The Sun. — London, England, 1845-03-17 00:00:00

~, of is tpeh aille e r the e s] , #, is certai nly he !s tions for e these fkre4':,i, the pupil 111;rdl sense n u . ) 0 0;17 p e rfect de Besor- ''ost i ; the° itti, ens 00 , 1 ,10° m ost c a c arrYl"▪ e pro ?rfec r ti.v. i n _ ° a v r e t i c ie the t he,' 'n w irer; ( d n di with OP, : o i e sin jus tl Y,:d ' et, f,rv• l er es - • e m iplo' dine or fr i)/1/0 v v•I. I' o o r LS. • to' ificeo co p , d . s map r the forth'" lofo,,ri„i‘ row a i in .0011 I ustrate roe .0 volumes. b of sri fect triull3P beautiful. ,• e 14 A B° v ----- RAIL WAY IN TELLIGENCE. No. 147. London and Brighti.n—Dorking branch ; and No. 214. South- Eastern—Reigate and Dorking branch. REP TIT Mg, OF THE RAILWAY DEPARTMENT OF BOARD OP TRADE ON SCHEMES FOR ACILITATING THE APPROACH TO THE METROPOLIS. If the atmospheric system of propulsion .should prove suc cessful and deserving of further adoption, it would seem to be better suited than the locomotive system of traction to the nature of this section of country. The whole question of railway communication with Dorking may be temporarily po;tponed without any inconvenience, and if hereafter the atmospheric system should prove available, the line from Epsom to Dorking, projected upon that principle, would appear to be the best adapted for supplying the wants of Dorking and its vicinity, without incurring the expense of making so many additional miles of railway. This Epsom line would be the shortest route from Dorking to London. The gradients are very severe, but not more severe than are encountered on some other lines to which we have not thought it necessary to object, nor yet too severe to admit f its construction as a locomotive line. It must, however, be a bad locomotive line, and in the possible event of failure of the atmospheric principle, it may be well at a future time to consider, whether a good locomotive line to Reigate, giving means for communication between Dorking and Brighton, or Dover, might not be more to the advantage of Dorking than a bad locomotive line to Epsom, giving indeed a supe rior access to London, but wanting the other advantages here alluded to. . . . Railway Department, Board of Trade, Whitehall, March 13, 1845. co ll.. Board constituted by Minute of the Lords of the courattee of Privy Council for Trade, for the transaction of iailwaY g had under consideration the follow fl4l,.schernes depotted with the Railway Department for Mating railway communications with the metropolis, viz. srnoiNl‘and Dorking G rosveno r,s iz• .1 • . L E o p 70 .. 83 Great.al wa, estern, Uxbridge, and Staines Junction ... 94 / .‘ ,.n and Brighton—Wandsworth Branch ........ 1 1 3 2 6 6 R., LoCmon and Croydon —Dorking Branch ndon and Bric.liton—Dorking Branch tendon and South-Western—Epsom Branch l5O A "clop & South -Western—Metropolitan Extension 166 tan Central Junction 164 Q e u timond and West-end Junction South_ th London and Windsor astern Branch—Reigate to Dorking 214 gotaities and Richmond , • • • aa3 sut:tiiii'lastern—Extension of Greenwich Railway ..- Lave -L astern—Widening of ditto for th det ermined on submitting the following report thereon , e co nsideration of Parliament. we 'n our report upon the Kentish and South-Eastern Rail- of 3 sc hetnes, we had occasion to point out the advantage the Proposed central terminus in the southern quarter of brid metropolis, at or near the Hungerford Suspension viz. ge• In several of the schemes embraced in this report, Lona . it'on and South-Western—Metropolitau Extension ; s ß t i a c i t n s on a d od ai ß id ie N b ir i nt i - it e i n ; d Junction; t'.9ficloa and Brighton—Wandsworth Branch; and thaeletropolitan Central Junction ; I ' t sPot is equally proposed for a terminus. pi aci a PPears to us that there is a manifest advantage in torunnag.a terminal station of this importance in the hands of iti e 4l m es haying large interests entrusted to their manage depe",;(rd whose permanent prosperity must, more or less. than upon their consulting the public convenience, rather ereat, in t giving it to any small independent company, whose !tati o T,'',,P r ofit might probably be derived from the use of tan 11" - ".)! other companies, and who might thus have an 11" k e i nlent to turn the possession of it to undue advantage. bett er es this, the safety of persons using the line ma . be ta tt ' i nsured if the arrangements are suited to the require tl4,,,,t(lthe long traffic, which cannot, from the nature of • tila i r' u e Conducted with the same punctuality, as regards ap,„ r rival of t ra i ns, as the traffic may be which is conducted 1 ,, the s horter lines. spo t reasons have influenced us in forming our opinion !eta ethe Proposed Metropolitan Extension of the London Its ~ t 7 th-Western R a il way, w h ere b y it i s soug ht t o tran s f er rtit r ot ion with th e metropo li s f rom Ni ne - e l ms to a more Veatal c a nd convenient s p o t near t o H un gerford-bridge. The giv e jost of this extension, in proportion to its length, has m ust l i:triength to the reasons above stated; since the outlay . 1 1 re ad :j'ess an object, proportionally, to a wealthy compa . ny d epend' 41 operation than it would be to any snort and in la pre ent line to be constructed, and where the capital sunk Part vi ding such a terminus would constitute a very large °f it - A _ s entire outlay. 4 .l 7 l ;aietrepolitan terminus in the central spot in question %Insi,, l , : the hands of the South-Eastern and South-Western 4 vair a ic'es might be, and doubtless would be, made fully 'ho le i l l e for the use of shorter lines, and especially when Or Rh'r of ! or lines will be, in other respects, tributaries to one i l .e tte those two companies. ap p ale, therefore, of opinion that, if Parliament should be Lt the" tO sanction the establishment of a railway station to.- central spot in question, there are not any public Ir °llB foe Withholding its assent to the London and South 4tero B T he it l etropolitan Extension. t° for m ' e hMond and West-end Junction Railway is intended i cklOb r r a a iunction with the South-Western Railway at Fal iotilift. t l i e t i about four miles from that terminus, whence the ( 11 ) ,.., e taken on the rails of that company to Hunger iiy lo p. itakoPis R ichmonignd 'West-end Junction Railway, and l e o var it: ° :Lation, the Richmond and Staines Railway, a . very ,„. 4 doi l ''''"us outlet will be provided for the population of L - tit b e , 0 places of favourite resort, while accommodation . 7tyre.,„g l l en to a considerable local traffic already existing Z 4. then many populous villages along the line and Lon . ff ,' `.' ground through which these two lines will be 'Nati 1 ' tlearlv level throughout ; the works will conse- Ndety4h.elighi and comparatively iaexpensive, and the cost h_ 14 ° 1 1:1 1 1 4 . 118 of the existing traffic along the line and the iwt tts "LrafE, ~ together, it can hardly be doubted that the gil't6 of these two railways will yield an adequate return : . , ?k ie- cet P u i_ ri ta .ds l s o u n nk w i h .n ie t h h "r formation. We therefore see no e tc. ' object to their construction. i i i .oi at training two schemes proposing to have their ter fr un gerford-bridge, and of which we have been able '4 S, favourable opinion, are— ' ileandsworth Branch of the London and Brighton ellw ay, ;Ile; Me tropolitan Central Junction Railway. *L3' fr oul rst . o t f these proposes the construction of a new rail ?Zee th.`„„ne Brighton line at Croydon to Wandsworth, sir Brighton trains would come forward on the rails sly '`" - Western Company to Nine-elms and Hunger ' \i'h• t dge. t ile b 'le w righ t - admit the importance of a west -end terminus for , traffic, there does not appear to he any de f l h e i d s th:)grea"antage to be secured by the construction o . _ A , rater than will be attained through the extension of 4 7 , 48 toltEastern Company's branch from the Bricklayers' 4 e1„ . t....,.,.'b ‘ , 111 ?5e . rf0rd-bridge. The loca . l traffic to be accom raoe line n 1S comparatively insin!ticant. ttTiep tti w ° ll ld not provide the frighten Company with oe, 4 anent terminus, which, in the ca . se of an extensi . % tit t lt; TO object deserving of some sacrifice for its attain tlialos nf !Y i _would simply exchange the possibly crowded tiall'ott he South. Eastern for that equally crowded of t t h - W .: .. t % et , estern Company, while, owing to the arrangee tedon It '?hed last year, by which the local traffic of th • lik t , - "vork„ a ,l l w, ay will be conducted in future on separate 1 161,;„°4- 4 ;r 1 uy the atmospheric system, and the two present til i cer tiZ t ?f that railway will be . rendered entirely avail -11,0111, ur ough-traffic, there will be less chance of inter . tellitot;:aPProaching London than would be the case if the p ..o rti ti „ r Lil l ; il, I 1, Wandsworth according to the proposed arrangement, were *t'i b ety ° , - v'andsworth over the rails . of the South Western , Ilk t hat already encumbered with their own traffic and k e ltig, th q the proposed Richmond and Staines lines. As , 41 1 , 44 shal e i r k e fOre. that the Croydon and South-Eastern Com ,''Lk h ais ',ue willing to accommodate the lirighton traffic er t ;,` is e , - ;,e tennis, the only effect, so far as the public in- Nii, b 6 ea)""rned, would be, that two capitals would be PICLY well mink in order to perform the work that may be N l : l 4t prinlePerformed by one; thus violating should of be the il 4h oi'i (41. Iples by which these questions g ' t e l t f es i 4 1 : e : e companies afford such accommodation as it , 1 / 4 - -iiik t •e:,.or their interest to do, upon moderate terms, ,i t itite zt pan thus created would not be productive of any kiii' N lit4 a ,utage to the Brighton Company, who would 7%, bq t he toll to the South-Eastern and Croydon Com- It Litli, t i ll order to do so must expend a sum, the interest iolilAtll,7l(sether with the toll they would have to pay to 1 11 tat t 'j stern Company, would probably equal the full th at a av i nz o'4 guns appear -. to us conclusive against this pro ' zKet i . I l i tt'‘ay„. °Milian Central Junction is an independent • 'qe t Eoli ' llt ended to connect all the great lines of railway • ' se lt qh tl - 1 s ide of the Thames with a central terminus on . tk a id ile r s'e at , a, Hungerford bridge, crossing for that pure ges, and joining the South-Western Railway at t bkrtita. • t h;:tow,, ,*4-tant,,--fe.r,this scheme to be uncalled for . at . present by e 11 1 %ill th e Public, and that its prosecution might pro NN eX Pend't • 4 pe„,,,, e i tne of capital. . , zs tt6 ea t w oo! Railway is likewise put forward as an in ."'e t_ -° Witi,'''''K ; its termini are at Pimlico and at a klkiri ldo .-‘ the Brighton Railway near Godstone, 14 unites • ,„ 14 e,„te * er n ,: line which thus requires the erection of L'ilt"„ t 4t '," the Thames, must necessarily be of expen i74:,:liet7'4l, and would require a strong case of public and"tit • ` a .iustify its adoption. No such case has been t ht I no' l4el eed nobody has appeared before us to advocate k 1 . 