Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

7 articles on this Page

fTHE /BUTE DOCK BILL. :.

News
Cite
Share

f THE BUTE DOCK BILL. PROCEEDINGS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. [BY OUR SPECIAL COHRESPONDENT.] HOUSE OF COMMONS, Thursday Afternoon.—The Bute Dock Siding, &c., Bill was to-day fairly entered upon by the House of Commons Committee appointed to con- sider this and the Barry Dock and Railway Bill. On Wednesday the opening statement of counsel for -the promoters of the Bute Dock Sidings Bill occupied the greater part of the day, and the evidence of one witness only, Mr Morgan, the recently-appointed stailhs super- intendent at the Bute Docks, was concluded. Mr M'Connochie again took his seat at the witness table, and returned his evidence, but the feature of the day's proceedings was the statement of Mr William T. Lewis, who has now prac- tically admitted that the real cause of this bill is the Barry Dock and Railway —Bill although he used the term" other ports," when speaking in regard to the probability of arrange- ments being made by the Taff Vale Railway Company which might induce competition with the Bute Docks. This, as it will be at once seen, is, by implication, an importaat ad- mission, because it has been alleged on behalf of the promoters that the Sidings Bill has been introduced with the view alone to meeting the requirements of the coal trade, and for the benefit of all the parties interested. The chair was taken at mid-day by the Hon. Mr Bourke, who had on his right and left the other members of the committee—Colonel Colt- hurst, Sir Herbert Maxwell, and Mr Causton. The local gentlemen present in the committee- room to-day included Mr W. T. Lawis, Mr John Boyle, Mr Lewis Davis, Mr A. Hood, Mr Nixon, Mr James Ware, Mr Williams (Roath Court), Mr T. R. Thompson, Mr F. Webb, Mr O. H. Ri ches, Mr G. Fisher, Mr Hurman, Mr C. Lundie, Mr Louis Tylor, Mr Evan s, Mr L. V. Shirley, Mr G. F. Hill, Mr Ingledew, Mr A. Lusty, Mr W. Jones, Mr Hooper, and Mr Szlumper. Before proceeding to refer to the proceedings of the day, I notice that an allegation has been made that anchorage ground is proposed to be taken by the Barry Dock Bill, and that if after the passing of the measure boats ran in fur a shelter to anchorage ground included within its provisions, there would be a penalty exacted of £20. This I am assured is not the case. The provisions of the bill do not include anchorage ground in customary use in the way alleged even if it did, the penalty clause to which reference has been made is now withdrawn altogether. At the commencement of today's sitting, Mr Bidder, Q.C. (who appears for the promoters of the Bute Dock Sidings Bill), in the urbane style which characterises his utterances, announced that he wished to make a communication to the committee prior to the taking- of evidence. There was not much interest felt in the committee-room on the statement; the whispered consultations going on in different parts of the ioom behind the barrier did not cease, even for a moment; those who are accustomed to listen to Mr Bidder's oratory in the committee-room of the House of Commons know perfectly well that he has a way of trying til impress upon the committee the great importance to his clients of very trifling con- cessions. It was thought desirable, however, that the leading counsel for the Taff Vale Railway Company should be present, and as it had only just struck twelve, some minutes were allowed to elapse, during which the chairman was engaged in conversation. When the leading counsel had put in an appearance—Mr Littler, Mr Sauudors, Mr Matthews, Mr Pembroke Stephens—Mr Bidder, at about ten minutes past twelve, volun- teered his statement, which he appeared to think would save the committee a good deal of trouble. So far as the general public are concerned, the only importance to be attached to it is that the promoters have now abandoned the proposal to construct a siding or depot at Treforest, for the more convenient conduct of the coal traffic at the Bute Docks; and that in the case of railway No. 3 at Penarth junction, where it is proposed t. tpKniiliig depot, it should v.an'y-uer oscd practically for down traffic—and that in the case of trains made up partly of waggons destined for Penarth, and partly of waggons intended for the Bute Docks, Mi- Bidder, after a good deal of circumlocution, having arriv -1 at this conclusion, resumed his seat, which he diu not think worth while to relinquish when counsel for the Taff Vale Railway Company described the proposals made as valueless. He did not appear and, in all probability, was not surprised. And the evidence was, after a good deal of skirmishing, recommenced. Mr M'Connochie, of the engineerim? department