The Sun.
London, England, 1845-08-02 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAN MORNING, AUGUST 2, 1845.

her rush, got np on the post, and mad.) it a dead heat ;
Sriteh a had third.
The -Maidstone Stakes of 15 sovs. each, ssith a renewal
of the gift of 50 sovs. added by Lord Maidstone ;
thre,! yrs old, 9st 91b ; four, llst 41b-; five, list 131 b ;
six, 12st 41b. The winner to be sold for 500 sovs.
The Maidstone Course, three miles and about 100
yards. To be ridden by members of the Goodwood
Club. (23 subs.)
Duke of Richmond's Red Deer,4yrs.(Capt. I
Lord G. Bentinek's John o'Gaunt, aged 2
Mr. W. H. Johnstone's Pythia, 3 yrs 3
Betting-5 to 4 agst Pythia (t)-5 to 4 agst Red
Deer —and 3 to I agst John o'Gaunt.
Rea Deer made the running, at a slow pace, to the
turn round the hill, where John o'Gaunt passed him,
improved the pace, and went on with a strong lead to the
stand. Red Deer then went up, ran a few strides with
him, and won easy by half a length ; Pythia a bad
third.

Time was so badly kept, that this race was run one
hour after the time.

Challenge for the March Stakes.
Lord G. Bentincles Naworth....
Lord G. Bentinck's Karnac 2
Lord G. Bentinck's African
Lord Maidstone's Arcanus
Lord Chesterfield's Cockfighter 0
Lord Howth's Beatrice, (61bs extra)
Mr. Osbaldeston's Sorella 0
Lord Howth's Wolfdog (slb extra)
6to 4 each agst Sorella and Wolfdog. A fine race,
won by a head. African close up.
The Bentinck Stakes of 5 soya. each, with 50 added by
Lord G. Bentinck ; three 3rs old, 9st 121 b ; four yrs,
llst 71b ; five yrs, 12st 21b ; six •rs and aged, 12st 71b;
winner to be sold for 100 sous ; Maidstone Course.

Ridden by members of the Goodwood Club. (26

Subs.) -
Lord-G. Bentinck's Best Bower, 4 yrs 1
Mr. O.baldeston's Fickle Wild Rose, 3.yrs ... 2
Several others ran.
Betting —3 to 1 agst Plenitude, 3 to 1 agst Best Bower,
and 5 to 1 agst Fickle Wild Rose.
Won by a neck.
Deciding heat for the Nassau Stakes.
Duke of Richmond's Refraction
Sir R. Bulkeley's Queen I'omare
Produce Match, 100, h ft ; Mr. Phillimore's Lady
Anna received forfeit from Mr. King's Lady Trampoline,
Bst 41b each ; Last Mile.
Match, 500, 50 ft; D.R.S.C. ; Mr. Clifton's Notting-
ham, .5 yrs, received forfeit from Mr. Johnstone's Pythia,
3 yrs, 7st 101 b each.
ST. LEGER BETTING IN THE MORNING.
7 to 4 agst John Day's Lot
5 to 2 agst Mr. Gully's Weatherbit
7 to 1 agst Mr. St. Paul's Mentor
10 to I agst Mr. Gully's Old England
10 to 1 agst Mr. Gratwicke's Merry Monarch
14 to 1 agst Mr. Johnstone's Annandale
16 to 1 agst Mr. Mostyn's Pantasa
23 to 1 agst Mr. Irwin's Ould Ireland
25 to 1 agst Mr. Watts's The Baron
23 to 1 agst Major Yarburgh's Red Robin
25 to 1 agst Mr. Irwin's Connaught Ranger
33 to 1 agst Lord Chesterfield's Pam
40 to 1 agst Lord Exeter's Wood Pigeon
40 to 1 agst Mr. Painter's The Paella
50 to 1 agst Mr. Ferguson's Clear the Way

GRAND JUNCTION RAILWAY.
THE ANNUAL MEETING.
(FROM OWR OVN REPORTER.)
LIVERPOOL, FRIDAY AFTERNOON.
This afternoon the annual general meeting of the Proprietors
of the above Company was held at the Cotton Sales-room in the
Exchange, in this town.
John Moss, Esq., Chairman of the Directors, took the chair.
The Secretary (Caps. H mit ) then read the advertisement
by which the meeting had been convened; after which he read
the report, from which it appeared that the income had been as
follows:
Coaching, carriages, horses, parcels, and
mails, including proportion of traffic from
the Manchester and Birmingham Com-
pany
Goods, including live stock, toll on coals, and
proportion of Manchester and Birmingham
traffic
Rents and interest ... 2,199 10 5

