The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-29 00:00:00

GROUP VIII.

The Committee assembled at the usual hour this morning, Mr.
Hawes (chairman).

The application was objected to by opposing counsea, but u
mately they agreed to the delay asked.
The CHAIRMAN they pronounced the Committee adjoujrned uz
Twelve o'clock on Monday next.

GROUP XL

NORTH BRITISH.

21%-
24%
834 I)

(STAIVIFOR.D TO V.TZSIIECE) LIZ l'E

GROUP X.XX

% ths
7/8 Its
2
227
62
29
23

iQ
so

1 p
153
34}4
47
10;
46

The Rev. Mr. Hughes, rector of St. Clement's, Oxford, Is a mem-
ber of the University and resident at Oxford, he considered the rail-
way would be most desirable. For literary and social jiurposes he
considered that the inter-communication which it would produce
between the students of the two universities would be most benefi-
cial, and unattended with the disadvantages which had been some-
times stated would accrue.
Mr. W. Ekin examined—Was brewer and moister at Cambridge.
Remembered that in 1824 and 1825 there were two coaches run-
ning in opposition from Oxford to Cambridge. The fares were
lowered, and this increased considerably the number of
passengers, and when one of them ceased to run, and the fares
rose, the number of passengers decreasedsonsiderably ; from which he
inferred that the proposed railway would increase to a great extent
the number of passengers between Cambridge and Oxford. If the
proposed railway were established, from the calculations he had
made, he had no doubt that thero would be fifty passengers a day
from these two points.
There was some additional evidence to the same effect, after which
the Committee adjourned.

314:
dis.
2 p
39%
12%
15%
234

50
75
35y?

GROUP XXXVII.
The Committee met this day at one o'clock, in No. 37 of the new
Committee Rooms. Present Lord Seymour (chairman), Lord Ebring-
ton, and three other Hon. Members.
The petitions were put, the names of the counsel, agents, &c., were
taken, and the preliminaries gone through iu respect to the several
Bills set down in this group for the day.
HORBURY BRIDGE AND CALDER..
This Bill was withdrawn, as was also the
MANCHESTER, HUDDERSFIELD, AND
t GREAT GRIMSBY DIRECT.
The Committee thee proceeded with the
SHEFFIELD, ROTHERHAM, BARNSLEY,
WAREPIELD, HUDDERSFIELD, AND
GOOLE.
The formal evidence was gone through, and the resolutions of the
Standing Orders Committee were put in.
Mr. TALBOT addressed the Committee, on behalf of the promoters
of this measure, and said he believed the Committee would perceive the
importance of the district to which it was proposed to give accommo-
dation. The Bill would afford a convenient exit for the mineral pro-
ductions of the district. The Manchester and Barnsley project was
objected to by the Lords' Committee, on the ground that it would not
sufficiently open up the Barnsley and Silkstoue coal fields. The length
of these beds was about thirty-six miles in length, and from Sheffield
to Wakefield, from ten to fifteen miles in breadth. The produce of
these beds was equal to the best Durham coals, and the seams were
considered by eminent geologists to be a reappearance of the Durham
seam. The existing lines did not give sufficient accommodation to
this rich mineral district, in which there were railways, indeed, but
these did not touch the coals. The present Bill would completely
supply the deficiency, which was at present so great, that the manu-
facturers of Sheffield were obliged to take their coals from Derby-
shire, instead of raising it, as he might say, at their own doors.
But independently of the coal traffic, the promoters would derive
large returns from the iron trade, and other kinds of traffic. In an
agricultural view, also, the railway would be a great advantage to
the district, as it would enalbe the cultivators of the unkind soil
(which, as usual in countries rich in minerals, forms the principal
part of the surface), to obtain an abundant and cheap supply of the
lime which they wanted so much for manure. The passenger traffic
was calculated to be very profitable. The extent of the line was
nineteen miles, with branches of three miles in length. The esti-
mated cost for the whole twenty-two miles was 800,0001., and
the engineering facilities were very great. There was some
opposition on the part of landowners, but he left that matter to the
witnesses, and called the attention of the Committee to the petitions
of the vast majority of occupiers in favour of the Bill. He then pro-
ceeded to call witnesses.
Mr. G. Chambers, a coalowner and member of a local geological
society, gave evidence very strongly in favour of the measure, on
account of the facility it would afford to, perhaps, the largest coal
field in England, the coal being of the best quality. There was also
a great deal of iron ore of good quality, and the several ironworks at
present established would be greatly benefited by the line.