at the Bute Docks, explained that when he had said on the previous day that there never was a block on the Taff Vale line when he managed the docks—he meant a block on the Taff Valo Railway between Crockherbtown junction and where they join the Bute line—not the main Tafl Vale line. Mr William Thomas Lewis next took his seat at the witness table, and describing himself as the manager of the Bute Docks, and of the mineral estates of the Marquis of Bute, informed the committee that he was intimately, acquainted with all the arrangements of the coal trade of the district. Taking this as in a measure the raison d'itre for what was to follow in his statement, he entered upon an explanation of the steps taken by the marquis to cope with the rapid growth of the steam coal trade of South Wales, and the consequent development of the coalfield. Mr Lewis was armed with a formid- able looking bundle of papers and documents, and through him Mr Bidder handed in a diagram, showing in detail the weekly variations in the traffic at the docks. This was placed before the committee, who were informed, in the stereo- typed phrases adopted by Bute witnesses, the business done at the Bute Docks, amounting in export trade to over seven and a quarter millions of tons in the year 1882, and considerably over a million tons of import trade, had been transacted with a profit to the marquis on an average of three per cenu. per annum. Again and again answered in the committee-rooms of the House of Commons, this allegation will have to be once more replied to on behalf of the freighters, and probably the laff Vale Railway Company. Mr Lewis attributed the delays at the docks to the inability of the Taff Vale Railway Company to regulate the coal trafho so as to avoid these. For a time Colonel Colthurst left the committee room during Mr Lewis's examination, but he had atten- tive listeners in the Hon. Mr Bourke, Sir Herbert Maxwell, and Mr Causton and amongst the other M.P.'s occupying scats allotted to members were Mr David Davies, M.P., Sir George Elliot, M.P., and Mr. G. W. Elliot, M.P., all of whom, having large and direct in- terests in the coal traffic either in South Wales or the North of England, remained in the room for the greater 0 part of the day. Under the guidance of Mr Whyte, who was as attentive as on former occasions with the pointer in explaining the maps and diagrams, the committee were taken through the objects in view in the projected railways. In regard to the sites of railways No. 1 and No, 2 the nearest point to the Bute Docks had been selected for sites—clearing buildings and the Taff Vale Com- pany's own repairing works-for the convenience of traffic. Mr Lewis told the committee in the most confident of tones that he believed the pass- ing of tho Buto Dock Sidings, &c., Bill, now under consideration would confer immense benefit upon the Taff Vale Railway Company, and, enlarging the scope of his mental outlook, Mr Lewis professed to see many and great advan- tages to the coal freighters. When they come be- fore the committee and speak to the contrary, the committee will be better able to decide as to the prospccti ve benefits to be derived by the freighters. But Mr Lewis was courageously frank—he ad- mitted that on this occasion the dock-owners were actuated by other than purely benevolent mo- tives, they believed the passing of the Bute Dock Sidings Bill would be of advantage also to the Bute Dock authorities it would, he thought, enable them to conduct a very much larger business than they had hitherto done at a lower expense. He expressed his belief that the measure would remedy the inconvenience at present felt, and said that whilst the Marquis of Bute was quite willing to have the docks con- structed entirely at his own expense, he desired to obtain proper" arrangements for working the proposed sidings. Mr Lewis touched upon the question of the differential rate between Penarth and Cardiff which the promoters of the Bute Dock Siding Bill intend enforcing by the proviso that mileage rates should be charged by the Taff Vale Railway Company for the carriage of coal to Peuarth. He is fully con- vinced that this would be a" proper" arrange- ment for the geographical position of Cardiff being, he urges, a mile and three quarters in favour of that town, as against Penarth, then the i dock authorities are entitled to do all they can to i maintain that geographical advantage. Such, in brief,is the rCbult of Mr Lewis's examination on this head. He, as the representative of the Bute Dock authorities desired to see competition with the Bute Docks put a stop to. In cross-examination, Mr Lewis admitted in effect that the provisions of the bill applied in this respect to the future as well as the