£221,326 4 4
That the Company have conveyed 90,500 passengers and
$15,000 tons of good a more than in the first six months of 18-14:
That the expense of conducting the traffic has been
96,636/. 15s. 10d., leaving a net profit of 129,6891. Bs. 6d. on
the half-year, being 18,568/. 19s. 9d. more than at the same
period last year :
That from the net srofit of the half-year the Directors recom.
mend that the usual dividend of 51. per share (21. 10s. having
already been paid ft r the first quarter) be now declared, and
that the surplus of 15,7961. Is. 6d. be carried forward to the
Reserved Fund, or " Rest," which will then amount to 45,4731.
6s. 3d., and added to the Depreciation Fund, present a total
balance of 64,0081. Bs. 10d. :
That the company's working stock of every kind is in the
highest state of efficiency, and that they have been enabled to
meet the increased demands upon them without difficulty, or in
any degree impairing their character for speed and punctuality.
They have to report that they have entered into a contract with
the Lancaster and Carlisle Company to supply them with en-
gines, carriages and waggons for a period of years, and they
consider that much benefit may arise to both companies from
this arrangement. In order to fulfil their engagements, it has
become necessary to make some additions (not of a very ex-
tensive character) to their manufactory at Crewe.
The report then proceeds—
The session of Parliament now closing has been one of un-
usual interest to all parties connected with railway undertakings.
The various projects affecting the Grand Junction Railway, re-
quired the unceasing attention of the Directors, and their
anxiety was increased by the adverse decisions of the Board of
Trade. It is with regret that the Directors refer to the
failure of their negotiations with the London and Birming-
ham Company ; they had not ceased to anticipate a
favourable issue, until all hope of adjustment was finally
dissipated by the unexpected union, in February last,
between the London and Birmingham, the Manchester and
Birmingham, the Trent Valley, and Churnet Valley Compa-
nies. With the Directors of the Manchester and Birmingham
Company the Board was, at the time, on the most friendly
terms ; they had no intimation of any intended change, nor of
the slightest dissatisfaction with their mutual arrangement ; an
arrangement which for eighteen months has had the effect of
transferring to the Manchester and Birmingham Company,
from the proceeds of the Grand Junction Line, a net annual sum
of from 12,000/. to 15,000/., and investing that Board with the
entire control and management of their own traffic over the
Grand Junction Line. The Directors offer no remarks on the
course adopted by the Manchester and Birmingham Board in
thus abruptly dissolving their friendly relations with the Grand
Junction. They thought then, and still think, that the agree-
ment was a most favourable one for the Manchester and Bir-
mingham Company; but as that Company entered into con-
tracts with other parties, altogether inconsistent with their
agreement, it only remained for the Directors to give them no-
tice that it would cease on the Ist of May last ; and acting
under advice, they are now taking the necessary legal measures
to establish their claim to their full mileage share of the traffic.
In the mean time, and till the question is decided, the differ-
ence, amounting to about 300/. a week, is not included in the
published statement of receipts.
In the Trent Valley Railway (now leased to the London
Company, at a dividend equal to that paid to their own Share-
holders), the Grand Junction Company holds stock to the
amount of 277,7801., and the Directors' attention was limited
to obtaining a clause in the Bill to secure to themselves the
power of using the line on reasonable terms. In this they suc-
ceeded. The Churnet Valley project was lost, Numerous
schemes have since made their appearance to supply its place;
whether any one of them may ultimately succeed is not so se-
rious a question to the Grind Junction Company as might be
supposed. The trade between Manchester and the South has
always been greatly over-estimated ; and in order to relieve
the minds of any proprietors who may have apprehensions on
the subject, it may be mentioned, that the total sum received
by the Grand Junction Company during the last half-year, for
traffic of all descriptions passing between any part of the Man-
chester and Birmingham line and London and Birmingham
line, including London and Manchester, falls short of 17,000/.,
or less than 8 per cent. of the income.
In order, however, to protect themselves as far as possible
against the threatened attack on the East, it became necessary
for the Directors to seek an alliance in the South ; and the Com-
mittee of the House of Commons in their report on the Oxford,
Rugby, and Wolverhampton Railways, distinctly alludes to the
necessity of affording to the Grand Junction Company a fresh
inlet to London, and securing them against any forced abstrac-
tion of their traffic.
Upon the whole, therefore, on contrasting the position of
the Company at the commencement of the session with its pre-
sent prospects, the Directors consider that there is cause for
congratulation.
Having thus briefly reviewed the past, the Directors *must
now allude to their future intentions, so far as they are already
determined on.
One of the most important is the shortening of distance be-
tween Liverpool and Birmingham. Arrangements are com-
pleted with the Duke of Bridgewater's trustees, the Admi-
ralty, and the Conservators of the River, for crossing the
Mersey at Runcorn. A branch from this new line will pro-
ceed to Warrington, ao as to place that town on the direct line
to Liverpool. A junction will also be made with the St.
Helen's Railway. In connexion with this extension, the
