The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-26 00:00:00

isTE
PARLIAMENTARYBUSI SS.

THURSDAY, APRIL 24.
The Gravesend and Rochester Railway Bill was presented
and read a first time.

The fl,llowing Bills were referred to the Select Committee
on Standing Orders :
South Easternitailw ay (liungcrford-bridge to Chilham with
Branches).
South Eastern Railway (Lewisham to Tunbridge and Pad-
dock Wood).
Londonderry and Coleraine Railway.
Tottenham and Farringdon-street Extension Railway.
Direct Northern Railway (No. 2) (Lincoln to York).

London, Chatham, and North Kent Railwav,—Report
from Select Committee on Standing Orders read ; Bill ordered
to he brought in by Mr. Smythe, Mr. Rice, and Mr. William
Henry Bodkin.

Standing Orders Committee,—Resolutions reported ;
1. " That, in the case of the London, Chatham, and North
Kent Railway petition, the Standing Orders ought to be dis-
pensed with :—That the parties be permitted to proceed with
their Bill."
2. " That, in the case of the South Eastern Railway
(Tunbridge to Tonbridge Wells) petition, the Standing
Orders ought to be dispensed with :—That the parties be
permitted to proceed with their Bill."
3. " That, in the case of the South Eastern Railway (Lon-
don and Greenwich Railway Widening and Extension)
petition, the Standing Orders ought to be dispensed
with :—That the parties be permitted to proceed with their
Bill."
4. " That, in the case of the South Eastern Railway
(Ashford to Hastings) petition, the Standing Orders ought
to be dispensed with :—That the parties be permitted to pro-
ceed with their Bill."
5. " That, in the case of the Eastern Union and Norwich
Railway (No. 2) petition, the Standing Orders ought not to
be dispensed with. '
6. "That, in the case of the London and Norwich Direct
Railway petition, the Standing Orders ought to be dispensed
with :—That the parties be permitted to proceed with their
Bill."
7. " That, in the case of the North Wales Mineral Railway
petition, the Standing Orders ought to be dispensed with :
That the parties be permitted to proceed with their Bill."
First, second, third, fourth, sixth, and seventh resolutions
agreed to.—Report to lie on the table.

NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE BILL -OFFICE.
Midland Railways (Nottingham to Lincoln),—Committee
on Bill, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
Oxford and Rugby Railway,—Committee on Bill, Mon-
day, May 5, at twelve.
Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway,—Com-
mittee on Bill, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
South Devon Railway (Tavistock and other Branches),—
Committee on Bill, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
Cornwall Railway,—Committee on Bill, Monday, May 5,
at twelve.
Launceston and South Devon Railway,—Committee on
Bill, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
Chester and Holyhead (No. 2) (Mold Branch and Pur-
chase of Chester and Birkenhead Railway),—Committee on
Bill, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
Chester and Holyhead Railway,—Committee on Bill, Mon-
day, May.s, at twelve.
Hull and Selby Railway (Bridlington Branch),—Com-
mittee on Bill, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
Shrewsbury and Grand Junction Railway,— Select Com-
mittee onyroject, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
Great north of England Railway (Clarence and Hartle.
pool Junction),—Second reading, Monday, April 28.
Sheffield and Rotherham Railway,—Second reading, Mon-
day, April 28.
Grand Junction Railway,—Second reading, Monday,
April 28,
Parnsley Junction Railway,—Report, Monday, April 28.
Huddersfield and Sheffield Railway,—Report, Monday,
Apt it 28.
Birmingham and Gloucester Railway (Worcester Branch
and Cheltenham Extension,—Select Committee on project,
Monday, May 5, at twelve.
Birmingham and Gloucester Railway (Worcester Devia-
tion),—Select Committee on project, Monday, May 5, at
twelve.
West Cornwall Railway,—Committee on Bill, Monday,
May 5, at twelve.
Shrewsbury, Oswestry, and Chester Junction Railway,—
Committee on Bill, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
Newark and Sheffield Railway,—Committee on Bill, Mon.
day, May 5, at twelve.
North Wales Mineral Railway,—Committee on Bill, Mon-
day, May 5, at twelve.
Ives Junction Railway,—Committee on Bill, Monday,
May 5, at twelve.
Birmingham and Gloucester Railway (Gloucester, &c.,
Extensions),—Select Committee on project, Monday, May 5,
at twelve.
Birmingham and Gloucester Railway (Wolverhampton
Line),—Select Committee on project, Monday, May 5, at
twelve.
Exeter and Crediton Railway,—Committee on Bill, Mon-
day, May 5, at twelve.
Manchester, Sheffield, and Midland Junction Railway,—
Committee on Bill, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
Shrewsbury and Birmingham kailway,—Select Committee
on project, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
London, Worcester, and South Staffordshire Railway
to Sedgley),—Select Committee on project, Mon-
day, (Dudley
May 5, at twelve.
London, Worcester, and South Staffordshire Extension
Railway ( Dudley to Wolverhampton ),—Seleet Committee on
project, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
London, Worcester, and South Staffordshire Railway,—
Committee on Bill, Monday, May 5, at twelve.
Ely P-ad Huntingdon Railway,—Select Committee on pro-
adjourned till Monday, May 5, at twelve.
Birmingham and Gloucester Railway Acts Amendment,—
Committee on petition, adjourned till Monday, April 28. .
Goole and Doncaster Railway,—Committee on petition,
adjourned till Wednesday, April 30.

