The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-12 00:00:00

PRIVILEGE.

The LORD CHANCELLOR laid en the table the report
of the Committee which had been yesterday appointed to
search for nrecedents relating to the petition of Thomas Baker.
The Dube of RICHMOND moved that Thomas Baker be
called to the bar of their Lordship? house, for the purpose of
delivering in the declaration in the action to which his petition
referred.—Agreed to.
The plaintiff, Thomas Baker, then appeared at the bar, and
in answer to questions from the Lord Chancellor and
Lords Brougham and Campbell, stated that he bad been
summoced, in the month of April, 1844, to appear
and give evidence before a Committee of their Lordships'
House on the subject of the laws relating to gaming. Since that
period he had been served with a declaration in an action
for libel, which had been brought against him by a person
named Harlow, foe evidence given before that Committee. He
had been served with a copy of the declaration in the action,
which had been brought in the Court of Queen's Bench, which
declaration had been read to him by the clerk to Mr. Baines,
his attorney, and a portion of the statement contained in the
declaration consisted of a portion of the evidence given by him
before their Lordships. He had not made that statement
elsewhere.
The witness was then ordered to withdraw.

The LORI) CHANCELLOR moved that the plaintiff and
his attorney be ordered to attend at the bar of their Lordships'
House on Monday. By that time the report would have been
printed, and their Lordships would be in a condition to con-
sider the subject.
Lord BROUGHAM would not object to the course pro-
posed to be taken, but he begged to guard himself against
being considered as pledged to support ulterior proceedings
against the parties by not opposing this motion.
The LORD CHANCELLOR also reserved to himself the
entire right of determining what course it might be advisable
to pursue when they should have had the plaintiff and his at-
torney before them.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE was rejoiced to find
that the House was prepared to assent to this motion. He was
glad to find them now prepared to adopt a course so opposed
to that which they had pursued yesterday. They were now
acting in a manner entirely conformable with the protest which
he had made against their proceedings yesterday. They had
actually no more information before them, and yet they were
now about to do that which they had refused to do yesterday—
namely, to summon the plaintiff and his attorney before them.
After a few words from Lord Baotronam, and an explana-
tion from the Marquis of CLANRICAKDE,
Lord CAMPBELL said that he should be prepared, at the
proper time, when the parties should have appeared at the
bar, to submit a motion on the subject of the course to be
adopted towards them, which would be in perfect accordance
with the practice adopted in similar cases by both Houses of
Parliament and by the courts of law.
Lord STANLEY reminded the House that they had only
agreed to summon the parties to the bar, without pledging
themselves as to the adoption of any particular course when
they had them there.
Lord CAMPBELL said that they now did not know more
of the subject than they had known last evening, and yet they
were prepared to summon the parties to the bar, which they
had refused to do last evening.
Lord BROUGHAM said that they had appointed the Com-
mittee last evening, not only for the purpose of searching for
precedents, but to give the twenty-four hours for reflection on
the matter before they decided.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said they were. in a different
position now to that in which they had been placed last even-
ing. Last evening they had only heard the allegations of the
petition. To-night they had had the evidence of the petitioner
delivered on oath at the bar, stating that the action had been
brought against him for evidence given before their Lord-
ships.—The motion was then agreed to.
ALLEGED RAILWAY FRAUDS.

The Earl of CL ANCARTY presented a petition from the
Chairman and Directors of the Irish Great Western Railway
Company, denying the allegations of a petition presented last
evening, charging them with fraud in attaching certain signa-
tures to the share list without proper authority. The peti-
tioners stated that they had `no reason to believe that any such
fraud had been committed, and that they had exercised the
greatest care and vigilance for the purpose of ascertaining that
all the signatures attached to the share list were genuine.
Petitions were presented in favour of the Wakefield, Ponte-
fract, and Goole Railway, and the Lynn and East Dereham
Railway.

RAILWAY DEPARTMENT OF THE BOARD OF

TRADE.

The Earl of DAL HOUSIE,III laying a minute of the Railway
Department of the Board of Trade upon the table of the House,
said he thought it right to state totheir Lordships the altera-
tions which Government were prepared to make in the Board
of Trade, and the ground upon which they proposed to make
the change. After tracing the history of the Railway Depart-
ment of the Board of Trade, and reminding their Lordships that
the House of Commons had departed from their former system
of appointing local Committees, and referring only one pro-
ject or Bi,l to a single Committee, proceeded to remark that
the alteration had been found to operate most suecessfully, and
before the close of the present session it wasfully anticipated that
the greater part, if not all the mass of railway business which
had come before the other House would be disposed of, The
Noble Lord, after explaining the alterations which had b,en
rtia...ie, proceeded to state what. had been the result of the labour
of Committees with regard to the Railway Bills which had
come before them. On 247 railway schemes, comprising
a distance of 8,000 miles, 58 of those schemes were withdrawn,
and 19 were rejected for non-compliance with the standing
orders. One hundred and sixty of these Bills were read a se-
cond time. and nine of them were still under consideration ; so
that, in point of fact, there were 151 railway schemes which
had been reported and decided upon by the House of Commons.
Now, of these, there were six ca .es where a different decision
had been come to from that of the Railway De,Jartment of the
Board of Trade. The gauges case, the Portsmouth, the Run-
eorn, the Eastern Counties line, and two other cases. There
were eight or nine other cases in which there was also a dif-
.erent decision come to, but in them there were some compro-
mises or change of circumstances which accounted for that. Of
the whole 151 schemes only 15 were rejected, and 123 were ab-
solutely confirmed. Now, in future, the Government would not
interfere with any railway scheme, but would leave its merit to
be decided in the way which had been found to work so admi-
rably. The minute which he would lay upon the table would
embed,/ the merits of that arrangement which it was proposed
to introduce.