Directors have agreed to become interested in the formation of
a railway from Warrington to Stockport. It appeared to them
that these important towns were entitled to railway communi-
cation, and that the through traffic could be more efficiently
worked by means of a friendly alliance with the Grand Junc-
tion Company, than with any other party.
The proprietors are aware that the Potteries Branch Bill was
thrown out after passing the ordeal of the Committee of the
House of Commons. It is not the intention of the Directors to
renew the application, because the line, on a more extended
scale, has been merged in that of the Derby and Crewe Com-
pany. This scheme appears in every respect most eligible for
the district, and the Directors finding it warmly supported by
local influence, did not hesitate to contribute a portion of the
capital.
The " South Staffordshire" project, extending from a point
on the Midland Line, near Alrewas, passing through Lichfield,
crossing the Grand Junction Railway at Walsall, and proceed-
ing thence to Dudley, has recently been brought forward, sup-
ported by an unusually strong local interest. It will open new
sources of traffic to the Grand Junction, without clashing with
its interests; and having been invited to join it, the Directors
have agreed to embark in it to the extent of one-fourth of the
proposed capital.
The aggregate of the above engagements is 600,000/.
With respect to the Shrewsbury and Grand Junction Rail-
way, the Directors are not at the present moment in a position
to speak ; but a communication will be made on the subject
shortly.
The Directors have observed with pleasure the rapid progress
made in the works of the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway, and
the probability of its being opened for traffic in the summer of
next year. By virtue of their interest in this Company, the
Grand Junction Company became entitled to an allotment of
2,500 shares in the York and Carlisle Company, and tinder the
circumstances deemed it their duty to accept the same.
They are also happy to remark, that the Caledonian Rail-
way, in which, as the Proprietors may remember, the Grand
Junction Company holds 2,000 shares, has obtained a Bill.
The opening of this line, together with its various extensions
towards the north of Scotland, cannot fail to be productive of
essential benefit to the through traffic of the Grand Junction line.
It was intended to have proposed at the present meeting na
issue of new quarter shares ; but the terms of creation of the
stock cannot be determined upon until the Amalgamation Bill
is decided. Under these circumstances, a special meeting will
be called for the purpose, so soon as the session is over.
The Proprietors have to elect three Directors, to supply the
places of Messrs. Gladstone and Sandbach, who retire by ro-
tation, and Mr. Roskell, who has resigned.
A vacancy having occurred during the half-year, by the re-
signation of Mr. John Cropper, it has been filled by the elec-
tion of Mr. P. M. Stewart, M.P. for Renfrewshire.
The CHAIRMAN then addressed the Proprietors, and said.
the report of the Grand Junction Directors, which has just
been read, places you so fully in possession of what has passed
during the last six months, so eventful to railway interests,
that on the present occasion I shall forbear troubling you with
further detail. This is the more desirable, because each suc-
ceeding month makes such extraordinary changes, that I feel
our Directors should be left freely to watch the interests com-
mitted to their charge, so as to be enabled to take such mea-
sures from time to time as the necessity of the case in their
judgment demands. If any Proprietor calls for information,
I will, as I have always done, endeavour to satisfy him. It
now becomes a duty I owe to you to inform you, that with
the close of the proceedings of this day, when my office of
Chairman of this Company ceases, I propose retiring
from that most honourable and important posi-
tion. The state of my health has compelled me
to announce to my colleagues, that I can no longer sustain
the mental and bodily exertion which the office of your chair-
man demands. I wished to have retired earlier, but remained
until now at their request. It is not my intention to vacate
my seat at the Board; and after having received so many acts
of kindness from my colleagues on trying occasisns, whoever
succeeds me may rely upon my desire to support him.—
( Cheers.) As a matter of record, I beg to state that we have
expended the sum of 2,600,00 J., including calls on the rail-
ways, we leave shares in our property valued at .the market
price of the day's worth ; 13,889 shares in the Trent Valley,
250,000/. ; 5,000 shares in the Lancaster and Carlisle Com-
pany, 275,000/. ; 2,0[0 shares in the Caledonian, 10,000/.
Our land, works, and machinery at Crewe, have cost 130,340/. ;
our surplus capital, undivided, is 64,0001. ; our stock of
engines, carriages, and waggons, is worth 250,0001., leaving
for stations, and a road of 104 miles, unincumbered with debts,
1,620,660/.—(Cheers.) We were able to place 34,0001. the
last year to increase our reserved fund. I do not shrink from
a comparison whh any other railway. Your confidence has
always been most gratifying to me. The post of work-
ing Director must now, as it ought to do, devolve upon a
younger man ; but no one, I assure you, can be mors sincerely
or more anxiously alive to whatever promotes the interests of
our Grand Junction Railway. The Hon. Gentleman sat down
amidst loud cheers.
The report was then received and adopted, and a dividend
declared.
Messrs. Gilbert Winter, Charles Turner, and Charles Law-
rence, were elected Directors.
Mr. L. Moseer then, in a very feeling speech, proposed a
vote of thanks to the chairman, who briefly replied, and the
meeting separated.

