The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-18 00:00:00

111AYIZOOTFI.

Petitions were presented against the grant to Alavnooth by
the Marquis of Breadalbane from Glasgow and several other
towns in Scotland, end also from a great number of the con-
gregations of the Free Church in that country. Petitions were
also presented against the grant by the Duke of Richmond
from Elgin, Matlock, Inverness, and several other places.
IMPROVEMENT OF LAND IN IRELAND.

The Duke of RICHMOND moved for a return of the nucn
ber of applications that had been made to the Court of Chan-
cery in Ireland for grants for the improvement of lands under
the 3d and 4th of Victoria. The return was granted.
BANKING SYSTEM OF SCOTLAND.

The Duke of RICHMOND. presented several petitions
against any alteration in the present system.
RAILWAYS.
Lord BROUGHAM rose, and was
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SrrA KEA took the Chiar at Four o'clock.
Sir JOHN HOI3HOUSE moved that the agents for the
Surrey and Sussex Roads ( Sunday toll) Bill be allowed to de-
posit a filled-up Bill, signed by them in the Private Bill-office;
that the Committee on such Bill be revived, and have leave to
sit and proceed on Monday next.—Agreed to.
allr. TUFNELL moved that the agents for the Manchester
and Salford Waterworks be allowed to sit on Monday next.—
Agreed to.
WEST YORKSHIRE RAILWAY.

Mr. M. MILNES, and other Hon. Members, presented pe-
titions against the West Yorkshire Railway.
The following Bills were severally read a second time and
ordered to be printed. Oxford Milcways, St. Matthew
( Bethnal-green) Rectory, Spoad (Clun), &c., Inclosure,
Castle Hill (Wexford) Docks, Lyme Regis Improvement,
Market, and Waterworks, Dublin Pipe Water, Claughton CUM
Grange (St. Andrew's) Church, Claughtoii cum Grange (St.
John the Baptist's) Church, Kendal Reservoirs.
AGRICULTURAL AND COMMERCIAL BANK OF
IRELAND.

On the motion that the Agricultural and Commercial
Bank of Ireland Bill be read a second time,
Mr. WATSON said that his attention had been drawn to
this Bill, and he thought that there were so many objections to
it, that he should move that it be read a second time that day
six months. The object of this Bill was to wind up the affairs
of the Agricultural and Commercial Bank of Ireland, and gave
power to the Court of Chancery to make orders, and to act in
the affairs of this company with all the efficiency necessary for
winding up the affairs of the bank. This he conceived ought
to be done by a public and not a private
.Act. Last session
an Act was passed for winding up the affairs of public com-
panies, but that Act empowered the Court of Chan-
cery to investigate into the manner in which the busi-
ness of the concern had been carried on ; and if
there had been any defect or neglect in the conduct of
a company which had stopped payment, a report was to be
made to the Board of Trade, who had power to adjudicate
upon it. In 1842 a similar Act to this had been introduced
with 33 clauses, and when the Bill went into Committee all the
clauses had been struck out but two. Another was
passed in the case of the Imperial Bank of Manchester,
in which the only power retained by the company was that
of suing and being sued, and of winding up their affairs
through a public officer. The Act of last session was a good
„Azg it Iglieratiet e 111 Alita iriggiret"rnto'4 'LT=
iienlune read a second time that day six months.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL recommended the post-
ponement of the second reading for a short time, in order to
give an opportunity of considering the subject.
Mr. WATSON withdrew his amendment, and the Bill was
ordered to be read a second time on that day week.
Mr. MARTIN presented petitions from the Mayor and Car.
poration of Bristol, against the Exeter Railway Bill; also peti-
tions from a Mr. John Parsons and another gentleman, praying
to be heard by counsel againt the Bill.
Mr. BROTHERTON presented a great number of peti-
tions against the West Riding Railway Bill.
RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
Lord G. SOMERSET, on introducing the consideration
of the Second Report of the Committee on Railways, moved
the first resolution, that counsel should open the proceedings
in railway measures, hut that they should be debarred the pri-
vilege of summing up. The other resolutions were of a gene-
ral character, and he need not trouble the House with their
details. He trusted the House would see no reason to object
to the measure, and that it would be allowed to pass unani-
mously.
Lord HOWICK expressed his surprise that the Noble Lord
had not brought the subject of proceedings before Railway
Committees more distinctly under the notice of the House before
those Committees should have commenced their labours. The
Noble Lord and the House might remember, that in thedebate
which had taken place on the resolutions moved by the Hon.
Member for Inverness, the Noble Lord then promised that
he should propose some alterations in the standing orders to
guide the Committee in their decisions. The House was aware
that one Committee under the present system decided on one
principle, and another
Committee on another principle. There
were great principles involved in the consideration of those cases,
and he had expected that when the Noble Lord undertook
that this subject should be brought under the consideration of
the House by her Majesty's Government lie would have done se
in a tangible form. These Committees were now about to
begin their labours, and yet the House was in dark-
ness as to the principles by which they were to be
guided.—( Hear, hear.) He was not prepared himself to
introduce any resolution on the subject, but he thought there
ought to be a general discussion as to what rules should be
adopted. He thought he ought to complain of the silence of
Government on this question.
Mr. WILSON PATTEN thought that if counsel were not
allowed to sum up the advantages of contending lines, the
Committees would be deprived of very great assistance.
Mr. SHAW opposed the resolution.
Mr. PAKINGTON thought it would be much better to
leave these questions to the decision of the Committees them
selves.

