The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-02 00:00:00

er t r Xbition

SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock.

TATTERSALL'S—THIS EVENING.
Six o'CLocK.

CHESTER CUP.
18 to 1 agst Sweetmeat
23 to 1 agst Mermaid
25 to 1 agst Whinstone
80 to 1 agst Pitzallan
40 to 1 agst Columbus
50 to 1 agst Roderick

DERBY.

9 to 2 agst Sting
22 to 1 agst Brocardo
22 to 1 agst lago
25 to 1 agst Tibthorpa
33 to 1 agst Malcolm

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
(THIS DAY.)

Sub-Committee No. 1.
This Committee met to-day at 12 o'cfock th roord No. 7 ; Mr. Strutt,
chairman.

CORNWALL.

This case, which was part heard on Friday, was resumed.

Mr. Burke appeared for the promoters.
Mr. Emacomez proceeded to open the case for the petitioners
against the Bill. The petitions contained a large number of allega-
tions, many of them of the greatest importance if they should be sus-
tained.
The first was the joint petition of Mr. Thomas Westlake and
others.
Mr. BURKE said he had to object to the petition being gone into,
inasmuch as the petition purporting to be Mr. Westlake 's had not
been signed by that gentleman. Indeed, he was prepared to prove
that Mr. Westlake was perfectly willing for the line to go on his
property.
Mr. ELLicostak was prepared to prove that the petitioner had
authorised the solicitor for the opposition to append his name to the
petition.
Mr. MALICE contended that the petition could not be received, inas-
much as it had been decided over and over again that it was a
breach of privilege to append the name of any person to a petition
without not only his authority, but even had he given such
authority without, in case of his not being able to write, his mark
being placed opposite his name. In this case, even admitting the
statement of Mr. Ellicombe, the petition did not contain the
mark of Mr. Westlake, who could not write his own name.
The Committee decided' that the petitioner's names li2cl not been
appended to the petition in conformity with the standing orders, and
that, therefore, the petition, so far as regarded Mr. Westiake's pro-
perty was concerned, could not be entertained.
The allegations in the petitions of the other parties were then
gone into.
The first allegation was, that the standing orders had not been
complied with, inasmuch as the cross section did not show the altera-
tions proposed in a road which crossed the line.
Mr. BURKE contended that it was not necessary to do so.
Mr. BRUNEI, said that it was not necessary to show such altera-
tions on the cross sections ; the cross sections were valueless when
the Bill passed the standing orders.
Mr. ELLICOMBE would maintain that the allegation was a most im-
portant one, and he was certain the Committee would take the same
view of the question. If the promoters were allowed to take the
same view of it as Mr. Brunel, there would be. no necessity of
coming before a Standing Orders' Committee at all.
The room was then ordered to be cleared, and after a few minutes'
deliberation,
The CHAIRMAN said the Committee were unanimously of opinion
that the standing orders had not been complied with, inasmuch
as the cross sections of roads at No. 67 on the plan did not point out
the alterations which would take place on the line, should the Bill
pass into a law.
The next allegation was, that certain roads marked on the plan
were not shown on the sections, in compliance with the 23d standing
order.

Mr. BraKz said that as the roads in question were lot intersected
by the line, although within the limits of deviation, it was not ne-
cessary for them lo be delineated on tke section.

Mr. ELLlcomna would maintain that the omission was a non-
compliance with the standing orders.
The CHAIRMAN said the Committee were of opinion that, as the
roads were not intersected by the line of railway, the allegation must
be overruled.
The next was that the lessee of property, Nos. 53 and 54, on the
plan had not been served with notice, nor had his name appeared In
the book of reference.
Mr. BURKE contended at much length against the allegation, but
he was stopped by
The CHAIRMAN, who said that the Committee were of opinion the
standing orders had not been complied with, inasmuch as the lessee
of certain fields bad not been served with notice, nor was his name
on the books of reference as lessee of the property mentioned in the
allegation.
Several other allegations of a similar character were sustained,
and a few unimportant ones were abandoned. This closed the case.

Sob-Committee No. 2

EDINBURGH, GLASGOW, AND DUMBAR-

TONSHIRE JUNCTION,
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)

Mr. nun', in his cross-examination of this witness, inquired as
to the accurate distance of the road from the polat marked 133
being two miles and four furlongs.
Mr. YORKE, (who entered a few minutes before) objected to this
line of examination being proceeded with, and a discussion then arose
which endeed in the room being cleared.
The CHAIRMAN (on our re-admission) said that the Committee
were of opinion that Mr. Pritt might pursue the line of examination
he had adopted with reference to the accuracy of the section.
Mr. Frew re-examined—Made his survey at Hellensburgh, and
carried it up (in conjunction with Mr. Kyle), to the point 231, and
the section was wrong at that point. It would follow as
a matter of course that the plan would be wrong
at the point that he had been called upon to examine. Both the
points alluded to were wrong.
Mr. Kyle, engineer, examined—The previous witness was his as-
sistant for a number of years and he generally found him correct in
his surveys. There was an error of 3 feet 6in the notes of persons
who had checked the line for the promoters of the Bill at the point in
rigiestlon. The notes passed through the point of the line alluded to,
and the result showed that the error alleged was committed Was
convinced, from the perusal of these notes, that his own calculations
were correct. _ _ _