GREAT CENTRAL SARDINIAN RAILWAY
COMPANY,

SO, King William-street, London.bridge, July 30, PB4&

The Duke di Lante di Montrefeltro, President, &c., &c., having
summoned a full board for this morning, stated that, in consequence
of an official interview he had yesterday with the Count de Revel
(who, in the absence from London of his Excellency Count Potion,
Minister Plenipotentiary of Sardinia, is acting as Charge d' A ffaires),
he was happy to be enabled to inform the Directors, that the Sar-
dinian Government had seen with satisfaction the forming of this
Company for the laying down of a railway through the island of
Sardinia, and that so soon as the deputation shall be prepared to
start for Turin for the purpose of receiving the final and exclusive
concession of this line (the only one in the Sardinian States which
will be granted by that Government to a foreign company), the
Embassy of his Sardinian Majesty in London will, with pleasure,
provide the deputation with letters for the authorities at Turin.

The Noble Duke further communicated to the Provisional Com-
mittee that Count de Revel had heard that his Excellency the Mar-
quis di Villamarina, Viceroy of Sardinia, had arrived at Turin from
Cagliari, and from what the Duke di Lante could understand,
personally to express to the superior Government at Turin the
anxiety manifested by the inhabitants of the island for the speedy
copstrnctien or this important railway.—By order,
G LANDELS, Secretary.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, Aug. 1.
Their Lordships assembled at the usual hour.
Messengers from the Commons brought up several Bills.
THE DUBLIN AND GALWAY RAILWAY.
The Earl of BESBOROUG II brought up the report of the
Committee appointed to inquire whether it was expedient to
prosecute the witness Stinton for perjury, which was to the
following effect :—That the Committee had met and considered
the subject referred to them, and that they were of opinion that,
although it was manifest that Stinton had wilfully contra-
dicted himself in the evidence given by him before the
Select Committee appointed to inquire into the allegations
against the Dublin and Galway Railway, contained in the pe-
tition of John Pimm, presented on the 7th of July, it was not
expedient to direct that he be prosecuted.
Lord CAMPBELL entirely agreed with the report, and
had no doubt that the dignity of the House and
of justice would not be compromised by the course recom-
mended. He was anxious it should be understood that pro-
ceedings against this person would have been taken if the House
had thought him guilty ; that persons would be S.ed or impri-
soned if guilty of equivocation or misconduct whilst giving evi-
dence before that House. If the same thing should occur again
it was clearly in the power of the House to punish the
parties, and they wou)d surely be punished.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH was also in favour of the report.
The report was then laid on the table.
GRAND JUNCTION RAILWAY.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE presented a petition against the
amalgamation of the Grand Junction, Leigh, and other lines.
COMMONS INCLOSURE BILL.
The Earl of FITZHARDINGE presented a petition froze
a Mr. Griffiths against this Bill.
CUSTOMS CONSOLIDATION BILLS.
The following Bills passed through Committee :—Customs
Laws Repeal Bill, Customs Management Bill, Customs Regu-
lation Bill, Smuggling Prevention Bill, British Vessels
Bill, Customs Duties Bill, Warehousing of Goods Bill, Cus-
toms' Bounties and Allowances Bill, Trade of 'British Posses-
sions Abroad Bill, Isle of Man Trade Bill.
'I he Coal Trade Port of London Bill passed through Com-
mittee, and was reported.
BILLS OF EXCHANGE BILL.
On the motion that this Bill be read a third time,
Lord MONTEAGLE said that it was not creditable to the
Government if they did not make the Bill permanent. The
Noble Lord then went into a minute statement of the changes
which the usury laws had undergone, and read extracts from
the evidence of Lovett, Gurney, and others, on the subject.
The evidence of the latter, continued the Noble Lord, was very
strong. He stated that before the relaxation took place in
those laws the failures were greater than they had been since,
and he had no doubt that they would have been greater still, if
those laws had not been relaxed. The Noble Lord then read
the evidence of two legal gentlemen, Mr. Maynard and ano-
ther, on the same subject, and proceeded to ask if, after the
evidence of those intelligent commercial gentlemen—after the
evidence of those legal gentlemen, who were conversant with
the subject in all its bearings—after the experience of 12 long
years that the relaxation had been attended with the best
effects, their Lordships would not at once resolve to make the
Bill permanent ? If the State had been subject to the usury
laws during the war the Government could not have obtained
any one loan. It was said that the usury laws were meant for
the protection of the poor. But in point of fact the usury laws
prevented the poor from borrowing money at all. He prayed
their Lordships to make the Bill a permanent enactment, and
he would therefore move that the words "the Ist of Jan. 1851,"
be expunged.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE thought that it would not be
expedient to make the bill permanent without very stringent
inquiry, and he would oppose the motion.
fhe Marquis of LANDSDOWNE having been twice Chair-
man of Committees in their Lordships' House on this subject, said
he could not allow the discussion to pass over without offering his
corroboration to the statements and opinions of his Noble
Friend. He should conclude by stating that he should support
the proposition of his Noble Friend.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said that the law ought tobe
renewed from year to year and not for five years, the principle
of which Ise did net understand.
After a few words from Lord Wharncliffe, the Earl of Wick-
low, and the Duke of Wellington, their Lordships divided, when
there appeared—
For the amendment

Against it

Majority for the Bil' 2B
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES BILL.
The Joint Stock Companies (Ireland) Bill was read a third
ime and passed.
STOCK-IN-TRADE BILL.

This Bill was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Lerd WHARNCLIFFE the Removal of
Paupers Bill was read a second time and ordered to be com-
mitted.
The Borough and Watch Rates Bill was read a second time
and ordered to be committed on Monday.
COMMONS INCLOSURE BILL.
Lord STANLEY moved the bringing up of the report on
the Commons Inclosuro Bill. He said the Bill contained one
or two unimportant amendments, such as a proviso in respect
to the mode of assessment, and anott.er, preventing parties
from building houses in any of the allotments of the field
gardens.
The Bill was ordered to be read a third time on Monday.
TAXING MASTERS COURT OF CHANCERY BILL.
The House went into. Committee pro forma on this Bill, and
it was ordered to be reported on Monday,
LAND REVENUE AMENDMENT BILL.
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
BOROUGH AND COUNTY RATES BILL.

Lord WHARNCLIFFE moved that this Bill do go through
Committee, which was agreed to, and the House then ad-
journed.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Aug. 1.

The SrEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four o'clock.
Ihe reports on the following Bills were brought up :—Fol-
lett's Estate Bill, the Birmingham Blue Coat School Estate
Bill, Sir Robert Keith Dick's Estate Bill, the Marquis of
Donegal's Estate Bill, Sampson's Estate Bill, Winchester Col-
lege Estate Bill, Bowes' Estate Bill, and the Duke of Bridge-
water's Estate Bill.

GLASGOW, BARRHEAD, AND NEILSTON
RAILWAY.

The Lords' amendments to the Glaggow. Barrhead, and
Neilston (Direct) Railway Bill were agreed to.
SOUTH WALES RAILWAY.

The Lords' amendments to the South Wales Railway Bi
were agreed to.
MONMOUTH AND HEREFORD RAILWAY.

