HC Deb 23 June 1840 vol 55 cc12-8
Lord R. Grosvenor

begged the indulgence of the House, whilst be shortly stated the object of the motion, with reference to this line of railway, of which he had given notice. It would be in the recollection of the House that, originally there were two plans of railway communication brought before Parliament to connect London and Dublin. The one was proposed to go through Shrewsbury, so as to avoid the Menai Straits; the other was proposed to go from Chester, through Bangor, and on to Holyhead. The superiority of the latter line of railway had been proved by competent and impartial witnesses. Early in the last year, a large public meeting had been-held in London; the result of which was, a request to the Government to appoint engineers to inquire into, and report upon the merits of the two competing lines. The Government thought the request reasonable, and a commission was issued, which, after able and strict inquiry, reported in favour of the Chester and Holyhead line. Unfortunately, that report was not laid on the table till the end of April, and if the House would not accede to his motion, the promotors of this bill would not be able to give the proper notices for next year, and would be compelled to wait till the year 1842. The first object of his motion was to suspend in this case the standing order which required notices to be given, and plans and sections to be deposited within a given time. When he reminded the house that many of the landowners along the line of road had petitioned in its favour, and that not one petition had been presented against it, he was sure that the House would not think it right to subject the promoters of this bill to any unnecessary delay. The second object of his motion was to suspend the standing order which required 10l. per cent, of the capital to be deposited in the Exchequer prior to the application to Parliament. He did not wish to say a single word as to the merits of this standing order, as he sought an exemption from it on the ground that this was a great national undertaking, which, if this particular standing order were to be rigidly persevered in, might be for a great length of time postponed, In the present state of the money market, there would be great difficulty in getting persons to deposit 200.000l. in the Exchequer, there to lie for a time useless; and moreover, it should be recollected that this line was far more likely to be taken up by those landowners connected with it than by speculators, as the probability was, that the profit arising from it would be remote. He would only further remind the House, that this railway, when completed, would effect a saving of 70,000l. a-year to the country, and on all these grounds he moved—" That the promoters of the proposed railway from Chester to Holyhead, be allowed to bring in a bill in the next Session of Parliament, for carrying the same into effect, on giving notices and depositing plans and sections, as required by the standing orders relating to other bills of the second class except railways and that the standing order requiring a portion of the capital to be deposited in the Exchequer prior to the application to Parliament be dispensed with."

The question having been put,

Mr. Green

resisted the application, on the ground that the Committee of Standing Orders hid over and over again decided that those orders were absolutely essential for the protection of the public. There was no reason why they should be departed from in this instance. Unless the portion of the capital required by the orders, that is, 10 per cent., were deposited in the Exchequer, prior to the application to Parliament, the door would be opened to the formation of such visionary or fraudulent schemes as the order was designed to prevent.

Mr. John Jarvis

said, that if this were a mere private speculation, or an ordinary railway, he might concur in the observation of the Gentleman who had last addressed the House. But this was a great national undertaking, by which the country would be relieved from great expense, and the Government and a large portion of the public would derive considerable advantage and convenience. The plan had been recommended by the Government Commissioners, who reported that it would save so much as seven hours in the communication between London and Dublin. The Commissioners, however, reported, at the same time, that it could not be undertaken with advantage by private capitalists, and ought, therefore, to be accomplished by the Government itself, as a matter of national importance. He asked, therefore, whether the House ought not to give every facility to private individuals who are willing to embark their capital in a speculation of such doubtful profit to themselves, and of so much advantage to the public, and especially to Ireland.

Mr. Estcourt

admitted that the railway in question was a national undertaking. But so was every other railway. The proposition in question was altogether irregular, and he thought it would be absurd enough to give an hon. Member leave to bring in a bill in the next Session of Parliament. Let the application be made in the next Session of Parliament. It would be for that Session of Parliament to inquire whether the proper notices had been given, and whether the proper deposits had been made, and whether, in fact, the standing orders had been complied with; and if that were not the case, then would be the time to endeavour to induce the House to accede to the proposition now made. At present the House had no jurisdiction to enter into any transaction on behalf of the ensuing Session of Parliament.

