Lord George Lennoxpresented petitions from Worthing, Shoreham, and other places in favour of the London and Brighton (Stevenson's) Railway.
§ Viscount Sandonwished upon this subject to put a question to the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade. Holding as he did himself petitions for several railroads in his hands, which he should have to present to the House to-morrow, he was anxious to extract from the right hon. Gentleman a definite answer as to the course which it was intended to pursue with regard to railroad bills in general. He wished to know from the right hon. Gentleman whether he was prepared on the part of the Government to suggest some course for the consideration of railway petitions and bills, by which the House would be enabled to have all such cases, especially those of rival lines, fully and completely 677 investigated, before it came to adjudicate and decide in favor of any particular bill. He (Lord Sandon), without entering on this occasion into the subject of railways generally, would content himself with putting that question to the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. Poulett Thomsonsaid, that it was not his intention to submit to the House any proposition on the part of the Government for preferring one line of railway to another, or even for pointing out any rule for the adoption of the House on the subject. It was his intention, however, in the course of the evening, to submit to the House the propriety of appointing a Select Committee to consider the best means that might be adopted by the House, or by the Committees sitting on railroad bills, for giving information to the House upon various points connected with the different railway bills that might be brought before the House. He had taken upon himself to propose this course to the House in consequence of the conversation that occurred some nights ago on the subject. It appeared to him that a strong impression then prevailed as to the necessity of adopting some mode of proceeding generally applicable to all those railway speculations which might be brought under its consideration. Many Gentlemen suggested different courses for adoption; but it seemed to him, and his own views had been confirmed by conversation with several Members since, that the principal point then in discussion would be best settled by a Committee upstairs in the first instance; their decision, of course, to be Subject to the subsequent consideration and adoption, if it should so think fit, by the House. His proposition then was, not that they should refer any particular railway or railways to any particular Committee, or that they should point out any particular course for Committees to follow with regard to railways, but it simply was to obtain the attendance in a Committee up stairs of those Gentlemen who took most interest in this important subject—he did not mean an interest in railroads, but in the good conduct of railway bills through that House, who might thus have the opportunity of deciding upon the various suggestions that might be laid before them, and who, he hoped, would be finally enabled to propose a plan to the House more worthy of its adoption, and which would tend more to secure a beneficial result than any resolu- 678 tion that might be moved, or any particular plan that might be brought forward by any individual Member of that House. As he knew that considerable misunderstanding had gone abroad on this subject, he was most anxious to state that his object in moving for this Committee was not to refer to it the plans of any particular line or lines of railways—his object in proposing it was, that the Gentlemen composing the Committee should merely lay before the House some recommendation by which their course of proceeding with regard to railways should be guided, subject, of course, to the approbation of the House. It was his opinion that the House of Commons itself should interfere in this matter. He bad therefore ventured, with that view, to put a notice on the notice-book of the House. He had done so as a Member of the Government, because he believed that the Government was to a certain degree responsible for the good conduct of those railway speculations through Parliament; and, also, because he thought that the proposition thus brought forward would, be more favourably received by the House. Having stated so touch in answer to the question of the noble Lord, he begged to add, that he thought, if it were intended by the House to adopt his proposition for the nomination of a Select Committee, it would be very desirable that the second reading of all railroad bills should be postponed far a short period. He thought that the Committee which he should propose would be able to report in, at the most, four or five days. As he had already said, the object of that Committee, as far as he contemplated it, would be merely to chalk out the rule that the House should adopt for the guidance of their future proceedings with respect to railways; and it was most important that no railway bill should be read a second time until that matter was settled. The delay required, as he had stated, would not be great. He would suggest, therefore, that the second reading of all such, bills fixed for that night should be postponed for only eight days; and in the meanwhile the report of the Select Committee might be prepared and laid before the House. He did not imagine that any inconvenience could arise from such a short postponement of the second reading of these bills. The Select Committee that was to be appointed might lay down certain rules applicable to such private bills before they were read a second 679 time, and it might require that additional information should be afforded to the House previous to their passing that stage. Now, if the bills that stood for that night should be read a second time, any such decision of the Committee would obviously be of no avail, as regarded them, as they would have been in the mean time referred to the List Committees.
§ Colonel Sibthorpwas gratified to hear the right hon. Gentleman admit that the Government was responsible for the good conduct of railway bills. Every attorney's clerk should not be allowed to bring in a railway bill, and then go about canvassing Members for its support.
