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

--- No. 1. New Railway to be made— Miles. Chains. Caledonian trunk line from Carlisle to point of divergence at Carnwath Point of divergence to E dinbur g h Ditto to Wishaw and Coltness R ailwa y l2 10 Castle Cary Branch lO 3 Dumfries Branch Mi no r Junctions, &c. -- Total of Caledonian Clydesdale Junction ..136 57 ~. 10 56 147 33 11. Existing railway, forming part of the syste— Miles. m Chains. Wishaw and Coltness line, and portion of Monkland and Kirkintilloch Garnkirk and Glaszo w 8 20 PoNoe and Govan (forming part of Clydesdale line) Total of Existing Railway .. Total of Caledonian System _ 169 _ . This system would afford a very complete railway communication from Ghsgow, Elinburgh, an I the North of Scotland, to all parts of limgland, with the ex ception of the eastern portion, the communication with which may he assumed to be alrctrly supplied by the Dist Cou:t line. . . The cmpeting system proposes to attain the same general objects in the folloaing manner :- 1. Ey 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 llawick, which the promoters offer to pledge themselves to continue to Car lisle, giving a communication from Edinburgh to tke West of England and the manufacturing districts. 3. By the Glasgow Junction liailway, intended to connect by an unbroken communication the Edinburgh and Glasgow, and railways north of the Clyde, with the Glaszow and Ayr, and Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle. This system would con •ist of the following parts: — I. New Railway to be made— Miles. Chains. Glasgow, Dumfries and Carlisle, from Kil %marnock to Carlisle Lind from Carlisle by Ilawick, to junction with the Edinburgh and Dalkeith Railway, about Glasgow Jumtion 91 16 86 0 1 30 178 46 IT. Existing Railways forming part of the system -3lne3. Portion of Glasgow and Ayr Railway, from Kil marnock to Glasgow 34 Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway 46 Edinburgh and Dalath 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 rejected. In this point of view, the Caledonian, and the Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle lines, are absolutely inconsistent with each other ; nei. ther could the Caledonian, and a trunk line from Edin burgh to Cailisle, by way of Hawick, stand together, although a line for the mere purposes of local accom modation between Edinburgh and Hawick, would not interfere with the traffic of 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 Junction, 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,7we 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, viz. 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 following gradients : Miles. Chains. 1 in 200 1 in 100 1 in 80 1 in 75 4 5 1 70 2 40 5 42 On the rest of the line the gradients, though in parts rather severe, are not of an 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 of four miles ; and for 16 miles together, in rising frorteliilmarnock to the summit, the average inclination is 1 in 154. Upon both lines the curves are un• exceptionable. 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 cur views upon the subject are fully stated : " GRADIENTS.—As thcquestion of gradients and curves enters as an important element into the consideration of these and many other schemes, it may be well that we shauld here state the views by which we have been guided in forming a judgment. e 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 thee have taken place in the con struction of the locomotive engine haVe greatly enlarged the standard of its capabilities. Not many years ago. anything ?tteper than 1 in 200 was looked upon as a de cidedlr objection&de feature in a line, and enormous expense was incurred in avoiding gradients of steeper • • inclination. " The d:fference of expense in construction between a line with first-class gralients, 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 then 10,0001., or even 30,0001. per mite. The London and Birmingham Great Western and Buighten lines, for instance, averaging above 50,0001. per mile, while the Grand Junction and London aed South Western did not exce d from 20,0001. to 25,0001. Experience has fully proved that no saving either in time or economy of work ing, has been attained at all commensurate to this enor _, -Ins us additional outlay of capital. Indeed, in many cases, cheaply-constructed lines have been worked at an equal or less expenditure for locomotive power, and at AS high an average velacity as lines constructed at twice the expense. " This is so universally admitted, that such gradients as were formerly thought objectionable are now adopted every thy u 3 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 altog thee impracticable, have a ma into general use. " It is interment 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 Lichey incline, on the Birmingham and Glou cester Railway, is a conclusive proof that a gradient of 1 in 37i for a length of 2 miles 3 chains may be • worked by the aid of an engine constructed for the pur pose, well •ut serious inconvenience to an extensive traffic. It is also proof that such an incline may be descended without danger by the force of gravity, regu lated 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 10i for 4 miles consecutively, is surmounted by the ordinary trains without difficulty or delay. " The use of a stationary engine for ascending tho in cline oa the Manchester and Leeds Railway, from the Victoria station, which is lin 59 for 1,000 ya rds, and I in 49 for 640 yards, has been in a groat mea;uro discon tinued, the ordinary engines being found capable of taking up it heavy passenger and goods trains of not less than 80 tons weight. " On tho Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway, stationer.) power has likewise been discontinued, the locomotive eng in e being found a inure efficient and economical substitute ou the Glasfs e' ew incline o f I i n 42 for 1-f miles ; and recently the locomotive engine has been equally substituted for stationary power upon the in dun' d plane of the London and Birmingliae l Hallway, 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 mir.lit he quoted, but the above seem quite eutficient to establish the general proposition,— " 1. That gradients of fr - m 1 in 50 to 1 in 100, are ; s seliVeefectly practicable to the ordinary locomotive engine, -with moderate loads. "1. That gradients up to 1 in 374 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 rich discri ruination, Nothing can be uote-fallacivus thatt 4 mere comparison of gradients upon two lines, without refer ence to their peculiar circumstances. "In the first place, the distribution of the gradients is a fact often of much more importance than their abso lute inclination. "A line of an undulefing character, wit'l steep bet short gradients, alternately rising and falling, may be often worked at as much advantage as one where the inclines, although less steep, are of greater continuance. On the other hard, 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 rate, 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 be positively better lines, i. e. more susceptible of cheep and expedi tious working, than others which have nothing steeper than 1 in 100 or 1 in 120. " Another important consideration with reference to gradients is the nature of the traffic. Tt may he con ceded that although gradients of 1 in 50 0.