The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-01 00:00:00

vantages which the London and York scheme presented were, '
the means of shortening the distance between London and
York, giving a direct communication with London to all the
large towns, and giving accommodation to the whole of the
northern and eastern districts of the country.
The first witness called was Mr. S. Strong, who was exa-
mined by Mr. Sergeant KINOLAKE—Witness resided at Barnet.
Was a farmer in the neighbourhood. Theprosperity of the town
had greatly diminished since the old coach traffic had been
withdrawn, and since the London and Birmingham Railway
had been established. The present price of coal there was
from 425. to 455. a ton. It was all brought by carts from
London. The district round Barnet was a hay-growing
district. The hay was all sent to London. The cost of
conveyance to London was 12s. a load of 18 cwt., being the
fourth of the value. Ile considered that the London and
York Railway, when made, would be a great advantage. It
would cause a saving of one-half in the carriage of hay. He
he counted himself, last Saturday, 187 carts containing hay
and straw, on their way to the LOndon market. The district
suffered greatly by the want of a ready mode of bringing
manure from London. The cost of taking manure from Lon-
don to Barnet was 17s. a load.
Mr. WELLS, who appeared for the Eastern Counties Rail-
way Company, and certain opposing landowners, was about
to cross-examine the witness, when
Mr. Sergeant KriGLAKE objected. He contended that
the Eastern Counties Company had no locus standi before
the Committee, inasmuch as no line connected with that
Company was before the Committee.
Mr. AUSTIN contended that as the Eastern Counties
Railway was a competing line with the proposed London
and York line, they had a right to appear.
The Committee, after a quarter of an hour's deliberation,
decided that the Eastern Counties Company had a right to
appear.
The witness was then cross-examined by Mr. WELL s
Never knew that the hay-dealers received hay by the Bir-
mingham Railway, although Watford was a hay-growing
district. The hay was sent in carts.
Mr. COCKBURN was about to cross-examine the witness,
when—
Mr. KINGLAKE objected.
Mr. COCKBURN said he appeared for the Direct Northern
Railway Company.
Mr. KINGLAKE said the scheme had been thrown out by
the Standing Orders Committee, and, therefore, the scheme
was not before Parliament.
Mr. COCKBURN said this question had been raised on that
very day in the case of the Hull and Gainsborough line,
which had been rejected on standing orders, the promoters of
which had applied to be allowed to appear against a rival
scheme. The opinion of the Speaker'had been taken on the
subject, and he had held that the parties ought to be allowed

to appear.
The Committee again retired. During their absence Mr.
B. Denison, Mr. R. Yorke, and Mr. Christopher, members
of the Provisional Committee of the London and York Com-
pany entered the room, and on the return of the Committee
entered into conversation with them respecting the merits of
the line before them.
The CHAIRMAN said the Committee are of opinion that the
Direct Northern are to be let in.—(Great aughter.)
The Committee then adjourned.