The Lords' amendments to the Monmouth and Hereford
Railway Bill were agreed to.
LONDON AND YORK RAILWAY.
Viscount COURTENAY moved the consideration of the re-
port of the Committee on the London and York Railway Bill.
Mr. WARD then rose, pursuant to notice, to move that
the Bill be recommitted. It was with great pain that he
ventured to trouble the House upon the present occasion to
reconsider the decision that had been come to with re pect
to the present measure. It was hardly possible at
any time to induce the House to reconsider a de-
cision of any kind, and that difficulty was greatly increased in
dealing with the decision of a Committee that had sat
for no less than seventy-three days ; under such circum-
stances nothing world have induced hint to appeal to the
House except a conviction that he had one of the strongest
causes that was ever brought before the House. If the Com-
mittee had had time to hear all the parties concerned,
nothing would have induced him to have brought
forward the subject. He admitted that the Committee had
been most persevering in their labours, but. they hail done
great injustice to several parties, and had come to most im-
proper decisions, because those 'decisions had been come
to without hearing facts ; arid the rights of parties
had been adjudicated upon without hearing either the facts or
the parties themselves ; added to this, the report itself bore
evident marks of the pressure which the Committee felt itself
to be under in consequence of the difficulty of getting through
the task imposed upon them at the present period of the session.
He appeared there to argue the claims of the York and North
Midland, the Midland Counties, and the Eastern Counties
lines, whose eases had been decided upon without being heard.
Ile was told that it was a difficult matter to dispute with a
great trunk line, such as the London and York, but they had
a right to consider themselves a great trunk line, and
they had so considered themselves. They expected to
lie allowed to show the Committee that they could
have effected a communication with York with a saving of a
million and a half. If they could show this, and if they could
prove that they had already nearly two-thirds of the line con-
structed, he hoped that the House would see the
propriety of re-committing this Bill. They were
at tirst admitted to be a competing line even by
the Committee, for in the first instance, when the
counsel for the Hertford and Biggleswade, and on a subsequent
day Mr. Austin, for the Eastern Counties Corni:any, mado an
application stating that he should satisfy the Committee that
they were a distinct and competing party, and that., if ex-
cluded, they would be debarred from the examination of witnesses
pro holm, the Committee decided that the Eastern Company's
scheme should be admitted into Court, and its counsel be
entitled to all the privileges of examining witnesses.
Mr. DARBY—Does that extend to the general principle of
competing lines?
Mr. WARD—The Honourable Member for Sussex asked
him if that extended to the general principle of com-
peting lines, why that Honourable Member himself
said that they might be considered so, but said that
in their examinations they must be sure to confine them-
selves to what had been alluded to in the first examination.
The Committee having thus decided, they expected that they
should be considered competing lines in the fullest extent, and
when, before the decision had been given on the preamble,
counsel applied to the Committee that they might be allowed to
blend the main evidences of the competing lines as against the
London and York line, with the object of saving the time of
the Committee, the request was complied with. This resolu-
tion was dated the 7th June, but he found that it was not
acted upon throughout ; and he begged to call the Noble Lord's
attention to this fact, that that proposition and the resolution
were materially altered in the report.
Lord COURTENAY—What date do yon call that?
Mr. WA RD—The 7th of June. Application was afterwards
made to the Committee to ascertain what course they would
wish to have pursued with regard to the rebutting evidence.
He found, on examining the reports, that the Committee
ordered that landholders and the other opponents should
be heard after, and he held in his hand
a resolution which was not to be found in this report. The
resolution passed by the Committee was such as might have
been acted on by all parties, but the next was of a very modi-
fied character. On applying to the short-hand writer for a copy
of it he found that the resolution stated that the land-
lords were to be heard next in order, but that the
Committee would offer no objection to the course of blending
the evidence against the London and York, and Mr. Hildyard
stated that he had arranged his case 50 as to class the rebutting
evidence together, and the other competing lines had agreed to
that course. This else was decidedly agreed to by the Committee
themselves. Nose the first it.timation they had of an intention
to decide upon the preamble was on the 12th of July, and
then the counsel and the parties in support of the three com •
petir, lines objected, on the ground that they had not been
heard.' This objection was overruled by tke Committee
on the 14th of J uly. Now this decision they com-
plained of, because they had never been heard. There
were great advantages in the line from London to Big-
glesm ade !or bringing the manufactures of the north to the river
terminus, which would be constructed in the course of the next
three months. It was thought that all the parties concerned
were Jul • lictally entitled to he heard—instead of that, however,
a hearing was refused, and the Committee voted that the pre-
amble of the London and York line was proved in order to shut
out all evidence from the other parties. Such was not the
ease with the Committee, of which the Hon. Gentleman
opposite was the chairman. Before that Committee
there were three lines submitted between Portsmouth and
London. Evidence on all of them was heard, and at last the
Committee, after having maturely considered all of them, de-
cided on that line which they thought most conducive to the
public interests. In the Noble Lord's Committee the practice
was altogether different. On the 16th of July another appli-
cation was made to the Noble Lord by Mr. Talbot, on the part
of the Eastern Counties line, to be heard, and the application
was over-ruled by a resolution, which was distinctly opposed
to that which was passed on the 7th of June. Evidence was
attain tendered on the 9th of July to the Committee, by Mr.
Wells, on behalf of the Eastern Counties line, with respect to
the river terminus, and again this application was decided against.

