The Sun.
London, England, 1853-11-04 00:00:00

RAILWAY TRAFFIC RETURNS.

THE GREAT NORTHERN RAlLWAY.—Traffie return for
the week ending Oct. 23, 1853 £18,773 16 1
Corresponding week last year 14,773 0 6
LANCASHIRE AND YORKSHIRE RAlLWAY.—Traffic re-
turn for the week ending Oct. 30, 1853 £17,599 311
Corresponding week last year 17,008 14 11
CHESTER AND HOLYHEAD RAlLWAY.—Traffic return for
the week ending Oct. 30, 1853 R 4,387 0 7
Corresponding week last year 3,332 14 7

Increase in 1853 £1,054 6 0
SCOTTISH CENTRAL RAlLWAY.—Traffic return for the
week ending Oct. 30, 1853 V,891 19 71
Corresponding week last year 2,741 7 4
GLASGOW AND SOUTH-WESTERN RAlLWAY.—Traffic re
.urn for thew eek ending OcL. 29,1853 V ,585 15 9
Corresponding week last year 4,207 2 7

--- , upon a certain statement, and every time we meet we
Increase in 1853 £37B 13 2 are in the habit of commenting and asking questions
upon it, the public will necessarily conclude that this
wecekoßelncdAinN,DOßetA.N2o RAlLwAY.—Traffic return for the
1853 ,
4;218 12 5 , was the only answer we could give to the statements so
Corresponding week last year
„,..„ 207 18 8 made. I trust, therefore, that the advice of my friend

Mr. Wood will be taken, and that for the future, until
the time comes when we can be examined upon oath
before the commissioners, that we shall let this inquiry
pass on and pursue its natural course, relying as we all
do upon the honour and the integrity of the commis-
sioners, and upon the good sense of the public, to dis-
criminate between truth and falsehood. (Cheers.)
Mr. GRESHAM—I think it due to the court and to the
commissioners to state that I was present at the inquiry
yesterday, and I never witnessed a more fair or more
patient course of proceeding. There is thrown over this
corporation by them a fair spirit of inquiry, and I hope
we shall not deprecate any course which they may think
proper to take. I think it exceedingly injudicious, un-
der the circumstances, that my friend Mr. Anderton
should have asked this question of the chairman of the
consolidated committee. I presented myself in Downing-
street as a citizen of London, unconnected with this court,
or with any committee of it. I made the inquiry whether
strangers would be admitted, and the answer I received
from one of the reporters was, "Reporters are admitted."
When the proceedings began, I said to the secretary,
" I am a citizen of London ; I am not a reporter ; may I
be admitted, or is my presence objectionable ?" He
immediately replied, " You are quite at liberty, sir, to
take your seat. I cannot help thinking that we should
be acting most injudicously by taking notice of any
statements piecemeal, such as those which were yester-
day brought under the notice of the commissioners.
Mr. FARRER—My Lord Mayor, however inconvenient
it may be to have questions put, or answers given, a
question has been publicly put to the chairman of the
consolidated committee, and I do most sincerely hope
that he, as their organ, will either make an admission of
the truth of the statement before the commissioners, or
give it a denial. I hope my friend will distinctly inform
the court, as nearly as it is possible for him in the
absence of documentary evidence, how much has been
expended yearly in the purchase of newspapers out of
the funds of the corporation. (Cheers.)
Mr. T. H. HALL---I believe-the statement to be one
of those which, having a little truth in it, is the more
dangerous if you leave it unanswered. I hope the ques•
tion will be answered, and then it will be seen whether
it is worth while to touch any of the other misstate-
ments.
Mr. WOOD—When I am asked as to a matter of
fact, I like, when I can speak from a document, to do
so, and that was my reason for calling for the minutes
of this court. The allegation that the corporation had
authorised an expenditure of 1,0001. a year for the pur-
pose in question, has been ails% ,;red by the document
which the court has heard read. (Cries of "No, no.")
There is no thousand pound mentioned at all, and there
has been no report to the court consequent upon that
statement. I thought I had conveyed my own feeling
that the answer to these statements should be re-
served for a proper time and place ; but as the subject
is pressed upon me, I do not shrink from saying that it
what whatthee sou:.
com-
mittee, in the exercise of their discretion, thought it
was not true that 1,0001. a year, or anything like 1,0001.
has
aays year, was
was
lexwpeinilded.
now (Cterlilesthoef
court "T ell us
proper to do as a kind of temporary proceeding. The
impression upon many members' minds at the time, was
that perhaps there should be some communication of a
permanent character, by which justice should be done
to the conduct and character of the gentlemen composing
this court. There was much difficulty in seeing how it
could be done, but in the end the committee came to
the conclusion of directing the hall-keeper in this place,
without reference to name of paper or politics, or other-
wise, to look at the newspapers on the morning after
each sitting of the court, and to select from them the
one that seemed to him to contain the best account of
the proceedings—
Mr. BLAKE—The longest, the most voluminous
account.
Mr. WOOD—The hall-keeper was to select the news-
paper, which contained the longest account of the pro-
ceedings of the previous day. That course has been
pursued up to the present time. The result of the
order of the committee to the hall-keeper has been
thought by members of advantage to the corporation
in this way—it has brought to their notice that the pro-
ceedings have been fully and fairly reported in many
instances. The hall-keeper has, by direction of the
committee, ordered 300 copies f the paper containing
the longest report of the proceedings of the court. Of
this number about 250 are circulated amongst the mem-
bers of the court, the other 50 being sent to the town
clerks of the various boroughs throughout the kingdom,
in order that the country corporations may know what
is going on here. The cost of this amounts to 51. or 61
each time the papers are purchased, and does not ex
teed 1501. a year. (To the hall-keeper) : Have you ever
purchased the Times?
Mr. TEMPLE, the hall-keeper, said he did not exactly
know.
Mr. WooD—Several times to my knowledge.

