Daniell then opened the case for the Birmingham and Gloucester Company’s Deviation line, and examined Mr. M. Pierpoint, who said that he believed this and the Tring line would be all that the citizens of Worcester would want, and would answer their interests better than the Oxford and Wolverhampton line. Mr. W. Chamberlain and Mr. Robert Hardy, with Mr. Tombs, of Droitwich, were also examined by Mr. Daniell. Mr. Cockburn then called witnesses in favour of the Great Western Company’s broad gauge projects: those from this county were Mr. James Boydell, Oak Farm Iron Works, Kingswinford; Mr. Jonathan Fardon, Stoke Works; Rev. W. H. Cartwright, Dudley; Mr. Paul Matthews, Stourbridge; Mr. John Hill, Mr. Alderman Edward Evans, Mr. William Lewis (Mayor), Mr. Henry Webb, Mr. Leader Williams, of Worcester; and Mr. T. A. Foster, of Evesham. After the committee had sat twenty days, they reported that they found the preamble of the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway and of the Oxford and Rugby lines, proved: and those of the railways promoted by the London and Birmingham not proved, with the Birmingham and Gloucester Deviation line. They evidently came to this decision from a belief that the broad gauge lines were so planned as best to answer the wants of the districts through which they passed, and that the public favour had been generally accorded them on that ground. The avowed intention of the Great Western Company to carry out a line to Port Dynllaen, had also probably some influence with the committee. The greatest excitement prevailed during the whole of the inquiry—no change of ministry ever created greater in the lobbies of the House—and the result seemed to be very unexpected, as shares in the Tring line went up considerably a day or two before the decision was given. The committee were occupied some days longer in considering the clauses of the Oxford Company’s Bill, and gave the Birmingham and Gloucester Company power to use the loop line at Worcester, at a remuneration to be fixed by umpires. It being known that the London and Birmingham Company intended to oppose the Oxford Bill in the House, petitions in favour of that line were sent up from Worcester, Droitwich, Dudley, Blockley, and Chipping Camden. Lord Ingestre moved that the report on the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway Bill be brought up. Mr. Pakington seconded the motion. Mr. Cobden moved, as an amendment, that an address be presented to Her Majesty to appoint a commission to inquire into the comparative merits of the broad and narrow gauges. Colonel Wood seconded the amendment; which, after much debate, was lost by 247 to 113, and the Oxford Railway Bill was read a second time. Its triumph was hailed with great rejoicings in this county. The bill had a comparatively easy passage through the House of Lords, though strenuously opposed in committee by the London and Birmingham Company, and on the 4th of August it received the royal assent.