Lord George Lennoxsaid, that notwithstanding what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman, he should persist in moving the second reading of the London and Brighton Railway Bill. He thought that the greatest injustice would be done to individuals by postponing the second reading of this Bill for eight days. He could not conceive what object could be gained by such a postponement. It should be recollected that the Bill, after it was read a second time, could not go to a Committee for ten days. By delaying the second reading for eight days an advantage was given to rival parties, and an opportunity afforded to them to oppose the Bill, It was exceedingly hard that parties should be thus thrown back after they had complied with all the standing orders and rules of the House regarding the introduction of such Bills. If they allowed this Bill to go to a Committee, he (Lord G. Lennox) was sure he should be able to show that Stevenson's line was the best that could be adopted. The noble Lord concluded by moving the second reading of the Bill.
§ Viscount Sandonquite concurred in the view taken of this matter by his right hon. Friend, and he would advise the House to pursue the course which his right hon. Friend had pointed out for its adoption, especially as where there were contending parties for a railway the Committee might point out the best plan to be par-sued. In the present case he understood that there were no fewer than seven different schemes. Now was there any means at present for the House to decide as to which of those schemes best deserved adoption? He was anxious that the House should be supplied with such means, and therefore, he should vote for 680 the appointment of the Select Committee. He was, for his own part, inclined in, favour of the proposition of the hon. Member for Lancaster—that railways having the same termini should be all referred to the same Committee, but that was a point for the Select Committee to decide. He begged leave to move as an Amendment, that the second reading of the Bill be postponed till that day se'nnight.
§ Mr. Gisbornewas of opinion that the proposition of his right hon. Friend would be one of the most violent proceedings that the House of Commons had ever adopted. His right hon. Friend had put a notice on the notice-book. He came down to move, but previous to doing so he proposed that the second reading of a number of Railway Bills which stood for that night should be postponed. Now, was it just towards the parties who had come down there prepared to have their bills read a second time to be thus put off for eight days? Such a delay tended to inflict a serious injury on them, by giving their opponents, where there were rival plans, a longer opportunity for petitioning against them as not having complied with the standing orders. These railway bills, if read a second time that night, would not go into Committee for ten days. His right hon. Friend's Select Committee could report in the space of four days. Why, then, should such a delay be interposed in the way of the progress of these bills? He certainly should divide the House on the Bill, the second reading of which he had to move that night. He would support the second reading of the noble Lord's Bill, and he hoped the noble Lord would support his also.
§ Sir James Grahamsaid, that upon public grounds he most entirely concurred in the sentiments that had been expressed by his right hon. Friend opposite, the President of the Board of Trade. When they took into consideration the number of those bills that had been already introduced, the number that was still likely to be introduced, and the amount of capital—not less than 45,000,000l. he understood—that was about to be embarked in such speculations, he was sure that it would be admitted on all hands that the subject was one of the highest importance, and welt worthy of the attention of the Government and of that House. It was to be remarked, that with regard to all other public works they had well framed stand- 681 ing orders; but as regarded railroads, the standing orders relating to the construction of canals had been rudely and and imperfectly made to fit railroads. Their standing orders on that point had not been carefully considered or properly settled, and it was therefore well worthy the consideration of the House whether the whole subject should not be referred to the adjudication of a select Committee, such as that proposed by his right hon. Friend. So far from looking upon the postponement of the second reading of the railway bills at present before the House as unadvisable, he (Sir J. Graham) should like to see the progress of all railway bills postponed for an entire session. He should like to appeal from the country drunk to the country sober. There seemed to exist at present a perfect mania for speculations of this description. He thought it extremely likely that one of the recommendations of the proposed select Committee would be, that some additional information should be afforded to the House before the second reading of any of those bills. It was therefore important that the present hills should not be read a second time until that Committee had made its report. The Government had only discharged its duty in bringing this matter before the House.
§ Lord Granville Somersetcould not concur with his right hon. Friend in thinking that all railways—no matter how great their commercial imporiance—no matter how beneficial they might be to the community at large—should be postponed for an entire Session. He must say, that he viewed with great suspicion the proposition for putting off the second reading of the railway bills which stood for that evening. That delay gave to rival opponents the opportunity of making still greater opposition. He thought that it would be a great hardship on parties where there was no rival line, and where they had complied with all the standing orders, to be put off in this way for another week.
