The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-03 00:00:00

IZAILVJAY.

Mr. CALTERT intimated that since Saturday a negotiation had
been going on 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 render 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
wiling 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 all
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, he 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. HUMPHREYS, for 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 his
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. CALTERT 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 oppised to such a step,
he begged to withdraw his application.
Mr. DANIEL said that he was now placed in the position •f 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 tables and engineering evidence.
The CHAIRMAN 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 Hurr 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 regard
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 he 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 with
the London and Birmingham Railway was about half 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 the line rose lin3 )0 forlabout 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 *junction with the
Trent Valley Railway. There were no tunnels 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. MERREVIETHER on behalf of
the promoters of the Bill. He said that he was the engineer of the
Great Western and South Devon Railway., 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 become joint shareholders
to the amount of 250,0001. He had, 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 smaller 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 11 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 and 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 snore than was occupied on other lines in breaking up the
trains and starting them afresh. The boat might be easily made
to oarry six carriages. One million, the estimated amount, would
be 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 net meet the wants of the district.
Mr. P. 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 Devonport. He stated that the Board
had proposed 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. MERREWEIVER said that was the case for the promoters of
the Bill.