The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-28 00:00:00

RAILWAYS.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE presented a petition from
Sir Percival Bank:, Bart., praying for the interference of
their Lordshi: s to prevent a projected railway from passing
near his property in Kent. While he was on the subject of
railways he would ask the Noble Lord when he intended to
bring forward the resolutions which he had on the minutes of
the House u-specting railways?
Lord BROUGHAM was anxious to bring them forward as
soon as possible. lie hoped to be able to do so on Monday
next.
After a few words from the Earls of Wicklow and Devon,
and Lords Reties('lle and Camoys, the Noble Lord ultimately
arranged to bring them forward on Thursday next.
TURNPIKE TOLLS.

The Duke of RICHMOND moved the third reading of
this Bill.
The Earl of ROSEBERRY moved as an amendment, that
the operation of the Bill be postponed till the 3d of April, 1547.
:After a short discussion, the amendment was withdrawn, and
the Bill was passed.
DRAINAGE OF ENTAILED ESTATES.

The Duke of RICHMOND laid upon their Lordships'

table the report of the Select Committee appointed to inquire
into the necessity for charging entailed estates for the pur-
pwe of drainage, and moved that it be printed. The Noble
Duke also introduced a Bill for carrying out the recommenda-
tion Of the Committee, which was read a first time, and or-
d,•red to be read a second time that day week.
ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS CONSOLIDATION

BILL.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY brought up the report of the
Select Committee to whom this Bill had been referred.

The Bishop of LONDON, as one of the Committee, begged
to be understood, that he neither approved of either the prin-
ciple or the details of the Bill. He had very considerable
doubts as to the expediency of the measure.
Lord COTTENHAM said the principle of the Bill had not
only been approved of by both Houses of Parliament, but by
Royal Commissions, which had been instituted on the subject ;
the Select Committee en the Bill and others were unanimous
in its favour. lie did not say that some persons would not be
injured by the Bill, but that was generally the case where im-
provements were adopted. The jurisdiction of the Ecclesiasti-
cal Courts with respect to marriages would remain the same,
no new principle was sought to he introduced. It should be
borne in mind that the law at the present moment gave many
lay officers the power of solemnizing marriages.
The Bishop of SALISBURY considered that if the remu-
neration of their officers were taken away, as it would be in a
great measure by the Bill, they would as a matter of course
have very inefficient officers. It was understood that
no measure affecting the Ecclesiastical Courts would
be introduced during the present session, and the Secre-
tary of State for the Home Department, on whom he
hal waited on the subject, had so informed him. He went on
his visitation on that understanding, and the first he heard of
this Bill was through a newspaper ; and since that period the
Government had pressed on the measure with great haste
during the present session. He was of opinion that the powers
which it gave should be in the hands of the respon,ihie advisers
of the Crown. lie agreed in the opinions which the Right
Rev. Prelate had expressed.

Lord BROUGHANI said the measure was not a Govern-
ment one. as it was brought in by his Noble and Learned
Friend (Lord Cottenham).
The Bishop of LON DO3l said, in explanation, that the
measure would take away a great part of their jurisdiction, and
affected the Church of England to so great an extent, that no
Government, or any person, would have ventured, a short
time back, to introduce a measure having similar objects in
view. There was an understanding with the last Government
that no measure of a similar character to the one before their
Lordships should be introduced without the consent of the
Bishops. This measure ought to have been a Government one.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he brought in a Bill of
a more modified character than the one before them, which
was ultimately abandoned when tlee present measure was
brought in, he found it so analogous to the Bill he had intro-
duced that he could not Lave consistently refused it his support.
The ,I3ishop of SALISBURY explained that he attended a
meeting of the prelates in Lambeth Palace on Ash Wednes-
day, 1542, respecting a Bill which had for its object the regu-
lation of these courts.

Lord BROUGHAM said that the Lord Chancellor did not
engage to support every clause in the Bill which had been in-
tro-duce(' by his Noble Friend. He merely supported the
pi ciple.
The Bishop of LONDON thought that a Bill of such im-
portance ought ,not to have been brought in unless by the
Government, and after a consultation with the bishops.
Laird CAMPBELL said, that the present Bill was exactly
similar to the one which the Right Rev. Prelate (the Bishop of
Loridon), as one of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, had re-
commended. He therefore thought that he had no ground
whatever for complaint.
The Bishop of LONDON said, that a person could not be
in that House for nineteen years without undergoing some
modification cf his opinions. Ile thought, if he had an oppor •
tunity of telling their Lordships a story, he would be able to
account for the inconsistencies wi'h which the bench of
bishops were charged in reference to that question. The
report was then received.
Thr Earl of DALHOUSIE then moved that the Commons'
amendments on "Scottish Railway Clauses Consolidation"
NA be taken into cowideration on Monday next.
Several BiLs were forwarded a stage, and their Lordships
adjourned at a quarter past seven o'clock.

