Papurau Newydd Cymru

Chwiliwch 15 miliwn o erthyglau papurau newydd Cymru

Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

12 erthygl ar y dudalen hon

BARRY RAILWAY BILL IN PARLIAMENT.

Newyddion
Dyfynnu
Rhannu

BARRY RAILWAY BILL IN PARLIAMENT. THE ATTRACTIONS OF BARRY ISLAND. CHARMING RESORT FOR EXCURSIONISTS. JEALOUSY OF CARDIFF TOWARDS BARRY. The above Bill, which has passed the House of Lords, came on Thursday before a Select Committee of the House of Commons, consisting of Sir Theocfbre Fry (chairman), Mr Wrightson, Mr FfrencW, and Mr Cohen. The promoters were represented by Mr Pember, Q.C., Mr Cripps, Q.C., and Mr Shaw. The petitioners against the Bill were the Glamorgan County Council, for whom Mr Reader Harris appeared and the owners and masters of coasting and trading vessels, tugs, &c., Mr Balfour Browne, Q.C., and Mr L. M. Richards. A petition had also been lodged by Lord Wimborne. but this was understood to have been withdrawn. Mr Pember, Q.C., in opening the case for the promoters of the Bill, said it was not a very im- portant measure so far as the length of the line went, but it would occupy a certain amount of the time of the committee, because of the peculiar character of the opposition. The railway, which was called Railway No. 2. joined the present ter- ninus of the Barry Lines, crossed a creek, or little arm of the sea, known by the name of Barry Harbour, and went on to a certain point in the niddleof Barry Island. The line was only some six furlongs and a few chains, or about three- quarters of a mile. The object was to land passengers upon this Barry Island, which was an -extremely pleasant and breezy place in the summer time, and a very favourable place for excursionists. He did not wonder at that, because it was as charming a bit of sea-side scenery of its class that they could well have. It was visited by a very large number of people. If there was one thing a tripper hated, it was to walk a yard or two, if he could help it, to his place of amusement; and in this case he had to be deposited not only three-quarters of a mile off his destination, stit the Barry terminus, bat he had got to be put across to this Barry Island, or go round to the head of it, and in either case, of course, there was inconvenience and trouble. Of course, in crossing by boats there was consider- able difficulty in getting the requisite number of boats; it was rather dangerous when the harbour -was full, and for a considerable part of the time part of the Barry Harbour was dry. Whitmore Day was about the only bit of good sand for the prposes of a holiday resort for several miles be. tween Porthcawl and Barry, and even Cardiff. He meed not add that the population of Cardiff and Newport and the Rhonddas was very great. Well, this little line involved an embankment across Barry Harbour and the filling up of the inland portion of the harbour. The proposal was opposed fjy certain petitioners on the ground mainly that Barry Harbour was useful as a harbour of refuge «nd trading harbour to certain coasting vessels and pilot boats, and that no portion of it should closed up by this embankment. The case for the promoters was that the part proposed to be closed up was the valueless part of the harbour, and that they proposed to make a breakwater at Jthe mouth of the harbour. They believed that -the number of persons using the harbour, as stated by the petitioners, was ridiculously exaggerated that it was very little use to anybody as it #tooi, but that it would be of some use to a number of persons after it had been altered in the way proposed in the Bill. When the Bill was before the House the Board of Trade reported somewhat hostilely-he used the word guardedly —on the Bill, stating that there were certain points that ought to be considered by the com- mittee. In the other House he took exception to the way in which the Board of Trade dealt with the matter. They talked of the harbour as being 110 station for tugboats, which was not the fact. Indeed, it was ridiculous to suppose that tugboats thit were .on the look-out for hire would hide themselves in this land-locked harbour. He also complained that the Board of Trade had made -their report without consulting the promoters and ascertaining their views, and he suggested to the committee of the House of Lords that it might be worth their while to see Sir Courtenay Boyle, or Mr Trevor, or some other official of the Board of Trade, and ask them what their feeling was about the matter. The committee then sent for Sir George NareSt and the evidence he gave could now tie referred to. The gist of his evidence was that if certain things were done the Board of Trade would have nothing to say against the proposal. At this point Mr Pember pointed out to the committee oe a large model of Barry Harbour and Island the alterations which Sir George -Nares, suggested. The first suggestion, he said, was to shift the centre line of the railway, as far as practicable, to the limits of deviation, namely, 120 feet, which would make a very considerable difference, because it would get rid of the idebat. able part of the harbour, so to speak. If there was a question as to how far the useful part of the harbour went-whether it was higher than the exact central line-all that question would be done away with if they shifted the railway anything like 12D feet. Then Sir George Nares admitted that the breakwater was