2'
6%
15%

MPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Twelve o'clock.
THE EDINBURGH, LEITH, AND GRANTON RAIL•
WAY (EXTENSION AND BRANCHES).
This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be corn.
mitted.

GROUP No. IV.
Mr. G. HOPE moved that the Committee on Group No.
IV. have leave to proceed as recommended in the report
from that Committee, presented 28th April.
The motion was agreed to.
RAILWAY BUSINESS.
Mr. R. HODGSON moved that the order, dated 23d
April, " That it be an instruction to the Committeeo on ever
before proceeding with the
private Bill originated in this House, relating t
way,meritsof such
re-
quire to be produced before them
in lieu the following
and
verifießdill,b
by the
thepromoters," &c., be discharged, and
resolution be introduced,
"That it be an instruction
.
T
House relating to any railway, to require to be produced be-
fore the promoters," kc.
to the Committee on every private Bill originated in this
fore them and verified by
Mr.couldeasily understand that some of the reso-
lutions DUNCOMBE objected to the original order being dis-
charged. He . .
they were intended to be inconvenient, in order
lutions might be inconvenient to some of the railway com-
panies; but
that those bubble schemes, which could not stand the test of
at scrutinising examination, might be exposed. He had no
objection to the resolution so far as to allow the Committee to
report immediately after the preliminary inquiry on any
scheme, without keeping the report back.
Sir G. CLERK had no objection to the alteration of the
resolution as far as regarded those particular Committees
which had not been appointed until Monday last. lie thought
those Committees might be allowed to proceed with the
merits of the Bills before them, without specially inquiring
into their compliance with the resolutions of the House. It
was due to the promoters of bond fide schemes that some dif-
ference should be made between those projects and those
bubble schemes which were inteeded solely to promote the
advantage of the projectors. He hoped the lion. Member
would so far modify his resolution as to the restriction of
those Committees only which were appointed on Monday
last.
Mr. HODGSON was not disposed to press his resolution
any further, and proposed to withdraw it.
i‘lr. GREENE, before the House came to any decision in
the matter, thought it extremely desirable that the services
of counsel in the preliminary inquiries before the Committee,
as provided by the resolution of the H on. Member for Fins-
bury (Mr. Duncombe), should be dispensed with. It would
only contribute to increase the expenses of the inquiry.
Mr. DUNCOMBE was of opinion that the services of
counsel en most occasions should not be dispensed with, as
by their assistance the truth of the documents required to be
produced was more likely to be ascertained.
Sir G. CLERK thought that if there was any doubt as to
the truth (*authenticity of those documents, there would be
ample opportunity afforded before the Committee to prove
their authenticity by the parties either appearing themselves
or by counsel.
After a few words from Mr. T. Duncombe, Mr. Cardwell,
Mr. Labouchere, Mr. Bernal, Mr. Hudson, Mr. Wakley, Mr.
Gisborne' and Sir R. Peel, Mr. Entwisle, the Speaker, and
Sir John C. Hobhouse, the motion was withdrawn.
Mr. ESTCOURT moved that Committees have leave to sit

EDINBURGH .IIND LEITH ATP/lOSPIIEERIC.
Mr. HAYDI applied on the part of the promoters of the krill for the
postponement of its consideration. He founded his request on the
ground that the consideration of this line could not be proceeded
with until the Leith and Granton Bill (the competing lino) was in a
fit state to come before the Committee.