- 1 in 100 may be perfectly surmountable by the locomotive en gine, they involve a certain less of power as compared to lines of less inclination. " 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 ; also, where high speed and great punctuality are eery important, as upon a long line, forming a link in a very extended communication, goad 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 stopding 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 depend. ne under such circumstances, upon gradients, that the in 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, i. e. of a large local traffic, with frequent trains, light loads, and numerous stoppages, the traffic may be conducted not only with far greater 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 the 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 fioo 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 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, vie., 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 1051 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, viz, 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 would only afford a circuitous line by way of Glasgow of 141 miles in length, and depending for an unbroken com munication on the con, truetion 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 laumfres line, are, proba bly, on the whole; better accommodated by it. Dum friesshire, although much worse accommodated in re spect of connexkn 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 rnanuracturing district of Ilstwick and Galashiels, are decidedly interested in the success of the llawick 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 Lat.ark, to Beattock, traverses a district singularly sterile and des titute of population ; and al►hough 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 affurdivg a supply of that article, and more especially of a particular description of it used in the making of gas; yet, considered es mer... local lines fur the accommodation of the Southern counties, it appears to us that th Caledonian would be productive of less bene fit than the two lines of the Dumfries and llaw•ick scheme. _ . We are, therefore, brought tl 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 Ifawick syttem. Trying it by this test, we find that— _ _ Ayr Roxburgh Selkirk Por ulation. ...... 164,356 46,025 7,990 218,371 h2re a strong interest in the adoption of the Dumfries and Hawick in preference to th? 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 (exc. pt, perhaps Fife), containing a population of 1,200,000, have a decid,d 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 bare no hesitation, therefore, in arriving at the conclusion that, on the whole, a decided preponderance of advantage to Scotland is of by the Caledonian scheme in connexion Uith the Scottish Central, as giving better trunk comnmunic•ation ft r 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 are 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 vant-nges, it may not be so easy to obtain an iibproyed one afterwards, THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, MARCH l7, 1845. Having arrived at the conclusion that the Caledonian scheme is preferable, on public grounds, we have now to inquire how far this conclusion may he affected by con siderations 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 construction of about 137 miles of new railway as against 178. An examination of the different plans and sections will show that the Caledonian line is, on the whole, of a less difficult and expensive character than the Dumfries line ; while the Hawick line would be still more expen sive to construct as a good double line for an important passenger traffic. The Glasgow Junction, which is re quired to complete this :y-steni, 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 Clyde. On the whole, therefore, the cost of construction of the Dumfries and Hawick system could not fail to he 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 Hawk': scheme would afford greater local accommoda tion to the Southern Counties, and therefore command greater local traffic, we are not of opinion that this ad ditional local traffic c:aild be at all sufficient to com pensate for the a Iditional 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 Scotland, while giving a decided preference to the Gilletlonian 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 ia the construction of Railways than the Commissioners would have been warranted is assuming ; the cost of working also has been considerably reduced ; and, ono ing 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 where, as in the present ca,e, they depend a good deal on speculative 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 see 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 undertaking ; and certainly no such decided reasons to the contrary, as should induce 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 dinburgh 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 u., 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 affordine• ' a communication with Edinburgh. If con structedcheaply, 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 reason, to the contrary to induce us to report an opinioll 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 1501. to 2001. 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 prospeious 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 distri c ts in Scotland, where the local advantage will be considerable, and where substantial parties are ready to undertake them ; although we may feel doubt 3, looking at the existing amount of traffic, as to its sufficiency to yield a fair la tarn 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. Subkct to this reservation, we have to report our opinion, that there are no public grounds why the burgh and llawick line should not receive the sanction of the Legislature. The Cumnoelc Branch of the Glasgow and Ayr Cum • piny, which runs in the same direction as thz 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 c:esirou of undertaking it as a feeler 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 Dun&e and Perth, and the Edinburgh and Northern. We have already stated our opinion that the Scottish Central line to I', rth must be assumed as the basis of a system of railway communicaiion for the northern portion of Scotland. It is equally clear thlt 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— roptdatien. Sonchaven' Brechin 7,560 Montrose Forfar . . - 9,620 Arbroath in connexion with Dunde 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 ascertaieed that a line of cheap construction and with favourable gradients can be found ; nor does the re 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 =deltaic 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 Fr'.ockheim, which, by rendering