The Sun.
London, England, 1845-08-06 00:00:00

!;•i.

HOUSE OF LORDS, 5.
Their Lordships assembled at the usual hour.
THE PRESENT HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.
Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition from an architect of
the name of Bernard, who stated that he could render that.
Hou.e—in which it appeared they were doomed to continue
for some time to come—wholesome and co:nrnudious. He
( Lord Campbell) wa; not very coast' emit in this an-
ticipation, as he believed Dr. Reel had been as
succeSs'ul as any man in his line, but although he had been
successful in. improving the House of Commons he had utterly
failed to improve that House. Ho stated that he could effect
what he stated without expense or inconvenience, and prayed
that it might be referred to a Committee bef.,re which he
might disclose his plan. At that—late period of the session.
however, be would not move for a Committee, but would
simply call the attention of the Goveinment to it, He would
hand it to the Noble Lord opposite ( Lord Stanley), who would
no doubt give it all the attention it deserved.
BUSINESS OF THE H:)USE.
Lord NIONTEAGLE moved for a return of the number of
private Bills before the House, the number of Peers who had
sat in Committee upon them, and the number of days %%biota
eatili bad sat. He was perfectly persuaded, that if the same
amount of private business occurred in the next session, their,
Lordships would find it necessary to adopt some other plan
than that hitherto adopted, and by which the business of the
House might be more proportioned. Then with respect to the.
deposits, he apprehended that they ought to be increased.
from Si. to 101. per cent., in accordance with the resolution
to which the other House had come.
The Duke of WELLINGTON was understood to say that
he hoped the Noble Lord would bring forward the subject 00
Thursday.
Lord REDESDALE said there was not one Bill which had
not had its Committee, and which had not been decided upon'
with the exception of the London and York, which had only
come up yesterday.
Lord MON TEAGLE only meant to say that there was not
a fair distribution of labour amongst the Members of that
House with respect to the business which came before it.
Lord BESBOROUGH said he should tnoveon Thursday next
that, next session, a letter should be written to every
of the House, requesting to know when he will be able to
tend on the Committees of that House.
The Merchant Seamen's Bill was lead a third time. and
passed. Member