They did not take one tittle of evidence on the importance of
effecting a communication with the Thames at Blackwall, and
yet the Committee attached the greatest importance to the ter-
minus of the London and York line. When the application
was made to be heard, the Chairman told the counsel that it

was an extremely proper application, but that the Committee
eJuld not entertain it. Even in the report, as regarded the
Londonand York scheme, it was clear the Committee had
. .

heard sufficient rebutting evidence to give it clearly and fully.
None of the rebutting evidence of the Direct Northern
and Cambridge and Lincoln lines had been heard,
and this evidence was necessary, in order that the
whole bearing of the entire scheme might be properly sifted
and adjudicated upon, and thus nearly the whole of the im-
portant part of the project was altogether put out. If the
opposing lines had received fair play the traffic evidence of the
London and York Railway would have been materially
altered. This evidence was got up in so absurd and extraor-
dinary a manner that the Noble Lord thought proper to tell the
promoters of the London and York line that the Committee
could not receive their evidence as to the coal traffic as it then

stood. In consequence of this hint the amount expected to be
derived from the coal traffic was reduced from 300,0001. to
170,0001. per annum. If the competing lines had insisted
at an early period of the case on producing rebutting evi-
dence, it would, perhaps, have been differently decided.
He would appeal to the House whether or not the case of the
London and York lino was ripe for decision at the present
time. He contended that the Committee had come to a de-

cision with imperfect data, and with an insufficiency of facts.
On Lord Lindsay's estate the Peterborough line bad already
been sanctioned, which traversed nearly the whole of his pro-
perty, and the Committee had decided that for the space of a
single mile in the same field the London and York line should
cross that railway, and had decided on a line which it was
physically impossible to construct, unless another line, which
had received the Legislative sanction, was altcgether abandoned.
He thought that the Committee, by the first paragraph of their
report, showed a diffidence in the decision they had come to.
They said they must came to a decision as the session was so
nearly at an end: that might be a great evil, but it was a far
greater one that the facts were net fully and completely in-
quired into. He had a perfect right to ask the House to re-
commit the Bill and suspend proceedings in the case, if
it were only from the fact that important companies
had not been heard before that Committee. They would have
. .

furnished a body of evidence against the project which would
be of the utmost importance, but they were precluded doing
so. When the London and York case had closed, an appeal

was made to the chairman that they should be heard by coun-
sel, but the request wa4 not acceded to; and he appealed to any
Hon. Gentleman present, who had been chairman of
a Committee of that House, if that refusal were not
unfair and contrary to precedent. Besides, the Committee had
not boen unanimous in their decision, and it was only by the
casting vote of the chairman that the preamble of the Bill
vas affirmed. Upon these grounds he asked the House to
suspend further proceedings on this Bill.
Alr. -HUTT seconded the motion, and thought the House
had good reason to be dissatisfied with the decision of the Com-
mittee. As to the proceedings of the Committee, he did not
wonder that they felt their physical energies giving way
under the overwhelming mass of business before them ; it was
scarcely to be expected that their strength should keep up
against such accumulating matters, and to that circumstance
might be perhaps attributed their unwillingness to adopt a course
more consonant with the regulations of the House. But to what-
ever cause it was to be attached, their proceedings were scarcely
con istent with the rules of Parliament or the justice of the

case. It was very true that, as yet, they had not concluded
their labours, but virtually and effectually they had concluded
their labours with regard to the present Bill. The House,
when it nominated certain Members to inquire into a ease,
necessarily required that some report should be presented
on each particular Bill, but at the present moment
several Bills had been disposed of without a hearing or the
slightest consideration, as much as if they had never appeared
before the Committee at all. For these reasons he considered

it his duty to support the motion of his Hon. Friend for the re-
committal of the Bill.

On the question being put from the Chair,
Lord COURTENAY said that as Chairman of the Com-
mittee to which the grouped Bills had been intrusted, he might
perhaps be excused if he stated to the House the course of pro-
ceeding, and as that, and not the peculiar merits of the pro-
ject!., had been made the chief subject of comment by the
Hon. Member for Sheffield, he would confine himself as strictly

as possible to meeting that particular question. The report
which had been that morning laid before the Members of the
House mentioned the number of Bills which had been referred
to the consideration of the Committee. The Hon. Member

opposite complained of the apologetic tone in which the report
was introduced ; if apology were discernible, he could assure the
Hon. Member that it was not from any misgiving of error or
irregularity, but that impressed with the stupendous charge with
which they were entrusted they wished to evince a sense of that
importance, and also show their respect to the House. They,
therefore, were not content with giving a mere dry and general de-
tail, but explained the circumstances which led to their decision.
He must be permitted now to say that, although upon the merits
of the two Bills the Committee were not unanimous, but

divided in their decision, as respected the course of proceeding
throughout their sitting they were invariably unanimous.
Whether, therefore, right or wrong, regular or irregular, these
proceedings were adopted in accordance with the unanimous deci-
sion of the Committee. —( Hear.) The Hon. Member for Sheffield
had stated that an arrangement had been made, and a resolu-
tion adopted, wherein they stated their intention of including
in one Bill the Sheffield and Lincoln, and Tottenham and Far-

ringdon••street Extension. That was perfectly true ; and it
was on this ground that the Bills thus included were considered
as more or less in competition with each other, either
in a direct line north and south, er, laterally,

