the Legislature had the fullest right to upon the accounts when called upon by a watch and regulate the movements of rail- certain number of shareholders, and in his way directors. It was said, too, that they examination separate the two sources of should let well alone; if things were well, income-traffic and capital. What he prohe might be content to do so, but he came posed by the Bill was this-when a certo a different conclusion. The Legislature, tain number of shareholders applied for an too, had already interfered with them in independent audit of the accounts of a many instances. The magnitude of the company, the Government Railway Board interests involved called for investigation should be empowered to appoint an auditor and scrutiny; it behoved the Legislature for this purpose. He did not propose that to see that the vast powers railway com- the person so appointed should have any panies possessed of raising and dealing power of imposing any penalty or punishwith capital were properly applied. The ment; all he asked was that he should have amount of money placed in the hands of rail- good access to all documents, and full way companies was increasing year by year power of making the investigation-that he in a fearful ratio. Previous to 1826, the might state his opinion frankly, and transmit capital invested in railways did not exceed it to the Railway Department that it might 1,500,000l.; from 1826 to 1835, the amount be a public document open to reference by authorised by Parliament was 19,000,000l.; that and the other House of Parliament. in 1836-1837, 36,000,000l.; 1844-1845, Railway companies had two separate modes 74,000,0007.; 1846, 132,000,000l.; 1847, of obtaining money to make a dividend; 38,000,000l.Total, 324,000,000l. Did one, out of actual profits, the other out of not the magnitude of that sum render the their capital. This occurred when a line interposition of the Legislature a duty? was only partly completed, or when being And if they found this enormous sum gra- complete from terminus to terminus, it got dually increasing at a fearful ratio, the a Bill to extend itself by branches. The necessity of that interposition became still whole position of a company might be algreater. The sum required under Railway tered by increasing its capital and issuing Acts during the last year, which exhibited new shares; and those who lent it money a great falling-off, compared with the had a security very different from the real years preceding it, was 38,000,000l. The one: this was made possible by a mystificawhole annual expenditure of the nation tion of the accounts, and the mixing up for its Army, Navy, and Government, was two sources of property which ought al17,000,000. But it was not merely the ways to be kept separate. Suppose the amount of capital involved in these enter- capital of a railroad was 100,000l., and it prises that made interference necessary; paid a dividend of 5 per cent, or 5,0007.; the mode in which it was dealt with also supposing its profits fell off, so that it could required attention. The property of a only give 3,000l. as a dividend, yet with railway company consisted partly in its power to call its capital to its aid, or of own capital, partly in what it borrowed; paying out of the main capital some of the and it was most important that those who expenses of the working of the line, the lent this money should have the power of greater dividend of 5,000l. could still be knowing on what security they parted with sustained. When they considered the it. If they analysed many of the events enormous temptations those who adminisof the last two years, he believed this tered these funds were exposed to, the power of borrowing, joined with induce- House would see that some remedy ought ments to do so at high rates of interest, to be provided. Upon these grounds he would be found to have been great ele-rested the measure he had brought before ments in the recent disorganisation of the House. He knew it might be objected commercial and financial affairs. The that it did not go far enough, and if he had Bank of England itself, he understood, had followed his own view, he should have made become a purchaser of railroad securities it more stringent; but he had thought it to the amount of 2,500,000l. The pre- better to try the Bill in its present shape, sent mode of auditing the accounts of rail-reserving to himself the power, if necesroad companies was insufficient; no sen- sary, of bringing the subject again under sible person could rely on it, and he there- the consideration of Parliament. The Bill fore thought that the peculiar condition would give to a certain number of shareof these speculations required that there holders (he had not fixed the precise numshould be an independent auditor appoint-ber) a power, not of vexatiously prying into ed, who should examine into and report the concerns of the company, but of pro LORD KINNAIRD did not oppose the Bill, but he did not approve of unnecessary interference with railway interests. It was true that great powers were given to railway companies, and it was very desirable that they should be placed upon a better system; but constant attempts to interfere with the management of these great interests was a serious evil. The Bill, he thought, would be to a certain extent ineffective; for it would take such a time before any person could go carefully through the accounts (which must be examined most minutely) that some months at least must elapse before a report could be made. tecting their interests by applying for the appointment of an auditor to be selected by the Railway Board; and in order to prevent any undue surprise it was required that the proprietors so applying