The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1881-07-16 00:00:00

THE STOURBRIDGE OBSERVER. -

4-" out pub P}istrict 41615.

TER CHARGE OF STEALING LORD STAMFORD'S
SILVER.—At the Stafford Summer Assizes, on
Tuesday before Mr. Justice Cave, Bernard Cochrane
(63), steward, and Julia Frances Beville (45), de-
scribed as having ne occupation were indicted for
feloniously stealing, in March last, at the parish
of Enville, 24 silver forks and 24 silver spoons, the
property of the Ear). of Stamford and Warrington.
Mr. A. Young prosecuted and Mr. Darling, instruc-
ted (Mr. C. W. Wyndham) defended. In the month
of November, 1880, the male prisoner entered the
service of the prosecutor as house steward, and
resided in the house at Enville Hall as long as
he held his stewardship, at the close of which he
went to reside at Forrest Ledge, Kinver, where the
female prisoner also resided. The male prisoner
and a butler named Ashby had charge of the silver
which was kept in a strongroom at Enville, and
of which room each had a key. On the 12th of
February a new butler was engaged, and according
to custom the articles of silver were counted, and
were then found to be correct. On the 7th or Bth
of June, whilst Lord Stamford was at his residence
in Leicestershire, he discharged the male prisoner.
On the 18th of June an examination of the plate
was made by Mr. Bennett, who kept an inventory
of it, and it was then discovered that 24 forks and
24 spoons were missing, The male prisoner then
denied knowing anything aboutthe missing silver.
On the 24th of June Lord Stamford himself went
to Enville, when Ashby, who had left in Februny,
was present. The male prisoner, addressing Ashby,
told him that he had had one key and he (prisoner)
the other of the room in which the silver was kept,
and as they were both responsible to Lord Stam-
ford ler the missing articles, he proposed that each
should pay half of their value. Ashby declined to
entertain the proposition. Subsequently, however,
a cheese box addressed to Lord Stamford arrived at
Enville, and on its being opened it was found to
contain the miscing silver. It was proved that on
! the preceeding day the female prisoner had booked
the box from New-street Station, Birmingham, to
Enville. The prisoners were afterwards arrested
when the female prisoner indignantly denied the
! charge, and also denied having being in Birmingham
'on the date the box was sent. A bag, however,
which a railway clerk identified as being the one in
which she took the box to his office at the station
was found in her bedroom. The male prisoner at
the time of his arrest made a statement to the
effect that the silver was removed by him through
an oversight. —Mr. Darling contended that there
was no evidence ef felony against the female
prisoner, except that she took the box to the
station. As to the male prisoner, he contended
that his actions were not compatible with a guilty
mind. He had occupied a respectable and respen-
sible position for years, and was a man to whom a
verdict of guilty would mean ruin, and a man
whose conduct had been harshly construed—he (Mr.
Darling) would not say by Lord Stamford; bu: the
mere fact that he told a generous falsehood to
shield the female prisoner, when he said he knew
nothing about the box, had been twisted into
evidence against him, and he argued that the facts
pokted more to his innecence than to his guilt.—
His Lordship. in summing up, said he saw very
little evidence affecting the female prisoner. The
main evidence of a person receiving property with
felonious knowledge consisted in his assisting to
dispose of it, but in this case the female prisoner
appeared only to have taken the box to the station,
and had it nut been that she told a story when
examined he certainly should see ne case against
her. He then dealt with the case against the male
prisoner, and told the jury if there was a reason-
able doubt as to how the plate came into his
possession they ought not to convict him.—The
jury, after being absent from Court for some time,
returned with a verdict of "not guilty" against
the female prisoner, and one of " guilty " against
Cochraue —The Judge, in passing sentence cn
Cochrane, told him he was placed in a position of
trust, and he abused it and carried off the preperty
of his master. But for the recommendation of the
jury his sentence would have been a heavier one.
He would have to be imprisoned and kept to hard
labour for four calendar months. The prisoner