4 41 t 4 , t , t k e aTht has been made to show in what manner , 4 l'i, a ,.: '0 supported if made. 11 1 4 4 r t, ' to Us that no public reasons exist why it should ' I N t ok l e t t k e d• 4 '4 rt leet u , L ondon and Windsor Railway, also an indepen- N, h t in Lad; like the last-mentioned scheme, not been Zi -4 W pa wax under our notice, further than by the N, . I t 78 and sections, and the publication of a pros -1,1;11 4 or i t , ° e* not appear that any company has been t.,_ revilien-teonstruction. . . 4 0 . wh,,. ‘ i l t : iii,wt ,_ lre e isitt f oeity. l be f e r r c idn m b; a ,n n examination of the plans that the must cvrih .et branches, right e very expensive. It would run NI. ''' ' 'ecupied part of the town between Blackfriars Dulwich, h to Southwark-bridge, a am and left, to Kennington, tstil'etild"' Brixton ir Of •,,_ tal,, i h ettt ''s le t t he same direction, and occupy for a great gLe!1(1 an gth aearly the same site as the Richmond and kL - ‘cli;,Mea t t ioll, and Staines and Richmond lines. Leav ti:k t l atilt Windsor, distance to the left, it would turn off to 't h ,7ll:ull foot ltt:rne g. Zf i the little park between Windsor Castle and Nt western totker branches are proposed to the Hammer tb 14 11 44 "tern I ‘evf, to Hampton Court, and to join e h•Lkhe itte Railway at Slough. '54C5 th at . is such an aspect of extravagance upon ukr, It it is dim o, l Sito h ay i, colt to conceive upon what prospect of q'q4h, l Q grope put forward. We consider that there 1 / 4 ty ;114:4:4,544:11.:hte, B :i sdt e lv ur why r i i t d should g j u not receive the sanction of ion Railway is promoted klOir,: t erta a Junction with the Great Western Railway at 44 Ititi. bra station, connecting Staines on the one ' 14 -11. ) i: Th e T l ge on the other, by about eight miles of i et give, Shiresbu Te would be easy of construction, and not . 1 4 1 ~e this respect would have no advantage Ne°vid e and Richmond line, while this latter . p t iii,',_ l'ailw„ accommodation for a larger population, Llitr?ti ~.,`Y,,faties to Twickenham, Teddington, `qto 1 %11 - "a tit t oti ag6B, thianipton Court, Sunbury, and numero t ( NOtti eti „, inhabitants of which will thus be brought #tlu, es i t ,,„,. nth the heart of London, while the population ' 11 1,• afr 0 .7 .. ,' , will have a vastly superior London terminus ra, RI 1., th t t tian a •••Y the Great Western Company at Pad -4 olitk e tion a k„ctiv. Yof , second line to Staines, would be to sanction r5:..:..:11:,:44,;adt.tge5.h Second capital in order to render both unpro litilieies from, Staines to Hungerford-bridge ei `°f th e le r the t, ,c_itl tk a G reat reasons offered, to be superior re t s o a t a h n e Western Company, we . must . express 114f.,N1e 4 1 . 114(tek.. e r : N e orte gL en a f ;: ri s attaioinne a s n j d un R c i t e i h on in R on a d ilw li a n 3 e ,. is preferable p to t.. ttl ot a ppear to us to be any case to justify at of a second line to Epsom. That ;!0ti,4,..111 the ?Y the South -Western Company was brought , 4 1 4 ‘4 the Croydonl ssion of Parliament, and rejected, in "4 t c't bt and • th e So. 1 4 „open ftr , Epsom Atmospheric line, which t t 4t , Eti e i r ' Yaffic until the summer of the present . hyk ~a..w,„.4.o_PrPosition to the Croydon and Epsom line, t. :ve4 o l. itts'or`:!! Company proved that there was not t 4 tli w arred to than one railway, and nothing can since li .v atteh. ~,10111. liTriu:ngs:orowntih_bartitdhey were wrong in arriving at this L I :41m! t or- n e advants f Nit -,, osed e ge 0 a west-end terminus will also, lir tni,s 4 xtension of the Bricklayers' Arms r, as - iTO et)/ 1 ,,,, well as g b e y , t b h e at ob p ta re in p e o d sed by by th t e he C s ro e y a d t o h n . k il %4' South ex , tow ...I l itioti on - - nt which the Croydon and Epsom Company, t kt r Pr el)ari n with the London .rid Croydon Company, are DN. Nam gto cac he ri l , to u ,.. ed of ....-- _- out, is one which the Legislature % al aeh : to beb'stzn, ational importance, so that there ap : lioNes ef in e, the or c e, public reasons against sanctioning a 4 4 _ tt ie 1 ,,, e e t of which would be to endanger the ter h \Ve ti Ei r tlY l" gave so which Parliament, on special grounds, k :111 e ,,,P induce d i ! sanction. O i „ ti,,,,, : , the pon d the circumstance just mentioned to re so,u",, of i - ti 7l' nement to a future period, when the ex li, t f oll 'iltaii h av e i Atinospheric Railway from London to 4 0, 4% . i ,.. tig le b a e lt e s t: Put in execution, the consideration of °' 13 ,1 3°41 and viz. ona o , ~_ , .... . ing, • .od Cro ydori—Dorking branch. The South-Eastern Company having leased in perpetuity the Greenwich Railway, are desirous of extending and widening the line, with a view to give greater convenience and security to the public, and we have no public objections to offer to their proposals for that purpose. In conclusion, we beg to draw attention to the passage of the fifth report of the Select Committee of last year, in which it is stated, in recommending that reports should be made to Parliament by this department upon railway schemes, " That no such report should be held to prejudice the claims of:private persons, t4e examination of which should be altogether reserved to the Houses of the Legisla ture." In submitting to Parliament, in conformity with the re commendat.ons of that Committee, the results at which we have arrived, with a view to the information and assistance of Parliament in forming a judgment upon the schemes in question, so far as our report may be available for that purpose, we are anxious that it should be distinctly under stood that we have arrived at these results solely upon public grounds, and to the exclusion of all considerations how far such results might require to be modified by a due regard for private rights and interests. DALHOUSIE. C. W. PASLEY. G. R. PORTER. D. O'BRIEN. S. LAING. ch.) int hai Di set 04 the labourer, ices le„, iond, vve ' ,lief etor 0 • DOilbtieiS I V , bef 1 1 canilest ; wheel, its ftil' England,. the 1 b g PSI 0 a aril, i j 0 conifort---vm° itili rer's cheek, ad L 41,4 If him tbe ereci.l;"o,ol Pritnest WO h p ter eliiniants Of t„" e v i with the noble vitkrof, t stroke of pbilttow,,os Olessed wonders. o, Printing; with 51 )f steam, De igill,itiri lm for Vic MOO "0! ()f England', lill'i oil ble rem, frt 01,41.) is to (-trick tha t ¢? is gYptian tnagieie j, ,rely a boal o',i ins his beneroleslr d ddoso weariell nen AO lshing O i t a l $ s t b s t lOW '69 to See i tiblel pi se an. Ho i n s tarenriel , silver trurePeo,9 There i 3 no semi nis repOor„il mission, V the REPORT OF THE RAILWAY DEPARTMENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE ON THE TRENT VALLEY AND CHURNET VALLEY RAILWAY SCHEMES. Railway Department, Board of Trade, Whitehall, March 13, 1845. The Board constituted by Minute of the Lords of the Com mittee of Privy Council for Trade, for the transaction of Railway business, having had under consideration the Trent Valley and Churnet Valley Railway schemes, have deter mined on submitting the following report thereon for the consideration of Parliament : These lines may be considered as forming portions of one scheme for shortening the distance of the principal railway communications from the metropolis to Ireland, Scotland, Liverpool, Manchester, and the northern and north-western portions of the kingdom. The Trent Valley Railway com mences at Rugby and runs by Tamworth, Lichfield, and Rugeley to Stafford, thus cutting off the angle of the London and Birmingham and Grand Junction lines at Birmingham, and reducing the length of the journey from London to Liverpool and Holyhead, and by Carlisle to Scotland, by nine miles of actual distance. The proposed line is 494 miles in length, and its gradients are of a very favourable descrip • tion. The serious delay now experienced in passing through Birmingham will also be avoided; and, on the whole, we agree with the Commissioners, who reported in 1841 upon the communication with Ireland and Scotland, that a consi derable saving in point of time will be effected upon through traffic. The importance of this saving upon such great lines of communication has been fully recognised on former occa sions, and is too obvious to require comment. The intermediate district between Stafford and Rugby, including Tamworth, Lichfield, Rugeley, Atherstone, Nuneaton, and the towns along the old Holyhead road, will also derive great benefit from the railway, and being brought forward in connexion with the existing railway company interested in the great lines of communication referred to, may be considered as un opposed. The Churnet Valley Railway, together with the above line, and with the existing London and Birmingham and Manchester and Birmingham Railways, completes a line of railway communication between London and Manchester 19 miles shorter than the present one, and which is believed to be practically as short a line as any which can be made between the two points. Commencing at Macclesfield, to which place a branch from the Manchester and Birmingham line has been already sanctioned, the Churnet Valley line passes by Leek and Uttoxeter to a point four miles north west of Tamworth, where it joins the proposed Trent Valley line. From Uttoxeter a branch diverges to Willington, a point on the Birmingham and Derby line, within 6i miles of Derby. It will thus be seen, by reference to the map, that the Churnet Valley line presents the double advantage of uniting, by the shortest practicable lines, Manchester, the great ma nufacturing metropolis of the kingdom, with London, on the one hand, and on the other hand, with Derby, and through the existing and projected railways which centre there, with Nottingham, Leicester, Stamford, Peterborough, Cambridge, and the whole of the Midland and Eastern Counties. At the same time it will afford to Derby, and to the traffic centering there, the shortest outlet to Liverpool, Preston, and the north ; and be productive of much local advantage to the important manufacturing town of Macclesfield, containing a population of upwards of 50,000; to Leek, another manufac turing town, containing a population of 11,738 ; and to the towns of Cheadle, Uttoxeter, Rocester, &c., and the district along the line. The importance of such a line has been already recognised, and in 1836 a Committee of the House of Commons reported that "It has been established to the satisfaction of the Com mittee, that a line opening a communication from Manches ter and Liverpool, through the populous and growing towns of Stockport, Macclesfield, and Leek, to Derby, to Leicester, to Nottingham, and to London, is one highly desirable for the public interest, and highly deserving of favourable con sideration in a future session." Since that period the in crease of population in the manufacturing districts, and the development of traffic and opening out of new railways, have added greatly to the force of these arguments. It is true that by the construction of the Manchester and Birmingham line to Crewe, the objects mentioned by the Committee have been partially attained, and by the pro posed Trent Valley, in connexion with this