Mr. O'Connell

said, that he held in his hand a petition from the Chamber of Commerce of Dublin in favour of this bill, in which the petitioners called the particular attention to this as a national work. They further stated, that, by the union of the two countries, mischief had been done to Ireland, inasmuch as the excise and customs departments had been removed from Dublin to London, and it was therefore of the highest importance that not one moment's time should be lost in the communication between the two countries. For that purpose the petitioners prayed that this railroad might be proceeded with as soon as possible. He was glad to find from the arguments of the hon. Member for Lancaster (Mr. Greene), and the hon. Member for the University of Oxford (Mr. Estcourt), that there was no substantial objection to this motion. The one had shown that the motion could do no harm, because his objection to it did not apply. The other had stated that no mischief could possibly arise from agreeing to the motion, as they could not bind the next Session of Parliament. All the merits of the question were in favour of granting the motion, but a technical rule was against it. The interests of Ireland required that the motion should be granted, and yet a technical rule was to be triumphant. There was actually an enthusiasm in favour of technical rules. The House had a right to shut out bubble speculations, and to prevent the country being cut up and injured by railways which there was no intention of finishing. These things it was that formed the foundation of the technical rule, and it was upon these grounds that the rule was made. But every one of these grounds failed in the present instance, so that they had a mere abstract right, without name or foundation, in the present instance, and yet it was to prevail. Oh ! but for their consolation, they were told that they might apply in the next Session of Parliament. True, but they would not be able to give the proper notices unless leave was now given. Who, under these circumstances, would advance money, or engage in the necessary preparatory expenses? Some other grave and excellent and respectable gentleman would get up with his technical rule, and say that the 25th of March (the day for giving the notices) had not yet come; or if it passed, they would then be told that they must wait till the next Session. The real question was, whether the bill must be postponed till the Session of 1842 or not? He hoped the House would grant the indulgence sought for. It was confessed, it was indeed manifest, that no mischief could flow from it; and, under these circumstances, he did venture to hope, that although Ireland was so deeply interested as she was, a technical rule would not be allowed to weigh against the advantage of Ireland.

Mr. Shaw

said, that, generally speaking, technical rules were useful, but he thought this was a case in which an exception might fairly be allowed.

Mr. Labouchere

quite agreed with the hon. and learned Member for Dublin, that to establish a speedy communication between Dublin and London, was an object which, since the union, had become of an importance which he might fairly call pre-eminently and peculiarly a national one, and the House had shown at various times, that they entertained the same belief by the public money that had been advanced to facilitate that communication. He thought, however, that no good reason had been offered to the House why they should relax in favour of a private bill those standing orders which it had thought fit and proper to adopt for the protection of the public. The hon. and learned Member for Dublin said, he hoped they would not set up a mere technical rule against an object of great national utility. He would not do so if he did not believe that, in matters of this kind, not to adhere to a rule was not only an exceedingly inconvenient, but an exceedingly unjust course. It would be opening to parties who happened to have great Parliamentary influence in that House, an exemption which was not given to the public generally. The noble Lord had made two propositions in many respects different. They were to relax two standing orders, the first of which rendered it imperative upon parties to lodge certain notices in March, and it was said, that in consequence of the report of the commissioners not having been made until within a given time, if this indulgence were not granted, the bill must be deferred till 1842. There was a good deal of weight in that part of the argument. He had considered it with care, and he confessed that he came to the conclusion with some difficulty, but he must say, upon the whole, that the inclination of his opinion was, that the safest and best course was not to depart from the standing orders. He had heard Gentlemen, exceedingly interested in the communication between Scotland and England, support this motion, and he knew they would say what was justice to Ireland was justice to Scotland, and the arguments now adduced might be set up in favour of an exemption for the Edinburgh and London Railway, and he did not see how the House could, if they acceded to the present motion, refuse the other. Upon the whole, therefore, he thought it unadvisable to relax the standing orders. With regard to the other proposition, for remitting the payment of 10l. percent. upon the capital, he had not a moment's doubt or hesitation. It might be right that the standing orders should be repealed. He did not think so, but still that would be a fair matter for discussion, but not to give the public the same protection in that respect with regard to one railway which they had in all others, he thought the height of injustice. He thought this a great national object, and he hoped that it contained sufficient advantages to induce the public to support it, but he thought that the public in general had the same right to protection in this case which they had in all others, and for these rea- sons he thought it would be exceedingly wrong to depart from the rule which had been laid down by the House.

