Lords Sitting of 23 July 1846

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a. Ordnance Survey.
Reported. Coalwhippers (Port of London).
3a. and passed. Saint Asaph and Bangor and Manchester Dioceses.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. From Kidderminster, South Molton, and Dorchester, in favour of the Small Debts Bill.—From Denis O'Flyn, of Cork, against the Collection of Ministers' Money.—From Benjamin Lewis, of Cumber land Place, New Road, for Alteration of the Small Debts Bill.

RAILWAYS.
The DUKE of WELLINGTONbegged to call their Lordships' attention to a petition which he had to present from a person named Hartnell, residing near Yeovil, in the county of Somerset, complaining of the injustice which had been done to him under an Act of Parliament passed by their Lordships in the last Session. The petitioner stated that he had a house and grounds which he used as a nursery garden, and which were included in the land proposed to be taken by a railway company, under the Act alluded to. That the company had entered on his grounds, but that the Act had not been since carried into effect; that no arbitrators had been named to award him compensation for his property, and that, in point of fact, no compensation had been given or offered to him; that his property had been completely useless to him since this Railway Act had been passed into a law; that he had since January last received two notices from the railway company of their intention to take possession of his property, but that nothing had been
1376
done in compensating him for the loss which he had sustained. The noble Duke proceeded to observe, that, from the great advantages conferred by Parliament on these railway companies, and considering the powers which were given to them, in order that they might keep to themselves those advantages, he should say they ought, at least, to conduct themselves with fairness towards those unfortunate proprietors who were the victims of their speculations, and of the measures passed to enable them to obtain possession of property. He would not conclude what he had to say on this subject without naming the company that had been guilty of what he should call this outrage. It was the Great Western Railway Company which was making this railroad by Yeovil.
The EARL of CLARENDONwished to say a word on this subject, as he had been Chairman of the Committee of their Lordships' House by which the Bill alluded to in the petition had been passed. The petitioner complained before the Committee that he had not been fairly used; and he (the Earl of Clarendon) inconsequence succeeded in suspending the decision of the Committee until an arrangement was come to by the company with this person. The engineer, on the part of the company, entered into a specific promise in consequence before the Committee, that the required arrangement would be carried into effect. There was not the least doubt but that, firstly, the petitioner had been extremely ill used, and, secondly, that the company had no right whatever to enter on this holding without awarding him compensation. He (the Earl of Clarendon) believed that the reason the company had so acted was that the party happened to be a poor man, and did not know how to resist them. He thought the Land Clauses Consolidation Act contained a clause providing a remedy for cases like the present, and he hoped this poor man would be so advised as to procure justice under it.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he was very glad his noble Friend had brought forward this matter. He (Lord Brougham) had occasion during the last Session to state this poor man's case before their Lordships, when presenting a petition against the same railway speculators, from a noble lady in that neighbourhood, who asked him also to mention the case of her poor neighbour. This was not a solitary case of the kind, as he knew by the many private letters which reached him. Lord Harbo-

1377
rough resisted these parties, and defeated them; but the petitioner was a poor man not able to compete with them. Their course was this. They kept the powers which they acquired by their Bill hanging over the poor man's head, and did not grant compensation until such time as they required to use the property, though in the meantime it was utterly valueless to the holder. The petitioner could not carry on his improvements as a nursery gardener, and yet this company declined paying him. He was glad to hear his noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Clarendon) admit that the trespass by the company was a most gross one; but there still could be very little doubt, as most jurors were railway proprietors, that if this poor man brought an action for trespass against the company, he would not get damages sufficient to pay him his costs out of pocket.
LORD VIVIANthought that the time fixed in all Railway Acts for the purchase of land should be materially shortened. It was monstrous for a company to seek a period of seven years, during which they could command a compulsory sale of property.
The DUKE of GRAFTONagreed that the time for the purchase of land should be limited, and he thought two years quite enough. He did not think, however, that such a long period as that mentioned by the noble Lord was ever allowed.
LORD VIVIANsaid, when the London and York Railway was before the Committee, of which he happened to be a Member, a power of seven years for the purchase of land was sought for, but he succeeded in having the period reduced to five years.
LORD PORTMANsaid, the company of which the petitioner complained was not the Great Western Railway Company, but the Western Branch of the Bristol and Exeter Railway.
Petition read and ordered to lie on the Table.

THE INSURRECTION IN GALLICIA.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEwished to state, in reference to the question which his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham) had put to him a few evenings ago, on the subject of the confiscation of the property of Polish refugees by the Austrian Government, and which he had declined answering until he could communicate with his noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and inform himself of the precise facts. He was anx-
1378
ious now to state to his noble and learned Friend and the House, that he had since then so informed himself, and that there had been certainly no communication made on the part of the Austrian Government to the Government of this country on the subject of the unfortunate circumstances—unfortunate in every respect—which had taken place in that country. But though no communication had been received from the Austrian Government, Her Majesty's Government had received most authentic information from time to time as to these proceedings; and he was happy in being able to announce that the last communication which had been received on the subject stated, that there was, on the part of the Austrian Government, a disposition to lean as leniently as possible on those parties. He had only to add, that he hoped that leniency would take effect more especially with regard to those unfortunate individuals who might have been involuntarily mixed up with those transactions, or who, from accidental circumstances, might have been suspected of taking a part which they really did not take. He relied on the character of the Government of that country that no time would be lost in doing justice to those individuals, as far as it was consistent with the safety of the Government of the country to permit, and that no conditions would be sought inconsistent with the feelings of honour, and the characters of the parties.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, nothing could be more satisfactory than the statement of his noble Friend; and he had only to add, lest the matter might lead to any misunderstanding elsewhere, his great and vehement displeasure at the whole proceeding connected with the insurrection in Gallicia, an insurrection that he regarded as wholly unjust.

