The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-20 00:00:00

UNITED SE]? T'ICE INSTITUTION.

The members of the above institution assembled,
pursuant to adjournment, in the theatre at the insti-
tution, Scotland-yard, on Wednesday, for resuming the
discussion on Mr. Fcrgusson's system of fortification ;
Lieut.-Col. W. IL Sykes, V.P.R.S., in the chair.
Amongst the distinguished officers present were—
Generals Wlnnes, Aitchison, Sir C. Pasley, Sir R.
Doherty, Briggs, and Horne ; Admirals Lord Rostock,
Crofton, and Sir Charles Napier ; Sir Charles Cuyler,
Sir J. Dunlop ; Colonels Fletcher, Colville, Torrens,
Codrington, Hope, Lemon, Markham, Townsend, Sir A.
Murray, Paget, Buen, Parlby, James Jones, Angelo,
Somers, Palliser, Jebb, R.E., Abbott, C.B. (of the East
India College, Addiscombe), Wortham, RE., and Fer-
gusson, R.M. ; Majors De Winton, Baron, Agnew,
Montagu, and Whitfield ; Captains Sutherland, Ford,
Warren, Evans, Elwyn, Crofton Key, RN., Dinor,
R. A., Lefroy, Eardley Wilmot, It. A., Sinclair,
King, R. N., Gardiner, R. N., Blythe, Roxburgh,
Fearon, Anderson, Williams, Hood, Simmons'
Mac-
laurin, Nixon, Desborough, Barnett, R.N., Ward,
R.E., Shaw, Johnson, R.N., A. Lane Fox, Kelly,
Stuart, Addison, Yorke, Rawlinson, Baker, R.E., Grif-
fiths, R.A., Galton, R.E., Ruddiman, Phillimore, Robb,
R.N., H. Reynolds, Dunlop, RN., Hogg, Hand, R.N.,
Fitzroy. R.N., Gambier, Mknsell, Appleton, R.M.,
Gordon, R.N. ' • Codrington. R.N. ; Timbrell, Watts,
Strong, Tower, Bague, W. H. Hall, R.N. ; Hammond,
RV. ; and Hoseasonß.N.; Lieutenants Pasley, RE.;
Tyler, R.E. ; Lumley, Henderson, R.N.; D'Aguilar,
Goose, R.N. ; Dr. Thomson, Dr. Kerr, Dr. Lloyd, Dr.
Baird, Dr. Adolphus ; E. Hawkins, Esq.; H. R.
Knight, Esq.; J. S. Kennedy, Esq. ; S. Lacon, Esq.,
&c., &c.

The CHAIRMAN, in opening the business, said this dis-
cussion had already run to a length far greater than had
been anticipated, having now occupied four nights ; and
as he understood that Mr. Fergusson was about to leave
town, it was desirable that the discussion should be
closed that night.