Mr. H. Hinde

did not see why the standing order should not be dispensed with in the present as in public works, such as the railway communication between this and Edinburgh. He thought, as a general principle, that every encouragement should be given to such works, for the sake of the employment they, gave to thousands of the labouring poor.

Mr. Warburton

would advise hon. Members to refuse this motion, unless they were prepared to relax the standing orders in every case. With respect to the general policy of this standing order, about which so much had been said, his belief was, that it would be a benefit to the real holders of railway stock, if subscription lists were prevented from coming into the market, unless the whole or the greater part of the shares was disposed of. If the House did not wish to see all the abuses which were formerly so fully exposed revived, they ought not to relax their standing order. If they did so in one instance, they must do so in all. If it were wished to have it totally repealed, let a motion for that purpose be made; but let not the order be relaxed in this one case, without any special reason assigned, which was only to be made a precedent for general relaxation.

Sir R. Peel

concurred with the hon. Gentleman in thinking that it would not be expedient to relax the standing order with respect to contributions of ten per cent. It was necessary that the standing order, if it were to be maintained, should be general in its operation; yet, he confessed, he should be very sorry to see it enforced with respect to the two proposed lines of railway to Dublin and Edinburgh. He thought, however, if they relaxed the standing order in respect of the line of communication between London and Dublin, they would be bound in justice to do the same as regarded the line between London and Edinburgh. These great works would enable the representatives of the other two parts of the United Kingdom to have immediate access to the metropolis. This, however, was a very special case. He could hardly conceive greater public objects of this kind than would be attained by the one railway. He had read the report of the commissioners as to the different lines to Dublin, and the perusal had perfectly confirmed him in his opinion as to the policy of Government in appointing commissioners foe the purpose of advising on the best line; far he had never read a more able or conclusive document. It had brought conviction to his mind, that the shortest line was that which they pointed out—namely, the Holyhead one, and that it should decidedly be preferred to others. Looking at the immense importance of the lines of which he spoke, he should be exceedingly sorry if the standing orders were enforced in those cases, at least so far as they opposed an obstacle to the commencement of the work next year. He must at the same time say, that he had the highest interest in coming to that conclusion. It was of the highest public importance that the Mouse should maintain its character for the regular con-duet of private business, but he thought that object would hardly be promoted if there were to be any combination of parties for the purpose of relaxing the rules established to secure that end. There was no pretence for asking public assistance towards the completion of the undertaking, as that would be effected by private speculation. An adherence to the rules laid down by the House would be advantageous both to individuals and the character of the House itself, and he must therefore, however reluctantly, come to the same conclusion as the hon. Gentleman opposite had done.

The Attorney-general

said, if this railway at all partook of the nature of a job, he should agree with the right hon. Baronet; but the right hon. Baronet had himself shown, that no suspicion could attach to the proceedings of the House, if they should consent to make this case an exception to the general rule.

The House divided: Ayes 110; Noes 120: Majority 10.

