The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-24 00:00:00

SANATORY CONDITION 'OF TOWNS.

A NOBLE LORD gave notice of a petition which he had
intended to present to the House that night from the
working classes at Manchester, praying that an inquiry
be made into their sanatory condition, but he would post-
pone its presentation until Monday next.
SMALL DEBTS BILL.

Lord BROUGHAM moved the first reading of a Bill
entitled " An Act for securing the payment of small
debts."

The motion was acceded to.
MAYNOOTH.

The Marquis of BREADALBANE rose to present the peti-
tion of which he had given notice, from the late conference of
delegates held in London. The Noble Marquis read the peti-
tion, which expressed great dissatisfaction and alarm at the
proposed grant to Maynooth, which the petitioners considered
to be strangely at variance with the Protestant religion, and
caleulated to reduce religion generally to a mere political ma-
chine. The petitioners, proceeded the Noble Marquis, grounded
their opposition on a religious view of the question. As Pro-
testants they could not give their sanction to a measure which
they looked upon as opposed not only to the feeling of Pro-
testants, but to the feelings of the country generally. It was,
in his opinion, a most unwise and impolitic course which the
Government had adopted in bringing forward that measure.
The Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of her Majesty's Go-
vernment had himself admitted that there was a strong opi-
nion in the country against it. There was never a measure
introduced into Parliament that went so far to subvert the
established religion of the country and bring into general ope-
ration the voluntary principles as the language held out was—
rather perish the Establishment than allow such a grant. With
these observations he would conclude by moving that the peti-
tion do lie upon the table.
Lord CH ARLEVILLE complained of the short time
allowed between the first and second readings of the Bill. He
might be told that the second reading of the Catholic Relief
Bill followed on a shorter period after the first reading, but it
would be recollected that on that occasion, that the reason
given was, that the subject had been fully debated before the
measure was brought before the House in the shape of a Bill.
Though many petitions bad been presented on the subject of
endowments to Roman Catholics, it was a rule of the House
that no petitions conld be received respecting any particular
measure till the Bill was before the House. Now there were
only four days allowed the peop'.e to present their peti-
tions—a period quite insufficient to give them an
opportunity of fully and freely expressing their sentiments.
In 1829 there were 922 petitions presented in favour of Ca-
tholio Emancipation, and there were 2,865 petitions against
it, and certainly if the number of the petitioners could be
taken as an indication of public opinion, this great majority
of three to one showed that the sense of the British public
was against Catholic emancipation. But against the May-
nooth grant there had been presented 8,753 petitions, which
were signed by 1,106,772 names, whereas but sixty-one pe-
titions had been presented in favour of the Bill. Under
these circumstances he besought the House to remember that
this ill stood upon a different position from other Bills,
for it was a money Bill, and their Lordships could make no
alteration in it whatever. He therefore called upon her Ma-
jesty's Government to reconsider their determination, and to
allow the Protestant people of this United Empire one small
week more, to express their opinion.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said—The Noble Lord has
called upon me to postpone fora " little week" the notice which
I have given but half an hour ago, that the Maynooth Oollege
Bill shall be read a second time on the 2d of June. Now, my
Lords, the Noble Lord has forgotten the latitude which has
already been given to this Bi il. This Bill, since its introduc-
tion in the other House, two months ago—or nearly two months
ago—upon the 3d of April las'. aly Lords, it will be two
months witien a day when the proposition will be laid before
you for tho second reading of the Bill ; and now there are
ten days given for the opportunity of presenting petitions,
which I think is as long as could be required for :Bill which
has already been a month under the consideration of Parliament.
There will be ample opportunity for presenting petitions not
only between this and the second reading, but in the succes-
sive steges of the Bill; and I feel it my duty to persevere in
bringing on the second reading of the Bill on the 2d of June.
The Earl of IVINCHILSE A, said that when their Lord-
whips considered there would be but two days of Parliamentary
business next week, it would not be too much to postpone the.
second reading of this fatal measure for another week. The
steuntry had not yet had sufficient opportunity of considering
this Bill, and he hoped the second reading would be postponed.
lie had several petitions which he had not yet had an oppor-
tunity of presenting.
The Marquis of BRE AD A L BANE had also several petitions
to present.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said that the Bill should be
read a second time on the 2d of June.

