The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-23 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, April 22.
The Lort:) CHANCELLOR. took his seat on the Woohack
shortly after Five o'clock.
The Archb:shois of CANTERBURY presented petitions
from different parts of Kent against the grant to the College of
Maynoot h.
The Bishop of WINCHESTER also presented similar pe•
titions from Downshire and other places.
The Earl of ENNISKILLEN presented similar petitions.
Lord STANLEY presented several petitions from Bedford,
and other places, in favour of the grant to the College of May-
wroth. _ _ _

'The Duke of NORFOLK gave notice that on Friday he
would present a petition from the English Catholics in favour
of the inant to Maynooth.
THE SEES OF BANGOR AND ST. ASAPH.

The Earl of POWIS presented several petitions against the
grant to Maynooth ; and a petition from Chester and its neigh-
bourhood against the union of the sees of Bangor and St.
Asaph. The Noble Earl, in pursuance of a natice 'which
he had given on Friday last, stated that it was his in-
tention, cn Tuesday next, to move the second reading of
the Bill on the subject, which was now lying upon their
Lordships' table. He should reserve to himself the
power of making Buell alterations as the circumstances of
the case might require. He would, at the same time, take
the liberty of moving their Lordships to order the report of
the Committee, appointed last year to search for precedents of
the case of the Bangor and St. Asaph Bill, be printed.
The LORD CHANCELLOR remarked that any altera-
tions ought to be stated to the House before the motion for the
second reading was made.
The Earl of POWIS was not prepared at the present mo-
ment to state the precise nature of the alterations, or the
precise course he might hereafter be disposed to take. It was
his wish to give her Majesty power, by the advice
of the Privy Council, to appoint two Bishops, but,
nevertheless, he might only be disposed simply to
repeal the Act of union of the two sees. He was not, how-
ever, prepared to pledge himself to any particular course which
he intended to pursue, because he wished to reserve to him •
self the right of adopting what course he thought advisable.
Lord MONTEAGLE asked whether the Government had
any objection to lay on the table of the House, before the Bill
was read a second time, a return showing the exact state of
the parochial clergy in these two dioceses, and exhibiting the
state of the episcopal fund ?
Th. Bishop of LONDON observed that the first Ecclesias-
tical Commission had already made such a return, and that re-
turn was printed some time ago.
IRISH LAND COMMISSION.

Lo-d WHARNCLIFFE laid on the table of the House the
report of the Commission respecting the occupation of land in
Ireland.
RAILWAY CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION RILL.

The Earl of DALHOUSIE moved the third reading of this
Bill.

