The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-26 00:00:00

GROUP LL.

The Committee met at twelve o'clock, Lord John Manners in
the chair.

THE LONDON AND BRIGHTON RAILWAY
(WANDSWORTH BRANCH).

Mr. Gregory, engineer to the Croydon Railway, was the first
witness examined in opposition to the Bill. He stated that the
Croydon line was nearly a level throughout, with the exception of
two miles five furlongs. The atmospheric line from the Dartmouth
Arms to Croydon would be ready to be opened in about six weeks.
The object of ,he atmospheric line wasto:supply transit for the short
traffic only, and to keep the present trunk lines uninterrupted for
the long traffic. The span of the arch on the proposed line crossing
the Croydon Railway was thirty feet, which did not allow sufficient
room for lay ng down three lines of rail. The height of the arch
was eighteen feet. Did not consider that height sufficient for all
the purposes of the line.
The witness was cross-examined by Mr. Hsu, and admitted that
he knew of no reason to prevent the promoters maims the span of
the arch thirty five, instead of thirty feet. Considered it an en-
gineering blunder to allow only eighteen feet for the height of the
arch, which was to be brick built. Did not know of any reason
why the arch should not be otherwise than brick built.
Mr. Wilson, chairman of the Croydon Railway, was cress-
examined, but his evidence was ehiedy of a speculative character,
and did not materially affect the projected line..
Mr. James Dudson, accountant to the Croydon Railway Com-
pany, said the whole capital of that Company, the atmospheric line
included, was 1,200,000/. ; the last dividend was Cs , the av'rage
divide,v4 fis. on the whole of the paid-up capital.
The cost of the
locomotive poo.er was Is. hid. per mile, and the rates and taxes
sl. .s. 4d. per mile.

be CAnzataittec then adpurmel tW
-4w4row At twelve,

GROUP Z.

The clauses were then considered, which, with a few unim-
portant alterations were agreed to, and the Committee broke up.

PARLIAMEN TARY DIVISIONS.

( From the Votes and Proceedings of the house of Commons.)
TUESDAY, JUNE 24.
OXFORD AND RUGBY RAILWAY BILL.

Motion made, iind Question proposed, " That the Bill be now
read a third time ;"—Amendment proposed, to leave out the word
" now," and at the end or the Question to add the words " upon this
day six months:"—Question put, " That the word' now' stand part
Question." The Hesse divided:—
MAJORITY—AYES, 132.