Captain WARD, of the Royal Engineers, then rose,
and spoke to the following effect :—I would not have
intruded myself on your notice at this late period of the
discussion, had I not felt that it was the duty of an engi-
neer officer to reply to the arguments used by the gal-
lant captain who last spoke (Captain Younge), and
which had probably a strong impression in favour of cir-
cular concentric lines, as applied to Gosport. I shall
first proceed to examine the strength of those lines. It has
been proposed to throw a salient curve across the isthmus,
and I will proceed to see if that plan of defence is the best.
Captain Younge has, I think, very satisfactorily demon-
strated to us that in such a position, embraced with
a curve of such a radius (two miles), it would be a mat-
ter of difficulty, if not of impossibility, to effectively
enfilade the proposed work. He has also dwelt upon
that important fact as the great, the'essential recom-
mendation of the proposed work for Gosport. Indeed,
to use his own words, " enfilade is the very foundation
of an attack of a fortress." But let us examine for a
moment• where the merit of this absence of enfilade lies.
If I have understood rightly, the reason why systems on
the circular principle are not open to enfilade is on ac-
count of their circularity. A circle possesses the advan-
tage of limiting the number of guns a besieger can
attack by enfilade fire ; and it is evident that greater the
curve, or, in otner words, the less the radius of the cir-
cle the less would be the number of guns open to enfi-
lade. It may be a matter of opinion how many can be
so attacked in each case—but there can be no doubt
that the degree of curvature is but one limit to that
number, however much it may be. But the gallant
captain feeling, I presume, that some case had been
established by Sir Charles ?alley and Mr. Wrottesley,
when they argued on the possibility of enfilading the
model fortress before us, says at all events the proposed
lines of Gosport are not open to this description of fire,
if the others are. I have admitted all this. But how
has he gained this extraordinary additional strength—
how has he limited enfilade ? Not by increasing
the curvature, but by flattening the arc ; in fact by
approaching to a straight line. The protection against
that most important fire in this case must not then be
put down to the merits of the circular system, for in the
position before us we are increasing in strength the more
we depart froin the circle, and we shall find ourselves
still less vulnerable when we have arrived at a straight
line. In the particular position before us, the straight
line— with tiers of parapets one behind another if you
please, but I will come to that point presently—would
possess many advantages over the salient curve. 1. In
the first place, it would be of less extent. 2. Next, it
would be easier of construction, for curved lines are
always more difficult to lay out or build up. Both these
facts diminish the cost of the works. 3 More fire
could be concentrated on any particular point of the at-
tack if desired. 4. And, as is easily seen, the enfi-
lade,_ " that foundation of the attack of a fortress,"
could not be attempted, as the prolongations go to in-
accessible positions. Both these facts add materially to
the strength of the fortress. If, then, the cost of con-
struction is diminished, and additional strength gained
by this modification, I may conclude it is superior to
the salient curve. Having arrived at this conclusion I
think it may reasonably be matter of opinion whe-
ther in similar positions a slight concave curve is not
stronger than either. The degree of curvature in this
case would be regulated by circumstances ; for instance,
it might be so arranged as to permit the whole garri-
son to concentrate their fire at the most effective range
of their guns, or on some vulnerable point of the be-
sieger's ground, as over that by which he must approach.
If such a plan was adopted it might be called a modifi-
cation of the circular system ; it certainly may be con-
sidered as a modification, but I think you will admit
that it is arrived at by turning it inside out. However,
to return to the straight line, which I think I have
shown, in the situation under consideration, possesses
advantages ,over the proposed salient curve. To any
who think the straight line an evident modification of
the circle, I would say it is a very simple one, and it
does not say much for the ingenuity of engineers hitherto
to suppose that the idea of a straight line of ramparts for
a defence never occurred to them, and that we are in-
debted for this valuable suggestion to the ingenuity of
the present day. A little consideration, will, I think,
show the contrary. Engineers not only saw that a
straight line of ramparts across an isthmus was a very
strong mode of keeping an enemy at a distance, when
they could afford to construct it, but they also found
that at a very small increase of expense they could
materially improve on that system, if it may be
called one. They therefore preferred to fortify thus :
By inclining the beginning of the lines at the
