The Sun.
London, England, 1839-02-21 00:00:00

England, the Government have stood by listless
while all the high roads of the kingdom have been
given up to private Companies, and they still re-
main in the same state of apathy, though the pub-
Lc with one voice call out for protection. Is the
President of the Board of Trade afraid of offend-
ing some of his Constituents, or is the Go-
vernment reluctant to enter into a contest with the
Railway Companies ? or is this, like all the mea-
sures that most intimately affect the people, to be
left an open question, and anirs to go on as now,
till the Companies acqiiire almost unlimited power ?
The Press, with one or two exceptions, for which
there are good reasons, are unanimous in urging the
Government to take some step. The Tories will
support them, as we may infer from the observations
of the Duke of WELLINGTON some twelve months
ago, and from the organs of that party at the pre-
sent time. The writers in the Liberal Press express
themselves strongly on the subject, but not more
strongly than their political opponents, as the fol-
lowing extracts will prove. In the last number of
the Quarterly Review, a writer well acquainted
with the subject thus expresses himself
We fear that a fatal error has been committed in
placing instruments of ouch immense importance to the
national interests in the hands of private speculators.
Many of the inconveniences to the public that might have
been anticipated from so false a principle have been already
experienced. The evil may be remedied when it reaches
an extent that will become intolerable:"

And the following are the opinions of the Times
and Morning Herald:—
" At present both the public and the Post-office are al-
most entirely at the mercy of the Companies, to whom mo-
nopolies of the most extensive nature have thus been
been granted without the reservation of the right of inter-
ference in the proper quarters."— Times.
" Having obtained from the Legislature powers with
which they ought never to have been entrusted, they openly
declare war upon the public, and baying driven for a time
all other modes of conveyance off the roads they resolve to
render their monopoly as offensive and onerous as possible."
—Morn ing Herald.

Mr. GILLON brings on to-night his motion re-
specting the taxes on internal communication, a
subject which, we trust, will meet with that attention
from the House of Commons which its unquestion-
able importance demands. The revolution which the
radual adoption of the railway system is producing
in cur internal communications, though in many
respects of the highest national benefit, has never-
theless its concomitant disadvantages, which it is
the business of the Legislature, if possible, to re-
move. One of the greatest and most obvious of these
is, the tendency to monopoly, inherent in the rail-
way system. as it has been hitherto established in this
country. The old mode of travelling, which was
regulattd by a salutary spirit of competition, has
been almost entirely superseded by the new, which
places the public completely at the mercy of private
companies responsible to no one, and carrying on
their operations without the least check from any
apprehended rivalry of other parties. On all the
lines of road, particularly on the great northern
trunk of communication, it is now extremely diffi-
cult to find the means of conveyance, except on the
railway. And why ? Because the coaches and
horses that used to convey passengers have been
taken off the road, in consequence of the inability
of the proprietors to compete with the railway people.
Now, wihout wishing to encroach upon the
the just and useful privileges of the Railway Com-
panies, we may be allowed to state our opinion
that the coach proprietors, the innkeepers, the
mortgagees of the turnpike revenues, and the public,
too, have a strong claim on the consideration of
Parliament for the remedy of those evils which
Parliament has been the means of inflicting upon
them. The. least that the Legislature can do
is to administer justice with an even hand,
between the parties whose interests clash in
this case. Can it be considered fair—to take but one
instance—that the proprietor of a coach should pay
a tax of more than two-pence per mile for every
passenger who travels by his vehicle, while the rail-
way proprietor pays only at the rate of hali;a far-
thing. Yet such is the fact. The coach-mas-
ter is compelled to pay a fixed duty for the
passengers which his coach is licensed to carry,
whether he gets the passengers or not, whereas the
railroad proprietor is permitted to make a return of
the number of passengers he conveys, and is
charged only for that number ? Is not this a mon-
strous injustice ? Does it require more than to
be barely mentioned, in order to be instantly re-
dressed? With this and other exclusive bur-
dens with which the coach proprietors are op-
pressed, it is utterly impossible that they should
not be crushed by their more privileged com-
petitors, who, if the taxation were equal, as it is
most unequal, would still have an immense ad-
vantage over them in other respects.
Let the Legislature, therefore, interpose its au-
thority to protect the sufferers from the ruin that
must otherwise soon overwhelm them. This it is
the more loudly called upon to do, as it has refused
to impose any direct controul on the monopolies
which it has created by the too ample powers with
which it has unwarily invested the Railway Com-
panies.

We were neither surprized nor disappointed at the
decision come to by the House of Commons on
Mr. VILLIERs' motion. We never expected that
the House would enter into such an inquiry, and
never entertained or encouraged the opinion that
any great advantage could result from it. To
collect six hundred and fifty-eight gentlemen
under one roof, all with their minds previously
made up, all animated with party spirit and
Lry with zeal, and to set them questioning
and cross-questioning witnesses on the influence of
taxation on prices—on the effects of changes in the
currency, and of the Bank monopoly, on productive
power and profit—on the relative skill and intelli-
gence of the agriculturists, in different countries,
on the growth of manufactures abroad and their de-
cay at home, with a view to distinguish how much
of either is caused by " slovenly" or unjust legis-
lation, and how much is the result of national
laws—on the precise price at which a quarter of wheat
can be grown at home, and imported from abroad,
&c., seems to us, we will own, about as happy a
method to confuse and perplex a plain question as
can well be devised. But if we are neither sur-
prised nor disappointed by the result of Mr. VIL-
LIERS' motion, much less are we disheartened. The
172 gentlemen, who voted far the inquiry, may be
considered as all pledged to the repeal of the Corn-
laws, and how many more have their minds made
up, like Lord HowruK, Lord JOIIN Rus-
SELL, and Sir FRANCIS BURDETT, to the
necessity of an alteration, the first division on the
merits of the question will demonstrate. We
should not be surprised if the numbers on both
sides were then pretty nearly equal ; but the mere
minority, backed as it is by a great mass of the
community, and founded as are its demands on
justice and reason, is quite large enough to
ensure us our object at no distant day. We
know no good cause which has not suc-
ceeded, though supported at first by much
less minorities, and we have not the small-
est doubt of ultimate, and even speedy suc-
cess. There are some things, aye, there are many
things, which Parliament, with its " slovenly"
legislation; cannot accomplish, and we venture to
say that it is beyond the power of Queen, Lords,
and Commons, even if united, now that the public at-
tention is well roused towards the subject, to continue
the atrocious Corn-laws.