The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-12 00:00:00

GROUP RR.

PRESTON BROOR AND RUNCORN air-NE.

The Select Committee on this group re-assembled at twelve
o'clock this morning, and proceeded with the case for the noble
promoter of the Preston Brook and Runcorn Railway.
Mr. Rippon, whose examination in chief was taken yesterday,
was cross-examined by Messrs. ATKINSON and BIELLis, with a view
of showing that the traffic was not sufficiently extensive to justify
the construction of the line.

Mr. George Oxley, a Staffordshire manufacturer, proved that
the line would be a considerable advantage to the Pottery districts.
Mr. George Frederic Bateman, a civil engineer, of some experi-
ence, said, he had laid out the line, and thought it the best line
that could be suggested. The whole length of the line from the
Grand Junction Railway at Prestonßrook to Runcorn Docks would be
about four miles and three quarters. There would be thiee passenger
stations—one at Preston Brook, another at Halton, and the third
at Runcorn. From Runcorn there would be two branches—one to
the Duke's Dock, and the other to Castle Rock, both of which
would be about a mile in extent. The severest gradient on the line
from Preston Brook to Runcorn would be about one in 120, and
on the branches one in 20 and one in 30. The branches, however,
would only be used for goods traffic, and would be worked by sta-
tionary engines. The main line would be through a cutting, and it
would not interfere with any parks or ornamental grounds, nor
would it prove a nuisance to any buildings of importance. The
cost of construction of the line and branches he estimated at
111,0001.
On cross.examination he said the line to Halton would be made
double, but the two branches to Runcorn Docks and Castle Rock
would only be made with single rails. The actual length of the
main line and two branches would be five miles and three quarters.

The CHAIRMAN here intimated that the Committee did not wish
to hear any further traffic or engineering evidence, and they should
therefore be glad if the opponents of the line would state the
nature of their opposition.
Mr. Ewa. on behalf of the Trent and Mersey Canal Company,
urged that a better line might be marked out for the advantage of
the public and the local interests of the district.

Mr. ATKINSON, who appeared for Sir Richard Brook, contended
that no sufficient case had been made out to justify the Committee
passing the preamble to the Bill. It was quite clear that there was
no local traffic to Runcorn, and then as to the line serving the
Potteries, it was monstrous to make such an assertion because
there was a through traffic from Staffordshire to Runcorn.
There was a through traffic, he admitted, from Stafford-
shire to Liverpool, and at the present time there was a
deeply-conceived scheme before the public for accommodating
that traffic, which would have to come before Parliament in the
next session. Now it was evident the Grand Junction Company
were endeavouring to intercept this great scheme, through the me-
dium of Lord Francis Egerton, and if the Committee sanctioned
the Bill, they would only be establishing a short interpolatory line,
which would prove of no public benefit, but might hereafter serve
as an obstacle to the carrying out of the larger and better scheme
to which he had alluded.

The room was then cleared, and the Committee having consulted
together for a short time, strangers were re-admitted, when
The CIIAIRM•N announced that the Committee were unani..
mously of opinion that the preamble had been proved.
The remaineer of the day was occupied in considering the vari-
ous clauses contained in the Bill. The Committee afterwards ad-
journed till one o'clock to-morrow.

GROUP SS.
THE EREWASH VALLEY LINE.

The Select Committee on this group re-assembled at the usual
hour this morning, and proceeded with the case for the promoters
of the Erewash Valley Railway.

Mr. G. Hudson, the Chairman of all the Midlands, was called
to prove that an agreement had been entered into be-
tween the promoters of the proposed railway and the Midland
whereby the former transferred their line to the latter in the event
of its being sanctioned by Parliament. The consideration for the
transfer was, that the Erewash Valley proprietors should hod
145,0001, worth of Midland Stock, and be at all times guaranteed
6 per cent. If the Midland dividend happened to be more
than that sum, the Erewash proprietors were to participate in
the increase. The Midland by the same agreement undertook to
continue on the Erewash line to Ambergate, or any other point
which might be thought more advisable, on the Midland Counties
Railway. The Midland people had always contemplated making
this branch, and it was calculated it would lessen the distance of
the main route to London by seven miles.

