The Sun.
London, England, 1847-04-26 00:00:00

GROUP XXVIL

This Committee met to-day at One o'clock in Room 33 of
the New Houses, Mr. Cardwell in the chair. The following
are the Bills referred for its consideration :
Lynn and Ely Railway (Extension to Spalding and Hol-
bpach).
Eastern Counties Railway (Wisbech to Spalding).
Great Northern Railway (Branch to King's Lynn).
Lynn and Ely Railway (Lynn and Wormegay Navigation).
Lynn and Ely Railway (Deviation and Lynn Docks).
Boston, Stamford, and Birmingham Railway (Wisbech to
South Bridge).
Boston. Stamford, and Birmingham Railway (Boston and
Wisbech Harbour.)
The list of Bills having been read, with the petitions, and
the usual preliminaries gone through, it was arranged to
take, first, the

EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY (WISBECR

TO SPALDING.)
This Branch was opposed by the Great North Railway
Company, which has a competing branch in the group.
Mr. HOPE opened the case, stating the general advantages
which the line would give to the public. It was about 20
miles in length, and intended to connect together the im-
portant parts of Wisbech and Spalding, and give an outlet to
the agricultural produce of the district.
Mr. Stevens, Mayor of Wisbech, was called and examined,
with the object of showing the advantages of the scheme to
the town of Wisbech.

A question was here raised as to the Boston, Stamford, and
Birmingham Railway (Boston and Wisbeach Harbour
Branch ), being considered as a competing line.
The Committee, after a short consultation, decided that it
should be so considered.

The evidence of Mr. Stevens was then resumed, and shortly
after the Committee adjourned till to-morrow, at twelve.

GROUP XXVIII.
SLEAFORD BRANCHES.

The Committee on the contest between the Great Northern
and Eastern Counties Branches in this part of the country,
comprising Lord Edwin Hill, Sir R. Lopez, the Earl of
March, Captain Harris, and Mr. T. D. Acland in the chair,
met this morning at twelve o'clock.
Mr Shepherd, an assistant of Mr. Gibbs, was called
to prove the distances of the table given in to
the Committee, and stated that he had ascertained

the several distances from the Ordnance map. The
respective distances from Spalding to Newark is
37 miles and 1 chain, while the distance by the Eastern
Counties line is eight chains further, measuring the Great
Northern to its own junction, and to the junction of the Not-
tingham and Lincoln, from the Eastern Counties respec-
tively. The distance between Sleatord and Grantham is
shorter by the Ambergate line than by the Great Northern,
but the distance to Manchester would be shorter than by
the Eastern Counties line by a mile and a half, being only
983,4 miles. The transit between these two places would be
on the Great Northern line to Newark, so on to Sheffield, and
over the Sheffield and Manchester line, which they had a
right to use. To Leeds the Great Northern Company would
get to Newark as before, thence by the main line to Doncas-
ter, and so on to Leeds.

Mr. GARTH, on behalf of the Eastern Counties, objected to
the reception of this evidence, as being unexpected.
Mr. Towel!, a corn-merchant, who had been for many
years in business at Lynn, testified that a large quantity of
malting barley, for which there was a great demand in the
neighbourhood of Newark, would be sent down by this line
from Norfolk.

Mr. Hutton, a timber-merchant, who resided at Lynn,
stated that Several timber ships came to Lynn, the cargoes
of which were called for in Sleaford and its neighbourhood,
but allowed that both Boston and Wisbeach were ports which
had easy access to Sleaford.
Mr. Edis, an assistant of Mr. Cubitt, the engineer, ut in
the list of the assentients and the dissentients on the line;
and this closed the case of the London and York Company.
Mr. JAMES then rose to address the Committee on behalf
of the Marquis of Bristol, and contended that the line pro-
posed by that company was quite unnecessary, in conse-
quence of the lines which had already been sanctioned by
Parliament; and secondly, that it traversed a tract of coun-
try which did not at all require it; and thirdly, that there
was no certainty whatever that it would ever be made.
The Learned Gentleman entered into an examination of the
evidence of Mr. Badley, a witness who had formerly, in the
London and York Committee, testified in favour of the loop
line of that company, as to the transfer of Scotch cattle and
other stock and produce from the north. If it went, then,
by the loop line these branches were quite unnecessary, and
they had no right whatever to make them, and cut up three
miles of the Marquis► of Bristol's property for that purpose.
He contended that the Grantham and Sleaford branch
would only compete with the Ambergate line. As-
sertions had been /made that it would save a quarter of as
hour in the transit of corn to Manchester, but even allowing
this there would be a more than concomitant disadvantage
is the transit of passengers roundabout to London. And
were they to sanction the expenditure of 400,000/. for such
an insufficient project as this? Certainly not; and he said,
therefore, on the part of the Marquis of Bristol, that there
was no public advantage whatever, either north or south. It
seemed as if the company had some doubt of the success of
their loop line, for they in the first instance claimed the
whole of the traffic for that line, and now they came
and claimed the whole of the same traffic for the
branches. Let them first make the loops, and then
should it not pay let them apply to Parliament for a new
route, unless the country should be previously provided.
The Learned Counsel then went into the financial portion of
the question, and complained that landowners were placed in
a false position by the inability of companies to purchase
the land over which they had obtained a Parliamentary
right; for, as in one instance in a neighbouring Committee,
there was a case in which the company had held that right
for four years without passing the money. Land thus claimed
could neither be sold nor leased. At the time the Bill came
before the Commissioners of Railways, in February last, the
two companies had spent 511,307/, of which more than
432,000/. had been paid for Parliamentary expenses, while
for land they had only paid 2,338/. at the same period. He
was aware that there were engagements for extensive pur-
chases, but he was not aware that any had actually been
completed; he believed that, at least, there was no evidence
to that effect. Mr. James then read an extract (rum the
report, showing this; but
Mr. Anasas stated that he had not the least objection to
have the whole of the report read.
Mr. JAMES then read the extract, and stated that the
amount of the capital of the London and York for the whole
of the projects would be upwards of 10,600,000 L, and he
contended that in the present state of the money market it
never could be raised, and cited the authority of Mr. Ste-
phenson for the assertion that their original projects would
cost upwards of 8,000,000/., instead of 5,000,0001., as the ex-
pense was stated to be by the company. And this bethought
was every fair position for the Marquis of Bristol to take.
The Learned Gentleman then went into the topic of the Par-
liamentary contract.