Ach 44:41' , "rislount Ebrington, Viscount Murray, AlexanCer
gnovisle, William Neeld, Joseph,
Acland, Su T.
. 17.0.c,r4 Bickhain .;ovine, Ralph
Acland, T. Ti• I..4AlaQ,Ogi ?'4:.T. Nicholl, John
Ashley, Lord
ZetcVl,l4 T. 9, Norreys, Lord
Baring. F. T.
Baring, W. B. F, -.5.:07' •
I.:Oci ,C. Northland, Viscount
' Barnard, E. G. Form.."' Ii
T. T. 491.11,140. J.
-4,. k- COnnell, M. J.
Barrington, Viscount Fuller, A. -- Pakington, ,f. $.
Barron, Sir 11. Gladstone, W. H. Pahnerstnn,litacQuid
Berkeley, Craven Gladstone, Captain
-
Berkeley, Grantley Glynne, Sir S. Pat,`.'' J. W.
Blackburne, J. I. Gore, Robert,
Blackstone, W. S. Granger, T. C.
Bodkin, W. H. Greene, Thomas pnlsthrd, Ti436,-.Tt
Borthwick, Peter Gregory, W. H. Rashle gh, W.
Bramston, T. W. Harcourt, G. G. Round, C. G.
Buck, W. L. ii: II:410;07c,
....17"
Hawes, Benjamin Russell, Charles
Buller, Charles Heatlicoat, John Sandon, Viscount
Buller, Sir J. Y. Henley, J. W. Scrope, G. P.
Carew, W. H. P. Henniker, Lord Seymour, Lord
Castlereagh, Viscount Hill, Lord E. Sheridan, R. B.
Chelsea, Viscount Hill. Lord M. Shirley, E. J.
Childers, J. W. Holland, Robert Somerset, Lord C.
Christie, W. D. Holmes, W. A'Court Stanstleld, W. R. C.
Clements, Viscount , Hope, G. W. Stewart, John
Clive, Viscount Howard, Philip H. Stuart, W. V.
Clive, E. B. Howick, Viscount Thornhill, George
Codrington, Sir W. Ingestre, Viscount Townelsy, Joint
Colebrooke, Sir T. Inglis, Sir R. H. Trevor, G. R.
Coote,:Sir C. Kemble, Henry Troubridge, Sir E.
Courtenay, Lord Labouchere, Henry Tutliell, Henry
Cripps, William Leader, J. T. Tyrrell, Sir J. T.
Darby, George Lefroy, Anthony Verner, Colonel
Davies, D. A. S. Lemon, Sir C. Villiers, Viscount
Dawson, T. V. Lennox, Lord A. Vivian, J. I.
Deedes, William Listowel, Earl Vivian, J. Ennis
Denison, E. B. Mackenzie, W. F. Wall, C. B.
Dennistoun, John li.PGeachy, F. A. Warburton, K.
Divett, Edward M`Taggart, Sir J. Wawn, J. T.
Douglas, Sir H. Mahon, Viscount Wemyss, Captain
Douglas, J. D. S. Martin, C. W. Wilde, Sir T.
Duncan, Viscount Mildmay, H. St. John Wood, Charles
Duncan, George Miles, P. W. S. TELLRI9.
Duudas, David Mitchell, T. A. Hayter, W. G.
Du Pre, C. G. Morris, David Shaw, Frederick

MINORITY—NOES, 95.
Ackers, James East, James B. Mule, Fox
Ainsworth, Peter Evans, William Muntz, G. F.
Archbold, Robert Zarnham, ~. B. Newdegate, C. N.
Arkwright, George Fel',den, William Newport, Viscount
Attwood, M. Fremantle, Sir T. Ogle, S. C.
Baillie, H. J. Gaskell, J. H. Ord, William
Baird, W lliam Godson, Richard Oswald, James
Bannerman, A. Gore, W. 0. Pendarves., E. W.
Banieby, John Grey. Sir Georga Philips, Mark
Benbow, John Grogan, Edward Polhill, Frederick
Bentinck, Lord G. Raiford, Sir H. ftlis4trdo, J. L.
Beresford, Major Hami ton, Lord C. ROss, Daykj it.
Bouverie, E. P. Hamner, Sir J. Scott, Robert
Bowes, John Hasa., Archibald Smith, A.
Bright, John Hatton, Captain Smollett, A.,
Brocklahurst, J. Heatheote, G. J. Spooner, Richard
Brotherton, J. !Linde, John H, Stanley, W. 0.
Buller, Edward Houldsworth, T. Strutt, Edward
Busfeild, William Hughes, W, B. Tancred, H. W.
Cartwright, W. R. Irton, Samuel Thesiger, Sir F.
Chapman, Aaron Johnstone, Sir J. Thompson, Alderman
Clerk, Sir G. Langston, J. H. Tollemache, F. J.
Cockburn, Sir G. Lascelles, W. S. Trail, Geor ,e
Collett, W. R. Lawson, Andrew Trollope, Sir J.
Collins, W. Loch, James Walker, Richard
Copelawl, Alderman Lockhart, William Walsh, Sir J. B.
Craig, W. G. Lowther, Sir J. Ward, H. G.
Dick, Quintin Lowther, Colonel Wilstiere, W.
Dodd, George Mackenzie, T. Wrightson, W. B.
Drummond, H. H. Maclean, Donald
Duff, James Mangles, R. D. TELLERS.
Duncombe, T. Marjoribanks, S. Douglas, Sir C.
Duncoinbe, A. Martin, John Gisborne, 'Thomas

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY June 25.

The Lord Chancellor sat for the first time to.day in Court
of Chancery since the last day of Trinity Term. His Lotclohip
sat in Lincoln's Inn Hall.

