The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-13 00:00:00

that the Bill to authorise arrangements between the London '
and Birmingham Railway Company and the proprietors of
the Birmingham Canal Navigation was before the meeting,
The CHAIRMAN of the latter Company stated that the
arrangements between these Companies were calculated to
be highly satisfactory, not only to those interested in them,
but to the country generally. A very great increase of
traffic would flow on to the Birmingham and London
Railway; in consequence of not less than four million tons
of iron having been conveyed upon the canal in the course of
the past year, and this amount would probably be greatly
increased on account of the readier access to the great mar-
kets of the kingdom. He deprecated the contests which were
constantly arising between great companies, and belicvEd
that a majority of the ephemeral schemes of last year owed
their origin to these disputes.
Mr. LEDWORTH thought that they ought to reduce their
freights to the utmost, tor not only hid they to compete with
the Great Western but with another powerful Company, the
Direct Manchester, and when he said that the promoters if
that Company were business men, he need only mention
the fact that many of them belonged to the L ague.
The CHAIRMAN was not aware that the supporters of that
line were members of the Anti-Corn-law League. Ile did
know that they were Manchester merchants, who looked
more to the facility that would be given for the transmis-
sion of their goods than to the comfort of their passengers.
Mr. CnosswAmnc proposed a vote of thanks to the Chair-
man and Directors, which was carried unanimously.
The CIIAIR3IAN then briefly returned thanks, and incident-
ally stated that the London and Birmingham fares were, in
the year 1846, as compared with 1844, as follows t—Fint-
class passengers paid now exactly what they had in 1844
paid for a second class conveyance. In 1544 they paid to
Birmingham for the first-class 605., and in some carriages
655., now they paid 265. 4d. ; while for the second-class they
paid 50s. and 405., which was now reduced to 18s. 6d.
After some further observations the meeting separated.

RAI LW AY COMMITTEES.
(THIS DAY.)

Sub •Committee No 1.
THE LEICESTER AND EIFIDFORD.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Mr. BURKE next proceeded on the petition of a Mr•
Turner. a landowner on the line.

Mr. CoATES objected to the petition being gone into. The
petitioner Mr.:Turner, had on the previous evening petitioned
the House of Commons to have his name withdrawn from
the petition—in fact lie was not now an opponent. •
Mr. BURKE said that he had to complain of a non-compli-
ance with the standing orders on a point which affected the
public. The survey of the property belonging to Mr. Turner
was not properly executed, inasmuch as the fences or
boundaries of the property was not shown on the plans and
sections. This, in fact, amounted to a very grave breach of
the standing orders, inasmuch as the plan was drawn from a
wrong survey, and was calculated to mislead the Committee
and the public. The property so drawn must have been
wrongly described in the books of reference.
Mr. COATES pressed upon the Committee the fact of the
petitioner having withdrawn the petition against the Bill.
The room was then cleared, and upon the parties having
been called in, _ _

The CHAIRMAN, after having consulted with Sir
William Heathcote, chairman of Sub-Gummi:tee No.
4, said that the Committee had given the point
raised their most serious consideration, as it was one
which might arise in many other inquiries. rile Committee
were of opinion that the allegation, in to far as it applied to
the public, should be entertained.
Mr. BURKE then called a witness to prove that several
fields divided by fences were shown as one field, the fences
havi:.g been altogether omitted.
Mr. COATES would again press the fact of the petitioner
having withdrawn his opposition.
• Mr. BURKE. said that it was a point of practice where a
petition was presented to the House for withdrawing a pre-
vious petition, unless the House referred such petition to the
Committee, it could not weigh in the inquiry.
Mr. COATES then read the petition.
The CHAIRMAN said, that it was clear the petition was not
referred to the Committee, which was the usual course. _

Mr. COATES said that the petition was only presented the
previous evening, ►►hen it was ordered to lie on the table of
the House, so that there was not time to have it referred to
the Committee.

The room was then cleared, but the decision of the Com-
mittee was conveyed privately to the agents. The point
was no doubt decided in favour of Mr. Burke, as he was
allowed to proceed on the allegations.
Mr. BuriKE called other witnesses to prove that the fences
on the property of Mr. Turner were not shown.
The allegation was sustained, and several others were al-
lowed. •

The Speaker having been announced at prayers, the Corn
mittce adjourned till twelve o'clock on Monday.

Sub-Committee ..tio. 2.
WEST Rl= G UNION.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)

The room was then cleared. On our re-admission,
The CHAIRMAN said the Committee were of opinion that
the parties were not at liberty to give evidence with respect
to the level of the scales, and that the standing orders iu this
case had not been complied with.
The remaining allegations were of a similar character.
The CHAIRMAN said the Committee were of opinion that
in the case of the West Riding Union Railway the standing
orders had not been complied with.
The Committee adjonrned till Tuesday, at twelve o'clock.