Lords Sitting of 31 May 1847

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS. Reported.—Factories.
3a and passed:—County Buildings; Army Service.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. From the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of Nottingham, for the Repeal of the Game Laws.—From Clergymen of Dewsbury, York, in favour of the Factories Bill.—From Independents of Uxbridge, against the proposed Government Plan of Education.—From Guardians of the Stockton Union, for Alteration of the Law of Marriage; respecting the Publishing of Notices of Intended Marriages; and for preventing Secret Marriages.—From Dublin, for the Adoption of Measures for the Suppression of Seduction and Prostitution.

PORTUGAL.
In answer to a question from LORD BROUGHAM,
The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEsaid, that no convention had been entered into respecting the affairs of Portugal. A protocol had been signed by the Three Powers which had before interfered in the affairs of Portugal, namely, Great Britain, France, and Spain, the object of which was the pacification of that unhappy and distracted country, having a due respect at the same time to the constitutional rights of the Throne and of the people of that country. It would not be satisfactory to their Lordships that he should lay upon the Table the papers alluded to by the noble and learned Lord unaccompanied by other correspondence, because such a course would only bring on a permanent discussion. The papers and correspondence upon this subject would be laid before Parliament, and no time would be lost in making that communication as soon as circumstances would justify it, and as soon also as it could be made without injury to the public service.

BIRMINGHAM AND OXFORD JUNCTION RAILWAY BILL.
LORD LYNDHURST LORD LYNDHURST moved to name the Select Committee on the petitions respecting this Bill.
LORD REDESDALErose to move that the order for the appointment of the said Committee be discharged. The directors of the Birmingham and Oxford Junction Railway had presented a petition against their own company; and having lost the confidence of the entire body, now called upon the House to uphold their proceedings. It would be a dangerous thing thus to allow a body of directors to act in opposition to the wishes of the body for whom they were elected to act. He belived that one of the directors had put from 15,000 l. to 20,000 l. in his pocket by the sale of his shares, and this gentleman now asked for powers to prevent the persons who had bought his shares from enjoying the privileges and benefits of that purchase. He hoped their Lordships would reconsider the vote they had come to on a former occasion, and discharge the Order of the Day for the appointment of this Committee.
LORD LYNDHURSTthought he had reason to complain of the course taken by his noble Friend. It was now two months since the subject came under the consideration of their Lordships, on a petition presented by the noble Earl who was the Chairman of the Committee. The subject was then fully discussed; he (Lord Lynd-

1287
hurst) entered into the details of the case, and the subject was most anxiously considered by their Lordships. There was, then, no foundation whatever for saying that the appointment of the Committee was lightly ordered by their Lordships. He denied that any bad precedent would be established by the course it was proposed to adopt.
LORD BEAUMONTsaid, that the appointment of a Committee would do no good, for it would not decide the questions pending between these two companies, the North-Western and the Great Western. It was no part of the duty of the House to interpret Acts of Parliament.
LORD WHARNCLIFFEsaid, if a company was allowed to devote its corporate funds to the purchase of an interest in another railway, it was obvious that the intentions of Parliament could in many cases easily be defeated.
LORD STANLEYsaid, that he thought it would be unwise to enter into an investigation which could lead to no practical result. It appeared to him that the directors of this railway had pursued a very extraordinary course in first amalgamating and then selling. The directors sold their shares at a great premium, and then they sold the property in which they had parted with their interest to the Great Western Railway. He must deny that the Great Western Company had purchased any shares with its corporate funds. The shares had been purchased in the open market by individuals. As no advantage would be derived from any investigation, he must urge upon their Lordships to reconsider the decision to which they had come for the appointment of a Committee.
LORD ASHBURTONsaid, that Railway Bills affected the great interests of the country, and, not being like private concerns, the Legislature had a right to demand that a public convenience should be secured. In the present case it was clear that that public convenience had not been secured, and it was therefore most important to see how the intention of the Legislature had been defeated, in order to prevent a recurrence of such mistakes in future. The inquiry was also important, in order that it might be seen whether these great railway companies overstepped the powers conferred by the Act, or neglected its requirements. It was doubtful whether 38,000 out of 50,000 shares had not been purchased by the one party, to control the proceedings of the other; in
1288
which case it would be ridiculous to say that the transaction was fair, and that the buyers had the right of private parties thus to purchase. He therefore considered that it was fairly a subject for further inquiry.
LORD BROUGHAMrose to defend the former decision of their Lordships, which had been not lightly arrived at, but was the result of long consideration, in which there was one adjournment for the purpose of inquiring into the matter still further. His noble and learned Friend (Lord Lyndhurst) had stated for the third time, in his usually clear manner, all the arguments and facts upon which the House had arrived at its former decision; and that he considered quite sufficient, or rather, that not a shadow of a reason had been urged for a reconsideration. He also reminded the House, that no circumstances except those of the most insuperable necessity ought to induce their Lordships to set aside any former decision deliberately arrived at; a contrary course would destroy the respect with which their Lordships' judgments ought to be received. There was not in this case the slightest grounds for saying, and he believed it was not pretended to be said, that the former decision had been lightly arrived at; and therefore it ought to be supported and confirmed.
The EARL of WICKLOWconsidered there was nothing of culpability whatever in the conduct of the Great Western Company; they had only done what the Legislature allowed them. The Committee granted in the first instance had only been granted in consequence of the clear statement made by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Lyndhurst), who moved the appointment of that Committee, and because there was no opposition whatever. He believed that there was not in the first instance the slightest necessity for the appointment of a Committee, and he should therefore vote with his noble Friend (Lord Redesdale).
LORD BROUGHAMexplained that there had been an opposition and a discussion on the former occasion alluded to by the noble Earl.
Their Lordships divided:—For naming the Committee 29; Against it 22: Majority 7.

