The Sun.
London, England, 1863-03-03 00:00:00

PROPOSED METROPOLITAN RAILWAYS

The map of the metropolitan railways as pro-
posed by the bills of the session of 1863 gives us a
pioture of this city not unlike an anatomical draw-
ing with endless filaments of blue and red veins
running from one blotchy centre to another. No
main thoroughfare, however important to the great
ebb and flow of London's traffic ; no trim, secluded
square, however apparently remote from intrusion,
but is threatened with obstruction or demolition by
one or more than one of the many iron monsters
that are wriggling into the metropolis from every
point of the compass. The companies that have
already got their bills and are fast completing their
works will do mischief enough as far as regards the
appearance of the city. Thus Ludgate-hill, at the

very point whore the best view of St. Paul's can bo

gained, will be blocked by a very unsightly railway
bridge—one of the most obnoxious of the many
similar gaunt iron structures which carry the übi-
quitous London, Chatham, and: Dover into the
heart of the city. The fine approach to Loudon-
bridge is already ruined by a similar obstacle, which
has to be made worse, if possible, before it is finished

owing to the perverse obstinacy of the Brighton
Company, who demand land to the value of some

£50,000 for the liberty of planting two columns in

place of two lamp-posts. These, however, are but
minor evils compared to what is proposed to be
done, for, emboldened by impunity and the ap-

parent indifference of the public to their own

Interests, not only are Finsbury, Sloane, and

Brompton squares threatened with extinction, but
two schemes have been brought forward for cutting
through Kensington-gardens, and one for bisecting
Greenwich Park with a deep cutting for a line to

take people to Greenwich and Woolwich by a route
about twice as circuitous as that by which they can

already go by rail. In short, from Barnes to Green-
wich and from Kensington to Blackwall, there is
literally not a square mile of London which is not
to have its peace invaded and its value impaired by
being crossed and recrossed by tiers of brick arches

and skew girder bridges over every street. Let our

readers look for a moment at where these lines

would go, and in what sort of state they would
leave London if the various companies were only

allowed to have their way.
The Albert and New London Railway Bill pro-
poses to construct an underground line from St.
Martin's-lane along Piccadilly to Glocester-road,

Kensington, and thence by an open cutting to the
- -

Kensington station of the West London Railway.
This line, besides seriously affecting the drainage of
the whole district, would actually prevent the con-

struction of the Piccadilly branch of the middle level
sewer, so that the Board of Works have no option
but to oppose it to the very bet. The Barnes, Ham-
mersmith, and Kensington Bill only prays to be
allowed to provida for the enormous traffic be-
tween Barnes and Hammersmith, to cross the river
at the latter place on a railway-bridge, and to
send its extensions spreading like a net all over
Kensington. The East London and Rother-
hithe Railway proposes to make a line from the
London and Blackwall to the Deptford Lower-

road, and to pass through the Thames-tunnel—a
mode of utilising that most gloomy passage to which
we think few will be found to object. Another
Fulham and Hammersmith bill hopes to construct

a line from the city junction at Hammersmith, and
be allowed to run through Fulham to the West
London Extension. There is a bill for running
branches from the London and Brighton and South-
Eastern to the River Thames, and to the Surrey
and Commercial Docks, which apparently has no
opponents worth speaking of. The formidable Great
Eastern applies to be allowed to make a line from

its Edmonton branch to the North London at Dal-
ston, and from there branches to the Tottenham and
Hampstead Junction; and, though last not least, a
line from the North London to Finsbury-circus

