The Express.
London, England, 1850-07-02 00:00:00

break of a firs. As long. therefore, as the present
system is perpetuated, so long men:Amato and ship-
owners will be robbed mistiest redress; sad not only
rubbed, hut, like Mr. DE Wom be laughed at for
their fruitless yaw in " reepeettally representing,"
humbly pupae and sending up, original docu-
ment. foe the customs' solicitor to She against his.
amid areeseity require." el

TIIe Asdit Representatives of the Proprietaries (not,
be it obwrved, of the Directorates) of all the great
Railway Companies have unanimously revolved to
Wfer the most determined opposition to the Raiiway
Audit Bill sent down from the Upper to the Lower
Homo of Parliament.

' They complain of the manner in which they have
been treated in the House of Lords; and with great
justice. Whilst, in conformity with the insuno-
tons of their constituents, these representatives
were engaged in preparing a scheme of effective
independent audit, Lord GRANVILLE, disregarding
the promises made by Mr. LABOCCIIEIVE, introduced
a measure into the Leeds, concocted by the Railway
Conensi-sioners,and proceeded tohurry it through that
house. In self-defence, they propounded their
scheme to the Lords; and, on rte mouses of
Lord STANLEY, both were referred to a seine com-
mittee, to which ample powers were given. With
this canvas the representatives, never doulying that
they would have an opportunity of expressing their
objections against Ltd GRANVILLE'S bill, were
satisfied.

On this committee Lord GRANVILLI of Course Ye-
men:4d and expressed the opinions of the Railway
Commissioners, a department in which neither the
paolic nor railway companies have any confllrmee
and Lord MONTEAGLZ was also there to enforce those
extreme views of audit which run into impracticabi-
lity. Wit such an array of force against the
companies, at.el without any rife on the committee
who really knew anything of their case beyond
what he had been crammed with for an occasional
speech, to have heard their representatives seemed
to 1)3 not only the most natural and pro- si
per, but almost an inevitable course of pro-
cedure. Instigated. however, by the Railway
Commissioners. the Lords' committee on the two bills
refused to hear any evidence; and thus deprived
themselves of that information which was isdtepen-
sable to a thorough uodcrstandirg, much more to
soured legislation on the question.
But whilst thus exciuding necessary informa-
tion, the Lords' Committee appears to have de-
sired to Let impartially. Arcurchngly their pro-
ceedings aimed at a compromise. they reject. d
Lord GRANVILLE'S bill, squatty as they rejec.ed the
Audi' Delegates' Bill ; and then directed the prepara-
tion of a measure which should contain the main provi-
sions of hot.; enacted &hermit say. This, however,
was an operation f some labour and requiring um.
little skill: more, unfortunately, than the lords had to
bestow on the subject. Who was called on to assist
is not positively known ; but the result of the labour
performed bears very strong iaternal evidence that it
must have been the Railway C..mmissioners them-
selves. For whilst an object prof. seed by the Com-
mittee was to give to Railway Companies the option
of a really independent audit, the hell, as sent
down by the lords, provides for a semi-indepen-
dent audit only, and requires the results of that audit
to pus through the ale mbic of the compulsory board
of audit before the shareholders can get any di-
vidend.

The truth would seem to be, that at present the
design of the Railway Commiseiontra is to erect an
audit law which shall prove unworkable; in order
to hereafter make further d mare violent eheroach-
meats on the independent administration cf the affairs
of railway companies. The evidence of this design
lies in the complexity, the astructiveners, and the
costlitess of the bill now before the Heusi of
Commons.

