The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-26 00:00:00

EDINBURGH AND HAWICK X.XNE.

On the reassembling of the Committee this morning,

Mr. TsLiskfr proceeded to make his general reply en behalf of
the promoters of the Bill. He stated if the Committee were of
opinion that it would be advisable to make a double line of railway,
he was instructed, on behalf of the promoters, to agree to such a
proposition, and it could be done without raising any extra amount
of capital. The line as at present laid out was intended for a
single line, but as it would be connected with the North British
Railway, and the plant belonging to that line being sufficient for a
double line, no extra expense would be incurred on the Edinburgh
and Hawick. The power which the Company possessed of bor.
rowing money would be quite sufficient to enable them to lay down
a double line of rails. The Learned Counsel concluded his address
by calling on the Committee to allow the preamble of the Bill
o pass.

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and on their re-
admission,
The CHAIRMAN briefly said that the Committee were of opinion
that the preamble of the Bill had been proved, and inquired
whether the parties interested intended to introduce any amended'
clauses.

Mr. Burke, the Parliamentary agent, said that no amended
tlauses were intended to be proposed. 'When the general Rail-
way Act for Scotland, now before Parliament, was passed it would
be necessary to have an amended clause introduced int..) the Bill.

The clauses being unopposed were then passed, and the Com
inittee adjourned.

GLASGOW BRIDGES BILL.

The Committee on this project met today at twelve o'clock,
Redeedale in the chair.
AUSTIN, in opening the case, paid this was a scheme for
constr acting a new bridge over the Clyde, in order to replace the
Bishops' Bridge, which was now rendered impassable, and had
been closed to the public for some time. The bndge had
existed for 300 years, and had been widened and improved as far
as was practicable by the late Mr. Telford. Mr. Walker, the Go..
•ernmeat engineer, had been sent down to survey the river, and
be had prepared three different plans, all of which had been sub-
mitted to Sir Robert Peel. He had selected one of which
he approved, as it appeared the best adapted for the ac-
commodation of the Glasgow people, and which plan was then
before the Committee. The scheme met with the approbation of
- all the influential people in Scotland, and would prove a great
public benefit.
Mr. Strang and other witnesses were then examined as to the
practicability and expense of constructing the proposed bridge.
As there was no opposition the Bill was allowed to pass, and the
Committee broke up.

LEEDS AND WEST RIDING JUNCTION
RAILWAY.

The Select Committee to whom the above railway has been
referred re-assembled at the usual hour this morning, and proceeded
with the opposition to the scheme.
Mr. George Jackson, of the firm of Jackson and Co., carriers, of
Manchester, was called to prove that when the Manchester and
Leeds Railway was opened, its competition with the Aire and
Calder and other canals proved highly advantageous to the public,
but since an amalgamation had been made between the railway and
the canals, the advantages resulting from the competition had
vanished.
Mr. Suclifit, a magistrate of Huddersfield, deposed to the im-
portance of a line running through Bradford, and striking off to
the north-west, as the West Yorkshire would do. The people of
Huddersfield were decidedly opposed to the West Riding line.
Mr. John Carr, of Halifax, put in the traffic tables which had
been taken for the use of the promoters of the West Yorkshire
scheme.

Mr. William Round, a worsted spinner of Bradford, gave very
positive evidence against the proposed railway. The traffic round
Bradford was extremely heavy, and it was therefore highly essential
that a railway intended to accommodate that town should have
the best possible gradients. The station of the proposed railway at
-Bradford was 154 feet above the level of the earth, and considered
by the people of Bradford to be highly objectionable.
Mr. Henry Hartop, manager of the Bowling Iron Works in the
neighbourhood of Bradford, and Mr. Serjeant, of the Barclay Iron
Works, gave corroborative testimony.
The NoaLa CHAIRMAN kere intimated the wish of the Commit-
tee to pass from the traffic to the engineering evidence. They
were inclined to think the result of the inquiry would depend
entirely upon the force of that evidence.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD said he should be prepared to go into
• such evidence after he had examined one or two other witnesses,
whose evidence would be of a general character.
Mr. Abbott proved that the Leeds and Manchester Company in
1933 undertook to make a branch to Halifax, but they failed to do
so until they were compelled in 1843.
Mr. Jonathan Ackroyd, a manufacturer of Halifax, proved that
he traffic between that town and Bradford was of the heaviest
:escription.

Mr. Richard Carter, a surveyor, of Halifax, proved that the
s cations on the West Riding line were inconvenient gild objec-
t .onable.

Mr. Young, a civil engineer, who had been professionally em-
oyed on the Leeds and Manchester and London and Birmingham
1 is:es, and who was the resident engineer of the Leeds and Brad-
t bed line, proved that Mr. Hawkeshaw's estimates were inadequate
tbr the construction of the works of the proposed railway, while
the gradient and stations were highly objectionable. It would
take very little more money to make them favourable,. The state-
ments in the report of the Board of Trade upon these lines rela-
tive to the expense of tunnelling in the West Riding districts of
Yorkshire were incorrect.
The witness was closely cross-examined by Mr. At:sTix, but lie
did not appear to swerve from his former evidence.

