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

SECONDARIES.--(THIS DAY.)

(Before Mr. Secondary JAMES.)
BROWNING V. CLARKSON.
This was an action to recover 12/., the amount of a bill of ex-
change, of which the defendant was the drawer.
The defendant pleaded payment of 91. on account, and 3/. 10s.
into Court.
To prove the payment two witnesses were called, who stated
that they were present when 9/. was paid to plaintiff, who re-
marked, " This is not busiLess at ter a bill being over due a month.
I ought to have the whole of the 124
Mr. CIIARNOCK, for the plaintiff, said he did not deny the re-
ceipt of the 91., nor that It was originally paid on account of the
121. bill, although the plaintiff had discounted several others for
the defendant ; but should prove that the latter requested him to
bring an action against the acceptor, and that the defendant said
that the amount paid might be appropriated towards the costs of
the action.
Mr. Dennithorn was called, and proved that he paid the 91. on
account of defendant, whom he afterwards accompanied to the
plaintiff's. Defendant said he should like to give Childs (the ac-
ceptor) a turn, and if plaintiff would bring the action he would see
him clear. Defendant afterwards went again and said he had no
money, but plaintiff had better go on, and he would send two carts
as a security for another bill coming due.
William Bull, clerk to plaintiff's attorney, proved the service of
the writ on defendant. Defendent then said, " I was never served
with a writ in my life before. I intended to pay him, but now he
shall never have a farthing." Defendant ordered the action
against Childs to be stopped.
Mr. Tisomss contended that this evidence did not prove any
direction to appropriate the money to costs.
The UNDER.SIIERIFF said, that if the money was originally paid.
on the bill, there must be an express direction'or permission to apply
it to any other purpose. An action might be recovered for costs
incurred at the request of defendant, who ought to pay.
Mr. CLARKSON considered that where an action was brought on
behalf of another on a bill of exchange, a written guarantee was
requisite to secure costs, but here the money was the security.
The jury gave a verdict for defendant.

DEATH OF THE REV. Dn. WELSH.—It is with sin-
cere regret we announce the death of this eminent gentleman,
which took place at Drumferk House, near Helensburgh, on
Thursday evening. He was a man whose mental ciltivation and
intellectual stores were of no ordinary kind, and which eminently
fitted him for the academical chair which he occupied, first in the
University of Edinburgh, and latterly in the New College con-
nected with the Free Church.—Ayr Observer.
MR. BALFE'S NEW OPERA, " THE ENCITANTRESS."—

Mons. De St. Georges has arrived in town to superintend the re-
hearsals of this opera, the libretto of which he has written. Mr.
Balfe seems to have been inspired by the beauty of the poetry, as
he has been very fortunate in composing many melodies remarkable
for their beauty and freshness of style. There are thirty pieces of
music in the opera, ten of which are sung by the charming Anna
Thillon. Many novel effects are introduced in the overture.
Die anise en scene is worthy of a theatre royal, and the scenery is
indeed splendid, Madame Anna Thillon changing her costume
seven times.
THE KING OF TILE FRENCH.. His Majesty the
King of the French has beets pleased to give the Society of the
French in London another mark of his paternal solicitude, by for.
warding, through Cuunt St. Aulaire, the sum of 50/. in aid of their
funds.
TRUE ClVlLlSATlON.—Prosecutions have already
commenced against the press in Algeria. This is the strongest
proof we have yet heard of the colony becoming every day more
and more French.--Punch.
IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, May 8.
RAILWAYS.

Lord REDESDALE said there was one remedy, and one re-
medy only, which would he for Parliament to throw out a few
Bills which grossly interferred with the rights of private
property. If that wore done in one or two instances, rail-
way companies would be snore careful to frame their
Bills in a proper manner. Of late years there had been an
opinion that railway schemes were so much to the advantage of
the country that Parliament was bound to look at railway Bills
favourably, and the consequence had been that the railway com-
panies had become completely careless of the private rights of
individuals.
Earl FITZ\% LLIAM said that thekffieulould be the
same. In order to avoid consenting Wit hardshipty w
infliated on
a private individual, they would prevent the completion of a
railway which would be a great public good.
Lord BEDESDALE—It would only be postponing it for a
year.
Lord CAMPBELL thought there could be no difficulty
whatever in the present instance. The railway actually cut
through this gentleman's property, and in that case a jury
would
experience that juries remainder, and
heh
would give him compensation, not otnolythf,o,r
It .as a hard
)
ayy s
came gave
closeam ptl ample indemnity.an
estate
through, but
mbuptbefloi
ktli)eewitfrornyi
without touching
-'dual •t anecs
--'dual had no remedy.
is Noble Friend was labour-
iner stated that the
meaning of