should have been proprietors for a year at least. It had been suggested that when a Bill for any railroad, or Amalgamation Bill, or Branch Bill, came before their Lordships, they should require that before the second reading of the Bill there should be an audit of the accounts by an independent auditor. He was very far from saying it might not be necessary to resort to that course; but such a measure, however good in itself, would not meet the object of his Bill, be- LORD ASHBURTON agreed with the cause many of the railroad companies noble Lord who had just spoken, that any which might be proper objects of his Bill vexatious interference with these great inmight not come before their Lordships at terests, in respect to their profits, would be all. With respect to the provisions of the the grossest injustice; but he did not conBill (which had very few clauses), he pro-sider that to be the aim and intention of posed that a balance-sheet of the company should be submitted to the Railway Commissioners, who would be empowered to appoint an auditor to report upon it, the report to be in duplicate, one part to be presented to the Railway Commissioners. As to the expense of the audit, he thought the party who called for the audit should pay expense of it, if, in the judgment of the Railway Commissioners, the call should apappear to have been unnecessary. The effect of this measure, and of the separation of the capital from the revenue accounts, would be to prevent the misapplication of the capital, and to secure the public against being deceived by a fallacious appearance of continued prosperity. The noble Lord concluded by moving that the Bill be read a second time, observing that he should postpone the the Committee until it should suit the convenience of all parties. The EARL of GRANVILLE said, a measure was wanted that should prevent the large privileges given to railway companies from being abused, and money being expended in a manner in which it ought not to be. He did not think the Bill went so far as that; but as far as it did go it was beneficial, and should have his support. Shareholders had a just right to know how their property was disposed of; and although the Legislature had made provision for that object, there was an impression in the public mind that the intentions of the Legislature had not been fulfilled. The auditors of railway companies were chosen from persons most active in the management of the concern, and the public impression was that there was something not quite sound in railway accounts. per the Bill, which merely obliged railway LORD MONTEAGLE explained some of vance of the Lord's Day.-By Mr. Lushington, from Ministers of various Denominations in North India, re specting the Validity of Marriages (India).-By several hon. Members, from various places, complaining of the for and against the Roman Catholic Relief Bill.-By Mr. Conduct of the Roman Catholic Clergy (Ireland); and habitants of Humberstone (Lincoln), for Better Obser- tions he already had received, that it was a great and growing evil. At the same time his hon. Friend would, he was sure, not press him to state more than that the subject was under the serious consideration of the authorities. This he would say to his hon. Friend, that if it should appear the subject was an evil of that magnitude that required legislative interference, he might be assured that he (Mr. C. Buller) would not fail to propose it. Frewen, from Clyst Honiton (Devon), against the Estab lishment of Romish Bishoprics.-By Mr. Pattison, and the Earl of Shelburne, from several places, for Inquiry respecting the Rajah of Sattara.--By Sir T. Acland, from South Molton, Mr. W. Miles, from Attorneys of Wincanton, and Mr. Ward, from Attorneys and Solici tors of Sheffield, for Repeal of Duty on Attorneys' Certificates. By Viscount Mahon, from Hertford, for Repeal of Duty on Carriages and Horses.-By Mr. Walter, from Nottingham, for Reduction of the Duty on Tea.From Independent Order of Odd Fellows, Manchester Unity, of Cheltenham, for Extension of the Benefit Societies Act.-By Colonels Conolly and Verner, from seve ral places in Ireland, for Encouragement to Schools in connexion with the Church Education Society (Ireland). By Mr. Gibson Craig, from Kirkcaldy, for Repeal of the Game Laws. From the Hon. Sir Richard Broun, Bart., for Production of the Correspondence relating to the Halifax and Quebec Railway.-By Lord Ashley, from several places, for Sanitary Regulations.--From Cork, for Alteration of Law respecting Landlord and Tenant (Ireland).—By Mr. G. Craig, from Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, for Reform in the Medical Profession.-By Mr. W. Miles, from Guardians of the Wincanton Union, for Alteration of the Law relating to MendiEllice, from Coventry, for Retrenchment of the Naval cancy. By Sir J. Y. Buller, from Torquay, and Mr. E. MR. W. MILES wished to ask the President of the Poor Law Commission a question relating to vagrancy. Had the right hon. Gentleman turned his attention to the point; and if so, did he intend to propose any legislative enactment on the subject? MR. C. BULLER assured his hon. Friend that not only had the subject engaged his own attention, but it was one to which the attention of all the Commissioners had been frequently and most painfully directed. He was endeavouring to obtain the fullest possible information connected with it, as he had reason to know from the communica NAVY PAYMASTERS AND PURSERS. CAPTAIN PECHELL inquired of the Secretary of the Admiralty if it was intended to make provision in the Estimates for completing the retired list of paymasters and pursers to the numbers recommended in the report of the Committee of Flag Officers in 1842; and