Mr. Buckley, M.P. for Newcastle, confirmed the evidence of
Mr. Hudson. The agreement was executed by Mr. Hudson and
himself.

Mr. William Jessop, a magistrate of Nottingham and Derby, and
a member of the Battesley Company, who employed upwards
of 2,000 hands, and had very extensive iron and coal works
on the line, was strongly in favour of the railway—
in fact, in his opinion, it was absolutely necessary for the wants of
the district that it should be made. He was a member of the
Society of Civil Engineers, and well acquainted with the mode and
manner of constructing railways. He thought the one before the
Committee could be made without difficulty. It was judiciously
laid out ; indeed a line going in the same routs was marked out
some years ago by Mr. Rennie.
This closed the case for the promoters of the line.
Mr. GREENWOOD intimated that the Counsel for the opponents of
the Bill did not think it necessary to trouble the Committee with
any address, and they would, therefore, with the permission of the
Committee, proceed at once to the evidence they had to produce
against the Bill. . .

_
Mr. Valentine, an engineer, was called to prove that the line
from Nottingham to Erewash was infinitely superior, and much
better calculated to serve the interests of the public at large and
the local establishments of the district, than the line before the
Committee.

Mr. Goodwin, a magistrate at Derby, proved that the Notting.
ham and Erewash line would do less damage to private property
than the Erewash Valley line.
Mr. Patteson, one of the managers of the Erewash Canal, was
examined to rebut the evidence which had previously been given
relating to the scarcity of water in the canal. He said it was
but rarely that any inconvenience was felt from a scarcity of water
or from floods,

The remainder of the day was occupied with similar evidence,
and the Committee afterwards adjourned till Friday.

GROUP WW.

THE ST. lIEZ EN'S CANAL AND RAILWAY.
The Committee met to-day at twelve o'clock, Mr. Pringle in the
chair.

The CHAIR VAN decided the point referred to in our yesterday's
report, that Mr. Scoresby had a sufficient interest in the question
to be heard.

Mr. Fortsvrir then resumed his statement in favour of the
scheme. It was a Bill to effect an amalgamation between these
two rival companies.
The railway was one of the oldest in Eng_
land, having been formed in 1833, but had hitherto never paid any
dividend. The canal, though it had paid a dividend, had done
so at the expense of the repairs which ought to have been made
upon It. It was expected, by putting an end to the rivalry,
and by the economy that would be effected in the management of
the amalgamated company, that the interest of the shareholders
would be greatly improved.
this stage of the proceedings, Mr. KNoWLEs, on behalf of
Mr. Scoresby, said that he had drawn up a clause, which the pro-
moters of the Bill had assented to, a clause which he had no doubt
Mr. Scoresby would agree to. He could not see that gentleman till
the evening, and, therefore. he would postpone the clause till after
then ; in the meantime he would withdraw his opposition to the
preamble of the Bill.
Mr. Sinclair, Treasurer of the Runcorn Gap Railway, deposed as
to the state of the company and its financial affairs. The whole
receipts for the last four years were 46,7161. the expenses had
been 32,4041. ; the Interest on bond debts 14,0001. ; leaving a
balance of 3121. The original cost was 205,0001. Since the line
opened there had been an actual loss of 2,0431. At the present
time there was owing, on simple contract, 2,6001., and on bonds
4,0431. The shareholders were of opinion that the amalgamation
would be of great benefit.
Mr. J. Ashton Case, the secretary to the canal company, gave
evidence that before the railway was formed, the dividend paid on
shares was 9 per cent.; the amount now patd was about 5i per cent.
This had arisen in consequence of the opposition between the two
Companies, and the reduced rate of tolls.
This was the case for the Bill.
The consideration of the clauses was then entered upon, and the
whole, with a few verbal amendments, agreed to. The Bill was
then ordered to be reported ; the Chairman reserving power to

sign the clause relative to Mr. Scoresby, as soon as that gentleman
had assented to it.

