The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-02 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, ..Tuly 1.
Their Lordships met soon after Five o'clock this evning.
CORNWALL RAILWAY.
_ _

Lord FALMOUTH presented twenty-five petitions in
favour of the Cornwall Railway.
NORTH WALES MINERAL RAILWAY.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Mr. Wntiley,
of Sergeant's-inn, barrister-at-law, against the North Wales
Mineral Railway.
GRANTING LEASES BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
RAILWAY BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Lord BROUGHAM moved the adoption of the three fob.
lowing resolutions :

I. That any Bill which is included in the second class,
under the standing order of the 16th of August, 1838, and
which shall he before thi: House in the present session, but
shall not pass for cant of time, shall be marked by the Chair-
mar, of Committees, and shall be proceeded with in the ensuing
ses-ion, if such Bill be br..ught from the Commons in every re-
si,ect the same Bill as that which shall have been so marked by
the Chairman.

t 2.. That any Bill of the said se-ond class which shall have
been stopped in its progress through the House of Commons in
the present session by reason of want of time, and which shall
be brought up to this House in the ensuing session marked by
the Speaker of that House as having been so stopped, shall be
in like manner received by this House.
3. That those Bills which shall have been stopped in this
[louse, and so marked as aforesaid by the Chairman of Com-
mit tees, and also those Bills which shall be brought up for the
first time next sessi,m marked by the Speaker of the House of
Commons as aforesaid, shell be proceeded with upon the same
notices as would have been required by this House under its
standing orders during the present session, and upon no other
aotice.
They had been reported, after full consideration, by the Select.
Committee appointed by their Lordships, and the object of
them was to facilitate the performance of the private business
of the House during the present over-burdened session of Par-
liament. He would, therefore, move the adoption of the first
resolution.

The Earl of WICKLOW was willing to admit the justice of
meeting the case slated by the Noble Lord, but he apprehended
that the end would be better attained by an Act of Parliament
than by those resolutions. The resolut ions would not accomplish
what a Bill would do. An- Act would enable them to introduce
the Bills in the next session of Parliament, ad eundem, at the
same stage precisely where they were left off in the present
session, and with less expense to the promoters.

After a few words in explanation from Lord BROUGHAM,
The Duke of RICHMOND said that a Bill would not save
expense to the parties. By a different line altogether more
advantages in every respect might possibly be chalked out, and
he considered it would not be doing justice to the public to
bind down Parliament to one which, perhaps, would not afford
so much public accommodation.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said that it appeared to
him that, even if they could close in the present session of
Parliament any of these transactions, this would not prevent
their Lordships from taking into consideration even the repeal
of any Acts having reference to them in a future session.
Lord HATHERTON agreed with his Noble Friend op-
posite (Lord Wicklow) that it was better to proceed by Bill
than by resolutions. The difference that would arise in pro-
ceeding by these methods was this. By adopting the resolu-
tions, the House would have to go through the same trouble-
some, tedious, and expensive forms with every one of the Bills,
as at present. By proceeding by Bill, their Lordships could
commence, in the next session, at exactly the same stage where
the Bill was left off. He did not think that they were alto-
gether without precedent in adopting such a course, for in
Divorce Bills, if he was not mistaken, a similar proceeding had
taken place.
Lord CAMPBELL was in favour of proceeding by Bill,
instead of by resolution. The real object to be obtained was
to provide that any railway Bill before the House should be
treated as if the House had only been adjourned, not prorogued.
In fact, to consider the two sessions as only one, an far as this
class of Bills was concerned.
Lord BROUGHAM said that, at. present, whether they
should proceed by resolution or Bill was not the real question.
It was as to the principle which the Committee had recom-
mended in the resolutions now before the House relative to
giving Bills the benefit next session of alsy progress they might
have mitOe in the present. He did not, however, believe it
was possible to draw up a Bill sufficiently intelligible to meet
the case.

Lord WICKLOW briefly explained the reason why he
thought the course by Bill was preferable to proceeding by re-
solution.

Lord BROUGHAM said there was no precedent for pro-
ceeding by Bill in such cases. On the other hand, the House
had proceeded by resolution in 1817 and in 1831, under some-
what analogous circumstances.

Lord STANLEY said the resolutions would only apply to
Bills that stood exactly in the same position the next sess:on
as they did at the period of rising in the present. If any altera•
tion was made in the Bill it would deprive them of theproposed
benefit.

