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

RAILWAY COMMITTEES.

(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
THE CORNWALL RAILWAY.

---
The Committee appointed to consider this Bill sat, for the first
time, at eleven o'clock, Lord Ellenborough in the chair.
A great number of petitions for and against the Bill were read.
Mr. AUSTIN said that he understood that the Bill was opposed by
certain parties connected with a rival scheme, entitled "The Central.
Cornwall Railway Company," but it was well.known that the
original shareholders in that Company had resolved to effect an
arrangement with this one, and certain persons were appointed to
arrange preliminaries. It was ultimately arranged that, in consi-
deration of 1,700 shares in this Company, the Central one was to
withdraw all opposition, and to dissolve itself as a Company. The
opposition, therefore, was not and could not be from the late Com-
pany.
Mr. AUSTIN objected to the reception of the petition from what
was called the Cornwall Central Railway, and to the Committee at
all entertaining their objections. They had no locus standi—there
had been no such project before Parliament—nor was there then
any such project—therefore, there could be no existing interest.
Such a project might have been once in contemplation, but it never
went before a Committee of the I-louse of Commons.

It was contended by Counsel on the other side that the petition
should be entertained. Such a project still existed; and though it
had not been sanctioned by Parliament, it had been before the
Board of Trade. There it had been rejected ; and the Committee
would recollect, that before Parliament met, and which was when
that rejection took place, It was generally believed that the
decision of the Committee of the Board of Trade was final
and conclusive, and this was the reason why the project had not
been pushed forward with vigour.
The projected line extends from Plymouth to Falmouth, passing
through Liskeard, Lostwithiol, St. Austell, and near Truro, on to
the terminus at Falmouth. The line is sixty-five miles long.
Many of the gradients are in the abstract very bad, but, considering
the hilly nature of the country, are as good as could be selected.
A long discussion ensued, as to whether or no the petition should
be received.
Mr. Smith, a solicitor residing at Truro, was examined. He
handed in The Morning Sun newspaper of the 19th February of
the present year, in which there was an advertisement, convening
a meeting of the Cornwall and Devon Central Railway for the 25th
of the same month. The witness went on to to say, that the pro.
moters of the present Bill suggested a proposal for an arrangement
with the Central Cornwall and Devon Railway, by which all
opposition to the Bill before the Committee would be abandoned
by the Central Cornwall and Devon, in case the former took 1,700
or 1,800 shares in the latter. This arrangement witness under-
stood had been agreed upon.

(LEFT BITTING.)

BRISTOL AND EXETER RAILWAY.

The Select Committee, appointed by the House of Lords to in.
quire into the merits of the projected branches of the Bristol and
Exeter Railway Company assembled, for the first time, this morn-
ing, Lord Glenelg in the chair, and immediately proceeded with
the investigation.
Mr. TALBOT stated that the object of the Bill the Committee
had to consider was, to give the Bristol and Exeter Railway Com-
pany power to effect a junction of their own line at Bristol with
that of the Great Western Company, and also to make three
branches from their main line to Cleavden, Yeovil, and Tiverton—
places of some commercial importance, and trading to a large ex-
tent with the towns of Exeter and Bristol. The line to Yeovil was
the only one opposed.
Mr. Charles Brown, a director of the Bristol and Exeter Rail.
way, Mr. Christopher Shapland, a merchant at Bristol, Mr. Thai.
Pairett, a farmer and grazier, at Middlezoy, and Mr. Joseph Board,
of Bridgewater, gave some general evidence in favour of the
Yeovil line.

(Linn BITTING.)

CLYDESDALE ZITNCTION RAILWAY.

The Committee met to-day at eleven o'clock, Lord Radnor in
the chair.
Mr. HILDYARD, on the part of the Garnkirk Railway Company,
made a proposition about referring the matter in dispute between
them to the Board of Trade, to which
Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAaI objected, and preferred leaving the
matter in the hands of the Committee.

The examination of witnesses was then resumed.
Mr. Pare gave evidence with regard to the traffic that might be
calculated on, taking the existing trade of the district as a
foundation. The first tables he drew up and submitted to the
Committee of the House of Commons contained local traffic alone.
He did not then assume anything for the Caledonian line, as it had
not received the sanction of either House. In those tables the
local traffic was set forth in gross at 31,2561. 19s. 3d.; deducting
44 per cent for working the line, the amount left was 17,5041.
6s. 3d., or about 5i per cent. on the capital of 330,0001. The
Caledonian Railway having now passed the Committees of both
Houses he had drawn up supplemental tables. The through
traffic from the Caledonian Railway to Glasgow that would pass
along this line be estimated at 10,9971. ss. 6d. In addition
to this he put down 3,7151. 12s. 6d. that would come
on to the line from the Ayrshire, Barrhead,
and Glasgow Railway, which had passed the House of Commons.
Deducting the expence of working there would remain a nett
additional revenue of 8,2391. 12s. 3d. ; that, added to the revenue
calculated in the previous tables, gave a return of S per cent. on
the capital. The witness then put in bath sets of tables.
Mr. John Williams, mineral engineer, was examined as to the
data of Mr. Pare's tables, on which the estimate of mineral traffic
was based. He entered into a calculation of the tons of coal,
ironstone, and lime that would pass along the line, the particulars
of which have already appeared.