seemed much affected by the sentence, his female
' companion also betraying considerable agitation.
RECOGNITION SERVICES AT THE CONGREGATIONAL
CHAPEL .—Recognition services in connection with
the settlement of the Rev. George Robinson, of
Drybrook, Gloucestershire, as the Congregational
pastor at Stourbridge, were held on Tuesday after-
noon, when a sermon was preached by the Rev. J.
P. Allan, M.A., Principal of the Congregational
Institute, Bristol. A tea meeting was aftr wards
held in the schoolroom, at which 200 sat down ; and
later on in the evening a public meeting at which
the Rev. James Richards presided. There was a
large attendance, amongst those present being the
Re's-dc. J. P. Allan, S. Marsh, Worcester; A. Gill,
Malvern, secretary to the Worcester Association ;
Maginnie, Unitarian; J. R. San-tell, Wesleyan ;
M. Cotton, New Connection, all from Stourbridge.
MALVERN RACES.—In our advertising columns
it will be seen that the Malvern Hunters Flat
Races will take place on Bank Holiday, August
Ist. The day's sport will consist of the Upton
Stakes, the Leabury Selling Stakes, the Worcester
Hunters Flat Race, the Malvern Stakes, and the
Malvern Link Selling Stakes The course, which
is an entirely new one, is within 5 minutes walk
oi the Malvern Link Station, and us excursions
run from Birmingham, Wolverhampton, Dudley,
Stourbridge, Kidderminster and other places, the
affair will prove a great suece4s. The admission
to the ground is 61 for pedestrians.
PERMITTING A NUISINCIC.-...At the Police Court,
held yesterday, before Colonel Fletcher, Lord
Lyttelton, H. 0. Firmstone, and C. Cochrane, Esqrs.
John Carrington was summoned for permitting a
nuisance to exist on his premises at Iverley, Mr.
Whitmore, inspector, proved the case, which was
admitted by defendant. The Bench made an order
for the defendant to repair, whitewash, and abate
the nuisance in one month, and pay costs.
BREACH OF THE PEACE.—John Watason and
Daniel Hopewell were charged with committing a
breach of the peace, by fighting on the 7th. Police-
constable Paynter proved that he saw both parties
strike. Withdrawn on payment of costs 6s 6d each.
CAUTION TO DRlVERS.—Williata Dickens was
charged with being drunk on the Bth inst., while in
charge of a horse and carriage. Police-constable
Moore proved the case, and said that defendant
drove on to the footpath. Fined 2s 6d and costs.
EXCISE PICOSECUTIONS.—WiIIiam Preece, laud-
lord of the Swan Inn, Hagley Street, was summoned
by Mr. J. F, Otter, supervisor, for that he on
the 19th May, he being a brewer, did unlawfully
use 81b of sugar, and neglect to enter it into the
book previded for that purpose, and had rendered
himself liable to a penalty of £lOO, Mr. E. W.
Johns appeared to prosecute, and Mr. Perry de-
fended. Mr. Johns said the case was taken in sec.
20, and he should be able to prove the case conclu-
sively.—Mr. J. FeOtter said that on the 19th of May
he went to defendant's brewery, accompanied by
Mr. Williams. Defendant had given notice to brew.
The book produced was for defendant to enter the
materials to be used at the next brewing, and to
give notice of the day and hour he intends to brew
The entry is to brew nine bushels. There was no
entry of brewing sugar. He took samples in bottles,
corked them, and sent them to the office by a
me-senger wLo was in sight the whole time. A
powder was put inSe the bottle to stop fomentation,
and they were packed and sent to Loudon. Cross-
examined: Defendamt denied having used any
sugar. Mr. Williams corroborated. Mr. Hartness,
the analyst from Someriet House, proved that there
came from No. 2 cooler 65 per ( ent cane sugar, teed
No. 2 copper 25 per cent. elle R. Bannister cor-
roborated. Mr. Perry addressed the Bench for the
defendant, who had instructed him that he had
used no sugar at all, and that the whole thing was
a mystery to him.—Mr Johns .epliee, aud s id h
(lid not wish to press for a heavy penalty, but
would suggest to the Bench that they should do a,
others had done, viz: fine one tenth. There were
two othere.eases and he proposed to give the evidence
before the first case was adjudicated upon.—Johu
Baker, landlord of the Glassmakers Arnie, High
Street, was charged with a similar offence, and
pleaded guilty.—A similar charge was preferree
against James Cook, landlord of the Bull's Head
Inn, Lye.—A fine of £lO was inflicted in each case,
with a recommendation for Baker to apply to the
Board of Excise to reduce his fine to ..22 10e.

