The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-04 00:00:00

ADVERTISEMENTS INSERTED in ALL THE THREE PAPERS, Morning Noon, and Night, thereby insuring a TOWN and COUNTRY CIRCULATION, at ONE CHARGE.

BRITISH INSTITUTION, PALL-MALL.
The GALLERY, with a SELECTION of PICTURES by
ANt lENT MASTERS and DECEASED BRITISH ARTISTS, is
OPEN Daily-.—Admission ls. Catalogue ls.
WILLIAM BARNARD, Keeper.

PHILHIARMONIC SOCIETY.
The LAST CONCERT will take place on Mom>At EVENING
NEXT, when will be performed Beethoven's Sinfonia Eroica. Trio
Corelli—Messrs. Lindley, Lucas, and Howell. Scene, with Chorus,
from "As you Like it"—lL Smart. Dr. Mendelssohn Bartholdy's
First Walpurgis-night, with Chorus (first time in this country). Con-
certs) Violin—Mr. Sainton. A Selection from Beethoven's Ruiris of
Athens, with Chorus, M.S. (trst time In this country). And Weber's
Overture to Oberon. Vocalists—Miss A. Williams, Miss Dolby, Mr.
Allen, and Herr Staudigl. ' Leader—Mr. T. Cooke. Conductor—Dr.
Mendelssohn Barthohly.
Single Tickets One Guinea, and Double Tickets, it. 103., to be had
of Messrs. Cramer and Co., 201, Regent-street.

SACRED HARMONIC SOCIETY, EXETER-
HALL.
TO-MORROW EVENING, July 5,
• Will be repeated
Dr. F. MENDELSSOHN BARTHOLDY'S ORATORIO,
ST. PAUL.
To be conducted by the Composer.
PRINCIPAL VOCAL PERFORMERS,

Madame Careori Allan, Miss Dolby, Mr. Hobbs, Mr. J. A.
Novell°, and Herr Staudigl.
The Band and Chorus will consist of about 500 Performers.
Tickets, 3s. each ; Gallery reserved seats, ss. ; Area reserved seats,
10s. fid each ; may be had of Vie principal music-sellers ; of Mr.
Bewley, 53,-Charing-cross ; Mr. Mitchell, 39, Charing-cross S and of
Mr. Ries, 102, Strand, opposite Exeter-hall.
THOMAS BREWER, Hon. Sec.

RIDING ITABITS.—Ladies are invited to
AA/in-
spect those made by Messrs. NICOLL, habit-makers to the
Queen and most of the Ladies of the Court.
Cards may ht bad at 114, Regent-street, LOndon.
Messrs. Nicoll offer moderate prices, as a further induoenient to a
correct fitting habit,

LAME ItT ON DEBILITY, NERVOUSNESS, AN9 ALL
DISORDERS ARISING FROM EXCESS, &c.
" He who in pleasure's downy arms
Ne'er lost his health or yeuthflt 'charms,
A hero lives, and justly can
Exclaim, in me behold a man!"
Just*published (In a sealed envelope), Tenth Edition, price 6d.,
or sent by post, free, to any address, 3s. d.,
QELF-PRESERVATION : a Popular Essay on
those concealed disorders, originating in youthfUl excesses,
and terminating in Nervous Debility, Local and Constitutional
Weakness, and all those Slnkings, Anxieties, and Tremors, which
afflict the Weak, the sedentary, and the Delicate. With Practical
Observations on Marriage, and on the Anatomy, Physiology, and
Diseases of the Reproductive! Organs, with plain Directions for
their perfect Restoration.
By SAMUEL LAMF.RT, Consulting Surgeon
9, BEDFORD-STREET, BEDFORD-SQUARE, LONDON,
Matriculated Member of the University of Edinburgh, Honorary
Member of the London Hospital Medical Society, Licentiate of
Apothecary's Flail, London,&c.
" The various positions of Lover, Husband, and Parent, the in-
herent privileges of mankind, are frequently marred and prevented
through the follies and frailties of early indiscretions. To such,
among others, this Essay addresses itself ; and by its perusal many
questions may be satisfactorily adjusted that admit of ne appeal even
to the most confidential friend."—Stafford Gazette.
" The design of this work will be tolerably obvious from its title,
and we cordially recommend the author and his book to all who are
suflbring from nervous debility and general weakness."— Wakefield
Journal.
Published by the Author, and sold in London by S. Gilbert, 51 and
52, Patereoster-row ; Starie, 23, Tichbosne-street, Quadrant, Regent
street; Hannay and Co., 63, Oxford-street; Noble, 114, Chancery_
lane; Gordon, 146, Leadenhall-street ; and by all Booksellers.
At home every day till Three, and from Five till Eight

MEDICAL TESTIMONIAL-SIGHT AND
HEARING.

