The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-09 00:00:00

ROYAL COMMISSION.

The Hon. Member was interrupted by the spileaMee
of Sir Augustus Clifford ( Usher of the Black Rod at the
-
bar, who summoned the House to the House of eers to
hear the Rnyal assent given by commission to sundry Bills.
The SPEAKER, on his return, announced that this House
had been to the House of Peers, where they had been present
while the royal assent was given, by commission, to several Bills
"for which see Lords' report).
IRISH RAILWAYS.

Mr. SHAW then resumed. He hoped the House would not
rescind their resolution in reference to this Bill, however
anxious he might be to see railroads in operation in Ireland.
Mr. WARBURTON agreed with the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, and he would add that the public could have no confi-
dence in the decisions of this House, if the decision in regard to
this Bill should be reversed.
Mr. WARD said that the alteration suggested by his Hon.
Friend seemed to him to have no bearing on the subject under
the immediate consideration of the House. The decision the
other night created a most unfavourable impression of the sta.
bility of the present system. It was most disastrous to the
character: of this House as regarded its private Bill legis-
lation. He was reluctant to do anything which might
operate against private enterprise, but he felt bound to carry
cut the principles by which railway legislation should be
governed.—( Hear, bear.) He was afraid the House had no
choice but to redeem its character by rescinding the decision
to which they had come to the other night.
Mr. BERNAL said he did not think it would be at all con-
sistent with the character and dignity of that House to be
affirming. by a solemn decision, certain principles upon one
night, and, after a Jim Crow fashion, reversing it the next.
Sir HENRY W. BARRON said, that within every recent
p riod, the decision of the Standing Orders Committee bad been
reversed in no less than six cases, and no notice had been
taken, but a great noire had been raised about this, and. the
only reason he could assign for it was, that
the six cases he had mentioned were English
ones, but this was a Scotch one. The whole
of the landed proprietors through whose estaies the rail•
way was to pass were in favour of the Rill. The point
brought before the Standing Orders Committee could only
affect those landed proprietors. The House had acted in ac-
cordance with the wishes of those gentlemen. It would be
most unjust and unfair for then} to reverse that decision with-
out showing a competent reason fur it.
Mr. STUART WORTLEY would decline making any
observations on the present occasion.
The motion was then agreed to.
Mr. F. FRENCH objected to several names on this Com-
mittee. Eight of the gentlemen proposed had already ex-
pressed themselves hostile to the Bill He objected to the ap-
pointment of the Hon. Member fur Kendal in particular, and
hoped he would not sit upon it.
After a few words from Sir G. GREY,
The names proposed by Sir G. Grey for the Comtnittee
were called over. The following names were agreed to k-Sir
G. Grey, Mr. Estcourt, and the O'Connor Don.
On the motion that Mr. Warburton be added to the Cotn-
mittee,

Mr:FRENCH objected to the name of Mr. Warburton, as
that gentleman was not at all acquainted with Ireland.
Mr. WARBURTON said, he begged to retire from the
Committee, as he had no particular desire to serve on it.—
(A laugh.) _ _

Afte-i a few words from Mr. MACKINNON, strangers
were ordered to withdraw, but no division took place, and the
motion was agreed to.

Sir G. GREY moved that Sir R. Fergnsson and Mr. Gre-
gory be added to the Committee, in place of the O'Conor Don
and Mr. Shaw.