eireu—.
case where a 1...
it, because then theinui...
Lord 13 RO UGH AM thou gni. ...
ing under a misapprehension; the re,„._
railway raked his land---,a most expressive term, ....
whitli was well understood by his Noble Friend opposite.
Noble and Learned Friend was also mistaken if he supposed that
juries were now inclined to give proper compensation in rail-
way cases. Formerly they used to give extravagant compen-
sation, but they did not award extravagant compensation now.
He was sorry to see that the railway speculators were now
setting themselves up as an interest in opposition to the landed
interest. He was sorry to see in the Railway Gazette such
an expression as the following : " This is another job cf
the land." This was said in allusion to the appoint-
ment of the Railway Commissioners for Scotland, as
if the landed interest was against railways. This was
very short-sighted on the part of the railway speculators. He
believed that the landed interest profited by the extension
of railways. He believed that the Syston and Peterborough
Railway would be of great public advantage, but he thought
it would be of great advantage to postpone for a year, as had
bean recommended by his Noble Frieud, this and all other
ralway schemes which "raked" the private property of indi-
viduals without their cowerit. lie wished on every scow,

... ...

public as well as private, that Parliament should be prorogued
03 speedily as possible. He hoped the Government would ex-
pedite the public business as much as possible; and whenever
the public business would admit of the prorogation taking
place, it ought not to besticlayed one hour on account of any
Railway Bills ; these that it was proper to allow to go on could
be admitted ad eundem next session, and in the meantime the

.....
railway fever would have had time to subside.
The Marquis of SALISBURY complained that railway
speculation existed to such an extent that it was almost im -
possible to find a jury the persons composing which were not
interested in railways, and they never awarded landed proprio.

tors proper compensation.
Earl FITZ WILLIAM said that Mr. Sowerby's case was a
peculiar one ? I.e was the lessee under a gentleman who was
again a lessee under some ecclesiastical body, and
under these circumstances it was exceedingly probable
that a jury would not award him that compensation
to which their Lordships might consider him entitled. He
wished that some principle should be laid down for the purchase
of land used by railways. On the one hand, each individual
was left to make his own bargain with the Company, without
any principle to guide him as to the price he was to ask ' • and,
on the other, there was no principle to guide the Railway Com-
pany as to the sum they were to offer, or the arbitrator, as to
the compensation which he was to grant. All persons had not
the same chance, and that was the difficulty which they ought
to get over ; and if they could not do that, they
ought to do something to palliate the grievance. He
thought some principle might be laid down as a
guide for that purpose. He was glad to see the Noble Duke
in his place, as he was sure he was of the same opinion as
himself. He had no doubt if those who were in power would
put their shoulders to the wheel something might be done.
The Duke of WELLINGTON had long been convinced
of the hardness of the situation of proprietors of property, and
particularly small proprietors.—(Hear, hear.) Considering
that the undertakers of railways monopolized passengers and
goods to an enormous amount, and made most extensive profits,
he thought some principle ought to be adopted in order to en-
sure the proprietors of land full compensation for the injury
and inconvenience inflicted upon them.
The Duke of GRAFTON believed that in all compensations
in the case of railways the same principle was acted upon with
re'pect to the poor as the rich.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA thought there had been no
principle acted upon in giving compensation, and he believed
that the course that had been pursued by railways had dune
more to set the middling class against the higher then anything
that had ever taken place. If Railway Companies chose to
speculate and gamble, he for one would do all in his power to
put an end to it..
Lord BEAUMONT complained of the Bill being hurried
through the House, and said, that according to the
principle laid down by the Noble Duke, no land
could be taken for the purposes of railways, without
due compensation ; but this was net the fact, for ac.
cording to the Railways Consolidated Clauses Bill, parties
were obliged to give up their property for railway Firm
and take what was agreed to be given them for it, or i they
submitted to arbitration or a jury, they had to pay half the ex-
penses of the proem ding,. If they did not pay this, and if
the property taken did not meet the expenses, in the event of
such adjudication, they were liable to have a distress issued out
against them. He considered a clause ought to be introduced
into the Bill founded on a more just principle to meet cases of
this kind.

