The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-24 00:00:00

'bout I third of a mile from the centre et the city than the Glasgow,

Kilmarnock, and Ay r Railway. The total length of railway would
be nine miles, and if required, the whole distance would be laid
down for a double line. At present, it was only intended to lay
down the distance from Glasgow to Barrhead, nearly seven miles,
On double rails. The stations on the route were contiguous to the
Places which they were intended to supply.
The witness was examined at considerable length as to the de-
tailed advantages of the line, and confirmed the statements which
had been advanced by Mr. Hildyard yesterday.
He was afterwards cross-examined by Sir T. PHILLIPS, but with.
out eliciting anything in contradiction to his examination in chief.
The engineering evidence was corroborated by Mr. Errington
and Mr. Vignolles.
Mr. Notman, manager of the Hurlet works, estimated the tota
traffic which would be carried on the proposed railway from them
at 60,000 tons,
The evidence of the witness was, however, decried until the
traffic tables should have been put in.
The Committee then adjourned.

Gli OUP L.
POUTSMOUTI-I .A.TIVIOSPEEILIC LINE.

The Committee assembled at twelve this morning, Mr. IL B•
Denison in the chair, with all the other members of the Committee
Present, when
Mr. Samuda was recalled and cross. examined at very consideralrie
length, but notwithstanding the great tact of the counsel, nothing
Was elicited to shake the testimony which he gave yesterday in ft-
'our of the atmospheric line.
Mr. Gibbons, the engineer of the Dalkey line, was again called,
• and repeated what he had previously stated respecting the working
Of the atmospheric principle on this line.
Mr. Cubitt produced the model which he had promised, and ex.
Plained the way in which the trains would meet and pass each

Other, precisely in the way which we gave it on his previous

examination,

3lr. Brunel confirmed the evidence of the previous witnesses,

living additional force to his testimony, by stating that he pre-
ferred practise to theory, and that Mr. liawkesley's formula might
serve for gas, but that in the present instaLcz it was inapplicable
Se air.
Mr. Joseph Cubitt was recalled, and went over the figures which
See gave yesterday.
This closed the atmospheric case, as the counsel stated, we be-
lieve, for the third time.
The Committee then adjourned.

LL.
ZOND ON AND BRIGHTON (WANDSWORTH)
EXTENSION.
The cross-examination of Mr. Langridge respecting the traffic on
the line was resumed by Mr. Sergeant Kinglake, but nothing of the
least interest transpired.

Mr. Edward Draix, surveyor, proved that the value of the land
hquisite for carrying out the line would be 27,2001., the quantity
for the line 66 acres.

. Mr. Rastrick—lt engineer to the London and Brighton Railway
Company. Surveyed the present line from Croydon to Wands-

Worth last year. It began at Croydon-common, crossed the Croy-
...den Railway, but did net in any way Interfere with the works as
they were eighteen feet ten inches above it. The span of the arch
Would be thirty feet. Thence the line proceeded north-west by
Collier's waters and down almost to Tooting. Thence to
the terminus. There were no engineering difficulties, the
deepest cutting was only 15 feet; the highest embankment 18
feet 6 inches. The line crossed no turnpike-road on a level, and
. only three parish roads on a level. The worst gradient on the line
• Wee 1 in 100, and that was only for the distance of half a mile.
The length of the line was 6 miles and 48 chains. The worst
curve was one of halt' a mile radius, at the junction with the South.
Western Railway; the next a curve of three-quarters of a mile
tedius. It was a double line. The total expense of the engineering
Work would be 91,7'264—via., earthwork 10,0001.; bridges, &c.,
19,3854 ; occupation lodges, diversions of roads, &c., 6,6001. ;
fencing, embankment, &c., 39,2684 ; stations, 6,9.804; contin-
dencies, 10,1901.

Crosii.exa mined by Mr. AUSTIN—Did not understand that it
was intended to enlarge theSouth.Western Railway in consequence
Of the junction with it of the proposed line. The principal cutting
ul his line was at. Tooting, where the clay was stiff.
Mr. Leather, another engineer, confirmed the testimony of Mr.
Itastrick, regarding the eligibility of the line and the estimates he
had handed in.
• Mr. Parsons, late Chairman of the Brighton and London Rail.
way Company, gave evidence in favour of the projected line.
Mr. AUSTEN appeared as Counsel for the Croydon Rail-
*aY Company. He would show the Committee that this Bill
Ought not to be now passed, and that it was desirable it
should be postponed. He admitted that a central London terminus
for
the Brighton, Folkestone, Dover, and Portsmouth traffic
would be most desireable, and that a west.end terminus would be
tilkeivise most desireable. It was a question of vital importance to
he Croydon Railway, as to whether the present Bill should be
1!11 sed. The Brighton traffic ran over the Croydon line, which was
,
°, fact part of the trunk tine to Brighton, and this, it was ob.
81°us, would be most detrimental to the interests of the Company.
130,000/. had been expended on the Croydon Railway, on the faith
fat the Legislature would protect their interests—be did not mean
t° exclude the idea of benefiting the public; but what he con.
tended for was, that as long as the traffic could be carried over the
e
.:03,d0n line with convenience it ought not to be interfered with.
Their present charges were most reasonable. He trusted
the Committee would not entertain any scheme which
would operate to the disadvantage of his clients. The
entoters of the projccted line had agreed to pay the South.
western Railway Company 7,0001. a year, and the working of the
gape
would cost more than 6,0001. annually, facts which should not
,""Pe the attention of the Committee in deciding upon the Bill
7ore them. 15,0001. a year was the estimated traffic on the pro-
ICted line, 9,0001. of which would be taken from the Croy.
do
-11 line ; but calculating the whole deduction of traffic
howthe Croydon line, and remembering that what
Guth-Eastern,
passed over the Croydon line wound pass over the
not leis: than 15,0001. per annum would be ab-
'aeted from the Croydon line. The Railway Committee of the
'eard of Trade deci,ied against the projected line, and added that
the reasons adduced against its formation were conclusive; but
they
recommended a prolongation of the South. Eastern line from
le Bricklayers' Aims (near the Elephant and Castle) to the Hun.
terford Bridge. The Learned Counsel went on to show the dis.
tdrantages of the projected line, and called upon the Committee to
elect the Bill.
the Committee then adjourned till to-morrow.

