The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-08 00:00:00

RAILWAY.

The preamble of this Bill also having been passed on Monday,
the Committee proceeded now to take into consideration the several
clauses. A great deal of time was taken up in discussing the
clauses retative to the tolls and charges; which were eventually
agreed to with some amendments.
NORTH WALES RAILWAY.

Mr. CALVERT, on behalf of the promoters of this line, proceeded
at great length to point out the advantages that would re-
sult to the public by the formation of this line. The
only opposition to it was from Mr. Wynne, and he thought
that he would satisfy that gentleman by the introduction
of a clause, to the effect that the Company would not take any
ground belonging to that gentleman without previously obtain-
ing his consent for that purpose. He hoped that this
would put an end to any further opposition on the
part of the Learned Counsel on the other side; and
proceeded to say that this line was intended to bring into connexion
the city and port of Bangor and the town and port of Carnarvon,
and thence to proceed through the mineral and slate distrizts of
Carnarvonshire to Portdynllaen. The length of the line was
28 miles. The capital was 300,0001. in 12,000 shares of 25/.
each. The course of the line, by the engineer's report and sec.
tions was exceedingly favourable, and the cost of the railway
and works would not exceed 300,000/. The traffic on the
line was calculated at 64,7254, and deducting 40 per cent. for
expenses, which would amount to 26,6901., there would be a profit
of 39,035/. on the undertaking. He thought that the railway
wcuLl confer immense advantages on that part at the country, and
concluded by calling on
Sir J. Rennie, who was examined by Mr. Hsenv—There was no
higher gradient than 1 in 203 in the whole line ; and the steepest
incline was two miles. The length of the whole line was 28 miles
4 furlongs. There was one tunnel on the line 704 yards long;
and the works en the whole line, as compared with other works
of a similar kind, were not heavy or expensive. The drainage of
the country would be rather improved than otherwise by the
line. The cost of the works would be less than 10,0001. per
mile. He thought that it would also improve the value of land,
and be of material service to the inhabitants of that district, zs
affording them increased facilities for traffic.
Cross-examined by Sir W. JAMES—Portdynllaen was, in his opi-
nion, a better harbour than Holyhead; by the expenditure of a mode.
rate sum of money it might be made an excellent harbour for com-
mercial purposes, as well as a good harbour of refuge; the estimate
for the line was 310,0001. ; calculated the cost of the tunnel at 30/.
a yard ; was of opinion that the harbour was of immense importance,
so far as the public was concerned.

It being now four o'clock, the Committee sent Lord Duncan to
ask leave of the Speaker to sit till five o'clock, for the purpose of
hearing as much of the evidence as possible before the recess.

Other witnesses were then examined, and deposed to the desir-
ableness of making this line, and to the advantages which would
result to the interests of agriculture, slate quarries, and commerce
generally, by ita formation, and their testimony was not materially
shaken by the cross-examination which they underwent by op.
posing counsel.

The Committee then adjourned till eleven o'clock to-morrow,

Group X.
LONDON AND YORK RAILWAY.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
_ .

Mr. Packe, a landowner in Lincolnshire, was called and exa-
mined by the promoters. The feeling of the people of Lincolnshire
was in favour of the London and York scheme. He had resided in
the county for forty years. Had attended several of the public
meetings which had been held in Lincolnshire in favour of this
railway.
Cross-examined—The meetings were not unanimous in their
resolutions.

Mr. Christopher, M.P. for Lincolnshire, was next examined. He
had attended the public meetings which had been held in favour of
the London and York Railway. The majority of the persons at
those meetings were in favour of the proposed line. He had at
first taken no part in the agitation in favour of the line, but he had
at length thought it desirable to give his support to the line. He
thought this line would afford the best means of communication to
Lincolnshire. The farmers were generally in favour of the line.
If he consulted his own convenience, he would support the Cam-
bridge and Lincoln line, as that passed within three miles of his
house, whereas the London and York line would be thirteen miles
distant from it.

Cross•examined by Mr. WEBSTER—Do you not know that
Boston is a very important port ?
Mr. Christopher—l have heard that in the time of the I-ler,
tarchy it was a more important fort than London.—(Laughter.)
Mr. WEBSTER—IS it not a very important port now ?
Mr. Christopher—Yes, it is an important port now.
Mr. WEBSTER. —And I believe the Cambridge and Lincoln
line passes there ?.
Mr. Christopher.—Yes, it does.
The Committee adjourned at four o'clock.

