The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-14 00:00:00

(THIS DAY.)

- -
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Th. n irliZ CORNWALL RAILWAY.
•-otoraittee met at eleven o'clock.
th4ll- Kenneth and Mr. Whitby were the first witnesses examined
litteprit4r4infl. Their evidence regarded the value of the land
t
eliat4;'r*biell the line passes, and was not of an important
larded
Whit
lb Y Was cross-examined by Mr. Rows, not only as re-
ofthand the land, but respecting the geological nature
Ilitthe„c444trYs the disadvantages of the line in point of curves.
tozwto o...auLgiblitnTe curves on the central line were better than on tl.e
4141titivsts objected to Mr. Rowe's eliciting evidence in
n of a line which was not before the Committee.
44'; the
said he only wished to show the demerits of the line
telt le Committee, but the object on the other side was to shut
Ae ,
the truth.
tglettioadereation then occurred between the Counsel, and the old
tette 4 of the locus standi of the opponents to the Bill was
*ed.
go
the c
00. ouernittee decided upon allowing the cross-examination to
lt was Proceeded with accordingly, but nothing material
elicited
I,:kr '
"%fa,. Blot'
deposed that he valued the land on the Bodmin
el;"4t 3,5501.
lisktltles Pearce had conducted the steam ferry-bridge at Tor-
41sNi et. Upwards of eleven years. He worked from six in the
htk 4g till half-past nine at 'tight. Was aisle at all times to
listith the bridge. There was very considerable naviga-
v etote'e• Vessels of 180 tons went up to Morham.
.4tiless,,,,e_,l44lined—Collisions had sometimes occurred between
'4lO ""u the floating bridges. A lady was drowned on one oc-
tet, 4' bit it
duet., Was from extreme carelessness on the part of the boat
ure.
t4e,a7,sWer to a question from Mr. MLesivaLE, witness said he
44' there ;would be no difficulty or danger in passing over a
I,c train mi this floating bridge.
taere,,,kthltlis of BREADALBANE—How long does it occupy you
Wits Hanaoaze with a large load?
Ilie-4L-Not more than six or seven minutes.
Wito.4.eltiltasr---.Do you carry cattle over P
bie;,4--Frequently.
'4citor for the Bill then gave some formal evidence respect
(tthe"%
4hede4 Fturiber and amount of shares. He was cross-examined at
1•
44,44 length by Mr. Rowe.
rt4eebete.ll explained to the Committee a conference which took
d has „,ween the promoters of the Bill and the Admiralty, when
;4eedi;_tisfactorily arranged that several clauses should heintrion.-
4fer,,,' the Bill which would guarantee against all injurious
`s*_e with the navigation of tbe Ilamoaze.
tees. Noble CHAIRMAN observed that it would be much better if
4
itkerard4 of Admiralty and Ordnance would carry on their corn-
-11,L°48 in writing than oral:y.
for the promoters of the Bill then closed.
4.44•
-juret witness called for the opposition to the Bill was J. W.
1., who stated that the line would pass through his
Pet4t• and Sear his residence. Did not think the line a good
'w' further considered that the county was not able to sup-
!,,lisZlinee. Mr. Locke the engineer, said it was the most slan-
,,‘eiti,:ne he had ever seen, and that a floating-bridge for the
se wits .
1, 41 to Possible, but a contrivance which he
.would do a great
I4t Ooid. Such was witness's opinion likewise. The coast
tram,
be most difficult, and would cross several deep ravines at
The e!". The line would cross several rivers.
that witness was cross-examined at great length. He admitted
Ihskhohlation was the strong point in favour of the present Bill.
e P4,sed through a populous district. But it would be
et to', useless to the corn-growing country of the nortn. The bridge
fall tht„W;lthiel would be a great nuisance to that town, as passing so
~s'r Principal street. In 1840 and 1841 everybody in Corn.
fs,W,;s in favour of the central line, but many of them were now
th;,,,tl' Of the line before the Committee.
`-'3utnrittee then adjourned till to-morrow morning.
44ittlIZEED, PONTEFRACT, AND GOOLE
et .. ,
The Coln. RAILWAY.