➢lr. Bites and Mr. Broch, both of Spalding, were then
called to show the advantages of the other line, and the
Committee then adjourned.

GROUP XXXIII.
The Committee met for the first time in room 27, at one
o'clock. Mr. Hope, chairman.
MANCHESTER AND LEEDS (ALTERATION

OF BROITGETHOUSE BRANCH).

yr,EDS, DZWSBUILY, AND MANCHESTER

(OSSETTBRsINCII)

These were unopposed Bills, and were, therefore, referred
,o Mr. Grune, the chairman of the Committees.

LEEDS CENTRAL STATION.

Mr. BA TNES, Q.C., opened the merits of this Bill, and
stated the object of it to be to erect a great central station
in the heart of the town of Leeds, for the accommodation of
the following four lines of railway, the Leeds, Dewsbury, and
Manchester Railway, Leeds and ThirEk, West Riding Union,
and when they have got their Bill for an extension to Leeds,
the Great Northern. The proposed station, 400 feet wide
and about 1.100 feet long, would afford separate and distinct
%V itnesse's e calledeen t contributed
bbu3
accommodation to each of the companies, and would cost in
to bewere
,tetclhebypreoamcohteorsf
ttohperocvoemthpeanpitelbsliinc equal propottionis,
advantage of the proposed station, and the details of the
nature of the works.
They were cross-examined on behalf of the Leeds and
Bradford Railway, and
privet
The evidence had not been 'a
proprietors,
finished
adjourned till to-morrow.when the committee

GROUP XLVII.
This Committee met to-day at twelve o'clock. The lion.
Eliot Yorke, Chairman.

imutrasrs AND DATEGATE avrecTiow
(DEVIATION AND A2V/MNDIVIMUITS.)

The Committee, atter meeting lor a few minutes, on ac-
count of the Railway Commi)sioners' Report on this Bin not
being forthcoming, adjourned without transacting any busi-
ness.

GROUP L.
Thin Committee met to-day at twelve o'clock in Room 34,

Mr. Bankes in the chair. All the other members of the
Committee present.
GLASGOW, PAISLEY, ICILMAIZNOCE, AND

AYR, AND GLASGOW AND BELFAST

UNION (No I.)
The postponed clause of this Bill was considered and agreed
to, and the Chairman instructed to report the Bill with the
amendments to the House.
GLASGOW, PAISLEY. KILDIAILNOCIE, AND
AYR. (No. II.)

The evidence on behalf this Company was then resumed.
Mr. Hamilton, factor to the Duke of Hamilton generally,
deposed to the superiority of the Ayrshire Company to Lon-
don coal-fields, as compared with the competing branch of
the Ardrossan Company. It would have access to three
ports, whereas the other would only have an outlet at Ar-
drossan. The Milton and Bushton branch would also be of
great service in opening up the minerals on the estates of Use
Duke of Portland and Lady Montgomery. He also gave si-
milar evidence on the Fenwick branches.

Mr. P. Sturrock, civil engineer, of Kilmarnock, gave
evidence similar to the previous witness. The Ayrshire
Company branches would not only accommodate the mineral
produce better, but offer a far more eligible access with di,
sea-coast.

Mr. Geddes, mining engineer, gave evidence to a similar
effect.

Mr. Mitchell, a magistrate of the county of Ayr, and a
landed proprietor, gave evidence on behalf of the West Col-
liery Branch of the Ayrshire Company. It went through a
line of iron district, and would enable the proprietors to ob-
tain supplies of coal, and clear their minerals to the basins,
iron works, at Glengarnock, Portland, and Blair.
Mr. Cranford, a landed proprietor i❑ Fenwick, near Kil-
marnock, gave evidence similar to the previous witnessts.
He had carefully considered both schemes, and gave his de-
cided preference to the Ayrshire scheme, as better calculated
to serve the mineral produce of the district.
Mr. Craig, manager of the Portland ironworks, was exa-
mined, with the object of showing the advantages of the
branches in bringing supplies of iron there to the works.
Mr. Cunningham, a landed proprietor, gave evidence
briefly in support of the Ittington branch of the Ayrshire
Company.
The Committee then adjourned till to-morrow at twelve
o'clock.