The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-28 00:00:00

Kingston as much as.ss. The bridge over the Boyne, he thought,
would cost 100,0001. He considered the elevation o. the line at Newry
so far above the quays very objectionable, and like'y to be a cause
of danger. The amount of population that would be benefited on
the inland line, taking ten miles on each side, was 5""4,560. In
point of traffic, and in point of payment and renaun, ation, he
was decidedly of opinion that the inland line was superior to
the coast line. If the coast line were formed, cross lines
would still be required to Enniskillen, Dundalk, and other
places, to the extent of 121 miles, whereas cross lines of 50
miles in connexion with the inland line would give the same
amount of accommodation, thus making a balance of 71 miles in
favour of the inland scheme.

The Committee then adjourned till Thursday, at twelve o'clock

Group K.

stated by Mr. Stovin as being received from this
traffic was 44,9741. in the year. In this calculation he only gave
25 per cent., which was lower than the average on the Brighton
and Dover lines. The goods carried from and to Gosport amounted
6,444 tons during the year 1844. The coals, he calculated, would
be about 18,250 tons, and these came from Hemsworth and Chi-
chester at I 1/,:d. per mile, those from Chichester going a distance of
23 % miles to Glodalming. He thought that this communication
would be cheaper than that by the Avon Canal, which charged
five farthings for the carriage of a ton of coals.
To the cross-examination of Mr. WADDINGTON, Mr Horne stated
that he conceived that the whole of the passengers to Gosport
would be abstracted from the old line to the new line, and on that
he put 25 per cent. ; but with respect to goods he could say
nothing. He had taken the whole of the traffic from Bognor, but
none of that from Littlehampton ; and he expected that the coast
traffic would be good, but not the most productive on the line.
To the crass-examination of Mr. FLOOD, Mr. Horne stated that
he believed there would be but one station, Petworth and Midhurst ;
but that would depend upon circumstances.
To the re-examination of Mr. GURNEY, the witness stated that
the distance from Petworth to Horsham was eighteen miles.
Mr. Wm. Tite, the architect and surveyor, stated that he had
considerable experience in the purchaseand saleof property, and he
had been employed with Mr. Osborne to survey and value the land
required for the railway. It had been agreed upon between them
that the quantity of land required for the railway was 575 acres,
worth 114,0001., including an allowance of 10,0001. for contin-
gencies. He was acquainted with the extension line of the South-
Western Company, which would give great facilities at Hungerford -
bridge for water communication, as well as prove a great convenience
to the proposed railway. The terminus there was intended to occupy
ten acres, and the expense of forming that branch would be
420,0001. for land and 380,0001. for works and contingencies, soak.
ing 800,0001. for the whole expense.
To the cross-examination of Mr. Rawlinson, Mr. Tite stated
that the land from Guildferd was good inclosed land, and some of
it excellent wheat land. In Portsea they took 14 acres, but to the
inquiry how much the witness calculated as the price fur the land
at Portsea per acre—

Mr. Sergeant WaaNunam, who appnred for the promoters, ob-
jected, and it was overruled by the Committee. He knew nothing
of the place where the stations were to be situated, and the quanti-
ties of land, as was usual in these cases, had been given to him by
the engineer.

Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM, at this stage of the proceedings,
stated that they had now brought the evidence, with the exception
of that on engineering points, to a close, and he therefore suggested
the adjournment of the Committee.
After an inquiry from Mr. M. MILNES as to the time this evi.
deuce was likely to occupy, the adjournment was agreed to till
Thursday at one o'clock.

Group W.

WAKEFIELD, PONTEFRACT, AND GOOLE RAILWAY.
The Committee on this line re- assembled today at twelve o'clock,
Mr. Pakington in the chair.

Mr. KINGLAKE stated that, before the examination of witnesses
was proceeded with, he had to complain that the sections and plans,
which Mr. Hardy had engaged should be furnished to him, were
not delivered.
The CHAIRMAN said he considered that if that had not been done
fair play was not given to the promoters of the Bill.
Mr. Hardy said that he had given instructions to have the
sections and plans sent to the solicitor of the promoters, and he
was not aware, till he heard the complaint this morning, that this
had not been done. He had no intention of withholding any plan
or section.

