The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-02 00:00:00

XI.L.XLWAY.

Mr. CALVERT intimated that since Sattirday a negotiation had
been going ou between the promoters and opponents of the Bill.
The negotiation had not yet been brought to a close, but, if the
Committee had no objection to adjourn till twelve o'clock to.
morrow, he had no doubt such an arrangement would be come to
as to reinier it unnecessary for the Committee to waste any further
time on the subject of the railway.
The CHAIRMAN asked whether all the opposing parties were
willing to consent to such an arrangement?
Mr. DANIEL replied that, on the part of those for whom he
appeared, he was instructed to concur in the application for an
adjournment, upon the specific ground that the traffic tables had
not been delivered till last night, nothwithstanding that the Com-
mittee had directed that the delivery should be made on Saturday.
Under these circumstances, be had as yet had no opportunity to
look into the tables, so as to put himself in a position to cross-
examine the witness who had made them.

Mr. HUMPIIREYS, fur the same reason as that stated by Mr.
Daniel, was willing to consent to an adjournment.
The CHAIRMAN could not help thinking that the traffic
tables ought to have been delivered earlier. It would
put the Committee to great inconvenience to adjourn, but
as an amicable arrangement was likely to be come to between the
parties, the Committee had no alternative but to put up with the
inconvenience, and accede to the application for an adjournment.
Mr. DANIEL remarked that he was quite in the shade as to the
negotiation mentioned by his Learned Friend, and added that bis
only reason for wishing for an adjournment was to enable him to
examine the traffic tables.
The CHAIRMAN said it appeared to him to be very like a one.
sided negotiation.

Mr. CALVERT was surprised that any difficulty had been thrown
in the way of an adjournment, for before the Committee met his
two Learned Friends appeared to be quite favourable to an ad-
journment. However, as they were now opp,sed to such a step,
he begged to withdraw his applicatiun.
Mr. DANIEL said that he was now placed in the position of his
Learned Friend, and would in his turn, for the reason he had al-
ready mentioned, pray the Committee to adjourn till to-morrow.
The CHAIRMAN thought the engineering and traffic evidence
ought to have been put in at an earlier period. Had that been
done, there would have been no necessity for complaints, or an ap.
plication of this nature.
Mr. CALVERT had pursued the usual course of business adopted
in Railway Committees. It was usual to close the case for the
promoters with the traffic Libles and engineering evidence.
The CIIAIRMAN had served on many Committees, and he
confessed on those Committees the engineering evidence was
always put in at an early stage of the proceedings.
Mr. CALVERT reminded the Committee that in the London
and York, Leeds and West Riding, Sheffield and Newark, and in
other important Committees the engineering evidence had come last.
Mr HUTT said a good deal of the miscellaneous evidence had
been quite unnecessary; indeed he thought, in some respects, it
had been against instead of in favour of the railway.
The CHAIRMAN concurred in the latter observation of his Hon.
Colleague. Decidedly, the evidence of the last day or two was
rather against than in favour of the promoters.
Mr. CALVERT admitted that the evidence of some of the wit-
nesses had materially differed with his instructions. With regud
to the traffic table, the fact was the clerks were at work upon them
from the very hour the Committee adjourned on Saturday, and it
was quite impossible for them to finish the tables earlier than they
had done.

The room was then cleared, and the Committee having deli.
berated for a few minutes, strangers were admitted, when
The CHAIRMAN announced that the Committee did not think
sufficient ground had been made out for an adjournment.