§ Mr. Claysaid, that on ordinary occasions it was not judicious to oppose the second reading of a private Bill, as it was only by referring Bills of that description to a Committee that they could be properly investigated and adjudicated. In this particular case, however, he would oppose the second reading of the Bill, concurring as he did entirely in the view taken of the matter by the right hon. Gentleman 682 the President of the Board of Trade. The Government had done its duty in bringing the whole subject under their consideration, and in endeavouring to provide the House, which was now quite at sea without compass or chart, with some general and pervading principle to direct it in its future adjudication of schemes of this nature. It so happened, that in one of the parishes of the borough which he had the honour to represent, there were no less than sixteen of those schemes afloat that would seriously interfere, if carried into execution, with private property there. In the parish of St. Mary, Whitechapel, there were no less than 1,284 houses and tenements scheduled to be taken down. The House might judge of the alarm and excitement that prevailed there in consequence, and that single fact proved how necessary it was for the Legislature to interfere at once in the matter, and to see that the public interests should not be injuriously or capriciously affected by suck speculations.
§ Mr. Charles Barclaysaid, that he should not consider himself precluded by voting, as he intended to do, for the second reading of this Bill, from assenting to the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman for the appointment of a Select Committee. He was glad that the Government had taken this matter up. It was absolutely necessary, not only for the protection of the country at large against the effects of wild schemes and improvident speculations, but for the protection of the speculators themselves against their own folly, that the House and the Government should interfere. He would suggest to the right hon. Gentleman the propriety of the Committee laying down some such rule as this—that no Railroad Bill should be passed without 5 percent. of the estimated expense being previously vested in Exchequer Bills, which would be some security to the public that the project would be completed. Such a condition would inflict no hardship on good bonâ fide speculations, and it would save the country from those of an opposite character, if the House acted with proper caution with respect to the passing of those Railway Bills, many of them would be productive of incalculable advantage to the country.
§ Sir Robert Peelregretted much he had not been present at the commencement of this discussion. When this subject was before the House on a former night, it 683 appeared to be the prevalent impression that the present mode of conducting private bills respecting railways was not satisfactory. He was one of those who thought that railways were most important for the welfare and maintenance of the commercial eminence of this country, but at the same time it was impossible to deny that they interfered greatly with private interests, and that private interests often suffered to a great extent from their being carried into execution. Of course, the principle that private interests must yield to the interests and convenience of the public was in this, as in other analogous cases, indisputable; but private parties so affected had a right to demand from Parliament its special consideration of each case, and its conviction, before deciding in its favour, that the projected speculation was really calculated to promote the public interests. That was due as well to the interests of the public as to those of private individuals. On a former night the hon. Member for Middlesex bud remarked, that the House was too much occupied with those private bills, and he had suggested that some other tribunal should be appointed for deciding on them. He apprehended that great objections existed to the adoption of any such proposition as that. He could not, for instance, conceive any other tribunal that could be appealed to in the last resort, except that House, to decide as to the public utility and advantage of such an important undertaking as a railroad from London to Birmingham, and what amount of private property should be sacrificed in carrying it into execution. That was his objection to transferring business of this sort—business of the highest importance—from the House of Commons to any subordinate tribunal. On the other hand, he did not like to be called upon to vote in favour of the second reading of a bill which went, as bills of this description did, to call upon individuals to make a large sacrifice of their private property, without any knowledge whatever of the facts of the case, and without possessing the slightest evidence as to the practicability or utility of the project in question. He felt that strongly when, last Session, he was called on as a Member of that House to vote in favour of the Great Western Railway. It had been suggested that railway bills which had two common termini should be all referred, to one Committee, The difficulty 684 there would be to select from the rival Committees the one to which the whole of the bills should be referred. He, therefore, concurred with the right hon. Gentleman opposite in thinking that a Select Committee should be appointed to consider, without delay, what course it was most expedient to pursue in this matter. He should certainly vote for the appointment of such a Committee, as he agreed entirely in the main principle of the right hon. Gentleman's proposition. It appeared to him that the following, amongst other recommendations, might be usefully adopted by that Committee, and laid before the House as one of the rules for its future guidance—namely, that the List Committees, to which private bills of this nature were in the first instance referred, should, instead of making a mere barren report that the standing orders had been complied with, present a report, giving to the House information as to the nature of each particular speculation, the number of shares in each, the amount paid up, the probable grounds of success, the number of landowners through whose property the proposed railway was to pass, the number that had given their consent to the measure, and the data on which the calculations as to the final success of the project were founded. The House would then have something like satisfactory grounds on which to found its decision when called on to assent to the second reading of a bill of this description. It appeared to him that the Committee proposed by the right hon. Gentleman might report in a few days, and till that report was presented the progress of all railway bills before the House should be suspended. He was not hostile to any of those speculations; on the contrary, there was one in which he was himself interested, but it must abide the fate of the others, and await the Report of the Select Committee that was to be appointed.
