The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-06 00:00:00

GROUP Q.

NORTH WALES MINERAL RAILWAY.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)

The Chairman was then ordered to report the Bill to the House,

THE NORTH WALES, PORTDYNX.I.LIEN,

AND BANGOR RAILWAY.

The remainder of the day was occupied with going through the
clauses in the Bill for making this railway, the preamble to which,
like the last Bill, had been proved on a former occasion. The
whole •f the clauses, with amendments, were agreed to, and the
Committee adjourned.

GROUP R.
DUNDALIC. AND ENNISMILLEN.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterdai.)

Mr. M'Carthy was examined as to the feeling of the inha-
bitants in the towns through which the line was to be taken,
which he represented generally to be very favourable. The land-
owners were also very much inclined to the line, and were desirous
of its being formed.
Mr. Redington, M.P. for Dundalk, said that from his know-
ledge of the country he believed that this line would be one of
the very best that could be constructed in that country. He had
an intimate knowledge of that part of Ireland, having been one
of the Land Commissioners, and this was his decided opinion.
Sir George Burgoyne, examined on the part of the Ulster Canal
Company, was of opinion that the traffic through the district of
country proposed was not sufficient to support such a line of railway
as that proposed.

Mr. Peter Russell put in the traffic tables of the expected re.
ceipts, with the data on which they were founded, and after under.
going an examination on the items, the Committee adjourned.

GROUP SS.
THE EREWASH VALLEY LINE.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Evidence was gone into at great length in support of the Bill.
The opponents' Counsel, on cross-examination, elicited nothing to
mar its progress.
The Speaker being announced to be at prayers, the Committee
adjourned until to-morrow.

GROUP V.
THE MANCHESTER, CHESTERFIELD, AND
MIDLAND JUNCTION RAILWAYS. THE
SOUTH LINCOLNSHIRE ALTERNATIVE
LINE.

Members—The Chairman, the O'Conor Don, Sir Denham Nor.
reys, Sir John Rae Reid, Mr. Davies, and Mr. Hope Johnstone.
The Committee proceeded this morning to receive further evi.
dente on the alternative line.

The evidence was of the same uninteresting character as before.
Mr. Isaac Vickers spoke to the injury which would be done to
the hay and cattle market in Sheffield, if the Chesterfield and
Sheffield Railway were allowed to be constructed.
Thomas Dunn Jeffcott, coal valuer, Sheffield—He was well ac.
quainted with the coal fields in the neighbourhood of Sheffield and
on the lines of the Chesterfield and Sheffield and of the Lincoln-
shire Railway. The coal on the latter line was of a much
more useful quality for manufacturing purposes, and could be more
easily reached, the nearest vein on the other line being six miles
from the town of Sheffield. There was no converting coal at Dron-
field.

A number of witnesses gave similar evidence, and the Committee
adjourned at four o'clock.

GROUP W.

BRAYTON AND GOOLE RAILWAY.

The Committee en this line met at twelve to.day, Mr. Yakington
in the chair. The Hon. Mr. Maxwell, the Hon. Mr. Bouverie,
Mr. Whitmore, and Lord Seymour were also present.
Mr. KNOWLES, 011 the part of the promoters, resumed his address
to the Committee. He contended that the Brayton and Goole
line should pass irrespective of any other line, for it had independent
merits of its own—would develop the general resources, and espe-
cially promote the extension of the traffic its coals and lime of a
large tract of country, that was hitherto isolated and crippled to a
most enormous extent, in consequence of having no outlet for its
commerce. The Learned Counsel pressed this point at great length,
and proceeded to say that the costof the line would only be 100.000/.,
and that it passed over a tract of country where no gentleman's
residence would be destroyed—no park or place interfered with in
its whole course. The Committee should not hesitate for a moment
as to the propriety of passing the line. But when he compared it
with the competing line (the proposed Wakefield, Pon-
tefract, and Goole line) as a communication with Wake-
field, Bradford, Leeds, and the west, he considered that it had
claims which made it greatly superior. In the first place, only twelve
miles of line would be required to be constructed, while by the
other route there would be twenty-seven miles. The cost would
be only 100,000/., while the cost of the other would be 350,000/.
In the second place, it possessed gradients far more
favourable, which, even by the admission of its opponents, more
than counterbalanced the three miles which it exceeded the other
line in distance to Wakefield. When he also considered that it
would afford accommodation and facility of conveyance to the
traffic to Wakefield, Leeds, and all the towns to the west, that
had hitherto been in the habit of importing and exporting
at Goole and Hull, the advantages which it presented were in-
finitely greater than those of the Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole
line. On these grounds, therefore—cheapness, gradients, accom-
modation, and advantage to the general traffic of the country—he
contended that the Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole line
was not for a moment to be compared with it.
But if the Committee would, in the face of the evi..
dence which had been adduced to prove these facts, be of
opinion that it had not such a superiority over the Wakefield and
Goole line, as a communication with the Manufacturing districts,
he thought that he had brought forward evidence sufficient'

