The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-14 00:00:00

SUNDAY TRADING.

Mr. WAKLEY also presented a petition from the
churchwardens, overseers, and guardians of the poor of
St. Luke's parish, praying the House to introduce a
measure to prevent Sunday trading.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from the Tower
Hamlets, praying that that district might not be included
in the operation of the Small Debts Bill. Also a petition
from a merchant of Liverpool, complaining of being
harshly treated by the Trinity House authorities, and
praying the House to substitute inquiries into the
powers and management of the trustees of that charity.
Also a petition from a parish in the county of Norfolk
complaining of the enormous amount of poor rates levied
on them (15s. 6d. in the pound), and stating that the
neighbouring parishes were supplied with labour from
their parish. They prayed that a general rate might be
limited in all parishes, instead of the rates being limited
to particular parishes.
The HON. MEMBER also presented a petition from the
inhabitants of Brentford praying fur the abolition of
corporal punishment in the army as soon as it could
possibly be done, and any other made of discipline sub-
stituted.
The Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod here attended to
summon the Commons before the Upper House to hear
the Royal Assent given by Commission to several Bills.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from James Sedge-
wick, Esq., a barrister-at-law, stating that after a long
service in the Excise and Board of Stamps, he had
been removed from that office, and placed on
a retiring allowance of 300/. per annum. The
petitioner prayed for a Select Committee to in-
quire into the allegations made against him, and prayed
that until such inquiry were made the retiring allow-
ance might be withdrawn, and that in case of such alle-
gations being discovered to be without foundation, that
ho might be reinstated in his office. The Hon. Member
gave notice, that to-morrow he would move that the pe-
tition be printed with the votes.
Lord MARCUS HILL presented a petition in favour
of the Small Debts Bill.
FLOGGING IN THE ARMY.
_ _ _

Mr. WAiiLBY said that, after having examined,
his opinion was unchanged. Their motion was not
refused without a motive, for he believed it would be
very inconvenient to produce these returns, as
they would give facts to show that the brutal
and disgusting practice of punishment by flogging
ought to be at once and for ever abolished.
He inferredefrom what had fallen from the Hon. Gen-
tleman opposite, that in his opinion the practice of flog-
ging had nearly arrived at its termination. Why, when
the number of lashes was reduced from 1,500 to 1,000,
the reduction was hailed with delight by the army,
but still an opinion prevailed that the number
could not be further reduced. The number, however,
was subsequently reduced to 200, and then the reduction
was admitted to be necessary; but still it was thought
in the army that it could not further be reduced.
the number had been reduced to 50, and the army ap-
proved of the reduction, but still it was thought the
number could not be further reduced. Now, leaving
out of the question the physical evils which arose
from flogging, leaving out of the question the physical
sufferings which it involved, he asked whether it was
humane, whether it was just, that even the power of
inflicting fifty lashes should exist.—(Hear, hear.) He
hoped that this system of flogging in the army was not
to last for ever. He felt quite certain that no man
could receive fifty lashes from a cat-o-sine tails with-
out his life being in danger. The lash with such a cat,
with nine knots on each thong, was equal to eighty-one
strokes.—(Hear, hear.) Whatever might be the skill
and judgment of the surgeon, it was impossible for him
to say that no danger would arise from fifty lashes. A
feeling was prevalent in the House that the names of
the regiments should not be specified in the returns,
but it was well known there were regiments in
which there were little or no flogging, while
in others there was a great deal, and they should in•
quire into the cause of the difference. He knew of one
regiment in which there had not been a case of flogging
for twenty years, and it was important they should
know the reason why there had been no application for
that punishment. With regard to that return which
required information, as to whether the party had sur-
vived the punishment, he admitted that the mode of
putting that return was liable to objection, for if the
party did happen to die within the year, it did not
follow that there was any connexion between the death
and the flogging. But that an individual might die a
year after the punishment, and from it, as the remote
cause, no medical man could deny. In this case, when
death did ensue, it was from a secondary disease which
supervened on the effects of the flogging. It was well
known that fifty lashes lacerated the skin very
much, and it was known that the blood began to fly
even after the infliction of twelve lashes. The injury
thus given to the skin might operate fatally to the
individual by acting as a remote cause of death. He
deprecated, however, the lash under any circumstances.
By adopting a system of rewards and punishments dis-
cipline would be more effectually preserved. A man,
when he became a soldier, ought not to cease to be a
citizen—he should not be treated as a slave; and, be-
lieving that the return would be productive of good, he
would vote for the return of the Hon. Member for
Winchester. _