INDECENT AssAuur.—George Tolley, of Clent,
was charged with indecently at.saniting Ellen Jane
Waldron (6), on the 13th inst. From the evidence
of complanutiat, it-appeat s she was going up Field
Lane about 12 o'cl. ck, when the defendant came
to her and put her down on the hank, and a-sa.ulted
her. After hearing the evidence of Mr. Waldron.
Harrett Mere iith, and Police-constable Wallace
prisoutr was coxunti!ted to take his trial.
CARD PLAYING.—Three boys named Dowler,
Hall, and Titunlins were each tined 2s 6,1 and costs
for k)la)ing at cards in the highway on the 10th
inst.

WILFUL DAMAGE.—A boy named Wm. Johnson,
of Cradley, was fined Os including co6ts, for wil-
fully damaging a currant tree, the property w
Edwin Southall, of Cradloy,—Sarah Higgins., a
respectable looking woman, was fined Cs 6d for
wilfully damaging a fence, the property of Elijah
Pearson.

ROBBERY FROM THE PkßSON.—Ellen Davis alias
Ellen May was charged with stealing from the
person the burn of £33 17s 6d, at Kidderminster
Station, the property of Edwin Proctor, on the
7th inst.-LProseautor said he was a traveller re-
siding at Smethwick, and on the 7th inst, about
8 o'clock at night, he was at Kidderminster Station.
He missed the 8.15 train and waited at the station
till the next train. he sat on a bench on the
platform and fell asleep. He suddenly awike and
observed the prisoner leaning over him. He 'voile

to her and she said she was going by tr em n and
asked him to give her 5d becaute she had nnt got
enough mr,ney. He gave her a sixpence or a
shilling. She then sat down by lii side by the
pocket in which there was a bag of money. The
bag contained £33 lOs in gold and 7s 61 in silvt r:
It was safe in his pocket about 8 fo'clock and it
was between half-past nine and ten when he
missed it. He gave information to the police and
on Monday last identified the woman out of six
women.—Henry Hebbelswait, omnibus driver, said
he was walking up and down the platform at
Kidderminster, about 9.25. , and saw the prosecu-
tor as 'eep. He saw the prisoner come out of a
third class refreshment room and go to the prose-
cutor and touch him on his shoulder. She then
sat by his side. I i saw the prosecutor give a
small coin to prisoner.' Prisoner then walked
towards the booking office, and put her hand under
her apron. He did not see anything more of her
afterwards.—Police-sergeant Jones prpved appre-
hending prisoner at a lodging•house in Birming-
ham Street, Stourbridge, on the Bth inst, and the
money was found upon her.—Prisoner, who 'said
that prosecutor gave the money to her, was com-
mitted to take her trial at Worcester.

BOARD OF GUARDIANS.—The usual meeting of
this Board was held yesterday. :Mr. Billingham
presided and there were also present Messrs.
Brooks,iThompson, Lavender, Forrest, Wood,
Crump, Wright, and J. Billingharn.—Acia.itted
into the house during the week 12 ; discharged
16; born 2; dead 0 ; remaining in the house
540 ; corresponding period last year 491.
Out-door relief, Kingswinford district £39 4s.
2d; Stourbridge district £3l 5s 81d ; lialesowen
district, £2l 8s Od ; non-resident 6s 41 ; total
£92 4s 2-id against £Bl 8s sd.

