The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-27 00:00:00

RAILWAY BUSINESS.

Mr. L A BOUCHENE said that the subject to which he
wished to call the attention of the House was the present state
of the railway business before the House. It was unnecessary
for him to go at any length into the state of that business, for it
was a matter of notoriety that the amount and the delay of
railway business was, without exception, unparalleled in any
foreign State. There had been presented to the House during
the course of the present session no fewer than 240 railway
Bills, 119 of which had received the approbation of the
Board. None of these Bills had as yet passed through the
House, and it showed what an immense mass of railway legisla-
tion they had now to struggle with. In the year 1828 and 1831
the House adopted a certain course under circumstances of a
far less aggravating description than this. The House resolved
to pass resolutions to enable Committees to receive the minutes
of evidence taken before former Committees, in order to save
the parties concerned a repetition of the expense and trouble
which they had already gone through. He would venture to
suggest to the Right Hon. Gentleman whether it would net be
better to do as was done in 1829. Many Bills in which the
parties concerned had expended a great deal of money, would
pass through Committees of the House, but at so late a period
that it would be utterly impossible for the other House of Par-
liament to take them into consideration. He would call upon
them to consider whether some means should not be devised to
facilitate the business, and thereby do benefit both to the public
and the parties concerned. It was of the greatest importance
to all parties interested that whatever was intended should be
announced without delay, that all might know what course
they would have to take, and not be left to mere conjecture.—
The question which he had to put to the Right Hon. Gentle-
man was whether he was prepared now to announce to the
House any intention her Majesty's Government might have
come to in consequence of the state of the railway business of
the House ? And if he was not so prepared, whether or not he
would he prepared at no distant period?
Sir G. CLERK said that the question was of great im-
portance, an-1 it had not escaped the attention of her Majesty's
Government ; but he could not say that it was intended to
propose any measure to the House at present. But no
inconvenience would be the consequence of delaying any pro-
position upon the subject for four or five weeks. The two in-
stances to which the lion. Gentleman had referred, took place
under very peculiar circumstances. They were both cases
which arose from the sudden dissolution of Parliament—in
1829, by the demise of the Sovereign ; and, in 1831, under
circumstances of a peculiar kind. The object of the question
was properly understood by her Majesty's Government, and it
would be duly attended to, but there was no precedent for the
course which was now suggested.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the Right Hon. Gentleman was
right in saying there was no precedent for the suggestion of
his Right Hon. Hon. Friend. But the state of business was
also without a precedent.—( Hear, hear.) He hoped that the
Right lion. Gentleman would not postpone the announce-
raent of his intentions for so long a term as six weeks.
Supposing the Bills should pass that House, in time
to pass the House of Lords, there would be an end
to the matter for this session. But if parties saw that by de-
laying the Bills which they opposed, they could destroy them
altogether, or make it necessary to go through all the expense
over again next year, they would stop at no expense or shifts
to procure the delay.—(Hear., hear.) He agreed with the
Right Hon. Baronet that the subject required great attention,
but he hoped that its importance would induce the Government
to give it that attention without delay.
Lord G. SOMERSET explained that the subject to which
the Noble Lord referred had been under the consideration of
• the Government.