The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-25 00:00:00

GROUP XLVII.

The Select Committee on this group re-assembled to-day, at twelve
o'eloek, and proceeded to hear evidence in favour of the

SHREWSBURY AND HERErORESHIRE,
the preamble of which Bill was eventually declared to be proved.
The clauses was then gone into. and the Committee.adjourued at four
until twelve o'clock to-morrow.

GROUP XLVIII.
I.X.YNVY VALLEY.

The Committee on this Bill resumed their sittings at twelve o'clock
to-day Mr. Aldham, chairman.l
to-dad•,

The opposition was proceeded with on behalf the existing tram
line already noticed in this journal upon the opening of the ease.
The Commlite adjourned at four o'clock till twelve to-morrow.

GROUP LITI.

This Committee re-assambled to-day as usual, in Room 26 (Grand
Guvidor); present, the Hon. E. Lascelles (in the chair), the Earl
of Arundel and Surrey, Mr. Hildyard, Captain Dalrymple, and Mr.
R. Clayton.
BIRMINGHAM AND SHEINITSBITRY, AND
BIRMINGHAM, WOLVERHAMPTON, AND
DUDLEY.
Evidence in favour of the latter of these competing lines were re-
sumed, the first witness called being
Mr. William Matthews, magistrate of the counties of Stafford and
Worcester, and also of Birmingham, who stated that he was exten-
sively engaged in the Iron trade in South Staffordshire, and that the ac-
commodation afforded to that district by railways and canals was very
limited. He had considered very attentively the relative merits %
the schemes under the consideration of the Committee, and he was
certainly of opinion that the Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and
Dedley would afford better accommodation than its rival, which
appeared to have been devised merely for the purpose of serving the
interests of the London and Birmingham Railway Company. He
then gave a history of the origin of this scheme, which, inasmuch as
It was an independent one, would best serve the interests of the
public. This line would give an outlet to Oxford, and to
the south and west of Birmingham. If it were formed,
the public would have the benefits arising irons
competition. He was of opinion that the proposed station at Snow-
hill in Birmingham would afford the best accommodation ; the level
of the line was a very convenient one, and would afford great facili-
ties to parties desiring to go by the Grand Junction, London and
Birmingham, Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton, and many
other railways. He had carefully examined the table, showing the
accommodation afforded by each of the rival schemes, and he was of
opinion that this scheme would give the greatest accommodation.
The Birmingham, and Wolverhampton, and Dudley Rellway would
accommodate 3,180 tons, the Shrewsbury and Birmingham
1,960, and the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton 2,1:0.
He could not say whether there was sufficient traffic beta een Wol-
verhampton and Birmingham to sustain two railways, there could
be no doubt that there would be sufficient for one.

In reply to Mr.CORBETT, who requested to tender tnrther evidence
as to the damage which the Shrewsbury ant Birmingham line would
indict on the works of Mr. Thorneycroft and other manufacturers of
iron at Wolverhampton,
The Hon. CHAIRMAN said, that the Learned Counsel had stated on
Friday last that be had given all the evidence he intended to offer
on that head, that the course would be very irregular, and that un-
less the counsel of the Shrewsbury and Birmingham consented, he
should reihee to hear any evidence of that sort.
Mr. RICKARDS, on the part of the iihrewsbury and Birmingham,
having consented to the application,
Mr. CORBETT accordingly proceeded to cress-examine Mr. Mat-
thews, to show that Mr. Thorneycroft, &c., would be injured by the
line passing over and stopping up the access to their works.
Mr. Ivrea vans also cross-examined this witness on behalf of the
Shrewsbury and Birmingham Company, when he admitted that he
was asharehoider in lite Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton
line, and had been one of the witnesses called on
behalf of the Great Western Company, on behalf of the
broad gauge, and three hundred shares were allotted to him
for his services. Mr. Barker, Mr. Thorneycroft, and others, were
also similarly rewarded for their trouble. He was a director in this,
the Birmingham and Oxford, and Seuth Staffordshire Companies,
and in fact every line which proposed to afford an independent
railway communication to the district in which his works were
situated. He was decidedly an ad .•ocate of the broad gauge, but it was
not because this line would be constructed on the broad gauge that he
advocated it. The question of gauge had, in fact, been kept in abey-
ance by the promoters. He at one time admitted that he should
rejoice to see the day when the broad gauge would be extended from
London to Liverpool, and he had no doubt that that would be
the case. He was certainly an enemy of monopoly, arid he would
disapprove of a Great Western monopoly being earned out In the
dtstrict with which he was connected, but he had stated at the
meetings of this company that he saw no objection to their being
amalgamated with the Great Western Company. That com-
pany had an interest in this scheme, and . would also be the
lessees of the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhamptou and
ON ford and Birmingham lines, which would have the
effect of putting the whole of the districts through which
they passed under the control of the Great Western Company. Ile
believed that even if those lines were formed, the Birmingham
Canal would continue to maintain its existence, and that the proposed
cunbination of the Shrewsbury and Birmingham Company with the
Canal Company would have a more prejudicial effect on those now
interested in the canal than the success of the Birmingham, Wolver-
hampton. and Dudley scheme. He did hot think that the clause in
the Shrewsbury and Birmingham Railway Bill, placing that com-
pany under the control of the Board of Trade, would give
much protection to the public against the attempts of adroit
men. The Shrewsbury and Birmingham scheme he believed to be
a complete piracy. The prospectus of the company of which he
was an advocate was published about the Ist of October. He be •
lieved that the Shrewsbury and Birmingham scheme originated in
1844. lie totally departed from the report of the Gauge Commis-
sioners as to the difficulties of a break of gauge. Of course he would
rather have a continuity of gauge, but he did not think the disad-
vantage so great as had been represented by commercial men.
Mr. SELF, on the part of certain landowners along the line, wished
to cross-examine the witness; to show the injury which tire line
would inflict on them, but