DUDLEY, STOURBRIDGE, AND KINGSWIN-
FORD TRAMWAY BILL.
HOUSE OF LORDS, Wednesday.
This bill came on for hearing to-day, before a
Select Committee of the House of Lords, consisting
of Earl
.11eaucinunp] (Chairman, Lord Ampthill,
Lord Bathurst, Lord Pembroke, and Lord Ribbless
dale.
Mr. Bidder, Q.C., appeared on behalf of the pro-
moters, while tile Great Western Railway Company,
who are opposing the bill, were represented by Mr.
Pember. Q.C., and Mr. Saunders, Q.C.
At the outset Mr. Bidder objected to the Great
Western :Company being heard. on the ground that
they had no locus standibut after some discussion
between learned counsel the committee decided that
the railway company had a perfect right to be
heard on their petition.
Mr. H. M. Wainwright, who was the first wit-
ness examined, stated that he was Mayor of Dudley,
was an alderman of the borough, and was also
solicitor to this bill. He was well acquainted with
the district, having resided in the locality for a
period extending osier 45 years. The whole of the
district between Dudley and Stourbridge was
extremely populous, and, in fact, it was almost a
continuous street. The population was mainly a
labouring one, the people chiefly employed in
mining ironworks. Brierley Hill had a population
of over 12,000, while a great deal of building was
going on at Hart's Hill. Wordslev, too, had a
very considerable popnlation, and there were large
works at Bretteil Lane, at which a large number of
hands were employed. The scheme that was now
being promoted in Parliament had been planned
witha view to providing special :accommodation for
the district in question, The original propos ii was
that the tramway should start from the railway
station in the Tipton Road, run through Dudley,
and so on to Stourbridge. They had, however,
been stopped by the Board of Trade in the Market
Place at Dudley. They possessed running powers
to the Great Western Railway, and those powers
actually extended to the North Western Station.
rhe tramways were, in his opinion, much wanted
in the district, where at present there existed no
means of conveyance equal to the requirements of
the public. The bill, he might mention, had re-
ceived the approval of the road authorities all along
the route of the proposed tramways, while it was
supported in an equally warm manner by the Cor-
poration of Dudley. In the district generally, he
believed, there existed a strong feeling in favour
of the tramways, as there was great complaint made
that the railway service provided was not of an
efficient character, and quite inadequate to the re-
quirements of the population. Unquestionably the
tramways would provide accommodation for a large
amount of traffic, for which the railway company
failed to afford the necessary facilities. It was
ridiculous to suppose that the tramway could
materially interfere with the goods traffic of tic
railway company, for they would never be able to
carry goods to any:large extent, and thus he tailed
to see how the scheme would have a prejudicial
effect on the interests of the Great Western Com-
pany.
Cross-examined by Mr. Pember He did not pro-
fess to have any experience in the working of tram-
ways. The scheme did not. originate in Dudley,
but it was adoyed there, and it had been received
most favourably by the public, The capital of he
limited company promoting the bill would be £2,000
and ,R 1,200 of that amount bad been stOscribed.
Mr. G. Webb, who was the next witness examined
said in conjuncti:n with his brothers he car:A-al on
a large business as seed growers, glass manu-
facturers, and wool merchants at Wordsley, where
they had large mills and storehouses. The proposed
faccommodation was, in his opinion, much needed
or the facilities provided by the Great Western
Company were of a most inadequate character,
was true that a few of the tradesmen in the principal
street in Wordsley objected to the tramway, but as
a rule the scheme had met with a most favourable
reception.
Mr W. J. Taney. who was next callel, said be