(which is to be superseded and dug out), and an
other branch thence to Shoreditch. A Greenwich
and Woolwich bill wants a line from Greenwich to
Charlton, and the Hammersmith Cityßail way a junc-
tion with Paddington, while the Kensington and
Knightsbridge bill expects to be permitted to run
a line along the west and south sides of the Serpen-
tine to Hyde-park-corner, with a branch from the
Serpentine-bridge underground beneath Kensing-
ton-gardens into Kensington, the traffic from which
pretty suburb must, one would think, be as great as
that of Manchester, from the number of rival com-
panies that are all striving for its possession. The
Leicester-square Company ask to be permitted to
tunnel from that forlorn spot along Piccadilly to the
Kensington station of the West London, and thence
by an open line by Brentford to Twickenham with
junctions going everywhere to accommodate the
immense traffic which is expected to flow instanter
from Leicester-square. The London and Brighton
have a bill for alterations and extensions; and the
London and Brighton and South Coast want power
to join to aline which they have not yet begun from
Peckham to Dulwich and Mitcham, yet another
line to the Epsom and Croydon, with junctions
with the London, Chatham, and Dover and Crystal
Palace. The same company has also a supplemen-
tary scheme for a few more furlongs of branches to
aid the Crystal Palace and the London, Chatham,
and Dover, as becomes that restless enterprise, has
so many constructions, extensions, branches, and
junctions in hand that we can only summarise by
saying that it intends to pervade London generally.
The Victoria Station Bill of the London Railway
wants leave to destroy Brompton and Sloane
squares, and to terminate after this little exploit
with a double junction at Pimlico. There is
.a bill
for authorising a Ludgate-station with all sorts of
junctions, which is the London, Chatham, and Dover
again under an alias; there is a bill to give addi-
tional lands to the Metropolitan ; one to take a line
from Gower-street through Camden and Kentish
towns to the foot of Highgate-hill; one (the Mid-
land) for passing down the Edgware-road, and sobn
by Haverstock-hill and Kentish-town to King's-
cross, and another (the Pimlico and Paddington)
which again makes a dash at Kensington, and hopes
to tunnel under the Gardens, and traverse Bromp-
ton with an open line to Victoria. A Putney and
Balham Bill is almost as ambitious as the London,
Chatham, and Dover, and, like that far reaching
and most costly scheme, seems to confine its atten-
tion entirely to places which are amply provided
with railways already. There is a line for continu-
ing the Great Northern by a cutting from King's-
cross to Windmill-steet, near the top of the Hay-
market. A Rotherhithe Railway Bill, another
South London, Greenwich and Woolwich Railway
Bill and yet one more for ravaging unhappy Kentish-
town and going to Highgate-hill by a new route.
When we add that these are only the schemes pro-
posed for this year, and that very nearly half as
many more were last session sanctioned by the
Legislatures, but have not yet been begun, our
readers will easily see that as matters are now going
on the whole metropolis is;likely to become nothing
less than a vast junction for all the lines in Eng-
land. This prospect is bad enough, but it be-
comes ten times worse when we look into the details
f
of some of the measures and find that one-half
them owe their origin to the quarrels and rivalries
d
of Boards of Directors, and that, so far from h
having any harmonious and general plan of utility,
they are nearly all made to impede,annoy,
ands lash
with one another as much as they ossibly nThe
idea of promoting public
.convenience by taking the
Great Eastern terminus to Finsbury-square, 30 feet
above the level of the ground, to be near the Metro-
politan, which comes into the same neighbourhood
30 feet below the ground, seems as preposterous
as the proposal to cut Greenwich-park in half to
make another line to Woolwich, or to destroy
Sloane and Brompton squares and burrow under
Kensington-gardens till it would be like a warren.
At the same time, while adverting to these pro..
posals, it must not be forgotten that they are as
yet only proposals, and very many of them are never
likely to be anything more. Two of the most ob-
noxious for going through Kensington-gardens
have already fallen to the ground through non-com-
pliance with the standing orders of the House of
Commons. The Leicester-square and Piccadilly
line is as certain to fall before the determined and
very just opposition of the Board of Works. The
quiet of Finsbury-square is not likely to be wantonly
disturbed when Lord Derby defends it, nor is any
committee likely to sanction the destruction of

Greenwich Park for a short, costly, and most un-
necessary line.

We have, however, no manner of wish to attempt
to prejudge the merits of any of these schemes. The
wise and forbearing rule laid down the other night
in the House of Lords that all these bills were in
justice entitled to a second reading, and could only
fairly be rejected when before committee, is not
likely to be departed from by either branch of the
Legislature. With the committees, however, it
will rest to see that the public are not wholly
sacrificed by the conflicting interests of these
projects which profess only the public- good.
Already enough schemes of this kind have been
sanctioned to ruin much of the little beauty Lon-
don ever possessed, and the limit of forbearance
in the matter seems now to have been overpassed.
A central railway terminus in London is out of
the question. It would be a mere chaos and king-
dom of misrule and disorder. Even now the chief
termiui are compelled to have separate establish-
ments for their gouts and passenger traffic, and one
almost shrinks from contemplating the confusion
which would be certain to result from the union of
them all under one roof, even if the scheme were in
other respects feasible. So also does it seem equally
impossible to expect the formation of any great
central authority, with power to check the rivalries
and harmonise the schemes of contending companies,
The formation of a Board of this kind would be vir-
tually equal to the formation of a new State Depart-
ment, with the most important arbitrary powers—,
powers that would be almost certain before long to
please neither shareholders nor public. The middle
proposition, therefore, that the Boaid, of Works
should be allowed to appear before the Railway
Committees, and oppose or support on behalf of the
public, seems, if not the best remedy for the
threatening evil, at least that which is most effec-
tive in our present emergencies. With their offi-
cers to point out how the poor neighbourhoods
through which these lines pass would suffer still
more from the obstruction of light and air by tiers
of railway arches, how cuttings would vitiate the
drainage, and how open places would be closed up,
new companies would grow more careful as to the
manner in which they propose to traverse the heart
of the metropolis. Witb these checks on injurious
or little-needed schemes, and the increased vigilance
they would naturally induce on the part of the
Committees of both Houses, a metropolitan exten-
sion would be regarded by directors as a scheme
which, if not absolutely necessary to avoid, was
certainly to be approached with great caution.--.