manded more attention from the Legislature, or more required definition, than the state of the law as to whether the railway companies had or had not the power of divesting themselves of all responsibility for any danger arising from their own negligence, and of thus leaving to the public, who were entirely dependent on them for their conveyance, no other choice but that of losing their transit, and subsequently instituting proceedings against the companies; and he thought it desirable to bring this point under their Lordships' notice, seeing that the present Bill purported to define the duties, responsibilities, and obligations of railways.

came to railways, where the public had no choice and the companies had a monopoly. Under these circumstances he thought a clause should be introduced into this Bill, placing railway companies and common carriers on the same footing in this respect.

EARL GREY concurred in the view taken by the noble and learned Lord who had just spoken. He knew a case where a railway company delivered a ticket, stating that the company received goods for conveyance on the following conditionsnamely, that the owners would undertake all risk from the loading or unloading of the carriages, or whether arising from the LORD LYNDHURST said, that by the negligence or default of the company's common law of this country a common servants, from defects in the stations, or carrier was bound to accept goods when "from any other cause whatsoever." So offered to him for the purpose of being that actually the servants of the company carried to their destination; and if he were might wilfully cut the throats of valuable guilty of negligence, and the owner of the animals in the trucks, and the company, goods suffered in consequence, he was under the security of this ticket, might bound to make reparation. The common turn round and repudiate all responsibility carriers endeavoured to limit their liability for what had happened. He understood by notices similar to those to which his that in the Common Carriers Act, which noble Friend had referred, and it was de- had been referred to, there was a particucided, when the case came before the lar clause which exempted special contracts courts of justice that they had a right to from the operation of the Act, and that do so. The consequence of this was, that therefore by this clause railway companies an Act of Parliament was passed to pre- could relieve themselves from their just vent that species of defence from being responsibility. He believed that, as the set up. Therefore, as far as common car-law had been interpreted in the courts of riers were concerned-he meant the gene- justice, there was no redress afforded to ral class of common carriers-that species farmers and cattle jobbers. They must of defence could no longer be pleaded. send their property to market by railway, But he understood that a case had come and if they were injured by the negligence before a county court of this description, of the company they could obtain no rethe very case to which his noble Friend paration. It was therefore absolutely nehad alluded; and the Judge of the county cessary that some restraint should be put court was of opinion, that the railway upon the power of these companies. If company had no right to insist on the pro- he was not misinformed, one of them had tection of such a notice as that which he attempted to carry this power of self-exhad stated; and he was informed, that in emption much further, and had declared in consequence of that decision the case came its tickets that even if death was caused before the Court of Common Pleas, and on the line, the relatives of a passenger the Act of Parliament which he had men- should be entitled to no compensation. The tioned was there referred to, and the Court courts of law, had, however, decided that of Common Pleas was of opinion that that this was a little too strong. [Lord CAMPAct did not apply to railway companies. BELL: Such a ticket would be mere waste The consequence of this was, that railway paper.] There, ought, therefore, to be a companies, although they were common clause inserted in this Bill to settle this carriers, stood upon a different footing matter. At the same time, he thought from that on which the common law and the liabilities of the railway companies the Act of Parliament placed common ought to be limited; so that if a valuable carriers. Now, it was clear, that if it was racehorse, worth 500 guineas, for instance, proper to put such a restriction on ordinary was put upon the line without a special carriage where great competition existed, notice, the company should not be bound there was a much stronger reason for the to make good the whole value in case of application of such a restriction when they accident. He believed this Bill, as origiThe Earl of Derby

nally drawn, had a clause suitable for the necessities of the case, but it had been expunged through the powerful influence of the railway interest in another place, to cope with which nothing but extraordinary firmness on the part of those who had charge of such a measure would suffice. He felt that by this Bill the Government were calling upon the courts of law to enforce obligations certainly substantial in their nature, but yet of so vague and undefined a character that it would be extremely difficult for such tribunals, whose proper functions were to expound the common and statute law, to discharge such new duties satisfactorily. Again, it would be very hard towards a private individual, say a cattle jobber dealing in the Newcastle market, to compel him to come into a court of law to oppose perhaps a wealthy and powerful company like the Newcastle, York, and Berwick Railway. He understood that in France, when undue favour was shown by a railway company to the prejudice of other parties, the injured persons laid the case before the Minister of the Interior, who considered it, and if the circumstances warranted it, prosecuted the company in a court of law on behalf of the Government itself.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, that was very much the mode proposed by this Bill, because it would enable the party aggrieved to go before the Board of Trade, when, if the case justified it, the Board of Trade would instruct the Attorney General to prosecute.

no company in the kingdom that did not from time to time come before Parliament to ask for additional powers, and nothing could be more reasonable than that they should, as guardians of the public interest, say to the companies, "We are willing to grant you the powers for which you apply, but only on the condition that you on your part accept those clauses which we consider to be essential for the protection of the public." It was not too late for their Lordships to take that course now, because there were many railway Bills that had not yet passed; and if they acted on that principle, he believed that, whether they passed such a Bill as the present or not, in three or four years' time there would not be a railway in the kingdom which would not be subject to the liabilities and obligations which their Lordships wished to impose upon it.

LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY said, he thought, with reference to the last suggestion of the noble Earl, that it would hardly be desirable to pass such a standing Order as would give the go-by to all the railway legislation of the other House during the present Session. With regard to the Post-office, and the facilities to which it was entitled from the railways, that subject had been under the consideration of the Government, and clauses with respect to it had been prepared; but a Committee had reported that it would not be expedient to introduce those clauses. A separate Bill would therefore be introduced on the subject as soon as the Committee who EARL GREY said, if that were so, his were considering it had made a further reobjection so far was removed. When port. He conceived that there would be no he looked at this Bill and saw how far objection to putting the railway companies it fell short of what was required, he and the common carriers on the same footmore and more regretted that the Go-ing, and he would take time to consider the vernment did not, as he had suggested in preparation of a clause to be inserted in the early part of the Session, consider this Bill for that object. He had not been what facilities the railways ought to give aware of the decision of the Court of to the public, and particularly to the Post-Common Pleas that had been referred to, office, which had not received from the companies the facilities which that department had a right to expect; and then have framed clauses to be enforced upon the railway companies. They ought to have made it a standing Order of that House that no additional powers should be given to any existing company, unless it inserted in its Bill clauses ensuring to the public corresponding conditions for its benefit. They were told that in the other House the railway interest was formidable; but that difficulty might be overcome in the manner he had pointed out. There was

and had supposed that the law was the same already with regard to railways and common carriers. This Bill laid down the great principle that there were certain duties and obligations attaching to railways which ought to be performed, and the machinery it proposed had the concurrence of the companies. Let that machinery therefore be tested, and should it be found insufficient to attain its object, it would then be competent for Parliament to substitute a better machinery in its place.

THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE said, if it was desired really to grapple

could not be carried out unless a better tribunal were established for the consideration of Bills of this description. At present, railway Bills were referred to a tribunal of five Peers, chosen, he could not say by chance, but certainly not from the most efficient Members of the House; and the same observation would apply, with still greater force, to the Committees of the other House of Parliament. One consequence of the existing system was, that most contradictory decisions were adopted upon the important questions relating to railways which were referred to Committees of both Houses. It was most important that they should have a better code and a better tribunal for dealing with this subject; and until some such plan as had formerly been proposed by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham), and which he trusted the noble and learned Lord would again propose, was adopted, it was impossible that railway legislation could be placed upon a footing that would be satisfactory to the public, that would avoid an enormous waste of money, and that would really fully and safely develope the resources of the country.

with the question, they must begin at the beginning, and reconsider their whole mode of procedure with regard to railway legislation. The whole of the mischief, the enormous losses, the ruin to which thousands of individuals had been exposed, the immense inconvenience to which the public had been subjected in connection with railways, arose entirely from the imperfect system under which railway legislation had been conducted in both Houses of Parliament. He was glad to see in the House his noble and learned Friend (Lord Brougham), who had taken so active a part in promoting many useful reforms, and who had already made attempts, which he trusted the noble and learned Lord would not abandon, to induce their Lordships to legislate on this important subject. It was to him (the Marquess of Clanricarde) a matter of wonder that the people of this country had so long borne the neglect with which a question of such vast importance had been treated by the Legislature. It was, he thought, a great misfortune that, in 1837, cold water should have been thrown upon the modest attempts at the regula tion of railways made by Mr. Labouchere. About that period most eloquent and LORD BROUGHAM entirely agreed with powerful speeches were made on the sub- his noble Friend (the Marquess of Clanriject by his noble and learned Friend (Lord carde) that they had mistaken their way Brougham); but Sir Robert Peel unfortu- from the beginning in their railway legisnately threw overboard the recommenda- lation, and he was also of opinion that the tions of Lord Dalhousie, which were un- true remedy to apply to the mischief was doubtedly the result of great labour and di- an alteration in that course of legislative ligence and were of the highest value. Since procedure. But with respect to this parthat time no effort had been made by any ticular measure, he also thought that it Government to improve our mode of legisla- did not go far enough by a great deal, and tion on the subject, and the noble and learn- that, to a certain degree, it did not go in ed Lord opposite had been almost alone in the right direction. He felt very much his efforts to attract attention to the matter the difficulty to which his noble and learned in their Lordships' House. It was not yet, Friend the Lord Chief Justice had called however, too late to deal with the question. their attention the difficulty in which the As had been observed, constant applica- courts of law and the judges would be tions were made to Parliament by the great placed by the Bill, because there was to be railway companies, and he thought it was an application to any Judge upon affidavit. most desirable that a proper tribunal should calling upon him to enter into the question be appointed, which might decide upon the whether a given railway that might be policy and safety of the propositions in- complained of had done its duty in providvolved in the Bills that were submitted to ing reasonable facilities either for the goods Parliament. Their Lordships would then or for the persons of the parties complainbe enabled to deal with the subject in a ing. He said there would be great diffirational manner, and, by degrees, they culty indeed in following this up, so as to would get those great bodies, that now carry it into effect; but he did not deenjoyed a monopoly which was injurious spair that it might possibly lead to some to the country, more or less under their check in the abuses now so generally, and control. The noble Earl below him had he was afraid he must add so justly, comthrown out very practical and excellent plained of. There was, however, another suggestions; but he (the Marquess of alteration which he thought was of tenfold Clauricarde) thought those suggestions importance-namely, to prevent the possiThe Marquess of Clanricarde

