QUESTION. SELECT COMMITTEE APPOINTED. (Hansard, 16 April 1863)

§ LORD STRATHEDEN
rose to inquire of Her Majesty's Government, What course is proposed to be taken with regard to the Ludgate Station and Junction Railways Bill?

§ EARL GRANVILLE
said, that this was a matter to be dealt with not by the Government, but by the House. What he should suggest was, that all the Bills upon which Colonel Yolland had reported should be referred to the Select Committee which he had given notice to move; which should examine, not into the merits or demerits of any particular scheme or schemes, but should inquire, with the assistance of the Board of Trade, whether any particular plan would or would not affect or interfere with a comprehensive system of railway communication in the metropolis. It might be desirable subsequently to refer certain technical points to a Commission composed of professional persons; but he had no doubt that the Report of a Committee of their Lordships' House would be of great value, as settling the general principles which should regulate legislation on this subject. The noble Earl then moved, That a Select Committee be appointed, To inquire whether any, and, if any, which of the Schemes now before Parliament for the Construction of Lines of Railway within the Limits of the Metropolis, can be proceeded with in the 195 present Session without the Risk of interfering with the future Adoption of a comprehensive Plat of Metropolitan Railway Communication; and to consider what Provision can be made for the se curing such a comprehensive System, with the greatest Advantage to the Public, and the lens Inconvenience to the local Arrangements of the Metropolis.

§ LORD REDESDALE
said, that the terms of the inquiry, as proposed by the noble Earl, would lead to a much longer investigation than he anticipated. Was the noble Earl prepared to say that al1 the Bills he indicated were to be referred to a Select Committee, and that a hearing was to be given to the promoters? If so, he (Lord Redesdale) thought that the inquiry would run to a great length, and in the end would not be very satisfactory. In reference to the latter part of the noble Earl's proposition, he (Lord Redesdale) submitted that they wanted no investigation of the character referred to. He recommended the noble Earl not to refer those railway schemes in question to such a Committee, but to propose that the Committee should inquire generally into the subject of metropolitan railway communication.

§ THE EARL OF DERBY
concurred in opinion with the noble Lord the Chairman of Committees in thinking that this inquiry would not turn out so simple and easy a one as the noble Earl seemed to imagine. He (the Earl of Derby), under existing circumstances, ventured to request the removal of his name from the Members of the Committee proposed, inasmuch as he was not at all prepared to enter into such a lengthened examination as the inquiry moved by the noble Earl would necessarily involve. The appointment of a Committee upon the subject would false the wind out of the sails of a Commission, and therefore render the proceedings of the latter wholly unnecessary. He thought that the object sought for could be much better obtained by the appointment of a Commission in the first instance. Looking at the present state of the House, it would be idle to enter into a further discussion on the matter. He would therefore leave the noble Earl to get out of the difficulty the best way he could.

Ld. President.	E. Shaftesbury.
D. Buckingham and Chandos.	E. Cowper.
	E. Carnarvon.
E. Devon.	E. Grey.

E. Lonsdale.	L. Somerhill.
E. Stradbroke.	L. Stanley of Alderley
V. Eversley.
L. Wodehouse.	L. Belper.
L. Redesdale.	L. Lyveden.
L. Colchester.	L. Taunton.