The Sun.
London, England, 1851-06-04 00:00:00

SMITHFIELD MARKET REMOVAL
BILL.

The Committee ma yesterday morning at the usual
hour.

The case for the City Corporation, in opposition to
the removal of the market, was continued, and, with the
view of better explaining the improvements proposed to
be made in the existing market, a model on a large scale
was exhibited to the Committee. The market, when
altered, would contain 6,057 bullocks and 40,000 sheep,
with ample space for each animal. The dead-meat mar-
ket was to front the cattle enclosures, and several foun-
tains and jets (1' eau were to supply the area with water.
A circular building was to be constructed as a bath and
washhouse, and the market itself would be encircled
with a terrace, built on arches, with a central inclined
plane leading down to the cattle pens. Near the dead-
meat market were to be abattoirs, and at either corner of
the market were designed calf and pig markets.
Mr. J. Deacon, a butcber residing at Camberwell,
stated that he purchased and killed about 3,000 sheep
and 200 beasts every year. He did not find that he sus-
tained any loss from injury to the animals in Smithfield,
and he conceived that in general they were not damaged
in the market. If the boasts were killed at the northern
extremity of the town and then carted home, the meat
would be disfigured, and would not keep so long. A
lobs would be sustained by the butcher from the more
rapid decay of his meat consequent upon its removal
from the slaughter-house before it was cooled and set.
The establishment of a market in the north would be of
considerable injury to butchers in a small way of busi-
ness. If the accommodation in Smithfield were increased
he should be very glad of it; but he did not think
that any better site for a cattle-market could be
selected.
Mr. Lawrence, a surgeon, was then examined as to the
offensive nature of the bone-boiling places, slaughter-
houses, and knackers' yards near Smithfield.—These oc-
cupations must to a certain extent influence the health of
a locality.
Mr. Henry King, a butcher of Brighton, in a large
way of business, also deposed that the beasts sustained
much greater injury from travelling by railway than
from driving. The quality of the London moat was
very good, it looked brighter than country meat. Did
not believe that a better site could be found for a cattle
market than at Smithfield.
Mr. Cooper, a butcher of Great Portman-street, and
Mr. Thomas Simmonds, butcher of Brompton, both
stated that the present central site of the market was
more convenient to the trade than any rite at the
northern end of the town. Beasts were more damaged
by railway travelling than by driving.
Mr. S. Phipps, a butcher in Belgrave-street, near
Belgrave-square, stated that he was in a large way of
business, and purchased his beasts at Smithfield. His
slaughter-house was in Tothill-street, Westminster.
He should greatly prefer Smithfield to any market at
the northern extremity of the town. He did not find
that the cattle received any damage of a material nature
in Smithfield. He had received beasts by railway, and
had found that they sustained considerable damage. The
proposed northern market would injure the smaller class
of butchers.

Mr. Adams corroborated this testimony.
Mr. Wakefield, of Maidstone, stated that he always
made his beasts walk to market, as they were very much
damaged by railway travelling. Any removal of the
market to the north of the metropolis would increase
the price of meat, and interfere with the trade ge-
nerally.
Mr. Bassett, of Woolwich, stated he killed 25 beasts
and 100 sheep a week. He preferred driving his beasts
to sending them by railway. The removal of the market
from its present site to the north of London would
make a difference of 150/. yearly in his expenses. Wit-
ness at present paid Is. per head to the drovers for
driving his cattle from Smithfield to Woolwich; but if
the market were removed to the north they would
charge an extra 6d.—not so much because of the differ-
ence in the distance, as from the necessity of driving the
cattle quite through the City, and the increased re-

sponsibility consequent upon it.
Sir C. Knightley stated that he had been in the
habit fur many years of sending beasts for sale in
Smithfield. Although he resided in Northamptonshire,
and consequently his cattle arrived at the northern end
of the metropolis, he did not think that a market there
would be beneficial. He preferred Smithfield from its
central position, and should of course send there, as the
greatest number of buyers were found there. Almost
the whole of his property was derived from grazing, and
some of his tenants were very large graziers. He never
heard any of them express a wish to have Smithfield
market removed.
Mr. Bunning stated that he was architect to the cor-
poration of London, who were in the habit of consulting
him on all their improvements and general works.
Mr. Sergeant WRANGUAM stopped the witness, and
asked him whether any plan to which he was about to
speak would require an Act of Parliament to carry it
into effect ?
The witness said that the plan he proposed would cer-
tainly require an Act.
Mr. Sergeant WRANGUASI objected to the testimony
of the witness. If schemes, which of themselves re-
quired separate Acts, were to be made the subject of in-
quiry before a Committee engaged in a totally different
investigation, there was no saying where the evidence
would end.