•LDYIELD W. COBIETT.

Mrs. Cobbett, at the sitting of the Court, applied to his Lord.
ship for a writ of habeas corpus, without payment of the fees, to
bring rp Mr. Cobbett from the Queen's prison, in order that he
might make an application to the Court for his discharge.
The LORD OIANCILLOR raid he had fully considered the case,
and he did not see why Mr. Cobbett should be treated more favour.
ably than any other suitor. He had already heard Mr. Cobbett
several times, and he could not grant the application without the
payment of the usual fees.

Mrs. Cobbett said that Mr. Cobbett had been most cruelly treated.
He had been imprisoned for four years, and had been mule a pauper
by the proceedings that had been taken against him Mr. Baron
Parke had the other day decided that the commitment was bad.
The LORD CRANCRLLOR—Then why did he not discharge Mr.
Cobbett ?

Mrs. Cobbett—He could not do so, my Lord, without the pay-
ment of the costs, and those Mr. Cobbett, in consequence of the
proceedings that have been taken against him, he could not pay,
Will your Lordship grant the habeas, provided I can raise tin
money to pay the tees ?

The LORD CisaNceLtoa—Mr. Cobbett will take any course he
may think right; at present I refuse the application because the
usual fees have not been paid.
Mrs. Cobbett then left the Court.

His Lordship then proceeded to hear appeal motions, none of
whieh possessed any points of interest except to the parties con-
cerned.

ROLLS' COURT, June 25.
His Lordship the ?diem of the Roue was occupied the whole
morning with petitions totally devoid of interest.

VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT, June 25.
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.)
His Hoxoua was occupied the whole day with demurrers and
further directions.
(Before the Vice-Chancellor KNlon'r Baum)
His HONOUR took bankrupt petitions to-day, none of which were
of any public interest.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Winitsm.)
His Howeua was occupied the whole morning with motions.

COURT OF EXCHI;QUER, June 24.
Nisi Prius Sittings, befure the Loan CHIEF BARON and a Specia
Jury.)
LACY V. BUNN.,

This was an action by Mr. W. Lacy, the comedian, to recover
damages from ➢lr. Bunn, the lessee of Covent-garden Theatre, for
the breach of an engagement under which the defendant undertook
to permit the plaintiff to perform the principal parts in light comedy,
and the plaintiff undertook to enact those characters at Covent.
garden Theatre during the season of 1543.

Mr. MARTIN (with whom were Mr. M. Chambers and Mr. Saun-
ders) opened the plaintiff's case. The real question that was to
be submitted to the jury was, whether the part of Ferdinand, In
The Tempest, was light comedy or not, and ridiculous as this ques-
tion might seem in the first instance, it became in this case one of
importance to the members of the theatrical profession, and espe.
cially to the plaintiff. Mr. Lacy had undertaken an engagement
at Covent-garden at a very small salary (we understood 61. a week)
with the understanding that he was only to be called upon to per-
form the principal parts in light comedy. The engagement
was entered into on the 11th of December, 1642, but Mr. Bunn
did not begin to perform on his own account until January
in the next year. Mr. Charles Kemble resigned the manage.
anent early in Dinember, and from that time until Christmas,
the performers acted for their own profit and at their own
risk ; but in January, 1843, Mr, Bur,n's management com-
menced. The first part performed by Mr. Lacy, under his agree-
ment with Mr. Bunn, was a character in a piece called The High.
ssusyntan, written by Mr. Morton, a dramatic author of reputa-
tion. The plaintiff was next called upon to perform Ferdinand in
The Tempest, which he declined, upon the ground that it was not
a character within the terms of his engagement. Mr. Bunn in-
sisted that the character of Ferdinand fell within the description
of light comedy, and upon this misunderstanding refused to suffer
Mr. Lacy to complete his engagement. The consequence of this
was, that Mr. Lacy not only lost his salary for the season, but also
was deprived of the advantage of being admitted upon the
Theatrical Fund, which he would have been entitled to had he
completed a second engagement at Covent.garden. In support of
the plaintiff's case it was proposed to call many performers of great
ernitaence, who would give their opinion sato wh it were properly ca' led
"light comedy" parts. If the jury had visited the theatres occa-
sionally, they were probably not unacquainted with the characters
of Charles Surface, in the School for Scandal, Captain Absolute,
in the Rivals, and Lord Trinket, in the Hunchback. These
were properly described as "light comedy." Characters of this
description were usually performed at the great theatres by Mr.
Ante!, Mr. Charles Mathews, Mr. Vining, and Mr. Wrench.
Some of these gentlemen would be called before the jury,
to state whether such a part as that of Ferdinand fell within
the range of their line of characters. There were in every theatre
a class of characters which properly fell to the "juvenile tra-
gedian " and the " walking gentleman."—(A laugh.) Ferdinand,
he understood, was always performed either by the juvenile tra.
gedian or the walking gentleman, and the only exception to this
rule was in the case of Mr. Charles Kemble, who belonged to a
gifted family, and was himself a performer of great versatility.
The Learned Counsel then read Ariel's description of Ferdinand,
and other passages from The Tempest, to show that Ferdinand was
a grave and serious character, and not one well adapted to a light
comedian.

