The Sun.
London, England, 1838-10-10 00:00:00

We offered, some days back, a few observations upon
the injustice and absurdity of imputing it as a fault to the
Irish Railway Commissioners that the lines recommended
by them did not happen to coincide with those which had
already been proposed by Companies in actual existence, or
in process of formation. It is with much satisfaction we
observe that the Times concurs in the view we have taken
of this matter. Our Contemporary commences an article
in his paper yesterday with the following remarks :
" We will not pretend to give an opinion as to the supe-
rior eligibility of the lines recommended by the Commis-
sioners of Railways for Ireland, or of those proposed by
the Railway Companies already formed or contemplated.
This must greatly depend on local circumstances, requiring
the most laborious examination, and of which none but
skilful and experienced engineers can be competent judges ;
and the last few years have shown how widely even those
persons can differ on such points. But as far as general
arguments, and as the traffic, means, population, and im-
portance of towns and districts are concerned, the recom-
mendations of the Commissioners appear fair and plau-
sible enough. They have been censured for objecting to
all the lines proposed by various formed or intended Com-
panies, and for recommending a line of their own in
lieu, it being argued that they were only appointed to
give an opinion respecting the comparative merits of the
hoes proposed bz_ different Companies, and to facilitate
the labours of ih67-associations, not, on the contrary; t!o
endeavour to crush them by objecting to their lines and by
recommending totally different ones. This construction of
the letters patent by which the Commissioners were ap-
pointed doss not seem to be warranted either by the letter
or intent of that document, or by the purpose for which the
Commission was issued. It appears to us that the Com-
missioners were not only at perfect liberty to object to
all the lines projected by Coapanies, and to recommend to-
tally different lines, but that they were bound to do so, if,
after a full and part'i'al examination of the former lines, they
found them disadvantageous to the public, or even less ad-
vantageous than others which could be suggested. Whether
this investigation was properly conducted, and the conclu-
sions of the Commissioners were fairly and impartially ar-
rived at (which could seem to be doubted by some of the
parties interested in rival lines), is of course quite another
question "

