses to be''