The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-28 00:00:00

CORNWALL.

- .
Mr. HuNT, jun., appeared for the promoters of thii lips, and
c.alled.several witnesses to prove
.the depositing of the plan" and sec-
tions, and books of reference.
The formal points of this Bill having been gone throng% the further
proceedings were postponed till twelve o'clock ou Monday. •
minors Eximr."7*.ntattplr-cztAzzivrobairs zairrs
CANAL (sn it worgszturvtrion) svArrortn);.
Mr. Pritt, jun., conduced the case for theLpromotcrs.
The Bill was unopposed, and the fornial"proas, having heel} given,
the Committee declared. Chat the standing tirdera; had lieeu coin-
plied with. •
The Committee then adjourned till twelve o'clock'on Monday.

.Sub-Committee No. 2.
This Committee met to-day shortly alter twelve o'clock. There
were present Sir J. Y. Buller (Chairman), Messrs. Bell, Walker; at.d
Kemble

~. . . .
MDINI3I7I.GII, GLASGOW, - AND -DITIYIBAR-
ToivisztinE. .
, .
.. The consideration of the 'petitions (one of which was disposed of On
.. .
Wednesday last) against theißillwas resumed. . n
'ein ,
The first petition take was thfro thilrtistees of Ihe'Durnbar-
totishiro highway, ilia:ging that due &hied had not been Served' on
them of the proposed line, in CoMbrnalty With thit Act ofTarliernerit:
Mr. Graham appeared in support of, and 11r. Venable, against, the
petition. • .•
Mr. Grieve Was ..examined to Jihow► thtt. he',lhid. story' ed notice on
the clerk of the trustees, sir. 'PCs:ulster. C.
; • . ' ~-4' • ' '-. ' '
Mr. INVlCenizie IVltil elamined'ti`sho'iv that M. 11` runistef•never
acted in the capacity deseribed. ,- • • . . 4,-:
Mr. Gsattam 'said las-thought the fact..vrienomproyed,Oeyond all
doubt. • i •
Mr. Grieve was re-examined, and stated that lie had ,served the
notice in question. - Mr. M`Canistei was the,:clerk—iif 'one' of the.
districts. ,
Mr: GRAHAM contended that lir. Mr`Canistei Wat'not',..the' clerk of
'the district' in question; ind.adduced evidelice te- show the fadt. .
• The Committee .fotnid that'llus stindaig orders id this case were

not complied with. : H , • ' • ' • s •• • • •
There was another allegation, with raw t to ,the turnpike-Louse
in the same district, in Unimitterfound that the allega-
tion *as sustained.
This was the last allegation,in this petition.'
The next petition taken into consideration was from the fituitgos of
the Kilmarnock district of roads, whielkallege&that the proposed hue
crossed the road twice, first with the in4zits'line, arid:next with the,
branch, and that notice of the latter crossing had not been served on:

the trustees. .
Evidence was .p-roduced,liett - the .Conamitteo found - that, the
allegation was not sustained. ": ." •
There: was another ialletation•toilte cants &Sept; which was sus

tained.
There were two allegatiens, namely, that the plan deposited in the -
office of the I:sheriff's clerk forintnibarton, and 10 marked int
the Private Bill-office, were omitted, which were sustained.'- •
It was 'alleged also that there 'was a similar ihacceracy. :iith respect
to the
.section- marked 2'ehains in the plan deposited in the-Private
Bill-office, which .was sustained. • - •
It was. alio alleged that near the terminas at Glasgow the radius
of the . curve two , furlongs was not markCd in the said plait and
duplieite.
This' allegation was admittad on the part 'of Mr. Venable*, agent
for the promoters.. .
There were several similar allegations,et diserepencybetween the
plans in question, which were sustained. „ •. •' - •
The next petition, was from AlOcandei Smollett,_ and ellegee
that the plan
.:odged in the Private' 13ill=ofllcE differeit NOM that: de-
POsited in the office of the.Clerli of The PeaCe for Dumbarton, where-
as the Act‘requiresi that'they shoiffd be copiers. •
'The Committee' baying inspected the Private Bill-ernes plan, found
that the allegation was not sustained., • • • • .
There was a similar, allegation with respect to section, described .as
4, which waszot sustained.. . •
limas allegedihat'there was a discrepancy between theßlars with
reference to the datum line.
Mr. lily, engineer, wa4 ambled in !supPort' of this allegation,
which the Committee,feund to be sustained in the case of the line to
the dyeworks. , • . ,
There was a similar allegation of inaccuracy with respect to the
distances on the sane section, which was sustained. '
It was allege that on the plan deposited in the office of the clerk
of the peace there Was an omission of the section marked L on. 'the
_ plan deposited in the Pi•ivate Bill-office; Which was sustained. •
•The licit allegation was to the ;same effect, but was abandoned,
the Committeonot'considering it sufficiently specific. ,
• . The t>gXt class of allegations lied reference to the leirels.
It was dllegea.thatat outpart oftag line na.melY, 231 there-was
an error of ee,-)12 feet.
The CHAIRMAN, after hearing some svldoneo pm atm cod.,
said that the Committee were of opinion that they
should not give any decision on this point until the notes of the par-
ties employed to check the line were produced.
Mr. VENABLE-5 objected to the production of them, and some dis-
cussion ensued, which ended in the Committee deciding that the pro-
moters should produce so much of their notes as had
the portion of the line in question to be argued before the Com-
. . ,

mitfee.
Mr. Venal)les agreed to this, and the consideration of this allega-.
tion was postponed.
It was also alleged that at the several places there was an inac-
curacy in the plans deposited with the clerks of the peace for the
counties through which the line was to pass, which was sustained.
There was another allegation of a similar character, which the
Committee considered not to be sufficiently specific.
The next class of allegations was, that there had been a non-
compliance with the standing orders, the necessary notices not having
been served in various instances.
It was alleged that the notice had been served on the petitioner
with respect to No. 32, in the parish of Dunbarton, and No: 237, in
the parish of Cardrop, which were to be intersected by the proposed
railroad.
Tae Committee considered the allegation was not sustained.
There was another allegation to the same effect, which was sustained.
The Committee then adjourned, shortly after four o'clock, till
twelve o'clock en Monday.