From T. J. Pettigrew, Surgeon, F.R.S. to Messrs.
S. and B. Solomons, opticians, 39, Albemarle-street,
Piccadilly,—Gentlemen, I have no hesitation in replying
to your inquiry as to the results obtained by the use of
your Improved Spectacles ; being in the constant habit
of reading and writing for many hours together by lamp-
light, it is but justice to say that your newly invented
Spectacle Lenses have afforded me the greatest comfort.
When I employed the ordinary pebbles, I never failed to
experience in the morning a great irritation in the eyes.
Since I have used your admirable glasses I suffer from
no inconvenience of the kind, and my vision is much im-
proved. I shall ever feel grateful to my good friend,
Dr. Blundell for having drawn my attention to the sub-
ject.—Believe me to b yours, very respectfully. T. J.
PETTIGREW' 8, Saville row. Also, newly invented
Acromatic Waistcoat-pocket Telescopes and Opera-.
glasses of the same kind of Lenses.—Every kind of Te-
lescope of larger size and increasing powers for shooting,
sea purposes, and upon stand for astronomical observa-
tions the powers are so great and the lenses so bright
and brilliant that minute objects at an extraordinary dis-
tance is brought completely under the eyes. Sportsmen
tourists, and sea-side visitors will indeed here have a
great treat. Acoustic instruments of every description
for deafness. Caution.—Messrs. S. & B. Solomons, opti-
cians and aurists, are not in any way connected with a
person of the same name in their immediate neighbour-
hood, nor in any part of the country. To prevent mis-
takes, be cautious. and observe—Only to be had at 39,
Albemarle-street, Piccadilly, opposite the York Hotel.
GOWLAND'S LOTION.—This elegant preparation,
an original formula of the late Dr. Gowland, for all im-
purities of the skin, continues to maintain a repute com-
mensurate with its specific properties of speedily eradi-
cating every species of eruptive malady, discoloration,
&c. ; and of preserving and enhancing the beauty of the
complexion by a congenial action upon the skin, as
perfectly innocent, as it is agreeable and efficacious.
" Robt: Shaw, London," is in white letters on the Go-
vernment stamp, without which none is genuine. Prices,
2s. 9d., ss. 6d., quarts, Bs. 6d. Sold by all Perfumers
and Chemists.
[ADVERTISENIENNT.]—The Atrapilatory, or Liquid
Hair Dye, the only dye that really answers for all co •
lours, and does not require re-doing but as the hair
grows, as it never fades, or acquires that unnatural red
or purple tint common to all other dyes, Ross and Sons
can, with the greatest confidence, recommend the above
dye as infallable, if done at their establishment ; and la-
dies or gentlemen requiring it are requested to bring
their friends or servants with them to see how it is used,
which will enable them to do it afterwards without the
chance of failure. Several private apartments devoted
entirely to the above purpose, and some of their esta-
blishment having used it, the effect produced can beat once
seen. They think it necessary to add, that by attending
strictly to the instructions given with each bottle of dye,
numerous persons have succeeded equally well without
coming to them.—Address Ross and Sons, 119 and 120,
Bishopsgatc-street,the celebrated Perruquiers, Perfumers,
Ifair-cutters, and Ilair•dyers.—N.B. Families attended
at their.own residences, whatever the distance.
CHARGING SEATS.—A chi') of nine persons agreed
to dine together every day as long as they could sit down to
table differently arranged. To have done so, they must have
all lived 110 years and 170 days, and ate 362,000 dinners.

iMPEittAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 3.

