The Sun.
London, England, 1847-04-28 00:00:00

GROUP XLVIII.

This Committee resumed its sitting this morning at twelve
o'clock; Lord Courtenay in the chair. Members present—
Mr. Townley, Mr. Chute, Mr. Seymer, and Mr. B. B. Cabbell.
GLASGOW, PAISLEY, KILMARNOCK, AND
AYR (No. IV.)
CROSSING OF THE CLYDE.
On the assembling of the parties,
Mr. ANDnEws said, it was his painful duty to inform the
Committee thathis clients had received a communication from
the Admiralty, which he begged leave to hand to the Commit-
tee. The effect of it was equally against both companies, that
were seeking to cross the Clyde at the point proposed, as it
containnd the decision of the Admiralty against any crossing
of the river at the place proposed vby both Companies.
What, therefore, he wanted the Committee to do, was, to
adjourn the Bills that related to the crossing of the Clyde
till Monday, in order that further communication might be
made with the Admiralty, to see if an alteration of that
decision could not be obtained. The royal Commissions,
who had been sent down to inquire into the subject, had
had reported strongly in favour of the proposed plan, and
that no injury to the river would arise thereon ; it was,
therefore, to be hoped that some modification of the Admi-
ralty's decision would be obtained before meeting again.
Mr. Foasrrir, on behalf of the River Clyde and Bridge
Trustees, opposed the adjournment.
Mr. COCKBURN, on the behalf of the Caledonian Com-
pany, said that though his clients had not received any
communication from the Admiralty, they did not expect a
different decision from the one which had just been
produced by his learned Friend. He must, how-
ever, say that it was an unexpected decision. Last year
the Caledonian had obtained an Act for the crossing of the
river, subject to the approval of the Admiralty; this the
Admiralty refused, and the result was that the inhabitants
of Glasgow, dissatified with this decision, took measures by
which Government Commissioners were sent down to inves-
tigate the whole matter. They sat three weeks making their
inquiries, and made their report in favour of the mode of
crossing proposed by the Caledonian Company. The ques-
tion now was, whether the veto of the Admiralty was to
over-ride the discretion of that Committee and the Legisla-
ture in reference to this matter.
The CHAIRMAN inquired whether the Admiralty, in cases
like the present, did not communicate to the committee their
decision ?

Mr. ANDREWS—It is, I lbelieve, always done through the
parties who promote the Bill.
Mr. COCKBURN thought that if the Committee acting on
the decision of the Admiralty, it would be idle to
proceed until they saw what could be done
to modify that decision. If the Committee on
the other hand thought that the report of the Commissioners
should modify the veto of the Admiralty, then it would be
better to proceed at once. It was a question entirely for the
Committee, and he left it to their discretion. He would only
remark that they had all their witnesses in town, end if they
adjourned for a week or ten days, it would occasion great
expense and inconvenience.
Mr. ANDREWS said the veto was a most important matter,
as by the general Act the Admiralty could veto in all such
cases as the present.
Mr. COCKBURN suggested that it would be easy to inscrt a
clause in the Bill, except it front the operation of the general
Act. The question would be for the Committee to say
whether they were disposed to adopt a clause, taking the Bill
for the crossing of the Clyde out of the operation of the
general Act.
Mr. ANDP.EWO intimated that all he wanted was an ad-
journment till Nonday. Their scheme was somewhat dif-
ferent to that of the Caledonian, inasmuch as it pro-
ceeded from their line tip the south side of the river, and then
crossed; whereas the other scheme was proposed to go in a
direct line to the river, and they to cross. The question
was, whether the Committee would go on or postpone the
matter to see what could be further done, as at present the
veto of the Admiralty was against a crossing of the river
below Stockwell Bridge.
Mr. FORSYTH said his clients had opposed this crossing of
the river at great expense, and they were anxious not to
be put to any more. For the three past years the proposal
for crossing the Clyde had been successively vetoed. He
hoped, therefore, the Committee would not allow the parties
to proceed with their Bill, unless with the proviso, that if
the Admiralty vetoed the crossing of the river, they
would nevertheless go on with the rest of their
scheme. He, for one, thought it was perfectly
hopeless to get the Admiralty to withdraw their
veto, and it might, therefore, be considered absolute.
He could not be a party to net- dless loss and heavy expenses
by adjournment, as he thought-the promoters ought to have
ascertained the sentiments of the Admiralty long before now,
instead of coming forward with it at the eleventh hour.
They knew that the Admiralty had opposed the crossiong for
two years past, and it was too bad now to call for an adjourn-
ment of the question. Ile called on the promoters of the
now; either to go on with
the crossing, or abandon it
altogether..
thelv o r Billserest
t tfo
In answer to the CMAIRMAN,
Mr. ANDREWS said, the former vetoes of the Admiralty
did not apply to the present mode of crossing the Clyde,
their make
scheme their
without
nut
with the exception of the decision of last year. The pro-
posal of last year, as of the present one, was to cross the
Clyde between the New Glasgow-bridge and Hock-
well-bridge. Above the former bridge only small
vessels ever went, and, therefore, no harm would
arise to the navigation by the proposed scheme.
Besides, in the present year they were in a different position
to what they were last, inasmuch as three gentlemen of
great character and talent, one of them a naval officer, had
gone clown to Glasgow, and after being fully satisfied, by
evidence taken on the spot, reported that no injury would be
done by crossing at the point proposed.
The room was then cleared for the decision of the Com-
mittee. On the readmission of the parties,
The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee had agreed to
postpone the question till Monday next, in order that the
Admiralty might be communicated with; and that on to-
morrow they would take the other Bills in the group that
were in a position to go on.
The Committee then adjourned.