Mr. WARBURTON did not deem it necessary to
enter now into the question of corporal punishment.
He considered the subject immediately before them was
the returns moved for, and of these returns he thought
none of them possessed half the importance of the Bth.
Every one who knew anything of moral evidence must
be prepared to say, upon looking at persons after
flogging, that the average of those who died from its
effects actually exceeded the average deaths from other
causes in the same regiment.—(Hear, hear.) Let them
know the average mortality after flogging, and whether
those who had been so punished died in greatr nombers
than those who were not. Stich information would be
most important and useful ; in fact, it was, in his
opinion, the most important part of the motion, and the
Government must present it to the House in an un:
objectionable form. Such a return as this would enable
them to judge with absolute certainty whether the
punishment did or did not affect life or limb, which it
professed not to do.
Mr. C. BULLER thought it would be utterly im-
possible for the Government to find information out of
which to compile the returns for which the Hon. Mem-
ber had moved, as there could be nothing more diffi-
cult than to obtain information as to the average number
of deaths against those who had received corporal
punishment. What they objected to was to furnish
returns which must, from the difficulty in the way,
only mislead the public mind—(Hear, hear)—and lay
the officers of the regiments open to severe animadver-
sion on the part of the public. He would not touch upon
the invidious nature of the return, particularly that por-
tion respecting the number of the regiment. If it should
have happened that in one regiment a man had died
after being flogged, in that case the regiment would be
run down ; for in 99 cases out of 100 no ordinary
casualty to human life occurred without some invidious
comparisons being made.—(Hear, hear.) He only men-
tioned this to show how slight a ground there was for
the arguments of his Hon. Friends opposite. The Hon.
Member for Kendal sought for a return of the average
number of persons who had died after flogging and other
causes. If they could attain returns for fifty years re-
specting an army of 100,000 men, and 10,000 of them
had been flogged, they might be able to afford some in-
formation on the subject. But he considered that, taking
a few instances, such as these documents would afford,
would lead to numerous erroneous inferences. It
should be remembered that those men who were
punished were generally of a dissolute class.
They would then have to abstract from their inquiry
the results of the general habits of those persons alluded
to. If this would lead to incontrovertible evidence, there
could be no persons more anxious than they were to
produce these documents, but they were satisfied that
they would have quite an opposite tendency, and only
mislead the public mind. With respect to the other
question, as to whether the trials were open to the
public. Now, it was impossible to say whether or not
all these trials were carried on formally or not, for they
would have to ask officers, who would not be likely to
convict themselves. He did not mean to enter into the
abstract principle of the law on this subject, but he
could state that courts-martial were open courts. There
was another point to which he should, with permission
of the House, allude. He considered that there was
great injustice in the remarks that were made as to the
instruments with which punishment was inflicted. That
was, he understood, regulated by the proper authorities,
and he understood that there was a general rule on the
subject.
Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY said the Hon. Member
for Finsbury was mistaken when he supposed the army
were ever averse to a reduction below 1,000 lashes.
After a few words from Mr. M. GORE, who said Sir
Charles Napier was not altogether averse to the using of
the lash,
Mr. ESCOTT replied, from the course the discus-
sion had taken, he was at a loss to know what portion
of the returns the Government was disposed to
and what to withhold. As far as he could understand
the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. F. Manic), he was will-
ing to grant all the returns except Nos. 8 and 10.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he was willing to accede
to Nos. 1,2, 3, and 4, and not the others named.
Mr. ESCOTT would then address a few observations
on those returns which the Noble Lord refused. He
considered it was most important that the public should
know all about these cases of flogging, the names of the
regiments in which they took place, the order for the
execution of punishment, whether the courts were open or
closed, and all other particulars connected with each case.
What was it that had caused the great diminution of the
punishment? Why, it was the verdict of a jury, that a
man had suffered capital punishment where he was only
sentenced to be whipped ; and surely it was a most im-
portant fact, that the public should know how many
similar instances had occurred. He was surprised at the
reason which had been given for refusing the return,
namely, that the communications of the surgeon to the
Commander-in-Chief were confidential. He did not con-
siser that they could refuse these returns, but he should
be contented to take what he could get; however, these
returns, which were now refused, he would get, and that
at no future day. He should get them next session, along
with some others which had been denied. He would tell
the Government, and that in no unfriendly spirit, that
they were destroying the confidence of the House and of
the country by some of their proceedings, and he could
tell them that they would hear more about it at another
time.
Captain POLHILL would support the Government.
He was aware from personal experience of the great ad-
vantages which arose to the discipline of the army from
the practice of flogging. He, when he was commander
of a troop in the service, had a most drunken disorderly
soldier, upon whom he had tried every punishment in
vain except flogging, at last he was ordered 300 lashes,
and he became positively the cleanliest, and the best
soldier in his regiment.
' Dr. NICHOLL would not press an amendment in
consequence of the promise of the Noble Lord.

