the committee upon any subject connected with the projects before them, he may be called in and examined with respect to that subject. Frequent instances have occurred of this being done. One case occurred in the Session before last, 1844, before the Bury and Manchester railway committee, in the House of Commons.

In cases where the bill was ordered to be engrossed in the Session of 1845, a Standing Order (88 a) directs that the committee shall examine whether the bill be the same in every respect as that at the last stage of its proceeding in the House in the last year. In such instance, no evidence shall be received by the committee [for or against the bill]. On the reception and adoption by the House of a report that the bill is in every respect the same as at the last stage of its proceeding in this House in last Session, such bill may be ordered to be engrossed without any further proceeding in respect thereof. [H. C. 88 a.]

[The committee clerk, after the report is made out, has to deliver in to the Private Bill Office a printed copy of the bill, with the amendments made in committee written therein. In this bill, all the clauses added by the committee are to be regularly marked in those parts of the bill wherein they are to be inserted.]

Promoting and Opposing Bills in Committee.

In the preceding part of this chapter the proceedings in committee on the bill as required by the Standing Orders have been duly noticed. It is at present intended to submit various general remarks with regard to the different circumstances under which bills come before committees, and with which promoters and opponents thereof may have to contend. They will be made under the following heads, and in this order :

1. Propriety of Consultations between Counsel, Solicitors, Engineers, &c.

2. Expediency of altering, or opposing the alteration of, Clauses.

3. Excessive Demands of Landowners, &c. 4. Practice of Committees generally.

5. Right to be heard against the Preamble. 6. Right to be heard against Clauses, &c.

The above divisions have been made for the sake of facility of reference, as many of the remarks and observations that follow, are necessarily of a miscellaneous and varied nature, and have, therefore, been arranged under these heads, and classed together in separate sections, as far as was practicable, for the convenience of the reader. To proceed, then, first, with the observations on,

1. The Propriety of Consultations between Counsel, Solicitors, Engineers, &c.

Consultations between the counsel, engineers, and solicitors, engaged in connection with any railway are extremely desirable, and will be found most advisable. It is impossible that the counsel employed, or the solicitors, can understand, without the assistance of the engineers, the chief practical points to be relied on in opposition to, or the best practical points to be urged in favour of a bill. Consequently, without frequent communications between these several parties, no bill can be safely carried through both Houses in case of opposition; nor can an opposition to any such bill be effectual and powerful without recourse to this or some similar mode. Hence the necessity of consultation, inquiry, and a thorough knowledge of plans and sections. The counsel and solicitors should, for this purpose, be aided by the advice and opinion of able, practical engineers. The talents of these gentlemen, together with their experience, will well fit them for that object. In their cross-examination of opponents, it will be expedient that counsel should have the engineer by their side. Just as no engineer can become an accomplished and learned advocate at once, so neither can the barrister, however extensive his experience and practical knowledge, or the solicitor, become an engineer

immediately, acquainted with all that will be requisite to conduct a bill safely through committee, when opposed, or to manage successfully opposition that may be raised to any railway scheme, for which the sanction of Parliament is sought to be obtained. Many engineering questions will arise, upon which an engineer himself will not be allowed to speak. It will, therefore, be necessary that those who are retained to act in connection for the attainment of one specific object (be it the support of, or opposition to, any railway bill in committee) should be well acquainted with the objections to be raised, or the circumstances to be urged in favour of the measure, as the case may be. An engineer, it should be borne in mind, can always be called in as a witness, though he is not allowed to be an advocate; and hence an intelligent counsel may, by an exercise of judgment, make the greatest use of the talent, experience, and practical scientific knowledge of the parties engaged with him, without in any way infringing on the usual practice of Parliament.

2. Expediency of altering, or opposing alterations of Clauses, &c.

It is often a question of some importance to those who have charge of the conducting of private bills, and especially railway bills, through Parliament, to consider as to the expediency of

altering, or opposing the alteration of clauses, according to the amount demanded, requested, or expected, for their lands or other interests, by parties threatening to oppose such bills. It is a general system, however, to give way in such cases, even more than to what might be deemed a reasonable and equitable extent. If, however, much too large or exorbitant a demand be made, as is too frequently the fact, it is in the discretion of the promoters, and it is often a sound discretion, to let the parties take their course, and leave all they have to allege in support of their claims to the calm and deliberate consideration of the committee on the bill, assisted by the advice and judgment of able counsel. This is frequently forced on promoters of bills by the high demands of opponents, who rely upon the anxiety of the former to silence and lessen opposition; but the latter often have cause subsequently to regret having compelled the agents and others to refer the question to the decision of the committee on the bill itself.

3. Excessive Demands of Landowners, &c.

It generally happens that persons who have land through which a railway is proposed to pass, consider that such railway must necessarily go through their land, and that, consequently, they can procure such price as they may ask