GROUP X.
11°Wthe Committee to whom this group was referred met in Room
~. 8, at twelve o'clock, Lord Courtenay in the chair. Present,
Raring Wall, Mr. Poulett Scrope, and Mr. Darby.
‘.3riecor,:er AND CAMBRIDGE RAILWAY.
~:th_e cross examination of Mr. Parks, who had taken the traffic
the line was their resumed by Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM,
tih! ben) the third L'ay he has been under examina-
Hg , e
was cross_exzmined at great length with
enosed on his direct ex
„Peet to the coach traffic which L." had d-r
as existing at present, and for some time past, on the
itTosed line, also to the amount of inter:',ediate traffic, and, in.
etteotially to the traffic which might reasona::ll' be expected from
• h these sources, for the proposed railway, if it w...'re carried.
kkr. DARBY took exception to the promoters claimin: 64,0001.
th Probable traffic revenue unless they were prepared to stay that
7. had included that sum in the traffic tables.
far
HILDYARD said that even excluding that sum they had a
tiv,i'w revenue, which returned nine per cent., and this, in his
liuni°n, was sufficient to induce the Committee to pass the
. as it was a larger amount of traffic than was usually
mon projected railways. They had only mentioned this
1,71' traffic as likely to pass by this line, in which case the re-
-1,14 would be 121/2 per cent., but, excluding it altogether, they
ullld have 9 per cent.
Blether
Committee then retired for a few minutes, to deliberate
nether they would allow this traffic to be assumed.
tO their return, the CHAIRMAN said the Committee were anxious
2"Beertain whether the promoters intended to include the 64,000/.
Part of the revenue or not ?
titt4, r• HILLIARD said that, after the explanation he gave, it was
The
Intention to do so.
eross.examination of Mr. Parks was then: resumed. The
Innber of fat cattle which the Cambridge and Lincoln line took
1,4: it for as traffic from Lincolnshire to Smithfield and Islington
siti 20.000, and of lean cattle 6,040. Mr. Hubbard, Mr. Dixon,
tio2lr. Road made up the tables. He expected to carry cattle
ept.- Nottingham to London, because the line from Nottingham
sail`cd the proposed line. They expected 3,000 cattle
tit , 61,060 sheep from Leicestershire. These calcula-
hs
torewere all made up by persons on whom they could rely
were at present 250 horses passing yearly between Doncaster
tihd
k;414 ewmarket, and he calculated that double that number would
lior:f the proposed railroad existed. They might not be all race.
lithr's other horses for training having the facilities of conveyance
tseoett the railway would give, would also pass to and fro. If
s
114 20/. represented the traffic in cattle of 83 miles, the Cambridge
44,4:Lincoln line, he did not know whether 56,0001. was an ex-
Lve traffic to claim for the London and York line. „,
4011;0,040 cattle from Lincolnshire, and the 4,680 claimed
hath. Other parts as anticipated to pass by the proposed line had
whatever to do with the 10,000 cattle alluded to by Mr.
tlai,,ini• In point of quantity he considered that as they had
Istrd credit for 14,135 tons of wool from London to York, 9,040
It, Claimed by the London and York line was a moderate estimate.
ttsie°4ltl not prove the tables of coal, general merchandise, or
lts: They were drawn sip by Mr. Lane, who would give evidence
tis-,sheill• The witness was then subjected to a minute cross.
elii7nation on the coach traffic, which he stated in his direct exa-
14.4tiori the London and York line had no right to claim credit for.
ltist—ewas a coach passing from Stamford to Leicester. He deducted
loati"ach, because he considered that the passenger going by it
Istt,cl slot take the London or York line, going either north or
trtd". If upon 124 Irish coaches the number of passengers ex-
.ketl nine, he was not able to say whether that was an
ek7aive average number to form a calculation on with re.
tmt to the English coaches. He considered that seven was
"A't. Proportion.
Aber a short re-examination by Mr. WEBSTER,
tr;"*. Pare,a railway traffic calculator, was then examined by Mr.
li it considerable length, but his evidence was of a similar nature
sth:l last witness.
Toe Committee then adjourned till twelve o'clock to-morrow.