present—the freighters contending that the object of the promoters is to hamper all undertakings by conditions which will render competition with the Bute Docks inoperative. Mr Lewis had to be pressed before he would admit some of these things, and as a kind of defence of the general line of policy adopted by the promoters in this bill, he states that the Taff Vale Company—in the face of a covenant—leaving the West Bute Dock to do all they could to further traffic to the Bute Docks—went out of their way to give the Penarth Docks an unfair advantage. To obviate this it was sought by the bill to prevent the Taff Vale Railway Company charging a lower mileage rate to Penarth than to Cardiff for the carriage of coal. Mr Lewis was somewhat puzzled how to get over the difficulty as to the absence of alternative routes to a port of shipment from the lihondda collieries and he was content to allude to measures which have not yet been carried into effect, and one at least of which is now before Parliament, Then, again, there was no answering the obvious reply to the allegatiou as to the unci ue preference for l'tmarth, Why not go before the Railway Commissioners?" There is no "block" in that quarter, and so far as I am aware there is no difficulty about it. But the fact is, as Mr Lewis most unwillingly allowed, that the promoters of the Buto Dock Siding Bill wish to prevent the Tag Vale Rail- way Company from making any such arrange- ments with other companies as would give Barnr or other ports an advantage over Cardiff. Mr Matthews, for the freighters, will contend as i against this that that the proposed sidings will not be a remedy for the grievances felt in the un- due delay of the coal traffic. Mr Lewis dwelt more I upon the S, ving of a year which the passing of the Bute Dock Siding Bill would prove ior the marquis, than upon the wishes of ■ freighters. He dCllled that the freighters would support anything which would give them relief from the grinding monopoly of he Bute Docks. But Mr Lewis took the committee into his con- fideiicc. He told the hou. members of the Lower House of Parliament that tho Buto Dock authorities could not forget the lease of the West Bute Dock what the Tafl Vale had covenanted to do, and what they had done was, said Mr Lewis, ever present to the minds of the Bute authorities. This was for Mr Lewis an answer to questions as to the Taff being the only route to Cardiff from tha Rhondda for coal. Directly asked as to the tipping accommo- dation at the docks, he asserted that even at tha busiest time they had eight or nine tips on the West Bute Dock lying idle. Mr Lewis remembered instances of this kind, but, strange to say,he was not "certain" as to whether he had a reply from Mr J. O. Riches to the cir- cular letter addressed by the dock authorities to the freighters; and he did not "remember" whether ha had any reply from the Great Western Colliery Company. No doubt, Mr Lewis's want of memory will be supplied on a fitting occasion, He left the witness-box this afternoon about half- past three o'clock, but will in all probability be re-called to-morrow. Mr James Aberncthy, C.E., gave evidence for the next half hour, which, summed up, meant that the docks would be better managed for all con- cerned were these storage sidings constructed. Sir John Hawkshaw, who will, it is said, be called by the Taff Vale Company, was this after- noon seated near Mr Pope—Mr Shirley and Mr Nixon being side by side close to counsel for the preinoters of the bill. j There are five or six more witnesses to be called to-morrow for the promoters. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Thursday.—The Iiearingof this bill was resumed to-day before a select com- mittee of the House of Commons. The committee consisted of the Right H>n. R. Bourke (chairman), Mr Causton, Colonel Colthurst, and Sir Herbert Maxwell. The counsel were, for the promoters, Mr Bidder, Q.C., Mr Michael, Q.C., and Mr O'Hara. The opponents were the Tail Vale Railway Company; counsel, Mr Pope, Q.C., Mr Littler, Q.C., and Mr Saunders, Q.C.; the Brecon and Merthyr Tydfil Railway, agent, Mr Dyson; Lord Windsor's trustees, Mr Bompas, Q.C., and Mr Clark Baggallay; freighters, shippers, and others, Mi- Matthews, Q.C., Mr Pembroke Stephens, Q.C., Barry Dock Bill promoters; Ponty pridd, &c., Railway, Mr Pope, Q.C., and Mr Batten ship- owners and traders of Cardiff, Mr Matthews, Q.C., Mr Pembroke Stephens, and Mr Jeune. Mr Bidder, Q.C., said ho might perhaps save the time of the committee by the announcement he wished to make now. The promoters had be.en anxiously considering the points raised in cross- examination, especially by the Taff Vale Railway Company. The committee would understand that the Bute trustees had not any desire