Lord STANLEY thought the Noble Lord who had just sat
down laboured under a misunderstanding respecting the
provisions of the Bill to which he had referred. What re-
lated to compensation in that Bill was what was introduced
into every railway Bill that passed through Parliament. If
any case of hardship respecting particular individuals existed,
such parties were in no worse a position, as far as this Bill was
concerned, than they were before, and he was sure that in
any case not sufficiently met by he provisions of that Bill,
Parliament at any time, on good reason being shown, would
interfere and protect them if it were necessary, even to the
throwing out of the railway Bill complained of. It had been
said, that Government had hurried through the Bill. So far
from this being the case, it had undergone the most rigid
examination in the other House. It underwent many night's
discussion in that House, and all its provisions were most
carefully criticised: It was difficult to lay down any general
principle upon which compensation should be awarded. The
difficulty was not so much with regard to land, as
with reference to other kinds of property.— the
interference with the comforts of individuals, and, questions of
nuisance. All that could be done in such cases was to assign
to each party, be he rich or poor, a just and equitable tribunal
to assess damages. It was impossible to lay down any general
principle that could meet complaints of nuisance or matters in
which individual comfort and convenience were involved. It
was provided in the Bill that parties whose claims were sub-
jected to the adjudication of a jury, if they got greater damages
than they originally claimed,the railway company was bound
to pay all expenses. But if the jury gave a less sum than that
previously claimed, however exorbitant that sum might have
been, he had still only to pay his own expenses, the company
being necessitated to pay all theirs. Parliament, he was sure,
had done its duty, and if at any time cases should arise that
could not be reached by the ordinary channels, Parliament had
full power to interfere, and he had lie doubt would interfere
were good reasons shown.
Lord BEAUMONT considered that the Noble Lord (the
Secretary for the Colonies) bad not fairly met his statement.
He (Lord Beaumont) denied that the poor man had equal jus-
tice with the rich. No doubt that both had equally the privi-
lege of petitioning against a Bill, but the rich man could ap-
pear iu defence of his petition by counsel, whereas the poor
man had no means in his power of doing so. His petition went
into that large blue bag and was no more heard of.—( Hear.)
The Earl of DALHOUSIE begged to correct the state-
ments of the Noble Lord who had just sat down. He was sur-
prised to hear it complained of, that the Government was
hurrying the Bill through with undue haste. Their Lord-
ships would recolloct that he did not place the Bill on the
journals of the House till a week after it was introduced, when
a day was fixed for its second reading. On the evening fixed
upon for the second reading, the greater portion of the House
went to dinner before the debate came on. It was, however,
read a second time, and afterwards fully debated in Com-
mittee. Noble Lords were therefore not justified in
saying that the Bill had been hurried through
the House. With respect to the right of petitioning,the rich
and poor were on an equal footing. It was true that the rich
man could appear by counsel, which the poor had not the means
of doing, but tbis was not a grievance peculiar to this ques-
tion;; the same difficulty, as far as the poor man was con-
cerned, existed in courts of law, and many other places. The
machinery introduced into this Bill regarding compensa-
tion was much improved, and afforded the poor man, as far as
the circumstances of the case would admit, equal access to
justice with the rich man, and equal opportunity of command-
ing full compensation.
Earl FITZWILLIAM disclaimed all participation in the
sentiments expressed by his Noble Friend against the Govern-
ment, but he did nut think that railway Bills were of a
satisfactory character. A railway company, in his opinion,
ought to be placed, so far as taking land was concerned, in
precisely the same position as a private gentleman who wished
to construct a road for his own immediate convenience. He
gave notice that, after the holidays, he would move for a Com-
mittee to inquire whether the mode of dealing. between rail-
way Companies and the proprietors of land, could not bo placed
upon a better footing than it was at present.
Lord BELHAVEN thought a railway Company ought to be
compelled to arrange with the landholders whose property
would be interfered with by the line before Parliament granted
them an Act to construct it.
After a few words from Lord Vivian and Lord BROUGHA m,
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY remarked that, as
many of the projected railways would pass over coal mines, it
might so happen that, in the course of time, they might give
way, and inflict serious injury, not only upon the owner of the
mine, but the public at large. He, therefore, wished to ask the
Noble Lord whether the Railway Clauses Consolidation Bill
made any provision for the purchase, by the railway Company,
of the mine as well as of the surface of the earth?
Lord DALHOUSIE was understood to reply in the
affirmative.
The matter then dropped.
The Bail in Error Bill went through Committee, and the
report was ordered to be brought up after the holidays.
The Privy Council Appellate Jurisdiction Bill was read a
third time and passed, a clause being introduced to postpone its
operation to the Ist of January, 1846.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
On the motion of the Duke of WELLINGTON, their
Lordships then adjourned for the holidays till Friday, the
6th instant.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 8. •
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
the convenience
learning
illnl a jlerset
lya
ntdo, eannddo wh
etwo h cooulgl ehgte si
it would
th e advancementbe to
of the House if he brought forward twat motion at five o'clock,
giving it precedence over all other public businees.—( Hear.)
Sir C. NAPIER wished to make some explanation respect-
ing the strong expressions which he had used on a former oc.
casion upon the conduct of Lord Seaton towards the Ban-
dieras. Since he made those remarks he had received further
nforrnation, and was better able to judge of the facts. lie
bad 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
i
Bandiera while n Corfu, and in refusing to send a vessel to
prevent them from landing at Calabria. With this explanation
he expressed his regret at having spoken so strongly on a pre
vious occasion.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
Mr. GISBORNE, seeing the Noble Lord the Chancellor of
the Duchy of Lancaster in his place, beggede to
s ask t himmmwihty.
there had been a change in the system of
.th 1
in several
they
teeoenss?istedWohtenfi v
et hi‘esieemberMembers,
while
Committeeshile now
wrehl
eorftog,:nnadlleYt'hfaotrmi
four. He wished to
of these Committees there
pylace, and the Commit-
,ivi,:iho:ntehtreaerkinottne ayes were to have it
whether the chairman was
tehgeuaelvleyntodroi
divided,
rice
taii.ceedd
against the Watts,
know,tee wasln
d vote?
to be entitled to a secon .
of which the Hon. Member complained. He
avoid the evil versa, or
Lord G. SOMERSET' said that it had been impossible to
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,
shou lidnosvusisptehna al
dt
till Committees
eir,,peratien nseuontsiilsttiiniegcoalf only four
lofthelemhers
House.
LUNATIC ASYLUMS IN IRELAND.
Colonel RAWDON said he was anxious to know if it watt
the intention of her Majesty's Government to introduce this
setsion iny measure in reference to the laws of debtor and
creditor, and the confinement of criminal lunatics in Ireland ?
Sir T. FREMANTLE 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 ore in reference to the other subject mentioned by the
Gallant officer, in preparation.
AUSTRALIAN GRAIN AND FLOUR. . .