§ Mr. Poulett Thomsonexplained, that his object was to obtain necessary information, and the Committee would consider the best mode in which the whole subject could be treated. He agreed with the right hon. Baronet that Parliament ought to be the court of last resort, and also in the view taken by the right hon. Baronet as to the points which the right hon. Baronet thought should be comprised in the reports to be made by List Committees on particular railroads. It might, how- 685 ever, be desirable that the House should be put in possession of some information previous to the second reading, and before it allowed the parties to embark on the wide sea of speculation, and, therefore, it was that he was desirous that the second reading of such Bills as stood for that night should be delayed for a week. He did not believe that any material inconvenience, or any great additional expense, would arise from this delay, whilst it was certain, that the information the Committee would be enabled to collect and to bring before the House would be of the greatest advantage in the consideration of all measures of this description. He was not unfriendly to the great works to which these bills related; but, at the same time, he felt bound, from the situation which he held in the Government, to take care that the capital of the country was not improvidently or unwisely applied. It was upon this ground that he had felt it his duty to suggest to the House the propriety of appointing a Committee, to consider of the most fit and proper mode of proceeding upon all bills of this description, and likewise of interposing some delay in their further proceedings upon them. For his own part, he thought it highly expedient that the House should overlook the inconvenience of a short delay, in order that the subject might be well inquired into, and all the suggestions of different Members of the Committee attended to and considered. He hoped, therefore, that the House would consent to postpone the particular Bill now under their consideration, and that he should afterwards receive their sanction for the appointment of a Committee.
§ Mr. Herbert Curteisshould feel it to be his duty to support, on principle, the proposition for postponement. It was of the highest importance that the House should not be hurried into untimely decisions upon bills of this description. One or two other lines of railway to Brighton had been projected independently of that contemplated in the present bill Why, then, should they blindly proceed to read this bill a second time, when afterwards they might very possibly discover that it would have been better to adopt one of the other plans.
§ Mr. Ewarthoped that the only object of his right hon. Friend (Mr. P. Thomson) in moving for the appointment of a Committee was, to give information to the 686 House and security to the public. In dealing with subjects of this description it should always be borne in mind, that whilst on the one hand it was the duty of Parliament to protect the country against dangerous speculations, so on the other hand it was also its duty to leave to the public the benefit of free competition. He was prepared to support such measures as would give information and security; but beyond that he would not go. He should strenuously oppose anything that appeared to him to approach an undue interference on the part of Parliament.
§ Mr. Harveyremarked that the truth of the proverb which said "the race is not always to the swift," appeared to be as applicable to the members of that House as to the world in general. He (Mr. Harvey), only a few nights ago, had made a proposition to the House of a similar description to that now suggested by the right hon. President of the Board of Trade; but it was then treated with indifference—as a matter of no consequence or importance whatsoever. He was glad, however, to find that the suggestion which he had originated had been taken up by the Government, and that the right hon. Gentleman was prepared to adopt a step which should put a check upon inconsiderate speculation, and enable the House to give a due consideration to all measures of this description. All that he regretted upon the present occasion was, that the right hon. Gentleman had not yet found time, although it was a matter which came strictly within the business of that department of the Government over which he presided, to give to the subject all the consideration it required, and was therefore compelled to ask for a week to consider of his plans. He thought that the right hon. Gentleman could not require so long a time, if he applied himself to the matter with reasonable industry. He trusted, therefore, that the right hon. Gentleman would be prepared to state his plans on Thursday next.
§ Mr. Patrick M. Stewartthought that if the House interfered at all in bills of this description, it ought to be before the second reading, in order to protect the public against the severe inconvenience that would attend the promulgation of more than one line of road. As regarded the present bill, he should vote for suspending the second reading until some general plan of proceeding were adopted.