Lged BROUGHAM had so often addressed their
Lord hips on the subject of railway legislation that
he did not think it necessary fir him, on the
preteant occasion, to trouble their Lordships at any great
length. The mischief of the course they were now
pursuing was threefold. The first was the very great
and almost unavoidable haste with which several of •
the railway measures must be carried through the
various branches of the Legislature, inasmuch as it was physi-
cally Impossible for those branches of the Legislature to be-
stow proper attention either on the principle or the details
of eaeh measure while there were 240 railway Bills in
the same session before Parliament. Ile thought that ap-
plied, to a certain extent, to the two Bills which were
now before the House for third reading, and he thought it
might be judicious of the Government to select a number of
principles, as they had done in those Bills. At the same
time, it was his opinion that nothing could be worse contrived
than the Railway Board. He did not say that his
Noble Friend (Lord Dalhousie) was not well qualified to pre-
side over it, or that his Noble Friend had not sedulously devoted
himself to the discharge of his new duties. But then the ordi-
nary business of the Board of Trade was quite heavy enough
without this addition. And as it was admitted by all
astrur.ouaers that there were not more than 9.4 hours
in the day, if he consumed every day in the year
1e45, it was physically impossible that the additional business
could be done. Therefore, they admitted that they only heard
one part of each case, and on the information thus obtained
the House of Commoris, which heard both sides, was
to be governed. That was not the blind leading the blind, but
the blind leading the seeing—( A laugh)—the blind Rail way
Board leading the seeing House of Commons. But it was said
that the decisions of the Railway Beard did not decide the case.
But the fict was indisputable that if they decided against a
scheme, it was one hundred to one but that scheme was re-
jected ; if they decided in favour of a scheme, it was
one hundred to one but that it was adopted. He
was almost ignorant of the practices of that depart-
ment, but this was what an uninitiated understanding
would conclude from the facts as they appeared.
Property was very much implicated in this. Here were
great shareholders vesting 10,0001. in a railway concern,
And another class, who did not vest more than 10,000 pence,
who had also an interest. These were the speculators.
And this Railway Board was of great importance
in determining the value of immense property, for a report in
favour of the railway would raise the value ten per cent.,
and a report against would tumble it down 10 per cent.
They heard only one party which was in favour of the railway,
and never heard the adverse side. Now, suppose that he had
a great interest in the South-Western Railway, and that he
had almost evidence sufficient to destroy all chance of a report
in favour of the South-Eastern Railway, he would not be
allowed to urge one objection, and the only person heard was
the railway projectors of the South-Eastern Railway. Then
down would tumble his stock in the other railway ; whereas.
if he had been allowed to be heard, his adversary would in all
probability be defeated, and his railway would hays been post-
poned. He believed that this was not without precedent, and
a pre tedent of very great importance, for it came not only
from a person of consideration, but from a person of experience,
and one of very high rank. Indeed it had royal authority, for
the individual was no less a person than King James I. King
James one day went into a court of law, and took the seat of
the Chief Justice, and after hearing the argument on one side
of the subject, he professed that he was quite ready to give his
judgment; but it was delicately hinted to him that his decision
might be dispensed with, anti that it was cot customary to
give an opinion without hearing both sides. He, however,
professed that it was vet y easy to decide upon hearing one side,
either for or against, but that hearing both sides so overloaded
the subject with difficulty, that it was next to impossible to
co ee to any decision at all ; and this was just the way in
which the Raili.vay Board acted. They heard the evidence on
one side, in order that they might decide; and they failed to
take evidence, because they sat for the purpose of assisting the
Howse of Commons in their decisions. They gave their opi-
nion for the benefit of both Houses when they had not suffi-
cient data for forming an opinion at all. There was something
also in the way in which those cases were decided. There was
something in the majority of the Board, because if the majority
of these five gentlemen was only as three to two, the probabi-
lity was that the minority was right, and the majority was
. wrong; and he should be inclined no more to put faith in the
infallibility of these gentlemen than he did in that of a certain
foreign bishop. He spoke with all deference in the presence of
his Noble Friend (Lord Beaumont); but he could not altoge-
ther give entire faith to everthing which he heard, and he re-
colleeted instances, and one might occur in that House
that light, in which the majority was as three to two, and yet
this ffisajority were proved to be wrong, for after the matter had
been maturely considered, the majority came over to the opinion
of the minority. In that House they often found that the
majority was in the wrong. The three and the two in the
Board of Trade might decide on any given case. It was
quite clear that it was material to know whether the majority
ware right or wrong.. Suppose the Board should be two and