line, the dis tance between London and Manchester would be reduced to 1881 miles, as compared with 179 miles by that of the Chur net Valley • and if this were the solo object, it might be questionable how far it would justify the construction of more than 50 miles of railway, of which a good deal is of a difficult and expensive character. But when we consider that not only Manchester but the surrounding district, com prising the towns of Bury, Bolton, Rochdale, Ashton, Old ham, Stockport, &c., and a mass of population of upwards of a million, actively engaged in the pursuits of manufacturing industry, will benefit by every reduction of distance in their principal communications; and also that the connexion of this district with the midland manufacturing district, and with the midland and eastern agricultural counties, from which it derives a large proportion of its supplies, would alone justify a railway to Derby, so that the portion of new line actually required for the purpose of completing the most direct communication with London is only 15 miles, it ap pears to us to be perfectly evident that there are sufficient public reasons to justify the construction of the line. By the reduction of the distance to 179 miles, the fare be tween London and Manchester, by the Parliamentary third class, established by the Act of last year, will be reduced to 15s. The time of the journey also by quick trains, under a proper system of combined management between London and Manchester, may, at the rate of travelling which is now established upon several railways, be reduced to 5i or 6 hours, so as to admit of the possibility of a person leaving Manchester in the morning, transacting business in London, and returning the same evening. The traffic which may be expected to pass over a line which combines so many important objects may reasonably be ex pected to afford an adequate remuneration on the capital re quired, although, as we have already observed, parts of the line are of an expensive character. The traffic tables sub mit ted to us also show a probability of a sufficient income ; and being in alliance with the other companies whose lines will form portions of the direct London and Manchester, and Manchester and Derby routes, a further security is afforded for the due development of the traffic and for the line being efficiently worked. The promoters of the Churnet Valley line have further de posited plans for a continuation of their line from Tamworth to Rugby, to meet the contingency of the Trent Valley line not being sanctioned; but as the Trent Company were first in the field, and have a preferable claim, founded on ex penses incurred on former occasions; as the traffic which will pass over their line towards Liverpool and Ireland will probably be greater than that over the Churnet line towards Manchester; and as the Trent Company offer to accede to any reasonable provisions for securing the unimpeded transit upon fair terms of the Churnet traffic over their line, it appears to us that they are fairly entitled to the possession of the integral line from Rugby to Stafford, and that the Churnet line should only be sanctioned up to the point north of Tamworth, where it leaves the direction of the Trent line. The Alrewas branch of the Trent Valley scheme would have been very useful in diminishing the distance between Manchester and Derby, had not a more direct route been afforded by the Churnet line. This however being the case, there hardly appears to be at present any sufficient object to justify the construction of this branch, although being only 71 miles in length, and of an easy character, it would not be expensive. The accommodation of the Potteries, by means of branches, also forms a part both of the Trent and Churnet Valley schemes. The latter proposes a branch from Stoke to near Leek, and the former a branch from near Stafford to Stoke, where it is proposed to meet a line promoted by the Grand Junction Company from their line at Crewe. The branch from Stoke to Leek would afford an outlet both towards Manchester and Derby, and although it might not be suf ficient in itself for the complete accommodation of the Pot teries district, and should not be allowed to interfere with any other scheme proposed for that object, it will afford a certain amount of accommodation, and we are aware of no public reason why it should not be sanctioned. The other line of the Trent Valley Company, from Stafford to Stoke, would form, in conjunction with the proposed branch of the Grand Junction Company, a scheme for the accommodation of the Potteries, so far complete, that in the event of its being sanctioned, there would be no likelihood of any other scheme for that purpose being brought forward. Considering that the scheme was originally proposed with a view to the accommodation of the Potteries district, as the result of some understood arrangement with the principal Potteries' interests, and that those interests now object to it, and urge that the whole question should he postponed until another year, to afford time for consideration, and for matur ing some more complete scheme for the accommodation of that important district, it appears to us, without expressing any opinion upon the merits of the projected line, that, under these circumstances, we are justified in recommending its postponement. With these exceptions, we are not aware of any objections, upon public grounds, that can be urged against the Trent and I Churnet Valley schemes, which are recommended, as we have already seen, by such obvious and important public considerations. _ . 1" . , rok i shat ore tbel,.+:lo9 1 -compelling o°oo i ) sooner 30Eerie., rouse a ro c re, i f away 111_..81A10, 1 ; balm to tbot 1, 7: o r i lecrotaancy of tveboli° • imagination f°,1.010, the Freetnasons , 0 0 1 .. opo r.l ey separab- ~,,..t- 0 ayes --50n0,074 olico, Lew raiaieutcvoi fireless beorlb+ tiogl his face, and lill'iroleu ,s smile ot tbe rpollict nt magic liestioe "i, Or ie Lsbotiol • i., the eountil• , _beffil ?r fails to raseeT,:o V., gifts it i Piro ST 1 leo- asel,4oly, b,,,, 0 e o w i '' take heart. noidloo; gut then, doe } ot nirlescension 0. nd. i 10°0 0( ! It is yo cod $ ; or night you Op% Yifi thOUght; CPO. 0 1, Withering "1000;1 * and I°U Of V {.° lig, it 004, lesl, •or ht ; necerOje } 0 ~,,,, ke an ulif _.`lo, 14'-' I London tAno /1”. of Riehoend Itt I. a ' 4 . 1141tvj union , , 400., ✓ brain w+P eniole granite gr 01,,,, As the Lbourer+, i 0 V sick ; it ills!:e1+1, rosh.re ; iv tbypie ei are COO 4 .It° 9 1 rself and sore' 4 01.54 ✓ wretch ! „'.ll,'j 3 to trielge..flii+it :bridge WO°, gt;el.4 rinter air. oulot ,i, 'r an order _. l jog oj4 lg, it is siebderob to;ii i call upon e tretj Igin ; it +a cell bid r) our wife e 0 lir o f ryi Ike heart 1 13400.. t,O hold upon 1 ley, l M ,15--nli thilt Clirietidit, Lurrahs Sea fiiii ion, tbef d r; .. l • Xiiir" U are Jost tiii ,If oil f it fortahle ger iiio 0 search of Or 1 0 , 7ing frord th° ti°,loo,o ne(...—bnt the °Ol,, 9 ,r sent to 0.4 clj, y s. an Are o°_,,f'ogeP; le youtlismieot ell 'from you, ofi,` 11)1,0 01 ou shiver, P odif i makes 3°o e4all' ;ng garruef i j• raiment o tots ~,,ra on ; bat yott, 0,0 ),,,01 ,ore tracelline 4 fitly ,y side 110'1'1,6.: 0 fo! 1,11;1,4 ;oil fight filfr'e 1,10 ppe rent d with t 1 ; 1 tb01„ IV t visit yOO,lO ,11" 01 cal connolon,!,,11„. 0109; ' oar ears. +++`",t,o, ,lio are not forgo, ..3 0,,,„ qi humanity,. prOlife stSI4IIIV fp you 00; *6 bed,▪ num 0;4 rs you. ovu v 4 ,e ono your lioreech ;tillr. You hove Vet lf,gl 's cold. 11 s A d reel) of death 1°,00; j 1 1l e pauper,' 141;0,4 words that he r-16 fleap of ClOl.-it;:s., ,laZonfeentS rit9; to Oki s to ti.ibeg, dui for 1/ hthe coofOrtrio, ' b' cl; '' .rinkft be +0 00010 the Vbeio' t i, s+ i it the b _.fsfett j nlnke Oleo bcold.r Cantwell 0 • • ) ..... -- /,. 1 colif ie. -sot r 1, ft e last egeS, s oti'le relsting to ihne,,,isgo," to London. 'oe 410 at. at Brisoltorvi yea (too ‘'ls r 0:1t$ lour. itnotbe § „4 u the altero.t.h°l#l€9" ;ttletdent, rilb A ercurv. i t ile )e -been adae,l t;:1111, est Britain. e ost.offi,e of , foll‘," l'ost-office .r. to VI rs betweeo ''' trek e of t oir twin Franc col . tain and her 41 Greeco„, v ogl :;"' 111$ tiOrTS At, j 00; (!) to state,kiir )licatio gt"i ,idl il the 60c,0„ oiAl 'fish translotlPooo,49 eokly billiudootli' ,llers And ee"' K NS Stls.atir,rie:orfer n, of Greot i'- eV 0 , , 0 Tie got o.sl, I ROOIOCe, ;,111:0601r s of Poris; h co 0,/,:iiV svo., whic , o , jio) , rlburn bas ,10(0,0;" 'els : 9..55100°4 untess of .10v1: , iy Ilenrii_r,: o , flgf tile"f r"CI If ' OA° 6 O l e . di, 1e....-Atia ' o door air 0.1",0rPc0,0, ii, 0/0 4 ,a by ueo: , foe er works, 01 ' i • it lir 1 r eveolo , p 14, ifiquestlfertior,V ;edertel.., ,r, IoY of )17-,„ 4 9: nwall. _Asrat:,,eo, ek, was I`oo re, which eiscoe!,,, , the °4' (0040140 e control. hc;s.,4 ,i ,fence that r p:4' Di 7. The i l .tle oe, °N 11 the a1015..11 ,he loge 11 Jle died °tl The only parties who have appeared before us as objectors to the Churnet line are the Grand Junction Railway Com pany, who contend that it would create an injurious and un necessary competition with existing lines for the traffic from Manche:=ter to the south. This argument, however, is met by the rcumstance that the other companies principally in terested in the Manchester and London traffic, viz., the Man chester and Birmingham, the Trent Valley, and the London and Birmingham, do not object to the Churnet Valley Com pany, but, on the contrary, are in alliance with it ; while the Grand Junction Company, whose line is principally a line for Liverpool, Irish, and northern traffic, do not appear to, be in a position which can entitle them to advance any objections, on public grounds, to the construction of a direct line between Manchester and London. In the absence of any such ob jections, it appears unnecessary for us to dwell at greater length upon the arguments in favour of this and of the Trent Valley line already referred to or to enter more fully upon TIIE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY MORNING, MARCH 17, 1848. N. . 1. New Railway to be made— Chains , . Calt,dorkin trunk line frem Carlisle to point of diverge nee at Carnwath Point of divergence to Edinburgh Diito to Wishaw and Coltness Railway l2 10 CasCc Cary Branch Duuu'rles Branch Minor Junctions, &c. comparison of gradients upon two lines, without refer ence to their peculiar circumstances. "In the £rst place, the distribution of the gradients is a fact °qui of much more iminxtance. than their abso lute inclination. "A line of an undulating character, with steep but short gudients, alternately rising and falling, may worked at as much a•lvantage as one where tin inclines, although less steep, are of greater continuance. On the other hand, where the inclination of the line is concentrated upon one or two gradients of such length and severity that assistant power is required at any rare, it may be comparatively unimportant whether such gra dients are a few feet in the mile more or less. In This way lines which have gradients of 1 in 70 or 1 in 80, distributed over them in short lengths, may.bo positively better lines, i. e. more susceptible of cheap and expedi • tious working, than others which have nothing steeper than 1 in 100 or 1 in 120. Total of Caledonian .. Clydesdale Junction.. ..136 57 .. 