Group B.
WEST YORKSHIRE LINES.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition )

This was the affirmative case on the part of the promoters
LEEDS AND WEST RIDING JUNCTION RAILWAY.
The opposition of the landholders to this railway was then gone
into.

Mr. BA INE, en behalf of the Moravian. of Fullneck, adduced evi-
dence to prove that course of the line would destroy their establish-
ment in that district.
The Committee then adjourned.

BAIL COURT.-(TIIIS DAY.)
\Sittings in Banco, before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE.)
QUI TAM ACTIONS.—HOBBS V. HARVEY.
M. PELcock said he was instructed, on behalf of the defendant,
to move for a rule to show cause why the plaintiff should not give
security for costs, and the proceedings be stayed in the meantime.
He moved on the affidavits of Alexander Dobie, the defendant's
attorney; of David Smith, of Edinburgh, Writer to the Signet;
and of Augustus George Lyon, clerk to Mr. Dobie
who stated that this action was brought by the plaintiff
against the defendant, to recover penalties from the " Globe" news-
Palter, by yiltue of the 6th and 7th Wm. IV., entitled," An Act to
prevent the advertising of foreign and other illegal lotteries.' The
affidavit of Mr. Dobie stated, that the declaration in the cause con.
tallied 73 counts, each claiming a distinct penalty, amounting
in the whole to 3,6501. was delivered to the deponent about the
`2Bth of April last—that the plaintiff had served several processes
in a similar form against John George Chapman, John Ebenezer
Eve, Charles Baldwin, Murdo Young, Thomas Payne, Charles
Heynell, and others, but had not yet declared
therein.e nel
And 1'
David Smith
ith in his affidavit
,atated. that a similar
action was brought
under the said statute by the
Y

present plaintiff, which was at present pending In the
Court of Session of Scotland, against Thomas Allan and Co., and
others, for whom deponent acted as attorney—that he applied to
the Court of Session to compel the present plaintiff to give seen.
rity for costs in that action, on the ground that the plaintiff was
residing out of Scotland, and was then domiciled in England—
that such application was opposed by the plaintiff on theground that
he was then domiciled in Scotland, and that it was afterwards
stated in his behalf that he was a Scotchman, a native
of Brechin, where he was brought up, and served his apprentice.
ship with Messrs. Speed and Nile, writers ; that he afterwards
came to Edinburgh, and was employed as a writer by Mr. A. Ste-
venson, writer to the Signet; and Mr. W. Muir, solicitor, in the
Supreme Court for about five years, and that he was never out of
Scotland till the 28th of September, 1844, when he sailed from
Granton Pier, and that he arrived in London on Sept. 30, but that he
never intended to reside in England ; that he was in no situation
there, but was merely engaged in attending some private affairs
of his own; that he did not anticipate being dctained there but a very
few days, and lived in furnished lodgings taken and paid for front
week to week. The same deponent also stated that the plaintiff was
married on the 16th of March, 1843, to a daughter of Mr. Patrick
Hutchi►rson, a writer in Edinburgh. That he and his wife re-
sided at his mother-in.law's, and that they afterwards re-
moved to Stockbridge, near Edinburgh; that they afterwards
went back to Mrs. Hutchinson's, where a considerable portion of
their furniture still remained, that they always had, and now had,
a constant residence in Scotland—that on the 2d of March he re-
turned to London. Mr. Smith also stated that such statement in
writing of the plaintiff was binding on the party on whose behalf it
was made, according to the practice of the Court of Session
just as if the same had been sworn to according to the practice of
the courts of England, and that the above statement was true as he
was informed and believed.
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE—Take a rule.

Mr. PEACOCK said he wanted to show that the permanent resi-
dene of the plaintiff was in Scotland, and that it was no answer
to the application to say that he was in this country when the ac-
tion was commenced, unless the affidavit stated that he resided and
intended to continue to reside in the country.
Mr. Justice COLEIZIDGE—You may take a rule, but without a
stay of preceedings.

