The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-02 00:00:00

THE BLIDG

The house then went into committee of ways and means,
and the adjourned debate on the budget was resumed by
Sir W. CLAY, who said that the financial mea-
sures of the Government bad his entire and
hearty approval. He believed that their rejec-
tion by the house would occasion disappointment
not only in the metropolis, but throughout all the great
towns in the kingdom. In his opinion they were wise
and prudent, as well as bold and comprehensive,
and in addition to giving an important and im-
mediate relief in regard to taxation, they held out the
prospect of laying a safe and solid foundation for our
fiscal system. The Government financial scheme was
built mainly on the propositions of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer as to the income and property tax, and if
they were rejected, that scheme must be altogether aban-
doned. The hon. bart. entered into the discussion of the
various arguments used against the extension of the in-
come tax to Ireland, contending that those arguments
had wholly failed in convincing him that the extension
of the tax combined with the remission of the Consoli-
dated Annuities was unjust to the people of that coun-
try. The main feature of the Government plan
connected with the income tax was its gradual and final
extinction. He considered it was impossible to expect
that the tax could at once be totally repealed. That
could only be done in two ways—either by the gra-
dual accumulation of the surplus revenue until
it exceeded the expenditure by the amount of the in-
come tax, or by substituting another tax ; and while he
believed the country would not assent to the first plan,
he considered that no minister would be found who
would venture to propose another tax as a substitute.
But by the gradual diminution of the tax, and by fixing
a period for its final extinction, the house had it within
its power to get rid of the tax altogether. He
thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer was quite
right in the course which he had taken, both in a
social and economical point of view. On the whole, he
thought that the budget was entitled to the approbation
of the country, and he should give it his cordial support.
Sir F. KELLY opposed the resolutions before the
house on the ground that they formed part of a scheme
of t-.ration, which was pregnant with new, enlarged,
and intolerable burdens on the already oppressed landed
interest ; because they sought to extend the income
tax to Ireland, without any justification or any
political or other necessity ; and because they sought
to perpetuate, or continue for the unprecedented period
of 7 years the income tax, with all those intolerable ine-
qualities which had brought discredit on the Legislature,
and under which so many classes of the people had suf-
fered.

[LEFT SPEAKING.)

FISHER'S DIVORCE.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(THIS DAY.)
Their lordships sat this day at two o'clock to hear the
evidence in support of the second reading of this bill.
The Peers present were the Lord Chancellor, Lord Grey
of Groby, Lord Clanwilliam, Lord Beaumont, and
Lord St. Leonards. _ _ _

The petitioner is the veterinary surgeon of the sth
Dragoon Guards, his wife is the daughter of the Rev.
Mr. Macheb, rector of a parish, near Beverley, and the
gentleman whose conduct with Mrs. Fisher has given
rise to the present proceedings is Captain Prime, also of
the sth Dragoon Guards.
Mr. Macauley, with whom was Mr. Wilkes, appeared
for the petitioner ; and having briefly stated the case,
proceeded to take the following evidence :
George Theakstone, parisk clerk at Etten, Yorkshire,
proved the marriage of the parties in the year 1848.
Mr. Wilkinson, veterinary surgeon in the Life Guards,
said that he had known the petitioner and his wife, and
had always considered them to be living together on
terms of mutual affection. They were visited on terms
of perfect equality with the officers in the regiment.
Mrs. Mary Smith, a corn-dealer, of Dublin, said that
Mr. and Mrs. Fisher had lodged at her house from May,
1851, until the time when Mrs. Fisher left her husband.
They were on good terms with each other.
In the early part of 1852, Mr. Fisher fell ill of the
scarlet fever, and was confined to his bed about eight
days. On the first day that Mr. Fisher was able to go
out, Mrs. Fisher went away while he was absent, leaving
word that she was gone to see her father, who was ill.
She did not return. .