§ Sir James Grahamhad two suggestions which he wished to offer to the House. First, if a postponement were to take place for eight days, he would suggest that in the interval, with respect to this particular bill, no petition should be received on the ground of a suspension of the standing orders; and secondly, if at the end of the eight days the second reading should be agreed to, then the House should go into Committee upon it at the end of three days. Whereas if the Bill were read a second time to-day, the House, agreeably to the standing orders, could not go into Committee upon it until after the lapse of ten days. Thus, if his suggestions were adopted, the parties would be left in precisely the same situation as if the bill were read a second time to-day.
§ Mr. P. Thomsonsaid that if the postponement were allowed, it should of course be understood that the committal of the bill should follow the second reading at the end of three days. If, upon a division, the House should determine that the second reading of this bill should be deferred for eight days, he hoped that all the other bills relating to railways, which stood for a second reading to-night, would be considered as being included in the decision.
Lord George Lennoxrepeated his determination to press the second reading of the bill on the present occasion. Great inconvenience and much injury would result from the proposed delay, unless, indeed, he were assured, that in the interval which it was proposed should elapse before the second reading, no proceeding should be allowed on the part of those who were opposed to the bill. A public meeting had taken place at the Town-hall, at Brighton, at which Sir J. Rennie's plan was declared impracticable, and consequently abandoned. Subsequently Mr. Stephenson's plan, the plan embodied in this bill, was taken up; and now that it was brought before Parliament, Sir J. Rennie suddenly started up with his rejected plan again; and the consequence of the postponement of the second reading of the present bill would be to enable Sir J. Rennie to introduce his plan to the detriment of Mr. Stephenson. If it were understood that during the postponement, Sir J. Rennie should not be allowed to take any step, he should not object to the amendment; but unless such an understanding were distinctly entered into, he must now press the second reading.
§ Captain Alsagerfelt entitled to say a few words, because he had charge of the second bill for a railway to Brighton, He thought that this second bill had a fair claim to the favourable consideration of the House, because in fact it was only a continuation to Brighton of a railway for which he last year obtained a bill, and which was to run from London to Croydon. In the course of a few days Re should have petitions in favour of the second bill from Brighton, Lewes, and Reigate. In the meantime he hoped the House would not consent to the second reading of the bill proposed by the noble Lord.
§ Sir John R. Reidthought the better plan would be to postpone the consideration of the question for a few days. He had a petition to present from very respectable persons, both from Epsom and Ewell, in favour of the line of road by way of Riegate, which was considered by them, and in which he concurred, the best line of road.
§ The House divided on the question that the Bill be read a second time. Ayes 75; Noes 271—Majority 196.
| List of the AYES.* | |
| Attwood, Thomas | Freshfield, James W. |
| Bagshaw, John | Gisborne, T. |
| Baillie, Col. H. | Gore, O. |
| Barron, Henry W. | Goring, Harry Dent |
| Barry, G. S. | Grey, Hon. Charles |
| Berkeley, Hon. F. | Guest, J. |
| Berkeley, Hon. C. C. | Hall, B. |
| Biddulph, Robert | Harland, W. C. |
| Bish, Thomas | Hawkes, T. |
| Blake, Martin Jos. | Hay, Sir A. Leith. |
| Bonham, Francis R. | Henniker, Lord |
| Bridgman, Hewitt | Hope, Henry T. |
| Buller, E. | Houldsworth, T. |
| Burrell, Sir C. M., Bt. | Hoy, James Barlow |
| Campbell, W. F. | Hurst, R. H. |
| Chapman, M. L. | Jervis, John |
| Chichester, J. P. B. | Leader, J. T. |
| Cole, Hon. A. H. | Lynch, A. H. S. |
| Cripps, Joseph | Macleod, R. |
| Dillwyn, L. W. | M'Taggart, J. |
| Duncombe, T. S. | Moreton, Hon. A. H. |
| Eaton, Richard J. | Mosley, Sir O., Bart. |
| Euston, Lord | Nicholl, J. |
| Ferguson, Sir Robert | O'Connell, M. J. |
| Finn, Francis | Parry, Colonel |
| Fitzgibbon, Hon. R. | Potter, R. |
§ *This is the first division in which the names of the Members dividing were taken down, according to Mr. Ward's plan (see ante p. 562.), and regularly entered in the votes of the House. The lists henceforth, except one or two, when the House was in Committee, which case was supposed not to be provided for by Mr. Ward's Resolution, may be relied, on.
