The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-01 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 1 1846.

case, the Learned Counsel observed that it was impossible for
his clients to accept the offer of Mr. Cockburn, as to the
building of another chapel, in the case of the annoy-
ance to the congregation being as great as was repre-
sented. His chents were of opinion that it would
be impossible to find an efficient arbitrator. It would be im-
possible to appoint any person who would be able to form a
judgment upon the many " nice points" which were included
in the question, as to whether the annoyance was as great
as had been anticipated. The Learned Counsel concluded by
observing that the objections to the line, on account of the
injury to property, would certainly not be sufficient of them-
selves, but that the line itself was not one which was called
for by the exigencies of the country, and that the Warwick-
shire and London lines were far superior to the Birmingham
and Oxford Junction.
Mr. WHATELzY then addressed the Committee on the part
of the promoters of the Bill at great length. The Learned
Counsel said, that the only very important opposition to the
line was on the part of the trustees of the chapel, and on the
part of Sir Edward Smythe. In respect of the latter, he
would only say that he was prepared to refer the question as
to whether the Company should buy the whole of his pro-
perty or not to any gentleman they might choose ; and he
would then refer the price to be paid for it to arbitration ;
or if Sir Edward Smythe wished to keep his property, or
any part of it, they would refer the question of compensation
to arbitration, and would give the most liberal compensa-
tion. In respect of the chapel, the Learned Counsel repeated
the offer made by Mr. Cockburn on Saturday, as to the con-
tingent building of a new chapel, and said that he
thought the Company could not make a more liberal offer.
He also instanced several cases of places of worship
being situated in the immediate vicinity of railways, and no
inconvenience being sustained, or, at all events, complained
of. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to object to the
Warwickshire and London Railways. He said that the
London and Birmingham Company had, in this case, pur-
sued an obstructive policy. These lines were not intended to
supply the wants of the country, but to take posses-
sion of it and keep every one else out of it. The
Learned Counsel objected to the three lines of the
Warwickshire and London on these grounds. The
Worcester and Weedon was an eastern and western
line, and it had been proved that the whole traffic was north
and south. There had been no attempt to prove a case of
traffic on this line, except in regard to lean cattle, and indeed
there wa.s ho traffic that could go by the line but that. The
same 'rim the case with the Hampton and Aschurch and
tb, Hampton and Banbury; there had been no evidence
whatever as to traffic on either? and the latter was a line
beginning nowhere and ending nowhere. It stopped
at half a mile from Banbury, and a junction could not be
made with the Oxford and Rugby line, because the level of
the Hampton and Banbury was thirty feet above the Oxford
and Rugby. Besides this, the Hampton and Banbury ran
for a considerable distance parallel to the Oxford and Rugby,
and then passed through most valuable property. Again, the
case set up on the part of the London and Birmingham.
Company, as to the hospital at Warnford, that the rail-
way would be rather an improvement than an injury to
the hospital, it certainly had been said by Doctor Jephson,
that the patients would rather like it than not; but he
would ask the Committee whether a man in the height of
fever, or a poor fellow who had had his leg taken off, and had
taken an opiate for the sake of forcing an unnatural sleep,
would be very much pleased by a train passing by, with the
engine hissing, screaming, and roaring in the dead of the
night ?—(A laugh.)
The Learned Counsel's speech occupied about an hour.
Mr. Augrni then rose on the part of the
WASIWICKSICZEZI AND LONDON (WOR-
CESTER AND WEEDON, HAMPTON AND
BANBURY, HAMPTON AND ASHCHI7ILCH).
In replyto the speech of Mr. WHATELEY, he dwelt at some
length on the accusations of that gentleman against the
London and Birmingham Company, and observed that
he was very sorry that the Great Western Com-
pan
tbis,y shwhicoul instruct their counse to such atns
as d h could not be disprovedl, butmake which healle thgougioht
could have no effect with the Committee. The Learned
Counsel proceeded to show that the three lines of the War-
wick and London were not competing with the Birmingham
and Oxford. The only parts of the two schemes which
could at all be said to compete, or even to compare one with
another, were the Warwick and Banbury portion of the Hamp-
ton and Banbury and the corresponding portion of the Bir-
mingham and Oxford. It had been said that the stations of the
Warwickshire and London, at Leamington and Warwick,
were not convenient. Now at these places each line formed
a letter S (Mr. Austin here referred to a plan). In the War-
wick and London one curve brought them close to Leaming-
ton, and the other brought them near Warwick ; and at each
place the station was within one street's length of the popu-
lous part of the town. But on the Birmingham and
Oxford the S was reversed, one curve taking the line far
away from Leamington, and the other carrying it far away
from Warwick. The Hampton and Ashchurch and the
Worcester and Weedon were not mere east and west lines,
but north-east and south-west lines, and would carry a large
amount of north-east and south-west traffic. The Hampton
and Banbury line did not fall short of the town of Banbury,
as represented by Mr. Whateley. There was a station to the
west of the Oxford and Rugby line, which was common to
this and the Tring to Banbury line, and although it was
lost in the Tring to Banbury Bill, it still remained
in the Hampton and Banbury line. The Learned Counsel
dwelt at great length on the question of monopoly and com-
petition, and urged that the passing of the two Bills for lines
competing with one another, would not have the effect of
preventing monopoly. There could be no competition be-
tween two canals or two railways, as when the tolls had
once come down to the lowest point to which it was the in-
terest of the companies to • bring them they
would amalgamate and raise the prices The ne-
cessity for high tolls being increased by the double
expenditure of capital, the passing of both lines would rather
injure than advantage the public. He did not look upon bis
Learned Friend's observations as to the mischiefs that might
result from the line passing by the hospital as likely to have
much weight with the Committee. He thought the evi-
dence of Dr. Jephson had set that point at rest, and he
should think that gentleman's opinion much more worthy to
be relied on than that of his Learned Friend.
Mr. AUSTIN'S speech occupied about two hours.
At about five minutes to four o'clock the room was cleared
in order that the Committee might consult as to the course to
be adopted in proceeding with the case. On our re-admis-
sion the Chairman said that the Committee would prefer to
take the evidence of the engineers who had been sent down
to examine the levels of the Worcester and Weedon line, on
Thursday, instead of to-morrow, if that would be equally con-
venient for the parties.
The Counsel having declared that it would,
The Committee rose at about half-past four, and adjourned
till to-morrow at eleven o'clock.