nOUS'E OF CO 'IMONS, June 27.
The SPEAKER. took the Chair shortly before Four o'clock.
DARTMOUTH—NEW WRIT.
A new writ was ordered for the borough of Dartmouth, in
the room of Mr. Stimes, deceased.
WHITBY AND PICKERING RAILWAY.
The Lords' amendments to the Whitby and Pickering Rail-
way Bill were ag,reed to.
YORK AND NORTH MIDLAND RAILWAY.
The Lords' amendmentsto
Billthe Yorkwere and North Midland
( 13ridlington Branch) Railway
BELFAST IMPROVEMENT` RILL.
On the motion of Mr. EMERSON TENN. rT, the
Belfist Improvement Bill was read a third time'anE
GREAT WESTERN (IRELAND) RAILWAY.
Mr. CLIVE brought up the report on the Irish Great West-
ern (Dublin and Galway) Railway Bill, which was agreed to
The Rochdiale Vicarage (3lolesworth's Estate) Bill was.
read a second time, and ordered to be committed.
LIVERPOOL AND MANCHESTER RAILWAY,
The Liverpool and Manchester Railway Bill was read a
third time and pa=sed.•
NORTH UNION AND RIBBLE RAILWAY.
The North Union and Ribble Navigation Branch Railway
Biil was read a third time and passed.
The St. Helen's Improvement Bill seas read a third time and
passed.
Heaviside's Divorce Bill was read a first, and ordered to be
read a second time en Monday.
GREAT WESTERN -RAILWAY (IRELAND)
The Great Western Railway ( Ireland) (Dublin to Mullingar
and Athlone) Bill, was read a third time and passed.
RI NCORN AND PRESTON BROOK RAILWAY.
On the motion that the report be received on the Runcorn
an 1 Keaton Brook Railway and Docks Bill,
Mr. V. SMITH objected to the Bill, on the ground that it

was to enable an individual to make a railway, which he would
afterwards sell to the Grand Junction Company.
Mr. T. EGERTON believed that the cour,e that was in-
tended to he adopted in this case had been often adopted in the
case of railway companies by individuals.
After some observations from Mr. Ricardo, Mr. \Varburto s,
and Lord Sandon, the report was read, and the Bill was
orde-ed to be engrossed.
BIRMINGHAM AND GLOUCESTER RAILWAY.
The Birmingham and Gloucester Railway (Gloucester
Ex-
tension,Stoke Branch, and Midland Railway Junction) Bill
was read a third time and passed.
The Glossop Gas Bill was read a third time and passed.
THE NORTH OF ENGLAND RAILWAY.
The North of England (Clarence and Hartlepool Junction)
Railway Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Richmond (Surrey) Railway Bill was read a third time
and passed.
Captain BERKELEY then rose, pursuant to notice, to
call the attention of the House to the hardship and injustice of
permitting the promoters of railway schemes, proposing to cross
or interfere with any tidal rivers, arms of the sea, and creeks,
over which the Board of Admiralty have control, appearing
before Committees of this House on Private Bills, without
having first obtained the written sanction of that Board,
according to the provision of the Act S Victoria,c.
Some remedy ought to be found for this evil. His object in
calling the attention of the House to this matter was, that some
instructions should be given to Committees as to the construc-
tion of bridges over tidal rivers. Any bridge must annihilate
the navigation, and there eas now no resource but to apply to
the Board of Admiralty for appearance; and opposition before a
Railway Committee would, it was well known, entail immense
expense. He would leave the remedy to Hon. Gentlemen op-
posite, but some course should be taken which would put a
stop to those needless expenses. He then concluded by mov-
ing that the question be referred to the Committee on Standing
Orders.
Mr. HUME said this was a question of the greatest im-
portance, and there ought to be some decided rule on the sub-
ject.—( lear, hear.) What he wished was, that whenever the
Admiralty had decided against any bridge, parties opposing the
railway should not be compelled to do so before the Committee
at great expense. In this case a tunnel under the river was
intended, but of such a construction as would impede the im-
provement of that river. The decision of the Admiralty ought
to be recorded in that House, so that there might be no need
for further interference on the part of private individuals.
Sir G. GREY said the question was one of considerable
importance, and he wished to call the attention of the House
to the report of the Glasgow Junction Railway, in which a
similar course was pursued, and a similar object had been de-
signed. The Right Hon. Gentleman quoted the report, en-
forcing the necessity of the Admiralty sending in a special
decision, which would be recorded, and so obviate the necessity
for further interference.
Mr. FITZROY said he thought the course suggested would
interfere with the functions of the Standing Orders Com-
mittee, where he thought the onus of stopping such a project
should remain.
Mr. HUME said, respecting the bridge on the Glasgow
Railway, the Admiralty had interfered, and effectually, to pre-
vent the construction of the bridge.
Mr. BERKELEY said there was no blame at all due to the
Admiralty from disinclination to interfere, as their capacity was
so limited.
Mr. FITZROY said there had been no consent giver, to the
project for the tunnel under the Severn. When it was pro-
posed they asked for the plans and sections, which had not yet
been inspected.
Mr. WARBURTON hoped that as the Board of Admiralty
were like others—fallible—that when they reported against
such a bridge as that mentioned by the Gallant Officer, their
engineers should state the reasons for such opposition.
Captain PLUMRIDGE said a few words, after which
Sir G. CLERK said, the Railway Consolidation Act gave
the Admiralty the power of interfering, not only before the
project was commenced, but even when in course of operation;
they might pull down any works which would in any
way operate to the inconvenience or obstruction of
the navigation of the tidal rivers. No parties of common sense,
knowing that this power lay with the Admiralty, would pro-
ceed with such works as that under consideration unless they
obtained the consent of the Admiralty. Therefore, he put it
to the Gallant Officer whether, under such circumstances, his
motion was not useless?
Captain BERKELEY would withdraw his present proposi-
tion.; his object was to save the expense of private individuals
in opposing great railway companies, bat would, on Monday,
bring forward a motion for the protection of private individuals
opposing such schemes.
NEWRY AND ENNISKILLEN RAILWAY.
The Newry and Enniskillen Railway Bill was then read a
third time and passed.
The Hawkins' Estate Bill was read a second time.
Captain EGERTON presented a petition from the College
of Surgeons, against the Medical Relief Bill.
SMALL DEBTS BILL.
On the motion of Mr. F. KELLY this Bill was read a first
time. We did not hear the date for which the second reading
was appointed.

