The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-24 00:00:00

through districts entirely destitute of railways. The estimate for the

Basingstoke and Salisbury line was •• .. •• .•.••• •• • • • • £700,000

Salisbury ana Yeovil
Yeovil and Exeter

• ....... • • .... 200,000
.............. 1,300,000

Making a total of •• . . ... .......
There was a surplus of nearly 300,0001. on the line between Exeter
and Yeovil, in consequence of one of the branches being thrown out
in the house of Commons. The actual estimate would therefore be
2,600,000/., which he considered amply sufficient for the purposes of
constructing the line.

Cross-examined by Mr. TALtioT —Yeovil was placed upon a branch
of almost two miles in length, proceeding from the main line. For a
distance of six miles between Sherborne and Yeovil the proposed line
would run parallel to the existing line of the Wilts and Somerset Rail-
way. They did not propose to effect any junction with that line. lie
thought there should be a narrow gauge line between Bridport and
Dorchester, In order to complete the chain of narrow gauge commu-
nication. He did not think that a line could be constructed north-
ward of Sherborne with a gradient of 1 in 98, or if It could be, he
was sure that It would be attended with very great expense.
As there was no probability of the cross-examination being con-
cluded to-day, the Committee adjourned till eleven to-morrow.

Room F

BIRMINGHAM AND OXFORD JUNCTION
AND BIRMINGHAM EXTENSION.

Their Lordships met again at the usual hour this morning, Lord
Ripon in the chair; present, Lords Eldon, Montford, Wynford, and
Sondes.

Mr. Wm amnia stated, on the meeting of the Committee, that none
of the witnesses whom he was about to call had been sworn, and that
they could not be sworn in the House at present, as a legal discussion
was now going on, and would probably last for some time. He there
fore requested their Lordships to hear the witnesses at once, and to
leave them to be sworn afterwards.

- Their Lordships, after some hesitation, gave their consent to the
"iourse

Mr. Haddon, a brewer, at Leamington, and Mr. Gladstone and
Mr. Nelson, merchar is and manufacturers at Birmingham and Ban-
bury, gave evidence in favour of the line, chiefly in corroboration of
that of the wftness called yesterday.
Mr. I. K. Brunel, the engineer to the lime, gave the engineering
evidence, which was the same as his evidence before the Committee
on Group 33, in the Commons, at an earlier part of the session. It
. .

was reported at sufficient length in The Sun at the time, and it is,
therefore, unnecessary to repeat it here. He referred to the offer
made to the petitioner, Mr. Wyse, to refer to any nobleman
or gentleman in the country near his estate, to decide whether or
ne the company should buy the whole or any part, or, if so, what
part of that gentleman's property, and also to put a price on it. The
company were ready to fulfil that offer, and to allow Mr. Wyse to
choose the reteree. He also made reference to the offers made by
the company to the several other petitioners, which he said they
were still ready to stick to.
Mr. Brunel's evidence was not concluded at five o'clock, at which
hour the Committee adjourned till eleven o'clock to-morro v.

Room H.

LEAMINGTON (lILACKBURN,
AND SOUTH LANCASHIRE

RUGBY AND
PRESTON,
JUNCTION).
The Committee met at eleven o'clock, the Earl of Strafford in the
chair.
Mr. WALLINGTON, a solicitor of Warwick, was heard in opposition
to the Leamington portion of the line, on account of its interfering
with the Crown Hotel. He maintained that a better line could be
made, which would interfere with less valuable property, and save
50,0001., without in any way detracting from the advantage of the
line, and called upon the Committee to adopt this deviation.
Mr. Nichol, a surveyor of Leamington, corroborated this statement.
The witness was eross-examined by Mr. LAING with respect to
several inaccuracies in the sections of the deviated line, which, he
held, were fatal to it, and that it could not be made. It appeared
there was a mistake of 10 feet in the levels, a gradient of 26 chains
being marked I In 104, instead of 1 in 114.
Mr. Duffy, an engineer and surveyor, admitted the mistake, and
also that such a mistake would, in many instances, prove fatal to
the undertaking.
Mr. Olding, an engineer, said, assuming the section correct, that the
line was practicable.
Mr. Stanley said his rent was 4501. a year, and that the line would
not touch the hotel, but would run aeross his farm within 20 yards
of it.

