The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-12 00:00:00

GROUP VIII.

The Committee met to-day at twelve o'clock, Sir William Clay
in the chair. Members present, Earl Jermyn, Lord Shelburne, Mr.
James Ainsworth, and Mr. Curteis.
GLASGOW, DUMFRIES, AND CARLISLE.
The case on behalf of this line having closed on Friday last, the
case for the opposition commenced this morning on the assembling
of the Committee.
Mr. COCKBURN said he appeared on behalf of the Glasgow and
Carlisle road trustees, and the grounds on which he did so were that
the line crossed their road twice on the level, between Dumfries and
Carlisle, whereas the Caledonian crossed the road by bridges. The
petitioners likewise thought that the Caledonian served the wants of
the district better than the Dumfries scheme. The case of Scetland,
in regard to compensation, was also different to that of England, and
the petitioners complained that due compensation was not given to
the road trustees for the abstraction of traffic which the Dumfries
line would occasion.
The CHAIRMAN suggested that those points were Tore subjects
for clauses than to be brought against the preamblh of the Bill.
Clauses ought to be drawn up to meet the objections submitted to
the Committee, when, if the preamble was agreed to, they would be
considered.
This course being assented to, the Committee proceeded to the
consideration of the
CALEDONIAN (EXTENSION AND
BRANCHES).

Counsel for the promoters, Mr. Sergeant Wrangham, Mr.
Cockburn, Mr. Hope, Mr. Rickards, and Mr. Pickering.
Mr. Graham, the agent of the Bill, was examined as to compliance
with Mr. T. Duncombe's resolutions, and the necessary documents
in relation thereto put in and received.
Mr. COCKBURN opened the proceedings for the opposition of the
Caledonian against the Dumfries scheme, and also on behalf of the
Dumfries branch of the former Company. He said he would reserve
his statement till the close of the evidence he intended to call, when
he would make a review of the whole. He hoped also, before the

close of the evidence for this Dumfries branch, that the Caledonian
Extension Bill would he read a second time, and ready to proceed
with in Committee, in which case it would not be expedient or just
to give any decision till that was likewise gone into, as it formed a
material point in the Caledonian case.
Mr. Locke, civil engineer, said be was the engineer of the Cale-
donian Company. His attention had been called to railway commu-
. _