STATISTICS OF IRELAND.
Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL, seeing the Chancellor of
the Exchequer in his place, he would take the opportunity of
putting the questions which he had intended, according to
notice, to put to the Right Hon. Gentleman, on the order of
the day for going into the Committee of Supply—" Whether
the Government will take into consideration the propriety of
adding to the statement of the expenditure of the United
Kingdom, given in the finance accounts of each year, a
special statement of the local expenditure of Ireland ;
that is, of all disbursements out of the revenue of Ireland, of
whatever nature they may be, and a statement of the balanee re-
mitted to England ? Also, whether the Government will take
into consideration the propriety of establishing some means of
registry, for statistical purposes, of the nature, quantity, official
and real values of all articles of traffic passing between Great
Britain and Ireland; and thus supply a deficiency much com-
plained of by the Irish Railway Commissioners of 1833, by Mr.
Porter in his Progress of the Nation,' and by others em-
ployed officially or otherwise, in inquiries relative to the statis-
tics of the United Kingdom ?"
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that on
the first ciu .stion he had only to say, that in the financial re-
turns annually laid before the House the information was given
which the Hon. Gentleman wished to obtain, as the amount of
Irish finance was published in a separate form. It would be
very inconvenient to depart from that form. With respect to
the other question, he would admit that the object desired by
the Hon. Gentleman would be of great value in a statistical
point of view ; but he did not think that the statistical value
would compensate for the expense and inconvenience.
After a few words tram Mr. J. O'CONNELL in explana-
tion, the conversation dropped.
THE IRISH LAND COMMISSION.
Mr. S. O'BRIEN, according to notice, put a question to
the Right Hon. the Secretary of Sta.e for the Home Depart-
ment, as to whether it is the intention of the Government to
bring forward, with a view to their enactment during the pre-
sent session, any of the measures recommended by the Irish
Land Commissioners ; and if any, what measures will be so
brought under the consideration of Parliament ?
Sir J. GRAHAM said that a second Bill was in prepara-
tion. His Hon. and Learned Friend the Solicitor-General
had been in communication with the Earl of Devon upon the
subject of the Bill, which would at an early period be intro-
duced in the other House of Parliament.
NEW SOUTH WALES.

Mr. SCOTT said, that he wished to put a question to
the Under-Secretary for the Colonies, whether it was the
intention of her Majesty's Government to introduce any
measure with regard to the unsold lands in New South Wales ?
Mr. HOPE said, that such was the intention, and the
Secretary fur the Colonies was in communication with persons
in that country on the subject.
In answer to a question fron Mr. EWART,
Sir GEORGE CLERK said that the removal and not the
dismissal of one of the masters of the School of Design arose
from the insubordination of some of the pupils.
SIR VALENTINE BLAKE AND I'HE LAW OF
ARREST.

