The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-05 00:00:00

Counties Extension were highly objectionable; for 1,000 yards
the decline was lin 88, and for 400 yards 1 in 96. The conse-
quence
of such steep gradients was the difficulty, if not impcssi- '
bility, of adopting the customary engines:to the rail. The curves
on the Norwich and Brandon were unexceptionably small, and
every other engineering point was equally easy. There are no
planes or tunnelling on the Thetford Deviation, the length of which
will be 51 miles. The steepest gradient is I in 218. Two high-
ways, one on the road from Wockham to Thetford, and the other
between the latter town and Wetton.lane, to be crossed, but no
engineeringdiffieulties of any consequence are experienced.
By Mr. RICARDO—The difference between the levels of Dereham
and Wyndham is 40 feet, the level at the latter town being so
much higher than at Dereham.
(LEFT SITTING.)

GROUP N.

THE CORNWALL, AND WEST CORNWALL

AND ST. IVES RAILWAYS.
At the sitting of the Committee Mr. AUSTIN said, before the
Committee gave their formal decision in the case of the Cornwall
and West Cornwall Railways, he wished to make a few observa-
tions with respect to the latter scheme. The Committee would
recollect, with reference to that portion of the West Cornwall, be.
tweet' Redruth and Trevascus—which was a portion of the Hayle
Railway, and which was opposed on the ground that no powers
were given in their Act to amalgamate it with the West Corn.
wall—a petition had been presented to the House of
Commons, praying the House to empower them to introduce
that provision into the Hayle Railway Act. It was referred to the
Committee on Petitions ; they had referred it to the Standing
Orders Committee, and he had reason to believe that that Com-
mittee would make a favourable report, and therefore they would
be enabled to remedy this defect. This was exceedingly important,
as the Committee must have come to an adverse decision with re-
spect to that line for the reasons lie had mentioned; or, if it were
en the estimates, he would call their attention to the evidence of
liaptain Moorsons.
The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Macaulay) said, I think you are rather
going beyond the limit. We cannot, with propriety, hear a speech
—I have no doubt an able one—in defence of your railway, when
the case on both sides has been closed.
Mr. AUSTIN said he was not going to make a speech, he was
merely making a kind of application with reference to future pro-
ceedings, and with reference to an application to Parliament, next
session for instance. Would they permit him to say that the fur-
ther consideration of the West Cornwall Bill was suspended until
the Committee had taken up and brought to a conclusion their deli-
beration on the Cornwall Bill. He wished, therefore, to make this ap-
plication before the Committtee gave their decision. It appeared to his
clients that the subject would be left in a state of great perplexity
unless they were acquainted with the ground on which the Corn.
mittee had come to their decision.
The CHLIRMAW said, Mr. Austin could not expect that they
should state the exact grounds of their decision.
Mr. AvariN said he thought that there might have been some
misunderstanding on the part of the Committee, more particularly
with reference to the Hayle Railway.
The CHAIRMAN—The Committee have fully considered the whole
of the case, and cannot state the reasons which influenced them.
Mr. AUSTIN repeated that his clients were anxious to know
the nature of their objections, for the purpose of satisfying their
shareholders, and with reference to the future course to be taken.
He was anxious to impress the importance of this on the Com-
mittee.
The CHAIRMAN said he was prepared to give the decision of the
Committee, and in doing so he thought it right to say, that they
had not arrived at it without the most serious consideration which
they could give to the case, and did not think that anything had
escaped their attention. The Committee considered that the pre-
amble of the Cornwall Bill had been proved, and that the preamble
of the West Cornwall Bill had not been proved.
Mr. Atawrix said it was clear that the St. Ives Railway de.
petaled on the West Cornwall line, and as that line had been
objected to, he should not trouble them with it, and should con-
sequently withdraw it.
Mr. C. Legh, one of the Committee, said that the whole of the
western scheme would have to be deferred for another year.