a very valuable work, but iie was disposed to think, although he would not pledge himself, that the way in which the pro. moters had designed it was not exactly the best way of doing it, and that they had not chosen the best position or the best angle. The promoters, tiowever, would consent to have a clause put in the Bill to the effect that in matters of detail of that kind their plans should be subjected to the approval of the Board of Trade. The gist of Sir George Nares' evidence was that those alterations would satisfy him, and so the Bill passed through their Lordships' House. Mr Richards said he did not admit the accuracy of the model. Mr Pember said the portion of the harbour that they originally proposed to take could only be catered or left two hours before or after high water at spring tides, so that it was only available For entry and departure a very few times per OMnth. The Chairman For what class of vessel ? Mr Pember: For vessels drawing about eight to nine feet of water. Mr Wrightson What is the rise of the tide ? I Mr Pember said it was 37 feet. He was told that eight feet was the usual draft for pilot vessels, and on most days they would neither be able to get in nor out. The committee could, therefore, guess ¡ .a priori how far it was likely that pilot vessels or tug vessels would go into the upper part of the .harbour, whence, perhaps, they could not get out for a week or ten days. In the portion of the harbour which they left there was an average of from five to six feet more water, and this, there- fore, remained the valuable part. They only pro- posed to take the upper part of the harbour, which they insisted was of little use or benefit to any- body, and for this they would make a breakwater with what were known as the York works that would afford a real and serviceable shelter. That was their position in regard to what they proposed to do. He then called attention to the provisions ef the Incorporating Act of 1884, under which the promoters were bound to certain terms for the protection of Barry Harbour. It was not worth the committee's consideration that he should tell them the promoters had done a great deal mcie to the second harbour of refuge than ever they were bøund to do by the Act. They had extended their breakwaters very much indeed, and they had dredged the interior, 30 that instead of having 15 feet, as was contemplated, they got 17 feet 7 inches at low water on spring's, and at low water oa neaps 25 feet 7 inches. He must say he could not help thinking that the opposition to this Bill was fostered by jealousy of a different kind, that was jealousy between Cardiff and Barry. The opposi- tion of Cardiff had been all along notorious, and, «ot only so, but natural. Barry was a new port, which was going to take a good deal of gilt off the Cardiff gingerbread. He did not wish to re-open i .14 gores, but the Cardiff pilots have been in the thick of the fight against Barry. The latter port got a pilotage board of its own. Like all people who won they could afford to be generous, and so Barry licensed men who had been most hostile to the new port. Two Cardiff pilots were elected on the Barry Pilotage Board, and these had been most actively opposed to Barry in all the contests which had taken place. He was tarring these men with the same brush, but was now told it was not fair, because one had turned out a much better fellow than he had thought. He had been mis- taken in supposing they were both equally bad. (Laughter.) The first thing the Cardiff pilots licensed by Barry did was to strike work; con- sequently Barry had to license apprentices. There had been a good deal of bitter feeling. No doubt if some of the present petitioning pilots were examined here early in the day, they would seek to persuade the committee that they were as meek as sucking doves, but he viewed that repentance ia a somewhat suspicious light. (Laughter.) The Chairman asked if the line was intended for passenger traffic only ? Mr Pember said that was so, but it was also thought a steamboat traffic might be developed for passengers. He would not waste time by reading the petition against the Bill. It set forth that the promoters were going to destroy a valuable harbour, but the reply was No." The gravamen of the petition of the Glamorgan County Council was that the company had provided no accommodation for passengers between Barry and Hafod, and that the Glamorgan people had as a consequence suffered great inconvenieace. But as he told the court yesterday when opening another Bill, the original proposals of the Barry Company were truncated. They, however, hoped some day to have such powers as they were deprived of in respect of passenger lines. He also begged to remind the court that the Glamorgan County Council raised no question in the other House. Mr J. Wolfe Barry, engineer to the Barry Com- pany, examined by Mr Cripps, said the access sought to be given under the Bill was very much needed, and it was important that the carrying out of the scheme should not be delayed. The popu- lation of Barry was rapidly growing, and Barry Island was being developed as a residential estate. In 1881 the population of Barry was 494. It was now about 15,000, and was increasing. The line which he had himself laid out was essential for reasonably good passenger accommodation. Since 1884 he had had no complaints about the state of the Barry Harbour, though