The SPEAKER took the chair at Twelve o'clock.
The Hon. ARTHUR HENRY COLE took the oaths and his
seat, as Member for the borough of Enniskillen, in the room
of the Hon. Henry Arthur Cole. The Hon. Gentleman was
introduced by Sir J. Y. Buller, and Sir Philip Egerton.
RAILWAYS BILL.
On the motion that the Order of the Day or going into a
Committee upon the Joint Stock Companies legistration
and Regulation Bill be now read,
Mr. HAWES said he should oppose the Bill. He believed
the Bill was imperfectly understood, and it was not known
that the Bill would be proceeded with so soon. From com-
munications which he had with several persons, he found
that the provisions of the Bill were not known to joint-stock.
Companies. The provisions of the Bill were not merely ap-
plicable to future railway companies, but to existing rail-
way companies. They were of such a nature, and went into
such minute details, that the Bill, if passed, would throw the
greatest possible obstruction in the way of Joint-stock com-
panies, present and future. It seemed to be the object of her
Majesty's present Government to interfere in everything and
to settle nothing. The great object of the Committee which
sat on this subject was to,prevent the formation of fraudulent
companies, by which the public would be likely to suffer.
But this Bill would not prevent the formation of fraudulent
railway companies. It did not merely apply to future com-
panies, but it said that existing companies required the su-
perintendence of the Executive Government. This was an
attempt to grasp at power which was perfectly unprece-
dented. The Bill not only applied to future companies, but
to existing ones, and it went into details to an extent which
was perfectly absurd. It even -lieave directors a power to
.appoint menial Strfants.- .Irifatf there was iiiaind of petty
legislation which this Bill did not embrace. He thought
they had a right to know what was the opinion of her Ma-
jesty's Ministers generally.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) seemed remarkably hostile to
the employment of capital in those great undertakings to
which this country was so largely indebted.—(Hear, hear.)
From beginning to end joint-stock companies were to be
placed under the control of the Board of Trade.
The Bill had been materially altered since it was first printed,
and very extensive powers had been given to the Board of
Trade in reference to railway companies—(an expression of
dissent from Mr. Gladstone)—and insurance companies.—
(Hear, hear.) He would join issue with the Right Hon.
Gentleman in reference to railway companies. The Right
Hon. Gentleman intimated that the Bill did not apply;to
them. Now in clause' 76 _ _

The SPEAKER here interrupted the Hon. Gentleman by
informing him that until the order of the day= had been read,
he could not discuss the clauses of the Bill.

•
The order of the day wap then read.
On the motion th^t the Speaker do leave the chair,
Mr. HAWES said the Right Hon. Gentleman had intimated
that the Bill did not apply to railways.—("No,"from Mr. Glad-
stone.) Then he would assume that it did apply to them ; and
indeed, he could conceive of no company to which it did not
apply. The insurance companies had been included recently,
and he thought they ought to have had notice. His great
object was to elicit a clear exposition of the principles and
intentions of the Government. To the Bill itself he enter-
tained three objections—first, that the interference took
place without sufficient notice to the several companies ;
secondly, that the interference was minute to a degree, which
would be destructive of the proper management of the com-
panies; and, thirdly, that the Bill gave to the Board of Trade
a degree of power in reference to joint-stock companies which
it ought not to possess. He would be glad to know
what necessity there was for a measure like this. Had there
been that extent of fraud and deception in the formation and
management of joint-stock companies, which alone could
justify such an interference? He maintained that there -had
not. The evidence taken before the Committee on this sub-
ject was of the most unsatisfactory character. The chairmen,
directors, and shareholders of joint-stock companies had not
been examined as to the .practicability or necessity of the
scheme. One of the principal witnesses was Sir Peter Laurie.
Another was a solicitor, who, by his own confession, had had
a great deal to do with undertakings of a very. questionable
character. It was not evidence of that description which
would justify the proposal of that measure. The Hon. Mem-
ber concluded by moving that the House should resolve itself
into Committee on the Railways Bill on that day six months.
Mr. HAYTER seconded the motion. The Bill was one for
giving to the Board of Trade unlimited control over all joint-
stock companies. Every document even connected with the
companies was to be sent to the Board of Trade. The Board
of Trade by this measure was assuming to itself all those
powers for the purpose of making itself an irresponsible tri-
bunal, and enabling it to throw a net over every company,
from which they could not escape. That was the real object
of the Bill. Every penalty fixed by the Bill was, he would
venture to-say, unknown to the Constitution, enormous in
amount, and unexampled in all times. But then it
was said that this Bill did not apply to railway
companies. He (Mr. Hayter) would assert fearlessly that
it not only applied to railway companies but to every com-
pany, even the East India Company ; nay, more, it applied
to every foreign railway company. "under such circum-
stances he _felt bound to support the amendment of his Hon.
Friend the Member for Lambeth.

