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

GROUP D.

ELEROLDIE, GAINSDOILOUGH, GOOLE, YOILZ
AND NORTE MIDLAND JUNCTION.
(Gontinued &on& our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Mr. PAGE Bross-examined to ascertain how many of the
places were upon the banks of the Trent. There was an endea-
vour to show a discrepancy in the evidence as to the cost of the
carriage of potatoes to the river and the railway, to the
former the charge being 2s. 6d., and to the latter is. 6d. a
ton, ahhough,the latter is the more distant of the two, but
it was explained by the assertion, that in using the railway
there would be a great central conveyance which would
justify the outlay.
Mr. Birkenshawe, the engineer, was called to speak to the
course of the line, which has already been described. The
gross amount of the returns he calculated at 60,2511., which,
less 40 per cent. for working expenditure, would give a divi-
dend of 9 per cent. for the shareholders. The ruling gra-
dient was lin 137. In the course of the line no difficulties
would occur, for there would be no tunnels, and the line for
four miles of its course ran over a moor. Eighteen public
roads would be crossed on a level, for which due provision
would be made ; the line would also cross the Ouze, the Don,
and the Dutch River, but the Admiralty had made no objec-
tion, and there was no property at all likely to be injured
by its fbrmation.
Mr. Paget cross• examined, to show the way in which this
line was affected by the London and York line, which this
line will cross on an embankment of seven feet. An endea-
vour was made to show that there was a greater deviation
than allowed by the standing orders.
Mr. WitrrEntntsr, Q.C., objected to this matter being
gone into, as there was no allegation in the petition respect-
ing this point.
The Committee decided that by standing order No. 8 they
could not entertain the objection.
lkir. PAGET addressed the Committee on this point, insist-
ing that it was competent for the Committee to go into the
inquiry, inasmuch as it was the practice of the House of
Lords to take the clauses and the preamble of the Bill
together, instead of doing as was done in the Commons,
taking the preamble first and the clauses afterwards.
Here the room was cleared, but when the hour for ad-
journment arrived, the Committee had not agreed, and their
decision was therefore deferred till to-morrow.