A" o'clssastnock, ittee
in on
the thiCourt of Common Pleas line (and Tenterden ands the Charn) met
oat areat
i. number of opponents entered their names against the
Po Zktatrr opened the case for the promoters. He said that
tstruction of this line would confer the greatest advantages
, 0. eastern counties of England, and particularly on the town
ressi,,°°le, which at present was almost destroyed by its
411,4%4 with its powerful rival Hull, and the disadvantages
arith Whichit Laboured iu rßilway communication as compared
Irate. The Learned Counsel entered into minute details of
Isse. showing that at Goole the northern coal-fields and the
sils`t;tslaire and Lancashire manufactures would find an admirable
aj,!st, and that from the connexion with the Manchester and
I,Qc Railway, no scheme in England had greater claims on the
of
;s he T.,
,q,,,...o.STirns:spianild:tavt,:eerd"---eoleoylae:.Counsel referred also to the petitions o. f the
Mr. Smith, of the York and North Midland
363,00T0/11.e length of the line was twenty.seven
Witness
411:_i:finretreosspWeeerte then called, and the first, Mr. John Lister, gave
of the rise, progress, and decline of the Goole
oini consequence of the superior advantages of the port of Hull.
t°itsss„ Y,,thing that could balance those advantages would be the
lattiS'etlon of independent railways of which this would be one.
bus I: Was a counter line proposed by'the York and North Midland,
40ie.1515 °Pinion it would confer no benefit upon the town of
-'44.„
--nes M.P. for Pontefract, spoke to the feeling of the
stra-
.in favour of the proposed railway.
the tr,,,,ltlehaed Patten, collector of Customs, furnished a return of
rtesseci""shof Goole, from which it appeared that while it had de-
., kr b ar of Hull had greatly extended.
iW alk and Capt. Laws gave similar evidence, and their Lord.
:10larned shortly before five o'clock.
tkx.,
I.27O2CESTER, AND I.VOI.VEX-
, The gliVir TON.
th srtwitittee met to-day at eleven o'clock, Lord Auckland
/4: -"air, when the examination of witnesses was resumed.
10,4 trunel's (civil engineer) examination continued-11e Ox.
sh,l4 it:Od ,ItughY line was mush more favourable than the branch of
I,:ests::-0h arid Birmingham. ale country was very easy, the
"iiss sradient beieg only one in 130. The gradients on the coa-
hspe'et'i4es were very severe, the steepest being one in 100. With
il°4o,dt°.. the break of gusges, ha considered Rugby superior to
is.°W sop'," the point for that purpose. At Rugby several railways
"t coops
under any circumstances, the.re would have to
s iron sking and remaking of the goods trains, the tranship-
°l the br d t e risrrow gaug or versa could be
itless,s -a With very tl
little additionales,
labourvice or expense. The
L
effs,„,"gew explained the mode by wh:ch the transhipment would
'lll C'd, which has already been fully given in his previous exa-
-14,," *°4 before the House of Commons' Committee.
\\i it
Litt)? x'e'sa Was cross-examined at some length by Mr. Sergeant
ks:Lir",, with the purpose of showing that the object sought to
'llr,:"Plished by the present scheme was the construction.of a
ttyski t7tius line of railway to Birmingham, so as to establish direct
Lttilest ,°4 With the London and Birmingham Railway.
.Bhe
17.14sermis,i'c", before the Committee would. not effect that direct
atmn with Birmingham, but in the event of the
f' °f Which
and Warwick line being formed, and a proposed
1,1:1114to'-;naisewhicakprospectus had been published, from Fenny Comp
b • a direct communication.
gt %how then
there
would
' independent of the
est „, ever, were proposed by companies
*gibith "estern Company, and the distance from London to 8ir-
(144 ti4:ll,l'oUld then be ;welve miles further than by the London
Znniihatn Still with the superior gauge and engines of the
tp,s 'wester • n Company he admitted that they could take goods
ksPril vs°llers at a cheaper and quicker rate than the London and
Nosy,
The difference of capital between the present
4Q
.41, the London and Birmingham was nearly a mithan of
Works -0 could not exactly explain the difference of capital, as
the rite „ ethe London and Birmingham line were heavier than
s'es the Great Western. The scheme of the former was ten
'se aiti.lo :6er than the latter, but this was not sufficient to explain
kr. elice of the estimates.
,21ast 'ergearit WRANCEIAM said he would suggest a course that
"ers rave the time of the Committee, as far as those estimates
tlttl°lleerned• He would furnish Mr. Brunel with a series of
t•tahiet- questions, to which he could furnish answers and explana.
kr. be afterwards placed before the Committee.
stekttit) nrnoel had no objection to the course suggested, and it was
R.IY so arranged.
s74,l;itben was next cross-examined by counsel on behalf of
ard and Redesdale and the Birmingham Canal Company,
N'
wir 'uout leading Mr
any material result.
Zp; elthitt and r, Vignolles, civil engineers, were examined in
to tLatinn of the evidence of Mr. Brunel. They both certified
taae with which the two sets of rails could be worked on
ttt -.4trteline of railway. With regard to the transhipment of
the
44,0 considered that it could be effected with dispatch,
.and
tss 'lt reasonable expense, Mr. Cubitt stating that goods might
ctts°stf:se_rred from one gauge. to another at a farthing a ton.
'etas the
witnesses were briefly examined on the evidence ad-
-441 e Committee adjourned till to-morrow at eleven o'clock.
tit
LONDON ILAILWAY LEASE AND
„The EXTENSION.
't'tt4 -vi Set Committee appointed by the House of Lords to
tin, th
tic Merits of this Bill re-assembled, after the adjournment,
4 kria--ay1.1% and, at the request of the parties, again adjourned

Zavv
04 Z(POOL AND zunli" LINE.
tl4 the
ttl,is eeting of the Committee this morning at eleven (the
Qove °f Clanricarde in the chair), the evidence in favour of the
44 fir,'he_tvas continued.
10 ti„a "I°o Cottam, accountant, at Manchester, gave evidence
,t°014.7 traffic and capital of the proposed line. 'The capital of the
Oaht 10 Was 912,0001, and the amount of loan which they
tt's'oed u. raise 304,000/. The amount of shares already sub-
t,:ecl V. Was 69t1,900/. The rest of this witness's evidence re-
eotnalllciPally to the traffic tables of the Company, which had
vhi, 8° Out by himself.
The "neluded the case on the part of the promoters of the line.
t:thele'reattble was then declared to be proved.
re,;s t,lauses of the Bill having been examined, and slightly al.
"° Committee rose.

