The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-18 00:00:00

Real del Monte, Unregistered .. .... 4 ..
.. 10 .. 22xd
United Mexican .. 281. 2s. 8% d.. 4%xj..

RAILWAY COMMITTEES
(THIS DAY)

Sub-Committee, Is-o. 2.
Tills Committee met to-day shortly after twelve o'clock.
There were present—Sir J. Y Buller (Chairman), Mr. Brarnsten,
Mr. Walker, Mr. Elliot Yorke, Mr. Gibson Craig, and Mr. litmb'e.
COVENTRY, NUNEATON, BIRMINGHAM,

AND LEICESTER•
The bearing of the petitions against this Bill was resumed.
Mr. Coates represented the promoters, and Mr. Thomas appeared
on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Charles Banbury.
The first allegation was, that there was au inaccuracy in the
cilium line in the second furlong of the first mile.
Ranford examined—The length of the datum line was eighty-
eight chains, and the inclination was one in 299. . _

• •
1116 Committee considered that in this case the standing orders
were complied with. . _ _

. - --
There was another allegation to the sane effect, which was ad-
mitted by the agent for the promoters.
The next allegation was, that the plan deposited in the Private
Bill-office was not the same as that deposited in the office of the
clerk of the peace in Warwick.
This allegation was admitted likewise.

The next allegation was, that the book of reference deposited in
the Private Bill-office did not contain the names of the owners in
sections 41, 45, and 46 A, in the pat ish of Folshill.
The Committee considered the allegatio:l sustained.
It was also alleged that notice had not been served on the owners
of the property in the sections
Thomas Harris was examirod, and proved that he had not been
served. Other evidence to the same effect was given.
The Committee were of opinion that the standing orders had not
been complied with in some of the cases adduced.

One of the petitioners had revoked his consent to the petition, and
a tlixannent was read by Mr. Coates which was dated the liith inst.
fir. coal es contended that the can in question was analogous to
that decided in Mr. Strutt's Committee.
Mr. TuoMes contended that the revocation produced could not be
taken.

After some further discussion, the Committee decided that a party
petitioning was entitled to revoke his consent.
Several other allegations were abandoned.
it was alleged that on the third furlong of the seVenteenth mile
the embankment was not marked.
The-Comrrattte found that the standing order? ha.lnetheca cora-
lalled with in this cane.
There were similar allegations with respact to the sixth furlong of
mile.in which were
the
mot,„o, ile, and the sacor..l furlong of tne tweaty-sccond
m ta4t sustained .
It
ent wasp: also
all
egcd that the extrenie depth of cutthrxs, in dif-
ferent was not marked, wl.icil w 43 abaillollel, 43 w
reral other ijalll3r alkaatiqw.
ell LA,!;r

There was another petition from George Wheeler, alleging that
so much of the plans and book of reference, as related to the parish
of Aston-Plaubil, had not been deposited with the parish clerk.
Mr. J. Pesszs supported ti:e petition.
The parish clerk was called, and proved that the plans, &c., were
deposited, but not till January last.
The allegation was not sustained, as well as several others of the
same n Attire. _

The Committee found that the standing orders had not been com-
plied with by the Company.
Engineer, Mr. Addison; Parliamentary agents, Messrs. Dyson
and Co. ; solicitors, Messrs. Bridges and Mason.
LEEDS AND YORE.

There were three petitions against this Bill, in support of whieh
no one appeared,

The formal evidence was then gone through, from which it ap-
pearel that the estimate was 5E5,000/.
The Committee found that the standing orders had been complied
with the exception of the certificate of registration.
The Committee adjourned shortly alter four o'clock till twelve
o'clock on Friday.

Sub-Committee, No. 3.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
x.nrzEpoom_AND PRESTON, AND MIN..

CHESTER AND SOUTHPORT.
The petitioners in this ease sought for power to make a railway
commencing at a point on the Liverpool and Bury Railway, near
Liverpool, to the North Union Railway, near Preston, also another
railway from Southport to Manchester, with various branches. The
total estimated cost was 1,600,000/,
The Cupiamsx stated that in this, as in the case of another rail-
way (the Wavency Valley and Great Yarmouth), alternate
sections had been deposited, which caused great uncertainty
and confusion to the persons who would be affected
by the Bill. In the present case the irregularity complainei of wus
in the plans and sections of one of the proposed braticbes. The
Committee also took an objection to the non-service of a notice
within the proper time. The Omission had been caused
in consequence of the notice being sent to Newcastle-on-Tyne,
wheras tlic party, for whyin it was intended, was residing at New-
castla under-Lyne.

In both these eases the Chairman dczided that the standing orders
had not been eomglied with.

SHREWSBURY, OSWESTRY, ANE CHESTER

JUNCTION.

The object sought by the promoter of this Bill was the power to
construct a railway front Weinai to Crick-heath. The estimated cost
was 208,0001.
Standing orders complied with.
SIMEWSBITRY, OSIVES rim, AND CHESTER
=NOTION ExTrarsxons AND DEVIA-
TIONS.
This case was precisely the same as the former one, with the ex-
ception of the extension and deviation.
Standing orders complied with.
EAST LOTHIAN CENTRAL AND TYNE
_ _