can ied on a large leather trade, and exported exten-
sively to the Continent and also the United] States.
His works were situated at the bottom of Stour-
bridge As chairman of the Stourbridge Com-
missioners the tramways had been brought under
his notice, for the Commissioners constituted one
of the authorities to whom the bill had to be re-
ferred. A meeting of the Commissioners was called
to consider that proposal, and the members of that
body present at the meeting expressed them;,elves
unanimously in favour of the project. The tram-
way, in his opinion, would provide accommodation
which was very much needed in the district, and
he believed if the scheme was sanctioned that it
would be very generally used.
In cross-examination by Mr. Saunders, witness
said the people of Stourbridge regretted that the
Board of Trade should have cut the tramway short
at the bottom of the town.
Mr. H. Hughes, who mentioned at the outset
that he had known the district of Stourbridge for
a period of 55 years, said he was well acquainted
with every inch of the ground which it was pro-
posed that the tramway should traverse. The route
was most populated, was bounded on either side by
houses over almost the whole district, while an
enormous amouut of traffic was continually passing.
The resid, rats in the neighbour.)d would be
greatly benefit ed if the tramway wes ca.rrie I oet,
and he had no doubt but that it would be exten-
sively utilised by the public.
Cross-examined by Mr. Saunders: He was one of
the promoters of the bill.
Mr. Skidmore, of Brierley Hill, wets then ex-
amined, and mentioned that the sohetne had received
the unanimous consmt of the Board there.
Brierley Hid had a total population of 12,00 a lade
the rateable value of the property there was
£1.03,000. The existing railway accommodation
could not be said lo be ad, quite to the requircmnentß
of the district, but still there were other piaci*
which he knew to be even worse off in that respect.
Along the road that would be traversed by ths
tramway there was always a large am .unt of
traffic, and foot passengers were c nstantly passim g
in great numbers. Much dissatisraction prevail( d
at the inconvenient times at which the trains le n.
Thus, in the morning there occurred an interval af
two hours and fory minutes, during which time
there were no trains running. He certainly be-
lieved the tramway would provide accommodatisn
which was not supplied by the Great Western
Company, and it was with that belief that he had
been requested by the Local Baard at Biierley Hill
to attend and give evidence there.
Mr. Bagott, an alderman of the Dudley Town
Council, regarded the scheme as a most us, ful arid
practicable one, and mentioned that public feeling
was unanimous in favour of the construction of the
tramway. He could not understand why the Great
Western Company should oppose the bill as the
tramway woul I afford accommodation which it was
a matter of impossibility for the company to supply.
Cross-examine I by Mr. Pember He wee n t a
shareholder in the limited company, but he believed '
he brought the scheme before the Corporation for
the consideration of that body.
Mr. Smith, civil engineer, of Birmingham, said,
in conjunction with Mr. Pritchard, he had prepared
the:plans for the tramway. He was well acquainted
with the district, and could not see that there would
be any difficulty to be encountered in working the
tramway in such a manner as not to interfere with
the ordinary traffic.
In cross-examination by Mr. Pember, witness
said the estima:ted expenditure in carrying out the
tramway was £l ,000.
Mr. Pritchard, civil engineer, of Birmingham,
gave some engineering details as to the tramway.
It was preferable, he said, that the tramway
should be worked by steam or some other mechanical
power rather than by horse-power, on account of
the gradients. There was not the slightest
possibility of the tramway competinz with the
Great Western Company in the way of goods
traffic, nor was he aware that the tramway would
interfere with the bridges of the Great Western
Company.

