The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-04 00:00:00

V
Aiwx,A, vAet Ite tO rt
4'

t ILW AY COMMITTEES.

(THIS DAY.)

GROUP IX.

The Committee met to-day at twelve oclock, Lord Wors•
ley in the chair.
-------

WEST OF SCOTLAND TUNCTION.

After some conversation, it was arranged that in abandon-
ing the junction with the Greenock and Polloc and Govan
lines south of the Bridge-street station, that the promoters
of the West of Scotland Junction did not give up_ the small
branch proposed to connect it with the Barrhead and :Neil-
ston, and that opposition should be heard on that head.
Mr. Gray, the deputy-chairman of the Clyde River Trust,
was called, and was undergoing examination against the via-
duct proposed over the river, when
Mr. HOPE wished the promoters of the Bill to put in the
exact plan of the bridge they intended constructing. They
had spoken about two or three plans, and he wished to know
which of them they selected, in order to regulate his exami-
nation of witnesses accordingly.
It was announced that the promoters were prepared to take
any of the plans that the Committee proposed ; either that
with seven piers detached from the present bridge, or one to
abut on it; or else to cross above it, as explained by Mr.
Miller. _ _ .

After some discussion on the point, the room was cleared.

On our admission the CHAIRMAN intimated that the parties
should confine themselves to one plan for crossing the river.
Mr. ANDREWS then said the plan selected was We viaduct
with the same number of arches and with continu4*ers.
Mr. Gray's examination was then resumed, wilt deposed
generally that he opposed the present scheme, because it
would interfere with traffic of the streets, while the crossing
of the Clyde at the point proposed would drive the shipping
down the river forty or fifty feet. The crossing would also
damage Glasgow-bridge.
The cross-examination of the witness did not elicit an'
particular point, arzd the Committee adjourned, at three
o'clo.k, till Monday at twelve c:Tnock.

GROUP I.
LONDON .A.NZI) OXTORID.
The Committee re-assembled this morning at the usual
hoar; present, Mr. Finch (chairman), Mr. Lawson, Lord A,
lierwy. and Mr. Wodehouse.

The CHAIRMAN then gave the decision of the Committe,

with respect to the objection raised against the validity o

the contract deed.• He said the Co—mtnittee were unani-
mously of opinion that the objection raised was invalid, anu
that they should, therefore, proceed with the investigation.
Without mentioning the names of those they had consulter
on the subject, he might say that they had obtained the opi-
nions of persons whose authority on such questions was ver
great, and who were all of the same opinion.
Mr. Humphrey Brown, general traffic manager of the Bir-
mingham and Gloucester Railway, was then called to giv(
evidence with respect to the traffic which might be expected
by the line. He said he had had much experience in tin
management of traffic by railway and water conveyance, ant
was formerly manag- rof a large carrying trade. Since the
firs► formation of railways be had been actively engaged ii
making estimates of traffic for lines now in operation. 'rhos(
estimates bad been generally realised. Was well acquaints:
with the district which the line would traverse. Hadsre-

ported on the traffic of the Great Western Railway fur s
body of shareholders at Liverpool at the time it was dis-
cussed whether the Great Western should be constructer

on the broad iatiie from Maidenhead to Bristol. The re-
venue which he anticipated would be derived from passenger.
travelling various distances, estimated front those now tn:-
vel ling by public and private conveyances at 44,403/.145. 10d.
100 per cent. increase by the construction of a railway
44,103!. 14s. 104.; passengers who now travel by the Great
Western 11,251/. 6s. Bd. Total revenue for passenger-traffie
102,058/. 16s. 4d. • merchandise and agricultural produce b.)
road, 9,2411. 2s. 2d. ; minerals by road, 578/. 15s. 4d. ; mer
chandise which now came by Hertford, 12,512/. 10s.; total
22,232/. 7s. 6d. Horses, cattle, sheep, and pig..
7,6071. 10s. 7d. •, parcels, mails, dogs, horses, and carriages
4,6091. 17s. Bd. ; total for traffic, 136,608/. 12s. Id..
out of which would have to be deducted 25,9291. 16s. 7u
for tollage to the London and Birn.ingham Railway ;
44,2711. 10s. 2d. for maintenance of roads, stations, locomotive
power, and the general expenses of the line (40 per cent.),
making a total of 70,201/. 6s. 91, and leaving a disposable
balance of 55,407!. ss. 44.1., or 71. per cent. on the capital 'DI
900,0001., and leaving a surplus for contingencies of
3,407/. ss. 4d. By this tine coals in the district would be
reduced from 325. 6d. to 175., thus saving 155. per ton. The
saving to the district in coals would be 155,000!. (The
assents and dissents were handed in.) He then detailed the
saving of time and expense which would ho effected, b,
baying the use of the terminus of the London and Birming-
ham Railway, over that of the Great Western.
This evidence concluded the case on the pint of tht
promoters
Mr. TALBOT then proceeded to address the Committee it,
opposition to the project, in behalf of the Great Wester;
Railway Company and the landowners who' had petitioner
against it, namely, Mi. Cox, Mr. Granville Prim, Lads
Grenville, Lord Carrington, Sir John Dashwood King, Lad 3
Wenman, Lord Abingdon, and the Colleges of Oxford. I=l,
said the line was open to innumerable objections: it was a
competing line with the Great Western, and ran, for sixteen
miles of its route between thiee and four miles of it. T 6
promoters, in the event of the line not passing, would be in-
volved in ruin, and in ruin no less deplorable, if it
received their sanction, because it was obvious that
it could not be constructed, but handed over to its competi-
tors, the Great Western Railway, in which case it would not
be made at all. Then it was absurd to say that the line
would be of advantage to the district, because it was self
evident that the Great Western offered every facility which
I the whole district required. Then let the Committee bear it
mind the difficulties with which the Great Western had tc