It appeared that there was a misunderstanding on the part of
Mr. Birkenshaw, the engineer for the alternative line, as to the
documents which Mr. Hardy engaged should be delivered. He
did not consider that the section as to which the complaint was
now made was one of the documents which he should have delivered.
The section was then handed to the engineers of the proposed line.
The adjourned examination of

Mr. Birkenshaw, the engineer of the alternative line, was then
proceeded with. He did not think that the line from Goole to
Wakefield was one which the public necessity required. A better
line might be formed joining to the Normanton station.
Cross-examined by Mr. KINGLAKE—Took the levels of the
alternative line on Friday last. He did so when the objection to
the Normanton station was first raised.

Mr. John Leather, civil engineer, examined by Mr. HARDY—
Had considerable experience in laying down railways, but not so
much as in other works. Was well acquainted with the country
through which the proposed Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole Rail-
way was to pass. Knew that part of it between Wakefield and
Pontefract. Thought that a better line could be got. Had seen
Mr. Birkenshaw's plans and sections of the alternative line.
Thought from his general acquaintance with the country, that a line
could be easily made without going to Normenton station.

Cross.examined by Mr. KINCLAKE—Had not gone over the
ground of the alternative line proposed by Mr. Birkenshaw, but
examined the plans and sections of it. Was engineer of the
Goole and Doncaster line. Was not aware that the proprietors of
that line had any desire to shut out the proposed line. Saw the
sections of Mr. Birkenshaw's alternative line yesterday for the
first time. Believed that surveyors were sent down on Friday
last to make the levels of that line, in consequence of the evidence
which had been given in that Committee relative to the inconve-
niences and delays which took place at the Normanton station.

Mr. Gouch, civil engineer, examined by Mr. HARDY, stated that
be had been employed as resident engineer for 36 miles on the
London and Birmingham line ; Lad constructed the Manchester
and Leeds line, and was since engaged on the Liverpool and Man-
chester line. Had had considerable experience in railway matters.
Heard Mr. Leather's evidence, and quite concurred with him on
the superiority of the alternative line to the proposed Wakefield,
Pontefract, and Goole line.

was some difficulty in carrying out the works of the Brandling
Junction Company, of which he was one of the Directors. They
were obliged to raise the sum of 200,0001. over and above the
sum allowed by the Act of Parliament, in order that no injury
might accrue to the shareholders. Immediately preceding the
time of the opening of the Newcastle and Darlington
line, the shares of the Brandling Junction rose,
in consequence of the understanding that such an
opening would be made. There was a gradual improvement up
to the time of the opening, when the shares became 501. each. A
committee was appointed afterwards to enter into some negotiation
with Mr. Hudson on the subject of selling or leasing the Brand.
ling Junction to the Newcastle and Darlington Company. It was
agreed that Mr. Hudson should purchase all the shares at 551. per
share, and pay all the debts of every description due from the.
Brandling Railway Company, and indemnify the directors
and proprietors. As the Company had not the power by Act of
Parliament to purchase, they required the personal responsibility
of Mr. Hudson. The agreement met the universal approval of
every director of the Brandling Company, including Mr. Brandling,
the head director. He was of opinion that it was very highly ad-
vantageous to the shareholders, and if that bargain had gone off,
lie would gladly have sold his share for 20/.
The CHAIIIIIIAN said that the Committee wished to know what
line of cbjection the counsel on the opposition side wished to take'
to this agreement. Prima facie, it appeared to he highly advan.
tageous to the public.
Mr. Mainstre said that the principle of his case was this : his
clients were shareholders in the Brandling Junction Railway Com-
pany, and he totally denied that any number of shareholders in that
Company had a right to sell the shares of the parties whom he re-
presented. In August, 1844, a certain number of shareholders
thought that it was their interest to sell their shares and his clients,
which they had no power to do. But if the Committee should
come to the conclusion that the shares of the Brandling Company
should become the property of the Newcastle and Darlington
Company they ought not to come there to assess the value of his
clients' shares, but ought to send them to a jury to get their value.
Mr. TEMPLE said that the objection taken by his Learned Friend
was quite different from that taken by him yesterday, and he would
assert, that if Mr. Greene his (Mr. Manistre's) client had been pre-
sent at the meeting of the directors which agreed to this proposal,
he would have given his consent so to dispose of his shares. In
many cases under the same circumstances, a large majority of the
shareholders had the power to dispose of the minority to the gene-
ral advantage.
After a few instances were given by Mr. HILDYLED, in which
shares were transferred from one company to another, on the con.
sent of a much smaller majority than that which existed in this
case,