the Arbroath and For far Railway available, mves the construction of 5 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 he 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 important town of Dundee, would be diverted over a considerable additional length of railway. The Aberdeen line, there• tare, appears to us to bn 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, trays raing a district of considerable popu lation and local traffic, is stated to. have been surveyed crow 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. Or 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 Caledonian as the southern links of a great trunk line of communication for Scotland, (he 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 tr.ile,7, by the latter in 44; 7 mites of the Arbroath and Forfar line being common to each combination. _ . Had the question simply been, whether under existing , circumstances, and with the existing prospects of traffic upon the Northern lines, it was better to take a circuit of six: miles, for the purpose of placing the towns of Arbioath and Dundee in the main line, and rendering the existing Dundee and Arbroath line available, or to shorten the trunk line by this distance, by go;.ng through Strathmore to Perth, we should have be n inclined to prefer the former alternative. But it appears that the advantage of an unbrolcen locomotive communication cannot be rATlrded by the Dundee route, which is inter rupted by two gaps, first in the town of Dundee, and secondly in Arbroath. The termini of the Dundee and Perth, and Dundee and Arbroath Railways are more than half a mile apart; and the only connexion proposed to be made is, by laying down rails along soma of the principal quays and streets of Dundee, over which a limited number of car riages and waggons may he hauled by hors, 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 Dander and Arbroath Railway Cum-any, of buying no aboat three quarters of a mile of this Railway, including its terminus, in order to meet the contingency of the space being rcquii Td fcr the accommrAation of the increasing trade of the port, or for additional dock room. In the town of Arbroath a similar interruption exists, and the traffic passing from the one railway to the other is drawn by horses over rails laid down in the streets. '1 he interruption at Arbroath might probably be avoided by effecting a junction of the two Tires outside the town, at a moderate expense ; hut at Dundre, owing to the peculiar situation of the town, which is confined between a - steep hill and the river, t.'ero 5,.-ems no pos sibility of effecting a Proper junction. unless at an ex pense so heavy as to render it vt ry unlikely that it will bg undertaken. _ The existence of this interruption seems to us con clusive against the alternative :electing 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 onred a communica tion 5} miles shorter in actual distance withou,; bite:l-up :ion, and with excellent gradients. The difforence in point of time between this and the Dar:lee ro ite, fur the transmission of mails and quick trains, must occels:.rily be considerable ; and this great line 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 . neces • 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 wo-ked econo mically in connexion with other lines, it ap,)ears 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 att?ntion of the Committee on the Bill to the estimates 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 marufactures, 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 200,000/, and which will, moreover, be the means of introducing coals at a cheaper rate iLto Dundee, and of accommodating a con siderable local traffic between that town and Perth, we cannot hesitate to report our opinion that, notwithstand ing the sanction of the Scottish Midland as the prefer able line for through communication to the North, the construction of the Dundee and Perth lire 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 f or th e 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, cwing 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 increased distance rendered necessary by the circuit 137 Perth, in order to avoid interference with the navigation of the Tay. 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 com mercial undertaking. This we do not feel to be the case, if the railway be constructed, as is proposed, with a single line of rails, and as cheaply as possible ; although we beg to dirt et 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 Hby 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 inderendent scheme proposed for that purpose, and the branch proposed by the Glasgow and Ayr Company from their existing line. giving a s h orter commu nication miles upon a t o t a l di stance Glasgow i s more by direct, two of nine miles. The former t o alsolt a m bl o y re situated f or ex t ens i o n ; an d places, a n d a l arger popu lation , - is supported by a great majo r it y o f the local interests is more accommodates favo tz r 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 circuitous, being eight 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 eConemy, and to support the expense of an independent establishment and station in Glasgow; and as a general rule it is certainly true that lines of this short length are worked more advantage ously as branches in connexion with existing lines; but in the prestlit 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 line offers such superior advantages, this is not a ease 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, Barrhcacl, and Nei'son 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 Polloc 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 pow • t where it forms o n e 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 prnper mode of applying a remedy, ere questions which depend so much upon detailed evidence as to local cir cue:stare-es, that we abstain from expressing any de cided opinion rospecting 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 reccmmend ing 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, the examination of which should be altogether reserved to the Houses of the Legislature." In submitting to Parliament, in conformity with the recommendations of that Committee, the results at which we have arrived, with a view to the information and assistance of Parliament in forming a jtul4ment 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 hare arrived at these results solely upon public grounds, and to the exelusion of all considerations how - far such rezul's might r.quire to be modified by a due regard for private rights and interests. DALHOUSIE. 