By the Lord Chancellor—She packed up all her
clothes and took them with her.
Mr. Faukner, clerk to Mr. Fisher's office, said that he
had accompanied Mr. Wilkinson to Southampton,
where they saw Captain Prime and Mrs. Fisher walk-
ing about together. Witness followed them to the house
where they were living, and saw them standing together
in the first floor window of the house. Witness also
served a copy of his bill and the usual notices on Mrs.
Fisher at Paris.
Mr. Wilkinson recalled, who deposed to having seen
Captain Prime and Mrs. Fisher walking together at
Southampton.
Susan Kelway, lodging-house keeper, of Southampton,
said that in May, 1852, Captain Prime and Mrs. Fisher
came to lodge at her house, and remained about a fort-
night. They lived together as man and wife.
Amelia Andrews, niece to the last witness, said that
in May last she was living with her aunt, when Captain
Prime and Mrs. Fisher came to live there. They occu-
pied the same bed-room, and lived together as man and
wife.
Mr. T. W. Pinniger, solicitor, proved that action was
brought against Captain Prime by Mr. Fisher. By mu-
tual agreement of counsel, a verdict was taken for 8001.
Both damages and taxed costs in that action, amounting
to 1,1691. 15s. 6d., were paid.
Mrs. Smith recalled, and examined by the Lord Chan-
cellor, stated that it was about six o'clock in the even-
ing of the day when Mrs. Fisher went away that Mr.
Fisher returned home. When witness told him he
seemed very much displeased that she had gone away
itlitbhyitsikioowuledge. He desired witness to write to
o'clock. in the da
her, which she did, but no answer was received.
Mr. Fisher, the petitioner, was then called, and exa-
minedse. He stated that it was about two
gone. She that he learned that Mrs. Fisher was
wwrasotebeer,tottmrs. ;Lishhert, told her to wait until he
to ••••
had
and
an witness wit previously said that she wished
he would take her. Witness
which he
same day, and afterwards
two other letters, to he received no answer, and
he then desired Mrs. Smith to write, but no answer was
ire directed to the Rev.
There was
returned two
returned to that. The letters
Mr Macheb, the father of Mrs.;
a misunder-
standing the letters in an envelope.
Macheb at the
standing between the witness and 4rwaB
time. Witness then sent his servant ion
and
various times ascertained that his wife was Jti.awn;iti,
tatlior, num laid the matter Won Ilia commanding

SPOETING INTELLIGENCE.

CHESTER RACES.

To-morrow the " May meetings" of the sporting com-
munity will be inaugurated on the Roodee of the an-
tiente citie of Chester. Abundant and interesting sport
is promised, and a cheering indication is afforded of the
continuance of fine weather for its celebration.

Efficient preparations have been made for the ex-
pected visitors. The stand and inclosure have been ma-
terially enlarged and improved, and, notwithstanding
recent falls of rain, the course is in excellent condition.
So great is the demand for stabling, that it has been
found necessary to appropriate the extensive cheese-
market to the reception and standing of horses. Lodg-
ings are also in increasing requisition, and at the dif-
ferent inns beds are at a premium. Cheap excursion
trains in connection with the various manufacturing dis-
tricts and neighbouring towns will be run ; and in order
to facilitate the ingress and egress of passengers at the
Chester station, additional rails have been laid down for
upwards of three miles, at an outlay of about 4,0001. !
Twenty-seven stakes are appointed to be contested in
the four days, and a striking proof of their popularity
and importance is afforded by the fact, that the number
of subscribers to those which are already closed amounts
to 190. 1,695/. " added money" is distribUted amongst
them.

Tuesday's list contains six events, the most important
being the Palatine Stakes, the Mostyn Stakes, and the
Chesterfield Stakes. The chief and all-powerful attrac-
tion at the meeting, however, centres in the Chester
Cup, which will be run for on Wednesday. Last year,
43 competed for this great Cestrian prize, and the field
on the present occasion is likely to be numerically as
strong.
HORSES ARRIVED AT CHESTER.—Talfourd, Lord-
Lieutenant, Indian Warrior, Sylphine, Mistletoe, Han-
nah, Venison filly, Margaret of Anjou, Pearl, Ithuriel
filly, Whittington, King David, Osbaldeston, Scarecrow,
' Sanita The Judge, Sweetness, gr g by alaor, out of
Martha, Pope Joan, Locket, Napier colt, April Fool,
Mountain Deer, oolwich, Little Jack, Missive, He-
lena, Bellewstown2 Rosalba.
TRAINS FROM LONDON.—NO special; the 8.45 p.m.
train arrives at Chester at 4.30 a.m., and, the 6 a.m,
train at 12 o'clock.

EETING-MAT 18.

'CHESTER TRADESMEN'S CUP,

Age st lb
Gadabout
Corybantes
St, George 6 6 0
The Carrier
Royal George
Talfourd (including
101 b extra) 3 6 0
Richard Primmer 4 5 12
The Sutler
B m out of Mina-
ture 5 5 10
Madeline
Valour
Monsoon
The Event 4 5 6
Veteran 3 5 2
Chaffwax

RAIL WAY INTELLIGENCE.

LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN.