to induce the Committee to grant the line on its own
independent traffic. Taking all these advantages into account,
together with the trifling expense which the construction of the
line would cost, the Committee, he was sure, would exercise a
sound judgment in passing the Brayton and Goole Railway, whether
they passed the 'Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole line or not.
This closed the case of the promoters of the line.
The CHAIRMAN then asked Mr. Bliss, who appeared on behalf of
the opposing landholders on the line, whether he would bring for-
ward any witnesses ?
Mr. Buss replied that he would not adduce any evidence, but
with the permission of the Committee he would address them on
behalf of his clients.

The CHAIRMAN then ordered the room to be cleared, and re.
mained in deliberation for three quarters of an hour. On our re.
admission

The CHAIRMAN told Mr Bliss to proceed with his address.
Mr. Buss then went on to comment on the evidence which had
been brought forward, and contended that no case whatever had
been made out on the part of the promoters of the Brayton
and Goole line for cutting up the property of his clients.
There was no evidence of a satisfactory character to show that it
had any merits on the ground of independent traffic. It was a
pure and gratuitous assumption on their part. Along the whole
line of twelve miles there was only one mile on which the land-
owners were favourable to it. There was eight miles
of dissentients, and three miles, on which the parties were neutral,
or had returned no answer. When the Committee considered that
there were already five lines of railway intersecting and cutting. up
the property of the Hots. Mr. Petre, and when they considered
the opposition that was offered by the other landholders, and that
there was another line proposed which would afford a 1
the accommodation which the Brayton and Goole would give, he
contended that there was no case whatever made out for the line.
The Learned Counsel then proceeded to analyse the tables of
traffic that had been made, and contended that they were all
erroneous, and greatly exaggerated. The whole receipts would not,
he said, amount to within 400/. of the cost of management. How
far different was the course pursued by the promoters of
the Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole line in the construc-
tion of their traffic tables. The greatest care had been taken
by them to procure accurate and incontrovertible information,
and the Committee would recollect what an enormous amount of
traffic they had proved as already existing, and to be anticipated, on
their line. The Learned Counsel then referred to Mr. Hudson's
conduct with respect to the proposed line, and said that the project
entirely originated with him, to promote his own interest and
that of the companies with which he was connected. He
would ask the Committee whether it was right or fair to the
public to empower any one man to have such a preponderating
Infiuence in the railway communication of the country.
The room was then cleared, and the Committee remained in
deliberation for half-an.hour On our readmission
The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee could not come to a
decision that day, it being then past four o'clock, and they had not
made up their minds.

Mr. WttElNs then asked if he would have permission to address
the Committee previous to any decision being come to that would
be adverse to his line or admit the Brayton and Goole line ?
The CHAIRMAN said that in the case assumed by Mr. Wilkins
the Committee would give him the permission he required.
It was then arranged that, after the decision to-morrow, the
Committee would proceed with the clauses of which line was
approved of, and would not enter upon the consideration of the
Doncaster and Goole line till Monday.
The Committee then adjourned till twelve o'clock to-morrow.

GROUP X.
LONDON AND YORK LINE.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)

Mr. Walker's cross-examination occupied a considerable time,
with a view to show that the cuttings, embankments, encroach-
ments, &c., would not be so extensive or so injurious in effect as
the witness appeared to anticipate. When his evidence had
concluded,
Mr. DENISON said that on the part of Lord Scarborough he
would not call any more witnesses. He would now wish to know
what course it was intended to pursue by his Learned Friends
opposite ?
Mr. PAGET said the London and York Company would be willing
to meet Lord Scarborough on the most liberal terms, and obviate
all his objections. If his Learned Friend had Closed his case then,
he (Mr. Paget) would address a few observations on the case he had
made out, while it was still fresh in the minds of the Committee.
The CHAIRMAN then, after a short consultation with the Com-
mittee, said it would be more convenient if Mr. Denison would
now make any observations he wished to offer upon Lord Scar-
borough's case, and then the opposite counsel could either reply
now or when he came to make his general statements.
Mr. DENISON then proceeded to speak of the beauty of Lord
Scarborough's estate. He contended that the beauty of that pro-
perty could not be surpassed by any in England ; a beauty which
it had attained by time, but which no future time could restore if
destvoyed, as destroyed it would be, by the innovation proposed to
be made by this new railroad, which it was alleged was called
for by the paramount claims of the public convenience. The road
would not only cut his estate asunder, but it would deprive him,
by severance of that portion of his estate which he was wont to
use for his own recreation and that of his family, friends,
and visitors. Independent of the many objections to this
innovation on private grounds, he would contend for it that,
even upon public grounds, his Learned Friends opposite
had not proved that this would be the most convenient and
useful that could have been laid out. He (Mr. Denison) had ex.
amined the several engineers produced ; but it did not appear
that any one of them had ever been over Lord Scarborough's
property.
Mr. PAGET objected to his Learned Friend entering upon the
general merits of the case.

