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

T. 112 PrTN, LONDON,

be verified. This had been done by the witness; and If the Com-
mittee entertained any doubt aTsaut it, he was. quite prepared to go
into the whole case. Ii the Committee had any cl.-•tibt whatever
about the matter. they might exerciae their power of cross-examin-
ing the witheses with the utmost strletriess.

this point th.? room was dem, .1, and when parti-s we*e re-
admitted, the Chairman decla-, d th,t the Cotunuttee were of
that the counsel opposing the Bill hsve a right to cross-examine.
To this 4r. t OCIZIVAN objected, and said that he coteceived if the
power of crossi-examination was to be eXtrcLied at all, it should be
used now, or not at all.

Mr. Ts. Liar stated that there was another alternative, and that
was to adjournthe case and hand over the papers to the opponents for
inspection. _

It was at last agreed that the opponents should have the right
of going to the Committee Clerk's office, or to that of the solicitors to
the company; andmake what extracts they pleased from the returns.
The Committee then adjourned till It o'clock to-morrow.

GROUP =.
The Select Committee appointed to consider the merits of the
schemes comprised in this group re.asse•ubled at the usual hour this
morning in the Committee-room; Lord Harry Vane in the chair.
T. 712 cmarm CANAL AND SIAXZW7I.Ir.
The 'ITAIEMAN intimated that the Cominittee were now desirous
of taking this case.
Mr. Sergeant WRANGELAM said the object of the promoters
in this case was to convert the Chard canal into a railway.
The canal connected the town of llminster with the town
of Chard, and the proposed railway would give to those places a
communication with the metropolis by means of the Bristol and
Exeter Railway and the towns of Bridgewater and Taunton and the
proposed Stelford. The line ran in the route by which the traffic
had uniformly passed ; while, as it was only requi: ed to till up the
canal and lay sown the rails, it would not in any way interfere with
any private right or private property. It was oPPoseil by the
Creoker branch of the Bristol and Exeterßailway, which was pro-
posed to be a bruich of the Yeovil branch, sanctionel by the Legis-
lature last ses.sion. It was sufficient for him, howeveroto say that
not a spade had yet b: en put into the ground for the Yeovil bras; h,
while the proposed new branch ran in a circuitous direction, and
diverted the traffic of the district from its natuprralalacerhedoarnn, esti-
matedswielaslsar.eisT3ol2topool.er.
aand it
st of frot ipioesep )tpoo.reda nteh,aftors whichual bynhtaehl
the sale
and it was
sent in the possession of the Chard Ca
calculated the traffic would yield a return of 81. per Cent. on the
outlay.

Mr= Giles Laing, a merchant, residin4 at liminster, proved that
there were three coaches passing daliy between Ilminster and Chard,
and Axminster and Taunton, and In his opinion the proposed con-
version of the canal would be of great public
On Cress-examination the witness almhte I that these coaches
ran from different places to CrcAer, and, pelts's, it womb! be more
convenient for some of the pa.slengers to have a line extending on to
Croker.
Mr. John Thorne, a merchant, of Ilminster, gave similar testimony.
Mr. Humphrey Brown, the gentleman who made out the traffic
tables of the proposed line, proved that the traffic would yield a very
ample per centage on the outlay.
The canal Ants were then put in to prove that the Company had
the pow.er to raise more money than would cover the estimate for the
proposed railway.
Some ether evidence of a general character was adduced, and the
Committee adjourned shortly after four o'clock.

XX.
The CaMmittee met at Gwen
tveP o'clock. Present, Mr. Sotheron
(chairman), Sir R. Pigot, Lori N. nentlnck, Mr. Rosa, and Mr.
Tancred.

