The South Wales Star

THE EAST GLAMORGAN RAILWAY BILL. FURTHER PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LORDS' COMMITTEE. [Continued from our last i.uue.] The Lords Committee, with Lord Balfour of Burleigh as chairman, heard the following additional evidence with respect to the East Glamorgan Railway Bill on Wednesday, the 6th iustant :— Lord Balfour of Burleigh, as chairman con- wilted his colleagues, and then observed The committee disallow the question. Mr Littler Very well; I have nothing more to ask. Witness My experience of the fairness of rail- way companies, Mr Pember, does not place it on a very high level. (Laughter, in which the com- mittee joined.) Mr Pember Ah, that may be your view. Mr Cripps was proceeding to call another witness when the chairman asked who he was, and, on being informed that he was a Mr Thomas interested in coal in the valleys and its export, The Chairman said it might be assumed that every trade north of the point in question would like to have as many lines as possible, not only to Barry and Cardiff, but to every other place. The question was not whether they would like these lines, but whether they ought to have them. With- out at all saying that he had made up his mind- because he had not in the slightest degree done so, and he was sure the other members of the com- mittee had not—it seemed to him doubtful whether additional traders' svidence would carry them much further. Mr Cripps consulted his clients, and said he would call a witness on another branch of the case -the import trade. Mr William Riley, member of a firm of timber importers at Cardiff, Penarth, and Barry, expressed the opinion that the proposed line was essential to the import trade of Barry. At present he was obliged to do his business at Cardiff and Penarth owing to want of facilities in connection with Barry Dock. Cross examined by Mr Pember, he said that Barry Dock was not completely occupied with the coal trade. The managers were most anxious for an import trade, but he could not do his trade there owing to the absence at Barry of London and North Western trucks, and his customers generally insisted on having those trucks. Asked how this scheme was going to improve matters, he said that the running powers would enable London and North Western trucks to be brought down from the Rhymaey, and from Tall-y-llyn Midland trucks could be brought down direct. Answering the Chairman, witness said that London and North Western waggons were sent to Cardiff and Penarth specially for his trade. Replying to Mr Pember, he said that he had asked the London and North-Western and the Midland Companies to send waggons to him at Barry. They had promised to send them, but they had never come. (Laughter.) Mr John H. Jennings, manager to Messrs Watson, timber importers, Cardiff, corroborated Mr Riley in respect to the truck difficulty. Mr John Lowdon, general manager of the Barry Graving Dock and Engineering Company, said that they did a large trade there in repairing abips. It was necessary for them to get propellers aad heavy machinery from the North. He had found continual delays at Barry in getting ships' stores and machinery from the North. Charters had baen lost, and it was a serious matter. The delay appeared to occur on the Taff and Rhymney Railways after the traffic had left the great main lines. Witness thought that the construction of this line would obviate the delays and pitt Barry ia as good a position as Cardiff. Mr John Guthrie (of Messrs Guthrie, Hey wood k Co., shipowners and brokers, Cardiff) also spoke of delay in. the arrival of ships' stores at Barry. Much annoyance had been caused by this, ships having lost a tide. He thought the East Glamorgan line would be of great advantage in improving matters. The committee adjourned till Thursday. THURSDAY'S PROCEEDINGS. Mr David Leyshon, chairman of the Pontypridd Local Board, said that the population of that district was 30.000. There was a considerable intercourse between Bargoed, Treharris, and Pontypridd. Pontypridd was a large market centre, and hence people wanted to get there. His board had considered this scheme, ann thought it would do good to the town whilst the feeling of the public was unanimously in favour of it. The line was neecessary for the future development of the traffic. Cross-examined by Mr Bidder, Q.C. (for the Bute Docks Company), witness said that Bargoed people had cheap market tickets to Merthyr. He also valued the proposed line as a communication with the Midlands. Mr T. A. Reed, consulting and superintending engineer at Cardiff, said he looked after a large number of steamers. A considerable number of them went to Barry. They got their stores from the North generally, and when they required large pieces of machinery they came direct from the builders in the North. He experienced delay in getting scores and machinery to Barry. He con- sidered that the making of this railway would result in lessening the delay. Cross-examined by Mr Bidder. Q.C., witness said he looked to the connection with the London and North-Wastern to remove the delays. Counsel pointed out that the London and North-Western could carry to Cogan and hand to the Barry there, to which witness replied that he was not a traffic manager. Cross-examined by Mr Pope, Q.C., (for the Taff Tale), witness said he could get his goods into