Mr. Humphrey Brown, who had made out the traffic tables,
then proceeded to explain to the Committee the basis upon which
he had made his calculations ; after which he was cross-examined at
considerable length by Mr. MURPHY and Mr. DANIEL, with a
view of showing that he had assumed that the carriage of the pro-
duce of all the collieries on the line, whether near to or distant
from, Coventry, would be charged at one price—lid. per
ton per mile—namely, Id. for toll and id. for the
use of waggons. He admitted, therefore, that a
collier, whose mine was twelve miles from Coventry,
would have to reduce the price of his coals to enable him
to compete in the Coventry market with a collier, whose mine was
only six miles from that town. He admitted that, during some
portion of the time that he was making his calculations,
the canals of the district were frozen up, but shortly after
the thaw lie calculated the traffic by these conveyances, and, of
course, the advantage was in favour of the canal, because immedi-
ately after a thaw the coal traffic for the first two or three weeks
is always very considerably increased.
Mr. John Addison, an engineer, residing in Delahay-street,
Westminster, said the length of the line was six miles fifty-eight
chains, and fifty links, and was the most favourable that could be
marked out for accommodating the mineral traffic of the district
through which it passed. The junction of the Leamington wish
the London and Birmingham Raitway was about a half of a mile
from the Coventry station of that line, and the junction of the pro-
posed railway with the same line was about another quarter of a
mile further on. The line would form a junction with the London
and Birmingham Railway on an inclination of 1 in 330, or 16
feet per mile. At passing this inclination the line came to a level
plain for about twenty chains. It then came to a rise of lin 200
for about a mile, and this line run on another level for about ten
chains, and then line rose 1 in 3)0 for about a mile. The line
then ran along a level plain for about half a mile, and then came
to a rise of 1 in 176 for nearly a mile, and then it came to a level
for about a mile and a quarter. The line then came to a rise of 1
in 619 which extended for about half a mile, and at the ex-
tremity of this inclination the line formed a junction with the
Trent Valley Railway. There were no tunnel nor engineering
difficulties on the line. The line would pass on a level across
seven roads which would be amply guarded and protected from
danger.
The Speaker being here announced at prayers, the Committee
adjourned till twelve o'clock to-morrow.

GROUP N.
CORNWALL RAILWAY.
The Committee met in Room No. 3, at twelve o'clock.
ENGINEERING EVIDENCE.
Mr. Brunel was examined by Mr. MERIIENVETHER on behalf of
the promoters of the Bill. He said that he was the engineer of the
Great Western and South Devon RA ways, and when he laid the
latter line down it was with the design of carrying it on to Cornwall.
He had considered how the proposed line could be carried across the
Hamoaze, and had reported to the Board of Trade on the subject.
The plan which Captain Moorsom had detailed of carrying the
trains across the Hamoaze would, in his opinion, be successful.
The boat at present in use with improvements would be sufficient
to convey the carriages from one side to the other in safety. In
the event of his reporting in favour of the line, the Great
Western, the South Devon, and the Birmingham and
Gloucester Companies 'proposed to became joint shareholders
to the amount of 250,000/. He bad, in consequence, examined
the plans and sections drawn up by Captain Moorsom, and had
gone over the proposed line. He reported in favour of the line,
and recommended those companies to pay their quota of that sum,
and become joint proprietors of it, which they did. It was a special
instruction from the companies that it should be surveyed for both
locomotive and atmospheric power, and that it might be applicable to
either. There were curves on the line of 15 chains, but he had
seen szAller curves than that worked With safety—on the Great
Western, and Bristol and Exeter lines, for instance. The effect of

short curves were over-rated, but not generally so. If a curve
was well constructed it would not have much effect on the traffic.
At the Bath station they had a radius of between 30 and 40
chains, on the Bristol a radius of 11 to 1 I chains, yet 25 to 30
miles an hour were accomplished without inconvenience. The dis •
advantages in the construction of the proposed line would be
met with in other parts of the country. They could
not avoid sharp curves and steep gradients. A speed of from
twenty.two to thirty miles an hour might be obtained on these
steep gradients ar.d sharp curves. If atmospheric traction were
used greater velocity could be obtained. The Bodmin branch
could be worked with locomotive power without inconvenience.
At the Hamoaze the railway carriages would be run on the boats
in the same way as private carriages, and removed in a similar
manner. The process was exceedingly simple. No
longer time would be consumed here than two minutes.
and not more than was occupied on other lines in breaking up the
trains and starting them afresh. The boat might be easily made
to carry six carriages. One million, the estimated amount, would
Le sufficient to construct the line, and render it fit for locomotive
power.