STAINES AND IFIXORIK3ND.
The returns neeesa try, according to the recent rezelutions of the
House of Commons, were hand, c 1 in.
Mr. M. CHAMBERS, Q.C. (with whom was Mr. Calvert and Mr.
Cowan) opened very briefly the merits of the line. In consequence of
the line which was being constructed b dween Richmond and London,
the present p;oject w ,s, in fact, a metropolitan line. It was ten miles
is length, and would hi executed at lees than 150,000/., althouzli the
proposed capita' was 230,0a0/. The people of Staines were almost
unanimous in favour of the proposed line, and were earnest to have
it passed by the House ; for since the construction of the South-
Western ant the ()mat Western Railways in the neighbeirhood, that
town, through which sixty or seventy coaches used to
11,133 daily, had suffered exceedingly ; and, moreover, the
fact of the importance of a railway from Staines was
witnessed by there being two other Rills before the House for the
sanae purpose. The proposed line passed the Thames nett,* Rich-
mond, and from that place proceeded on to Hungerford-bridge, by the
Richmond and London Railway, through several important towns.
The competing lines were the London and Hounslow, the London
and Windsor, and the Henley and Staines ; but these were encum-
bered with great expense and engineering difficulties; besides that,
the London and Windsor proposed tertninating st Knigh tsbridge, which
would he a most inconvenient district for a station as respected coals and any of those commodities necessary for a community. Mr.
Chambers said there were other opponents, private proprietors and
others, and alluded generally to the character of their opposition,
which would resolve itself into a question of compensation.
Mr. T. R. Ward, a magistrate of Egliam, and other gentlemen,
were then examined before the Committee as. to traffic on the eourse
of the proposed line.
The examination of witnesSet had not finished when the Committee
adjourned.

GOXVII
This Committee re-assemtß Jedthis morni.ng at the usual hour; Sir
Charles Lemon in the chair.
NOTE STAPPOR,DSIIIILZ (THREE LIN.ES).
The engineering evidence on this scheme was resumed this morn-
ing by the manination of Mr. John Hawkshaw, the enzineer of the
Leeds and Manchester Railway, who deposed at great length to the
practicability of continuin4 the line, and +o the great accomm.dation
they would afford to the traffic of the district. It was merely a cor-
roboration of the evidence given by Mr. Bidder, which we have
already given.

This c 4 cod the
ca.se for the promoters.
Mr. TOWNSEND, counsel on behalf of Mr. Wood and Mr. Warren,
two opposing pAitioners, then addressed the Committee, and was
proceeding to enter Into the general question of railway communica-
tion for the district, ant to urge considerations which affected the
preamble of the Bill, when he was interrupted by
Sergeant Waimottax, on behalf of promoters, who contended that
the opposing petitioner (Mr. Wood) had no right to enter into the
general question at all, that his objection to the line, as far as it
affected his own property, was all that could be gone into ; and this,
he again asserted, was merely a question for compensation.
The room was cleared on the point, and ou war re-adinlision,
The COMMITTEE decided against the course proposed to be pursued
by counsel for the opposition.

Sir. Swan then addressed the Committee, on behalf of Lord Bagot
and the Inhabitants of Leek, against the Churnet Valley line, and
contended that it would not afford the accommodation which the
district required ; that it was not a bona Ai! undertakhq, for the
director:, last year would give no guarantee (when called upon to do
so) that it would be then carried out, and that the prominent were
merely desirous to pre-occupy the district, so as to prevent oVier
companies (ruin laying down lines witch would afford better accom-
modation.

Mr. Challoner, solieltop to the Macclesfield and Lichfield Railway
(a projected line lost this session on the standing orders), was then
examissed by Mr. Austin, for the purpose of showing that the pre-
sent opposition, though ostensibly from Lord Bagot and the inha-
bitants of Leek, was in reality truth that Company, whose project
was at present in abeyance.
Mr. AUSTIN then submitted that the petitioners had no right to be
heard, inasmuch as the petition was " got up' by the M:scciestirld
and Lichfield Company, and did not emanate from the inhabitants
of Leek as a bona fide opposition to the hue.
Mr. M. SMITH objected to such surmis,s, and said that the opposi-
tion of Leek was net prompted by the Macelestiel.l Company, but
that their opposition existed before that company was incorporated.
The Committee decided that evidence in favour of a competing
line could not be Mini ted.
The Committee then adjourned.

GROUP XXIX.
This Committee assembled to-day at eleven o'clock—present, Mr.
Labouchere, Sir W. Molesworth, Sir J. Duckworth, Colonel Rawdon.
and Sir J. Smyth.
BOSTON, STANFORD, AND EIRMIATGHAM,
(STAMFORD 'llO vizsazc _.-z) LINE.
The Committee went through the clauses agreed to by the corpo-
ration of the Bedtbri Levels, and Ihe promoters, for the purpose of
securing the drainage of the land, and the reversion of the
property through which the line W 24 to pass to the original pro-
prietors at th, price fur which it aas sold, should they be desirous to
re-pu. chase, in case of the railway being abandoned.
The amended clauses were then read uric; im, and received the
signa,ure of the Chairman.
The report was al-o reset, and signed by the Chairman.
The Committee then separated, this being the last Bill referred to
them.

GROUP XXX.
This Committee assembled to-day likortly after twelve o'clock.
Present. Lord Charles Wellesley (chairman), and the other members
of the Committee.

