The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-18 00:00:00

the stock of the Company had risen to a most unac-
countable height in a very short time, but what was
the cause of it he could not tell.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE stated that the scheme
had been laid before the House last year, and if any
objections were to be made, what he said
he was, that
tnot
they might have been made then ; but did
mean by that to preclude his Noble Friend from
taking the objection at any time he thought proper.
Lord CAMPBELL gave the Noble Earl credit for
the very excellent qualities he had brought to the con-
sideration of the important subjects laid before the
Board of -which he was the head ; but at the same
time he (Lord Campbell) believed that that Board
was altogether incompetent to decide upon those
questions. As well might twelve drunken porters
meet and give their opinions on the convenience of
one scheme, or the inutility of another of
the schemes brought forward, with respect to rail-
ways. This Committee of the Board of trade for the
consideration of railway questions had no authority
from Parliament, and no existence in common law ;
and it was, therefore, impossible that their decisions
could be respected in the country. They examined
no witnesses, and yet they decided upon questions of
such paramount importance. True, the Noble Earl
said that they examined written evidence. That he
(Lord Campbell) supposed meant the state-
ments of the parties themselves, who felt it their
interest to make out the most plausible case
to advance their individual interests. If such
were their mode of coming to a decision, how
could they asssist Parliament in their deliberations,
if their decisions were come to without hearing evi-
dence ? These decisions must be conclusive or not.
Ile thought that some other mode should be found
by which the Board should arrive at their decisions.
A division in the Board would not shake his faith in
their decisions. On the contrary, he thought this
would entitle them to greater weight. He would
suggest whether it would not be better to consider
how this Board could be improved, in order to ensure
it the confidence of the public.
Lord STRANGFORD said that one of his Noble
and Learned Friends stated that the decisions of the
Board would be influential, while the other Noble
and Learned Lord declared that it would have no in-
fluence of any kind. He (Lord Strangford) was quite
at a loss to reconcile these two things.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that anyone would
suppose, from what had fallen from Noble Lords
opposite, that some particular and private object was
to be gained to the Government by the establishment
of this Board. What were the facts ? The House of
Commons, finding that they were placed in a diffi-
culty by the multitude of these railways coming be-
fore them, appointed this Board to enter into an exa-
mination of the schemes, in order to relieve the House
of Commons from some of this difficulty. This was not
done in a hurry, but after the most mature delberation.
All the Board had to do was to assist the House of
Commons, by sifting the claims of the several parties
before they went before the Committees of Parlia-
ment. It was even suggested, after the Board had
got through three-fourths of their labour, that an al-
teration in the mode of their proceeding should take
place. He could not suppose that his Noble and
Learned Friend had made this suggestion on due
consideration. Let them see during this year the
effect of the working of the Board, and then, if im-
provements were found to be necessary, they could
be made.

Lord BROUGHAM (holding a large blue book
in his hand) rose and said, he w3uld ask whether he
was liable to the reflection which had been cast upon
him, that, although he objected to the constitution of
the Board now, he did not do so last year, when it
was appointed ? He held in his hand the report of
the Select Committee on Railways. At page 15 of
that report, it was stated that the Board should be
appointed, " firstly,:to afford additional aid in elucida-
tion of facts by the testimony of witnesses competent
by knowledge and habits and opportunity, atad offi-
cially responsible." It turned out, however, that
these witnesses were not witnesses but judges. The
report went on to state that the particular judgment
of the Committee was not.to prejudice the claims of pri-
vate persons, the examination of which was altogether
to be reserved for the Legislature. He could only
say that last year had he read this report, he never
would have expected that it would have led to a
course of proceeding such as that which had taken
place. The subject then dropped.
PENAL LAWS AFFECTING ROMAN