The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-27 00:00:00

Room D.

GLASGOW, DIISIPRIES, AND CARLISLE.
The 'Committee met today at eleven o'clock, the Earl of
Bt. Germans in the chair. Other Members present, Earl
Duck, Viscount Canning, and Lord Charleville ; Lord Orford
absent through indisposition.
The Committee having obtained leave to sit without Lord
Orford, the further examination of evidence for' the oppoai-
tion te the Bill waa.resemeat.•
Mr. Collister, civil engineer, was recalled, and cross-ex-
aminee by Mr. Sergeant BELLAsJS—IIe furnished last night
all the details. respecting the estimates that had been
made. He had made the calculation from examina-
tion of the plans and sections of the line. The
plans and sections from which he calculated the estimates
were not larger than those deposed in the Parliamentary
office. Taking the cutting of rock at twenty miles on the
line deposited, the greatest depth was twenty-five feet, and
the average was twenty-four feet. (The witness was here
requested to show the mode he had adopted to arrive at the
average of the cutting, and • the calculatihn Le had made of
the cubical contents of the cutting, as a test of the accuracy
of his general evidence on theengineering.) There were, he
said, two portions of cutting near to each other at this place
on the line included.in the calculation. The one cutting was
twenty-five feet at its greatest depth and sloped down to no-
thing; the other was twenty-feet and sloped down to
eighteen. He made the total of_ the cubical contents at
33,000 feet. That was the conclusion he had come
to from the data he had ►von. The cutting at the twelfth
mile was 60,000 yard 4 at one grid a half to one slope. lie
calculated this on Thursday to be 89,000 yards of sandstone
cutting, but that was a mistake. He found it out the night
before last. He believed it was mixed cutting, about one-
third of it being sandstone. Allowing the cutting now to
be a slope of a half to one, it would bring the expense to
about the same. This 89,000 yards was included in the
221,000 yards of sandstone cutting he gave the other day.
The correction he had made would reduce it
about 60,000. With respect to the crossing of
the Crawick water, he thought a viaduct over the
whole of the valley, such as he estimated, would be the best
midmost economical way of doing it. He was sure that
Mr. Blyth could not cross the water at the price he named
for his bridge and embankment.... There was a difference of
2001. per mile for the permanent way:between Mr. Miller and
him. 'Mr. Miller's was 5,5701. per mile, and his 5,3701. 75/.
per yard was the price he assumed the rails would cost. At
701. per yard, the price per mile would be about 1761. per
mile less. He was not aware that the Ayrshire Rail-
way had rails of 68 lbs. per yard; 75 lbs. was the
weight used on the Grand Junction and other lines
in connexion with it. The price per ton he esti-
mated at 91. 10s., delivered at the works. They had
tried both Wales and Staffordshire for the Caledonian line,

and could not get the rails for less. Bails could be got in
England for lea; than in Scotland. He had received a letter
from a gentleman who had been sent out to inquire about
the price of rails, and the lowest offer was 9/. ss. per ton at
the works. These were rails of an inferior character. The
best were 9/. 155., and the carriage to Ar nan would make them
ill. He was not aware that Mr. Blyth had also estimated
them at 11/. per ten. He was not aware that iroa rails were
in the course of making on the route of the line. The witness was
next examined respecting the prices he had set on the turn-
pike and other branches. Ile was not aware that bridges on
the North British line had been constructed at similar prices
to those stated by Mr. Blyth.
Mr. Sergeant BF:LIASIA was about putting a contract of
the works of the North British line into witness's hands in
order to examine him on the bridge estimates, when
Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM objected to any such contract
being used. as it had been executed before the passing of the
Consolidated Act.
The contract was accordingly withdrawn.
An estimate for the execution of the works on the Kilmar-
nock and Cumnock line, and a further offer by the same con-
t ractor to execute the bridges on the Dumfries line, was next
submitted, but this was also objected to, on the ground that
it was not a contract or deed, but merely an offer to do cer-
taia works, which had not been as yet accepts&
Witness's cross-examination continued—He had estimated
the bridges in agreement with the provisions of the Consoli-
dated Act. He bad taken Government duty on the gross
passenger traffic. He was not aware that a great proportion
of the passengers would not have duty paid on them.
Re-examined by Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM—He had
thnself superintended the execution of railway works. On