Mr. ESCOTT said he had a motion on the paper
on the subject of flogging in the army, but he under-
stood that the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary-at-
War objected to make the returns required. He did
not know what the Right Hon. Gentleman's objections
were, and in the absence of any intimation from the
Right Hon. Gentleman upon the subject, he still re-
mained of opinion that the returns were necessary to
supply the House with ample and accurate informa-
tion with regard to the extent and amount of corporal
punishment which had recently token place in the army.
The Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving for a return
of persons flogged in the army in Great Britain and
Ireland, in the years 1845 and 1846, to the end of July ;
specifying, 1. The offence. 2. The regiment, the place
of station, the time. 3. The sentence. 4. The order
for its execution. 5. Whether the trials were open to
the public, or only open to the regiment, or with closed
doors. 6. The number of lashes inflicted, and the
day. 7. How soon after punishment the man was able
to return to his duty, and at what place he was then
quartered. 8. Whether death has followed within twelve
months of the flogging, and the date of such death. 9.
Whether the punishment was inflicted, if in cavalry re-
giments, by the trumpeter or farriers •, if in infantry re-
giments, by privates or drummers, and with what instru-
ment. 10. Copies of the surgeon's minutes of all such
punishments, and any subsequent observations on their
consequences.
Mr. FOX MAULE had hoped that after the recent
discussion on this painful subject, and after the deter-
mination of the Commander-in-Chief on the subject, the
matter would have been left at rest for the pre-
sent. With respect to the returns sought, he had no
objection to give them for the last year—noting the
number of cases of flogging, the offence, the regiment, the
place of station, the time, and the sentence. He did not
see much use in giving the order for its execution, though
he would have no objection to that. With regard to the
trials, the custom usually was to conduct courts-martial
with open doors, and he had never heard any complaints
with regard to the mode in which these investi-
gations were conducted. Nos. 6 and 7 returns
he had not any great objection to, but he
could not agree that any returns such as
those sought under head 8 should be given. It
would lead to the supposition that the death of any
soldier within a twelvemonth after his being flogged, from
whatever cause, was to be attributed to that event.
As to whether the punishment was inflicted, if in cavalry
regiments by the trumpeters or farrier, Mid if in infantry
regiments by the privates or drummers, and with what
instrument, he had to state,lthat in infantry regiments it
was customary for the drummers to inflict the
punishment, and in cavalry regiments the far-
riers. The instrument of punisment was the
" cat," any irregularity as to which could be easily
remedied. With reference to the copies of the
surgeon's minutes of such punishments, and any sub-
sequent observations on their consequences, he looked
upon them as confidential communications to the com-
manding officer, any attempt to call for which would be
an interference with the discipline of the army, to which
ho could not consent. In fine, he did not consider
the whole of the return necessary. He considered that
the House had reposed confidence in the Commander-in-
Chief and the Government with regard to this subject, and
he was sure that every possible cafe would be taken that
in future the punishment should not go farther than it
ought to go, and that, all permanent injury to the indi-
vidual would be avoided. He would conclude by moving
as an amendment the omission of all words after the
word " sentence " in the third line.
Mr. HUME considered that the first four points in
ent, the place where the punishment
the motion would be amply sufficient--the offence, the
name of the regiel
was inflicted, and the number of lashes. He hoped the
Honourable Member (Mr. Escott) would be satisfied
with returns on these points. He (Mr. Hume) did
not see much necessity for information on the other
points. They would then be able to see whether the
sentence of the court-martial had been properly carried
out or not.
Dr. NICHOL", submitted whether it was necessary to
call fur the whole of such an invidious return. Returns
specifying the offence, the name of the regiment, the
place where the puuishment was inflicted, and the sen-
tence of the court-martial, would, in his estimation, be
sufficient to enable the House to judge how that depart-
ment of the Government was conducted. If the whole
return were granted, a stigma would, perhaps, be thrown
on officers who might not have an opportunity of defend-
ing themselves.
Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS considered that the re-
turns which the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. F. Maule) had
agreed to would be sufficient. The others would, pos-
sibly, cast aspersions on the service. After the expla-
liatinin that House, elter the stetetheute of an