The room was cleared, and on our re-admittance,

The CHAIRMAN stated that it was the desire of the Committee
to offer a suggestion to the promoters of the Bill to insert a clause
in this Bill to the following effect:—" Provided that nothing in
this Act with- regard to particular shareholders (here naming
them) tends to take away any right of action at law that may be
vested in these shareholders for the recovery of an enforcement
of such rights as they may be now possessed of."
Mr. AUSTIN said that he would not take upon himself the re.
sponsibility of such a clause; he should leave it to the Committee,
and go on with the case, as he saw that much difficulty might arise
from the insertion of such a clause. If they agreed to the bargain
it would be all right, lout let them, if they object, have their
shares valued as they were before the time they were enhanced by
the amalgamation.
After the room was again cleared for a short time,

The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee came to the resolution
that they felt that this preamble of the Bill should first be proved,
as they had not sufficient evidence to show that they should take
away their shares (coin these shareholders. They would proceed
with the case tomorrow morning at eleven o'clock.

This witness was cross .examined by Mr. KINGLAKE at consi-
derable length to show that the alternative line was not so good,
either in gradients or In facilities for public accommodation.

Mr. Smith's case here closed, and witnesses were then called to
rebut his opposition.

Robert Buchanan, Esq., was then examined by Mr. WILKINS—
Resided at Pontefract. Was a magistrate of the West Riding of
Yorkshire; was chairman of the proposed line. Accompanied an
engineer to see the chief difficulties and features of the localities
of the line. When he heard of Mr. Smith's complaints, he went
himself to visit Mr. Smith's house and property, where the alleged
injuries would be sustained. There was a common close by Mr.
Smith's house, and there were also stone-quarries. There was also
a canal, on which there was a great deal of traffic and
a high road, and also a blacksmith's shop. The embankment on
the line opposite Mr. Smith's house would, not, in his opinion,
materially interfere with the view from the house, but as Chair-
man of the Company he had to state, on the part of
the Company, that there was every wish to obviate
any inconvenience Mr. Smith might sustain, or even to
compensate him for any loss he would suffer by the proposed line
passing through his property. He made a proposal to Mr. Smith
to submit the whole case between him and the Company to arbi-
tration. (The witness was then proceeding to reply to Mr, Wil-
kins, to state some further particulars relative to the
negotiations that had taken place between Mr. Marsden,
Mr. Smith's solicitor, and himself, but Mr. Hardy objected to this
on the ground of the communications being private.)
Cross-examined by Mr. HARDY—None of the objects which he
had described were to be seen from Mr. Smith's house, neither the
blacksmith's shop, nor the canal, &c. He did not know,
but thought that the front windows of Mr. Smith's house could be
seen from the bridge over Barnsley Canal. The embankment ran
close by this canal.

Mr. Martin, examined by Mr. KINGLAKE—Was an engineer
and surveyor. Surveyed the Leeds and York line. The embank-
ment on the proposed line could b• only seen by slight
glimpses through the trees from Mr. Smith's house.
He explored the country not only on the line as it was at present
projected, but in several other places. He did not do this in con.
sequence of Mr. Smith's objection to the line as projected. The
railway passed at a distance of five-eighths of a mile from Mr.
Smith's house. That was the nearest point fram which it
could be seen. Was perfectly confident that Sir Edward Dodsworth
would sustain far more injury by Mr. Birkenshaw's alternative lin,
than Mr. Smith would by the proposed line, as it would pass
close by his house and preserves. He had no doubt but Sir
Edward would give such a line the most determined opposition.
The stations of the two proposed lines were more commodious for
the public on the Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole line than upon
the other suggested line.
Mr. Hawkshaw examined by Mr. KINGLAKE—Laid out the
northern portion of the London and York Railway. Had the ad.
vantage of all the sections that had been made by that Company.
He considered that the advantage of the Junction of several rail-
ways at such an important place as Wakefield would far more
than compensate for the greater facilities which the gradients
might afford were the line laid down in a more favourable part of
the country.