Mr. lIILDYARD contended that the case was simply one of com-
pensation ; and after some discussion, a clause was agreed to, that
the property of Mr. Stanley should not be interfered with with-
out his consent, and that compensatien should be awarded, if injury
was done.
The preamble of the Bill for the amalgamation was then agreed to.
BRISTOL AND BIRMINGHAM (GLOUCES-
TER AND STONEHOUSE).
This was a Bill to enable the Bristol and Birmingham Railway to
lay down the narrow gauge by the side of the broad gauge from
Gloucester to Stonehouse, a distance of seven miles.
Mr. AUSTIN opposed the Bill, for the Great Western Company, on
the ground that an agreement had been entered into lay the two com-
panies which this Bill would interfere with. lie had no objection to
the laying down of the narrow gauge even as far as Bristol, but he
held that the narrow gauge ought not to be laid at the side of the
broad, but within it.
Mr. Sanders, the secretary to the Bristol and Birmingham, gave
evidence to show the necessity of the narrow gauge to Stonehouse,
and. the Committee adjourned until to- morrow.

Room 5.

ROTHEILIZAIVI, BARNSLEY,
WAKEFIELD, HUDDERSFIELD, AND
GOOLE.
The Committee on this line met at the usual hour, at No. 5
Abingdon-street, the Earl of Radnor in the chair.

The case of the promoters having closed yesterday, the evidence
on behalf of the opposition was proceeded with this morning.
Mr. Graham, master of the Milton Iron Works, near Shetlicld, was
exarninel at great length. The effect of his evidence was to show
that a line east and west would give greater accommodation than
one north and south.

Mr. Itigley, a coal surveyor at Manchester, corroborated the evi
donee of the last witness. Ile did not think that the proposed lin

would accommodate the coal-fields so well as a line east and west

Messrs. Swanwick and Gee, civil engineers, were each subjected to
a long examination on the part of the opponents of the line, to prove
the difficulties connected with its construction. The latter gentle-
man stated that it would cost a great sum of money, and that there
were more tunnels on the line in proportion than on any other line
with which he was acquainted.
The Committee adjournel till to-morrow.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
GROUP LX 11.

The Committee on this group of Bills met again to-day In Room
22 (Grand Corridor), Lord Lincoln in the chair, when the case of the
LONDON AND SOIITH-WESTERN (LONDON
BRIDGE EXTENSION)
was resumed, the preamble declared to be proved, and the clauses
agreed to.
The Committee then adjourned.

GROUP LXIX.
This Committee re-assembled to-day in Room 23 (New Uonses of
Parliament), Mr. W. Baring in the chair.
NVISDECII, ST. IVES, AND CAPIZZEIDGE

?UNCTION
This case was resumed, and the preamble of the Bill eventually de.
dared to be not proved.

GROUP LXX.

The Select Committee on this group of Bills re-assembled to day
at the usual hour, in Room 24 (New Houses of Parliament) ; Sir
George Clerk in the chair. There were also present all the other
members of the Committee, ♦iz., Colonel Peel, the Hon. Captain
Carnegie, Mr. Smyth, and Mr. Tower.
DUBLIN AND ENNISKILLEN.
The opposition to this Bill was resumed.

Mr. Fleming, secretary of the company, was called by Mr.
Murphy, to prove noncompliance with the Duncombe resolutions on
the part of the proprietors.
Mr. RYAN, accountant to the Dublin and Kelso Bank, was also
called for the same purpose, but no decision on that charge was
given at the rising of the Committee at four o'clock.

STANDING ORDERS' COMMITTEE.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Their Lordships' Committee on the Standing Orders met to-day at
two o'clock, in Room No. 1, Parliamentary Offices, Abingdon-street,
the Earl of Shaftesbury in the chair. In the case of the
SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE RAILWAY (WITH BRANCHES).
The preamble was proved.
BIRMINGHAM, WOLVERHAMPTON, AND STOUR VALLEY
(BIRMINGHAM, WOLVERHAM ?TON, AND DUDLEY
LINES).
The preamble of this Bill also was proved.
CORK AND WATERFORD (TWO LINES.)
The preambles of these Bills were also proved.
LEEDS AND BRADFORD (JUNCTION AT BRADFORD).
Preamble proved.
EAST AND WEST INDIA DOCKS, AND BIR3IINGILi.3I
JUNCTION RAILWAY.
The preamble of this Bill was proved ; as was also that of the
GLASGOW, GARNKIRK, AND COATBRIDGE RAILWAY
EXTENSION.
Their Lordships then adjourned.

NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN
CONNECTING RAILWAY.

A special meeting of the shareholders in this line took
place yesterday at the London Tavern, under the provisions
of Lord Dalhousie's Dissolution Act, in order to determine
upon the propriety of winding up the affairs of the Company.
There was rather a numerous attendance of the proprietary
present.
The chair was taken, at half-past one o'clock, by Mr. E.
Scard.
The Sacarrany read the advertisement convening the
meeting.
The CHAIRMAN said be had received a letter from Mr.
De Burgh regretting that he was unable to attend the meet-
ing of the Company, in consequence of a domestic affliction.
It did not behove him to state very much to the meeting;
he would merely observe that they were all aware of the
rejection of the Bill in the House of Commons, and
likewise of the action in the Court of Chancery
commenced against the directors. He was happy to say that
the plaintiff's, Messrs. Castendeeck, Baring, and Swinton,
had consented that the money be withdrawn from the Ac-
countant-General's hands, and placed in the hands of two of
the directors, Mr. Edward Scard and Mr. Johnston, and two
of the plaintiffs, Mr. Castendeeck and Mr. Swinton. He would
conclude by observing that they would do their utmost to
discharge their liabilities in a manner satisfactory to the pro.
prietary at large.
Mr. FRANCIS begged to move that the Company be dis-
solved.
Mr. CORSET seconded the resolution.
Mr. CLARKE desired to have a statement of the accounts
before he would proceed to act as a scrutineer.
Some very disorderly and irregular conversation here en-
sued, and Mr. Daniel, one of the scrutineers, refused to act
with Mr. Clarke. After some further noisy discussion, the
resolution was carried for a dissolution of the Company, the
number -voting being 456 shares, assenting to a dissolution
without bankruptcy, and 510 remain neutral.
1 The meeting then settarated.

DIRECT WESTERN RAILIVAY
COMPANY.

( The adjourned meeting of the shareholders, for the purpose
of determining on the dissolution of the Company, was held
at the King's Head Tavern, Poultry, at two o'clock.
Ye3sfter'ia
r. Alyderman CIIALIS having taken the chair, apologised for
not being present at the appointed hour, having been detained
by magisterial duties, and then read the clanseof theActunder
which the adjourned meeting was held.
The SECRETARY read the advertisement convening the
meeting.
meetingemen presentt
at
the
wholewoul d
recollect from li A I R M A
whatN octheenurresadida,
at
question was simply whether they should go on, or whether
they gould dissolve the Company? and, if so, whether they
thethe lagsetntl that
would declare a bankruptcy, or consult, perhaps, their inte-
rests, more efficiently, by leaving it in the hands of the com-
mittee. He had told them at the last meeting that the effect of
going into a Court of Bankruptcy would be that the concern
would be referred over to a Blaster in Chancery, and
it might not be settled in the course of two or
three years. He said, however, if the Company could be
referred to any official tribunal in the country, with a pros-
pect of ready settlement, the Committee would be very glad
to get rid of it. He made these remarks because he took
the chair that day, as he hadAone before, only with a view
to yield to every proprietor every reasonable satisfaction on
'any matter connected with the present failure—for failure it
had been ; and just because it was so, the suspicions of
proprietors would be most naturally excited against
the Provisional Committeemen. For his part, he
had actually sought for objections among his friends, and
the amount of these, he would be candid enough to tell
them, was that the committee had spent a large amount
of money on engineering, when they knew that the pub-
lic would not take up their shares. But this objection
arose out of ignorance of what actually occurred. It
was only in the month of October that the shares were
issued, and they were all issued at the same time.
Now if it was considered that by the month of Feb-
ruary following the committee had to place the Company
in a fit position to make their deposits, so that between
October and February they bad to originate a working corn-
mittee, get up surveys, and prepare sections for 150 miles of
railway, within the space of six or seven weeks—if
taken into account, it must appear that the Provisionalt
Com-
mittee had only done what they would have been most 1
culpable, indeed criminal, if they had neglected. Another