A special meeting of this company was held on Satur-
day, at the Euston-square station, to consider the ex-
pediency of prosecuting the bills now before Parliament
for the construction of new works. There was a large
attendance of shareholders, and Major-General the Hon.
George Anson, chairman of the company, presided.
Mr. C. Stewart, the secretary, having read the notice
calling the meeting,
The CHAIRMAN rose and said—When I last had the
honour of addressing you from this chair, I announced
to you that it was the intention of the directors to call
a special general meeting of the company at an early
period, for the purpose of submitting to the proprietors
the expediency of prosecuting the bills which were
named in the half-yearly report, and of asking for your
approval of them, provided the directors, after duly
considering them, should think it desirable to proceed
with them in Parliament. The reason for adopting this
unusual course was, that a committee of the House of
Commons had been appointed for the purpose of in-
quiring into the propriety of allowing and sanction-
ing those large amalgamations which were proposed by
some of the principal railway companies in the kingdom.
On that occasion I ventured to offer my opinion,
that it would not be possible to confine that inquiry
to the simple question of amalgamation and agree-
ment. I felt that it could riot be limited to the present
proposals of the companies, and that it would be found
necessary to extend it to the past, as well as to the future
course of legislation, with respect to railway matters
generally. Knowing, as I did, that the system now in
operation, of which we have had ample experience to
enable us to form a full and accurate judgment upon it,
had proved most injurious to railway interests generally,
and that it was defective also with respect to the conve-
nience and accommodation of the public, I did not be-
lieve, remembering that the committee of the House of
Commons was composed of able and sound headed men,
that it would be content with pursuing its investigations
simply into the measures which were then proposed by
the great companies, and for which the sanction of Par-
liament was asked, principally for the purpose of ena-
bling them to enter into arnalgmations and agreements,
which, in point of fact, could virtually and practically
have been carried out, even though the House of Com-
mons, or a committee of the house, had refused to give
them its sanction. It was likewise quite evident to me
that if the inquiry should be pushed into the question of
railway legislation generally, and if the committee should
be inclined to grapple with that question effectually, so
much time would be required for the investigation that
I was satisfied the greater part of the session would be
consumed' in hearing evidence and collecting informa-
tion, and I was in great hopes, therefore, that the
whole of the bills now before Parliament would have
been deferred. In this I have been much disappointed.
The select committee have decided that all amalgama-
tion bills, all bills involving agreements and combination
of interests between companies, should be postponed ;
but that all bills projected by new companies, all bills
brought forward by independent interests, may be allowed
to proceed. Now, the effect of this upon us is, that it
deprives us of the power of obtaining those acts which
we really thought and believed would be most beneficial
on all accounts for our interests. The committee have
given us no option as to our future policy, but has left
us exactly in the position in which we were when Par-
liament first undertook to endeavour to amend the sys-
tem of which we all disapproved. It has left us no other
alternative than to proceed with these bills, which, it is
now useless to disguise, have been projected solely for
the purpose of protecting our interests against the in-
roads and encroachments of hostile companies. What
have been the grounds for this decision on the part of
the select committee ? It is true that a great deal of the
evidence they have received has been of a contradictory
character ; but I would like to know what great ques-
tion has ever been mooted before a committee of the
House of Commons, or before Parliament itself, in re-
gard to which you will not find able and zealous advocates
on both sides ? It has always been so, and it always
will be so. I know it would occupy too much of your
time to sift this evidence as I could wish, but I cannot
help alluding to some portions of the evidence given by
the more important witnesses. In the first place, I will
name to you Mr. Laing, Mr. Stephenson, Mr. Swift, and
Captain Huish, all gentlemen intimately and, perhaps,
better, acquainted than we are with the management of
railway affairs, each of them pursuing different occupa-
tions and employments in connection with railways,
and all of them capable of giving a sound and judicious
opinion on the subject which the committee had been
appointed to investigate. Well, what is the effect of
their evidence ? All of them express a strong opinion in
favour of amalgamation. They showed plainly before
the committee that the objections to amalgamation on
the ground of competition were untenable ; that com-
bination had always followed, and would always follow,
any attempts at competition, and that if Parliament
should now refuse to legalise and sanction the proposed
union between companies, agreements could and would
be entered into in spite of Parliament, to which the same
objections would apply, if valid, as are now urged against
amalgamation by Parliamentary enactment. On the
other side of the question, we have Mr. Denison, Mr.
Russell, and Mr. Sandars, all expressing a different and
contrary opinion, and all disapproving of amalgamations.
It is true that Mr. Denison qualified his disapproval
much more than the others, because, while he most decid-
edly objected to an amalgamation between the London
and North-Western and the Midland Companies, he did
not seem to be of opinion that an amalgamation of the
Great Northern and Midland would be open to the