Mr. GLADSTONE was surprised that a measure like the
present should have been met in the manner it had been by
the Hon. Member for Lambeth. The Hon. Member made
the measure a source of accusation against her Majesty's
Government. Thinking that such an accusation was
unworthy of the Honourable Member, and totally
uncalled for by the provisions of the Bill, he
should take no further notice of them, but go at once into
the discussion of the objection that the Hon. Member had.
raised. He (Mr. Gladstone) was surprised that such objec-
tions should come from the lion. Member for Lambeth, be-
cause it must be recollected that the Hon: Member for Lam-
beth was a member of that Committee upon whose resolutions
the present Bill was founded—(Hear, hear)—and if he (Mr.
Gladstone) was not mistaken, that Hon. Member agreed in
every word of that Committee's report. Whether the provi-
sions of the Bill were meritorious or not her Majesty's Govern-
ment were not to.blam e. It, was the act of the Committee, and the
Committee alone, and the Bill was founded upon the resolu-
tions they had come to. If there were details in the Bill that
were objectionable, why he would ask, should not the House
go into Committee in order 'to amend them ? The real ques-
tion they • had to consider was, what was the main
spirit, and what was the outline of the Bill. Upon
that it was his wish that the measure should
stand or fall. The resolutions of the Committee had been
printed no less than four months, and he challenged the
lion. Member for Lambeth to. state that any serious objec-
tion bad been taken to the Bill during that period. Added to
any amendment to the measure. The principal object of the
I.;aintgtile m-ssember of Parliament had given notice of
there should be established a public office,
igetli4l all parties soliciting to take part in joint-stock
tßtclooimils':vplna'asnies might repair, in order to know the real history
of these companies. That was the groundwork of the Bill,
and could 'any Hon. Member doubt that it was most important
that the Legislature should put a stop to the system that
hail been.so long carried on of attaching the names of Hon.
Members, and men of importance and property, to schemes
in order to entrap the unwary.—(Hear, hear.) Many of the
assertions of the Hon. Member for Lambeth he (Mr. Glad-
stone) would give an unequivocal denial te. The principle
of the Bill was prospective legislation, and its provisions
were to be applied to future companies. The registration re-
qnisoff thekliill for present companiee, consisted of as few
add ei Ale parr culk, eyEy3.4ne of whichtwis Teeiamme
by the Committee, and assented to lethelinn.- :Member for
Lambeth:
WES-4c() •
pA
'Mr. '614. ADSTO,NE said 'that twentieth' resolution
required that the registration should take place, and who was
an assenting party to this resolution in the Committee?
Why the lion. Member for Lambeth himself. How, then,
that Hon. Gentleman could now come down to the House
and make the large and general statement he had done—
how he could assert in so sweeping a manner that this Bill
was to apply not only to all future but to existing companies,
was to him (Mr. Gladstone) a matter of so much surprise, that
he could only account for it by supposing that he must re-
cently have drunk very deeply of the waters of oblivion.
But if there were all those evils really attached to the Bill
which were asserted to
.be attached to it, let them
_e•et into
Committee at once, and prune them out. Having
Alluded to the first allegation of the Honourable
Member for Lambeth, he would proceed to notice his
next. The Hon. Gentleman said the Bill would bring all fu-
ture companies under its operation. He (Mr. Gladstone)
should meet that allegation as he had met the preceding one,
by plainly asserting that it did not bring all future compa-
nies under its operation. This was not a point of law. Were
it so he should not presume to say one word upon it, for he
(Mr. Gladstone) was no lawyer. It was simply a point of
fact ; and as a point of fact he strongly contradicted the view
taken of the provisions of the measure by.the Hon. Gentle-
man who led the opposition to it. But it was charged upon
him (Mr. Gladstone) that the great object he had in view
was to increase the power, the patronage, and the emoluments
of the Board of Trade. Why, by an Act, already in existence,
the Board of Trade, in conjunction with her Majesty in Council,
could now exercise every privilege that the Bill now before the
House gave, and many more privileges besides. Why the
express object of this Bill was to get rid of the discretionary
powers already vested in the Board of Trade—powers which
caused him and all connected with him in his office very great
anxiety and uneasiness. He could assure the House that
when he was sitting in the Board of Trade with his secre-
taries and others about him, attending, to the best of their
ability, to their duties, there was nothing gave them so,
much uneasiness and annoyance as the exercise of the dis-
cretionary powers already vested in them as to the manage-
ment of commercial matters. Re repeated the object of this
Bill was first to limit these ungracious powers, and then to
get rid of them altogether.—(Hear, hear.) As to the dis-
cretionary power which this Bill was to give with respect
to joint-stock banks, it would give the power to make
them a statutory body. But even this discretionary-
power was not a new one, but one rather
of a relaxing than of a stringent character. Joint-stock
companies at present could not be formed with any privilege
such as that of suing and being sued, except by coming to
her Majesty in Council, or by applying to Parliament. What
was
.one of the main principles of this Bill ? That under
it they could be formed entirely irrespective of the Board of
Trade, and they would be subject to that department only as
to certain forms of construction and regulation. Under this
Bill, there would be a power, for the first time, for persons to
associate themselves in companies, for the purpose of com-
mercial pursuits, without the fear of interference from any
human being whatever. So that this Bill was, in fact, a
limitation of the powers of the Board of Control, and not an
extension, as had been asserted. But the most ridiculous of
all suppositions was that the Bill was conceived in a
spirit adverse to joint-stock companies. Why he (Mr.
Gladstone) stood there moving and supporting the
Bill as an organ of the very Committee on whose
resolution it was founded, rather than as a member of
the Government. And all that the Bill, in fact, proposed was
to establish publicity as to joint-stock companies, and a cer-
tain degree of regularity in their proceedings. For his (Mr.
Gladstone's) part he could not conceive anything more ex-
traordinary than that a Bill should be framed on the resolu-
tions of a Committee—that it should be passed without
opposition in its early stages—and that it should afterwards
be combated by one of the very Members who assisted in
passing those resolutions. But the Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Hawes) said alterations had been made in the Bill within the
last twenty .four hours. So there had been, as far as regarded
insurance offices. They were to be not exempted,

