The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-28 00:00:00

After a few instances were given by Mr. lIILIWARD, in which
shares were transferred from one company to another, on the eon-
s,nt of a much smaller majority than that Which existed in this

The room was cleared, and on our re-admittance,
The CHAIRMAN stated that it was the desire of the Committee
to offer a suggestion to' the promoters of the Bill to insert a clause
in this Bill to the following effect:—" Provided that nothing in
this Act with regard to particular shareholders (here naming
them) tends to take away any rizltt of a 'Um at law that may be
vcorid in these sl,treholders for the recovery of an enforcement
of such rights as they may be now possessed of."
Mr. AUSTIN said that he would not take upon himself the re-
sponsibility of such a clause; he should leave it to the Coinmit'ee,
and go on with the ease, as he saw that much difficulty might acise
from the insertion of such a clause. If they agreed to the bargain
it would be all right, but let them, if they object, have their
shares valued as they were before the time they were enhanced by
the amalgamation.
After the room wrs again cleared for a short time,
The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee came to the resolution
that they felt that this preamble of the Bill should first be proved,
as they had not sufficient evidence to show that they should take
away their shares from these shareholders. They would proceed
with the case tu-morrow morning at eleven o'clock.
NEWCASTLE AND BE WICK.
The Committee then went through the remaining clauses in this
Bill, and adjourned.

Group DD.
THE CALEDONIAN AND THE GLASGOW
AND CARLISLE RAILWAYS.
The business of the Committee was commenced this morning by
Mr. llopE resuming his cross.examination of Mr. Miller, the
civil engineer; but nothing of public importance was elicited le-
yond what has already appeared.
On reexamination, Mr: Miller said that the two forks on the
Caledonian Railway would present a very great obs'acle to the pro.
per working of the railway, as one train is obliged at the turn of
the fork to wait until another train arrives. The Dumfries line
was not intended to term a subsidiary railway to the Ayrshire line,
which would be very convenient for all traffic coming from the
north and south. The character of the gradients on the
fork of the Caledonian would be a great hindrance to
speed. It was understood that the Ayrshire line was
perfectly open to the Dumfries to work at their convenience, and
the rates on the Ayrshire would be moderated to suit their xates.
It was possible, in case the Dumfries line were made, to maintain
a branch from it through the Delvine pass.
The CHAIRMAN then interrupted the examination, and said the
Committee were of opinion that the suggested branch was very
desirable, and had been waiting far some da,s to near whether it
was intended to make a lib, in that direction.
Mr. Miller said the plans had not yet been made for the branch
through the- Delvine Pass, but he had carefully examined the
country in that direction, and, speaking from recollection, was
satisfied it was practicable to carry the line through it. The highest
summit was 1,000 feet above the level of the sea, and the gradients
for six miles would be from about 1 in 70 to 1 in 75.
The CSAIRIUAN observed that nothing had been said in Mr.
Locke's report, or had been mooted by any one else, as to the prac-
ticability of making a line in the proposed direction.
Mr. Miller was about to explain the direction of the branch
from near Thornhilf through the Delvine Pass, when it was ob.
jected that as there were no plans or sections before the Com-
mittee, it would be difficult for him to give a sufficient explanation.
The CHAIRMAN then recommended an adjournment, as a very
important point had been raised, and it would be necessary, for the
convenience of all parties, that sufficient time should be atTerded
to satisfy the Committee as to the intended line.
After some conversation between counsel and the Committee, as
to the practicability of proceeding to investigate the merits of the
mooted points,
The CHAIRMAN said he thought it would be advisable in so im-
portant a matter to apply to the Government to send down some
impartial and competent person to survey the country and report
accordingly.
Mr. Committer suggested that perhaps it would be better for the
Oommittce to hear the evidence on both sides, end it might be as
well to adjourn for a time to afford an opportunity of getting up the
evidence and rebutting it.
The CHAIRMAN said that it was the opinion of the Committee,
and must also be manifest to every intelligent person, that, pro.
vided the pass was practicable, it would be a great advantage to the
rich districts of the west in connecting Dumfries with Edinburgh ;
and there was no doubt that with the proposed branch the Dma.
fries line was preferable to the Caledonian. A contieuous
communication would be established with the north and •
west of Scotland, and the shortest distance between
Scotland and Ireland would be obtained. If these ad.
vantages could be obtained, it was the bounden duty of
the Committee, on a matter so importantly affecting the public in-
tereres, to give it their most diligent attention. In the present
stage of affairs, however, the point was doubtful. The Committee
had not had sufficient data presented before them to decide de.
finitively; and it would not be fair to hear the evidence on one
side without giving to the opposing party an opportunity of dis.
proving it it it were possible.
On the suggestion of Mr. COCKBURN,
Sir T. PHILLIPS then proceeded with the residue of his case, and
the consideration of the proposed new branch was adjourned.
Sir T. PHILLIPS concluded his re-examination of Mr. Miller,
and called Mr. Mitchel:, a railway contractor. He said he had
constructed extensive works in various parts, and was well
acquainted with the method of working. He had carefully
examined Mr. Miller's estimates, and considered them. very
reasonable and fair. He would have no hesitation in undertaking
the construction of the railway at the prices put on the works.
Mr. Vignolles, civil engineer, said he had examined the country
through which the proposed lines would pass, and a portion of the
districts through which the Caledonian Railway event was com-
paratively poor. The forks on the Caledonian ought,
in his opinion, to have been made in the vicinity of
Carlisle: the advantages which would result from plac-
ing the junction there would be to have the line carried
through a rich and populous country on either side, instead of a
poor country, which it now passes through ; and this was an im-
portant object in laying out a line of railway. He would concur
generally as to what the previous witnesses had stated with respect
to the benefit which the Dumfries line would confer on the country.
On cross.examination, Mr. Vignolles said he considered the
Glasgow Junction Railway would never answer.
Mr. Brunel, C.E., stated it as his opinion that more regularity
in the passage of trains might be expected on the Dumfries line
than on the Caledonian, as great inconvenience would be occasioned
by the forks on that railway. He corroborated the previous en-
gineering evidence.