Lord BROUGHAM approved of the fair and candid state-
men's made by the Noble Lord with respect to the decent in-
terment of the Board of Trade. The Noble Lord then com-
mented on the immense power of delay which was exercised by
Mr. Hudson to protract the passing of railway bills for the pur-
pose of enabling him to take advantage of their standing orders.
If he only got. a bill protracted for so many days more, no re-
port would be made, and the same sum of money would be ex-
pended again next session. His advice to the Committee would
be to make a report at all events, for it was perfectly necessary
for their protection against Mr. Hudson, the Minister of Delay.
.—(Laughter.) He was working for delay with a twelve
counsel power, each of them being capable of expending as
much time as he was capable of expending money; agreeably to
themselves and disagreeably to everybody else. He, Mr. Hud-
son, would be just as well pleased to hear a speech from a coun-
sel opposed to him of six hours in length as a speech of the
same length from his own counsel. He was quite surprised at
the eulogiums passed on the Board of Trade by the Noble
Lord in announcing its end. Why should they put an end
to a body that was gifted with all the good qualities which he
(Lord Dalhousie) had attributed to them ? They must have
come to their end unfairly, either by murder or suicide.
After a few words from Lord FEVERSHANI and Lord
BROUGHA al, the matter dropped.
COSTS ON RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
•
Lord BROUGHAM then moved that his railway resolution
be adopted as a new standing order. The object of the resolu-
tion was to make the promoters of a new railway pay the costs
of an opposing landholder.
The Duke of RICHMOND suggested that a proviso should
be introduced providing that costs should not be recoverable in
cases where the opposition was proved to be of a frivolous
nature. _ . _

Lord BROUGHAM consented to make the alteration.
The Earl of WICKLOW objected to the resolution, because
there was no precedent on record that could justify their Lord-
ship; in adopting it.
Lord BROUGHAM argued that the resolution their Lord-
ships had come to relating to costs in their judicial proceedings
was a sufficient precedent to justify their Lordships in adopting
this resolution.
After a few words from Lord MONTEAGLE and the Duke
of RICHMOND,
The Earl of WICKLOW thought that there ought to be
some communication between the two Houses before that
resolution was carried. He thought there was one material
objection to it, which was that it prevented parties from pe-
titioning the House upon the subject of railways. He thought
that as the Noble Lord himself had changed his mind so often
upon the subject, it would be well to defer the consideration of
the matter.
Lord BROUGHAM said that it was impossible for a man to
make a frivolous opposition on a matter connected with his own
property. Should it be said that a man's resistance of an inva-
sion of that kind sh..uld be considered frivolous and vexatious?
If they did not pass the resolution, they Would'be continuing to
Lute a inan'vroperty, and subjecting him durinr, all next session
to the expenses consequent on his resistance. • He thought, in
conclusion, that proceeding by resolution was 'a much better
mode of proceeding than by Bill.
Lord WHA RNCLIFFE said that no alteration which the
Noble Lord could make in the resolution would make it accept-
able to him.
Lord BR )UGH AM said that if no change that he could
make would please the Noble Lord—if the Government set their
lace apinst the resolution in every shape, he would wash his
}lat.& of the matter.

~Lott WHARNCLIFFE said that he did not speak as a
member of the Government. He spoke as a member of
the Howe of Lord,. _ _ .

Lord PORTMAN was very glad of the course taken by th•
Noble and L 'arned Lord (Lord Wharncliffe. ) He was inclined
to think that all these things should be regulated by Act of
Parl►ament. He thought the most proper course to follow
would be to proceed by B►ll. One Noble Lord stated that the
C 0455 of these schemes should be taxed. Now if the costa on
other proceedings could not be taxed unless by Act of Parlia-
ment, he did not see how they could give costs on railway
legislative proceedings.
Lord BROUGHAM said that he never had occasion to hear
so many mistakes in all his life as the Noble Lord made who
hal just sat down. The resolution which he purposed to add
to the standing orders of the House was based upon the report
of the Committee to which the Noble Lord referred.
Lord POR MAN intimated his assent, but said that he did
not mean to state that there had been a discrepancy.
Lord BROUGHAM asked if there was any Noble Lord
present who did not believe that the Noble Lord wished to
convey the idea that there was a discrepancy between the reso-
lution and the report of the Committee ?
The Earl of DEVON thought it would be most discredit-
able to the House if they would not hear any parties who
might petition the House.
The LORD CHANCELLOR wished to know what the
position of the qaestion before the House was? He understood
that the Noble Lord ( Brougham) wished to withdraw his re-
solution, and bring it forward, in an amended form, on Mon-
day night, and, if that were so, he thought it was only waste
of time to continue the discussion.

Lord LAN •DOWNE then moved for leave for the Noble
Lord to withdraw his resolution, and to submit it again on
Monday.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE then withdrew his opposition.
Lord BROUGHAM was sorry that his Noble Friend had
done so, for he wished to have had the pleasure of a triumph
over him.

After a few words from the Earl of Devon, Lord Brougham,
and Lord Redesdale,
The resolutions were then postponed till Monday.
The Documentary Evidence Bill was read a third time and
passed.
The Earl of CLANCARTY gave notice that early next
session he should move for a Committee to inquire into the
working of the Irish poor-law.
Several Bills were then advaWced a stage, and their Lord.,
ships adjourned.