The Committee metROU at the usual hour.

WEST RIDING UNION.
Mr. BAINES, Q.C., opened the case for the promoters of this
line, in a speech of considerable length.
The first witness called was
Mr. Hawkshaw, the engineer to the line. He was also
the engineer to the Manchester and Leeds Railway. The
whole system of railroad included in this scheme was about
45 miles in length. The main line was laid out so as to form
a continuous line of communication between Leeds, Bradford,
and Halifax. The next branch was proposed to accommo-
date Bradford, Halifax, and Huddersfield. The third branch
ran in the direction of Bradford, Dewsbury, and Wakefield.
There was also a branch from the main line at Brighouse to
Bradford. A branch called the Cockersdale branch was pro-
posed to be made for the purpose of accommodating the ex-
tensive coal fields in this district. The examination and
cross-examination occupied the whole of the day.
The Committee adjourned till 12 to-morrow.

GROUP XLVIII.
IVIONMOUTBSEIRE.

-------
The Committee met again this day, lir.Aldham, chairman.
The remaining 'Clauses of the Bill were proceeded with,
and a lengthy discussion ensued on the proposed amendments.
The other clauses of this Bill were postponed till twelve
o'clock to-morrow, in order to give the promoters time for
introducing some amendment&
NEWPORT, ABERGAVENNY, AND

question now before the Committee. He understood that an
arrangement between the two companies had been proposed
to the effect that the district in question should be fairly
and equally divided between them. He begged to say,
on behalf of the public, or at least that portion of
the public which he represented, that they had a most
decided objection to any arrangement which should prevent
the green line (the Shrewsbury, Wolverhampton, and South
Staffordshire) from Tipton to Dudley being carried through
to Wolverhampton. He trusted that the interests of the
public would not be sacrificed by any arrangement between
the two countries.