', DUMFRIES;

Sir T. Purwps then announced that the case for the pro-
moters of the Glasgow, Dutnfrces, and Carlisle Railway had c, n.
eluded with• the last witne,s.

At the close of the case it was sugge3ted to the'Comantke that
here was a gentleman in the room who could give some informa-
on as to the proposed subsidiary branch through the Delvne

The Committee having consented to hear his stalement, *.;r.
Jardine, engineer at Edinburgh, was called and examined
by the CHAIRMAN. Mr. Jardine said he was intimately
acquainted with the subject, of gradients and elevations, and
other matters
.connected with railway affairs were familiar to him.
He knew the lead hills, and bad surve)ed the country for the pur-
pose of making a road by the Twced to Erricks'one. From his
general knowledge of the count!), he could stat..., that the line
could be made, and be considered the bc,t junction
with Edinburgh could be effected through the Dclvine
Pass. He was not in a c.;ndition to give any , idea
of the nature of the gradients that would be required, as he had
not examined the pass sufficiently to give a correct opinion.
The Chairma•t did not continue the examination of the witness,
as it appeared from his not having examined tt,e country for rail-
way purposes, he was not competent to satisfy the Committee as to
the practicability of making the proposed branch.
Sir T. PHILLIPS then said he appeared to support the petition
of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Company against the Caledonian
line.

He then called Mr. Mills and Mr. Miller to show that a con.
siderable degree of traffic would be diverted from the ellagow
Company's line at the forks en the Caledonian Railway, and that
by adopting a portion of the Edinburgh anti Glasgow line the Cale.
donian would avoid the expense of constructing an unnecessary
line of railway of eight miles in length.