Mr. PEACOCK said he made the application for security for costs,
and they had given the other party notice.
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE—You know you can have no stay of pru.
ceedings on the last day of term.
Mr. PEACOCK said that perhaps his Lordship would allow him to
take the rule in this way—a rule to show cause why in the mean-
time the proceedings—
Mr. Justice CoLnaince said he could not do that, or that
would, in effect, be staying the proceedings altogether. They
could only be stayed during the pendency of the rule.
Mr. PEACOCK did not ask to make the pending a stay of pro.
ceedings, but merely why security should not be given, and in the
meantime proceedings stayed.
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE—When cause is shown it becomes part
of the rule, which upon the rule being made absolute the proceed.
ings should not be stayed.

SHERIFFS COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

SMITH V. AUSTIN.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)

Mr. ROBINSON addressed the jury, denying that there was any
engagement for regular services, but that the plaintiff had only
been occasionally employed, and was paid at the time or otherwise
satisfied.

The jury, after a short consultation, gave a verdict for the
defendant.

Mr. THOMAS applied to have the writ retained, in order to apply
to the Court to set aside the verdict.

The UNDER-SUERIFF said it had been entirely a question for the
jury, and he did not sce that he could interfere. An application
could, however, be made to a judge. It certainly was a case he
would assist in if he could.

TATTERSALL'S.—THIS EVENING.
Six o'CLocK.

A blank day--not a bet laid.

THE CHESTER CUP.

CHESTER, WEDNESDAY
INIcIIT,
TWELVE O'CLOCK.

Mr. Gully has objected to Intrepid 07., the ground that
he is thorough bred, and the stake 4 are withheld. The
proof rests with Mr. Gully.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS EVENING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
RO YAL ASSENT.
The royal assent was given to-day, by Commission, to the
Sugar Excise Duties Bill—The Auction Duties Repeal Bill—
the Customs' Duties Bill— The Bastardy Bill—The Sheriffs'
( Wales) Bill—The Colonial Passengers Bill--The Companies
Clauses Consolidation! (England) Bill The Companies
Clauses Consolidation ( Scotland) Bill The Lands
Clauses Conso!idation (England) Bill The Lands
Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Bill—The Railway Clauses
Consolidation Bill— The Greenwich Hospital Fisher's-
lane Improvement Bill —'l he Stipendiary Magistrates
(Manchester and Salford) Bill—The Forth and Clyde Naviga-
tion Bill—The Birmingham, Liverpool, and Ellesmere Junction
Canal Bill—The Wallassey Improvement Bill—ThelKingston-
upon-Hull Docks Bill—The Birkenhead Docks Bill—London
Orphans' Asylum Bill—The Amicable Insurance Companies'
Bill—The Sparrows Herne Road Bill—and the Rromyard Road
Bill.

The Cromissioners were the Lord Chancellor, Lord Wharn-
cliffe, and the Duke of Buccleuch.

A message from the Commons brought up several Bills.
Several Noble Lords presented petitions from various parts
of the country against any additional grant to Maynooth.
Earl FITZWILLIAM presented a large number of peti-
tions, praying their Lordships to take steps for securing a better
observance of the Sabbath.

On the motion of the Earl of ROSEBERY, the Fresh
Water Fish Protection Bill was read a third time, and passed.
The Bishop of NORWICH presented several petitions
complaining of the sale of intoxicating 'liquors on the Lord's
day.

The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented a petition against
the Parish Settlements' Bill.

Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Rochdale in
favour of the increased grant to Maynooth. The Noble Lord
also presented a petition from the county of Salop, praying the
House to abolish imprisonment for debt altogether; and a peti-
tion from a landholder, whose property would be disturbed by
the progress of the proposed Syston and Peterborough Rail-
way.
Earl FITZWILLIAM considered that Parliament had
placed itself in an extraordinary dilemma, in consequence
of the want of proper regulations for conducting
the proceedings, as regarded the management of these rail-
way Bills. Now it appeared that this railway went
within two hundred yards of the housse of Mr. Sowerby, the
petitioner. Now, Parliament must either do that which would
be a great hardship, and perhaps an injustice to a private
individual; or, on the other hand, it must throw
out the Bill, and deprive the country of that which
would be a great public benefit. Now he thought it was the
duty of Parliament to take measures to avoid this dilemma and
to do justice to private individuals without depriving the
public of a railway which would be a great benefit to them.
Lord REDESDALE said there was one remedy, some re-
medy only which would be for Parliament to throw out a few
Biils which properly interferrcd with the rights of private
property. If that were done in one or two instances, Rail-
way Companies would be snore careful to frame their Bills in a
proper manner,

LEFT SPEAKING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The SPEAKFR took the Chair at the usual hour.