same objection. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Now, I
would like to know, if an amalgamation of the Great
Northern and Midland would be an advantageous
arrangement for the public and for the companies them-
selves, why an amalgamation of the London and
North-Western and Midland would be objectionable. I
' think it would require all the ingenuity of the most able
partisan to convince the public that there is any distinc-
tion between the two cases. (Hear, hear.) But Mr.
Sandars objected to the principle of amalgamation in tote
upon public grounds. His opinion was that wholesale
competition was good for the public, and that, moreover,
combination was not practicable. If so, I would like to
be informed why the Great Western Company, of which
he is himself so able an organ, should be quite ready to
enter into any arrangement with those parties whose
alleged monopoly they have held up as a bugbear to induce
Parliament to sanction their competition scheme—a mo-
nopoly which it is their professed desire to destroy, but
which it is their real object and intention to share.
(Cheers.) I am satisfied that the committee of the
House of Commons did not, or does not, entertain any
strong opinion against amalgamations. What induced
it to arrest the progress of the bills in Parliament was a
vague and undefinable fear that if the demand for amal-
gamation should be encouraged by the Legislature with-
out inquiry and mature deliberation, it would speedily
and largely increase, and that ultimately all the railway
interests in the kingdom would be united in one body.
That this result might be possible I will not deny ; but
that it would be detrimental to the interests of the pub-
lic I am not prepared to admit. When Mr. Sanders was
asked what protection he would give to the public against
the evils which might arise from this vast power being
vested in the hands of one company—what remedy lie
would apply to prevent any serious consequences aris-
ing from this combination of interests—the reply he gave
to the question did not evince that ability for which
I should have given him credit. He said that he had
no plan to propose, that he would leave things as they
are, that he would allow the different companies to take
care of themselves. In short, the result of his whole ar-
gument was, that lie thought combinations and agree-
ments so objectionable he would endeavour to prevent
them by act of Parliament. Prevent combination by
act of Parliament ! Really this is too absurd to bear
discussion, and I feel it would be a mere waste of time
to answer it. (Hear.) Far different was the evidence
of the gentlemen on the other side. When Mr. Ste-
phenson and Mr. Swift were asked what protection they
would afford to the public, they expressed their opinions
boldly and clearly—opinions in which, having been
formed upon extensive experience of railway matters
generally, and not in the interest of this or any other
company, I do not hesitate to say I very much agree.
And here I gladly take this opportunity of stating my
own views upon this question, because, though I was
was not called before the committee, I feel that, stand-
ing in the position in which I do with regard to this com-
pany, and having been for some time closely connected
with the management of its important affairs, you the
proprietors have a right to know my sentiments. I
have always been a strong advocate for amalgamations,
because I think that union of interests between railway
companies in any system whatever, whether continuous
or lateral, would be of the greatest advantage, not only
to the railway companies themselves, but also to the
convenience and accommodation of the public. That is
my firm belief ; but the occupation of the country by one
company, in consequence of amalgamation, instead of by
two or three, would not remove the evils of which I com-
plain, would not prevent attempts at competition, would not
prevent other companies from endeavouring to come into
your district for the purpose of taking away your traffic,
and forcing you to buy them off at a ruinous and extra-
vagant cost. Some other remedy must be applied ; for
thatamalgamatione alaroen e wouallldvriot
d besufficwouldienta to
de
ssiercaubrl
ee
thing to arrive at—namely, the stability of our property.
vested
eds
toe notd
inlitebs
si taßtne
atrod soafy I
Tr
awd
eo u
tohi beex
ahma
npey s e
all nee
wp opwr enr.
jects, and to appoint proper persons to investigate the
necessity of their construction, to inquire into the grounds
upon which they are required, and to ascertain precisely
the parties by whom they
are originated. (Hear, hear.)
If they found that there was a necessity for their con-
struction, the construction of them should be offered to
Nnhhae
ok poe
projectedtrbt iee sn ee cwc ut
linesphye
min g: the
Iwe country,wnno would
dld
gaivls give
them
bmde
pm if they
owtner the
trhefe upEsaeord t
tai
re
dos
of Trade to make such rules and regulations as would
wn preventeowud m
eebeapiarayn protectionie acts
e onf oppressiontir
eto partt the
of
e public
ethe beingr
feexercised
companies,
s, ando ver
attemptsthes
to create a monopoly. Another objection to the rireseit
system is, the inconvenience to the public at point ofi s
junction. I would give to the Board of Trade power to
make arrangements for the convenience of the public,
provided then
the companies
way
of themselves b
ls
eh should
accommodation
tainnny
obstacles
which the public has a right to demande .
re-
spect to all complaints of want of acoommodat on gene-
rally, I think the Board of Trade, or a body of per-
sons nominated by the Board of Trade, would be
good judges in such cases ; and I believe we would be
willing to submit to their interference if proper security
were given to us that no inroads and invasions on the
pearrttyo.f lißoytislueeb companiesmeans I ouhlcl have
ee
halilnetwededaiuron:
stability
iplirtoy-
and value would be given to your property, which I
think it ought to possess. Another question which has
been raised is 744th regard to the limitation of dividends.
It has been urged that we ehould giVO fiOinctlling in re- k