10 56 147 33 IL Existing railway, forming pert of the system— Miles. Chatni. Wishaw and Coitness line, and portion of blonlilan 1 and Kirkintilloch Gardl,irk asd Glas-ow 8 20 Polloc ani Govan (forming part of Clydesdale line) Total of Existing Railway " Another important consideration with reference to gradients is the nature of the traffic. It may be con ceded that although gradients of 1 in 50 or 1 in 100 may be perfectly surmountable by the locomotive en gine, they in x olve a certain less of power as compared to lines of less inclination. Total of Caledonian System 169 35 Tiis system would afford a very complete railway communication from - Glasgow, Edinburgh, and the North of Scotland, to all parts of England, with the ex ception of the eastern portion, the communication with which may be assumed to be already supplied by the East Coast line. " Where the traffic is of such a heavy nature, that the full, or nearly the full power of the locomotive engine is rendered available with the ordinary trains, any increase in the inclination must require extra power and extra expense ; and therefore, up to a certain point. increased original outlay in improving gradients may become pro ductive of eventual economy ; alio, where high speed and great punctuality are very important, as upon a long line, forming a link in a very extended communication, good gradients, if attainable at any moderate outlay, may be very desirable. But in the ordinary circumstances of a line dependent not so much on a heavy through-traffic, which can be concen trated upon a few trains a day, as upon a local traffic, requiring frequent and light trains stopping at nume rous stations, it appears perfectly well established that, in a commercial point of view, it is unwise to enlarge, beyond a certain point, the original outlay for the sake of arriving at perfection in gradients. Such a small pro portion only of the total cost of working is dependent, under such circumstances, upon gradients, that the in- I terest upon any considerable additional outlay is far more than equivalent to any possible saving in working expenses. The interest upon the extra cost of construc tion, occasioned by a slight improvement in gradients, would often be sufficient to defray not merely the addi tional, but the total cost of locomotive power upon the line of inferior gradients. " Experience seems also to establish that under these circumstances, 1. e. of a large local traffic, with frequent trains, light loads, and numerous stoppages, the traffic may be conducted not only with far gr, ater economy to the Company, but also without loss of speed or other in convenience to the public. A remarkable instance of this is afforded by t':e working of the traffic between Oldham and Manchester, which has to pass over inclines of 1 in 59, 1 in 48, and 1 in 27 for two miles, the whole distance being seven miles, and the gradient for the re maining five miles lin 150. Ten trains are run each way carrying, on the average, 1,200 passengers and 3.00 tons of goods per day, at an average speed of twenty-two miles per hour. The working of the North Union, New castle and Carlisle, and other lines, also affords a proof, that with light trains the effect of steep gradients on speed is very limited. The experience of the cases above quoted appears also sufficient to show that gra dients ranging from 1 in 100 up to 1 in 50, or even a higher inclination, may be worked under ordinary cir cumstances with perfect safety." To apply these views to the case before us—it is evi dent that the long ascent on the Caledonian line, of 14 miles at an average inclination of 1 in 97, cannot be con sidered as impracticable. It would, however, require in most cases the aid of an assistant engine, in order to ensure the passing of trains with tolerable speed and punctuality. This would involve some expense as com pared with a line capable of being worked without such assistant power, and also some loss of time, since the ascent, even with the aid of an assistant engine, could not be expected to be surmounted at the average speed upon a moderate gradient, nor could the whole time lost in the ascent be regained in descending on the other aide. The c&mpeting system proposes to attain the same general objects in the following manner :- 1. By the proposed Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle line, in connexion with the existing Glasgow and Ayre line, giving a western line of communication from Glas gow to England. 2. By a line from Edinburgh to Hawick, which the promoters offer to pledge themselves to continue to Car lisle, giving a communication from Edinburgh to die West of England and the manufacturing districts. 3. By the Glasgow Junction Railway, intended to connect by an unbroken communication the Edinburgh and Glasgow, and railways north of the Clyde, with the Glasgow and Ayr, and Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle. This system would consist of the following parts: — I. New Railway to be made— Niles. Chains, Glasgow, Dumfries and Carlisle, from Kil marnock to Carlisle Line from Carlisle by Ilaw•ick, to junction with the Edinburgh and Dalkeith Railway, about Glasgow Junction 178 46 IT. Existing Railways forming part of the system 111i les, Portion of Glasgow and Ayr Railway, from Kil marnock to Glasgow Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway 46 Edinburgh and Dalkeith It is quite clear that the traffic from Scotland to the south would not be sufficient at present to support two competing systems ; and that if the one be sanctioned, the other, or so much of the other as directly competes with it, must be reji cted. In this point of view, the Caledonian, and the Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle lines, are absolutely inconsistent with each other ; nei. t her could the Caledonian, and a trunk line from Edin burgh to Cal lisle, by way of Hawick, stand together, although a line for the mere purposes of local accom modation between Edinburgh and llawick, would not interfere with the traffic crf the Caledonian line, and would not necessarily be inconsistent with it. The Clydesdale line, although a material part of the Caledonian system, has a local traffic of its own, and would not necessarily be included in the rejection of that system. So also the Glasgow Junetiot , although a part of the system opposed to the Caledonian, might, if a suf ficient case of public advantage were otherwise esta blished to overrule the objections of a private and local nature to which we have alluded, be sanctioned. notwith standing the rejection of the system of which it formed a part. Having thus explained the two competing systems,'we proceed to investigate their comparative merits. The leading public objects which it appears to us to be important to keep in view are,- 1. The traffic of Glasgow (including the district of which it is the centre) with Liverpool, Manchester, Lon don, and the rest of England. 2. The traffic of Scotland, north of the Forth and Clyde, with same places. 3. The traffic of Edinburgh (and its district) with Liverpool, Manchester, and the west of England (the traffic with London and the east of England being as sumed to be sufficiently provided for by the East Coast line.) 4. The traffic of Edinburgh and the east of Scotland with Dumfries and the south west. 5. The local accommodation of the southern counties of Scotland not already provided with railway commu nication by the Berwick line. Assuming, for the sake of comparison, each system to be carried out completely, the advantages would appear to be divided. For the first of the above objects, via. the connexion of Glasgow with England, the Caledonian system is pre. ferable, as giving a shorter line by 23 miles. In order to obtain this diminution of distance, the Caledonian line, however, has to pass the range of hills which runs across the south of Scotland at a higher level than the Dumfries line, and to attain the requisite elevation by gradients of great severity. It becomes necessary, therefore, to examine the nature of these gra dients more in detail, in order to ascertain how far the advantage of the Caledonian, as a trunk line, in actual distance, may be neutralised by the character of its in clinations. The principal ascent on the Caledonian line is on the south-side of the range. From Beattock to the summit of the Clyde pass, the ascent in 13 miles 77 chains is 760 feet, or at an average inclination of 1 in 97, which is surmounted by the fallowing gradients : Miles. Chains. 1 in 200 ......... for 1 in 100 1 in 80 ......... for 1 in 75 ......... for 5 42 . On the rest of the line the gradients, though in parts rather severe, are not of un extraordinary character, having nothing steeper than 1 in 100. On the Dumfries line, the steepest gradient is 1 in 100 ; but at this inclination there is a continued plane i f s rom l oc u k p t o o n the bo s t u h mm lin it s th t e h a e ve c r u a r g i of four miles ; and for 1 6 m il es toget h er, i n ris i ng in 154. e xceptionable. • e e cures ar are inclination u n . The question of gradients enters so materially into a comparison of these lines, that we think it right to subjoin the following passage from one of our previous reports, in which our views upon the subject are fully stated " G RADIENTS. —As thequestion of gradients and curves enters as an important element into the consideration of these and many other schemes, it may be well that we should here state the views by which we have been guided in forming a judgment. " Discarding all merely theoretical considerations, we have approached the subject in a practical point of view, referring to the actual experience of existing railways as the sole test of what is admissible in regard to future ones. " And first in regard to gradients. " The improvements that have taken place in the con struction of the locomotive engine have greatly enlarged the standard of its capabilities. Not many years ago, anything steeper than 1 in 200 was looked upon as a de cidedly objectionable feature in a line, and enormous expense was incurred in avoiding gradients of steeper inclination. " The difference of expense in construction between a line with first-class gradients, as it was called, i. e. none steeper than 1 in 200, and one with second class gradients ranging up to 1 in 100, was frequently not less than 10,000!., or oven 30,000/. per mile. The London and Birmingham Great Western and Brighton lines, for iestance, averaging above 50,0001. per mile, while the Grand Junction and London anti South Western did not exceed from 20,000!. to 25,000/. Experience has fully proved that no saving either in time or economy of work ing, has been attained at all commensurate to this enor mous additional outlay of capital. Indeed, in many cases, cheaply-constructed lines have been worked at an equal or less expenditure