to harass the Taff Vale Railway Company in the con- duct of their traffic. It had been suggested that the Bute trustees would order trucks from denOt to depot, as if they were children playing at rail- ways, and that kind of thing. They had con- sidered the thing since yesterday with a desire to meet the views of theTaff.Vale Railway Company to the .utmost. While securing accommodation that would relieve the present obstruction in a way that would help both -the company and the trustees, they were desirous of doing nothing that would in any way interfere with the traffic of the former. One of the points dwelt upon by the opponents of the bill was that the trustees had sidings at the railways No. 1, 2, and 3, with another so far away as No. 4, and that trucks might be left at each of these or moved about from one to another. To meet that objection, the promoters of the bill would consent to do without railway No. 4—the one most remote from Cardiff. They could see their way to accommodate the traffic on the other sidings. With reference to railway No. 3, that was at Penarth Junction, the sidings to be established there being in immediate contiguity to the sidings of the railway company themselves, which they used in exactly the same way as the new sidings would be used, the in- tention of the promoters was, practically, to en- large the existing sidings of the Taff Vale Railway Company. The habit now was, when a train came into Penarth Junction with coal destined partly for Penarth Dock and partly for the Bute Dod; the train was split ihto two at the junction, and the portion destined for Penarth Dock was put into the Penarth depot, while the portion destined for the Bute Docks was sen ton tilele at once. TheinleniAo«r>tf the pro- moters was that the portion for the Bute Docks should go into a siding depot, and this depot they were wiliiug to make at their own expense. He wishedit to be quite clear thatNo. 3 railway was in- tended to be used only for that purpose, and thus it would be an auxiliary to the company's means of carrying on the traffic. The Chairman You are referring now to the accommodatiun of the tratlic to the Bute Docks ? Mr Bidder: Yes. In point of fact, for the siding to be used for analogous purposes to that used by the Taff Vale Company. Now, with reference to another point raised yesterday by Mr Saunders. It never certainly entered into their heads that they might say to the Taff Vaie Rail- way Company, "Yon shall take coal on to Railway No. 3, and then from there to Railway No. 2 or No. I," and then order it to be taken on tothe Bute Docks. What ha desired to be clearly understood was this, that they never contem- plated anything of the kind, and he wished to give effect to thot by saying- they were perfectly will- ing to introduce provisions into tho bill so that they should not have the right to call upon the Taff Vale Company to do more than to put coal into the depot, and, at the proper time, to bring it down to the docks, and that they should not have the power to call for a second move. He thought these were all the points he had to mention, and he deemed it convenient to state them at once, to save what would become unnecessary examina- tion, and he hoped it would satisfy his friends that they were simply endeavouring to meet the exigencies of the traffic. Mr Littler replied that Mr Bidder seemed to be labouring under a misapprehension. Their con- tention was not a question. Mr Bidder: I will withdraw what I said with regard to that point. I do not withdraw my offer, but I will withdraw the observation of the offer as being made in order to shorten tho in- quiry. The offer was made by me with the best intention, and if it falls through I cannot help it. Mr Littler: I think it right at once to inform the committee that any such offer as that made by Mr Bidder is absolutely useless. I will not make use of any stronger expression. My friend must at once and distinctly understand that we most strenuously object to anybody coming to interfere with our railway. We consider that we are quite capable of managing our own pro- perty, and we consider that we are quite intelli- gent enough. The Chairman Mr Saunders made your objec- tion sufficiently clear yesterday. Mr Littler Our desire is to do all that is necessary for the development of the traffic. Whatever is necessary in the interests of the traffic we will do. But we object to anybody else coming to do the work for us. Mr Bidder: I do not make the offer as a bargain, but in order to avoid misappiehension. If it is not accepted I cannot help it. Mr M'Connochie was then recalled, and pro- duced a diagram showing the proposed new rail- way works. Mr Saunders objected to the diagram on the ground that it did not show the proposed sidings. Mr M'Connochie said he had a large cartoon on the way from Cardiff. The Chairman Will that show the junctions? Mr M'Connochie No, it will not. Mr Bidder: The cartoon is, I understand, only a general district cartoon. This diagram is nIl I have now to offer. If it is imperfect, you can supplement it at the proper time. The witness then explained on the diagram the position of the lines in reference to the points of the compass. The chart represented the up and down mineral lines, the Taff Vale line at the point of junction, and the proposed new line. Mr Bidder There are, I think, only five or six passenger trains on this line per day ?