Deputy BENNOCH —Get at the fact at once.
Mr. TEMPLE, on reference, found that the Times had
been four times ordered during the year, the total num-
ber of orders during that period not exceeding thirty.
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR—I can say that the Times has
been purchased. If I had been in court at the com-
mencement of the proceedings, as I ought to have been,
I should have suggested to Mr. Anderton to put a
simple question.
Mr. ANDERTON— I did.
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR— I should have suggested the
question. Is there any statement of 1,0001. a year being
spent in the manner described by Mr. Acland ? I then
should have suggested to my friend Mr. Wood to report
that there was no truth in the statement of Mr. Acland.
(Hear.) lam quite sure that very many of the state-
ments made by Mr. Acland might be explained as this
has been. But while you may complain of that gentle.
man on account of the course which he has taken, you
might also, if you choose, complain of the next witness,
namely—
Mr. BLAKE—I rise to order. I feel deep regret that,
pending an inquiry of this kind, this subject should be
further jdiscussed. I hold it to be the height of in-
decency that this matter should any longer occupy the
time of the court, and move that we proceed to the
business of the day. (Cries of oh, oh, and hear, hear.)
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR—WhiIe so much time has been
allowed to be consumed with reference to Mr. Acland's
statements, I say we should not be discharging our duty
if we did not also put in the strongest disclaimer upon
the observations and evidence of Mr. Travers. (Hear.)
Deputy BOWER appealed to the Lord Mayor as to
whether Mr. Taylor was in order, there being no motion
before the court.
The LORD MAYOR said he considered that he was.
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR said he would not further occupy
the attention of the court.

The subject then dropped.
THE APPROACHES TO THE PROJECTED NEW BRIDGE

BETWEEN BLACKFRIARS AND SOUTHWARK.

Deputy BENNOCH moved, " That it be an instruction
to the improvement committee to retain possession of
such ground on the western side of the Old 'Change, and
on the south side of Watling-street, as is likely to be affected
by the projected new bridge and the appro aches thereto,
until this court shall have decided upon the report of
the Bridgehouse Estates Committee, delivered in on the
14th day of April."
Mr. ROSE seconded the motion.

Deputy PEWTRESS thought that delay was necessary,
in order that further information might be obtained upon
the subject from the Bridgehouse Committee.
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR—It has been said by the seconder
of the motion that the ground sought to be secured by
Mr. Bennoch was not at present to be built upon. Why ?
It was intended for the approaches to a new bridge. In
a paragraph in the papers, a day or two since, this came
out at a meeting held in Hastings, respecting the
formation of a new line of railway from that town to the
city of London. Besides, hundreds of thousands of
pounds were involved in the question mooted by Mr.
Bennoch ; and, believing that the project, as a whole,
would not be beneficial to the citizens of London, he
would move the previous question.
Mr. T. H. HALL (the chairman of the Improvement
Committee) requested Mr. Bennoch to withdraw his
motion for the present. The Bridgehouse Committee
had to report as to their conference with the directors of
Southwark-bridge, and, therefore, it was desirable for
them to wait.
Mr. NORRIS observed that Mr. Bennoch had with
great labouriproved to the Court that more bridge accom-
modation was required in the City. The matter was
referred to a committee, and a report was brought up,
stating that 300,000/. was required by the proprietors
for that useless structure, Southwark-bridge. The ques-
tion as to the new bridge was still undecided, and now
Mr. Bennoch said, "As you have hung up my bridge ques-
tion, while you confer with the proprietors of Southwark-
bridge, now hang up your street improvements until the
question of a new bridge be settled." As to the rail-
way scheme, that project was unknown and undeveloped
altogether to Mr. Deputy Bennoch. That gentleman's
project was for a bridge for public and ordinary traffic,
and not for railway purposes at all. It might be that,
since the idea as to the necessity of more bridge accom-
modation was entei 'mined by Mr. Bennoch, the fitness
of the site proposed for a railway southward was unde-
niable. He (Mr. Norris) was of opinion that no damage
to the public would arise from blocking up the progress
of building for some time, until plans and estimates
could be prepared of a permanent structure, at a less
sum than the Southwark people required for theirs—a
structure which would do honour to the Corporation of
that great and increasing City.
Mr. HALL would engage that no steps should be taken
for three months as to building upon the ground speci-
fied. He repudiated altogether, however, the leaving of
the ground blank until some undefined scheme for a
bridge was projected and carried out.
Mr. BENNOCH would leave the matter in the bands of
the Court, believing that the whole would be honourably
carried out by the Improvement Committee, without
prejudice to the proposal he had made.
The motion was then withdrawn, Mr. Bennoch baying
repudiated altogether any connection with ashraeilw_aoyr
or railway bridge scheme, or company established d
become
such a purpose. Parties had applied to hi
so connected, but he had invariably refusedmto have any-
thing to do with such matters.
PROPOSED WIDENING OF LOrNhDnOtN
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR moved, " -- itßßbleDGrieferred to
the Bridgehouse Estates committee to ascertain the
condition of London-bridge as regards the stability of
1 the structure, and to consider the expediency and prac-