turn for the security we ask. Now, I would give no- '
thing for amalgamation simply, but for security I am
disposed to make a large concession. I am not prepared
to admit that we are called upon to submit to any limi-
tation of our dividends, but believing that the measures
I have proposed, if carried into effect, would lead to a
considerable and permanent improvement in our pro-
perty, I do not think you would object to the fixing of
71 per cent., or 2 per cent, above your present dividend,
as the point at which some reduction of the tolls should
be made. Moreover, in order to prevent any improper
expenditure of capital, supposing such a prosperous state
of things should arise, and for the sake of keeping the
dividends within the specified amount, I think we should
be willing to submit to a public audit, the auditors mak-
ing a report to the Board of Trade annually upon the
financial position of the different companies. Ido be-
lieve that under such a system as I have faintly outlined
a different state of things would arise. I believe our
expenditure would be diminished—l believe our receipts
would be increased—l believe the resources of the coun-
try would be more effectually developed, and that ulti-
mately your property would be placed upon a basis
which I desp.a ir of seeing so long as we are allowed
to go on as we are now. The chairman then enumerated
the new lines proposed to be constructed, and for which
bills are now before Parliament. The directors did not
anticipate any objections to the first—a line connecting
St. Albans and the district round Amersham and
Chesham with the main line at Watford, at an esti-
mated cost of 152,0001. This branch was demanded by
the people residing in the district, to whom they are
bound, in fairness, to supply railway accommodation,
and would, he was convinced, prove a remunerative
concern. The second was a line from the Oxford, Wor-
cester, and Wolverhampton Railway at Oxford, through
Thame to Tring, at an estimated cost of 400,0001., the
distance being 31 miles. The meeting would bear in
mind that there was at present a bill before Parliament
for the construction of a new line, to be called the Mid-
Western from Oxford to London. He believed there
was no necessity for it, and that it would be opposed by
the Great. Western ; but as there was also a new line
proposed from Cheltenham to Oxford, which he thought
would be carried, the line from Tring through Thame to
Oxford would place the towns and districts accommo-
dated by the Oxford and Cheltenham in connection,
through the London and North-Western lines with the
metropolis. It could be made for 400,0001., while the
proposed Mid-Western would cost at least 1,000,000.
The distance from Oxford to the Euston station would
be 62 miles, against 59 miles to the terminus of the'
South-Western at Waterlow-road. The third was a
short branch, forming a junction between the Bucking-
hamshire line and the line of the Oxford, Worcester, and
Wolverhampton Company, near Oxford—length, 2 miles;
estimated cost, 37,0001.. Last year the bill was not
sanctioned by Parliament, but the directors thought a
fresh application should be made, as it was necessary
the line should be constructed. The fourth, a line of 18
miles in length, from Northampton to Market Har-
borough, at an estimated cost of 250,0001., was sup-
ported by the town of Northampton and the landed pro-
prietors in the district. A large mineral field had lately
been opened in the county, and there was every prospect
of the line being a remunerative one. The fifth was a
line from near the Oldbury station, on the Stour Valley
Railway, to Stour-bridge, 81 miles ; estimated cost
300,0001. This line would pass through a rich mineral
and very populous district, and must prove remunerative,
worked in connection with a system of railway so exten-
sive as that of the London and North-Western. The
same observation applies to the sixth project, a line
from near Wellington to Colebrookdale, with branches,
ten miles ; estimated cost, 150,0001. The proposed
line from Shrewsbury to Newton, with a branch to
Oswestry, was 44 miles in length, at an estimated cost
of 500,0001. It certainly dived into a new district, but
the landowners and others were in favour of it, besides
which, parties in the interest of the Shrewsbury and
Chester and Great Western companies had before Parlia-
ment a line to Newton, which would no doubt be passed,
if the superior project of this company were not pro-
posed, and thus the entire district of central Wales would
be transferred to the opposing companies. The eighth of
the series, a line from Crewe to Shrewsbury passed
through a district free from any engineering difficulties, and
many of the landowners having agreed to dispose of their
land at fair rates, and to dispense with needless or costly
works, the whole length, 33 miles, could be constructed
for 850,0001., about 10,600/. per mile ; while its forma-
tion would bring Liverpool, Manchester, and Yorkshire
into direct communication, by the lines of the London
and North-Western Company, with Wales. The whole
amount of capital that would be required for the proposed
lines would be 2,149,0001. —a very large sum of money ;
but he hoped he had satisfied them that they would not
do wrong in allowing the directors to proceed with these
measures to the extent that might be necessary in the
present session of Parliament. The question now arose,
how were the means to be provided to meet this heavy
expenditure ? In order to encourage and aid the exten-
sion of railways in connection with the several lines from
the system of the London and North-Western Company,
the proprietors had from time to time subscribed to other
undertakings, the amount of capital so invested amount-
ing to 3,292,6561. The market value of the shares so
held now amounted to 2,905,9701. It might be asked,
why not avail yourselves of that capital for the purpose
of providing means for constructing the proposed line ?
The answer was simple and twofold. In the first place,
during the last four years the value of the property held
in other undertakings had increased to the amount of
1,200,0001., and having regard to the reasonable prospect
of further and considerable improvement, it appeared to
the directors inexpedient to realise the property at pre-
sent. In the second place, even if the directors were so
inclined, such a step would not meet the immediate re-
quirements of Parliament in reference to new works
to be sanctioned. What they recommended, therefore,
was, that ordinary share capital should be raised to
the amount of 3,054,600/. ; that the new shares shou/d
be offered to the proprietors entitled to participate, in
the proportion of one share of 2/. 10s. for every 100/. of
stock, and that a deposit of 21. 10s. per share should
immediately be made, it being understood that there
would be no further calls for the present. It was fin-
possible for the directors to say how much of that money
would be' required ; but the proprietors might rest as-
sured that no further demands would be made upon
them without due and proper notice being given. With
respect to the projects themselves, there was another
process through which they must pass before they could
be carried into execution. After receiving the sanction'
of Parliament they would have to be submitted to a
Wharncliffe meeting of the shareholders, called by pub-
lic advertisement, and forms of assent and dissent to
each bill would be distributed among the proprietors
several days before the meeting in question, such forms,
if returned properly filled up, to have all the authority
and legal force of proxies. He hoped that the share-
holders would be satisfied with these propositions. They
had hitherto reposed• the fullest confidence in the di-
rectors, for which his colleagues and himself returned
their grateful thanks, and he should be extremely sorry
if that confidence, were now to be withdrawn. The
chairman concluded by moving a series of resolutions in
accordance with the recommendations of the directors.
Admiral MOORBO3I seconded the resolutions.
_ _ _