BOROUGH RATES BILL.
This Bill passed through Committee, and was ordered to be
read a third time on Thursday.
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS BILL.
This Bill passed through Committee, and was ordered to W
read a third time on 1 hursday.
TURNPIKE-ROADS (IRELAND) BILL.
The Bill went through Committee, and was ordered to
read a third time on Thursday.
NAVAL MEDICAL SUPPLEMENTAL. FUND BIT'
This Bill went threugh Committee, and was ordered t 0,,,
read a third time on Thurslay.
MUNICIPAL DISTRICTS (IRELAND) BILL.
This Bill went through Committee, and was ordered to be
read a third time on Thursday.
LONDON AND YttliK RAILWAY BILL.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE then rose to present Of°
petitions, ot which he had given notice, against the Loy d°
and York Railway Bill, and to move that one of them be re-
teried to a Select Committee. Attar toe course their Lord'
ships le,: pursued in the case of the Dublin and Galway Rat
way, they eoul,l not refuse to refer the prescot case to a Cool'
mat!. Teo, first pete oti was from a Mr. George Pre' 1
lamed prop, heti,- residing near to Huntingdon, whose 10;
eerty would be interfered with by the progress of the propose
railway, who alleged, and he believed correctly s°l
that the original capital of the Company was estimate-
by Mr. Ctsbttt at five millions, but had since been increased 7
six millions and a half. This was a matter, however, whic
was within the jurisdiction of the Standing Orders Committee:.
and he did, therefore, propose to refer this petition to a Seler,
Committee. The second petition he had to present to the'',
Lordships was from the same gentleman, who alleged that tbe
contract deed was entirely fictitious, in as far as it contained
the names of parties who represented upwards of half a milln
some of whom were fictitious, and others were incapable °
paying such a sum. In the petition which was presented Yes'
terday a mistake was no doubt made with respect to 13azter'
but there were other cases of far greater consequence
than that, and infinitely greater than any that hrle
occurred in the Dublin and Galway Railway. Pj
would not trouble the House by going ever all the names'
Ile would merely refer to one or two of them, and he vis
sure that he should make out a sufficient case for further in-
quiry. Their Lordships might remember, that by the!,
standing orders the residence, as well as the name of the tuui,
scribers, should be given in the contract deed, and the grourA
on which many of the names on the Dublin and Galway (14;
were objected to, were a non-compliance with that order. 're
hoped they would carry it out also in the present case. Theo
was one perso-i, named John Theohald, Esq., who was do
r_
to the amount of 25,0(101. Now, he was informed that tit:ere:l
was no such person in existence. A person who had fig the
in the Galway case, William Shackwell, held scrip delis.
amount of 5,0001. According to the reports before l;he
ment, this person now held scrip in different railways to es
amount of 41,500/. Another person, named Edward
Durham, of 90, Watling-street, was down for 12,70
Henry Daw for 2,0091., a messenger in the East India,ll°did
1,000/., and a person of the name of Banks 12,5001., "f°o,od
not ',side ;it tl,O residence alixeti to his name. He was 00
It „
out to be a clerk in the Australian Trast Company: nfltfe
quite impossible, however, that a person in this station T„ the
could he responsible for such a large amount. A curate,R lit
county of Kent was a subscriber to the amount of 25'aloont
various railways, and in this one he held shares to the wbo
58
of 10,0001. There were different other parties trilbseribers
names he would not trouble the House, who were.° iietenee
to the amount of 2,0001. and upwards, and whohad
,Arl°eith those
whatever. These names he had himself compare- w
ite eorree';
on the contract deed, and he had found them clU";
~r 21004
Another person was a subscriber to the amount. 0` evil°
There were two individuals of the name of Gurney. _
werestock-broker, o c k _tbhreo
ksoenr s oatnda charwoman.
hel
held
shares
to tOnehe amount
ot hurt
ofw
chant,hrothe r
andC h
Nod
about 0
every one knew that the income of these persons was
k Charles
guinea and a half, or, at most, two guineas a-wee .
Gurney said he never applied for any shares; so that
was
the per'
aw assublms'errtiebrerttoo stlhre. eilxittecehtcooefk,2s',ooow wine
- who procured the scrip in his name traded on
tt
for their own benefit, without any responsibility, and
never gave him a single farthing of the gains. He vrou'"
a:2,10%171c too;
say no more. He thought he had stated quite enough to hide'
their Lordships to investigate these charges. Now let it be 14:,
collected that these cases were all discovered within the 17,1
week, and were the consequence of the decision which be(
been tome to on the Dublin and Galway case. The eler,,,ai.
the county ton, had shares to the amount of 5.0 M. One i° of
vidual gave 22, Norfolk-street, as his address, but it aelteteee
that Francis Ommanney and Sons lived there, and of °Doe
there was no such person in existence. Taking the whole $lO
in all its details, a grosser piece of fraud and irnpositi.l est
never heard of. The Galway case was nothing to it. netbod
decidedly of ,pinion that the Bill should not proceed till 00
allegations were investigated, and' he would therefore 113.

thai the petition be referred to a Select Committee. Pti'
Lord :MON TEAGLE begged to present' a eta
tion referring to the same subject. He did not ni..t it
to vouch for the accuracy of the statements it contained, blot
came from a ic,pectable man; who was agent for the,.
ore.
under con,ideiation. He was induced to petition their Lo
ships in consequence of the statements which had been ',es.
on a folner occasion in that house, with respect to the ~00
pect.bility of the parties w hose names were on the subforrPitl to
Bred of the Company. The Noble Lord then peoceede"re.
read the petition, which stated that the parties wit° reP.R.B
sented a subscription of 20!,,001., and whose names 07;4,
a:leged to be fictitious and false,_ were bowl fide shareholde;,
and it was utterly untrue that they were fictitious personil.o
tions. They were all respectable men, and from their proPerio;
and standing, fully equal to the responsibility which tbel the
curred. The petitioners stated that they would abide by
decision of the House. e
The Earl of WICKLOW said though as strong a oa'
the Dublin and Galway had not been made out, yet he thotto
that a strung enough case had been made out for them to gtrbit
the Committee of Inquiry ; he apprehended, however, vett
they had a competent body in the Standing Orders Cointolehe
whose duty it was to investigate cases of the kind before, yif
House. On this ground he should oppose the motion or the
Noble Friend, yet at the same time he was willing that ifej
allegations contained in the petition should be fully inqu