Mr. ROBINSON doubted whether their petition had been properly
presented, in which case he had no locus standi.

The petition was produced, and after being inspected it was agreed
that Mr. SizrE might cross.examine the witness, who stated that he
did not believe that the promoters of this line proposed to have any
side lines. He could not say which of the two lines would most In-
tercept the passages between the iron works of Wolverhampton and
the canal. •

Cross-examined—The side line.; might be provided for by a clause,
or some arrangement. Although Darlaston would not be accommo-
dated by this line, Great-bridge, which was of much greater impor-
tance, and which was left entirely unaccommodated by the Shrews•
bury and Birmingham, would be passed through by this 1 ne.

Mr. George Frederick Muntz, M.P. for Birmingham, was next
called, and stated that he was extensively engaged in manufactures
there. The people of that district differed much upon railway com-
munication with the other parts of the country. Ile had considered
the relative merits of the different lines before the Committee, and he
better situation
thought that tills line would give the best accommodation.
ile had originally been a supporter of the other line, but
finding that the promoters would not form an inde-
en,lent company, he had come over to this, which would be
an independent company. He considered that Snow-hill was the
better
bo, of the two proposed far stations at Birmingham,e
int, hi" „e_r.eagood sites. Ihe Majority of people and geode enter.
neighbouMalmof from Wolverhampton entered and stopped in the
London and Etirtniii.giht
and Itirminwhani.
effect of
reducing the pries;
sn, because it was an inde
were gentlemen
as
tr.)w-bui. Ile was of tine same opinion as the pre•
4r.:
cociTrAiipui,Linel;il effects of the control which the
penzsrla in
largely interested ielitt%
nlsirmingliam, and particularly
would have over the Shrewsbury
constituents, peee. Mr. Spooner as well as himself
gent representations of their co
scheme. The directors of this line
district over which it would
loaltructiori of this line would have the
to .
teen, induced by the ur-
b in-., converts to this
cross-examined by 3fr. itiC/CANDe—n had been . „„r,..,„...
because it ege.,, the -,-.-..r of
after the Birmingham, Wolverhampton, a first lit the
market, but .. uct 'Judie
that it was decidedly a better line p• . Y
the Shrewsbury and Birmingham line,
came out, he saw
company. and it
not be tender
terests of his constituents. NO ;amine dens
would best serve the in
made in favour of this line by the peep%
stration had been by several
der the control of any canal or railway '. , ould
of Birmingham, but
v to support it. The Snow-hill
Of his constituents Person all- one. He knew Instances
station was decidedly he had been applied to
in which competition had not served
he was therefore not always in favour of Competition. Ile did not
point to be considered
think that low tolls was the most important po.
servtetderthe interests of the public, and
in these matters; economy, combined with time,
wad the most im-
portant. If these things could be obtained by
two companies he should be content, lout he did not think that the
London and Birmingham had properly served the public, and be
should therefore look suspiciously upon any union with them.
Re-examined by Mr. ROBINSON—From what he had seen, he
believed that nothing bat competition would compel the London and
Birmingham Railway Company to act rightly towards the public.
To Mr. R. CLArrotc—l am merely looking upon this line as a
means of giving accommodation to the people between Wolver-
hampton and Birmingham, and not as a line calculated to give a
direct communication with London.

Mr. John Harker, ironmaster, Staffordshire, stated that he manu-
factored about 25,000 tons of iron, and used 150,000 tons of coal.
He and his partners employed between 1,100 and 1,300 men, as well
as his neighbours. Ills works were in the township of Wolver-
hampton, and would be much better accommodated by this than its
rival lines. This would be a competing line, and therefore very
beneficial to the public. Clauses in Acts of Parliament did not, In
his opinion, protect the public against abuses on the parts of railway
proprietors. .

Thewtin en was cross-examined at some length by the Learned
Counsel for the Shrewsbury and Birmingham scheme,
but
very material was elicited, further than the admissionthnaotthtihnigs
company had made no provision against its amalgamation with
other companies.
At four o'clock the Committee adjourned until twelve to-morrow.