but excluded from thiS Bill.—(Hear, hear.) But
this had been agreed to simply and solely on the
condition that they were to be regulated separately here-
after. Even here, however, there was surely no extension of
the powers of the Board of Trade. Then, as to railway
schemes—what was the specific effect of this Bill? This—
to cut away the encouragement which the present system
gave to letter sellers—(Hear, hear)—and jobbers in scrip—
(Hear, hear)—men who had no real or permanent interest
in the undertakings whose shares they sought for. This Bill
certainly struck a very severe blow at those persons, and he
was sure neither of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite (Mr. Hawes
and Mr. Hayter) would disapprove of this. But whatever
they did disapprove of would be best discussed and best
settled or remedied when the House got into Committee.
Mr. HATTER, .in explanation, said the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman was entirely mistaken. He had never seen the Bill
till yesterday, and since yesterday he had had no communi-
cation with any one individual connected with railways, ex-

cept the Hon. MenTberforßeading. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman, therefore, was not justified in pointing either the
finger of scorn or approbation at any Hon. Member of that
House.

Mr. GLADSTONE could assure the Hon. Gentleman that

he was not conscious of having used any terms disrespectful
to him. If he had, he begged to retract them.
Sir W. CLAY had heard the speech of the Right Hon.
Gentleman, and he was bound to say that he (Sir W. Clay)
gave his entire approbation to the Bill as a whole. Ile

