The Sun.
London, England, 1847-05-01 00:00:00

GROUP XLVIII.

This Committee met to-day at twelve o'clock, Lord
Court enay in the chair. All the other Members of the
Committee were present.
CALEDONIAN, GLASGOW, GARNignix. and
COATISSIDGE (ISEA7/SCH TO GLASGOW
STATION).
On the assembling of the parties, the case on behalf of this
line was resumed.
Mr. Sprot, a proprietor on the line, said that he had been a
director of the cotrpany from the beginning, He was chair-
man Of it before its union with the Caledonian Company.
The reason why, in 1844, they sought to approach the Glas-
gow station at an elevation, was to avoid expense, the
scheme being a short mineral line ; but since its importance
hadwincrraesn
edbythe amalgamation with the Caledo-
nian, decided to improve the scheme by the
hadpirlese'bneit )
present ill. The Inchbally road trustees, who now opposed
the scheme, had also petitioned against the plan of 1844, but
withdrew it, on receiving 1,0001.
Mr. Lamend, who bad been the agent of the Garnkirk
Company before its union with the Caledonian Company, de-
posed that the present scheme would interfere less with the
Inchbßv road than it did in 1844, when compensation was
given by- the company to the trustees. An agreement re-
sulted, the pTovisions of which would have required a devia-
tion of the turnpike; that by the present amended scheme
would not be required.
Mr. Scott gave evidence as to the value of the land to to
taken by the line, which he took at forty-five veers'
.pur-
chase, at a rent of 51. per acre.
Mr. Errington, civil engineer, was next examined—He
detailed the origin of the present line and its progress till
now, in confirmation of the evidence of Dir. Collister. The
deviation now proposed was wanted, in miler to get better
station accommodation and better levels. In addition to the
100,0001. for the line, the station would cost 50,0001. extra.
With respect to the crossing of the canal and the tunnel of
the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway, he saw no difficulty in
effecting them. They were of an ordinary engineering cha-
racter. In the mode of doing it he agreed with Mr. Col-
Hater, who had furnished the details.
In cross-examination witness stated that it would be quite
sufficient for the protection of the opponents if a clause, usual
in such Bills, was inserted, in which it should be provided
that the works would be made to the satisfaction of the en-
gineers of the opposing companies, or a neutral one.
The CmAxeshix said he thought this would be sufficient
protection.
Mr. BURKE was not satisfied, and was prepared to call im-
portant evidence on the other side.
Mr. Locke corroborated the evidence of Mr. Errington.

:e considered the works could be done with perfect

. _
safety. He had last night offered the canal engineer to leave
the crossing of the canal or railway to any engineer in the
kingdom.
Mr. Maclean, civil engineer, corroborated the foregoing
evidence
Mr. Edminton, surveyor, of Glasgow, agreed with Mr.
Scott in the value of the land taken for the railway.
Mr. Collister was here recalled, and put in a plan which
he had prepared of the mode of crossing the canal and rail-
way, the particulars of which he explained to the Committee
in detail.
The Committee then adjourned till Monday, at twelve.