The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-30 00:00:00

In all other kinds of meat exceedingly little business was transacted.
Beef from 2s 6d to 3s 6d ; Muttoe, 3s 4d to 4s 6d ; Lamb, 5s 4d to
6s 8d ; Veal, 4s 4d to 5s 4d. ; and Pork, 3s Gd to 5s per Sibs by the
carcase.

RAILWAY COMMIrrEES.

(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.

DI IN AND MziNxEritiLElT, rum
NOTLTII MIDLAND, Duman. AND nza..-
PAST JUNCTION, AND ITANTAN nizaiv

The Committee on these Bills met this morning at eleven o'clock
in Abingdon-street. Present, the Marquis of Salisbury (chairman),
the Earl of Jersey, Lord Charleville, and the Bishop of Oxford.
Mr. O'MALLEY occupied the whole of the morning in addressingthe
Committee in favour of the Dublin and Enniskillen-Railway, and in
opposition to the other two projects. Ile expatiated at great length
on the advantages which would accrue to those portions of Ireland
which the line was proposed to traverse on account of its direct
character, and as being the course which was admitted by all the
witnesses to embody a greater stream of traffic than that possessed
by any other part of the county. After commenting with great
severity on the evidence of Sir John 111`Nelle, the engineer of the
Irish North Midland, he proCeeded to say that the fact that share-
holders in the line which he represented having been able to pay up
101. per cent., whilst their opponents had only paid 51., showed that
they could command the necessary capital for its construction; besides,
if there was any dsubt in the minds of the Committee as to the wishes of
the shareholders with respect to it, the promoters would, if allowed
time, call a meeting, and adduce evidence before the Committee that
the shareholders as a body were anxious not to withdraw the Bill
from Parliament, but to proceed with it. lie concluded by calling ou
the Committee to pass the preamble of the Bill.
A petition, purporting to be from several shareholders of the line,
praying that the Bill might be abandoned, and the Company
dissolved, was placed before the Committee, but was rejected on
account of the signatures not having been appended by the persons
whose names appeared, but by a Mr. Barnett, a clerk in the employ
of Mr. Layard, who had sent a circular to the various parties on the
subject, from some of whom he had received authority to append
their names to the petition, which was accordingly done.
The Committee held that this was altogether inadmissible, and re-
jected the petition.
The CHAIRMAN then ordered the room to be cleared, in order that
the Committee might give their decision on the Bills.
On the admission of the parties,
The Cnatammt stated that the Committee had come to the fol-
lowing resolution :

" The Committee are of opinion that the line from Newtonbutler
to Cavan, with a branch to Belturbet, should be given to the Dublin
and Enniskillen Company. That the line from Kelly to Navan
should be also given to them, on condition of their making a junction
with the Navan and Drogheda, and that it be recommended to the
Belfast Junction to take advantage of their present Bill to form this
junction. The Committee will not adopt any line south of Navan,
The Irish North Midland have not proved their Bill."
The Committee then adjourned until to-morrow, when the clauses
of the successful Bills will be proceeded with .

HOUSE ( )F COMMONS.
GROUP IV.

The Select Committee appointed to consider the merits of the Bills
comprised in this group, re-assembled at the usual hour this morning ;
Mr. B. Hope in the chair.

THE GREAT NORTH OF SCOTLAND.

The CHAIRMAN said he wished, before resuming the evidence, to
call the attention of the parties to the fact, that a meeting of the
Perth arid Inverness shareholders had been held at Inverness, at
which it was decided by a majority of 46 to 2 not to go on with the
Bill.

Mr. Sergeant BELLASIS said that decision could not be taken as the
opinion of the great body of the shareholders, for they were spread all
over the line, but a small portion of the whole body. But there was
the remarkable case of the London and York.
The CusiumeN—What is that?

Mr. Sergeant Bzmasis—Why in that case a large number of share-
holders were for stopping the line while the scheme was in a most
healthy and flourishing condition.
Air. AUSTIN said it might be as well for him to state that a similar
meeting to that alluded to by the Hon. Chairman, had been held at
Perth. It was pretty certain that the London and York scheme was
on its death-bed.

Mr. Sergeant BELLests presumed the wish was father to the
thought.
The Duke of Richmond was the first witness examined this morn-
ing. His Grace said that he preferred the Great North of Scotland
line, because it gave more accommodation to his tenants, and to the
public, and gave a decided opinion that there was not traffic enough
to justify the construction of an inland and a coast line. There could
hardly be a doubt, his Grace thought, that the Great North of Scot-
land was the most preferable of the two coast lines, inasmuch as it
followed the natural channel of the traffic, while It passed through
vast tracts of land capable of improvement.
His Grace, on cross-examination, admitted that the Banffshire line
might benefit Fort Gordon, but that was a small fishing village of
little importance. He did not admit ofits being an Inconvenience to
go round a distance of 61 miles to get from Perth to Inverness, be-
cause if they avoided that detour they neglected the local ac-
commodation which the important counties of Aberdeen, Banff,
Maury, and Perth gave. Certainly it would not be a benefit to the
public to have both lines, because it was quite impossible that both
could pay, and railways only benefited the public, in his opinion,
when they paid. The Aberdeen and Elgin line patsed through the
most expensive part of the country, and he was fully convinced the
line could not subsist upon its local traffic. He did not anticipate
that drovers would avail themselves of the railway, because, as
there were few tolls in Scotland, it was cheaper to drive cattle over
the bills than send them by railway.
By the COMMITTEE—The Aberdeen and Elgin line crossed the
river Spray in an objectionale manner. On the whole his evidence
amounted to this—he should prefer the two lines, if they could be
made to pay, but as he thought the traffic would only admit of one
line being effectively worked, there could only he one line ; and of
the two he thought the Great North of Scotland line was the best.

Another discussion here arose as to the mode of proceeding in
cross-examinations. The Committee seemed to think that the
Nairn and Perth line was not a competing line with the Great North
of Scotland; and, therefore, the Learned Csunsel, who appeared for
the former, had no right to cross examine the witnesses called by
the latter.

Mr. Sergeant BELLASIS said the Perth and Nairn line would not
pay without they had the management of the tra e between Nairn
and Inverness; and they were, therefore, a competing scheme with
the Great North of Scotland, as between those two places. The
Aberdeen, Banff, and Elgin line depended for support upon local,
and not through traffic, and for local traffic, and as a local line, it
was a competition with the Great North of Scotland.