Mr. KEMBLE presented a petition praying for a modifiea•
tion of the Act of Imprisonment for Debt rinsed last session.
Mr. H. BERKEI.EY, and other Hon. Members, presented
petitions against the grant to Maynooth.
sconm SCHOOLMASTERS.

The LORD ADVOCATE presented reveral petitions from
places in Scotland, praying for an increase of the stipends of
parochial schoolmasters in Scotland.

MAYNOOTH.

- -
Sir R. H. INGLIS presented a great number of petitions
against the endowment of Maynooth College.
EisiCROACHAIENT UPON THE ENJOYMENTS OF

THE PEOPLE.
Mr. PARKER brought up the report of the Committee
upon the Scottish Central Railway Committee, to the effect,
that it was the opinion of the Committee that the House ought
not to consent to the establishment of a railway station upon
the piece of ground called South Inch, in the neighbourhood
of Perth. 't he report was received with considerable cheering.

IRISH RAILWAYS.
Sir GEORGE GREY in moving for a select Committee to
inquire and report whether any and which of the standing
orders which are enforced in the case of Railway Bills in Great
Britain are unnecessary, and ought to be dispensed with in the
case of Railway Bills in Ireland, and to move the following
names for the Committee ;—Sir George Grey, Lord Granville
Somerset, Sir Thomas Fremantle, Mr. Labouchere, Mr.
French, Mr. Shaw, Mr. Estcourt, Mr. Strutt, The O'Conor
Don, Mr. Wilson Patten, Mr. Warburton, Sir 'William So-
merville, Mr. T. Greene, Mr. Rcdington, and Mr. Hamilton
(Dublin University), said that he did not mean to throw the
slightest obstruction in the way of the construction of rail-
ways, more especially in Ireland ; but as a series of regu-
lations had been passed by that House, intended on the
one hand to check undue speculation on the part of Companies,
and on the other to protect private properties, he did not see
why in particular cases these orders should be set aside, as in
the case of the Irish Great Western (Dublin to Galway),
Ireland. For that reason, and to ascertain in what instances
the standing orders, which were compulsory on English specu-
lations, should be set aside on Irish railways, he brought for-
ward this motion.

After a few words from Lord G. SOMERSET,
Mr. FRENCH said that the Right Hon. Baronet had
placed on his Committee eight Honourable Members who
had before decided against this railway, and that out of a Corn-
mittee of fifteen was a sufficient majority. He protested, in
the name of the majority of the other evening, against this
mot ion.

Air. W. PA TTEN supported the motion.
Sir R. INGLIS thought the decision to which the Howe
had come to on the Great Western (Ireland) Railway Bill was
an unwise one, and that the Standing Orders Committee ought
to be supported.
l‘lr. SHAW did not think any practical advantage would
arise from this moticn. He thought the Committee
would end in nothing if it were appointed. The vote
which he had given was not quite satisfactory to him-
self.---(A laugh.) The Hon. Member was interrupted by the
appearance of Sir Augustus Clifford (Usher of the Black Hod)
at the bar, who summoned the House to the House of Peers to
hear the Royal assent given by commission to sundry Bills.
The SPEAKER, on his return, announced that this House
had been to the House of Peers, where they had been present
while the royal assent was given, by commission, to several Bills
(for which see Lords' report).
DUBLIN AND GALWAY RAILWAY.

Mr. SIIAW then resumed. He hoped the House would not
rescind their resolution in reference to this bill, however
anxious he might be to see railroads in operation in Ireland.
Mr. WARBURTON agreed with the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, and he would add that the public could have no confi-
dence in the decisions of this House, if the decision in regard to
this Bill should be reversed.