GROUP X.
CAMBRIDGE AND LINCOLN LINE.

At the sitting of the Committee this day,

Mr. HILDYARD, having been called on by the Chairman, rose and
said, it was only for him now to state, that unless the House of
Commons interposed he could do nothing more than go on with his
case as a project, and therefore he would put Mr. Rendall in the
box, and call upon his Learned Friend to continue his cross-exa-
roination.

Mr. Rendall then took his seat, and was cross.examined by Mr.
Sergeant WRANGHAM—He said, in answer to the question, that
his estimate had been made on an amended section, in reference
only to the error in question, but that error was really nothing.
Sergeant WRANORAM—Was it not identical with the de.
posited section, so far as it was connected with that
error 7—lt was ; but that error could be correeted by
keeping the line five feet higher than it appeared on the
section. There was an error with reference to the datum line;
but there wss no error with reference to the level of the surfaces.
He would produce a copy of the section that had been deposited,
and on that he would lay down the point at which the alleged
error commenced, and which extended the whole way to Lincoln,
and would show that it would not affect the earth-work at all for
the whole of that distance, except the one furlong. He would
wish an explanation he was now going to give should appear in
the short-hand writers' notes; it was this: at a distance of six-
teen miles from Cambridge he would mark a point called A, and at
the distance of one furlong from that towards Lincoln he would mark
another point B; it was between these two points, and for that dis-
tance only, that the level would be ten feet lower than the line from
Cambridge to point A; but from B, the whole way to Lincoln,
there was no error ; but as the error did exist between A and B,
the line from B to Lincoln was ten feet lower than the line from
Cambridge to A. Here the witness spoke of his inability to furnish
the section before the day after to-morrow, and of his wish to be
candid in his answers, and not to fence any question, where-
upon the Learned Counsel who cross-examined him expressed his
entire satisfaction at the answers the witness had given, and his
conviction that he had been quite candid, &c., &c. He then pro.
ceeded to question the witness as to the extent of the population of
the different towns in the district through which the Cambridge
and Lincoln line was proposed to be made.
The witness was next examined as to the length of certain
branches, supposing them to be made as branches from the proposed
Cambridge and Lincoln line, with a view to show that the whole
of the distances, taking them by the shortest routes by which
it would be possible to make a railway, were much
longer than branches to the same places proposed
to be made by the London and York line. At the conclusion of this
branch of evidence, the Learned Counsel intimated that he would
resume his cross-examination as to the presumed error in the
section when that section should be produced.
LANDOWNERS' OPPOSITION.
Mr. TRIPP said he appeared to oppose the Bill on behalf of Mr.
Pemberton, as trustee to the owner of certain property through
which the proposed line would pass.
Rev. Mr. Sibthorp said he appeared in his own behalf on the
same ground.

The witness said, in answer to Mr. FRIPP, that the proposed
line crossed the high road at Chesterton at six feet above the level
of that road, and separated Chesterton from Cambridge, but al-
lowed of communication between those two places by gates, and
elevations, &c. ; a bridge might have been built Instead of this
mode, or the village of Chesterton might have been avoided by
making the line a mile longer, but this would be at an increased
expense. Two bridges must be built to effect the crossing by
either way, one of which would cost 1,4841 and the other 3,7321. ;
and therefore the route by Ely would be a mile longer than by
Chesterton, and more expensive.
In answer to Mr. Sipthorpe, he said he had walked over the
fens between Lincoln and Peterborough. The height of the pro-
posed bank above the level of the surface at Branston-delf was six
feet. Did not know where Mr. S.'s house was situated,
The witness underwent a protracted re.examination by Mr.
WEBSTER, with a view to explain facts elicited by, and arising out
of, the cross.examination ; and after it had termi-
nated, two other witnesses were called, who deposed
to the fact of public meetings having been held
in various places last year, in the district between Cambridge and
Lincoln, as well as at both these towns, and of speeches having
been made, and resolutions passed, declaratory of the unanimous
leeling of the proposers, and seconders, and others present, in
favour of the proposed line.
The Committee then adjourned.