Our Contemporary, however, has objections to the report
of the Commissioners, which he proceeds to state.
He objects, first, that " they have gone beyond the letter
and evident intent of their instructions, by entering
into. minute details and calculations of the cost and
return of the lines recommended by them ; thereby
putting the public to a large and unnecessary expense in
attempting to do what the experience of the last four or
five years has proved to be utterly impracticable, while their
calculations may have the effect of seriously damping the
spirit of even legitimate enterprise in those undertakings."
We must here repeat what we have said already, that if
"
the calculations of the Commissioners have been correct,
whatever damping" effect they may produce upon the
s Brit of railway enterprise must of necessity be a pubiic
ben: fit. If the calculations are erroneous, let that be shown.
The Times, however, thinks that the Commissioners have
exceeded in their calculations the letter and. intent of their
instructions. Let us quote the terms of the Commission :
" Our will and pleasure is that you should consider, first,
as to a general system for railways in Ireland in such man-
ner, either by causing surreys to be made of the leading
lines, or otherwise, as may best tend to guide the Legisla-
turein the consideration of Me projects that may be brought
before it. Secondly, as to the best mode of directing the
development of said new and important means of inter-
course to the channels whereby the greatest advantages
may be obtained by Me smallest outlay, taking into consi-
deration not only the existing means which the country
presents, but those which may be anticipated frem the re-
sources which may in future be developed. Thirdly, that
you should make inquiry as to the port or ports on the west
or south coast of Ireland from whence the navigation to
America may be hest carried on by steam or sailing ves-
sel ; and that you should investigate particularly the faci-
lities for the construction of lines of railroad across Ire-
land,, to such. 9iip,orts in connection with the greatest
possible ciillatefits to internal communication. And,
fourthly, that you should inquire into all such other mat-
ters as may appear to you essential to the useful prosecu-
tion and result of your investigations."
We have printed in italics the words of the Commission
which appear to us to have opened to the Commissioners
tie largestl inquiry end calculation. It seems to us
tolthvebe fibeneuti of
utterly impossible to resolve the problem, how
the greatest advantages nit& be obtained by the smallest
outlay," by any vague and general researches, or without
entering into "' minute details of the cost and return of the
lines recommended." Moreover, it is quite clear that the
more minute the investigations of the Commissioners, the
better
" guide" are they ,likely to prove to " the Legisla-
ture, in the consideration of the projects that may be
brought before it."
Having made these observations, it cans scarcely be ne-
cessary
and unnecessary expeuse" to which the public have
cessary to reply to the remark of the Times as to ``the
been put by this Report. We have alreaey stated that
the outside of that expense is 16,0001. ; and it must
proved that the labours of the Commis-
certainly be
sioncrshave been nearly useless before it can
be maintained that such a sum has been misapplied.
at e conclusiona
ra
s onoe of theor two principal
article we r efelri
nteos, ad-
mitsgo
railways are perhaps the most
of thedein matterswhichpubltioc
moneys useful mode
could be expended in Ireland ;" and he closes in the
following words With:•—`` thetexception
The
fairly 71i ates
that,
a s f
which we have aha
sy e alluded, the Commissioners seem
to have perfernied their task as well as circumstances would
permit. Their Report and appendices contain much useful
and interesting information, the principal of which we
shall lay before our readers in a condensed form." The Times would seem to argue that because " the
Birmingham railway will have cost about the double of the
laid before Parliament.," and I
original estimate because the
same difference between previous calculations and
eventual expense has been experienced by various
Railway Companies, the Irish Commissioners have
therefore
engaged in a fruitless inquiry, or " at-
tempted to do what experience has proved imprac-
ticable.". To this we reply, that in works of all de-
scriptions, private and public, it is impracticable to arrive
at a previous exact estimate of the cost to be incurred ;
but it has never been, therefore, contended that it was use-
less to make some preliminary calculation of the 711illiMUM
expense in which a given work would involve those who
might undertake it. It is this minimum which the Irish
Railway Commissioners hive computed ; and it is owing to
inattention to this fact that the Times goes on to make,
with the air of strictures upon the Report,
,the follovrinsr,
remarks, in which we are certain the Commissioners would
concur as readily as we do :

" The same uncertainty is shown as respects returns. The
present extent of traffic and intercourse is found to form no
criterion whatever of what is likely to be their future amount.
Steamers and railroads usually (we may say invariably,
where the means and taste of the population or other
local causes do not present unusual obstacles) create
so complete a revolution in the travelling habits of
every district with which they are connected as to
set all previous calculations at utter defiance."
WTe now, however, come to a. passage which proves the
writer in the Time: to have been very imperfectly ac-
quainted with the portion of the Report upon which he un-
dertook to comment. We again quote his words :
" Moreover, while the Commissioners hare thus been
exceeding their instructions and putting the country
to great expense for an unattainable object (unless,
indeed, the real object was to throw a
good. job in
the way of a friend or of a Whigling), they have,
by their own showing, omitted to do what they were clearly
instructed to perform. The letters patent directed them to
take into consideration not only the existing means which
the country presents, but those which may be an-
ticipated from the resources which may in future be de-
veloped.'
Now, this they have not done, and they ex-
pressly say so at
page 17 of their Report. No allow-
ance; they observe, has been made in these estimates
for the increase which would attend the progressive im-
provement of the country.'"
We pass over the sarcasm in the parenthesis,
mix up the discussion of this subject as little as possible
with party feeling, and disputes. The Times quotes the
words at page 17 wishing to
of the Report with perfect correctness ;
but the inference he draws that the Commissioners have,
" by their own showing, omitted to do .what they were in-
structed to perform," is as erroneous as an inference can
be. When the Commissioners state that in the estimates
made in the foregoing part of the Report " no allowance
has been made for the increase that would attend the pro-
gressive improvement of the country," they merely say, that
in framing these estimates they have taker: for their data
the actual circumstances of the country or actual state ,of
internal traffic and communication. We should like to
know upon what other data they cotfild have pro-