fur locomotive power, and at as high an average velocity as lines constructed at twice the expense. " This is so universally admitted, that such gradients as were formerly thought objectionable are now adopted every day as a matter of course, and as the capabilities of the locomotive have been enlarged, gradients of a class which would have been considered a few years ago altogether impracticable, have come into general use. " It is important to ascertain, by reference to actual practice, the results which have been a'ready arrived at, and which must be taken as starting points to guide us in the consideration of any new scheme. " The Lickey incline, on the Birmingham and Glou cester Railway, is a conclusive proof that a gradient of 1 in 371 for a length of 2 miles 3 chains may be worked by the aid of an engine constructed for the pur pose, without serious inconvenience to an extensive traffic. It is also proof that such an incline may be descended without danger by the force of gravity, rep lsted by the action of breaks. " The Sutton' incline of 1 in 88, on the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, is surmounted by the ordinary trains of that railway, whose traffic is of a very heavy description, with a single locomotive engine. " On the Newcastle and Carlisle line, an incline of 1 in 106 for 4 miles consecutively, is surmounted by the ordinary trains without difficulty or delay. " The use of a stationary engine for ascending the in cline on the Manchester and Leeds Railway, from the Victoria station, which is 1 in 59 for 1,000 yards. and 1 in 49 for 640 yards, has been in a great measure discon tinued, the ordinary engines being found capable of taking up it heavy passenger and goods trains of not h ss than 80 tons weight. " On the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway, stationary power has likewise been discontinued, the locomotive engine being found a more efficient and economical substitute on the Glasgow incline of 1 in 42 for 11 miles ; and recently the locomotive engine has been equally substituted for stationary power upon the in clined plane of the London and Birmingham Railway, from the Euston- square terminus to Camden-town, parts of which are at 1 in 66 and 1 in 75. " Many other facts of a similar nature might be quoted, but the above seem quite sufficient to establish the general proposition, — " I. That gradients of from 1 in 50 to 1 in 100, are perfectly practicable to the ordinary locomotive engine, with moderate loads. " 2. That gradients up to 1 in 37 or higher, may be surmounted by heavy trains, with the aid of an as. sistant engine of peculiar construction. " The application of these facts requires much discri mination. Nothing can be more fallacious than a mere The comparison, however, does not lie betwetween this portion of the Caledonian Railway and a line nearly level, for the Dumfries line has, as we have seen, an as cent of 16 miles at an average inclination of 1 in 154, of which one plane of four miles is at 1 in 100. It is probable that the use of assistant power would be required to enable trains to surmount it with tolerable speed and punctuality, and would equally involve some expense and loss of time as compared with a level line. On the whole, therefore, after a careful comparison of the gradients of the two lines, we do not think that, supposing passenger trains of the ordinary weight drawn by powerful engines of the most improved construction, and assisted in each case up the long ascents by assistant engines, to run over them from end to end, the differ ence in the time of performing the journey would be so much affected by the gradients as to neutralise much of the advantage of the Caledonian line in respect of actual distance. Neither do we think that the dif ference in working expense would be so great as to in duce the shorter line to charge the public a higher rate of mileage than would be charged upon the other line under ordinary circumstances. This being the case, we have to repeat our opinion that for the first of the ob jects above enumerated, viz., of supplying a trunk line of communication for Glasgow southwards, the Cale donian line is decidedly preferable. For the second object, viz., the traffic of the north of Scotland with England, the Caledonian is still more de cidedly superior. By its junction with the Scottish Central line at Castle Cary it reduces the distance for all traffic from that point to Carlisle to 1052 miles, while, from the same point, the distance, by way of Glasgow and Dumfries, would be 144 miles. This assumes, moreover, the railway communication to be completed by the construction of the Glasgow junction line, which is strongly opposed on grounds of local and private interest. In the event of this line being rejected, the " Dumfries line would fail in providing an unbroken railway communication for the north of Scotland, since the Clyde would intervene between the proposed rail ways." For the third and fourth objects, via. of affording a communication between Edinburgh and the west of England south west of Scotland, the Caledonian is also superior. The distance by it from Edinburgh to Carlisle is 100 miles, while, by the proposed Hawick line, it would be about 97 ; but the latter is a much worse line in respect of curves and gradients, and is only proposed at present as a single line. In fact the proposed line between Edinburgh and Hawick, for which alone plans and sections are deposited, is not of a character which could be readily sanctioned as an important passenger line, when one of a better de scription is to be got. As between Edinburgh and Dumfries, the Caledonian scheme affords a line of 84 miles, while the rival system woull only afford a circuitous line by way of Glasgow of 141 miles in length, and depending for an unbroken com munication on the construction of the Glasgow junction line, or a line very circuitous by Carlisle. On the other hand, for the fifth object, viz., of local accommodation to the Southern Counties of Scotland, the " Dumfries and Hawick " scheme appears preferable to the Caledonian. _ . By the Dumfries line the county of Ayr is accommo dated, which is entirely left out by the Caledonian scheme ; Paisley and the county of Renfrew are about equally situated, in respect of distance, to England, by the two schemes; but being placed in the through line of communication by the Dumfries line, are, proba bly, on the whole, better accommodated by it. Dum friesshire, although much worse accommodated in re spect of connexion with Edinburgh, is more directly tra versed by the Dumfries line, and gains in distance to England and Glasgow. It is, therefore, also, on the whole, probably interested in the success of that line, as also, to a slight extent, the adjoining counties of Kirk cudbright and Wigton. The counties of Roxburgh and Selkirk, including the manufacturing district of Hawick and Galashiels, are decidedly interested in the success of the Ilaw•ick line, which alone proposes to afford them any accommodation. On the other hand, the Caledonian line, for about 33 miles of its course from the fork, near Lanark, to Beattock, traverses a district singularly sterile and des titute of population ; and although the northern portion of the line will be of considerable local benefit to the important county of Lanark, and by opening up a rich coal field in the vicinity of Wilsontown, will be of great use in affording a supply of that article, and more especially of a particular description of it used in the making of gas; yet, considered as mere local lines for the accommodation of the Southern counties, it appears to us that the Caledonian would be productive of less bene fit than the two lines of the Dumfries and Hawick scheme. We are, therefore, brought to consider whether the larger interests and greater amount of population are benefited by the superior advantages of the Caledonian, or by those of the Dumfries and Hawick system. Trying it by this test, we find that— Population. Ayr 164,356 Roxburgh Selkirk 218,371 have a strong interest in the adoption of the Dumfries and Hawick in preference to the Caledonian scheme. Also,— Population. Renfrew Dumfries 72,832 Kirkcudbright Wigton 308,216 On the other hand,— Population. Lanark and all Scotland north of the Forth and Clyde (except, perhaps, Fife), containing a population of 1,200,000, have a decided interest in the adoption of the Caledonian line. Also Edinburgh and the adjacent district, population about 250,000, have a decided, although not as strong an interest the same way (being already supplied by the East Coast line.) We can have no hesitation, therefore, in arriving at the conclusion that, on the whole, a decided preponderance of advantage to Scotland is afforded by the Caledonian scheme in connexion with the Scottish Central, as giving better trunk communication for all the most important streams of traffic ; and we have consequently to report our opinion that it deserves, on public grounds, a pre ference over the competing scheme. We aro fortified in this opinion by the consideration that the minor local benefits of the competing scheme will probably be attained by the gradual extension of branches in connexion with other lines, although they may be now postponed in order to secure the best trunk line for the country at large; whereas if an inferior trunk line be sanctioned for the sake of minor local ad vantages, it may not be so easy to obtain an improved one afterwards. MMwii the details of these We have therefore to report, that we are aware of no public grounds why the Churnet Valley and (with the exceitions above referred to of the Potteries and Alrcwa.4 branches) the Trent Valley ilaiN ay schemes should not receive the sanction of Parliament. In conclusion, we beg to draw attention to the passage of the fifth report of the Select Committee of last year, in which it is stated, in recom•:iending that reports should be made to Parliament by this department upon railway schemes, "That no such report should be held to prejudice the claims of pri vate persons, the examination of which should ba altogether reserved to the Houses of the Legislature." In submitting to Parliament, in conformity with the re commendations of that Committee, the results at which we have arrived, with a view to the information and assistance of Parliament in forming a judgment upon the schemes in question, in so far as our report may be available for that purpose, we are anxious that it should be distinctly under stood that we have arrived at these results solely upon public grounds, and to the exclusion of all considerations how far such results might require to be modified by a due regard for private rights and interests. DALHOUSIE. C. W. PASLEY. 