The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-05 00:00:00

RAILWAY.

The Lords' amendments to the Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmar-
nock, and Ayr Railway (Curnnock branch) Bill were agreed to.

PAUPERS:

Mr. S. CRAWFORD presented a petition from several
poor-law girirAiins in Ireland, complaining of the grievances
to which the Irish poor were subjected by the operation of the
present law, as regarded their removal from England to their
own country. The petitioners prayed that a clause might be
introduced in the amended Bill, giving those Irishmen who
had resided far five years in England a right of settlement in
the latter country.
ACTIONS AGAINST MEMBERS.

Mr. BAINES, who was almost inaudible in the gallery, was
understood to present a petition from John and Charles
William Scott, shipbuilders., Greenock, praying that certain
officers of the House might be al'orred to attend in the Court of
Common Pleas, to identify the person of the Hon. Member
for C:ellenliam ( Mr. Craven I-3erkeley), against
whom an action had been brought in that court.
Without wishing to impugn the conduct of the Honourable
Member for Cheltenham, he Baines) thought that,
under the circurns!ances, the prayer of the petition should be
acceded to.

Mr. BERNAL thought this was a singular proceeding. It
was somewhat extraordinary to require the presence of tNO of
the officers of that House in any of the courts of law to
identify the person of the Honourable Member.
He would very briefly advert to the circumstances
which gave rise to this action. It originated in a
transaction which dated as far back as 1837 or 1838, when a
Company was projected fur the purpose of giving a steam na-
vigation from Glasgow, Greenock, and the west of Scotland to
the West Indies. '1 he Hon. Mendier for Cheltenham was re-
quested to act as a Director of the Company, but he at once
objected. Neither, as it appeared, did his Hon. Friend
undertake the progress of the Bill through the House, for, as
it happened, the name of another Hon. Member, not his, was
endorsed on the back of the Bill. The Honourable
Member's name had been, however, notwithstanding his
objection, placed in the list of the directory, and the present
action was brought for the cost and expenses of a steam-ship
built at Greenock, to the order of the Steam Navigation
Company. Now, as the Hon. Member explicitly denied that
he had consented to have his name introduced as a
director ; as he was perfectly ignorant that his name was in
any way made use of, and, as the House was well aware,
that many private Bills were passed, of which the
majority of the Members were totally ignorant, and on which
therefore any name might be introduced, was it, he asked, just
or reasonable that expenses like those sought for in this action
should be recovered from the Hon. Member ? He was de-
cidedly opposed to the reception of this petition.
Mr. URA VEN BERKELEY denied that he had at any
time either directly or indirectly sanctioned the adoption of his
name as a director of the company. He was quite ready, how-
ever, to assist as far as lay in his power to a full and searching
inquiry into all the circumstances of the case.
Mr. WARBURTON said that in the peculiar circumstances
of the case, if he were in the position of the Hon. Member for
Cheltenham, he should offer no objection to the attendance of
the officers of the House.
Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY said the Hon. Member had
misunderstood him. He li,cl said that he courted the most
searching inquiry.
Mr. WARBURTON explained.
Air. HUME thought it was the usual course to permit the
officers of the House to attend in such a case as the present.
Sir GEORGE CLERK said that it did frequently happen
that officers of the House having charge of certain hooks or do-
cuments were required to produce them in Court, and to be
examined upon them, but this was a case of a very peculiar
kind, and he could not help suspecting that the parties had a
peculiar object in view in requesting the attendance of the
officers. It should also be recollected that the Hon. Member
might be very easily identified without calling upon that House
to interfere between the parties.
On the question being put, the motion that the petition be
received was negatived without a division.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

In answer to a question from Mr. WYSE,
Sir JAMES OttAFIAM fixed the Literary Society's Bill as
the first order of the day for Monday next.
Mr. SHELL gave notice that on Monday next he should ask
the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Govern-
ment, in what number of American ships had the right of
visiting in distinction from the right of search been executed.