The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-08 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESIJA

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.
(YESTERDAY.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
THE CORNWALL RAILWAY.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of ywsterday.)

Mr. Harvey, Secretary to the Cornwall and Devon Central Rail-
way Company, said the advertisement spoken of appeared in the
Times and Chronicle, as well as in The Morning Sun. The pur-
port of the meeting was to receive the report of the Committee in
which the engineer's statement was embodied. Felt satisfied the
meeting had not been convened for the purpose of entering into
any arrangement with the promoters of the present project. The
project of which he was secretary was going on very well until the
report of the Beard of Trade came out at the end of last December,
when their proceedings were paralysed by it. The witness
went into a detail of the proceedings at the meeting alluded to, at
which there was considerable difference of opinion, and a good deal
of angry squabbling. One body of the shareholders was in favour
of an arrangement with the promoters of the Cornwall Railway
Bill, whilst another witness stated that a most influential and im-
portant part was averse to it.

It was held by the promoters of the Bill before the Committee
that after the meeting of the 25th of Februat y, the Cornwall and
Devon Central Railway Company had dissolved, whilst by the op-
ponents the reverse was contended for. An immense number of
shares had been taken in the Central Cornwall mid Devon Rail-
way, for which not one shilling had been paid in. The majority of
the Provisional Committee paid nothing in. The South-Western
Railway Company took 10,000 shares, but paid nothing. Only
7,000 shareholders had paid in. There were between 30,000 and
40,000 shares allotted to the public, exclusive of 5,000 shares to
Mr. Turner, M.P., and 10,000 to the S,uth.Western Company.
Mr. Tilley, a solicitor, was next examined on the part of the op.-
position—The Cornwall and Devon Central Railway Company was
provisionally registered.
Mr. AUSTIN denied this assertion.

Witness went on to say, that in every principal town in the
county meetings were held on the subject of the central line,
at which an unanimous feeling prevailed in its favour.
The promoters of the present scheme had never held
a meeting in the county, because they were afraid
to face it. The meetings in favour of the scheme was at-
tended by the principal men in Cornwall. At the meeting of the
2iith of February, a resolution was carried to enter into the ar-
rangement spoken of with respect to the promoters of the Cornwall
Railway; but witness, Mr. Passingham, the engineer, and others,
protested against it, as being a sacrifice of the interests of the
county.

Mr. Austin and Mr. Cockburn, at the conclusion of this wit-
ness's testimony, engaged in a most dry and wearisome argument,
as to whether the Central Cornwall and Devon Railway had any
locus standi before the Committee.

Mr. COCKBURN then read the petition of the Cornwall and
Devon Central Railway, alleging several gross misrepresentations
on the part of the promoters of the Bill before the Committee, and
praying for a hearing before their Lordships' Committee.
The Committee adjourned at five o'clock.

BRISTOL AND EXETER RAILWAY.
(Continue from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday )

Mr. Brunel, the engineer cf the Great Western and Bristol
and Exeter Company, proved that the length of the Yeovil line
would be about twenty miles, and would cost about 2.20,000/., or
11,0001. per mile. The junction at Bristol would be about a
quarter of a mile in length, and cost from 50,0001. to 60,0001.
The branch to Clevedon was about three miles, and the branch
to Tiverton would be four miles and three-quarters, and the cost
of the whole of these works he estimated at 375,0001. There
were no engineering difficulties on any of the branches.
Mr. Board was called to put in the traffic tables which had been
taken in the district of the proposed line.
This closed the case for the promoters.
_

Mr. Henry Hetherage was then called by the opponents to
prove that the traffic tables were considerably overrated, and based
upon inaccurate data. _ .

Mr. Giles, the civil engineer, proved that a better line might
be obtained by way of the valley of the Yeo.
Mr. MERREWETHER then addressed the Committee on behalf of
the opponents of the Yeovil branch, contending that its pro_
moters brought it forward, not with a view of accommo-
dating that town, but to gain a preoccupancy of the
district through which the branch would run. It was quite evi-
dent from the evidence that the line would never prOve a re-
munerative one.