The Bishop of LICHFIELD presented several petitions
against the grant.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented petitions from Banff,
and several other plates, against the grant.
RAILWAYS.

Lord BROUG hIANI presented a petition from Wilf,aty, fox
Talbot, Esq., of Laycock Abbey, in Wilts. The pet it ion stated
that the petitioner and his family had her;, in possession of the
estates ever since the Reformatio7,—during three centuries.
The estate, which was very h_•:,autilul, was to be intersected by
the Wilts, Somerset, Plu.
Weymouth railway, which would
entirely destroy tl'.
comfort and enjoyment of this estate. Not-
wit itstandin- every effort, Mr. Talbot had been unable to ob-
tain information as to the route the line was to take until
Ole very last day, when, according to the standing orders, no-
tice c,oold be lodged. The number of proprietors in the parish
was 90, and out of those proprietors only nine were assen-
tients to the railway. Notwithstanding all this, the directors,
who seemed to think that they were in possession of unlimited
powers, paid not the slightest regard to the feelings of the
proprietors, because they felt assured that their Bill would pass
throuigh Parliament. The proposed line was '22 miles long,
while a line was devised which would be no more than 10 miles
long. Laycock Abbey was one of the most magnificent
mansions in any part of this country. He could bear testimony
to this, for he had seen a representati to of the mansion, not
taken by the common usage of draughtsmen, but by a means
whieh could not fail—he meant the photographic process.
This process was the discovery of the petitioner, who was not
otily a maw of extensive practical scientific attainment, but
also one of the most brilliant mathematicians at present existing
in this country.
Earl FIT ZWILLIANI said that he presented himself, not as
She advocate of an individual, but of all those who were injured
by these projects. Yet, if their Lordships supposed that they
eaw before them one who was opposed to railways, they greatly
erred. He would be delighted to see the whole country inter-
sected with railways. He d• sired to see every market town in
England approached by one. But if any of their Lordships did
not desire such extension, and represented any town
which was against it, he did not wish that town to be
included in the number. He did not wish that any place
where just objections could be urged against a railway, should
have one forced upon it ; and he considered that the place
from which the Noble Lord presented the petition was a place
of That kind. There were many others similarly circum-
stanced which had frequently come before the notice of their
Lordships. It was impossible to justify the conduct of the
projectors of many of those schemes ; and he thought it would
enable their Lordships to understand better how they managed
these things if he read them a few extracts from a newspaper
relative to a projected railway. He thought it would excite a
little curiosity and no little astonishment, and that it was cal-
zulated to show the English to be a most gullible people.—
( The Noble Earl here read some extracts from a prospectus in
the Railway Times, which was headed " Great Eastern and
Western nallway," and which stated that a new line was to be
laid down, commencing at Great armouth, and ending at
Swansea.) In that prospectus, continued his Lordship, they
proposed to bring iron from Merthyr Tydvil, and other places,
ai
rt there Iva.; scarcely a place in England that was not named,
and winch they alleged would receive benefit from this line.
They were to convey Welsh slates, which their Lordships knew
were peculiar to Caernarvon—they lime
ey were to convey for awl-
cultural purposes—Droitwich salt, and the trade in woollens,
silks, and Welsh flannels was to be greatly extended among
the eastern counties, and, in fact, that every sort of produce
and manufacture was to find a reandiyehoutlet Yarmou'h and
the promoters of these
:chweamns,s .gullTerdigthwe aesouthnetrwya.y in\r' )7Y, he held in his hand a re-
porttua tog, railway, and
1,41
of a Committee on the Ely and H
In ChM report it was stated that there was . not a singlehincpas3:.l
indi-
vidual in the whole district thr3tighwhich tt
who wan connected with it. Tee sharehakiers all resided at