0. W. PASLEY. D. O'BRIEN, G. H. PORTER. S. LAING. REPORT OF THE RAILWAY DEPARTMENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE ON RAILWAYS PROJECTED IN THE NORTH AND NORTH WEST OF IRELAND. Railway 1) partment, Board of Trade, Whitehall, March 13, 1845. The Board constituted by Minu•e of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade, for the transaction of Railway business, having had under consideration the different sch•'mes deposited with the Railway Department for ex tending Railway Communication in Ireland to the north and north west of Dublin, have eeeided on submitting the following Report tiereon for the consideration of Parliament. The proposed lines are the— Dublin and Belfast Junction, Northern Railway Inland Line (Armagh to Dublin), Dub:in and Drogheda Branch to Kells, C 'Tat North Western, which are connected with the metropolis of 'laud! Newry and Enniskillen, Enniskillen and Dundalk, .2elftst and Ballymena, Londonderry and Enniskillen, L ndrmderry and Coleraine, which have chiefly fur their object communication be tween inland towns and their nearest seaports. In examining into these schemes, we have derlvcd much assistance from the second report of the Com missioners appointed to ccarsider and recommend a general system of railways for Ireland, printed in 1838. To them we are indebtd for a mass of most valuable and well arranged information. ,Since 1837, however, when the Commissioners' inquiries were going forward, com mercial changes have taken place; still the report must, cn the whole, be regarded as high authority; and without it we should have found great difficulty in arriving, in several instances, at what we consider to be sound con clusions. It is also satisfactory to observe that the pro jectors of the various schemes in Ireland look upon the Commissioners' report as the most useful guide they could have followed. Judging from the Commissioners' report, railways in Ireland hold out no prospect of very great remuneration to the projectors: judging from the statements made by the projectors, considerable profits must be derived from the receipts on all the projected railways. On the one hand is the weighty argutuent, that if capital be laid out in railways in Ireland, which cannot u,,mmand a reason able re: urn, a check will be given to railway enterprise there, which must retard their useful ex tension. On the other hand, manifold advantages are pressed on us as the certain results of railway com munication throughout the country. On this portion of the subject we must observe, that while we are quite alive to the benefits which will be generally diffused thereby, we are not prepred to believe that in many cases the railway receipts will greatly exceed the Com missioners' estimates, notwithstanding the changes which have taken place in the last eight years. The traffic cases connected with the various railway schemes in Englani which we have examined, have ge nerally been attended by circumstances which have ena bled us to judge of the probable success of each under taking. For instance, the actual traffic on an existing railway has frequently guided us in forming our opinion of the value of an estimate of traffic on a projected line likely to he placed in nearly similar circumstances. But, in Ireland, we have had no such help : neither have we had the power of making inquiries to an extent that might have tested, in a satisfactorymanner,the accuracy of many of the statements which we have received. We are, consequently, induced to direct the particular atten tion of the Committee on the Bill to the estimates of' traffic in each case. With regard to the general direction of the leading lines of railway best adapted for Ireland, we are fully disposed to consider the recommendations contained in the report of the Commissioners as of great weight, where the circumstances under which those recommen dations were made, continue unaltered. In the present instance, however, of the railways pro jected for the accommodation of the north and north west of Ireland, this is manifestly not the case. At the date of the Commissioners' Report, no line northwards from Dublin had been sanctioned by the Le gislature, nor was there then any prospect of the line from Dublin to Drogheda being brought forward by a private company, as a commercial undertaking. Under these circumstances the Commissioners, pro ceeding on the same sound and cautious principle which had induced them to recommend the concentration of the traffic of the south and south west of Ireland, upon a single trunk line, similar to that which was sanctioned last year by Parliament, from Dublin to Cashel, adopted a similar principle with regard to the communications of the north and north west, and recommended the adoption of a single trunk line from Dublin to Navan, with branches by way of Cavan to Enniskillen, and by way of Armagh to Belfast, with a view to the concentration of the principal streams of traffic upon the smallest possible number of miles of new railway. In this view, also, the Commissioners were very much guided by the belief stated in their report, and founded upon the plans and sections then before them, that a practicable engineering line could not be found through the difficult country between Dundalk and Newry, and therefore that the coast line could not be looked to as ; affording an unbroken trunk communication between Dublin and Belfast. We have been informed by parties whose authority is unquestionable, that if the Commissioners had had before them in 1837, the plans and sections of a practicable coast line throughout, such as is now brought forward, their views would have been materially modified, and the result of their recommendations might have been very different. In addition, however, to this consideration, there is enough in the circumstance of the Dublin and Drogheda lice being constructed and in successful operation, to alter completely the state of things under which the Commissioners made their report. It is manifest that the same consideraticns of economy which induced the Commissioners to regard favourably the combination of an inland line, which then appeared to require the construction of thefewest miles of railway, now weigh in favour of effecting the most important object:, that of connecting Dublin with Belfast, 1 y continuation of the coast line, of which the first and most expensive portion of 33 miles from Dublin to Drog heda is already constructed. The doubts respecting the existence of a sufficient amount of traffic to support the inland lines which pass by few considerable towns, and through a district of less population, also derive addi tional strength from the fact which must now be assumed, of the existence of a coast line competing with them for much of the through-traffic. The views also so properly expressed by the Commissioners of the importance of the results depending upon the first investments of capital in railway enterprise in Ireland proving remunerative, tell forcibly against the unnecessary adoption of any line which would have the effect of ruining or materially in juring the principal line now in operation in Ireland, viz. the Dublin and Drogheda. Under these circumstances, it is evident that it would be a complete misapprehension of the arguments con tained in the report, and of the comprehensive views of the Commissioners, to quote them as conclusive under an altered state of things, which to such a great extent mo difies their application. We therefore proceed to consider the different schemes now proposed for the extension of railway communica tion in the north and