SUNDAY TRADING.
Mr. HINDLEY moved the first reading of the Bill to
amend the laws relative to Sunday Trading.
Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY said he would not op..
pose the first reading of the Bill, provided the Hon.
Gentleman would not press it further during the present
session.
Mr. HINDLEY consented to the arrangement.
Captain PECHELL withdrew his motion for a copy
of a report presented to the Board of Trade, relating to
the state of the law affecting Wreck and Salvage, and
the practices relating to the same, in different parts of
the kingdom.
; The Mouse then adjourned at Seven o'clock.

EXECUTION AT YORK.—On Saturday John Rolly
suffered the extreme penalty of the law at York Castle, for
nawdor iAftat it Uipt9p, is crarm,

illustrious individual elsewhere, he thought that the , PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS.
Hon. Gentleman would not have persisted in his motion.. 1 (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.)
The House and the country could not fail to see that the ITEDNISDAY, AUG. 12.
practice was growing into disuse, and when the Messengers from the Lords brought up the following Bills, to
wlti,ich their Lordships had agreed :
moral character of the soldier was improved it would
ndu ,
r Lecture
E Rooms Bill--Cormlidated
fall into disuse, without being absolutely abolished. Fund 'crre(ll,oll,otl.reßill is Tar an tlibankment Rill—South titaf-
Besides, the measures now being carried out by the fordshlre Junction Railway with Branches (No. 1) Bill —Leeds and
I,l,lsraill,tl(alii:,:lirilLiliaehillway (Junction Line at Bradford) Bill—Midland Rail-
proper departments would have the proper effect. He
had commanded on foreign stations for a quarter of il. Leicester
iEtaxitle,u,s,3,,
Extension)
ozebTrr33:,
INvt,tanveeartio.nr, , Btioriul i i.inrigt-i
century, and could safely say that the punishment was,3 , South Staffordshire Junction Railway (No. 1) Bill—Monmouthshire
never resorted to except when absolutely necessary, i Railway (No. 2) Bill—Sheffield New Streets Bill—Amendments to
and never without a degree of pain to those whose duty , einvh,enrst,oibtaiv(oorer Ce erriTlis'llisti:isotatoef
JBeilrlii—Cs,l'laurik,s's,cDati•ror7e Billi—rMlat-
ti iz a t
compelled them to resort to it, which ought to prevent tsl,l3„l,o,:N's Estate Bill— Sligopand Shannon Railwayir Bill,loilvit'lliol—ut
the officers from being stigmatised as wanting in humanity. amendmen..--Huddersfield and Manchester Railway and Canal
There were several measures of great utility that might (Oldham Brans'') Bill—Norfolk Estuary Bill—Wexford harbour
Improvement Bib, with.with
.a.mie,intclniamteenit,sd—meßnrtighouse Sewering, Drain-
be brought forward, and which would, only for the
Lighting, 11:::
want of finances. For instance, colonial severities age, and
might be mitigated. He trusted this explanation would
he considered sufficient by the House, and that the
Hon. Gentleman would withdraw his motion.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that giving the
name of the regiment would give rise to invidious com-
parisons, which, at the same time, would be very unjust,
for in one case an army might require punishment, and
in another not. A case to this effect was stated by
General Taylor.