RAILWAY COMMITTEES
(YESTERDAY.)

Group No. 2.
LEEDS AND MANCHESTER LINE.
FRIDAY, FIFTH DAY.
-the Committee sat at the usual hour this day, and made
arrangements for the more convenient conduct of the proceedings,
the crowd for the last few days having made the heat of the room
intolerable.
Mr. TaLaor had an application to make to the Committee.
Though they had closed their case, still there was one witness, an
engineer named Asterisk, whom he wished to examine as to the
tunnel ; he could not have examined him yesterday as he was
under examination in another Committee.

The CHAIRMAN said that, having examined two engineers upon
that point yesterday for two hours, the Committee conceived they
had had engineering evidence enough.
Mr. Bartf, dealer in wool at Wakefield, deposed that 14,410,000
lbs. weight of the wool imported into Huddersfield came from the
east, and that should come from Hull by the Manchester and
Leeds line, either by land cr water ; it usually came by land in
Creer and by water in summer, the latter being cheaper then. It
would, in his opinion, be very desirable that the proposed line should
be in the hands of ne company, the Manchester arid Leeds.
To Mr. BAINES—Is a shareholder in the Manchester and Leeds
Company.
Mr. Anderton, worsted spinner—By the table of imports he
perceived that the import in the wool trade into Huddersfield from
the east was seven times more than that from the west.
Mr. Hawkshaw. engineer, deposed that he had measured the
proposed line, and his estimate was, that the continuation of the
branch from the Leeds Junction to Huddersfield would cost
100,0001.
Mr. Tecear intimated that he had closed his case.
Captain Lewes wished to explain part of his evidence of yester-
day. Since he was examined he had learned that there was an
agreement in writing between the Canal Company and the Leeds
and Manchester Company, and he would get a copy of it for the
Connittee, but he had never seen it.
Mr. Baisies then rose, and said he would trouble the Committee
very shortly with a few observations in reply.
Mr. TALBOT hoped his Learned Friend would recollect that he
appeared for the Leeds and Dewsbury line, and that should not be
lest eight of, it being a district branch,
Mr. BAINES said if the Huddersfield and Manchester line should
he carried, the Dewsbury line would not be looked for. With re-
spect to the Bill now before the Committee, he would call upon
the Committee to allirm the proposition contained in the preamble
of this Bill—namely, that it was the one which would I rove to
be of greatest public utility; and in addition to that they had the
fact that this Company had the power to form the whole line
from Staleybridge and Cooper-bridge. Then the report of the
Board of Trade stated that if the Committee should be satisfied as
to the utility of the line, its claims were paramount. He would
next call attention to the evidence of Mr. Locke, who was the
engineer whose reputation was at stake, as he had declared
that the line could be made within the estimate. As to the ob.
jection to a single line of rails in the tunnel, all danger could be
very easily avoided by a little care ; but then the Bill had
a clause empowering the Board of Trade to compel this
Company to make another tunnel, if that should be
deemed necessary; and the Bill contained another clause
giving power to raise money for that ptspose. It was given
in evidence that there was at present one line terminating within
one mile of Huddersfield, with several manufactories on both sides