Mr. UPCROFT opposed the resolutions for several reasons.
First, because the proposed lines would cost at least
5,000,000/. ; secondly, because he understood that the ca-
pital account had been closed ; and thirdly, because he
thought it would be more respectful to the select committee
to wait until it had completed its investigations and
made its final report for the guidance of the House of
Commons. He moved an amendment.

Mr. DiamorsoN seconded the amendment. He knew,
from the communications he had had with his brother
proprietors, that considerable difference of opinion existed
among them with regard to the policy of amalgamation
propounded from the chair. They were not called upon
to discuss that question now, but he protested against its
being passed over sub .silentio. As for the propositions
now before the meeting, he complained that more time
had not been given for their consideration, involving as
they did, the expenditure of a large amount of additional
capital. He had no objection to the line connecting the
Buckinghamshire-and the Oxford, Worcester, and Wol-
verhampton railways, if they thought it worth struggling
for ; but he most decidedly objected to all the others,
as being exceedingly improper and disadvantageous to
the company. He had recently been much about the
lobby of the House of Commons, and the information
he received on all hands was, that no railway bills of
any description would be passed this session. He.thought
therefore that the consideration of the resolutions should
be postponed.
Mr. GEAcH did not believe with the last speaker that
no railway bills would be passed during the present
session. On the contrary, he believed that a large
number of bills would be passed, and therefore he
thought it was absolutely necessary, for the protection
of their interests, that they should ask Parliament
to sanction the bills to which the chairman had re-
ferred. The mover of the amendment had said it
would be more respectful to the select committee if they
delayed the prosecution of these bills. So undoubtedly
it would ; but if they consented to delay, what security
had they that hostile companies would adopt the same
course ? Mr. Dickenson had objected to the line from.
Oxford to Tring ; but he asked them supposing the pro-
posed line from Cheltenham to Oxford were to be agreed
to, would it not be better to have a line for bringing on
the passengers to London than to allow them to stop
short at Oxford? He maintained that the new lines
were necessary for the protection of their interests, and,
in his opinion, the present was a favourable time for rais-
ing the additional capital that would be required, money
being both cheap and abundant. It was folly to talk of
closing the capital account. He believed it would be
impossible to do it under the present system.
Mr. DEANS supported the amendment believing that
the measures proposed by the chairman would be
highly detrimental to the interests of the company. He
admitted that it was the duty of railway companies to
supply all the reasonable wants of the public ; but when
the landowners and inhabitants of any district came
forward and demanded a new line to be made, he thought
they should be told to construct it themselves, and not
endeavour to throw the burden upon others. (Hear,
hear.) The chairman had frankly stated that the proposed
lines were not necessary, except as protection against
other companies, That was exactly what he complained of.
He complained that their own and other companies had
been so occupied in competing among themselves, in en-
deavouring to injure each other as much as possible,
that they had not been able, for want at the necessary
means, providq proper accommodation for the public,
to put their lines in good working condition, or to in-
crease the dividends of their shareholders. (Hear, hear.)
Accordingly he found, on looking over the list of new
lines, that they were all either intended to MAiet an
injury upon other railways, or elfie snedi as would never
pay the cost ccinfiptic,ion. The line from Crewe to
Shrewsbury was an Insane atteMpt to compete with the
Great Western CoMpany, and to ilceNT.,At it establishing
a connection with Lancaihiie. Be objected to the re-
venue of the ccmpariy being squandered j! Parliamentary
conteds+ and remMeti the doectero that what they new

proposed was directly in the teeth of their own report,
which declared that it was inexpedient to encourage or
authorise the expenditure of capital in the construction
of duplicate lines with a view to competition. (Hear.)
Mr. NICHOLSON spoke in favour of the resolutions,
but regretted that the Hampstead line had not been pro-
ceeded with.