Sir GEORGE GREY did not think it would be prudent
to let a counsel state the case for his clients before their oppo-
nents had made out theirs, for that would be giving one party
an unfair advantage over the other.—( Hear. )
Lord G. SOMERSET said he conceived it would be better
to let Committees, in all cases, exercise their own discretion
as to the manner in which the proceedings should be carried
on—( Hear, hear)—for it had been found extremely difficult to
lay down rules for the guidance of Committees in this respect ;
therefore, it had been deemed a more prudent course to leave to
the Committees the power of making such arrangements as the
merits of each case should require. However, he now begged
to say that he would withdraw the resolution.
RECAL OF LORD ELLENBOROUGH.
Mr. HUME said that his motion for the production of cor-
respondence connected with the recal of Lord Ellenborough
stood for Thursday next. He now wished to give notice that
he did not intend to bring it forward until the Government was
freed from the annoyance on the Maynooth grant.—(A laugh.)
Lord HOWICK wished to know from the Noble Lord op-
posite (Lord G. Somerset) whether the reports of the Board of
Trade would be laid before the Committees which were to
meet on Monday?
Lord G. SOMERSET was understood to say that no order
had been made on the subect.
Lord HO WICK only hoped that no motion would be made
at a late hour of the night, when only a few Members might
be present.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said he understood that the reports
of the Board of Trade would be laid before the Committees
as a matter of course.
Mr. DUNCOMBE said that the standing order on this sub-
ject was a most objectionable one. It was smuggled into the
House last session, and he would take the sense of the House
with a view to rescind it on Monday.
Mr. AGLIONBY said that he thought the postponement
of the decision till Monday evening would put the Commit-
tees to great inconvenience, and the parties who had their
agents and witnesses in town to considerable expense. He
thought the House ought to meet to-morrow, and come to a
decision.

, Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET made an explanation
across the tab:e which was not distinctly heard in the gallery.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that the motion of the Noble
Lord would by no means interfere with the motion which he
intended to make on Monday. The reports which had been
submitted to the Committee ought to be accompanied with cer-
tain documents from the Board of Trade, containing the grounds
on which they founded their reports. It was the public
opinion that there were ex parte statements made to the Board
of Trade, and that there was gross partiality on the part of the
Railway Department of that Board. The object of his mo-
tion was that certain documents should accompany the reports
of the Railway Department of the Board of Trade, stating the
reasons why they recommended the dismissal or adoption of a
Bill. This he wished to propose now by way of amendment.
Lord HOWICK said that he should make no objection to
the motion of the Noble Lord, but he should take this oppor-
tunity of calling the attention of the House to the nature of the
reports. There was a distinct understanding that her
Majesty's Government had no objection to comply
with the motion of the Honourable Member for
Finsbury. He thought that the House had great reason to
complain of the great want of care exhibited on the part of the
organ of the Board of Trade. It was the duty of an officer of
that department to have ascertained earlier the necessity of
making such a motion ; it should have been brought forward
when it would have been practicable. He thought that the
House had a great right to complain. It was only another
example of the system of carelessness which from first to last
characterised the fiscal business of that department