Sir VALENTINE BLAKE rose and said—Sir, seeing
her Majesty's Ministers in their places, and seeing her Ma-
jesty's Solicitor-General in his place, I will take the very great
liberty of putting a question, and thereby suggesting to the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman, and all the Hon. and Learned
Gentlemen who took part in the debate last night, and who
were present in this House—(Laughter)—that the proper
view of the question was not taken by this House or them.
The SPEAKER intimated that this was not putting a
question.

Sir V. BLAKE—The question I have to ask the Hon. and.
Learned Gentleman is this:—supposing an Honourable Gen-
tleman is sued to execution for a debt, and supposing he is
arrested, what is the proper course then to be taken ?
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—In answer to the question
put to me by the Hon. Gentleman, I think the proper course
would be to take a legal opinion.—( Cheers and laughter.)
CAPTAIN BOLDERO, MR. BONHAM, AND THE
SOUTH-EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY.
Mr. HAWES then rose, and referring to a petition which
he had presented from the South-Eastern Railway Company,
said he thought he would be best discharging his duty by
simply moving for the appointment of a Committee to inquire
into the allegations of the petition.
Captain BOLDERO—I think, Sir, that I can best
perform my duty by following the example of
the Honourable Gentleman, and merely second the
motion. At the same time, as great anxiety
is felt both by my friend Mr. Bonham and myself, I may ex-
press a hope that the Committee will be of the mast searching
character.—( Hear, hear. )
After a few further remarks fr.-An Mr. HAWES and Sir R.
PEEL the motion was agreed to.
THE LAND COMMISSION.
Mr. REDINGTON begged to protest against any measures
which might be introduced by the Government as being con-
sidered by Members of the House as coming from the Land Com-
mission, unless they were satisfied from the perusal of the
report that such measures were really based on it.
DECORATIONS OF THE HOUSES OF
PARLIAMENT.
On the order of the day for going into a Committee of Sup-
ply being read,

Mr. ROEBUCK rose to put a question to the Noble Lord
at the head of the Woods and Forests (Lord Lincoln) respect-
ing the Fine Arts Commission. It was well understood
that an exhibition of frescoes was about to take place
for the purposes of art, and for the purpose of deciding which de-
signs were proper fur the Houses of Parliament. Ile under-
stood that her Majesty had been down that day and inspected
them. He was also informed that Members of both Houses
would have the privilege of inspecting them. If there
was to he any distinction at all, it should be for public
purposes, and not to gratify any personal curiosity. The
question he had to ask was, whether it was required that Mem-
bers of the House should ask the Secretary for tickets of ad-
mission ? He had been there last year, and had been told that
unless he had a ticket of admission, signed by Mr. East-
lake, he could nut be admitted, and that, as a Member
of Parliament, he could not be admitted without a ticket.
What he wished to ask was, whether Members of Parliament
would be admitted to-morrow without tickets, or whether any
restriction would be placed upon the admission of Members of
Parliament ?

The Earl of LINCOLN had not been able to attend any of
the recent meetings of the Commissioners of the Fine Arts,
and therefore was not able to give any precise information on
the subject. He knew that it had been intended that no re-
striction should he placed upon the admission of Members of
either House of Parliament. In what had fallen from the
[lon. and Learned Gentleman, however, relative to the occur-
rences of last year, he was apprehensive the same difficulties
might arise. He would, however, take care to see the Secre-
tary of the Commission in the course of the evening, and the
Hon. and Learned Member might rest assured that there would
be no impediment thrown in the way of the admission of Mem-
bers of Parliament to the exhibiti in.
Mr. LIUME asked if the families of Members would also
be admitted ? ( Laughter. )
The Earl of LINCOLN said that the lion, and Learned
Gentleman asked for the admission of Members upon public
grounds, but he did not think that public grounds required the
admission of their families.
BROAD AND NARROW GAUGE.
Mr. BERNAL was anxious to take that opportunity of
doingjustice to the sentiments of an eminent engineer, on the
comparative merits of the broad and narrow gauge. He had
stated on a former occasion that Mr. Walker had stated that
hea uwas e
n
infavour
broad
gauge and against the narrow
gauge, inference had been drawn that Mr.
ad hetheofu
g heitt a n inWalker was in favour of substituting the broad gauge
t
for the
The narrow. evidence of Mr. Walker, however, would not
bear out such an inference. The question put to that Gentle.