nication with Scotland in 1836 or 1837. Some time after that a som-
mission was appointed, for which he made a survey, and laid a re-
pert before the commissioners. The Caledonian trunk line was the
result of his survey. This line was substantially adopted by the com-
missioners. When the Caledonian Company was formed, witness
was appointed its engineer, and the present Caledonian scheme was
brought out. His scheme was brought under the considera-
tion of the Board of Trade, as was also the Dumfries
line on the one side, and the Hawick branch, in connexion with the
>forth British, on the other. He quite agreed with the passage in
the Board of Trade report, that there was not traffic to support two
through lines. With careful consideration that was his deliberate
opinion. Last year, she believed, he estimated the Caledonian to
yield but 51 per cent., after paying working expenses. That esti-
mate included all the Glasgow and Carlisle traffic, and a cons'.
derable portion of the Edinburgh traffic also. He calculated the
whole receipts of the Caledonian to be 224,0001. Deduct-
ing 107,0001. for working expenses, that left 117,0001., which
was 91, per cent. on the whole capital. He was quite sure that the
Dumfries line and this could not pay together. The Caledonian
Company had already expended from 200,0001. to 300,0001., and the
expenditure was now about 50,0001., and would soon be double. At
the present moment 7,000 men were at work. All the works were
contracted for and the land bargained and paid for as it was used.
He calculated that the line would be completed by 18 months unless
a great number of Bills were carried and workman could
not be obtained. Had he conceived last year that the.
Dumfries hoe on the one side and the Hawick Extension
on the other, would be granted this year, he would not have advised
those contracts to be entered into. It was his opinion that the Cale-
donian line was the best line to the north as well as to Glasgow and
,Edinburgh. The Edinburgh and Glasgow traffic would be much
crippled by rival lines, but the north traffic could never be taken
saway. The north traffic, however, would not at all compensate the
Company for the capital expended. Last year, after long and anxious
Inquiries in both Houses, and after the examination of about a
hundred witnesses, both Committees decided in favour of the Cale-
donian scheme. The Dumfries branch was then struck out as not
being sufficiently digested, and being strongly opposed by the Annan
gneople, because it did not touch there. This year a branch
was proposed which went from Dumfries, by Annan, to Gretna.
Iven, as between Dumfries and Glasgow, the distance by
the Caledonian scheme was shorter than the Dumfries scheme,
the Caledonian scheme also connected Dumfries in a better manner
with Edinburgh. The Inhabitants of Paisley would also, he believed,
be at least as well accommodated as by the Nithsdale scheme. As it
respects Dumfries, the inhabitants of Ayr, 3faybole, and Girvan,
would be accommodated by the Ayrshire and Galloway line from
.Ayr to Castle Douglas. He considered the inhabitants of Carlisle
and Canontile would also be better accommodated by the Caledonian
scheme than by the Nithsdale. Should the Caledonian extension
line be granted Ayrshire generally would be well supplied, and there
would exist no reason whatever for the formation of the Nithsdale
line, on the plea of accommodating local traffic. He had kept In
view from the beginning that the Dumfries traffic would be an im-
portant hem in connexion with the Caledonian scheme.
Re had estimated last year to run through from end to
end four pa-senger trains and two goods trains ; the passenger trains
to carry twenty persons each. He applied the same data to the
DUmfrieS branch. He had made allowance for all possible traffic,
and this was the result. He was quite certain that the two lines
could not exist on the traffic, and had he thought that two such lines
would be sanctioned he would not have advised any of his friends to '
take a share, or have taken one himself. The competition that must
ensue would only end in a combination, from which the public would
greatly sufler. Looking at the table of the towns from which the
Dumfries and ffithsdale scheme expected their traffic, he saw many
P laces from wich the Caledonian line took credit for traffic last year.
Cross-examined by Mr. FORSYTH—He would not say that the
Ayrshire and Galloway line would be the best route from
Dumfries into Ayrshire, but it would be a convenient
one. He did not know what sort of line that was, as he
had nothing to do with It. He had no objection to a line
from Kilmarnock and Dumfries if it could be shown that the local
traffic would warrant it, and if the Caledonian scheme and extension
were opened, and not likely to suffer from the competition of this
Nithsdale line. Still he thought the two lines too near, and the
country too thinly populated, to warrant the construction of both.
He was decidedly of opinion that there was not traffic for two lines.
If the Caledonian line was opened and paying 10 per cent., his views
would be very much modified ; then his opinion might be, that there
was room for another line. At present it would be hard on those
who
had embarked their capital in the Caledonian scheme to allow
another line of railway without waiting to see what the traffic of
the line already granted would be. The Caledonian promoters as-
sumed the whole of the Dumfries traffic last year. He admitted the
branch now proposed was substantially the sameitll the issue of the
as the south portion
of the :tilthsdale scheme of last year.
Caledonian was tried he did not
ell
scheme of the kind like the Nithaiek any new
should be
sanctioned by Parliament. In doing this, he did not think the inte-
rests of Ayrshire would be sacrificed, as they would be consulted by
the Caledonian Extension. He thought that nothing at
should be done that would damagethe construction and carrying out
of a great national scheme like the Caledonian. The whole capital of
the Caledonian Extension with which Ayrshire
wastoembertacionc°r his
dated, was about 1,700,0001. in theyhole. The Ayrshire'
would be more expensive than that to Peebles. The expense would be
from 19,0001. to 14,000/. per mile. He did not recollect the terms of
the prospectus of the Caledonian issued in 1844, which set forth that
the returns would be 8 per cent. He understood the capital stated
there was 1,800,000/., whereas the capital in the Bill, when it went
before Parliament, was 2,100,0001. This made a considerable differ-
ence in the calculation of returns. If Dumfries was not named in
the prospectus, he had always calculated for a considerable amount of
traffic from there.
Re-examined—He was satisfied the estimates, when brought
before Parliament last year, were fairly made. The amount of
capital had been increased in order to meet the case, which close in-
vestigation subsequent to the Issuing of the prospectus required. lie
was quite sure 5% per cent. was a fair calculation. He would not
like to guarantee even that.
In answer to a request of the Chairman,
Mr. Locks promised to prepare by to-morrow a table of the dis-
tance from London to Edinburgh, by the east coast route, in com-
parison with the London and Birmingham Grand Junction and Cale-
donian schemes ; also the distance from London to Glasgow by the
Caledonian, compared with the Dumfries and Ayrshire route, both
by Dolry as well as by the Barrhead and Neilston direct route.
Mr. Hope Johnstone, for Dumfriesshire, examined—Said he
was chairman of the Caledonian Company. It had always been In
view to accommodate Dumfries, but the main object was
direct communication between the north and the
south. He did not believe the Nithsd bothe could co-exist
with the Caledonian, so as both to pay. Had lines been granted
last year he could not have advised the shareholders to proceed with
the works. With his knowledge of the country, he considered if the
Dumfries Branch was formed along with the Caledonian Extension
that an abundant accommodation would be given—he would not
say a complete, still it would be ample. The portion that would not
be so well supplied was the district between Dumfries and Cumnock,
which was a thinly-populated agricultural district. He agreed in the
estimate that the profits would not exceed 53 j per cent.
The witness was cross-examined by Mr. LIDDELL, on behalf of the
Duke of Ruccleuch, the Marquis of Queensberry, and Lord Mansfield,
who petition against the Dumfries Branch ; also on behalf of the
,Glaegew. Dumfries, and Carlisle scheme, but no point of importance
Ives elicited.