The Committee met this morning at twelve o'clock, Mr., Hawes in
the chair.

The clauses of this Bill could not be proceeded on acct/ant of the
petition, which had been deposited at the Board of Troth', not being
forthcoming. The subject was therefore adjourned till M vnday..
ED =nun ti II AND LEITH ATMOSPI i um= •
This Bill was also postponed until Monday.
The Committee then adjourned till that day.

GROUP XXIX.
This Committee assembled to-day at eleven o'clock—vresent, Mr.
Labouchere, Sir W. Molesworth, Sir J. Duckworth, Colon tAltawdon
and Sir J. Smyth.

BOSTON, STAMFORD, AND InrunrN GRAM,

The Committee went through the clauses agreed to by
.the
corpo-
ration of the Bedford Levels, and the promoters, for the , purpose of
securing the drainage of the land, and the reversiion of the
property through which the line was to pass to the oaf iginal pro-
prietors at the price for which it was sold, should they be .desirous to
re-purchase, in case of the railway being abandoned.
The amended clauses were then read seriatim, and reveeived the
signature of the Chairman.

The report was also read, and signed by the Chairman.
The Committee then separated, this being the last Bill referred to
them.

This Committee assembled to-day shortly after tweE've o'clock.
Present, Lord Charles Wellesley (chairman), and the othcgr members
of the Committee.

CAMBRIDGE AND OXFORD.
The evidence in favour of this Bill was adduced.
The Rev. Charles Jeune, Head Master of Pembroke Coll( ge, Oxford,
examined—Was acquainted with the Cambridge and Oxfo.id Railway.
He considered that undertaking would be of the greatest; advantage
to the students of the 'respective Universities, and wo• cad tend to
advance the interests of science. It would not affect injutriously the
property of either Universities.
Dr. Ingram, President of Trinity College, was examith id, and cor-
roborated the preceding testimony.
Cross-examined by Sir JOHN BAyLET—Considered that the line by
Bletchly was not as desirable as the present line.
Mr. J. W. Harley, M.P. for Oxford, examined—The lin I: would be
of great advantage in his neighbourhood (Waterperry). He under-
stood that the gentry in the neighbourhood had assented :to the Bill.
It would give his neighbourhood communication with thq Birming-
ham Railway, and with London. Their only communication at pre-
sent to London was by Aylesbury, and thence by the Birmingham
Railway. Coals were 30s. a ton in the neighbourhood. l:t would be
of great advantage if they could get coals from Newca vtle, which
could be procured there for 1/. 6s. a ton. The proposed railway
would act less injuriously on the property through whit al it would
pass than any other line with which he was acquainted.
Cross-examined—Dissented from all railways some time ago.
Would not avail himself of the Great Western Railway, even were
the rates on the same reduced. He had been informed that the
cheapness at which they could procure coal would, next t o the con-
veyance of passengers, be the greatest substantive benefit ;they would
reap from the proposed railway.
Mr. J. Ashurst examined—Was a magistrate of Omford, and
eldest son of Mr. Ashurst of Watercross, and expressed
the opinions of his father. Watercross, where he reside( 1 , was nine
miles from Oxford, and between that and Thame. Th,c proposed
railway would increase the value of property in the count;, for they
would have an increased facility for the transit of their agricultural
produce, and would be enabled to procure coals at a mod orate price.
The farmers in the county were in favour of the railway, and he
considered that the same would be of the greatest banal it to them.
Knew the propose line between Thame and Oxford. TI I ere was a
number of populous villages around that place, and he considered
that it was the most desirable situation that could be sele(lted.
Cross-examined—Neither he nor his father were pro visional di-
rectors, or possessed any shares in the proposed railway.. His opi-
nions respecting the railway were made with reference to Dxford and
his own neighbourhood.