was most unwilling to act against the Report of a Select Committee; but the proceedings of the Committee on this Bill were altogether different from those on any other that he recollected. The House should remember that Mr. Pym went before the Standing Orders' Committee; but his evidence was not received, because it appeared that he had no locus standi, as he was not a proprietor in the line, or had any other interest in connexion or in competition with it. This person, then presented a petition to that House, which was most irregularly referred to a Select Committee, which certainly was against the Standing Orders. He conceived that it would be a most unjust proceeding, if they did not allow this Bill to pass. He did not deny that some frauds had been committed, but he strongly denied that the directors and promoters of the Bill were in any way a party to them. [The Earl of Besborough: The Report.] The Report did not directly make such a charge; but it stated that some persons had got a certain number of signatures improperly affixed to the contract deed. Was it not notorious, that there was no description of ingenuity which was not resorted to for the purpose of obtaining shares, as such large profit was often derived from speculating in them? It was known, also, that the stockbrokers had now lists of persons, called black lists, who were constantly engaged in the traffic of shares, and many of these persons had imposed on persons engaged in promoting English and Scotch railways, who were much better able to protect themselves from such proceedings than the promoters of an Irish railway; and all this arose from the imperfect state of the law. The noble Marquess then proceeded to read a list of the names of persons who had imposed upon the directors of this Company, and who had been referred to in the Report of the Committee, and showed that those persons were subscribers for shares in several English and Scotch Railway Companies to a much larger amount, than was the case with respect to the Dublin and Galway Railway. By referring to The Times newspaper, in which the advertisement for this Company first appeared, it would be found that out of twentyfour advertisements of railway companies published in it, only four required any reference at all; and in the Times of the 6th or 7th of November last-he did not then recollect which was the datethere were no less than fifty railway advertisements, all inviting the public to take shares, and of these only ten required any reference to be given. Thus the Dublin and Galway Railway Bill was now to be thrown out because they did that which had been done by four-fifths of all the railways in England, Scotland, and Ireland, when they were really in the market. But he would come to what had been described as the model of a railway, and of a board of directors, namely, the London and York, and to that model of a witness, Mr. Moatt. When that gentleman had been asked whether they had had any applications from men of straw, such as stable-boys and men of that class, he replied that they had not above twenty applications in which they had been imposed upon. If, therefore, that Company, which was so much cried up, had been imposed upon in twenty cases, how could it be expected that a number of Irishmen forced to resort to the London share-market should be more successful? That reminded him of another argument. The evidence of this witness showed that even great English companies did not disdain to give allotments of shares at first without inquiry, and that it was only when they got a position in the market that they took the precaution to have men of undoubted credit selected as their shareholders. In fact, it was quite necessary at the commencement of such undertakings that more than ordinary risk should be incurred. The witness stated that it was found to be always the case that when capital was coming in, it begot other capital from subscribers of greater respectability. It was a notorious fact that in the case of the Greenwich Railway, which now, he believed; carried as many passengers as any railway in England, that fully half of the capital, when the Bill passed through Parliament, was utterly bad, but that these shares afterwards fell into good hands. And in another railway, also-the Gloucester and Bristol Railway-which now conferred great benefits on the part of the country through which it passed, upwards of one-third of the subscription list, as it originally stood, was found to be bad, though the shares of this company were now selling, or had been selling two days ago, at 30 per cent. premium. He could not, therefore, see why they were to make an example of the Dublin and Gal tempt to improve the social, political, and way Company, whilst others had been allowed to pass. It was quite possible for parties to get up fraudulent cases, for the purpose of extorting money from the directors. For instance, four persons, A, B, C, and D, might sign the subscription list for each other, and then if they found the speculation not to answer their wishes, they could go to the directors, and, under threats of exposing their own dishonesty, extort money from them. In this way, he could account for the petition of the person, or rather the name of Gerard Barry. No such man could be found, and though the name was one that sounded familiarly enough, it could not be discovered that this person had ever existed. The entire amount required to be subscribed in