.
PARLIAM._I?..NTARY DIVISI°1"
(From the Votes and Procet2dings of the House of Commons.
AUG. 12.
wEro'Esnin.;-
(1.1,1 THE COMMITTEE.)
RELIGIOUS OPINIONS BILL.—
Acts I Eliz. c. 1, and 2
First Clause (repealing certainparts ~'s,'
lchnent contained shall
Eliz. C. 1 : Proviso, that rothing Di this el \
or persons to affirm,
authorise or render it lawful for an Persoi
hold, stand with, set forth, maintain, Dr def - i any such foreign
r shall the same
power, pre-eminence, Jurisdiction, or authC.ritY,
extend further than to the repeal of the pailicuLlC penalties and
punishments herein referred to, but in all other respeCtS,the law shall
continue the same as if this enactment had not b..en made) :
Amendment proposed in page 3, line 26, after the word,. " referred
to," to insert the words " or consequent thereon :"—Qne, .t.iPn put,
" That those words be there inserted." The Committee divia,.\::—

Arundel, Earl of
lirldgeman, 11.
Browne, IV.

Collett, John
Duncan, George

MINORITY-AYES, 10.
O'Connell, M. J. Yorke, Henry R.
Pechell, Captain
Wakley, T.
Williams, W.

TELLERS.
Escott, Itickhain
Strutt, Edward

MAJORITY-NOES, 53.
Anson, Colonel Gladstone, Captain Pigot, David
Baine, Walter Gore, Robert Rich, Henry
Bellew, R. M. Grey, Sir G. Russell, Lord J.
Blackburne, J. I. Hatton, Captain Shaw, Rt. lion. F.
Bodkin, William 11. Hawes, B. Shell, R. L.
Brocklehurst, John liayter, W. G. Sheridan, R. B.
Brown, W. Henley, J. W. Somerville, Sir W.
Byng, G. S. Jones, Captain Spooner, Richard
Collins, 'William Labouchere, llenry Thornely, T.
Cowper, W. F. Layard, Captain Troubridge, Sir E.
Craig, W. G. Macaulay, T. B. Turner,,Edmund
Cripps, W. Morpeth, Viscount Walpole, S. H.
Douglas, Sir 11. Muntz, 0 F. Wawn, J T.
Duncannon, Lord Newdegatc, C. N. Wilshere, T. W.
Dundas, David Nicholl, John Wyse, Thomas
Ebrington, Viscount Owen, Sir John
Estcourt, T. 0. Palmer, G.
Fuller, A. E. Parker, John
Gibson, T. M. Philips, Mark

TELLERS.
Hill, Lord M.
Tufnell, 11.

GAUGE OF RAILWAYS BILL,

Read a third time ; Clause (nothing in the Act contained shall pre-
vent the construction of the Birmingham and Oxford Junction Rail-
way, the Birmingham Extension Railway, and the Birmingham,
'Wolverhampton, and Dudley Railway, including the line between
Wednesbury and Dudley, on the same gauge or gauges according to
which the Oxford and Rugby, and the Oxford, Worcester, and Wol-
verhampton Railways may be constructed), brought up, and read a
first time ; Motion made, and Question put, " That the said Clause
be now read a second time." The House divided

MINORITY— AYES, 15.
Bernal, Ralph Harcourt, G. Thornely, T.
Bridgeman, Hewitt Ilayter, W. G. Wawii, J. T.
Crawford, W. S. Henley, J. W. Williams, W.
Cripps, William Layanl, Captain TELLERS.
Duncan, George Nicholl, J. Muntz, G. F.
Ferguson, Sir R. Rolleston, Colonel Spooner, Richard

MAJORITY-NOES, 46.
Arundel, Earl of Escott, Bickham Rich, Henry
Bateson, Thomas Etwall, Ralph Rumbold, C. E.
Beresford, Major Gibson, Thomas 31. Scott, Francis
Berkeley, Captain Gore, 31ontaguo Seymour, Sir 11. B.
Berkeley, H. F. Grey, Sir G. Somerville, Sir W
Blackburne, J. I. Hawes, Benj. Stewart, P. M
Bodkin, W. H. Hobhouse, Sir J. Troubridge, Sir E
Brocklehurst, J. Howard, P. 11. Turner, Edmund
Brotherton, Joseph Mangles, H. D. Ward, 11. G.
Brown, W. Mastennan, John Wilshere, W.
Buller, Charles Morpeth, Viscount Wood, Charles
Byng, G. S. O'Conor, Don Wyse, Thomas
Cowper, W. F. Palmer, G.
Douglas, Sir H. Parker, John
Duneannon, Lord Philips, Mark
Dundas, Admiral Pigot, David
librington, Viscount Plumridge, Captain

TELLERS.
Tufnell. H. ._
Craig, W. G.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES,

(YESTERDAY)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Room B.
BATTLE OF THE GAUGES.
Ibis Committee commenced its sittings this morning at
eleven o'clock. The Noble Lords who constitute this Com-
mittee are—Lord Scarborough (chairman), Lord Calthorpe,
Lord Churchill, Lord Forester, Lord Si'chaster, commonly
known as Lord Longford.