The witness was examined by Mr. Rowe, but nothing was eli-
cited to show that the line, with its curves and gradients, could not
be effectively worked. A line to the north of Bodmin might be
made, but it would not meet the wants of the district.
Mr. I'. Smith, the solicitor to the Cornwall Company, was then
called by Mr. Rowe, for the purpose of being examined with re.
spect to the consent of the Board of Ordnance with regard to the
line crossing the glacis at Davenport. He stated that the Board
had propescd the insertion of a clause in their Pill, to the effect
that they would consent to their passing the glacis in the event of
the Falmouth Docks Bill passing, but, if it did not pass, they
should withhold their consent.

Mr. IVERREWEIHER said that was the case for the promoters of
the Bill.

EVIDENCE ON BEHALF OF TIIE PETITIONER.

Mr. Rowe thin called Mr. Humphrey Williams, of Truro, a
banker, and connected with the copper trade there and in Wales—
For the last thirty years he had been acquainted with the agri-
cultural and commercial interests of Cornwall. A line from Fal-
mouth, avoiding Penryn, to Truro, and avoiding Mr. Thomas's
property altogether, passing on eastward to Bodmin, by Liskeard,
Saltash, &c., and so on to its destination, could be constructed
with equal if not greater advantage to the public.
The greater portion of the ores raised were shipped
and would not go by the coast line, as was stated. The agricul.
tural produce of Neybtldge and its neighbourhood, which was a
considerable corn-growing country, would not go by the line
Granite, instead of going by the line, would be shipped at Penryn—
it could be conveyed cheaper to London and other places in this
way. The population of Cornwall was 350,000. The majority of
those residing in the south were opposed to it. Sir Joseph Saul,
Mr. Tremaine, and other large landed proprietors, were among
the number. There would be no difficulty in raising
the money for such a line as he had pointed out.
If the coast line were constructed, it would be a great obstacle to
other railway accommodation for a great many years to come.
The mining interest were decidedly opposed to it.
By Mr. M. SMITH—Was the banker for a rival scheme. The
district through which it was proposed to carry the line did not
produce one-sixth of the ore raised in the mines between Falmouth
and Plymouth.
Mr. Tremaine—Had represented the county in Parliament, and
was a large landowner, having his principal residence at two or three
miles from St. Austel. He was conversant with the mines in that
part of Cornwall, and was of opinion that none of the mineral pro.
duce would go by the line, nor the materials consumed in the
mines. A line like that alluded to in the examination of the last
witness would be of greater advantage to the country than the pro.
posed one. They were desirous of having a direct communi.
cation with Falmouth from Exeter, and would no doubt obtain it
if the south scheme were abandoned.

By Mr. M. SMITH—Had been desirous of obtaining railway ac-
commodation iii Cornwall since 1830. He was a friend of rail-
ways, and held a number of shares in the Great Western. Had
said that it would be desirable if the Great Western would carry
on their line direct from Exeter to Falmouth.

Re-examined by Mr. ROWE—Was desirous of having efficient
railway accommodation into Cornwall, and would bear a share in
the expense of surveying the country for that purpose. The
avoidance of the Hamoaze would be an advantage in railway ac-
commodation.

Mr. Pendarves, M.P. for the western division of the county,
a chairman of the quarter sessions, and generally acquainted with
the county. He said he was a considerable holder of shares, and
was familiar with the south coast between Plymouth and Fat
mouth. He was of opinion that the coast line would not carry
much of the ore cr much of the materials used in the mines. The
other line indicated on the map by a red line would effer far
greater facilities. St. Columb, Collington, and other districts which
did not grow sufficient agricultural produce for their own consump-
tion, would have such produce by the line of which he was in
favour in place of the coast line. He was in favour ofa line which
would not cross the Hamoaze, and avoiding the ordnance ground
at Devonport. The inhabitants of Penryn were adverse to its pass-
ing that creek. He would do all he could to aid a proper and effi-
cient line of communication to the country.
Mr. Richard Davie, of Redruth (which is on the line of the
West Cornwall), examined—His brother and he were owners of
mines. He was well acquainted with the mines in the south, and
agreed with Mr. Williams and Mr. Pendarves that the proposed
line would not carry the ores or the materials used in the mines in
that district. The other line would be used to a great extent, and
would offer far greater facilities.