Mr. BRIGHT recommended that the meeting should be
adjourned for a fortnight, and that in the meantime a
Petition should be presented to the House of Commons,
praying that no railway bills be passed this session.
(A laugh.)
A PROPRIETOR complained that the directors had not
supplied the meeting with the means of forming a cor-
rect judgment upon the merits of the proposed lines.
The CHAIRMAN then briefly replied to the various ob-
jections which had been made to the resolutions. These
objections, he said, would have had greater weight with
him if they had not come from gentlemen who always
opposed the plans of this company. (Hear.) Although
he believed with Mr. Geach that the capital account of
so extensive an undertakingcould never be closed entirely,
yet it was so far closed that the directors could not
touch any part of the capital without the sanction of the
proprietary, and he for one was not disputed to disturb
that arrangement. But they must not jump to the con-
clusion that the expenditure increased in proportion to
the increase of capital., The experience of the last three
years showed the reverse to be the fact, for while the
capital had been increased to the extent of 6-93, the re-
ceipts had increased to the extent of 2-13. He was con-
vinced that all the proposed lines, besides being neces-
sary for the protection of their interests, would be remu-
nerative, while the cost of their construction would be
much less than they had formerly any experience of.
He did not agree with Mr. Dickenson that no railway
bills would be passed this session. A considerable num-
ber of bills had already received the sanction of Par-
liament, and it was absurd to say that they should de-
lay until the select committee had made its final report
to the house. If they did so, the opportunity of passing
their bills would be lost for ever, and the projects of
hostile companies would be carried into execution. The
reason why he had not mentioned the Hampstead line
was, that they were pot interested in it corporately, but
he believed the measure was in progress. So far from
thinking, with Mr. Deans, that they should not seek to
prevent the communication of the Great Western with
Liverpool, he should, as long as he occupied his present
position, resist it to the uttermost, and he should have
the support of the whole proprietary. (Hear, hear.)
The question was then put, when there voted—
For the resolutions 65
For the amendment 23
Majority —42

The resolution; were accordingly declared carried.
A vote of thanks was awarded to the chairman, and
the meeting which had lasted upwards of three hours,
separated.

PARIS TO STRA SBURG RAILWAY.
The general meeting of the shareholders of this com-
pany took' place on April 28, at Paris, in Herz's Great
Room, Count de Sdgur in the chair. Near him were
seated the following directors :—The Duke de Galliera,
Baron d'Hervey, Baron Alph. de Rothschild, M. Jayr,
M. Fol, M. C. Arnoux, M. Baignieres, M. Blacque-
Belair, M. Clary, M, E. Chevaudier, M. Hainguerlot,
M. Marcuard, M. Roux, M. E. Perdonnet, and M.
Dubochet. It being announced that there were present
240 shareholders, representing 36,000 shares, the meet-
ing was declared to be duly constituted.
The CHAIRMAN then rose, And stated that the pre-
sent meeting was convoked both as an ordinary and
extraordinary one ; the former was for the usual busi-
ness of having a statement of the position of the com-
pany made, the accounts passed, and a dividend de-
clared ; whilst the latter was for the consideration of a
project for creating a caiese de retraites for the men em-
ployed on the line 25 years, and some other matters of
importance. The number of shareholders present and
the number of shares represented not being sufficient to
constitute an extraordinary meeting, these latter objects
could not be brought forward at present.
A SHAREHOLDER wished to inquire how it happened
that after the public journals had, a fortnight back,
spoken of an arrangement between the Strasburg and
Northern companies relative to a tender for an impor-
tant line, after the Minister of Public Works had agreed
to the proposal made, and when all that remained to
terminate the matter was the approbation of the Emperor
—when all this had taken place, how did it come to pass
that the hon. chairman did not say one word about the
matter when speaking just now of the extraordinary
meeting?