also, if the Board of Admiralty had taken into consideration the several memorials of the commanders and lieutenants with regard to a retired list, and of the masters with respect to the rank they hold in the service? MR. WARD said, that no provision had been made in the Navy Estimates for completing the retired list of paymasters and pursers; and that, whenever the discussion should come on, he should be prepared to show that those parties had already received a full equivalent for what they had given up. With regard to the memorials of the commanders and lieutenants, he could only say, that the Board of Admiralty did not feel themselves justified in making any further retired list of masters and commanders, and lieutenants. DISABILITIES OF THE JEWS ADJOURNED DEBATE. MR. C. PEARSON could not pretend that he was altogether uninitiated in the practices of a deliberative assembly; but as it was some years since he appeared as a debater, and as he was labouring under the fashionable complaint, he hoped for a larger share than usual of the indulgence which the House invariably awarded to new Members. He lamented, in common with other hon. Members, that religious topics had been introduced into the debate -topics but little adapted to the heated atmosphere of a political assembly. He had hoped, that from the mild and moderate manner in which the noble Lord at the head of Her Majesty's Government had brought forward the question, it would have been discussed solely upon the broad principle of civil liberty. But many of those who had addressed the House, had, which had been directed against them, had been subjected, there was no disparagement that more severely wounded their feelings than that of being called Jews, and the spitting upon their gabardines. But if to spit upon their gabardines, and to call them Jews, was considered persecution, what were they to say of the imputations, and those of the severest character, which, within the walls of the House of Commons, had recently been cast upon that body? The speech to which he more immediately from conscientious motives, given the discussion a religious direction. Those, therefore, who represented large constituencies might deem themselves bound to take that view also of the subject, in order to prevent their conduct from being misunderstood by those to whom they had to give an account. But if this subject were to be discussed as a religious subject, it behoved them to be exceedingly careful that, while they used great frankness and candour, as well as great courtesy, they should especially strive to avoid encroach-referred, and upon which he should make ing upon the feelings of those whose sen- a few remarks, had since assumed a place timents upon the subject were opposed to among the literature of the country. He their own. He, for one, felt bound to regretted deeply that the hon. Member— state, that he did not participate in the he meant the hon. Member for Midhurst sentiments expressed by the hon. Member (Mr. Walpole) should have permitted for Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli), who, himself to have given it this prominent poalthough he intended on this occasion to sition, containing, as it did, expressions in vote on the same side of the question as regard to the Jews that conveyed imputahe (Mr. C. Pearson) did, had arrived at tions which he had no right to cast upon the same conclusion with himself, not only them. It had been said that the exclusion by a different but by a directly opposite of the Jews was conformable to other exroute. That hon. Gentleman had ex- clusions sanctioned by the law of the land; pressed himself in favour of a religious and the hon. Member for Midhurst inconformity taking the shape of religious stanced the cases of age, sex, and protruth. He could support the Bill upon no perty, as being tests applied to all persons, such grounds. It appeared to him that if whether Jews or Christians. But the only the House adopted that view of the case, reply he (Mr. C. Pearson) thought it nethey most be prepared to return to the cessary to make to such an argument was, Test Acts, the Corporation Acts, the Act that it was not proposed to admit either of Conformity, and the Act of Uniformity. Jewish minors, Jewish women, or Jewish The State had no right to coerce the con- paupers into Parliament. All that the sciences of men, and cast them in the Jews claimed, or rather all that was claimmould of conformity as a condition for ed for them, was, the right of eligibilitytheir obtaining public employment. He a right to be elected in common with every should support the Bill upon the principle other individual in the country. He stood of religious liberty. He was aware it had there as an elector of the city of London, been said, and he adhered to the proposi- which had returned this Gentleman (Mr. tion even to its fullest extent, that the ul- Rothschild) - one of between 6,000 and timate result of this measure would be the 7,000 persons who composed the ancient admission of Mahometans into the House livery companies of the city of London, of Commons. Now, he did not hesitate consisting of the merchants, bankers, trato say, that if the son of Ramohun Roy, ders, and inhabitant householders of the inheriting his father's virtues, and imi- first commercial city in the first commertating his conduct, should receive the con- cial country in the world, and who in the fidence of a large constituency, and be re- exercise of their rights and the discharge turned to that House, he believed the of their duties had thought fit to elect as House would be prepared to recognise the their representative one of the most emibroad principle of civil and religious lib- nent of their commercial