0. R. PORTER. D. O'BRIEN. S. LAING. REPORT OF THE RAILWAY DEPARTMENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE ON THE SCHEMES FOR EXTENDING RAILWAY COMMUNICA TION IN SCOTLAND. Railway Department, Board of Trade, Whitehall, March 13, 1845. The Board constituted by Minwe of the Lords of the Comittee of Privy Council for Trade, for the tran saction of railway business, having under consideration the following schemes deposited with the Railway De partment, for extending railway communication in Scot land, viz.:— The Aberdeen Railway ; Caledonian ; Clydesdale Junction ; Dundee and Perth ; Edinburgh and Northern ; Edinburgh and Glasgow--Stirling Branch ; Edinburgh and Hawick ; Glasgow, Barrhead, and Neilston ' • Glasgow and Ayr—Barrhead and Neilston Branch . ; Glasgow and Ayr—Ctunnuck Branch ; Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle ; Glasgow Junction; Glasgow Hartour Union; Scottish Central; Scottish Midland; have determined on submitting the following report thereon for the consideration of Parliament. The above schemes may be classed according to the leading objects which they have in view. ! I. The Caledonian Railway on the one hand, with the Clydesdale and other minor railways, which it is pro posed to use in entering Glasgow; and on the other hand, the Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle, and Edinburgh and Hawick, in connexion with the ex isting Edinburgh and Glasgow and Glasgow and Ayr Railways, and the North British Railway, sanctioned last year, may be considered as competing schemes for completing the railway communication south of the Forth and Clyde between Scotland and England. 11. The Scottish Central (in continuation of the line of the Caledonian from Castle Cary on the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway to Perth); The Scottish Midland (in continuation of the Scottish Central from Perth to Forfar) ; The Edinburgh and Glasgow—Stirling Branch ; The Edinburgh and Northern (from Burntisland on the Frith of Forth opposite to Edinburgh, through Fife to Perth) ; The Dundee and Perth ; and the Aberdeen (from Friockheim, a point midway on the Arbroath and For far Railway to Aberdeen); are schemes proposed for extending railway communication north of the Forth and Clyde, or, more correctly speaking, north of the line of the present Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway. 111. The Glasgow, Barrhead, and Neilston, and Glas gow and Ayr—Barrhead and Neilston Branch, are com peting schemes for supplying local accommodation to a manufacturiag district in the vicinity of Glasgow. IV. And finally, the Glasgow Junction, and Glasgow Harbour Union, are schemes for extending existing rail ways in the town of Glasgow, with a view to effect a junction with other railways, and to obtain a readier ac cess to the river for coals and minerals. Both these schemes, however, appear to depend so materially on considerations of private interest, which we are pre cluded from entertaining, and on detailed evidence as to local circumstances, that we do not feel ourselves justi fied in r poriing any decided opinion respecting them. The other lines referred to are delineated on the map accompanying this report, a reference to which will afford the readiest explanation of their respective objects and direction. It is evident that a consideration of these lines raises the whole question of deciding on the best permanent system of railway communications for Scotland gene rally. The sanction of the North British Railway from Edinburgh to Berwick, last year, together with the com pletion of the eastern chain of English lines up to New castle, warrant us in assuming as an admitted fact, that this eastern line of communication from London to Edin burgh will be completed, but with the exception of this fact, the whole question of railway communication for Scotland may be considered as an open one. In approaching it, we will endeavour to consider, first, what are the cardinal points to be attended to in laying out a system of railway communications for Scotland. Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Perth, are evidently the three points upon which we must fix our attention, as determining the direction of the leading railways. Edinburgh, as the capital, and seat of the courts of jus tice and university, and Glasgow as the commercial and manufacturing capital and city of largest population, are the great centres to which the principal streams of traffic in Scotland converge, and from which the principal con nexion with England is maintained. - Perth again, from the natural configuration of the country with the Gramisians, on the one hand, and the estuaries of the Forth and Tay on the other, is evidently the point of convergence for the traffic of the northern portion of the kingdom. In railway communication the preservation of an entire and unbroken line is a point of vital importance, and in our report on the Worcester and Wolverhampton district, to which we here beg to refer, we have pointed out numerous practical instances of the very great ex pense, delay, and inconvenience which have been found to result from any break in this entireness of commu nication, occasioned by the meeting of different gauges. A break occasioned by the intervention of an arm of the sea or wide navigable river is, of course, an evil of a still more formidable character. Considered merely with reference to time, a short ferry would, generally speaking, involve a delay equivalent to several additional miles of travelling on an unbroken line of railway, a dis advantage which would be still further increased if, as seems probable, the rate of railway travelling should, by the continued improvements in the construction of the locomotive engine, become considerably accelerated. . For the conveyance of goods, coals, cattle, agricul tural produce, &e. (which constitutes a most important portion of the benefits likely to result to the community from the introduction of railways), the loss of time re presents but a very small portion of the inconveniences arising from any break in the chain of communication. In fact, the inconvenience to all traffic of this descrip lion is so great as to justify us in assuming, as the most indispensable point to be attended to, in considering the extension of a trunk line for the northern portion of Scotland, that such line shall afford an entire and un broken communication. Now with this view, Perth and Stirling, which ere the points at which the navigation of the estuaries of the Forth and Tay ceases, evidently determine the direction of the trunk line for the North of Scotland. A line through Fife may give local accommodation and be used for a portion of the traffic from Dundee, and the towns on the east coast to Edinburgh ; but it can never be put in competition with an unbroken inland line by Stirling and Perth, as a trunk line for the connexion of the North of Scotland with Edinburgh, Glasgow, and England. The Scottish Central line appears to comply with these conditions, to be unexceptionable in its direction as the first link of a great trunk line for the North. The gra dients of this line are, in parts, rather severe, but not more so than are perfectly practicable and have been frequently sanctioned, and as are necessary from the na ture of the country, is order to avoid any great expense. The works are not on the whole- very heavy, and the es timates of traffic, which have been carefully prepared, appear to show a fair probability of a sufficient ebturn on the capital required. We conclude, therefore, as the first step in our inquiry into the question of railway communications for Scot land, that the Scottish Central line ie one which, upon public grounds, appears to deserve the sanction of the Legislature. As a consequence of this condlusion, it follows that we must express an unfavourable opinion of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Company's Stirling Branch. This branch competes, and is manifestly inconsistent with the southern portion of the Scottish Central line ; and although in it• self it might have been an useful and proper undertak ing, it is clear that if our views, already stated, are cor rect, it must give oay to one of much larger scope and national importance. We now come to the more difficult question of Rail way communications south of Edinburgh and Glasgow. We have already described generally the two com peting systems proposed ; which, for the sake of brevity, we may designate as the " Caledonian" and the " Duna fries and Hawick" systems. The Caledonian line consists'of a main trnnk line of 73 miles in length from Carlisle, in the most direct practicable route, to a point near Lanark, where two branches fork off, one of 271 miles in length, to Edin burgh, the other towards Glasgow. The connexion with Glasgow is effected by two routes, and partly by means of railways already formed. From the fork or point of junction with the Edinburgh branch, the Glasgow branch diverges north-westward till it joins the Wishaw and Coltness Railway, which it uses for four miles to Motherwell. At this point, the proposed Clydesdale Railway branches off to Glasgow, to the south side of the Clyde, giving an access to the quays on the south side of the river, and forming a junction with the Glasgow and Ayr, and Glasgow and Greenock Rail ways; while the Wishaw and Coltness line, in connexion with the Glasgow and Garnkirk, continues the commu nication to the north side of Glasgow, and to a junction with the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway. Agreements have been entered into between the Caledonian Company and the company of proprietors of the minor connecting lines above-mentioned, by which the latter bind them ' selves to adapt their lines to the traffis of the Caledonian Company, and allow the use of them on moderate fixed terms, giving a priority to this traffic over their own local traffic. The Caledonian scheme further comprises a line from the Glasgow and Garnkirk line, a little beyond Nlother . well, to join the Scottish Central line at its southern • terminus at Castle Cary. The whole Caledonian scheme, therefore, ,will consist of the following parts : Having arrived at the conclusion that the Caledonian scheme is preferable, on public grounds, we have now to inquire how far this conclte,ion may be aact«l by con sithrations of expense, and whether the scheme is likely to sustain itself as a solvent commercial undertaking. As compared with the rival scheme, we have seen that the Caledonian involves the constr uctiun of about 137 miles of new rail a ay as against 178. An exatnination of the differunt plans and sections will show that the Caledonian line is, on the whole, of a 1.7-ss difficult and expensive character than the Duudries line ; while the Hawick line would be still more expen sive to construct as a good double lin e f or an i mportant passenger traffic. Tie Glasgow Junction, which is re quired to complete this system, would also be a very ex pensive work, being carried partly by a tunnel below the town of Glasgow, and partly by arches across the streets and the Cl 3 de. On the whole, therefore, the cf,st of construction of the Dumfries and Hawick system could not fail to be much higher than of the Caledonian ; and it would re quire, including existing lines,. about 240 miles of rail way to be worked as against 170 by the Caledonian sys tem, in order to accommodate the same principal