The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-27 00:00:00

GROUP XVII.

The Committee met this morning at twelve o'clock. The Hon. E,
Yorke in the chair.

MANCHESTER AND SOUTHAMPTON AND
SOUTH WESTERN (ROMSEY AND REDBRIDGE BRANCH).
Mr. James Griffin, of the firm of Griffin and Co., was then called
and examined by Mr. HATHzlvrom—Has a yard at Redbridge,
and has supplied the Government with foreign and English timber.
Receives a great quantity of timber from America and the Baltic.
Sends a good deal of timber from Redbridge to Salisbury by land
carriage which he should send by this branch.
The cuatast.ste intimated that the Committee were satisfied that
there was a good deal of traffic between Redbridge and Salisbury. It
.dneneeceoun
at the same time they would be glad to hear e
1 would therefore be unnecessary to multiply evidence tl , t •
tOsthieDicon si
of transit and the saving which the line wouldveff Examination continued—The cost of sendingeet.
a from Redbridge to salisbury was 10s. ; by ma
ura%t of timber
m ;.eozitlid be
about half that amount. The London, Salisbury, a
made, would be of considerable advantage, as it would promotieett
timber trade with the west of England and take inland goods fur
exportation and bring foreign goods back.
Cross-examined by Air. It. Guarzy.—Timber landed at Southamp-
ton was floated up to Redbridge, and the expense of floating up 50
loads, which would require the assistance of two men, would be 10s.
Small quantities were not floated, but conveyed by land carriage.
Now pays Is. per load per mile for the conveyance of English timber.
The railway charge is 4d. The expense of floating a load uo t
Ri d'iridg• was 4d. or 6d. The drafting was not more than Id. a
,;:a ~ Was not aware that the Manchester and Southampton sought
no more in their Bill to charge bruin
powers I%d. a load. It they
charge would be Gd
did this, the only additional .
think you could sell it cheapen by floating it than tin
Do you
—We should be able i
t at Southampton. to Lo BO at Red
merchant
bridge, bat not at Salisbury. Could not name any other place
where he could sell it cheaper.
th Western terminu-s lii abo t The Sou - u a guar-
By Mr. SAUNDEItS—
k b water more than half a mile. The
mile from the doc s, y
ter of a
M inchester and Southampton terminus is near the public quay,The witness, in reply •
to Mr. Days, said timber could not be
the ebb And
floe
of the tide, or during
floated up to Redbridge during
^, except a sou - a
th e ist wind.
the prevalence of heavy g—es,
A line from Redbridge to Romsey would be of
By the CHAIRMAN— quantity of timber at South-
large q
infinite advantage. If he had a
w •
Redbridge as no , perhaps he should
South-
ampton he should float it up to
send small quantities by the railway.
The CHAIRMAN said—Perhaps the promoters of the line were de-
sirous to know the opinion of the Committee with respect to their
project. It was quite clear that somebody must construct it,
be-
cause such a line would be of particular benefit to inland traders, and
t
to traders at Ding ; but the promoters had only proved his fact by
i
, evidence from the two extremities of the line,:Romseylatai Rt &ridge ;
but Eling and Redbridge are situated on an tuary.
toreach which
various menses had to be incurred—river dues, pilotage,
things,which ofcourse
increased the cost of transit. 'the Committeehad,
however, to look not simply to the public or local advantage, but to
the greatest public advantage which it would afford. Now, as he
had said, they had only proved this by those locally interested. They
wanted more general and extended evidence than that which hati up
to that time been exhibited to them.
After the examination of several other witnesses, the Committee
adjourned adjourn to the till Thum slay, and on Friday they will
Thursday following

of which were considerable wool and glove manufactories, where as
wally as 1,200 tons of coals were con:llnd annually, and 1,000 tcna
more in domestic purposes, at a price of 30s to 335. a ton. That price
would certainly be greatly reduced, and the price of timber
from Gloucester, which came by a very circuitous route,
would also be affected. The Stratford branch was nine miles long,
running through the parish of Weston,in Gloucester, through Mickle-
ton up to the borough of Old Stratford. There existed, he said, at
present a tramway from Stratford to Morton-in-the-Marsh, and in the
contest of last year much stress was laid upon this tramway, Which
the Company, it was understood, would keep open and improve. But
that tramway was circuitous and inconvenient for locomotive purposes.
The present branch was therefore proposed, but yet the tramway
would be kept open.. The communication to Stratford at present
was by the Avon and the canal to Birmingham. Coals were prin-
cipally brought. from Staffordshire, between Kidderminster and
Dudley, and there was great traffic in corn. There was consider.
able traffic 'with Esham, with Chipping-Camden, where there
were silk mills, and with Chipping-Norton, where wool manufac-
tures were carried on. The Droitwich Branch was intended to open
communication with the Stoke works. The Stratford branch, he
said, was opposed by the London and Birmingham Company, who
had two lines in another Committee, one from Halnpton-in-Arden
to Ashchurch, and one transacting that line from Weedon to Wor-
cester. But last year they had opposed the main line, and now
since that line had been passed he expected that Parliament would
decide against allowing their last year's opponents to take away the
traffic of the line which had been already sanctioned.
Several witnesses were called and examined on the traffic of the
different districts through which branches are proposed.
Mr. Brunel, engineer for the line, stated that the length of the
branch to Witney was 4% miles ; to Stratford, 8 miles, 6 furlongs ;
and to Stoke, about 1 mile. There was no engineering difficulties on
them, and the steepest gradient on them was one in 74, for a distance
of 20 chains. The estimate for the Witney branch was 68,0001., for
the Stratford, 114,0001., and far the Stoke branch, 12,0001., but the
gross estimate was 220,600/. He stated that on the main line they
were laying down the broad and narrow gauge from Abbotsford to
Worcester and Wolverhampton, by order of the Board of Trade. He
did not know what gauge would be adopted on the Oxford to Ban-
bury line. He did not see any difficulty of communication from the
broad to the narrow gauges.
The Committee then adjourned to Thursday next, at twelve.