Mr. COCKBURN submitted that before the Committees de-
cided upon the terms proposed, they ought to hear his clients
on the question of level. They were quite willing to
amalgamate with the Shrewsbury and Birmingham, provided
the low level at Wolverhampton were adopted. If the Com-
mittee decided that the high level of that company should
be sanctioned, the fate of his clients' line was sealed.
Mr. HOPE said that, for the purpose of coming to a fair
arrangement with the Learned Counsel's clients, he proposed
that both levels should be adopted, and he submitted that
the Committee might fairly come to a decision on the terms
proposed between the Shrewsbury and Birmingham and the
Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley Companies, with-
out hearing the case of the other companies as to the advan-
tage of the low level. Let that lengthened inquiry be re-
ferred to the engineers—that course had been adopted in
other Committees.
The Hon. CHAIRMAN said he thought it would be well, in
his opinion, that the Learned Counsel on the opposite side
should consent to refer the matter.
Mr. COCKBURN objected to do so.
It was, however, eventually arranged that the question of
the supposed inaccuracy in the level should be referred to the
decision of the engineers of the lines.
The room was cleared of strangers, and on our re-admission,
after the expiration of half an hour,
Mr. Sergeant KINGLAKE again attempted to lay the
written statement before alluded to before the Committee.
Mr. HOPE again objected, and
The Hon. CHAIRMAN decided that,. it ought not to be
received, remarking that the written terms already before
them required no supplemental explanation.

DECISIONS.
The Hon. CHAIRMAN then said that the Committee had
come to a decision in favour of two stations at Birmingham,
and also two at Wolverhampton. They had also decided
that the whole of the lower line (as represented on the map)
should be assigned to the Shrewsbury and Birmingham
Company, and the upper to the Birmingham, Wolverhamp-
ton, and Dudley.
After a short conversation between the Hon. Mr. Talbot
and Mr. Lang and the Committee,
The Hon. CHAIRMAN said that the Committee had come
to the decision that the preamble of the
SHROPSHIRE UNION RAILWAY and CA-
NAL (CHESTER and WOLVERHAMPTON)
Bill had been proved.
At the request of the Learned Counsel, the Committee
postponed going through the clauses of the Bill until to,
morrow.

The Committee then adjourned, at half-past three o'clock,
till twelve o'clock to-morrow.

GROUP LXI.

EDINBURGH AND GLASGOW, AND SCOT.

TIMM CENTRAL rinvorroiv.
The Committee met again this day at twelve o'clock, and
proceeded with the clauses of the Bill. After some amend-
ments several were agreed to, and the counsel for the oppo.
nents continued to propose other alterations in various clauses
of the Bill.

STANDING ORDERS' COMMITTEES.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Their Lordships met at the usual hour in Room 6, House
of Lords, Lord Shaftesbury in the chair.
There were five Bills on the list, all railway Bills.
LEICESTER AND BEDFORD.
The Committee decided that the promoters of this Bill
had proved compliance with the standing orders.
PORTBURY PIER AND RAILWAY.
Their Lordships made a similar decision in this case.
GLASGOW, DUMFRIES, AND CARLISLE.
In the absence of two witnesses, this part-heard case was
adjourned till Monday.
EDINBURGH AND BATHGATE.
The standing orders were declared complied with.
LONDON AND BIRMINGHAM (WEEDON AND
NORTHAMPTON BRANCH).
This case was adjourned until Friday.
Their Lordships then resolved themselves into a Select
Committee on Merits.
There were twelve Bills on the list, four only being railway
Bills.
WAKEFIELD, PONTEFRACT, AND GOOLE (METH-
LEY, ASKERN, AND OAKENSHAW BRANCH.)
The preamble of this Bill was declared proved, clauses
being inserted to insure the building of lodges at all level
crossings.