north-west of Ireland, with refer ence to the existing state of things, and to the circum stances under which they are now brought forward. The Commissioners' Report has established an im portant fact, which, in considering the several railway projects in Ireland, it is necessary to keep in view; and that is, passenger-traffic has hitherto converged towards Dublin, and goods traffic has drawn towards the nearest or most convenient seaport. With reference to the district through which the rail ways under consideration are intended to pass, the Com missioners state that, " The population is most crowded and numerous in the counties of Armagh, Monaghan, and in part of the counties of Antrim and Down. " The northern portion (of the population of Ireland) are bAter lodged, clothed, and fed than the others; the wages of labour are higher, being on an average about one shilling per day : they are a frugal, industrious, and intelligent race, inhabiting a district for the most part inferior in natural fertility to the southern portion of Ireland, but cultivating it better, and paying higher rents in proportion to the quality of the land, notwithstanding the higher rate of wagei."—(Second Repo, t of Railway Comm-issioners, Ireland, Part I.) The proposed Dublin and Belfast Junction is an ex tension of the existing Dublin:and Drogheda line from Drogheda through Dundalk and Newry, to join the Ulster Railway at Portadown. Its length is fifty-six miles fourteen cha'ns. On part of the line the works will be inconsiderable ; on part of the line they will be heavy and costly : on the whole, however, we do not know that the country could have afforded a better or a less expensive line. To compete with this scheme a project has been started, termed the Northern Inland Railway, which takes up the line formerly recommended by the Irish • Railway Commissioners from Dublin to Navan; and from thence it proceeds by Armagh to join the Ulster rail way at Portadown. From Dublin to Navan, by .this line, the distance is 28 miles ; from Navan to Armagh, 57.1 miles. The works would be heavy, and the :cost would be considerable. The Belfast Junction scheme has this great advantage over the other scheme, that it is supported by a power ful existing railway interest. Assuming, however, both to be substantial and bona fidc schemes, we find that the Dublin and Belfast Junc tion is in all respects to be preferred to theinland hve. As regards the town of Belfast, by the Dublin and B2lfast Junction, the distance to Dublin is above eight miles shorter than by the Northern Inland line. The Dublin and Belfast Junction h as a l rea dy 33 miles made, viz., from Dublin to Drogheda, leaving 56 miles to be made ; the Northern Inland ..would have 85i miles to construct. __ _ The c::st of the Dublin and Belfast Junction wilt be probably 700,0001.; the Northern Inland would probably cost 1,200,0001. The population of the country through Which the Dublin and Belfast Junction would,pass from Dublin to Portadown is stated to .Le 79,468 ; tho, population through which the Northern Inland would pass, having the same termini, is Mated to be 39,265. The Dublin and Belfast Junction proposes to pass through the important towns of -Drogheda, Dundalk, and Newry. The Northern Inland would not pass through any town of importance between Dublin and Armagh, except Navan. Between Belfast and Dublin, the through . traffic by the Dublin and Belfast Junction, combined with the local traffic, does not promise a greater return than 51 per cent. on the outlay. 'Do Northern Inland, with scarcely any local traffic, would not be likely to pay even its - working expenses; . _ _ On these public grounds we are of opinion that the Dublin and Belfast Junction is preferable to the compt • ing scheme. The Great North Western Railway, commencing on the north side of the city of Dublin, is proposed to pass through the towns of Never), Kells, and Virginia to Cavan. It is 70 miles 11 chains in length, and has a branch to Trim 5 miles 61 chains in .length. On the whole the works may be considered light, and, comparatively-, in expensive. The line is the same with that marked out by the Commissioners in their report on Irish railways. The promoters of the projt et have intimated their inten tion of proceeding at a future period to Enniskillen, if their line be made. To occupy part of this district also, a branch from the Dublin and Drogheda Railway is projected; 2f, mites . in lorgth, which, commencing at Drogheda, passes through Navan,,aad terminates at The Great North Western Railway and the Branch to must be considered as competing lines. 'We have already ventured to draw attention to the - i'act that passenger traffic in Ireland has converged to wards Dublin; goods traffic has always found its way to the nearest or to the moat - convenient seaport. We be• love that, unless the passenger traffic be combined with the goods traffic, lines of railway in Ireland cannot at pre ,, ent k e al.tiritalp.C; an 12y tidd, r,r11,2,,s goods traffic be fOstc - ..4-'d as much as possiblf., rlilways in Ireland will by no means cifeet that amelioration in the condition of the people which is loolicd and to as the result of well combined railway communication in that country. In examining the Irish Railway Commissioners' Re port, to which we have referred, we find that the pas senger,9' by regular conveyances from Cavan, going to ward Dublin, are not considerable; at Bells they .in crease ; and from .Navan to Dublin they are greater still, but not equal to the numbers of those going into Dublin by the main roads from Drogheda, Leixlip, or Naas re spectively ; while the stream of goods traffic from Bells and Navan together, to Drogheda is greater than to Dublin. If the line through Dells and Navan to Dublin were made, the two former towns would be debarred from ac cess by railway to their nearest sea-port ; and all ex ternal supplies and internal produce would necessarily pass through Dublin, or would continue to be carried as they now are, by the carts of the country, betwern these towns and Drogheda. If the branch only were made, a reaso. , able accommodation for passengers to Dublin, and the best accommodation for goods traffic to the nearest sea-port, would exist. . We have very great doubts that the proposed line from Dublin to Cavan would be at all remunerative. We think that the branch line from Kells to Drog heda, in connexion with the main line frcm Dublin to Drogheda, might be, to a certain degree, remunerative, and it would be efficiently worked. With reference to this subject we beg to repeat what we stated in our report on the Kentish and South- Eastern Railway sehemes. " An established Company, which has a valuable pro perty and large available - income independent of the new scheme, can, of course, offer a guarantee for the fulfilment of all that it undertakes to accomplish greatly superior to that of any new Company, however respectable. " This consideration derives great weight from the experience which has been already afforded of the failure of many new Companies to accomplish the ob jects for which they were incorporated. We need only refer to the instances