The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-05 00:00:00

LYNN AND DLY (111AUCE EXTENSION).

This was a petition tor leave to bring in a Hill to construct a branch
railway from Wisbeach to March, in the Isle of Ely. The cost was
estimated at 60,0001.
The usual formal proofs were gone into, and the Committee de-
cided that the standing orders had been duly complied with.
SOUTH UNION.

The object of the Bill sought to be obtained by this Company Is the
construction of a line of railway between the Manchester and Bir-
mingh ;m Railway and the North Staffordshire Railway. The pro-
jected line is intended to commence at Colton, a point on the
Trent Valley line. and to run to Roughly, a point on the
North Staffordshire Railway, both in the county of Stafford.
The length is thirty-two miles, and the estimated cast is 700,0001.
Messrs. Dyson and Hall are the agents, and 3fr GraYatt is the en-
gineer.
The formal proofs 'Were gone through, and then the Committee
a number of non-compliances
withtoo the
took
ansutianing ts
buleirororPdeetiti."3 alleging

Mr. VENABLES appeared for Mr. Walter Hyde, whose petition con-
tained a number of allegations which were entertained.
The Committee reported that the standing orders had not been
complied
milepllied'viot e has respected the crossing of a turnpike road at the
ethe projected line, inasmuch as the cross section was
not properly shown upon the plan, not being numbered and other-
wise speciticially pointed out as required by the standing order on
the subject.
Various other allegations of a similar character were sustained,
but they were too trivial to be reported in detail. The engineer in
explanation said that the plans were so badly printed as to be
almost illegible, and quite unfit to enable him to reply satisfactorily
to the questions of the Honourable Chairman. Had the plans been
Another alegation sustained was, that two miles of the proposed
lines had been omitted, a whole sheet of the plan deposited with the
clerk of the peace at Stafford being absent.
ground.
Another many of the allegations would have falleu to the
The Cuatestert decided that upon the general merits of the de-
posits ou the 30th of N vember last they were altogether inaccu-
rate, and that the standing orde.s had not been complied with.
The deposits were worse than
information to the public. In the course of
nngmade some pertinent remarks upon the mode
worthless, being calculated to mitt-
gave their evidence. He complained of the
ne mis-
leadth insteadhe,,c. oinafei
Chairman
witnesses
loose manner in which questions were put, and the very careless way
in which they were answered. Facts were gabbled over In a sin-
gular way, and so little respect appeared to be paid to them that
it was very difficult to understand them. He trusted witnesses
would for the future be examined in a better manner, so as to enable
the Committee to he able to put a proper value upon their statements.
The Committee took no other case, and at four o'clock adjourned
until twelve o'clock on Friday next.

Sub-Committee No. I.
Th• Committee met at twelve o'clock—present, Mr. Home Drum-
mond (Chairman), Mr. Forbes Mackenzie, The O'Conor Don, and Mr.
Compton.

lIANCHESTER IND POOLE RAILWAY.
In this case, which was before the Committee yesterday, and stood
over on an objection raised respecting the sufticiency of the notices
for application, published in the respective newspapers through which
it was proposed to pass,
The CHAIRMAN said, when the case first came before them, he had
expressed an opinion that it was not necessary to prove the publi-
cation of notices in counties through which other lines in connexion
with it had to pass. He alone was responsible fur taking such a
view of the question, for ho considered that the additional notices
would be superfluous. But, considering the Bill now before the
Committee which contained some clauses amending other Rills, he
had consulted the Chairman of the Committees, all the Members of
the present Committee being present at the conference. The unani-
mous opinion of the Committee was, tiat them: shoved be other
notices given on account of the amendments proposed, as in the case
of a third-class Bill. _

Mr.; 3fACICEDIZIE said with respect to third-class Bills, notices
should be given within the district, to which clauses 8 and 9 referred,
and that notices for a second-class Bill, in all the districts through
which the new line was proposed to pass, like that of the Manches-
ter and Poole project.
The CUAIIIMAN said, in reply t• a gm 'Bon from Mr. Coates, that
there was no objection to mix up notices given of second and third
class Bills.

The Committee then decided that, with tho exceptions already
noticed, the standing orders had been complied with.
MACCLESFIELD AND LICHFIELD.

oltev ilehles ,
This case, which stood over from yesterday, was next resumed,
datumfrom whichpo int
the was
dproceededum pwith.point
was
s .at waske
n,
caonndtettlialeeadetcit,tftrtactyhe
were inzorrect, and that there was no datum point, it
being described as taken from the pier or a proposed
bridge, to be constructed over the contemplated line,
whereas there was no pier shown on the snaps, and that the term
pies' was improperly used, a " pler" being a building beta fen the
arches of a bridge, or work projecting into a river or sea. A model
of the bridge was then produced by the engineer who took the trial
sections, who proved that he could not find the part described as the
"pier" from which the datum line was taken.
On the part of the promoters of the line,
Mr. Lock, engineer to' the line, was called, who distinctly stated
that no fair engineer would have any trouble or difficulty in finding
the pier in question, as the bridge, being a single span, the piers of
coarse would be the buildings on either side, from which it sprung.
On cross-examination, he admitted that the more usual term was
" abutment pier," when talking of the buildings next to the shore.
Several other engineers were called, who gave similar testimony
to the last witness, among whom was
Mr. Donaldson, professor of architecture to the University College,
London.
Mr. Clarke was called next on behalf of the promoters of the line,
to prove the accuracy of the levels taken, but Mr. G. P. Bidder,
proved from the field-book of Mr. Clarke that ass error of 16 inches
existed.
The agent for the Bill then solicited a postponement for the purpose
of re-taking the levels, which was opPoial by Mr. Burke, and the
Committee ordered strangers to withdraw On our re-admission
The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee had decided that the
standing orders had not been complied with, inasmuch as the datum
horizontal point on the line was not correctly described.

Sub-Committee No. 6.
This Committe resumed its sittings at twelve o'clock this day,
there being present Captain Jones (in the Chair), Mr. Dander, and
Lard Ebrington.
The following additional Bills have beau referred to the Com-
mittee :
The North Union (Harwich Branch) Railway.
The Leeds, York. and Midland Junction Railway.
The Manchester and Hyde Railway.
The Bristol and Birmingham And Midland Railway.
The Birmingham Railway
Tring.to Banbury).
The Bristol and Gloucester, and Birmingham and Gloucester
Railways.
The Chester and Birkenhead Railway.
Ihe Newcastle and Darlington Junction Railway (Pontop and
South Sheila Railway Purchase).
The London and Birmingham Railway (Birmingham Extension).
The Leicester and Birmingham Railway.
The East Coast Railway.
The Northampton and Bedford Railway.
The London stud Birmingham (Leamington Extension, and Coven-
try and Rugby Stations Enlargement) Railway.
The Landon and Birmingham Railway (the Aylesbury Purchase).
The Sheffield, Ashton-under-Line, and Manchester Railway 00.111.•
patty Amalgamation.
The Midland Railways (Birmingham Extension).
The London and Birmingham, Grand Junction Purchase.
The Sheffield and Lineolashire Railway Extension.
The Southampton and Dorchester Railway.
The Guildford Chichester, and Portsmouth Railway.
The Rochdale Canal and Manchester and Leeds Railway.
WEST LONDON IMPILOVEMENT AND