ARMY SERVICE BILL.
EARL GREY EARL GREY moved the Third Reading of this Bill.
The MARQUESS of LONDONDERRYsaid, he was under obligations to the noble

1289
Earl opposite for his having postponed, at his request, the third reading of this Bill from Friday to this day. It was rather sharp work to carry it the first day after the Adjournment, and many officers and noble Peers interested not in the House. However, he found that that short delay would have no effect in relieving the Army from deserters or the mischief of this Bill, which he had ever thought so mistaken and injudicious in principle, that he would not attend during the Committee upon the Bill, being satisfied that no change would he accomplished to make it palatable to the profession to which he belonged. He understood that, in the Committee, some important and valuable changes affecting our troops in India, were introduced by a noble Earl (the Earl of Ellenborough) greatly competent to judge of the question; and that had determined him, and probably others, no longer to oppose the measure. He confessed, therefore, under those considerations, that it would be unbecoming in him, having so often trespassed on their Lordships on the subject, to force another division against the opinions of those who had become more reconciled to the Bill, and probably be subject to a smaller division. It appeared also, in Committee, that the noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington) adopted a tone more conformable to the views of the Government than he did in the commencement of this discussion. Still, he must say his Grace's opinions were of a variegated hue; and he did not think he would show or hold any ill-will towards him for respectfully but pointedly protesting against this measure. No argument had been adduced in answer to the great points he had alleged against the Bill. Destruction to the discipline of the Army at the period when the men approached the end of their servitude, when they would become insolent and insubordinate, and would make the good steady soldiers so also, while there was also a great injustice done to the old men; and, as to inducing a superior class to enlist, it was perfectly absurd, and one of those powerful theories on which his noble Grace's legislation seemed to be founded. It was preposterous, surely, to hope that they would remain in the Army if they could get equally good means of living out of it, any more than school boys would stay happily at school. But all those and innumerable other objections had been so much dwelt on, that he would not trouble the House further. Whatever mischief might
1290
arise, it was hardly probable, under the will of Providence, that he should live to witness the unhappy results of this measure; but he heartily hoped the noble Earl (Earl Grey) might be spared, and when he saw a tenth annually of 72,000 men, being the average of our colonial force, having the right of their discharge in the colonies, and who must be brought home, he hoped the noble Earl might do him the honour of remembering his prophecies, when he or some less theoretical Minister would then, or probably long before, return to the unlimited service, which was far more in unison with the duties of the British Army than the enlistment for limited periods, which had so often been tried, and had always failed. He was ignorant whether the noble Earl had cast his eyes on the able speeches of Sir H. Douglas in another place: they were printed, and in a small compass, and he would do well to read them. The extracts from the speeches of the Duke of Wellington were very remarkable and fatal documents to the noble Earl's Bill. In conclusion, he owned that he did not envy the noble Earl's feelings in carrying this measure. It had been passed through both Houses by small majorities; it had been squeezed out of a murder which, from various reasons and delicacies, he would not further allude to. It had been passed against the opinion and feeling of all the oldest, most experienced and ablest officers of the British Army. It had been passed in their Lordships' House by the aid of the right rev. Bench, who were manifestly as ignorantly of everything relating to a soldier as the Secretary at War had proved himself to be in his speech, and as the noble Earl had shown himself to be, of the conduct and character of commanding officers of regiments in the service.
Bill read 3a and passed.
House adjourned.