extreme ends a little inwards, then adding two
small lengths of ramparts, capable of holding five
or six guns each, and joining these by a straight line.
The expense of constructing this, over and above the
straight line, was about the cost of the two flanks. See
what these flanks did for them in return for the expense.
Each fired along the face of the rampart in its front, and
when these latter were much elevated above the plain of
the country, this service was of no small importance, for
it prevented certain sappers and other burrowing under
them like rabbits, and so blowing up the brave defendors.
They also protected by musketry fire the foot of each
other's ramparts, and each undertook this duty for the
other's half of the remaining straight line called the
curtain. Now, these little additions to the cost of a
straight line added materially to the strength of the
ramparts, so much so that engineers of those days ar-
rived from practice at the conclusion that they were
well worth their cost, and always applied them to their
fortifications. Nor have any that have seen service
from that time to this differed from them in opinion.
Flank defence is essential, if for no other purpose, to
protect the foot of the escarps from the mining propensi-
ties of sappers, as I have mentioned. And though to he
flanked is to be outflanked, to be not flanked is to be
blown up, and so the choice is left us. I think then that
I, and others like myself, who have not had the experi-
ence of battles, do right to incline to the opinion that
flank defence is desirable, and that we should prefer add-
ing it to any system of fortification, even if carried across
an isthmus. I think now I am justified in concluding-
1. That the broken bastioned line is, in the Gosport po-
sition, superior to a straight one in its capability of -re-
sisting attack, and I have shown before that the straight
is superior to the salient curve ; 2. That, though the
first cost of the bastioned line would be slightly superior
to the straight one, it would amply repay the extra ex-
pense, and therefore be cheaper in the end ; and 3.
That the first cost of the bastion line would not exceed
that of the salient curve, as it would not exceed it in
length, and certainly not in difficulty of construction. I
am willing, however, to go yet further with those who
still admire the circular salient curve, and examine its
comparative value. I do not think there can be a sha-
dow of a doubt in any one's mind that a straight line.
across the Gosport isthmus would be preferable to a sa-
lient curve of a similar profile, for I cannot imagine one
objection to it. The question then lies between the
straight line and the bastion front. Now, by breaking
the straight front into faces and flanks, you do not deprive
yourself of one gun, you command the same extent of
fire to your front as before—you may say that I make
flanks to be enfiladed. Admitting for a moment that they
are easy of enfilade, if I was on that account to decide on
putting no guns there at all I should be no worse off than
if I had a straight line ; but, inasmuch as by putting these
guns so, I am doing great service to the defence by flank
fire, and I oblige the besieger to throw up batteries,
and bring guns to destroy these flanks, before he can
come up to the face of the bastions—l am making a
stouter resistance, and it requires a longer time for the
besieging force to overcome me than would otherwise be
the case. I hardly think, however, that I shall be told
by the admirers of the circular system, that five or six
guns in a row are worthy of, or easy to, enfilade, when
they generally resist the possibility of eight or nine of
them being so treated in that system. For Mr. Wrot-
tesley has clearly shown in his diagram that this number
are capable of being taken up in one line. However,
even against such an enfilade, it would be easy to pro-
vide a remedy by placing a traverse, or putting the guns
in case-mates, or making the flanks somewhat lower than
the faces, or making them circular and concave—this
latter, and indeed all these methods have been tried,
but engineers have generally arrived at this conclusion
respecting them, that insomuch as these flanks are very
short, and so difficult to enfilade, that besiegers do not
care about making the attempt, it is better to apply a
straight flank to systems, the curve or case-mates not
being worth the expense or trouble. I think then, sir,
we may come to the conclusion that if it is necessary to
throw a continued line across the Gosport isthmus,
it had far better he a broken bastion line than a
salient curve, and that if the circular system pos-
sesses advantages they are applicable to the site for
which they have been proposed. With respect to the
proposed plan of putting parapets and guns one behind
another, I will examine that presently, but it can in no
way invalidate the arguments I have used. Such para-
pets (if they possess ees advantage adequate to the ex-
pense of their construction) eau be equally well applied
to the faces and curtains of the bastion system for Gos-
port, as to the 'Anent circular one, WhotheF thmj.pu

