The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-26 00:00:00

3ITNCTION.

This is a Bill to form a line connecting the Southern and
Western Railway (station at Carlow) with the town of
Wexford. The length of the line will be 46 miles, and the
cost is estimated at 420,0001. Sir John M'Neil is the engineer,
and Mr. Smith is the Parliamentary agent.
This was an opposed Bill, there being seven petitions against it.
Messrs. Hunt and Co., appeared in support of six, but in respect of
the seventh, that of Patrick Burns and others, no appearance was
made. The six supported petitions were :--l. That of Thomas Poun-
der and others. 2. Of Sarah Gaublere and others. 3. Of Thomas
Greenhan. 4. Of John C. Sparrow. 5. Of Herbert Hall and others.
6. Of Michael Kerne and Sarah Wheeler.
The first allegation—of the petition of Thomas Pounder, and six
other persons, was, that the notices served on them were so served
on Christmas Day, and that no such notices were served on any other
I day. _. . . _ _ _

in support of this allegation, the petitioner Thomas Pounder was
called. Ito stated that he received the notice on Christmas Day, but
could not say that no notice had been subsequently served, though ho
had received none.

The agent for the line, Mr. Smith, said that the allegation wise not
proved, as to this petition, as it wise not shown that no notice had
been subsequently served.

The Committee were of opinion that evidence ought to be given to
show that a notice had been served after Christmas Day.
Mr. Smut said, that if the Committee would reserve the point, he
could produce a witness to prove that notices had been served after
Christmas Day, on the seven petitioners.
Five other petitioners proved that the notices were served on them
on Christmas Day ; and one of them, Mr. Thomas Gaubiere, said that
he was present when a notice was served on his brother, who was
one of the petitioners, and that this notice was served on Christmas
Day.
The Committee were of opinion that the allegation was not
answered.

BELFAST AND HOLYHEAD ATMO-
SPHERIC.

An application was made on the part of the promoters, to with-
draw their Bill, which was agreed to.
The Committee then adjourned at Five o'clock.

Sub-Committee, No. 5.

THE LONDON, SALISBURY, AND YEOVIL.
JUNCTION (BASINGSTOILZ TO YEOVIL).
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Thenext allegation was, that John Green the younger, was
described as the owner of certain property in the county of
Dorset, marked No. 3 on the plan, while the Rev. John
Goldsbow was and is the owner, the said John Green being
only the occupier. This allegation was found not proved,
and Mr. Venables said he was happy to say that ended the
case.

The CHAIRMAN then announced that the standing orders
were not complied with.
GLASGOW, niutitunan, AND NEILSTON
DIRECT (BRANCHES TO THORNIE-BANS,

HOUSEIIII.X., AND HURLET).
This Bill was opposed by petition of the Earl of Glasgow,
complaining of non -compliance with the standing orders.
Mr. Dimms, of the firm of Dimms, Dunlop, and Hope, ap-
peared as Parliamentary agent against the line, and Mr.
G. H. Long appeared for the promoters of it ; and the soli-
citors were Messrs. Campbell and Lenants, Glasgow. The
capital was 150,0001., and the estimated cost 150,0001. Amount
subscribed, 86,250/.

'
The Committee decided that the standing orders were corn-
plied with on the Thornie- bank, Househill, and Hurlet
branches, and then proceeded to consider the Paisley branch
of the said line.

The first allegation was, that the book of reference
deposited with the schoolmaster of the parish of Paisley was
not a copy of the book of reference, inasmuch as property
described in the book of reference in some instances was
arable land, when it was not so.
The objection was not entertained.
The next allegation was, that the height of certain
bridges described in the book of reference did not
correspond with the copy deposited with the parish
schoolmaster of Paisley, and were not marked in plain
figures. In this instance the Committee were of opinion that
the allegation was sustained.
The next objection was that the names of several lessees
were not contained in the book of reference through which
the branch railway was proposed to pass, and that they
had not received notice of such railway, although they were,
and are, owners of some of the land through which it was to
go. After some considerable time spent the agent withdrew
this objection, and the Chairman stated that the standing
orders were complied with except in one case.
GLASGOW, PAISLEY, AND GIZEENOCIE
(BRIDGE OF WEIR. BEANcR).

•
The object of the petitioners for this line, is to construct
a branch railway from the Glasgow and Greenock lines to
the Bridge of Weir, the estimated cost of which is 60,000/.
r. VENABLES appeared to oppose the Bill, and the first
allegation raised was, that in the parish of Kilbarton there
was a carriage-road not shown, or the height or span of the
bridge proposed to be constructed on another road not marked
or described truly on the section.
The Committee decided that the standing orders were not
complied with in those cases.
The next allegation was, " That the datum horizontal line
was not properly marked." The Committee found that the
standing orders were not complied with.
Mr. VENABLES next proceeded to prove that the parties
who signed the subscription contract were not liable, inas-
much as two gentlemen bad not given their proper address.
The Committee decided that the standing orders were not
complied with, and it being then ten minutes to five ad-
journed until to-morrow, at twelve o'clock.

Sub-Committee No. G.

This Committee resumed its sittings at twelve o'clock this
day. Present, Captain Jones (in the chair), Mr. Pakington,
and Mr. Deedes.
WEST LONDON EXTENSION AND IM-