The schemes referred to the consideration of their Lord-
ships are—
Grand Junction Railway, Showhill and Portobello Branch,
and the Taff Vale Railway upon re-commitment.
Their Lordships decided upon proceeding first with the

GRAND gUNCTION,RAILWAY, (SHOWHXLL
AND PORTOBELLO BRANCH).
Mr. TALBOT, Q.C., opened the case on behalf of the "pro-
moters of the Bill. The object of the proposed line was to
construct a branch, on the narrow gauge, from the Grand
Junction line, of about three miles in length, to afford the
means of a better communication with the town of Wolver•
hampton, and also to give to that town the benefit of a com-
munication with the South Staffordshire Railway. His
Learned Friend Mr. Austin appeared for the Oxford,
Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway. The object
of his opposition was to prevent the construction
of this narrow gauge branch, and thereby to shut out
the Grand Junction line from the central station at

Wolverhampton. The Learned Counsel appeared on the
part of the promoters of the line to give the Oxford, Wor-
cester, and Wolverhampton Railway access to the central
station at Wolverhampton, or to refer the question to the
arbitration of the Board of Trade, as to whether the line
should be laid out between Showhill and Portobello in such
a manner as to accommodate both gauges.
Mr. Locke, C.E., engineer to the line, was then called and
examined by Mr. Hom—ln examination he stated that
there would be no station at Showhill, the point of junction
on the Grand Junction line, and there would not,
therefore, be any accommodation for the traffic of the Ox-
ford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton line, supposing such
traffic to be carried in that direction through Wolverhamp-
ton. The station at Wolverhampton was laid out with a view
of giving accommodation to five different companies, and he
considered that these five companies on the narrow gauge
would be sufficiently complex without having the additional
difficulty to contend with of laying down a line upon the
broad gauge.
Mr. Jordan, chairman of the South Staffordshire line, was
the next witness called, who stated that he considered
the proposed branch would be of
,great public importance.
The central station at Wolverhampton was purchased by the
South Staffordshire line ; subsequently the four other Com-
panies alluded to by Mr. Locke, including the Oxford, Wor-
cester, and Wolverhampton Railway, were allowed to run
into the station, and it was only till lately that he had beard
of the proposition of the Broad Gauge Company to extend
their line to Showhill.

Mr. Lane, C.E., engineer of the South Staffordshire line,
gave evidence of a similar nature.

Mr. Swift, solicitor to the Grand Junction Railway, was
examined by Mr. liorE on the subject of an agreement made
between the Grand Junction Company and the Oxford, Wor-
cester, and Wolverhampton Company, by the terms of which
the Broad Gauge Company bound themselves not to go be-
yond the central station at Wolverhampton towards the
north.

This concluded the case on behalf of the promoters of the
Bill.

Mr. AUSTIN, Q.C., then addressed the Committee in oppo
sition to the Bill, and contended that if this branch were
made it should be made in such a manner as to afford
the greatest possible convenience to the public, with a due
regard to the proprietors of the Oxford, Worcester,
and Wolverhampton Railway, and also in such a
manner as to avoid the proposed level crossing
over the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton
Railway near the central station, which would be used by
the different companies referred to by Mr. Locke and the
other witnesses eJled by his Learned Friend in support of their
case. The Learned Counsel concluded his address by
calling the attention of their Lordships to three clauses which
he proposed to insert in the Bill, making it compulsory upon
the promoters of the line to afford suitable accommodation
between Wolverhampton and Showhill for the Oxford, Wor-
cester, and Wolverhampton Railway.
The Learned Counsel then called