suggested by the Duke of Wellington in one particular case, that of boroughs charged with corruption, but a plan of unusual application.

LORD CAMPBELL hoped that, as the second reading of the Bill would not be opposed, ample time would be given for considering its provisions before their Lordships were asked to discuss it in Committee. He also wished to have an opportunity of consulting with his brother Judges as to the additional duties proposed to be cast upon them by this measure.

LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY expressed his readiness to meet the wishes of the noble and learned Lord.

On Question, agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly; and committed to a Committee of the whole House on Friday next.

House adjourned to Monday next.

of this description the Legislature would further have the satisfaction of knowing that they would also mightily improve the course and system of transacting Parliamentary business in general. He hoped EARL GREY remarked, that there was that this subject would, with the least nothing novel in the proposal that their possible delay, be specially considered by Lordships should attach certain conditions both Houses of Parliament. He had re- to their consent to pass measures of pripeatedly called the attention of their Lord- vate legislation, and that such a course ships to it; and had laid before them some would be no invasion of the rights or priyears ago a body of Resolutions for effect-vileges of the other House, but would be ing the improvement in Private Bill legis- a legitimate exercise of their Lordships' lation. He had the happiness of knowing powers. that the attention of the greatest authority in the other House - the Speaker- had lately been directed to it, and he was confident that the more the subject was examined the more strong would be the conviction of the absolute necessity of making some alterations in the course of private legislation. Within the last eight years great improvements had been effected in the proceedings with regard to private business in the other House by the appointment of Examiners, who perform the duty which used to be discharged by preliminary Committees, of ascertaining whether the Standing Orders had been complied with. The appointment of those Examiners had, he understood, been productive of the greatest possible benefit. They got through their inquiries in one-third of the time that used to be occupied by the preliminary Committee. He understood that during the last Session 366 private Bills passed through Parliament, and the Examiners were able to discharge their duties in connection with those Bills in five or six weeks, while, under the old system, the Committees would have been engaged for as many months. There was not only a great saving of time, but considerable saving of expense to all parties, and the inquiry conducted by the Examiners had the advantage of being much more deliberate and satisfactory than that of the Committees. He hoped the recommendation contained in a Resolution that had been passed, he believed, almost unanimously in the other House, would be adoptednamely, that the same general plan of procedure with respect to private Bill legislation should be common to both that measure. True, illicit distillation had Houses. He would not be satisfied with the mere appointment of Examiners by their Lordships; but he hoped to see joint Committees of both Houses of Parliament substituted for the separate Committees of the two Houses, according to the plan laid down in his Resolutions, a plan originally Lord Brougham

HOUSE OF COMMONS,

Friday, May 19, 1854.

MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS. -1° Ecclesiastical
Courts; Cruelty to Animals.
2° Public Statues.

EXCISE DUTIES BILL.
Order for Committee read.
House in Committee.
Clause 1.

LORD NAAS said, he must advert to the fact that the Government had not redeemed the pledge given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make an addition to the strength of the revenue police in Ireland. This, however, ought to be done, if it were intended to augment the spirit duty, for an increase of illicit distillation might be expected to follow from

not increased to the degree anticipated from the additional duty imposed last year; but the reason for that was to be found in the high price of grain. It was notorious that when prices were high but little illicit distillation took place, but when otherwise too many farmers turned their