—That is so. Of course, each line would be the same as the one represented?—Yes, the same. The Chairman Does the plan show the line up which you propose to shunt ?— No, it does not. 1\11' Bidder Our own sidings. This diagram is simply intended to show the interference with the Taff Vale line of railway No. 1, but when it is clear of their lines umic is any amount or fan ning out" and divergencies. The witness pointed out on the diagram where the shunting would take place. The Chairman: That is quite clear now. Mr Bidder (to the witness) I believe you wish to explain something in your evidence yesterday ? —Yes. I said I had managed the Bute Docks, and there was then never any block on the Taff Vale line. I meant to imply no block on the Taff Vale line between Crockherbtown and where they join our line, Mr Bidder Can you tell whether there were blocks north of Crockherbtown ?—I cannot. Cross-examined by Mr Littler Would the re- sult of your arrangement be that every train coming up is first of all to come to a stand on your line ?—Yes. Then, while the shunting is taking place, the other trains would have to stop ?—They would be stopped by signals. In addition to this, have you to put the brakes on all the trucks of the train ?—No, not on all the trucks. The engine brake would be sufficient tu stop the light waggons. But the full waggons would require brakes?— Yes. When you have put your empty waggons into the sidings, the engine has to come back and hook on to the remainder of the waggons before going on its journey ?—We simply put the empty trucks into the sidings and take on the others. Well, how long would the main line be blocked during the operation?—The main line need not be blocked. We could let trains pass if there were time. What is to become of the brake-van ? Is it to be left in the sidings ?—No. Then the trucks that are left must be next to the engine?—Yes, next to the engine. When you get off your line on :to our main line you then disconnect the truck and put them off on to the sidings ?—There are a large number of Sidings. The shunting would be done off your main line. I am aware of that. Is the process this-the whole train leaves our main line and goes on to your main line ?—Yes. Having got on to your main line,you disconnect the trucks in front intended to be deposited in your sidings, the engine then moves upwards and deposits the trucks in the siding ?—Yes. The engine then backs out and takes on the other trucks ?- Yes. Then is not the line blocked all that time ?— No, we could let trains pass it there were time. Do you think you could keep any sort of punctuality by that ariaugement ?—I think so. Do you know our railway is worked by the block system ?—No, I am not aware of it. How many trains are there on the up line during the afternoon and evening ?—I do not know. Are there trains running every J.2 minutes during the whole working day ?—I do not know. Have you made yourself acquainted with working of the Taff Vale line ?—No I liav'f ffir And yet you come here to tell us how it sh be worked ?—No. j Mr Bidder Mr M'Connochie came here not t tell you how the line is to be worked, but as j j engineer of the line. There are other penoøl tell you how it is to be worked.. u < Mr Littler: The down passenger user] as a mineral line, is it not 1—Yes. A ( By goiag into your railway No. 3 yoa block both our down lines ?—Crossing is j blocking. What would happen if a down passenger was coming — We should take care that w not working when a down passenger train coming. M The Chairman You admit that it would impossible for a down passenger train to into Cardiff while this operation was going oil. Mr Bidder: Of course two trains cannot cuppy the same rails at the same time. „ Mr Littler: Is railway Nn. 3 to hold both" and empty wagons?