streams of traffic. Admitting, as we have done, that the Dumfries and llawiek scheme would afford greater - local aecommoda lion to the Southern Counties, and therefore command greater local traffic, we are not of opinion that this ad ditional local traffic could he at all sufficient to com• pensate for the additional cost of construction and work ing ; and therefore we think that if any scheme for con necting Scotland with England, in addition to the line by the East Coast, can support itself, the Caledonian is most likely to do so. Upon this point, we are aware that the Commissioners who reported in 1841 on the best mode of effecting Railway communications between England and Scottand, while giving a decided preference to the Caledonian route for national purposes, expressed a somewhat unfavourable opinion ; and we think it very probable that under the circumstances, and upon the evidence then before them, that opinion was a sound and Judicious one. Considerable changes have, however, taken place since that period. A much greater degree of economy has been introduced in the construction of Railways than the Commissioners would have been warranted in assuming ; the cost of working also has been considerably reduced ; and, owing to the improvement of the locomotive engine, steep gradients have ceased to be regarded as such a formidable source of expense. The continuation of the Western line from Lancaster to Carlisle, and the support given by the Western Companies to the Caledonian line, also place that line on a much more secure footing than it held when considered by the Commissioners. The Traffic Tables, which have been prepared with much care, show an ample return on the estimated ca pital; and although these estimates must always be, to a considerable extent, uncertain, especially w here, as in the present caw, they depend a good deal on apt culative sources of income, such as the diversion of passengers and merchandise from steam-boats and other existing modes of water communication; yet still, on the whole, having regard to the above circumstances, we ace no sufficient reason why the Caledonian line, if constructed with due regard to economy, may not be able to support itself as a fair commercial under taking ; and certainly no such decided reasons to the contrary, as should indu:e us to recommend that the sanction of the Legislature should be withheld from a line of so much national im portance. We directed our attention very particularly to the Edinburgh Branch of the Caledonian scheme, with a view to ascertain whether it promised a sufficient return to be a support rather than a burden to the main undertaking; and also whether the construction of an unnecessary line might not be saved if this Branch were made to join the existing Edinburgh and Glasgow line instead of entering Edinburgh independently. It appeared to us, however, that owing to the difference of levels, this latter ob ject could not be attained without great difficulty, while the advantages of the separate entrance into Edin burgh, and separate terminus there proposed by the Caledonian scheme, were represented to be considerable; and as regards the branch generally, we were satisfied that it was likely to bring a large accession of traffic, and to afford much public advantage, more especially from the supply of coals which it would furnish to all the towns and districts adjacent to the main line. On the whole, therefore, we have arrived at the con clusion that the Caledonian scheme in its integrity ap pears to us, on public grounds, to be deserving of pre ference. This, as we have already stated, appears to us to in volve the rejection of the Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle line, and also of any scheme from Edinburgh to Carlisle, proposed as a competing scheme to the Caledonian. The Edinburgh and Hawick line, however, considered simply as a local line for the accommodation of the district, does not fall within this description. It will unquestion ably afford considerable local advantage to the district traversed, including the towns of Hawick and Galashiels, which are the seats of a thriving woollen manufacture. The benefit conferred on all this district will be great, by lowering the price of coals, which are now carted at a heavy expense from the vicinity of Dalkeith, and by affording a communication with Edinburgh. If con structed cheaply, the traffic may be sufficient to afford a moderate remuneration to the North British Company, by whom it is undertaken, and of whose Dalkeith line it will be a feeder ; and although this is a point which we should have wished to investigate more fully if we could have commanded the requisite time and evidence, and to which we beg to direct the attention of the Com mittee on the Bill, we do not, as at present advised, see any sufficient reasons to the contrary to induce us to report an opinion adverse to the measure upon public grounds. There are some facts connected with the experience of existing Railways in Scotland, which would make us hesitate in concluding that Railways, if constructed with economy, may not be supported even in localities where the existing traffic appears insufficient for that purpose. Between Arbroath and Forfar there was no public conveyance previous to the formation of the Railway ; the population of these towns is only 8,707 and 9,620 respectively ; there are only a few small intermediate villages, and the traffic in the direction of the line was quite inconsiderable. Now there are 90,000 passengers, in the course of the year, conveyed by the Railway, and its receipts average from 150/. to 2004 per week. The Dundee and Arbroath Railway, likewise, has created a considerable traffic ; and although only seventeen miles in length, and, therefore, too short to be worked with ad vantage as an independent line, is in a prosperous con dition, paying a dividend of from five to six per cent. These circumstances induce us to hesitate in recom mending the rejection of lines proposed to open out new districts in Scotland, where the local advantage will be considerable, and where substantial parties are ready to undertake them ; although we may feel doubts, looking at the existing amount of traffic, as to its sufficiency to yield a fair return on the required capital. In such cases we think it better to direct the attention of the Committee on the Bill for authorising the under taking, specially to the point of estimates and traffic. Subject to this reservation, we have to report our opinion, that there are no public grounds why the Edin burgh and Ilawick line should not receive the sanction of the Legislature. The Camnock Branch of the Glasgow and Ayr Com • pany, which runs in the same direction as the Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle line for 18 miles from Kilmar nock, does not appear either to be necessarily involved in the fate of that undertaking. It will open up a rich mineral field, and afford local accommodation to a con siderable district in Ayrshire; and, as the Glasgow and Ayr Company are desirouF of undertaking it as a feeder to their existing line, we are aware of no public reasons why it should not be sanctioned. We now come to the remaining schemes north of the Forth and Clyde ; viz, the Aberdeen, the Scottish Midland, the Dundee and Perth, and the Edinburgh and Northern. We have already stated our opinion that the Scottish Central line to Perth must be assumed as the basis of a system of railway communication for the northern portion of Scotland. It is equally clear that the Aberdeen line is a proper and necessary part of such a system. Aberdeen is a town of 64,000 inhabitants, the seat of considerable trade and manufactures, and the centre of an important district. The population along the line, including— Population. Stonehaven Brechin 7,560 Montrose Forfar . . 9,620 Arbroath in connexion with Dundee, Perth, Edinburgh, Glasgow, and England to the south, also appears sufficient to jus tify and support an extension of railway communication in this direction, where it is ascertained that a line of cheap construction and with favourable gradients can be found ; nor does there appear to be any reason why such a line might not afford, as well as the Dundee and Arbroath, and Arbroath and Forfar lines, a moderate return on the capital invested. At the same time, it is obviously desirable to avoid unnecessary expense ; and with this view, the termination of the Aberdeen line at Friockheim, which, by rendering the Arbroath and For far Railway available, saves the construction of 51 miles of main railway, and four miles of branches, appears justifiable, although a slight shortening of distance in the main line to the south might be attained by taking the line, as has been suggested, straight to Forfar. By this latter combination, however, not only would in creased expense be incurred, but the distance of the town of Montrose from the main line would be increased and all the traffic of that town, and of places to the north of it, with Arbroath, and with the large and import int town of Dundee, would be diverted over a considerable additional length of railway. The Aberdeen line, there fore, appears to us to be well laid out, with a view to the objects which it has to attain. The importance of this line is increased, by the consideration that a cheap and easy line, traversing a district of considerable popu lation and local traffic, is stated to have been surveyed from Aberdeen to Inverness. Should this be the case, it seems not improbable that railway communication to the more northern counties may be extended in this direction. On the whole, therefore, we have to report our opi nion, that we are not aware of any public grounds why the Aberdeen line should not be sanctioned. Assuming the sanction of this as the northern, and of the Scottish Central and Ca'e lonian as the southern links of a great trunk line of communication for Scotland, the question of supplying the intermediate link rests between the Scottish Midland, and the Dundee and Perth, in connexion with the existing Dundee and Ar broath, and Arbroath and Forfar lines. By the former the connexion between Perth and the Aberdeen railway is effected in 38 miles, by the latter in 44; 74 miles of the Arbroath and Forfar line being common to each combination. Had the question si m ply b een , w h e th e r under existing circumstances, and with the existing prospects of traffic upon the North ern lin es , it was better to take a circuit of six miles, for the purpose of placing the towns of Arbroath and Dundee in the main Line, and rendering the existing Dundee and Arbroath line available, or t shorten the trunk Ine - by this distance., by going through Strathmore to Pettit, we should have been inclined to prefer the former idternative. But it appears that the advantige of an unbroken locomotive communication cannot be afforded by the Dundee route. which is inter rupted by two gaps, first iu the town of Dundee, and secondly in Arbroath. The termini of the Dundee and Perth, and Dundee and Arbroath R always are more than half a mile