of the Eastern Counties Com pany, which was incorporated as a line from London to Norwich, and has never yet been carried beyond Colchester; of the Northern and Eastern, which for many years stopped short of Cambridge ; and of the Great North of England, which abardoned a portion of its line between Darlington and Newcastle. " The traffic of a system of lines connected with one another can always be worked more economically and conveniently under one uniform management than by independent companies." " An established company can always, if so disposed, offer guarantees and advantages for a greeter extent of railway than the new company; viz., for the existing as well as the projected lines. When the existing company is already in possession of the principal trunk of the district, the advantage of securing such guarantees for the whole system, rather than only for a,small portion of it, is rendered more apparent. Though the Dublin and Drogheda Railway has not been open for any length of time, the traffic has been conducted in a satisfactory manner; great accommodation has been given to the public, and the fares charged have been very low. A disregard of the interests of railway companies al ready established in Ireland, and of the capital invested in them, would give a great shock to the confidence in the security of the investment, which is now for the first time operating to induce persons both in Ireland and England to embark in railway projects in Ireland. We therefore submit that there are strong public grounds for preferring the Kells branch of the Dublin and Drogheda Railway to the Great North Western Railway scheme. NEWRY AND ENNISKILLEN RAILWAY.— ENNISKILLEN AND DUNDALK RAILWAY.• These two Railways are nearly identical from Ennis killen as far as Clones, where they diverge ; from thence, Ist. The Enniskillen Railway Company propose to carry their line through Monaghan and Armagh to meet the Ulster Extension in that city, and from Armagh to continue the line to Newry. We may term this, for brevity and distinction, the Newry scheme. 2d. The Enniskillen and. Dundalk Company propose to go in almost a straight direction to Dundalk, by New bliss and Castle Blaney, connecting Monaghan by a branch with the main line at Castle Blaney ; and this project we may call the Dundalk Scheme. In judging of the merits of these two schemes, we must repeat, that throughout Ireland passenger traffic has converged towards Dublin ; it is clearly shown on the Commissioners' traffic map, and the reason obviously is; besides that city being the capital, it has afforded the shortest and most frequent communication with England. On the other hand, goods and produce are generally sent to the nearest seaport for shipment. While the map referred to shows the passenger traffic between Enniskillen and Dublin to be more than that between Enniskillen and Belfast, and Newry and Dun dalk together, it also shows that these three last-men tioned towns have drawn all the goods traffic, within a reasonable circuit, to themselves, instead of its going to the metropolis ; and since 1837, when the map was made, this has been more decidedly the case. The great object, therefore, to be attained is to give to the north and north west of Ireland such railway ac commodation as shall, at the smallest outlay, provide for the combined transit of passengers and goods towards Dublin and towards the east coast. 1 1 In considering these schemes we suppose that the line from Cavan to Dublin will not be made, and that com plete and direct communication between Dublin, Dun dalk, Newry, and Portadown, will be established by the construction of the Dublin and Belfast Junction Railway. The Newryscheme opens outlets for the produce of the county of FerManagh and the north of the county of Monaghan, by the ports of Belfast and Newry, and gives a very direct communication between Armagh and Dublin for passengers ; but if it. . be carried into effect, to the exclusion of the Dundalk scheme, the passenger transit of the North Western counties towards Dublin will be circuitous, and the county of Fermanagh will be barred from its nearest pert, which is Dundalk. On the other hand, if the Dundalk scheme only be adopted, the produce of Fermanagh and the north-west could not reach Belfast except by a circuitous, and there fore expensive, route, and consequently would be, con fined to Dundalk for its outlet ; though passengers towards Dublin would be carried more directly by it than by the Noiry scheme, which would necessarily take them round by Arniagh. The Newry scheme leaves Monaghan without access to. Dundalk, except by Armagh and Newry, and the Dundalk scheme cuts it off from Belfast, except by a circuitous route. The branch from Monaghan to Castle Blaney, as proposed by the Dundalk party, is objectionable from its direction, because it would only serve the town of Monaghan. The portion of the Newry scheme between Armagh and Newry is objec tionable, as it would not only be difficult of construction, and very costly, but it would prove a competing line with so much of the Dublin and BelfaSt Junction as will be made between. Newry and Portadown. Moreover, the traffic is doubtful ; and we believe that, if the line were made, it would only produce the effect of dividing between both the traffic which is not likely to be more than would afford remuneration to one line only. It is necessary here to notice the proposal of the Ulster Railway Company to complete their line from Portadown to Armagh. In the year 1836 they obtained their Act for the whole line beta een Belfast and Ar magh ; but owing to circumstances which it is not our province to enter into, proceeded from Belfast no further then to Portaclown. A new survey has since beee made; various alterations and improvements have been t ffected on the original plan ; and as Parliament has already sanctioned the general proposition of. making such a line, we cannot doubt that what the Ulster Company desire to obtain will- now be granted. It being clear that these projects possess within them. selves elements to form a comprehensive and complete scheme for supplying the district with abundant Rail way communication, by combining those parts which are manifestly useful, to the exclusion of these which we have stated to be objectionable, we have, after much de liberation, decided on recommending for the considera tion of Parliament a general measure which shall be adapted to the circumstances of the district, and at the same time be based on the best portions of the two pro jects in question. In order to give to the inland counties an access to the iMportant town and port of Belfast, it is necessary to re tain so much of the Newry scheme as will accomplish this pin-pose ; and,to supply the means of transit of goods and agricultural produce to Dundalk, as well as of pas sengers to Dublin, it is necessary to retain much of the Dundalk scheme ; while at the same time due regard must be had to the convenience of the town of Newry, which, though situated on the projected line of the Bel fast Junction Railway, cannot be omitted in arrange ments vt hich will materially affect its commercial pros tY• We