thought it a measure called for by the necessity of the case;
there might be portions of the Bill which he disapproved, and
some of its provisions might be susceptible of improvement.
As far as be had looked at it, he was also bound to say that
it fairly carried out the resolutions of the Committee, of
which he was a member. The Right Hon. Gentleman said
this Bill worakaWrltilt thnitecessity of the Aloard of Trade
acting cn the law of letters patent. The Bill did not
repeal the Letters Patent Act in express terms, but it
would go far to supersede the necessity of the Board
of Trade acting upon it. He had always thought that the
Letters Patent Act was one of doubtful expediency, and
conferred powers which it was dangerous to give to any
partment of the Government. The Right Hon. Gentleman
and his predecessors had always acted with extreme caution
on that law. As to the effect of the Bill on'joint-stock com-
panies, if there was anything on which the public mind was
made up, it was on the necessity of some change in the
mode of forming joint-stock companies. There was a gene-,•
rat feeling that some remedy must be applied •to the evils
with which these companies were attended. That remedy
was sought to be applied by the present Bill, and its provi-
sions were 'well calculated-to accomplish its purpose. Joint-
stock companies generally sought from Parliament -advan-
tages by a Bill, which they could not possess under the law as
it stood. The object of the Bill, by one general enactment;
was to give all joint-stock companies those advantages which
they now sought by separate Acts. He should support the.
gping into Committee.
Air. GODSON referred to the mischief done by such companies
as the Westminster Loan Society, and the West Middlesex
Insurance Society, and stated that the inquiry of the Com;
mittee was directed to how such companies were fortnea,
and the ground work of the Bill was in substance to pro-vide'
against such bodies being formed. Instead of the Bill
going too far, he thought it did not go far enough.'
One object of the Bill was to register existing companies, in
order that they might be known. The Hon. Member' for
Lambeth did not deny that some legislation was necessary
for the regulation of future companies. The Hon. Member,.
therefore, agreed in the principle of the Bill, and ought not .
to refuse to go into Committee. If he considered the
tions too stringent, the Committee was the proper place to
have those regulations altered. The Hon. Gentleman ob-
jected to giving the Board of Trade the power proposed by
this Bill. The fact was, the Bill merely regulated the great
discretionary powers already vested in the Board of Trade:
Its object was to prevent the imitation of good companies '
by bad ones.
Lord SEYMOUR could not, suppose that the Board of.
Trade, was actuated by any hostility to joint-stock coM-
ponies. But he would suggest the propriety of excluding
railway companies from the operations of the Bill. Those
companies had always been considered as of a peculiar
character, and as requiring regulations which were not re-
quired by other companies. He would, therefore, ask the .
Right Hon. Gentleman if it would not be better to exclude
railways altogether from this Bill, and to introduce any regu-..:
lations which might be required in the general Railways,;
Bill?
Mr. PAlkliEß agreed that great harm had been done by
the abuse of the principle of joint-stock companies; but.;
he considered that the advantages which had arisen from
them more than preponderated, and they should be careful
while legislating against the dangers that they did not de-'
stroy the advantages also. One great principle distinguish-
ing this country from others was, the non-interference of the'
Government with the regulations of trade. It was not wise
to give the Board of Trade power to interfere too much. The
first speech which the Right Hon. Gentleman had ever
made in that House had been in defence of the West Indian:
proprietors. What amount of compensation the Right
Honourable Gentleman got he knew not. But no one would
say that his arguments were undeserving of attention on that.
occasion, because he was connected with the West Indict.
Neither were the arguments of Hon. Gentlemen connected
with joint-stock and railway companies undeserving atten-
tion, because they were so connected. The Right. Hon.'.
Gentleman bad accused them of being actuated by party
spirit, because they alluded to the manner in which the Bill
had been drawn up, and on the late period of the session at,
which it had been introduced. Now, he (Mr. Parker) recol-
lected when the Right Hon. Gentleman would have been elo-.
quent against anyßill of 91 clauses, with every clause ill-drawn,
which should have been introduced on the 2d of July.—.
(Laughter.) One great advantage they were promised from.
the change of Ministry was, that they were to haVe no ill-
drawn Bills.—(Cheers and laughter.) Every measure was to
be carefully considered, everything was to be well done; and
now the Hon. Gentleman accused them of being actuated
by party spirit, because they objected to an ill-drawn Bill. .4-
Mr. GLADSTONE did not accuse Hon. Gentlemen of party
- spirit because they opposed this Bill. He had no objeetion
to the Bill being subjected to the most minute criticism, bet
he considered that the Hon. Member for Lambeth had,
throughout his speech, alluded not to this Bill only, but
the general system of legislation. .„
Mr. HAWES said he alluded to legislation with regard to
special Bills, arid not to general legislation.
Mr. GLADSTONE said he would then withdraw what he
had said.

Mr. PARKER said he had no abjection that such persons
should be appointed under the Bill as were necessary to carry
out its provisions, but he thought it would confer very
great patronage on a certain office in Whitehall. He ob
jected to any preliminary interference being thrown in the
way of companies, and he thought the Right Hon. Gentle-
man would do better if he had entirely confined himself to
that class of joint-stock companies not yet incorporated under
Act of Parliament. He thought it would be better to separate
the two classes which the Right Hon. Gentleman proposed
to unite.. He would not object to going into Committee if the
Right Hon. Gentleman consented that no preliminary diffi-
culties should be thrown in the way of persons coming to Par..'
liament for Acts. _ _ .