RELIGIOUS OPINIONS RELIEF BILL.
LORD LYNDHURSTwished to draw their Lordships' attention to a Bill which had been for some time before their Lordships' House—he meant the Religious Disabilities Bill. That Bill had passed through Committee on the understanding that a communication should take place on the subject between himself and a right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Exeter), and it was now waiting to be recommitted, with a view of considering some Amendments that were intended to be proposed. He had since had an opportunity of meeting that I right rev. Prelate, and had agreed with

1379
him as to some Amendments. He wished at present that their Lordships would consent to go into Committee pro formâ, for the purpose of having the Amendments printed, with one or two ethers which he intended to propose. He understood that Her Majesty's Government were disposed to make this a Government question, to be brought forward as a Government Bill. He was willing to accede to that proposal on the distinct understanding that they would proceed with the measure without any avoidable delay. He hoped, under the circumstances, their Lordships would allow the Bill to pass pro formâ through Committee, in order to have the Amendments printed.
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEsaid, he was exceedingly glad that the noble and learned Lord was willing to go on with the measure. He could not have the least hesitation in assuring the noble and learned Lord, on the part of the Government with which he had the honour to be connected, that they would consider this Bill as a Government measure, so far as giving it every facility in their power in its progress through Parliament.
The BISHOP of LONDONsaid, he and his right rev. Friends had not had an opportunity of seeing the Amendments to which the noble and learned Lord alluded, and it was their earnest hope that Her Majesty's Government would not press the third reading of the Bill during the present Session.
LORD BEAUMONTsaid, he could not help expressing his surprise at the application made by the right rev. Prelate, especially when he recollected the course which the right rev. Prelate had himself taken when the question was before the House. This question had been for more than three years before their Lordships; and the present Bill had been fully discussed on two occasions this Session, in presence of the right rev. Prelate himself—the right rev. Prelate having spoken on each occasion. On one of these discussions the right rev. Prelate left the House before the termination of the debate; and on the other he declined dividing the House. Both the supremacy of the Crown and the introduction of bulls had been fully discussed. The former of these questions being a matter of fact, could not be affected by any law repealing the penalties to which a person denying that fact was now liable.
The BISHOP of LONDONexplained. The noble Lord appeared to forget that he (the Bishop of London) had no objection to the Bill itself. He was not one of those who thought the Bill should not pass; and the objections which he raised to certain parts of it were, he believed the noble Lord would admit, not urged in a speech of a very polemical character. The ground on which he now asked for a postponement of the measure was, that the bishops were all officially employed in their respective dioceses, so that it was impossible for them to attend in their Lordships' House.
LORD LYNDHURSTsaid, that he did not complain of the manner in which the discussion had been carried on on this Bill by the right rev. Prelate. He hoped that they would at once go into Committee pro formâ, and he would then name an early day for its discussion.
House in Committee. Amendments made. Report to be received to-morrow.

THE ST. ASAPH AND BANGOR AND MANCHESTER DIOCESES BILL.
On the Motion of the EARL of POWIS this Bill was read a Third Time.
On the Question, That the Bill do pass, a question arose as to whether the Queen's assent was not necessary; and the Motion was postponed until Monday.

THE PRESTON, LIVERPOOL, AND ORMSKIRK RAILWAY BILL.
LORD STANLEYwished to call the attention of his noble Friend the President of the Board of Trade to a petition on this Railway Bill, as well as a number of other Railway Bills which were now being proceeded with. The progress of this Bill had been impeded by a number of circumstances over which the projectors of it had no control; so that the second reading of it was only put down for Monday last, the 20th of July. Now one order prevented an opposed Bill from having a Committee named on it on the same day as its second reading; and another order directed that no Bill should be committed after the 20th of July. The progress of this Bill had already involved the company in a charge of 60,000 l. He did not wish for an immediate answer to his question; but he wished to ask his noble Friend whether the Government would provide some remedy to meet a case of hardship of this kind? It would be but an act of justice to put an end to the uncertainty which existed on this subject.
LORD BROUGHAMsaid, that it appeared in this case that the delay was not attributable to the conduct of the parties. Under the peculiar circumstances of this Bill, they should make some allowance, as every disposition had been manifested by the parties to get the second reading of this Bill before the last day named for that purpose. The whole of the 60,000 l., which would otherwise be thrown away, might be saved by coming to some resolution on the subject.
The EARL of CLARENDONsaid, that he had received a deputation of the parties promoting this railway, but he had not held out to them any prospect of their obtaining what they asked for. It was for the House to consider whether, under the peculiar circumstances of this case, an exception might not be made. He would state in the course of to-morrow the course which the Government would recommend to pursue.
LORD REDESDALEdenied that any peculiar hardship existed in this case, for notice was given in May last that no Committee on a Railway Bill should be appointed after the 20th of July. This might appear a case of hardship, but there were many cases of greater hardship. He trusted that the House would adhere to its Orders, for if they opened the doors on these occasions it would lead to endless confusion, for all parties would imagine that they could break through a neglect of the Orders, as they could always get excused.
LORD BEAUMONTconsidered that it would be inconvenient then to go into the discussion, as the House had fixed it for to-morrow.
LORD STANLEYwould suggest that a return should be prepared, and laid on the Table, of the state of the Railway Bills before the House on Monday last.
Petition laid on the Table.
House adjourned.