Mr. TALBOT replied, that although the line would not of itself
prove remunerative, yet it would amply compensate the promoters
in the way of a feeder to their main line.

The CHAIRMAN then directed the room to be cleared, and the
Committee having remained in deliberation for a few minutes,
strangers were re-admitted, when
The CHAIRMAN announced that the Committee had determined
upon adjourning till tomorrow.

CLYD2ESDALE JUNCTION RAILWAY.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)

Mr. Smith, of Deanston, the celebrated agriculturist, was
examined respecting the value of the land to be taken by the rail-
way, and also respecting the value of the estates of Mr. Graham
and Mrs. Hamilton intersected by the line. He stated that he had
endeavoured to effect an arrangement with Mr. Graham, and on
behalf of the Company offered what he considered ample terms,
which were refused. He also conducted a negotiation with Mrs.
Hamilton's agent, and an agreement come to, which was afterwards
broken through on a dispute about paying a sum of money down.
_ . .

In cross-examination it came out that Mr. Smith had concluded
an arrangement with Mrs. Hamilton's agents, agreeing to pay 1501.
for
.the expenses then gone into to the Bill, and that the
culverts, bridges, and reservoirs on that portion of the line should
be left to the regulation of the witness. This was afterwards
repudiated by the Committee acting on behalf of the Company.
The witness having stated that a correspondence had taken place
en this matter, it was ordered to be read, in which the foregoing
statement was clearly set forth.
Mr. HOPE was proceeding to examine this witness further,
with the object of showing that there must have been a misunder-
standing, when the Chairman stated that he considered the Com-
pany had broken their agreement, and had not acted fairly in the
transaction.

Mr. GREGG, on behalf of Mrs. Hamilton, was willing to take the
same terms, providing all the expenses of the opposition were paid
up till that time.

Mr. HOPE was not prepared to assent, and on the recommenda-
tion of the Chairman, the point was postponed till the rest of the
case was gone through, by which time perhaps an amicable settle-
ment would be come to.

Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Bain, and Mr. Fisher, were severally exa-
mined respecting the value of Mr. Graham's property, when
The Committee rose, having decided, on account of the engage-
ments of some of their Lordships, to adjourn till next Friday, at
eleven o'clock.

The following Railway Bills, which, as being unopposed, were
referred to the Earl of Shaftesbury as the Chairman, were this day
declared to have passed through the Committee:—The Great
Southern and Western (Ireland), the Cork and Bandon,
the Great Western (Dublin and Mullingar), and the Cockermouth
and Workington.
The Waterford and Limerick Railway Bill was postponed to
Thursday, as we understood.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
GROUP A.
(Continued from •ur Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Mr. TALBOT then addressed the Committee on the part of the
proposed
ASHPORD AND HASTINGS (ATMOSPHE—
RIC) BRANCH 01' THE BRIGHTON AND
LEWES LINE,
which was now taken, according to Mr. ALEXANDER'S suggestion.
He alluded to the various advantages expected from the proposed
line, but said that the Company did not expect any very great re.
muneration from the proposed line; at the same time, he
thought it a very important scheme. He then quoted the opinion
given on this subject by the Board of Trade.
On the conclusion of Mr. Talbot's address, Mr. MELLOR called
Mr. Rasti ick, the engineer o f the line, who said he considered
it the best that could be selected in the neighbourhood. There
was no steeper gradient on the line than 1 in 50, which only oc-
curred in one place, at the Ore Ridges, where it continued for
only three-quarters of a mile. The whole length of the proposed
line would be 29 miles 7 chains. There was no important dif-
ficulties on the line, and, except at the Ore Ridges, the
gradients were remarkably slight. The expense of the line was
estimated at 497,3581., which included the expense of purchasing
land.
The witness was then cross-examined by Mr. Bellasis, but Mr.
Alexander omitted to cross-examine him, according to agreement.
Mr. Williams, a Government engineer, and a magistrate at Hast.
ings, had examined the proposed line, and especially that part of
the line where it crosses the Rother, and thought the arrangements
the best that could possibly be made in the country through which
it passed. Toe only bad gradient on the line was where it crossed
the Ore Ridges, and in that place it had the best gradient that
could be got there. The Ore Ridges formed a very great natural
obstruction, and had been dealt with in the best possible manner.
The witness having been cross-examined by Mr. HILDvAnD on
the part of the Commissioners of Rye Harbour,
Mr. MELLort said that the next witness he intended to call was
Mr. Pare, who was not now in Court, and that it would be neces•
sary to pause for awhile in order to allow him, Mr. Mellor, to
call him.
Mr. HILDYARD proposed that his case against the line might now
be allowed to go on, and asked whether the case as to the crossing
of the harbour at. Rye was yet concluded ?
Mr. MELLOR replied that it was, and that he only wished to
examine Mr. Pare as to the traffic tables.
Mr. HILDYARD said that lie had nothing to do with the tables,
and that his case only referred to the crossings of the harbour.
The committee then agreed to proceed with Mr. Hildyard's case