Mr. Avery, timber-merchant, said he imported timber from the
north as well as the south coast. He imported timber between
Falmouth and Truro, and along the south coast generally. He
agreed in the opinions expressed by the other witnesses called on
behalf of Mr. Thomas, the petitioner against the Bill, that the coast
line would net offer so many inconveniences for the transit of these
and other materials as the ether line specified in the snap as the
" red" or " northern line."
The Committee then adjourned.

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING,

happen to he mistaken, he should sincerely rejoice—but he could
not help thinking (and he was sure the Committee would under.
stand that he did not use words, which, in any case, can be tortured
into a want of respect to the Committee) that their case was to
some extent prejudiced in the minds of some Hon. Members en
this Committee. By the time their adversary's case was completed,
there was an impression on the minds of the Committee prejudi-
cial to the case he was engaged for. It was natural
that it should be so, for their opponent's case had been recom-
mended by the report. It was supported by a most able address,
and aided by a series of evidence which undoubtedly required
strong evidence on their part to break down. The result was, that
there was, to a certain extent, a determination on the question an
some of the Hon. Members' minds before they had heard the other
side of the question, and he well knew the difficulty which that
places on a party, however strong his case may be; not but he did
every Hon. Member of this Committee the full justice to believe that
he and they, one and all, had moral courage enough to avow
to themselves—ay, and to others—if they had expressed an opinion
based upon one view of the case, that that opinion should be
eradicated from their minds, if they once became satisfied that that
opinion so formed and su conveyed was founded upon error.

The CHAIRMAN said he could assure Mr. Cockburn that he was
in error if he supposed that any such opinion was formed.
Mr. COCKBURN received that statotnent with great joyfulness
and thankfnlness, and he begged to assure them that he had
formed that opinion in common with his colleagues.
He rejoiced to thick it was not so, and he entered en the discussion
of the case with, he owned, a weight relieved from his mind, for
which he could not be sufficiently thankful. He would proceed
now at once to the case. It was one undoubtedly of very great
importance; and he did not know that he took an erroneous view
of the case, but it did not appear to him to be one of that magni-
tude and importance which the other side sought to invest it wiih,
It appeared to him, that as far as the Board of Trade was con-
cerned, there never was a more complete mystification
than that which had been practised upon their
minds. He trusted not upon theirs. With respect
It has been sought to make this a question of national importance
with regard to the two gauges—whether the preference should
be given to the wide or narrow gauge. It seemed to him
that that is not the question at all. The simple question
here is, whether one of two lines communicating between the
Staffordshire mineral district on the one hand, and Oxfordshire and
the district around it on the other. And here it has been that
the cunning—the artifice of the adver,ary had succeeded to an
extraordinary degree in their endeavour to persuade the Board
of Trade and the Committee that that is not the ques-
tion, but that the question is to ,be viewed with
another, as he submitted, wholly foreign to it, and which had not
the remotest bearing whatever upon the case. The question be.
fore them was that of two competing lines, to connect, by means of
railway communication, the mineral districts of South Staffordshire
with Worcester and Oxford, and the districts around. The
question was, which of the two systems was the better.
It was very true that it did so happen that one
line was to be on the broad and the other on the narrow
gauge. It might be incidental to the question to determine which
of the two the Committee would give the preference. If they
thought one so superior to the.
.other as that that
superiority should alone entitle one line to the
preference over the other. But that is not the question which the
Board of Trade has taken up, which appears to be, that in one
line with which this has no connexion whatever, except that it runs
into it, the narrow gauge should be substituted for the broad. He
did not dispute but that that might be a grave question. But it did
not arise upon this inquiry, and he should presently show why. But
efore he entered into thediscussien of the gauges, let the question
be considered as it there were no gauges at all—let them put aside the
question as to whether on the Birmingham and Bristol lines of
railway they would prefer the broad or narrow gauge, and consider
which line they would prefer, irrespective of that question. Then
he would have no diffiulty to show to the Committee that, viewed
alone on that which appeared to him the legitimate scope of in.
quirt', the line which he advocated was decidedly entitled to a
preference at their hands. Ater that question, then, lie would
come to the ether. He would then submit whether
the Great Western line was to be entitled to the
preference of the Committee irrespectively of the question
of glum Then he should be able to show that the question of
guage cannot deprive the Great Westhrn line of that preference to
which he should submit to them, on the whole of the evidence, it
is entitled. Take the first question now, The line advocated by
the Great Western Company proposes to connect the mineral dis-
tricts of South Devonshire with Oxfordshire and the surrounding
districss. No one can appreciate too highiy the importance of con-
necting the South Staffordshire district, both with the North and
the South, and neighbourhood of Oxfordshire.
The Learned Counsel, after going into the evidence submitted
on the other side, closed a ♦ery able address by calling on the
Committee to pass the preamble of the Bill.
The Committee rose at four o'clock and adjourned to twelve
o'clock the next day.