a continued fortification across the isthmus at Gosport
is the most effectual mode of defending the harbour, is
another question. After all the object of fortification is
but to ensure our lives and property, and every one in
this commercial country would prefer knowing the rate
of insurance he has to pay and for what. However, let
me first remark shortly on some of the points alluded to
last evening by the advocates of the circular system.
One was mentioned by a gallant captain in the navy
(Captain Hood). In speaking of the wet ditch and Sir
Charles Pasley's plan of crossing it by Colonel Blan-
shard's or by India-rubber pontoons, he says if the
besiegers attempted to do so he would let the water
out, and then he appealed triumphantly to know
where the besiegers would be then. Now, gentle-
men, in order to master this grand conception, I
must remind you that the ditch is not permitted to
be less than fifteen feet deep in water, 200 feet broad,
and is about four miles long ; that it must be filled
by the tide and cannot well be sustained at a level
above high water. It is then no matter of difficulty to
tell you where the besiegers would be ; if they attempted
a passage across they would do so at high at water,
when the water would simply refuse to go out ; but even
supposing a passage to be attempted at a time most
favourable for the gallant engineer to indulge his long-
ings, lie might, with the most approved sluice-gates,
probably lower that immense body of water a few inches,
in an hour, by which time it would be all over with the
fortress. A few words on the recommendations of this
system by a brother officer (Captain Simmons). I can
speak for myself, and I am sure I can for the corps, how
pleasing it was to find one of ours arising in defence of
this system. It showed that we had but one feeling in
coming to this discussion, not that of a determined oppo-
sition, but for the public good. I may, as lam on en-
filade, allude to what Captain Younge said last evening,
that "no enfilade can properly be so called that does not
follow the line of parapet or ditch against which it is
directed, and that it is a palpable contradiction of terms
to say that a shot which only passes along a chord
enfilades the arc." Now, sir, an engineer does not care
to set guns to enfilade the arc, but the guns in that
arc, and if some part of each of the guns in any arc
are on an alignment with a besieger's fire they will
be equally effectually enfiladed, whether the parapet
in front of them is an arc or a straight line. Mr.
Wrottesley has shown, by his diagram, how many guns
are so open to enfilade in the circular system, drawn on
the scale proposed by the ingenious projector. I will now
proceed, sir, to notice some of the defects of the circular
system. The art of fortification, then, has arrived at its
greatest perfection when it enables a fortified place to hold
out with the least expense for a certain period against
the greatest force. It cannot be expected that a fortress
of 1,000 guns is compared against one of 200 ; that it is
necessary to prove the former must fall quicker, or even
as quick, before the same besieging force, to establish the
point that the larger fortress is not so good as the smaller.
Besides, in this circular system, Mr. Wrottesley has shown
that 55 guns are the most that can be brought to bear on
any besieger's battery, and he uses three batteries, em-
ploying 165 guns, to oppose him, out of the whole fortress.
Here, then, we find in the height of the siege 835 guns at
least standing idle, and that number must continually
stand idle supposing we were to commence fighting now,
and continue doing so till the world's end, supposing the
siege to last so long. But, expecting as we do to have
some peace, it will not be over-estimating it if I say that
900 guns of every 1000-gun fortress must be continually
idle. Is it judicious to fortify so ? Are 900 platforms,
guns, and carriages to be exposed from year to year, the
platform to rot, the guns and carrriages to be continually
re-painted and re-lacquered; the extent of parapets they
occupy to appear continually for repair in our arsenal
estimates ? Really, sir, this would be paying a high in-
surance for protection ; and even that insurance, it has
been admitted, will not give us undoubted security. I
have said that I do not think it can be for a moment
supposed that six tiers of guns are not stronger than
one ; but I intend to show that guns and parapets so
placed do not yield a protection equivalent to their cost.
I have no doubt it is evident to all that the besieger, if
he requires say three guns to enfilade one face, does not
require six times three to enfilade six ; because any shot
fired may be expected to hit some one or other. The
same remark applies to counter batteries ; and it is also
evident, that with such extent of parapets the besieger
can continue firing all night, with guns that in attacking
the old system would have remained silent. Here,
then, the comparison, gun for gun, is at once in favour
of the besieger. Now, the expense of constructing every
tier of guns increases in a much greater ratio than the
number of tiers, for every succeeding parapet, is placed
higher, requires more earth to construct it, and is
supplied from a deeper and more distant source than
the one below it. This supply has therefore to
travel further to be properly appropriated, and will
cost more to appropriate. It is evident, therefore,
on the first view of the case, that this system is
muds more expensive in its construction than has
generally been supposed, and that the comparison is
here again in favour of the besieger. But I am sure
very few could have formed any idea of the proportion
of this additional expense as compared with a single
line. I have estimated this with some care, and I will
explain the proceedings. As it might be a matter of
opinion at what prices certain works could be executed,
I cannot give you the actual cost of the construction ;
but as there can be no doubt that the proportional cost
of any construction depends on the amount of work to
be done in each case, I have made a section by which
you at first sight guess that proportion, and a calcula-
tion by which you can at once arrive at the true com-