Lord BROUGHAM said this matter had been fully consi-
dered in Committee, and it was there the general opinion,
after mature examination, that no Bills but those which re-
mained exactly the same, without amendment, should have the
benefit of the resolutions.

Lord REDESDALE, as one of the Committee, defended
the view advanced by the Noble and Learned Lord. He ob-
jected to proceeding by Bill.
Lord HASTINGS argued that the resolutions infringed upon
the prerogative of the Crown, and, in his opinion, they ought
to proceed with this mat ter by enactment instead of resolutions.
He could not conceive it possible that there could be any
difficulty in adopting this suggestion.
Lord BROUGHAM had never heard anybody express him-
self with more entire ignorance of the subject.—(Laughter. )
He quite agreed with the Noble Lord that their course would
be unconstitutional if the resolutions should have the effect of
passing the Bills, but they would only allow Bills to pass
through the Standing Orders Committee, which had teen
stopped short in the House of Commons by the termination of
the present session. In a word, the object of the resolutions
was to enable the preliminary notices of those Bills which had
been given in 1844 to serve for 1845.
. _

Lord RF:DESD ALE thought that his Noble and Learned
Friend was in error respecting the orders of the House. The
House had the entire controul of its own orders, and these were
frequently set aside to facilitate the passing of a Bill in one
night.
Lord COTTENHAM said it was not necessary for their
Lordships to pass any new regulations respecting Bills sent up
from the House of Commons.
After a few words from Lord ASHBURTON, _

The LORD CHANCELLOR said that any Bill which
came up from the House of Commons would be received by their
Lordships as a matter of course. Their Lordships could not
decide upon any course, until they saw what resolutions the
Commons might pass. He, however, agreed with his Noble
and Learned friend, that their Lordships should proceed by
resolution, and not by Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM said, the Bills to which his resolu-
tions related must commence in the House of Commons. But
that House was waiting to see what their Lordships would
do. The Commons would continue doubting, as to their
own resolutions, until they saw how their Lordships were re-
solved.—( A laugh. )
The resolutions were then agreed to.
PROTECTION OF PROPERTY BILL.

Lord WIIARNCLIFFE moved the third reading of this
Bill.

Lord BROUGHAM observed that he thought it hardly
worth while to pa,:s a Bill of this nature. If an action of tres-
pass had been brought in the case which gave rise to this Bill
(the injury to the l'ortland vase,) the person who was guilty
of the offence would have been quite sufficiently punished.
Lord CAMPBELL would be sorry to see the penal code
extended, but he believed the public was shocked to find that
no punishment could be awarded for such an outrage as that to
the Portland vase. He reminded his Noble and Learned
Friend (Lord Brougham) that this was not a civil injury, for
which the recovery of damages was a sufficient recompense,
but a crime which ought to be punished.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—As he read the Bill, a per-
son who broke the finger of a tlaster of Paris cast exposed
for sale in a shop window, might be imprisoned for two years.
That was too severe. _ _ _

Lord BROUGHAM hoped this was a House of Lords'

Bill.—( Some Noble Lords said " No.") Well, he was really
ashamed to see that the House of Commons sent up a Bill pro-
viding that a person found guilty of the offence charged, might
be imprisoned, with hard labour or without, for such a period
as two years.
Lord CAMPBELL—Why, this Bill was introduced in the
other House by the Solicitor-General ; and it was a somewhat
strange course that his Noble and Learned Friend on the wool-
sack should endeavour to throw a slur on it.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—It was new modelled under
the superintendence of his Noble Friend ( Lord \Vharncliffe). He
thought that the punishment should be restricted to six
months' imprisonment with hard labour, or with private whip-
ping, but not both. Surely that punishment was quite enough.
This amendment was agreed to, and the Bill was read a
third time. _ .

The West India Relief Bill went through Committee.
DOG STEALING.

The Duke of BEAUFORT moved that the Dog Stealing
Bill be read a first time. The motion was agreed to, and
the Bill ordered to be read a second time on Monday next.

CORN FROM CANADA.

The Duke of RICHMOND—His Noble Friend the Secre-
tary for the Colonies had said some time back that it was im-
possible to state what quantit, of corn came from the United
States to Canada, as no return had been received from that
country. He wished to know if the return had been received
since, and if so, when it would be produced ?
Lord STANLEY promised to make inquiries, and if the
return had been received, he should not have the slightest ob.
jection to produce it.
Their Lordships then adjourned to Thursday.