JUNE 2, 1845.

Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS. There were manufactories
for soda, alkali, and soap, at Liverpool, Warrington, and Hull.
Thought he bad facility to supply the Manchester trade at as cheap
a rate as any of those places. Notwithstanding the increased cost
of carriage which he would have to pay from Newcastle, supplied
three-fourths of the crystals of soap used in the kingdom. Ha•.t a
great hand in the making over of the North Midland Railway to
Mr. Hudson.

Mr. James Allport, manager of the Newcastle and Darlington
line, was next examined, and gave evidencr, at great length, on the
nature, extent, and cost of carriage of the traffic on the line with
which he was connected, and read portions of a long correspon.
dence, detailing the negotiations he had been engaged in with Capt.
Lawes on the part of the Manchestet and Leeds Company. On the
cross-examination of the witnesses ; he admitted that Mr. Hudson
had the command of lines of railway to almost all the towns on the
eastern coast of England.

Mr. Arthur Wade examined by Mr. PICKERIND—Was a sugar-
refinar at Goole. Supplied Leeds, Beadford, York, Liverpool, and
Maiehester with sugar, but principally the three first. He sent
1,200 tons annually to these places. Consumed from twenty to
thirty tons of coal weekly in the manufacture of it. This wit.
ness pointed out the great advantage which he, in common with
others in the town of Goole, would derive from the formation of
this line by having increased facilities for the conveyance of their
manufactures, and also by being able to procure coals, &c., more
conveniently and cheaply.
As the cross-examinat►on of this witness was about to com.
mence, the Speaker was announced to be at prayers, and the Com-
mittee adjourned till twelve o'clock co-morrow.

GROUP X.
LONDON AND Ironic LINE.

The Committee sat this day at twelve o'clock, in Committee-
room No. t.

Mr. S. C. DENISON announced that he appeared on behalf 'of
Lord Scarborough.

Mr. Sergeant -WRANGUAM— Is it to the preamble of the Bill ?
CHAIRMAN—Yte.

Mr. Sergeant WILANGLIAM said he understood that the petitions
of lat.downers were confined to Sir William Milner, he being the
only one who appeared at the time.