parison. I intend to compare the cost of such a line as
has been proposed for Gosport, and a simple bastioned
line, as I have been speaking of, applied there—you can
then arrive at your own conclusions—first, whether it
is worth our while to go to the expense ? and, second,
if it is, whether the money cannot be more advan-
tageously expended in the defence ? I have drawn a
section on a scale of twenty feet to an inch of the
proposed lines for Gosport, as laid down in the
" Perils of Portsmouth ;" and also one of a simple
Vauhan's bastion system, such as we should probably
use now with a command of 25 feet, a relief of 43
feet, demi-revetments 30 feet high, &c. In each case
the mass of earth for throwing up the parapets,
must go from the ditch, and I have employed the usual
way of calculating the labour required to move the
quantity of earth. The distance of the centre of gravity
of the mass before moving, to that of the same when
finally settled into its new position, multiplied by the
number of cubic met moved in each case, gives, of course,
an accurate comparison. (He then went into a com-
parison, by figures, to show that the proposed system of
Mr. Fergusson would be more expensive than the sys-
tem of Vauban.) Now, since, under the most favour-
able comparison, the circular fortification for Gosport
would cost ten times as much, it becomes a matter of
consideration whether four parallel tiers are worth the
expense. For the same money ten such systems as Vau-
ban's could be constructed ; one in front of another, all
requiring to be passed, or it could be very advantage-
ously distributed in outworks, containing say double the
amount of labour as the main line, and at one-third the
price of the circular work. I have endeavoured to show
you the comparative cost of the four tiers it has been
proposed to apply to Gosport. I do not know that I
need say anything more ; the facts speak for them-
selves. There are certain principles in this system
which experience has shown us will not answer. It
is no matter of opinion that casemates 40 feet
high will not stand in made ground 60 feet
high ; that wet ditches 60 feet will not permit of
such steep unrevetted sides as we see recommended for
them ; and that if a quantity of earth has to be taken
ten times the distance it must be at ten times the cost.
If such is the comparative expense of the Gosport lines,
with ditches 30 feet deep and a command of 48 feet, I
must leave you to conclude what it will be for ditches 60
feet deep and corresponding commands. We must, how-
ever, all feel thankful to Mr. Fergusson for the attention
he calls to fortification, and the interest in our defences
he has excited in the public generally by publishing his
works. We should thank him for what lie has done,
not blame him for what lie did not do. It is not to be
expected that he who has been a useful member of society
in other ways should be as well versed in practical details
as we who spend our lives in that service.
Lieut. RISLEY then at some length reviewed the pro-
posed system, contending that it would not meet the ex-
pectations that its projector anticipated.
Colonel jEBB, of the Royal Engineers, considered
that, without wishing to detract from the great merits
of Mr. Fergusson's system, its great defect was because
there were neither effectual flank, defence, or outworks,
nor the possibility of forming retrenchments.
Mr. FERGUSSON, in answer to the call of the chairman,
then rose to reply to the objections that had been urged to
his system. He said—lf 1 were to attempt to answer all
the objections that have been made to me and to my sys-
of fortification I fear I should far exceed the time that
can be allotted me for such a purpose. It requires only
a few words to make an assertion, but often a great
many to rebut it. I believe, however, this meeting will
not think I am shirking a difficulty if I put on one side
at once all ob)ections and remarks personal to myself.
It is not I who am on trial here, but my system of for-
tification, and to this I would confine my remarks, and
would not even notice Lieutenant Tyler's jokes about
the gas, nor Captain Wrottesley's misrepresentation of
my reasons for wishing the national store of naval guns
being transferred to Portsmouth when fortified instead
of being left in an open arsenal at Woolwich. I will
also pass over all such objections as those made to show
that there was nothing original in my proposal. That is
a question, I conceive, in which I only am interested,
and it will be time enough to dispute about the ori-
ginality when we have determined what there is of good
in the proposal. At the same time, if any one chooses
to assert that this model of my system represents the
same thing as that model of Cormontaignes, or that this
drawing of the Gosport lines is like that one of a fire of 1
the ordinary construction, I can only say that his eyes
are formed on a different system from mine, and that he
sees resemblances where I only see differences. Mr Fer-
gusson then recapitulated the main features of his plan;
and, in answer to Lieutenant Tyler's mode of attack,
said it appeared to him to be more scientific than Sir
Charles Pasley's. His proposition was that 24 mortars
could in 60 hours destroy his parapets over say 200 yards
of front, so as to render him unfit to cover either men
or guns, and so make the assault easy. Now according
to the best tables (said Mr. Fergusson), I find that shells
thrown a distance of 600 yards, as shown on Lieutenant
Tyler's diagram, penetrate 21 inches to two feet, and in
exploding form a small crater four or five feet in diame-
ter, displacing from five to eight feet of earth, one-half
of which falls back into the holes, the rest is he :peg on
its sides, except a very small portion blown away. Now
if such a hole were formed in the terreplain of the ram-
part, a man with a shovel will repine thg earth in a few
seconds, 444 if followed by ono with a rammer no
damage is done. To calculate the real damage done we
must first assume that the mortars throw shells at the
rate of 200 a day, or 500 shells each, or 12,000 alto-
gether ; of which 300 will on the average explode in
each of the five parapets, or one in every two feet lineal,
/*Tow I would ask any one if a numbef 9' quail Oaten