| Russell, C. | Stuart, Lord James |
| Ruthven, Edward | Surrey, Lord |
| Sanford, E. A. | Thornley, T. |
| Scholefield, J. | Tooke, William |
| Scourfield, W. H. | Twiss, Horace |
| Scrope, G. P. | Villiers, Frederick |
| Sheldon, E. | Whalley, Sir S. |
| Sinclair, Sir G. | Winnington, Capt. H. |
| Smith, J. A. | Wood, Matthew |
| Somerset, Lord E. | Wrottesley, Sir J. Bt. |
| Somerset, Lord G. | TELLERS. |
| Strickland, Sir Geo. | Lennox, Lord A. |
| Stuart, Lord D. | Lennox, Lord G. |
| List of the NOES. | |
| Adam, Admiral | Clay, W. |
| Aglionby, H. A. | Clerk, Sir G., Bart. |
| Agnew, Sir A., Bart. | Clive, Edward Bolton |
| Ainsworth, P. | Clive, Visc. |
| Alsager, Richard | Clive, Hon. R. H. |
| Angerstein, John | Colborne, N. W. R. |
| Anson, Sir George | Cole, Lord |
| Ashley, Lord | Collier, John |
| Astley, Sir J. | Compton, H. C |
| Bainbridge, E. T. | Conolly, E. M. |
| Baines, E. | Cooper, A. |
| Baldwin, Dr. | Corry, Hon. H. T. L. |
| Barclay, David | Cowper, Hon. W. F. |
| Barclay, Charles | Crawford, W. S. |
| Baring, Francis T. | Crawford, W. |
| Baring, T. | Curteis, Herbert |
| Baring, H. Bingham | Curteis, Edward B. |
| Barnard, E. G. | Darlington, Earl of |
| Beauclerk, Major | Davenport, John |
| Beckett, Sir J. | Divett, E. |
| Bentinck, Lord G. | Duffield, Thomas |
| Bethell, Richard | Dundas, J. C. |
| Bewes, T. | Dundas, Hon. T. |
| Blackburne, John | Dundas, Hon. J. D. |
| Bodkin, J. | Egerton, Wm. Tatton |
| Borthwick, Peter | Egerton, Lord Fran. |
| Bowes, John | Ellice, E. |
| Bowring, Dr. | Elphinstone, H. |
| Brady, D. C. | Entwistle, John |
| Bramston, T. W. | Estcourt, Thos. G. B. |
| Brodie, William B. | Ewart, W. |
| Brotherton, J. | Fector, John Minet |
| Bruce, C. L. C. | Ferguson, Sir R. |
| Brudenell, Lord | Ferguson, Robert |
| Buckingham, J. S. | Ferguson, G. |
| Buller, Charles | Fergusson, R. C. |
| Buller, Sir J. | Fielden, J. |
| Burton, Henry | Finch, George |
| Byng, G. S. | Fitzsimon, Chris. |
| Calcraft, J. H. | Fitzsimon, Nicholas |
| Callaghan, Daniel | Fleming, John |
| Campbell, Sir H. | Forbes, Lord |
| Canning, Sir S. | Forbes, Wm. |
| Cartwright, W. R. | Forster, Charles S. |
| Castlereagh, Visc. | Freemantle, Sir T. W. |
| Cavendish, Hon. C. C. | Gaskell, Daniel |
| Cavendish, Hon. G. H. | Geary, Sir W. R. P. |
| Cayley, Edward S. | Gladstone, Thomas |
| Chalmers, Capt. P. | Glynne, Sir S. R. |
| Chaplin, Thos. | Gordon, Robert |
| Chapman, M. L. | Goulburn, Rt. Hon. H. |
| Churchill, Ld. C. S. | Graham, Sir J. R. G. |
| Greene, Thomas | Morpeth, Viscount |
| Greisley, Sir R. | Mostyn, Hon. E. L. |
| Grey, Sir G. | Murray, John Arch. |
| Grote, G. | Musgrave, Sir R. Bt. |
| Halford, H. | Nagle, Sir R. |
| Hallyburton, Hn. D. G. | Norreys, Lord |
| Halse, James | O'Connell, D. |
| Harmer, Sir J., Bart. | O'Connell, John |
| Harcourt, G. | O'Connell, Morgan |
| Hardy, John | O'Connell, Maurice |
| Harvey, D. W. | O'Connor, Don |
| Hawkins, J. H. | O'Loughlen, M. |