It being now four o'clock, the Committee adjourned till Thurs-
day, at twelve o'clock.

Group FF.
NORTH OF SCOTLAND DlsTiticr.
The Select Committee on this group re-assembled at the usual
hour this morning, and proceeded with the affirmative evidence in
the case for the promoters of the
EDINBURGH AND NORTHERN LINE,
A scheme got up with a view of supplying the northern districts
of Scotland with a general system of railway communication.
Mr. Wiseman, one of the Board of Directors, who gave evidence
yesterday, in support of the Bill, was cro►s-examined by Mr.
ATTON, on behalf of several landholders, whose property would
be disfigured or interfered with by the progress of the line, with a
view of showing that, if the Bill were delayed till next session, the
scheme could be rendered more complete in itself, and take
such a course as to remove the chief objections of the landed
proprietors residing in the various districts through which the
line must necessarily pass, in the event of Parliament ultimately
sanctioning the scheme. The witness admitted that the promoters
would have to come to Parliament next session for a supplemental
Bill to extend and improve the line, but, nevertheless, he thought
it advisable that one part of the line should be constructed before
another. He denied th.it the main line would avoid the coal-
fields of Fifeshire, but admitted that the Company might be ha-
rasced by the proprietor of the Burnt Island and Granton Ferry. at
present in the possession of the Duke of Buccleuch; unless they
bound the Duke down to certain conditions by stringent clauses.
The Duke, however, was a large shareholder in the Company, and
of course it would be to his interest to accommodate instead of
embarrass the Company. He conceded to the Learned Counsel
that the present coach fairs between Cooper and Dunfermline were
exceedingly low, but at the same time he insisted upon the prin-
ciple that a railway invariably doubled the passenger traffic of the
district through which it passed, and it was always to the interest
of the Company to reduce as much as possible the former rates of
carriage.

On re-examination, he said the Burnt Island Ferry was the most
available point on the coast for terminating one part of
the line, but there were others which would be equally as conve-
nient, should the Ferry Company refuse to run ferry-boats cor••
responding with the trains on the railway. The interest however
of the Ferry Company was identical with that of the Railway
Company; but were it not, the Ferry-pier Bill contained a clause
for the protection of any future railway.
Mr. Peter Cameron, a carrier at Edinburgh, who had esta-
blishments at all the principal towns of Scotland, was well ac•
quainted with the traffic passing through Fifeshire. His establishment
carried upwards of 8,040 tons of goods annually along the route of
the proposed railway, and another firm that he was acquainted with
carried from 30 to 40 tons weekly. At present the traffic was con-
veyed by carts, and if a railway were made it would prove a saving
of nearly 50 per cent. to the towns of Perth and Dundee alone,
as well as tend generally to the advantage of the trade of the other
districts through which the line passed. He was a farmer as well
as a currier, and knew of his own knowledge that Fifeshire ex-
ported great quantities of grain. It was at present conveyed by
carts and such conveyances, but if a railway were made through
Fife, he had no doubt large quantities of farm-produce would pass
over the line. There was only one stock market in Fifeshire, but
if the present line were made, it would, no doubt, lead to
the establishment of a market at Cooper. The firm
to which he belonged preferred carrying their goods
across Burntisland Ferry to Queen's Ferry, because they received
more accommodation at the one than the other. If the rails were
brought down to the pier, he had no doubt the carriages could be
transferred to the steam.boats without injuring goods—indeed at
present all the loaded carts on the route were bodily carried over
the river. If there were a railway to Perth he did not
think any passengers or goods would go to that town
via Dundee. The line, in fact, would have the effect of diverting
all the traffic that was at present transmitted by water to Perth ;
and in his opinion it would be the best paying line running north of
Edinburgh.

It being near four o'clock the Committee adjourned, in accord-
ance with an arrangement made yesterday, till Thursday at twelve.