tiko, which happened in the case of thelSouth •Eastern Railway.
The Board were two and two, and the casting vote of that
ideal indi,ideal, the Chairman, turned the balance. In point
of voting, that was decisive, but in point of authority it was
no authority at all, either way. It was a rule of the Board
that every man, whether he agreed or disagreed with the
report, signed the report. Now that was not fair. It was
not fair to the subject of the report, because it tended to make
it appear that the party defeated had been defeated by the
unanimous voice of the Committee. It was not fair to the
Houses of Parliament, which the authority of this Board was
intended to aid, because it tended to show them what was
contrary to the feet, namely, that all the five members of
the Board were unanimously agreed upon recommending a
certain course ; but it was said that this: was the common
course of proceeding in the other departments. Could there
be any similarity in the proceedings of the Board of Trade and
every other department of the Government? From the one
an idea was given, while from the other an opinion was put
forth. Therefore it was that he held the constitution of this
Board to be eminently little calculated to attain the objects for
which it had been constituted. Having stated thus much, he
abstained from merely invidious remarks. But there was one
reason which had great weight in his mind, arising
from the secrecy of this tribunal—one consequence of
that had been that it had given rise to speculation
and gambling, and if not actual jobbing, at least to great sus-
picion of it. They would never be able to eradicate this from
men's minds as long as that tribunal was a secret one. If it
were an open one, no man could entrap his neighbour by false
stories of what he had picked up as to the probable resolutions
of the Board. No one could overreach his friend in the pur-
chase or sale of railway shares. He was aware that there was
one argument which might be adduced in favour of the Board,
namely, the tendency of open courts to delay the business be-
fore them, but that advantage was greatly overborne by the
disadvantage he had referred to. He dii not deny to the Board
the merit of industry. He had nothing to say against the mem-
bers composing that Board, but he did object to the construc-
tion of the Board itself. The infallibility of the Board
of Trade would on this occasion be greatly doubted,
because in the case of many Bills which the Board had reported
favourably on it would be found that Parliament would reject
them, and those which they had rejected would, he was persuaded,
be adopted by the House. Thus, instead of assisting the labours
of the Hense, the Board would be only found an obstruction
with respect to another matter—namely, that the evils of this
railway system would be to a certain degree attempted to he
removed by the Milli before the House, and that the frenzy
of speculation which had arisen in this country would be re-
pressed and kept within limits. He could not help thinking
hat the disposition of Parliament was to encourage speculation
and spread speculation. The Bill was pregnant with some good
consequences, but lie complained of it as giving too much
facility to this sort of legislation,
speed, a sort of wholesahasdpecsdorfiving it on with railway
Act of Parliament manu-
facture; one statute contained:ah no less than 150
provisions, and another, the
methd _ Clauses Act, about
as many more. They were
„tiAng, systematizing
and teducing to a code the principles were to govern all
railway Acts (unless some peculiar exceptions), p t
powers and facilities to all—promoters and objectors—the giving the same
ctieh to private
rs—the same
t
systematic methodical plan, taking away the
rig
property ; facilitating, expediting, quickening in the same sys-
tematic mode, and by a sort of corpus juers, sabvertine and
confounding all the rights of private property. Why should
such a systematic, methodical made be adopted for the
purpose
of facilitating the passing of railway Acts? What was the c
elusion to be drawn from this? Why it would seem that
rnainl--
way speculation was the very breath of the community ; that
they were essential to the welfare of the kingdom ; and that
Parliament wished by every means in its power to promote
the passing of railway Bills, and to encourage all sorts of
gambling and railway speculatious. If twenty or even thirty
railway Acts were only passed in a single session, it would not
be necessary to form such a code. Could they, after having
lent themselves to this speculation—after having encouraged
this mania—this frenzy of speculation as it has been termed
—could they complain—could they wonder if those specu-
lators increased—if this railway-share gambling covered the
whole length and breadth of the land—could they wonder at
it, or blame it? Could they otherwise than pity it, and
should they not reflect a little before they helped to promote
so pernfcieus a system, which instead of mitigating an evil
increased it—which, instead of applying a remedy, and en-
deavouring to spread over a space of three years that specula-
tion which would now be compressed into one,
promoted it, nurtured it, and maintained its vitality.
Should not they when the reaction came—when the revulsion
took place—when the money market was oppressed—when a
repetition of that convulsion in the money market took place,
which had happened in former times from causes infinitely less
potent than those now in operation—should they. not reproach
themselves that they had done nothing to mitigate or relax
this fever of speculation ? When that day should arrive, could
" they do otherwise than blame themselves as having been par.