To the system of audit propounded in this bill,
there are no fewer than four existing Gov.rnment
Boards foes- ed. First, there is the Board of Rail-
way Commiseioners whose fingers are delica,ely and
Discreetly introduced into the outworks of t he cum Drone
machinery, ready, of course, to be thrust in further
as opportunity shall cffcr. Next, there is the B mad
of Commissioners of Publio Accounts, who are to
have such patronage as the Railway Commissioners
dare not at present resume. Tnen comes the
Board of Wand Revenue, which is to act as
bankers of the large sums to be extorted
from railway companies t defray the cast
of this monstrous scheme. Lastly, there is the
Treasury Board, which has certain indefinite
powers asstgned to it. 'this quadrille cf government
board has to date. round the Board of Railway
I Auditors, their secretary, officers, servants, and staff,
to be for the first time established by the bill.
Now, in such a system there can be no per-
manence; its very complsx:ty will defeat its suc-
cessful operation. In • session or two its failure
will be apparent ; and then, the wedge being in,
down will come the Railway Commissioners under
the pleas of economy and of simplicity, and otter to
do all the work of ad the five boards gratuitously for
railways. This, we take it, is what the bill really
aims at. Tide, at all events, is a natural conse-
quence.
But this is not the only wedge the bill will insert.
Section 38 professes to give companies the option of
independent and private audit. Bat thin come sec-
tions 47 and SO, and covertly destroy this option. For
to the auditors to be appointed by companies to exa-
mine their own accounts, the former adds a nominee
of the Board of Railway Auditors. Here, again, is
the principle of external or of government audit sur-
reptitiously introduced.
The wedge thus 'tautly inserted is quietly driven
• little further home. For by section 50 the accounts
even thus audited may be subjected to a second audit
by the Board of Railway Auditors, to avoid whose
interference in their affairs, the companies availed
themselves of the option given them by section 38,
and appointed their own auditors.
The option, then, of independent audit, professed to
be given by this bill, which was the principle under-
stood to be adopted by the Lords' Committee, thus
becomes by all this manipulation the grossest delusion
ever attempted to be palmed off on credulity.
With such a system in practical operation, and
carried out in the obstructive temper and spirit in
which it has been conceived, the declaration of divi-
dends may half-yearly be indefinitely pcstpontd ;
and at last be defea•ed by inattention to the host of
notices and circulars which an required to be given at
certain dates to shareholders. For, first, the Cen-
tral Board of Railway Auditors, no matter how
large the balance of profits fairly earned at
a company's bankers may be, have the power
of suspending and postponing all half-yearly
dividends until it be satisfied in all its prurient
maricsity. While how that Board is simultaneously
to get through the audits of all the companies in Great
Britain within the period of fourteen days (and prac-
tically, it will have no longer time) passes all rea-
sonable comprehension ; as it also brings the matter to
this alternative: that their audit must necessarily be
hasty and inadequate, or shareholders must be con-
stantly exposed to the postronement of their divi-
dends. Either is a pleasant prospect!

THE METROPOLITAN INTERMENTS BlLL.—Yeir-
terday, a meeting of deputies from the protestant dinenton
of the metropolis was held at the Bing's Head, Poultry, for
the purpose of petititsing the H raw of Lords on the sub-
ject of the Interments Bill. The chair was occupied by
J. R. Mills, Esq.. who stated that the objections heretofore
entertained to the bill be the dissenters still continued, be-
cause in its pump through the House of Commons it had
been In no respect improved either in its main features or
prominent principles. lie admitted that the object of the
*unsure was good, but then that good object was about to be
made inzrumental to inflicting a great injury on the inhabl-
tent s, beeouse it invested the whole power of taxation on a board
consisting of some fear or five persons. He moved the adop-
tion of the petition to the House of Lords. This petition was
similar In substance to one already presented by the Dissen-
ters to the House of Commons. It preyed that the bill be
not paned, without previously submittlog it to a 'elect com-
mittee, and the insertion of certain clauses to provide for the
decent preservation of burial grounds, whizn may he dioxin-
hosed by order of council. Mr. Conder seconded the adop-
tion of the petition. Mr. Griffin thought the Dissenters
would only be maintaining Muir consistency of principle by
praying that the bill be thrown out, tor, in hls
opinion, the measure we. worse now than when
P tad been originally introduced, inasmuch Of the creeping
from the fern was, according to Sir George Grey, to be ap-
propriated to the purposes of church extension. He de-
dined to move an amendment. After some discussion, the
prayer of the petition was altered sod agreed to as Wows:
That the bill may not pass through your honourabis
house, but that it may be referred to a select committee, be-
fore which your petitioners and other parties aggrieved by
the provisions of the measure may have en opportunity,
hitherto denied then, of ezplaining and substantiating their
objections." The meeting separated with the noel vote of
thanks to the shaman.