E.
NEWCANEWCASTLEGroup AND BERWICK.
The Committee, on sitting this morning, proceedel with the
clauses of the Newcastle and Berwick Railway Bill. The fares
were sett!ed at 3d , I and Ad. per mile in the first, second, and
third classes respectively.
NEWCASTLE AND DARLINGTON (BRANDLING
JUNCTION).
Mr. itilipsox was called, and examined by Mr. Tioins—.Ther•

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDA Y EVENING,' MAY 28, 1845.

omit some witnesses they had intended to call, in reference to their
coal traffic evidence, in order that they might be able to close to-
day. He then went on to say that since the Committee had sepa.
rated they had taken measures to supply the omission in respect
to Cambridge, that bad horn mentioned yesterday. It was to be
supplied, provided the line from Peterborough to Cambridge
should be completed.
The examination of Mr. Wrigly was then resumed, in
reference to the profit which he had calculated
would result from the coal traffic in London.
He had calculated that 2,600,000 tons of coals now came to Lon-
don for annual consumption ; and assuming that one-eighth of
that would come by the London and York line, the Company's in-
come, at the rate of 34 d. per tom per mile, would be, on 325,000
tons, 177,734/. Supposing that the London and York Company
were to supply one-half of the whole quantity consumed in the
country district, exclusive of London, the quantity would be
357,061 tons, and the income would be 44,632/. 12s. 6d., giving
a gross total income from the coal traffic of 222,367/.
Mr. Wedd, corn-factor, of London, was next examined as to the
corn traffic. He deposed that 14,917 tons of wheat were now ex-
ported from Peterborough in this way-6,000 tons to London, and
7,000 to Yorkshire, all of which would be conveyed by the pro-
posed London and York line, as it afforded the best facilities for
conveyance.

Mr. HILDYARD asked witness why would not some of the Peter.
borough wheat go to Lincolnshire, Nottingham, Birmingham,
Derby, and Staffordshire P—Witness said, because there was no
mode of transit. Could not say whether the wheat would go to
those districts from Peterborough if there were a line from that
place to Stamford, because he could not calculate upon such an
assumption.

Mr. West, land.agent—Has been a good deal engaged in the
agricultural district of Grantham. He corroborated the evidence
of the last witness in respect to the corn trade of the districts
through which the London and York line would pass.
Mr. John Badley, cattle dealer—Has been employed in ascer-
taining the cattle traffic on the London and York Line. The
number of fat beasts sent from the London and York district to
Smithfield was 22,504 ; fat sheep, 222,552. The present mode
of transit was by land and water. All these animals would be
sent by the London and York line. The average distance they
would have to travel would be 85 miles. The estimated annual
income by railway for the trasit of them would be 51,4001. 4s. 6d.
After this witness had been examined as to the comparative
facilities for cattle traffic upon the proposed competing lines, and
those to be afforded by the London and York,
Mr. PAGET said that unless the Committee required more evi-
dence upon this species of traffic, he would take upon himself the
responsibility, heavy though it was, of not calling any more wit-
nesses as to the traffic.
The Committee asked if the evidence as to the coal traffic had
concluded ?

Mr. PAGET said it had.
CHAIRMAN—Then you mean as to the cattle traffic?
Mr. PAGET—Yes.
The Committee then consulted together for a short time,
after which

The CHAIRMAN announced that the Committee were of opinion
that this was a point upon which they did not feel they would be
warranted in offering any opinion, aye or no; the counsel should
take that responsibility upon themselves. At the same time:it was
hoped that no unnecessary consumption of time would take place.
Mr. PAGET hoped he had already evinced a desire to economise
time; and then, after a short pause, he said he would take upon
himself not to call any other witnesses to give evidence of this
character.

The CIikIRMAN hoped Mr. Paget would lay a clear statement
before the Committee as to the whole traffic.

Mr. PAGET said he would, and they would now proceed with the
fish traffic.

Mr. Benton, of Harford Pool, then deposed that he had a very
extensive fish trade with London, the expense and facility of the
transit of which would be greatly facilitated by the London and
York line ; has paid as high as 271. per ton for the carriage of fish
to London ; thinks that would be reduced to 51. by the proposed
line, and the trade increased to 100 tons a day.
Cross-examined—Has sent as much as five tons of herrings In
a day to London, but they did not pay well. The Counsel then
asked the witness if Grimsby was not 50 miles nearer London than
Harford Pool, but though he asked the question twenty times, he
could get no direct answer, or no answer at all, but one to the effect
that the fish would be bad, unsound, and useless, by the time
it got to Grimsby. After a few more questions,

Mr. Sergeant WRANGIIAM said he would not call another wit..
ness on this branch of the case.

