The Sun.
London, England, 1852-02-13 00:00:00

----
pared, and after consulting with the Town Clerk, Soli-
c,aintdo ro rda
rde
diet c: ear:
saute
tnoe ebr;
dwael y approved
ionf
tthhbe
Gnao
zt iect et
e,
and papers accordingly. We also directed the plans and
models of the contemplated measure to be laid before us
at our next meeting, and that the question of appointing
competent engineers should be then considered, and we
requested the architect in the mean time to examine the
plan and estimate prepared by Mr. Pearson.
" That at our subsequent meeting, the Remeenbrancer
reported that the notices had been duly inserted in the
Gazette and newspapers, as directed by us. The City
architect was heard on his proceedings under the order
of the previous meeting; and Mr. Pearson having at-
tended, with Mr. Stevens, jun., his surveyor, laid before
us plans and sections in explanation of hie general plan,
and Mr. Stevens was heard as to the gradients embraced
in the proposed measure, and stated that there was no
difficulty in connecting the proposed line with the other
railways to the north of the Thames.
" That your committee having heard Mr. Pearson
generally on his plan, it was resolved that the same was
desirable, if, upon further inquiry, it should appear that
no practical objection existed to the execution of the
work, and that the cost could be amply provided for.
And in order to fully satisfy ourselves and to afford the
necessary information to the Court, we further resolved
that it should be referred to Mr. Banning, the City's
architect, with some gentlemen to be thereafter named,
to consider as to the practicability and cost of the plans
proposed by Mr. Pearson, with power to make and re-
ceive any suggestions they might think calculated to
improve the plan, and to report to ns thereon. It was
further resolved, that Mr. J. W. Higgins be one of the
parties to be associated with the City architect in the
inquiry; and that Mr. J. Walker be the engineer to he
is like manner associated; and we requested E. Harri-
son,putthEesmq.s'edlveepsutyin, ocnormcmh
aa
ni rime
aatni
0,
nw
wi t
iht h Mt
hro.
aße ugnenniun
eg
et
no
forthwith, and request that they would attend us at our
next meeting;
attin
goiir meeting on 21st November last we were
attended by Mr. Walker and Mr. Banning, who were
both beard, and the latter laid before ns la
cora
tion from Mr. Higgins, in reply to the referengtounhlima, when we
"Resolved—That the consideration of the subject be
adjourned to Monday, 15th Decemberiirtoreeeive and
consider the reports from Mr. Bunning,. Walker,
Mr. Higgins respectively.
" That your committee met on the 15th December
accordingly, and received reports from those gentlemen,
copies of which are hereunto annexed for the informa-
tion of the Court, and are respectively marked A, B,
and C. We were also on that occasion attended by Mr.
Pearson as the projector of the plan, who laid before us
a statement from Mr. Stevens in explanation of the same,
and particularly with reference to the cost of the pro-
jected
measure, After hearing all the parties, and fur-
ther considering the subject, we referred it to Mr. Wal-
ker to report to us how far it would he practicable to
connect the proposed trunk railway with the Great Nor-
thern, the Great Western, and the Eastern Counties
Railways; and it was also referred to Mr. Higgins and
Mr. Bunning to consider and report as to the cost in re-
spect of the property involved in any mode which Mr.
Walker might agree to be practicable in an engineering
point of view, for connecting the present railways with
the proposed trunk line. We also authorised Mr. Hig-
gins and Mr. Bunning to give Mr. Pearson any infornaa-
Lion respecting these reports which in their discretion
they might think proper to communicate.
" That at a meeting on the 19th December we di-
rected Mr. Walker to be informed that we wished to have
his report on the 29th December, when we would meet
to receive it.
" Having then heard Mr. Pearson upon his plan, who
in addition read a statement in respect of the informa-
tion he was desirous of having as to the estimates of Mr.
Bunning and Mr. Higgins, and having also heard these
gentlemen upon the subject, we resolved that they should
be requested to give Mr. Pearson ithe amount of
their estimates with respect to the property to the south
of the line marked on the plan referred to in Mr. Pear-
son's statement.
"That your committee accordingly met on the 29th
December, when we received a report from Mr. Walker
upon their last reference, accompanied with a map and
four sections in explanation of it, we also received copies
cf the reports of Mr. Bunning and Mr. Higgins to Mr.
Pearson, giving him their estimates, as directed, and
heard each of the gentlemen respectively upon the sub-
ject of their report, and we resolved to discharge the
reference to Mr. Higgins and Mr. Bunning as to the cost
of the several communications with the other railways,
as some of the lines were purely hypothetical, and we
did not feel justified in incurring, for the present, the
expense of such a survey, having satisfied ourselves of
the practicability of the commuercation.
"Having thus detailed our various proceedings, it now
remains for us to allude to the reports •of Mr. Walker,
Mr. Higgins, and Mr. Bunning, as well as to the state-
ment of Mr. Stevens, all of which we have caused to be
hereunto annexed, for the more full and complete infor-
mation of this honourable court.
" And your committee beg further to report to your ,
Honourable Court that, having, as before stated, deter-
mined that Mr. Pearson's plan was desirable, if no prac-
tical objection existed to its completion, the expense being
amply provided for, we subsequently considered Mr.
