The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-28 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, JULY 28, 1853.

In theory, the railway is open to all comers, like a com-
mon highway, on payment of toll ; in practice, no one
can carry upon a railway but the owners of the stations,
water-tanks, and other accommodations along the line ;
in other words, the owners of the line ; except for short
distances, and in particular cases, where special powers
have been given by Parliament, enabling one company
to use the accommodations of another. The exercise of
these powers is attended by many objections on the
score of safety to the passengers conveyed in the trains
of both the companies ; and it is in evidence before your
committee, that when obtained from Parliament, these
powers are sometimes employed, not in the way
which Parliament designed, to create for the public
a means of communication which would not other-
wise exist, but for the widely different purpose of
obtaining for the company to which they have been
granted a pecuniary concession from the other com-
pany. In speaking on this subject, Captain Huish says—
" I conceive that in almost all cases the result would be
an arrangement between the companies ; running powers
aro granted over a particular portion of a line, in order,
it is said, to save the construction of a duplicate line ;
they are asked for on the plea of public interest, and are
obtained on that ground, and they are then sold as a
matter of bargain almost as soon as they are obtained ;
that is the real object in obtaining them ; it is not to use
but to sell them ; I could give numberless instances
of it."

If a company which has obtained its powers on public
grounds resolutely refuse to admit upon its line, with
facility and convenience to the travellers, the traffic of an
independent company, it appears to your committee es-
sential that some remedy should he found for such a re-
fusal. In the case of Salisbury, it has been stated to
your committee by the mayor, that the line from that
city to Warminster is left uncompleted, because the
Great Western, whose line it is, have a .greater interest
in conveying passengers by a more circuitous route ; that
the line would of itself be remunerative, and that the
capital could be raised for its completion • but that the
interest of the South-Western at Salisbury adverse,
as that of the Great-Western at Warminster, the line,
when constructed, would be comparatively useless with-
out powers being secured to its promoters for the free
transmission of its traffic over the Great Western and
South-Western Railways respectively. As regards the
transmission of goods, it appears from the evidence of
Mr. Stephenson that salt raised from the mine in
Cheshire, and intended for alkali works at Newcastle, is
carried round to Hull, and thence by shipment to New-
castle ; and that cotton from Manchester for owners at
Newcastle is also sent to Hull, because it serves the in-
terest of an intermediate company to divert the traffic in
both cases from the channel in which the convenience of
the owners would have directed it to flow.
To the concession of running powers of a limited cha-
racter in cases like these, there seems to be in justice no
ground of objection, and yet considerations of public
safety are decidedly opposed to the concession. It is
therefore most important to consider whether there be
any mode by which justice can be done to the public,
without the introduction or extension of a system, ob-
jectionable on the score of danger.
It has been much discussed in evidence, and seems to
be generally recommended by the witnesses, that the
railway department, as now constituted, or some other
department to be especially created for this purpose, in
short, that the Executive Government should be invested
with strong powers for compelling companies so situated
to give to each other and to the public every reasonable
facility.
The following is the carefully considered opinion of
Mr. Denison, the chairman of the Great Northern Rail-
way Company :
" Do you think that general amalgamation would be
desirable, or otherwise ?—Very undesirable as regards
the public, unless the greatest possible precautions were
taken by Parliament. Perhaps such amalgamations
might be advantageous to shareholders generally, but as
regards the public, in my opinion, they would be very
disadvantageous, unless very specially guarded.
" It may be taken for granted that such amalgama-
tions, if sanctioned by Parliament, would be specially
guarded. Can you state, in a general way, any guards
and precautions which might be effectual for the pur-
pose ?—Nothing short, in my opinion, of the establish-
ment of a distinct Railway Board of Control, being put
in possession of very ample powers, much larger than
they ever had, much larger than they have at present,
and to such an extent that they should, in point of fact,
have the complete control of the machinery of the rail-
ways. Without that, I should think, it would be ex-
ceedingly dangerous, as regards the public, to let such
amalgamations proceed.
" By a complete control of the machinery, do you
mean a complete control in the way of authority, or
do you mean that the servants actually employed in
carrying out the details of railway managemen
should be the servants of the Government ?—No