Mr. DENISON said that this was the first time he appeared before
the Committee, and did so now, because he had been led to under-
stand that the power of Lord Scarborough to a;ipear at any time
during the investigation had been reserved to Lord Scarborough.
The CHAIRMAN said that that was his impression.
Mr. M. SMITH then proceeded to cross-examine Mr. Cubitt, but
the noise in the room rendered the questions and ansa ers for a
few minutes inaudible. The witness was understood to say that
it was in September, 1844, he was appointed engineer to the line. The
line proposed to go about three miles through Lord Salisbury's
property ; did not hear that the Company were about to abandon
that. The number and names of all the stations on the line had
not been at all fixed. The stations on such a line formed a very
important item in the estimate. There were to be stations at Lon-
don and York, besides ten other stations of the first class, ten of
the second, and twenty of the third class. He allowed 350,0001.
for all the stations—that was to say, 150,0001. for the
London, 50,0001. for the York, and 150,000 e. for all
the other stations; on the loup there was to be one station at every
ten mllesat an average; for the station at Sheffield he allowed
7,0001.; had estimatad the ten main stations at county towns at
10,000/. each, Inclusive of land; thinks that would be ample; has
not fixed on the places for the stations in thedifferent towns ; the
quantity of land required for each depended upon local circum-
stances ; say from an acre to three acres for each ; even considering
the establishment of coal depots, the money he had mentioned
would be sufficient if all this was exclusive of the London station.
The CHAIRMAN here referred to the direct evidence of the wit.
ness, and said he had given 117,6804 as the sum for land.

The witness said that was for land for the line merely.
To the CouwsEL—The 50,0001. for the stations on the leup in-
cluded the land. The Lincoln station would cost 15,0001., partly
inclusive of land, and partly not. Doncaster station came in as a
country town station ; the cost, 10,0001. The same with regard to
Gainsborough and Bawtry. The cost of the bridge over the Swan
Pool, at Lincoln, he had already given ; it was 1,3191. The
bridge ever the Treat, at Gainsborough, would cost 10,000/. Did
not know that the line from London to Selby could be made at 164
miles.

To Mr. Wells—The heaviest cutting on the line was 1,112,212
cubic yards ; part of that would cost 28,3511., and part 25,0001.
The estimate of 3,000/. per mile for carriage would include the
carriage for coals.

To Mr. DENNtsom.—The station at Sheffield, on the Bantry
line, would run into the existing Sheffield station, therefore it
would not cost much, but he had allowed 4,0001. for
that. The present station at Sheffield is quite sufficient for present
purposes. The 4,0001. did not include lard, for the station would
be on the line. Did not survey the Sheffield line, but had it done
by an accredited agent, for whom he was responsible, but had gone
over the line himself. It was surveyed by Mr. Fairbank, engineer,
of Sheffield. The gradients on this line were as follows, beginning
at Bawtry :--1 in 125, 1 in 173, 1 in 120, 1 in 12(1, 1 in 127. 1 in
146, 1 in 120, 1 in 120, 1 in 178, 1 in 100, 1 in 120, 1 in 122, 1
in 554, 1 in 640, 1 in 268, 1 in 397 ; that was to say, there were
56 yards of level on the whole distance; there were two tunnels on
the line ; one was 1,980 yards, and the other 1,245 yards; th
strata was principally rock. The longest tunnel was near Sheffield
and the strata consisted alternately of clay and soil. and very little
water. The cost he hal estimated at 601. per yard forward. Tun-
nelling was the moat difficult and intricate work in engineering.
Mr. DENNISON—And therefore required the greater care and
minuteness before making an estimate P—l wasn't going to add
that.—(Laughter.) It required more experience than either. There
were four stations on the line.

To Mr. Picsianzsia, on behalf of Sir William Milner—Witness
knows Sir William's estate. Does not know how near the line
will go to Manapleton Park. It was more than B.loths of a mile
from the house itself; cannot say for what distance; cannot say
whether it was at the back or front of the house; if the York and
North Midland line should be formed, the house should be placed
in the fork of the two lines; cannot say if any of the farmhouses
were to be cut off:

The witness was re-examined by Mr. Sergeant KINGLAKE
With a view to explain some of the answers given by him in cross
examination, in reference to the slips of embankments, gradients,
cost of stations, &c., but none of the answers were of any impor-
tance. lie said that the cost of the first 20 miles out of London
would be about 38,0001. per mile, or a gross sum of 776,6071.,
exclusive of the cost of land on the London station.