1 foot to 18 inches deep, 5 or 6 feet apart, in a mound of
earth 8 feet high and 18 feet broad at top, would in any
way injure its properties as cover to men at guns ? I should
say certainly not. On the contrary, to cut away the 200
feet of earth the parapet contains would, as near as I can
calculate, require from 30 to 60 shells per foot lineal, or
not far from 1,000,000 of shells. This would require 26
mortars, throwing 200 shells per day for 100 days suc-
cessively, while no mortars ever made could stand a
twentieth part of that work. Mr. Fergusson then pro-
ceeded to reply to some of the objections urged by Lieut.
Tyler to his system, on the ground that it was exposed
to enfilade. With respect to the main question of ex-
pense, he said—ln my book I stated that the number of
cubic yards required for the erection of a fort of circular
form with five ramparts, as shown in the model, would
be 2,500,000, or 312,500 per front. Sir Charles Pasley
has taken out the quantities with more care than I have,
and states it at 2,328,7000, or 291,087 per front. In
these Gosport lines the quantity is even less, or about
280,000 cubic yards per front. In other words, very
considerably less than that required for a fort of forti-
fication of any- of the usual systems ; Comonlayers being
313,000, Vauban's 354,000, and others above and be-
tween these. As to the objections that had been urged
to the parapets being at an angle of 45 degrees, he stated
that he adhered to that because there was not a fort in
Europe or elsewhere where the parapets did not stand
at that angle. In conclusion, he said he hoped that
he had shown that the principle at least contained
the element of a great improvement in the art of for-
tification ; but be hoped it would be received in
the spirit in which it had been made. There was, lie
said, insuperable difficulties in carrying Colonel Sykes's
proposition of appointing committees of attack and de-
fence, and finding arbitrators accessible to all parties,
and, in fact, carrying out a siege on paper ; but instead
of that, he would propose that those officers—who had
spoken, against his system, and others who think it a
fallacy, should join in drawing up a plan of attack,
stating the number of mens and guns they would re-
quire, the amount of ammunition, the time, and the
mode of procedure. Those should be printed, and then
submitted to him. He could then draw up a statement
of his means of defence, and reasons for dissenting from
their conclusions, if such should be the case. The ser-
vice and the world in general would then have an oppor-
tunity of calmly weighing the question, and of judging
more deliberately than they could do in a discussion of
that sort ; and he had no doubt that it would go far to
set the question fairly at rest and for ever. (The above
is but a mere abstract of Mr. Fergusson's address,
which we are compelled to curtail for want of space.)
A short discussion ensued, and, upon the motion of
General Aitchison, a vote of thanks was passed to Mr.
Furgusson for the great services he had rendered in the
production of this plan.
Mr. FERGUSON acknowledged the compliment, and
said he would leave his plan in the hands of the en-
gineers of this country at large, and should be ever
ready to meet them to answer any attack they might
make upon it.
The meeting broke up at half-past eleven o'clock.

RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE.

SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY.
PROPOSED COMPLETION OF THE COAST LINE FROM
DORCHESTER TO EXETER.

The special meeting of the shareholders of the South-
Western Railway, convened for the purpose of taking
into consideration, among other matters, the propriety
of promoting the extension to Exeter of the Southamp-
ton and Dorchester line, for the protection of the com-
pany's interests, threatened in the West of England by
the proposed measures of the Great Western and Bristol
and Exeter Company, was held yesterday, at the
Assembly-rooms, York-road. The proceedings were of
some hours' duration, and the tone in which the ques-
tion was discussed was of an excited and occasionally of
a very personal character, but the whole case, so far as
the public service and the remunerative nature of the
proposed extension are concerned, may be comprised
within a very short space.
The proprietors having sanctioned the bills before
Parliament for the completion of the Basingstoke and
Salisbury branch, the case in favour of the extension
from Dorchester to Exeter was opened in an address of
about an hour and a half's duration from the chairman
(the Hon. Mr. Scott), who was answered rather briefly.
by Mr. Mortimer, one of the two newly-elected direc-
tors, who dissent from Iho propriety of the extension.
In justification of the proposed extension to Exeter,
it was stated that the company had had assurances that
if they remained quiet in the West of England, the
Great Western and Bristol and Exeter Companies
would not seek to interfere with the South-Western
traffic ; but those corporations had promoted the
Dorset and Devon line, which would affect the com-
munication between Dorchester and London, and had
expressed their determination to carry it out on the
broad gauge ; and that it was in self-defence alone
that the South-Western board had resolved to go
for powers to extend their Southampton and Dor-
chester line to Exeter. It was contended that the Dor-
set and Devon line, which would be in fact rather an
extension of the Wilts, Weymouth, and Somerset than
of the coast line of railway, would be detrimental as
well to the public interests as to those of the South-
Western Railway Company. The projected extension
of the Southampton and Dorchester line has, it was
stated, very good local support ; and the chairman
asserted that it is looked on in a very favourable point
of view by the War-office and the Ordnance, adding,
that in an interview which he had had with Lord
Hardinge, that gallant officer " most distinctly said he
thought it would be of the greatest national importance
that the South-Western Company's Southampton and
Dorchester line should be extended westward ; that he
considered the laying down of the broad guage was a
national calamity, as it interfered with the movement of
troops, and, therefore, with the defence of the country ;
and that a line like this (the Dorchester and Southamp-
ton), running as it did a certain distance from the coast,
but communicating with it at certain points, was the
line most desirable in case of an invasion." With re-
spect to the cost of the line,, Mr. Brassey, the eminent
contractor, and another equally competent authority,
had stated that the railway could be made for 700,0001.,
and that he (Mr. Brassev) was willing to undertake it
for that sum ,provided the land could be procured for
60,000/. The gradients were not particularly severe.
The steepest were 1 in 75 for a mile and two furlongs,
and 1 in 90 and 100 for three miles, all the other gra-
dients being less than 1 in 100 ; while upon the Devon
and Dorset line, promoted by the Great Western and
Bristol and Exeter Companies there was a gradient of 1
in 60 for a mile and five chains, and 1 in 83 for 17 or 18
miles. There was upon the proposed Dorchester and Exe-
ter Extension a tunnel which would be 1,800 yards long,
if a moderate gradient were preserved, but it might be
reduced to 1,400 yards by adopting a steeper gradient.
The population to the west of Dorchester, in the direc-
tion of Exeter, was more dense than that of the country
to the east of Dorchester, towards Southampton. In the es-
timate of traffic the South-Western board had not calcu-
lated upon obtaining a single through passenger from
Exeter to London, though they might fairly have done
so, seeing that the distance by the broad-guage from
Paddington to Exeter is 194 miles, and the average
duration of the journeys seven hours and twenty minutes,
while the distance from Exeter to Waterloo-station via
Dorchester would be 196 miles, rnd the average duration
of the journeys seven hours and forty minutes, wit!' the
advantage of being nearly half an hour nearer the heart
of the City. It was asserted that the traffic upon the
proposed Dorchester and Exeter line wollri be more
productive to the eampany than is the traffic on the
existing Southampton and Dorchester Railway. The
earnings of the latter for the last year were declared to
be 56,130/., and the working expense to have amounted
to 50 per cent., leaving, therefore, a profit of 28,060.,
which, upon the cost of the line—viz., 750,000/. (exclu-
sive of plant), is equal to a dividend of 34 per cent. ;
but if the plant, which is estimated at 40,000/., were
included, the dividend would be about 31 per cent. But,
in addition to this profit upon the Southampton and
Dorchester line proper, the line, it was observed, con-
tributed, in 1851, to the parent railway, calculating by
mileage rate, about 39,740/. per annum ; and, deducting
from the latter amount 25 per cent, for working ex-
penses, there was a profit of 29,800/., so that the whole
of the net income accruing to the South-Western Com-
pany from the Southampton and Dorchester line per se,
and from the traffic which it brought upon the trunk
railway, amounted to 57,800/. for the last year. Ap-
plying the same principle of calculation to the proposed
Dorchester and Exeter line, reckoning its length at
50 and 56 miles, and deducting 6,600/. as traffic
already enjoyed by the South-Western line, it would
yield a gross annual revenue of 41,0001., or, deduct-
ing 50 per cent. for working expenses, a net profit
of 242,0001., that was 32 per cent. on the outlay ;
but, taking into consideration the amount of traffic
it would bring upon the parent line, and upon the
Southampton and Dorchester extension, and which
might be fairly calculated at 54,000/. per annum, the
company would derive the following returns—viz.,
from the latter source, 54,000/. per annum. Deducting
from that amount the 6,600/. already mentioned, and
12,000/. for working expense, the net profit would be
35,400/., which, added to the 22,000/, net profit upon
the working of the proposed extension from Dorchester,
would give a divisible revenue of 57,400/.—a sum equal
to nearly 8 per cent, upon the estimated outlay of
700,0001., subject, of course, to reduction in respect of
the cost of working plant.
It was stated by the chairman that the proxies with
respect to the proposed extension to Exeter were as
follow :