are therefore of opinion, that this general measure might be carried out in the following manner : Both Companies to combine in constructing, and after wa:th in working, the line from Enniskillen to Clones ; but as the porrons of the two schemes batween Ennis killen and Cloncs are not exactly the same, _that one of the - two which on the whole appears to be the best, to be selected for this purpose. The Newry and Enniskillen Comp:ny to make their line from Clones through Monaghan to Armagh, there to join the Ulster Extension Railway, arid so give free and direct communication to Belfast and Enniskillen and the surrounding country. The Enniikilleu and Dundalk Company to make their .line from Clones to Dundalk, so that the latter shall be available as a port, and so that the passenger traffic to Dublin from Enniskillen, and places to the north and west of it, shall have the opportunity of coming on the Belfast Junction Railway, at Dundalk, and thereby reach As regards the junction of the two lines at Dundalk and. access to the town of Newry, such accommodation to he given to the traffic to Newry, both by the Belfast Junction Company and the Ennisliiilen and Dundalk Company, as the nature of the ground and the circum stances of the respective lines may admit of. We do not think it would be prudent ; coder existing circumstances, to recommend the constru,!tion of a greater extent of railway than is compris,A in the above measure. The last scheme, as a whole, appears to us to be the best which may be proposed ; and we have covery reason to believe that the different parties will join in carrying it into effect. We are of opinion that these panics will arrange terms for this purpose between them-elves which may be conducive to their respective interests, and which will be such as shall not militate against the public convenience. . BELFAST AND BALLYMENA RAILWAY. The object of this scheme is to give railway accem. .modation between the inland town of Ballymena aad the commercial town and port df Belfast. It i 3 prop:. , s2d to . pass throUgh the town of Antrin74 and to communicate by branches with Carrickfergus and Randal sto t, fell d e length is 32 , miles 78 chains; the branch to C011;,1, is three . a s ; a-el the broch Rardel =too 4 1 0 es chains in length. Upon _he of vele° ft.° '7'o l heavy, and be costly. A single Ea.! only, however, is intended to be laid doe a. „ The company undertaking this project 'ttesbsr,f appearance of stability ; a large proportion ei ""me are held in Antrim and Carrickfergus ; the state f traffic which has to the Board appears, as far as we can judge, to be trustwerts:oool the district gives a reasonable prospect of WI "' pee scheme from its character as a thriving and wet 4, country. e 3 $ Ballymena is a large increasing town , w "st l derable quantity of linen is manufactured 15 ` Bel t supplies the provision ma rket with corn, pork, butter, &c. slte 83 ttst The Commissioners' map before referred to tet ocl there was a good deal of traffic then (in 17) es Belfast and Antrim. 0 pa r 'We are of opinion, therefore, that there are no t reasons why the proposed scheme should sanctioned. KI I 4- O T'i c r LONDONDERRY AND EN ED O'NIS n J The object of this line is to afford railway' c ° , tion between the town of Enniskillen and the otY irr nc i ' S Londonderry, through the towns of thaagh ( s it g eel bane, a distance of about fifty-eight miles ; fore Branch to Lough Swilly of nearly eigl a t t , in g i dian t i % The line is intended to be single. i im e to be obtained in a national point of view Pr e :i s selves very forcibly: The city of Londonderr3 $1 of trade, wealth, and importance ; c onnect ing ,t bee ° Dublin, with Belfast, Newry, and Dundalk, In tl- w se sidered as being very desirable. In case of v ilail d rapid means of conveying intelligence wbieswilly.,' afford, between the great estuaries of Loch a geei Loch Foyle, and the metropolis, must be adocalitese° and, in a military point of view, it would be ; v eil to place the garrison towns of Omagh tin derry on a line of railway. - a strf and their The local advantages are manifest. Otn" h t ' t ae ces t s r (rot bane would obtain not only a ready - nearest seaport, but also to Dublin, and the erte cjiie Londondeiry would be fed from the country ill t ser; between the termini. If the railway be in,:isdlt s , sources of the country will be developed ; the of the people called more into action than it , sent, and their social condition will be olenortioseti On the other hand, the works on the Flo be ia will be heav:a, and when the several projected .ceiteatei in Ireland and in Great Britain, 1 , 10 1 ) ,, to rt oo r: cot sanction of Parliament in this session, ar e a i ! 1 pric e construction, labour and materials wil l rise h p rof, higher than what was probably expected hY tb el t is tors when they projected their scheme. It in aroct fore, be demisted whether it be possible a g ed • , f thef works for so small a sum as that estim 0 0 , jectors. With regard also to the traffic which is , sa i iel se t :t l l,4 " likely to come on this line if it be made, it Is rojecr able whether it will amount to so much as I he 0 14 anticipate. a °fe e d On these two points we have not the means, iota? to so decided a conclusion as we should desltee °P the relative amounts of cost and traffic I v ' sous question turn. on l' o f tb e In these circumstances, therefore, the , ;00 o which we can pursue is to direct the att f7 011 re' Committee on the Bill to these points; ann if, tigation, they appear to be satisfactory. ry e ° bo de c no public reasons will exist which ought t against this scheme. 0 1. de r LONDONDERRY AND COT- 0 ° ear ° to' The Londonderry and Coleraine soh( aPrailesa,YrPote an aspect totally different from any o ther of ) jest which has yet come before the l 3 °'' „ s tet' The objects of the promoters are two: — an d - 1. To bank out the sea from the south er d , ri bicb toe border of Loch Foyle by an ernbankraen,t t '' oa ee ' 3 ' 4 o o° , tended to run for the most part at a d,' s a bout' miles from the shore, in order to ocelot?' o sem" acres of waste land, which at high tide is fre`e n water. loa' o .as 2. To 'make a railway 32 miles 29 0 1 ' 1 1 4 te, rs bie Londonderry to Coleraine, with a branch c osil ui d Limavady 6 miles 54 chains in long tie %tab ° irbi ell portion of the main line to run along w e lin e 1 1 1 4 above mentioned. The part of the pror se t i s sbeotioo dens not run on the intended embanlostena oonstriot° the section to involve works of no very ea e iTb e n which would certainly be rather above, eac h average cost ; and the embankme.nts len6t this project are intended to be 19 miles i n . h sit ° those of the rivers which pass the line; f aln e e pOi r The proposed capital is 500,0001 n ° a the r ed h° 300,0001. is to be charged on the land ; a p e ssitte ta l. ing 200,000/. is to make the railwaY, javei'sienq traffic is to afford a return for the portion 4 t hou, Now it is quite clear that the existence:etc°, must depend on the powers which maY b d If t to ° , Legislature for the reclamation of the la corai ed a be t b e " were reclaimed, some opinion might be sir n