The witness, in answer to the Committee, said he hnd hereto-
fore experienced no difficulty in his trade until he reached Rugby;
but, from that point to London the mode of traffic amounted to
a prohibition to the trade.
The Committee then adjourned to one o'clock on Thursday.

Group B.
RIPON AND HARROGATE LINE.
The Committee resumed at half-past twelve, Mr. P. M. Stewart
in the chair.
The first witness called was Mr. John Harris, a civil engineer,
who stated that he considered the country traversed by the Leeds
and Thirsk line exceedingly ineligible. Had surveyed the country
proposed to be traversed by the Great North of England scheme.
The works on the Leeds and Thirsk Line would be very heavy and
expensive. Thought a much better line might have been selected
between Leeds and Harrogate. A line more easterly would have
been preferable, and would, he thought, traverse equally popu-
lous districts, but of this he was not quite sure. A
great many difficulties might have been avoided,
which were embraced in the Leeds and Thirsk line, as in
crossing the wharf. Thought the calculations and estimates fur-
nished by Mr. Grainger were greatly too low. They would have
been ruinous to any contractor at Mr. Grainger's price. Mr.
Grainger's price for tunnelling was 40/. per yard ; it could not be
done for less than 451. The amount of cutting on that line would
be 1,297,000 yards, and three yards deep, including in the whole
90 acres, which, at 150/. per acre, would amount to 13,5001., as
the value of the land.
Cross-examined—Had been assistant engineer in the Shelton
tunnel, and had executed the Weirdale Extension Railway.
John Parker Bidder was the next witness, an engineer—
He considered the Ripon and Harrogate line free from any objec-
tion in an engineering point of view. Thought the Leeds and
Thirsk line had very large works, whereas the works of the other
were very light. Thought the Leeds and Think line had remark.
ably large and heavy works—larger than any he was acquainted
with, even than the London and Birmingham. With reference
to the curves and gradients be would not say there was anything
very bad in them, but the gradients might be, in some places, so
difficult as to prevent speed and punctuality in travelling. The
tunnelling would exceed that upon the London and Birmingham
by twenty per cent. Was of opinion that the line could not be
executed for 1,500,0001.—he meant the Leeds and Think line
with its branches.
The CHAIRMAN observed that that wail nearly deuble Mr.
Grainger's estimate.
Witness continued to say that he did not make a detailed
estimate of the plan. Thought the Leeds and Think project rash
and ill conceived.
In answer to Mr TALBOT, witness said that he thought it would
be very unwise to form a line passing south from' Wetherby to
Leeds,
And being cross-examined by Mr. BAINES, admitted that he had
not minutely considered the expenses of procuring materials for
the respective lines.
Mr. Martin, an engineer—Knew all the district round Leeds
intimately. Knew the Leeds and Think line. Many places on
that line would not be accommodated by that line—they were
already accommodated by the Leeds and Bradford Railway.
Disapproved of the Leeds and Think line as too expensive. Knew
the coal district in the neighbourhood of Leeds. If the Durham
coal-owners would sell their coals at Knaresborough, Ripon, Har-
rogate, and Wetherby, at 9s. or 10s. 6d. a ton, there could be no
competition with coals brought on the Leeds and Thirsk Railway
from Leeds.
Cross-examined—Was surveyor to the Leeds and Bradford Rail.
way Company. Thought the Leeds and Thirsk line would be use.
ful for persons going to the north. There were six or seven mills
on the line. (Witness was handed a paper with numerous signa-
tures to it, but he did not know the handwriting of the Individuals;
but he did not agree in the opinion expressed in it as to the eligibi-
lity of the Leeds and Think line.)
Mr. George Mason produced a paper containing the list of as-
sents and dissents to the line, and other formal matters.
The case then closed on behalf of the promoters of the Ripon
and Harrogate line.
THE CHURCH FEBITON AND HARROGATE LINE.
This line was then brought under the consideration of the Cons.
mittee. This line is a branch of the York and North Midland
Railway.
After very considerable delay Mr. HILDYARD entered the Com-
mittee-room, and said he was happy to say that there would be no
opposition to the Church Fenton and Harrogate line; he would,
therefore, at once call witnesses to show that the proposed line
would confer great advantages on Harrowgate and the towns