Car- diff a day quicker than to Barry. Mr Pope: You have a direct connection with the London and North-Western at Cogan ? Witness It is a roundabout way. I want a junction between Barry and the London and North- Western, as near the main line of the latter as possible. Mr Pope It seems to be the policy of the Barry -Company to go and get everywhere. (A laugh.) Be-examined: witness said the delays meant sometimes the loss of a tide by a ship. He had had to cart machinery from Cardiff to Barry. Mr Frederick Joseph Pilcher, engineering superintendant of several large Liverpool ana London shipowners, residing at Liverpool, said that some of the vessels loaded at Cardiff and Sarry. He had experienced very considerable <)elay in getting goods and machinery down to Barry. The proposed line, he thought, would factlitate expeditious communication with Barry. Mr Pope, Q.C. The trade to Cardiff is regular and large, but that to Barry is only small. Witness But I do not see why Barry should be handicapped when it is coming to the front. Do you know anything about the interchange of traffic between the North-Western and Barry?—I cannot say anythirg about that. Mr Pope: Then you cannot tell where and how the delay oecurs, and I do not think it is any use Asking you any more. Mr David Prosser, a member of the Glamorgan Technical Instruction Committee, said generally, as an inhabitant of Treharris and member of the county council, he bad considered this scheme, and thought it would be very beneficial to the district. To Mr Pope: We have need of another rail- way. To Mr Stockwood (for the Glamorgan County Council): The county council decided to oppose the Bill for certain reasons. Mr Sbw (for the promoters) said he had many other witnesses of the same kind, but did not know whether it was necessary to call them. The noble Chairman said he thought they need not be called unless they could treat the question from another aspect. Mr Shaw thought their evidence would be to the same effect as recent witnesses, and he would now go to the railwaymen. Mr Richard Evans, general manager of the Barry Railway Company, sketched the history of the concern in brief, and said that the Barry Company had no direct connection with any colliery. After the Barry Railway was opined a reduction in the coal rates of the district set in. a saving in the reduction of rates amounting to £200,000 to the traders and freighters having taken place in consequence. At the present time the Batry Company were about completing a new deep water dock at a cost of £200,000, which would enable vessels to enter at all states of the tide. The Barry Company were also making an import dock of 20 acres, at an expended cost of something under JB500,000, He considered it necessary that the Barry Company should extend its system in the Bargoed direction. At the present time they found an inconvenience in dealing with import traffic at Barry. The difficulty in conection with the London and North-Western, which Mr Riley spoke of yesterday, was a real difficulty. Line No 1 (the main line) would be a very valuable one, not only as a feeder to Cardiff, but as affording public accommodation. Taking, first of all, the easternmost district around Bargoed and the Rhymney Valley, a very small amount of that traffic at present came to Barry. There were two special difficulties in the way-the difference in rate and the delay in transit. Coal coming from the easternmost district to Barry would cost between 4d and 5d more than the same coal to Cardiff. If the proposed line were sanctioned, they would be able to give the same rate to Barry as to Cardiff. With the new line they would get a straight run through on good gradients all the way from Bargoed to Barry. He did not think that the proposed running powers would interfere with the working of the lines over which it was proposed that such powers should be granted. They were powers which would be of great value to the Barry Company, in order that they might have the traffic in one hand from pit to port. It would mean that instead of occupying 10 to 12 hours in transit, the traffic could be brought down in two-and-a-half to three hours. With running powers up to Rhymney or Bargoed they would get a direct communication with the London and North-Western, which would be very important for the purposes of the Barry import traffic whilst at Talyllyn Junction they would get direct communication with the Midland, which would be a very important traffic facility. Connection with the larger companies was abso- lutely necessary for the development of the import trade at Barry. Upito the present they had not been able to develop an import trade at Barry, which he attributed to want of connection with the large companies. With this new line they would be able to give the same rates from Harris's collieries to Barry as were given to Cardiff. Taking Ynysybwl as an illustration, he said that they wanted to get there at Cardiff rates. For an import traffic it was necessary to have the same rate to Barry from a common point as to Cardiff. They had applied for that, and been refused. If they got an independant line in their own hands they could make their own rate, and it would be the same as from Cardiff. He thought that the main line, if sanctioned, would carry a large traffic to Barry. Cross-examined by Mr Pope, Q.C., witness com- plained of the import traffic of Barry being hampered, upon which Mr Pope quoted figures showing that the imports had increased year by year reaching 145,406 tons last year. Mr Pope This Bill is for the substantial benefit of the Barry Company ?