The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-02 00:00:00

THE SUN, LIGI4DON,

Mr. Backhouse, a resident for a long period at Tadcaster, said that
than
iswould
rboeporns
eudchbymtohre Northcomm
e o3diiioduiasntdo
jtiutencpteloopnl,ewofhTicandwcasoultedr
the line
unnecessarily destroy an extensive quantity of meadow and pasture
land in that neighbourhood, that would not be done by that of this
Company. The construction of the rival line in question would
impede the navigation of the river running through Tadcaster, and the
inhabitants from past experience were very apprehensive of the floods
which it would occasion.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant WILKINs--Was a brewer and
farmer. Founded his observations with respect to the apprehension
of the inhabitants from what he gathered in conversation. Had not
heard that almost the whole of the inhabitants of Tadcaster had
petitioned in favour of the North Midland Junction, although
he had heard that a petition of that nature had been
presented to the House of Commons. Had not taken particular
trouble to ascertain the nature of that Company's works. He did not
think that the junction station would be more central than that of
the Leeds Extension line in that district. It would be necessary to
cross a bridge to arrive at Mr. Hudson's station, and also that of the
rival line. The first time he heard of Mr. Hudson's line was some
time after he heard of the North Midland Junction scheme.
The petition of the inhabitants of Tadcaster, referred to by the
Learned Sergeant, was Lere produced by the clerk of the Committee,
at his request. The petition contained a clause to the effect that the
petitioners were of opinion that the scheme of the promoters would
not at all interfere with the navigation of the river at Tadcaster.

The petition from Tadcaster in favour of the Leeds Extension
scheme was also produced, at the request of the counsel of that
company. _

Cioss:examination resumed—There were not many names of re-
spectability in the petition, though Mr. Robert Kirby, Mr. Upton,
Mr. W. J. H. Think, Mr. Ireland, Mr. Scope, Mr. Mathew Kidd, and
Mr. Follett, all of whose names appeared underneath the petition,
were men of considerable respectability.
Re•examined— Colonel Wyndham, who was decidedly one of the
most wealthy individuals in the neighbourhood of Tadeaster, pre-
ferred the Leeds Extension scheme. He was the owner of a consider-
able number of houses in that town. If these two schemes were
permitted Colonel Wyndham would have two railways passing
for a considerable extent through his estate, only 100 yards
distant (in some places) from each other. Mr. Matthew
Hobson, to whose name his Learned Friend had not drawn
his attention, was a very respectable chimney-sweeper.—(Laughter.)
One man named Simpson, who had affixed his mark, was often on
the parish, so also were Mr. George Eastwood (who spelt his name
with a little "e "), and Mr. Matthew Kidd. The petition in favour
of the Leeds extension scheme contained the names of three-fourths
of the most respectable inhabitants of Tadcaster, and that station
had been consieered as the most advantageous to them, and had in
fact been recommended by them.
G. HUDSON, Esq., M.P., the Chairman of the York and North
Midland Company, said that he was one of the Committee that was
appointed in 1833 to consider the best railway communication be-
tween York and Leeds. Heiwas a very active member of that com-
mittee. He and the committee gave the subject very considerable
attention; in fact, he pointed oat the line to their then
engineer, Mr. George Remington, who had recommended another
line, but after considerable discussion and a lapse of time
Mr. Stephenson, their present engineer, recommended the presen
scheme. The York and North Midiand Railway was opened to th
town of Leeds in 1839. The present route between York and Leeds
was very circuitous, and he had been often urged to propose a more
direct line of communication. This company's line had afforded
railway accommodation with the smallest loss of life of
any in the kingdom. The number of passengers between Leeds
and York during the last year was upwards of 72,000, and the
totaLrepelpts upwards of 20,0001. The local traffic was 8,0001. odd.
The working expenses were about 401. per cent., which was exceed-
ingly low, considering the nature and length of the line. The traffic
was not limited to people living between the two termini ; the line
afforded facilities to individuals carried beyond those termini.
This line would be a continuous one, the importance and
advantage of which could not be over estimated.
The Leeds and York Railway were dependent on the London and
York for communication with York. They would not be an indepen-
dent company. Assuming the London and York to pass, it would not
afford such communication to the Leeds and York Company as to
make the scheme manageable. The North Midland Junction scheme
would not benefit the public that wished to proceed from Leeds to
York. Their gradients were worse than those of this Company. The
estimated cost of the Leeds and York was 600,0001., which he felt con-
fident could not remunerate the promoters of that undertaking. He
could not see whence the dividend would arise. The expense of this
company's scheme would be 36,0001., and it would give the advan-
tage of a Marsh-gate station amongst others. He considered that a
railway in the district of Abbotford and Tadcaster should certainly pass
near such coal mines as those of the Misses Gaskin and others in
that district. The uniting of the Marsh-gate station with the Mid-
land station would be highly Important. This line would open out
the country traversed by the Church Fenton line, which was a matter
of considerable importance, and it would also supply the people of
Ilarrogate with coals. The construction of the North
Midland Junction scheme would in his opinion lead
to very great public inconvenience, and the remuneration
to the promoters would not be sufficient, as it would not be an inde-
pendent company. The gradients on it would also be very difficult.
It was not his custom to advertise or " puff " his schemes as other
companies usually did. He attended the meeting at Mr. Fox's with
his engineer and solicitor, at the urgent request of several gentlemen
in the neighbourhood of Tadcaster, and it was unanimously resolved
that this scheme was the best.

Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant Witnins—The express trains
that had been put on the present line of this company were certainly
not owing to the announcement of the scheme of the North Midland
Junction Company. He could not say whether they were first
started after or before the issuing of the prospectus. He considered
that his company had trains travelling as rapidly as it was possible
for railway engines to move them. The express trains were of no use
whatever to the intermediate stations, although the interme-
diate traffic increased in proportion to the facilities of commu-
nication afforded to intermediate districts. The North Midland
Junction would make use of six miles of an existing railway, whilst
this company would only use three miles. It was also desirable to
avoid inte►ruption to existing traffic, and that great importance ought
to be attached to good and easy gradients. He was chairman
of the Leeds and Bradford line, but the petition that had
been presented by that Company under his seal against any such
company as the Midland Junction was signed by him merely in his
official capacity. It was true that shares had been reserved for the
landowners of the district through which his line would pass.
Cross-examined by Mr. HARDY—He had been considering the ne-
cessity of some such line as that now proposed by him since the
year 1834. The line generally was chalked out, but nothing decisive
done until the meeting at Mr. Fox's. The delay occasioned at a
junction in the reduction of speed would not be more that a minute,
in his opinion. There was a considerable amount of traffic between
York and Manchester; and, assuming that the Huddersfield and
Manchester line were formed, the traffic intended for Manchester
would meet with a desirable conveyance along it. Curves caused
a slight wear and tear on engines, and it was necessary to slacken
the speed whilst passing over them,
Examined by Mr. KNOWLES (who appeared for certain landowners)
—lt was customary during the last two years to reserve shares to
owners of land through which a railway would pass, and the pro-
prietors of the company of which he was chairman authorised him
to make such allotments. The allotment of shares, however, was
not mentioned at the meeting at Mr. Fox's.
Mr. Birkenshaw, engineer of the line said, that he had been in
the railway world for the last seventeen years, under the superin-
tendence of Mr. itephenson. The York and Scarborough, and the
Churchfenton were made under his direction, The works
of this line in the neighbourhood of Tadcaster would not be
very difficult. From Tadcaster southward they used about five miles
of existing lines. Tadcaster was the most important town in that
district. The line would then proceed through Hazlewood, and
would thence proceed to the Leeds and Selby. There would be a
tunnel under Arlington Park, which would be made for the purpose
of inflicting the least residential injury on the owner. They then
made use of another existing line to the extent of five miles.
After that the works would be rather heavy in em-
bankments. The would then unite with the Bradford
Railway. The river Ayre would have to be passed. There was no
engineering work which deserved to be specially brought under the
notice of the Committee except the tunnel, the boring of which would
not ins olve any great difficulties. lie believed that he had secured
the shortest practicable communication between Leeds and York.
The existing companies over whose lines this scheme proposed to
pass were on terms of perfect amity with its promoters. Ills atten-
tion had been called to such a line as this in Sep-
tember, 1844. He considered the fact that this scheme would
give the choice of three stations in Leeds was of considerable
importance. This line would be constructed at about 21,0001. per
mile on the average, which would be much less than the expense of
the two other schemes. The expense of the tunnel would be 61,0001.,
which was a lower sum than works of a similar nature and extent
had cost. The consent of all the principal landowners along the line
had been obtained to its formation.

Cross-examined by Mr. Haunv—The delay occasioned by a junc-
tion on a line would be about five or six miles an hour. He would
supply the promoters o the rival schemes with an account of the
gradients on the line att. he next sitting of the Committee.
Mr. Sergeant Wimuss having suggested that the Committee should
now adjourn, they accordingly did so until Monday, he having pro-
mised, on the request of Mr. Knowles, to supply the other parties
with information respecting the North Midland Junction, similar to
that promised by Mr. Birkenshaw.

Sub-Committee, No. 1.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
BEIL.XSIIIRE AND HANTS (HITNOEXPOILD
EXTENSION).
In the case of this Bill the standing orders were declared not to
have been complied with.

STANDING ORDERS' COMMITTEES.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Their Lordships wet this day at the appointed hour; present, the
Earl of Shaftesbury (chairman), Lord Hawarden, and the Earl of
Ilchester.
LONDON AND BRIGHTON RAILWAY (EAST GRINSTEAD
BRANCH).
This was the first case which came under the consideration of their
Lordships. The requisite evidence having been gone through, and
Lord WhanicWe's standing order having been proved,
Lord SHAFTESBURY intimated that the Company had fulfilled the
standing orders, and that the Bill had passed.
This line is six miles and a half in length, and the capital is
160,0001. Parliamentary agents, Dorington and Co.
EXETER AND EXMOUTH RAILWAY.
This case, after occupying the attention of the Committee for some
time, was adjourned until Monday next. Parliamentary agents
Messrs. Dorington and Co.
SOUTH-EASTERN RAILWAY (RYE TO RYE HARBOUR.)
This, which is a very short line, merely connecting Rye with the
harbour, was the next case which came under the consideration of
their Lordships.
After hearing the usual evidence, the Committee decided that the
promoters had complied with the standing orders, and that the Bill
had passed. Parliamentary agents, Messrs. Burke, Pritt, and Co.
GLASGOW, PAISLEY, KILMARNOCK, AND AYR RAIL-
Their
Lordships adjourned the(No. bearing
of this case until prooft
should have been given of the estimates and declaration, all the other
necessary proofs having been given. When these are proved the line
will pass as a matter of course.
GLASGOW, PAISLEY, KILMARNOCK, AND AYR RAILWAY
AMENDMENT AND BRANCHES (No. 2).
This case was also adjourned from a similar reason to the pre-
ceding, as also was the
GLASGOW, PAISLEY, KILMARNOCK, AND AYR RAILWAY
AMENDMENT AND BRANCHES (No. 3).
EDINBURGH AND GLASGOW RAILWAY AMENDMENT
AND BRANCHES.
The Committee adjourned this case, for want of flirther proofs,
until Tuesday next.
The following Bills which came before their Lordships, on second
reference, were further adjourned till Tuesday next :—Clonmel and
Thurles Railway, Limerick, Ennis, and Killaloe Railway, Great
Southern and Western Railway, Ireland (Cork Extension), Mallow
and Fermoy Railway, Killarney Junction Railway, Mount Mellick
Junction Railway.
Their Lordships rose at half-past four o'clock.

RAILWAY BILLS and PROJECTS.
The following is an alphabetical list of railway companies
which have given notices of meetings, pursuant to the new
sessional orders of Parliament :
Ambergate, Nottingham, and Boston, and Eastern Junc-
tion Railway.
Ayrshire, Bridge of Weir, and Port. Glasgow Junction.
Birmingham and Oxford Junction.
Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley.
Buckinghamshire and Oxford and Bletchley Junction.
Cheltenham and Oxford.
Colchester, Stour Valley, Sudbury, and Halstead.
Dublin and Kingstown Extension.
Dublin and Sandymount.
East Coast.
East Lancashire.
East Lincolnshire.
Tottenham to Barnet
Stratford Stations Enlargement.
Eastern Counties, HertfoßrdraannedhesH,unatnidngdthone London and
.
Eastern Counties York Extension.
Eastern Counties and Thames Junction.
East
annddWyeosrtk.
Eastern r ou gh , and
Yorkshire Junction, Harrogate, Knarez-
b 0
Union and Hadleigh Junction.
Edinburgh and Glasgow.
Enfield and Edmonton.
Eastern Union.
Forth and Clyde Navigation.
Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle.
Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr.
Great Southern and Western (Cork Extension).
Great Western and Uxbridge.
Great Western and Wycombe.
Harwich and Eastern Counties Junction and Pier.
Ilford and Epping.
Killarney Junction.
Leeds and Bradford.
-Leeds and Carlisle and Yorkshire and Glasgow Union.
Leeds, Wakefield, and Midland Junction.
London and Brighton, Dorking and other Branches.
London, Newbury, and Bath Direct.
L
Londonl
aa3, nt
col rhnVe
saaat
ennl
drld Windsor
Dyaa and South o
Junction.
uthneWt
Southampton.oa lne. s Junction.
London and South Essex.
d
Mallow and Fermoy.
MManchester, Burton, Matlock, and Midlands Junction.
Manchester and Birmingham Branch Railways and Arnal
gamatioia.
Midland and Eastern Counties.
Mountmellick Junction.