Air. Smith, of Dean:ton, deposed as to the character of the valley of
the VOL The country at the Ayrshire end, near to Cumnock,
was very good, and abounded in minerals, but after leaving New Cum-
nock, the valley of the Nlth became very narrow and sterile, and
continued so till near to Dumfries, where it expanded and became
rich. The population in the neighbourhood of Sanquhar and Thorn-
tdu was very thin—both the agricultural and village population—
:be route only supported one two-horse coach. He was well ac-
(Waisted with tile draining, and he thought the item of traffic under
this bead, calculated by the Nithsdale Company, preposterous. He
did net believe that 12,810 tons of tiles would be takenfrom Cumnock
to Dumfries. He believed they could be made conveniently near
Dumfries. Besides, the draining could be as well earried out with
.stones as by tiles. To allow for such a tile traffic, there would be
vequired 33 tile works to be started at Cumnock, which was not at
all necessary. To u drained umber of tiles estimated for, 2391 acres
would require to be yearly, at an expense of 24,0001.
The cross-examination of the witness did not materially vary the
point* elicited by his examination in chief, beyond the admission that
tie dtd not know for a fact there was clay for tiles to be found in the
-valley of the ►though, judging from the geological character Of

the country, there must be. He had been told that clay was found
at Sanquhar.

To the CattumAx—He thought that clay would be found also
between Thornhill and Algirth-bridge. The price of tiles at Cum-
flock was about 30s. a ton.

Re-examined—With the facilities of obtaining stones in the valley
of the Nith, he did not think that tiles would be carried at any great
length. He would, under such circumstances, prefer stone to tiles.
The Committee then adjourned till te-morrow, at twelve o'clock.

GROUP S.Y.
This Committee did not meet to-day. Its sittings will be resumed
to-morrow at the usual hour.

GROUP XXVII.
This Committee re-assembled to-day at the usual hour ; Sir Charles
Lemon, chairman,

SOUTH MIDLAND.
The formal evidence as to estimates, &c., commenced the pro-
ceedings of this morning.
Mr. Brown, Secretary to the Company, was examined to prove the
amount of capital, and how allotted, &c.
This witness was subjected to a long cross-examination by Mr. Ser-
geant Wrangharn, with the view of showing that the present capital
was not the capital proposed to be raised by the original scheme ; and
also the extent of shares subsequently allotted to the Directors of
the Midland Railway Company, the scrip being then at a premium of
seven.
Mr. Jay was examined upon the subject of traffic, and confirmed
the evidence already given on that point.
The evidence on traffic was continued, and two witnesses, Mr.
Alger, front Bedford, and an agent from a colliery in Leicestershire,
occupied the remainder of the day.
The Committee adjourned at four o'clock till to-morrow, when the
engineering evidence will be proceeded with.