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

IMPERIAL PARLIA)IENT

ITOUS!!:

)F

i n

, .
The LORD CH IN'CL:.L.'-)11. to ,k s seat 0.1 tho Woolsack at
Five o'clock.

LAW OF LIBEL ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
The Law of Libel Act Amendment bill was read a second
time.

PRIVILEGE

The LORD CHANCELLOR laid en the table the report
of the Committee which had been yes!erday appointed to
search for precedents relating to the petition of Thomas Baker.
The Duice of RI,_;11110ND moved that T orris Balp:r be
call d to the bar of their Lordships' House, fur the purpose of
oelivering. in the declaration in the ac ion to which his petition
referred.,—Agreed to.

The plaintiff, Thomas Baker, then appeared at ts.e bar, and
in an,...ver -to" questions from the Lord Chancellor and
Brow-fham and Campoell, statel that he had been
su•:itn-ored. in the in nth of A;wil. IS-11, to apoear
and gi,:e evi ience before a Cornmi'tee of their Lordships'
11.,use on the •übje •'- of tit,- 1 tws r,latt:,, to q,amttig. Since that

d ire ha.l 1,3,11 with 3 i.s an action
for libel, which hail been -Drought against him by a person
named Harlow, for evidence giveo before that Committee. He
hail been serve I with a copy of the deelarivion in the action,
which had been brought in the Court of Qasten's Bench, which
deciaratin had been read to him by the clerk to Mr. Baines,
his attorney, and a portion of the statement contained in the
iiiiclara ion consisted of a portion of the evidence given by him
before their Lordships. He had not made that statement
elseahere.
The witness was then ordered to withdraw.
The LORD Ctl ANCELLOR moved that the plaintiff and
his attorney he-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 ati-
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 BROUGHAM, and an explana-
tion from the Marquis of CLANRICARDE,
Lord CAMPBELL said that he should be prepared, at the
proper time, when the parties should have appeared at the
bar, to stimit a motion on the subject of the course to be
adopted towards them, which would he 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 an to the adoption of any particular course when
they hail 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 la-t 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 hail 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 CLANCARTY presented a petition from the
Chairman and Directors of the Irish Great Western Railway

Company, denying vthe allegations of a petition presented laa
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 reasun 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 DALHOUSIE, in 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 successfully, and
before the close of the present seseion it was fully 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 been
made, 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
bad been reported and decided upon by the House of Commons.
Now, of these, there were six cases where a diff..rent decision
had been come to from that of the Railway Department of the
Board of Trade. The gauges case, the Portsmouth, the Run-
corn, the Eastern Counties line, and two other cases. There
were eight or nine other cases in which there was also a dif-
ferent decision come to, bat 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
embedy the merits of that arrangement which it was proposed
to introduce.
Lord BROUGHAM approved of the hi:- 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 eke. He, Mr. Hud-
son, would he just as well pleased to hear a speech from a coun-
sel opposed to him of six hours in I,eigth 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
came to their end unfairly, either by murder or suicide.
After a few words from Lord FEVERSFIA3I and Lord
Iluouc Era ar, the matter dropped.
COSTS ON RAILWAY COMMITTEES.

Lord BROUGFIAM 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
eases where the opposition was proved to be of a frivolous
nature.

Lord BROUGHAM consented to mal.:e the alteration

The Earl of WIt:KLOW objected to the resolution, because
there was no precedent on record that could justify their Lord-
.slt_ips in adopting, it.
Lord WA OUGHAII argued that the resolution their Lord-
ships had come to relating to costs in their judieial proceedings
was a sufficient precedent to justify their Lordships in adopting
this resolution.
After a few words from Lord AIONTEAGLE and the Duke
of RICHMOND,

The Earl of WICKLOW thought that there ought to be
Erme 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 raffle ay s. He thought
that as the Noble Lord himself had changed his mind so often
upon the subji:cst, it would he 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 invq-
sion of that kind should be considered frivolous and vexatious?
If they did not pass the resolution, they would be continuing to
take a man'sproperty, and subjecting him during all next session
to the expenses consequent on his resistance. He thought, in
conclusion, that proceeding- by resolution was a much better
mole of proceeding than by Bill.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that no alteration which the
Noble Lord could rrys-le in the resolution 'would snake it accept-
able to hirn.

Lord BR "DUGH AM said that if no change that he could
mike would please the Noble Lord—if the Government set their
face against the resolution in every shape, he would wash his
ha :d; of the matter.

Lori WHARNCLIFFE said that he did not speak as a
member of the Government. He spoke as a member of
the House of Lords.
Lord PORTMAN was very glad of the. course taken by the
Noble and Learned Lord (Lord Wharnclifle. ) He was inclined
to think that all these things should be regulated by Act of
Parliament. He thought the most proper course to follow
would be to proceed by Bill. One Noble Lord stated that the
Costs of these schemes should be taxed. Now if the costs on
other proceedings could not be taxed unless by Act of Parlia..
scent, 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
tai 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.
Loris POI THAN intimated his assent, but said that he did
not mean to state that there hail been a discrepancy.
Lord BROUGHAM asked if there was any Noble Lord
prosent who did n t believe that the Noble Lord wished to
cotivey 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
!night petition the House.
The LORD CHANCELLOR wished to know what the
position of the question before the House was? lie understood
that the Noble Lord ( Brougham) wished to withdraw his re-
.olution, and bring it forward, in an amended form, on Mon-
day eight, 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
Allonday.
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
oassed.
The Earl of CLANCARTY gave notice that early next
:2seiwo he should move for a Committee to inquire into the
working of the Isish poor-law.
Several Bills were then advanced a stage, and their Lord-
ships adjourned.