Liverpool, Manchester, and a great number of places in the
north of England. That was the way in which
the people of the country were seduced to encourage
these schemes.—( Hear, hear.) What was the case,
however, which was made out by the promoters? There were
vat ious principles on which the price of the purchase of land
might be adjusted. There was the price which might be ar-
rived at by valuation, and they might take the charge to the
railway company by a multiple of that valuation. Their Lord.-
ships were aware that the railway companies were about to lay
before Parliament some returns of their probable revenue, and
whether the company was to take a hundred or a thousand
acres of land, the House would be enabled to calculate the pro-
portion of revenue derived from carriage over that land, and
thus estimate the value of the land to the company. In this
calculation he bad not included sufferance. Their Lordships
were aware that an Act called the Railway Clauses Consolidation
Act had been passed during the present session, which made a
great improvement in the purchase of land. By that Act the
proprietors of the land might go either before a jury or before
arbitrators. But in some cases, as in the line from Great
Yarmouth to Swansea, which passed through eleven different
counties, the juries or the arbitrators on that line
might take eleven different views of their duty, and he therefore
thought that some fixed principle should be adopted for the
valuation of land, whereby the rich man should not get more,
or the poor man less, than was his due. He was aware that
there was a liability of bargains being made beforehand, but
knowing, as he did, that these bargains would always bear an
impress of the power of those with whom the bargains were
made to oppose ,the line, these two modes of valuation be-
forehand, and of valuation by persons employedby Government,
were well worthy of consideration, and he should, therefore,
move that a Committee be appointed to inquire as to how far
it was practicable to ascertain whether any, and what mode of
valuation could be adopted, and also to take the question of
severance, both as regarded the owners of and residents on pro-
perty. through which any I roposed line was to pass.
Lord STANLEY was not opposed to the Committee which
his Noble Friend (Earl Fitzwilliam) had proposed. His Noble
Friend proposed to go to a jury or a commission before the line
came before Parliament. Why, that was precisely the course now
pursued. The ether course which his Noble Friend proposed
to take, was a certain multiple of an uncertain quantity, and
this was no better than before, but his Noble Friend had left
the question of severance altogether out of sight. Now, the
real grievance was that the owners of mansions were de-
prived of that which to them was above all price.
With respect to the princivle proposed by the Noble
Earl it was equally unreasonable. The attempt to value land by
the revenue which was to be derived from it, was alto-
gether an untenable point, for the fact was, that the profits on
a railway were derived, not from the land, but from the ex-
tremes on either side, and, therefore, there was no principle
whatever on which compensation should be given. These were
the two principles which the Noble Earl had proposed, and he
thought that hehad shown that there were no grounds on which
the Committee could proceed ; but if his Noble Friend would
bring any tangible measure before the House, in the shape of
a Bill or motion for a Commission, he should be happy to meet
it. He had no objection to the Committee, but he saw no
practical benefit likely to arise from the Committee ; yet if
their Lordships should consider that it was advisable to appoint
such a Committee, he should offer no objection.
Lord BROUGHAM agreed in a great measure with what
had been so clearly and so forcibly said by the Noble L' rd
(Lord Stanley). He thought the House ought to accede to
the motion as, in his opinion, it would lead to important re-
sults to the public, the landowners, and the proprietors of
railways. He knew from long experience of the decisions of
juries that they set the real value of property required for the
purposes of ;a railway to the owner aside, and awarded only a
compensation suited to land sited for the commonest purposes.
He should like to know what compensation that would be for
taking part of the lawn in front of his house? Yet he was of
opinion that it was in vain to think of laying down any general
rule for the negotiation of parties in relation to these matters,
as each transaction varied, and must depend upon the peculiar
circumstances connected with it. Among the many unfavour-
able doctrines which he held with respect to railways was this,
that he would much rather see a railway delayed for a certain
time, and then carried out on proper principles, and without
interfering with the sacred rights of property, which were of
more importance, than see it carried out in opposition to them,
and with injury to their property. He had prepared a stand-
ing order, which he was dt-sirous of submitting to the con-
sideration of the Committee proposed by his Noble Friend, to
the effect that a certain number of assents should be necessary
from each important district through which it was proposed to
carry a line, before the proposition could be entertained, for
what opposition could a poor man, whose few acres might be
affected, offer to the scheme when it was before that House?
lie must come to the House with his attorney and his witnesses,
and spend several hundred pounds, when he was not worth as
many shillings. He agreed with his Noble Friend, that every
village should have a railway.
Earl FITZWILLIAM—No; I said every market-town.
Lord BROUGHAM—WeII, every market-town. But they
ought to be, if possible, with the consent of the landed pro-
prietors over whose property they were intended to run. It
was only just anti natural—nay, it was a most amiable and praise-
worthy principle—to be anxious to preserve their fa-
mily residences. But they must not stop here, as
there was another thing very advantageous to see
—that overgrown estates should be a little more
equalized. His friends were frightened at the very idea of this
—what he meant was, that the property of a man who had not
more than 701. a year, and who was starving, and another who
was in the possession of 70,0001. or 80,0001., should have equal
justice meted out to them, and that all the benefits should not
go to railway Proprietors. He threw out these suggestions for
the consideration of the Committee, which, he hoped, would be
able to effect something for the benefit of proprietors—consult-
ing their interests, and the interests of the railway proprietors,
and, is ith this hope, he heartily wished that their Lordships
would be induced to give their sanction to the motion of his
Noble Friend.

