METROPOLITAN RAILWAY COMMUNICATION. (Hansard, 28 April 1863)

§ EARL GRANVILLE
said, he desired to point out to the noble Lord (Lord Campbell) who had given notice of a Motion for on address for a Commission with respect to Metropolitan Railway Communication, that as that subject was under the consideration of a Select Committee of their Lordships, and as many noble Lords who were well informed on the matter, being Members of that Committee, were precluded from taking part in the discussion, it would be very inconvenient, if not against the rules of the House, for the noble Lord to proceed with his Motion.

§ THE EARL OF DERBY
said, he thought that the subject of the noble Lord's Motion had been disposed of by the reference of the subject to a Select Committee. He would not say that to bring forward the subject again would be contrary to the rules of the House of Lords; but it was certainly inconsistent with their practice that a subject already disposed of by the House should be discussed again during the same Session. Such a proceeding in the House of Commons would be contrary alike to practice and rule.

LORD CAMPBELL
denied that the question now proposed to be raised was identical with that to which his noble Friend had referred. As the sense of the House appeared to be against his proceeding with the Motion, he should not persevere with it; but he certainly thought it would be desirable that some discussion should take place on the subject, in order that there might be a more general and clear understanding than at present existed, and that the great mass of these schemes might not be permitted to make their way 856 before the Committee had reported on the subject.

THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE
said, that had the noble Lord proceeded with his Motion, he would have moved that Dublin should be included in it; for a Bill had been recently introduced for the formation of a railway that was to enter into that city, to the great disturbance of its beauty and convenience, and which had received no other attention from the Government than the usual Report of the Board of Trade. It would only be just to the inhabitants Of Dublin and to the people of Ireland, that before any irrevocable step were taken, there should be an inquiry by competent persons on the part of the Government to see whether it was proper that the present schemes should be adopted, or whether some general system ought not rather to be entertained.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
said, that in suggesting to the noble Lord that it was not desirable that the Motion should be proceeded with, he had expressed no opinion adverse to an inquiry by a Commission. The noble Earl on the other side of the House had intimated an opinion, the other evening, that a Commission was better than a Committee; but their Lordships concurred with the Government in thinking it desirable that the matter should be referred to a Committee, the question being reserved whether or not there should be afterwards a Commission, to consider certain points at all events. The Committee had, however, come to no Resolution as yet, and therefore it was impossible to say how they would report. With regard to what bad fallen from the noble Marquess, he must say that he had no wish at all to undervalue the City of Dublin, but in respect to railways he believed there where only a few schemes affecting Dublin, while with regard to London there were something like thirty-three. There were, moreover, other considerations, all of degree, which made an essential difference between Dublin and London in questions of this sort. At the same time, if the issue of a Commission should be recommended by their Lordships' Committee, the noble Marquess would then have an opportunity of suggesting that the inquiries of the Commissioners should embrace Dublin.