at once.
Mr. Henry Stocks, harbour-master, was then called by Mr.
HILDYARO, and spoke to the injury which would be done to the
navigation of the harbour and the river by any bridge crossing the
harbour, as the proposed line would. In cress-examination the
witness said that the Board of Commissioners of Navigation of Rye
Harbour were 48 members, being 40 too xnany.—(Laughter.)
Mr. Hicks was the clerk of the board.
Mr. Holmes, a ship-owner at Rye, spoke to the injury which
would be done to the Rye Harbour navigation by the bridge if made
there. Any bridge at that place ought to be at least seventy feet
above the high-water mark. The reason why the height ought to
be seventy feet was, that many vessels passing that place had masts
of seventy feet. The injury to the navigation would be the
greater on account of the peculiar nature of the tide, which was
very rapid, and which set in such a direction that the barges would
be driven against the piles, and most likely would sink. Barges
often became unmanageable on account of the force and rapidity of
the tide.

Mr. William Ker, a pilot at Rye Harbour, corroborated the
above evidence. As a pilot, it was his duty to go up the Channel
with vessels, as it was very difficult to navigate the river, and none
but very small vessels would venture to attempt it without a pilot.
The witness was then cross-examined by Mr. MELLOR.
Mr. HILDYARD was about to call another witness, when
The CHAIRMAN said that he thought any further evidence on
this subject was not necessary.
Mr. HILDYARD said that he had about a dozen witnesses to call
as to this point, but that he also wished to call Capt. Moorsom, an
eminent engineer, to prove that such a bridge was not necessary.
The CHAIRMAN thought the examination of further witnesses as
to the injury to the navigation would:be superfluous, and that Mr.
Hildyard ought therefore to call Capt. Moorsom at once.

. _
Captain Moorsom was then called, and said that, as an engineer,
he would not, if he were laying down a line from Ashford to
Hastings, make any bridge across the Rye Harbour. It could be
avoided by a curve of a quarter of a mile radius, which was, in his
opinion, no engineering difficulty.
This evidence occupying the Committee up to four o'clock, they
adjourned till to-morrow, with the understanding that on their
meeting Mr. Hildyard would proceed to address them on the part
of the Commissioners of Rye Harbour.

GROUP X.
DIRECT NORTHERN RAILWAY.

The Committee assembled at twelve o'clock, Lord Courtenay in
the chair; Mr. Poulet Scrope, Mr. Baring Wall, and Mr. Darby,
present.

Mr. WEBSTER called Sir J. Rennie, under whose superintendence
the line is to be formed. It commenced at Burton, three miles north
of Lincoln, and presented no engineering difficulties whatever.
The only consideration was the crossing of the several drains by
which the flats of Lincolnshire are intersected. There were several
canals to be crossed : the chief of these were the Witham and
Fosdyke Canal. The Chesterfield Canal was passed at a rise of 18
feet; the Ayre Canal at a rise of 22 feet; and the Leeds and
Selby Canal at an elevation of 18 feet. The North Midland
Railway would be crossed at a rise of 18 feet ; and the Leeds
and Selby Railway at the same height. On the contrary,
the London and York line crossed some of the streets of York