Mr. WARD said that the alteration suggested by his Hon.
Friend seemed to him to have no bearing on the subject under
the i:nmediate consideration of the House. The decision the
other night created a most unfavourable impression of the sta-
bility of the present system. It was most disastrous to the
character of this House as regarded its private Bill Legis-
lation. lie was reluctant to do anything which might
operate against private enterprise, but he felt bound to carry
out the principles by which railway legislation should be
governed.—( Hear, hear.) He was afraid the House had no
choice but to redeem its character by rescinding the decision
to which they had come to the other night.
11!
nr BERNA
theL said
chtee
rd i
adundo t
dthink i t
owf oul
thisd beH
oauts
eal lt
oc o
ben -
y
na:gitsohrmditr,,il:tHhngeEd'
a,Nbeayetittieast solemn:W o.
BARRON
fimtheCSrotawn
AdßecßisoioNn,scaeidr,tatihnatprwinitchiipnleasveurpyornecoenne
fdaisnligi non
r, reversingdersc o Committee
mi
ttt
ehee
had been

reversed in no less than six cases, and no notice had been
taken, but a great noise had been raised about this, and the
only reason he could assign for it was, that
the six cases he had mentioned were English
ones, but this was a Scotch one. The whole
of the landed proprietors thraugh which the rail-
way was to pass were in favour of the Bill. The point
brought before the Standing Orders Committee could only
affect these laaded proprietors. The House had acted in ac-
cordance with the wishes of those gentlemen. It would be
most unjust and unfair for them to reverse that decision with-
out showing a competent reason fur it.
Mr. STUART WORTLEY would decline making any
observations on the present occasion.
The motion was then agreed to.

Mr. F. FFRENCH objected to several names on this Com-
mittee. Eight of the Gentlemen proposed had already ex-
pressed themselves hostile to the Bill. He objected to the ap-
pointment of the Hon. Member for Kendal, in particular, and
hoped he would not sit upon it.
After a few words from Sir G. GREY,
The names proposed by Sir G. Grey for the Committee
were called over. The following names were agreed to:—Sir
G. Grey, 3lr. Estcourt. and Ihe O'Connor Don.
On the motion that Mr. Warburton be added to the Com-
mittee,

Mr. FRENCH objected to the name of Mr. Warburton, as
that gentleman was not at all acquainted with Ireland.
WARBURTON said, he begged to retire from the
Committee, as he had no particular desire to serve on it.—
(A laugh.)
After a few words from Mr. MACKINNON, strangers
were ordered to withdraw, but no division took place, and the
motion was agreed to.
Sir G. GREY moved that Sir R. Fergusson and Mr. Gre-
gory be added to the Committee, in place of the O'Conor Don
and Mr. Shaw.

Mr. J. S. WORTLEY said that they were now left in the
same position they stood in before the Committee was appointed,
All he wished was, that when the Standing Orders Committee
reported to the House with respect to the non-compliance of
the standing orders, they should report whether the rejection of
the Bill arose from the difficulty of complying with the standing
orders. He would, therefore, move that the report of the Sub-
Committee on petitions for private Bills on the Great Western
(Ireland) Railway Bill be referred to the Land Committee.
The motion not being seconded, was dropped.
Mr. GODSON presented several petitions against the en-
dowment of Maynooth College.
DUBLIN UNIVERSITY.
Mr. WYSE gave notice that on that day fortnight he should
bring forward his motion relating to the University of Dublin.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE moved that the petition of Eliza
Price (presented 7th May) be printed.
Mr. HUME gave notice that he should move a call of the
House on Thursday, the 22nd.
Sir C. NAPIER wished to make some explanation respect-
ing the strong expressions which he had used on a former oc •
casion upon the conduct of Lord Seaton towards the Ban-
dieras. Since he made those remarks he had received further
information, anti was better able to judge of the facts.
[LEFT SPEAKING.]

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS.
WEDNESDAY, MAY 8.
The Londonderry and Coleraine Railway Bill was read a
first time.

The following Bills were reported, and the report referred
to the Select Committee on Standing Orders:—
West London Railway.
Staines and Richmond Railway.
Portarlington and Tullamore Railway.
Eastern Union and Harwich Railway and Pk,r (co. 2).