Mr. J. S. WORTLEY said that they were now left in the
same position they stood in before the Committee was appointed.
All he wished was, that when the Standing Orders Committee
reported to the House with respect to the non-compliance of
the standing orders, they should report whether the rejection of
the Bill arose from the difficulty of complying with the standing
orders. He would, therefore, move that the report of the Sub-
Committee on petitions for private Bills on the Great Western
(Ireland) Railway Bill be referred to the Land Committee.
The motion not being seconded, was dropped.
Mr. GODSON presented several petitions against the en-
dowment of Maynooth College.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE moved that the petition of Eliza
Price (presented 7th May) be printed.
Mr. HUME gave notice that he should move a call of the
House on Thursday, the 22d.
ACADEMICAL EDUCATION ( IRELAND.)
Sir J. GRAHAM gave notice that he should to.morrow
(this day) move for leave to bring in a Bill to enable her
iltnlajlersetlyantdo, eanntldowhet wtohcooulglehgtesitfowr
would uldadbveantcoetmheen
et
oonf learning
venien e
of the I louse if he brought forward that motion at five o'clock,
used
towards on a former er
oe
easion upon the con
diems.giving it precedence over all other public business.—( Hear.)
Sir C. NAPIER wished to make some explanation respect-
ing the strong
Since he made those remarks he had received further
expressions
swohf Liehorhed Seatonßan-
had
nformation, and was better able to judge of the facts. He
had received a letter from a relative of his, now in the Mediter.
ranean. containing the whole facts of the case, which he read
to the House. The substance of the letter went to show that
Lord Seaton had exercised sufficient discretion in the course
he had pursued in refraining from apprehending the brothers
Bandiera while in Corfu, and in refusing to send a vessel to
tshseemd from landing at Calabria. With this explanation
his regret at having spoken so strongly on a pro
hpereevient pre

vious occasion.
RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
Mr. GISBORNE, seeing the Noble Lord the Chancellor of
the Duchy of Lancaster in his place, begged to ask him why
there had been a change in the system of the Select Commit..
tees? When these Committees were originally tormed they
consisted of five Members, while now be found that in several
andto Commit..have it
of these Committees there were only four. He wished to
rknow, ,
was
n the
equallyevent
divided, de
f add
,i v iagainst the noes, or vice versa, or whether the chairman was
whether takingion
t h el'
l ayesaee'
w e
r the
to be entitled to a second vote?
SOMERSET Lord G.
said that it had been impossible to
avoid the evil of which the Hon. Member complained. He
presumed, that in the case of a
division, the chairman would
not be entitled to a second vote, but, when there were two
against two, the question would be carried in the affirmative.
Mr. GISBORNE gave notice that he would, on an early
day, move that all Committees consisting of only four Members
should suspend their operations until the call of the House.
Colonel
slidS Y
hLeU 111,1aSs
anxiousl N IRELAND.te
kwew
if it was
the intention of her Majesty's Government to introduce this
session any measure in reference to the laws of debtor and
creditor, and the confinement of criminal lunatics in Ireland ?
Sir T. FRENI AN TLE said there was a Bill in preparation
in reference to the law affecting criminal lunatics in Ireland,
and it would be laid before the House immediately alter the
holidays. But he was not prepared to say that there was any
mea ure in reference to the other subject mentioned by the
Gallant officer, in preparation.
AUSTRALIAN GRAIN AND FLOUR.

Mr. HUTT begged to more, " Thlt the House resolve it-
self into a Committee of the whole House, for the purpose of
considering the following resolution : That it is expedient to
permit Grain and Flour, the produce of Australasia, to be un-
ported into the Un ted Kingdom e n payment of the same
amount of duty as is now levied on Grain and Flour the pro-
duce of Canada." In proposing thin motion, he hoped he would
be heard with patience while he nude a few observations cm
this important sehject. The House should be aware that the
attachment of the Colonies could only be secured by a system
of:good government, and their amount of usefulness to :he
parent country by the measure of prosperity they themselves
enjoyed. He w ould beg leave to remind Honourable Members
who mirht be disposed to r, fuse his motion, by alleging that a
free iir.portation of grain from that colony would be likely to
injure the agriculturists of this country, by trenching upon the
Tro:ection laws, to which they were so much attached; be
would remind them that there were interests which equally de-
manded the attention of the House with those of she farmers.
They allowed the Canadians to introduce their corn free, and
they refused the same liberty to the Australians. What bad
they done that they should be subject to that treatment?
They were subject to the same sovereign,
o and obedientto
to the same laws, and why should th
portions the
nshould they in-
all
2 What could indoce them to set asidethe
same people.
sth.ieto.seam:
ifeagviosulartivaeriddipstriontectoiotioon?betwMoreehyoy
wartnvg • of experience, to di4regard all coaaiduattolvt of jostic,