—ST. HELEN'S CANAL AND RAILWAY.
The preamble cf this Bill also was declared proved, clauses
being inserted as in the last case.
WISHAW AND COLTNESS (GREENHILL BRANCH).
The promoters of this Bill also succeeded in proving their
preamble.
SHEFFIELD, ASHTON-UNDER-LYNE, AND MAN-
CHESTER (DUKINFIELD, WORSBOROUGH, AND
OTHER BRANCHES).
Preamble proved. Clauses inserted as to level crossings.
Their Lordships then rose at half. past three o'clock.

cliffe to be Colonel Commandant, vice R. F. Wilson, who
retires, June 23.

Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of Somersetshire.
First Somerset kegiment of Militia—Adjutant W. S. Cook
to serve with the rank of Captain, June 18.
Second Somerset Regiment of Militia—Adjutant A. J.
Macpherson to serve with the rank of Captain, June 18.
Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of Haddingtonshire.
East Lothian Yeomanry Cavalry—J. M. Balfour, Esq., to
be Captain Commandant; J.W. Hunter, Esq., to be Captain;
T. S. M. lanes, Gent., to be Lieutenant; W. Sandilands,
Gent., to be Lieutenant; H. M. Davidson, Gent., to be
Cornet; C. Balfour, Gent, to be Cornet.

WHITEHALL, JUNE 27.
The Lord Chancellor has appointed William Sweet, of the
city of Bristol, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the
High Court of Chancery.

DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY.
George Hornsby, builder, Lesbury, Northamptonshire.
BANKRUPTS.

Joseph Wood, plumber, Luton, Bedfordshire, to surrender
July 10, at half-past twelve, and Aug. 14, at eleven, at the
Court of Bankruptcy. Alsager, official assignee, Birchin-lane
Cornhill ; Taylor, Finsbury•circus, London.
William Molyneux, innkeeper, Sandwich, Kent, July 14,
at three, and August 11, at eleven, at the Court of Bank-
ruptcy. Edwards, official assignee, Frederick's-place, Old
Jewry ; Hall, Moarilyan, and Rowsell, Verulam-buildings,
Gray's Inn ; Lee and Tapley, Sandwich, Kent.
William Menry Hounsfield, draper, Cardiff, July 10, and
Aug. 18, at one, at the Bristol District Court. Acraman
official assignee, Bristol ; Bevan, Bristol.
Thomas Dolphin Weaver, ship-broker, Liverpool, July 15,
and Aug. 11, at twelve, at the Liverpool District Court.
Turner, official assignee, Liverpool; Wilkin, Furnival's Inn ;
Brown, Liverpool.
Joseph Clerk, innkeeper, Plymouth, July 16 and August 6,
at one, at the Exeter District Court. Hirtzel, official as-
signee, Paul-street, Exeter • Elworthv, Plymouth; Sun and
Gribble, Lombard-street, Exeter;
; Stogdon, Exeter.
William Jane Geach, auctioneer, Cornwall, July 16 and
August 6, at one, at the Exeter District Court. Hernamann,
official assignee, Exeter ; Commins and Son, Bodmin ;
Stogdon, Exeter; Smiths, Southampton-buildings, London.
James Waterhouse and Robert Sutton, calico printers,
Salford, Lancashire, July 14, and Aug. 5, at twelve, at the
Manchester District Court. Fraser, official assignee, Man-
chester; Claye, Thompson, and Welsh, Manchester; Gre-
gory, Faulkner, Gregory, and Skirrow, Bedford-row, London.
Robert M'Kim, merchant, Bombay, July 17, and August
6, at twelve, at the Manchester District Court. Hobson,
official assignee. Manchester ; Abbott, Charlotte-street;
Saunders and Atkinson, Manchester.
Jane Wright, licensed victualler, Manchester, July 18 and
Aug. 6, at eleven, at the Manchester District Court. Hob-
son, official assignee, Manchester ; Johnson, Son, and
Weatherall, Temple, London; Hitchcock, Buckley, and Tids-
well, Manchester.