1. " That, in the case of
Standing Orders Committee,—lZ'';,olutions reported ;
:;,e Grimsby Docks petition for
leave to present a pet;::
ion for a Bill, the Sessional Order
ought to be disnP:ased wto present ith;—That the parties be permitted
petition accordingly."
2. a hat, in the case of the Glasgow Harbour Union Rail-
7ay petition, the Standing Orders ought not to be dis-
pensed with."
3. " That, in the case of the London and South Western
Railway (Epsom Branch) petition, the Standing Orders
ought not to be dispensed with."
4. " That, in the case of the Cambridge and Lincoln
Railway petition, for additional provision, the Standing
Orders ought to be dispensed with :—That the parties be
permitted to introduce such additional provision accordingly."
5. " That, in the case of the Birmingham and Gloucester
(Gloucester Extensions) Railway petition, the Standing
Orders ought to be dispensed with :—That the parties be
permitted to proceed with their Bill, provided that the same
do not confer upon the Midland Railway Company any
right or privilege of purchasing or of taking a lease of the
Birmingham and Gloucester (Worcester Deviation) Rail-
way, or of enabling the Company for the latter to sell and
convey or to lease their Railway to the Midland Railway
Company."
6. " That, in the case of the Birmingham and Gloucester
( Wolverhampton Line) Railway petition, the Standing Or-
ders ought to be dispensed with :—That the parties be per-
mitted to proceed with their Bill, provided that the same do
not confer upon the Midland Railway Company any right or
privilege of purchasing, or of taking a lease of the Birming-
ham and Gloucester (Wolverhampton Line) ILilway, or of
enabling the Company for the latter to sell and convey or to
lease their Railway to the Midland Railway Company,"
7. " That, in the case of the Birmingham and Gloucester
(Worcester Deviation) Railway petition, the Standing Or-
ders ought to be dispensed with :—That the parties be per-
mitted to proceed with their Bill, provided that the same do
not confer upon the Midland Railway Company any right
or privilege of purchasing, or of taking a lease of the Bir-
mingham and Gloucester (Worcester Deviation) Railway, or
of enabling the Company for the latter to sell and convey or
to lease their Railway to the Midland Railway Company,"
" That the Committees on this and the two preceding
Bills do examine, in the first place, how far such Orders have
been complied with, and do report the same to the House on
the report of the Bills."
First, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh resolutions agreed
to.—Report to lie on the table.

Irish Great Western Railway ( Dublin to Galway),—Bill
ordered to be brought in by Mr. French, Mr. Gregory, The
O'Conor Don, and Mr. Thomas B. Martin.

The Birkenhead, Manchester, and Cheshire Junction Rail-
way (No. 2),—Petition for Bill ; referred to the Select Com,
mittee on Petitions for Private Bills.

NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE BILL OFFICE.

York and North Midland Railway (Bridlington Branch),
—Report, Friday, May 9.
Whitby and Pickering Railway,—Report, Friday, May 9.
York and Scarborough Railway Deviation,—Report, Pr--
day, May 9.
Huddersfield and Manchester Railway and Canal,—Re-
port, Friday, May 9.
Midland Railways Company ( Birmingham and Gloucester,
and Bristol and Gloucester Railways Purchase),—Committee
on petition, adjourned till Monday, May 19.
Birmingham and Gloucester Railway Acts Amendment,—
Committee on petition, adjourned till Monday, May 19.
Great Grimsby and Sheffield Junction Railway,—Report,
Friday, May 9.
0 rCto,lnF
Friday,
d t3einaii,o9n.
Hull and Selby Railway (Bridlington Branch)—Report,
Harwich
--,rnaoßnuedtPh Railway,—Com-
av,_ Blackburn,T h
Railway,—Third
Burnley,reading, A,crriidnagi,ta,ory:ns7 9
Friday, May 9.
Railway,—Committee on petition, postponed from
Friday, 9th, till Friday, May 16.
iienl dobfnuo
Bristol and Exeter Railway Branches,—Committee on Bill,
Railway,—Com-
mittee
Monday, May 19, at twelve.
rrpgdh,tiactinhodnieGiti.oelrasts:gdro,dwintlitoll(iialc,provision,
Friday,
May
9.