.. - .
Mr. HUTT begged to move, " That 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 im-
ported into the United Kingdom (0 payment of the sane
amount of duty as is now levied on Grain and Flour the pro-
duce of Canada." In proposing this motion, he hoped he woulA
be heard with patience while he made a few observations on
this important schject. The House should be aware that the
attachment, of the Colonies could only be secured by a system
-ood government, and their amount of usefulness to ;he
AI .t, . -•ry by the measure of prosperity they themselves
Parentr-,-, --1 d beg leave to remind Honourable Members
"i 6 S"' lie w'''''" • <fuse his motion, by alleging that a
who might be disposed'', r
grain from that colon; would be likely
het°,
finrejeurieir;hpeorata4iint
protection lads,
to which they were so much. attached;
°Lists of this country? by trenching upon the
manded the attention of the House with those of the _
would remind them that there were Interests whicfhequaally,d7-..
the Australians. IN hat and
they refused the same liberty to .
that treatment?
They allowed the Canadians to introduce their corn
,free,
,anel..
they done that they should be subject to.
liable to
to the same laws, and why shou,ld they
Why not
they in-
the same favour and proteetinon .between
portions of the
They were subject to the same Soverelgorit,
ba.end obedient
stitute a legislative distinction
01 considerations of juatiee
warslio; of expeOrPce? d $ , to set. aside all the
sane people? What could
to_i,rtricloaruede them