Mr. W. Mathews, director of the South Staffordshire and

other railways, who stated that in consequence of the late ar-
rangements which had been come to by the Grand Junction
Railway with the London and Birmingham Railway,
and their fusion into the Great North-Western scheme,
the directors of the South Staffordshire line had
thought it inexpedient to leave this branch entirely
in the hands of the Grand Junction. Railway. The
witness also went at considerable length into
the details of the disagreement which had taken
place between the various companies in consequence of this
amalgamation of interests.
In the course of the witness's examination by Mr.
IforE, he admitted that he could net say what interest the 1
Grand Junction Company could have in carrying the traffic
away from Wolverhampton, rather than through the central
station of that town.
Mr. Brunel, C.E., engineer to the Oxford, Worcester, and
Wolverhampton Railway, was, then examined, and stated
that he had always thought that the line up to
Showhill was to be used by the broad gauge line as
well as the narrow gauge line ; and he had stated his
opinion to that effect to the directors of the Oxford, Wor
caster, and Wolverhampton Railway, when spoken to by
them upon the subject. If the broad gauge trains were
allowed to run on this line in continuation with the Oxford,
Worcester, and Wolverhampton, they would then be able to
compete upon fair grounds with the Grand Junction and
other existing companies.
Lord Cllunciiir.r. said that the real difficulty which be
thought the Committee had to deal with was the question of
the level crossing proposed to be made by this railway near
the station at Wolverhampton.
Mr. HOPE said that he did not think any difficulty existed
upon that point, as the crossing being so close to the station,
the trains would consequently be in estate of quietus.
Lord Cituactirra, said that unless the parties could come
to some arrangement between themselves he was afraid that
the Committee would be compelled to refuse their sanction to
the line, upon the ground of this level crossing; and further
intimated their opinion that evidence upon this point was
desirable.
Mr. 'lora then called Mr. Brunel, who said that the line
would cross the line of the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolver-
hampton Railway in a very injurious manner, as it would
interfere with the various forks and switches belonging to
the station.
Mr. HOI'E then proceeded to address their Lordships, but
was interrupted by
Lord Cituncitira., who stated that the Committee had made
up their minds on the subject, and the only question which
they wished to hear the Learned Counsel on was the level
crossings, and he thought the better course would be for the
parties to come to some arrangement.
A clause was then submitted, on the part of the promoters,
by Mr. HOPE, regulating the number of trains which should
pass through Wolverhampton from the Grand Junction
Railway, or submitting the same to the decision of the Board
of Trade.
Mr. AUSTIN, Q.C., could not accept of it, and would come
to no terms whatever upon such grounds.
Mr. Hora said that he would take:the opinion of the Com-
mittee, as to the level crossings, and proceeded accordingly
to address the Committee upon this point, and contended
that no danger could possibly arise from this level crossing,
because it was near to the station, at which point the trains
would be comparatively quiet. Level crossings were not at
all unusual ; upon the London and York Railway there were
several of them, and with the slightest care and diligence
on the part of the officials of the Company, no difficulty or
danger could possibly arise.
The room was then ordered to be cleared; upon our re•
admission,
i The CHAIRMAN announced that the Committee were quite
ready t 9 pan thci Dill, if the clawm pg§trmed by the oppo-

nents were inserted in it, and he hoped the parties won/
come to some arrangement.

Mr. Horn said, that with such clauses he could not accept
the Bill, and must therefore withdraw it. The Learned
Counsel also stated, that in consequence of the intimation of
the Committee that he should confine his i 'marks exclusively
to the question of the level crossings, he had purposely ab-
stained from going into the subject of these clauses. They
were money clauses, and could not be entertained by their
Lordships.
The parties having deliberated for some time,
Mr. Horn stated that the difference between the parties
was so great, that he did not think they could prepare any
clause at all likely to give satisfaction to the parties, and as
to the proposed clauses he must say, on the part of the pro-
moters, that they could not for a moment think of receiving
them. If their Lordships, therefore, were of opinion that
such clauses were necessary to the Bill, he must beg leave ti)
withdraw it.

The Bill was accordingly withdrawn.
The result of the contest, therefore, is similar to that of the
celebrated battle of the Kilkenny cats, for neither the broad
nor the narrow gauge remain in possession of the field, and
and it may be said that the conduct of the promoters in the
fight has been similar to that pursued by parties who, in
order to prevent their treasures falling into the grasp of the
enemy, deliberately set fire to or otherwise destroy them.