no doubt there was a good deal of silting in the upper harbour. There was no difficulty in carrying out their obligations whenever called upon. The estimate for the line (works and land) was £30,000, and for the break- water, £ 2,200. The lines had nothing to do with the dock traffic. Cross-examined by Mr Reader Harris (on behalf of the Glamorgan County Council), Mr Barry said he gave evidence in' the other House in support of the Bill, his view then and now being that the company would run passenger traffic when they had laia the foundations for it. The company were perfectly bona-fide in respeot to passenger traffic on their main line when they could get the accommodation. The Barry Company were anxious to get to Porth, which was an important centre for interchange, and not to be stopped at Hafod. The Chairman asked if this had anything to do with the question under discussion. Mr Reader Harris respectfully contended that it had, because, as representing Glamorgan County Council, he wished to show that the public would be benefitted to a wider extent if passenger accom- modation were provided throughout the main line. Mr Cripps We cannot entertain that here. The Chairman It appears to me to be a waste of time. Mr Reader Harris If you tell me that my ask- ing questions about passenger traffic on any part of this line is a waste of time, I will withdraw. We succeeded in getting a promise from them during discussion on a pievious Bill this Session (the East Glamorgan) that they would give passenger traffic right through their system. The Chairman Your argument seems to show the consignment advantage of this railway No. 2. The committee consider it is not necessary to go into the question of passenger traffio all over the line. Both you and the engineer are agreed that you wish to have the traffic as soon as possible. Mr Reader Harris I wish to show that it could be done at once, and that these people have under- taken to do it. Mr Cripps: I must ask my learned friend to obey the ruling of the committee. Mr Reader Harris If the chairman says I have no right to put questions on the subject of passenger traffic I will withdraw. The Chairman You may offer any opposition to the railway No. 2 now before the committee. Have you any objection to railway No. 2 per se 1 Mr Reader Harris If you refuse to hear me on the question of passenger traffic I shall not trouble you further. My business is to hand over my brief to my clients. Mr Harris at once gave up his brief and left the committee-room. Mr Richards then cross-examined Mr Barry upon his evidence in the other House, and asked if there had not been a very strong opposition on the part of the petitioners whom he represented? Mr Barry We have always had opposition, and shall to the end of time. (Laughter.) Further cross-examined, Mr Barry explained his objections to a back shunt in lieu of the pro- posed works. The difficulties were most serious. Mr Pember To take passengers over this shunt. ing ground would be as reasonable as taking them round the docks of Cardiff. Mr Richards Mr Pember opined that this Bill is to satisfy the interests of the public. Mr Barry I don't think he opined anything of the kind. Mr Richards The building sites on Barry Island are very much exposed, are they not ? Witness: They are not nearly so much exposed as at Penarth. Mr Richards: Are you aware that Barry has been very much overbuilt ? Witness: I am not aware of it. Probably people do there what is done at other places- underdo it at one time and overdo it at another. Possibly Barry may be overbuilt at the present moment. Replying to the Chairman, Mr Pember said no Barry pilot proper had petitioned against the Bill. Re-examined: A tramway would be perfectly useless for the accommodation required. Mr John Guthrie, vice-chairman of the Barry Pilotage Board, and nautical assessor at Cardiff, examined by Mr Shaw, gave evidence in support of the Bill. He had been authorised by the board to appear. The works, if carried out, would pro- vide. ready means of access, and the place would he materially improved as a harbour of refuge. The Chairman May we take it that the loss of this little piece of the harbour will be no practical disadvantage ? this little piece of the harbour will be no practical disadvantage ? Witness: None whatever. Captain Moriarty, R.N., C.B., formerly nautical assessor to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, examined by Mr Shaw, said the pier pro- posed under the Bill would be a very great im- provement to the harbour. Cross-examined by Mr Balfour Browne He did not regard the harbonr as a harbour of refuge, notwithstanding what Parliament said in 1884. In re-examination by Mr Pember, Captain Moriarty said the shortest way of expressing the difference between the harbour as it was now and as the promoters proposed to leave it was value- less and valuable." Replying to the Chairman, Mr Pember said he had several other witnesses to call. The eommittee adjourned until noon on Friday.

FRIDAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

MONDAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

TUESDAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

SHEBEENING AT BARRY DOCKS.

SETTLING A " BROTHERLY AFFAIR"…

Advertising

-------.------------------DETERMINED…

A BOLD THEFT OF A HORSE ANDI…

------BARRY CHAMBER OF TRADE.

SAD END OF A WOMAN AT CADOXTON-BARRY.

Advertising