The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-25 00:00:00

GROUP XXI f

This Committee sat at the usual hour, Mr. B. Denison, chairman.
EXIITER, YEOVIL ATZIO DoncEzsTmn, AND
LONDON, SAL sircrity AND YEOVIL.

The cress-examination of Mr. Locke was resumed this morning by
Mr. MINCE. The cross-examinatea was confined exclusively to the
opposition of landowners along the line.
The landowners along the line, whose opposition was gone into,
were the Earl of Digby and Mr. Bridges, represented by Mr. Butt;
Mr. Frampton, represented by Mr. Sergeant Kinglake ; the trustees
of the Wardour estate, for whom Mr. Murphy appeared, and Mr.
Gordon, who appeared personally, and examined Mr. Locke at some
length himself. . .

Mr. Cockburn and Mr. 'Merrewether having re-examined Mr.
Locke at considerable length,
Mr. Vignoles, C.E., was then examined. He considered that the
line proposed by Mr. Locke between Exeter and Yeovil was better
in every respect than the line as laid out by Mr. Brunel, on the part
of the Great Western Company.
The Committee having intimated at this stage of the examina-
tion, that it would be useless to examine other engineers, who would
merely corroborate the evidence of Mr. Locke,
Mr. MEREEWETLIER offered, on the part of the promoters, to with-
draw his witness provided that the promoters of the Great Western
Company waned their engineering evidence to one witness also.
This proposition not having been acceded to by Mr. DENISON, on
the part of the Great Western Company, the examination was pro-
ceeded with, but in consequence of the lateness of the hour was
brought to a close very shortly afterwards by the Committee ad-
, j ourning.

GROUP XXV I .
SOUTH ESSEX.

The Committee assembled this morning at twelve o'clock, ➢lr. M.
O'Connell in the chair, when evidence was resumed on the part of
the .North Gravesend Railway in opposition to the South Essex line,
and Mr. Meeson, a large proprietor of chalk-pits at Grays, and seve-
sal other witnesses, were adduced to show that the proposed advan-
tages would not be nearly so great as they were supposed to be at
present. .

This closed the case of the South Essex Company ; after which
Mr. RonwELL opened the case en behalf of the River Lea Naviga-
tion trustees, by reminding the Committee that even in these
times of railway mania, as he termed it, the benefits of canal
communication had been entirely overlooked, although at the present
time the trustees were successfully competing with the Eastern
Cou ties Railway. It was well known that many of the places
within a short distance of the proposed line were already in
the neighbourheod of railway communication ; so that the
necessity for any change in the means of communication
was quite evident. The Learned Counsel then went into a detail of
the plans for crossing the river Lea which Mr. Locke had submitted,
and endeavoured to show that, in consequence of the Lea being a
tidal river, these plans were very injurious, and intimated that he
should call Mr. Walker, the eminent engineer, as well as the engineer
of the Lea Company, to show that they were objectionable,
net only on account of the influx of the tide, but because
also of the opposition that would be offered to the egress of the
waters collected in the marshes of Essex. On the part of the River
Lea Company, he proposedlthat there should either be a bridge
of 100 feet, or at least one of 85 feet, with a towing-
path under, and a lay-to, by which the boats
could be launched. Considering all the circumstances he trusted that
the Committee weuld sea that there was no necessity for the rail-
way at all, or if they allowed the preamble of the Bill, that they
would at least preserve the rights of the River Lea Company as they
were, and as they had been secured, by several Acts of Parliament
for two or three hundred years. The trustees bad no
private ends to serve, and were persons of the highest
respectability, and had only the public interests to serve. He
might add that the Eastern Counties and the Northern and Eastern
Counties Companies had acceded to the terms of the company. Mr.
Rodwell then called

Mr. Marchant, clerk to the trustees for twenty years, stated that
the parties were of the highest respectability. That the tonnage
carried under the proposed bridge was 300,000 tons, the tolls for
which were expended in the improvement of the river. The naviga-
tion extended from Hertford to the Thames. besides the branches to
Hogstone. The site of the proposed bridge would pass in precisely
the very worst part of the navigation, and the Company had already
expended between 16,0001. and 18,0001. on its improvement.
Mr. MARSH cross-examined the witness, to whom ho replied that
the bridge to which allusion had been made had fenders under it,
which restricted the water way, but that difficulty was
likely to be obviated by the substitution of a swing bridge, which
would allow a greater water way. A proposition bad been made to
settle this matter by the arbitration of two celebrated engineers, but
it was refused by the Company on the ground that they were the
best judges of the necessities of the navigation, however succinct the
engineers might be. Bridges had beeu obtained from other compa-
nies of 94 feet and of 61 feet span, but none of I'o feet span.

To Mr. RODWELL'S re-examination Mr. Marchant replied that ti ey
had got from other companies all that they required, and they only
came to the Committee because this Company proposed to restrict
their water way.
Mr. Griggs, surveyor of the Lea Company, desCribed the course of
the navigation, and stated that this was the worst part of the navi-
gation, and he believed that the plan proposed by Mr. Locke would
amount to annihilation of the navigation. In the course of the exa-
mination an endeavour was made to show that the objection was
futile, but it failed.
Mr. Walker, engineer, was then called to show that the bridge
would impede the navigation, unless the arches were of sufficient
width. The witness then went into the principles of tile several bridges
proposed for crossing the Lea, and showed that the bridge proposed
by him would be cheaper as well as better titan that proposed by
Mr. Locke. The bridge to be constructed over the Tamar for the
Cornwall Railway was to be 250 feet span, and that over the
Drogheda Railway, supported by iron work, was to be of the
same span. The effect of contracting the stream would be to
increase the velocity of the stream, and to break the banks
below the bridge. He thought, upon the whole, that the Company
had better give the 100 feet at once.
Mr. Warner and several other practical navigators -bore testimony
to the difficulty of the navigation at the particular spot, the tide
running sometimes as much as nine or ten miles an hour, and acci-
dents had frequently occurred. The chance of accident would, of
course, be increased by the erection of the proposed bridge.
On the cross-examination of Mr. ADAMS the witness described the
course of the navigation and the impediments which were presented
to it by the set of the stream and tide. The ordinary length of the
craft on the river were about eighty feet long, exclusive of the rudder,
which was nine feet. Ti ere were other bridges as narrow, but there
was no place so narrow with so strong a tide as this. Nor is there
any portion of the river so tortuous as this. The principal difficulty,
cmrhowever,eaas:er
tsewa
enohdu
ned
cof experienced. chiefly by the London lighters which
werert Worked by one man only. He spoke from an experience of
ce
ti I y-tive years, and he believed that the bridge would largely in-
Mr. RODWELL was
if this pier were erectepreparedespecially theaccident.
Mr.wouldt o andodtu
venture
adduce
iftowu re orto
sliveend otthhee ry
valuable
ua
or barge-
masters,
cargoes up the Lea which he had hitherto dispatched, but
The Committee declared that they were satisfied, and adjourned
till twelve o'clock to-morrow.