—Full. Mr Littler At that point there are four 1^ Suppose you are bringing full trucks from near side of the four, must you not for the being foul all the others? Mr Bidder Without a doubt. tI Mr Littler It is quite plain that we shall bf* to Ud our own diagrams hereafter. We ought have drawings showing how it is proposed join every one of these railway sidings. Mr Bidder I have no objection to supply friend with anything I have got, but I you follow me in my next question it will expjjj matters. (To the witness)—The ground uet that fork south of Penartii Junction is the p{2 at which the Taff Vale Company have got £ 5 own sidings and working depots ?—Witness is so. J. And consequently at the present moment tram composed of wagons designed partly for*^ Bute Docks and partly for Penarth Dock perform the very same operation of crossing main line?—The very same. Doing all this dreadful fouling Mr Littler" mentioned?—Yes. j- These sidings being limited to the use of t made up partly of waggons destined for Pe Dock and waggons destined for Bute the trains must go there for the sake of the Vale Company's traffic?—They must. There will be no more fouling by our than there is by their own ?—No. Mr Littler We have full trains for both jJ-" and Penarth. Mr Bidder Our only necessity for ra^^j No. 3 is in the case of such trains as are not trains for either place, but partly composed Penarth waggons and partly of Bute wagg*^ We are quite willing that its use should'' limited by clause to that. Taking that limitati?" it follows that such trains do necessarily foul main line as is described. I am willing that clause railwi-y No. 3 should ,be restrained fr^- being used for full train loads destined for ™ Bute Docks. a The Chairman: Are the committee ngh^v supposing that railway No. 1 is to be used » full down trains only ?—Full only. The Chairman And railway No. 2 for silXl up trains ?—That is so. The Chairman: Is railway No. 3 for both and down?—That must be so, but oaly in JI case I have mentioned. It will resolve practically unto use for down trains oniy. The Chairman That shows quite plainly way that Railway No. 1 and 2 will be used, I am not perfectly clear in regard to railwaY,) 3, how the traffic up and down is to be carr¡ 011. Mr Bidder It is only wanted for down trafJiCI and I am willing to limit it to down traffic. i' The Chairman If railway No. 3 is to b? for down traffic only, why is it not put 0:1 t same side as railway No. 1 ? Mr Bidder: Fortius reason—that it is d tined for the use of down traffic, partly of Penarth and partly of Bute traffic. \J train always goes int,o that fork to their l>v\J Penarth sidings, and, being there, by putting railway also there we cause no additional Mr Littler That makes it all the more i'.np^'L ant that we should have full drawings of wru»*/J proposed, and that they should show the leng^ of the sidings. « Re-examination by Mr Bidder continued;^ goo 1 deal Ins been said about your stoppi"? the traffic between the two block signal next to railway No. 3. Would not this very be a. signal station ?—It would. Where a junction is made, the sigaals of junction have to be provided at the expense those that make the junction ?—Yfo.s. j* Consequently as the line is worked 011 the Jibck stanon here* There would. And as soon as a train had gone off the line, the block signals would be able to signal W* line clear ?—Yes.. Is this blocking not exactly the same thing ? happens at seres of places 011 the Taff Vale i way, where there are entrances to collieries works?—I believe it is. For instance, the patent fuel works and ™ work" at Crockherbtown Junction?—Yes. a Do tiie Taff Vaie Railway themselves de a large number of empties m their :iJillggWh you wi"h to make railway No. 3?-1 have seaB large number there. j. Mr William Thomas Lewis, examined by jf, Bidder, stated I reside at Aberdare, and al" justice of the peace for Glamorgan aud am a civil engineer, chairman ot the Sou** Wales and Monmouthshire Colliery A tion, and manager of the Marquis Bate's docks and property at Cardiff. I man3^ the mineral estates of the marquis, and know the circumstances connected with the coal tr: of the Aberdare and Rhondda Valley. The dock constructed at Cardiff was the Bute Dock. That was constructed by the late niarq" under an act obtained in the year 1830. SuhSj" quently to that the Bute East Dock was adde^j and opened in 1855. Subsequently, again, Roath Basin was constructed in 1874. Last y powers were taken for the construction ot Roath Dock. The contract for the dock was let the beginning of January, and the works W begun on the last day of January or the tirst of February, and are now being carried 011. expenditure of the marquis 011 the docks £ 2,500,000, and the expenditure on the wojdjjt no w in construction is estimated at auother £ 500,0'T' The return last year on the money expended this way was about 3 per cent. That is the resUy of a statement made by the auditors of the estate* Up to tho 1st January it was £3 Is 61 per ce4t There has been a continuous and very increaoe in tiie coal