this Company, under the Standing Orders, was 810,000Z., while the amount really subscribed was 819,000l., of which 67,2001. was found to be bad. But then by the alteration which had been proposed in the original plan, a saving of twenty miles would be effected, in consequence of the Galway line joining the Cashel line at Portarlington. A sum amounting in the entire to 228,000l. would, from this and other circumstances, be available over and above what was necessary to complete the line, independent of which the Great Southern and Western Railway Company now offered to subscribe 100,000l. additional capital if the Bill were now passed. The noble Marquess proceeded to refer to the evidence of Mr. Mulvany, the engi-erable officer could not be named) would neer, and of General Sir John Burgoyne, chairman of the Board of Works in Ireland, given before the Committee, to show the great importance of this line of railway, and then continued to say that he would humbly submit to the House that this Bill should be allowed to pass on the ground of its great utility to the country -on the ground that its rejection could effect no public good-on the ground that by throwing out the Bill they could do right to no person who had been wronged -that they could not remedy any imperfections in their law-and that they could do nothing except put a stop to one of the most important works that could be undertaken in Ireland, and that, too, at a most critical period in the affairs of that country. The present Session had not been either a very short or a very unimportant one, and yet he would put it fairly to the House what had they done for Ire- The Earl of Wicklow said, he was exland? They had certainly made an at-tremely sorry to find that he was compel be unable to detect such parties, when men like Sir I. Goldsmid and Mr. Hudson had been deceived by them. He (the Marquess of Clanricarde) could not believe that the House would thus stop this Bill; it ought, he conceived, to be re-committed. Earl Bathurst, as chairman of the Committee on the Bill, wished to state that they had not felt themselves the less bound to report the frauds they found, because such practices might have existed elsewhere. In fact, the Committee had given no opinion on the Bill, nor was the House placed under the necessity, therefore, of sustaining any finding of theirs. The Committee had only reported that certain frauds had been committed; and they had left it to the House to decide whether those frauds so vitiated the Bill that it ought not to be passed. led to vote against the further progress of | punishing those parties, but innocent the Bill. He believed that the work would persons, who had in no way contributed be a most beneficial one for Ireland. But to those frauds. The individuals who had it should be remembered that that was fraudulently obtained the scrip had since the first case of gross and palpable fraud parted with it, at a considerable profit to in connexion with the proceedings of rail- themselves; and that scrip was now held way companies that had been brought by persons who were ready and able to under their Lordships' notice; and he pay up the amount of their shares. It certainly thought that they ought not to appeared that they could not punish even allow those frauds to pass unpunished. the managers; for those managers had He had a further reason for objecting to the sold out the 500 shares which each of passing of the Bill, and that objection was them had taken in the first instance. In founded on the fact that their Lordships his opinion, their Lordships ought, if poscould have no security that the money sible, to adopt such measures as would necessary to construct the works would be prevent the sale of scrip immediately after forthcoming, and that those works would it had been allotted; for that was the be completed. source of all the most objectionable proceedings in connexion with railway speculations. He considered the fairest course would be for the Committee to enter upon the consideration of the preamble of the Bill, and ascertain whether there were funds sufficient to carry out the project in case the Bill should ultimately pass. But he had only to observe in conclusion, that it seemed to him very expedient that the House should, without delay, adopt some general measure for the prevention of the perpetration of any similar frauds in future. The Earl of St. Germans said, he could not agree in the remark as to the peculiar character of the parties deceived. The directors were not unsophisticated Irishmen, but, for the most part, gentlemen resident in London. It would not, in his opinion, be desirable that the House should interrupt the labours of the Committee on the Bill. It appeared to him, on the contrary, that they ought to allow that Committee to proceed, and to hear all the evidence that could be adduced in the case. He believed that it would be quite consistent with the practice of Parliament to allow supplementary subscription lists to be put in, and that practice might be adopted in the present case. He did not ask their Lordships to pause before they determined on rejecting the measure, on the ground that they should look more favourably on the Bill because it was one affecting Ireland, than they would look on a Bill affecting England. All he asked was, that justice might be done in the matter. He admitted that a case of great laxity and carelessness had been made out against the promoters of