| Hayes, Sir E. S. Bt. | Ord, W. H. |
| Heathcoat, John | Paget, Frederick |
| Hector, C. J. | Palmer, Robert |
| Herbert, Hon. Sidney | Parker, M. E. |
| Hindley, Charles | Parker, John |
| Hobhouse, Sir J. C. | Parnell, Sir H. |
| Hodges, T. L. | Parrott, J. |
| Hogg, James Weir | Patten, John Wilson |
| Holland, Edward | Pattison, James |
| Hope, Hon. James | Pease, J. |
| Hoskins, K. | Pechell, Capt. |
| Howard, P. H. | Peel, Sir R. Bart. |
| Howard, Hon. E. G. | Pelham, Hon. A. |
| Howick, Viscount | Pemberton, Thomas |
| Hughes, Hughes | Pendarves, E. W. |
| Hutt, W. | Perceval, Col. |
| Horsman, T. | Philips, Mark |
| Jackson, J. D. | Pigott, Robert |
| Jephson, C. D. O. | Pinney, William |
| Ingham, R. | Plumptre, John P. |
| Inglis, Sir R. H., Bt. | Pollington, Visc. |
| Johnstone, J. J. H. | Pollock, Sir Fred. |
| Jones, W. | Poulter, J. S. |
| Irton, Samuel | Powell, Colonel |
| Kearsley, J. H. | Power, R. |
| Kemp, T. R. | Poyntz, Wm. Stephen. |
| Knatchbull, Sir E. | Price, Richard |
| Knight, H. G. | Pringle, A. |
| Knightley, Sir C. | Pryme, George |
| Labouchere, Henry | Pusey, Philip |
| Lambton, Hedworth | Reid, Sir J. Rae |
| Langton, Wm. Gore | Rice, Right Hon. T. S. |
| Lawson, Andrew | Rickford, W. |
| Lee, John Lee | Ridley, Sir M. W. |
| Lees, J. F. | Robarts, Abraham W |
| Lefroy, Anthony | Robinson, G. |
| Lennard, T. B. | Roche, D. |
| Lewis, David | Roebuck, John A. |
| Lister, E. C. | Rolfe, Sir R. M. |
| Loch, James | Ross, Charles |
| Long, Walter | Russell, Lord John |
| Lowther, J. | Ryle, John |
| Lushington, S. | Sanderson, R. |
| Lushington, Charles | Sandon, Lord |
| Lygon, Hon. Col. H. B. | Scarlett, Hon. R. |
| Mackenzie, J. A. S. | Scott, Sir E. D. |
| Macleod, R. | Scott, James W. |
| Mahon, Lord | Seale, Colonel |
| Mangles, J. | Seymour, Lord |
| Marsland, H. | Sheppard, Thomas |
| Martin, J. | Sibthorp, Col. |
| Maule, C. Fox | Smith, Robert V. |
| Maxwell, John | Smith, A. |
| Methuen, P. | Smyth, Sir G. H., Bt. |
| Mordaunt, Sir J., Bt. | Stanley, Edward |
| Stanley, Lord | Walker, R. |
| Stanley, E. J. | Wall, Charles Baring |
| Steuart, R. | Wallace, Robert |
| Stewart, Patrick | Walpole, Lord |
| Stormont, Lord | Warburton, H. |
| Strutt, Edward | Wason, R. |
| Stuart, W. V. | Welby, G. E. |
| Tancred, H. W. | White, Samuel |
| Tennent, J. E. | Wigney, Isaac N. |
| Thomson, C. P | Wilbraham, B. |
| Thompson, Pau B. | Wilks, John |
| Thompson, Col. P. | Williams, W. |
| Trelawney, Sir W. | Williamson, Sir H. |
| Trevor, Hon. G. R. | Wilson, M. |
| Troubridge, Sir E. T. | Wodehouse, E. |
| Tulk, Charles A. | Wood, Charles |
| Tynte, C. J. Kemeys | Wortley, Hon. J. S. |
| Vere, Sir C. | Wrightson, W. |
| Verner, Colonel | Young, G. F. |
| Vesey, Hon. Thomas | Young, J. |
| Vivian, J. H. | TELLERS. |
| Wakley, T. | Hume, J. |
| Walker, C. A. | Ward, Henry George |
§ Second reading postponed for eight days.
§ A Committee to consider the subject was appointed.