Mr. TALBOT said, that no one knew better than Ser-
geant Wrangham that such an objection was at variance
with the general practice before the Committees of the
House of Commons. The city of London appeared
before the Committee as landowners, holding property
upon which it had pleased former Sovereigns to confer
certain privileges. It was proposed by this measure to
shut up their property, to suspend their privileges, and
certainly to entail serious loss upon them by the viola-
tion of their ancient rights and charters. The ground
on which this was sought to be done was the inconve-
nience and risk attendant upon the existence of a large
cattle market in the centre of a crowded city, and when
he attempted to show that the evils complained of
would be remedied by the plan proposed by the corpo-
ration, and the necessity for the abolition of the market
removed, he was met by a technical objection, by which
his right of evidence was denied. He contended that
the scheme proposed by the corporation was far better
than the violent and crude measure proposed by his
Learned Friend, and he thought that their scheme,
therefore, had a perfect right to be entertained by the
committee. The practice to be observed in this particu-
lar case ought to be the same as that pursued in any other
Committee on a private Bill; and it could not be con-
tended that in another Committee on a railway Bill such
an objection would be tenable.

Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM stated, that the argument
of Mr. Talbot, that the City corporation were land-
owners, was one to which he did not subscribe. It would
be seen, when the charters were referred to, whether the
corporation of the city of London were the owners of
the land in Smithfield. He (Mr. Sergeant Wrangham)
believed that the corporation appeared as the owners of
a certain franchise—as the proprietors of certain tolls.
At all events, he would leave that part of the case, and
urgo upon the Committee the fact that the proposition
which was illustrated by the model before them, had
been made to the House of Commons this session, and
rejected by a very large majority. His Learned Friend
would surely not contend that it was the practice of Com-
mittees to allow an opposing scheme to any project to be
brought before them after it had ben rejected by the
House of Commons.

Mr. TALBOT had only attempted to uphold a proposi-
tion which bore upon the question before the Committee,
viz., the propriety or necessity of removing the market
from its present site. If he could show generally that
such a plan could be adopted as would remove the evils
complained of withou taking away the market he appre-
hended that a reference to that plan would not be objec-
tionable.
Mr. Sergeant WBANGRAM did not object to the plan
being referred to generally, but his Learned Friend had
no right to go into details on a scheme already decided
by the House.
The room was then cleared. Shortly after the exclu-
sion of strangers, the doors were re-opened and the
Committee was declared adjourned.

It was understood that this adjournment without
coming to a decision on the point arose from tho fact
that the Chairman had retired to consult the! Speaker,
but found that there was "no House." The point was,
therefore, reserved. A question arose as to the power
of the Committee to adjourn, under the circumstances,
but the Chairman declared that, in his opinion, the ad-
journment was perfectly in accordance with the rules of
the House.

THE BALLOON ASCENT FROM
• BATTY'S HIPPODROME.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
you allow me to make a few remarks re-
specting my ascent on the 2i inst., from Mr. Batty's
Hippodrome. The day was exceedingly fine awd calm—
indeed, the weather was so still that we were almost
stationary for nearly one hour. I was accompanied by
two gentlemen and Mr. Grey, architect and surveyor,
of Camden Town, and Mr. Wittaker, the architect and
builder of Mr. Batty's Hippodrome. After remaining
up one hour and three-quarters we safely descended close
to the New-cross Railway station, and were most kindly
assisted by Mr. Hawkins and other parti©s connected
ith the station. My supply of gas was excellent from
the London Company.—l am, Sir, yours, &c.,
, Aeronaut.
JOHN HAMPTON

UNIVERSITY INTELLIGENCE.
OXFORD, JUNE 3.—ln a Convocation holden this day
the Rev. George Sparkes, late curate of Llansantfraid,
in Monmouthshire, was ected to that benefice, the pa-
tronage of which for this turn is vested in this Uni-
versity.
M. 1.63 n Foucault's experiment of the rotatory no-
tion of the earth by means of the pendulum is now in
course of trial in the Radcliffe Library, under the direc-
tion of eminent scientific men.

ARRIVAL OF THE UNITED STATES SCREW STEAM-
SHIP LAFAYETTE.—LIVERPOOL, MONDAY.—To-dav, shortly
before noon, the United States screw steam-ship Lafayette,
under the command of Captain Stoddard, late of the Ame-
rican steam-ship Crescent City, arrived in the Mersey from
Queenstown, where she had been compelled to put in for a
supply of coal. On rounding the Rock she steamed very
fast up the river, and presented rather a striking appear-
ance. Her hull is constructed somewhat after the style
which the Americans have recently adopted in their clipper
vessels, being very sharp fore and aft. She is barsue rigged,
carries a large spread of canvass, and from her nne propor-
tions, even without her steam power, must be very fast.
Owing to the breakage of the air pump the high-pressure
plan was adopted, and the waste steam escaped by a pipe
placed on the quarter-deck.

PRICES Op WHEAT AND OATS IN IRELAND.—We
learn from returns before us that during the last twelve years
the price of wheat in Ireland has varied from 295. Bd. per
barrel in 1840, to 21s. 9d. in 1850: the average price for
seven years being 303. 9d. The rates of oats have been
16s. 'ld. in 1840, and 103. in 1831: average price, 12s. 6d.