the line, but he did not think that they ought at once to determine at that stage on rejecting the Bill. Let the Select Committee proceed with its inquiries, and pronounce a decision on the merits of the case, after they had heard all the evidence that could be brought forward on the subject. The Duke of Cleveland fully agreed in the sentiment expressed by the noble Lord who had just sat down, that it was most desirable for that House to take some means to prevent such frauds as those complained of from being practised. It was alleged as an excuse for the conduct of the Company under consideration, that similar practices were carried on in all Railway Bills; but that was no ground for permitting a fraud which was detected from being punished. The present case was, it seemed, the first one in which those frauds had been found out; and it was then certainly the duty of Parliament to take cognizance of that which had been detected. The time had arrived when it became absolutely necessary to endeavour to put an end to the system of jobbing which was now going on; and before the present Session terminated he thought it indispensable that the Legislature should Lord Beaumont said, that he should not come to some general resolution on the have had the least hesitation in acceding subject-a course which would deter the to the Motion of the noble Earl, if he promoters of railways hereafter from purthought that by rejecting the Bill he suing the line of conduct which they now would be punishing the parties who had did. One way he would suggest, by committed those frauds. But the fact was, which he conceived the evil alluded to that they would not by that means be I might be remedied, and that was, to in troduce a clause into every Railway Bill to prevent parties to whom shares were allotted, and who were subscribers to the subscription contract, from selling their scrip until at least two-thirds of the money should have been paid up. He hoped the House would not suffer the Session to pass, however advanced it might be in the year, without coming to some general resolution on this subject. results. The House having adopted certain rules and regulations for the management of its business, was bound to enforce them; and though he confessed he did so with some reluctance, believing that this measure was calculated to be of great benefit to Ireland, he felt constrained to give his vote in favour of the Motion of the noble Earl behind him (the Earl of Besborough). He did not think that those gentlemen who took an active part in the manage fraud themselves; but they had not acted with sufficient caution, and were bound to have used more care in preventing the interests of others which were entrusted to them from suffering through their neglect. The rejection of the measure, however, did not by any means prejudice the undertaking hereafter; and as it was one calculated to be of great benefit to Ireland, he regretted that it should be postponed even for a time. Lord Redesdale said, the real question before their Lordships was this:-A chargement of this Company were guilty of had been brought against certain parties of not having complied with the rules and regulations required by that House to be observed in its proceedings, and that charge having been fully brought home to them, were these parties to be allowed to go scot free? It was said, indeed, that their Lordships would not be punishing the guilty individuals; that the weight of their censure would fall upon those who purchased shares bona fide. Now those who had purchased shares knew very well they were doing an illegal act; and they should, therefore, be satisfied to take the risk and the consequences of their own conduct. The question here was, not whether or not this Bili would be a good measure for Ireland, but whether that House was prepared or not to uphold its own rules and Standing Orders? If it was a reason that these parties should not be punished because others had been guilty of similar practices, not a pickpocket who was detected in his guilt but might say, Oh, you ought not to inflict punishment on me alone; there are twenty other persons picking pockets in the same place, you caught me-am I alone to suffer?" He had only to say in conclusion, that this was an occasion on which the House ought to enforce its own rules, if it did not make up its mind to let them be all considered as mere waste paper in future. Lord Monteagle feared that when once a spirit of gambling got abroad, it would be impossible for any measures they might introduce to repress it. There were many laws at this moment in existence to prevent fraudulent practices, but they were found insufficient for that purpose. He doubted very much whether throwing out the present Bill would lead to any such salutary consequences as were calculated 66 on. But at the same time, he should say that after the fraud which had been discovered in this matter, to pass this Bill now, would be productive of mischievous The Earl of Devon would briefly state why he intended to vote against the proposition then before the House. He would be glad to know how it was in any way necessary to the ends of justice that this Bill should be thrown out? Who were the parties to whom they were doing justice by rejecting this measure? Was it necessary to do so, with respect to the individual who had presented a petition to that House? Was it in justice to the landed proprietors through whose properties the