through which it was proposed it should pass.
Mr. Birkenshaw, an engineer, was the first witness called—
The line, he said, :would commence at Harrogate and
pass through Wetherby, by way of Thorpe, and near
Saxton, to the Church Fenton station. The distance between
Hull and Harrogate would be nearer by this line than by
any other line. Knew the country well between Harro-
gate and Church Fenton. Wetherby was a place of considerable
importance. So was Thorpe Arch, which, with Boston, was a
watering place much frequented during the season. There were no
engineering difficulties en this line. It would pass through a rich
agricultural district. The cost of the line would be 230,0001.
the length eighteen miles and a quarter. In this estimate
was computed a double line, which would be necessary. Wit.
ness's remuneration did not depend upon the contemplated extent
of line. There would be 538 yards of tunnel. The worst curve was
35 chains radius, the steepest gradient in the line was one in 87.
There would be no difficulty in working that with the traffic which
might be anticipated on the line.
The CHAIRMAN—How came the Board of Trade to designate
the gradients on this line as on the whole unfortunate?
Witness—Unfortunate as compared with all the gradients in
ether districts, but the gradients were the best which the district
could afford.
Mr. HILDYARD said he believed the Ripon and Harrogate line
had withdrawn.
CHAIRMAN—YOU mean withdrawn opposition to the Church
Fenton line ?
Mr. HILDYARD—I mean withdrawn itself from the Committee
altogether.
CHAIRMAN—Can that be the case, Mr. Denison ?
Mr. DENISON, Counsel for the Ripon and Harrogate line, said
he could not contradict his Learned Friend, though he had received
no instruction on the subject.
Mr. Hanman, a farmer, lived in Deighton, near Leeds—Knew
die line of Church Fenton and Harrogate—it would pass near
Wetherby. His opinion was that the line would be moat advan.
tageous ; it would afford a ready transit to Wakefield, which
might be termed the key of the whole manufacturing district. It
would also afford transit to Hull, which was the best port for pro-
curing timbers, artificial manure, and materials for fattening cattle.
The line passed through the best lime kilns, and they would thus
be able to obtain the best lime for building or manure. The best
coals could be likewise had by this line.
Mr. Wilkinson gave evidence as to the traffic, &c., which would
take place on this line, and which, he said, would amount to
23,631/. Os. Bd., 6 per cent. on the estimated capital. The gross
traffic would be almost JO per cent. on the estimate. The capital
proposed to be raised pas 230,0001.; shares subscribed, 180,0001.;
deposits, 9,0001.
At the request of Mr. HILDYARD, this case was allowed to stand
over until Thursday.
The CHAIRNIAN would defer giving his opinion on the respective
lines until that day.
Mr. HOPE said that Earl De Grey had witnesses and counsel in
attendance, who would oppose the North of England line.
Mr. Sergeant BELLASIS then rose, and said he appeared on behalf
of the Earl of Cardigan to oppose the Leeds and Think Railway. It
would pass through nearly four miles of his property, near the town
of Leeds, and would entirely destroy the picturesqueness which it
at present possessed, and greatly deteriorate the value of the pro-
perty. The ground there was very suitable for villas and houses of
a superior class, which were about being built there, but Lord Car-
digan's principal objection was, that it would destroy the beauty of
that venerable and beautiful structure, Kirkstone Abbey, which
every Yorkshireman regarded with feelings of admiration. Lord
Cardigan's property lay upon both sides of the Aire ; through that
which lay upon the other side of the river a railway was made
a short time ago. If this railway, the Leeds and Thirsk
line were carried out, it would quite cut up and
destroy the beauty of the property, for it would inclose it, taking
within it the abbey he had mentioned. The abbey had, of late
years, been preserved at great expense by the Earl of Cardigan,
and great preparations had been recently made for planting and
otherwise beautifying the neighbourhood. The Leeds and Thirsk
line could be easily run into the Leeds and Bradford, and a branch
line would well supply the place of the Leeds and Thirsk line,
though there would be a gradient of 1 in 39.
Mr. Downes and Mr. Hayward, agents to the Earl of Cardigan,
gave evidence contkreatory of the above statement. They con-
curred in saying that the proposed line would, if carried out, greatly
deteriorate the value of his Lordship's property in the neighbour-