into. n derf
The Earl of SHREWSBURY said the Standing rll
Committee could only inquire whether the contract t",sj
had been properly signed, and that the standing orders
been complied ; but they could not inquire at all into its
stance. to
ea The Earl of .DEVON said the contract deed ought )
he

a safe instead of an unsafe guide to the public.--( Hear, - he
The Bill had undergone a full inquiry in a Committee 0' the
of Commons. The report only was brought LIP rea
terday—by their Bill it appeared that they were erniow—,, t
to l:e,rrove a sum of money, which supposing the frauds
forth to be true, would enable them to carry out their Or.,
He was opposed to the course which they took with referee
to the
Lor d D U
uidin and Galway. : e'
BEAMONT agreed with his Noble Friend lei" ta-
spect to the Dublin and Galway. They had, however, etsrie,
Wished a precedent which he believed they could not well 0
part from in the present case. If, however, they contiintil
dtlopted similar steps to that taken with regard to this 0
they wou44 put a stop to railways altogether. tbel
Lord REDESDALE thought, in common justice,
ip
ought to agree to this Committee. They ought to do gear
every case where errors such as those alleged had been c
mitted. Ile
Lord CAMPBELL said, that during the present raorniater
had had his opinion canvassed on both sides, but he had de 0,
mined to keep his mind clear of both sides, and having dnne be
he was inclined to think this application could not possibll
refused.
The Earl of WICKLOW having heard the explanatio.iltteer
the Noble Chairman of Committees, he thought the Conan
ought to be appointed. gDla
Alter a few words from the Marquis of CLANRICA .ttee'
the petition was ordered to be referred to a Select Cool° ame
The Marquis of CLAN RICARDE was not prepared to
the Committee at present. IA to be
Lord MONTEAGLE thought the Committee coug--„ugh
appointed at once. Whether they were able to get tm..„.0
the case in the present session, depended on circuing""
ehich they could not controul.
BRIGHTON AND CHICHESTER RAILWAIriord.
Lord LOVELACE presented a petition praying their
ships to recommit the Brighton and Chichester ttailwilcaus-
anti gdve notice of his intention to move that it be r
mitted. f OPPe-
Tin:, Duke of RICHMOND intimated his intention 0
sing the motion whenever the Noble Lord should make,. 1.
nor
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said this was nrn'
rtg'
peting line—it was simply a line from Chichester to °
mouth.
tint le.l:f Dlauskte,,tiigf
tR,ti,NCT,IIObNe RICHMOND said spariedvethntat
tthheeserecsuornlt
po;ottihedesartrei
giving 'such instructions to Counsel as they would n? without
carry oor beiore any of the Judg.,s—viz., to conclude
hearing both parties.
signed nFoarrleaoro tho?.in, no;
the
last night vot,d for the recommittal ar. the Pi: aes
.1)1""t imouth Fbould, unless some reason
signed, at indeptin:lent line, vote again' tn__ not tbe
lvi.C.hKleOveWr
fosaridhit,,hnaitottihoen,Naonhdle Lord b. a dhassi
Lord BEA UM( INT conceived that :he lines. sle''
projects of the sA conipan).
Lord REDESDA LE exid4ined thebefore
the sever.' lines, as they have been repeatedly
st
public. e of the nwey.
Lord MONTEAGLE said that this was
Ohre
once.
Th •
whimsical cases that had ever come under their n
and the,'
tin, line, b • a
had last night dealt with this Bill as a compe Linh
th, vc"- lit
had recommitted the Bill for the Direct Poi tsinou rne, and
chansx of cireernstances had become a compenug„' could 11°
d. !le line,
was but justice that it should be recommitte
particular
a color"
ing
rid himself of the impression that !,his was Lord
and should therefdre be recommitted.
motion nricarde,
After a few remarks from the Marquis of
oation Wag nee
Itedesale, and the .r.arl of Haddington, 'the in, __ed.
lived, and the Bill was real a third time and rts positions
.00f
SMALL DEBTS BILL.
favour of
hankers, merchants, and traders of Liver
The LORD CHANCELLOR presented
Pact' bs. the Fein:lof
Bill, and also one to the same effect signied
1 the attention
mercantile men in England. He then ea oalpientition from
till: