The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-23 00:00:00

LINE

Sub-Committee, No. 2.

This Committee met to-day shortly after twelve o'clock
present Sir J. Y. Buller, (Chairman,) Mr. Bell, Mr. Brain
ston, Mr. Kemble, and Mr. Walker.
CHELMSFORD A D BURY.

Mr. GRUBBE (agent for the petition, thecOnsideration of
wt ich was commenced, but not concluded on Friday) s :id
that as a question had arisen with reference to the manner in
which the petitioners' engineers had checked the levelF, they
(the petitioners) would consent to have the consideration of
the remaining allegations postponed till !he line had been
examined by one or two competent engineers, the expence of
which they would defray. This course of proceeding had
been sanctioned in a case before the House of Lords.
The Committee were i.f opinion that the case had better
be proceeded with, and the couside,ation of the temaioing
allegations was then resumed.

The first allegatit.n was, that there was an error of 8 feet
at the sth mile, 7th furlong, and 6th chain, on the datum
line at the surface.
Evideuve %KS adduced in support of the allegation, and the
room was cleared.

The CHAIRMAN (on our re-admission) said that the Com-
mitteß were of opinion that in this case the standing orders
had been complied with, the surface of the ground at toe
point specified being shown on the plan in question.
There was another allegation to the sauce effect with re-
ference to the sist mile 6th furlong and 4th chain, which
was sustained.
Some similar allegations were abandoned.

The next class of alegations was that the radius of the
curve at various points was not slmwn on the plan deposited
with the Clerk of the Peace fur Essex, one instance of which
was adduced and sustained.

There was another allegation to the same effect with re-
spect to the plan deposited with the Clerk of the Peace for
Suffolk, one instance of which was sustained.
It was next alleged that the change f gradient on the
Stowmarket branch at the eighth mile, seventh furlong, and
eighth chain, was riot shown on the said plans.
Evidence was heard in support of this allegation, which
was sustained.

Another allegation to the rime effect was sustained.

Sub-Committee No. 6.

This Committee resumed its sittings at twelve o'clock t;)
day, in Room No. 11. Present, Captain Jones (in the chair),
Mr. Pakington, and others.
The following additional Bills have been referred to
them, viz. :

Blackburn, Clitheroe, and North Western Junction.
Blackburn, Darwent, and Bolton.
Huddersfield and Sheffield Junction (Dar&ld Branch).
Kiurcss Jurction (A).
Southampton and Dorchester.
Cameron's Coalbrook Steam Coal, and Swansea and Loughor.
Scottish Southern Termini.
Lesmahagow, Wised, and Coatbridge Mineral Junction.
The.first called on was the
DZACZBURN, cxaTzinzon, AND NORTH-

WESTEILN aUNCTrozr,
against which the petition of a Mr. William harper and two
other parties had been lodged, but no parties appearing on
their behalf, the Chairman directed the clerk to enter "no
appearance" in respect those parties.
rhe object 4,f the Bill is an extotsi.,n of the Blackburn,
Dar .ven, and Bolton Railway to the Leeds and Bradford
Extension Railway, and to the North Wes'ern Railway,
This line will connect Blackburn, Clitheroe, Gisburne,
t.etale, Bradford, and the ueigaouuriug ualumfacturiog tons

The CHAIRMAN declared the standing orders to have Leen
complied with. The length of the line is 12 miles; Cat esti-
mated cost 160,000/., or at an average of nearly 12,0001. per
mile. Engineer, Mr. Gale; Solicitor, Mr. Lamont; Parlia-
mentary agent, Messrs. Dein:s, Dunlop, and Hope.
PAISTAZY, ,NARRIIMAD, AND NURIET
LINZ.
There were two petitions against this line, alleging non-.
compliance with the standing orders; one from Sir J. Max
well, which was withdrawn, and the other from Mr. P. M.
Stewart, whose agent appear-d. The object of this line is
to connect the village of Barrhead with Paisley and the
mineral districts; the length of the line is 12 miles, and the
estimated coat 195,0004, on an average of 14,0001. per mile,
including branches. Engineer, John Mitten, Esq.; Parlia-
mentary agents, Messrs. Deans, Dunlop, and Hope.
Mr. P. M. Stewart's agent, contended that there was dis-
crepancy between the datum line on the section and the
actual mode in which the line would traverse a bridge, which
cro,sed a river in Renfrewshire. A witness was called, who
deposed as to a mien-description in the section. The parapet
of the bridge was formed of iron railing, horizontal and up-
right ; but that it would be impossible to understand from the
description in the section, whether the proposed railway was
to run below the level of the railing of the bridge or upon a
level of it.
Mr. George Martin, the engineer, who prepared the section,
deposed that he conceived the description in the section to
be sufficient, and that the term "railing," as applied to a
bridge, was such as ne Scotch engineer could mistake.
The room was cleared for a division, and on re-admittance
the Committee declared that the objection did not hold good,
though they conceived that the description might have been
better.
The next objection was somewhat of a similar character,
and the error was admitted by the agent to the Bill.
The next allegation wasiliat the miles were not numbered
on the map, but were distinguished by crosses, which was also
admitted.
The next allegation was that the plan and section differed,
inasmuch as that the plan described a certain distance be-
tween two given points, as 5 miles 5 furlongs while in the
section the same distance was tiescribed as 7 miles 6 furlongs.
The agent to the Bill said he admitted the allegation, but
in the Bill he had limited the said distance to that marked
in the plan.
Standing order not complied with.
Several other allegations of Llie same character were made,
and declared by the Committee to have been proved, and the
standing orders net complied with.
The agent stated that all these discrepancies had been
corrected in the plan deposited in the Private Bill- office