The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-29 00:00:00

LONDONDERRY AND ENNISKILLEN RAILWAY.
Mr. TA Lain opened the case of this railway, which was unopposed.
The line had the approbation of the landowners on the hoe, the
principal of whom was the Marquis of Abercorn, through whose
property the line ran for fifteen miles.
Mr. John Leatliam have evidence as to the traffic between the
termini of the proposed railway. The line was very much required.

Group FF.
EDINBURGH DISTRICT.
The Select Committee on this group re-assembled at the usual
hour this morning, and proceeded with the evidence in support of
the Bill for constructing the
EDINBURGH AND NORTHERN RAILWAY.
Mr. Cameron, a carrier of Edinburgh, who had been examined
in chief on Tuesday, was cross-examined at some length this
morning by Mr. Ayton, with a view of showing that the
goods traffic over the route of the projected railway
was not sufficiently extensive to justify its construction. The
witness denied that the Glasgow and Greenock Railway was
the worst paying line in the kingdom, but he admitted that a
good deal of traffic was diverted from that line by the steamers.
The journey from Dundee to Leith by water was only 21 miles,
but going by way of Burnt Island, which was the route of the pre-
sent line, the distance was 57 miles. A line from Glasgow to
Perth he did not think would be objectionable, because it would
shorten the journey by 113 miles, and avoid a ferry.
➢ir. Sergeant BELLASIS informed the Committee that the Duke
of Buccleuch and Mr. Gladstone, who arc the present proprietors of
Burnt Island Ferry, were quite ready and willing to bind them-
selves by agreement or otherwise to carry passengers across the
ferry at such a rate as to accommodate the traffic of the railway.
Mr. Thomas Anderson, a banker, of Newburg, and who had
been brought up as a merchant, was well acquainted with the
trade and commerce of that town. Of his own knowledge he could
state that 1,809 tons of flax were annually imported into Newburgh.
The cartage of this article cost from Bs. to 9s. per ton, and after
it was spun the same expense would be incurred again, because it
had to be sent back by the same conveyance that it came. The route
those conveyances generally took was precisely the same as that
of the proposed railway, and he had therefore no doubt whatever
that this traffic would come on the line. Potatoes, starch, and
lime, and other commodities were largely exported from Newburg,
and it was his firm belief that they would all go by railway if there
was one.

Group R.
DUBLIN AND ARMAGFI RAILWAY.
The Committee met to-day at the usual hour, Mr. Gibson
Craig in the chair, when the examination of witnesses was re-
sumed.
Mr. Lindsay, cross-examined by Mr. ALEXANDER—He had
been engaged since 1824 in public works, especially roads and
bridges. He had never been employed hi any other public
works, nor been engaged on a railway. He had never constructed
a viaduct nor a tunnel, yet he thought he knew about the con-
struction of these as well as Sir John M`Neill. The highest
embankment he had ever been engaged in was fifty
feet, and the deepest cutting about forty feet. He
had made an estimate of that excavation, which was
sixpence the yard. The witness was here questioned very
closely with respect to his knowledge of the mathematical prin-
ciples on which the construction of railways depend, the answers to
which were very evasive and unsatisfactory, and excited considerable
merriment in the room. There were, continued the witness, to
the best of his knowledge, five miles of granite on the coast line
near to Johnsborough, and the elevations were otherwise much greater
than on the inland line. He was employed to survey the inland line
by Mr. Pierce Mahony ; that was in October last. Mr. Mahony is not
at present connected with it. He had been applied to by Mr.
Cumming, the solicitor, to come over, but beyond that he had
had no orders, except it were the Speaker's warrant, at whose in.
stance he had come. He had been over last month at the Stand-
ing Order Committee, and he then had been over at the instance of
the people of Armagh. He had not been expressly appointed by
them. Mr. Cumming was the party who he understood acted for
them. He had not yet received any pay for coming over, but he
expected to be paid by the Ulster Canal Company. He under-
stood that a certain party was to receive a sum of money from
that quarter, and he (the witness) supposed would get some of it.
Mr. ALEXANDER requested witness to give the name of this party,
when Mr. Chambers interfered, and thought this course of cross-ex-
amination was very improper, as it would operate very prejudicially
if made a rule in Committee, and prevent parties taking an active
part as the originators and promoters of railway speculations.
After a short consultation, the CHAIRMAN asked if the gentle-
man referred to was connected with the Ulster Canal Company ?
Mr. Lindsay—l believe he is.
The CHAIRMAN said, then the Committee were clearly of opinion
that they ought to be put in possession of his name, in order to see
whether this opposition was a fair one, and whether the project
before them was a bona fide affair
Mr. ALEXANDER again put the question respecting the name of
the gentleman who was to find the money, when he answered that
the name was Dargan. Witness himself hadadvanced no money be-
yond his expences, which had amounted to four or five hundred
pounds. He knew of no sources from whence he was to get back
this money but the Ulster Canal Company. He had never em-
ployed any solicitor in getting up this opposition. He never in-
structed Mr. Cumming, for Mr. Cumming generally instructed
him. He had not stated at a meeting at Cavan, that General Bur-
goyne had said that every opposition should be given to the coast line.

Group X.
LONDON AND YORK LINE.
This Committee, which stood adjourned from Tuesday, assem-
bled this day at one o'clock, in Committ ee.roorri No. 8.
Mr. Charles Lindley—Resides at Mansfield, in Nottinghamshire,
and is proprietor of a stone quarry situate westward of Newark.
The blocks on the table are specimens of the stone of the quarry.
Here the witness described the different specimens, and said that
one of them was that of which the present Houses of Par-
liament were being built. There were several other
quarries in the vicinity of the proposed line, the
stone from which was extensively used in building.
Has no doubt that if the London and York line should be made
much of this stone would be conveyed by that line. The present
cost of the transit of stone from the Mansfield quarry was 245. per
ton to Peterborough. The cost by the line would be 7s. Bd. per
ton, exclusive of the value of the article, which was 25.3 d. per ton
at Peterborough. By the London and York line it would be
Is. lid., or about half. The cost of transit per ton to London was
at present 20s. 6d. By the proposed line it would be 13s. 4d.
The present mode of transit was by water. Had
visited many of the other towns along the line, and
found that the cost of transit at present for stone amounted to a
prohibition. The witness then deposed that the saving to be ef-
fected in the transit of the stone to those different towns
by the new line would be proportionably great. The
same evidence applied to the cost of the transit of
lime, both for agricultural and building purposes.