—Witness Yes. Then why is it not a Barry Bill ?-For financial I reasons. But the Barry Company have no financial difficulties you know. Explain to the committee why this is not a Barry Bill.-Because the Barry capital would have been very much enlarged and the present dividend of the Barry Company would have been affected. But you say this is to be a profitable under- taking ?-Yes. Then why did not the Barry like to have ii ?— Because they prefer to contribute towards the capital and guarantee the dividend. I do not follow yet what is the benefit to Barry in promoting this scheme separately ?—It is customary for companies to promote schemes independent of their own. When there is nothihg behind them but taking this as a straightforward scheme for extension up to Bargoed and running powers beyond, why do not they promote it ?-They do. No, no, an independent company promotes it. Is it not just this—that by promoting by an inde- pendent company you may get the extension with- out obligation, which would result to the Barry Company ?—No. Then what object had you in promoting it as a separate concern J—I have explained it. I do not think you have ?-The capital would have had to be added to the Barry capital. That is plain ?-And the shareholders in this scheme would participate in the Barry dividend, whereas if it is promoted as an independent company then the Barry Company can find the money and give a guarantee dividend. I do not follow it yet. You have no other answer to give us as to why it was not a Barry Bill ?-No, that is an answer. Mr Pember, Q.C. (for the Bute Dock Company) You are going to guarantee a dividend. What per cent.? Witness That has to be decided. I assume that it has been considered .'—I do not think it has. The amount of dividend will be an important factor in the new company getting capital ?— Before the issue of the prospectus it will be, no doubt. What is the probable dividend—five per cent ? -1 should not like to commit myself. May I take it that 5 per cent is the probable dividend ?—I do not know. Take that as a supposition, what is the price of your preference shares in the market now'!— 147-9. Are they 5 per cenb. ? Yes. Ai that price they would return a good deal less than 4 per cert. Then according to that, even if you only guaranteed 4 per cent., and took £ 150,000 worth of shares, it would be a far cheaper financial arrangement for Barry if they made their own line at once and issued preference share." ?—I do not know. I am not good at mental arithmetic. Then as co the import trade question-you are only five years old ?—Yes, but we are full-grown. And your imports have more than doubled ?— That is so. And yet you are not content ?—No. Re-examined by Mr Cripps (for the promoters), witness pointed out that it was more advantageous to guarantee new capital than to distribute it amongst existing shareholders. Mr Pember asked the chairman to put to wit- ness a question as to whether the Barry Dock was not a very profitable undertaking ? The Chairnan (having consulted his colleagues) said the committee were unwilling to ask that. Mr Frederick Harrison, general manager of the London and North-Western Railway, reolying to Mr Cripps, said a freighter consigned his t-affic by a particular route, and if ha could get the waggons of the company owning the route he preferred it, because the company in such case were prone to forego demurrage for detention uf their own waggons at their own stations but if other companies' waggons were used that other company had to be paid demurrage. Under this scheme, he did not think there would be any difficulty in getting North-Western waggons to Barry. There was, of course, greater difficulties in getting trucks to Barry, than to Cardiff, there < being a rival interest by which the trucks had to ( pass to Earry. The proposed running powers to Rhvmnev would mnnfipt thA Rap™ < -J-J -£.J with the North-Western. MrCripps, Q. C. Do you think it is of public importance that the Barry traffic should be put in convenient communication with the London and North-Western ? Witness I do. I do not think it is possible for Barry to develop the trade that docks of such importance ought to be expected to develop at the present lime and with their present incon- venient connection with the North-Western. Do you think the proposal in this scheme giving a direct communication between Barry and the North-Western a good solution of the present difficulty ?