Walker's report of December 15, 1851, and are of opinion
that such report does not show any practical engineering
diffielty in its execution; but, on the contrary, that it is
capable of completion with only the ordinary difficulties
attending such a line through a crowded part of the
town, and where so many streets and thoroughfares are
to be interfered with; but as the surmounting of these
difficulties will afford facilities for improving many of the
streets and communication, they may, in the result, be
rather a recommendation to the plan than an objection.
Mr. Walker, in his report, specifying distinctly all the
works to he done, estimates the amount, upon a conside-
ration of the details, at 750,0001,
"As to the cost of the execution, Mr. Higgins and Mr.
Bunning, having been in corn municatton with Mr. Walker
upon the hasty and general survey which the limited
time allowed them only permitted them to make, state in
their reports that they had estimated the amount under
compulsory dealings in the total (detailed or apportioned
estimates being impracticable) not to exceed 1,673,000/.
after deducting the estimated value for surplus properties,
the market sites and building frontages, and sites round
the passenger station and the intended streets, making,
together with the amount of 750,0001. before reported by
Mr. Walker, the sum of 2,423,0001.
" Mr. John 11. Stevens, the engineer and surveyor
employed by Mr. Pearson, in a report to that gentle-
man, dated 15th December, 1351, states his estimate of
the cost of construction at 800,0001., including the entire
cost of excavating the ground tor four double lines, with
sidings, the viaduct over Farringdon-street, the raising
of Holborn Valley, the alteration and reconstruction of
sewers, the completion of the connexion of all side
streets with the main line of road, and the completion of
the four lines of railway and their stations, including all
contingencies; and further estimates the balance of loss
between the purchase of the whole property required,
and the sale of the surplus at less than 700,000/, in-
cluding the sums for trade compensation and the con-
tingent loss between buying and selling surplus property,
not required to be taken for the purposes of the under-
taking, making together the sum of 1,500,000/.
" In addition to the practicability of the trunk line,
inasmuch as the ultimate profit of that line, as well as
its benefit to the public and the city of London, must in
a great measure depend upon the other lines to the north
of the river Thames having access to it, we referred it
to Mr. Walker to report to us the general practicability
of communication between these several lines of railway,
and we received from him the report, which we consi-
dered sufficient to show the reasonable practicability of
tho junction of the trunk line with the Great Western,
the North-Western, the Great Northern, the Eastern
Counties Railways, and the Dock Junction, by means of
several lines, some in existence, others projected, and
others alternative, in none of which, however, are there
any unusual engineering difficulties to prevent their exe-
cution.
practicable, and
of
.
"We are, therefore, of opinion that the trunk
line
and the communicating lines are praee
with-
out expressing any opinion whether. thecorporation
embarkprovided
lnirie
ioaturil isyy
to be executed w
purely a ques-
rLaoilnwdaoyn
scheme, would o rwchoi ne
hl d
wwei witch
consider
r teot ybe
nthues,
most
the approbation of
tion for this Honourable Court, and not within our pro-
vince, we do not s
being carried to
thet ahney proposedcoobnjae ection
near to
i
itehe
the corporation; and we consider that it would be
desirable to secure, if possible, to the public and the cor-
poration of London, the great benefits which will arise
from such a terminus, and the street improvements
which will be the necessary consequences ee the con-
struction of the line may be secured without any risk
being incurred by the corporation
,beyond that for
which
there will be an adequate return."
Mr. Deputy HARRISON then moved that the considera-
tion of the report bed ostponed, and that the report t
appendices be prinand circulated Amongstthe an
mem-
bers of the Court.
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR said he had no objection to the
printing of the document just read and the reports of
Messrs. Walker, Banning, and
Higgins,
but he objected
to the idea of printing the views
projector, who had already de'ws and opinions of the
subject sufficiently to the b isplayed his talents on the
public. It would be nothing less than identifyin—
g the Court with the speculations of that ingenious yang
an, and he should therefore move
an amendment to the effect of excluding from the mo-
tion the statements, opinions, and explanations of the
projector.
Alderman SIDNEY said if the Court should determine
to print the report and the appendices of the engineers,
they were bound
jector.—(gear, to print the observations
jector.—(Hear, hear.) It would be found that the pro-
fessional entertained very
men engaged upon the occasion
remarkable dif etences of opinion, varying, indeed, from
half a million to two million four hundred thousand in
their estimate of
the probable ex .
pense —(Hear, hew.,
and loud cries of " No, no," and laughter.) It would be
recollected, too, that the estimate was confined to the
junction with one railroad, whereas upon the introduc-
tion of the plan the junction with four was contemplated,
a Project which would have swelled the most moderate
estimate to upwards of six millions.—(Laughter, and
cries of "Oh" and " Hear.") If the Court would print
the documents they would be able to understand the
magnitude of the plan, and could not be charged with
injustice or prejudice.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. WILLIAM JONES said it would be an act of great
unfairness not to publish the whole of the documents
upon which the committee had founded the report which
had been just read to the Court. It was a subject
which generally affected the constituency, and upon
which every member of the corporation ought to be
fully informed.—(Hear, ht at%)
Mr. Deputy LOTT said the documentary .matter
in-
cluded the able and persuasive address of Mr. Charles
d
Pearson, and he would ask the Court whether they
ever yet done such a thing as print the evidence of their
own officer upon a scheme of his own forming—(Hear,
hear, And lagliter, and aim oho Ile "chid say