In favour of tho extension .. Prosier.
•• 1,314
Against ditto ... 243

Majority in favour

1,071

Amount of stock in favour
Against ... ...

43,774,449
... ... 570,502

Excess of stock in favour ... ... £3,203,947

In favour
Against

Votes.
~ ... 20,646
... 3,441

Majority of votes in favour ... 17,205
The chief objections urged against the scheme were
made by Mr. Mortimer, one of the newly-elected
directors, who admitted that he thought the proposed
extension would materially benefit the South-Western
Company ; but who, as far as we could understand his
observations, appeared to think that for the purpose of
avoiding an expensive contest with the Great Western
and Bristol and Exeter Companies, the latter should be
Permitted to promote unopposed the Devon and Dorset
scheme, and he taunted the board with having turned a
deaf ear to the landowners, who, with their friends, had
offered to supply half the capital for constructing the
extension of the Dorchester line to Exeter, and sell
heir laud to the company at exceedingly moderate

rate's. He declared that the gradients of the propose.c!
extension from Dorchehester to Exeter were 20 per cer,t_
worse than those of the Dorset and Devon scheme. bt_e,
contended that the cost of the Southampton and Do;
chester line had been 800,0001., and the plant 148,430 i.?
and that the actual working expenses for the past 91
were 40,0081.. 4s. 5d., leaving a net profit of 12,00 n _
only, and that as 4 per cent., or 32,0001. per annum, voi
paid upon the 800,0001. with which the line was on:
structed, the loss upon the working of the line 1/91
16,000/. annually. Mr. Mortimer, however, did :.
touch the accuracy of the statement respecting , '
amount of net profit which it is declared is realised DY
the traffic which the Southampton and Dorchester es:
tension brings over the trunk line. Another argument
urged against the construction of the proposed extensusit
of the coast line from Dorchester to Exeter was, tli s
the Great Western and Bristol and Exeter Compaq
projected Dorset and Devon line must bring a larg°
amount of local traffic upon the Southampton and P'll
chester line. The through traffic from the SouthaniPt"
and Dorchester line was stated to he 11,000/. per au,.
only. To these objections, it was replied that the woo'
ing expenses of the Southampton and Dorchester line
for the past year, had been accurately ascertained to !,)'
rather under 50 per cent. of the gross receipts—that is,
27,4081., and not 40,008/. 4s. sd. ; that it is not tille
that the gradients of the proposed Dorset and Dever
line are better than those of the projected Dorchest
and Exeter Extension, and that the through traffic °f
the Southampton and Dorchester line is very much 111°r8
than 11,000/. ; and, in answer to the statement that thet
country to the west of Dorchester belongs to the
``,eat
Western Western Company by agreement with the South-NS et.
ern Company, it was declared that the former had brolieLL
such agreement by diverting traffic from the latter;
The Dorset and Devon line was asserted to be so tai'
out as to seriously affect the coast traffic, and the ineel;
venience of a break of guage at Dorchester was strongly
commented upon.
Mr. CHAPLIN, having been called on to state his opini°.:
of the project, said they all knew his opinion vis'skij
favour of flip central line, and all the arguments he ue
heard that day had convinced him that the only Ol
policy of the South-Western Company was to construed
the central line from Salisbury to Exeter. The seer,d
beet scheme was the coast line from Dorchester to -'4.t.i.
ter, and he was prepared to support that scheme with
his votes, and the proxies with which his friends had rel.
trusted him. He would therefore vote for the MO9l/. a
brought forward by the directors. 41
DICKINSON thought they hadikter not pro
any further, as they would only spen the funds of the
company in law and parliamentary warfare without do'.
ing any good. There was nothing worth fighting fel.' r '
Mr. LocKE said he had told the proprietors at forme
meetings what the Great Western Company were d°i#ling'
and the parties who had dissuaded them adopting ,6
central scheme had inflictedserious injury on the B°lll4l-
Western Railway Compan He would never be sit
0
fled until he had a narrow- age line to the west,. hey
he of the district by the broad-gauge inie."
he would consider as a national injury, and unless theYi
made the short and direct line to Exeter they
never participate in any of the traffic of that place, be
bet
by doing so they would ensure one-half the
traffic.
art
Resolutions were then passed adopting the reP f
which had been issued by the directors on the subject o
the extension from Dorchester to Exeter, stating th9tf
the interests of the company required the rejection °
the Dorset and Devon scheme now before Parliauleut,
and the extension of the line from Dorchester to 1311;1.0
port and Exeter ; authorising the directors to take ',ll
necessary steps to supply the district in question wL
the least possible delay ; the capital to be rais4o,;
company, and not by independent parties, fo '- .
therance of those objects.
A vote of thanks to the chairman and directors s/9g
then carried, and
After some observations from Mr. Hutchins, 14.:.
Edwards, Mr. Locke, and otherproprietors, in re- ' et,
ence to the course adopted by Mr. Mortimer, the ine, „
ing separated without passing any resolution ou ''
subject. Wight

CRICKET.

I ZINGARI v. THE ROYAL HORSE GUAR

(BLUE.)
It was said some time since that I Zingari, at leril
that branch of the fraternity who had abandoned
r
hedge-breaking and the roost-robbing, and turned tit
minds to cricket, bad been lost, at the close of the
season, in Ireland. It has happened, however, that eerti
tain officers of the Royal Horse Guards having alight°
upon the body, have drawn them out from the shrtib9,•
by what means we are not prepared at the present ol°
ment to say ; and so from the sister country or eils:j
where the wanderers have come, and yesterday pite'l
their camp and hoisted their colours upon the Ova', v.
defiance of their former gallant opponents. It will, h°‘ e
ever, be found that, let their winter's avocations lA/ f
been what they may, they have (from the defalcation ~.°1
one or two of their bowlers, we will assume, at all even'
not kept up their cricket practice. Hence the 101.'
appearance they now make on paper.

I ZINGARI.
Marquis of Worcester, b Berkeley I
A. Ricardo Esq., run out 0 b Venn ............. •
Colonel Taylor, b Venn
21 400 runKnight,B kuet
Berkeley
B e.
1.
k.
el .
Hon. E. Bligh, b Venn
Lord Guernsey, run out
F. Bathurst, Esq., c lloward, b
Venn
E. Tredcroft, Esq., b Venn
Lord Dupplin, c Howard, b Dor-

5 b Venn
4 b Venn

0
- 4

10 b Berkeley.

mer
Captain Mundy, s Thompson, b
Venn l3 b Venn
A. Baillie, Esq., not out 4 not out ............. • •
Hon. J. Fiennes, b Berkeley
Byes, 2 ; leg-byes, 1; wide, 1 4 Byes ...............

0
...... •• • 1

Total

Total ....... •••

ROYAL HORSE GUARDS.
Corporal Venn, c Taylor, b Private Thompson, b
Baldwin 0 Mnndy .................... :rr
D.Baillie,Esq., cA. Ba.illie, 7 Captain Millie, not out..;
b Baldwin 7 Private Howard, b 1331', ii
Private Knight, c Dnpplin, win ......................... •
b Bligh 6 Hon. Cr. Dormer, c Fienues 3
Private Thornton, c Bald- b Ricardo
win, b Bligh' 1 Byes, 2 ; leg-byes, ''`' 17
F. Berkeley, Esq., c wide, 13..........- • ' '''
Fiennes, b Dupplin 3l
Hon. G. Miles, run out
Captain Trelawney, b Bald-
win l2 1
And here the play terminal
of May did not continue lon

Total ......... 219

ted, for daylight on thel9til
iger.