-I think so. I think it would be most valuable to the port of Barry and useful to the North-Western. Further examined, he said he was not an advocate of running powers as a rule, but he considered that if exercised as proposed in the present scheme, no inconvenience would result to the traffic. Mr Connacher, general manager of the North British Railway Company, and formerly general manager of the Cambrian Railway and Neath and Brecon Railway, expressed the view that if the scheme were sanctioned it would be of great benefit to the public, and added that it was especially necessary for the important traffic of the Barry Company. He agreed with Mr Harrison as to the practice of railway companies in respect to trucks. He did not see how Barry was to get a supply of empty trucks through Cardiff, seeing that two other companies with an interest in Cardiff intervened. With Barry in communication with the North-Western the truck difficulty could be arranged and managed. He thought that the proposed running powers over the Brecon and Merthyr could be exercised without any inconvenience. The noble chairman, interrupting, said that the Brecon and Merthyr Company were not now appearing. Witness went on to express the view that other running powers were feasible. Mr Cripps, Q.C., then announced the close of the case for the promoters. A PORTION OF THE SCHEME FAILS. The noble Chairman, after consulting a few seconds with his colleague, said The committee are unanimously of opinion that there is no case for railway No. 4 (this is a short line from Ponty- pridd to Ynysybwl). On the suggestion of Mr Pember, Mr Szlumper, engineer of the scheme, was re- called, and further explained some minor physical alterations in connection with one of the branch lines. The Chairman asked if there was a possibility of the case being finished to-morrow ? Mr Pember did not see why it should not be. After all, the matter was mostly argument. The committee then adjourned till Friday. FRIDAY'S PROCEEDINGS. The case for the Bill having concluded on the previous day, the committee proceeded on Friday to hear the opposing interests. Mr Pember first addressed the committee on behalf of the Bute interest. He commenced by pointing out that four millions of money had been spent in this district by his clients. The greater part was spent to make Cardiff, and in fact Cardiff had been made absolutely by the enterprise and energy or two generations of the Bute family. And when he said Cardiff he said this part of Glamorgan, for where would they have been but for the outlet of this great port ? Lord Bute had already covered 115 acres with docks, still a larger area with appurtenances, and a committee had just sanctioned a further expenditure of capital to make another dock of 42 acres. It went without saying that this provision had been more on the faith of the traffic which this proposed line was intended to carry. Then, considering that the output of the valleys to which Barry had access now was 14 million tons per annum, whereas the output of the valleys to which these lines would give access was something like two millions, one was justified in saying Barry might have been con- tent to let well alone when well was so very well. This Bill was an instance of how little protestations of innocent intention could be trusted from young suitors for Parliamentary favour. It was common knowledge how completely the promoters of the Barry Dock pledged themselves that they only wanted first of all the Rhondda coal-that they did not want imports-that they left them to Cardiff, and that a million and a half to a couple of millions of tons of coal would satisfiy them. Notwith- standing these professipns, here Barry, at the early age of five years, sought to tap all these other valleys. They cried for more imports, although they had a considerable amount and had doubled their original amount, and they were discontented, although their shipments were now over four millions and a quarter, showing three times their modest estimate of 1884. In conclusion, he said that the line was physically useless it was not in the public interest, but simply intended to dirvert traffic from Cardiff to Barry. As to running powers he said nothing at present, as he was speak- ing on the Bute case, which was not specially con- cerned with them, excepting in so far as they tapped and took traffic from Cardiff to Barry. Of course these running powers were of the most injurious order, for they were intended to tap local traffic, and not merely to get over the line to go to some other destination. For the present, he asked their lordships to reject the lines on which the pro- posed running powers hung. Lord Balfour of Burleigh remarked that as to the passage of traffic the difficulty was very strong. He did not quite see how any clause could be drawn which would enforce-because if an obligation in words was put in the Bill that the railway should carry passengers, they might do so at the rate of a mile an hour-the carriage of passengers in practice. Mr Reader Harris remarked that the Railway Commissioners would come in there. Would his learned friends be willing to come under an obligation to carry out their offer ;with regard to Railway No. 1 ?. Mr Cripps, Q.C. We intend to carry railway passengers on this line and right down to Barry. Mr Thomas Mansel Franklen, called by Mr Reader Harris, on behalf of the County Council of Glamorganshire, said he was clerk to that county council and clerk of the peace to the county. A school promoted under the Welsh Intermediate Education Act was to be erected near line 3. Towards that school the Treasury, under certain conditions, made an annual grant of L500 a year. One of the conditions was that the Treasury should approve of the site. As soon as the county council heard that the railway com- pany had included the school site within their limits of deviation, he wrote to the Treasuryl to ask how this would affect their grant. The Treasury referred him to the Charity Com- missioners, to whom he wrote. An assistant com- missioner was sent down, who visited the site and saw the plans of the company. The charity Commissioners then wrote. What was the purport of the letter?