I think it so important a question that for fear-i
should make any mistake, I have written down my
views upon this particular point. I think, That a
Railway Board of Control should be appointed, which
should have power to see carried into effect, according
to the best of their judgment, the intentions of Parlia-
ment, and the object of the promoters of every railway ;
and to decide, in case of any dispute, how the traffic be-
tween all places should be conducted, and upon what
terms, rates, and conditions. That all agreements be-
tween companies respecting traffic should be subjected
to the approval or disapproval of such board. That the
board should have power, and that it should be part of
their duty, to send inspectors over the railways for the
purpose of seeing and reporting the condition of the
railway, the carriages, &c. ; and that the board should
have power to make and enforce such orders for amend-

ment or alteration as they may think proper. That the
board should hear all complaints and answer in open
court. That the board should have the power to regu-
late the time of starting trains. That the board should
have power to advise Parliament, from time to time,
what legislative measures should be adopted, after
hearing all parties in the presence of each other.' That
is my opinion in respect to the board. The reason
why I have made some strong observations on the
parties being heard in open court is, because I am sorry
to say that I have a great deal of experience of the
greatest possible inconvenience arising from railway
board officers, with the best possible intentions, first
hearing one party with closed doors, and then hearing
the other, and deciding on the case without the parties
knowing why. They Laid themselves open to the
greatest possible suspicion, and I have no difficulty in
stating that that system was the cause of the Railway
Board of 1845 raising public indignation against it."
But in practice this plan would be attended by diffi-
culties of a very serious kind. If it were the interest of
one company that its trains should arrive at a station
at a time calculated to disappoint the train of another
company, or to refuse that interchange of carriages
which obviates the necessity for a removal of luggage,
or by the adoption of other expedients to render that
mode of travelling inconvenient and uneasy, it would
be very difficult even for an executive body to over-
come the obstacles which their power, guided by ex-
perien'e, would enable them to interpose. Your
committee, however, think it would be possible in certain
cases where the general convenience of a district was in
question to raise the dispute between the public and the
companies in such a shape as that the interposition of the
railway department might be effectually exercised.
With the view of preventing this power from being ren-
dered nugatory by the introduction of small objections
of a practical kind, ingeniously created for the purpose
of embarrassing the decision, it would be necessary that
it should be conveyed in the widest terms.

Since, however, this control, when actually applied,
must be arbitrary in its nature, and free from all tech-
nical fetters, and since the exercise of it will always
effe,ct the pecuniary interest of the company against
which it is directed, your committee feel that the occa-
sion on which it should be executed must be carefully
defined. The constitution of the Executive Government,
affording no means of inquiry in presence of the bar and
the public, is unfavourable for the determination of such
questions, and your committee recommend that the fact
of wrong having been done by the company should first
be substantiated before a public tribunal, and the aid of
the executive department be afforded to that tribunal
in framing its decisions with a view to their practical
effect. This course of proceeding will be the more con-
I venient, inasmuch as the process of the court will in any
case be requisite to enforce any decision at which a de-
partment of the Goverment might arrive.
The difficulty, just adverted to, of arranging the in-
tercommunication of different systems at their points of
junction, is much increased where it relates to the sub-
ject of loca branches constructed for the purpose of
uniting small towns or rural villages with the leading
lines of railway. In these cases the branch cannot af-
ford to maintain engines and carriages for itself ; its
traffic, counted over its own mileage only, may be unre-
munerative, although as a feeder to a larger line over
the greater mileage of which its traffic will pass, it may
not be unproductive ; and in such cases, unless assisted
by the trunk line, or empowered by Parliament to in-
crease its mileage, and thereby maintain its own plant
by running powers over the trunk line, the branch could
not be made. It is more difficult for your committee to
furnish in words any rule for the decision of cases, each
of which would present some degree of specialty arising
from local circumstances, than it would be to maintain
in practice an uniform current of decision in like cases.
It seems, however, reasonable to assert, as a principle
of railway legislation, that no trunk line should be re-
garded as fulfilling the conditions of its relation to the
district in which it was situate, unless it afforded every
equitable facility for the working of local branches when
ever the residents came forward to aid in their construc-
tion.

(To be continued.)

RAILWAY TRAFFIC RETURNS.

THE GREAT NORTHERN RATLWAY.—Traffic return for
the week ending July 17, 1853 (283 miles) 11 5,549 0 6
Corresponding week last year (2234 miles) 10,524 19 3

LANCASHIRE AND YORKSHIRE RAlLWAY.—Traffic re-
turn for the week ending July 24, 1853 ,.£20,028 5 0
Corresponding week last year 18,024 10 10

CHESTER AND HOLYHEAD RAlLWAY.—Traffic return for
the week ending July 24, 1853 £5,976 19 2
Corresponding week last year 4,168 3 5
Increase in 1853

£l,BOB 15 9

SCOTTISH CENTRAL RAlLWAY.—Traffic return for the
week ending July 24, 1853 £2,489 10 3
Corresponding woek last year . -12,145 2 0
Coax AND BANDON RAlLWAY.—Traffie return .for the
week ending July 23,1853 £192 14 10
Corresponding week last year 224 15 3
WATERFORD AND KILK ENNI-RAlLWAY.—Traffic return
for the week ending July 24 (29 miles) £176 16 10 Corresponding week last year (13 miles)„,,„,„ 98 13 0 j