The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-07 00:00:00

WEST LANCASHIRE.

The object of the Eat is to connect Liverpool with the watering
town of t;emthport. The length of the proposed line Is 17 miles ; the
cost Is estimated at 200,0001. The engineers are Mr. Bidder and Mr.
J. Lowe; Messrs. Parkes, Costes, and Co., are the Parliamentary
agents ; and Messrs. Earle and Barry, of Manchester, are the solicitors
to the Bill.

Mr. Pam' appeared in support of a petition from five persons, con-
taining the usual allegations as to defects in the plans, sections, and
book of reference. _ _ _

Mr. Coe'rEs, for the promoters, opposed the reception of the peti-
tion, on the ground that four of the petitioners had presented to the
House a counter-petition for leave to withdraw their names from
that which Mr. Pritt now proposed to press upon the Committee,
the filth petitioner, Mr. Johnson, the solicitor to an adverse railway
company, not being an owner or occupier of land within the limits of
deviation, nor otherwise having any interest which could entitle him
to be heard against the hill.
After some lengthened discussion the room was cleared, and the
Committee deliberated.
On the re-admission of the parties,

The Cfmtamart announced that the Committee decided to hear the
petitioner, and
Mr. Pairr proceeded with the allegations.
After hearing evidence in support of the petition, the allegatiene
were sustained in several instances, and the standing orders were
declared not complied with.
The Committee then proceeded with the case of the
SOUTE DEVON (No. IL)

The object of this Bill is to authorise certain alterations in, and
extensions of, the South Devon Railway, and the formation of
branches therefrom to Tavtstock, Brixham, Kingswear, and several
other places.
There are in all seven branches of lengths varying from fifteen to
twenty miles- The engineer is Mr. Brunel ; the agents are Messrs.
Burke, Pritt, Venables, and Co. ; the solicitors are Messrs. Howe
and Runt, of Whitehall, London ; Messrs. Whiteford, Hervite, and
Tucker, of Plymouth ; and Messrs. Button and Kennaway, Of
Exeter.
The formal evidence having been gone through,
Mr. PAmtks appeared to support the petitions of the Rev. Mr.
Searle and Mr. Watts.
The allegations were not sustained.

In consequence of the absence of witnesses ou the part of the pro-
moters, the further consideration of the case was postponed till to-
morrow morning.

The ConlinMee then proceeded with the consideration of the
DIRECT NORTHERN.

The object of this Bill is to form a direct line from London to York,
with branches to Bedford, Huntingdon, Peterborough, Newark, Lin-
coln, Sheffield, and Leeds.
The length of the line, with the branches, is 263 miles. The cost
is estimated at 5,400,0001.
John Millar is the engineer. The agents are Messrs. Webster and
Co. ; and the solicitors are Messrs. Johnstone, Farquhar, and Leach.
The formal evidence having been received,
The Committee adjourned at four o'clock till twelve o'clock to-
morrow.

Sub-Committee No. 2.

The Committee met to-day at twelve o'clock in room No. G. Pre•
sent, Sir J. Yard° Buller, Mr. Kemble, Mr. Brainston, and other lion.
3lembers. They resumed the consideration of the

Sub-Committee No. 4.
This Committee assembled at twelve precisely, Sir W. Heatheote
in the chair, and proceeded with the adjourned ease et the

_
7..ATINCZBTON AND SOUTH DNVON (NO. IX.)
It will be remembered that the formal proofs in respect of this Bill
were commenced, but not perfected, on Friday last. No evidence was
offered of the deposit of plans and sections at the offices of the clerks of the
peace for the counties of Cornwall and Devon, through which the line
passes; but it was explained by Mr. Burke that plans and sections
had been deposited, which, being found to be inaccurate and useless,
were abandoned by the promoters of the Bill, and other plans, &c.,
deposited in lieu of them. These latter were, however, not deposited
until the middle of December. It was the intention of the promoters
to leave it to the sub-Committee to report that no evidence had been
given of the deposit of plans with the clerks of the peace, and then
the promoters could put forward the fact of the deposit of plans in
December, in their statement to the Standing Orders' Committee,
who would, they hoped, admit them as sufficient.
The Committee now proceeded to hear the case in support of a
petition against the line, being that of two owners and occupiers
of land. _ _

-- -----
Mr. &Wm objected to the hearing of this case, as he said he was
prepared to show that the petitioners, one of whom was the attorney
to the promoters of a competing railway, were not " owners,
lessees, and occupiers" of land upon the line; but as he admitted that
he could net prove that the attorney to the other line was not
a lessee of land, the Committee were of opinion that the petition
must be entertained, but only as on the part of one petitioner.
Mr. ELLICOMBE, who appeared in support of the petitioner, called
the clerk of the peace for Devon to give evidence in support of a
number of allegations, to the effect that the plans deposited with him
were Incorrect ; that they contained no datum line, that there was
no scale, &c. The clerk produced the plans, and proved that they
were deposited on the 29th November.
Mr. Buaxa said, that it was needless to enter into the allegations
of this petition, as it was admitted that the plans a ere generally
incorrect, and the promoters did not rely on them.
The Committee were of the same opinion, but Mr. ELLICOMBE in-
sisted on giving evidence in support of all the allegations that were
not admitted by Mr. Burke. Having gone through that part
of the petition that referred to the plans, and giving several
violent " kicks" to the " dead horse," proceeded to allegations re-
ferring to the books of reference, &c.
These allegations having been disposed of, the Committee declared
the standing orders not complied with.

EAST AND WEST OP ENGLAND ZITECTION.
This Bill was called on, and the formal proofs occupied the Com-
mittee up to the time of their adjournment.
The Committee rose at a quarter past three o'clock, and adjourned,
as we understood, until after Easter, but did not fix their day of
meeting.