Th
'171.=.31". LONZIcsi 13.41.XLIVAY.
orninittee on thin line of vvtich Lord Brougham is the
inet at 11 o'clock.
eo,!, rta g•mlents b4tween counsel not having been completed,
zit% cqUence of the absence of an engineer, it way prorosed,
Art: C°lllmittee adjourn imt;l Wednestiay.
tbntittMule conversation it was at length determined that the
ce sticnltt adjourn tii.til Fiiday.—Adjourned accordingly.
Oh i?e°.rTISIE masx.yrod-ar,
docko. morning, at eleven
e re.assembling nt the Committee this
7ir°, 'Dlittwa proceeded to :2ddre;s them on behali (4' the op.'
4 tt4 „n '4lldowner. The Learned Counsel quoted several extracts
1/ ‘lb,Port of the Board of Trade, from which it appeared that
klltrpt line was not an inferior line to that before the Com.
1214 that the etoppages on it were ottlectOneble• The

question of the proposed line, looking simply at its merits, divided
itself into two parts, First, into the through traffic, and then into
the question of the local tratile. The subject of tbe traffic going
north and south was a mole gee-ed.:hi of saving, in point of time, of
about five minutes as cerararcd with the coast-line; and looking
at the j-ireiitcr cutout of public accommodation which the latter line
would i.ffortt, it ti us meet tionably the prt fr. Table of the two.
With respeat to the local traffic, he contended that the amount
had teen cver.rated to the extent of 20,000/.; that the periods of
the year whiff h bud been selected for the computation of the tables
were most unfair, and that the small requirements of the district
which the line traversed did not justify the damage and
nuisance which it would occasion to the owners of
the eight milts of laud who were opposing the Bill.
He contended also that the passenger traffic, which bad been put
down as being derived front Cargill, Arbroath, and other places,
could not, in phint of fact, be properly included. These were
matters which their Lordships ought to consider well before they
came to any decision on the subject. With regard to the goods
traffic frets Forfar to Dundee there had not been one particle
of evidence to show that it would go by the railway, and
11,e probabilh, was that it wouid continue to be conveyed along
tie read by which it had always been sent. The same observa-
tions would apply to the traffic in stone, wood, and other similar
articles. The items in the coal and lime tables had been greatly
exaggerated : credit had been taken for 26,000 tons out of 40,000
tons from mere guess and pro-pective notions. There would be
a: great a comp, tirion in the sate of coals front the Dundee market
in GlAnis and other points of the proposed line as there
would be in the coal coming from Forfar, which place
had been set forth as the point of concentration, where all
competition would end. The grand depot for their cattle traffic
was at Brechin. That point could be settled in a few words. A
railway already existed for the conveyance of the cattle from Brechin
to the south. The same observation applied to all the traffic except
the intermediate cattle traffic, but then it was absurd to suppose that
these cattle wcule be driven four or five miles for the purpose of merely
travelling a few miles by railway. He contended that it was the
du' y of the promoters to lay before the Committee that clear and
cogent evidence that its authenticity could not be doubted. The
cause, however, was that their tables had been constructed on in-
correct data, and consequently could not be relied on.

Mr. Stocks, who was examined for the opposition, spoke gene-
rally as to the traffic to Perth, which he said he should prefer
sending in carts as at present, rather than by the proposed railway,
owing to the distance. They carried potatoes to Perth, and
brought back coals. The price of the Glengarry coal, at Perth,
was 14s. per ton, and English coal, of an inferior quality, might
be obtained at 12s. per ton. He never saw any cattle coming east-
ward from the Forfar market. Cargill was almost entirely an
agricultural village, and certainly not one-third of the population
were engaged in cotton spinning. He thought the tables were
generally very incorrect and extravagant. He had conversed with
all the farmers between Kinclaven and Perth, and the majority of
them were adverse to the proposed line. He was not aware of any
petitions being presented in favour of it. For his own part, he
thought it would never answer.

Mr. Isaac M'Cray, coach contractor at Aberdeen, was next ex-
amined. He said he was nearly the largest contractor in Scotland,
and usually kept from 200 to :MO horses. He considered that the
main line of communication between Dundee, Perth, Arbroath, and
Montrose, would be by means of the coast lines, and not through
Strathmore. The coach traffic in the tables had been generally
overstated. The proposed line was not, in his opinion, necessary
for the convenience of the district, as the points of distance were
very short, and were easily travelled by coaches.
1 he witness was subject to short cross.examination by Mr. HOPE
without materi:dly altering his statements, and
Tho Committee edjourhed till to-morrow at eleven.