of it, and a great number of people constantly passing to and from
those mills ; and it was at that point that the Leeds and
Manchester Company wanted to have their line
cross that at a level ; and yet they talked of the
danger of a single line in a tunnel, with such a propo.
sition as this before the Committee. Then the Committee
had the evidence that the people of Huddersfield were decidedly
against the Manchester anti Leeds proposition, and in favour of
the one he was now advocating. The Learned Counsel then
went on to comment on the evidence of the different
witnesses at great length, and contended that every word the
Committee had heard went to confirm the utility of the line he was
representing.
The coons was then ordered to be cleared, and the Committee
having remained in consultation some time, strangers were re-ad-
mitted, when
The CHAIRMAN announced that the Committee had decided that
they considered the preamble of the Bill of the Huddersfield and
Manchester Company proved.
When this announcement was made,
e a long argument ensued as
to which line should next be
thTlea. discussion occupied a
considerable time, and the counsel onf.
mwe
inhidtsthitffeenrdenedt projectsin kept up
a constant cross fire of contradiction
The CHAIRMAN stating that the Co'
ian
shp
complex
decidedt. thatre
thatthe
question now before them was one of so ccoe:
up consult some !porn:
aemabultehoofr authority.
they should take timeto consider it, and
In the meantime they would proceed to fill
Bill they had approved of.
The clauses of the Bill were then read and agreed to, until clause
2.5 was read, winch was relative to the chargestobe made
for tolls;
but the further consideration of it war postponed owing to the
[douse of Commons having, the night before, made a ruleregulating
the taaxitnum sum at which toll charges should be made.
Mr. TALBOT asked the Committee to go out of the order of the
clauses, as he wished to examine Mr. Gisborne, M.P., as a witness to
certain facts in reference to the contents of a forward clause re.
hating to a certain canal.
Mr. Gisborne was then examined—Was a trustee to the Staley.
bridge and Duckenfield Canal. All the sites on the banks of the
AzilllOTl Canal were taken up by steam mills ; the reason of that is,
that the Act contains clauses to enable mill owners to build them,
and take water from the canal for condensing, and return it again
to the canal, without charge ; the Huddersfield Canal Com-
pany refused to allow a miller to take water from their canal
even at a charge, and therefore the miller declined to build, as
be would be at the Company's mercy, either as to .their amount
of charges, or the sum they would expect for passing pipes under
the canal to the river.
Cross.examined— k great number of the mill.owners have pur-
chased the right to take water from the canal.
Mr. Basses said that the Canal Company did not seek for any
sew powers whatever; but the owner of the land, Lord Stamford,
eipeci.ed to be paid a fair sum for his ground. If the chum/ con.
tained some provision fixing the compensation which the Canal
Company ought to receive, they would be satisfied; but they con-
ceived they were in justice entitled to some compensation.
Mr. Tat.nor said he connived it would be unjust tot c his
clients to do now what had never been asked before.
The 111119.11 AN said the Committee could not go the !e sgth
required by Mr. Talbot ; and. therefore. . o .111)J f.); me
amount could be agreed to.