line was to pass, that they adopted this course? Was it in justice to any other project that might be more advantageous, that they were called upon to throw out this Bill? No such thing. It was merely in justice to the House of Lords itself they were asked to do so. Now, such being the case, he thought there were peculiar circumstances in this matter which made it fit for them to consider whether it was right to take this means of vindicating their own orders. The Report of the Select Committee charged certain promoters of the Bill with having been guilty of frauds. Now, he did not think there was any evidence before it which sustained such an allegation. It was said the course the House was about adopting was for the purpose of punishing the parties who infringed its Standing Orders. Now, they would not be punishing those parties; they would be punishing others. Was not the arm of the law, however, sufficiently long to reach those who were really guilty? The throwing out of a measure of so much importance as that was not the way to proceed. They might, even in vindicating their own orders, commit a great public evil in attempting to punish parties who were guilty of a fraud that they could not reach after all. He concluded by announcing his intention to oppose the Motion before the House. The Marquess of Clanricarde, in explanation, observed that, notwithstanding all the allegations they heard about the Standing Orders, the reception of that petition had been an infringement upon them, such as had not taken place on any other Railway Bill in England or Scotland. The Earl of Besborough then briefly replied. The Duke of Wellington wished to make only one observation on what had fallen from his noble Friend near him (the Earl of Devon). There could be no doubt that the evidence went to show that nothing more could be charged against the directors than negligence in the performance of their duty. He had to observe, that in the commencement of the Report, the directors had been called upon, if they thought proper, to answer those charges, but as they had not thought fit to do so, he thought the proposition of the noble Lord must fall to the ground. On Question, that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Motion? House divided-Contents 35; Non-contents 8; Majority 27. Resolved in the Affirmative, and the further consideration of the Bill put off for three months. ing Order he was about to propose. It was well known that it was the common practice to insert names of persons as directors of a company who had no knowledge whatever of its existence, for the purpose of inducing the ignorant multitude to embark their property in the undertaking. For the protection of the public, therefore, as well as of individuals, it was necessary that some such Standing Order as that which he had to propose should be adopted by their Lordships. The noble Marquess then laid on the Table a Resolution, that when in any Bill to be hereafter introduced for the purpose of establishing a Company for carrying on any work or undertaking, the names of any person or persons should be introduced as manager, director, proprietor, or otherwise concerned in carrying such a Bill into effect, proof shall be required before the Standing Orders' Committee, that the said person or persons had subscribed their names to the petition for the said Bill, or to a printed copy of the Bill, as brought up or introduced into the House. Motion to be taken into further consideration on Friday next. POOR LAW (SCOTLAND) BILL.] On the Motion of the Duke of Buccleuch, the Bill was read a third time. On Question, that the Bill do pass, the Government would best consult the The Marquess of Breadalbane said, that interest of Scotland, if they postponed the passing of that measure till next Session. If they persisted in passing it during the present, the consequence would be, that they would have to bring in a Bill to amend it next Session. Lord Cottenham proposed to strike out the 17th Clause, which had no connexion with the Bill, and which went to unite South Leith to Edinburgh, for the purpose of parochial assessment for the poor, which was in direct opposition to the judgment of the Court of Session, and that of their Lordships, on the point involved in it. NEW STANDING ORDER.] The Marquess of Lansdowne rose to propose the adoption of a Standing Order of which he had given notice. His attention had been called to the subject, in consequence of a court of justice, after full consideration, having determined that a special case should be made, for the purpose of trial by full court, of the simple and legal ques- The Duke of Buccleuch said, he could tion, whether a person whose name was not consent to the omission of the clause. inserted in the Act of Parliament, al-The decision of their Lordships had made though there was no proof of his having consented to its being inserted, was sufficient evidence of his being a director of the company to which the Act alluded? Whatever might be the result of that proceeding, he thought it was necessary for the protection of their Lordships and the public, that they should adopt the Stand the alteration in the law necessary. Lord Campbell was surprised that Her Majesty's Government should still persist in this clause, which would bring a reproach on the Government. It completely reversed the decision of that House, confirming the decision of the Court below, on an appeal which he, as an advocate, sup |