men, whose erty, and admit that son of Ramohun Roy. name was known in every part of the It had been said by the hon. Member for world where the peaceful flag of commerce Oxford, that privation was not persecution, floated. Why should this Gentleman not and that exclusion from office was not to be returned to that House? The first be considered that description of disparage- reason assigned was his inability to join ment of which the Jews had any right to in the prayers with which the proceedcomplain, so long as we did not spit upon ings of the House were opened. their gabardines, and call them "Jews." had been stated that he could not join Now, of all the treatment to which the in prayer with other Members of the Jews, in the long history of the persecution! House without awful blasphemy towards It secure God, and hypocrisy towards his fellow-men. | vernment a piece of ground on which to Now, these were very hard words to be- erect a Protestant place of worship, Mr. stow upon a body of the Jewish community. D. Samuel, a Jewish gentleman in the He, for his part, had had the privilege of high confidence of the king, procured an being acquainted with Jews for thirty-five edict sanctioning the grant of a plot of years. There were persons within the ground for the erection of a Protestant sound of his voice at that moment belong- place of worship in that country. Mr. ing to that community with whom he had Samuel contributed towards the purchase been acquainted for that period; he had of the ground so obtained; and, in accoralso been acquainted with the late Solomon dance with the unanimous wish of the Herschel, Dr. Mendola, and several mem- Protestant residents, he laid the first stone bers of the Jewish clergy and laity of all of that Christian temple; and he (Mr. classes; and he solemnly declared, that he Pearson) had at that moment in his pocket never in his life heard fall from the lips of a copy of the vote of thanks addressed to one of the Jewish people a single word or that gentleman for his liberality. That sentence, not only not resembling in the gentleman was at this moment residing in slightest degree the expression imputed to England, and probably, if this Bill passed, them—namely, that of calling our Saviour he might become a candidate for admission a crucified impostor-but not even a single into that House; and he (Mr. Pearson) expression which the most delicate and was quite sure that if he did succeed in fastidious Christian could be offended at. obtaining a seat there, he would, like his He took leave to inform those hon. Gen- Jewish brethren, conduct himself during tlemen who imputed mockery and blas- prayers in such a manner as would enphemy to the Jews, in the event of their title him to the esteem of the House. being present in that House, that he (Mr. But with regard to the attendance at Pearson) had been in the house of God prayers, he (Mr. Pearson) understood with members of the Jewish community, that the presence of a Member at prayand he could conscientiously say, he had ers was entirely voluntary. Indeed, the never seen them guilty of the slightest of- only object appeared to be to fence to their Christian brethren. It was seats; for he believed that, except in the the duty of the high-sheriffs of London to honeymoon of a new Parliament, if twenty attend upon certain days at the ministra- Members were present at prayers it was tions of religion in the Protestant form. as much as could be expected; and, thereThey had all seen in the newspapers a fore, a Jewish gentleman might perform short time ago, that a certain ceremony all the duties of that House without intook place at a certain place where the curring the censure which had been atinterrupting words of "Mockery, mock- tempted to be cast upon a Jew attending ery!" were frequently and distinctly heard. at prayers. The objection to the admisThat ceremony took place in an edifice in sion of the Jews appeared to rest upon which an alderman of the city of London three grounds: first, that it was contrary was in attendance, and he attended with to the constitutional rights of the country; the Riot Act in his pocket, as in duty secondly, that it was inconsistent with the bound; and the violent conduct of certain faith of the people; and, thirdly, that it clergymen, who echoed "Mockery, mock- was inconsistent with sound religion and ery!" from pew to pew at the solemn Christian principles. The hon. Baronet confirmation of a bishop-for that was the (Sir R. Inglis) who had spoken so well ceremony to which he alluded—had almost and so long upon this subject, had divided caused him to put the Riot Act in force. the history of the country into three disNow, those cries did not proceed from tinct periods. He had challenged the fuJews. No! the conduct of the alderman, ture historian of England to point out any who was a Jew, was on that occasion, as instance, from the time of Alfred the Great it was on every other occasion, like that and Edward the Elder, to the time of of his Jewish brethren-respectful and Praise-God Barebones-from the time of blameless. Those cries proceeded from Praise-God Barebones down to the Revothe Christian, and even from the clerical lution-and from the Revolution to the portion of the assembly. He had known present period-in which the taking of an the Jews perform many services for Chris- oath upon a Christian symbol, or the book tians connected with the promotion of their of Christian records, was not a condition religion. He recollected that, in the year required to be so fulfilled by all persons 1821, at Rio de Janeiro, when the British previous to taking any office of the State. Protestants could not obtain from the Go- Now, it was a very remarkable circum |