Mr. Lovel proved that the line between Loughmore was moat ob.
-tionable. It was upon a very severe gradient, and entered Bradford
,upt nan unnecessary elevation. A better line could be obtained, with
Xia ors, favourable gradients and a lower station, at very little addi.
-tonal ,txpense. It would be extremely difficult to form a junction
between the West Eliding line and the Leedi and Bradford Valley
line. The line was decidedly ill calculated to accommodate the
heavy traffic of the district ; and he was confident a better one
° could be obtained if time were allowed.
(.Ir. Robert Stephenson, the engineer to the London and Bir.
3 Ingham Company, confirmed the testimony of Mr. Locke. He
a tided that he could lay Gown a better line than the West Riding
L 'time were allowed.
The Committee shortly afterwards adjourned till tomorrow at 11.

•
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
GROUP A.
On the meeting of the Committee this morning, Mr. Mellor re.
,La- mod the examination of witnesses is favour of the
:LONDON, CROYDON, CHATHAM, AND
0 itpvg•GT (ATIVIOSPLAMiZIC
7 Ise first witness called was
cues Colley Sherrard, civil engineer, who stated that he had
t. et n employed, in the course of October last, by the London and
C ro ye.'on Company to lay down a line from the present Croydon line
to • I 'ortsmouth, with directions to choose the most direct that could
be. n lade, without any gradient greater than lin 50. He „n_
sit let ed the Line he hail laid down the best that could be made
thi7o, aoh Kent. He was not prepared to speak of the merits or
dame rits of the atmospheric principle. He had examined the lice
from Kingstown to Dalkey, and was satisfied of the
meets enical success of the principle, but was not informed on the
subje tof its commercial success. The •expense of the proposed
line , mould be about 18,0001. per mile. The expense of the works,
stati. ms, atmospheric tube, Electric telegraph, and land, for the line
from the junction of the Croydon line to Chatham, would be
546, 851/. The expense of the line from Chatham to Chilham
woe id be 343,8551. This included all the items which were in-
lud ed in the estimate of the line between Croydon and Chatham,
with the exception of the atmospheric tube. The reason this was
%nit ted was, that this part of the line was to be worked by locomo-
si ye t'action. The expense of the Orpington branch (atmospheric)
iir e 7 Noold be about 120,0001., and thetotal expense of the linefrom
the jt inettion ivith the Croydon line to Orpington would be 620,7161.
Th es estimales all includ,.l the expense of purchasing :and.
1 le ing cross-examined by Mr. WELANGH4M, the witness stated
that t were were three tunnels in the course of the line, one of
whi ei i would pass under Fort Pitt. It would be possible to blow
up ON • fort from the tunnel. He had never heard of such things
being done in time of Mar, from sewers or other passages under
Auildi rigs. The atmospheric portion of the line would not be fit
for a locomotive line. If used as such it would be a very bad
line. The locomotive portion could be used as an atmospheric
line, a nd would make a very good One. He believed the Corn-
wall 11 ailway had worse gradients than one in fifty, and was a loco-
Motive • line.
Mr. Sergeant WRANSEIAII said that the Cornwall Railway had a
axes nglile, but Mr. Sherrard said he knew it to be a locomotive
Me.

Mr. Rherrard was then cross-examined by Mr. MBRItZWIMIER
as to t. le mode of draining those parts of the line on which the
highs
.radients occur.
Sir WatTEst RIDDEL, who appeared on the part of the Commis-
,i (Teri ,of the Navigation of the River Medway, cross-examined
Ir. :_Slf errard, but no important point was made out by him.
31r. MiaREWIiTHER here stated that Colonel Cockburn was now
prase,.: :, and requested that his evidence be now Lakin,
M
anyoti o
. Sergeant \\THAN/SHAM said that before the examination of
wou,er witness he wished to make art objection to the further
. ,s of this Bill, founded on the evidence of the former
wanes i, who had stated the intention of the Company to erect a
bridge over the river Medw, for which the consent of the Ad-
iniralt r had net been obtained' . No bridge could b
any pa rt of a creek, river, or arm of the sea, in whichtehemtide e over
gows
and re flows, withouteek,
ad
fore, if the Bill were to pass through
of the Admiralty. There-
ugh both Houses of Parliament, it
Would not be possible to snake
any
u
Wrfinl :ham) thought that the Committeey se
must direct Mr. Mellor to
of it. He (Mr. Sergeant
produc a the consent of the Admiralty to
the passing
this bridge, and if it were not produced t of the river by
on the part of the Croydon Company. o put a stop to the evidence
Mr. WlL.sionn said that the objection was entirely new. In
Admiralty had caused
all Cali sin which the non-consent of the A
the rejr .?ction of Bills the Admira:ty had
made
formal objections to
them. But even if the formal consent of the Admiralty were ne.
raessary ,it could not be expected that the Committee would., reject
the lII] I merely because it was nut produced on the ir,,,
.
The CliataMLN o:Wight it was necessary to produce tl-se consent
of the Admiralty.
Mr. Witaroas was willing to produce it, but could not produce
It on tl is instant.
Mr. Sergeant WILINGII.IIi would withdraw his objection if Mr,
Wilms ,re said he had the consent, and could produce it.
Mr. WiLmoitc said that he had not obtained the formal consent
of the Admiralty, but that he had no doubt but he could obtain it.
The CHAIIIMIN thought it was sufEcient to produce the consent
of the Admiralty any time before the conclusion of the case on
the pas tof the Croydon line, but that it would give more satis-
faction to the Committee to produce it at once.
Mr. Witmorrkz undertook to produce the consent of the Admi-
ralty ti i-morrow.
Mr. MEIRSWSTICCai on the Put 'ithe