List of the AYES.
Archbold, R. Browne, R. D.
Archdall, M. Bryan, G.
Baines, E. Byng, rt. hon. G. S.
Barnard, E. G. Campbell, Sir J.
Bateson, Sir R. Cholmondeley, hon. H.
Beamish, F. B. Collier, J.
Bell, M. Corbally, M. E.
Bolling, W. Corry, hon. H.
Bridgeman, H. Craig, W. G.
Brocklehurst, J. Dashwood, G. H.
Brodie, W. B. Dennistoun, J.
Brotherton, J. Divett, E.
Dugdale, W. S. O'Connell, M. J.
Duncan, Viscount O'Connell, M.
Duncombe, T. O'Conor, Don
Dundas, C. W. D. O'Neill, hon. J. B. R.
Dundas, F. Paget, F.
Egerton, Sir P. Pattison J.
Ellice, E. Perceval, hon. G. J.
Evans, G. Phillpots, J.
Evans, W. Pigot, D. R.
Ferguson, Sir R. A. Ponsonby, hon. J.
Fitzpatrick, J. W. Redington, T. N.
Fitzroy, Lord C. Roche, W.
Gaskell, J. M. Rundle, J.
Grattan, J. Shaw, rt. hon. F.
Grattan, H. Sheil, rt. hon. R. L.
Grimsditch, T. Smith, G. R.
Hall, Sir B. Smyth, Sir G. H.
Hector, C. J. Somers, J. P.
Hinde, J. H. Somerville, Sir W. M.
Hodges, T. L. Stanley, hon. E. J.
Hodgson, R. Stanley, hon. W. O.
Hoskins, K. Stuart, Lord J;
Howard, Sir R. Stuart, W. V.
Hurst, R. H. Stock, Dr.
Hutton, R. Talfourd, Mr. Serjeant
Jackson, Mr. Serjeant Trench, Sir F.
Jervis, S. Turner, E.
Jones, J. Turner, W.
Langdale hon. C. Vigors, N. A.
Langton, W. G. Villiers, hon. C. P.
Lefroy, rt. hon. T. Vivian, J. H.
Lennox, Lord G. Wakley, T.
Lister, E. C. Wallace, R.
Lynch, A. H Westenra, hon. H. R.
Macnamara, Major White, A.
M'Taggart, J. White, H.
Marsland, H. Wilbraham, G.
Morris, D. Williams, W.
Muskett, G. A. Wilmot, Sir J. E.
Nagle, Sir R. Wood, Sir M.
Norreys, Sir D. J. Yates, J. A.
Northland, Lord
O'Brien, W. S. TELLERS.
O'Connell, D. Grosvenor, Lord R.
O'Connell, J. Jervis, J.
List of the NOES.
Abercromby, hon. G. R. Buller, E.
Aglionby, H. A. Burroughes, H. N.
Ainsworth, P. Canning, rt. hon. Sir S.
Bailey, J. Chalmers, P.
Bailey, J. jun. Chetwynd, Major
Baker, E. Childers, J. W.
Baldwin, C. B. Chute, W. L. W.
Baring, hon. W. B. Clements, Viscount
Barrington, Viscount Clerk, Sir G.
Barron, H. W. Compton, H, C.
Basset, J. Conolly, E.
Berkeley, hon. C. Courtenay, P.
Bethell, R. Creswell, C.
Blackburne, I. Davies, Colonel
Blackstone, W. S. Drummond, H. H.
Boldero, H. G. Duffield, T.
Botfield, B. Easthope, J.
Bramston, T. W. Egerton, W. T.
Brownrigg, S. Eliot, Lord
Bruges, W. H. L. Elliot, hon. J. E.
Ellis, W. Lushington, rt. hn. S.
Ewart, W. Lygon, hon. General
Feilden, W. Mackenzie, T.
Fellowes, E. Mackenzie, W. F.
Finch, F. Mahon, Viscount
Freemantle, Sir T. Maule, hon. F.
Freshfield, J. W. Maunsell, T. P.
Gillon, W. D. Miles, P. W. S.
Gladstone, W. E. Milnes, R. M.
Gore, O. J. R. Nicholl, J.
Goring, H. D. Ord, W.
Goulburn, rt. hon. H. Packe, C. W.
Graham, rt. hon. Sir J. Pakington, J. S.
Greg, R, H. Parker, J.
Grey, rt. hon. Sir G. Parker, M.
Halford, H. Peel rt. hon. Sir R.
Hawes, B. Plumptre, J. P.
Heathcote, Sir W. Ponsonby, C. F. A. C.
Heneage, G. W. Pringle, A.
Hill, Lord A. M. C. Pusey, P.
Hindley, C. Rae, rt. hon. Sir W.
Hobhouse, T. B. Richards, R.
Hodgson, F. Round, J.
Hope, hon. C. Rusbbrooke, Colonel
Hope, G. W. Russell, Lord J.
Horsman, E. Salwey, Colonel
Hughes, W. B. Scarlett, hon. J. Y.
Hume, J. Sinclair, Sir G.
Ingestre, Viscount Somerset, Lord G.
Ingham, R. Sotheron, T. E.
Irton, S. Stansfield, W. R. C.
Jenkins, Sir R. Strutt, E.
Kelly, F. Thesiger, F.
Kemble, H. Waddington, H. S.
Knatchbull, rt. hon. Sir. E. Walsh, Sir J.
Warburton, H.
Knight, H. G. Williams, T. P.
Labouchere, rt. hn. H. Winnington, Sir T, E.
Lascelles, hon. W. S. Winnington, H. J.
Lincoln, Earl of TELLERS.
Lowther, J. H. Estcourt, T.
Lushington, C. Greene, T.
Back to