TIIE TOTTENHAM AND FARRINGDON-STREET
EXTENSION RAILWAY.
This Bill was said in our Third Edition last night to be
thrown out by the Standing Orders Committee. This,
however, is not the case, the Bill is allowed to go on. The
error originated through a false rumour raised in the passages
to the Committee-room, by
some of the gentlemen whose in-
terests are compromised by the success of the promoters so far.
Sub-Committee No. 1.
The Committee re-assembled this day at twelve o'clock
in room No. 7 ; present Mr. Strutt, Chairman ; Mr. Villiers
Stuart, Mr. Brotherton, Mr. Cavendish, and Mr. Beckett.
The respective agents of the Bills set down for this Com-
mittee having conferred with the Chairman, it was agreed to
adjourn the following petitions for Bills :
The Goole and Doncaster till to-morrow—the Midland
Railways Company (Birmingham)—Gloucester and Bris-
tol, and Gloucester Railway purchase, to Tuesday next—
Birmingham and Gloucester Railway Acts Amendments, to
Tuesday next—the Great Western Railway (Ireland)—Dub-
lin to Mullingar, till to-morrow.
The Committee proceeded with the adjourned inquiry into
the allegations in the petition against the
STAINES AND RICHMOND RAILWAY.
Several allegations of misdescription of property were
allowed.
Mr. Samuel Hughes, the civil engineer, of Duke-street,
Westminster, was called by Mr. Venables, to prove the mark-
ings on the plans and sections. Standing orders not com-
plied with in those instances.
A large number of allegations of a clerical nature were
sustained.
The next allegation possessing anything like interest was
that the promoters had not served notices on the owners of
a field at Staines, through which flows a portion of the River
Thames.
Mr. ELLICOMEE, for the promoters, objected to the allega-
tion, on the ground that it was not sufficiently specific. He
considered the allegation should state who were the owners
of the River Thames. It was impossible to prove that no
notices had been served without naming who were the par-
ties that should be served.
Mr. VENABLES submitted that the River Thames had con-
servators, and it was plain that they were in the .light of
owners.
The CIIAIRMAN ordered the room to be cleared, to enable
the Committee to consider the allegation.
After a short deliberation the parties were called in, and
informed by the CHAIRMAN that the standing orders in this
case had not been complied with.
A few other trifling allegations were disposed of, and the
opposing petition having been gone through,
The CHAIRMAN said that he would report to the House
that the standing orders had not been complied with in se-
veral
instances.
LONDON AND BRIGHTON RAILWAY (REIGATE
AND DORKING BRANCH).
This line of railway is to be from Redhill station, through
Reigate, Buckland, Blechwortb, anti end at Dorking. It will
be seven miles in length, and is estimated to cost 109,734/.
Engineer, Mr. Vignoles.
Mr. Ellicombe appeared for the promoters of the Bill, and
Mr. Coates appeared on the petition of Mr. Stent, and also
another petition from the owners and occupiers of property
on the line, amongst whom is the agent to the Duke of
Norfolk.
The formal notices having been gone through,
that
t forh e one
l\lr.
theic
ELLICOSIBEo e
maintained
Mr. COATES submitted the first allegation to the considera-
tion of the Committee, which was to the effect that the plan
and sections, as well as the Bill, deposited in the Private Bill-
office, contained powers for making two lines of railway,
whereas
sserved
were onlys
asked for
powers to make one line of railway, and not two lines ; and it
was not to be supposed that they would attempt making
two lines.
nt
The room was cleared, and, after a long deliberation, the
parties were called in and informed by
The CHAIRMAN that the Committee were of opinion the
standing orders had not been complied with.
A few trivial allegations were then sustained; after which
The CHAIRMAN said the standing orders were not com-
plied with in several instances.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER, April 30.
TRIAL AT BAR.—THE GREAT DISTILLERY CASE.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. GEORGE SMITH.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Mr. G. Whitehead, principal clerk in the rectifying-house
t f Mr. James Scott Smith, examined by Mr. WaTsort—Had
held the same situation twenty years.. Recollected the re-
building of the house in 1836. Previous to that the water
from the distillery was conveyed, partly by a trough along the
roof, and partly by a pipe under ground. This was
the case at the time when witness went to the establishment.
The pipe was altered in 1838. The cock was under ground,
where the under-ground spirit tubs were. There was a flap
or trap over it, to be lifted up by a ring. Thought it could.
not escape the notice of an officer on surveying duty. There
never had been, to his knowledge, one drop of spirits passed
through the pipe to the reetifying-house before it was done
by the officers. Believed it to be utterly impossible that spi-
rits could be so passed without his knowing it. There were
sixty-eight gallons of spirits in the vat No. 17,
before the officers began. The day after the experiment was
made the water used for drinking iu the counting -house and
messengers' room, supplied by the pipe, was remarkably
tainted with spirit. The taste was very remarkable. His
attention was first called to it by the messengers. After the
seizure was made stock was taken, and again in six weeks
afterwards, when there was found to be a decrease
of 48 gallons upon a stock of 40,000 gallons. In three
weeks afterwards stock was taken again, when a decrease of
twenty gallons was found. Those decreases took place
whilst the officers were in full possession of the premises.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL objected to this line of examina-
tion having nothing to do with the case.
Mr. WATsox said he had all that he wantel The ques-
tions were put in reference to what had been stated by the
Crown witnesses on the subject of decrease.
Cross-exaMined by Mr. subject
the officers asked
him where the water came from which was dripping into the
still-head, he said he hardly knew. In fact. he did know
that it came from the distillery, but not exactly from what
particular tank.
By the Cowtr—What he meant by the answer he gave to
the officers was that he thought it better to_ .give no distinct_
Mr. James oi b d. mg, examined by Mr. MARTIN—Had been
managing distiller in the Whitechapel distillery 28 years from
1807, that is down to 1835, when his engagement cer.sed.
The evidence of this witness was merely confirmatory of that
given by the two previous witnesses as to., the great number
of years during which the rectifying-house had been supplied
with water from the distillery by a pipe underground. That
pipe could not have existed without the knowledge of the
Excise officers. A great quantity of water was necessary in
a distilling or rectifying-house. A large supply was
ngcon-
veyed by pipes tó every distillery he knew except in Ireland,
where some distilleries were built closed to a river side,
and the worm was placed in the river.—(A laugh. )
In 1826, Mr. lietheri ton, the principal surveyor, who
was the chief officer under the Board, and the two officers
next to him in authority, Mr. Steele and Mr. Logic, made an
accurate survey cf the premises, and the water communica-
tion was accurately examined by them.
The SOLICITOR-GENARAL objected to the mode of of exa-
mination as irrelevant.
The CHIEF BARON said, that as the Excise witnesses _for
the Crown had sworn that they knew nothing of the com-
munication, it was competent for the defendants to give evi-
dence that their superiors knew of it.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL wished the Court once for all to
understand that he objected to any evidence of surveys before
1836.

Mr. KELLY was about to reply, when
The-Lonn CmEr BARON said,Vr. Kelly, we are of opinion
that you are competent to give any evidence of this kind you
please. It will be for us to tell the jury whether it affects
the issue or not.
Mr. Baron PLarr—A great part of the evidence for the
Crown has been directed to establish the charge of conceal-
ment, and to show that the officers were ignorant of the com-
munication. It would be most unjust to prevent the de-
fendant from proving that there was no concealment, and the
Excise authorities were aware of the fact.
Examination resumed—Up to the time witness left the
employment all the officers surveying the premises were aware
of the Communication. As to the question of taking charges,
the matter was so difficult, and the instrument so uncertain,
that the Act of Parliament allowed a variation of 25 per
cent. and in taking the charge upon the same back of wash,
no two charges will be alike. The witness was going to ex-
plain the mysteries of brewing, distilling' and guaging, when
he was interrupted by. the Court. "My Lord," said he, "if
my explanation is not material to the case it is material to
my character as a brewer, 'that when I am examined
upon such a question I should not make a fool of myself."
—(Great laughter in which their Lordships heartily joined.)
when the law was altered in 1825, and it was necessar7 to
have the dipping-rod fixed, a new receiver *as made. fhe
hole first made in the cover for the rod did not satisfy him or
the Excise, aud, consequently, a new hole was made by wit-
ness's order. The original hole was then covered by boards.
The cross-examination of this witness,.although frequently
intetru pted by objections and legal discussions, elicited nothing
material.
"tiles Beau,' examined by Mi. Wasok--114 been