Atter Counsel had cross.examined the, witnesses in this case,
which was not of the slightest public interest,

The CHAIRMAN said, in reference to carrying a branch of the
Dumfries line through the Delvine Pass, he begged to state to alt
partie;,concerned—to those interested in the Caledonian, the Was..
gow, Dumfries, and Carlisle, and the Clydesdale Junction Rail_
ways—that the distinct opinion of the Committee was, that
there were several points which referred to those lines
that seemed to admit of an arrangement amongst the
different companies with regard to their separate interest. It was
the instruction of the Government to the Committee to lock out
for the best trunk line, one that would conduce most to the public
convenience and interest; and if the contending parties ceuld not
arrive at some satisfactory arrangement, the inconvenience of the
result would be only attributable to themselves. The intention of
the Committee was to look simply to the public edvantage ;
and by this determination they were hound to abide,
whatever might be the sacrifice to any of the competing
companies. lie would, therefore, recommend to the attention of
all parties interested the necessity which existed for the protee.
thin of their separate interests, by their arriving at some satisfae—
tory determination with regard to their mettlel future proceedings.
The points on which it had been deemed advisable to urge this
course of proceeding had already appeared, and it would be un.
necessary for him to recapitulate them.

Sir T. Pia Wes observed that he was instructed to sty, on the
part of the Edinburgh Company, that they were prepared to meet
the other Companies in a spirit of fairne,s and amicability.
The point WAS at.Tain• urged whether the Committee would pro.
cecd to hear the evidenea fo: and against the eligibility of the
Dclvine Pass, and Mr. Lecke r7.la he was quite prepared to give
the Committee the result of his opinion on the stiljcct if they wished
to hear it, or he would send down a c,wapetent engineer this even.
ing and inspect the place, and make his report. It was ultimately
resolved that the matter should stand over till Thursday mowing,
till which time the Committee adjourned.

Group X.
LONDON AND YORK LIN.
The Committee resumed this cane to day, at tE
welie o'clock.
rho CHAIRMAN said he understood the evidence for the Loud
in en
and York line was to be closed to-day, except the engineerg
eviderice.- ,e
eoseti to
•
Mr. PAGET said he hoped ft would b, clay.
Mr.
-
The CHAIRMAN said that the committee had resolved that the
evidence should close to-day.
Mr. Sergeant Waalcutiam said he would take upon himself to

was some difficulty in carrying out the works of the Brandling
Junction Company, of which he was one of the Directors. They
were obliged to rase the sum of 200,0004 over and above the
sum allowed by the Act of Patliament, in order that no injury
might accrue to the shareholders. Immediately preceding the
time of the opening of the Newcastle and Darlington
line, the shares of the Brandling Junction rose,
in consequence of the understanding that such an
opening would be made. There was a gradual i:nprovement up
to the time of the opening, when the shares became 501. each. A
committee was appointed afterwards to enter into some negotiation
with Mr. Hudson on the subject of Balling or leasing the Brand.
ling Junction to the Newcastle and Darlington Company. It was
agreed that Mr Hudson should purchase aH the shares at 551. per
share, and pay all the debts of every description due from the
Brandling Railway Company, and indemnify the directors
and proprietors. As the Company had not the power by Act of
Parliament to purchase, they required sthe personal responsibility
of Mr. Hudson. The agreement met the univers.,l ai
every director of the Brandling Company, including Mr. Brandling,
the head director. He was of opinion that it was very highly ad-
vantageous to the shareholders, and if that bargain pad gone off,
he would gladly have sold his share for 20/,
The CHAIIIINAN said that the Committee wished to know what
line of Lbjeetion the counsel on-the opposition side wished to tal.e
to this agreement. Prima fade, it appeared to be highly advan.
tageous to the public.

proval of

Mr. Mainstre said that the principle of his case was this : his
clients were shareholders in theßrandling Junction Railway Com-
pany, and be totally denied that any ❑umber of shareholders in that
Company had a right to sell the shares of the parties whom he re-
presented. In August, 1844, a certain number of shareholders
thought that it was then' interest to sell their shares and his clients,
which they had no power to do. 'lnt if the Committee should
come to the conclusion that the shares of the Lrand ling Company
should become the property of the Newcastle and Darlington
Company they ought not to come there to assess the value of his
clients' shares, but ought to send them to a jury to get their value.
Mr. TEMPLE said that the objection taken by his Learned Friend
was quite different from that taken by him yesterday, and he would
assert, that if Air. Greene his (Mr. Manistre's) client had been pre-
sent at the meeting of the directors which agreed to this proposal,
be would have given his consent so to dispose of his shares.. In
many cases under the same circumstances, a large majority of the
shareholders had the power to dispose of the minority to the gene-
ral advantkre.