east and west ; and subsequent to this arrangement, on a spe
vial application, the Hertford and Biggleswade was added to
the list by sub-grouping. That preliminary matter being
settled, they proceeded to classify the schemes in the order in
which they should be heard. The London and York was that
taken first, because it was the first in point of fact.
Throughout the entire case counsel were let in to cross-examine
every witness, and it would be found, on reference to the
report, that one, two, three, four, and five counsel exercised
this right. If any Member had been present in the Com-
mittee-room, during the seventy or eighty days that the
Committee sat upon the line, he would have seen the course
adopted, and been enabled to bear witness to the accuracy
of his statements. The Hon. Member had also referred
to the resolution adopted by the Committee on the
7th of June, to the effect that the Committee cannot, with a
view of instituting a comparison between the population in the
district within ten miles on either side of the London and York line,
and within a similar distance of the Cambridge and Lincoln line,
admit the population on lines which are not before Parliament.
The lion. Member stated that that resolution applied to lines
competing with the London and York, whereas the fact was
that the Cambridge and Lincoln line, being the principal com-
peting scheme, the promoters were informed that if they dra
sired to show that a further portion of the country beyond the
ten miles could be secured by the line as then before the Com-
mittee, it might be done on the same principle as that adopted
by the Committee in the previous part of the investigation.
Several Members of the Committee had expressed a desire of
coming to a decision on such parts of the case as would not
inflict injury on other parties who had claims to be heard before
the Committee ; and, as far as the leading lines were con-
cerned, it was zonsidered necessary and desirable to come to
some resolutions on such parts of the scheme as would involve
this arrangement of the business. In pursuance with this
application was made before the case of the London
arid York was gone into, and when an objection was
taken to it in respect to certain errors which were alleged
to exist in the plans of that scheme, that the whole case be-
tween the two great lines should be taken, and that the counsel
on behalf of the Direct Northern should state the places at
which they proposed to prove the effect of the errors specified
to be so great as to render the work impracticable—it was
at the same time requested by counsel on the side of the London
and York, that the Committee should come to a decision on the
merits of that scheme, after the termination of the Tottenham
and Farringdon-street case. Himself and his Hon. Colleagues
on the Committee concurred in saying, in answer to
the application, that on the Monday following they would give
their decision separately on those applications. On the
Monday they met, and came to the conclusion that when the
cases of the Direct Northern and Farringdon-street Extension
lines were closed, they would proceed to consider the merits
of the two competing lines before them, for effecting a second
trunk railway communication between London and York, viz.:
that of the London and York Company, and that which con-
sisted of the Cambridge and Lincoln, the Direct Northern,
and the Farringdon Extension lines, in conjunction with the
Eastern Counties Railway, already executed as far as Cam-
bridge. All were agreed on this resolution. They were guided
by the arguments of the report of the Board of Trade in ex-
cluding that part of the Midland Counties Railway which was
considered to be in competition with the London and York line.
They considered that it would be exceedingly objec-
tionable to extend further the Midland Counties scheme,
considering the circumstances under which that Company
hail acted. They took that step with due deliberation,
subject to the responsibility of that House. They felt justified
that the course they took was in conformity with the interests of
all parties concerned. An application was made to them on July
16, on behalf of the Eastern Counties and the York and North
Midland Companies, to be allowed to present rebutting evidence
against the London and York line. The application was
made by Mr. Talbot, and an answer was returned to the
effect that the Committee, in the exercise of its discretion,
considered the London and York, the Cambridge and Lincoln,
the Direct Northern, and the Tottenham and Farringdon
Extension, with the existing Cambridge Railway, were the
only two schemes that competed inter se as it respected a direct
trunk communication from London to York ; and that the
Cambridge and Huntingdon line should be taken next in
order. These resolutions were come to, after a due
examination of evidence and a careful consideration of
the question. The opposition of Lord Lindsey had
been referred to, and on that subject he would say a few words.
Counsel on behalf of that Noble Lord had been heard, witnesses
called and subjected to examination and cross-examination ;
many questions were asked by the members of the Committee,
and a map of the place was used to guide them in their inquiry.
In fact, it was not without much care and consideration that
the Committee decided, and then not before the case on behalf
of the Noble Lord had been fully heard. The prineiple on which
the Committee acted was, at every stage of their business,
to select such Bills as might be considered competing
schemes, and to view them in connexion with each other.
The House had entrusted the Committee with
a certain discretionary power, and it had been
honestly and he trusted impartially exercised.
That was the resolution they had acted. upon. He was not
conscious of having omitted any part of his duty as a Member
of the Committee, but thought all of them had acted in ac-
cordance with precedent, and in conformity with the immense
interest involved in the case. He would further say, that
they had endeavoured to do the best they could, and hoped
the House would consider that they had not acted in any way
improperly,
Mr. BARING WALL said he felt very strongly that the
attention of the House should be drawn to the manner in which
the London and York Committee had acted—if that Committee
had adopted the same principles as had been acted upon in others,
a great number of the complaints of his Hon. Friend the Mem-
ber for Sheffield would have been unnecessary. He would not
now enter into the merits of the case, but thought the
Committee had taken every pains to arrive at a proper result.
( The Hon. Member spoke in so low a tone of voice, that one
whole sentence of what he uttered was not audible in the
gallery.) Ile could not think, looking at the quest ion of com-
munication from London to York, that it could be said the
Committee had done wrong in coming to the decision it had
done. The Committee had given indications of their wish to
hear all theopposing lines, and they would have heard them if
they could have come to a decision before the Parliament was
prorogued. On the whole, he thought the Committee had
exercised a sound judgment, and he trusted, therefore, that the
House would not accede to the motion of the lion. Member for
Sheffield.
Mr. I)ARBY said that if the Committee had exercised an
improper discretion he fur one trusted the House would recom-
mit the Bill. He trusted, however, the House would lock at
what the system of grouping was, and that they would look at
the effect upon it, if it was to be said that the Committee did
not exercise a sound discretion. The Hon. Member for Shef.
field had totally mistaken the principle upon which the
groups were classed. If the Committee were not to exercise a
discretion each railway would have to be sent to a separate
Committee. He was prepared to maintain that the Committee
had taken not only the right course but the only one it could
take. It was upon a general agreement of counsel that the
Committee bad pursued the course which was so much com-
plained of by the Hon. Member for Sheffield. The Hon.
Gentleman had said that the decision of the Committee was

