The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-22 00:00:00

SION BILL.

The Duke of RICHMOND moved the order of the
day for the further consideration of this Bill, and
James Thomas Russell was called to the bar, in pur-
suance of their Lordships' order of Friday last.
The LORD CHANCELLOR asked was the witness
at the bar, and being answered in the affirmative, his
Lordship informed the witness that a part of the ques-
tions and answers of the previous examinations would
be read to him ; and if Mr. Russell desired the whole
would be read to him.

Mr. Russell wished to hear the whole read, which
was accordingly done by the clerk.
The reading of the evidence being concluded, _
Lord BROUGHAM asked the witness did he not on
the former day say that he had never seen the person
whose name he refused to give, except in the presence of
his brother.
The Earl of RADNOR rose to order. He had on the
former occasion objected to this question being pressed.
The witness and counsel were ordered to withdraw.

Lord RADNOR proceeded—He was of opinion that
neither in law or justice should the witness be compelled
to answer the question or to be committed to prison if
he did not, as was threatened the other day. He rs -
minded their Lordships that when the Bill was sent up
from the House of Commons, a petition was presented
from the plaintiff, Charles Henry Russell, praying to
be heard by counsel against the Bill, and the counsel
were heard. Well, after that, a Noble Duke moved that
evidence should be required to show that the petitioner
was the bona fide plaintiff. It seem( dto him that it was
rather late in the day to call for evidence that he was the
plaintiff after he had been named by his counsel as
plaintiff upon his petition. But passing that over let
them come to the position the matter now stood
in.—(Hear, hear.) The witness on Friday refused
to give the name of a person whose name was commu-
nicated to him in professional confidence, and
stated that he had laid a case before Mr. Erie, the
Queen's Counsel, that he was not bound to divulge the
name to the House. The House then adjourned in orde r
to examine the witness's evidence before the Committee,
and to compare it with what he had given before the
House. He (Lord Radnor) had compared the evi-
dence, and he could not find that there was any
discrepancy. Whether the person whose name it
was sought to get at was a gentleman or no gentleman,
it was quite consistent with the most respectable cha-
racter that a man should be desirous of putting an end
to gambling of this kind, and yet might not wish
to be held up as a common informer in a qui
tam action. In such a case it was not improper
or unreasonable that a man, gentleman or no gentle-
man, should go to an attorney, and ask him to find
some one to bring the action, he himself being liable for
the costs. The object of fishing out the name was to
enable the Earl of Egremont and the other defendants to
know against whom they might proceed hereafter, if the
action went in their favour or were stopped. He did not
think that the answer would be of any use to the House.
He could not see what they wanted with it, or what
right they had to exercise their power of committing the
winsesses.

Lord BROUGHAM thought that this was not the
time when the Noble Lord should have made his
speech. The time would be when the motion should
be put for committing the witness. Then it
would be for his Noble Friend to make his speech
to show cause why the witness should not be committed.
—(A laugh.) But lie (Lord Brougham) never beard so
marvellously erroneous an argument in his life, as
that the witness was not bound to answer because a
Queen's Counsel very learned in the law, gave an
opinion that he was not bound to answer the question.
What ! was it to be said to their Lordships that they
should be governed in their acts, whenever a point of
law arose, by the opinion of a counsel learned
in the law? He (Lord Brougham) was sorry that his
Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack was dis-
turbed by other Noble Lords.—(Hear, hear, and
laughter.) He wished to have the attention of his
Noble and Learned Friend, because this point was
very material—more material in respect to the forms and
privilegs of the House then to the case itself in question.
His Noble Friend (Lord Radnor) did not understand the
case—(A laugh)—the question was one of very material
consequence to the case. The object of the
examination was to ascertain who was the per-
son interested in these qui tarn actions. The pa-
titioner was herrd by counsel on his representation
that he was plaintiff, and that he would be
injured by the passing of the Bill. Now, the object of
the question was to ascertain, whether he was the plain-
tiff and liable to be injured by the Bill. It was with a
view to the privileges of the House that he troubled
their Lordships with those observations.
The Duke of RICHMOND said that his Noble
Friend the Earl of Radnor had taken up this case with
great warmth and but little consideration. The
Noble Earl had accused the Committee of striving to fish
out the name of an individual to serve the purposes of
Lord Eglintoun. If that had been said out of the House
he (the Duke of R.) would give it a very short answer.
He thought they were more perfectly right in getting
at the name of the individual who brought the action
in another person's name, and might be, for aught they
could know, the foreman of the jury, although he was
interested in the amount of all the costs and one-half of
the damages.
Lord EGLINTOUN was certain that hale.
Friends on the Committee would not condesced to

as they had been accused of acting, for the purpose of
serving his interests. He would by no means wish that
onhis account any friends of his would be so influet red.
—(Hear, hear.)
[LEFT srrusc.l

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
RAILWAYS BILL.