Joan Astley, fustian manufacturer, Manchester, July 15,
and 31, at twelve, at the Manchester District Court. Hob-
son, official assignee, Manchester; Johnson, Son, and Wea-
therall, Temple, London; Dearden, Manchester.
George Bury, surgeon-dentist, Handswortb, Staffordshire,
July 9, and Aug. 8, at twelve, at the Birmingham District
Court. Bittleston, official assignee, Birmingham ; Motteram
and Knowles, Birmingham; Smith and Co., Bedford-row,
London.

James Evans, cattle dealer, Haywood Lodge, Hereford-
shire, July ll and August 5, at twelve, at the Birmingham
District Court. Whitmore, official assignee, Birmingham;
Gwillim, Hereford; Suckling, Birmingham.
Isaac Sansome, ribbon manufacturer, Coventry, July 9 and
Aug. 15, at twelve, at the Birmingham District Court.
Whitmore, official assignee, Birmingham ; Troughton and
Lea, Coventry; Austen and Co., Gray's Inn.
Trytle Joel, jeweller, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, July 7, at
half-past ten, and Aug. 25, at half-past one, at the New-
castle-upon-Tyne District Court. Baker, official assignee,
Newcastle-upon-Tyne; Crosby and Compton, Church- court,
Old Jewry; Hodge, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
Thomas Melton, victualler, Lincoln, July 15, and Aug. 5,
at eleven, at the Guildhall. Kingston-upon-Hull. Kynaston,
official assignee, Hull ; Rushworths, Scaple Inn, London ;
Sanderson, Leeds.

LAW IN TELLIGEN CE.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. June 30.
(Sittings after Term at Nisi Prius, in London, before Mr.
Justice ERLE and Common Juries.)
BAKER AND ANOTHER V. PLASKETT.
In this case Mr. Sergeant Byles and Mr. Unthanke ap-
peared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Whitehurst and Mr. Ser-
geant Dowling for the defendant.
The action was brought by the plaintiffs, who are share-
brokers in London, to recover from the defendant, who is an
attorney residing at Gainsborough, the sum of 1,0651. 12s. 6d.,
being the full value of 550 shares in the East Indian Railway
Company, together with the plaintiffs' commission as a broker
for purchasing the same.
It appeared on the part of the plaintiffs, that; in December,
1845, the defendant employed a person named Stark to pur-
chase for him from 500 to 750 East India Railway shares,
which Stark undertook to do, and to deliver on the 30th or
the 31st of December, 1845, to be settled for on the 15th of
January, 1846, and Stark purchased 550 shares in pursuance
of this arrangement from the plaintiffs; and the plaintiffs,
on learning that the defendant was Stark's principal, wrote
to him in March for payment. The defendant, however.
denied that he ever gave Stark authority to pay for the
shares, or that he had constituted him his agent to that ex-
tent, but Only that as a broker he was to buy the shares for
him.

For the defendant it was contended that Stark was in-
debted to the defendant in a large sum for some Preston and
Wyre shares, and that in liquidation of his claim he was to
obtain for the defendant these East India Railway shares;
and that he was employed merely as a broker. It was also
contended that the company came into existence before the
Ist of November, 1844, at which date the Joint-stock Com-
panies Act came into operation, and that the shares could
not, therefore, be legally sold.
His LORDSHIP left it to the jury to determine whether
the contract declared upon was proved by the evidence, at d
whether the company was established before the Ist of No-
vember, 1844. If to, they would find for the plaintiffs.
Thejury found a verdict for the plaintiffs—Damages 1,0004
the value of the shares; and 31/. ss. brokerage.