Cross-examined—lt was not an unusual thing for engineers to
make their levels from different datum points, which was the case
in the present instance. There was a change of gradients at two
miles three furlongs and eight chains. There was a difference be-
tween his calculations and those of the notes made by the party who
surveyed the line for the promoters.
The Committee were of opinion that the allegation was not sus-
tained, and therefore that in this case the standig orders had been
complied with.
Several allegations to the same effect were abandoned.
The next was an allegation by the proprietor of the ferry at Bein-
hill, which was crossed by the railway by two bridges.
Mr. M'KxsztE proved that Mr. Smollett had a right by crown
charter to levy ferry dues on the bridge In question, which he had
substituted for a ferry boat. The line of railway did not touch the
bridge. Mr. binollett was proprietor of the laud on the side of the
river Leaven, where the railway came to. was agent to Mr.
The allegation was not sustained.
It was also alleged that the radius of the curve at the Glasgow
Terminus, which was a mile in length, was not marked on the plan
deposited.
Mr. PBLTT contended that the allegation was not sufficiently
specific, inasmuch as it did not state what section was meant.
The allegation was not sustained.
Mr. GRAHAM suggested, that as the next case which related to the
Canal Company could not possibly terminate that day,. the case
should be postponed.
The Committee then adjourned shortly before four o'clock to
twelve o'clock to-morrow.

Sub-Committee Zfe. 6.
SOUTH WALES.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Considerable delay was occasioned in this case in consequence of
a point raised by the Chairman as to the sufficiency of the declaration
regarding the mode of raising the necessary funds for the estimates.
The declaration set forth that the sum 0f.1,101,0001., which was part
of a sum of 1,611,000/., was provided for by a surplus of the original
funds of the company, of which 2,530,0001., hart not been required.
The consideration of the point raised occupied about an hour, and
on our readmission to the room, which had been cleared of strangers,
the Chairman decided that the declaration was sufficient, but post-
poned his final decision until he should have consulted with the Chair-
Men of the other Sub-Committees.
This was the only railway petition which came under the con-
sideration of the Committee, and they adjourncd at four o'clock till
twelve to-morrow.

STANDING O
HOU RDERS' COMMITTEES.
SE OF LORDS.
This Committee resumed its labours at twelve o'clock
this day.
Several cases came under the consideration of the Com-
mittee, but, in consequence of the non-attendance of wit-
nesses, they were adjourned till a future flay. The case of the
WATERFORD, WEXFORD, and DUBLIN RAILWAY,
which occupied nearly the entire day, has been fixed to
come on at twelve o'clock to-morrow morning. The
TEMPLEMORE and NENAGH RAILWAY with the
CLOMNEL and THURLES have also been adjourned.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT,
(THIS EVENING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY took his seat on the Wool-
sack at Five o'clock.
IRISH RAILWAYS.
Lord AfONTEAGLE rose to present a petition from
certain individuals in Ireland, praying that some trifling
irregularities which had occurred in the serving of
notices on parties connected with a line of railway
between Wexford and Carlow, might not impede
the passing of those works through the Standing Orders'
Committee. The expediency of passing measures to
facilitate the providing employment for the Irish people
was denied by no one; and their Lordships, as well as the
other House of Parliament, seemed to feel that these rail-
roads were the most natural and most useful source of
employment. They complained that a stop might be
put to these works unless the House interfered. He
gave notice that to-morrow he should call the attention
of thir Lordships to the petition.
PROTECTION.

The Duke of RIC6IOND presented thirty-six peti-
tions from various parishes in Montgomeryshire, praying
that protection to agriculture may be continued. He
also presented a similar petition from Fermoy, in the
county of Cork.

PROTECTION OF
Lord BROUGHAM- LIFE
(IRELAED) BILL
(Earl St!
the general said that highly approving of
Scope of this measure, introduced by
the Noble Lord
amend Germans), and as there
were some important to be proposed, it
was requisite the measure shin° amendments
soon as possible, as his Noble and Learned be proceeded with as
have to leave town on Saturday Learned Friend would
Brougham) should, as the organ of11.311!ii He (Lord
Learned Friend, suggest that the Bill ----
Noble and
Committee to-morrow, or they might be considered in
'bona now, and re-commit it for the
r , onsideration
lamenaments to-morrow. of the
The LORD CHANCELLOR suggested that it would
be better to have the Bill printed and laid on the table
te-morrow, and that they should go into Committe on
Friday night, which was agreed to.
IRISH COERCION BILL.
Lord GREY rose and said, that unless some change
took place in the Coercion Bill respecting persons who
were found out before sunrise and after sunset, he would
feel it his duty to move an amendment.
Lord CAMPBELL said that a power should be
givn when it could be made to appear that a fair
trial could not be had to change the venue to some
country or other place where a Fair trial could be
secured.
A NOBLE LORD suggested the propriety of post-
poning the second reading until Monday, when,
Lord BROUGHAM said his Noble Friend was not
aware that the Earl of St. Germans was leaving town
on Friday.
After 'a few words from Lord BROUGHAM and Lord
C.:.MPBELL,
Ear'! GREY said that he bad not had the opportunity
of seeing the amendments introduced by the Lord
Chief Justice, and he could,
therefore, only say that
runless these am' en -1
nam.etrnts embraced one which he intended
to propose
those who might ), to mitigate the punis;l22ent of
be out after
Oast transportation was much too
sunset, he, consideiWg
t
tt:ms offence alleged. Should such great a punishment for
beezi introduced, he should feel on amendment not have
it his duty to divide the
gouge • *Roo the subject.