Mr. HODGSON was opposed to the Bill, not so much
because it interfered with joint-stock companies, as becauie
it interfered with railway companies; but he would not
object togoing into Committee, because he could in Com&
mittee propose those alterations he thought advisable,
fie had never intended to say_one lyorA whiclvyas. disrespect-, ,
ful to the gentlemen conneVe,d vith the prosPeatis iirtraV
-London. and York.. Railway Comp Any... WhArhe objected to

;was the mode of getting tip the snames. •
, Sir G. STRICKLAND said had never held a railway
ishare•in his - life, and he believed ,tha4,he never,-should.
Therefore anything which he might say would not be Open'
to the objection that he was an interested party. He was sur-
prised that the Right Hon. Gentleman should have thrown
something like a slur upon those gentlemen who had given
the sanction of their names to the projected railway
from London to York. He himself was one of those individuals ;

. _
and his sole object had been to provide a check against the
existing monopoly.--(Hear' hear.) Notwithstanding what
the Right Hon. Gentleman had said, he was still of opinion
that not only additional, but very great powers, were
given to the Board of Trade with respect to the forma-
tion of . new railway companies. The 27th clause de-
clared that it should not be lawful for the'officers of the conil
pany to exercise the powers given to them by Act of Parlia-
ment without the consent of the Committee of the Privy
Council. •
Mr. GLADSTONE said his mind was not made up, but the
rail Way companieS ought to be included in the Bill, except in
their early stages. He proposed that they should go through
the provisions of the Bill generally, and that it should then be
open to any gentleman to propose that railways should be
excepted in certain particulars.
Mr. GILL thought the Right Hon. Gentleman the Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade was not justified in introducing
some of the clauses he had done into this Bill, with respect to
railways. It was surely. not the duty of the Board of Trade
to throw obstacles in the way of measures of this description.
All that the Board of Trade was called on to do, was to put
an end to fraud; and if the Right Hon. Gentleman would
only bring in a Bill .for that purpose, he had no doubt it
would receive the support of every Member. No statement
had been made why railways.were included in this Bill. He
was glad to hear the Right Hon. Gentleman intended to take
this measure into his further consideration.
Mr. ENTWISLE said there was now sought in this
Bill a power to regulate railway companies in their pro-
ceedings, even before coming to that House for their Act.
This was a power which might be exercised in a. very
dangerous manner, and which, therefore, he should
strongly warn the House to be careful of conceding.
The Bill gave the power to receive the deposits of share-
holders—a thing unheard of before. Again, it was pro-
posed to invest in the Board of Trade a power to pur-
chase hereafter such railways, as might now or at. any
future period be contemplated and formed. These
things, he must really suggest, were eminently worthy of
the reconsideration of the Right Hon. President of the
Board of Trade. _

---
Mr. BROTHERTON said he really could -not .see
why there should be so much hesitation in going into
Committee on this*Bill. For his own part, he. thought
there had been a good many railway schemes brought
forward in connexion with which there had been more
fraud' and felony than ever he had heard of before in
connexion with public matters.—(Hear, hear.) Many
persons were extremely anxious to have railway matters
excluded from the operation of this Bill; but, though he
was aware it was an unpopular opinion, he felt hound"
to say they ought not to be excluded.—(Hear, hear.)
There were constantly bubble schemes going forward to
derange the market, and injure the honest bona fide
speculator, that, under the provisions of this Bill, would
never see the light at all.—(hear, hear.) Let 'them go
into Committee, and then they might be able to:correct
the defects of the Bill, and send it forth to the world a
useful and valuable measure for the protectid4 of the
community.
Sir J. GUEST explained.
Sir. WALTER JAMES thoughtthe Bill a most use-
ful measure, encouraging, as it did, the trade' of the
country on the one hand, and discouraging bubble com-
panies on the other. lie approved of the /preliminary
investigation which had been objected to by,.tbe Member
for Sheffield. A preliminary investigation was in *tied

on in all cases in which companies came to Parliament
for a Bill, and he thonght such an investigation ought to
take place in all cases.