Sub-Committee No. 3.
This Committee resumed its sittings at the usual hour this morn-
ing, Mr. Aglionby in the chair.
WELSH MIDLAND.
The cOnsideratien of this case was resumed,' and the Committee,
finding that the plans deposited, on the 30th of November, with the
clerks of the pcace were so full of defects as to render them almost
useless, the promoters of the Bill, who were represented by Mr. Bax-
ter, determined upon abandoning them altogether.
The Committee therefore proceeded to take evidence in favour of
the plans deposited on the 31st of December, and the whole of the
day was occupied with this description of testimony.
Mr. Efrain was allowed to appear for the original petitioners
against the scheme, namely, the Earl of Jersey and the Corporation
of Worcester, and assisted by Mr. S. Hughes, the engineer on behalf of
the petitioners,he succeeded in proving to fhe Committee that there
were omissions and defects even in the plans alleged to have been ex-
amined and checked by Mr. Sidney Hall, who personally laid out the
line, and deposited on the 31st of December.
The case had not terminated when the Committee adjourned.

Sub-Committee We. 5.
The Committee met at half-past twelve this-clay ; present Mr,
Home Drummond, (Chairman), • the O'Conor Don, Mr. G. Phillips,
Mr. 11. E. Compton, Mr. Tatton Egerton,
,Mr. Forbes Mackenzie.
and Mr. Cornwall Leigh.
!APACIUMROATA, AND
noirrorr.

- _
The further hearing of this cue, from yesterday, was resumed,
and the petition of several persons against this line was entered into.
• The next allegation brought forward this merniug was, that in the
parish of Boston the height of the proposed railway over a certain
carriage-road was not shown.
Mr. Thomas Harrison, surveyor of highways, was called, but he
did not prove the road was a public ono, as it only led to private
property. He was in the habit of repairing it, and the expense was
charged to the parish.
Mr. Rice, a solicitor, of Beaton, was called, but said he never saw
any carriage pass ever it.
The Committee decided it was a public road, but whether a car-
riage road they would not for the present decide.
The next allegation was that a certain place in the said parish was
not mentioned in the book of reference and that there were no cross
sections laid down.
Mr. Underwood, an engineer, pointed out the cross sections on the
plan, and the Committee decided the standing orders were complied
with in respect to this railway.
CRESTED. AND MANCHESTER DIRECT.
Mr. DLITT, agent to the line, begged for a postponement as they
were not prepared before Monday to enter into the proofs. The
Committee would not comply, and decided that the standing orders
were net complied with, inasmuch as the proofs required were not
given by the promoters of the line.
TITANESS AND wrArnEsvizaz.
The object of the promoters of this line is to extend the Kendal and
Windermere Railway to Parma, a distance of 17 miles fritiflongs,
the estimated amount being 252,0001., and the amount of the sub-
scription contract 198,540/.
The Parlitunentary agent is Mr. Ellicombe, and its formation was
opposed by Mr. Pritt on behalf of James Mackhill and William
Townley, petitioners against the Bill. '
There were a great number of allegations made by the petitioners
that the standing, orders were not attended to. The first objection
was that the plan and reference book deposited were not in accordance
with the standing order, as there was no datum point shown.
This objection was overruled.
The next allegation was, that a certain field, marked 500 on the
map,twas stated to be 507 in the book of reference.
Mr. EuLICOMBE admitted that it was so, but it was only a clerical

error.
Standing order not complied with.
Several allegations were then passed over by Mr. 'NUT, until
l
he came to the following : that the distances marked in
and furlongs on the datum line did not correspond with those marked
on the plan, inasmuch as the crossing of a road, maked 508 :—the
In this case a diverging of the proposed
sections, was not shown.
line took place, for the purpose of avoiding the formation of a bridge.
Allegation sustained.
The next objection, that an enclosure No. 214 was not described in
the book of reference, and is within the limits of deviation, was ad-
mitted.
The Speaker was then announced to be at prayers, and the Com-
mittee adjourned the further hearing of the case until twelve o'clock
next Monday.

Sub-Committee No. 6.
This Committee resumed its sittings at two o'clock this den'
present, Captain Jones (in the chair), Mr. Deedes, and others.
WEST LONDON TENSION.
AND EX-
TENSION.
This case had been adjourned from Wednesday, and after some
customary proof had been handed in, it was again postponed for the
production of further documents. We gave the particulars of this
line some days ago.

TAPP VALE.
whsn we gat
This was also a postponed case from Wednesday,
the object of the Bill, Bcc.
Standing orders complied with.
WORCE STER AND PORT DYNLL
This A.EN.
was also an adjourned case.
In consequence of the absence of some witnesses, the deeisi(ll
was postponed until they were forthcoming.
SOUTH WALES RAILWAY (NO. II).
There being some doubt whether this case did not properly belong
to Sir J. Y. Bullet's Committee, it stood adjourned.
The COMlZattet 01•11 AdJeliniad uutil 12 o'cloclt on DialCiay.
• •