Mr. Page, an engineer, who stated that he had
had very considerable experience in the IA orking of
tramways, gave evidence to the effect that the pro-
posed tramway would comply with all the require—
ments of the Board of Trade.

This concluded the case for the promoters.
Mr. Harrison, who was the first witness called on
'oehalf Of the Grtat Western Company, said he
failed to see that there was any great necessity for
the proposed line of tramway. It would, in his
opinion, be a vary great inconvenience to the heavy
traffic along the road, of which there was a great
deal. In addition to that he considered a steam
tramway woul Ibe positively dangerous. It would
scarcely have been possible to select a worse road
on which to lay down a tramway, for the surface
of the ground had subsided to such an extent that
the houses in the locality were almost unsafe to
live in, and certainly it would be dangerous to run
heavy engines along the road. The railway ac-
commodation was fairly good, and even if the
scheme were sanctioned he did not believe the
tramway would be used by the people to any large
extent, while it would not prove a remunerative,in-
vestment.

IMr. Walker, surgeon, cf BriLrley Hill gave
evidence to the efft:ct that a tramway would greatly
! enhance thc danger and difficulty of the traffic
along the road. The population, besides, was
• essentially a working one, and the people, he was
- convinced, would sooner walk to their work than
ride. The railway service was, on whole, very
satisfactory, and if the Great Western would only
run one or two more trains no reasonable person
would have any cause to c,
Mr. Martin, civil engineer, oi S-ourbridge, stated
that from the nature of the ground be anticipated
considerable difficulty would be encountered in the
making of the tramway, and that besides it would
constitute an additional danger to the traffic.
Mr. Robault, another civil engineer, gave similiar
evidence, and also expre-secl an opinion that the
tramway would enter into serious competition with
the Great Western Company in the way of traffic.
IThis concluded the evidence, and the committee
then adjourned.