Sub-Committee, No. 6.
This Committee met in room 12, at the usual hour. Captain
Jones in the chair. Present also Mr. Deeds', Mr. T. Egerton, and
Mr. Phillips.

NONTNAMPTON AND BANBURY.

This Bill was originally placed on thy list of Sub-Committee No. 5,
but as that Committee did not meet this morning the Bill was re-
ferred to No. 6. _

......__ _ _
air. CoeTra, on the part of the promoters of the Bill, said he was
not prepared to meet the allegations of the petitions against the
Bill, as, understanding that all the Bills in the list of Sub-
Committee No. 5 were adjourned until the Thursday after Easter, he
had not considered it necessary to have his witnesses in attend•
an ce.

Mr. T. EGERTON said that he was a member in No. 5 at the time,
and that although the Committee adjourned till after Eatter, they
said nothing about adjourning any Bill except that under consider-
ation at the time. Indeed the question having been put to Mr.
Frere, the clerk to the Committee, whether the ether lines were
adjourned, he replied that the Committee had nothing to do with the
other lines until they were called on.
Mr. COATES said that he was totally unprepared to go on, and
hoped the Committee would adjourn the ease.
As the petitioner refused to consent to the adjournment,
The CHAIRMAN said that the case must be proceeded with ; but
after much discussion, the petitioner consented to the adjournment,
on condition that the promoters of the Bill should pay the costs in
curred by the attendance of the witnesses to-day. The case was ac-
cordingly **owned.

IPSWICH, NORWICH, AND YARMOUTH.
This is a Bill to connect Norwich and Yarmouth with Ipswich, at
which place it will form a junction with the Ipswich and Bury line.
Its length will be seventy miles, and the cost is estimated at 855,0001.
The engineer is Mr. Rennie, and the agents arc Messrs. Dorrington.
Mr. Coates appeared as agent for several petitions against the line.
The first allegation against the Bill was that the point to which the
datum line was referred was not sufficiently described. Several wit-
nesses were called to prove that they could not find the point in
question, amongst others, Captain Morrison and Mr. Bruit
The point to which the line was referred was " fifty feet beluw
the flat stone by the parapet of the bridge over the canal on the
Ipswich and London road, and level with the crown of the said
bridge."
It appeared that there was no other flat stone near the summit of
the road-way of the bridge, and the principal point in dispute was,
whether the "crown of the bridge" meant the summit of the road-
way, or whether it applied to the road at the whole length of the
tetdgeb
The Committee then declared the allegation not proved, and the
standing orders complied with, but the Chairman observed that
a better datum line might well have been chosen.
All the allegations up to the 94th were withdrawn.
This allegation, and those following, it, occupied the Committee up

to four o'clock. They were, however, of no public interest, rererring
chiefly to questions as to whether certain ruads were public or
private roads ; and similar points, on some of which the Committee
divided for and on others against the promoters of the Bill.

Having been occupied the whole day with the evidence and dis-
cussions on this fill, the Committee adjourned at four o'clock till
twelve o'clock to-morrow.

STANDING ORDERS' COMMITTEES.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Their Lordships met this day at the appointed hour. Present, the
Earl of Shaftesbury (in the chair), Lords Redesdale and Hawarden.
DUBLIN, DUNDRUM, AND INNISKERRY.
This case came before the Committee on second reference, in order
that the promoters of the Bill might prove the second lodgment of
5 per cent. In the Accountant-General's hands, and the signature of
the directors. The certificates having been proved , the Committee
decided that the Bill had passed the standing orders.
MIDLAND GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY OF IRELAND
(MULLINGAR 'lO GALWAY).
This case came also before the Committee on second reference,
in order that the promoters of the Bill might have an opportunity
of proving compliance with Lord Wharncliffe's standing order, proofs
of which having been entered, the Committee decided that the stand-
ing orders had been complied with.
MIDLAND GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY OF IRELAND (LIF-
FEY BRANCH AND LONGFORD DEVIATION).
This case came on for heariug on the same point, and the proper
proofs having been put in, the Committee decided that the Bill had
passed the standing orders.
BRIGHTON, LEWES, AND HASTINGS (EASTBOURNE HAIL-
SHAM) RAILWAY.
This was the next case which came before their Lordships—it was
unopposed, and the usual proofs having been gone through, the Com-
mittee decided that the promoters of the Bill load complied with the
standing orders.
NEWRY, WARRENPOINT, AND ROSTREVOR RAILWAY.
The hearing of this case was adjourned until the 23d instant, for
the production of further proofs.
TEMPLEMORE AND NENAGII RAILWAY.
The deposit of 10 per cent. having been proved to have beenlodged
in the Accountant-General's hands, and the other usual proofS having
been entered, the Committee decided that the standing orders had
been complied with by the promoters of this line.
TIIE LONDON AND YORK RAILWAY.
This case, which had been so frequently adjourned, came on before
their Lordships and occupied their attention for a considerahle por-
tion of the day. It may be in the recollection of our readers, that
we stated a question arose as to whether the money
deposited in the Accountant-General's hands, under the original
deed of the Company, was available for the Company • who'
came before the Committee with a new deed, there being many new
names to it, and a portion of the former promoters having declined
further connexion with the Company. It was argued that the pre-
sent Company had no legal claim upon the fund in Court.
The Attorney-General and Solicitor-General having given their
opinion that the fund was available for the present Company,
Lord Suarresause intimated that the Committee coincided in that
opinion, and they therefore decided that the standing orders had been
complied with.
BRIGHTON AND CHICHESTER RAILWAY (STEYNING
BRANCH).
This case, which was formerly adjourned for want of proof of com-
pliance with Lord Wharncliffe's order, was decided to have complied
also with the standing orders.
The Committee adjourned at five o'clock.