Before the plaintiff's witnee'es were called, Mr. Jaavta, who
appeared for the defendant, appea'ed to the Lord Chief Baron to
say If he did not think this cause would be better disposed of else-
where, though by so doing he felt he was somewhat marring the
amusement of the Court and the public.
The Loan Clime BARON certainly doubted if this was the fittest
place oe the fittest tribunal for deciding whether Ferdinand was
14ht or heavy comedy. He did not limos bow it was to be preyed

,
CAMBRIDGE AND LINCOLN LINE.
Mr. Robert Hubbard, editor of the Smithfield Reporter, was the
AM witness called this day at the sitting of the Committee. He
produced returns of the number of sheep, cows, and other liii
stock brought to Smithfield market from the various breeding
counties, in each year, for the last fourteen years. It had been
his business for that time to attend that market regularly, and make
those returns for the information of the public through his paper,
and certainly not with any view to forwarding the Cambridge
and Lincoln Railway scheme, er giving evidence upon
it, or for any other. Witness had also had
means of ascertaining the quantity of slaughtered
meat brought to the principal London markets in a year,
namely, the Newgate and I.,adenhall markets. The average was
about 130 carcases of beef, 1,200 of mutton in each week, from
Yorkshire and Scotland; but in the present year this number had
been greatly exceeded, the number of sheep being 3,000 in one
week, of which 1,000 came from Lincolnshire.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant KINGLAKE—There was no fat
stock brought to the Islington market. That market has been
closed about six years. Has seen a good many lean beasts at the
b le
. b Did
yn.
Lave—One...
. . not
lay era there, about five or six years ago, as many as 300.
market, from the
, Had taken care to get his information as to the arrivals of stock
salesmen and the drovers also ; is quite
r,arties who had been engag,_
es was next examined,
at. .
maßnyy of
lu rt 11 of the drovers. Does not know
apply to a,
sure of tn... --...
of 'the in
making out the traffic tables with Mr ra..::
and he corroborated •
that gentleman's evidence generaii). His cross-
examination did not elicit any evidence of importance

The witness was not cross.examined at any length, and. when
his evidence had concluded the Committee adjourned.

' Committee on this group re-assembled to day at twelve
The Room 17, the Honourable Mr. Clive in the Chair.
o'clock, in _'4TWESTERN (DUBLIN AND
MIMI *RI.— GALWAY).

Mr. Rowe said that b,..fore the clauses of the Bill were proceeded
with he wished to address a
rnw wcrdo to the Committee. He
,
rt of the proprietors of the
had come that morning en the
;on of a clause for the
Grand Canal Company, to require the inset,— .
she promoters of
protection of the canal, as it was the intention or
^bents,
the line to construct bridges over it at several points. His .
however, had come to the conclusion of refraining from makinv
such an application, as it might prejudice their case before the Lords'
Committee. He himself felt great pleasure that such a course
had been resolved on, as it would prevent further branching,
and save the Committee all further trouble.