GZ PP XLIV.
The Committee met this morning at twelve, Lord Palmerston in
the chair.

The Committee were occupied with the formal evidence required
by the House in respect to the amalgamated projects now known as
the Northern Counties Railway, the Bill for which was read before
the Committee yesterday, and agreed to.
The Committee proceeded to read the clauses of this Bill, but
Mr. ALEXANDER applied for leave to enter first upon the merits of
the Preston and Wyre Railway—a scheme which, through mistake
of the Committee of Classification, had not been referred to this group
till lately.
The CHAIRMAN refused to enter upon the consideration of this new
project, which, in conformity with the rules of the douse, must be
postponed to the sth of June next.
Mr. ALEXANDER applied to have a clause introduced into the Bill
then before the Committee, giving powers to the Preston and Wyre
Company to construct a short lino of nine miles' length ,between
theirs and the Fleetwood line.

The CHI IRMAN would not consent to consider anything which was
not properly before the Committee.

. .
The clauses of the Fleetwood Bill were then read and agreed to.
The Committee then adjourned ti I twelve on Thursday next.

GROUP LIZ.
This Committee met to-day at the usual hour ; Mr. P.. Mile
chairman.

GRAND JUNCTION (lIITYTON AND WAR-
RINGTON BRANCH), AND ST. HELEN'S
CANAL AND RAILWAY.
IMPORTANT DECISION.

Mr. TALBOT opened the case of the Huyton and Warrington
Branch on behalf of the Grand Junction Company.
Captain Huish, of the Grand Junction Railway, and Mr. Locke,
civil engineer, were then examined on behalf of the promoters.
Mr. Sinclair was examined by Sergeant WHANGRAM on behalf of
the St. Helen's Canal Railway Company.
The room was then cleared, and on our re-admission
The CHAIItItdAN AMIOUBeed that the preamble of the Grand Junc-
tion (lluyton to Warrington) Railway Bill was proved, and that
the preamble of the St. Helen's Canal and Railway Bill was proved
only as far as Garston.

'The Committee then adjourned till three o'clock on Thursday next

GROUP LIII

This Committee re-assembled at twelve o'clock this morning, in
Room 26 (New Houses of Parliament). Present, lion. E. Lascelles
(in the chair), the Earl of Arundel and Surrey, Mr. Hildyard, Capt.
Dalrymple, and Mr. R. Clayton.

stistoPsuntz UNXON AND CANAL (CUES.
TER TO WOLVERHAMPTON).

The evidence in this case was resumed

Mr. Thomas Baldwin, carrying agent to the Chester and Aylesbury
Canal Company, being the first witness, was called to show the
superiority of a railway over a canal, in the carriage of passengers and
traffic, and the desirableness of having a direct line of railway commit-
nication between Wolverhampton and Birkenhead.
Mr. James Boydon, an extensive ironmaster, was next called, to
show the great advantage that would be conferred on the iron-
masters in the neighbourhood of Wolverhampton by the constriction
of this railway.
mr. Alexander Easton, resident inglieer to the Birmingham and
Liverpool Canal Company, was the next witness. He proved that
that company experienced great difficulties in procuring a proper
supply of water, particularly in the summer months.
Mr. Edward Cresswell, of the firm of Hayward, Creswell, and
Sons, iromnasters, Dudley, was next called to show the benefit which
the construction of this railway would confer on the ironntasters of
Dudley and the neighbourhood.
The remainder of the day was occupied with the hearing of similar
evidence, and the Committee adjourned at four o'clock till twelve on
Thursday next.

GROUP LIV.

COVENTRY, NIINEJLTON, EIRMINGR.ADX

AND LEICESTER.

The Committee met at twelve precisely this morning, and were oc-
cupied for some time in deciding on the order in which they should
proceed with the numerous Bills comprised in their group. The
Committee decided eventually to proceed with the Coventry, Nun-
eaton, Birmingham, and Leicester Itailway. . _

The Bill was opposed by the Leicester and Birmingham Company
and by the Birmingham and Leicester Direct Company.

From the evidencell;;;;red that the length of the line from
Coventry to Nuneaton was twenty-six miles, and from Leicester to
Birmingham about eighty-five miles. The estimates were fully
sufficient to carry out the works. There were no peculiar engineering
difficulties to be contended against. The population was numerous in
the vicinity of the line, and the general mineral and other produc-
tions would ensure a ready and remunerative traffic.
The Committee were engaged all day with evidence of a general
nature, and adjourned at four o'clock.

THE SUN, LONDON, WrtDNESDAY MORNING, MAY 27, 1846.