ot necessity for a railway. But now we l in ,l re° even an Act for the purpose will be Passeauiai Then the line must of necessity rtt i a, ;aa ; it to the several miles from the present poPtn a ' . fre le o some time before any population can creel',,o o 0 „ c ol t Railway on one side, while the sea inns The jute,'" 5 01 ; all source of profit n the other side• eannet irtittl) between Coleraine and LondonderrY ficiently great to maintain a line of railWilat ce- , ief; intermediate traffic, except that a bleb In ti "da 1 0 5 ., lil t. a branch which is proposed to be ai r° tbe r° l/ 01 town Limavady, at right angles, leavi n g „, 0 a ( 0 , 00 0 about four miles distant from the shore , 'roe ';' 4 ,clb e ; vied that distance upon an embankment. fdo es signers of 1837 show that but little traooot4oltw tween these pieces : indeed, the rugge d e a it Coleraine and Londonderry has rendere' to to to be maintained. t each No national advantage of aby nin nien a tlY le 0 , t it ';4 offered by this line ; nor is there ape be blic w ga ble d advantage advantage either. Great gain maY bad s nationally and locally, as the result of h so h s t P o cb 9 o 7,, sea and reclaiming the land; but w it 0 0;0. 1/ 05 r t i e this Board has nothing to do: 'lf the en' e ,bco -a 01 • t pie be a good orie it will not need the al o ne, ~,b ro. - jeCt to help it out. If it be not ag o ` all pe 0 " 0 14 money raised for making the railtvaY t drat tt e s diP th o expended on the embankment. A grea bl ° the accuracy of estimates.in these casesabie if not impossible, to make even toler o ' f o co% ,0 4 / eventual cost of a sea-wall which is tide' rl joii`', o `l length and exposed to the action of ti :_ e o ae 0 5 t 611 " b le Considering, therefore, that the sea . tbi t ,:ere, if Scheme presents no national advantl'i's Ina oi all o t e it) ore no great local advantages ; that its matical ; that the traffic must be v_e 4 . l iL i . sanctioned now, it may prevent a bettor pert runs district being brought forward at a flit_ i , ic a ode 0 ., of opinion that public reasons exist I" he C O to t o fi decisive against it. Oa t° 'tte the. In conclusion, we beg to draw a t c orol co g sage of the Fifth Report of the S elen e cora nle t n '' aeP po rl year, in which it is stated, in r by -1 reio • , reports should be made to Perlis'. oo pet vi a a Teat :0 0 e t ment upon railway schemes, o f pit r te s should be held to prejudice the c laims , toga tbe ast the examination of which shoubl,,be 0 40: 1 ,jell to the Houses of the Legislature. d o rtai t t ts 0 0 ,10' In submitting to Parliament, in cn tbe reen oo s' tbe recommendations of that Committee,. pales t ' o pea,te, the .in iaa ell„ t 0 5 ' 00 14 we have arrived, with a view to siAance of Parliament in forrnieg ni!o7 tee, i t 000 schemes in question, in so far as v. v ioos tbsi o t ti t;io available for that purpose, we are o n ' erri s , e' eS el be distinctly understood that we ha ve i tee, t re( 1 0 0 . an i, I results solely upon public grounde, ato jo bti of all considerations how far suet) restu,„ivate to be modified by a due regard for P' 14 14 ' interests. DALBOITSIi),. 013`"6, C. W. PAS LEY. s. a a l. o G. It. POlITElI• r t.. e• $ CoM r ,"ioi P isc• GREAT WESTERN STEAM- SlisForic, OW , ' V, meeting of this body took p'ace to ta Do rioc . i o ot report was read, principally rela l ,';3on. ,:" t i l e TV, i-y trip of the Great Britain to /3 ,istoa . . to ra f ai; time that vessel lay in the Flost,daftro,,,, 1,7491. 14s. 6d. had been they f ano 00 5 A ce meeting lasted only half-an - h 0 the o itera t a. re fc'' will shortly be held, to confirm t°_,,nt, NOLL' have been made in the deed of settlem' to the new shares.—Bristol/iereuilk Ph O li n lip t s 7 E 7 s . t q h , i o nst a . ‘,...„...„.. , darn, of a daughter. -.....---,.........,./... fostp 0,6 Doc/ On the 10th inst.,lyvacaattti nCaunlihratornn/, t , l - 1 0 e lifi lAdY_ f t ° l f je j°P lt h i.,, e : if° ' • d a thy, l l3 l .l..a.r e di !. 191 If 151'.. J. V° "I:lit:et' 130" tlis On the 1 lt . h inst at G-o-re-road, NorOt of W. J. Williams,l-sq of ' a daughter. e of BVig ii ol aft O tay n doa t fu h Ag e : 1 1te 1 ey t ,rn h :f i t n ci ls.l:o,larnrtd.:l3ru c s q k I,a(n,fdaGtirriaurt 1 7 z , 0, 1 5 1 1 ro p 1 if, t „ i f 5 11 0 , 9° ,4: On the 12th lust., at Dublin,thewile of W.•coleg' ,01 On the 13th inst., Mrs. W. .li. Treacher/ IA th e bo rli• ..-. • ,ttoo, „ t ill' yet' On the 13th inst., at Marine-parae, 1-jrbf A of $ ' Sir Claude Champion de CrespignP B rt ' ° Ad) , c' f'.. On the 13th inst., at Eaton-squar, the 1 kills, Esq., of a daughter. $ lll i , 10,1 11 i tr England, jnaigio o m:n n leaasi nait t chce h i ea, e cmi l a3p l mtb t h h ep ibil lust., Campbell, .t . , at 211: 111 °II - P E I a l)c.° ' E t d, i f b A fu rsc'c'rg l r e e t3vPiii° t Thomson, Esq., merchant, in China, to j-‘ll'the lat e 4 1 ont h e 11th i ns ,a t rtntorFiPlttodnka,:lSgo hinteerr;t: t i "• r e e 11 1 i:t f.°fl%;°ljl) Buckler, Rector of . Ilchester, to Mary .A- 913 ' 0 ,/ 4. roll' air ' : , .'sq., Hainbury House. T. of vac '`ifsd Captain in the 17th 'Lancers, e i s ) ta l tfilaieuri ß it a er rt o ., t o l f ,. K .‘ c v n e u b r b e , - .E p a s a s if; k e l . , d /tl-)1 9 1i 0 Lr 1 11-`17'nf;e : li t 4 r t . 134:13'135'. :: e li ld of wool- , 4 1. Mort,fli, le At St. James's-street, Brifhtri, On the 23th ult., at Rornedirs. S. Faller/ . .oteas Fuller, R.N. : b" - ' fe 141 001 Cc ho3l.omn je a sl l t ,CTtillaorml Haymarket.as suLaE,l3s7t.r a n g e , On the Bth inst.. at Southwood, fl , g r" • irg .' DSO General On the Bth inst., Elizabeth, the vlrife °f . ate fl l'ie of On the 10th inst., at Budleighton Satlerto , e ver eldest c l 9 a 81 the late Sir Charles Forster Goring/ 0 1 Art Fitter, '"- " /.15/1/ On the 12th inst., at Tortsea, Bridget, lll' Mr. G(lvioe e* ot, On the 12th inst., at Dover, Godfre.r t oll", , . e lj f ri 4l 'h , --we, _ ,5 , 4 0 , place, oinntta,.thiglieleeedl62oll inst., at New el-P, erne'''' C.O . ' Maria, relict of the late Major Rudd, of :_-tle , t, jeo .ice . , he the Elizabeth, zwriabeth,lll:33l;tlllll.leitinTftt?o,auter EllGairniiilltto,l3-etells9lt-:1;1111rS:P°;.(1,3 0 I Roos, of Elder-street,-"eq_....udaale:, : 111 : .,t__,, teerd ° l l6 l . l: ',lc :f l' o e ! ''i,t • i t f l e i the 11th c i nsitt.e,vi.n pii'..l'.llrpairrn 5.:51-87(1ita13r:if.,_9,,,..,;:0t Lay. field , Sufi - Wk. -401') Jig' :,' Un office/0 00 - .. PrintO the 3tra - -". 1 ;P trzni'aeir;:iiti Middlesex, Monday, March 1 7, 1945. 112, a fi ~-,.'" ....m1.00.,.....--- , ?TIRE tap / Cu 1 A\ 1/ ;7 1 11 , 7 ED , u ,' ' 11 ; Paper „ • s, o cto `:l)ers r Co held 0 • A " P nPers o n gset,lB43 Aug Apt 1844 t r ilE 12th A i ' .l)] Q Pril, gra 2: + rnit ent, 4 r Ted to ii 18 8 ecent d ut t Alligato ,fl o or nigellne —•onde in , clleisl e C nitnian tol P Cani o e 4, thi ne (310 er m en eanienon Atd p art " orb nts, assig n S th 1 ( . RP,R ral B l' n ‘ r , l T. , g bee th e It con eript 4 1 ner with ititt 'j t u t t ' h ti ng to in bene -*eased athessi CALA:I,,,ry 1,7 t. - Tlue vo k , 4 0 kr , 6 2 4 44 ,ti o , 144 1: 1i r . 11 i ,„„,w thq,b4,l ti° an Ou ta i: 4 t s I, tr. Th at .v 0 0 a, Bat bo l e as It to Arm y en T n eU That