apart; and the only connexion proposed to be made is, by laying, down rails along sonic of the principal quays anck streets of Dundee, over which a limited number of car riages and waggons may be hauled by horse power. Even this arrangement will be subject to the control of the Harbour Commissioners, who have a power secured to them by the Act of the Dundee and Arbroath Ralway Com-any, of buying up about three quarters of a mile of this Railway, including its terminus, in order to meet the contingency of the space being required for the accommodation of the increasing trade of the port, or fir additional dock room. In the town of Arbroath a similar interruption exists, and the traffic passing from the ones railway to the other is drawn by horses over rails laid down in the streets. he interruption at Arbroath might prob Ably be avoided by effecting a junction of the two lines outside the town, at a molerate expense ; but at Dundee, owing to the peculiar situation of the town, which is confined between a steep hill and the river, there seems no pos sibility of effecting a proper junction. unless at an ex pense so heavy as to render it vtry unlikely that it will In undertaken. The existence of this interruption seems to us con clusive against the alternative of selecting the Dundee route as the sole line of through communication from the north of Scotland to the south ; when by the Scottish Midland or Strathmore line we are offered a communica tion 5A- miles shorter in actual distance without interrup tion, and with excellent gradients. The difference in point of tinie b:tween this and the Dundee route, for the transtnission of mails and quick trains, must necessarily be considerable ; and this great lino of communication could not properly be made to depend on the exercise, on the part of the Harbour Commissioners of Dundee, of - a dis• cretion guided by circumstances referable to the trade of that port. The Scottish Midland line appears thus to be neees sary as an integral portion of the Northern line of com munication, and it moreover will afford great accoMmo dation to a district of considerable resources, and ca pable of much improvement ; while, being of remark ably easy construction, and likely to be worked econo mically in connexion with other lines, it appears to hold out a fair prospect of remuneration. This, however, is a point upon which, as in the cases before referred to, we must content ourselves with directing the particular attention of the Committee on the Bill to the e4timates laid before them. The construction of the Scottish Midland would render the Dundee and Perth line unnecessary as part of the through line from the North to Perth. But looking at the importance of the town of Dundee, which, as the seat of extensive linen manufactures, is much connected with Glasgow, Liverpool, and other commercial and ma• nufacturing towns in England, it appears to us very desirable that it should enjoy a connexion with the general railway system of the kingdom ; and as this connexion can be effected by a line of 201 miles, the estimated cost of which is only 200,0001., and which will, moreover, be the means of introducing coals at a cheaper rate into Dundee, and of accommodating a con siderable local traffic between that town and Pt rth, we cannot hesitate to report our opinion that, notwithstand ing the sanction of the Scottish Midland as the piefer able line for through communication to the North, the construction of the Dundee and Perth line appears to us, upon public grounds, to be justifiable. In considering this line, we have assumed that it is• to follow the alternative line on the north bank of the Tay, and not, as originally proposed, to cross that river by a bridge ; such bridge having been objected to by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, after investigation by an engineer appointed by them for the purpose, as calculated to interfere irjuriously with the navigation. For the same reason, in considering the Edinburgh and Northern line, we equally assume that it is to run to Perth, without effecting a junction lower down, by means of this proposed bridge, with the Dundee and Perth line. We have already stated our opinion that for the purposes of a through line of communication, this line, owing to the interruption of the Ferry, cannot be placed in competition with the Scottish Central. Considered, however, simply as a local line, it is calculated to afford great accommo dation to the county of Fife, and also by opening up the coal fields of that county to the adjoining counties, and to the towns of Perth and Dundee. The advantage to the latter town will be somewhat diminished by the ircreased distance rendered necessary by the circuit by Perth, in order to avoid interference with the navigation of the 'ray. Still the advantage, from the introduction of coals at a cheaper rate, will be considerable ; and having re ference more particularly to this, we do not feel ourselves justified in reporting unfavourably of the undertaking, unless fully convinced that it holds out no reasonable probability of being a solvent COTS. mercial undertaking. This we do not feel to be the case, if the railway be constructed, as is propmed, with a single line of rails, and as cheaply as possible ; although we beg to direct the attention of the Committee on the Bill particularly to the estimates both of cost and of traffic. With this reservation, we have to report that we are aware of no public grounds why the scheme should not be sanctioned. The two remaining schemes—the Glasgow, Barrhead, and Neilston direct ; and Glasgow and Ayr, Barrhead and Neilston Branch—have reference to a local question of competition for the accommodation of a manufacturing district in the vicinity of Glasgow. This district com prising Pollockshaws, Thornliebank, Barrhead, Neilston, and other manufacturing villages, is evidently of suffi cient importance to justify the extension to it of railway communication ; and the sole question is between the independent scheme proposed for that purpose, and the branch proposed by the Glasgow and Ayr Company from their existing line. The former is more direct, giving a shorter commu nication to Glasgow by two miles upon a total distance of nine miles. It also accommodates more places, and a larger popu lation ; is more favourably situated for extension ; and is supported by a great majority of the local interests concerned, which are opposed to the Glasgow and Ayr branch. The only point in which this branch appears prefer able to the direct line is, that it affords a shorter com munication towards Paisley; but as the principal traffic of the district is with Glasgow, and as the distance from Barrhead to Paisley is still very circuit ous , b eing e i g h t miles by railway, while it is only three by the turnpike road, this advantage does not seem of much weight. It has been objected to the direct line, that it is too short to be worked with economy, and to support the expense of an independent establishment and st a ti on i n Glasgow; anda s a general rule it is certainly true that lines of this short length are worked . more advantage ously as branches in connexior? with existing lines ; but in the present instance this objection is obviated by an agreement with the Glasgow and Greenock Railway Company to work the line, and to provide accommoda tion at their own station in Glasgow. It appears to us, therefore, that as the direct li ne o ff ers such superior advantages, this is not a case in which the Glasgow and Ayr Company can fairly claim to be al lowed the privilege of extending a branch from their existing line; and we have therefore to report, that of the two competing schemes, the Glasgow, Barrhead, and Neilson direct appears to us to be preferable. With reference both to this line and to the proposed Clydesdale Junction Railway, we beg to direct the at tention of the Committee on the Bills, to the crossing of the turnpike-road from Glasgow to Paisley on a level, by a portion of the Pollee and Govan Railway, over which some part of the traffic of the lines in question may pass. A level crossing over a road of this importance, at 'a point where it forms one of the principal outlets, and in point of fact may almost be considered as one of the public streets of Glasgow, is evidently objectionable, whatever restrictions may be introduced against the use of locomotive engines, or for regulating the passing of waggons ; but the amount of inconvenience, and the proper mode of applying a remedy, are questions wh ic h depend so much upon detailed evidence as to local cir cumstances, that we abstain from expressing any de cided opinion respecting them. The only other projected lines in Scotland are certain short branches proposed by the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway Company, viz :- 1. A branch, three furlongs in length, to connect the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway with the Monkland and Kirkintilloch. 2. A branch five miles in length, to the village of Campsie. 3. A. branch, two furlongs in length, to afford access to additional station-room in Glasgow. We are not aware of any objections to these branches, on public grounds. In conclusion, we beg to draw attention to the passage of the fifth report of the Select Committee of last year, in which it is stated, in recommend ing that reports should be made to Parli amen t by this department upon railway schemes,. "That no such report should be held to prejudice the claims of private persons , the examination of which should be altogether reserved to the Houses of the Legi s l ature ." In submitting to Parliament, in conformity w i t h t h e re commendations of that Committee, the res u lt s at w hi c h we have arrived, with a view to the i n f ormat i on and assistance of Parliament in forming a j u d gment upon the schemes in question, in so far as our report may be available for that purpose, we are anxious that it should be distinctly understood that we have arrived at these results solely upon public grounds, and to the exclusion of all considerations how far such results might require to be modified by a due regard for private rights and interests. DALHOUSIE. C. W. PASLEY. D. O'BRIEN. G. R. PORTER. S. LAIN G. REPORT OF THE RAILWAY DEPARTMENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE ON RAILWAYS PROJECTED IN THE NORTH AND NORTH WEST OF IRELAND. Railway Department, Board of Trade, Whitehall, March 13, 1845. The Board constituted by Minute of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade, for the transaction of Railway business, having had under consideration the different schemes deposited VI ith the Railway Department for ex tending Railway Communication in Ireland to the north and north west of Dublin, have decided on submitting the following Report thereon for the consideration of Parliament. The proposed lines are the — Dublin and Belfast Junction, Northern Railway Inland Line (Armagh to PUbVII), Dublin and Drogheda Branch to Bells, Great North Western, which are connected with the metropolis of Ireland; . ~~ i _