Mr. Alderson, of course, called upon the committee to reject the bill; and he protested "against the despotism of the Exchange at Liverpool striding across the land of this country. I do protest," he concluded, "against a measure like this, supported as it is by such evidence, and founded upon such calculations." The case of the other numerous petitioners against the bill still remained to be gone into. Witnesses were called to prove the residential injury which would be caused by the "intolerable nuisance" of the smoke and fire from the locomotives, and others to prove that the price of coals and iron would "infallibly" be greatly raised throughout the country. This was part of the case of the Duke of Bridgewater's trustees, whose witnesses "proved" many very extraordinary things. The Leeds and Liverpool Canal Company were so fortunate as to pick up a witness from Hetton who was ready to furnish some damaging evidence as to the use of Stephenson's locomotives on that railway. This was Mr. Thomas Wood, one of the Hetton Company's clerks, whose evidence was to the effect that the locomotives, having been found ineffective, were about to be discontinued in favor of fixed engines. The evidence of this witness, incompetent though he was to give an opinion on the subject, and exaggerated as his statements were afterward proved to be, was made the most of by Mr. Harrison when summing up the case of the canal companies. "At length," he said, "we have come to this--having first set out at twelve miles an hour, the speed of these locomotives is reduced to six, and now comes down to two or two and a half. They must be content to be pulled along by horses and donkeys; and all those fine promises of galloping along at the rate of twelve miles an hour are melted down to a total failure; the foundation on which their case stood is cut from under them completely; for the Act of Parliament, the committee will recollect, prohibits any person using any animal power, of any sort, kind, or description, except the projectors of the railway themselves; therefore I say that the whole foundation on which this project exists is gone." After farther personal abuse of Mr. Stephenson, whose evidence he spoke of as "trash and confusion," Mr. Harrison closed the case of the canal companies on the 30th of May. Mr. Adam replied for the promoters, recapitulating the principal points of their case, and vindicating Mr. Stephenson and the evidence which he had given before the committee. The committee then divided on the preamble, which was carried by a majority of only _one_--thirty-seven voting for it, and thirty-six against it. The clauses were next considered, and on a division, the first clause, empowering the company to make the railway, was lost by a majority of nineteen to thirteen. In like manner, the next clause, empowering the company to take land, was lost; on which Mr. Adam, on the part of the promoters, withdrew the bill.