Mr. DERBY—Supposing the owners of the present station at
Sheffield should not agree to allow you to cross it, have you sche.
duled land for a station for }ourself? The witness first said he
had not, then he looked at some documents, and said he Consi-
dered the 4,000/. would be sufficient, with the land to be taken In
the deviation.

Mr. DERBY—But the present statism at Sheffield occupies a
great deal of room, I sec by the map. Where have you scheduled
for land for a separate station, if you are not allowed to cross the
present station ? We will cross it on a level.
Mr. Betts, of Southampton, railway contractor—Has had the
contract for several railroads. Has estimated for the works on
the London and Yorkshire, and is quite satisfied that the prices he
has named wculd be sufficient to cover all expenses. The lire
presented no engineering difficulty, and it could be executed in
three years, if the land was had.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hitniann—Contracted for the Vaux-
hall and Weymouth line, and a line to Sonthampton ; also the line
from Rugby to Leicester. Part of the Croydon line was choaked
np about two years ago by a slip of embankment, which was
made of London clay. Could not say what contractor would under-
take the whole of the London and York line. Was ready himself
to uudertake the contract for the whole, or a portion, of the line.
Mr. Betts, jun.,—Was willing to run the same risk as his father
in contracting for the whole of this line or any part of it.

Mr. John Tuttle, land valuator—Had valued the country along
the line between Peterborough and East Redford. The acreage
was 711 aeres, and 61 acres on the Stamford branch ; but valued
the whole at 122,5001., or thirty-three years' purchase.

Cross-examined—Had gone as high as Si. an item per annum ;
255. was the minimum, and took 50 per cent. for insurance ; did
not take into account any sum to be paid by the Cempany, under
peculiar circumstances.
Re-examined—Had taken some land as high as 4651. per acre.
Mr. George Smith, land and house valuer—Had valued the
ht uses, &c., at King's.cross. Had included 59 acres altogether.
Is of opinion that that ground could be purchased for 208,2621.
To Mr. HILDYARD—Did not consider when the Small Pox
Hospital, which will be removed, is to be rebuilt. There
were a great many occupiers of houses in the 10 acres, and about
240 houses. Could not tell by what tenure they held. There
were no houses on the 49 acres. Had valued about 80 acres alto-
gether, from King's-cross to Hornsey.

Mr. Jarvis had valued the land on the line from the Hornsey-
wood to Sandy, 45 miles, or 587 acres area, on the Bedford
branch; had set down their value at 57,8581.
To the Committee—Had made the valuation upon a calculation
of rhirty- three year's purchase.
The Committee then adjourned.

GROLTI! XX.
THE PAIR VALE RAILWAY.

--- -
The Committee met at a quarter-past two o'clock, Mr. Vernon
Smith in the chair.
There was only one witness examined as the Bill was unopposed,
and nothing of any public interest took place. It may he added
that the line is only three miles in length.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS EVENING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS. •
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at
Five o'clock.

THE MAYNOOTH GRANT.
The Earl of HAREWOOD presented 160 petitions from
various places in England and Ireland against the Maynooth
Bill.

Petitions to a similar effect were pre3ent by the Bishop of
Cashel, by Lord Denman and Lord Brougham ; by the Earl of
Charleville, from Leeds, Penrith, Antrim, Ballycastle, Dublin,
Armagh, and a number of other places.
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from the
General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, signed by the
Moderator, with the seal of the Assembly attached, against the
proposed erant. The petitioners considered the measure was
in opposition to the spirit of the Reformation, and calculated
directlp to encourage Poperys His Grace also presented
positions from the prasbyters of the Free Church, Synod of
Kincardine, Mr. O'Neill, and the Dissenters of Cornwall,
against the Bill,
The Earl of FALMOUTH presented eleven Bills against
the grant.

