The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-18 00:00:00

DUBLIN AND GALWAY RAILWAY.

The Earl of BESBOROUG II brought up the report of the
Select Committee, appointed to inquire into certain allega-
tions which had been made against the Dublin and Galwas
Railway Company. The Committee had only thought it ad-
visable to go into the allegation respecting the forgery of four
names to the subscription-deed of the Company, and they as-
certained that the Company had been in the habit of making
allotments of shares without obtaining any references as to the
respectability or status of the applicants. They also hoped
that their report, and the petition containing the allegations,
would be referred to the Committee which was nosx
sitting upon the Bill. It was not his intention Po
oppose the second reading of the Bill, which was appointed, for
that evening or to raise any discussion at present resrecting
these allegations, as ample opportunity would be afforded, on a
future occasion, for that purpose.
Lord BROUGHAM thought it much better that no discus-
sion should arise on the subject at present.
After a short consultation the Bill was read a second time
and ordered to be committed.

The Inelosure of Lands Bill, the Loan Societies Bill, the
Turnpike Acts Continuance Bill, the Highway RetEs Bill,
and the Unlawful Oaths Bill, were severally read a first tiro*,
and ordered to be printed.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE wished to put a question
to one of the Ministers of the Crown in referer,•e to the con-
duct of a magistrate and deputy •lieutenant. of the comity of
Leitrim.
The Duke of Ps ELLINGTON—You should have given no-,
t ice of your question.
The Marquis of CLAN RICA TIDE said he would pr,t his
question then to-morrow. It would relate to the cons:uct of a
11r. Watson, a magistrate and a deputy-lieuten-Ant of the
cuunty of Leitrim, who had taken an active part is the Orange
meetings and processions which had lately taken place in that
county.
LANDLORDS AND TENANTS (IRELAND) BILL.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY, who had not the good
fortune to be present on Tuesday evening when the Noble Lord
the Secretary for the Colonies statedhis intentions with respect
to the Landlords and Tenants' Bill, would be glad if the Noble
Lord would state clearly and distinctly whether Government
intended proceeding with the measure in the present session.
The Noble Marquis then presented a number of petitions from
various places in Antrim, Belfast, Londonderry, and Down,
against the Bill, signed by landowners and others, and con-
, eluded by imploring the Noble Lord to withdraw the Bill.
Lord STANLEY regretted that the Noble Marquis was
not in the House when he made a statement with respect to the
Bill. It was not his intention to ask the House to pass the
Bill during the present session.
RECOGNIZANCES FOR COSTS OF BILLS BILL.
Lord BROUGHAM said, as it had not yet been determined
whether the order with regard to costs in railway Bills should
be affected by a Bill or not, he should postpone the second
reading of this Bill until to-morrow. The Noble Lord ex-
pressed his regret that a Bill (the name of which he did not
mention) had been read a third time before five o'clock, during
his absence from the House. By it a poor clergyman, who had
a living of 70/. a year, and who kept a school within forty yards
of the route of the railway, would be nearly ruined, as no one
would then send their children to his school. What compen-
sation would the Railway Company give him for so great a loss?
Lord REDESDALE cited the case of a poor person who
had expended 1,0001. upon a building, which would be greatly
deteriorated by a railway passing within 100 yards of it.
'f HE GLASGOW JUNCTION RAILWAY.
Lord DALHOUSIE presented a petition, numerously
signed, from Glasgow, against this line, on account of its pro-
moters intending to carry it along the Quays.
MUTUAL SURRENDER OF CRIMINALS BILL.
The Earl of ABERDEEN moved the third reading of this
Bill, which he said was to facilitate the mutual delivering up of
criminals between France and the United States.

The Bill was read a third time and passed.
The third reading of the Public Works (Ireland) Bill was
:hen proposed and carried, and the House adjourned.

ROUSE OF COMMONS, Juh, 17.

LUNATIC ASYLUMS AND PAUPER LUNATICS

BILL.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
On the motion that the Bill do pass,
Sir JAMES GRAHAM moved to withdraw the 6th clause,
which exempted the populous parishes of Marylebone, St. Pan-
cras, and St. George, from the operation of the Bill.
Sir CHARLES NAPIER objected to the withdrawal of
the clause. There was no metropolitan Member in the House,
with the exception of himself, and he certainly must say that
the insertion of the clause, if it was now to be withdrawn,
looked very much like an intention to deceive them, for no
notice had been given to any of the metropolitan Members of
the intention on the part of the Government to withdraw the
clause.

Sir J. GRAHAM defended the course pursued by the Go-
vernment and insisted on the rejection of the clause.
Lord ASHLEY said when he consented to the introducticu
of the clause, he stated that its provisions must be well con-
sidered, and the propriety of its remaining in the Bill could be
discussed on the third reading. For his own part, he was
favourable to the clause.

Mr. HENLEY supported the withdrawal of the clause,
considering that as it at present stood it would opc.9 ate entirely
on one side.

Lord DUNCAN said if this clause was to be retained he
must move the adjournment of the House. His Hon. Friend
the .Alember for Montrose had entirely withdrawn his opposition
to the Bill on the ground of the introduction of the clause.

Lord ASHLEY had stated to the Hon. Member for Mon-
tro,e that on the third reading of the Bill the propriety of re-
taining the clause would be discussed ; that he thought him-
self there were great objections to it, and that probably, on the
third reading it would be necessary to withdraw it.
Mr. WARBURTON trusted the Noble Lord the Member
for Bath would not persevere in his motion.
Lord DUNCAN said he would not persevere in moving the
adjournment.
Sir U. NAPIER said he would divide the House on the
motion that the Bill do pass.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, but no division tot,k
took place, and the Bill passed.