The Express.
London, England, 1867-04-10 00:00:00

RAILWAY AFFAIRS.

The Times treats the request of Sir Df. Peto for
a committee to inquire into the affairs of the London,
Chatham, and Dover Railway as one to which parliament
could not assent. So far an his own character is concerned
there is of course nothing to say. It stands precisely where
it was. It is no better, an I, the Time, is pleased to add, no
worse. But there was one conseqw nee of his laudable de-
sire to free himself from the aspersions of the vulgar
which cannot be pawed unnoticed ; namely, the rider
by which Mr. Whatman demanded an investigation affect-
ing the characters of Mr. T. Baring and Mr. Freshfield, two
men of unspotted reputation. Of Mr. Whatman's con-
duct the TIINIA speaks in the strongest terms of censure,
saying that lie shot his bolt, and was content to let it hit
and fester or miss its aim, equally careless what might be
its fate, and whatever might befall the persona against
whom he directed his missile.

The nous devotes a leader to the report made by a
special committee on the finances of the Great Eastern
Railway Company, thinking that the scheme which they
suggested may in some respects be useful in reviving
public confidence. Above all, it is imperatively necessary
that the entire truth should be made known as to the
amount and nature of all obligations affecting a com-
pany. If this were generally done railway securities
would soon enjoy • favour commensurate with the in-
trinsic value of railway property. The Great Eastern,
with its 1,000,000/. a year clear profit, and a good margin
for at least its guaranteed shareholders, ought to have
little difficulty in obtaining money ; but so long as it is
not known distinctly how this revenue is mortgaged, or
by what obligations it may be intercepted, the company
loses the benefit of its position.
The Herold thinks that Sir M. Peto, as far as he is con-
cerned, has every reason to feel satisfied with last night's
discussion, but thinks there is not much to be said to the
credit of the member for Maidstone. If parliament
cannot, as an assembly, or in its committees, be made a
court of appeal or a court of exoneration for its members
in any other than its legislative capacity, so it ought not
to have its apparatus perverted to uses which might,
however well-intentioned may have been Mr. Whatman's
aim in this particular case, be uses of malice.
The Stain/aril also remarks that Sir M. Pete must be
well satisfied with what has occurred. Mr. Disraeli and
Mr. Gladstone expressed their sympathy for his misfor-
tunes, and their admiration of his character, and although
the unfortunate debenture holders of the London, Chat-
ham, and Dover Railway Company will perhaps consider
the admiration misplaced, it will always serve the hon.
baronet as an answer to the persons who, as he complains,
persist in bringing his name before the public in an unfair
way. Mr. Whatmsn it describes as having eaten the leek,
and it confidently trusts he will never again trouble the
house with a motion or a speech.
The rcle9ruPh Gaya the vindication of the hon. member
for Bristol is no further advanced than before, and it in-
sists that in this time of railway emberrasiament, confu-
sion, and shipwreck, it is not out of place to inquire
whether the safeguards provided by parliament for credi-
tors have been systematically evaded by the very men who
were entrusted to watch over those provisions. Parlia-
ment is not asked to sit in judgment on a particular under-
taking so much as on the working of its own acts ; and an
inquiry into this subject forms a proper introduction to
that legislative action which, we all feel, must take place
without delay.