The Earl of WICKLOW was sorry the Noble Lord (Lard
Brougham) was in favour of the motion ; his statement and the
statement of the Noble Farl did not hold out any inducement
to Noble Lords to grant it. The objects for which they were
desirous to see it appointed differed. The Noble Lord (Lord
Brougham) was 'desirous that the Committee should consult a
certain standing order which was not on the table of the
House.

Lord BROUGHAM said they were on the table.
The Earl of WICKLOW said he was glad of that, and was
desirous that they should go before the Committee for its eon-
siceration, in the event of their Lordships acceding to the mo-
tion. But whatever might be his intention as to the future
achption of these standing orders, he trusted it was not his in-
tention to apply them to the railway propositions before
Parliament, for nothing could be more unjust.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord BROUGHAM said it was not.

The Earl of WICKLOW said he was glad the Noble Lord
had taken an opportunity of stating that that was not his in-
ention.

Lord BROUGHAM thought he had mentioned it. It
was his most clear intention not to apply the standing order he
had specified to the schemes before Parliament. The House
must not take them by surprise. He had totally omitted a
suggestion which ought to come before the Committee—that
notice should be given that no Bill could be passed in this ses-
sion which did not come up on or before a certain day. The
best course would be, to give notice of the day, and that those
coming up after that must be deferred until next session. One
of his objects in proposing the standing orders was to save ex-
pense. _

Lord HATHERTON hoped that some plan would be
adopted by which the poor man would have the means of re-
dress. There were many instances of small freeholds being
entirely ruined by railways, and inadequate compensation
awarded to their proprietors. They bad been bandied about
from year to year in the hope of getting redress. He hoped
that the Committee would consider the necessity of appointing
land-agents and other parties in various parts of the country to
constitute a tribunal to see and enforce the fulfilment of the
contracts of Railway Companies with persons who bad not the
means of doing so themselves. Parties dissatisfied with arbi-
tration had a remedy by a suit in equity, or by action at corn-
mon law.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was glad the Noble
Lord (Lord Stanley) had not offered any apposition to the
motion, as he believed it would give great satisfaction to the
landowners. The Bill which had been lately passed with
respect to railways was most objectionable in many points, and
he could cite many cases of hardship in connexion with it.
For instance a railway might be carried for 100 miles through
mining property, which was in no degree valued except under
an arrangement by the railway directors, who sent their engi-
neer to make a valuation. Could anything be more unjust than
a valuation by an interested party? A compulsory clause ought
to have been put in the Bill to compel the parties to purchase
the mine under the railway. It was necessary for the public
safety that a fair remuneration should be given to the indivi-
dual who owned the mine, which he was obliged to work for a
number of years by the terms of the lease. It was said that it
was not safe to work a mine under a railway. Then the com-
pany should be forced to buy it, otherwise the unfortunate pro-
prietors would be seriously injured. They ought to insert a
clause to that effect in the Bill. If the Committee were ap-
pointed, cases would come out which would render it necessary
that justice should be rendered.
Several motions were postponed till Monday, and their Lord-
ships adjourned.