—It was that if the railway was made as laid dawn, it must undoubtedly be objectionable, but that the commissioners were not prepared to say at the present moment how it would affect the grant. (Laughter.) How would the railway affect the school?—I believe it would, perhaps, ruin the school, for the line might run through the site, and then the Charity Commissioners might say that they did not consider the site was a desirable one, and the school would lose JE500 a year. Is the whole of the school within the limits of deviation ?—Yes. Lord Balfour of Burleigh said that when it was intended to oblige a railway company to carry passengers it should be done on one system, and not, in his opinion, by various Private Bille. lie did not think, supposing the preamble to be proved, that that committee would carry the matter further than to take from the counsel engaged for the promoters the promise to carry pansengers. If eventually they did not carry out their promise, that breach would be a powerful lever in order to obtaiq the carriage of passengers by other means. He did nob wish to stop the counsel; he was not in the position of of the man who said that he was open to conviction, but would like to see the man who could convince him. (Laughter.) If the railway company undertook to carry passengers, the question of facilities to be afforded would come up before the Railway Commissioners. There was no law which would force the company to equip itself for passenger traffic, and he did not see how that committee could be asked to enforce that equipment in a Private Bill. Mr Reader Harris Will my learned friend extend his undertaking to Railway No 3 as well as to Railway No I ? MrCripps, Q.C. :Yes. Mr Reader Harris With that undertaking I dont think I need ask the witness any more questions. Mr Cripps, Q.C. (to witness) Suppose you had Railways 1 and 3 open to traffic, would the Glamor- gan County Council wish to have the line thrown out because of the interference with the school site ?—I have no authority to say. Mr Phillips said that he appeared for Mr Phillips, a local landowner. He called Mr James Hurman, formerly connected with the Taff Vale Railway, who said that he knew Mr Phillips' house well. The railway would pass within 125 feet of the house, and interfere seriously with its amenities. There was excellent stone in the soil underneath, but wishing to have the full benefit of his residenoe, Mr Phillips had refused to work it. Mr William Henry Mathias, railway contractor, concurred in the evidence of the last witness. Mr H. P. D. Phillips, the owner of the house at Gelligaer on the line of route and one of the peti- tioners against the Bill, expressed the opinion that the railway would so injure his property as to make it undesirable to live in. The Powell Duffryn opposition (which is directed to railway No. 2, from the vicinity of Bargoed to the Brecon and Merthyr) was next taken, and Mr Szlumper, the engineer to the scheme, again entering the box, explained plans affecting the lines. Mr Ogilvie, chairman of the Powell Duffryn, Colliery Company, with an output of a million and a half tons per annum, stated, in reply to Mr Moon, that the interests of his company would be served by having a connection with Barry if it were a properly devised scheme but the free, unfettered use of the land over which No. 2 line was designed to go was essential to a new colliery scheme which his company had been engaged for some years in developing, and which covered about forty acres. They proposed to sink three pits here, and in addition to colliery sidings they would re- quire the works in connection with the utilisa- tion of coal. They would, therefore, require the whole of the forty acres; he would be glad if it was eighty. Railway No. 2 would there- fore be of no advantage it would be an intoler- able nuisance. The railway would be at a height of some 80ft above the river, and connection with it would be almost impossible it would, in fact, have to be in the mature of a switchback. (Laughter.) Dealing with the proposition as made to the committee, it would not be satisfactory if the line, instead of being on an embankment, was on piers. It would interfere with his use of the land. He would rather see the whole scheme wrecked than have Railway No. 2 sanctioned. Mr Hann, a civil engineer, said he was the resi- dent engineer of the company, and stated that he had examined the plans of the proposed railway where carried over the property by embankment or on pillars, and he had come to the conclasion that the line would be very objectionable. Mr R. Jordan, an engineer, was called by Mr Moon. and said that he had examined the site of the new colliery and the proposed line. He con- sidered that a railway line across the ground would be injurious to the prospects of the colliery. Unforeseen circumstances often arose which rendered necessary works outside the sinkings. It was not desirable to have interference with the colliery. Mr Szlumper was then re-called by Mr Worsley- Taylor, Q.C., in order to show that he could accommodate the railway to the necessities of the colliery. He admitted that the line as proposed originally