On the motion that the House resolve itself into a
Committee on the Railway Bill,
Mr. MORRISON said, that some few years ago the
Government of the country appeared to be altogether
opposed to any interference with railroads, in conse-
quence of which greater enterprise was manifested by
capitalists to embark in railroad speculations. It would
have been much better if the Government had shown
this desire of interference some years ago. If the pre-
sent Bill passed, the public would be benefited to the
extent of more numerous competing lines, but the pro-
prietors of existing railroads would be most materially
injured. He thought, that if a tariff of lid, or 2d. was
levied on competing lines, it would have the effect of
causing a reduction of fares, if that was the
object of the Bill. The best objection to' the
Bill was, that it was unnecessary. With r,
gard to third class carriages, he thought that
public opinion would soon correct the abuse of delaying.
poor persons travelling in the third class. He was bes:
acquainted ,with the Great Western Railroad, and he
thought that a great improvement might be made in tl:e
third class carriages. He also thought that the comfort
of those persons who travelled in the second class car-
riages was also too much neglected. Another abuse
was that some carriers were favoured more than others
by the directors. He-thought that lists of the prices of
carrying goods ought to be left with the Board of Trade,
and that they should adhere to those price,. He did
not think that railway companies ought to be liable to a
penalty of 101. for parcels which might be lost. On
grounds of public policy, he thought that such a pro-
vision was necessary with regard to stage coaches ;
but railro:ds were circumstanced so differently
that he thought they ought not to be made
subject to a penalty for lost parcels. He
had great faith in the atmospheric principle upon
railways, and he thought it would soon become exten.
sively adopted. He did not thoroughly approve of the
Bill of the Government, because it passed by three lead-
ing points—revision, tariff, and lease.
Mr. WILLIAMS did not think this Bill went far
enough in protecting the public. He thought greater
powers ought to have been taken by the Board of Trade
with respect to the revision of railways ; and he thought
that the provisions of the Bill ought to have been ex-
tended to old as well as to new companies. He hoped
the. Right Hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board
of Trade, would consent to extend the clause relating
to third-class passengers to all existing companies.
Third-class passengers had hitherto been treated
in the most inconsiderate, unjust, and cruel manner,
by existing railway companies, and he hoped
therefore, that all companies ought to be made
to come under the operation of the third class passen-
gers' clause in this Bill. He thought, too, that power
should be given for the revision, by the Board of Trade,
of the carriage traffic on a railway, as well as the pas-
senger traffic.
Colonel SIBTHORP had no hesitation in saying that
the present Bill was a very similar Bill to that which
was originally before the House. More than half the
clauses had been struck out, and the Bill was most par-
tial in its operatiens. The Bill would have the effect of
establishing a monopoly in favour of existing railway
companies.
Mr. V. SMITH had expected that some statement
would have been made by the Right Hon. Gentleman
with respect to the alterations which he had proposed.
Great alteration had been made, and he thought that
only one day for their consideration was too short a time
especially without any explanation by the Right Hon.
Gentleman.

The House then went into Committee on the Bill.

On clause one heiniProPosed,
Mr. GLADSTONE rose and said he would take that
opportunity of explaining the alterations which had been
made in the Bill. lie did not think that the public in
terest would be prejudiced by the abandonment of the
clauses which had been struck out of the Bill. The Hon.
Member for Lincoln appeared to imagine that in the Bill
as it originally stood the option of revision and purchase
wag. made applicable to existing railway companies..
He could Assure his Hon.. Friend that such was
not the case. That part of the Bill remained
exactly the same. His 119 p, and Gallant Friend came
forward with great sympathy for the poor, and took
objection to this Bill OD that round. prow the Bill in