The Bishop of EXETER presented a number of petitions
with a similar prayer.
MR. O'DRISCOLL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR stated that in consequence of
what had transpired in that House eight days ago respecting
Mr. O'Driscoll, inquiries had been made, and in consequence
of that gentleman's recent proceedings, and also in consequence
of some former misconduct in the Rolls Court of Ireland, the
Lord Chancellor (Si: E. Sugden) had considered it his duty
to dismiss him from the Commission of the Peace.

The Messenger of the House of Commons then brought up
several Bills, which sere ordered to be laid on the tabe of the
House.

The Bishop of WINCHESTER presented petitions from
St. John's in the Isle of Wight, and several other places, against
the grant to Maynooth.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE presented a great number of
petitions against the grant to Maynooth.
The Bishop of NORWICH I resented a great number of
vetitions to the same effect, but he read the names in so low a
tone that we could not catch one of them.
The Bi,hops of London, Chichester, Worcester, St. David's,
and Durham, and Lord Kenyon, Earls Fitzwilliarn and Veru-
lem presented petitions against the grant to Maynootls.
The Earl of ELDON presented petitions from the Wesleyan
congregations of Lincoln's Inn-fields and several other places,
against the grant toS Maynoot h.
MALL DEBTS BILL.

Lord BROUGHAM moved the second reading of this Bill.

MAYNOOTH GRANT.

The Duke of WELLINGTON then rose and said that it
was his duty to request the attention of their Lordships to an
important subject—to explain the principles and the nature of
the provisions of the Bill which he would submit
to their Lordships to carry it into execution, namely the main-
tenance of that institution.

The Yoker Road Bill was read a third time and passed.
Mr. GISBORNE moved the third reading of the Midland
, Railway Bill ( Lincoln and Nottitigha:n).
Colonel ROLLESTONE presented a petition against the
Bill, and m-wed, as an amendment, that the Bill should be
read a third time that day week.
The O'CONNOR DON thought no benefit could be ob-
tained by postponing the third reading of the Bill.
Mr..CHRISTOPHER hoped the House would not sanc-
tion the postponement of the third reading of the Bill. If any
party had not appeared before the Committee, it was their
fault; but they would have an opportunity of appearing
before a Committee in another place.
Sir J. R. REID opposed the postponement of the third
reading of the Bill.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE believed that the Bill was not for
necessary at all, and if his Gallant Friend had moved
that the Bill should be read a third that day three or
six months, he would have voted with him, as it
was he thought his Gallant Friend had good grounds
moving for delay. He believed there was not a single indi-
vidual in Nottingham who was in favour of this measure,
which if carried into effect, would cross two high roads.
If the Bill was postponed for a week no doubt some arrange-
ment would be made that would be sutisfaciory.
Mr. W. COLLETT supported the third reading of the Bill.
Mr. MUNTZ supported the third reading of the Bill.
Lord WORSLEY trusted tt e Hon. Member for Notting-
hamshire would withdraw his motion.
After some observations, the amendment was withdrawn,
and the Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Great Grimsby and Sheffield Junctim Railway Bill
was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Sir J. TROLLOPE the Midland Rail-
way (Sys:on to Peterborough) Bill was read a third time
and passed.
Molyneux's Estate Bill was rend a second time and ordered
to be committed.
The &wish Central Railway Bill was read a third time and
passed.
Mr. METCALFE moved the third reading of the Neweas-
tle-upon-Tyne Coal Turn Bill.
After some observations from Mr. LABOUCIIERE and Sir
G. CLERK,
Mr. T. DUNCOIIIBE suggested that the debate could be
adjourned for a week.
After a few observations from Sir G. Clerk, Mr. Labou.
there, Lord G. Somerset, and Mr. H. Hinde, the debate was
adjourned to Tuesday next.
The Southampton and Dorchester Railway Bill, the Kendal
and Windermere Railway Bill, and the West London R.,:tway
Bill, were severally read a third tine and passed.
The West London Railway Bill was read a second titn,
The Brighton, Lewes, and Hastings Railway Bill ( Hatt-
ings, Rye, and Ashford Extension) was read a second time.
GAME LAWS.
Mr BRIGHT presented several petitions against the game
Laws.