by-and-by trouble the Committee with a very few observa-
tions. In the meantime he would pass from these matters
of detail, and proceed to address himself, as shortly as he
could at that prolonged period of their sittings, and at that
advanced period of the ses.ticti, to the main feature of this
great measure, to which he trusted the Committee would give
their sanctioe, and, by that sanction give, not merely a
direct means of transit between the great manu-
facturing districts of the north and the rapidly
rising port of Southampton ; but would still more
benefit the community by conferring upon the local
districts traversed those facilities of conveyance which
up to that moment they were so sadly in want of.
Before he came to deal with the general features of the mea-
sure, let him pause to inquire, or rather lead the Committee
to ask for themselves, from whom the real and only opposi-
tion emanated which the promoters believed they had to
encounter? Upon what grounds did that opposition rest, and
what pretext had their opponents for putting it forward ?
But he would not occupy the time of the Committee by
dealing with the real nature of the opposition of the land-
owners put forward in the one interest or the other, because
he looked to the great object of the measure; and he would,
therefore, only ask, who were the opponents who appeared
before them in the guise of landowners but the Great
Western and South-Western Railway Companies? But he
apprehended that two powerful railway companies
never came before a Committee of either House
of Parliament to oppose the passing of a measure
with less chance of success, and whose ground of opposition
was so utterly in contradiction of almost their every act, or
the pretext upon which they rested their opposition was so
utterly consistent. He took it that those companies opposed
them on the principle that the introduction of competition,
by constructing a railway through this district, would be likely
to entrench upon the vested interests which belonged to them.
Whatever phrase they might dress their opposition in, he
apprehended that no one who had attended to the pro-
ceedings in the Committee, could doubt that that was the
real and substantial reason which brought them there.
His Learned Friend (Mr. Austin) put it that it would inter-
fere with the vested interests of the Great Western and South-
Western Railways; but he would inquire to what extent it
would interfere with either of them, and whether or not OR
public grounds it was not fully justified? But let him for a
moment beg the Committee to consider who it was that,
raised this cry—" Don't interfere with us—don't seek
to raise competition against us— don't touch our vested
interests." This language proceeded from the Great
Western, every line in connexion with which they
had promoted before Parliament, this session had been in
distinct contradiction to the principle of non-competition.
Why all the lines they had been promoting north of their
own line were distinctly promoted and justified, and success-
fully pressed upon Parliament on the ground of establishing
a competition on their part against the London and Birming-
ham Company. Why their opponents were those who did
not shrink from carrying a line of railway from London
to Birmingham upon the ground of creating a
competition with existing railway companies. Were they
fit parties to come there to oppose the construction of a
line between two points like Manchester and Southampton,
because they might incidentally, interfere with their traffic
and compete with them for some portion of the trade which
they hoped to carry? So much for the Great Western so far
as competition was concerned, the principle of which they
had .sarried further than any other existing company, and
those Bills of which the Committee had heard so much—
the Worcester and Oxford, and the Rugby and Oxford—
were distinctly promoted and sanctioned on the principle of
competition.
M.r. BROCK LERURST said the Oxford and Birmingham was
prepared to be constructed on the principle of competition.
Mr. Sergeant WEANGHAM said the lines branching north
to Birmingham were urged by the Great Western oa the
ground that they would establish, as between the mining
districts and the metropolis, two competing lines in the
hands of two competing companies. And the South-
Western also were not entitled to complain of com-
petition, as they had carried a line from London
to Exeter, in opposition to the Great Western itself. But
the Manchester and Southampton was not formed on the
mere principle of competition, but for the grand purpose of
opening up direct communication between the great empo-
rium, Manchester in the north, to Southampton in the south.
That being the state of parties, what was the nature of the
issue in the cause ? He apprehended that the Com-
mittee, although they had been led into a wilder-
ness of investigation, were now in a condition to de
tide satisfactorily to themselves whether they had
judiciously selected that line, which would be of the greatest
public benefit. Then his Learned. Friend (Mr. Austin) cast a
number of imputations on the company, and declared that it
was a " bubble company," and that they were not formed for
the bona
,fide purpose of executing a line of railway, but
that they were "confederated" together for the pur-
pose of speculating on public credulity, and accu-
mulating fortunes for themselves, by issuing shares on
account of a company not intended to be carried out.
That was a strange imputation, and one which ought
not to rest on the breath of a committee. There should have
been some evidence adduced in support of these heavy
charges which his Learned Friend had flung at a body of
gentlemen, who did not yield in respect either to his Learned
Friend or to any there. The Committee had before them,
in evidence, what ought to be enough to refute these
charges thus flung at random at the promoters of the line.
They had the prospectus of the company, which contained a
list of its provisional and managing committee. Did they
find there the name of any noted knave, who was likely to
seek, either by legitimate or unlawful means, to obtain some
miserable bounty to himself out of the credulity of the pub-
lic? He found in the list of names convected with this line
gentlemen who, in point of rank, station, or name, would
yield to none to be found in any similar document.
These remarks were not made in the heat of
an address, when his Learned Friend might have
been excited. Then again there were allegations in petitions
distinctly imputing some heavy charge to this company, and
he asked, who could lay a petition in itself calumnious before
the Committee, and shrink from supporting these allegations
with one tittle of evidence? Was this a matter which was
to be left alone to the vague suggestions of counsel,
however ingenious, to sustain them before a tribunal
which was to try the measure these gentlemen were
premoting, who were gentlemen of the purest honour and of
the moat unstained integrity? He was wholly unjustified
in using such language towards them. What were the
facts? He said the shares were 20/. shares, and that this
was in itself a " badge of suspicion," but the Great
Western had opened 20/. shares in the Oxford and
Birmingham line, so that what in that room would be called
iniquity would equally apply to that line, as the money
necessary for its construction was proposed to be raised
by 201. shares.—(Laughter.) If this were so, they would go
down to iniquity with Mr. Hill on one side and Mr. Austin
on the other. The Committee were no doubt aware that
shares varied from 1001. to 151. each, and that the tendency
of late had been rather towards diminishing than increasing
shares. The same rate of shares was adopted by the Buck-
ingham Company, under the patronage of the London and
Birmingham. by the Eastern Counties in their extension
shares from Cambridge to York; by the Norfolk Railway, by
the West Riding Union Railway, by the York and North
Midland, and last, though not least, the Trent Valley Rail-
way. He might swell the list, but he would not detain the
Committee further on the subject.
Mr. BROCKLEIIURST said the plan was very convenient, be-
cause 100/. share were divided into five shares.
Mr. Sergeant %VRANGIIAM went on to say, that his
Learned Friend accused them of only seeking for 5 per cent.
instead of a larger sum, which he stated was the " true test
of bubbles ;" at that period the amount of deposits had not
been increased to 10 per cent., but when they applied to their
shareholders bey acceded; but it they had been a " bubble"
company there would have been no necessity to ask for
another shilling up to the present time, besides they
might have passed through the Commons without calling on
the shareholders for any future deposit. They had called for
and received the full deposits for the passing of the Bill
through Parliament, and therefore, on his own showing,
they stood acquitted from the charge of being a " bubble
company." Then, with respect to allowing 41. per cent.
interest before the line is made on the capital paid up, which
his Learned Friend said showed "consummate art"—
Mr. BROCKLEII URST said this was common to all Bills las
year.

- Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM said it was. In one case he found
that instead of 41. one company allowed 5/. per cent.,
namely, the Great Western themselves, with respect to the
shareholders in the Oxford and Rugby ; but his Learned
Friend did not consider that this was encouraging specula-
tion.—(Laughter.) But if the Great Western had sinned,
the South• Western was not blameless, as the shareholders
in the South-Western amendment were allowed to partici-
pate in the terrible practice. It was also advantageous to
shareholders, because it enabled them regularly to pay up
their calls. Then with respect to the statement made
at the affirmation meeting, that the promoters would
not call for more than 4/. per cent. per annum,
they must recollect that the shares are 201. each, and that
the adoption of this course would not detract from the public
benefits which the line was intended to confer, and would
enable parties to know what they would have to pay in the
course of a year. This would not put them to any incon-
venience on account of the want of capital, because five or
six months must elapse after the passing of the Bill
before they could obtain possession of the land, be
fore which time they would have more than a suf
ficiency of capital. Then the tunnel at Cottiswold hills,
2,900 yards in length, would require three years to
construct, but the line to Andover could be made in twelve
months, before which time they would have 360,000/. in
hand, which would not be required. ByJanuary, 1849, they
would have 1,600,000/. without troubling the Midland Com-
pany for any portion of their 400,000/, out of which, by that
lime, they would have to pay 150,0001., leaving 50,000/. sur-
plus. In this respect there was no blot on their escutcheon.
After referring to the great public advantages which would
accrue to the districts through which the line would pass, and
to Manchester and Southampton, and inconsistencies in the
evidence of Mr. Locke and Mr. Brunel, who each stated
that they had lines "in their heads" to accommodate the
district to the various lines projected, as contrasted with the
opening of the Manchester and Southampton, sixty-five
miles of which, as stated by Mr. Stephenson, would be a sur-
face line ; and in the case of Mr. Everett, whose property
they could not help crossing if the line was to be made at all,
alhough they were willing to deviate to the utmost extent, or
by a tunnel of 60 yards below the surface of the ground, he
called the attention of the Committee to the traffic returns
of twenty-three lines, the average weekly returns of which
were 891., whilst they only put theirs at 421.; thus showing
they did not anticipate more than the London and Brighton.
Mr. BROCKLEHLTRST suggested that the Manchester and
Southampton should amalgamate with the South-Western
from Romsey to Southampton, and use their terminus.
Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM considered that this would be
most objectionable, and hoped the Committee would not de-
prive them of a separate terminus at Southampton.
The Committee then adjourned until to-morrow.

STANDING ORDERS' COMMITTEE.
HOUSE OF LORDS.

The Earl of Shaftesbury and his colleagues re-assembled
this morning at the usual hour in Room 1 (House of Lr)rds).
Lord Redesdale and the Marquis of Winchester were present.
Their Lordships immediately resolved themselves into a
Select Committee on Merits.

There were eleven Bills on the list, but only two were en-
tered into. Dr. DPFarlane's (Glasgow College) Estate Bill
occupied them up to half-past five-o'clock, although it had
previously been part heard, and bad engrossed a considerable
amount of time. It stood over till to-morrow.
The case of the
WAKEFIELD, PONTEFRACT, AND GOOLE, AND
PORT OF GOOLE
was called on, and the preamble declared proved.
Their Lordships then proceeded to hear the following
cases on the _ _

STANDING ORDERS.
GLASGOW, DUMFRIES, AND CARLISLE;
standing orderq complied with.
BLACKBURN. DARWEN, AND BOLTON;
standing orde-s complied with.
AIRDRIE AND BATHGATE JUNCTION,
adjourned ( having h. en part heard) till to-morrow.
BLACKBURN AND PRESTON,
also part heard. and adjourned till to-morrow.
ENFIELD AND EDMONTON.
This case, too, wai adjourned, the proofs being nearly com-
pleted.
The remaining Bills on the list were adjourned, and the
Committee rose A half-paat six.