Mr. M. PHILIPS had come down to the House
entertaining considerable prejudice against the Bill, but
the course which the debate had taken had convinced
him of the propriety of going into Committee. He cer-
tainly, with regard to railways, thought considerable
caution ought to be exercised to prevent companies
making an improper use of names. He himself had been
asked some time ago by an Hon. Member to put his
name on the back of the Carlisle and Glasgow Railway?
Bill, and, considering that a direct communication be-
tween Manchester and Glasgow would be advantageous,-
he had consented to do so. To his surprise, a few days
afterwards he had seen his name in the newspapers as a
member of a provisional committee of a railroad in
embryo. He of course took measures immediately to
rectify the mistake.
Mr. 4. S. WORTLEY hoped that, while excluolipg
railroad companies from the operations of the Bill; they
would exclude sham railroad companies. One of
.the grossest frauds ever perpetrated had been called ‘a
railroad company. He thought the clause making those
who lent the guarantee of their names
a most wholesome enactment. He had no pity
for those persons who thus lent their names
and induced others to risk their property in undertakings
of this nature. He thought the word "promoter" ought
to be more clearly defined. He had himself, before he
had the honour of a seat in that House, been a promoter
of a Railway Bill before a Committee. He thought the
words of the clause ought to be so defined as not to in-
elude those who were profeSsionally employed in
promoting Bills before Committees.—(Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Member for Lambeth had agreed to the whole
of the resolutions of the Committee on which the Bill
was founded with one exception, a point on which he
divided the Committee. If the reso'.utions were com-
pared with the Bill, they would be found closely to re-
semble each other.

Mr. HAWES explained. He contended that the Bill
went much further than the resolutions, conferring
powers which the resolutions never contemp!ated.
Mr ROEBUCK objected to part of the principle of
the Bill, and stated also that within a very few hours a
most important clause had been introduced into
the Bill. He did not see any objection to
including joint-stock companies and the for-
' mation of railways in the Bill. If it was
,to prevent fraud, it was as proper to prevent frauds
in railway companies as in any other. He com-
plained that the Solicitor-General was not present on
an occasion of discussing a Bill so important as the pre-
sent one, and objected to the power under the Act given to
the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which was
no less than that of preventing parties from coming before
Parliament for Bills. This was a distinct principle, and
as it had not been discussed sufficiently, he hoped the
Committee would not be pressed.
Stranzers were then ordered to withdraw, but
Mr. HAWES having stated that after the discussion
he would not divide the House, his amendment was
Withdrawn, and the House went into Committee,

Air. PRINGLE in the Chair.
Clause 1 was then agreed to.
On clause 2 being proposed,
Mr. HAWES asked how this Bill was to apply to
incorporated companies?
' Mr. GLADSTONE said the Bill would certainly
apply
,to future incorporated companies, as, in some
points, it applied to those already formed. The Act did
not apply either to Scotland or Ireland, but to England
only.
Mr. HAWES said the Bill applied to all Scotch and
Irish companies having agencies in England. Unless it
reached all companies, this would have an unjust and
partial operation.
Mr. GLADSTONE said he applied the Act to these
companies simply because they were not exclusively
Scatch or Irish companies, but carried on their opera-
tioas in England. After some discussion, the Right
114. Gentleman suggested that the clause should be
wised as it stood, reserving the point, whether it should
extend to Scotland, for further, consideration.
HAWES said he thought the 'clause ought to be
po4tponed.
.... After a few words from Capt. LAYARD and Mr. J. S.
W dMiTLE Y,
?Jr. GILL moved that the Chairman do report progress.
After some discussion the CHAIRMAN reported pro-
gress and obtained leave to sit again to-morrow.
COVENT-GARDEN PETITION.

Mr. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Bir-
mingham, praying for inquiry into railway charges for
gods and passengers ; also, a petition, agreed to at a
public meeting in Covent-garden, praying for the libera-
tion of Daniel O'Connell, Esq., M.P., and his fellow
prisoners.
Mr. WARD presented a petition from certain settlers
in New Zealand, praying that the titles to their property
might be established on a sure foundation.
_ _ .

Mr. BECKET presented a petition from Leeds against
the Joint-Stock Companies Registration and Regulation
13W.
Lord SANDON wished to ask the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman the President of the Board of Trade at what time
there would be parties in Java and Manilla who would
.tai authorised to issue certificates of origin of sugar, and
also'whether in cases where certificates could not be ob
tamed sugar would be admitted without a certificate ?
" Mr. GLADSTONE said that the advices which would
go out by the July mail from this country to Java and
Manilla, would find persons there qualified to issue cer-
tificates as to the produce of those islands. In answer
to the other part of the Noble Lord's question, he said
that a discretionary power of course would be vested in
the Board of Customs as to the admission of sugar with-
out certificate.

In answer to a question from Mr. HAWES,
Mr. GLADSTONE said, that as the matter was not
in his department, he could not distinctly say what the
Post-office arrangements were in respect to communica-
tion with the ast India Islands. But he understood
that Manilla was the port chosen for the Philippine
Islands, and that the Dutch Government would not allow
intercourse with any other than three ports in the island
of Java ; tho3e were Samarang, Batavia, and another
place.