i HOUSE OF LORDS, TIIURSDAY.—The hearing of
this bill was resumed this morning, before a Select
Committee of the House of Lords, consisting of
Earl Beauchamp (Chairman), Lord Arnpthill. Lord
Bathurst, Lord Pembroke, ana Lord Rib blesd
Mr. Bidder, Q.C., again appeared on behalf of the
promoters, while the Great Western Railway Com-
pany were represented by Mr. Pember, and Mr.
Saunders. Q.U. Mr. Pember, addressing the com-
mittee on behalf of the Great Western Company,
pointed out at the outset that the gradients of the
proposed tramway were of a
.most unfavourable
character, being as much as one in 15 and N.
whereas a tramway should be laid down over levsl
ground. Nor should it be forgotten that the popu-
lation of the district through which the tramway
would pass was essentially a working one, and of
such a description, too, as would not require to use
a tramway even if it were constructed. Further,
there was the consideration—and he could not urge
that point too strongly on thek lordships—that the
tramway, if sanctioned and carried out, would enter
into active competition with the Great Western
Railway Company, not only in the matter of goods,
way
but also of passenger traffic. Virtually the train-
' ' would be a railway, and
.the only limitation that
would be imposed was that a higher speed than
eight miles an hour should not be attained. Even
taken at that there would be no great or essenial
difference between the speed of the Great Western
Company's trains, stopping as they did at all the
stations, and that of the cars on the tramway. Com-
petition between the Great Western Company and
the tramway was inevitable, and their lordships, in
considering the point, should not forget that this
tramway would be.in,connection with tramways from
Dudley to Dudley Port, Tipton, and from Tipton to
Birmingham. They had, however, been told by the
engineer to the tramways that they would have no
sidings or terminal. He' would ask what was to
prevent the Tramways Company constructing
branches to their line of rails, or from ruening into
a coal depot, or some such place, which would
answer all the purposes of a terminus? '1 here was
an extreme likelihood of there being a cetnpeti•ion
for goods, and also passenger traffic, fur it was
evident people would have to choose between rail-
way and tramway, and that they would be treated
as two lines of railway iii competition the one with
the other for every kind of traffic. The two lines
were never more ti.an half a mile apart, while in
many instances the distance that separated them
was much less. As to the accommodation provided
by the Great Western Company, of which such
complaint bad been made by the witness called on
behalf of the promoters, he would remind their
lordships that the company had spent very large
sums of money in provididg the requisite railway
facilities for the district. It was a significant fact
that they had six stations within a distance of five
miles, wuile a new station had been built at Brierley
Hill. and that at 13rettell Lane was bemg remodelled
Further, they had eighteen trains days per day run-
nig one way and seventeen the other, and with the
exception of six of all those trains stopped at
every statton. From that he thought it must be
evident to the committee that there were no
reasonable grounds on which complaint could be
made as to the insufficiency of the service provided.
Coming to the cite stion of population, they found the
population to be essentially an artisan one, grouped
round clusters of what he might call public works
—manufac!o ies and establishments of that kind
Even Mr. Skidmore in his evidence had admitted
that the people in the vast majority of cases livodlin
the vicihity of the works, and that statement had
been verified by other witnesses. It was indeed a
fact that had been placed beyond dispute that the
working lasses generally lived w,thin a very short
distance of the scene of their labours. Once more,
he would point out to their lordships that Stour-
bridge, Wordsley, Woodside, Brierley Hill, and
other places, were not suburbs; that DuGley had
thrown out other localities in which the artisan
population of that town resided. Each town formed
a centre of its own, independent of its neighbours
with its own industries, and markets, and a resident
population, between whom and Dudley there was
but little traffic. Even in those cases where the
working people lived some little distance from the
worksi it did not of necessity follow that they lived
on the high road. It was quite as likely they would
reside in cross roads, and thus in going to their
work it would frequently be a question of whether
they should walk several hundred yards or go the
longer distance by tram. Taking the actual con-
dition of things generally into consideration, he
would not admit that any need existed for the lay
mg down of this tramway. If the populationto-
siding between Stourbridge and Dudley worked in
Dudley, then he would willingly confess that a
tram way such as that proposed by this bill would
weld be desirable, but then the evidence that had
ueen given had proved directly the contrary. These
several towns were independent centres, with popu-
lati ,us that were permanently located in them, an I
that being so, what possible need existed for this
communication by tramways with Dudley, with
which they had comparatively little traffic. Prac-
tically there did not exist any traffic to be c rried
even if Vie tramway was constructed, aud this view
was greatly strengthened by the fact that they did
not at the present time find any omnibuses running
over the proposed route, How was that to be ac-
counted for ? Simply thus—the people well knew
that the traffic was of so limited and insignificant a
kind that an omnibus service was not needed for
the district, and what was more would_ not even pay
Nor acre these the only objections he had to raise
to the scheme, The roads, he submitted, were
uttsrly unsuited for the construction of' a tramway.
cot only was the population one that did not re-
qui. e the proposed accommodation, but even if it
were laid down the tramway would be absolutely
un.,afe. It was, too, a curious fact thdt no evidence
had been, forthcoming on the pa.t of the pron.oters
as to the amount ot traffic, and further that no
workingmen or foremen of flytories had been called
as witnesses ia support of the bill. Again, there
had been no public meetings called at Brierley Hill
or Woodside in favour of the scheme. At King-
swinford, he was ready to admit, they did want a
tramway, and one connecting thot place with Stour-
bridge would be an admirable thing. The whole
oroposal, in fact, Aas originated at Kingswinford,
and the people there no doubt were perfectly alive
te the value of alliances and felt that the more they
developed and extended the scheme the more likely
was it to succeed Thus they looked round. and
very naturally the proposal was brought under the
notice of the people of Dudley. In Dudley they I
succeeded in obtaining the assistance of the Mayor, i
who was also a solicitor, and who subsequently be-
came soliciter to this bill; and eventually the
matter was submitted for the approval of the Dudley
Corporation. To all intents and purposes. however,
it w ,s scheme that originated it Kingswinferd, and
not in Dudley ; and still less even was it a Brierley
Hill, Woodside, S!ourbridge, or Brettell Lane scheme
Finally the learaed counsel contended that the road
was unfit for the construction of a tramway; that a
tramway was not desired by the inhabitants of the
district ; that there did not exist any traffic to be
carried; that it would compete with the Great
Western Campany, in a lditionto constituting an
inconvenience to the traffic passing and lastly,
that of the capital it was proposed to raise the
greater part would be spent in the promotion of the
bill. On thcse grounds he appealed to their lord-
ships not to sanction the scheme. The committee,
after an extremely brief consultation, decided to
pass the preamble of the bill.