The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-10 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT,

(THIS EVENING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Their Lordship met at Five o'clock.

Messengers from the Commons brought up a large number
of railway and other Bills, which were severally read a first
time.

The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from the
scripholders of the Yorkshire and Glasgow Union Railway
against the further progress of the Bill.
Lord DENMAN presented a petition from a place in the
county of Down, praying for the abolition of capital punish-
ments.

BIRMINGHAM AND OXFORD JUNCTION RAILWAY

The Earl of CLARENDON laid upon the table of the
House a minute of the Board of Trade on the subject of this
Bill, and moved that it be printed, and referred to the Corn•
mittee on the Bill.

Several Bills were then advanced a stage, and the House
adjourned.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.

(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Room B.

CALEDONIAN (GLASGOW TERMINI AND
BRANCHES).

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Mr. John Miller, engineer of the Great North British
Railway, in his evidence said that the ground at Shiels-
bridge was already pre-occupied by the General Terminus
Company, whose Bill had been granted, so that the arrange-
ment come to by the Caledonian Company before the Com-
mons' Committee, to carry back their junction with the
Ayr Railway to near that bridge, could not be constructed
without diverting the Paisley canal beyond the limit
of the deviations which this Bill gives them power
to do. That, assuming the Caledonian got this
proposed terminus in the City, their mode of carrying
along the through traffic would necessitate a break of the
train ; that part of it might be carried along Bridge-street
by another engine, or they must give up the Bridge-street
branch altogether. Mr. M. considered that the whole
scheme was such as the engineer would not now, under the
altered circumstances, propose to lay down.
Cross-examined by Mr. HOPE—There were altogetherlos
feet within the limit of deviation and the canal, and four sets
of rails could be laid down in 53 feet; but not so if these
sets of rails belonged to different lines, and much less if they
were on different levels, as was the case here, for the canal,
the Caledonian, the General Terminus, and the joint line,
would give four different levels.
Mr. ANDREWS, Q.C., produced three letters of the 6th, Bth,
and 28th of May last, to Lord Woreley, Chairman of the
Commons Committee from the Admiralty, the last of which
Was accompanied with a report from Captains Bethune and
Denison, unfavourable to any crossing of the river Clyde, as
proposed by the Caledonian Company, south of the Stockwell-
bridge. The Admiralty agreed in this report, but their
letter of the 28th of May reached the Chairman of the Corn
mons Committee a day after the preamble of the Bill for the
Caledonian liine was passed.
Lord Belhaven havisig been called, said he was well ac-
quainted with Glasgow and the lines south and north of the
Clyde. He considered it very important that a junction be-
tween these should be effected, which would necessitate a
crossing of the river, but he thought one crossing, and one
only, should be allowed.
Mr. AUSTIN, QC., proposed to call Mr. Walker, with a
view to lay before the Committee a full statement of all the
circumstances under which the report from the Commis-
sioners of the Admiralty had been drawn up, which, he
Mr. AN D
ex-
pected to show, was not a final decision.
feNr twi eo su'
saidd
hell
hadll
Evr
weress objectedto Mr. Walker being allowed to
givTeheevidence, as the case for the promoters was closed.
thtoatbteheclecaermedm. onca be,inrg.
re-admitted,
CfranittAPti
Walker,Walker.
Mr. examined by the
been sent down by the Admiralty to ex amine this very cross-
ing, and he made his report on the 12th of March. He
understood that another company was to cross at the
place. He believed that Captains Bethune and same
on
were sent down about the formation of the docks near
Glasgow. He said he had stated in his
report
to the Admiralty that if a great public good were to be
gained, the obstruction would be very small to the river.
The Committee refused to hear Mr. Walker's report, the one
on their Lordship's table being later. He said he was con•
suiting engineer to the Clyde trustees.
Mr. ANDREWS then addressed
the Committee against
the Bill, on the part of the Glasgow and Ayr Rail-
way, the city of Glasgow, and the town of Gorbals,
and individual proprietors, contending that the approach
to Glasgow, and through it, should be confined to one great
general scheme, which would effect a junction with the lines
north and south of the Clyde without exposing the city
and private property to be cut up by rival and independent
companies. Sir. Andrews, in commenting on the evi-
dence, cautioned their Lordships as to the testimony given
by Mr. Walker, who admitted that he was consulting en-
gineer to the Clyde trustees, the Chairman of which was
called to give evidence in favour of the Caledonian line.
Mr. MONTAGUE SMITH addressed the Committee on be-
half of the heritors of Gorbals against the Bill, and called
witnesses to show that damage would be sustained be the
Gorbals parish church, situated within 30 feet of the Cale-
conian proposed line, at the corner of Carlton-terrace and
Buchan-street.

The Committee then adjourned till eleven to-morrow.