traffic of the district duri» recent years. The total import and export in year 1&82 was 7,241,404 tons, of which tons were exports, and 1,183,310 tons were impo^ We have all the most modern improveuie? in the way of tips and staiths for rapid sh'K ment, and they have been very much impN duriug tho past 10 years. Tips formerly adapfj for six-ton waggons have beeu made capable^ tipping into ten-ton waggons. During tho l year the average amount shipped in oneweet." the Bute staiths was 113,000 tons, and least amount shipped in one week was 6ó,Wt tons. (A diagram was here handed in showing fluctuations in the shipments.) » Mr Bidder Do you find you have very delays in the shipment of coal when you are !Just; Witness: Very great in the delivery from Taff Vale Railway to the Bute staiths, aud ™ their receiving empties from the Hut. aitb8. What do you attribute these delays tot-I bt I" read the reports from our manager, and Ie cOol respo.idonce that has passed with the manager the Tuff Vale Railway, from which I attribute delays entirely to the Taff Vale Railway as be*w unable to deal with the traffic. « You have very extensive sidings upon the B", ground in the neighbourhood of the docks?—* have. j But is it important for the rapid discharge your business at the docks that those sidlnf should be available in connection with the w ing of the staiths ?—Most decidedly. A g1^ many of our sidings are unfortunately placed1 the rapid despatch of business, and we oug«c have a siding north of Cathays. aiefc Under the present system by which the traflj » carried on, these sidings at the docks are great extent occupied as storage sidings?— involving a great deal of unnecessary expense an actual loss.. oi Is it not a fact that a considerable poitioB if. coal is consigned to the Bute Docks before 1t determined where it is to be tipped—whether • the East or the West Docks ?—Y es a great o • of coal is sent down before it is required, ap(t before there is a ship ready for it. What uocomoa of it ?—It is placed on tiie 1 c Viaduct, and has to be hauled round by way the Bute Viaiuct, and brought down to staiths on their side of the docks.. Had that coal been stopped whilst at railway No. 1, I suppose it would not have ÐJ4 cumbered the working of the docks, and woO" have been brought down at the proper the proper place of shipment ?—Yes, immedia1 there was a vessel ready to receive it. øtf Supposing the traffic coming from ^jiT upon the Taff Vale system, and intended for sB £ ment on the east side of the Bute East what is the only and convenient route for would come over the Taff Vale Railway as Crockherbtown, and then come down by Rhymney Railway. And do I understand that the Taff Valep^ pany have insisted upon carrying the traffic^ the other side to the detriment of your trafcc^ Yes, involving, as it does, a back shunt over Bute Viaduct, and then coming down; a.11 íI shunting back it meets the down traffic. rrb oS totally unnecessary and useless, aud is a was e time and m,m0,Y. 1t1" And not only is it unnecessary, but it Is, pose, an inevitable obstruction to the Tati v d; traffic, as well as to yours ?—Very much so, aV¡Jl have pointed it out repeatedly to the Tan Company. Ip I suppose there is also necessarily a block IYer1 Taff Vale line back towards Aberdare 1- much so. Besides the loss it involves upon the of Bute?—It is a very serious expense to the estate as well as a great delay to the freigh^^ng. In consequence of these delays, obstruc and difficulties, do you find practically t»a ^gl- are very much hampered in conducting the uess of the docks ?—Exceedingly so. I believe it has been the subject of a3Lee' consideration to yourself and the tr of Lord Bute ?—Yes, for more than two ye as ft What was the conclusion you came to Y gards the best mode of remedying the "e jy tt* The conclusion we came to was that it W Y anc best to ourselves, to the Taff Vale to the freighters, to have reception 9idinSf tb* of Crockherbtown. If it had not keen building ground and the Taff Valley ya~ds, which cover a very large area, nffS t,10r» have endeavoured to have placed 81" ".foe 1 The object of putting No. 3 railway °"0ll W*' side of the railway near Penaith 1. rpaff V*1 that it should be in connection with the Company's Penarth sidinar. The intention of the plan is practica y gid'1* a mere extension or multiplication ot n)()a already existing ?—We intend it for tined tion of the traffic gonerally, whether u«= the the Bute Docks or the laff Vale, UIK> -t_ sumption that the Taff ale would ag You are willing that the hn %vill?*J limited to the down traffic ?—We are1 q j to limit it to the down traffic if they

Advertising

Family Notices

FRIDAY, APRIL 6, 18*3.

THE EMIGRANT SHIP OXFORD.I

|THE TALK OF THE WEEK.

Advertising