would interfere with the works of the colliery, but that could be remedied. Lord Balfour of Burleigh said he had no doubt that if the parties were absolutely in accord, even on a space of 40 acres, the ingenuity of the engineers would reach the desired end. To do that, however, a large draft on the improbable would have to be made. Mr Worsley-Taylor, Q.C.: These cases, my lord, are often met by simple arbitration. Mr Balfour Browne then proceeded to address the committee on behalf of the Brecon and Merthyr Company and the Great Western, saying that their cases were to some extent the same. Railway No. 3 proposed to make a junction with a line jointly owned by the Great Western and the Rhymney. They not only sought to make a junc- tion by which they might get traffic to Barry which did not at present go there, but they sought for running powers up to Dowlais. He did not exactly know why. They said they wanted to join hands with the London and North-Western. They seemed to want to join both hands-that was to say, at Dowlais and Rhymney also. As far as running powers were concerned, his olients said absolutely that they were unnecessary, and should not be granted. It was proposed to take running powers on lines which he represented to the extent of 28 miles. To justify this they must make a strong public case, and he argued that the pro- moters had failed to do this. Their object was simply to get traffic they were not entitled to, and such a Bill ought to be rejected. Mr Littler, Q.C., for the Taff Vale Railway called Mr Beasley, manager of the Taff Vale Railway, who said that his company had a junction with the Great Western, which was used every day. His company was prepared to carry all the traffic which Harris' Navigation Company might give. There had never been a demand for a rate through to Barry. He considered that in the traffic of the Taff Vale Railway there were ex- ceedingly few delays. From whatever station in England, over whatever line, when there was a through rate to Cardiff, the sa.me rate was applic- able to Barry. The growth of the traffic from Barry did not point to any difficulty in getting it in or out. Lord Balfour of Burleigh asked when the pro- ceedings would close. Mr Pope, Q.C., said he hoped on Monday, as his speech would be short, and that of Mr Pember, Q.C., would not take long for the Rhymney Com- pany. Witnesses would be few, and there would only be the reply. The Committee then adjourned until Monday morning. LAST DAY'S HEARING BY THE LORDS. The Bill on Monday again came before the Lords' Committee. Mr Beasley, general manager of the TaffVale Railway Company, whose examination- in-chief was concluded on Friday, again went into the witness box, and was cross-examined bv Mr Cripps, Q.C., on behalf of the promoters. Mr Pope, Q.C., then addressed the Committee on behalf of the Taff Vale Railway Company. He said that their case was, first, that there was no legitimate necessity for this line at all, and secondly, that the legitimate sense in which it might be of service to the Barry would be unfairly hostile and injurious to the Taff. He desired to emphatically endorse and adopt Mr Pember's argument with regard to obtaining through rates. The Taff ought to have the power of fair compe- tition with the Barry; they would not have that power if this line were authorised.—Mr C. Lundie, general manager of the Rhymney Rail- way Company, was then called. Having described his long connection with railway matters in South Wales, witness went on to say that he objected to the whole of this scheme. The obstruction of the Rhymney traffic almost at its source, and the running over the Rhymney lines to get that traffic, were the principal grounds of objection on his part.—Mr Pember afterwards proceeded to address the Committee on behalf of the Rhymney Railway interest. He said that the Bill was an attempt to evade the general law. There J was no pretence for concealing the fact that the Barry Company shares were not largely held by some of the great coalowners. Their interest in their collieries was far greater than in their own railway, and they could afford in directing the counsels of the railway, to lose some of the dividend as shareholders to carry their coal down to the sea at low rates. Thus there was presented an unfair and one-sided competition. Barry now paid 10 per cent., and would probably pay more but for the dual capacity of some of its principal shareholders. There was a time when the Taff paid 17 and more. Unfortunately that time existed no longer. The reason was to be sought, perhaps, not in the Rhymney, but in the Barry. He went on to appeal to the committee to be careful that they did not in handing over these railways to the Barry Com- pany put them in a position to work their dual capacity of dock owners and railway-owners unfairly to the other interests concerned._Mr Cripps, Q.C., replying on the whole case, con- tended that no conclusive evidence had been put before the Committee to show that the proposed line would effect adversely any of the several interests represented on these proceedings.— THE PREAMBLE NOT PROVEN. The Chairman cleared the room at five minutes paab three. On counsel and the parties being re-admitted in about 20 minutes, the Chairman said The Committee are of opinion that the preamble is nob proved.—This concluded the proceedings.