The CHAIRMAN replied that it was quite correct that
the two companies alluded to had more than a fortnight
back agreed to tender conjointly for the Ardennes Rail-
way. They had sent in a proposal to the Minister of
Public Works, who had at once entered on an examina-
tion of their tender, but no answer had as yet been re-
' turned. It would be consequently premature to speak
of a matter which had not been brought to a conclusion.
It would be better for any shareholder who desired to
ask for information to allow the proceedings to go on
regularly, and speak when the report had been read.
He should now call on the secretary-general to read the
report of the Board of Directors.
M. BOSSANGE then rose, and read the document in ques-
tion. It commences by stating that the promises made in
the report of the preceding year had been more than
realised. On June 15, trains had commenced running from
Paris to Forbach, and on 12th August following from Paris
to the Prussian frontier, without any break or interruption.
It was only by great exertions that this could be effected.
and when once the whole line was opened a difficulty
presented itself, which, although tending to the ultimate
advantage of the undertaking, was for the moment a
source of annoyance. This was the sudden and unex-
pected augmentation of the passengers and goods' traffic
to such an extent that the company was forced, notwith-
standing the amount of working-stock which it had pro-
vided in anticipation of that opening, to refuse a cer-
tain amount of the business which was offered. The
consequence was that it was found necessary to make an
additional command of 100 locomotives, 100 tenders,
36 passengers' carriages, and 1818 goods' waggons, the
expense of which was, in round numbers, 13 millions.
There was no intention of providing for the expense at
present, as the company could meet it during the cur-
rent year ; but next year the general meeting would
have to decide whether it might hot be advisable to pro-
vide for it either by a loan, or by creating a reserve fund
from a certain sum kept back from the dividend of each
year. The various goods' yards, stations, and sheds on
the principal line may be considered as terminated, with
the exception of the terminal station at Nancy. The
plans for that building were at present under the consi-
deration of the Ponts-et-Chaussdes. The Strasburg
terminus was now in course of construction, and was
advancing rapidly. On the 17th of November last the
Prussian and Bavarian lines were united wth that of
Strasburg, and the latter was placed in direct communica-
tion with Manheim and the coal districts of Prussia. The
branch-line to Rheims, which the company was bound
to have terminated in March next, would be opened to
the public in November. As to the branch-line from
Metz to Thionville, there was every reason to hope that it
could be opened to the public at the end of 1853, that is,
two years earlier than the conditions of the contract re-
quired. Hitherto the working of the coal basin of Saar-
bruck and the manufacture of coke had been kept in the
hands of the Prussian administration of mines, but by
an arrangement lately entered into with the Prussian
authorities, the company had obtained permission to
make coke 'on its own account at the coal-pits. In
order to facilitate that operation the company had pur-
chased ground to the extent of 5 hectares 19 area (14 acres.)
The company intended to establish 112 ovens, which
would give about 120 tons a-day. Already 28 of these
ovens have been built. The second line of rails was to
be laid down on the whole of the principal line by the
end of the present year. The report then enters into a
very minute account of the results of the working, and
shows how general has been the augmentation of traffic
in every kind of receipts.
The gross receipts for the year ending March 31,
1853, amount to ' 17,795,5141 r. 58c.
from which must be deducted for the
passengers' tax of one-tenth, sub-
ventions, &c.,

962,365 fr. .46c.

leaving a remainder of 16,833,149fr. 12c.
From that sum there being deducted,
first, the expenses of the working,
amounting to 6,524,771 fr. 38c.,
and secondly the balance of the
interest paid during the construc-
tion, namely, 1,685,553 fr. 75c.,
in all

there was a surplus of receipts of .. 8,623,623 fr. 99c.
From that sum must be deducted,
first, for the reserve-fund to meet
unforeseen expenses, and which
cannot be less than 5 per cent, on
the net receipts, or 433,884 fr. 990.,
and next, interest paid to the
shareholders for 1852, or
4,925,000 fr., making in a 11......... 5,358,884 fr. 99c.

Leaving a disposable sum of
........... 3,264,139 Oc.
which would give a dividend of 13fr. per share. That
sum being added to 20fr. already paid as interest, gave
a total dividend of 331 r. per share, or 6 3-5 per cent, on
the capital paid up. Had not the obligation existed to
complete the reimbursement of the sum of 15,162,500 fr.
paid in interest to the shareholders during the construc-
tion of the line, there would have been distributed
1,685,553 fr. additional, which would have given within
a shade of 40fr. per share for the year 1852. It was to
be remarked, in addition, that during the last three
months of the year which has just concluded, the re-
ceipts had amounted to an average of 54,981 fr. 4c. per
day. Such an amount at the very commencement of
the working of the main line, in conditions by no means
of a favourable character, seemed to demonstrate that
the returns of the line would be even greater during the
present year. Should the dividend be approved, it would
be paid at the office of the company on and after the 2d
of May,

M. RENNIN, in the name of the Committee of Ac-
counts, read a report stating that he and his colleagues
had visited the line in every part, and that they could
only express their approbation of all they had seen.
A vote of thanks was passed to the Committee of
Accounts, and the members composing it were requested
to continue their functions (which are gratuitous) for
another year.
The amourstii Were then approved of, and the dividend
of per share agreed to. The proceedings then ter-
minated.

A WELL-DISCIPLINED SOLDIER.--A laughable circum•
stance took place a short time since. As a soldier was
carrying the dinner belonging to his mess from the baker's,
one of his companions coming behind him, called out
"Attention !" when this well-disciplined soldier dropped
his hands, and at the same time the dinner of his unfor-
tunate ooraradee.—Warcoter Clovnicle.