contend in making their branch from Didcot to Oxford
which was indisputatny the best line of railway in the coun,
try, and that it had only been opened twelvd
months ; that the directors had had scarcely time
to make' all the arrangements necessary for affording the
inhabitants of Oxford all the advantages of their line. In
what had ithe Great Western gained ? A person might
travel from Oxford to London for 95., and the fares were
being gradually reduced, but in the event of any of their
passengers being withdrawn by a competing lire this salu-
tary insertion would be frustrated, and they would be obligee
to increase their fares to keep up the revenue which they de,
rived from a larger number of passengers. It wa..
true the collegians of Oxford were originally opposed
to the Great Western, but the line was alterei
and re-altered to meet their wishes, and at lengtl
they gave their assent to it. He should call Dr. Winter,
the late Vice-Chancellor of Oxford before them, in order t
show the feeling of the colleges with respect to the Great
Western and the proposed line. They had nu security that
the proposed line would give greater facility for the transmis-
sion of parcels at a cheaper rate than the Great Western
for they might, and would, no doubt, charge the highest rate
allowed by Act of Parliament. Would it then he either fah
or equitable to pass ai competing line toone so latelyopened, and
whose resources had not as yet been fully developed and at tht-
instanceofa few disappointed and envious persons 2—were they
to adopt vindictive legislation because a few persons, of this
kind wanted a railway to theirdoors. If the Great Western had
been guilty of all the misconduct which had been attributed
to it by the promoters of the London and Oxford, was it not
likely that more than two persons, living at Oxford would
have invested their capital in it? Either abuses did or did
not exist, but it was most evident from this that they did
not exist ; and that the proposed line was rot
required by the inhabitants of Oxford. Then they
admitted that their line was a bad one in an
engineering point of view. Then, again, this line was to
effect a solution of the gauge question. The absurdity of
this was evident when it was considered that the construction
of a narrow gauge line into a broad gauge district would
make " confusion worse confounded," and that the Great
Western was constructed on the broad gauge to Exeter, and
proposed to be extended to Fishguard and Porthdynallen, in
South Wales. He was at a loss to know how the line was
to save 155,0001. per annum. in the article of coals, when in
the estimate furnished by Mr. Brown the amount
of revenue for coals was set down at 5781. only. It
was equally ridiculous to conceive that the whole of
the stations could be made for the sum proposed,
namely, 22,000/. Then the whole district, instead of a rich
agricultural one, as:stated, was a poor one, and thinly po.
pulated, which he should prove by witnesses. Uxbridge, for
instance, to which the Great Western proposed to make a
branch 2%. miles in length, would be a mile nearer Londdm
than by the line proposed. Then let thorn look at the towns
they proposed to accommodate. In the list of places in-
cluded in their list, he found places smith of Maidenhead
where the Great Western had a station, Hanwell, where they
also bad a station ; Hampstead and harrow, to which the
London andßirmingham gave accommodation ; andotherplaces
the porttlation of which they had included in their list, and
which they proposed to accommodate, were intersected by
the Great Western. They proposed to carry coals to Theme,
but the line of the London and Birmingham to Aylesbury,
and the proposed extension to Thame, would fully give this
accommodation. The assents were only 137, and from persons
residing on sixteen miles of the line, whilst the dissents had
been received from persons residing within twenty-two miles
of the line. Was it likely that the large landowners who
had petitioned against this line would have done so
' if it would bestow upon them all the advantages stated?
No; they preferred to depend for railway communication
to a solvent Company instead of a project. admitted to be
bad and inefficient, and proposed by parties of whom they
knew nothing By the branches proposed from the Great
Western to Henley-upon-Thames, to Wycombe and to Ux-
bridge, no town of the slightest consequence would be more
than seven miles distant from a railway. Then, as to coals,