come to by the casting vote of the chairman. Now, with but
one exception, and that was taken by himself, all the Mem-
bers took the sante vier of the question.—( Hear.)
Now with respect to the petitions of the North Eastern Com-
pany and that of Lord Lindsay he should direct the attention of
the House to them very shortly. It appeared to the Com-
mittee, on retiring and considering the matter, that these parties
should be allowed to oppose and make a second attack out of the
Midland Companies' purse. With respect to the Swinton and
Lincoln extension of the Midlands Railway it appeared to the
Committee that it could not be considered a competing line, as
opposed to the London and York, because they entertained the
same objection to it w hich had weighed with the Board of
Trade—namely, that it passed round by Lincoln and Cambridge,
and could not, therefore, be considered a direct line to York.
They had also decided against the petition of Mr. Hudson on
similar grounds. He begged to say distinctly that if a Com-
mittee had not the power of deciding which competing line
they should adopt, he trusted he would never be placed on a
Committee which had to consider a group of railways. He
firmly believed that those who had not been heard, if their evi-
dence was worth any consideration, they should still have an
opportunity of being heard.
Mr. P. M. STEWART thought that the Committee had
discharged their duty in accordance with the rules of that House.
If Group X during its long sitting acted according to the prin-
ciples upon which this House wished Committees to act,
every other Committee with which he was acquainted this ses-
sion, and that which he had presided over, had acted perfectly
wrong. The practice which they observed must be sanctioned
by this House. The House should tell them the distance that
they should go, and that they should not proceed further.
But, instead of doing this, the Committee had gone on with a
whole mass of projects, and had put them all at loggerheads
together ; and, then, when this difficulty came in the way, they
saw the mistake they had made. The Committee had the
power to re-group their Bills, and other Committees having
done that, the business became easier.
Mr. DARBY made an observation across the table which
was not heard in the gallery.
Mr. STEWART continued by saying, that the Committee
had not heard the different projects separately and distinctly,
and the result of their mode of proceeding was, that they had
shut out a great deal of rebutting evidence. Ile had no doubt
but that the Committee believed that they were doing what
was right, and had adopted the course which they conceived
best ; but, still, if they had re-grouped the Bills as they had
the power to do, and as other Committees had done, much of
the labour and difficulty would have been avoided• Ile
did not mean to enter upon a discussion of the merits of the
line, for he knew nothing of them ; but he did think that
another course ought to have been adopted in reference to the
mode of hearing the evidence. He had a great respect for the
Committee, and was aware of the labours they had endured ;
but he should again say that his opinion was that they had
adopted a wrong course.
Mr. P. SCROPE said he would wish to say a few words in
explanation. The Committee had made the best decision they
could on the Bills given to them to dispose of; but it should
be recollected, that they were involved in great difficulty by
means of the enormous mass of evidence laid before them.—

( Hear.) He would just. ask the House to look at the map,
which was more like a spider's web, and say if it did not present
an amount of difficulty not easily disposed of. However, it
would be seon by the map, that all those other lines were com-
peting lines with the London and York line, and they all had
the benefit of cross-examination ; but there was such a vast
mass of it, that the rebutting evidence was not gone into, and
the Committee conceived they had heard quite enough of the
evidence.

Mr. R. COLLETT thought the Committee should not have
declared the preamble of the Bill proved, but shou!d have sus-
pended the inquiry until next session.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion 79
For the amendment
Majority —6o
Mr. S. WORTLEY observed upon the difficulty Commit-
tees had to contend with, from the present want of system and
arrangement in the business which came before them, and sug-
gested that the Board of Trade should, in the interval between
the present session and the next, digest and lay down for the
consideration of the House, some plan which would facilitate
the progress of railway Bills.
Mr. HUTT presented a petition from New South Wales,
respecting the waste lands in that country.
PROPERTY TAX.

On the order of the day for the second reading of the Ex.
chequer Bills 8.11.
Air. C. BULLER had to put a question to the Right Hon.
the Vice President of the Board of Trade, founded on a petition

, .
from an old lady of the name of Keene. She complained that
during several years she had been assessed above 1501., when
she had not that income, and she added that no redress could
be had from the Commissioners.

➢ir. CARDWELL said that inquiry had been instituted into
the circumstances, ar.d it was found that the petition w•as
groundless, as was also the general charge against the Corn-
missioners.

UNION WORKHOUSES.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE asked a question in reference to a
practice that prevailed in the Mansfield Union Workhouse, of
putting persons who sought shelter and food for the night on to
a wheel in the yard four hours in the morning, previous to
receiving any breakfast. If there was only one person to put
on to the wheel, then it was customary for the governor of the
workhouse to put more weight on the wheel in order to make
it heavy—this was contrary to the spirit of the New Poor-
law, and he would ask the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Se-
cretary for the Home Department, as he had referred to it
before, if any inquiry had been made into the matter, and what
steps had been taken?
Sir JAMES GRA HAM was decidedly of opinion that the
practice referred to vras opposed to the letter and spirit of the
New Poor-law. He had represented the matter to the Poor-
law Commissioners, and if such a practice prevailed they would
order the discontinuance of the practice.
Captain OSBORNE said that considerable objections had
been taken to the practice of bone grinding in workhouses by
the Right Hon. Gentleman, when the subject was brought
before the House on a former occasion ; he (Captain Osborne)

expected it would have been put an end to`;
but he was in-
formed it was still continued in many of these establishments,
owing to the increased demand for guano for agricultural

purposes.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM replied that the practice which
the Hon. Gentleman (Capt. Osborne) referred to was clearly
contrary to law, and required interference ; the present case
was one in which he had no power to interfere.
Captain OSBORNE hoped there would be some legislation
ou the matter.