CA74II3TI.IDGE AND OXFORD.
The evidence in tav ur ut th,s Liiil was adilu. ed.
The Rev. Charles Jenne, Head Master of Fri/Awoke College, Oxford,
examined—Was acquainted with the Cambridge and Oxford Railway.
liwould considered that undertaking wuu. be of the greatest advantage
to the students of the respective Universities, and would tend to
advance the interests of science. It would not ailed icjuriously the
property of either Universities.

lir. Ingram, President of Trinity College, was examined, and cor-
robora:ed the preceding testimony.
Cross-examined by Sir JOHN BATLEY—Considered that the line by
Bletchly was not as desirable as the present line.
Mr. J. W. Harley, M.P. for Oxford, examined—The line 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 the 'Aiming-
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. It would be
of great advantage if they could get coals from Newcastle, which
could be procured there for U. 6s. a ton. The proposed railway
would act less injuriously on the property through which it would
pass than any other litse with which he was acquainted.
Cross-examined—Dissented from all railways sonic time ago.
Would not avail himself of the Great Western Railway, even were
the rates on the same reduced. lie had been informed that the
cheapness at which they could procure coal would, next to the con-
veyance of passengels, be the greatest substantive benefit they would
reap irons the proposed railway.
Mr. J. Ashurst examined—Was a magistrate of Oxford, and
eldest son of Mr. Ashurst of Watercross, and expressed
the opinions of his father. IVatercross, where he resided, was nine
miles from Oxford, and between that and Theme. The proposed
ratilvaywould increase the- YMlte of property in the county, for they
would have an increased facility for the transit of their agricultural
produce, and would be enabled to procure coals at a moderate price.
The farmers in the county were in favour of the railway, and lie
considered that the same would be of the greatest benefit to them.
Knew the propose line between Theme and Oxford. There was a
number of populous villages around that plate, and he considered
that it was the most desirable situation that could be selected.
. _

Cross-exatnhied—Nrither he nor his father were provisional di-
rectors, or possessed Any shares in the proposed railway. His opi-
nions rev,: ectino., the railway were made with reference to Oxford and
his own neighbourhood.

The Um lir. Hughes, rector of St. Clement's, Oxford, is a mem-
ber of the University and resident at Oxtird, he col:sidered the
way would be 'most desirable. ' For literary and'sodil ptirposes he
considered that the inter-communication which it would..produce
between the students of the two universities would be most bellal-
dal, and un .ttended with the disadvantages which had been some-
tines stated would accrue.

Remembered that hi 1824 and 18M there were
Ntr. Nv:Eliitcexauiineq-- Was brewer and
I
uing ht opposition from Oxford to Cambridge. The tares were
maiStetirvoa'eoCaamebelt
lowered, ana ‘lll3 increased cons derahly the miin IX! of
eassenaers, and when one of them ceased to run, and the fares
rose, . he number or passengers dealrsasedconsbleratey; troth which he
Interred that the proposed railway would inc. ease to a great extent
the number ut passengers between Cambridge and Oxford. If the
proposed railway were established, trout the eaten' ations he had
from made,these two points he had no dou that there would be fifty passengers a, day
bt.
There was some a idi.ional evidence to the, same effect, after which
the Conituittee adjourned.

GROUP VII.
The Committee met thts day atXX o.leXo'clock, in No. 37 of the new
Committee Rooms. Present Lord Se, moor (chairman), Lord Ebring-
ton, and three other lion. 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 .roup for the day.
HeJR,33(7a.Y 8 fLIDGII AND CALDER.
This Bill was with !rawti, as was the

MANCZESTER, RUDDERS-2'lElLn, AND
G_-EAT GRIMSBY DIEXCT.
The Committee then lin.ctedefi with the
siimpr into), ROTHERHAM, aARNSLL■Y,
IiUDDE&BrIEZAD, AND
The form ,1 evidence was gone through, and the resolutions of the
Standing ordele Committee were put iu.

Mr. TALBOT addressed the Committee, on behalf of the promoters
of this measure, and said he .elieved the Committee would pet...wive the
importance of the district to which it was pro? oed to give accommo-
dation. The Bill would affor,l a convenient t to* the mineral pro-
ductions of the district. The Manchester and B tritsley project was
objected to h; the Lords' Committee, on the g Ittiad that it would not

-stifficTientiy open up the Barnsley and Silksto e coal tields. The length
of these ikds IVAS 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 emMent geologists to be a reappearanee of the Durham
seam. The existing lines did not give sufficient accommolatioe 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
ageicultural view, al7,e, 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 rick in minerals, forms the principal
part ut :he surface), to obtain an abundant and cheap supply of the
lime which they wanted so much for mauure. 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 8044,0001., and
the engineering fadlitles were very great. There was some
oposltton on the part of landowners, but he left that matter to the
witnesses, ail I called the attention of the Committee to the petitions
of th. vast m ii.rity of occupiers in favour of the Bill, lie then pro.
ceed
ierd to witnesses.
. G. Chambers, a walowner and member Qf a local geological
Society, gave evidence very strongly in favour of tile inea,ure, on
"'MI"
th': AWRY it would tuTvrd to, perhaps, the burst coal '

tad in En::land, the coal being of the hest quality. There was also
a great daal of iron ore of ge,..d quality, and the several ironworks at
present established woad ba greatly benefited by the line. The talvn
of Sheffield alone would save 53,0001. per annum in the cost of its
coal fur manufactui-ing and ether purposes, by obtaining their coal
by railway from this district. The railroads as y t formed in the
neighbourhood having driven off the stage-coaches, without suppl-
ing other ineatis of traffic to the district, hal done it considerable ia-
j-kry. . The proposed hne was greatly wanted, and woUI,I be highly
beneficitatp all the towns in the West Biding of Yorkshire.
Th,- witness was shown a petition in favour of the Bill, signed by
2.50„ s.c pus, who were, he said, the most respectable inhabitants of
Sheffield.
Cross-etafttined by Mr. PERIttNe, on the part of certain petitioners
against the Bill —The SLkstone bed extended to Sheffield, but in a
convulsed or disrupt.d manner. There Is a coal-pit at Shelled,
from which the coal was sold tor gas at 6a. 101 pea- ton. There was
a great demand for lime ;for manufacturing as well as agricultural
etahrrelmag,eelvwesasfosor
hyo
didut thenot dklitor,ivct
which. iut
wthaye
tocosttuorfn
it," Projected branches of the Shefi3eld and Manchecer line would
pgruert,steshatthr°' ,; ge
give some accommodation to this coal district, but not sufficient.
tie was not altogether aware of the details of that branch.
lie was not here to oppose the Barnsley branch of the
BheißeLl and Manchester. As a director of the Company
now before the Committee, he had moved a resolution that the
Barnsley branch should not be opposed by them. This Company
took neutral ground in respect to that branch. Then was
agree-
ment with the South Yorkshire Company that latter an
the was to make
the line scut h of Barnsley.
Cross-examined by Mr. LEE, fir the Millsn.
,Barnsley, Xieffield,
Dewsbury, and Bradfordline, hich is the parallel competin, line with this,
runtiln„ , to it for a considerable distance.
Lion
witness stated
although there was a circuitous water csrn. l •
nun con between Shef-
field and Barnsley, yet this did not touch
the coal pits, which, in fact,
had no canal accommal lat on. Sheffield received the largest part of Its
supply of coal from the estates of the Duke of Norfolk in ' the town
its elf or immediate neighbourhood. The Manchester and Leeds
Company wore to supply one-half of the capital. That was the ar-
r)ngement from the be.tinning.
The Committee then adjourned
at a quarter-past four, and will
meet to-morrow In room No. 21. -

GROUP XL.

The Committee met at one o'zlo.lc, Mr. Stafford O'Brien, chairman

NO:TrEt rz s TZIELN.

Mr. RAINES shortly 141..1 the merits of the project before t-te
Committee.

It is proposed that the line should start from Skipton, where it
joins the York and Lancaster and other lines, and passes by Kirby
Lonsdale, through the north-west of Lancashire into Westmoreland,
effecting a junction with the rail which lies between
Kendal and Penrith. A branch leaves the main trunk at Clapham
for the town of Lancaster, and an3ther branch proceeds from Kirby
Lonadale to Milnthorpe, at the head of Morccombe Bay. The length
of the main trunk is 36 mile!, the branch to Lancaster 18 miles, and
that to Miluthorpe 13 miles.
Witness ,s were examined to show the amount of traffic in coals
and Furness ore and manures fOr the land.

Mr. WnATELEY opposed the Milathorpe branch on behalf of the
proprietors on that part of the line, and shortly addressed the Com-
mittee.

The ro'm was afterwanls cleared. On being admitted parties
were ~,h1 that the Committee were of opinion that the preamble of
the Bill was proved, except so tar as_it referred to the branch from
Kirby Lonsdale to Milnthorpe.
The Committee then adjourned till to morrow.