Mr. DENISON contended he had a right to do so, and to oc-
cupy the Committee for three weeks if he pleased.—(Laughter)—
and take the Committee from London to York, and speak
upon the evidence as to every mile of the line, for he originally
appeared in opposition to the preamble of the Bill, as well as on
behalf of Lord Scarborough.

The Committee agreed with Mr. Denison, and requested him to
proceed.

Mr. DENISON did so. He contended that no evidence had been
adduced to show accurately the amount, of injury that would be
done to his noble client's property, and therefore he was warranted
in saying that if the London and York Company could
prove that fact, they had intentionally and wilfully
held back that evidence. The only person who could
prove it was Mr. Fairbank, but he had not been produced.
In fact, all the evidence on this point was of a very general cha-
racter, and none of the witnesse, could say that the line went
nearer than within two miles of the house, while in fact it
went within one mile. Mr. Wightman had been asked
what was the nature of the injury that would be done to Lord
Scarborough's property, and he said the injury would be entirely
of an agricultural character, and that no residential in-
jury whatever would be done. Now he (Ur. Denison)
would contend for it that the injury was entirely re-
sidential, and of a ♦ery serious and injurious character.
In the first place, Lord Scarborough at present had various modes of
access to this wood from his house—by private pathways and
other means— without going on the road, or being ex.
posed to the public; but this proposition so completely
cut off all communication, that his Lordship and his
children and his visitors could reach the wood from his house only
by crossing a level or over a bridge where there was a cutting.
His Lordship also was given to hunting, but he had not yet been
able to get horses sufficiently broken in to stand the puff
of a steam engine.—(Laughter.) With such an in-
jury he (Mr. Denison) would ask was 564 an acre
any compensation, or what amount of money could be said to be
sufficient compensation ? The Learned Counsel having recapitu.
toted the engineering evidence at some length, concluded that he
had shown sufficient grounds for establishing the fact that the pre.
amble of the Bill had not been proved.

The CHAIRMAN then called upon Mr. Paget to reply.
Mr. PAGET said he would do so, though he would rather not.
But, as it was the wish of the Committee, he would proceed to
confinehimselfstrictly to Lord Scarborough's case. He was willing
to take the facts in regard to the extent of the supposed injury
to his Lordship's estate to be as they had been stated by Mr.
Powell and Mr. Walker. His (Mr. Paget's) clients were willing
to make any sort of approaches that should be deemed necessary to
those places on his Lordship's farm that should be severed by the
railway. And, further, they were willing to make a tunnel
wherever the cutting was so very deep as to be objectionable.
Mr. PICKERING, on behalf of Sir Wm. Milner, next rose—He
said that his client's house was situated on a very beautiful site, in
proof of which he need only say that it was at one timea nunnery,
for it was well known that the nunneries and monasteries of this
country were remarkable for the beauty of their sites. Some time
ago the Parliament conceived the public convenience demanded
that a line of railway, called tl:e York and North Midland,
should pass through his client's estate, and the result was, that
two miles of the estate was taken up by that railway, and at
a distance of only two miles and a half from the house,
which was situate on an estate that had cost 72,0001. He
(Mr. Pickering) had, like his Learned Friend, Mr. Deni.
son, to complain of the want of accurate engineering evi-
dence as to the extent to which Sir W. Milner's estate
would be affected by the present project. None of
the engineers could state accurately the distance; but he could tell
the Committee it was no less than three miles, with an embankment
of 19 feet deep just opposite the house, and close to the carriage-
drives that were in daily use by the family. He would call wit-
nesses to prove, not only that he was correct in this statement, but
that also on public grounds this was not the most useful line to the
public that could be had, and that for 14 miles it would run parallel
with a line already existing, a thing almost unprecedented.
Mr. Robert Smith, surveyor, was then called, and corroborated
the Learned Counsel's statement in regard to Sir W. Milner's
estate, its locality, value, rent roll, and the manner in which it
would be effected by the proposed railway.
After the examination of another witness to the same effect, the
Committee adjourned at half.past five o'clock.