Mr. Errington, civil engineer, deposed as to the engineering
peculiarities, giving some explanations of the gradients, cuttings,
and embankments ; also respecting the proposed connexion wirh
the Barrhead and Glasgow direct, the Greenock and the Ayrshire
districts. The particulars were the same as those given in the Re-
port of the Commons Committee already printed, He was of
opinion that 290,000/. would be quite sufficient for all the purposes
of the line.

The witness was cross-examined by Mr. HILDY/ARD as to the
superior merits of the Garnkirk Railway as a means of entrance to
Glasgow, but no new point of importance was elicited-
( LEFT SITTING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
GROUP A.
ASHFORD AND HASTINGS (SOUTH-
EASTERN) LINE.

The case on the part of the promoters of the above line was I
opened by Mr. Merrcwether on Friday last, and the evidence given
was published in an Evening Edition of The Sun of that day.
The CHAIRMAN, on taking his seat this morning at the usual
hour, said that he had received a communication from the Admi-
ralty, referring to the bridge on the river Bother proposed by the
Sonth-Eastern Company, and forming a necessary part of the Ash-
ford and Hastings line. The letter was dated 4th June, and con-
tained a statement to the effect that the Admiralty would not
allow any such bridge to be made.
Mr. ALEX ANDER said that he had a letter from the Admiralty,
dated sth June, and containing the assent of that Board to the
making of the bridge on certain conditions. Mr. Alexander then
put the letter in in evidence.
Mr. Mark Dorman, a carrier at Ashford, spoke to the advan-
tages to trade derivable from the proposed line, and especially to
the great improvement in the wool trade of Ashford which would
ensue from the formation of such a line.
Mr. Barlow, engineer, spoke to the superiority of this line over
the proposed Brighton, Ashford, and Hastings line, in an engineer
ing point of •iew. The line was 26 miles 24 chains in length,
It had but one tunnel, the length of which was 2,129
yards. This was the only important difficulty on the
line. The steepest gradient on the line was lin 100, which was
continued for I miles in one place. The total length of the inclines
of 1 in 100, would be five miles eighteen yards. There would be
a swing-bridge over the Bother, and the height of that bridge from
high water-mark would be twelve feet. The proposed Brighton line
would have a bridge across the Bother only four feet above
the high water-mark. The proposed swing.bridge might
have a span of forty feet. There were several
great difficulties on the proposed Brighton line, and there were
grad,ents of 1 in 50. He had estimated the expense of the pro-
posed line, which would be 420,0001. This included the expense
of masonry, &c., for a double line, but of rails only for a single line.
The reason he had formed the estimates in this manner was, that it
might be necessary at a future time to make a double line of rails,
but it was intended to make at present only a single line. The
expense of the proposed Brighton line would be 500,0001., being
80,000/. more than the Ashford and Hastings line. This estimate
had been formed on the same principle as that of the Ashford and
Hastings line, allowing a sufficient sum for masonry, &c., for a
double line, but allowing for rails only for a single line.
The witness was then cross-examined by Mr. Mellor on the part
of the proposed Brighton line, and by Mr. Belasis on the part of
the Commissioners of the Rye Harbour.
Mr. ALEXANDER then observed, that he had intended to call
other witnesses, but there was an arrangement between the South.
Eastern and Brighton Companies whirls he thought would not
, only save the time of the Committee, but would be productive of
great public good. For this reason he wished to postpone the
remainder of his evidence for the present, and would suggest that
the Committee should go on with the Brighton line in the mean
time.
The CHAIRMAN assented, and the Committee was about to pro-
ceed' with the Brighton line, when
Mr. MELLOR said that he was not prepared to go on, but would
, be ready in a few minutes.

Mr. AUSTIN proposed that the
GRAVESEND AND ROCHESTER LINE

should be taken next, as it would not occupy more than a few
minutes.

The ClikllthlAN agreed, and ➢fr. Austin called
Mr. Langridge, the engineer of the proposed line, who spoke to
the nature of the scheme. The line was already in existence but
was a single line, and it was proposed to make another set of rails,
as a double line was found to be necessary.
The Lnalenaeni Oen:tied thy ptentoble of the 13111 to be ploved,
and the clauses of the Bill were then read and agreed to.

GROUP W.