The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-20 00:00:00

.•
I. .
• . „

..4,4
5...,/,,,,81L
....
`s, 4,A, r:
`v,
----A fv,

tt Vibttion

SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
(THIS DAY)

Sub-Committee No. 1.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
BOSTON, NEWARK AND SHEFFIELD.
Mr. Ellicombe appeared for the promoters.
The witnesses to prove the deposit of the plans, sections,
and books of reference, having been examined,
Mr. Burke appeared on the petition of the owners of land
on the line.
The that allegation was that the parish of Averham was
omitted from the book of reference deposited with the clerk
of the peace and at the Private Bill-office.
Mr. ELLIUOMBE called a witness, who stated that Stathorp,
which was the township of the parish of Averham, was in
the books of reference, but that the line would only go
through the township.
The Committee decided that the standing orders in this
instance, had not been complied with.
The next allegation was that the plans and sections were
not duly deposited with the clerks of the peace for the several
districts through which the line is to run.
Mr. BURKE called Mr. Gibbs, the engineer to the line.
Mr. BURKE—Is there a branch from hocking to Splding?
Witne,s—There is.
Mr. BunKE is there a section to show that branch?
Witness—There is not.
Mr. Behr,:—ton stated, when first examined by Mr.
Ellicombe, that the plans and se; thins were duplicates. of each
other, but Lore is a complete section entirely onn,te I.
The Cir.sinsias— You most distinctly stated, when the
plans were put in at the commencemer t of the present in-
quiry, that the plans and sections were duplicates of each
other.
Witness—l stated that the plans and sections, as drawn
by me, were duplicates of each other; but since then, I un-
derstand, some alteration has been made in the powers of
the Bill. which must account for the omission.
The CHAIRItAN—This must be explained, for at present
there is no pis of as to the plans.
Mr. ELLICOMBE called the assistant-engineer, who said
that the plans and sections were altered subsequently to Mr.
Gibbs having seen them—the section No. 1 omitted, that of
No. 2 substituted, which took the branch in.
Mr. BURKE would deny this on the face of the Bill ; he
would prove that the standing orders in this most import-
ant instance were not complied with.
It being now half-past three o'clock, the Committee said
they would adjourn to twelve o'clock on Tuesday.

Sub-Committee, No. 6.
(Continued front our Afternoon Edition.)
LONDON, SALISBURY, AND YEOVIL
JUNCTION.
This Bill has fur its object the making of a line from the
station of the South Western Railway at Basingstoke, to
Yeovil, the length of which will be 73 mites, and the cost,
a' estimated, 1,900,0001. Mr. J. Locke is the engineer, and
Messrs. Webster and Co., the Parliamentary agents.
Against this line there were several petitions, mostly upon
the ground that the plans and sections were incorrect, and
calculated to mislead, and one contained an allegation that
the parish of Clifton Maybank was not named in the notice.
Mr. 'enables appeared for the petitioners.
The petition of Mr. A. C. Bridge, in which it was stated
that there was already a line of railway passing through his
property, contained the allegation that there was in the
Gazette notice no mention of the parish of Clifton Maybank,
through which one of the branches would pass.
Mr. WEBSTER said that the parish was mentioned.
Mr. VENABLES contended that the parish ought to be
named in the notice of the Yetminster branch.
Mr. WEBSTER contended that this was not necessary, and
that if the parish was named in the notice at all it was
sufficient.
After a long discus ion on the point, the Committee de-
cided that the star ding orders were not complied with.
The second allegation of this petition was that in the
plans denc:sitedlNith the clerk of the peace for the county of
Dorset there was no mention of a branch leaving the alter-
native line.
Mr. VENABLES explained that there were two branch
lines, which, in the plans deposited with the clerk of the
peace, were both represented as leaving the main lino, while
in the 8.11 and notices one was represented as leaving the
alternatire line. There were several other allegations de-
pending on this, one of which was that there teas no section
of the branch from the main line in the parish of Yetnrinster.
The Clerk of the Peace for the county of Dorset handed
in the plans in question.
In the course of the discussion it appeared that the
mileage was incorrectly marked.
The Committee reserved the point as to the sections: till
their next meeting.
At about quarter to four o'clock the Committee adjourned
to Tuesday next

Sub-Committee No. 2.

DrligECT LONDON AND MANCIXESTER.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)

The usual formal proofs were gone through.
The first peti ion against the Bill taken was that cf Mr.
W. Egerton, which alleged that in the township of Cheedle
Moseley the description in No. 89 in the book of reference
and in the plan was wrong, Elishia Warren being stated to be
the owner, and Sarah Fyides, the occupier, the trne owner
Icing Mrs. Anna Maria White, and the occupier of the same,
William Bailey.
Mr. Plitt appeared for the petitioner.
Mrs. White l roved the incorrectness alleged, and also that
she had not been served with a notice.
The petition next alleged that there was a similar inaccu-
racy with respect to the property numbered 91, Peter Puwnall
being described as the owner, and Isaac Falconer as the oc-
cupier a the same.
The allegation was sustained.
Several other similar allegations were abandoned.
It was also alleged that in No. 4.1 in the plan the road de-
scribed as an occupation road and the property of the
petitioner was a public highway, and the property of the
surveyors, who had not been served with due notice. The
Committee considered the allegation sustained.
The next petition considered was from the owners and
lessees along the line, complaining of non-compliance with
the standing orders.
The petition contained several allegations analogous to
those of the prec7(ling petition.
The Committee had proceeded to some extent with these
allegations when it was announced that the Spsaker was at
prayers.
Engineers, Sir John Rennie, Mr. Rastrick, aed Mr. G.
Remington Parliamentary agents, Messrs. Dyson and Co. :
solicitors,9, Messrs. Ashurst and Son, Ludlow and Sons, and
J. Owens.
The Committee adjourned shortly before four o'clock to
Monday, at twelve o'clock.